Don’t forget we moved!
https://brandmu.day/
Concordia Thread
-
@BloodAngel said in Concordia Thread:
I have been asked to leave this game and was banned. I have no idea what I did, but I still say it is an amazing game and wish it all the best!
As much as I agree with games being able to refuse access to anyone for any reason, I do still think that that reason should at least be communicated. That’s just fucking good manners, you know?
Like if you didn’t want to say, that’s fine. But if they didn’t even tell you what you did that was so bad they didn’t tell you stop, just straight up banned you, that’s problematic on their part, since they aren’t even doing the bare minimum to attempt to protect other games or other people from having to deal with whatever that was, since even YOU are now UNAWARE of what it was, so you can’t make the conscious decision to change it.
It’s bad practice to ban/boot someone for reasons undisclosed to even them. Even if it’s, “we just don’t like you, man”. That’s still a reason and should still be communicated.
In Occam I trust.
-
@Coin I got a forum post. But I don’t know what I did at all.
-
@Coin Honestly it was a great game, I hope everyone can enjoy it! I loved the concept, the world building all of it!
-
@BloodAngel said in Concordia Thread:
@Coin Honestly it was a great game, I hope everyone can enjoy it! I loved the concept, the world building all of it!
That’s big of you to say, considering they banned you. But it being or not being a great game concept-wise or even in general isn’t the issue I’m addressing, so much as this specific thing. It’s okay to focus criticism on a specific action rather than weighing it in general, imo.
-
Two people were fired from our work without being given a specific reason. (“Told they could resign rather than having to put on other applications that they had been non-renewed.”) If professional settings can’t be bothered, it doesn’t surprise me a game would do the same.
-
@junipersky said in Concordia Thread:
Two people were fired from our work without being given a specific reason. (“Told they could resign rather than having to put on other applications that they had been non-renewed.”) If professional settings can’t be bothered, it doesn’t surprise me a game would do the same.
It’s not a surprise. But it happening in a professional setting does not mean it’s unquestionable or justified in a non-professional setting (or even in said professional setting).
My criticism comes from what I perceive as bad practices for the reasons mentioned.
In Occam I trust.
-
@Coin
Gotcha! -
Be it unprofessional setting or not, I feel like the person in question should have have been given some kind of context for their removal. Even if they were being an absolute shit(not saying this situation, since it seems that no one knows).
But especially if that person is being a shit.
-
I did not really expect to post on this forum again, but I’m feeling well-disposed towards a game actually addressing creepy behavior. They outlined reasons at https://concordiamu.aresmush.com/forum/1/310
-
@Tchotchke Okay, as I said it was vague. I would like to know what about my behavior was creepy. I referred to the post above. So I can do better in the future, social cues and me don’t always work. I have many mental issues, to be honest.
-
@Tchotchke said in Concordia Thread:
I did not really expect to post on this forum again, but I’m feeling well-disposed towards a game actually addressing creepy behavior. They outlined reasons at https://concordiamu.aresmush.com/forum/1/310
Yeah, sorry. Again, I’m not saying it’s an obligation to disclose the actual behavior (especially not in public), but that post does nothing to explain or elaborate. It just says ‘complaints and bannable behavior’.
What were the complaints about? What was the behavior? I’m not even saying it should be on the forum, but @BloodAngel is saying he wasn’t told, and that is the issue I’m addressing.
In Occam I trust.
-
@BloodAngel Eeeeeeh, are you asking for people that might’ve complained about your behavior wanting to come forward? They don’t have to if that’s the situation.
Not for nothing, that implication might not be all that great either. Which I’m not saying is what you’re doing, but that might be how it reads to some, yeah?
I don't know what I'm doing. Poke at Seven Nations sevennations.aresmush.com port 2021
-
@Coin I had not a word from the staff. I would have tried to adjust myself. I got a don’t run a scene and run an event page, my next two events I did not RP and run.
-
@BloodAngel I can understand why you might want to know more details, but it can sometimes be hard to give details without it then becoming identifying information.
she/they
-
@Tez I don’t want names, I just want to know how I can do better that is all.
-
@Testament No, I want to know what the banned things are so I can be better in future talking to others.
-
@BloodAngel That’s fair enough.
At the same time, and as much you might not wholly agree with it, staff of any game aren’t obligated to give a reason. Since it’s their game, ethical questions aside.
It kind of reminds me when I was trying to apply for a different position in my company. I asked for feedback for how I could improve for future attempts. I was told there was no feedback to give. In either situation it doesn’t sit well.
I don't know what I'm doing. Poke at Seven Nations sevennations.aresmush.com port 2021
-
I have to agree with @Coin
Just because companies in the US can just fire people willy nilly because our labor laws are ass, doesn’t mean people shouldn’t have the basic reasons of their banning provided to them. I guess unless it’s someone who’s such a problem you’ve got to get them off right then and there, but tbh @BloodAngel doesn’t strike me that way.
-
@Testament said in Concordia Thread:
@BloodAngel That’s fair enough.
At the same time, and as much you might not wholly agree with it, staff of any game aren’t obligated to give a reason. Since it’s their game, ethical questions aside.
It kind of reminds me when I was trying to apply for a different position in my company. I asked for feedback for how I could improve for future attempts. I was told there was no feedback to give. In either situation it doesn’t sit well.
Just because someone doesn’t have an obligation to do something doesn’t mean it’s not crticizable or that it doesn’t merit calling out.
I’m not concerned with obligation, I’m concerned with pointing out behavior that I think is detrimental. If you just ban people without any sort of explanation, you’re putting them back out there with no CHANCE of bettering their behavior. Sure, there are those who won’t change because they like being assholes, but there are plenty of others for whom cultural and even neurological differences make social integration and relations a tricky proposition and who, if their behavior is pointed out, will do their best to self-correct.
It seems to me no one even bothered to be like, “hey, @BloodAngel, can you stop doing [x, y], please? Thanks”. It was just ban, and no, you can’t know why!
That just seems myopic.
-
@Testament said in Concordia Thread:
At the same time, and as much you might not wholly agree with it, staff of any game aren’t obligated to give a reason. Since it’s their game, ethical questions aside.
I mean, yes, games can do whatever they want, because they belong to whoever is running them. No one is legally obligated to even foster a generally good environment on a game. You can just as easily say that game-runners aren’t obligated to protect their players from creepy comments. Lack of obligation is kind of irrelevant in these sorts of conversation; they’re generally about what people to be find ethically appropriate.
