Conquer Club

Concise description:

• a moderator or team of moderators that deal with grievances between players.

Specifics:

• this person/team would deal with grievances between players for things that are not game related or definable within the C&A forum

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• truly resolving grievances between players that are not game related, with a more suitable response than "please stay away from each other".
• will resolve issues/grievances between players that are not game related, i.e. abusive game chat, abusive pm's, excessive abuse of the rating system, stalking of players in games, harassment of players within the forums, etc...

this was an idea i came upon when searching old posts, and updated the idea to something that fits CC now. as that thread was taken over by a few people making light on the final page, i do not believe it got a fair shake in GD, thus i am making a formal suggestion here. the previous thread started by Twill years ago, can be read here:

Subject: Grievance Moderator needed

seriously, it is an interesting concept. why? this week you had a guy complaining about a PM he received insulting his country and origin, and nothing was done to the offender... if you heard what the pm's said, and the explaination from the member complaining, the offender should have received disciplinary measures. one weeks prior, a member was accussed of using a friends account to pm someon on his foe list that he was a dick. no real evidence was found, and the alleged offender received a 6 day ban. both "grievances" were not game related and could have been solved by a level headed, intelligent, impartial grievance moderator. at the very least, a fair and consistent disciplinary system could be used. to top it off, as it is now, things occur between members, and members are told to "avoid each other" and to not "contact each other", and to stay out of games that each are in. this doesn't really solve anything and leads to further clashes between members in threads, sub forums, etc... a grievance moderator or two within a seperate Grievance Sub-forum would well serve the community, and resolve a lot of garbage that goes on and perpetuates because there is no real process to deal with it. SUCK IT UP CUPCAKE!!!...-6cd

I would volunteer to spend some time explaining to cranky people, how a thicker skin is a beneficial thing, and also how to use the 'foe' function, and inbox rules.

I would too. There are too many angry people around, and I'd gladly explain the finer things in life too them.

Most people would gladly volunteer to help this site, without any sort of special treatment or compensation of any kind.

There does come a point where mods get tired of dealing with certain members repeatedly. It is the most unfortunate part of modding, and tends to keep people away from the task. A person who would take this on would have to be able to stick with it for quite a while, because it doesn't seem like a task that could change hands frequently.

Timminz wrote:I would volunteer to spend some time explaining to cranky people, how a thicker skin is a beneficial thing, and also how to use the 'foe' function, and inbox rules.

exactly... and how hard would it be to block 2 people from further contact in games etc, if they have THAT much of a problem? a member of my clan was stalked by an ex-member and a slew of her new clan mates for quite some time, and nothing was done about it, because they weren't on his foe list at the time. when you have an entire clan go after one member out of spite, that could be a grievance. of course, the person that was persecuted got the last laugh by causing a mega implosion in the other clan, but that is beside the point. more and more garbage goes on here, than most people are aware of, and that mods don't want to deal with or don't have the power to deal with. having a sub-forum to post your grievance and have it looked it by someone with authority to make a decision is a great idea...-6cd

p.s.-what colour would the grievance mods have? pink, like the frosting of a cupcake?

I think that having some kind of grievance arbiter to attempt to mediate and settle disputes without recourse to bannings, blockings and other such rubbish would be a really great idea.

I am, of course, willing to offer my time and efforts should they be desired.

Dancing Mustard wrote:I think that having some kind of grievance arbiter to attempt to mediate and settle disputes without recourse to bannings, blockings and other such rubbish would be a really great idea.

I am, of course, willing to offer my time and efforts should they be desired.

well... i agree with the mediation... however, if a player then violated what had been resolved, don't you think a timeout would be necessary? for instance, someone spams up a members box with insults about his mum and country and hair lip... the offended user posts a grievance and a mediator finds for him and warns the offender to stop the harassment or a ban will be forthcoming... the offender fires off another missive a few weeks later, again insulting the user... shouldn't that user be given a time out for busting the outcome of the mediation? i do agree that the first steps shouldn't involve a ban. but the grievance mod or team would have to be able to back themselves up with a ban if the behaviour persisted, right? very interesting...-6cd

owenshooter wrote:well... i agree with the mediation... however, if a player then violated what had been resolved, don't you think a timeout would be necessary?

Only if what they did was a breach of the site's guidelines.

owenshooter wrote:for instance, someone spams up a members box with insults about his mum and country and hair lip... the offended user posts a grievance and a mediator finds for him and warns the offender to stop the harassment or a ban will be forthcoming... the offender fires off another missive a few weeks later, again insulting the user... shouldn't that user be given a time out for busting the outcome of the mediation?

See, if we had mediators here, then I'd see their function more as negotiators and dispute resolvers than enforcers. I'd hope that users would go to the mediator saying "X is acting like a dick, can you have a word", whereby the mediator would take a look at the facts, and go have a quiet word with the complained-about-person about acting more pleasantly in the future. If it didn't work out, and their advice went unheeded, then that'd all just be another thing for mods to take into account if that user received a complaint in the future.

In other words: What this community needs is healers and mediators to try to soothe tensions and increase understanding amongst users. It has enough autocrats, rule-enforcers, and judgemental penalty slingers... but what it lacks is people who genuinely listen to grievances and try to help solve them in the long term. We don't need more mods here (see: History of this forum's deterioration), but we'd be well served by some official concilliators who (1) were user's first port of call for the resolution of disputes, and who (2) were voices of reason that mods could listen to when trouble broke out. That way mods wouldn't be bothered by every single complaint by users, and would have informed parties to advise them to save them from continuing to throw out callous showers of locks'n'bans just to shut people up.

Seriously, this place doesn't need more people with lock-powers and itchy trigger-fingers; it needs people who can read, understand, mediate and advise. If that's not what you're suggesting, then I'm afraid I can't be on board.

Dancing Mustard wrote:Seriously, this place doesn't need more people with lock-powers and itchy trigger-fingers; it needs people who can read, understand, mediate and advise. If that's not what you're suggesting, then I'm afraid I can't be on board.

see, this is exactly why a discussion is a good thing.... i agree with you on this point, and all your points in general... and i guess in your mind, a time out would be the last case scenario for someone absolutely out of control and unable to be reasoned with, that offends multiple times, correct? i think i like this idea more and more. hell, you wouldn't even have to give the new "mods" any extra powers, just the ability to read, discuss something between themselves or whatever the process is, and then contact the offending parties or post in the sub-forum where the thread is... very logical DM... in full agreement with you.-0

like the idea

id volunteer to do it

i am receiving a great deal of PM's about this idea, and many are interesting. here is an excerpt with a bit of insight that is valid:

Prominent CC Member wrote: (what they need are) people who use the forums and understand how they work. Not a posse of semi-regular (forum browsers) that got picked because they'd never done anything interesting and thus never caused a problem.

So many of the 'troublemakers' here would be such good 'community leaders' if they were given half a chance. The only reason that they cause so much 'trouble' is because they're angry at how much better things could be if they were given half a chance to help improve them; instead of just being continually talked down to, dismissed and marginalised by a clique of imbeciles.

seriously, this is such a good idea, and it isn't like mod powers would have to be handed out to whomever did this. but the people that were chosen would need to be forum regulars that know the rules, know what is bending them and what is breaking them. i hope more people give more input here...-6cd

One of the reasons we switched to ratings from feedback, was due to the fact the 'Grievances' were taking up a large portion of the staff's time, and thus dealing with the disputes hurt more things than it actually ended up helping. But we may have something in the works that would nearly function as this...but I'm not sure how far down the road it is...but it is an exciting prospect if it does come within some time... But anyways, a few questions to consider to better craft this suggestion:

But what sort of Grievances would this person or group mediate? Examples?
What happens when the advice/action is ignored?
Are these volunteers? How much time would someone devote?


--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:But what sort of Grievances would this person or group mediate? Examples?
What happens when the advice/action is ignored?
Are these volunteers? How much time would someone devote?
--Andy

do you mean for me to add this to the first post on page, because some of it has been covered within the posts... sure,they are long and they are wordy, but we are wordsmiths... if you mean that i should change this in the first post, i'll do that without any problem...-6cd

I think that this is a great idea
It would give CC a kinda "personal touch" to those members who have grievances with other members on matters outside of the game & its rulings
Part of the frustration for me when i made my complaint about severe PM abuse was that i felt my grievances had not been taken too seriously as i was not asked what the contents of the PM"s sent to me were,nor was i asked to produce them as evidence! All i was told was the matter was now closed & to block him & have no further contact with him! Had i have been asked i believe the outcome may have been different
Having someone that i could have dicussed the problem with a little more in depth would have been a great help if only to be asured that my grievances were being heard & understood correctly, even if they were not entirely agreed with.
Yes i feel that if what owenshooter suggests becomes reality,it can only be good a good thing & i him for it

I'd like to see how this could develop, but as a general idea right now I agree with it.

While some configuration of this sounds like a great idea, I will temper my expectations.

I fear that the Grievators would be similarly handcuffed by a series of acceptable canned responses, much like the current mods most likely are. This could very well result in another level of hierarchy and bureaucracy and potentially further delay responses from the appropriate end decision maker.

Focus should be kept on making this process quick and responsive, not furthering the distance to meaningful resolution. This is the pitfall that must be avoided if this project is to be useful.

PepperJack wrote:I fear that the Grievators would be similarly handcuffed by a series of acceptable canned responses, much like the current mods most likely are. This could very well result in another level of hierarchy and bureaucracy and potentially further delay responses from the appropriate end decision maker.

I think one of the main points of this would be to have someone who actually discusses things with the players involved, rather than giving them a "canned" response.

Timminz wrote:

PepperJack wrote:I fear that the Grievators would be similarly handcuffed by a series of acceptable canned responses, much like the current mods most likely are. This could very well result in another level of hierarchy and bureaucracy and potentially further delay responses from the appropriate end decision maker.

I think one of the main points of this would be to have someone who actually discusses things with the players involved, rather than giving them a "canned" response.

yeah, pretty much. one of the first things i talked about was the current resolution of "stay away from each other" from mods/admins, simply not working. this is a small place, you are bound to bump into your nemesis/stalker at some point!! the whole point is, as timminz clearly stated, to have a core of people that actually MEDIATE the disputes and help resolve situations so they don't escalate again...-6cd

owenshooter wrote:

Timminz wrote:

PepperJack wrote:I fear that the Grievators would be similarly handcuffed by a series of acceptable canned responses, much like the current mods most likely are. This could very well result in another level of hierarchy and bureaucracy and potentially further delay responses from the appropriate end decision maker.

I think one of the main points of this would be to have someone who actually discusses things with the players involved, rather than giving them a "canned" response.

yeah, pretty much. one of the first things i talked about was the current resolution of "stay away from each other" from mods/admins, simply not working. this is a small place, you are bound to bump into your nemesis/stalker at some point!! the whole point is, as timminz clearly stated, to have a core of people that actually MEDIATE the disputes and help resolve situations so they don't escalate again...-6cd

I get what you're saying and understand that you've highlighted such intentions. In an extremely roundabout way, I was attempting to say that if such a person/team is empowered that they have to be properly so. Keep your eyes on the prize and don't inadvertently add another step to a process that can seem out of touch at times.

PepperJack wrote: Keep your eyes on the prize and don't inadvertently add another step to a process that can seem out of touch at times.

pepper, i believe you are the person that added an additional step to the process we are discussing. it hadn't been mentioned, it hadn't been suggested, it hadn't been discussed, it wasn't even a THOUGHT about adding another step. in fact, the fact that this "mod"/team would not need additional "mod powers" would make this a position able to be filled by people that would be seen as too risky to be considered mods, and people that are actually regulars in the forum. i am always amazed by the fact that people become mods, then become active in forums they have rarely visited to try and help moderate it. how can you moderate something you do not understand? i was recently told by 2 seperate mods that the solution to my problems was to stop posting so much. ooooohhhh, ok... what a WONDERFUL solution to a problem. again, as DM voiced earlier, this place doesn't need more people with lock-powers and itchy trigger-fingers; it needs people who can read, understand, mediate and advise.

owenshooter wrote:it hadn't been mentioned, it hadn't been suggested, it hadn't been discussed, it wasn't even a THOUGHT about adding another step.

Exactly. That's why it would have been done inadvertently. Just because you lay out the framework for a potentially useful idea does not mean that idea will be work exactly as you envisioned it.

Extreme examples or analogous situations include but are not limited to:

• The Bay of Pigs
• Deregulation of lending
• The Streisand Effect
• Unprotected sex (pick your poison - babies or STDs)
• Proliferation of spam

I'm not saying don't try to create your team. I'm just trying to make sure that the discussion includes some of the potential pitfalls of creation of such a team especially when all you can do is give the idea, not implement yourself (you're not lack and if he wanted to, he could bastardize your idea).

Its always a good idea to acknowledge Murphy's Law, sorry for stepping on your rose colored glasses.

Really great idea. Moderators without lockout or banning powers would function primarily on respect they earn from arbitrating grievances. Good suggestion owenator.

PepperJackSpongePants wrote:Exactly. That's why it would have been done inadvertently. Just because you lay out the framework for a potentially useful idea does not mean that idea will be work exactly as you envisioned it.

well PepperJackSpongePants, instead of offering up how my idea can turn into the bay of pigs, why don't you help out a bit. what sorts of mediation do you believe a mod without mod powers, should be able to take care of? Abusive PM's? Abusive Game Chat? Harassment by other members? Offensive Avatars? what do you think a team of intelligent "mods" would be able to handle through a process like this? THAT is a great question to pose to someone like yourself who is quick of wit, intelligent, and understands the forums...-6cd

p.s.-the pepperjackspongepants is only because my son thought i was looking at a sponge bob website when he saw your avatar...

OOOh, that is cheese, and I thought it was a wet blanket.

I really like this idea.
I don't think there is anything I could add, I like it just as you all have explained it.