test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Update on Rule Wording
ambassadorkael
Member, Administrator Posts: 2,679 Community Manager
Hello folks,
There has been an update to the rule regarding real life threats. Previously, it was worded poorly and seemed to indicate that only fellow users of the forum were protected from real life threats. This was never the case, and now the rule is clear. It reads:
Real-Life Threats
You may not create posts and/or private messages that allude to, contain language, comments, references, links, symbols, terms and/or imagery about and/or promote and/or otherwise support, in any manner whether directly or indirectly, violence or threats against another user, a member of the development team, or any other human being.
As players of STO, you are passionate and engaged and we love you for that. But threatening violence, real, imagined, or "just as a joke" will never be tolerated here. To be clear, threats also include wishing someone would lose their job. Let's be civil, and act like Star Trek fans.
There has been an update to the rule regarding real life threats. Previously, it was worded poorly and seemed to indicate that only fellow users of the forum were protected from real life threats. This was never the case, and now the rule is clear. It reads:
Real-Life Threats
You may not create posts and/or private messages that allude to, contain language, comments, references, links, symbols, terms and/or imagery about and/or promote and/or otherwise support, in any manner whether directly or indirectly, violence or threats against another user, a member of the development team, or any other human being.
As players of STO, you are passionate and engaged and we love you for that. But threatening violence, real, imagined, or "just as a joke" will never be tolerated here. To be clear, threats also include wishing someone would lose their job. Let's be civil, and act like Star Trek fans.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I am really sorry that happened to you. That is not cool.
When it comes to how one interprets and reacts to things, the buck stops with them. thinking differently and expressing different opinions is fine but chaseing after someone for an opinion is not.
Mwahahahahahahaha
Kael, and the rest of the devs. You definitely do not deserve this. Keep working hard and being your rocking self that brings us the game we love for the past 11 (almost 12) years.
I know you will make mistakes and sometimes makes questionable decisions the playerbase does not like. However, you dont deserve what you have been receiving of late. Try to not let these people get to you.
(my first post in several years, iirc)
I don't wish you to be unemployed, but wishing you had a different job that didn't effect this game is totally in bounds and you should expect it to continue.
Either deal with it or do a better job.
As for actual threats.. way out of bounds and those people should be banned and seek therapy.
That being said, this whole situation is absolutely beyond ridiculous, but knowing what I know about human nature and fandom, I'm really not all that surprised at the ludicrous behavior some in the community have demonstrated.
After I saw what Kael posted on twitter--I believe that this wording change is not intended to punish people for questioning the the Community Manager's job performance. However wording that says you cannot joke or indirectly say something that could be interpreted as "wishing someone might loose their job," sounds very draconian. And without the context it seemed like this was a reaction for some calls among the forum users that Cryptic should consider hiring a new Community Manager.
With that in mind, I decided to retype some of my earlier thoughts from that post. I want to clarify of course that I do not condone the actions of whoever has threatened either Kael or the development staff.
"Changing professions or a means of livelihood is no violence. And passively wishing for someone's misfortune is no threat. Although I could certainly see how they could bruise an ego.
"I also think questioning an unelected community representatives' job performance is healthy when it is that person's job to represent the community. Much of the community here does not feel represented. And worst yet, some of the community feels outright ignored. Especially here on the 'official forum.'
"Kael, I realize you cannot represent everyone the way they would like to be represented. But is it just to ban someone for questioning our communicator's ability to communicate? Is it also a 'violence' to have someone banned from the official forum under such a loose definition?
"I wish we could focus more energy on the wording of press releases than on the semantics of what constitutes an attack. And it certainly would be nice to have a less adversarial community here. You can not always choose your neighbors, coworkers, or even politicians--so what chance is there of choosing our community manager? So I guess we need to strive to get along civilly in our civilizations of gamming as well. As the Star Trek nerds say-- Peace and Long Life."
"
I seriously dislike several of the decisions made recently and question the motives behind those decisions, besides disliking the general course of the game with endless grinds with few possibilities to take a break from the game.
But that means I'll just walk away from STO at some point in the worst case scenario. Threatening real people over a game? The mere idea is ridiculous.
Are you serious comparing threats of physical violence to people complaining about your job performance?
They are two completely different things, and to do so is in extremely bad taste.
And everyone else: I think we can agree that violent threats are abhorrent, but in your replies, I seriously think you need to differentiate between the two things.
-K
> Creating a rule so they can ban anyone who speaks ill of them literally not doing their job or who dare to demand that we get that job filled by somebody who will...pretty sure you are the who does not know what the word means.
Freedom of speech is a protection from the government.
Nobody. Else.
Cryptic and PWE pay for this service. They get to decide what is and is not on it. You do not have any right whatsoever to come onto a privately owned and operated website that is fully paid for by somebody else and say whatever you tribbling well please. That right has never existed in the entire history of rights.
You want to complain about the game? The rule is, be civil, and no personal attacks.
...THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED!
I'm always open to feedback, but this particular one is not up for debate. You folks are allowed to be upset with decisions this company makes. That's absolutely fine - passion is fine. But you cannot threaten people, period.
There is a difference between them yes. HOWEVER... when basically used in the same tone as a threat of physical violence... the distinction starts to fade significantly. And honestly... its no different than any other kind of personal attack to demand someone's vocational head on a silver platter.
People are angry because you have been offered 'feedback' for literally years and haven't taken it. We want accurate information in the press releases, if you can't do that, can you at least explain to us why not?
The preference has never been for you to be fired, that's a harsh thing to ask for. I have been unemployed and it sucks, I don't wish it on anyone.. the preference has been and still is for you to instead just make a change to make things better. The anger is boiling over because you don't listen and it's frustrating.
Still, the threats are completely undefendable, and even speaking as someone that's not your biggest fan, I am truly sorry you had to put up with that. I am all for a change in how things are, but that's way too far.
> Having reread this thread, I think a lot of people are operating under a very mistaken idea. The position is NOT Community Representative, it's Community Manager. I don't know about y'all, but I've worked a LOT of jobs over my years, and never have I ever referred to any of my managers as a representative: they're my boss.
I don't work for Cryptic. They don't pay me. It's not my job. I am allowed to participate in their community at their discretion only, but that doesn't oblige me to conform to your model of a boss-employee relationship. It isn't applicable.
I don't think they require apologists from the community to speak for them. Occasionally I'm pleasantly surprised when someone manages to find the right words. Thank you Ambassador Kael for your last comment. I'm frequently critical when I don't like things and don't say it enough when I'm impressed.
In spite of a hard line being drawn on criticisms of job performance under the aegis of threats you stepped up and clarified when you could have let it ride. Accountability is a quality too often left by the wayside. Great work!
Join Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010
We have tried Honey.. literally for years.
Then we went to Vinegar and since that wasn't strong enough, now we have apparently gone to a Hammer.
And still.. no one listens.
Saying that someone should be fired is NOT a threat unless you are their boss. It's really that simple.
I agree that it's not a particularly pleasant thing to do, but it is not a threat.
If you want to add a rule saying that requesting that someone be fired from their job is banned, that's your prerogative of course. Of course, you'll then have to face the question of unreasonable censorship, which are reasonable questions to have to answer.
No it doesn't.
And if you want to lump it in with personal attacks, again, you could and I'd say it's more reasonable in that 'bucket', but I still consider it a very different thing.
For the record, I've never called for anyone to be fired on this forum, so in that sense I don't have a dog in this fight. However, I do find it disingenuous and offensive to try to group the two things into the same offence.
-K
To be fair, you are doing quite a good job. I know that some people have a different opinion - and they're not entirely wrong to have that opinion because there is room for improvement.
But we shouldn't exaggerate how bad things are.
Proof reading official game news and messages would be a major improvement. Some of the errors are totally unnecessary. Fortunately, that also means that the fix is easy. It's basically just some carelessness that needs to be addressed - mistakes that are easily made but just as easily prevented with some minor effort.
Aside from that, I think we all appreciate the detailed updates we receive from you and the rest of the Devs on the state of the game, the ideas and considerations for future releases, tweaks and so on (as often posted and shared by @somtaawkhar ).
(Now, I have some totally different complaints myself, as I shared in a previous post in this thread. But those issues are not the fault of any one specific person.)
People also need to understand that just because a company doesn't immediately jump and do everything you say they should do, does NOT mean they're ignoring you. They're not obligated to implement every single suggestion just because someone makes it. If they did that, this game would be an unplayable nightmare. Feedback also works both ways. For every person advocating for something, there could equally be someone advocating against. If you have half your players saying "hey do X" and the other half saying "hey don't do X" they have to make a decision as to what they're going to do, and no matter what they do, someone isn't going to like it. People also need to consider with feedback, the company has to make money as well to keep the lights on. Simply because they don't jump at your feedback doesn't mean they should be fired either. If you don't like someone and want to complain about them, there are other avenues you can use to make your complaints known. This forum is not one of them. Thinking someone isn't that great at their job is one thing, but demanding someone be fired because you don't like something in game is a completely different ballgame and would also fall under the flaming/trolling rule in addition to the above.
This is about having some common courtesy and keeping things civil. I don't see what they're asking as being that unreasonable.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
They did no such thing. The US courts ruled that elected officials cannot block people from social media accounts on which they do government business on the grounds that this violates their constituents' freedom of expression. They can, however, mute them so that they don't receive notifications. And that ruling does not protect the officials themselves or the constituents from being penalized by the company for violating the rules set by the social media company itself. And there is no comment whatsoever on this "commons" notion.
Once again: freedom of expression is a protection from the government. It does not protect you from private organizations.
Sources:
...THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED!
I can confirm... it was in response to a threat. It was reported by another forumite, I saw it and instantly went "oh shi..." and went to the Mod Chat to call for reenforcements. Outside of general confirmation, I don't know if its allowed to go into specifics or not so that's as far as I'll go. But again... this was in direct response to a threat.