Yeah, like I said in the previous post, it makes sense in cases of like "why did staff ban my previous account" and similar specific moderation actions, but has also at times been applied a little too widely in some cases to shut down most critique of the site both unreasonable and reasonable.
There's definitely instances (e.g. discussing moderation actions) where it makes sense bc there's nothing of value to be gained in publicly discussing those. However, some of the other times it's been applied I don't agree with.
For example, I recall it being applied pretty liberally at various points in regard to special eyes (I don't remember the specifics so it may have been on release or after some time), and while some of that was users being bitchy and toxic at each other, some of it was reasonable and productive discussion that was shut down in sweeping comment deletions that seemed from the outside to just be a dislike of negative public opinion rather than having a real and legitimate reason.
Feedback forms are great, but there is sometimes genuine value in having things (again, not moderation actions) discussed publicly because ideas can be iterated on and improved. For example, if user John's idea of fixing eyes is to make eye changes a dropdown box on all dragons with unlimited changes for free, maybe user Jane sees that (when she wouldn't have thought to send a feedback form otherwise) and goes, "Well that seems unreasonable and against the point of the feature, but perhaps X price or Y limitation might make it something the admins would be more willing to consider." Then further users can contribute as well until there's enough variety to pull a genuinely good starter from, rather than if John had just sent in "make it basically free and unlimited and easy" which would have only indicated demand for the feature and not given any reasonable ideas on how to accomplish it. This is honestly kinda a shitty example bc of how extreme John->Jane is, but it was so long ago that I don't remember better specifics, and what one user thinks is good is so subjective that I can't give idea progression everyone will agree with anyway.
But yeah, generally I do agree with you (as stated at the end of what I wrote) that specific moderation actions just aren't worth discussing publicly and should be shut down. The problem is when the rule is taken and applied too generally even outside of discussion of specific actions and is used to silence general discontent over site features or additions. (I think it's been done over new genes as well once or twice, though I don't remember specific examples.)
My personal opinion for what shouldn't get removed/shut down but has in past: - Non-heated, non-toxic discussion about new site features, genes, or similar site discussion/critique. (A rarity, but it does exist and has gotten removed in the past, throwing the baby out with the bathwater.)
My personal opinion for what should be removed/shut down: - Toxic bitching ("Wow, this gene is so lazy, [Artist] really phoned it in on this didn't they?") - Moderation discussion ("I got banned bc Undel personally came to my house and didn't like my cat!" reality: multi, or "Why did my forum thread get locked? I did nothing wrong!" reality: broke ToS)
no subject
Yeah, like I said in the previous post, it makes sense in cases of like "why did staff ban my previous account" and similar specific moderation actions, but has also at times been applied a little too widely in some cases to shut down most critique of the site both unreasonable and reasonable.
There's definitely instances (e.g. discussing moderation actions) where it makes sense bc there's nothing of value to be gained in publicly discussing those. However, some of the other times it's been applied I don't agree with.
For example, I recall it being applied pretty liberally at various points in regard to special eyes (I don't remember the specifics so it may have been on release or after some time), and while some of that was users being bitchy and toxic at each other, some of it was reasonable and productive discussion that was shut down in sweeping comment deletions that seemed from the outside to just be a dislike of negative public opinion rather than having a real and legitimate reason.
Feedback forms are great, but there is sometimes genuine value in having things (again, not moderation actions) discussed publicly because ideas can be iterated on and improved. For example, if user John's idea of fixing eyes is to make eye changes a dropdown box on all dragons with unlimited changes for free, maybe user Jane sees that (when she wouldn't have thought to send a feedback form otherwise) and goes, "Well that seems unreasonable and against the point of the feature, but perhaps X price or Y limitation might make it something the admins would be more willing to consider." Then further users can contribute as well until there's enough variety to pull a genuinely good starter from, rather than if John had just sent in "make it basically free and unlimited and easy" which would have only indicated demand for the feature and not given any reasonable ideas on how to accomplish it. This is honestly kinda a shitty example bc of how extreme John->Jane is, but it was so long ago that I don't remember better specifics, and what one user thinks is good is so subjective that I can't give idea progression everyone will agree with anyway.
But yeah, generally I do agree with you (as stated at the end of what I wrote) that specific moderation actions just aren't worth discussing publicly and should be shut down. The problem is when the rule is taken and applied too generally even outside of discussion of specific actions and is used to silence general discontent over site features or additions. (I think it's been done over new genes as well once or twice, though I don't remember specific examples.)
My personal opinion for what shouldn't get removed/shut down but has in past:
- Non-heated, non-toxic discussion about new site features, genes, or similar site discussion/critique. (A rarity, but it does exist and has gotten removed in the past, throwing the baby out with the bathwater.)
My personal opinion for what should be removed/shut down:
- Toxic bitching ("Wow, this gene is so lazy, [Artist] really phoned it in on this didn't they?")
- Moderation discussion ("I got banned bc Undel personally came to my house and didn't like my cat!" reality: multi, or "Why did my forum thread get locked? I did nothing wrong!" reality: broke ToS)