This topic is locked
I'm growing increasingly frustrated with this community, and although it is NOT my intent to point fingers at anyone in particular, I would like to share my reasons for feeling this way. I'm hoping that taking the time to type this out will help me work through it, and although I could post this in private somewhere, I feel like this needs to be public. So here goes nothing...
One of the greatest challenges facing any community larger than one individual is that unity of opinions, values, morals, etc. isn't 100% possible. Differences can and frequently do lead to conflict, and in order for any community to survive, it must have some sort of system for resolving conflict. Naturally these systems are never perfect, because WE are not perfect. However, like just about anything else we create, these systems can be modified and improved over time, in order to meet the evolving needs of the communities they serve.
When the health of this community was threatened by one of its Faction Leaders attempting to recruit people away, the staff responded to that threat by banning the offending person(s). This reaction may seem extreme to some, but consider if this had happened in a real-life setting. If a corporate executive decides to encourage people he works with to start working for a competitor, he's going to get fired. If a member of the military encourages dissertion or defection, he is going to be charged and punished for his crimes accordingly. Under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, those crimes are punishable by death. Although this is a website and this is "just" an online community, the response of the staff was proportional (in this setting) to the offense.
There are some who felt that the staff was too heavy handed in this case; some who argued that they should involve other leaders in the community in dealing with situations such as this. This idea was considered and found to have merit, and thus the Inner Council was formed. Their purpose is to deal with tough issues that affect the health of the whole community, and to do so rationally, leaving emotion at the door to the best of their ability. The six members of the staff who sit on this council are balanced by six faction leaders that are NOT a part of the Gothic Wars staff; they are members of the community. I am one of these six, and I believe my reputation speaks for itself. I am loyal to my chapter, but I am also loyal to the larger community. I am friendly to most, and I am NOBODY's "bitch". I think it is safe to say that the other members of the council could be described in similar terms.
We've had to address a few serious issues since the council's inception, the most recent and most high profile being the situation with Gerhart. These issues were dealt with to the best of our ability, and in my opinion, they were dealt with well. Note: I did NOT say they were dealt with perfectly. To be honest, I don't believe a "perfect" solution is possible in this case. Gerhart's removal from this community has (not surprisingly) caused uproar among his loyal brothers, and even members of the community who do not belong to his chapter disagree with his banning. However, there are others who feel just as strongly that his conduct warranted this action, and therefore they agree with the council's decision.
This train of thought has brought me back to my original thoughts about communities comprised of more than a single individual. The odds of any such community reaching 100% agreement about anything diminish the larger that community grows. The decision to ban Gerhart did not have 100% support among the Inner Council, comprised of only 12 people; therefore it is NOT surprising that the decision faces opposition from some members of the larger community.
What is (a bit) surprising, and also disappointing (to me), is the way that opposition has manifested. I knew the majority of the Crimson Fists would not take kindly to the announcement. Frankly, I admire their loyalty to their leader and to each other. However, I feel very strongly that some (NOT ALL) are aggrevating an already difficult situation with their conduct. The ones I take issue with are those who behave as if the whole chapter is being persecuted because of the council's decision to take action against ONE person. A few act out in ways that bring the term "drama queen" to mind; stirring up animosity and generally being unpleasant and/or inflammatory. I think this behavior reinforces the council's arguement rather than refuting it. Similar Conduct = Similar Consequences... just sayin'.
Some members of the Crimson Fists (Blood Bone, Simon), as well as other members of the community (Nox), have posted their disagreement (my opinion about your post Nox, I am aware of your claim of not taking sides) with the council's decision in a way that gives credit to their point of view. They bring up rational arguements against the ban, they mention possible second-order consequences of this course of action, and generally share their point of view without trying to make things WORSE. I don't really know exactly where I'm going with this paragraph, other than making sure you all understand I am not trying to over-generalize or group everyone into one category or another. Sorry.
Lastly, I want to say that I'm a bit disappointed with they way some of our community leaders have decided to "go native" and respond to the "irrational" behavior of others by acting in kind. Although it could be argued that they are simply mirroring those people in order to illustrate how "ridiculous" their behavior seems to be, it could also be construed as hypocracy. How is it wrong for some members to "Abuse the Post Reporting System" or to commit acts of "trolling/baiting" but perfectly acceptable for others to do the same?
Maybe I'm missing the point; maybe we're all just wound up too tightly and you're trying to alleviate tension by showing a sense of humor... but in this case I feel that those who are responsible for maintaining the health of this community by monitoring the conduct of its members are undermining their own position by behaving like the alleged "problem-children".In Summary:
1. This community needs to have a method for resolving internal conflicts and issues created by the conduct of its individual members. At this time, the Inner Council is the best we've got. Although the council is not perfect, we do the best we can.
2. Our imperfect system is never going to resolve issues in a way that is 100% satisfactory to 100% of the community. However, disagreement with decisions made by the council do not justify attacks on the character of council members, nor does such disagreement justify further violations of the rules of the community. If you disagree with some rules, consider being an advocate for change. If this doesn't seem feesible, consider whether or not you really want to be a part of this community.
3. I don't particularly like the way some people have started acting out in response to the difficult situations this community is dealing with. This conduct seems counter-productive at best, and deliberately harmful at worst. I am not a fan of censorship, but a little self-restraint would go a long way in my opinion. This applies to members of the staff as well as those they are mimicking. I'm not trying to enforce my own values or morals on anyone, I simply don't like what I see and feel the need to say so.
So now that I've pissed off everyone on both sides of this issue, I guess you can all direct your wrath at me for a change, instead of constantly going after each other. I've done my best to express my feelings on this subject without being offensive, although I realize I've probably failed to some degree or another.
