Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 93
  1. #11
    Rattlesnake Flavored RedSavage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard K Niner View Post
    Strangely, I'm not seeing any actual rule violation on the part of the user, unless they were calling someone out on Weasyl. Does the Weasyl community policy apply to every website now?
    The journal was linking directly to personal information and names. Weasyl isn't trying to moderate what's going on with the other website. It would simply prefer to not be a platform for unproven accusations. Just because I host a NSFW image on another site and link it into my journal, that doesn't mean I'm not violating ToS and ratings rules.

    And as XoPachi said. They have the right to enforce the rule as the admins choose to interpret the rule. And I for one trust their judgement on it.

  2. #12
    Regular Jim's Avatar
    Jim-Medic-Dude(NSFW), Jim
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    North Carolina
    So, just to basically reiterate and ensure I've got things straight here.

    The user is cool, and isn't getting in trouble for what they did. They can keep their journal up. But they can't link directly to their aggressor's profile on Weasyl?

    If that's the case, can they still link to personal blogs off-site that explain things and name people? Since it's not on Weasyl I don't see how it would be an issue with the rules. If they're not directly calling them out on Weasyl, or linking to assets on Weasyl, and they're doing so on other websites, it's cool, right?

    The way their journal is currently structured I really don't see the issue. They're not pointing at the user's Weasyl profile and saying "sick 'em!" they're just telling people to avoid that person. And they only name them off-site, not on Weasyl. Reading the journal you cannot figure out who the individual in question is without going to a different website entirely. I feel like deleting their journal, despite their best efforts to redirect traffic about the specific person's identity to private messages and other websites, is counter-intuitive to not punishing them. They've obviously made efforts to avoid making the journal a total call-out journal.

    Are they allowed to privately respond to inquiries? Like, if I asked who the human garbage was could they tell me in a note/message? Or would we have to finagle that off-site?

    And another thing I'm wondering about, if it did officially come to light the person being accused actually did commit a crime that hurt users of the site, or were further demonstrably shown to be a danger to the furry community, would the Weasyl admins/staff disable them for the sake of user safety? I get not wanting to jump the gun without precedent or solid evidence, but if it was there, would those in charge of Weasyl take such measures?

    I mean really, if we KNEW the person did it, and there was proof (or they even admitted to doing it in a journal) would the administration be willing to terminate their activities on Weasyl? Their behavior may not directly affect the site, but as a danger to Weasyl users as furries and con-attendants surely it'd be a reasonable means of limiting the offender's access to our community and vulnerable individuals within?

    Half the reason Weasyl even has the traffic it does is people wanting to get away from horrible conflicts of interests and the support/protection of terrible people by admins on... other sites. If you guys ever find out someone on the site is being god-awful or doing terrible things would you be willing to take a stand on the issue and tell them to go hitch a ride? I'm not necessarily talking about this case in particular, but if it were to be super evident a user was a danger to users of the site, or just a blight on the community in general, would you guys do something about it or just sit by and make excuses for inaction like a certain alcoholic digital monstrosity? You guys say you care about the users and their safety, surely minimizing the effect and contact a harmful person could have on users would be a means of doing this as well.

    Which brings me to another thing, this kind of stuff coming up reminds me of issues we've seen elsewhere in the past. Just in general can you guys promise to avoid becoming the next ... you know? The next THAT website? There's so many different things they've done terribly or shadily it's hard to get specific or fit into a short line or two, but most of us are aware of it. Are you guys going to avoid that stuff in general? And if so, what are you doing to ensure things don't head in that direction over here?

    I will say, the transparency and open discussion is nice. Nobody's been banned or had messages deleted in this thread so far which is a breath of fresh air. Also the user in question hasn't had their journal deleted (yet) or account banned over this issue, and it doesn't seem like you basically told them to shut up as not to sully a popufur's public affection, though you have told them to stop being specific about it, you guys are still doing leaps and bounds better so far. The fact that I feel confident enough to post this inquiry without worrying about a ban or forced deletion of the post speaks volumes.

  3. #13

    The way I see it-- the very second that journal went up, the Weasyl Admins were screwed.

    If they left it up-- they would have been bending their own rules and turning a blind eye to people just because they supported their cause.
    If they took it down? "OMG! RAPIST SUPPORTERS!".
    They were stuck between a rock and a hard place the very second the journal showed up.

    I also feel like part of the "RAPIST SUPPORTERS" accusation popped up so quickly because of how that other furry website poorly handled their rapist-among-us situations.
    Despite the fact that Term got emotional and said some things he shouldn't....(Tho-- To be honest we have to remember that admins are human beings and WILL get angry or frustrated. They are not highly trained robots that just call down actions with the flip of a switch), I think this was handed extremely well.

    They realized that they had been put in a tough spot-- so they just put their hands up and said "Well Shit. Theirs not much we can do to make ourselves look good, besides offer our side of the story and not hide anything-- despite the fact that people might have already made up their minds about us". They realized they were in a tough spot, and just made a public announcement about it as soon as possible (before the journal was even taken down, might I add!) and then just said "Hey-- Make your own judgements, but regardless we're going to try to fix the grey area in our Rules".

    Even if you think this was handled terribly-- I still think this was handled 250% better than that other site.

  4. #14
    Junior Richard K Niner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim View Post
    If that's the case, can they still link to personal blogs off-site that explain things and name people? Since it's not on Weasyl I don't see how it would be an issue with the rules. If they're not directly calling them out on Weasyl, or linking to assets on Weasyl, and they're doing so on other websites, it's cool, right?
    Evidently not, since that is exactly what the user in question got in trouble for.

  5. #15
    Resident Khajiit Ibuuyk's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Trois-Rivières, Québec
    Hey, on the bright side all this shit's caused the forums to break its record for the most users online at once! If there's anything that attracts furries to a forum like moths to a flame, it's drama.

    Nonetheless, I agree this was handled surprisingly well, especially compared to previous issues that simply got swept under the rug with all those involved mysteriously silenced. Maybe the staff's realized it's time they start working on their behavior so they get a better reputation? If so, Weasyl's future is looking bright indeed.

  6. #16
    Senior Vae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    the sky
    Ludwig Von Koopa
    Quote Originally Posted by SpikedKanine View Post
    I still think this was handled 250% better than that other site.
    I don't really think Weasyl should revolve their decisions around "Well, at least we aren't that guy."
    Because when that guy sets the bar so low, it doesn't take much to step right over it.

    OT: I think the decision made is fair.
    Those who want to know the identity of the accused could find such information if they truly wanted to, the important information is still available in the journal, and Weasyl upholds its rules.
    If the user complies, that is.
    Resident Koopa Trash

  7. #17
    Junior KaydenFrei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    There will always be some people who jump ship at the first whiff of trouble and I hope the leavers wont discourage the staff too much. I think this was handled about as well as can be.

    I think too it is imporant to remember that those comments made were made in private confidence, and although they may not have been the most tacktful i think it is fairly obviously they werent made with ill intent and werent really dismissive of the issue at hand.

    Will there be furthur public updates as the wording or rule may be changed and to let us know of any furthur corespondence on the issue? Although the rest of us users arnt directly involved it seems best to me that the transparency be kept up so we can all see the whole of how the issue will be dealt with?
    Last edited by KaydenFrei; 11-30-2014 at 07:43 PM. Reason: typing on the phone is a pain :v

  8. #18
    Senior Gamedog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    I have to say, I think this was handled appropriately.
    Nice work, Weasyl team.

    I agree with the rule against allowing call-outs on the site, no matter what the call-out may be about. I agree with Rotten, CC, RedSavage, and SpikedKanine on this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard K Niner View Post
    Strangely, I'm not seeing any actual rule violation on the part of the user, unless they were calling someone out on Weasyl.

    Does the Weasyl community policy apply to every website now?
    I saw the journal and didn't have to do any snooping to figure out who the alleged rapist is. That's a call-out and therefore rule violation.

    [Admin note: Content removed in reverence to off topic material]
    Last edited by Fay V; 11-30-2014 at 09:43 PM.

  9.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Fay V View Post
    Admin Notice: Please keep commentary on the actions of "The User" to a minimum. While we have redacted the name for privacy this is still a sensitive topic and we do not wish to invite discussion on what an individual should or should not do regarding their private life which does not pertain to this site use.
    Reiterating this: the substantiation of the claims at the root of this issue was not a factor in our decision, and should not be at the heart of this conversation. Please keep the discussion focused on us and our handling of the situation, and not "The User". Thank you.
    Last edited by Ikani; 11-30-2014 at 08:16 PM. Reason: fixing typos

  10.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #20
    Didn't try, Succeeded Fay V's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    A reminder, please everyone stay civil in discussing these events, both on and off site. We absolutely do not condone any harassment both toward the users, or supporters of any view in regards to this situation.

    Now I apologize for the slow responses, we wanted to be sure everything is being covered in the replies.

    @ Richard K Niner-

    The policy does not apply to every website, specifically the problem with the journal is the use of direct links which directed to posts that named the accused user. We do not expect anyone to adjust offsite content, however the use of direct links does not eliminate the problem of a call out violation.

    The pertinent CG passage: Community Guidelines. III.A.6.
    "Linking to or otherwise making available items otherwise prohibited by Weasyl Terms of Service or prohibited elsewhere within the Community Guidelines."

    Our intent had always been to have the journal edited so as to remove the direct link, this could have been better stated in the first message, and the message being drafted in the logs we believe better shows this point.

    @Jim- This is a long post, hopefully we address everything to satisfaction.

    Yes the user is cool. We do not intend to punish this user, just as generally we do not punish on journals or submissions where we request minor content edits.

    The journal can stay if the direct links to material which calls out the user by name, even though the actual content is off site, are removed.

    I noted a relevant CG rule above that explains linking to offsite content is not appropriate on Weasyl as it is a method to circumvent site rules. We understand the user wished to communicate their concern with others but these rules must apply across the board, and while in this case they may not have desired harassment, in many other cases a user may draw attention, then link to off site material giving both a name and a call for harassment. This is a case where the rules have been put in place to protect the community overall and in one instance has been disruptive toward a goal that may not be malicious in nature. It is unfortunate and as stated into the announcement we are reviewing the policy and will be looking for the application with the most utility.

    Could they respond to private inquiries?
    Yes, notes are considered private information and not public calls. However if a user begins to use the note system to incite harassment, their account will be in violation of harassment policies.

    Will Weasyl staff take measures to protect user safety?
    Yes, Weasyl policy specifically states that we will remove permissions and ban users who use the site in order to harm others, or use the site to coordinate illegal activity. We also may remove permissions for the safety of the site, which, if a user is deemed a safety concern, we may choose to do.

    These decisions are not made lightly however. We do not want to make this discussion a focus on proof or questioning the claims of any user. The staff does have measures to protect the community and does take them seriously.

    In regards to the final comment, this would require too lengthy a response even for an open forum such as this. First and foremost, we don't simply want to be better than other alternatives, we want to stand on our own merits. We do have measures to ensure that we are always good for the community.

    As seen in the logs, our staff actively work with one another. This particular incident was troublesome and did not represent our staff in the best or the most accurate light, but we do work as a team, and we do work to determine our best course of action. We believe transparency is good for the community and so in the past we have been open for discussion, and in this case we have laid out the specifics of what has occurred.

    If there are specific concerns you would like to address, please bring them up, but for now I would like our policies to speak for themselves. We hold ourselves to the Staff Code of Conduct, we hold ourselves to a position of transparency and communication with the community, and we have a very dedicated staff.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts