Gaia's ToS needs to be revised

[Whitneys Miltank]

lanzer

Sorry I had held my head down as I tackle bugs and features, that I haven't got to drop by this thread sooner.

I need to be the first to admit that I was the one who jumped the gun and dealt with a few user accounts on the first few days of my return. I was not briefed in detail about what transpired while I was away, and I felt the immediate urge to take action while I devote that time to communicate with everyone on Gaia. In retrospect, all users who felt that they were treated unfairly should get a chance to voice their concern with us in a concerted effort, and we will be doing that soon.

Since then I had been talking to Zero extensively about how things transpired and the rules and regulations that were set forth by previous management. It was a tough time for Gaia users to see how the site was mis-managed, but it was even tougher for all moderators who had to deal with an unprecedented level of negative emotions and criticisms. For all moderators who stayed behind despite the incredible emotional burden that were placed on them, they were not only dedicated, but also willing to sacrifice their own well being to keep the peace in a volatile and often hostile environment. I can't imagine myself in their shoes.

Moderators had been operating under the same guidelines for years, their reports are public wtihin the modding community and information shared with peers. There's always justification for their actions that follow the rules and guidelines set forth by management. I don't think it's fair for any Gaians to point at mods and criticize them for the fact that they were following the rules that were setup. The root of the problem stem from the management team, not the mods whose job are to enforce the rules. In a large part, the rules might be strict but at their roots they were there to control the high emotions that were coursing through the communities at the time. There wasn't a morale challenge rather a challenge of leniency. Many Gaians were dancing the line between sharing their honest opinion and being abusive towards the intended audience. I don't envy the job for those who had to differentiate between the two.

Zero had never stopped thinking about doing what's right, and soon we'll be addressing those who felt unfairly treated during the past two years. We'll be posting more info about it in the near future. For now, I just wanted to share my gratitude to all our moderators who went through hell and back for us. I owe each member a great deal of gratitude.

Thank you for the acknowledgement, transparency, and honesty Lanzer. I really do appreciate what you're doing.

I believe that everyone who feels their ban was wrong or overly harsh and unjust should at least be given the opportunity to present their case. I'm glad you're open to hearing from those who've been banned, as right now there is no real way for us to appeal our cases, and not in the fairest of ways.

Not only are these appeals being sent to the very same people that train the moderators, but the Ticket Center is an absolute mess. Unless you're having issues with Gaia Cash you are not going to get any acknowledgement in any other department. I've talked to people who've been waiting almost 1 year for their ban appeals to be opened and worked on. The Ticket Center is a whole other issue in and of itself, and I hope that is high in your list of priorities in trying to stabilize Gaia.

On a more personal note, I really do hope I am given another chance. Thank you for your compassion as well. Even if my account is not restored, at least I can think that Gaia will be going in the right direction with you back at the helm. Welcome back. heart

[Katulain]

lanzer

I need to be the first to admit that I was the one who jumped the gun and dealt with a few user accounts on the first few days of my return. I was not briefed in detail about what transpired while I was away, and I felt the immediate urge to take action while I devote that time to communicate with everyone on Gaia. In retrospect, all users who felt that they were treated unfairly should get a chance to voice their concern with us in a concerted effort, and we will be doing that soon.

In a large part, the rules might be strict but at their roots they were there to control the high emotions that were coursing through the communities at the time. There wasn't a morale challenge rather a challenge of leniency. Many Gaians were dancing the line between sharing their honest opinion and being abusive towards the intended audience.

I have a couple questions and perhaps they could be answered by Zero as well but I loved your explanation.

1) Will the ToS be returning to prior-to-Dec. 2013's version of the ToS? A new version?

And

2) Is amnesty or a recovery system for permanently banned users on the table? Or will changes exclusively effect how users appeal bans that applied directly under Dec. 2013's 'control clauses'?

smile

[Alexius08]

Neshira Namea Returns

Given that this thread has devolved from healthy discussion and feedback to insults and blatant trolling I think it might be best if the mods took up with the participants 1 on 1 for any issues they have and lock this thread.

While both parties have interesting points and I agree with either I must point out that there are cases of unfair bans and always have been.

...

In the end the TOS does need to be revised to its more fair state and Lanzer has already stated he's going to be setting up queues for banned users to try and state their cases and attempt to get their bans repealed.

The thread cannot be locked yet. Sure, they have promised to revert to the previous ToS version and allow appeals. First and foremost, however, we have to remind them once in a while of the promises they made until they fulfill them. Second, details on how to accomplish the aims of this thread need to be discussed so that they could be developed further.

lanzer

Moderators had been operating under the same guidelines for years, their reports are public within the modding community and information shared with peers. There's always justification for their actions that follow the rules and guidelines set forth by management. I don't think it's fair for any Gaians to point at mods and criticize them for the fact that they were following the rules that were setup. The root of the problem stem from the management team, not the mods whose job are to enforce the rules. In a large part, the rules might be strict but at their roots they were there to control the high emotions that were coursing through the communities at the time. There wasn't a morale challenge rather a challenge of leniency. Many Gaians were dancing the line between sharing their honest opinion and being abusive towards the intended audience. I don't envy the job for those who had to differentiate between the two.

The rules intended to control high emotions have existed long before the previous management took over (Secs. 4b and probably 4k which are identical in both versions, and the original Sec. 4a). Their additions to the rules achieved much more than that. They wanted to suppress evidence for things that they were caught doing. They suppressed discussions that have the slightest mention of them so that they could escape mostly unscathed by the community's anger against them as soon as they get a chance to bail out. I think they would have succeeded with their exit plan for Gaia if the community didn't bring discussions of the previous management's misdeeds offsite for the rest of the Internet to see.

When Schofield took over, Siskataya made a thread that introduced him by name. He later posted in that thread and explicitly approved calling him by his name. If controlling high emotions was indeed the aim of those new rules, the thread would have been locked but will still remain accessible after abusive comments were removed. Instead, the thread itself was removed. Reading thorugh parts of it that were preserved in the Wayback Machine, I didn't see any post that is bad enough to warrant taking the whole thread down. The previous management's additional rules are a massive overreaction to the backlash they earned.

lanzer

Zero had never stopped thinking about doing what's right, and soon we'll be addressing those who felt unfairly treated during the past two years. We'll be posting more info about it in the near future. For now, I just wanted to share my gratitude to all our moderators who went through hell and back for us. I owe each member a great deal of gratitude.

Many in this thread are focused on users who got unfairly banned. Do you also intend to restore threads and posts that were deleted in accordance with the previous management's rules, but would be allowed to remain according to the old rules? Proactively restoring deleted posts and threads would be the ideal solution, since not everyone who made those posts and threads have stayed. If possible, use this opportunity to train the newest batch of moderators on moving threads to where they belong and undoing post deletions and other mistakes made by other mods, especially if those mistakes were done to enforce rules that should have never been enforced at all.

[Katulain]

Alexius08

I think they would have succeeded with their exit plan for Gaia if the community didn't bring discussions of the previous management's misdeeds offsite for the rest of the Internet to see.

This is an important point. Also, important to note that some of the most vocal advocates for undoing Dec. '13 "control clauses" were also formerly highly invested in exposing the truth about what Gaia was doing offsite.

On March 20th, 2015, I was contacted by YouTube Support with a request directly from Mr. Loia to remove a video from YouTube.

After contacting YouTube with a message to the effect that, the video's content was originally owned by Innovation Enterprise, purchased by myself (for $50) and then I chose to make the video public, YouTube support decided to keep the video up.

Speaking on behalf of Alexius08, I can say that his Downfall of Gaia Online videos and A Case for Hyperinflation in a Virtual Economy posts went highly cited and were instrumental in showing the rest of the world what was happening beyond the new and conveniently imposed captcha-wall for visitors of Gaia.

There are people, who, dedicated hundreds of hours, much in the same way moderators invest themselves in this community, who ultimately shed light on what was happening here and ensured that people knew the truth.

And I think that's important if there's a question of which side in this has had a commitment to the community. Those who advocate for the unbanning of users between '13-'16 are not run-of-the-mill trolls looking to supplant authority. We've been at it... taking risks and hits for the sake of Gaia's community in different, but similar, ways to the long-time moderators here.

[Lanzer]

Katulain

I have a couple questions and perhaps they could be answered by Zero as well but I loved your explanation.

1) Will the ToS be returning to prior-to-Dec. 2013's version of the ToS? A new version?

And

2) Is amnesty or a recovery system for permanently banned users on the table? Or will changes exclusively effect how users appeal bans that applied directly under Dec. 2013's 'control clauses'?

smile

Most likely a new version. Any of the rules we knew were excessive will be removed, while things such as sharing personal info will probably stay since we've enforced that even before the ToS update.

Any appeal will be focused towards users affected in the past 2 years. All other appeals should be submitted through the regular channels as they had been done before.

[Katulain]

lanzer

Most likely a new version. Any of the rules we knew were excessive will be removed, while things such as sharing personal info will probably stay since we've enforced that even before the ToS update.

Any appeal will be focused towards users affected in the past 2 years. All other appeals should be submitted through the regular channels as they had been done before.

Very cool! Just as a follow-up to that point, Will a new version also look at changing key clauses in the ToS that many in the community have felt are broadly subjective? Such as the famous trolling clause which defines it as: "intentionally interfering with any member's enjoyment of the website". We're hoping that re-shaping misinterpretation of gray areas in this document is one of your goals.

Also, I'm assuming the new appeal process specifically targets the past 2 years for sake of an initial volume of requests? There are quite a few requests that may apply as far back as 2013 (3+ years). Just wanted to note that.

Thanks for the continued responses. Very appreciative.

[Lanzer]

Alexius08

The rules intended to control high emotions have existed long before the previous management took over (Secs. 4b and probably 4k which are identical in both versions, and the original Sec. 4a). Their additions to the rules achieved much more than that. They wanted to suppress evidence for things that they were caught doing. They suppressed discussions that have the slightest mention of them so that they could escape mostly unscathed by the community's anger against them as soon as they get a chance to bail out. I think they would have succeeded with their exit plan for Gaia if the community didn't bring discussions of the previous management's misdeeds offsite for the rest of the Internet to see.

What Gaians need to understand is that previous management do not believe that what they were doing was wrong on a business sense, and no matter what the community reaction is, their goal is to sell the company to the highest bidder. Part of the process of me and our team getting control of the company back actually involves outbidding competitors. The point here is that the previous management had very different goals, and though all is welcome to speculate, the truth is often different. It's not like I support what they do or empathize with them, I just don't want false speculations to be taken as the truth. They don't enjoy reading negative sentiment towards them, but that wouldn't deter them from their goal.

Alexius08

When Schofield took over, Siskataya made a thread that introduced him by name. He later posted in that thread and explicitly approved calling him by his name. If controlling high emotions was indeed the aim of those new rules, the thread would have been locked but will still remain accessible after abusive comments were removed. Instead, the thread itself was removed. Reading thorugh parts of it that were preserved in the Wayback Machine, I didn't see any post that is bad enough to warrant taking the whole thread down. The previous management's additional rules are a massive overreaction to the backlash they earned.

Remember my point is that all moderators on Gaia were instructed to act in order to control the situation that was at hand. Their job was extremely difficult as they are all Gaians themselves and having to control what they were asked to control is difficult and emotionally draining. I wouldn't care a single bit what anyone think previous management's concerns or goals were, as further discussions will just identify them from bad management to ... bad management still.

If you say that previous management sucks, you're preaching to the choir. If you say that Sisky sucks, then you're missing the whole point and I will disagree on that claim.

Alexius08

Many in this thread are focused on users who got unfairly banned. Do you also intend to restore threads and posts that were deleted in accordance with the previous management's rules, but would be allowed to remain according to the old rules? Proactively restoring deleted posts and threads would be the ideal solution, since not everyone who made those posts and threads have stayed. If possible, use this opportunity to train the newest batch of moderators on moving threads to where they belong and undoing post deletions and other mistakes made by other mods, especially if those mistakes were done to enforce rules that should have never been enforced at all.

What I wish to do is to be fair for all Gaians. If someone who posted something in the past and have a strong wish to undelete such messages, we'll take those on a case by case basis. I'd like us to use our time efficiently, and on a time when we're short handed, trying to spend many hours in an effort to restore year old posts, I'd rather suggest all Gaias to state their voices in active or upcoming threads. When resources are limited, my goal is to benefit all Gaians that are actively engaged in the community.

It is a fine line to point and say who is making mistakes in the process. If I ask you to press the red button when it's the green button that should be pressed, it's my mistake, not yours. Moderators by a large part have the dedication and common sense to know what is right, with much of their training supplementing them to the rest of the rules. I wouldn't need them to undelete old threads to learn that. New mods will be current Gaians that are active in the community, which probably went through the event of past management, after all. I look forward to seeing not only a bigger and thriving Gaia community, but also a larger moderator team moving forward.

[Katulain]

lanzer

What Gaians need to understand is that previous management do not believe that what they were doing was wrong on a business sense, and no matter what the community reaction is, their goal is to sell the company to the highest bidder. Part of the process of me and our team getting control of the company back actually involves outbidding competitors. They don't enjoy reading negative sentiment towards them, but that wouldn't deter them from their goal.

If you say that previous management sucks, you're preaching to the choir.

This is like... totally brand new information (to my knowledge). I'm not sure Alexius08 or myself have seen the 'transition' between 2012 explained or the process of the most recent transition explained when it comes to Gaia's administration. So all we've had is speculation based on what we've seen. I think I can speak for him when I say we have zero interest in disseminating misinformation.

Honestly, while gloves are off and transparency is a thing, would you be comfortable with explaining some of the behind the scenes of how Gary Schofield and Jason Loia were originally brought on to the scene? Did we lose a seat on the "board of directors" in the process? Was this something Mike Sego initiated? (edit: not looking to place blame. Although every Steve Jobs has to have their John Sculley razz )

And, can you elaborate on the process of how you got Gaia back?

[Sagebomb]

lanzer

If you say that Sisky sucks, then you're missing the whole point and I will disagree on that claim.

Sisky rules, definitly someone I loved talking with in ATAs and when she took over BLTs, and especially loved reading about her fitness journey.

I was glad to see she made a post in Decemeber when you came back.




Off topic reply is off topic, but yep <3 for sisky.

[Alexius08]

lanzer

Katulain

I have a couple questions and perhaps they could be answered by Zero as well but I loved your explanation.

1) Will the ToS be returning to prior-to-Dec. 2013's version of the ToS? A new version?

And

2) Is amnesty or a recovery system for permanently banned users on the table? Or will changes exclusively effect how users appeal bans that applied directly under Dec. 2013's 'control clauses'?

smile

Most likely a new version. Any of the rules we knew were excessive will be removed, while things such as sharing personal info will probably stay since we've enforced that even before the ToS update.

I'm fine with retaining Sec. 4q of the current version if it's altered allow sharing of some information on public personalities and consenting private individuals. As it stands right now, no distinction is made between details that may be posted and details that may not be posted. I hope that no celebrities have bothered to invoke the rule in its current form to suppress any mention of them.

lanzer

If you say that previous management sucks, you're preaching to the choir. If you say that Sisky sucks, then you're missing the whole point and I will disagree on that claim.

I never intended to bash Sisky at all when I mentioned that example. I mentioned the action taken on that thread as an instance of overkill when it comes to the enforcement of rules. Some who have posted to this thread don't see the need for reform, so I have to cite some examples of overkill to justify to them what I'm proposing.

[Katulain]

Important to note and give a shout-out to some of the staff/mods who have participated in part of this thread. Turning back some long-standing paradigms with regard to the ToS and creating new ones creates change. And change is not always easy.

I'm proud to stand alongside a new staff and, at least what feels like, a new mod team, committed to listening, responding and taking action with regard to requests from this community. It's awesome!

[Zero Omega]

Katulain

Important to note and give a shout-out to some of the staff/mods who have participated in part of this thread. Turning back some long-standing paradigms with regard to the ToS and creating new ones creates change. And change is not always easy.

I'm proud to stand alongside a new staff and, at least what feels like, a new mod team, committed to listening, responding and taking action with regard to requests from this community. It's awesome!

Just as an fyi to clear up any confusion, aside from new management taking charge, we haven't changed anyone on the mod or admin team in a few years. A lot of the mods and admins on the team now are the same ones that have been on the team since 2010.

[Katulain]

Zero Omega

Katulain

Important to note and give a shout-out to some of the staff/mods who have participated in part of this thread. Turning back some long-standing paradigms with regard to the ToS and creating new ones creates change. And change is not always easy.

I'm proud to stand alongside a new staff and, at least what feels like, a new mod team, committed to listening, responding and taking action with regard to requests from this community. It's awesome!

Just as an fyi to clear up any confusion, aside from new management taking charge, we haven't changed anyone on the mod or admin team in a few years. A lot of the mods and admins on the team now are the same ones that have been on the team since 2010.

Knew that. Was referring to a new team as in new direction from the top. But thanks for the clarity. wink