preventing unnecessary drama

2 replies·48 views
User avatar
amogusimposter

你是个大个子!对你来说

6 days ago#72995(edited 6 days ago)
I believe that before enacting changes/ impactful decisions, the admin team, or the one making the change, should make a lil blogpost about it, explaining why.
Think about the "Mustard sexualized babyjaks" incident. What if, instead of doing that, Mustard first posted something like this
>Since no one actually goons to sexualized babyjaks, and they do not look like children pedophilic (babyjaks look like grown men wearing binkies) it's okay to post them. The sexualized babyjaks are meant to poke fun at puritans who think everything is 'p. This contrasts with Soylita since actual pedos goon to it and post it seriously. No one posts babyjaks with a sexual intent.
and then posted/approved the babyjaks; don't you think less drama would have been generated? (now that's not what Mustard said, 9a0c did, but he probably agrees with it)
I don't argue that admins should put everything up to debate (they could very well just make the blogpost, and then lock it), but I sincerely think pointless drama generated from a disconnect between users and moderation is what kills the site.
User avatar
Biznessmann

SNCA Is my name and my game

6 days ago#73005
I think the solution is we just send mustard to a gulag in Kolyma
User avatar
cocoschoppenboer

Judge, Jury and Executioner

6 days ago#73010
they're practicing valve level transparency
Log in to reply to this thread.