What Does the Community Think of League Moderation? (ALL of your opinions, NONE of mine)

[Gustav 6,417]

Disclaimer: opinions represented here are not necessarily my own, and this is not directly meant to push for any policy change. I have done this simply to represent the opinions of the community as a whole and try to start a respectful dialogue.

 

I'm going to try to do this as objectively as possible, so let me know if you think I haven't done that. 

 

Last week, I put up a survey asking for all of your opinions on the performance of the mod team. With many complaints being floated out there in recent memory (many perpetuated by none other than yours truly), I felt that everyone yelling at each other on Discord wouldn't be a productive way to start a discussion. On top of that, I believe that both mods and community members may be taken more seriously with their actions and ideas backed up by public opinion, should those opinions line up with what they do and say. Though the mod team is here to hold us accountable as members, I believe that the members play a role in holding the mod team accountable in return, a relationship which--ideally--should be healthy. Though I will not attempt to draw any single conclusion from the results of this survey, I believe that it will provide valuable feedback and a good general sense of what has been done correctly and what has not. 

 

Before we get into the report, I'd like to address a few things about how I'm going to give you the report, to hopefully give you a better sense of how to interpret it.

• All who responded were given options to remain anonymous. Some gave me their name and will be named in this article, some gave me their name and will not. Some didn't give me their name, as that was an option that I gave as well.
• All responses (aside from anything that was, like, 3 words, or contains negative comments about specific people) will be reported in this article, because even if something is covered in another comment, I find it important to show the relative amounts of certain responses as recorded. I gave an option to survey respondents to not be quoted in the article, and in those cases the responses will be withheld.
• In some cases, I will edit the responses for proper grammar/spelling/punctuation. Wording will not be changed unless it is necessary to make a sentence grammatically correct, and I will not alter the meaning of any response.
• Though most responses were great, I have chosen to reject one entirely, and another partially. One response gave a score of 1 in every category without comment and without giving me any name--something which, though I could certainly use it to push my own agenda, I don't feel comfortable reporting seriously--and another gave a response to one question (which was scored differently from the others and may have been a source of confusion) which was entirely out of line with their comments and responses throughout the rest of the survey. These responses will not be counted in the calculations I will provide, though I don't know of a way to take them out of Google Forms. Because of this, they are still represented in the graphs provided (though I had enough responses that this shouldn't matter).
• I recognize that most of this article is other people's quotes (and it will be a ton of words). I'm only going to claim this for two weeks at most because of that (and it's not in the Media Spot section because I have something else sitting in there at the moment and this is more in the "discussion" category anyway).

 

Let's get into it!

 

 

Thanks to the following, for the following:

@Berocka

@Spartan

@N0HBDY

@Ahma

@ajwllmsn

@FrostBeard

@Hogan

@JardyB10

@thadthrasher

@a_Fork

@Doomsday

...as well as 13 others who either chose to remain anonymous or gave me a name I'm unsure is correct (to whoever responded as me, I think I know who you are but I'm not going to assume).

 

 

Among those who responded, 91.7% do not have any mod powers (8.3% do). Both mods and non-mods were free to complete the survey.

 

 

Question 1: Do you believe that the VHL Code of Conduct provides a good general basis for moderation?

• 65.2% answered YES
• 17.4% answered NO
• 17.4% answered OTHER:
  • "Yes, but I can guarantee that 99% of users are not going to read it." -Anonymous
  • "I feel ike overall it's good. Like anything, it can be improved and likely will be improved as time goes on. Everything evolves!" -Anonymous
  • "For the most part, yes. But when they announce bans by referring to section 1.1, that's a problem. That part just lists the punishments." -Anonymous
  • "I believe that the meaning of the CoC is good. That said, we are coming to a point as a community where joking around by the CoC can become problematic." -FrostBeard

 

 

Question 2: Is there anything that you would like to see added to or removed from the Code of Conduct?

 

• "It's too specific, making chatting about the league and anything even fringe on the line a no go. Too restrictive." -Anonymous

 

• "Maybe have consequences laid out. EX - First time offender: 10 min mute 2nd: 1 hour 3rd: 12 hours etc" -Anonymous

 

• ""Any comments made that belittle members of an oppressed group will not be tolerated." This should be removed, why do they have to be an oppressed group to get the treatment everyone deserves?" -Berocka

 

• "I'd like to see more clarity on what rules are actually enforced and which ones aren't. We've apparently had rules against baiting/trolling/drama/fighting for quite a bit now, and we have quite a lot of all of that in chats. However, it's never been punished before, so I'm not quite sure why they're included very vaguely if each reported situation is handled on a case by case regardless, and supposed infractions are just assigned to very high level buckets" -Spartan

 

• "I'd like to see kind of a limit as to how long ago something have happened can be reported, such as in Hogan's case this is 4 months later, and only resulted in a measly 1 week tpe ban. Like it was 4 months ago, is it worth even bringing up and reviewing and just going through all the trouble in general just to handout a slap on the wrist like that. This way like nothing minor, or likely as stupid as what hogan did gets brought up when it really didn't need to be. I'd like to see the admins and whoever handles these things take more responsibility and have more accountability when it comes to their mistakes. They likely saw what Hogan said when it happened, but thought it was ok then since nothing happened, so why change your mind 4 months later?" -N0HBDY

 

• "Nothing. I really like that the Mods have cracked down on members to make the community safer and more fun to be a part of." -ajwllmsn

 

• "Yeah, remove baiting. Obviously it's been meme'd to hell and back, and will continue to be so." -Anonymous

 

• "Punishment for abuse of power by a member of the moderation team." -Anonymous

 

• "I believe that CoC should be as simple as it can be. Don't do *list all the things like sexual advances, act with respect towards every human being, be mindful of what you say to people as it might hurt*. (That is just a quick list of things and is not complete) Anything after that to me is just trying to make sure that the league becomes TOO regulated." -FrostBeard

 

• "Maybe make it a bit more clear, I know when looking at some bans members were confused to what a section meant and how it related to a ban." -Hogan

 

• "I think that many of the rules are still very open to interpretation. It's kind of similar in the NHL to be honest. The rules are left just vague enough that the rule can be enforced differently depending on the situation and technically still fit within the definition. That can lead to bias against certain groups or members." -a_Fork

 

• "COC has become extremely tight and limiting, nothing in particular to remove as that's more on the enforcement side." -Anonymous

 

• "A statute of limitations on punishments for past offenses, as times and people change. I also really don't want to see instances like Hogan's where people dig up something from months ago for no good reason other than to be petty." -Doomsday

 

 

Question 3: On a scale from 1 to 10, how do you feel the mod team as a whole has performed in terms of CONSISTENCY (similar/equal actions taken for similar/equal offenses)?

Average score: 4.96

Standard deviation: 2.70

 

 

Comments:

• "Bans different lengths and punishments seem stupid for different reasons. Similar to NHL punishments, so at least that's realistic." -Anonymous

 

• "Very inconsistent, I think this is one of the biggest issues for the mod team right now." -Anonymous

 

• "There is obvious favouritism. Often you see certain members, who I won't name, get away with things. Then, you see members who aren't as liked do the same or less and they get slapped with the fine. This isn't with all moderators either, I don't believe." -Anonymous

 

• "I guess we do not see warnings, only the final results--so I do not know what is happening to know if the punishments are fair." -Berocka

 

• "I think the most recent situation with Hogan has a spotlight on this point specifically, as there are plenty of instances of the CoC being broken over the past 2 years that it's existed in this format. A simple search of "retard" on discord gives me 23 hits, including hits from a current moderator, most from 2019 through today. Since drama/fighting/trolling/baiting isn't allowed, all threads that got locked due to fighting/drama should have the involved users punished as well. Even recently, the NSFW rule to make the discord safe for work was enforced by the removal of the boomshack, but there was a discussion about porn in gen chat just a few days ago, and people are free to use profanity. This isn't a comment to advocate to make our league rated E for Everyone, or suitable for children across the board, as I frankly think most of the people in this league are old enough to contain themselves. People at work/school have more pressing things than to worry about mentions of porn in gen chat, although apparently those don't get moderated anyways." -Spartan

 

• "I think that they over exaggerate what the requirements it takes to be a mod, sure being of age is fine, but being available and on discord however many hours they said seems unreasonable, and I also think that they're overstepping their boundaries by now moderating discord locker rooms which they have no business in doing, and then hiring 4 new mods when they only had to replace 1 and maybe needed to add one more." -N0HBDY

 

• "Fishy has been on the BALL. Every time I need to tag a mod for help with member issues, new players with inappropriate names, etc... Fishy has been there right away to help fix problems. The other mods as well are doing a great job, I have just noticed Fishy really taking charge." -ajwllmsn

 

• "I've been in multiple voice chats where there's been a number of things that go against the code of conduct while moderators were present and nothing happened. That's not to say I want a policed-state in the league, but as to whether they are consistent or not, no they are not." -Anonymous

 

• "TPE bans are garbage. A person like Spyro, who has been Welfare+PF for their career, doesn't care much about a 2 week TPE ban I would assume. Then on the other hand you have Hogan, who has been max earning with his new player up to this point. Although the TPE almost evens out (2x 6 for Spyro = 12) and (1x 13 for Hogan), and I'm not exactly sure what Spyro did, but this affects Hulk Hogan 2's entire career, compared to a barely active Spyro." -Anonymous

 

• "I have been following the VHL on a consistent basis and the regularity of new mods implementing joke mutes or other behavior is disappointing. They also seem indifferent to some things that can be viewed as inappropriate, yet other times implement action immediately." -Anonymous

 

• "I think that when it comes to consistency, you can't really argue that it is there, after all, people are getting punished for doing small and irrelevant things too, things that should at best warrant a warning so, yes, it is equally consistent." -FrostBeard

 

• "A lot of the inconsistency for me comes in discord. Sometimes mods will quickly move topics to other channels while sometimes they let it stay. It feels like sometimes posts stay that should be deleted and vice-versa." -Hogan

 

• "By and large, the mod team does a great job. There's a couple recent things I didn't 100% agree with but don't disagree with enough to question the decisions too much or their conduct in general." -JardyB10

 

• "I've seen a variety of users break the CoC at various levels of severity. It seems that certain users have received more frequent/severe punishments over others." -thadthrasher

 

• "The mod team applies the letter of the law as consistently as possible. They're not going to see everything given the nature of Discord, but overall, as far as consistency goes, I think they do a relatively good job." -Anonymous

 

• "I think mods are fairly consistent and I think it's silly to expect 100% consistency on a group of people.  They are not a hive mind.  Although it's possible they are not as consistent as I think but that I just don't mind what they do." -Anonymous

 

• "I think it's kind of a toss up. The code of conduct still seems very broad and could be implemented differently by everyone." -a_Ferk

 

• "Punishments seem to vary wildly from user to user for similar issues/coc violations." -Anonymous

 

• "A couple of head scratchers here and there, but for the most part, it's typically just and consistent." -Doomsday

 

 

Question 4: How do you feel the mod team has performed in terms of PROFESSIONALISM (general respect in mod-related discussion)?

Average score: 6.70

Standard deviation: 2.99

 

 

Comments:

• "People are people and we make mistakes and they have to still enjoy the site too. They're not gonna be robots. They have emotions too. Similar to that standard, members should be and USUALLY are treated the same." -Anonymous

 

• "If we're limiting the definition of professionalism here to ""general respect in mod-related discussions,"" then it'd be a straight 10 since they either say ""we can't provide details" or simply don't participate in conversations. 

 

• If we're covering professionalism across the board, I think people are generally fine, although some folks have issues with handling emotions during conflict. It leads to discussions being unproductive since people go on the defensive very quickly or want to leave the discussion. It doesn't help at all with conflict resolution when impulsive things are said. I can't really ding mods for acting immaturely without breaking code of conduct, since simply being immature isn't punishable in the league." -Spartan

 

• "The older mods that have done this longer are the more professional of the group I would say, it likely takes time to establish yourself into the role. But from the newer mods, I was in a vc and was server muted for no reason other than the mods wanted me to be quiet or didn't like what I was saying, which what I was saying was not violating CoC guidelines. It makes me feel much more insecure about what I think I am able to say not because these mods feel that they can mute at their disposal even when there are no rules being violated." -N0HBDY

 

• "I would consider myself to be closer (friends) with some of the mods, and they even take their role seriously when I start joking or doing anything. For example, in gen chat we were making jokes about the CoC, Sam shut me down right away which she rightfully should have. Nothing has changed, we don't hate each other because of it, she was just doing her job." -ajwllmsn

 

• "Too professional. We're here to have fun, and it seems like everyone is going out of their way to get people bans. And I'm all for moderation and justice, but I can't be the only one thinking this??" -Anonymous

 

• "I believe every response by mod team members, every post about a ban or a CoC violation has been well written, thought through and professional." -FrostBeard

• "I don't see much unprofessionalism. You can't ask mods to completely remove their personalities to become pure professional entities but I think they do a good job at staying professional." -Hogan

 

• "It's easy to lash out at the rabble, and they don't. They state their actions and their (maybe sometimes vague) reasons, and they respond to protests, if there are any, respectfully. And they don't flip flop on their decisions." -JardyB10

 

• "I've seen users ask about CoC violations and whether something was allowable or not and had members of the mod team say "if you have to ask..." This conveys a level of unprofessionalism and assumes that everyone understands the CoC to the same degree. There are members who vary in cognitive ability, and these members may genuinely not know or need help understanding." -thadthrasher

 

• "Almost gave a 10 here - for all of the complaints some people may have, professionalism cannot be one of them." -Anonymous

 

• "I haven't worked with them on any issues, I don't see them going around handing out bans or time outs or shutting down conversations for no reason." -Anonymous

 

• "I don't really care about professionalism of a mod team for a fake hockey league." -a_Fork

 

• "You generally need to be a real clown for the mod team to dunk on you over your behavior." -Doomsday

 

 

Question 5: How do you feel the mod team has performed in terms of TRANSPARENCY (availability of information when giving it is reasonably possible)?

Average score: 4.09

Standard deviation: 2.94

 

 

Comments:

• "Hiding things makes people talk about it more." -Anonymous

 

• "They need to be more transparent for sure, some of these conclusions make no sense." -Anonymous

 

• "Little bit transparent. They give you what you need to know I guess. I know once upon a time there was a grand purge where everything bad about the blues etc was PUUUURGED. Certain events happen and you only know a small part. Maybe details, to an extent, would be better to help establish guidelines and understanding." -Anonymous

 

• "They show who gets banned and reveal as little information as required whilst keeping the people anonymous." -Berocka

 

• "I had hoped that a revamp/rewrite of the code of conduct would provide more clarity on how moderation would work in this league, and would allow league members to go back to normal league activities such as earning, interacting with their teammates, growing the community. Instead, all the focus has been on the inconsistency and murkiness of the current moderation policies, which isn't optimal. This inconsistency/murkiness is based on the sheer lack of information being provided on what is acceptable and what isn't. Punishments from instances months ago are getting punished without rationalization, and one of them was even completely miscategorized. Requests from the league members to clarify moderation policies have generally been answered with ""we can't provide more details"" under some apparent crackdown on moderation to prevent harming any victims of abuse. However the same refusal to elaborate existed in Hogan's situation when he openly discussed what he did wrong, yet moderators chose not to elaborate on the process and help the league understand what is acceptable and what isn't.

  I just find that the current moderation policies 1. leave little room for a reported offender of conduct rules to defend themselves, 2. opens up the possibility for people to report others based on a ""I don't like this"" rationale, without actually addressing it with that user directly, and 3. essentially leave all decisions on any report to a group of people who seem to not be following any set precedent, and all operate in a similar mindset considering how they have collectively responded to anything moderation related." -Spartan

 

• "[They] don't say any reasoning for why a punishment happens, why they chose that specific punishment, or what the person actually did or said. It's just "code of conduct violations"... like thanks. Would be nice to see what people actually did or said so we can judge if the punishment is too severe or not." -Anonymous

 

• "There's never enough on why the person was banned, you always have to hear it through the grapevine, which is annoying and benefits no one. It keeps it private, which in some cases it likely should be, but all evidence for the persons ban is typically deleted and so people have no base of where to judge who's in the wrong and have to instead rely on the grapevine which has no way of telling you if something is true or not which leads to a lot of slandering of someones name, such as the mattyice case, we all thought that they deleted the team locker room they ran to cover up evidence but it was just because they were a boomer and hadn't transfered server ownership to someone else, and so when they tried to leave, boom, server gone." -N0HBDY

 

• "There hasn't been a time when there has been a problem with transparency, at least I have not yet to see one yet." -ajwllmsn

 

• "I recall reading on the forums that details of bans wouldn't be super detailed or whatever. I don't know, I think it's better to keep things super transparent so people understand where all parties are coming from. Just my opinion though." -Anonymous

 

• "I know you have been the one clamoring for the most transparency, and it has not really come, just mostly copy paste messages for different situations. Yes, sure, they don't want to put details out there, but come on, give us something if you're going to be policing everything with an iron fist." -Anonymous

 

• "Simply stating a violation is a breach of CoC 1.1 or similar is not good enough. Specify the offence." -Anonymous

 

• "This question is the one where I strongly believe that transparency is important. We as a community need to know precisely why someone gets banned or penalized, who reported it and when. THAT is needed for a simple reason - so that people know and don't questions the way how certain issues are handled." -FrostBeard

 

• "I think transparency in the biggest problem is moderating. In the two most recent bans I think the transparency has been terrible. In my ban I had to ask for it to be mentioned that in happened in July and in a draft stream. Without this information members were to think anything could have happened recently including a lot worse such as racism/sexism or something along those lines. I think adding on that it happened in July was done late and if never done could've changed opinions on me.

  In the case of DarkSpyros ban. He received a 2 week TPE ban following a heated report in which he swore and called the members named for what he claimed was harassment.  [REDACTED] asked for some screenshots. After two days Spyro didn't send any and told me ""When I seen it was [REDACTED], I couldn’t take him seriously"". [REDACTED] had told Spyro that he would be TPE banned for 2 weeks. After saying ""you should know we take CoC violations very seriously"". [REDACTED] then told Spyro they would not be moving forward with his claim of harrasement.

  I just think the league could've done a better job here in two ways. Firstly, in the original report. Had they done their own investigation they would find a few posts which I would call [REDACTED] being [REDACTED]. To a member that has little to no idea who he is these may come off as rude and annoying. I think the mod's could have informed Spyro that this is pretty average for [REDACTED] to see if they could try to cool him down. Instead this slapped him with a ban for letting his emotion get the best of him in what he believe what a reasonable situation.
  The second place they could've done better is transparency for the league. When I heard of his ban I thought maybe somebody dug something up, maybe he ripped into a player or maybe anything happened. With the lack of things they said it was hard to know. I think the appropriate way to adjust this would be to mention that he used rude language towards another member in a report and didn't reply in 2 days, resulting in a ban." -Hogan

 

• "I don't think their actions should be 100% transparent, as has been discussed much and everyone agrees on. I agree with you that they can be at least A LITTLE more specific in their rulings like you laid out in your article. It doesn't need to be "Gus has been banned for showing his penis to everyone on Discord," but it should be more than, "Gus has been banned because rules." A nice "Gus has been banned for sexually inappropriate and degenerate behaviour on the Discord," is perfect." -JardyB10

 

• "Without delving into the detailed reasons behind bans and what not, there seems to be a general vagueness when people ask about what happened. Sure, there are some people are simply nosey, but others may want to better understand what is and is not acceptable." -thadthrasher

 

• "This is a bit of a sticky issue, but given the nature of some of the complaints, not all of the details can be shared." -Anonymous

 

• "I looked at the ban thread for 2021, and felt things mostly had enough information (not all bans were by mods).  I agree with what I have seen mentioned a few people say in that citing 1.1 (spyros ban) as the reason for a punishment is not ideal.  I don't feel obligated to know many details but a section number is appreciated." -Anonymous

 

• "The mods are not extremely transparent in my opinion. A lot of the reasoning for bans could mean literally anything. I understand why it is though and it isn't necessarily a bad thing. Not everything should be public knowledge; especially in the more serious harassment cases." -a_Fork

 

• "It's not perfect, but it's definitely improving. Steps in the right direction lately." -Doomsday

 

 

Question 6: How do you feel the mod team has performed in terms of RELATIVE VOLUME (amount of action taken compared to your own perception of a proper amount)? To clarify--a score of 5 for this question is considered "just right".

Note: this was the question I rejected one person's response for--comments throughout the survey indicated that they believed that the mod team has been too harsh, but the number given for this question was a 1. This number is not included in the average/standard deviation below, but it is present on the graph.

 

Average: 5.91

Standard deviation: 1.41

 

 

Comments:

• "Times have changed. Everyone is PC, over sensitive and take things too seriously. This is a community that's supposed to be light, fun and a hobby. Always someone to get upset over nothing and then someone to over police to be a hero." -Anonymous

 

• "This is based on my own opinion of not seeing anything sinister happen. But maybe they are doing their job right that I don't see anything bad happen." -Berocka

 

• "Overall, the actions that have been publicly taken seem to be around fine, considering each situation has deserved the punishments they received with the exception of Hogan who got a 4 month delayed TPE punishment instead of a temp mute/suspension. However, the chatter around staff ownership of locker rooms, abolishment of locker rooms and non-staff run VHL servers, and other community staples that moderators want to have control over concerns me, as its essentially removing the abilities for GMs and other community members to develop their own mini-communities and have more quality interactions." -Spartan

 

• "I think some of the punishments were a bit excessive. Not sure if that counts for volume though." -Anonymous

 

• "I don't like how they're running the place now but they also aren't at that level where I can no longer stand them. I understand that they feel the need to keep the league sfw and other things, but punishing the smaller stuff that could likely have slid in the first place is unreasonable, almost like they're taking the "job" too serious." -N0HBDY

 

• "The bans and actions taken have been right. Members who have received these bans have shown their hate and anger towards the Mods and the CoC, but they need to realize they are mad and angry because they are in the wrong. The Mods don't want us to hate them, they want us to love and respect our community and the people in it. Mods will do whatever is needed in order to achieve this goal." -ajwllmsn

 

• "Like I alluded to before, I don't think we need a policed-state here in VHL. If people are being pricks then sure, deal with them. It's simple enough not to be an asshat. Punish those who are. I felt this whole CoC thing is a little much. Every situation has context. There's a ton of people in this community who clown around and joke about all sorts of spicy things, and I'm not saying that's right or wrong. People need to gauge the room and know their audience. I feel like a concrete set of laws doesn't gel well with that." -Anonymous

 

• "7 just from Hogan. I will forever not agree with that ban. But from what it looks like, that number will be rising very soon. Since the CoC ramp up a month ago, there has been 4 bans to prominent members. In the year prior, there was 3 or 4 total to prominent members based on the CoC (not including new member trolls/members with multis/etc.)" -Anonymous

 

• "I lean towards far too much action due to a simple reasoning - I think that when it comes to "trying to make the league a safe space" we are not actually doing that, what we are doing is creating a league where we will silence the difference of opinion, where we will not be able to feel safe as feeling safe is not about being isolated out of the things you don't like, it is about figuring it out how to better yourself in the light of these things, how to make sure that you don't take everything to heart." -FrostBeard

 

• "Probably like a 6 or a 6.5. Again, even though it was a minor punishment for a minor offence, pun less intended than your article, I didn't find that necessary." -JardyB10

 

• "I selected the middle option here because this varies. I feel it varies largely on who the user is. It seems that the CoC has been applied lightly to veteran users and heavily on newer ones." -thadthrasher

 

• "Too much action, but this has been a long time coming. For years, when it came to rules, moderations, just about everything, the general consensus was ""don't be a dick - this is a league run by volunteers for fun and the spirit of the law is more important than the letter of the law."" Over the past couple of years, we've continued to shift more and more towards a corporate environment that needs a policy for everything. This isn't a shot at leadership because it's essentially what a vocal portion of the userbase has demanded, but it then just becomes a never ending battle of punishment and precedent. 

  I also have a problem with the moderation of the forum in general and the number of hidden posts for ""trolling"". The recent VHL Mod Team Hiring thread is example number 1,2, and 3 of this. There are numerous posts hidden in there that do 0 harm - are they necessarily helpful? No, but what are we doing hiding forum posts? Why? I'm rambling, but overall, I feel we're swung way too hard to the ""over moderating"" side of the pendulum." -Anonymous

 

• "I think it's been fine." -Anonymous

 

• "I'd say it's somewhere in the middle. It annoys me when there are mutes for meme trying to ban someone though. I don't think anyone is naïve enough to think that a goober like me is legitimately staff." -a_Fork

 

• "Feels like we probably overreact and punish to fast." -Anonymous

 

• "The mod team is very consistent with punishments and I'm struggling to find an example of where I felt it was too harsh." -Doomsday

 

 

Question 7: Are there any particular mods who you feel represent the above qualities significantly better or significantly worse than others? If so, please explain why. NOTE: ALL responses to this question will be withheld in the final article, regardless of your answer to the first question.

 

As stated above, I'm not going to report anything in this article. This question was meant to be a tool for feedback--if any mods would like to message me for a general, entirely anonymous summary of the comments made about them, good or bad, they are welcome to do so.

 

 

Question 8: Which of the following do you consider issues with current league moderation?

 

 

One person selected "other" and commented:

• "Mainly unnecessary punishment or what I'd call avoidable. I think more information could be said and things could be more consistent. Although its hard to be more consistent with the recent addition of multiple mods." -Hogan

 

 

Question 9: In general, what do you feel the current mod team does well?

 

• "Online time" -Anonymous

 

• "They're always online. Good coverage. Typically they're okay. Kind of shitty in deescalating situations." -Anonymous

 

• "As I mentioned earlier, they are all considerate to the opinions people that are reporting situations hold." -Spartan

 

• "I think they do a good job establishing themselves as a higher power for the league." -N0HBDY

 

• "Cracking down. Not being the Mr. Guy anymore and making people know that when they do something wrong, there will be punishments." -ajwllmsn

 

• "Overall, I think having an updated, professional Code to moderate by is a good thing. But the code does not explicitly detail what goes into the decision making for a ban. I'm not a fan of the "everything is case-by-case" way of thinking. Like it or not, that can easily lead to favoritism." -Anonymous

 

• "Collect their weekly pay." -Anonymous

 

• "Mod team does act really quickly to problems. It is vital that this happen when there is a serious issue though for Mod team there is one thing that has to happen - before you penalize, remember to teach, instruct and explain, provide warnings before you do something irrational." -FrostBeard

 

• "Activity. I think there's always a mod there to talk to. 
  Overall moderation. Just making sure no rule is blatantly broken at a major level. Although getting into more particular situations I dont think its done as well." -Hogan

 

• "Their jobs" -JardyB10

 

 

Question 10: In general, what do you feel the current mod team does not do well?

 

• "Blanket bans on bad words on Discord with no context. Feels like they just don't want to actually do their jobs and get a shitty bot to do it for them." -Anonymous

 

• "too restrictive/ favoritism" -Anonymous

 

• "Remain consistent" -Anonymous

 

• "Favouritism, poor handing out of consequence, over policing. Yes, everyone needs to be respectful. People can have convos though without someone crying and being upset." -Anonymous

 

• "They are a bit heavy handed on some things. I don't agree with the mod team reaching past the VHL discord server and forum though." -Berocka

 

• "In contrast, there is very little flexibility or patience given to someone accused of breaking a rule, and the team as a whole does not communicate necessary or helpful information to the community." -Spartan

 

• "transparency 100%" -Anonymous

 

• "I think they overstep their boundaries and just need to chill out." -N0HBDY

 

• "I haven't seen anything wrong lately. Others will disagree but I feel like the people who disagree are the people who have done wrong and received punishments for their actions." -ajwllmsn

 

• "Consistency" -Anonymous

 

• "Meme/Unnecessary Mutes, trying to control topics in GENERAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CHAT" -Anonymous

 

• "Give a sense of fairness to decisions." -Anonymous

 

• "I think I have answered this a bit in the previous question but Mod team needs to be more understanding of BOTH sides of the argument - not only the accuser but also the defender. If that is something that Mod team believes is wrong, sadly, I think at that point the Mod team is just abusing their given power. " -FrostBeard

 

• "Transparency for what I've said previously. Also having so many mods isn't always a great thing." -Hogan

 

• "In general I think they're good. MAYBE can improve transparency a bit, but I'd be fine with their current rate if it avoided conflict." -JardyB10
• "I'm not sure, in general I think they are doing fine." -Anonymous

 

• "I feel like the code of conduct allows favoritism to an extent. Banning someone four months after the fact is pretty suspect and I will die on that hill." -a_Fork

 

 

Question 11: Are there any issues that you feel are not addressed to a great enough extent by the current mod team (i.e. "is there anywhere you feel mods should be MORE strict")?

 

• "Hold everyone to the same standard ok?" -Anonymous
• "Just to know their boundaries and know that they represent the league in a way and should be careful with what they say or do." -N0HBDY
• "They have been strict in this category but I want them to be extremely strict on sexual harassment. I feel as an online community with majority of members being male, the females do get picked on more often with sexual harassment. I want all genders to feel safe and wanted here. So as a male myself, I want all the other males to not be creepy and make others (usually females) uncomfortable. It is just embarrassing to all guys when that happens and it isn't right." -ajwllmsn
• "Not really. One thing is league voice chats. It's hard to manage them but I feel like tons of things are being said in there daily that shouldn't be. I don't go in often and have heard a few things. No real way to have that moderated though." -Hogan
• "No" x10

 

 

Question 12: If you have any comments not addressed by the above questions, please add them here.

 

• "[We] should take a look at what other leagues do when discussing punishments. PBE puts the comments in, SHL gives reasoning as to why they choose that punishment. "code of conduct violations" means nothing." -Anonymous

 

• "My only extra comment is that I have seen in gen chat that people feel as if adding new mods isn't the answer to fixing problems. That's not true. More mods means more eyes to catch you in your acts. Maybe you think these new mods aren't qualified enough to have joined the team, and I disagree. I can't name anyone on the mod team who isn't qualified. All 7 members have been around the league for a long time, know the ins and outs, and are all very nice human beings. Same with commissioners and admins, they wouldn't have their roles if they were just random Joes. They're all very much qualified and I respect all members on the team and think they're great for the job." -ajwllmsn

 

• "I think I pretty much covered it but to recap, I'm not a huge fan of the system as a whole. That's not to say there shouldn't be rules, but if we just deal with the people who do obviously bad shit, all of this shouldn't be necessary." -Anonymous

 

• "I just want to make it clear I am not calling for VHL to be like the wild west, with slurs, offensive shit, harassment, etc to be rampant. But I don't want to feel like the CoC is breathing down everyone's neck and at the forefront of every single conversation, like it is now. I just want to have a healthy balance." -Anonymous

 

• "I would have rated the mod team far higher scores, had they not implemented a TPE ban on Hogan for something that happened too long ago and on an anonymous report probably. I'm not a fan of Hogan but the retroactive nature of this action is unacceptable and shows signs of sheer desperation on behalf of the mod team to be seen to actually do something." -Anonymous

 

• "At this point, I want to address something that has been bothering me so strongly, I have multiple times noticed that there is this sentiment that ""If you are doubting something is against CoC, don't do it"". I think that with that kind of thinking, this league, this community is laying down a brick road to hell. CoC as a general way of we act, the way how we conduct ourselves should be based on each persons humanity. Can that include trashtalking and not agreeing to decisions? Yes. Can that humanity include baiting and acting like a total jack ass? Yes. Can members act towards each other with certain level of malice without being punished? Yes. To me, the whole point of CoC should not be to make the league safer, it should be to create a long lasting understanding that certain things are not allowed and should be thought through. Did Hogan deserve the TPE ban? No. Was Tate situation something that warranted an instant ban of such severity? No. I could go on, but I think at this point you get where I am standing with all this. 

  CoC should be reworked." -FrostBeard

 

• "sorry if writing sloppy not re readin brothaer" -Hogan

 

• "Pull from this what you would like:
  The CoC states in 1.1 that, ""The VHL aims to curate a welcoming, inclusive community intended to provide enjoyment for all its members, regardless of ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability."" When an organization has a set of rules for conduct it has to be applied to the areas that it states. I want to make sure that we have a safe environment for people to have fun together, but I'm concerned that we may be taking it ""too far"" in some respects and maybe not far enough for others. Let me make the case for religion.

  We have a huge variety of religious beliefs throughout our community. In order for us to use the CoC correctly regarding religion, the moderators need to know the intricate details of those religions and what may be deemed as offensive. For example, let's say a user makes a player named ""Muhammad."" This user then goes on to create a graphic of their player where they portray themselves as the prophet Muhammad. In some sects of Isalm, if not most, this is offensive.

  Christians see taking the Lord's name in vain as a sin, and may consider it offensive as well. Meaning users should avoid saying ""Oh my God/god;"" ""Jesus Christ"" as an exclamation of disbelief, anger, or frustration; or even ""God d---it.""

  Jewish users may not spell out ""God"" and will instead write ""Gd"" or ""G-d."" One person writes, ""We do not write G‑d's name in a place where it may be discarded or erased. Treating G‑d's name with reverence is a way to give respect to G‑d. So even though on a computer the name is not really being erased (and perhaps is not really there in the first place), and ""G‑d"" is only an English term used to translate G‑d's holy name, it is in keeping with this respect that I write ""G‑d"" in my emails and on-line articles."" So, in order to be inclusive of our Jewish brothers and sisters, the word ""God"" should be avoided.

  After stating what I did as a profession there was a user who made a pretty offensive joke. Now, they immediately messaged me and apologized, and I wasn't offended at all. I come into this community knowing that I view ALOT of things differently from ALOT of users, and some of what is said is incredibly offensive. But, I also understand this risk when I come into a diverse and large community. I do not expect, nor do I want, the entire community to have to change their behavior and language to avoid offending me.

  I bring these up not because I think the VHL should be a place where every moderator has to be a subject matter expert in the realm of religion or social issues, but to show that there is an existing level of ambiguity in the CoC, what is and is not offensive, and how those offenses are being handled. I want to make sure we have a CoC, of course! But, we have to keep in mind the wide variety of cultures and beliefs of the users in the VHL. " -thadthrasher

 

• "This isn't directly related to the moderators but wanted to say that I'm flabbergasted at the communities response since the CoC came out.  I could be wrong but I don't think most or any of the rules listed in the post are actually new items.  So I'm not sure why people have acted like the rules are so different now.  Same with people who think the rules are too vague and that every instance of something that can be classified as a wrong doing under the rules is going to get you in trouble.  If you haven't gotten in trouble in the last year, you probably have nothing to worry about.

  Overall I think moderation has been fine, but I guess it's all in the eyes of the beholder." -Anonymous

 

• "DAVID" -Doomsday

 

 

Once again, to those who responded, THANK YOU for your time, and I hope both members and mods alike read this, take this seriously, and listen to what they do not agree with. I've learned a lot myself with this survey and I hope you'll agree!

[Vice 403]

@GustavMattias

Very well put together survey! You've made my sociology degree very happy in doing this. In analyzing the results, you said that you helped omit or remove information not needed or too personal. Wee there specific people on the moderation team called out for things listed in the surveys or were they all just general comments out of curiousity?

[Gustav 6,417]

Just now, Vice said:

@GustavMattias

Very well put together survey! You've made my sociology degree very happy in doing this. In analyzing the results, you said that you helped omit or remove information not needed or too personal. Wee there specific people on the moderation team called out for things listed in the surveys or were they all just general comments out of curiousity?

 

Good to hear I managed to do some sociology shit right, given that I have no experience with it 

 

I only omitted a few comments--the too short/not helpful ones were just stuff like "good job" or "bad job" with no further explanation.

 

Only one response outside of the "are there any mods who you think are better/worse" question (which I kept out of the article, though mods are free to contact me for general summaries of things said about them there) named one person in a negative light, and I took it out. Aside from that, negative comments about the mod team as a whole were included as they aren't personal statements.

[a_Ferk 766]

30 minutes ago, GustavMattias said:

"Hiding things makes people talk about it more." -Anonymous

Whoever said this hit the nail on the head with how I feel. If I see what happened I read it and move on.

 

If it is kept ambiguous my imagination runs wild.

[Horcrux 322]

great read,

i am not going to touch on anything talked about here cause it would end with me getting a warning or banned but ill say this. 

although I agree with most of this and disagree with other stuff here. Thank you for making this objective and leaving it open for discussion without being acusitorial. 

now do the other member groups, Admins, GMs, BOD would be interesting to see what other poeple feel 

[Spartan 4,402]

33 minutes ago, GustavMattias said:

"I don't want to feel like the CoC is breathing down everyone's neck and at the forefront of every single conversation, like it is now."

mood

[Horcrux 322]

4 minutes ago, a_Fork said:

Whoever said this hit the nail on the head with how I feel. If I see what happened I read it and move on.

 

If it is kept ambiguous my imagination runs wild.

its a double edged sword because it may also be none of your business. Just saying

[a_Ferk 766]

44 minutes ago, GustavMattias said:

(to whoever responded as me, I think I know who you are but I'm not going to assume).

lmao someone responded as you?

[Daniel Janser 2,170]

5 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

its a double edged sword because it may also be none of your business. Just saying

 

But then it appears hippocritical to me, to publicly placate the offender and the penalty, but not the actual 'crime' (for the lack of a better word). Just saying.

[Horcrux 322]

1 minute ago, Daniel Janser said:

 

But then it appears hippocritical to me, to publicly placate the offender and the penalty, but not the actual 'crime' (for the lack of a better word). Just saying.

in all of these the crime has been explained quite clearly. the hogan thing was mistep and a mess up, but I feel (aside form the lack of july thing) they have handeld every situation well 

[fishy 1,757]

35 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

now do the other member groups, Admins, GMs, BOD would be interesting to see what other poeple feel 

the survey was open to everyone. when he originally posted the survey, gustav said that anyone could fill it out. we just chose not to (edit: it looks like someone actually did, i just noticed at the beginning of the article that 8.3% of respondents did indicate that they have mod power)

 

i will say that i chose not to fill it out because it doesn't really feel like my space. if i have issues/suggestions with mod team, i'll just tell mod team

Edited December 2, 2021 by fishy

[Baozi 1,658]

Thanks for doing the leg work on this @GustavMattiasand thanks to all participants for taking the time to do the survey.

[Horcrux 322]

1 minute ago, fishy said:

the survey was open to everyone. when he originally posted the survey, gustav said that anyone could fill it out. we just chose not to

 

i will say that i chose not to fill it out because it doesn't really feel like my space. if i have issues/suggestions with mod team, i'll just tell mod team

i meant do a dimilar thing wit them

easier for you lol you have a direct line 

[JardyB10 4,865]

1 hour ago, GustavMattias said:

"DAVID" -Doomsday

Honestly I couldn't agree more.

[JardyB10 4,865]

33 minutes ago, fishy said:

(edit: it looks like someone actually did, i just noticed at the beginning of the article that 8.3% of respondents did indicate that they have mod power)

For transparency, one was probably me. That leaves one other culprit

[AJW 2,156]

The survey numbers honestly surprise me. I must not know much about what’s going on I guess. Everything I have seen from the mods has been good.

Edited December 2, 2021 by ajwllmsn

[v.2 1,406]

1 hour ago, a_Fork said:

Whoever said this hit the nail on the head with how I feel. If I see what happened I read it and move on.

 

If it is kept ambiguous my imagination runs wild.

Agree 100%.  Keeps the drama feeders feeding.

[JardyB10 4,865]

12 minutes ago, ajwllmsn said:

The survey numbers honestly surprise me. I must not know much about what’s going on I guess. Everything I have seen from the mods has been good.

You're just biased because you're friends with the mods .

 

I'm biased because:
A. A lot of stuff seemed to be regarding Discord, which I don't frequent.

B. I'm a shit and have a black belt in getting away with it because I'm so GD friendly and likable (i.e. I literally tell everyone to fuck themselves at the end of every podcast, one of which used to be named after a penis WHICH RECENTLY GOT MODERATED GRRR). Which I see now people have issues with

C. I guess I don't care enough one way or the other.

 

So yeah, we don't see many issues with moderation as a result. I do think there were lots of good points raised by some of these responses, some I don't necessarily agree with, but can't invalidate either. A number of people felt they're a little censored, which I see shades of (RIP Chodesode, also I got automuted on Discord once for talking about bodily fluid), but I don't see it as much of an issue really. I just won't say COME on Discord now, it's fine. And I'll reel in the wiener jokes a bit. It's okay.

Edited December 2, 2021 by JardyB10

[Gustav 6,417]

9 minutes ago, ajwllmsn said:

The survey numbers honestly surprise me. I must not know much about what’s going on I guess. Everything I have seen from the mods has been good.

 

While I don't personally agree with much of what you said, I appreciated your perspective! I hope what you said makes sense to other people and vice versa.

[AJW 2,156]

12 minutes ago, JardyB10 said:

You're just biased because you're friends with the mods .

 

I'm biased because:
A. A lot of stuff seemed to be regarding Discord, which I don't frequent.

B. I'm a shit and have a black belt in getting away with it because I'm so GD friendly and likable (i.e. I literally tell everyone to fuck themselves at the end of every podcast, one of which used to be named after a penis WHICH RECENTLY GOT MODERATED GRRR). Which I see now people have issues with

C. I guess I don't care enough one way or the other.

 

So yeah, we don't see many issues with moderation as a result. I do think there were lots of good points raised by some of these responses, some I don't necessarily agree with, but can't invalidate either. A number of people felt they're a little censored, which I see shades of (RIP Chodesode, also I got automuted on Discord once for talking about bodily fluid), but I don't see it as much of an issue really. I just won't say COME on Discord now, it's fine. And I'll reel in the wiener jokes a bit. It's okay.

honestly wouldn’t even say I’m biased, I just don’t know what’s going on really. To this day I still don’t know why Matty was banned for a month. Everything seems to be dealt with and kept quiet, don’t know the reasons behind things.

[AJW 2,156]

12 minutes ago, GustavMattias said:

 

While I don't personally agree with much of what you said, I appreciated your perspective! I hope what you said makes sense to other people and vice versa.

LOL, respectable

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

24 minutes ago, ajwllmsn said:

The survey numbers honestly surprise me. I must not know much about what’s going on I guess. Everything I have seen from the mods has been good.

 

Have to also remember that those who feel most strongly about an issue are those likely to respond to a voluntary survey. The "things are just fine/average" folks generally don't participate.

[Beketov 9,025]

I'm not going to respond to everything because that would be a lot but just to give some thoughts here and there:

 

1 hour ago, GustavMattias said:

All who responded were given options to remain anonymous.

Totally fine but I do wish that in the quotes you could have listed which ones were the same, like Anonymous 1, Anonymous 2, etc just to get the quotes in context with each other. I guess that kills the anonymity a bit but still. Anyway.

 

1 hour ago, GustavMattias said:

"I guess we do not see warnings, only the final results--so I do not know what is happening to know if the punishments are fair." -Berocka

This is a very valid point that I'm not sure enough people consider. An instance could be more severe and warrant an immediate punishment while another could be more minor and only warrant a punishment after multiple warnings. if warnings are not known they could look wildly inconsistent (Person X said something once and was banned, Person Y says shit all the time and gets nothing). Could be a simple enough matter of mentioning (without going into too many details) "prior warnings" in punishments.

 

2 hours ago, GustavMattias said:

essentially leave all decisions on any report to a group of people who seem to not be following any set precedent, and all operate in a similar mindset considering how they have collectively responded to anything moderation related.

Not gonna touch on your points that immediately preceded this but just so that things are clear as well: The mod team does tend to seek blue approval on punishments and does keep running track of past punishments so precedent is considered and they aren't making the decisions purely on their own. Ultimately they come up with the suggested punishment and we can alter it if we feel it's too lenient or harsh.

 

2 hours ago, GustavMattias said:

However, the chatter around staff ownership of locker rooms, abolishment of locker rooms and non-staff run VHL servers, and other community staples that moderators want to have control over concerns me, as its essentially removing the abilities for GMs and other community members to develop their own mini-communities and have more quality interactions." 

In the interest of fairness to this one the reason isn't necessarily to remove GM abilities but rather to avoid any potential transfer issues and to actually make sure that things are moderated fairly in the same way as they are in the public areas. The locker rooms are still related to the site. If someone wants a private server that's completely removed from the VHL then I have no problem with them having that but if something is called an official VHL locker room I do think that there should be a way to at least peak inside if need be. In the old days we could give ourselves permission if we received reports that something was going down that shouldn't have been but now we can't and if a mod asks for it a GM could theoretically start calling out their players for being narcs and cause more people to be afraid to come forward for anything. I get the idea of a slippery slope of problems but I think problems are present in both instances.

 

2 hours ago, GustavMattias said:

There are numerous posts hidden in there that do 0 harm - are they necessarily helpful? No, but what are we doing hiding forum posts?

Interesting, someone who can see hidden posts haha. To respond to this though: the reason is likely simply to keep the interview thread clean. As we all know there's been a lot of unnecessary bickering that can happen in them so we've been asking for awhile to keep it strictly business in those and hide posts that don't do that. Nothing to do with that specific post.

 

2 hours ago, GustavMattias said:

This question was meant to be a tool for feedback--if any mods would like to message me for a general, entirely anonymous summary of the comments made about them, good or bad, they are welcome to do so.

FWIW I would be curious to read these.

 

2 hours ago, GustavMattias said:

I'm not a fan of the "everything is case-by-case" way of thinking. Like it or not, that can easily lead to favoritism.

It can, inadvertently or otherwise, but I also argue that not making it case by case and having too much set in stone leads to, as we have long seen, far too many instances of people pulling the "it's not technically against the rules" line of thinking which doesn't benefit anyone.

 

2 hours ago, GustavMattias said:

trying to control topics in GENERAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CHAT

I would argue that's a massively important part of the job being the main hub for the league to discuss things in. You let it get too toxic and it leads to far too many people being scared off.

 

2 hours ago, GustavMattias said:

on an anonymous report probably

It wasn't anonymous, the reporter just asked not to be named.

 

2 hours ago, GustavMattias said:

"This isn't directly related to the moderators but wanted to say that I'm flabbergasted at the communities response since the CoC came out.  I could be wrong but I don't think most or any of the rules listed in the post are actually new items.  So I'm not sure why people have acted like the rules are so different now.

Correct, the CoC in it's current form has been in effect since early last year at least and in an even vaguer way since before that. All this version did was clarify a few sections, it's not new.

[Beketov 9,025]

That was a lot of reading and typing, time to go home.

[AJW 2,156]

I do have a question. Is the CoC not made to let people know that they should be respectable to everyone and lay down basic rules? To the people who are mad about the CoC, I just feel like they’re being assholes then and got caught in the wrong. I could be totally off so if someone can fill me in I would appreciate it.