Open discussion about issues with project management and hub enforcement

The following hub rules are being repeatedly and openly broken / ignored by certain individuals within wizden leadership:

  • Strike system:
    Currently not followed for the overwhelming majority of cases, might as well remove. Numerous recent examples.

  • Enforcement Procedures:
    Servers are being dehubbed without the owners being reached out to. Recent example being Arcadis.

  • Section 2 rules:
    Goob was dehubbed briefly before being reached out to about naming issues. If the individual who did this would have followed their own hub policy; said interaction would have resulted in a stike at most, but more likely would have been resolved within DMs without need for preemptive dehubbing.

The following issues, while not directly stated in hub rules are extremely problematic.

  • There are currently no rules about deauthintication:
    Despite this; deauthintication is being used as a weapon against other servers. If nothing else; create rules that the community has access to about deauthintication rather than using it against people silently and without a procedure.

  • The current wizden stance on servers being ā€œGuilty by associationā€ is blatant misuse and abuse of the hub rules:
    If an individual truly is guilty by association for the crime of being within a discord server, I regret to report that several wizden staff members past and present were within a server that pedophilia and grooming took place. And while these members did not speak much in these servers and likely did not know what was going on; if the current guilt by association behavior were followed it would be a very bad day for everyone involved. It is very obvious as to why procedure should be followed for each and every server.

  • Harassment is undefined and used as a blanket punishment:
    It is used dozens of different ways and has lost all meaning. I have personally been told that the incident in which a wizden staff member told someone to ā€œfuck themself ten times with a rakeā€ and called them ā€œa pathetic piece of shitā€ is not harrassment. I was also told that it would harrassment be if directed at a staff member. Defining the term would likely help communities to not harrass anyone, because as of now it seems no one knows what it means.

  • A standard of professionalism is needed:
    As the official Space Station 14 servers a standard of professionalism is fair to expect. It would also go a long way in earing your communities trust and respect, as well as making it less likely people will stumble upon messages sent by leadership and become alienated. If angry and emotional outbursts are not allowed in the discord server; staff should not being having them. Recent examples include a message within the SS14 discord servers announcements stating: ā€œI FUCKING HATE THIS PROJECTā€ as well as numerous examples of insults / needlessly aggressive interactions both in and out of DMs while the other party was extremely calm and collected.

  • Transparency would go a long way
    Currently, quite a bit of wizdens operating procedures are extremely secretive. For example; I have been requesting for months any evidence of ā€œprolific community members harassmentā€ and have been repeatedly told that such evidence will not be sent as to protect the harrassing community members (who were still named despite the supposed desire to protect them.) If nothing else proving such evidence would make previous tantrums that have taken place seem more justified. Dehubbing is also an extremely secretive process despite its importance. For a community to be dehubbed there should be quite a large amount of damning evidence provided in the announcement. Unfortunately until recently there has been no attempt to provide evidence for any hub actions that have taken place, and recent evidence is lackluster at the best and nonexistent at the worst.

  • Staff should be background checked
    A few months ago, an individual who was guilty of grooming, pedophilia, and incest among other things was briefly allowed to become staff for around a week before being removed from the staff team for unrelated issues. This same person was discovered to be all those things in a matter of hours by a small group of individuals. There is absolutely zero excuse to allow such a thing, it does not take much effort to conduct even a basic check on someone. This is also in direct violation of the hub rules and could have resulted in a strike for other communties.

Over half of your staff team has left and more continue to leave due to mismanagement. Numerous players have done the same and reached out to me with concerns about the project. Several ex-staff members I spoke with provided me with some of the above issues. I would implore those who remain to work to fix the many issues before they continue to spiral and damage more of the community than they already have.

7 Likes

All cases in which this is done are warranted.

This was because Durk was intentionally playing chicken with their server listing, and if you ask him he will happily tell you this was fully justified. They changed their name in rapid succession to the following:

  • ā€œNO FELINIDS IN COMMANDā€: blatant speciesism, asked them to remove it, they did.
  • ā€œ/gb/station Terryā€: Impersonates TGstation in SS13. I contacted TG staff and they were not pleased. Asked to remove, they did.
  • ā€œGooberā€™s Den Grasshopperā€: Impersonates Wizden. Dehubbed and told them they can get back on if they fix their shit.

Donā€™t harass us or send us legal threats and we wonā€™t. Guess what people did.

It is absolutely justified to call somebody a harasser for openly engaging with harassers, even after this is pointed out to them.

Harassment is actually quite well defined. And we follow this definition.

It would be harassment if this was a repeat occurrence. What actually happened is the the ā€œtargetā€ of this harassed our staff for months on end, and I wrote that message while fucking sick of his shit. Forgive me for having human emotions in a one-off occurence.

If I constantly lied about somebody in our staff and that was an example of it, this would be a valid argument. As it stands, youā€™re just taking things out of context and siding with abusers.

Sorry but Iā€™m too tired after getting harassed for 2 years. All of our staff is.

This is completely untrue. We cannot provide evidence of actions in all cases to protect sources, not perpetrators. Basically half the reports about hub shit, especially harassment, are from people that donā€™t want people to know they reported it.

Furthermore, even when we do provide sources, people just fucking ignore it. It is just not worth our hassle to neatly organize 10 pages of evidence, because people will call it ā€œabuse of powerā€ no matter what we do or how true it is.

I do not understand how you can say this when itā€™s trivial to disprove this when looking at the recent list of hub actions.

Please elaborate what kind of checks you think we should have done to avoid this specific issue.

This is not true. We have told people to remove staff before, they have, everybody moves on with their day.

1 Like

I just read the blog you published. Making publicly available documents like this disproving common criticisms is a good step in the right direction. It would be good to show the community that you are making steps in the right direction, like explaining what you have done to prevent more predators from getting into positions of power after what happened with the last one. It is probably not the best idea to start such documents with messages of how much you hate people though, doing such is just going to get rid of whatever good faith people had left for you and cause even more alienation.

Again, Iā€™m only discussing this type of thing because this community has a ton of potential and I am quite invested in it. I do not hate you. There is not a single person on the staff team I hate.

Forgive the strange formatting, I could not find the quote button.

1 Like

Another small point I would like to bring up is the harassment definition. If wizden does go by ā€œconsistent bothering is harassmentā€ then why are people consistently banned for first time instance of bothering staff with harassment as the ban reason. It cant be both ways.

4 Likes

I agree, and will continue to agree with everything games sweatshop has said/will say and I will provide no further explanation as he does a better job at stating the facts than I possibly could.

If you are talking about the ā€œbackground checksā€ part, we have not. We do not believe it to be a systematic issue as we acted immediately upon getting notified and we consider that to be sufficient. There was no evidence of any staff failing to forward the evidence or anything like that, and no evidence that anybody got harmed thanks to their staff position.

Like I said, I would like to know you think we could have done.

I am asking you this because I know at least one harassment document about this situation said we should have used Fucking Kiwi Farms as a source of background checks. Which is such a laughable statement anybody reading it should instantly close their browser tab and block the person that sent them the document in question.

I know itā€™s not true for everybody reading it, but I did make my post as an honest good-faith attempt in the hopes that the people that do hate me (and I know they exist) at least read this. And yes, I did send it to those. So I figured it was worth acknowledging for those people.

Select a line of text in a post, itā€™ll give you a button.

It really depends. I do give out warnings a lot on Discord and Steam, but Reddit doesnā€™t have a good way to do it. Generally I go for full bans in this case only if itā€™s obvious theyā€™re not engaging in good faith. People spreading the same old tired shit accusations and harassment from somebody else, people disregarding entire evidence posts, etc.

Gonna provide my two cents on this because I feel like the more input from everybody the better.

PJB, the lack of any evidence for any of your issues for harassment has been very concerning, you cannot throw around harassment accusations without making a paper trail.

The statement of ā€œpeople wonā€™t careā€ doesnā€™t remove the fact that evidence is crucial when talking about removing people off of hubs. You need to create an official document for why exactly a community is getting removed, as the way youā€™ve gone about this has lead to a lot of confusion in your own community as to what exactly has happened.

In addition there has yet to be any ā€œofficialā€ statement on the Wizden Server as to what has been going on, and itā€™s doing nothing but hurting your own reputation as the Project Lead. Mostly everyoneā€™s been left to speculate with the images that have been circulating around other communities. Images that show you yourself saying ā€œOn a personal note, I hope you and everyone else you regularly interact with in your pathetic community goes and fucks themselves with a rake 10 times over so I never have to see you again.ā€. How exactly would this benefit your own image in the wider community other than making yourself appear extremely emotional?

This may be how it appears to yourself, but to the wider audience it appears spiteful and full of hatred for the people youā€™re hoping to reach, you have to control yourself when youā€™re writing a response to an issue. I think I can say for a lot of people that the emotional way youā€™ve handled yourself with the italics and swearing and the issues with being able to talk responsibly with server hosts in addition to you being unable to provide evidence makes you out to look like the bad guy.

I know there are issues with people in Einsteinā€™s Engine and theyā€™re not good people, but you need to hold yourself accountable as the Project Lead, youā€™re not someone who owns a small fork of Space Station, you are the Head. You need to show yourself to be someone who can actually handle themselves and persevere through repeated harassment instead of someone who is an easy target FOR said harassment.

I would really recommend taking some time away from the project and stepping down if at all possible, some time away from the community to get some fresh air from the harassment would be, in my opinion, a decent way to maybe refresh yourself and come back with a better mindset on how to actually deal with the issues of harassment and bullying within your community, as the path youā€™re currently taking seems to be making the situation worse and worse by the day.

1 Like

I do not know how you can see this when you have read my blog post, which clearly contains a lot of evidence. Or the EE dehub, which has a lot of evidence.

And we do that, when we can. I have already explained in this thread why we sometimes cannot.

There literally is? [2024/12/17] Dehubbing of Einstein Engines servers

I donā€™t know. I kind of expect people to be rational? That image is from a DM thread. That means there are two people that couldā€™ve leaked it. One of those got striked for hosting a harassment community.

We post the most benign shit and people take it out of context regardless. There is no amount of ā€œjust be more professional than themā€ that will stop us getting harassed, they always find reasons to. I am a human being doing this in my free time, forgive me for having emotions.

I would be open to suggestions, because, as I alluded to in the blog post, we have nothing we can do except consistently put our foot down and ban everybody involved in harassment. All our attempts at communication get blown off. So that is what we do.

What is aggressively daft about the circumstance from the EE side is that this is a FOSS game, both Robust and Wizden are under MIT, and the amount of effort to set up some superior alternative hub away from the tyranny of PJB being mean in DMs is a comparatively trivial amount of work.

IIRC even in the EE dehubbing thread thereā€™s a screenshot of one of the ringleaders talking about ā€œgetting an alternative hub set upā€ or somesuch. But invariably this gains no momentum. It should! If folks donā€™t like the Wizden moderation, then folks can just move on.

The only value in Wizden is the contribs/maints/community that surrounds it; if folks donā€™t like it, then folks should go make a better community. Thatā€™s the beauty of FOSS and ā€œwe donā€™t like you, weā€™re going to go do our own thingā€ has been the underlying logic behind the balance between the BDFL and the development community underneath them since the term BDFL was coined back in the 90s!

For the folks involved, this really isnā€™t about anything other than attacking the Wizden leadership. Thereā€™s no money in this game, other than the Patreon money that goes on keeping the servers up, I guess.

12 Likes

Iā€™m going to add my two cents on this thread!
PJB, if anything, this thread AND your blogpost, made me gain lots more of appreciation about you, before today (I did a somewhat deep dive today), I had the wrong idea about you, but after going around, investigating all of the drama and issues and things that have happened as of lateā€¦ I can say for sure that all of my worries about you and wizden in general were completely missplaced! A very good thing that armok pointed is the ā€œlack of informationā€, not saying that no information was ever posted or published, but what I notice is that some venues such as discord and/or reddit, do not have posts/info about the issues in an official channel, it is spread around in different places and etc!

I did learn some things from kiwifarms, but the MAJORITY of the stuff said there is just ludicrous, Iā€™m hella sure that a lot of those stuff were also said by people because they didnā€™t verify, they didnā€™t look around, they didnā€™t use their god damned heads!!!

There were issues in wizden, there were decisions done too early about things and etc, BUT, so much of everything was so overblown because people speculate when faced with the unknown, and then unfortunately they assume the worst, they see a tempest in a tiny drizzle!

Donā€™t focus too much on this whole thing during new years, enjoy festivities PJB, have fun, try to take your mind off of this issue just for a bit, and remember: whenever you feel like all people hate you, that is just not true, it is a product of anxiety and of emotion.

Like armok, I like the entire what is ā€œSS14ā€, I know there are some bad apples around, but the community and the game so far is amazing, and that would not have happened if you didnā€™t take that first step back then, and did the work you did and everything.

2 Likes

Iā€™d suggest you stop justifying your actions to idiots. You wont convince internet trolls using text, it will only make them feel more justified out of pure spite. Every word you respond is just potential ammo.

Thereā€™s literally no point in communicating with someone acting like that.

2 Likes

Interesting that this is about EE. Isnā€™t that the one downstream branch that refused to remove the salvage shuttle?

The delist couldnā€™t possibly have something to do with that, but still. Interesting.

1 Like

goob also has the salvage shuttle, whats your point?

Hey PJB, hereā€™s a serious propositionā€”no clowning around this time. Letā€™s open a channel and actually talk. I would like to step in as a mediator because, believe it or not, Iā€™m pretty good at sorting out messes like the ones plaguing the Space Station 13 remakes. We both know the so-called ā€œcurseā€ that follows these projects: everyoneā€™s so busy arguing that the game itself gets lost in the shuffle.

I realize we have had our differences, and I must have robbed you of countless hours you couldā€™ve spent productively. I told myself, donā€™t be sorry, be better. And I do believe people can change. Empathy and kindness are skills we can practice and grow, just like training a muscle.

So imagine a future where weā€™re not caught in endless drama, but channel all that creative and emotional energy into building an awesome Space Station 13 experience, finally free from the remake curse. Letā€™s make that happen.

1 Like

Iā€™m gonna throw a tought or two here (more cents for the forum):
PJB was pretty nuclear. But if you look at all the shit the staff as a whole has endured, i feel like it is justified.
It is questionable to do blanket punishments by association. But when so many of those associates have been in such heinous cases, i feel like it is just a necessity.

Like, just look at the amount of people with past offenses in positions of power within the EE council. And that is not even the problem, the problem is that they keep using those positions to fling shit. EE pretty much got their way, they still had hubbed servers, they had their own (and well structured) code base meant to be easy to re-use. But they just could not stop with their harrassment.
I doubt there was other option than to rip it by the roots. Volunteers working on a FOSS game, itā€™s maintenance, forums and community as a whole donā€™t deserve to endure that kind of shit.

3 Likes

Iā€™m gonna weigh in since someone made a post here just over a week ago, and the state of the hub has been bothering me every time I think ā€˜I might play SS14 todayā€™. Iā€™ve been thinking about how best to word this for a while; itā€™s going to be long, but Iā€™ll condense it at the end.

To preface a little context, I voiced concerns after the EE dehub, specifically that I believed, as I still do, that Peptide and his Singularity servers recieved the full force of a punishment for a misconduct that took place in a discord server he was in, with his only crime being failing to speak out against it. Iā€™ll re-state that I have a limited horse in that race, having put a little work into Peptideā€™s Fallout server more than a year ago, and worked alongside him enough to have what I think is a decent meassure of the guy, but weā€™ve not talked in over a year. Frankly, recent events have only made me feel more certain that this was mishandled, especially seeing earlier in this very thread that the strike system has been simply put aside out of convenience because someone was pushing boundaries, and apparently part of that consisted of having a server name that contained ā€˜speciesismā€™ - which is solely a server rule and has nothing to do with the hub (unless I am completely misunderstanding that exchange above, which is possible).

When I was discussing this on the Admin Help channel in the Discord, with hindsight, I really didnā€™t make my case as good as I would have liked, so Iā€™m going to take a second stab at it here, with a broader focus on how I think the hub administration is being handled improperly, the tangible effects of it, and some suggestions.

  1. Why this matters:

I want to start by laying out why, imo, any of this matters. I think itā€™s easy to look at any failings in hubministration as low-stakes community drama, as something that will seem unimportant a few more years into the project, or as an inevitable result of managing a project of this size. Anyone who has contributed to the game knows implicitly how much personal time, effort and passion is required to do so - this scales from the hours or days to learn git and the language in order to make small tweaks, all the way up to the months and years a person will invest in making a hardfork or total conversion codebase. Everyone involved with the project understands intimately how much it hurts when that much effort gets lost to a git issue, or a failed storage device, or just an insurmountable bug or design issue. Itā€™s easy to pretend that a dehubbing is just a slap on the wrist, or a cessation of providing one hub platform of many, but to pretend cutting ingress of all but the most determined 1% of players is anything other than a death sentence for a server is obviously disingenous. On a personal level, taking months or years of freely contributed work, from potentially dozens of contributors and pressing a single button to condemn it to unplayablility should not be a decision made lightly. To pull Peptide in as an unwilling example; I know heā€™s been working tirelessly on his fallout fork for at least 3 years, the guy has kids and he found time to put endless work in over something he was passionate about, he enjoyed and primarily, he knew other people would be passionate about and enjoy. Isnā€™t this the reason weā€™re all here? The idea that in a situation like this, pulling that plug is something thatā€™s being done without every consideration, check, and moment for cooler heads to reassess and confirm is what is bothering me the most, personally.

  1. Transparency:

Iā€™ll interject my own train of thought here for a sidebar because Iā€™m sure the response to this is going to be ā€˜the decision was not made lightly, all considerations were given, it was decided that in this case, the punishment was aptā€™, to which Iā€™d say; how am I supposed to know that, and how is anybody supposed to trust that if the process is as opaque as it is right now? In the case of the EE dehubbing, evidence was given that people a number of people in the ā€˜EE councilā€™ discord made an attempt to pull the plug on Wizden hosting; as I said the last time this was discussed, I think this is a perfectly valid reason to take action with mod administration. In all the screenshots and information the community were supplied, Peptideā€™s crimes consisted of:
A) being present in a discord group of server hosts
B) saying he didnā€™t believe ā€˜thisā€™ (presumably the DMCA, but impossible to tell as we have no direct context for the quote) doesnā€™t comprise harrassment
C) ā€˜operating a server weā€™ve had to strike for harrassment beforeā€™ - no further information provided, no prior strikes visible on the forum hub administration tag that I can see
D) ā€˜being fineā€™ with these events
I think itā€™s evident to anyone coming at this from an honest and neutral perspective that nothing Peptide has specifically done here breaks any of the hub rules, let alone to the extent that the entire strike system was seemingly leapfrogged directly to a dehubbing for all 3 servers.
Now when this was discussed in the discord, I was told that there was some other unspecified wrong that had been done which justified all the treatment, I was given no further information and every staff member present functionally told Iā€™d have to take their word for it, and that Peptide was a malicious actor who deserved what happened to him, something which I still canā€™t square with the guy I worked with a few years ago on his Fallout server. Being blunt, the whole thing feels like something is being covered up, and it feels like any resultant ambiguity is being inflated to seem as big as possible to justify actions which otherwise wouldnā€™t fly - and how would anyone in the community confirm anything otherwise if weā€™re not being told anything? Iā€™m just using Peptideā€™s case as an example of a lack of transparency, but I will touch back on this topic - my point isnā€™t so much that something was covered up, or that any lies were told, or truths were implied, but that, as a community member outside the circle, there is literally no way to know, and that makes for a really difficult environment to foster trust - trust that is essential to the process.

1.5. Why this matters to the community:

To return to the point, aside from risking just throwing someoneā€™s personal work in the trash, and how shitty that is, I also feel the need to point out that if dehubbing is handled without the gravity it should be, itā€™s inevitably going to feed into a bunch of community woes. Iā€™d like to get ahead of the response Iā€™ve heard before; to the tune of ā€˜its inevitable that some people will resent the punishments they fairly recieveā€™ by saying yes, obviously, and that I agree; as I said before with the DMCA takedown being a fair reason for a dehub, I am not of the opinion that no violation deserves punishment, or that itā€™s possible to completely avoid any negative feelings between wizden and the broader community. With that being said, if Wizden is seen to be, as I argue it has, using its position rashly or irresponsibly, thatā€™s gasoline to any sentiment regarding a wizden in-group presiding over an out-group. As I attempted to convey in the previous discord conversation, if people feel like they could catch a dehub for minor offenses, like being present while other people discuss breaking rules, thatā€™s going to put people on edge, and is going to lead to the community clustering into groups distrustful of wizden - which is very much what the EE group seemed to be. Iā€™ll fly over the obvious reasons this is bad; a divided community will be unwelcoming and unlikely to co-operate on larger projects and moderation, inter-server drama bullshit will get more personal and heated, individuals will be less inclined to fork codebases for fear of dehub, or of the rules changing under their feet to where previously acceptable behaviour risks the work theyā€™ve put in etc etc. If Wizden are attempting to act as community arbiters, such as here (do note the complete lack of any information at all), itā€™s even more important than it would otherwise be that the rules are enforced fairly, consistently, and, most importantly, are seen to be all of these things. Anything else is frankly irresponsible and is going to lead the community bit by bit to a very unpleasant place.

  1. It costs nothing to improve this:

In terms of what Iā€™d suggest should be done, my suggestions are incredibly minimal, which I think is a point unto itself - doing this right would be basically free. Iā€™ll go into more detail towards the end, but all that needs to happen that isnā€™t happening now is that the rules need to be enforced as written, we need some form of non-wizden oversight to ensure impartiality (and to make sure people can see itā€™s impartial), we need more transparency, with things that arenā€™t disclosed being justified, and the people most directly involved in the drama should absolutely not be the ones making decisions on how to resolve it.

  1. Things arenā€™t improving:

The two dehubbings I have some familiarity with are that of EE and the Nyanotrasen dehub from 2023. To their absolute and unsarcastic credit the staff involved openly admit that the NT dehub was handled poorly - I donā€™t disagree with the underlying sentiment, and based on what I heard around then and what happened since, Rane-headed Nyanotrasen was probably going to the block sooner or later. What concerns me, however, is that a lot of the issues then; the lack of communication with the actioned party, the lack of transparency with the community, and the seemingly rash decisionmaking involved are present in both dehubbings as far as I can tell. After the discussion on the discord I did a little digging on the other side, and as far as I can tell from Peptideā€™s perspective, he recieved a pretty hostile DM telling him that if he didnā€™t leave the EE discord his server would be dehubbed, to which a response of standing oneā€™s ground and pleading oneā€™s innocence, to me, is reasonable - as far as I am aware, thatā€™s the full extent of communication. These two dehubbing events were over a year apart and, as far as I can tell from the limited information I actually have access to, the processes and approaches to hub administration havenā€™t significantly improved at all. Without transparency and oversight, I see no reason why they would at all.

  1. Can we be nicer generally:

The last unbroached point is something Iā€™ve seen raised and acknowledged internally a few times which strikes me as both a hypocricy and catalyst to exacerbate pretty much all the other issues which is wizden maintainers and higher rank contributors, (I will say this largely doesnā€™t apply to admin staff) being standoffish, short-tempered, and just generally rude, to peers, community members, and when talking about people outside the community. This isnā€™t a new take, Iā€™ve seen high level staff talk about it, I seem to recall there was an announcement a month or so ago saying it would be improved, Iā€™ve seen a fair amount of staffers leave the group because of it. If people are prone to making quick rash decisions, especially if those people are, or percieve themselves to be the target of rulebreaking, that person should absolutely not be involved in the processs of deciding the response to it unless there are no other options. This might seem like Iā€™m subtweeting PJB, but itā€™s a very common thing Iā€™ve seen through the years in the community and absolutely isnā€™t limited to her, though in the case specifically of harrassment-based dehubs, to my understanding she is usually the target of, let it be said, unfair and genuinely disgusting smears. I am genuinely sympathetic to that, and Iā€™d never say a person shouldnā€™t be upset or angry about it, but to reiterate, that person is not going to be able to make impartial decisions about how to respond to the situation and it seems incredibly obvious to me that in these cases whoever is the relevant party should be functionally recused. As a secondary point, Iā€™ve seen plenty of venom spit about other community figures by wizden staffers in the discord - I donā€™t like the idea that one of the hub rules seems to amount to ā€˜dont talk shit about other server staff past a thresholdā€™ when shit is talked about other servers from in wizden; I understand that no wizden staffers are whispering that anyone else is a pedophile, but Iā€™ve definitely seen people be called wastes of space, disgusting human beings etc etc which I think puts fuel to people concerned about ā€˜one rule for wizden one rule for everyone elseā€™, whether itā€™s true or not.

  1. Why Iā€™m worried:

Iā€™m sure Iā€™m not alone in that I have personally never liked the idea of the administration of one server having a button they can press to functionally remove any other server with zero oversight. Just picture SS13 if /tg/ had the ability to dehub, or Goon - the community would be significantly worse and everyone would hate it. When I voiced my lukewarm concerns in the Discord, I felt like what I was saying was taken on board, at least somewhat, and the reply assuring me that dehubbing would barely be used, and, where it was, it would only be used appropriately, after serious consideration, and only when the reasonable hub rules were broken sufficiently. The last few months have shown me that this isnā€™t the case; the hub rules are guidelines, the strike system is only used as long as itā€™s not too inconvenient, and decisions are being made hastily and opaquely. This is not good, itā€™s not fostering a community thatā€™s enjoyable to be a part of, and itā€™s not sustainable. If things stay as they are, I can only see the course holding, resentment building, the community atomising, forks drying up and god only knows who will be holding the unsupervised controls to the hub in 5 years.

3.5. Suggestions:

My suggestions are as follows; some are vague, some are specific, Iā€™m not a cop I barely play the game at the moment, so theyā€™re worth whatever theyā€™re worth:

  1. Enforce the hub rules as written. If colluding to break rules together is a violation, the rules should say so - the server rules are longer than the hub rules last I looked. Obviously every edge case and shitty rules-lawyer canā€™t be pre-empted, so in these cases it should be seriously discussed, made clear, to the people discussing and the community afterwards that an exception is being made and why it is being made, ideally be added to the rules going forward, ideally be given more leeway than a straight violation would be (IE not insta-dehubbing, maybe even having a non-confrontational conversation with the person to establish facts), and even more ideally, overseen by a third party of some kind, see 2:

  2. Involve at least a bare minimum non-wizden in the hub administration process. Itā€™s really not a mystery where the secret cabal accusations come from. This does not have to be an embarrasing discord channel where people roleplay as the UN and cast votes; having one or two high-level staffers from servers that arenā€™t owned/run by wizden staff, who you can trust to be adults and not disruptive, in the room and able to voice their opinions on dehub discussions will go a long way to earning community trust. If you want to be cynical, frame it as adding fall guys to share the aggro. It would be great if there was an agreed rule to the effect of ā€˜no dehubbing unless lawbreaking, X strikes, or the third party okays itā€™, but thatā€™s probably a big ask. Also crammed in here because it doesnt fit in 1 or 3; as I said before, if someoneā€™s targeted, they need to recuse themselves from the process; angry decisions donā€™t lead to long-term good outcomes.

  3. More communication generally. Even if someone is snickering while obviously breaking rules and it seems stupid to reach out to tell them, I think itā€™s better that people are having 50 slightly awkward conversations than 1 person gets dehubbed for reasons they arenā€™t 100% clear on. Obviously the person reaching out needs to be at least a little impartial, so not the person whoā€™s being targeted if itā€™s harrasment. You canā€™t run a community if your only interactions with groups thereā€™s disagreements with are threats and mod actions. Also this applies to the community; obviously stuff needs to be redacted sometimes, itā€™s much better to say ā€˜yeah we left out X because it contained personal information about a staff memberā€™ than to just not mention the hole. Further bonus points if the redacted stuff gets looked over by a trustworthy third party from 2 and they go on record agreeing that itā€™s fair to redact this to put to bed any concerns about impartiality.

I could give some spiel about how weā€™ve got a chance to a fresh start and we can learn from the fuckups of SS13 and, with some work, make a community that doesnā€™t hate eachother and collaborate, and work together to deal with bad elements in the community, but I feel Iā€™ve touched on or implied it all already. SS14 is in a better place than Iā€™ve ever seen 13, but thatā€™s not something that stays the case without putting heads together; at the moment, I am plagued with visions from the dark timelines that flippant hub management will bring us. Iā€™m not saying stop managing it, or stop banning people, or anything like that; just that we need to be sensible, community-minded and efficient with how we do.

I used chatgpt to generate a TLDR:

  • Why This Matters:
    Dehubbing can severely impact a server, potentially ending years of work with little consideration. In the case of Peptide, the dehub seems to be based on questionable grounds, which is concerning. The decision to dehub should not be taken lightly.
  • Transparency:
    Thereā€™s a lack of transparency in how decisions like dehubbing are made. Without clear information, itā€™s hard for the community to trust the process. We need more visibility into the reasoning behind such actions.
  • Impact on the Community:
    If dehubbing decisions feel arbitrary, it divides the community and creates distrust. This can lead to uncooperative behavior, increased drama, and discourage people from contributing to the project.
  • Minimal Changes Needed:
    The solution is simple: enforce the rules consistently, improve transparency, and introduce external oversight to ensure impartiality in decision-making.
  • Ongoing Issues:
    The lack of improvement in hub administration is troubling. Past dehubbings have shown similar issues with communication and decision-making, which still seem unresolved.
  • Behavior in the Community:
    Staff behavior also contributes to the issues. Rude or rash actions, particularly when directly involved in a situation, harm the fairness and integrity of the process.
  • Why Iā€™m Concerned:
    I worry that unchecked power to dehub can harm the community, as seen in SS13. Without proper oversight, dehubbing can create resentment and erode the community, leading to its collapse in the long term.
2 Likes

You want people to be nicer and to reduce drama, by leaving actual and constant instigators unchecked?
It was even shown in the dehubbing post the reasoning as to why this is not acceptable.
Indifference to an abuser is support. Specially when you are in their close circle, regardless if you interact with them or not. Hanging out with bad people and not saying anything about it makes you part of the problem.

You cannot foster a nice community with one that is literally deadset on messing with the other trough harrassment.

They have all the right in the world to not provide a platform to blatantly toxic and hostile groups, SPECIALLY when that is shown in the rules. As YOU said, they worked hard and poured years of their life to moderate, develop and maintain this game. They donā€™t have to take the higher road just to avoid ā€œdramaā€.

I will not deny that this could be a slippery slope into abusing precedents. But saying that there is a lack of transparency or that this isnā€™t consistent is hard to agree with.
The only lack of consistency is the amount of harassment that was actually ignored JUST to avoid this situation, but they never stopped, so it came down to this.

  1. Donā€™t hang in circles where there are people inciting harrassment, even passively.

  2. If you end up hanging in those circles passively and you get hit by consequences for it, disavow the harrassment wholeheartedly and distance yourself from the harrassers.

Itā€™s really not that hard.

1 Like

Hereā€™s my thoughts: Wizden is not ideal, their leadership has flaws which I was personally subjected to. However that is a different topic, a topic which I fear that if I discuss here, Iā€™ll face retaliation.

I used to be pretty active on these forums, I donā€™t intend to continue that activity following a recent incident.

The problem: While alternative systems and hubs do exist, they all suck. And wizden as the ā€œofficialā€ provider has inherent flaws which cannot be denied. Neither options is good for the community. EE, SSMV, etc, they all have some sort of drama going on. But thatā€™s to be expected, because all of the alternatives are faced with the challenging task of confronting wizden, whom has held influence over SS14 nearly since the beginning of when it was first opened source. Iā€™ve spent hours of my days researching this topic, Iā€™ve reviewed every alternative provider, I tried to do everything right with wizden. None of the currently existing options are ideal for the games future.

The solution: someone needs to make a truly neutral alternative provider, free of corruption, favouritism and the such. And while an alternative provider should enforce rules to ensure the game is represented in its best form, such rules should only be enforced by impartial individuals. Wizden is not impartial, and therefore should not be the sole representative official source for everything related to SS14. We need alternatives, and the alternatives must both be trustworthy and impartial. Their intentions must be clear.

That is all I have to say about the matter, I may edit this post to better reflect my thoughts if I find flaws in my wording. My focus has shifted to other games, however Iā€™ll keep a watch on SS14, waiting for things to improve. Maybe one day this game will be better.

2 Likes

Iā€™ll start by responding to the shared point across both posts, then go into the other parts from the first.

Indifference to an abuser is support. Specially when you are in their close circle, regardless if you interact with them or not. Hanging out with bad people and not saying anything about it makes you part of the problem.

Donā€™t hang in circles where there are people inciting harrassment, even passively.

Both of these are simply a restating of the reason given, while not actually providing any justification, defense, or mitigating context.

To be clear; Iā€™m not in this thread to advocate for Peptide, to appeal his dehubbing or anything like that. I bring Peptide up as an example of a case where the highest severity hub mod action was applied with none of the steps outlined in the hub rules, for an offense that also isnā€™t outlined in said rules. Simply restating ā€˜I guess he should have been more wholehearted in his disavowal of the bad guys, L bozoā€™ applies to nothing I have said and, if anything, is a good display of exactly the kind of callous heavy-handedness Iā€™m talking about. If the rules stated that failing to adequately disavow people when asked was a violation, if a conversation or pretty much anything more than ā€˜disavow the group or youre dehubbedā€™ had ocurred, or if the system of strikes as laid out in the rules were followed, the situation would be significantly less of an issue, in my opinion. If hub moderation is just calvinball, why even have the hub rules in the first place?

You want people to be nicer and to reduce drama, by leaving actual and constant instigators unchecked?

No, nor did I say this. Hub moderation is required and important; the point I clearly laid out was that it should be fair, follow its own rules, and be transparent. People being nicer would also be nice.

They have all the right in the world to not provide a platform to blatantly toxic and hostile groups, SPECIALLY when that is shown in the rules. As YOU said, they worked hard and poured years of their life to moderate, develop and maintain this game.

The mindset that the ability to dehub servers is some kind of prize earned by contributing is a really bad one. If there is one thing I wanted to convey itā€™s that we need to start taking dehubbing seriously and not use it lightly. Being tasked with the ability to dehub servers absolutely should not be seen as a right or a reward, itā€™s a responsibility.

Iā€™d also like to point out that the underlying assumption that the red button is something youā€™re meritocratically bestowed is incorrect on the face of it; the current maintainer team are not the same as the intiial coders who launched the project, nor will the people making the decision in 5 years be the same as who we have now; this is a position inherited by circumstance - I wonā€™t deny that the maintainers work hard, but so did the maintainers who came before them, and so do the ones working in other servers. This does not need to be a competition.

They donā€™t have to take the higher road just to avoid ā€œdramaā€.

No, but if Wizden want to act as the guardians of the broader SS14 community, especially if they are taking the responsibility for handling inter-server conflicts, then taking the high road is part of the job, and benefits everyone involved.

saying that there is a lack of transparency or that this isnā€™t consistent is hard to agree with.

When I point out that there is a lack of transparency and that rules are applied inconsistently, Iā€™m pointing to observable immutable facts, not stating an opinion. There are dehubs where barely any information was given out beyond ā€˜theyā€™ve been bad, you have to trust usā€™, and very rarely does the explicitly outlined system of strikes and rule severity seem to actually come into use. This is not something that should be played by ear.

The only lack of consistency is the amount of harassment that was actually ignored JUST to avoid this situation, but they never stopped, so it came down to this.

Then maybe lighter action should have been taken earlier; someone reaching out to try to defuse or deescalate or, failing that, give a soft warning or a strike. If a non-wizden third party were involved in the process, maybe the hubmins would have felt their hands tied less by the idea that their actions would be viewed as lacking oversight. To be clear, Iā€™m not arguing for less enforcement or less moderation - in some cases I think getting involved in situations earlier would be better, and in all cases if the parties involved see hub moderation as fair and reasonable, people are far more likely to be more co-operative and charitable to the process.

EDIT:

The solution: someone needs to make a truly neutral alternative provider, free of corruption, favouritism and the such.

Iā€™d like to agree with this as a solution. The issue is that the only launcher thatā€™s every going to matter to 95% of players is the one downloaded from steam. It doesnā€™t matter if the althub is a perfectly neutral, fair delightful utopia, the majority of people will not seek it out, and any servers relegated there will not be able to maintain a playerbase.

1 Like