Log Posting Standards

[Meg]

Honestly, I think of BMD as a one party consent state, if I were relating it to anything. Only one person needs to consent to the log being posted, that was involved in the log.

[Roz]

@Tez said in Log Posting Standards:

QUESTION FOR THE FORUM:

How do you feel about removing a log if someone requests it be removed?

a) The person it was posted to call out;

No.

b) Person or persons in the log who are bystanders;

Anonymize bystander involvement, sure, but no – can you imagine if someone were posting a log of someone being awful to them, and some random person who also happened to be in the scene was like “no please take down this log”? No.

c) A person in the log who was a victim of the actions being called out in the log;

I’d rather anonymize than remove but if a victim of the actions requested then yeah I’d say it has weight to consider.

d) A bystander

Someone not even involved? No. Not unless it’s people being like – “hey staff someone just posted a log full of porn” where it’s – you know, content that just full stop probably shouldn’t be on the board type of thing.

[KarmaBum]

a) The person it was posted to call out;
“I wasn’t posting it to call anyone out! I’m just clearing my name!!”

b) Person or persons in the log who are bystanders;
Remove the poses in question. If they’re just bystanders, they probably don’t factor in. Summarize if needed.

c) A person in the log who was a victim of the actions being called out in the log;
“My name is Macha and this log makes me uncomfortable.”

d) A bystander
I think that’s what happened here and it clearly wasn’t universally well-received.

e) Remember where we are
Once upon a time, the Rough & Rowdy (or WORA, or whatever we called it) section of the forum was where the gloves came off. We have definitely tempered our behavior over the years, grown out of slinging racial epithets at each other. But this is still an opt-in aspect of an opt-in hobby.

You’re not required to be here.

You’re not required to read anything.

Logout. Close the window.

[Pavel]

I’d also say that if the log is publicly available (say an Ares scene, or posted to a wiki, or whatever else) then it’s fair game without the consent of anyone involved.

ETA: Also, use the spoiler tag. I installed it for a reason.

[hellfrog]

@Tez said in Log Posting Standards:

a) The person it was posted to call out;
b) Person or persons in the log who are bystanders;
c) A person in the log who was a victim of the actions being called out in the log;
d) A bystander

a) no
b) no
c) probably?
d) no

@bear_necessities said in Log Posting Standards:

nobody’s comfort level should dictate the content that someone else can read.

If it isn’t breaking the rules of the forum, it should not be removed unless it’s requested by the victim.

[STD]

@Tez

I would not support the removal of any logs for any reason, except for spam. If, as Pyrephox has said, someone keeps posting logs to gum up the forum or individual posts, then cutting the spam (and banning the account) seems reasonable. Like most gray areas, there’s no hard and fast rule for what constitutes spam, though, so it’d be up to admin fiat on a case-by-case basis.

I think that’d be better than trying to head off this situation by requiring posted context since it wouldn’t stop it anyway (the spammer would just put in bullshit reasons why they’re posting the logs) and still would require an admin fiat ruling eventually.

[Meg]

@hellfrog said in Log Posting Standards:

If it isn’t breaking the rules of the forum, it should not be removed unless it’s requested by the victim.

The problem is who gets to decide who the victim is. Historically, we weigh in on who we think was right or wrong. But if I post a log, and you post the exact same log, and we both claim we were the victim in that log??

Which of us gets to call for its removal?

[Tez]

@Meg Fair point.

[hellfrog]

@Meg I agree, that’s a sticky wicket, and why I said “probably?”. I’d lean towards no, unless there’s a pretty clear victim in the situation. That is a call I trust admin to make in that situation.

[GF]

@Pavel at work so must be brief but I am deeply sorry I made you feel like I think you’re a bad person. Was never my intent. Can elaborate if it would help or leave you alone as you prefer.

[farfalla]

Every single log shared in order to provide proof of harassment will, by its very nature, be exposing the thing that harmed the victim. Always.

One of the fucked up things about abusers is that addressing it must involve some level of exposure of the victim. We either accept that and do what we can to mitigate it (remove the name of the victim, etc.) or we let it continue unchecked. It is impossible to address a problem if we don’t talk about the problem.

Do you all think I enjoyed having everyone read my DMs with Macha? I sure didn’t!

It’s all logs or no logs.

[Herja]

@farfalla said in Log Posting Standards:

It’s all logs or no logs.

This is my exact stance. Either we allow logs to be posted or no one can post logs. While I definitely like and trust the admin team of BMD, and this is no slight to them or their work, I think it sets up some pretty untenable situations that could possibly favor the abusers over those who have been abused.

[Tez]

After discussion with the full team (WELCOME, @junipersky!!) we are agreed that:

• We will be reinstating the log that was deleted.
• It will be placed behind spoiler tags.

Going forward we would ask that logs – especially logs of SUCH LENGTH – be placed behind spoiler tags with some sort of context or TL;DR so that people know what they are in for if they choose to view.

We will continue to discuss and review when and if we have any situations in need of revisiting this stance.