3) What kinds of threads/posts am I allowed to create?
Discussions about women's issues in gaming cover a wide variety of topics. Female miniatures; the portrayal of women in fantasy art and D&D; female writers and developers of WotC products; the creation of female characters; ways to ensure that your game appeals to female gamers; and discussions that seek the opinion of the members of Astrid's Parlor are all welcome topics here
What? Forum mods not following the rules of the forum that WotC has handed down? That NEVER happens!
Quiet, you! :P
DoveArrow, since I'm the one who requested the move, I think I should respond.
I'm just trying my best to keep things directed on the topic of women and gaming.
If someone else had posted that thread, I would have requested it be moved - while it's funny, it's just a general "I think this is funny" thread.
Now, it does all go back to the discussion of what belongs in Astrid's and what doesn't. I made a big deal about this when Pamela asked me to be a FL - I didn't think Astrid's should be a general-discussion forum for women (or feminists, or whatever). She mentioned that she wanted my "outsider" opinions there.
I'm only human. I think if you had more clearly tied it to either women and gaming or the forum itself, I wouldn't have asked for the move.
Yes, I probably could have left it there, just to be a humorous thread for the forum, and I apologize.
Personally, I think those guidelines should be revisited, mostly because they're damn confusing to me
Please see this thread.discussions that seek the opinion of the members of Astrid's Parlor are all welcome topics here
This is our current policy with Astrid's Parlor. We can revisist the overall policy after the re-org, if we like.
There is no all encompassing forum- that is, even D&D general isn't a "post anything here" board. Only stuff that doesn't fit the other forums goes there.
"seek the opinion of the members of Astrid's Parlor" means in terms of D&D, not anything and everything. "What do you think of this breast cancer study?" not on topic. "How do I get my female friends to play?" on topic.
When the forum was asked if they wanted to be a more "general" forum for females, the votes were for keeping it D&D.
As for the topic, some clearer guidelines would be nice. But I don't personally mind humorous or slightly general threads in Astrid's, especially since it's not the busiest forum (though not the least busy either), so I rarely discover that a topic I'm not done with yet have moved beyond the first page.
I'm just trying my best to keep things directed on the topic of women and gaming.
If someone else had posted that thread, I would have requested it be moved - while it's funny, it's just a general "I think this is funny" thread.
Now, it does all go back to the discussion of what belongs in Astrid's and what doesn't. I made a big deal about this when Pamela asked me to be a FL - I didn't think Astrid's should be a general-discussion forum for women (or feminists, or whatever). She mentioned that she wanted my "outsider" opinions there.
I'm only human. I think if you had more clearly tied it to either women and gaming or the forum itself, I wouldn't have asked for the move.
I'm really not sure how I could have made it clearer. I said in the first post that we should start (man, this is going to sound funny) a No Eating Baby Club in Astrid's Parlor that allowed girls. Then, when you made your comment about it being off topic, I tried to clarify that I wanted it to be left in Astrid's, because OOTS is a comic about gaming, and because I wanted the opinions of the people in Astrid's Parlor. However, in spite of this clarification, the thread was still moved.
That's why I'm upset. I did everything I could think of to make it clear that I wanted it in Astrid's Parlor, and the thread was still moved. So again, if the moderators aren't able (or willing) to take the time to determine if a thread is seeking the opinion of people in Astrid's Parlor, then they need to change the rule.
This is our current policy with Astrid's Parlor. We can revisist the overall policy after the re-org, if we like.
I am willing to wait until after the forum reorganization to continue this discussion, if that's what you think is best. However, on the subject of reorganization, I have mentioned that if we are going to allow general discussions in Astrid's Parlor, that we should have a separate subforum for it. That way, people can discuss these kinds of general topics without fear of having their thread moved, even when they've tried to make it clear they want it in Astrid's Parlor.
This is our current policy with Astrid's Parlor. We can revisist the overall policy after the re-org, if we like.
I agree- that part should be re-visited.
There is no all encompassing forum- that is, even D&D general isn't a "post anything here" board. Only stuff that doesn't fit the other forums goes there.
"seek the opinion of the members of Astrid's Parlor" means in terms of D&D, not anything and everything. "What do you think of this breast cancer study?" not on topic. "How do I get my female friends to play?" on topic.
When the forum was asked if they wanted to be a more "general" forum for females, the votes were for keeping it D&D.
And that's why it needs to be clarified - that's how I read it. As long as it's D&D, if someone wants the opinion of Astrid's, they have to say so.
But discussion of things like "I like toast" would be off-topic.
GZ, is that right?
I'm really not sure how I could have made it clearer. I said in the first post that we should start (man, this is going to sound funny) a No Eating Baby Club in Astrid's Parlor that allowed girls. Then, when you made your comment about it being off topic, I tried to clarify that I wanted it to be left in Astrid's, because OOTS is a comic about gaming, and because I wanted the opinions of the people in Astrid's Parlor. However, in spite of this clarification, the thread was still moved.
That's why I'm upset. I did everything I could think of to make it clear that I wanted it in Astrid's Parlor, and the thread was still moved. So again, if the moderators aren't able (or willing) to take the time to determine if a thread is seeking the opinion of people in Astrid's Parlor, then they need to change the rule.
I apologize, I had made the request to have the thread moved when I saw the OP. I saw your reply, and it was moved before I could respond. I am now trying to straighten things out in the Rec Room.
Yes, OotS is D&D-based, and is probably in a grey area in concern with talking about D&D. I'm sorry, I erred on a more strict interpretation of the off-topic.
Popularity contest of course.
If you are viewed by the volunteers as disruptive and annoying, your posts will get moved. If you are viewed in a more friendly light (or cause a lot of grief when your posts are moved), your posts won't get shifted even if you don't ask for a particular perspective.
Typical expected human behaviour, really.
I would love to disagree with you, Silly. I'd love to be able to say that whether or not something is on or off topic for a forum has nothing to do with the person who started the topic, only the content.
Unfortunately, it appears you're correct...
Hey, guys, come on. I've asked for threads to be moved from the forum because I thought they were off-topic.
Not because I didn't like the posters, or that other off-topic threads were more "friendly". There are a number of "forum-friendly" posters whose threads I've requested be moved, and of number of "forum-unfriendly" posters whose threads remain open.
I really try not to take my personal opinions of the posters into account, honestly.
Do I think the rule needs readdressing? Hell yes, and I've said as much a number of times.
Am I more likely to ask a thread be moved if it is disruptive? Sure - I mean, it's more likely to stick up on my radar as being off-topic if it's actively disruptive. But that doesn't mean I won't ask for a thread to be moved if I feel it's off-topic, just because it's "nice".
And there is room for interpretation on what is on-topic and off-topic - that's the whole point. I'm trying to get a better understanding of what is or isn't on-topic so that I can make better decisions when asking for threads to be moved.
BTW, thanks to the posters who said I'm doing a good job. I appreciate it.
Every forum should be a forum that is "friendly" to all gamers, with the caveat that threads built for sharing opinions / arguing are going to contain such. No one should ever be personally attacked based on the CoC itself. However, no one should also be "safe" from having their viewpoints discussed. That's how you segregate and form echo chambers of non-discussion.
The current policy for Astrid's is working quite well. The "issues" that are popping up aren't due to moderator mistakes but are instead the results of newbie errors and consistent choices on the part of a few posters to attempt to treat the board as their private club where anything goes as long as they discuss it only with their fellow club members. If anything, the mods aren't quite heavy-handed enough (there's a thread in there now about getting coupons for gaming books for some reason, several days after being reported).
It could be a good idea to change the line DoveArrow is referencing, however, because it can lead to some thinking they can abuse the system in this clubhouse-like manner by using that note (as we see in this thread and the referenced thread).
Looks like this one was spun-off, then someone continued the discussion back in the original thread instead, and it kept going for another page and a half. Oh well.
I hate that policy because it implies that Astrid's Parlor is really for women, not simply about women, and that by asking a question not specific to women in that forum, you'll be getting a woman's perspective in the answer, thus implying that men shouldn't respond.
If men should respond, then Astrid's has become a general discussion forum first, and place to discuss women's issues in gaming secondarily.
I'd like to expand upon this by saying that making a forum for women, and more specifically a "woman-friendly" environment in which to discuss all matters of gaming, implies that the rest of the forums are decidedly not for women, which is not a good stance for the management to take.
This is one of the reasons I'm pushing for a male verion of Astrid's to be created.
I'm on the wagon asking for a single board with more of a "social issues and gaming" or "diversity and gaming" classification.
Once you've established that we need to reach out to more than just women, there's the possibility of opening a floodgate for all minority and social groups clamboring for their own board, which will clutter up the boards and segregate everybody to their own little corner.
EDIT: Moving this post to the more appropriate thread titled "sexism."
So... the following are also on topic:
- "Hey, I made this new class for a dude in my game. What do you folks think about it?"
- "People in my group are arguing about whether the harm spell, as worded in 3.5, can kill somebody on a failed save. What do you folks think?"
- "Kobold Quarterly 4 just came out. What does everybody think of it?"
- "Here's a list of all my house rules. What do you think of them?"
- "I'm interested in knowing how quickly your group levels up."
If all those are on-topic for Astrid's then there's no point to having other forums. We can just put everything in Astrid's and close down the other D&D forums...
Zherog, again, I think this is a conversation that doesn't belong in this thread. If you absolutely feel that this topic should be discussed, then by all means, start your own thread. However, I think it is not only childish to disregard multiple requests not to discuss this subject here, I think it is disruptive, and has served to do exactly what I said it would do; which is to derail the thread.
It appears to me, based on the descriptions provided in this thread, that if you had perhaps made your intent to have the AP regs discuss OOTS clearer, it would not have been moved.
Granted. And as I have said, and as you have pointed out, I thought I was clear on this point, and when I discovered that I wasn't, I tried to clarify that this was my intent. So yes, I recognize that if I had been clearer from the outset, that my thread would not have been moved. However, as has been stated already, I am not the first person who has experienced this exact same scenario. I am not the first person who has thought that there points were clear, who has thought that they didn't need to be any more explicit about which audience they were addressing, who has then tried to clarify their position, and then still had their thread moved. Which is why I am requesting a change.
And again, I really don't care what the change is. If they decide to get rid of the anything-is-on-topic-as-long-as-it-is-requesting-the-opinion-of-the-people-in-Astrid's-Parlor rule, that's fine. If they decide to create a separate subforum, which is what I've been requesting as part of the forum reorganization, then that's fine with me too. If they assign a specific moderator to the forum, who is more sensitive to and aware of the many kinds of discussions happening in Astrid's Parlor, then that would suit me. If they come up with some other idea that addresses the issue and makes it less likely that threads will be moved, then that will be just peachy. Going with the same ol' status quo, though, will not be okay. It hasn't worked for a long time. It won't work in the future. If they decide to stick with it, I think it will just make more people upset in the future, which is why I am requesting a change.
I am requesting a change to the moderation of Astrid's Parlor. I don't care about the thread. It's simply an example. I am requesting a change in moderation. Let me repeat again: I am requesting a change to the moderation of Astrid's Parlor. If this idea is not clear, please reread my post three or four times in its entirety. And please, for the love of all that is holy, don't do one of these numbers:
Granted. And as I have said, and as you have pointed out, I thought I was clear on this point, and when I discovered that I wasn't, I tried to clarify that this was my intent.
Well derr, it sounds like yer post should have been more clearer, Dove. I shore do think that dem ol' modduradors were right in moving that thar thread.
I'm not questioning whether they were right to move the thread, or whether I was as clear as I thought. I acknowledge that they were and that I wasn't. The thread's locked now anyway, so it's a moot point. So please, focus on the fact that I want a change to the way the forum is moderated, and not on whether or not it was right or wrong to move the thread under the current moderation guidelines, because that's the issue that I'm trying to get the moderators to address.
Zherog, again, I think this is a conversation that doesn't belong in this thread. If you absolutely feel that this topic should be discussed, then by all means, start your own thread. However, I think it is not only childish to disregard multiple requests not to discuss this subject here, I think it is disruptive, and has served to do exactly what I said it would do; which is to derail the thread.
I think it's completely on topic for this thread. Go re-read post #4, where Mike declares:
I've moved this topic to a new thread, since it's a question about the editorial content about Astrids and not about the forum re-org.
This thread is about editorial content of Astrid's. Discussing what is on and off-topic is part of determining the editorial content.
Or, in short -- no, I won't take it to yet another thread. It belongs here.
I think it's completely on topic for this thread. Go re-read post #4
Well now I'm completely confused, because in post #54, he declares that he thinks this discussion is off topic. Did they move just a portion of a previous thread to this new thread, and this post just got accidentally carried along with it? I honestly don't know, which is why I'm asking.
Well now I'm completely confused, because in post #54, he declares that he thinks this discussion is off topic. Did they move just a portion of a previous thread to this new thread, and this post just got accidentally carried along with it? I honestly don't know, which is why I'm asking.
I made the mistake of answering a question in the old thread, instead of having it moved here. It should all be cleaned up now. Sorry for that.
Thanks.
Because I'm not a particularly good detective (I have low Wisdom, so my Spot check sucks), could you briefly say what was cleaned up? Or, perhaps a better way to ask the question: which quote from you is "correct" -- the one I posted, or the one DA posted.
Thanks.
[hint]Look at post #54[/hint]
Post #54 of this thread is by DoveArrow, where he links to post #54 in another thread. And, frankly, the link chain doesn't help me understand what thisthread is supposed to be about -- especially when compared to the gajillion other Astrid's threads going on in this forum right now.
This is the thread created to discuss what is on-topic for Astrid's and was created because of Gamer_Zer0's post in the other thread. Our questions got moved here so your recent posts are absolutely bang-on relevant and on-topic there.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1015520
I would like to point out that some threads have been moved TO Astrid's.
Which in some ways is a shame too. Sometimes it is interesting to see the discussion in a larger non-self-selecting group.
In fact, it would be interesting to compare the same topic discussion on Astrid's and say D&D General or Rec Room.