Right now, the only official method to provide site feedback is through the forums. This works well for the most part, but when it comes to potentially sensitive topics (like site content that's offensive), there have regularly been instances where a thread has blown out-of-proportion to the issue and the OP has been dogpiled. I think a lot of it boils down to the limits of conveying tone via text, especially if a user feels personally hurt by something about the site content. Despite this history, users who first reach out privately end up getting directed to post publicly in the forums.

With that in mind, the onus is often on marginalized users, who are most susceptible to discrimination and harassment, to point out any content that’s offensive and disrespectful. I've spoken to users who've had valid criticisms for site content, and it feels as if we're walking on eggshells when it comes to posting such criticisms in the forums. While the community guidelines do cover not responding with obvious and overt nastiness, any onsite response from staff can only be done retrospectively, and staff can't really do anything about offsite harassment. Plus, there are definitely borderline cases where a user might be using microaggressions, which aren't obviously disrespectful, but still replicate real-world oppression. Speaking personally, I've been subjected to such microaggressions (and honestly outright macroaggressions in a couple cases lol) where, as far as I know, absolutely nothing was done.

I'd like to suggest making it possible to privately provide content feedback via tickets. Subeta is already searching for a community advocate/manager, and I think that collecting (and potentially acting on) feedback via tickets would fall under their duties as described in the job posting. Tickets can already be filtered by topic, so site programmers wouldn't have to spend time on tickets that are strictly about site content.

I'm aware of how thinly-stretched staff are at the moment, which is very important to acknowledge, but perhaps the addition of a new staff member would open up time for other staff to do more work in their own areas. I'm also aware that having just one person in charge of these issues isn't a perfect solution by any means, but my hope is that it at least it would at least allow users to speak up when site content replicates or normalizes oppression. I'm not sure how the search is going for the new staff member, but hopefully staff are considering the applicants' background of social justice to some degree.

Anyway, that's my quick suggestion for one way to make the site a little friendlier to marginalized users! :) I enjoy the community Subeta has and the willingness of staff to communicate for the betterment of the site, and hopefully it's something that would help staff in their work, too.

There is definitely an uptick in the amount of threads that get locked within a page, maybe two if we're lucky.

If Staff aren't interested in what other users are saying and just base their answers off of what OP alone says, there should be a way for users to say what's on their mind privately and bow out.

Maybe a specific email or something would work as to not clog up the ticket system for people who have account issues.

Making a public post is a hard ask and I'm not sure why its done.

My cynical side says its to make the issue go away without having to address it. I mean, I have no idea how many tickets they get of this nature, but I'm pretty sure that many people when confronted with the instructions to go post it publicly, will just drop it rather than run the risk of harassment.

My more charitable side says they want to gauge how the users in general feel about it, but then, as pointed out, why lock down the threads so quickly?

" While the community guidelines do cover not responding with obvious and overt nastiness, any onsite response from staff can only be done retrospectively, and staff can't really do anything about offsite harassment"

I honestly think that the community guidelines need to be enforced a bit more. But that's clearly just me being salty.

There has been some issues lately, and seeing something locked with "we'll fix the issue someday ok kthxbai"

Staff locking down everything potentially controversial fairly quickly worries me. Wasn't aware I wasn't playing Neopets or FR, where the smallest criticism is welcomed with a lock/thread deletion.

I get that staff doesn't want to see the discussion go around in circles, but I feel like the userbase are hella more creative and adaptable than what we're given credit for.

I agree! I feel like this is a great idea for the new community manager to be in charge of! It can still work via a system similar to tickets, but site feedback specific tickets will just go to them. :)

And if it's a sitewide issue (for example: a potentially offensive item may need to be changed or something) then the community manager can create their own thread asking for sitewide feedback. That way, all of the pressure isn't put on OP to absorb all of the feedback whether it's positive or negative.

And I hope marginalised users will feel comfortable that they can actually approach the community manager with such issues. That comfort will really boil down to who is/was hired for the position.

As someone who once made one of these threads...I would appreciate this option. It hasn't, like, haunted me or anything but some of the responses were less than pleasant at the time and it kind of put me off wanting to mention additional items that may not have aged well for one reason or another should I come across them. This was pre-community guidelines days iirc so I had to ask for the thread to be locked instead of having it locked on page one though.

I like the idea of a staff member making the thread if they want feedback/perspectives on an item so that an average user doesn't have to put themselves out there in case of backlash

I agree with this. I have a lot of opinions lol but I'm not outgoing enough to create threads for them. Very good points about the potentially offensive items.

The early locking was exactly what prompted me to make this thread to begin with. It's really odd to invite users to provide feedback via forums, then shut down discussion? At that point, there's really no use to have a conversation about it. (Locking threads so early without allowing discussion is also kind of... not a great look, especially since it's the only way to officially provide feedback.)

I like the idea of the community advocate being the person to more or less host these conversations! My hope is that whoever it ends up being has the background to know when a content complaint is worth addressing more seriously, and you're absolutely right that the person needs to be approachable.

i've been a little vocal in the past about how staff locking feedback threads so quickly (and often) is a really bad look. i agree that we absolutely need a way for users (especially those marginalized and most at risk for harassment) and think it would be a great addition to the community manager position they are adding.

That's wonderful to hear - thank you for keeping us in the loop! :D

I'm actually unsure about this idea as it is suggested. I don't believe the ticket center is the best place to give general feedback or suggestions, primarily because it comes with the expectation of a personal reply. This is neither realistic nor fair, and will very quickly become overwhelming (even if you try and limit it, people will still file tickets when they shouldn't, because hey.. someone's got to at least read your idea before closing, right?).

If something was going to be implemented, I would recommend it being separate from the ticket center; such as a feedback form, or suggestion box, where items can be submitted and staff can peruse through and discuss at regular intervals (i.e. a monthly staff meeting). I imagine, however, it's going to get bogged down the same generic items (lag, fixing bugs, etc.) that will make it inefficient.

Staff has always been limited, and have always had to choose areas to prioritize. Posting publicly allows for a quick and easy way to gauge interest in something new or something that should change, which I image helps staff to determine where to best allocate their resources.

I think it would be far more simple and effective to just ask that UAs allow for reports of this nature, provided that their only obligation is to acknowledge the report and ensure it is brought at for discussion - again, without specific feedback on every item.

Community Guidelines are intended to apply to the entire site, and everyone should have the opportunity to report things that make them feel uncomfortable (be it a shop name, another user's comment, or even an official item); of course, again with the caveat that you might not get direct feedback or see change based on your report.

These same rules apply to the forums, and I implore anyone who feels they are being harassed or attacked for something they posted to report it to staff, and not feel bad for doing it. I would personally recommend first going to a minimod of that forum, because sometimes a quick reminder or a "hey, chill guys" from one of us can have a big impact, without the defensiveness that might be brought on by a higher staff member acting.

I also want to point out that staff, including the minimods, have a hierarchy, so if you don't feel if something isn't being handled appropriately there's almost always someone else you can discuss it with. TBH, I think the real issue is how these types of threads have been handled historically, which is something that should be addressed and worked on regardless of any other decision.

"I also want to point out that staff, including the minimods, have a hierarchy, so if you don't feel if something isn't being handled appropriately there's almost always someone else you can discuss it with. I'm probably pretty biased here, but I've found all the staff to be reasonable and understanding, though also human."

I had better experience in tickets over forums, so yeah.

There are things I want to give feedback on that are polarizing, and I'd rather not see my thread turn into a shouting match about who is the most right. So yeah, I'd rather have tickets because I want staff to pay attention to it.

If the thread devolves into a fight, staff will be more hesitant to tackle what they see as a can of worms. The statu quo will remain.

I think you make a fair point about the expectation of a response via tickets. I should clarify that the reason I suggested using the ticket system is because it already exists, so I thought it would be easier to implement. Since tickets already operate on a drop-down menu, I figured that it would be a comparatively straightforward process to edit the current ticket system so that tickets marked as "site feedback" (or whatever) automatically go to the proper person.

Plus, I imagine it'd be OK to also have automated responses--for example, if the ticket is opened by the community advocate, the system automatically sends a response. Or, have a few auto-fill responses to indicate if action was taken (in cases that pretty clearly go against community guidelines) or that the issue will be discussed or otherwise get a closer look (in more grey cases). I think most people submitting feedback of this nature--rather than glitches/bugs personally affecting their account--would understand if the response they get wasn't quite personalized.

I agree with Reya on the expectation of a personal reply will become overwhelming. A generic thank you for voicing your offensive content concern, it will be reviewed by staff at the next meeting should be enough. It should be honestly for Subeta content related concerns since that is officially pushed out by staff and over the years things have changed.

Things that clearly go against community guidelines is for UAs to handle. It shouldn't be on the community manager who is acting as a bridge between Admin and the casual player. As mentioned there is a hierarchy across all the teams. When it comes to the forums it starts with that forum's minimod. And sometimes hearing it from a moderator helps settle things down before staff who can issue consequences such as official warnings or bans become involved. We are regularly combing our forums and will bring up specific threads to staff for official input when needed if they don't already step in, or to keep on the radar.

If you feel like you are being targeted please put in a ticket. That part of what UAs are supposed to handle. I put in tickets when I think someone is being too aggressive.

Staff are also checking the threads. So the idea of hey I want staff to pay attention is kind of moot because they are. Either in ticket or the forums, people are expecting a personal response to their inquiry. Which is why I hope just a generic reply would be enough.

I am glad made this thread and hope it never dies. I feel this issue is important for the safety and wellbeing of its users. I think tickets make more sense in that other users might not target a non marginalized user as much they would one who was. I was wondering about a very private forum where users post their feedback, no usernames are shown and UA’s respond.. yet.. there is the loophole that someone will find a way to see who the posters are given how old the sites coding is. Tickets can have the Manager ask the question or report on a thread as feedback feels good as users shouldnt feel anxiety about making a post. I honestly dont think users would mind the private answer staff give in tickets as its probably not as biased bashing as a thread might become. I dont think some users would mind waiting for a response a little if it meant their anxiety would be at ease more.. Users are looking for someone who can report their question and feel safe knowing that they wont get pushed into ongoing traffic, metaphorically speaking. They are not looking to make the UA’s jobs harder, they just want a chance to have a voice without being targeted and forced into early lock! Marginalized users should be allowed to have that right! JUST AS USERS CELEBRATE PRIDE EVERY DAY HERE! PROUD TO BE WHO THEY ARE AS IT ALWAYS SHOULD BE!! This site has always made me proud for its support of LGBTQA+ Plus maybe some of the subscriptions users have might not disappear as much -shrugs-