Discord Staff Team Discussion

[anna]

If it hasn't been made clear we need members of the community to not only feel like their opinions are heard and matter but offer an avenue to do so. While I am not prefect at this, I think this is a wonderful chance for everyone to share their opinions, hopes, dreams and wants with regards to our Discord Staff team.

Please share your opinions/suggestions below! I will be reading them all and while I cant promose they will be all acted on, I can promise they will be considered and heard. I have purposefully not provided my thoughts as I would like to not alter/discourage responses!

 

[Saturnity]

For the Discord team specifically, the thing I'd most want to see is a clear, written standard for what Discord moderation looks like, yknow?

not just rules per se, but how enforcement is expected to happen. Right now it kinda seems that the gap between what's technically a rule and what actually gets actioned feels too dependent on who's involved, and that's not a new criticism, it's something I've seen echoed by people across the community, especially with the "Problem with GL" thread. Written process doesn't fix bias on its own, but it gives people something to point at. It makes inconsistency more or less visible rather than deniable.

The second thing is some kind of check built into the team itself. If the Discord staff ends up being the same decision-makers with a new label, the announcement doesn't change anything. I think the community would feel a lot more confident if there was a clear avenue to flag a moderation concern to someone outside the chain of people who made the original call, as that's kind of like the funny ass thing behind "We investigated ourselves and found no wrong doing B)" even just one person whose job it is to say "yeah that was handled wrong" when it was. Shit, give it to some trusted users of the community that have time to waste or don't mind. Better yet, give it to a few people who are trusted but the team doesn't necessarily 'like' as sometimes that adversary can create a really strong link. It's one of those things that yeah, obviously uncomfortable, but it's more or less a situation that brings a necessary challenge to the status quo and will somewhat compliment everybody on the team as a whole. It's a way to reduce blind spots and see different perspectives, and not default to a yes-man that just agrees with everything. The personality trait people might dislike them for might be the reason to have them on in the first place, as it's a direct opposite. You know you're going to get honest feedback, which of course can be reviewed and taken into account with other members that have input in the situation. Plus, there's always the bonus that forcing yourself to work with someone outside the zone of liking pushes you to better development, kinda like learning to deal with that one fuckass coworker that is a pain in the ass.

Whatever the Discord team ends up looking like, the goal should be protecting that, not just enforcing against the worst possible version of things. A lot of the energy people have been putting into this community would come back if they felt like it was safe to just be normal again. With caveats, as some people just uhhhh shouldn't be what they believe to be normal. Certain lines are... Odd to cross lmfao.

Anyway. Good luck with it

 

[tiefling lesbian]

anything that is enforced as a rule needs to be written as one, at least to the extent that you can clearly, reasonably, and intuitively connect any given infraction to a specific written rule, barring exceptional outliers
relevant example, if discussion of a particular political topic or entity isn't allowed, there should be a clear rule prohibiting political discussions, instead of being vaguely allowed with an unspoken rule that you'll be punished if you ruffle the wrong feathers

and the consequences for breaking a rule should be largely predetermined, either by some form of point system, a general guideline for what each infraction should entail, or at the very least following established precedent for similar infractions with respects given to severity
the key point is that punishments should be consistent and predictable, not chosen arbitrarily at the time they're given based on the mood of whoever gives it

you simply can't sustainably moderate a large community based on vibes, and you can't expect users to follow rules that you only make up after the fact
rules should be guardrails you put up to protect your community and set the stage for the types of interactions you want to facilitate, not a cudgel you wield to beat users who fall out of line

general "you"s all around

 

[Siddo]

hi. hello.
I've previously made a suggestion directly to the big Agennon himself. Regarding how to set us up for success in moderating on discord. So I'm just gonna copy it over and post that without significant edits to the core idea; I've cleaned up some sections to improve clarity.

I'm happy to hear feedback and for this to be picked apart or have flaws pointed out. This was my first draft and I've not revisited it in the time since making that in the distant long ago of last week.
It's written in the context of being a guide for staffing discord.

Staffing on Discord​

When staffing discord, our goal is first and foremost to keep the space fun. That means your first instinct shouldn't be to reach for a formal warning or ban, but rather to defuse the situation. This can be done in multiple ways. We can view this as separate in the form of "mediation"

So what is mediation?​

Mediating is ensuring that our users, even though they're all different with different ideas and views and opinions, can coexist in our space. Mediating is the first step you take when donning your discord staff uniform. Options for mediating include:
Distracting, e.g. talking about something else. Such as "Sorry teach, my car ate my homework" - silly though it sounds, can be such a strange interjection that it draws attention and starts to water down the tension of the conversation. It can also be a more real line of conversation like "I can't fucking beat this stupid wall of flesh in terraria ts pmo " - this works best before things get heated and people get really invested.
Directing, e.g. pulling a person aside to level with them. Such as "I don't quite understand what this is about, could you explain it to me in a dm?" - This relies on rapport with the user in question, because otherwise this can escalate the friction instead. It's best used for people that you already get along with. By pulling someone aside and directing their attention elsewhere, you interrupt the escalation and can encourage a better conversation.
De-escalating, e.g. acknowledging the grievances and guiding the conversation to a more calm tone. Such as "Honestly, that's fair, I can see where you're coming from. What do you think needs to be done here?" - this ruptures the tension very effectively in a lot of cases and is the most universally applicable method. Because that acknowledgment alone goes a long way to making users feel heard and makes them feel less combative about whatever is upsetting them or causing division between two people.
Diverting, e.g. telling them to take the conversation elsewhere. Such as "This ain't the place for it, bubs, you can yap in dms if you need to get it off your chest" or "Stop talking about captain underpants" - this is more of a middle ground between mediating and moderating and should be used only when you're preparing to step into moderating.

Then what is moderating?​

Moderating is taking formal action as staff. Handing out logged warnings, mutes, kicks, time-outs, bans, whatever is needed. This is the last resort in our discord moderation toolbox and should be used only if mediating fails. It's important that you log everything - much of it is already done via using the bot. Make sure that you reach out to the person(s) you're taking staff action against, explain clearly and succinctly the actions taken; why you did it, what they can do about it, and how they can avoid it in the future. Follow the protocol for the offence in question and apply the relevant punishment. If you feel unsure about whether to elevate, you're always welcome to confer with your fellow staff about whether something crossed a line or not to avoid acting on a personal bias against players or a misunderstood situation.
(discord protocol here, I guess)

My intent is giving concrete, actionable ways of handling things in a primarily social setting, such as discord. And a lot of issues are best handled without pulling staff powers into the mix, because that's heavy handed in a social setting. Everything that you can resolve by mediating™ is better resolved that way. It reduces tension in the long run. It also builds trust between staff and community - trust in things being treated charitably and fairly; that staff will communicate in the moment rather than nuke from orbit a week or month later.
I would want to flesh that out a bit, make it easier to digest, and boil it down to the simplest and shortest version it can be.
But it sets the standard for how to engage as staff when you see something that needs to be handled, while laying out a clear guideline that staff have to communicate BEFORE they reach for the power tools.
Added benefit is that it's outlining how to handle things before taking staff action, meaning it lines up perfectly with our current rules and protocols. Nothing would need to change about the rules, only the staff enforcing them. It is setting up how to handle things in a better way