# Request



## Snarf Zagyg

Hey,

Please delete my account along with the snickers. Thanks. 

-Snarf


----------



## FitzTheRuke

It might be your unusual sense of humor, but I'm afraid that I don't get this joke. What's up? And what's this about snickers?


----------



## Snarf Zagyg

FitzTheRuke said:


> It might be your unusual sense of humor, but I'm afraid that I don't get this joke.




It is not a joke. There's not much else to comment on, other than I respect the hard and thankless work that is done to keep this website running so well. 

@Umbran or @Dannyalcatraz , I assume you will take care of this. It's much appreciated.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Snarf Zagyg said:


> It is not a joke. There's not much else to comment on, other than I respect the hard and thankless work that is done to keep this website running so well.
> 
> @Umbran or @Dannyalcatraz , I assume you will take care of this. It's much appreciated.



Well, I guess I was just _hoping_ that it was a joke. I dunno what happened, but I know that I don't want to see you go.


----------



## Benjamin Olson

You'll be missed! 

Sorry for the several times I implied you were secretly a self-hating bard. Loquacious trails to you.


----------



## aco175

I give it 2 months.


----------



## Gradine




----------



## SkidAce

Snarf Zagyg said:


> It is not a joke. There's not much else to comment on, other than I respect the hard and thankless work that is done to keep this website running so well.
> 
> @Umbran or @Dannyalcatraz , I assume you will take care of this. It's much appreciated.



Don't leave!

I enjoy your perspective.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

You will be missed.


----------



## Sacrosanct

This seems sudden, extreme, and a bit out of character. I hope something didn't happen, because you are valued here. However, you know yourself best, so I wish you the best, in however that manifests.


----------



## Alzrius

Sacrosanct said:


> This seems sudden, extreme, and a bit out of character.



This. Someone having their account hacked is the sort of thing that you only ever hear about third-hand, but in this case I'm wondering if it's actually happened.


----------



## Morrus

I’ll give it a few days. If you still want it deleted (it’s irreversible) on Monday, I’ll delete it.


----------



## payn




----------



## TwoSix

I'll assume that RL happenings, or simply a change of heart, necessitate your leaving.  This forum will be poorer with your absence.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg

Morrus said:


> I’ll give it a few days. If you still want it deleted (it’s irreversible) on Monday, I’ll delete it.




Thank you, Morrus.

Take care.


----------



## Cadence

Morrus said:


> I’ll give it a few days. If you still want it deleted (it’s irreversible) on Monday, I’ll delete it.




Do posts stay online when the accounts are deleted, or do they aetherize?


----------



## Nikosandros

Cadence said:


> Do posts stay online when the accounts are deleted, or do they aetherize?



From what I know, the posts stay online. The profile is gone, but you can still search by author's name.


----------



## Sacrosanct

Cadence said:


> Do posts stay online when the accounts are deleted, or do they aetherize?



When lowkey13 did this, I believe the posts were there, but they all said "deleted" under the post text.


----------



## TwoSix

Sacrosanct said:


> When lowkey13 did this, I believe the posts were there, but they all said "deleted" under the post text.



To the best of my recollection, that was a special situation, as lowkey specifically asked for their posts to be removed.  Other posters who I remember moving on still have their posts available.


----------



## darjr

There are options. If the posts need to go they can. It doesn’t appear that snarf wants the posts gone. Though it’s not clear given that snarf wants the “likes” removed.


----------



## South by Southwest

darjr said:


> There are options. If the posts need to go they can. *It doesn’t appear that snarf wants the posts gone.* Though it’s not clear given that snarf wants the “likes” removed.



*I* certainly don't! Snarf's threads on here are much of what I live and work by. Not casually will I miss his insights, mental patience, and clarity.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg

darjr said:


> There are options. If the posts need to go they can. It doesn’t appear that snarf wants the posts gone. Though it’s not clear given that snarf wants the “likes” removed.




Re-logged in just for this. I apologize for the confusion- I just want my account deactivated. The other thing was a reference to the precipitating event, not a request for deletion of likes. I wasn't trying to be unclear.


----------



## Alzrius

Snarf Zagyg said:


> The other thing was a reference to the precipitating event, not a request for deletion of likes. I wasn't trying to be unclear.



I'm suddenly reminded of Ben Riggs' talking about how one of the biggest mistakes TSR made was creating a place where talent could be refined, and then driving those talented individuals away.

History, it seems, really does rhyme.


----------



## Kobold Stew

I will be very sorry if you leave the site. Your contributions bring both insight and fun, consistently.


----------



## TwoSix

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Re-logged in just for this. I apologize for the confusion- I just want my account deactivated. The other thing was a reference to the precipitating event, not a request for deletion of likes. I wasn't trying to be unclear.



This is why I try (emphasis on "try") not to get involved in long threads unless they involve pizza toppings.


----------



## Umbran

Nertz.

You know, I wish folks would have a discussion with us before deciding on and announcing a nuclear option.  

I'm well aware that how things unfold on this site can sometimes be, let's say, extremely frustrating.  But it might have been good to try other things to manage that frustration short of this.


----------



## Nikosandros

TwoSix said:


> This is why I try (emphasis on "try") not to get involved in long threads unless they involve pizza toppings.



I'm not sure about that. Sooner or later someone will mention pineapple and then, as an Italian, I have something of a duty to complain...


----------



## Retreater

I've considered leaving the site a few times recently too - mostly because my pessimism about the new edition has made me an outcast. So I just don't post in anything 5.5e-related. 
For now that has done the trick, but regardless of that, I hope you enjoy your sabbatical from the site, Snarf. Always enjoy your posts.


----------



## Warpiglet-7

Retreater said:


> I've considered leaving the site a few times recently too - mostly because my pessimism about the new edition has made me an outcast. So I just don't post in anything 5.5e-related.
> For now that has done the trick, but regardless of that, I hope you enjoy your sabbatical from the site, Snarf. Always enjoy your posts.



I actually did so and sort of regret it.  It was cleansing and good to have a fresh start but I would have been better served just signing out and then coming back later.

At the end of the day not matter how I feel about some things, I get a lot of information here and really get a lot of insight into the game.

I may not end up being a 5.5 guy but a lot of those discussions, I think, will still have relevance.


----------



## Smackpixi

How about an indefinite suspension, something less irrevocable.


----------



## Umbran

Warpiglet-7 said:


> I actually did so and sort of regret it.  It was cleansing and good to have a fresh start but I would have been better served just signing out and then coming back later.






Smackpixi said:


> How about an indefinite suspension, something less irrevocable.




Sometimes folks find an enforced break useful.  One option is a long, but definite suspension - we ban for a month, three months, six months, or whatever.  The person has an enforced break. 

Ideally, the break is long enough that they actually forget that the end of it is coming. We make it long enough that they get to change habits, do other things with the time they were spending here.  Then, after the enforced break ends, when they think about it, they get to make a choice, based on where they are at the time.


----------



## Morrus

I love time loops!


----------



## Mercurius

Now this would be a real loss - hope you change your mind, @Snarf Zagyg


----------



## Alzrius

Given that EN World would absolutely be poorer without Snarf here, and that his account won't be deleted until Monday, I hope the mods are discussing ways to fix this, since it was one of their own that precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs. At the very least, a public apology might go a long way towards hopefully getting Snarf to change his mind.


----------



## CleverNickName

Aw.  First Lowkey, and now you?

For what it's worth, I've always enjoyed reading your posts...even when you're taking the p--s out of me for liking pineapple on my pizza.  Wherever your internet presence takes you, I hope you continue to be wrong about pizza.


----------



## UngainlyTitan

I have no idea of what precipitated this, though I can infer something did but I will also miss @Snarf Zagyg


----------



## Alzrius

UngainlyTitan said:


> I have no idea of what precipitated this



Snarf answered that earlier in the thread:



Snarf Zagyg said:


> Re-logged in just for this. I apologize for the confusion- I just want my account deactivated. The other thing was a reference to the precipitating event, not a request for deletion of likes. I wasn't trying to be unclear.


----------



## CleverNickName

Umbran said:


> Nertz.
> 
> You know, I wish folks would have a discussion with us before deciding on and announcing a nuclear option.
> 
> I'm well aware that how things unfold on this site can sometimes be, let's say, extremely frustrating.  But it might have been good to try other things to manage that frustration short of this.



I've walked away from ENWorld several times since I joined back in 2007.   There have been a couple of periods where the environment here was a bit too toxic for my tastes, and certain people were beginning to damage my blood pressure.  Sure, 'sticks and stones' and all that, but when I start losing actual sleep over an internet chat forum I tell myself it's time for a break.  I'll just log off and wander away for a couple of days/weeks/months, until both my attitude and the forum climate have improved to my liking.  Then I'm back on my usual, clumsily-worded, snarky old B.S.

It hasn't happened in a while, though.  I think the most recent time was back in 2018 or so, when people were trashing gaming streams (especially Critical Role) for being so popular, and folks were comparing it to adult filmmaking.  Ugh.  Before that, it was probably one of the many, many repeated, heated (rep-heated?) arguments over 4th Edition.  I probably took three or four breaks from ENWorld over that topic, and I still won't play it to this day.  Change always seems to bring out the worst in people.

In all cases, I've never taken the time to write out my cause for doing so.  Which, in retrospect, isn't terribly helpful for the moderators and owners of the forum.  In the future, I'll take the time to write out a quick "see you next week and here's why" email to the mods on my way out.

(Christ, have I really been here for 15-1/2 years?!  My account is old enough to apply for a driving permit.)


----------



## Umbran

Alzrius said:


> Given that EN World would absolutely be poorer without Snarf here, and that his account won't be deleted until Monday, I hope the mods are discussing ways to fix this, since it was one of their own that precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs. At the very least, a public apology might go a long way towards hopefully getting Snarf to change his mind.




With all respect, there is no one-sided "fix" here.

If this is the result of one moderator action, it is rather out of proportion, and there's darned little we can do about that. 

If this is the result of longer term issues or frustrations, there's still nothing we can do if Snarf doesn't choose to come to us to discuss the matter. 

That this thread exists suggests that Snarf doesn't want to talk, which is Snarf's prerogative.


----------



## Umbran

CleverNickName said:


> I've walked away from ENWorld several times since I joined back in 2007.




Heck, I walked away, for like a year.

Burnout is a thing.  It happens.  It is certainly better to walk away than to be miserable.


----------



## niklinna

Alzrius said:


> Given that EN World would absolutely be poorer without Snarf here, and that his account won't be deleted until Monday, I hope the mods are discussing ways to fix this, since it was one of their own that precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs. At the very least, a public apology might go a long way towards hopefully getting Snarf to change his mind.



It was Snarf who precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs, with the comments quoted in the moderation post. We are all free to stay or go, and if somebody wants to walk away after being reminded to treat others well, that's their prerogative.


----------



## Malmuria

niklinna said:


> It was Snarf who precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs, with the comments quoted in the moderation post. We are all free to stay or go, and if somebody wants to walk away after being reminded to treat others well, that's their prerogative.




Not sure this is the place to discuss it, but the offending paragraph was this



Snarf Zagyg said:


> ....which doesn't work. It's why *most* of the thoughtful 5e players don't engage in these lengthy ... threads ... with the same conversations. It's pointless to try and discuss a bad example (with some people who don't even play the game) with exemplars from other games.




In sum, the position is that that people criticizing 5e in that thread are not players of 5e, and thus "most" (not all) posters who play 5e had dropped out of the discussion by that point.  The mods interpreted this as saying the other commenters in the thread were "not thoughtful," but that's weird; the thrust of it was doubt that the discussion by that point was operating in good faith.  The other post that got moderated in that thread was much more pointed and impolite.

The mods have a difficult job.  A lot of the arguments in threads devolve into Team A and Team B, with people "liking" only the posts from their teams.  I think what could be effective is if you ("you" in the general sense) see someone being impolite who is otherwise on your "team" to, instead of liking their post let them know that they might be coming across as overly aggressive or condescending.


----------



## Umbran

Malmuria said:


> Not sure this is the place to discuss it




It is not.  We don't publicly discuss individual moderator actions.


----------



## Malmuria

Umbran said:


> It is not.  We don't publicly discuss individual moderator actions.



ok


----------



## Blue

Alzrius said:


> Given that EN World would absolutely be poorer without Snarf here, and that his account won't be deleted until Monday, I hope the mods are discussing ways to fix this, since it was one of their own that precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs. At the very least, a public apology might go a long way towards hopefully getting Snarf to change his mind.



Oh gods, I hope not.  Mods won't be able to do their job if they feel that if they happen to give a single warning to a prolific poster will cause a backlash and a forced public apology.  An apology, that forced, is probably not sincere.

Also, considering Snarf's comment in this thread:


Snarf Zagyg said:


> There's not much else to comment on, other than I respect the hard and thankless work that is done to keep this website running so well.



It does not seem like they are pushing against the moderation.  Which makes it more likely that it's a bigger issue or issues and the moderation was just the straw that broke the camel's back.  Leading to an apology not correcting the issue either.

Basically, I disagree complete with the concept of moderators having to tiptoe around giving out moderation and being forced to give apologies if someone is upset for having earned one.  They have to read us at our worst, and do so to keep the whole site better for everyone.


----------



## Fifth Element

Umbran said:


> Heck, I walked away, for like a year.
> 
> Burnout is a thing.  It happens.  It is certainly better to walk away than to be miserable.



I've only recently returned from being away for like eight years. The site has improved since that time. Far fewer toxic posters.


----------



## Lazvon

Me too. Has been about 17-years for me though. Joined when some folks in a campaign I was in recommended it and then I forgot about it. Started playing 5e with the kids, and rediscovered it. 

Really there are only about 5 posters that annoyed me (until I clicked ignore) with their constant back and forth posting, showing they weren’t really listening or evolving their opinions. Instead, just seems they want to be right or have the last word by dragging down a thread. With those 5 ignored, forums have been great for such a large population. Folks sometimes need reminding to keep it great; but again, amazing it generally works the last couple of months I’ve been back.


----------



## Cadence

Selfishly*, using ideas from above, @Snarf Zagyg should ask for a one year ban, save up and just dump some big post on us at the one year mark,  and then ask for another one.  We can call it Snarf Day and celebrate by burning bard character sheets and ordering pizza only from places that don't have pineapple.

_* Me being selfish, that is._


----------



## Eric V

Alzrius said:


> Given that EN World would absolutely be poorer without Snarf here, and that his account won't be deleted until Monday, I hope the mods are discussing ways to fix this, since it was one of their own that precipitated this unfortunate state of affairs. At the very least, a public apology might go a long way towards hopefully getting Snarf to change his mind.



I hope you're not blaming the mod...


----------



## aia_2

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Re-logged in just for this. I apologize for the confusion- I just want my account deactivated. The other thing was a reference to the precipitating event, not a request for deletion of likes. I wasn't trying to be unclear.



I am with you, Snarf! You have all my shympaty! You could not take a better decision. I wish i will meet you on other boards as i enjoyed reading you!


----------



## Lanefan

Umbran said:


> It is not.  We don't publicly discuss individual moderator actions.



Which while understandable from one angle may, from another, be part of the problem.

Once in a while a mod action really is puzzling (my current example is what seems like a completely harmless thread here in Meta titled "Trades" was locked); in these cases the ability to publicly ask why it was done and get a public answer would be appreciated.


----------



## Morrus

Lanefan said:


> Which while understandable from one angle may, from another, be part of the problem.
> 
> Once in a while a mod action really is puzzling (my current example is what seems like a completely harmless thread here in Meta titled "Trades" was locked); in these cases the ability to publicly ask why it was done and get a public answer would be appreciated.



You can ask questions in meta. That’s what it’s for.  In that case, the question was asked and answered.

But having mods forced to defend at length every single decision (because that’s what that would be) = not having mods. And a mod-free community is not the sort of community I’m interesting in hosting. There are plenty of places like that out there for those who want them. This ain’t one of them.


----------



## Umbran

Lanefan said:


> Which while understandable from one angle may, from another, be part of the problem.




Yes, well, perfection is denied us in this life.  We make do with what we can.



Lanefan said:


> Once in a while a mod action really is puzzling ... ; in these cases the ability to publicly ask why it was done and get a public answer would be appreciated.




Oh, we understand it would be appreciated.  But it would be an unsustainable practice.


----------



## R_J_K75

Cadence said:


> @Snarf Zagyg should ask for a one year ban, save up and just dump some big post on us at the one year mar



I bet there's phonebooks smaller than this post would be. Well not anymore, they don't make phonebooks. Hopefully this is a case of a bad day, misunderstanding, or we could've all handled the situation better, and it'll get worked out. If it's a case of all sides sticking to their stance, then sometimes it's better to just walk away.


----------



## Muso

Toxic people are part of D&D forums. I recently left an Italian famous forum (considering Italian standards for "famous" with respect to international forums ). Few toxic people made funny people to move away and now they can speak within themselves. I don't want to see it also here (OK, here you need tons of toxic people to make all the nice people to leave, but in the Italian forum it started with few nice persons leaving). Just take a break or ignore toxic people, but stay here.


----------



## Mallus

Godspeed Snarf! Here's hoping you either decide to stay or return at some point in the future. You had great taste in film, if somewhat questionable taste in Italian pastry...


----------



## overgeeked

Apologies, but not all red text is created equal. Mod actions, i.e. telling posters to stop breaking the rules is one thing, but snarking at posters in red text should not be covered by those same forum rules of no discussing mod actions. If any non-mod poster had told another to "go have a snickers" the mods would rightfully red text that post. Yet, in this case, it's a mod and done in red text...so it's somehow above reproach. That's a bit much.


----------



## Umbran

overgeeked said:


> Apologies, but not all red text is created equal. Mod actions, i.e. telling posters to stop breaking the rules is one thing, but snarking at posters in red text should not be covered by those same forum rules of no discussing mod actions. If any non-mod poster had told another to "go have a snickers" the mods would rightfully red text that post.




We already noted that we do not, and will not, be discussing individual moderations in public.  Please respect that - it is in the rules, you know.  Those aren't in abeyance here.



overgeeked said:


> Yet, in this case, it's a mod and done in red text...so it's somehow above reproach.




Not really.  We answer to Morrus, since he's the one who owns the place.  If he doesn't like something we do, he tells us.  If we ever did anything he felt was way out of line, I would expect him to boot us from the role.


----------



## FrogReaver

This seems as good a place as any to say this.  One trend that I'm noticing more and I'm very pleased to see is mods red texting threads with a general warning to be nicer to each other first and then proceeding to mod more strictly after that.  I don't know if this was planned or just coincidence or heck, maybe it always happened and I'm just now noticing, but it's a practice I think most of us likely appreciate.  Obviously, this can't be a 100% all the time thing but I wanted to give props.


----------



## overgeeked

Umbran said:


> We already noted that we do not, and will not, be discussing individual moderations in public.  Please respect that - it is in the rules, you know.  Those aren't in abeyance here.



Right. And that’s the problem. I’m not interested in talking about this mod enforcing the rules. I am curious about this mod breaking the rules. Telling a poster to “go get a snickers” is not something anyone else would get away with. We all know that. That’s a problem. The mods should not be above the rules.


----------



## Cadence

overgeeked said:


> Right. And that’s the problem. I’m not interested in talking about this mod enforcing the rules. I am curious about this mod breaking the rules. Telling a poster to “go get a snickers” is not something anyone else would get away with. We all know that. That’s a problem. The mods should not be above the rules.




When I first read the post being discussed, I took the "snickers" line to be similar in spirt to dial it back and maybe take a break - but in a less formal way.  And so that didn't feel inappropriate to me for a mod to say.  

In the follow up, I went and googled it later and was surprised that "Have a snickers" was* a lot* stronger than that on the Urban Dictionary ("eat a snickers" was less strong).


----------



## John R Davis

It is one of the big issues.... What words actually mean nowadays, and how they translate across boundaries, cultures, countries, etc. I get very confused with a lot of turns of phrase


----------



## Alzrius

Cadence said:


> When I first read the post being discussed, I took the "snickers" line to be similar in spirt to dial it back and maybe take a break - but in a less formal way.  And so that didn't feel inappropriate to me for a mod to say.
> 
> In the follow up, I went and googled it later and was surprised that "Have a snickers" was* a lot* stronger than that on the Urban Dictionary ("eat a snickers" was less strong).



Hence why I suggested a public apology, since as @overgeeked pointed out, that's the sort of thing that would get someone else slapped down by the mods, and as such it sends a rather poor message when the mods themselves break the rules they're supposed to be enforcing with impunity.

But apparently, a single instance of a mod saying "sorry, I went too far" in front of everyone is the same thing as having no mods at all.


----------



## FrogReaver

overgeeked said:


> Right. And that’s the problem. I’m not interested in talking about this mod enforcing the rules. I am curious about this mod breaking the rules. Telling a poster to “go get a snickers” is not something anyone else would get away with. We all know that. That’s a problem. The mods should not be above the rules.



Go eat a snickers 

IMO. There’s no perfect way to tell someone they are behaving badly.  Often a bit of humor can make the correction more palatable, but it does risk coming across snarky.  I think we should give the mods posts even more grace than we believe our own posts deserve.


----------



## overgeeked

FrogReaver said:


> Go eat a snickers



I look forward to this becoming the new mod-approved snark of the forum. 


FrogReaver said:


> IMO. There’s no perfect way to tell someone they are behaving badly.



You just did. “You’re behaving badly. Stop.” It’s not rocket surgery. 


FrogReaver said:


> Often a bit of humor can make the correction more palatable



I’ve only ever seen it escalate the situation and cause tension.  Snark is snark. Red text or no. 


FrogReaver said:


> I think we should give the mods posts even more grace than we believe our own posts deserve.



I’m the opposite. The mods set the example. They have the power to silence and boot people. If anything they should be held to a higher standard rather than a lower one.


----------



## FrogReaver

overgeeked said:


> rocket surgery.



I will be using this all the time now!


----------



## FrogReaver

overgeeked said:


> I’m the opposite. The mods set the example. They have the power to silence and boot people. If anything they should be held to a higher standard rather than a lower one.



I agree here but I think that they are held to a higher standard.


----------



## Alzrius

FrogReaver said:


> I agree here but I think that they are held to a higher standard.



Personally speaking, I haven't seen anything to suggest this, versus several examples that suggest the opposite, of which Snarf's leaving is only the latest.

Now, it's possible that there are internal conversations going on among the mods about this, but that's not exactly helpful for the wider community. If improvements are made completely out of the public eye, then as far as everyone else is concerned they might as well not exist. The appearance of propriety (and impropriety) is quite often just as important as propriety itself.


----------



## Umbran

overgeeked said:


> Right. And that’s the problem.




Sorry. But we still won't be discussing individual moderator actions in public.


----------



## Umbran

overgeeked said:


> You just did. “You’re behaving badly. Stop.” It’s not rocket surgery.




No, it isn't rocket surgery.  It is _human behavior_ which is even more complicated.

When we are blunt and direct, people complain that we have no sense of humor.  When we display a sense of humor, people complain like you are doing now.  

There is no one perfect approach to moderation that won't cheese anyone off, ever.


----------



## AnotherGuy

nvm


----------



## Umbran

Alzrius said:


> Hence why I suggested a public apology...




With respect - in general, when we have to make apologies (and we do, on occasion) we do so in private, to the person who was actually wronged, and for the thing _they_ feel was the issue, not the thing third parties have decided was the issue.


----------



## overgeeked

Alzrius said:


> Personally speaking, I haven't seen anything to suggest this, versus several examples that suggest the opposite, of which Snarf's leaving is only the latest.
> 
> Now, it's possible that there are internal conversations going on among the mods about this, but that's not exactly helpful for the wider community. If improvements are made completely out of the public eye, then as far as everyone else is concerned they might as well not exist. The appearance of propriety (and impropriety) is quite often just as important as propriety itself.



Exactly.


----------

