test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Update on Rule Wording

ambassadorkael#6946 ambassadorkael Member, Administrator Posts: 2,400 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.
«13

Comments

  • qultuqqultuq Member Posts: 521 Arc User
    edited August 24
    Wow. You didn’t write the context here. But it seems someone must have emailed you personally or cyber-stalked you or something. I guess that is one of the problems with internet anonymity.

    I am really sorry that happened to you. That is not cool.
    Post edited by qultuq on
  • cheesebasketcheesebasket Member Posts: 1,090 Arc User
    The fact that this even needed clarification is concerning tho. Disagreeing with someone is fine. but once one crosses that line into pursuing or insisting upon taking action against then they become the aggressor. It's never justifiable in a game and it's unhealthy to let anything get that far into one's head. My advice would be to step back, cool down, meditate if possible, or find something else to do because once that harmful energy is channeled it can mess with who they as a person and before you know it nobody recognizes them. Better to disagree and walk away than to let an argument turn one into a jaded, vindictive shadow.

    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.
    The hamster will RULE ALLL....

    Mwahahahahahahaha
  • foxman00foxman00 Member Posts: 1,263 Arc User
    I am genuinely horrified what has happened in the last twelve hours to the devs with the latest announcement. I am saddened what some in the community are doing here and in reddit/sto are doing over essentially nothing.

    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.
    kXx65VK.jpg
  • captainoblivouscaptainoblivous Member Posts: 2,284 Arc User
    Jeepers, It's mindboggling that this even has to be clarified!

    (my first post in several years, iirc)
    I need a beer.

  • westmetalswestmetals Member Posts: 7,240 Arc User
    edited August 25
    Okay, I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous.

    I am aware of (at least one of) the actual threats, as in I read a post that contained one, and I would have reported it myself except that I didn't know how to do so non-publicly and I was about to log off (to go to work) and didn't have time to find out.

    And yes it's clearly out of line to be making threats of violence, and certainly if there was not already explicitly a rule, then making sure that there is explicitly a rule is necessary. Fine.

    However... rolling "threats also include wishing someone would lose their job" into an anti-violence rule is simply condescending, insulting, disingenuous... I'm sorry, but unemployment is not violence. Calling that violence is doing an injustice to victims of assault, domestic violence, etcetera.... If you want to make a rule about that, it should be a separate rule.

    And while I am here... if people are actively calling for someone to lose their job - in a civilized, conversational manner - that itself should be a big alarm bell. Without getting too into specifics, I'm one of the people who has previously made such suggestions (in a civil way), and the reason is because the person is responsible for - as in their name is the byline on - the official news blogs, which are practically a form of advertising... and yet are so studded with simple errors that it's clear they have not even been proofread by anyone competent in proofreading. Events that aren't consistently called the same name throughout a single document... dates that don't exist... beginning dates that are after the ending dates... etcetera. Considering that those blogs are a form of advertising, I'm not a lawyer, but I wonder if it might even rise to the level of being legally actionable as false advertising.

    Certainly I would think that if a document is going out with their name on it, they would want it to be free of such errors... or corporate or legal would... and the fact that they are consistently not, to the point that it has become a running joke on the forums that a blog isn't official if it DOESN'T have such errors, speaks to either incompetence or inattention. In either case, we would be better served if someone else was doing the job.


    Post edited by westmetals on
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,676 Arc User
    We have a right to wish for a better CM, one that cares about the community.

    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.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • grumpyoldnord#3239 grumpyoldnord Member Posts: 6 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    That sounds like somebody is attempting to finally censor the forums like they do Twitch.
    Censor does not mean what you think it means, my friend.

    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.
  • qultuqqultuq Member Posts: 521 Arc User
    My initial reaction to the post was very concerned about the wording of this rule. I agree with the points that west, and sea are bringing up here that holding the Community Manager responsible to our gamming community is an important role of the forum as well.

    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."
    "

  • reyan01reyan01 Member Posts: 15,267 Arc User
    edited August 25
    I will say, the threats described in the OP are disgraceful and completely unacceptable under any circumstances.

    However, I'm also going to note the irony in the lack of typos in the update to the rules & his Tweet, which demonstrate that he clearly can proof read...
    Post edited by reyan01 on
  • fleetcaptain5#1134 fleetcaptain5 Member Posts: 2,906 Arc User
    It's pretty sad that such a rule is needed apparently.

    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.
    [4:46] [Combat {self}] Your Haymaker deals 23337 (9049) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother

    [3/25 10:41][Combat (Self)]Your Haymaker deals 26187 (10692) Physical Damage(Critical) to Orinoco.
  • captainkoltarcaptainkoltar Member Posts: 760 Arc User
    To be clear, threats also include wishing someone would lose their job. Let's be civil, and act like Star Trek fans.

    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
  • wingedhussar#7584 wingedhussar Member Posts: 359 Community Moderator
    edited August 25
    > @coldnapalm said:
    > 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.
    Post edited by ambassadorkael#6946 on
    latest?cb=20171202101458

    ...THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED!
    Volunteer community moderator for the Star Trek Online forums. Not a Cryptic Studios or Perfect World employee.
  • ambassadorkael#6946 ambassadorkael Member, Administrator Posts: 2,400 Community Manager
    You can say you don't think anyone - especially me - does a very good job. You cannot threaten their life or wish they were fired. It's a simple line to walk, and no censoring is happening.

    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.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 54,634 Community Moderator
    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

    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.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,676 Arc User
    edited August 26
    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.

    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.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • grumpyoldnord#3239 grumpyoldnord Member Posts: 6 Arc User
    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. Kael's job is not to represent us, but to keep us in line. It is OUR job to represent ourselves, and threatening, harassing, bullying, ad nauseum, are not good representation. And as has been said before, many of the people in the community who do not resort to threats and incessant complaints have requested this exact change (or at least something along these lines). If you feel your wishes are not being heard, then it is your job to do better at being heard. Something something flies, something something honey.
  • horridpersonhorridperson Member Posts: 656 Arc User
    > @grumpyoldnord#3239 said:
    > 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!
    battlegroupad_zps8gon3ojt.jpg

  • ikonn#1068 ikonn Member Posts: 1,418 Arc User
    edited August 26
    As coldnapalm mentioned, The Community Manager's job is essentially to be the liaison between the player base and the STO Development Team. In addition, The Community Manager is repsonsible for the maintaining STO's presense on Social Media (Twitter, Twitch, and especially these Forums... hint! hint!). Kael is the PR guy as well.... smile and SAY CHEESE!!!!
    -AoP- Warrior's Blood (KDF Armada) / -AoP- Qu' raD qulbo'Degh / -AoP- Project Phoenix
    Join Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,676 Arc User
    Something something flies, something something honey.

    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.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • captainkoltarcaptainkoltar Member Posts: 760 Arc User
    But you cannot threaten people, period.

    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.
    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.

    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
  • fleetcaptain5#1134 fleetcaptain5 Member Posts: 2,906 Arc User
    You can say you don't think anyone - especially me - does a very good job. You cannot threaten their life or wish they were fired. It's a simple line to walk, and no censoring is happening.

    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.

    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.)
    [4:46] [Combat {self}] Your Haymaker deals 23337 (9049) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother

    [3/25 10:41][Combat (Self)]Your Haymaker deals 26187 (10692) Physical Damage(Critical) to Orinoco.
  • darkbladejkdarkbladejk Member Posts: 3,199 Community Moderator
    Oh where to start. I am a proponent of free speech as well and I'm generally skeptical of government and regulation as much as the next person. Feel free to ask the mods if you want confirmation. With that said, the commons argument does not work as Cryptic isn't trying to market the forum as a communication engine like a phone company. This forum is meant to be a place centralized around the game. This means they have the right to boot anything from this forum that doesn't fall within those parameters they see fit, whether you believe it's for better or worse. True constructive criticism is one thing, but way too often it's an excuse for people to bust out the flamethrowers, then when folks get called on it they say "it's just constructive criticism" when we both know that's not true. People aren't required to like anyone here, but that doesn't give them an excuse to bust out flamethrowers against other people.

    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.
    "Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations

    Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
  • eazzieeazzie Member Posts: 3,223 Arc User
    Oh where to start. I am a proponent of free speech as well and I'm generally skeptical of government and regulation as much as the next person. Feel free to ask the mods if you want confirmation. With that said, the commons argument does not work as Cryptic isn't trying to market the forum as a communication engine like a phone company. This forum is meant to be a place centralized around the game. This means they have the right to boot anything from this forum that doesn't fall within those parameters they see fit, whether you believe it's for better or worse. True constructive criticism is one thing, but way too often it's an excuse for people to bust out the flamethrowers, then when folks get called on it they say "it's just constructive criticism" when we both know that's not true. People aren't required to like anyone here, but that doesn't give them an excuse to bust out flamethrowers against other people.

    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.

    👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
  • wingedhussar#7584 wingedhussar Member Posts: 359 Community Moderator
    edited August 26
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    > @coldnapalm said:
    > 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.

    For now...however with the internet being the new commons, let's see how long that lasts. They already have precedence that politians can not ban people from their social media as it is ruled as the commons.

    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:
    Post edited by wingedhussar#7584 on
    latest?cb=20171202101458

    ...THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED!
    Volunteer community moderator for the Star Trek Online forums. Not a Cryptic Studios or Perfect World employee.
  • keepcalmchiveonkeepcalmchiveon Member Posts: 3,320 Arc User
    its grey for both sides. but the only huge disadvantage for us, is that you all have the ban hammer.

    physical threats, no matter how small or large - out of bounds. generally accepted as such universally.

    advising someone to proofread, make changes, take more time to do the job correctly, in any matter of: improve yourself, learn to proofread, take a few minutes and look things over, ask a teammate to look over your details, all the way to wtf is going on with all these continual errors of dates/times/prizes...

    it speaks volumes when many of us could be in the same shoes, and no longer have a job because we cost the company money and more due to our negligence. i guess its nice to know that cryptic has a huge bungee cord for such irregularities where people just get to come back and repeat the same errors continuously.

    im not privy to the exact details as to why this came out, i can just take note that it appears that someone either got a real life threat (again, out of bounds) or they got butt hurt because people have come out in force now after the latest fiasco of incorrect information...and well...had enough.

    dark said common courtesy, and he is correct, but that goes both ways. the community has been asking for correct data be completed so as to halt continual and often bad vibes against cryptic, to only be presented with take backs that can upset people. (case in point - the RA mentioned more than what was given) this falls on the CM to address it ASAP so it doenst get to a level it has recently, and not only for that, mind you. but also understand, that the CM rarely posts in here...the "official," unofficial forums. he prefers to twit and red things and a few others, over ever stepping foot here. so as stated...courtesy is a two way street.

    many here i bet would enjoy the job of CM...play a game you like, interact with the dev team and player base, and so much more, yet our CM acts like its a weight of a starship on his shoulders.

    to also point out that it seems yall dont listen...the launcher still has "no win" as dated 8/13 to 8/16...and its been how long now? 3 days? but i digress on that.

    anyway, it seems the language was updated to remove a slight inference as to someone's job, from what i read vs what was posted in the OP. at least some sensibility was applied and data updated to reflect that.
    meh

This discussion has been closed.