So let's get right down to brass tacks here.
Dogpiles are bad.
In fact, they are the biggest problem we have today. And as Brihard's references indicate, it's not a new problem for us which means that despite our considerable efforts, we still have some ground to cover.
I've talked about the sense of entitlement that new members have when they show up here, expecting that others do their legwork for them. I do recognize that they sometimes don't have the knowledge, experience or means to do that legwork themselves. In that case, direction from a senior member, a Mentor or the Staff is meant to guide them on track, but not necessarily spoon feed them an answer. (In part, because when they inevitably have a follow-on question, we will have set the expectation that someone will be along shortly to answer it - that may not be realistic.)
However there is another sense of entitlement that exists here and is no less harmful. Having shaken down the new users for failing to search or follow the Guidelines, it's only fair to point out that this problem has another side, which lives here daily.
The other piece to the 'dogpile puzzle' is the senior members who feel they are entitled to pounce on new users for their mistakes.
We know by their very nature that new members here will make mistakes - they're learning the ropes or in many cases haven't taken the time to learn the ropes.
Our response to that can at times be aggressive. Donning my kindergarten psychologist hat, I'd suggest that this is because the senior members get very, very tired of seeing the same old blunders over and over again.
But that still doesn't mean bashing is the order of the day. I've always held that if you have nothing positive to add, just move along. If the question languishes unanswered so be it, but that's still better than starting a dogpile, even if it's under the guise of providing helpful direction.
Yes, this may be the hundredth time you've seen this same, inane question asked. But for the poster, it's the first time they've asked it and they can't comprehend the animosity that comes with the response. Imagine if you phoned 411 and the operator berated you for not knowing the middle name of the person you're looking up. Would you think it professional of them? Would you lash out at the operator? Would you phone back?
I realize that it's a poor example for a variety of reasons, but I think it's still roughly accurate.
Now I'm not trying to paint everyone with the same brush here. The majority of users are helpful the majority of the time. However sometimes frustration gets the best of us and instead of simply walking away, we jump in with steel-toed boots. I know this is done as an effort to protect the community we've built here, knowing that a forum full of repeat questions quickly becomes useless.
Unfortunately, taking an aggressive tone with new members does more damage than good.
I can hear the grumbles now... Mike's gone soft they're saying.
The reality is that we can - and should - continue to shut down repeat and misguided "first posts" and snuff out trolls as we've always done. The important part is in how we do it. There's no need to take a parting shot, call someone down, suggest they'll make a poor addition to the CF, etc.
I'm not suggesting this is a problem of epidemic proportions. There are plenty of examples of us 'doing it right' out there, but of course these don't get dredged up as examples, so things always seem skewed to the negative side of the argument. But this is good news... It means that we have a manageable in front of us.
If you've read this far through my wandering ramble, odds are you're not part of the problem. The difficulty will always be reaching those who don't invest the time in their community to learn more. In fact nothing I've typed so far is new, nor do I expect any of it to materially change how things operate here. However there are a couple of things we can do.
The first is obvious and should be easy for us all: Lead by example.
When replying to an ongoing discussion if you see someone who's trolling, hit the report to moderator button, or ignore it. Anything else will simply add to the derailment. It
is possible to reply to a thread without addressing that one post which tried to pull it off track.
By giving the troll air time in the form of a reply, we invite them to participate further and keep pulling that thread away from the original topic. We've all seen this many, many times and I'm sure we can agree that having a Staff member drop that one 'trolling' post would be much more effective than breathing life into it through a string of replies.
If you have advice for the original poster, great... fire away. But if you're just looking to start or jump in on an existing dogpile, know that you're as much of the problem as the original poster.
In fact by their very nature, the new user is new, and as we already know probably hasn't taken the time to understand the nuances of our community. On the other hand, our senior membership understands it well and as such we have higher expectations of our them. If we want our new members to follow the Guidelines, we need to set that example right from the moment we reply to their first post. Coming out with guns blazing simply sets the tone and they reply in kind.
It's far better to show new users the ropes than showing them the door, but if you can't do one without the other, show some restraint and leave it for someone else.
Brihard, you also mentioned that you never agreed to the
Conduct Guidelines on joining the site, and that they're challenging to find on your own. When registering, you are required to accept (and implicitly read) the registration agreement. This is typically just a duplication of the Guidelines, though from time to time an upgrade will overwrite them with a generic version and I'll forget to update them.
The Guidelines are also at the bottom of every page, linked under the "Unofficial site, not associated with DND." text, and appear randomly as a "news" item in the upper right.
Additionally, each new member needs to agree to the
Legal Terms though these are not about conduct as much as being a simple CYA.
Having said all that I agree with you that the Guidelines are probably not as easy to find as they should be, especially for a document that is so core to our community.
With that in mind, I'll put out a call for suggestions. How can we make the Guidelines more visible without overpowering the membership? How can we tune the language of the Guidelines, or update them to accurately represent our direction? Are there other things we can do?
Rather than preaching to the choir yet again, let's see if we can make some changes that will reach those who need to understand our community better in order to participate effectively in it.
