I think that Notes and bans should be able to be freely discussed on the discord, the reasoning for the new rule being “ongoing issues with misinformation, and general toxicity” is the job of the discord staff to handle toxic players and as for disinformation if someone is wrong the other admins should work to disprove any claims. This rule is only insulating Staff from criticism against bans and notes players should be able to call out admins on poor rulings and if they are just bad at their job
32 Likes
I would like to clarify a few things, namely that this is the purpose of Staff Reports. This rule was implemented because I rarely see productive conversations regarding the issues, it’s generally people just aimlessly complaining that they don’t like a certain member of Staff.
Again, I cannot stress enough, that if you think a member of Staff has acted improperly, you should file a Staff Report or speak with the relevant Manager.
1 Like
People complain about staff when the same staff member has been reported successfully countless times and, from a players point of view, absolutely nothing has been done.
13 Likes
I genuinely think the rule could be reasonable, but banning all discussion of notes of all things… Kind of a very blanket ban imo.
Why not just allow ppl to discuss notes, but only if they censor names of admin/moderator?
7 Likes
I take issue with this statement. The rule, as written, is broad enough to cover ANY discussion of notes or bans. That is not what staff reports are for. Staff reports are specifically for if you think a recent note or ban that you received was unjust and should be removed.
What if I see someone talking about a bug/exploit/strategy and wish to say “I got noted when I did that” or “I heard someone got banned for that”? There is no reason for me to make a staff report in that situation as I am not trying to get the note overturned, I am just communicating to other players that I was noted for something.
Same applies if you are just joking around. Like when people post their past notes because there’s some funny story or shenanigans behind them. Again there is no reason for them to make a staff report, in fact they couldn’t even if they wanted to because there is a time limit on staff reports.
10 Likes
Im down for it at least if it forces certain admins to also not gab about people’s notes and bans
3 Likes
This change seems like a temporary fix to a deeper cultural issue within CM. The staff members frequently discussed often face criticism due to their behavior and conduct in said bans/notes. Personally I’d like to see the guidelines for how staff are required to act and approach players in admin pms to be refined as a whole to be more professional as they represent an important part of the community to players and should be some of our best.
Regarding Discord discussions, implementing a blanket ban on conversations about notes or bans seems counterproductive. Instead, Discord staff should focus on moderating individual discussions where issues arise, rather than imposing a broad restriction that affects the entire community. This approach would better address problematic interactions without killing open communication for everyone. 
11 Likes
Entirely counterproductive. Punish toxic people not discussion. This is the equivalent of using of butcher cleaver when a scalpel is necessary. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
3 Likes
Thank you for this constructive feedback. I understand the concern regarding moderating individual discussions, and I do ultimately agree with it. However, resources are limited in what Discord Staff/Volunteers (including myself) are willing to do. There are only a handful of us, and unless massively expanded, we cannot be everywhere at once, all the time, to make sure conversations remain civil.
So, yes, I do agree that it is not the optimal solution, but I believe it is the best solution considering the situation.
(Also I miss you come back to the Discord)
1 Like
However, resources are limited in what Discord Staff/Volunteers (including myself) are willing to do. There are only a handful of us, and unless massively expanded, we cannot be everywhere at once, all the time, to make sure conversations remain civil.
How does this change with the current rule though? discord staff still have to be present to enforce the rule, the new approach will justy apply a more rigid and less nuanced enforcement. (that I feel like CM already suffers from) This means that any violation will result in the same punishment, regardless of the context or the intentions of those involved.
It feels like it might just make the whole staff vs player mindset worse. (Which I feel like we should be trying to improve more than ever these days)
(p.s. i miss u too but im taking my mandatory cm community break and i will be back)
(p.s.s. im putting in my discord staff app rn to fix this)
6 Likes
Grim There were already rules in place to keep people nice which is rule 3, if a staff member makes bad decisions or is rude players should be able to talk about it. staff report is useless because even if a report is approved management will end up covering for that mod instead. for instance, Segrain has had 8 approved staff reports a couple of them for frivolous stuff and he is still on staff
3 Likes
I think this rule is a bit silly, because notes/bans have been brought up in the past within the Discord and have either been
A) Clarified
B) Overturned
C) Other
I think CM staff should address the issue itself, rather than toing and throwing - they’ve certainly not helped themselves in the past. Take the BigCheese situation, where a very vague @everyone was made in #announcements over a regular permaban - rather than countering misinformation, staff just kinda ignored it or muted people. This is not how you deal with it.
I personally have not seen in my years of CM that much toxicity when it comes to bans/notes, in fact I’ve seen much the opposite with players comparing hilarious notes about wacky situations they’ve got themselves into. Removing this, as the title of the thread suggests IS detrimental to the community. Me personally, if someone is offended at the discussion of a note(?) or ban(?) they should either: grow up; or go through the proper channels, and as such staff should not impose a blanket ban on discussion.
A reoccurring issue I’ve seen with these situations is that a problem arises, staff then chooses to make a change to rule/community/etc, and outrage ensues. I don’t think I’ve ever seen management/staff take a step back, assess the situation then look at themselves. It seems to me, and I think many people, that staff are blaming the community rather than themselves for creating these situations.
Looking at how this specific situation arose, this is EXACTLY what I’m talking about. If you are getting consistent reports of someone or something, then resolving it by going “Yeah, we’ve discussed this - we’ll edit the note and change the system a bit.” You are going to build resentment and confusion. That is a fact. As I work in Customer Services, there is only so many times I can go “We’ll take your feedback and make adjustments accordingly” before people start to go “Well then, where are they?” and start popping off.
5 Likes
Well said @AlbertBlackwell. You bring up a good point @Hellware. I have a feeling this will increase the divide not mend old wounds.
2 Likes
I have to say that if your primary argument supporting Rule 11 is that it will reduce the burden on the discord team, Hellware is absolutely correct in that it’s not the case.
If anything, this will (and is) increasing pressure on the discord team simply because a sizeable portion of all traffic in the discord is now technically illegal, and they have to crack down on it (which, most of the time- it won’t happen, thus making this rule effectively unenforceable outside of just instant muting and banning people for even uttering a word about notes- Something that will make the staff-player divide dramatically worse.).
Discord volunteers cannot be everywhere at once. This is true. So why is the solution to massively increase the amount of rule infractions, even when the majority of said infractions are actually benign?
This rule change makes no sense- It doesn’t improve the health of the discord. The root of the problem of “misinformation” and “toxicity” is NOT the discussion of notes/bans. If I had a small discord staff with limited resources, I’d be focusing on the more limited and easy to deal with instances of toxicity, rather than telling them to start shooting wildly at anyone who engages in CM’s favourite pastime.
4 Likes
I’m not in the Discord but Pink did show me the rule update and I would just like to clarify that Grim in the screenshot I was provided encouraging people to discuss their bans or notes with the responsible manager directly, which is great.
This is a luxury that has been denied to me every time I have tried to have a discussion with the manager responsible for overseeing my situation. I’ve been denied a private or even public back and fourth about any and all aspects of my situation. If open discussion is going to be an offence I think there should be another official procedure that gives an individual the right to speak to a manager or other members of staff whom are responsible in which cannot they simply be ignored if the manager chooses to simply not talk to you because the way it works now If I want to contact a manager directly I have to hope that they’re interested, willing and that they even see my personal message as they may be overwhelmed with 100 messages daily from other CM related stuff.
If this is a rule that is going forward it’d be nice to see the ban procedure get an amendment so that during the minimum 2 day wait period an individual should have to be contacted by staff directly to discuss the circumstances of their ban and their appeal. In-game reports on against a player that players has the right to talk to staff in 99% of situations I don’t see why I should be any different for any other ban or potential note.
In short - If you want to encourage people to handle these matters privately then those responsible for processing bans, appeals, reports etc need to be obliged by their position to talk to the offender about the situation. The way it is now any private messages can be ignored if they don’t want to talk to you.
If this adds too much of a burden to staff then a simple solution would just be to make offenders wait longer, you can’t have a discussion or get your application processed for a few extra days or a week or something. The process should be made longer to help staff cope, the community as a whole shouldn’t suffer more because we don’t have enough staff.
9 Likes
I don’t think rule 11 is contingent to a better future. I think it’s gonna get removed, bare minimum because the spirit of the rule is already enforced in rule 1 and it seems like it was hastily placed because of some present drama that’s likely occurring. It’s probably a warning so that people shut up about whatever drama is happening and they don’t have to throw out bans. It’s not gonna last.
Besides that point, you guys need to understand that moderators are voluntary and unpaid, they’re not obligated to wrangle you individually the way you like it. They enforce the rules, and everyone has, one way or another, broken a rule and had an excuse for it. If you like a moderator, either there’s something wrong with you, you like them outside of being a moderator, or they’re not a very good moderator; either because they’re inept or corrupt.
CM is a public free access project with no profit whatsoever, none of these people are paid to moderate, in fact they pay the cost of being known in a negative light. People will remember your name, harass you in game, you’ll be prone to more “accidents” or being targeted by opposition more often, and, to add a cherry on top, people will dislike you outside of the game. This isn’t a deeper cultural issue in CM, it’s the nature of authority.
BTW, Hellware, I’m not trying to be rude and I hope I’m not breaking the rule on shitflinging. But, respectfully, I don’t think you’d be a good candidate for discord staff. I don’t know if you’re serious or if it’s an aloof “maybe I will maybe I won’t.” You flake from the server almost biweekly and when I do see you it’s you shmoozing management. I think you’d be a great mentor and a shoe in for whitelists, but for moderation, you’re too agreeable.
It sounds like you would be open to discord volunteer applications then, and that used to be a thing, but it got removed, why is that?
2 Likes
Besides that point, you guys need to understand that moderators are voluntary and unpaid, they’re not obligated to wrangle you individually the way you like it.
Yes, staff are volunteers and don’t get paid, but they themselves signed on to representing the server and its rules. Being volunteers doesn’t excuse unprofessional behavior or speaking negatively about the community they aim to improve.
They enforce the rules, and everyone has, one way or another, broken a rule and had an excuse for it. If you like a moderator, either there’s something wrong with you, you like them outside of being a moderator, or they’re not a very good moderator; either because they’re inept or corrupt.
This doesn’t make any sense, If you find yourself disliking every staff member, you need to self reflect, the problem probably lies with you. Staff are here to enforce rules fairly and represent the community, not to be disliked or act antagonistically.
I don’t think you’d be a good candidate for discord staff. I don’t know if you’re serious or if it’s an aloof “maybe I will maybe I won’t.” You flake from the server almost biweekly and when I do see you it’s you shmoozing management. I think you’d be a great mentor and a shoe in for whitelists, but for moderation, you’re too agreeable.
Yes, I take breaks from the CM community periodically; it’s a healthy practice. Staff shouldn’t have to be constantly present throughout the year without breaks. If some staff members took time to focus on themselves and their hobbies, we would probably see less of what we do.
There is no “flaking from the server” CM is a community I love and one I sometimes cant stand, I take a break occasionally to get away from it and focus on other things I enjoy.
6 Likes
Let’s pull back a little bit. I didn’t say every staff. I like the staff. The mentors are nice, the devs are good (despite the bitching from the community), the managers are competent, the host is keeping it together, I love the staff; and I’m sure most players do too. And, I like moderators, but I like them for them outside of moderation. I do not like being moderated. No one does. If Crystal Keep ever breaks 10 players consistently, I’d love to have the staff here (shout out to Crystal Keep, play tests coming up in a month or two).
The issue is that moderating sucks. People will dislike you for one reason or another. I’m pretty sure Morrow, before he left, was the one deleting runners because they were farting on marines (low RP BM behavior was the reasoning). Imagine being the receiving end of that and never knowing Morrow outside of moderation. You’re not gonna like Morrow for ruining your fun, and some people really take these things personally and start shit flinging notes in discord. Now imagine that and then disliking Morrow for whatever else he did, it stacks up and people now have someone to point an angry chimp finger at.
So yes, moderators, by nature, will be disliked because you’re not happy when you’re dealing with them unless you’re on the receiving end of grief. Even then, it feels a little demeaning when you have to report someone, like you’re tattling or whining to the school teacher. Unless, of course, you like having power over someone else via moderator proxy, which circles back to, if you like a moderator, there’s something wrong with you.
yes moderation sucks but its something you volunteer for and can leave at any time like you said. That’s not the issue, if bad faith actors are causing problems for people just doing their jobs in the cm community they should be dealt with on a case by case basis.
It should not be a blanket ban that is applied to the entire community as punishment.
3 Likes