Posted by Admiral Joe P (Election Coordinator) in Question for the Candidates - About Questions

Posted by Robert Archer in Question for the Candidates - About Questions
[snip]

Good morning Joe, thanks for your opening round of question for this election cycle.

I was in a conversation with someone discussing the election yesterday, and at one point my interlocutor expressed the following sentiment:

If only questions mattered other than to piss off the candidates…

1. Do you agree with this sentiment? Why or why not?

No I do not agree. The reason I do not agree is legitimate questions asking about how a candidate would do XYZ if done in good faith to me should be something that would ‘piss them off’ as you say. If someone is asking a question which could do that, I would hope that the person who is the election coordinator or their assistant would step in as good faith to moderate such a question in a neutral manner to either party. This would be how say the president/vice president would be expected to moderate Command against any legit ‘attacks’ or similar posts on people there or elsewhere in STF for that matter.

1. If you were in a conversation with someone and they said something like this, how would you react?

Pretty much my reaction would be much of what I said above in some form to them in reply. If they did not like this then I would probably try to figure out why, and/or if I could not and felt like their tone was disrespectful or the like I would stop engaging with them.

1. Do you think this sentiment is indicative of a larger problem with our club? If yes, what is the problem and what (if anything) would you do to solve it? If not, why not?

Joe

Answering this third part of your question Joe is a complex response. Is it a ‘large’ problem in the club? Sort of is my answer. Can we directly DO anything about it though to force change someone’s questions or intentions in the club? Not really.

The first part of my answer is that this is something you can see anywhere on the internet and so is not just solely a thing in STF. As for the second part of my question about doing something basically the only thing we can ‘do’ is first as a community try to strive to be respectful of others in any discussions or exchanges on the club boards or in Discord etc. We as a community need to work to not being so hostile, but also except that as some would say ‘this is the internet’ it can and will happen. This is where then those in the community who should moderate such areas need to step in, or if lets say those people are the ones at fault, other players regardless of standing step in and be the bigger person to call that person or group out on their own hypocrisy. In STF’s own TOS it reads in the opening part of the general section:

Any conduct by you that in our sole discretion restricts or inhibits any other party from using or enjoying STF will not be permitted. You agree to use STF only for lawful purposes. You are prohibited from posting on or transmitting through STF any unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, profane, hateful, fraudulent, racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable material of any kind, including but not limited to any material that encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, national, or international law.

In addition to my above italizing that section I have bolded and underlined the part which I feel is quite important to remember when we post in heated questions or replies which I think is related to your question. So if a person makes such a question which does those things to someone replying then its a TOS violation in theory and at the least the person should be called for it in a respectful manner appropriate to the situation at hand, this would in my feeling go for any member with no leeway given regardless of their position, standing, time or whatever in the club.

Hope that makes sense to you Joe, and thanks again for asking.

Robert Archer

So, it doesn’t make sense to me, but that’s because I read your the first part of your first answer and was confused as to whether or not it contains a typo that changes the meaning of your answer significantly. I don’t want to misconstrue anything you said, so could you please check if you’re missing a word in the second sentence of your first answer, and let us know? Then if there are follow ups I can make sure I’m asking the right ones.

Joe

Hey Joe, so to clarify is the part here in bold what you’re referring too on where I got my mistake?

No I do not agree. The reason I do not agree is legitimate questions asking about how a candidate would do XYZ if done in good faith to me should be something that would ‘piss them off’ as you say

If so then it should read:

No I do not agree. The reason I do not agree is legitimate questions asking about how a candidate would do XYZ if done in good faith to me should NOT be something that would ‘piss them off’ as you say.

Does this clear it up?

Robert Archer