Difference between revisions of "Community Guidelines"

From BlogNomic Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "As of August 2021, an effort is being made to establish an approach to resolving community issues that rose above the level of game- or ruleset-challenges. This page is to doc...")
 
 
(10 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
As of August 2021, an effort is being made to establish an approach to resolving community issues that rose above the level of game- or ruleset-challenges. This page is to document that process and provide a community platform for discussion of the outcome.
+
The following is a set of guidelines for interpersonal conduct in the BlogNomic community. It covers conduct on all BlogNomic spaces, including the blog, the wiki, and the slack or discord, as well as interactions between members of the community off-site. It is, at this stage, non-binding and has no enforcement mechanism; it is, however, expected that all players of the game be aware of the contents of this document and voluntarily abide by it wherever possible.
  
 
==Statement of Purpose==
 
==Statement of Purpose==
This section aims to arrive at some mutually agreeable language regarding the purpose of the community resolution process. It is separated into elements to allow for the discussion of separate issues.
+
Simply stated, players should always treat each other with courtesy and respect. Civility is a basic requirement, even in heated debates. Differences of opinion are inevitable and faceless words on a screen communicate nuance poorly. Players are expected to maintain an assumption of good faith and to step away from the game when that assumption cannot be maintained.
  
<blockquote>The BlogNomic (BN) community is dedicated to providing an enjoyable, tolerant, and harassment-free environment for everyone. Antisocial conduct should not be accepted in this community, including (but not limited to) intolerance of another person's gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, or religion. We do not tolerate harassment of participants in any form.</blockquote>
+
BlogNomic is specifically a social game that occasionally involves deceit. It is important to separate the player from the play. Individual opinions on what constitutes the parameters for acceptable underhandedness will vary by player and time, but it is important to remember that critiques on the basis of game culture should be aimed at plays, not players.  
  
:This process has a slightly awkward tension, in that it should be appropriate to use for both interpersonal tension that can't be resolved by the participants (at the lowest extreme) and incidents of violence or harassment (at the greater extreme). Given the nature and size of this community, we probably don't need something heavy-duty, and least not every day, although we may end up being grateful that we have a process for serious cases if one emerges. [[User:Josh|Josh]] ([[User talk:Josh|talk]]) 09:44, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
+
BlogNomic is a game, and its purpose is to provide an enjoyable, calm and stimulating environment for everyone. Antisocial conduct should not be accepted in this community. BlogNomic is not an appropriate venue for intolerance of another person's gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, or religion, and we do not tolerate harassment of participants in any form.
  
<blockquote>This code of conduct applies to all BlogNomic spaces, including the blog, the slack channel, and the wiki, as well as any other spaces that BlogNomic hosts.</blockquote>
+
==Guidelines for play==
 +
The following advice governs specific behaviours that may arise during play.  
  
<blockquote>This document sets out the process for reporting and seeking redress for antisocial or harassing behaviour on BlogNomic. Its key principles are to be fair, objective and transparent, and to take the needs of the complainant, the community, and the subject of the complaint into account.</blockquote>
+
As with the rest of this document, this section is advisory, and its individual stipulations may be flouted if necessary to, say, enact a really clever play. However, it is expected that this kind of flouting is advised and rare, and that players mostly commit to upholding the advice below as a matter of the game's culture. When a player finds that the game is compelling them to broach these guidelines, they should raise the issue with other players and either seek to change the rules to make them more manageable or step back from the game until it changes.
  
:The principle of transparent decision making is important but needs to be balanced against the needs of the participants, particularly - where appropriate - the need for anonymity. [[User:Josh|Josh]] ([[User talk:Josh|talk]]) 09:44, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
+
* The rhythm of a dynasty of BlogNomic should not be less than 24 hours - which is to say, the ruleset should usually not require players to check the game more than once a day. The game may run quicker than that at times (for example, during busy stages of a dynasty proposals may get resolved in 12 hours) but the maintenance of a high pace for a sustained period of time should be avoided. Occasional time-based plays may be fun but consistently sacrificing other parts of your life (like sleep) to marginally increase your chances of victory is discouraged.
 +
* The responsibility for the health of BlogNomic as a game rests with the community. It is never an individual's responsibility, even the Emperor's, to fix the game or the ruleset. Some dynasties fail, and sometimes the game is quiet; this does not call for extraordinary action from any individual.
 +
* Players should be careful to be respectful of other players' plays and approaches to the game. The proposals of other players represent their labour, given to the game for free, and may represent their idea for the dynasty or may advance their agenda; there will often be reasons to object to some of these but it is important that objections focus on the merits of the play, rather than its reflection upon the player. Other players should not presume to instruct them on major elements of their proposal, or on the game as a whole, without their advice being solicited. This extends to respecting the input of an Emperor, which can carry a higher burden of accuracy and which may be complicated or invisible.
 +
* The BlogNomic community is largely competitive, and while personal definitions of success in the game vary it is often the case that a high premium is placed on winning. This is not enforced, however - those players who simply wish to have fun or participate in co-creation are welcome and should not have their approaches or contributions dismissed.  
  
==Approach for Resolutions==
+
Above all, it's important to operate on the assumption of good faith. Most, if not all, players will be carrying out actions that they think are validly part of the game and its culture, or will be testing the boundaries of the game or its culture constructively. Feelings will occasionally be hurt and exchanges will occasionally be heated but players are encouraged not to allow negative feelings towards one another spill outside of the inciting incident. Players who regularly find themselves embroiled in conflict may wish to review their communication style, but each individual has a responsibility to consider their own actions and responses objectively and ensure that they are living up to their own ideals for respectful conduct.
Some models to consider:
 
  
<blockquote>If you are being harassed by a member of the community, notice that someone else is being harassed, or have any other concerns, please contact the Anti-Abuse Team. If the person who is harassing you is on the team, they will recuse themselves from handling your incident. We will respond as promptly as we can.
+
==Guidelines for communication==
 +
BlogNomic broadly adopts Wikipedia's guidelines on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility incivility] and encourages players to review them regularly.
  
This code of conduct applies to our spaces, but if you are being harassed by a member of the community outside our spaces, we still want to know about it. We will take all good-faith reports of harassment by community members, especially bloggers, seriously. This includes harassment outside our spaces and harassment that took place at any point in time. The abuse team reserves the right to exclude people from the community based on their past behavior, including behavior outside out spaces and behavior towards people who are not in the community.
+
BlogNomic also adopts Wikipedia's statement on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks personal attacks]. Players found to be systemically engaging in personal attacks on other players may be removed from the game and the community.
 
 
In order to protect volunteers from abuse and burnout, we reserve the right to reject any report we believe to have been made in bad faith. The Anti-Abuse Team is not here to explain power differentials or other basic social justice concepts to you. Reports intended to silence legitimate criticism may be deleted without response.
 
 
 
We will respect confidentiality requests for the purpose of protecting victims of abuse. At our discretion, we may publicly name a person about whom we’ve received harassment complaints, or privately warn third parties about them, if we believe that doing so will increase the safety of members or the general public. We will not name harassment victims without their affirmative consent.
 
 
 
Consequences
 
Participants asked to stop any harassing behavior are expected to comply immediately.
 
 
 
If a participant engages in harassing behavior, the Anti-Abuse Team may take any action they deem appropriate, up to and including expulsion from all Geek Feminism spaces and identification of the participant as a harasser to other GF members or the general public.</blockquote>
 
 
 
<blockquote>Speaking up form
 
Members and non members can speak up via a form available on {form}. The form makes it clear that the information provided will be directly and solely communicated to a site founder and asks the following from the person wishing to speak up:
 
 
 
Name and email address of the person speaking up
 
Identity or description of the member who did harm
 
What happened?
 
It is reinforced with this last question that 'Our stance is that [the person speaking up] feelings are always valid. What might seem minor to [them] may be part of a larger pattern of behavior that has affected many members.
 
 
 
Members ad hoc committee
 
An ad hoc committee of 6 members is called by the founder via the app general feed to address what happened. It is key that members:
 
 
 
*represent a diverse range of identities and experiences,
 
*are not related to any protagonists in what happened,
 
*respect at all time the privacy of the matters discussed.
 
 
 
Process
 
The founder receives an email with the data shared by the member speaking up and contacts on the spot the person to gather as many information as possible and identify what would be a satisfying outcome for them, the member who did harm and our community.
 
The members ad hoc committee is called in a video meeting to discuss the matter, information gathered by the founder and come up with a plan to be submitted to the person who's spoken up for a final go before it is implemented.
 
Once the plan implemented, the matter and the chosen community response are documented anonymously, shared with all protagonists, archived to support the treatment of matters and a communication is made community-wide.</blockquote>
 
 
 
 
 
==Consequences==
 
<blockquote>The resolution process should have a wide array of potential tools available to it, including
 
 
 
*A domain-wide ban, including removal from the game
 
*Enforced idling for a period of time
 
*Temporary or permanent exclusion from non-gamestate channels, such as the slack
 
*Do-not-contact orders
 
*Public statements of sanction
 
*Public statements of findings</blockquote>
 

Latest revision as of 10:35, 17 August 2021

The following is a set of guidelines for interpersonal conduct in the BlogNomic community. It covers conduct on all BlogNomic spaces, including the blog, the wiki, and the slack or discord, as well as interactions between members of the community off-site. It is, at this stage, non-binding and has no enforcement mechanism; it is, however, expected that all players of the game be aware of the contents of this document and voluntarily abide by it wherever possible.

Statement of Purpose

Simply stated, players should always treat each other with courtesy and respect. Civility is a basic requirement, even in heated debates. Differences of opinion are inevitable and faceless words on a screen communicate nuance poorly. Players are expected to maintain an assumption of good faith and to step away from the game when that assumption cannot be maintained.

BlogNomic is specifically a social game that occasionally involves deceit. It is important to separate the player from the play. Individual opinions on what constitutes the parameters for acceptable underhandedness will vary by player and time, but it is important to remember that critiques on the basis of game culture should be aimed at plays, not players.

BlogNomic is a game, and its purpose is to provide an enjoyable, calm and stimulating environment for everyone. Antisocial conduct should not be accepted in this community. BlogNomic is not an appropriate venue for intolerance of another person's gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, or religion, and we do not tolerate harassment of participants in any form.

Guidelines for play

The following advice governs specific behaviours that may arise during play.

As with the rest of this document, this section is advisory, and its individual stipulations may be flouted if necessary to, say, enact a really clever play. However, it is expected that this kind of flouting is advised and rare, and that players mostly commit to upholding the advice below as a matter of the game's culture. When a player finds that the game is compelling them to broach these guidelines, they should raise the issue with other players and either seek to change the rules to make them more manageable or step back from the game until it changes.

  • The rhythm of a dynasty of BlogNomic should not be less than 24 hours - which is to say, the ruleset should usually not require players to check the game more than once a day. The game may run quicker than that at times (for example, during busy stages of a dynasty proposals may get resolved in 12 hours) but the maintenance of a high pace for a sustained period of time should be avoided. Occasional time-based plays may be fun but consistently sacrificing other parts of your life (like sleep) to marginally increase your chances of victory is discouraged.
  • The responsibility for the health of BlogNomic as a game rests with the community. It is never an individual's responsibility, even the Emperor's, to fix the game or the ruleset. Some dynasties fail, and sometimes the game is quiet; this does not call for extraordinary action from any individual.
  • Players should be careful to be respectful of other players' plays and approaches to the game. The proposals of other players represent their labour, given to the game for free, and may represent their idea for the dynasty or may advance their agenda; there will often be reasons to object to some of these but it is important that objections focus on the merits of the play, rather than its reflection upon the player. Other players should not presume to instruct them on major elements of their proposal, or on the game as a whole, without their advice being solicited. This extends to respecting the input of an Emperor, which can carry a higher burden of accuracy and which may be complicated or invisible.
  • The BlogNomic community is largely competitive, and while personal definitions of success in the game vary it is often the case that a high premium is placed on winning. This is not enforced, however - those players who simply wish to have fun or participate in co-creation are welcome and should not have their approaches or contributions dismissed.

Above all, it's important to operate on the assumption of good faith. Most, if not all, players will be carrying out actions that they think are validly part of the game and its culture, or will be testing the boundaries of the game or its culture constructively. Feelings will occasionally be hurt and exchanges will occasionally be heated but players are encouraged not to allow negative feelings towards one another spill outside of the inciting incident. Players who regularly find themselves embroiled in conflict may wish to review their communication style, but each individual has a responsibility to consider their own actions and responses objectively and ensure that they are living up to their own ideals for respectful conduct.

Guidelines for communication

BlogNomic broadly adopts Wikipedia's guidelines on incivility and encourages players to review them regularly.

BlogNomic also adopts Wikipedia's statement on personal attacks. Players found to be systemically engaging in personal attacks on other players may be removed from the game and the community.