Thanks D: I knew it had been brought up before, but couldn't remember if there was a final word in it... it's quite unfortunate they can't lift the time restriction :c

Although I wonder if spammers have never thought of spamming the SB / if having that SB help within the first 24h helps the player retention rate in a relevant way. Given the bad experiences we keep hearing of, I can almost say it would be preferable to leave newbies silent for a day than to be exposed to a non modded SB (depending on the hour of the day, I guess)...

Maybe you should read again, because it was certainly not "we were breaking the rules, waaah" it was literally users having a lively, but still very civil, discussion about feminism. Yes, it could, and should have been moved to the forums. But the fact that Keith himself was taking part in it? Yeah, mixed signals much?

Calling a debate is using the term VERY loosely. I mean, it truly was more a discussion when people are explaining what feminism is, really.

Basically, Keith joined in on the discussion, then when HE was tired of it, rather than saying, "Ok, lets all take this to chitchat/debate" it was shut down without warning.

I guess the one thing we can take out of this is that its ok to talk about lady boners and sex, but feminism is just far too risqué.

;A; Noo, the SB shouldn't be removed! I met sooo many nice and sweet people there, after most of my friends already quit!

But it's true that sometimes, when a debate starts, it ends in drama... But many times, the users themselves avoid it by saying "Don't talk about xxx here", so it's not like we aren't trying.

I was already confused when I came back to SB after years of absence, and saw people talk about pervy things or users named Sexy or shops named "My vagina" XDD I have nothing against it, absolutely, but back in my day you got a warning for saying "stupid" or vaguely pointing at anything sexual etc, that's why I was confused :D I'm glad people are a bit more open minded now, after all, we don't go into detail, so it's fine. Feminism, vegan and all the other "hot" topics atm should definitely stay out of sb, cause someone will ALWAYS feel offended by whatever someone says :I

I am kinda curious if this board would have even been posted if a female staff member had closed the SB. I really don't think that the topic was the issue. A staff member did not like the way that things were going in a conversation and so it was closed. As for it not being closed other times, I will be the first one to say that I agree. There has been some totally inappropriate conversation and reporting it is all well and good but if it stopped before the ticket is answered then there is really nothing to do. And that is not good for new people to see either. Maybe the best thing would be to have the SB closed unless a staff member is actively looking. shrugs I don't know. But Keith already explained his reasons and he already admitted to contributing to the conversation in the first place. As a staff member, he is allowed to close the SB. Warnings are all well and good but I seem to remember a time where I asked people to change the subject and then a staff member also did and people still wanted to continue. Sometimes they just don't work...

Personally, I feel like this thread is justified as it really does seem like this man just exerted his power to oppress female members. I implore everyone to look at it from both points of view. As has been stated many times, the discussion was civil. The one user who brought up "gamergate" came here and admitted to it, even asking why she wasn't banned from the SB if it was such a problem-- the whole rule about banning disruptive users SHOULD cover that. They said it was put up JUST so that they could remove "problem users" before having to close the shoutbox.

Boyee. If all it takes to get the SB closed is a staff member not liking a conversation, then I truly worry for Subeta. :/

Well, there is that. :/ At least one minimod/staff member agrees with that aspect. >. o; If one user can be banned after people have taken screenshots of what they said, then why aren't these other users being taken care of? There are plenty of screenshots. It feels like the rule was made just to dispose of that one user. But I digress.

Well, then the SB would be closed all the time, wouldn't it? Because from the looks of it, no one is ever there to look. And I believe the UAs already tried that... back in '07 or '08.

Yes, he did admit to it. And honestly, if the SB can get closed because he can now see the future (omgamazing), then why can't he see that people are going to start talking about drugs, erections, etc? I personally feel like this was a cop-out. Since he contributed, he should have at LEAST asked for a topic change or linked to the forums. Flat out shutting the SB down in that manner was gross, for reasons I shouldn't even have to explain.

Not trying to pick on you, Destiny, but I did want to respond to what you had to say. I do thank you for taking the time to take a good look at the situation here.

[Quote=destiny]I am kinda curious if this board would have even been posted if a female staff member had closed the SB. I really don't think that the topic was the issue. [/quote]

I think it would be and for good reason. To participate in something that you claim should not have been going on in the SB in the first place, and then close the SB because you think it is possible that things might get out of hand is ridiculous and does indicate a change in the way things are handles that should be clarified by staff.

[Quote]Sometimes they just don't work...[/quote]

The comments regarding past actions of the SB don't seem relevant in my opinion. If the new protocol when a staff member (or is this power for Keith only) "senses" trouble is to now close the SB rather than ask the user to change the subject then I hope thy open a new area where newbies can ask for help.

To say, well in the past telling the SB to change the subject didn't work does not mean that it should no longer be an option. The people posting and lurking change constantly and those people shouldn't be punished for the actions of others.

I don't frequent the SB because what I constantly see going on in there is not appeling but I still think more consistent moderation is needed.

Even though Keith himself said it was?

😒😒😒

Not a problem. I have actually been trying to think of a way to respond if at all in the first place. But I will go ahead and respond again xD

--I never ever said that this board was not justified. I never said it was. I am just genuinely curious if this would have happened had a female closed it. --Again...that is kinda twisting what I said. I never said Keith did not LIKE the conversation. After all, he already said he was talking about it too. I think the problem was only the way that it seemed to be going. In his opinion, it was heading in a direction that he did not want it to go. --I can't say much about the banning and warning of users. That is not really something I have access to or deal with. But yes, I have seen some stuff posted in there that has gone over PG13. --Just because they don't post, doesn't mean they aren't there! I may not be red but I even lurk a lot. It might be closed quite a bit if that were to happen yes, but if users are going to angry that the SB is not modded then why not only open it with staff on. --No one can see the future. But if you see a snowball coming in your direction, are you going to duck thinking that it might hit you, or are you going to sit there and do nothing since it may not hit you? Weird analogy I know. And as for linking...he'd have to break site rules to do that ;)

I am not in any way trying to invalidate anyone's anger or say what should or shouldn't have happened. I just don't really feel that the closing was a malicious attempt to shut down feminists. Especially by Keith...who is basically like...a fuzzy red panda.

Actual depiction of Keith during subeta meetup.

I stand corrected. I still don't think he meant that he closed the SB because of feminism. I think any heated topic would have been the same. But that is just my opinion.

I only brought up past events because others brought it up as well.

I did assume that there was rule breaking due to the fact that no debates are allowed in the SB and it sounded like it was a debate. But okay, with that information I still feel the starter for this board is a little ridiculous. As I said, maybe Keith did go overboard, I certainly wouldn't diss a board made to criticise that. But OP and a couple others bringing in gender to the situation makes it feel like less of an attempt at get answers/say it was unfair and more of an attempt to shame an apology out of him because they didn't like that they couldn't do what they wanted. Bringing up that it was a feminist discussion and he's a guy is an easy way to do that.

That's just my interpretation, of course.

Mixed signals don't matter, Keith suspected later on in the discussion that the topic was moving too much into rule breaking territory and took actions against that - actions that may or may not have been right. I'm not defending Keith's behaviour, I'm saying that OP's intention with this board is personally suspect to me for the reasons I stated above.

Also, I know that the second part of your post isn't directed at me, but I just want to mention that most instances of talking about sex and lady boners are not political, whereas talk of feminism is always inherently political. So no, it's not that it's too risqué, it's that the SB has rules against debates and where politics surface, debates tend to follow. But yeah feel free to ignore this, it wasn't directed at me, I just read it and wanted to say that.

idk man have you seen this [ Image removed by staff. ] they lure you in with a false sense of security D8

lmao , that gif! ^~^

edit just saw 's post LOLOL welp there goes that.

---

Uhm I definitely wasn't trying to "shame" keith. Why are you even here? Did you see what was happening in the sb? No.

Sorry, but you are coming here with accusations about the event though you weren't present for it? What are you even doing?

OP (Ireland, I have a name) was just feeling really crappy about the whole situation. I just came here to express my feelings about it. I just needed a few more words from to feel better about it. Is that such a bad thing?

Just because you don't have any feelings about the topic doesn't mean you can tell other people that they shouldn't.

lololol i have nothing further to add about that but i suppose even commenting that is "spam".

on a srs and actual thread related note, i'm more concerned that there seems to be one set of rules for one and another for another set. if there's to be no debating in the sb then don't start it and certainly don't participate in it esp when you're staff :x you can't say things are reviewed by a case by case basis. because when it comes down to it people still get punished/silenced in one respect and not in others. topic could be feminism/donkies or tractors it was still handed incredibly poorly.

I have a tendency to not remember people's usernames, so I tend to refer to people as "OP" and such in case other people are the same and prefer not to scroll around to find out who I'm talking about. I didn't mean to cause offense (if I did).

Who says I have no feelings about the topic? If I didn't care, why would I take the time to post about it? Just because my feelings are different to yours doesn't mean I don't have any. And none of my "accusations" are about the specifics of the SB discussion, they're all about your, and a couple other people's, reaction to it. It's not a bad thing for you to share your feelings but equally it's not a bad thing for me to share mine. And I do feel you were accusing Keith of something rather outlandish and unfair.

I was harsh in my original comment and it was pretty garbled too as I was thinking about two things at the same time. But ultimately that is what I think, and you did open this discussion in a public space so I assumed you were fine with people responding to it.

Sorry if you don't like what I'm saying, but there we are.

Sooo, why are you here again?

Defending the things you said was basically pointless???

Thank you for posting three paragraphs of pointless things to me.

It is beyond annoying when people stick their gigantic noses in to other peoples' business. This is what you are doing. Please just stop. You are adding nothing to the conversation.

There is also a post you made on this board saying that, "my friends and i are just pissed cause we got in trubs ;-;"

If you would have even paid attention to my OP, then you would have seen me say that I wasn't taking part in the conversation about feminism.

This is not a debate board. This was posted in site feedback. It is for people who were there and have an opinion, or for Keith and other mods.

Thanks.

If Keith really is like that gif, that would be so adorable to watch>w> -snuggles-

I don't understand why this is still a thing. Keith thought it was getting to much heated. He closed it and you came here to complain. The topic was obvious not important enough to enough people, because no one has yet to put it in the debate forum. I have seen the arguments for that topic on another website and I do think it is debate material. Sb material? no. He closed it on the situation that he thought was unfolding, not to silence the topic. Technically..you guys silenced it by not putting it in the debate forum and ending it. Or maybe you went to smail or comments idk.

It's fucking sexist to say that a man can't do what has to be done because he is a man. That's the whole god damn point of feminism isn't it? Not discriminating someone based on their gender. Yet there are people here saying that Keith shouldn't have done what he did because he is a man. WHAT? I think the word for this is hypocrisy.

On topic: if the staff says that the purpose of the shoutbox is not serious discussions. Then why is this even a problem? Serious discussions go to the debate forum. Isn't that what it's for?

I'm not sure if the way of handling it was right though. If the shoutbox is supposed to be for newbies, then why close it? If it's closed then where do newbies have to go? Think of the poor newbies! Just tell everyone to shut up if things go the wrong direction. If they don't shut up, ban them.

Of course because I'm always curious in the exact opposite way everyone else is, I have to ask:

I know there's analytics for basically every aspect of the site (Keith's discussed before how he monitors these to make informed decisions). How often is the shoutbox ACTUALLY used by newbies seeking help as opposed to general chat/discussions? Surely account age is something that would be useful in analytics to determine if veteran users, newer users, or all users are enjoying certain features of the site - so are there stats like this for the shoutbox?

I don't proclaim I need to know them (obviously that's site stuff and should be for staff!) but I'm asking because if users are saying they don't see newbies asking questions really, and shoutbox statistics don't reflect that, why not hide the widget as default? If users aren't using the feature in the way it's intended, using that as a reasoning for xy or z is a flawed argument.

I'm definitely not saying the shoutbox doesn't need to be kept in line or follow rules - I'm just pointing out that unless the user experience of the shoutbox is geared to newbies being inclined to use it, and they're shown to respond to it - it's not doing that job and that argument just doesn't hold water unless you're redesigning the box to fit that use case (which I think a lot of users might be sad to see given their use case of it!)

I do agree that bringing 's gender into this was a poor choice by those that did it. What he did was wrong not because he is a man, but because he acted hypocritically (by adding to the problem) and to some, it appears he abused his power as the site owner.

Precisely this.

The irony of this statement is not lost on me...

My issue isn't that the "debate" (could we even call it that?) was about feminism and then Keith suddenly decided to close it. My issue is that time and again we're told no debate topics in the SB, and yet, Keith is there contributing to one. And /then/ he decides to close the SB, rather than putting his foot down in the beginning and saying "Not here, guys". Whether it was /going/ to get heated or not isn't the issue. It's the fact that he thought it was okay for a debate topic to happen in the SB in the first place, just because he had something to say on the matter.

That's not how it works. Just because you own the site doesn't mean you can change the rules around and then punish everyone else for it (closing the SB).

If the issue really was about the topic changing to the war/draft and getting heated, he could have easily said "Alright, that's enough. Forums, now." But that didn't happen either.

I feel like you should see ^ too.

[edit]

Honestly, I would have probably made the thread if Ireland didn't, whether Keith or a female mod closed the SB. If staff joins in a debate topic, and THEN closes the SB for said debate topic going on rather than redirecting it to forums, then something is clearly not right.