Updates from the Mod Team

[fishy 1,757]

@Members

 

The VHL has a commitment to continual betterment and support of its members. In response to the recent situations involving harassment and feedback that the mod team has received, we have made some adjustments and clarifications regarding personal conduct in VHL-designated spaces.

 

First, we have updated the Code of Conduct (COC). You can now find a link to the complete COC in the Announcements subforum or by hovering over the “rules” tab along the top of the site.

 

We felt that the previous version of our COC was 1) difficult to find, as it was embedded in the VHL rules, which are distinct from the other leagues’ rulebooks, and 2) spread across multiple posts. For this reason, we have condensed our COC into one post that provides a more comprehensive understanding of our community rules.

 

Please note that it is the responsibility of each member to know and understand the Code of Conduct, which they agree to follow at the time of joining the league and its domains. If you have questions about its contents, it is essential that you request clarification.

 

Second, we created an informational guide. This post is pinned in the Announcements subforum as well–it includes a link to a reporting form that allows members to submit reports anonymously if they prefer. We encourage everyone to read the post for a better understanding of how the mod team operates.

 

We created this guide to help clarify the role of moderators, what kinds of reports we handle, and the types of reports we handle. This is in response to a lack of transparency regarding the reporting process, and we felt that more information would help encourage people to not only report concerns to the right people but also feel comfortable coming forward.

 

Finally, we have updated the discord #rules channel in accordance with the previous two points. Not much has changed, but you can now find a link to the reporting form in that channel for convenience.

 

The goal is that, together, we as a community will take this opportunity to take a step in the right direction toward enacting respect for all members. Aided by the rework of our Code of Conduct, the expectations for personal conduct will be solidified and clear; our reporting system facilitates volunteering information, especially anonymous reporting, which allows members to remain protected in situations that they are hesitant to identify themselves; the informational guide serves as a resource for all members, whether new or longstanding, to better understand how reporting works and the needs that various roles fulfill.

 

While there is more information about the anonymous reporting system in our informational post, we would like to emphasize anonymous reporting allows individuals to come forward about situations that sometimes feel embarrassing. We hope that the added layer will encourage members to come forward rather than sweeping concerns under the rug out of fear of judgement.

 

We take reports of harassment very seriously, and we hope that, by clarifying its definition, we can better address the issues that some of our members are facing. Rather than positioning ourselves against the user base, the mod team aims to align our values of common respect inclusion with the league. This means that we work with members and support them in times of need as opposed to operating as an enigmatic force of power who exists separately from the members.

 

The highest priority of the mod team is to help create a community in which everyone feels welcome and safe. We feel that these adjustments and implementations are a step in the direction toward positive change in the league.

 

If you have questions about any of the contents of this announcement, the COC revisions, or the informational guide, feel free to reach out to a moderator directly or respond in this thread.

 

- @Moderator, @Head Moderator 

Edited November 10, 2021 by fishy
i wanted to be the last edit >:)

[Horcrux 322]

14 hours ago, fishy said:

@Members

 

The VHL has a commitment to continual betterment and support of its members. In response to the recent situations involving harassment and feedback that the mod team has received, we have made some adjustments and clarifications regarding personal conduct in VHL-designated spaces.

 

First, we have updated the Code of Conduct (COC). You can now find a link to the complete COC in the Announcements subforum or by hovering over the “rules” tab along the top of the site.

 

We felt that the previous version of our COC was 1) difficult to find, as it was embedded in the VHL rules, which are distinct from the other leagues’ rulebooks, and 2) spread across multiple posts. For this reason, we have condensed our COC into one post that provides a more comprehensive understanding of our community rules.

 

Please note that it is the responsibility of each member to know and understand the Code of Conduct, which they agree to follow at the time of joining the league and its domains. If you have questions about its contents, it is essential that you request clarification.

 

Second, we created an informational guide. This post is pinned in the Announcements subforum as well–it includes a link to a reporting form that allows members to submit reports anonymously if they prefer. We encourage everyone to read the post for a better understanding of how the mod team operates.

 

We created this guide to help clarify the role of moderators, what kinds of reports we handle, and the types of reports we handle. This is in response to a lack of transparency regarding the reporting process, and we felt that more information would help encourage people to not only report concerns to the right people but also feel comfortable coming forward.

 

Finally, we have updated the discord #rules channel in accordance with the previous two points. Not much has changed, but you can now find a link to the reporting form in that channel for convenience.

 

The goal is that, together, we as a community will take this opportunity to take a step in the right direction toward enacting respect for all members. Aided by the rework of our Code of Conduct, the expectations for personal conduct will be solidified and clear; our reporting system facilitates volunteering information, especially anonymous reporting, which allows members to remain protected in situations that they are hesitant to identify themselves; the informational guide serves as a resource for all members, whether new or longstanding, to better understand how reporting works and the needs that various roles fulfill.

 

While there is more information about the anonymous reporting system in our informational post, we would like to emphasize that abuse of this system could result in punishment. Anonymous reporting allows individuals to come forward about situations that sometimes feel embarrassing. We hope that the added layer will encourage members to come forward rather than sweeping concerns under the rug out of fear of judgement.

 

We take reports of harassment very seriously, and we hope that, by clarifying its definition, we can better address the issues that some of our members are facing. Rather than positioning ourselves against the user base, the mod team aims to align our values of common respect inclusion with the league. This means that we work with members and support them in times of need as opposed to operating as an enigmatic force of power who exists separately from the members.

 

The highest priority of the mod team is to help create a community in which everyone feels welcome and safe. We feel that these adjustments and implementations are a step in the direction toward positive change in the league.

 

If you have questions about any of the contents of this announcement, the COC revisions, or the informational guide, feel free to reach out to a moderator directly or respond in this thread.

 

- @Moderator, @Head Moderator 

[Horcrux 322]

I love the defined roles of Admins, Mods and who handles what. I love the transparency of updating the COC and the process in which a report is handled. you all knocked this out of the park. Well done mods, this is a HUGE step in the RIGHT direction. love to see it 

[BOOM 8,748]

I confirm that I have read and understand the new rules and requirements as they relate to myself and my interactions with the VHL and its various entities. 

 

 

[STZ 5,360]

This feels like a work email.

[RomanesEuntDomus 442]

32 minutes ago, STZ said:

This feels like a work email.

 

For real. These are good measures and it's good that the issues at hand are getting taken more seriously, but boy could you have formulated this any more like a hollow corporate press release or HR mail ?

 

If have not followed the recent incident(s) too closely but what I find a bit unfortunate is how vague this all is. Someone who wasn't here for the situation itself will have no idea from this post what it was all about, and as an extension will find it hard to improve his own behavior based on it. All we really get out of this is a rather generic "read the rules" and "harassment is bad", is that really enough?

 

I think we need to take a more concentrated effort to better ourselves and give people the chance to learn from this. I'm pretty sure that the problem with the user who that most recent controversy was about wasn't that he thought that harassment was okay, the problem was that his definition of harassment differed from that of the female userbase. If we want to bridge that gap we probably need to be a bit more specific about what is acceptable and what isn't.

Edited November 10, 2021 by RomanesEuntDomus

[BOOM 8,748]

How do we prove what baiting is, and also do reports against a mod go directly to Tfong or is there an official process? 

[BOOM 8,748]

Nevermind, I see the appropriate links now. 

[Baozi 1,658]

21 minutes ago, BOOM said:

How do we prove what baiting is, and also do reports against a mod go directly to Tfong or is there an official process? 

 

The reports goto and are visible by the entire mod team just to clarify that bit, the process which I believe you found but I'm just replying for awareness.

 

Baiting is an fairly complex definition however it is identified on case by case basis we will look at an individuals history of engaging with other individuals to determine the intention of whatever conversation is going on. That being said, if you want a simple outlook on what baiting would be it, its simply arguing in bad faith in order to get you in trouble. This could be as simple as daring someone to make a post, or to antagonize them into saying something against the COC with the purpose of getting you in trouble. There unfortunately is no real textbook definition for this at the moment so we'll look at these on a case by case basis. When in doubt, ask a mod or submit an anonymous report.

 

[BOOM 8,748]

Thank you @tfong

 

I shall word my affidavit accordingly.

 

 

[bigAL 2,176]

10 hours ago, RomanesEuntDomus said:

I find a bit unfortunate is how vague this all is

It kinda needs to be eh? This discussion came up when looking at other leagues’ mod policies. Some five very specific punishments related to very specific infractions, but we need the flexibility to adapt to every situation. We trust our mods’ collective professional judgement to use the rules to keep everyone happy and safe here. Being super specific leaves so many loopholes and gaps because we can’t plan for every possible human action or reaction. Vaguely specific and specifically vague allows the guidelines to be applied broadly when they need to be. 
 

The less official version mostly boils down to one of my life mottos: “don’t be a jerk, and respect people by considering how your actions might affect them.”

[Grape 677]

23 hours ago, RomanesEuntDomus said:

 

the problem was that his definition of harassment differed from that of the female userbase. If we want to bridge that gap we probably need to be a bit more specific about what is acceptable and what isn't.

The issue with that is adding in specifics is going to cause more unnecessary reports from third parties. Let's say you're saying stuff to me that would, in the specifics, be seen as harassment, but I'm completely fine with it, it's in good fun, I don't care, etc. etc. A person could come into it with a lack of context and report you, despite the situation being fine. You are now punished because someone else felt harassed on my behalf. For this instance, we need to keep things general and at a case-to-case basis so as to ensure that someone isn't wrongfully reported.

[Horcrux 322]

19 minutes ago, Grape said:

The issue with that is adding in specifics is going to cause more unnecessary reports from third parties. Let's say you're saying stuff to me that would, in the specifics, be seen as harassment, but I'm completely fine with it, it's in good fun, I don't care, etc. etc. A person could come into it with a lack of context and report you, despite the situation being fine. You are now punished because someone else felt harassed on my behalf. For this instance, we need to keep things general and at a case-to-case basis so as to ensure that someone isn't wrongfully reported.

Very well put.

[Gustav 6,417]

 

14 hours ago, bigAL said:

It kinda needs to be eh? This discussion came up when looking at other leagues’ mod policies. Some five very specific punishments related to very specific infractions, but we need the flexibility to adapt to every situation. We trust our mods’ collective professional judgement to use the rules to keep everyone happy and safe here. Being super specific leaves so many loopholes and gaps because we can’t plan for every possible human action or reaction. Vaguely specific and specifically vague allows the guidelines to be applied broadly when they need to be. 

 

Yes and no. I'm not going to mention any names or make any official reports because it's over and it wasn't my problem to begin with, but the other day someone asked what specifically led to one of the recent punishments and was just hit with a copy-paste of the ban thread post--and not only a refusal to explain further, but an insistence that said copy-paste was a full and complete explanation of exactly what happened.

 

I completely understand why we aren't being given all the details--keeping it vague in those specific cases is the right thing to do to respect the privacy of those affected. But the league deserves to know what's OK and what isn't, and asking for examples of what's OK and what isn't shouldn't be met condescendingly. I've honestly seen this type of thing happen a few times since recent punishments went down--you know my general perspective on modding and free speech and all that, so maybe I'm biased, but we should keep in mind that a "higher standard" goes beyond (and isn't necessarily equal to) tighter control.

 

So yes, I agree that things need to be handled on a case-by-case basis, but please, if you have the authority to hand out punishments, be willing to educate those without it on what is and isn't cool to do when asked. Because I'd like to acknowledge some of the efforts made recently as positive (as I do see some of them as positive, regardless of how hard that may be to believe): the new posting/improved accessibility of the code of conduct is a good thing, and an example of some guidelines being specifically delineated. 

[Horcrux 322]

1 hour ago, GustavMattias said:

 

 

Yes and no. I'm not going to mention any names or make any official reports because it's over and it wasn't my problem to begin with, but the other day someone asked what specifically led to one of the recent punishments and was just hit with a copy-paste of the ban thread post--and not only a refusal to explain further, but an insistence that said copy-paste was a full and complete explanation of exactly what happened.

 

I completely understand why we aren't being given all the details--keeping it vague in those specific cases is the right thing to do to respect the privacy of those affected. But the league deserves to know what's OK and what isn't, and asking for examples of what's OK and what isn't shouldn't be met condescendingly. I've honestly seen this type of thing happen a few times since recent punishments went down--you know my general perspective on modding and free speech and all that, so maybe I'm biased, but we should keep in mind that a "higher standard" goes beyond (and isn't necessarily equal to) tighter control.

 

So yes, I agree that things need to be handled on a case-by-case basis, but please, if you have the authority to hand out punishments, be willing to educate those without it on what is and isn't cool to do when asked. Because I'd like to acknowledge some of the efforts made recently as positive (as I do see some of them as positive, regardless of how hard that may be to believe): the new posting/improved accessibility of the code of conduct is a good thing, and an example of some guidelines being specifically delineated. 

I mean....really?

 

Use your common sense, you know as a person what's right and wrong to say. You shouldn't need you handheld and explained that inappropriate jokes just shouldn't happen or be encouraged. 

 

As for the log. Unless it involves you, or in this case the members in question why they were banned is really no ones business..period. 

 

[Gustav 6,417]

11 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

Use your common sense, you know as a person what's right and wrong to say. You shouldn't need you handheld and explained that inappropriate jokes just shouldn't happen or be encouraged.

 

I do know what's right and wrong to say. I've read the code of conduct and I've always followed it.

 

12 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

As for the log. Unless it involves you, or in this case the members in question why they were banned is really no ones business..period.

 

And I agree.

 

What I'm saying is that a higher standard of moderation also involves being more accessible to the average member. Asking a legitimate question and basically being told to fuck off isn't constructive, and it doesn't help anybody. I'm not saying that I need to know exactly what happened in every case--I don't know, I don't need to know, and I'm not trying to find out. 

 

In the specific case I'm referring to, something like linking a good, legitimate definition of harassment (i.e. "any unwelcome offensive action") or even just putting it in super general terms (i.e. "let's say you're saying certain things to someone and they ask you not to do that, don't keep doing it") is a much more clear and professional response than a copypasta and "I don't know what else to tell you".

[Horcrux 322]

11 minutes ago, GustavMattias said:

 

I do know what's right and wrong to say. I've read the code of conduct and I've always followed it.

 

 

And I agree.

 

What I'm saying is that a higher standard of moderation also involves being more accessible to the average member. Asking a legitimate question and basically being told to fuck off isn't constructive, and it doesn't help anybody. I'm not saying that I need to know exactly what happened in every case--I don't know, I don't need to know, and I'm not trying to find out. 

 

In the specific case I'm referring to, something like linking a good, legitimate definition of harassment (i.e. "any unwelcome offensive action") or even just putting it in super general terms (i.e. "let's say you're saying certain things to someone and they ask you not to do that, don't keep doing it") is a much more clear and professional response than a copypasta and "I don't know what else to tell you".

Then your comment of I don't know what to say is dumb.

 

And again unless the parties are involved a generic answer is fine. It doesn't effect you, if member A gets suspended or not. You don't need to KNOW the reason. You just need to know what rule was broken.

Edited November 12, 2021 by Horcrux

[Beketov 9,025]

3 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

Again.. You do know what is right and wrong to say. You have a brain. Use it. Common sense. 

 

And again unless the parties are involved a generic answer is fine. It doesn't effect you, if member A gets suspended or not. You don't need to KNOW the reason. You just need to know what rule was broken.

I don’t think he’s saying he would need to know for some kind of personal want to know everything, more so just to make sure that the understanding of where the line is drawn exists. That doesn’t seem extreme and should be doable without going into too many specifics. For example, and this is purely made up, if I said “person A was suspended for making sexual comments about person B despite being repeatedly told by person B that they made them uncomfortable” that would be giving a reason without giving specific and sometimes intimate details. That’s not an unreasonable request IMO unless person A or B specifically requested that no details at all be shared.

[Horcrux 322]

3 minutes ago, Beketov said:

I don’t think he’s saying he would need to know for some kind of personal want to know everything, more so just to make sure that the understanding of where the line is drawn exists. That doesn’t seem extreme and should be doable without going into too many specifics. For example, and this is purely made up if I said “person A was suspended for making sexual comments about person B despite being repeatedly told by person B that they made them uncomfortable” that would be giving a reason without giving specific and sometimes intimate details. That’s not an unreasonable request IMO unless person A or B specifically requested that no details at all be shared.

I believe it's situational. For one, no one should be told if it was sexual or not. Just inappropriate. In my opinion. 

 

But if you go. to your job and someone asks why X was fired the boss won't tell you. 

 

Every single thing should be situational because context matter and that would come up during an investigation. 

 

(Based on your example given)

Edited November 12, 2021 by Horcrux

[Dom 1,445]

1 minute ago, Horcrux said:

I believe it's situational. For one, no one should be told if it was sexual or not. Just inappropriate. In my opinion. 

 

But if you go. to your job and someone asks why X was fired the boss won't tell you. 

 

Every single thing should be situational because context matter and that would come up during an investigation. 

 

(Based on your example given)

To be fair, one of the ways to raise awareness of people is to make it sound raw and unfiltered. Its a way used even by governments, just look at the campaigns against cellphones or drugs on the road. They don't ease their words to make it more friendly, it shock you and you remember that campaign when you drive. So with all that being said, while I don't think the details needs to be given, I also don't think we should try to ease it too much.

[Baozi 1,658]

One of the reasons why we don't release details of incidents is because we value the privacy of those hurt in these situations. For many victims, seeing descriptions and/or their names attached to situations will further hurt them or or trigger their trauma. We want to protect these people, not put them in the public eye for others to "investigate" or analyze why they are hurt.

 

Now if you are looking as to what we deem as inappropriate, I believe we can start sourcing materials or presentations on such things and posting them here if that helps. We can look towards educational awareness campaigns as well if you or others believe that would help establish what is "wrong" or "inappropriate".

[Gustav 6,417]

42 minutes ago, tfong said:

One of the reasons why we don't release details of incidents is because we value the privacy of those hurt in these situations. For many victims, seeing descriptions and/or their names attached to situations will further hurt them or or trigger their trauma. We want to protect these people, not put them in the public eye for others to "investigate" or analyze why they are hurt.

 

And this is exactly what people who ask what happened with these things should be told. It's respectful and gives a good reason why things were announced the way they were.

 

The issue I had was that what was told was nothing like this. It's all in the past now, but in the future it would be appreciated if respectful questions were met with respect.

 

(That's not directed at you specifically btw, and I don't intend to call out any individuals. I just feel that at times mod interactions with other members regarding rules have been a bit harsh for no real reason--which doesn't lead to many positive experiences.)

[RomanesEuntDomus 442]

10 hours ago, Grape said:

The issue with that is adding in specifics is going to cause more unnecessary reports from third parties. Let's say you're saying stuff to me that would, in the specifics, be seen as harassment, but I'm completely fine with it, it's in good fun, I don't care, etc. etc. A person could come into it with a lack of context and report you, despite the situation being fine. You are now punished because someone else felt harassed on my behalf. For this instance, we need to keep things general and at a case-to-case basis so as to ensure that someone isn't wrongfully reported.

 

Interesting, I basically look at it the opposite way. As long as things are so vague, anything and everything might be reported because it could be seen as "harassment" of some sort by some members. That's not necessarily bad but my point is that those vague rules don't prevent unnecessary reports, they actually make them more likely. At the end of the day it will have to be a case-by-case decision anyway where the perspective of the person that was potentially being harassed is key, no matter if the rules are specific or vague.

 

Without knowing every little detail, I have to say that reading the thread that prompted this discussion left me a bit frustrated, because it felt like a lot of potential to facilitate more constructive change was wasted there. Basically what I as someone who wasn't personally involved saw was a group of mostly female members bringing up relatively broad accusations, which were then met with unspecific and non-committal essays, PR speak and promises to "be better" by parts of the male user base.

 

Now I completely understand that the women didn't want to put every detail out here in the open, both to protect their own privacy and dignity and that of other people involved. There is nothing wrong with that, I don't doubt the validity of their claims. But not releasing any more (anonymized) details even after the cases are resolved makes it really hard to actually draw useful lessons from that. "Just don't be a dick" isn't enough imho. I'm sure most of the perpetrators in these cases didn't think they were dicks either, and yet that's how their actions were perceived. It's that very gap that we need to bridge if we want to make real progress. Because what I saw in that thread coming from many of the male users often looked like mere lip-service to me or the typical kind of social media passive progressiveness where you try to show everyone how enlightened you are without actually doing anything that really makes a difference.

[Horcrux 322]

5 hours ago, RomanesEuntDomus said:

Basically what I as someone who wasn't personally involved saw was a group of mostly female members bringing up relatively broad accusations, which were then met with unspecific and non-committal essays, PR speak and promises to "be better" by parts of the male user base.

The accusations were not broad in the slightest. and saying this is and pardon my french is (censored) and irresponsible. 

a lot of members seem to have wanted to insert themselves into situations that have nothing to do with them. What as you said "mostly female members" went through and what we reported is NO ONES (censored) BUSINESS but you are now what? moaning because you dont know what someone was suspended then decided to rage quit the league? like how about no and dont make stupid accusations. the admins and mods were asked not to share details. 1.) no ones business 2.) didnt feel like reliving that shit. I dont understand why thats so hard for some of you "Male members" to understand. you dont hold a league job that would require you to know, you dont have any stake in what happened. period. 

so simply dont be an asshole, read the rules, and you should be okay 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Horcrux
to fit in the C.O.C.

[Grape 677]

5 hours ago, RomanesEuntDomus said:

 

As long as things are so vague, anything and everything might be reported because it could be seen as "harassment" of some sort by some members. That's not necessarily bad but my point is that those vague rules don't prevent unnecessary reports, they actually make them more likely.

While the vagueness could lead to more reports, that increase in frequency wouldn't lead to an increase in punishment. Specifics would allow really no wiggle room for the mods when it comes to choosing a decision and a subsequent punishment. The vagueness allows for the mods to look at and listen to both sides and better determine if it was actual harassment or genuine miscommunication. Yea it's sucky that there's no hard definition for harassment, but no matter what we come up with if we want to have one, nobody is going to feel happy and someone is going to feel alienated.

 

5 hours ago, RomanesEuntDomus said:

But not releasing any more (anonymized) details even after the cases are resolved makes it really hard to actually draw useful lessons from that. "Just don't be a dick" isn't enough imho. I'm sure most of the perpetrators in these cases didn't think they were dicks either, and yet that's how their actions were perceived. It's that very gap that we need to bridge if we want to make real progress. Because what I saw in that thread coming from many of the male users often looked like mere lip-service to me or the typical kind of social media passive progressiveness where you try to show everyone how enlightened you are without actually doing anything that really makes a difference.

It is tough to understand the full picture as an outsider, but at the end of the day the privacy of the members takes priority and we gotta respect that. I'm confident there was a deeper conversation about this with all members involved in private that better outlined what is to be expected. I will agree with you though that a good chunk of the response from the male userbase came off as lip-service and lacked a genuine feeling of caring, but that's what you get with the internet. Hard to really convey feeling through text and it's my hope at least that the male users that responded do mean what they say and aren't just trying to score some social points.