conrad wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2024 4:07 am
What I saw causing concern to almost everyone on that thread was a "for the tiders" stance moreso than "for the players". I shit you not, there are players that hate being tided. This is why, for example, I asked what I asked about the tiding meme.
i think it's presented in a humorous way with the memes and such, but when you look at what the tiding policy is actually saying it in fact makes it a lot easier for people to punish tiding IC because they don't have to worry about getting ahelped over killing some guy disturbing people and breaking into departments. i don't really think this would increase the amount of tiding, and tbh if a person is going to intentionally inconvenience others and break into departments they shouldn't get to complain to admins when they get killed for it.
I do sincerely appreciate that this "players vs admins" isn't part of your rationale. It bothers me to no end 'cos admins wouldn't go after someone who's griefing fnr just to put another imaginary pin on their admin trenchcoat, and any of your favourite headmin candidates can attest that if someone is proud of a ban they get an instant group bollocking for being utterly cringe. In the end, every admin is doing this voluntary work for the players, and every headmin is, deep down, a "headmin for the players".
Driving wedges in the community is usually reserved to people that won't last long, or if they do, will go out spetacularly. I can't name an admin that unironically believes this "players vs admins" bullshit, and I wouldn't wanna work if them if I could.
As for incidents previously resolved, think of it as notes. They cast a precedent and if someone saw something on a previous headmin term that they didn't like, they'll want to know if it'll happen again. Check my questions on timber's and tbm's threads and you'll see what I mean.
whether admin or player, everyone is an individual with their own way of thinking so it would be a bit silly to say all admins hate non-admins or vice versa imo, especially because admins are just supposed to moderate the game to keep it playable. i think this admin vs. players mindset tends to grow in certain people when they feel ostracised/separated from the community, however the average player is honestly a lot less connected to the forums/discord where a lot of discussion takes place compared to that of an admin, so that would definitely cause some differences in the overall ideas on what the game should be like between the two.
I guarantee you that being headmin is more stressful than responding to an aggressive campaign thread. Kieth already done this rodeo once, so yeah, he needs to be able to tank it. So does every headmin candidate.
of course if a person starts breaking down over one or two angry people they are likely not going to make it to headmin in the first place... i was more so saying that it'd be natural for someone to feel a little discouraged by it. this topic doesn't seem to be relevant to kieth anyway tbh, from what can i see he's doing perfectly fine. i would also imagine that he is more than used to this kind of stuff after having been a headmin once
dendydoom wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2024 5:32 am
thanks for the thoughtful response.
i, speaking only for myself here, don't feel that it's necessary to hold the infamous terry chapel incident against kieth on a personal level. at the time i think it was an incredibly stupid and rude thing to do after having served a term alongside admins who were using admin chatter to talk about their lives and mental health etc pretty regularly. personally i would've banned him too. but after sitting out and then appealing and having that appeal accepted, i consider it a resolved matter. if he says he has learned from the experience and isn't just saying what everyone wants to hear, then i have no reason not to believe him.
i've spoken to him one to one on this matter and what my thoughts are on saying these kinds of things to other people, even in a roleplay sense. the short of it is that i do not like it, and it troubles me to see people use a communal space to spread that sort of message, whoever they may be, and however jokingly they may say it. my recollection of this talk are that he took my concerns seriously, so since then i have not given it much thought because i haven't felt it necessary. i will trust someone until they give me a reason not to any more.
but i don't want to hold others to that standard either. there is something to be said for someone who wants to be headmin being involved in something like that, but what exactly it says is up to individual people. if you don't care, then obviously you don't care. but admins do tend to care about this sort of thing, and with the standards we have for candidates etc, it is not surprising to me to see it become an uncomfortable historical issue with some admins.
me, personally? the only thing that would piss me off beyond any belief is if he went and did it again. or used the headmin position to validate other people doing it. but i have no reason to believe either of these things will happen. my expectations of a headmin are that they know they're a headmin and not just a player any more. first term kieth seemed to understand this assignment, and my hope is that a second term kieth will too. it is a highly visible role with a lot of personal responsibility and access to a lot of otherwise heavily safeguarded information. by that very nature someone in that position is no longer a player and will have to step up instead of trying to play the ignorant terry tider while also managing one of the highest positions in the community that controls the entire admin team. you cannot both have your tide and headmin it too, or whatever.
in a game like this there are definitely moments where it is very easy to get carried away and do some dumb crap, but i think it's wrong of the person to specifically say that kieth "told an admin to kill themselves" when that was neither his intention nor what he actually did. the situation has a whole resolved appeal to read and tell them what happened, and yet they still decide to word it in such a misleading way that paints kieth in a inaccurately bad light to anyone who doesn't know the details of the situation. i perfectly understand the concerns anyone would have about it even if his appeal was resolved, but in this specific case the way it is done just seems rather aggressive.