Discussion:Discord Policy

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Back to Main PageMeta PagesDiscussions

Green Dragon (talk01:21, 8 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

The basis for policies on D&D Wiki's official discord server has been layed out with this discussion. Consensus may change, so please include any policy referendums for the discord server on this page. Any policy discussions must take place here, since policy discussions on discord do not have any bearing for the server.

Varkarrus (talkOfficial Discord Server link location14:38, 15 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

I feel the link to the D&D wiki's discord server is a little hidden away right now. It took me a while to find the community portal on the main page; I don't think I'd ever noticed that link before. Meanwhile, the currently very underused Tavern Chatroom is displayed on the navigation and on the main page. Personally, I think the link to the Tavern Chatroom could be outright replaced with the link to the discord server, though I have no problems with it remaining where it is. It's not unusual for a wiki community to have a discord server that's proudly displayed with a large logo; take for instance the D&D 5e wikia.

I should say why this could be important. When looking at the tavern chatroom logs, some of the most recent messages as of this writing are variants of "is anybody there?" spread out over a week. Most recently, a newcomer asks if the Tavern is always this empty, and then they're given the link to the official discord.

Since a newcomer's first experience with trying to join the D&D wiki community's chatroom will almost certainly be the tavern chat (as it is more prominently displayed), they may get a false idea of how active the community is, which may discourage them. Varkarrus (talk) 14:38, 15 December 2018 (MST)

BigShotFancyMan (talk14:43, 15 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

I too have thought this for other things. I am use to communities prominently displaying a Discord server link as well, along with their other pages though. Maybe a bigger discussion if those get brought up.

Green Dragon (talk05:40, 16 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

Something like this? Discord Logo.png We could add this to the Main Page, as well as on the sidebar (if anyone knows if its possible to add an image to Mediawiki:Sidebar, otherwise it can be added below it like the FB was before) if we can agree on doing this.

BigShotFancyMan (talk07:49, 16 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

That link is beautifully! Hope others agree with its addition to the sidebar.

NPC Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 09:21, 16 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

i agree

ConcealedLightChatmod.png (talk10:13, 16 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

Looks good to me. Let's add it.

NPC Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 10:28, 16 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

This looks like consensus to me, so I'm going to go ahead and do the thing.

Varkarrus (talk12:02, 16 December 2018 (MST)[edit]

Awesome! Thanks

BigShotFancyMan (talk13:23, 19 February 2019 (MST)[edit]

Announcing Featured Article Nominees in the #Announcements channel

As someone continually wanting to drive traffic to these pages, are there objections to sharing a link to the FA page letting Discord users know these discussion are waiting for input. At the very least, posting there once a month-I'd prefer to ping @everyone when that happened. Extra posts would be to put out a new article has been nominated, but @everyone wouldn't be used for that, just the (proposed) monthly one. So yeah...thoughts?

That seems like a reasonable use for the #announcements channel as it doesn't get much use. Though I believe it should act as more of a feed when a new article is added and only pinging the relevant system as not all users will find updates for other systems they don't know interesting. Other then that I support the general idea. —ConcealedLightChatmod.png (talk) 14:03, 19 February 2019 (MST)
No objections here. — NPC Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 14:38, 19 February 2019 (MST)
Good Idea to use relevant system pings CL. I’ll post in announcements soon and if someone thinks it’s not good I’ll adjust. ~ BigShotFancyMan (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2019 (MST)

NPC Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 12:35, 22 March 2019 (MDT)[edit]

Political Discussion on the Server[edit]

RedHawk007 brought up that political discussion is something that tends to spark arguments and flame wars, and he proposed implementing a "no politics" rule on that basis, and other users have expressed similar sentiments, which I can understand and appreciate after myself having gotten into a heated political debate a couple of days ago. We already have a rule that says "Be respectful of other users and their opinions" and "obey the wiki's Behavioral Policy", but this becomes a really easy rule to break with how divisive and black and white politics has become. What are people's thoughts on implementing this "no politics" rule, or if this becomes something that some people really want to discuss, adding a "politics quarantine" channel so that people that don't want to get involved never have to look at it? — NPC Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 12:35, 22 March 2019 (MDT)

I'm personally ok with political discussion. But I've seen on the discord how people probably have muted the discord or never looked to it because of political discussions that dragged on and on. If it makes people that uncomfortable, then I'm also ok with "no politics".--Yanied (talk) 12:44, 22 March 2019 (MDT)
A quarantine sounds like a good idea. Free speech and the exchange of ideas are important and i think the arguing won't end just because politics is forbidden to argue about. Everything can be political, after all, so it just becomes a veiled discussion about something else with politics at heart. Like arguing about if certain races are chaotic evil or not and talking about the ingame consequences of issues like this. "If Kobolds are evil by nature, i think genocide against them is justified." Better to have something that can contain the various discussions that can be safely ignored. --Kara (talk) 13:18, 22 March 2019 (MDT)
While I am fine with polite discussions, some users have shown that they simply cannot maintain a civil conversation. Chat Moderators should be within their right and not afraid to hand out warnings or mutes for conversations that threaten to get out of hand. Toxic behaviour has already driven several people out of the discord server and I'd hate to see more go because of a few bad apples. The server should first and foremost be about D&D - all other topics have second place and they shouldn't threaten the integrity of the wiki itself. I'm not a fan of 'quarantine' channels as "#adult topics" (I believe it was called that) simply did not work. -- ᴄᴏɴᴄᴇᴀʟᴇᴅᴡɪғᴇ (Contributions) (Squa) 15:55, 22 March 2019 (MDT)
This is going to sound shocking coming from me of all people, but I fully agree with the idea of forbidding any political discussion. Quarantine channels, in my opinion, don't work. As pointed out before, some of us can't discuss things with civility, and I honestly don't think a quarantine channel would really help that much in that regard. It would just keep all the incivility in one area, which would just cause it to inevitably spill out into the rest of the server. The last thing we need is this server suffering the same fate as the previous. To those who want to discuss politics and support the idea of a quarantine channel: That's what DMs are for (direct messages, that is. Not dungeon masters. *winkity wink*) --MetalShadowOverlord (talk) 12:18, 23 March 2019 (MDT)
I'm frankly surprised this is even a controversy or a debate. I'm all for a "no politics" rule. If people want to whine and moan about IRL politics, then there are a million more relevant places on the internet to do it than, y'know, an apolitical hobby-related chat for discussing games. Or even better, they can get off the freaking computer for once in their lives and try talking to real people with real opinions instead of seeking validation from an online echo chamber. Just saying. Based Quincy (talk) 12:47, 23 March 2019 (MDT)
"try talking to real people with real opinions instead of seeking validation from an online echo chamber." *combination of my laughter from how you wrote that along with some MLG airhorns* --MetalShadowOverlord (talk) 00:47, 24 March 2019 (MDT)

~ BigShotFancyMan talk contributions  13:12, 22 March 2019 (MDT)[edit]

Discord Moderators
Sort of in line with Geodude671 post above, moderators. Admins are automatically bestowed with moderator rights. Mods would help make sure respect is given to users. Geodude is the most available admin/mod on the Discord, followed by CL then myself. Even with some of our availability we really only answer SRD/balance questions. I think using the Wiki to have a Request for Moderator (or whatever is deemed) would be helpful. Users like ConcealedWife are already trying to do these things on Discord, and perhaps being a mod would bestow help to those trying to keep the peace.

I've actually been toying with this idea for some time now. While I'm in no way experienced enough (nor do I currently aspire) to be an admin, I would be interested in becoming a discord chat moderator. -- ᴄᴏɴᴄᴇᴀʟᴇᴅᴡɪғᴇ (Contributions) (Squa) 16:11, 22 March 2019 (MDT)
I think this would be very beneficial, though we'd need to work out specifics. I personally think ConcealedWife and Yanied would be good candidates for the first non-admin moderators.
Should Discord moderators also get mod privileges in the tavern chat? It's probably not necessary with how low activity in the tavern is, but it could be nice to have. — NPC Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 12:47, 23 March 2019 (MDT)
I don't see why not. I can see how that would be helpful. Based Quincy (talk) 12:49, 23 March 2019 (MDT)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!
system ref. documents

admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors