Taking a leave of absence

[Spyder]

Putting this all back in the place where it belongs is exactly what I've tried to do. Having RogueIce back helps, as there's two of us not to send IMs, PMs, and catch up with folks running amok.

The problem is, and this is the big deciding factor here, is that we're not exactly sure what happened with Ender. He's not being totally forthcoming about it, and there is a chance that this is either a very minor thing, or something misconstrued completely. I know also that he was very upset about something unrelated in RL, and he may have just lost his patience and blown up.

So RogueIce and I are trying to put everything back where it was, keep this from spilling over, and contact Ender to fight WTF really happened-- and if we really have a right or a reason to be worked up about it.

I do know that something really affected him, and he's upset, and we believe from the context of some of his messages that it has something to do with someone here. Quite frankly, now you all know pretty much what we know...

Can you elaborate on the comments Ender's referring to in the second post?

[Publius]

As a matter of principle, issues should be dealt with at the lowest level possible. If it is not absolutely necessary to move threads from the Mess, it should not be done (the same applies to any other private forum, where there is a certain presumption of additional privacy, Internet message board or no). The Mess's senior leadership (Rob Wilson etc.) should be the judge of whether or not any further steps on the public forums are necessary. Should anyone point out that this confessional seal has already been violated, why would Ender or any one else want a further hemorrhage of privy business? There are enough Senators and other senior board officers in the Mess to manage matters like this with discretion, with a minimum of fuss and embarrassment.

This applies not just to Ender's particular... issue... but also to any future problems of this kind.

[RedImperator]

I'm for tabling this. At this point, it doesn't appear that anyone knows what's going on, which makes any discussion in the Senate just a lot of hot air. Meanwhile, there are apparently real-life stakes involved, which, above and beyond any claim to privacy the Mess may have, calls for discretion, not a public investigation. If and when it comes time for the Senate to decide if any skulls need cracking, we can figure out exactly how that decision will be made and implemented then.

[CmdrWilkens]

While perhaps sounding a bit officious in new capacity I'd like to state that the Mess is working to clean its house right now and if we fell the matter needs additional attention, something where the fault line is something we can't fix, then I will open things up within the Senate personally.

[Knife]

I agree completely. When I said above that the administration should deal with it if they (evidently) can't, I didn't mean anybody below the highest level of mucky-mucks. I don't think anybody below the admin staff should be involved, obviously including myself. The integrity of the Mess as a place just for the current and former servicemen is something that should definitely be preserved--just because a handful of Mess people shot a load of venom on the public forum and are engaging in other shenanigans, doesn't mean that we have to invite the Senate in. I know that if I was in the Mess, I wouldn't want a bunch of anonymous motherfuckers in something this sensitive.

Funny, I feel like I just said that same thing (though with less words) and you jumped my shit for it.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Funny, I feel like I just said that same thing (though with less words) and you jumped my shit for it.

The key difference between our statements would be the part I said about the admins (Mike et al.) helping you deal with it, whereas you essentially said "we'll handle it all by ourselves and by the way fuck you because our club is extra super-private." As if this was the right time to insist that the gate be kept shut, now that the privacy cows had trundled off.

[Knife]

Funny, I feel like I just said that same thing (though with less words) and you jumped my shit for it.

The key difference between our statements would be the part I said about the admins (Mike et al.) helping you deal with it, whereas you essentially said "we'll handle it all by ourselves and by the way fuck you because our club is extra super-private." As if this was the right time to insist that the gate be kept shut, now that the privacy cows had trundled off.

As always, it's Mike's board and he can do what he wants with it. He already has access to 'everything' so pointing it out is a moot point.

What I pointed out though, is that there are senators, govenors, mini mods, mods and even super mods all with in Mess membership and Mike can go where he wants in these forums (I thought it went without saying). With all that managment represented, what the fuck are a couple more going to do? And just because a couple fuckwits start saying 'to hell' with the rules doesn't mean the rest of us are ready to drop them.

[Surlethe]

I've been thinking more about this, and given that the Senate's function is, at its heart, simply threefold (to recognize good debaters, deliberate on and recommend punishments for miscreants, and recommend new policies -- I think it's important to remember that our body is simply an advisory council), I'm cooling down on the idea of a Senate-overseen investigation into the matter. It just doesn't seem to be in our jurisdiction, and given how sensitive the information is or could be, it strikes me as neither wise nor worth the effort of creating special forums viewable only to Senators. I've no doubt this august body is capable of undertaking an investigation, but is it in our best interests or in our job description?

[InnerBrat]

At the risk of a "me too" post, I know that if and when anything like this happens in SOS:NBA or GALE, both immensely private fora, I would consider it a private matter for the usergroups and admins only.

So yes, this is a 'me too' post - this is at the moment a matter for the Mess and the admins only, even burning with curiosity as I am.

[Coyote]

Thank you all, for those re-affirming the line of seperation. I do apologise, again, for the "spillover" that resulted. Things have been rather hot and fiery there for a few days... now they're settling into a sort of sullen, angry quiet... with an unfortunate dose of recrimination seething as a sort of icing. It's quieted down a bit, but it's not a relaxing quiet. And, of course, a few guys that were gone for awhile came back and stirred things a bit with some "WTF!?" posts, which RI and I are taking care of. Mostly with a flurry of "heads-up" PMs.

I will, however, provide updates as soon as it is possible, but for now I just want to err on the side of privacy considering that this could, potentially, be a RL situation... or something mistaken and blown out of proportion.

[Surlethe]

RogueIce has asked me to relay this message:

• Senators,
  
  With regards to the ongoing difficulties and any punishments that may or may not bear mentioning (at least so far as the board is concerned), I would like to point out that Darth Wong is the PSAO of the Warwolves. What that means is that, above and beyond the obvious fact that he can, as an admin, see our forums anyway, he is already an invited member. Thus when he chooses to view the forums it is not in any way a violation of privacy.
  
  And, as he is the owner of the board, he can very easily deal out whatever punishment is appropriate, without dragging it out in front of everyone (there has been far, far too much of that already) and his word is final anyway. I would therefore propose that we be allowed to handle this in-house, with any punishments rendered by our PSAO (and the board owner) in the interests of allowing the board at large to move on past all this drama.
  
  Thank you for your time,
  RogueIce, Acting Mod of the Mess

[Frank Hipper]

Something that cries out for mention here is that the Senate simply is not authorised to "investigate" this.

Senate Powers and Perks

[Simplicius]

Not only not authorized, not even capable. How, exactly, would we address a matter in a private usergroup without, e.g., some sort of power to subpoena? We can only take on super-serious business with the assistance of board staff with real power, and the very existence of those people makes us redundant anyway.

There is very real authority placed where it is needed. The moderators deal out chastisement as necessary to keep the public threads in order. It seems there is nothing we could do that is not already being done by someone else, so we might as well just sit back and deal with trifling things like Kittie Rose.

[LadyTevar]

If that is the case, Simplicius, I shall start a motion to lock this thread.

[Spyder]

Seconded, consider the previous motion withdrawn.

[Coyote]

Please, by all means. If the situation warrants it, I shall start a new thread to bring the Senate up to date.

[Surlethe]

... the very existence of those people makes us redundant anyway.

This is an excellent point. The board ran smoothly for four and a half years without the Senate. The moderators and administration decided that they wanted to create this body of users to advise them, but in the end, that's all we exist to do: recommend things.

Therefore, I'll third the motion to lock.

[LadyTevar]

The motion to lock has been made and seconded (thirded).

If there is no objection, I hereby request that Rob Wilson or one of the SuperMods lock this thread.

[Darth Wong]

Not only not authorized, not even capable. How, exactly, would we address a matter in a private usergroup without, e.g., some sort of power to subpoena? We can only take on super-serious business with the assistance of board staff with real power, and the very existence of those people makes us redundant anyway.

Not exactly "redundant"; the purpose of the Senate is to vote on issues where there is some uncertainty about which action to follow, and to let us know what the more serious users think of our actions and policies. For example, if a Senator thinks that the mods are too quick to lock threads, he could start a thread for discussion on that, whereas someone doing that in the regular forums would be told that to shut the fuck up and stop telling mods how to do their jobs. But for the Senate to conduct "investigations" is a bit silly; even the moderators have precious little power to "investigate" something like this anyway.

[Coyote]

I am posting this here so as not to have too many threads about this subject cluttering up and hanging around.


Okay, as we all know there has been a bit of a firestorm developing in one of the private forums. It involves one member of that forum accusing other(s) in the same forum of giving information about his personal life to people who have no business with that knowledge. It is information that is problematic for this person's professional and personal life.


In close consultation with Darth Wong, and other moderators of this private forum, we are attempting to localize the dispute as much as possible and keep it contained within the private forum itself. Some might say we have met with dismal success in this; OTOH I feel that if the full extent of what was going on in the private forum was known, the protests would be much greater.


For now, no Senate threads should be started over the activities in private forums. Let private forums try to police themselves as best they can. If problems continue, maybe the Senate can advise whether or not to close the private forum entirely.


If a person is booted from a private forum, do not ask that person for information regarding the incident-- it will risk getting a new argument started in public, and possibly damaging more people. It is up to the discretion of the private-forum mods to determine if a brief and objective outline of the incident shal be recorded for public consumption in SDnet history.


We are trying to establish a new sort of SOP for handling this in the future.


Thank you for your patience and understanding in this matter.