pack colors, the 3.1 rule question

I think it's important to remember that the CMs as a whole are willingly volunteering their time and money and energy and coding knowledge to make sure this forum is kept up and functioning for the masses who use it. 

As entitled as you might feel about the pretty little colors that you picked for your pack, if that's the sole focus when looking at Wolf, you may want to take an interior design class instead. This is for writing and reading and developing plot! Please just have an open mind. Please do not behave as though you are owed an explanation for why colors might need to shift and change. 

The goal has been clear from the start: this is a free game we are all fortunate enough to take a part in. Be respectful of your peers and CMs. Try to be kind to each other and you may find yourself having a more enjoyable experience here.

Thank you for wording this so perfectly (And you, too, JB!). I 100% agree with everything said here—especially in regards to the fact that this game is free and we are all fortunate enough to take part in it.

I'm a little confused by the defensive responses on any end. So now I'm wondering if I stepped on anyone's feelings, which I hope I didn't. I made the list in hopes for some more clarification on what's going to be expected of us as I don't feel what was added in the Guidebook (right now) answers my question. When I said I could see why some found it limiting, I wasn't trying to sound ungrateful to the Admins, or 'poo-poo' all over the idea. Mostly just looking for an answer to if the online color needs to work or if it's the entire pack graphic.

One of my favorite things about Wolf is its readability. I adore that there are no tables, font size is legible, etc. I'm all about visibility. So I really hope that wasn't the take away from my posts here. If so, my apologies, I worded them poorly.

Seconding Rachel, never meant to step on anyone's feelings or make y'all feel attacked. I was just interested in participating in the discussion and inputting some opinions; my apologies if anything I said came off as rude

My 2 cents - bear with me, I didn't read everything yet, but I wanted to address a few points.

A LOT of how the current mybb code works is custom plugin code built by me.  So suggestions like a different color for light and dark mode are wonderful and definitely doable!  I really appreciate people putting forth ideas that they like better, ones that fit the goal and still offer more freedom of choice <3

Suggestions are always welcome.  We love hearing members' ideas on how to make things better.  But where the line comes into play is comments assuming that changes we want to make are to the detriment of members (they aren't) or are being put into place in a bad spirit.  

If packs don't choose a new color, then yes, the CM team may choose one for you that is close to a current color.  No, the PMs will not be banned.  That would be ridiculous (sorry) and is not at all the spirit that this rule is being put into place for.  Bans are a result of discourtesy, treating other members poorly, and in general being a bad fit for the site.  We don't ban PMs for not adjusting ranks, not keeping up with posts, etc.  Why would we ever penalize over this?

There's feedback and then there's constructive feedback.  A lot of the feedback here has been constructive, and you are lovely, I appreciate it.  But at the end of the day, the site's code and management are on us, as is the site's appearance and presentation.  We don't mind suggestions, but what I personally (and I think the other CMs) take issue with is the insinuation that we are wrong in not asking members before putting this change into effect.  It is one of very few instances where this isn't necessary, and falls directly in line with the change made previously to remove html tables from posts.  We didn't take opinions then (which caused a lot of lashback as well) but has resulted in a FAR better reading experience across the board.

Sorry, I'm trying to work while following, so this is a bit piecemeal.  I just wanted to be sure to state that this thread and most of the discussion is appreciated.  There's just... a few things to remember when engaging with the site and changes we put into effect.

• CMs have the right to enact changes we feel are for the good of membership and staff.
  
• Members can (and should!) suggest ways those changes can be improved on, or reasons why they think those changes are a mistake
  
• Members do not have the right to be informed of changes before they happen.
  
• Members do not have the right to be a deciding factor on site policy.  We try our best to take member opinion into account in all things where needed, but sometimes, we need to change something for our own sake (running the site) or to meet compliance standards.
  

Thirding what Rachel has said-
There was no intention of attacking, nor' have this thread I posted into a spiral of such; only with the intention of asking if it was possible to discuss the change and how felt on it so. Apologies if so hurt anyones feelings on the matter.

My 2 cents - bear with me, I didn't read everything yet, but I wanted to address a few points.

A LOT of how the current mybb code works is custom plugin code built by me.  So suggestions like a different color for light and dark mode are wonderful and definitely doable!  I really appreciate people putting forth ideas that they like better, ones that fit the goal and still offer more freedom of choice <3

Suggestions are always welcome.  We love hearing members' ideas on how to make things better.  But where the line comes into play is comments assuming that changes we want to make are to the detriment of members (they aren't) or are being put into place in a bad spirit.  

If packs don't choose a new color, then yes, the CM team may choose one for you that is close to a current color.  No, the PMs will not be banned.  That would be ridiculous (sorry) and is not at all the spirit that this rule is being put into place for.  Bans are a result of discourtesy, treating other members poorly, and in general being a bad fit for the site.  We don't ban PMs for not adjusting ranks, not keeping up with posts, etc.  Why would we ever penalize over this?

There's feedback and then there's constructive feedback.  A lot of the feedback here has been constructive, and you are lovely, I appreciate it.  But at the end of the day, the site's code and management are on us, as is the site's appearance and presentation.  We don't mind suggestions, but what I personally (and I think the other CMs) take issue with is the insinuation that we are wrong in not asking members before putting this change into effect.  It is one of very few instances where this isn't necessary, and falls directly in line with the change made previously to remove html tables from posts.  We didn't take opinions then (which caused a lot of lashback as well) but has resulted in a FAR better reading experience across the board.

Sorry, I'm trying to work while following, so this is a bit piecemeal.  I just wanted to be sure to state that this thread and most of the discussion is appreciated.  There's just... a few things to remember when engaging with the site and changes we put into effect.

• CMs have the right to enact changes we feel are for the good of membership and staff.
  
• Members can (and should!) suggest ways those changes can be improved on, or reasons why they think those changes are a mistake
  
• Members do not have the right to be informed of changes before they happen.
  
• Members do not have the right to be a deciding factor on site policy.  We try our best to take member opinion into account in all things where needed, but sometimes, we need to change something for our own sake (running the site) or to meet compliance standards.
  

Yes queen ٩(๑❛ᴗ❛๑)۶

tldr for my post - y'all didn't do anything wrong posting this thread, or suggesting ways to make this change better/reasons why you don't think this change is a good idea.

I don't want anyone to feel discouraged from posting things like this in the future!  We just want to be open that sometimes the tone/assumptions people make in these sorts of discussions hurt <3 and address it.  We are also looking to clarify more around CM role vs member input, as a means to mitigate this in the future.  It's a hard balance to strike.

i appreciate that post a lot starr, it was very helpful. thank you!

edit -- would also like to throw in an endorsement for the idea of different colors for light and dark mode.

Sorry if I made people think I was being crazy, I was exploring the very extremes to see what would be done. I knew it would be very unlikely anu sort of banning and disbanding would be even considered, but if it suddenly appeared to be on the agenda then it would be quicker to get to the point rather than beating around the bush until the time comes. Sorry if I shocked anyone lol

I can see where everyone including the CMs are coming from. im literally neutral af and i love everyone on this beautiful site so pls dont take my words as me being rude. im a very blunt, honest person. 

I understand why the CMs could be disappointed by the feedback they're getting but its the communities honest opinion and if they cant handle the truth and what ppl think then idk what to say. Ppl feel strongly towards the colors cause its a way to express and yeah it doesn't effect IC stuff but like its been this way for some time now and its become a big part of the site, sometimes change is hard to stomach for some ppl. I know no ones planning on getting rid of the colors completely but im just saying feedback is feedback and whether its bad or good its the communities honest opinion and thoughts on the subject. What the CMs choose to do with said feedback is on them. they have the option to acknowledge and carry on and do what they want despite the community feedback. it just be like that sometimes

I find the insinuation we don’t appreciate feedback or don’t know how to handle it uncharitable. We’ve done a lot of revisions to site policies lately based on member feedback.

What we don’t appreciate — or specifically me, I can’t speak for other CMs — is the insinuation we lack transparency because a minor revision was made to improve site accessibility. That’s strictly a CM decision, and members do not have any jurisdiction on WOLF’s layout/accessibility and never have.

tldr for my post - y'all didn't do anything wrong posting this thread, or suggesting ways to make this change better/reasons why you don't think this change is a good idea.

I don't want anyone to feel discouraged from posting things like this in the future!  We just want to be open that sometimes the tone/assumptions people make in these sorts of discussions hurt <3 and address it.  We are also looking to clarify more around CM role vs member input, as a means to mitigate this in the future.  It's a hard balance to strike.

Agreed with this! I apologize if my original post sounded like this wasn't the case. I wanted to quickly clarify why it got added to the Guidebook without a community discussion, what part of the decision wouldn't be changing, and address/relieve some of the worry about timeline and non-compliance.

I am grateful for the suggestions on how to make the ADA compliance feel less limiting, and although I didn't expect this discussion to be where it occurred, grateful we had the opportunity to further clarify how decisions are made by the CM team and be honest about how the CM team sometimes feels. As objective as we try to be, we're not robots with no emotions!

Edit: Also agreed with Lauren. I didn't appreciate the policing of my tone or insinuations that we would unfairly punish people, or that stating so means we don't appreciate/can't handle constructive feedback. We historically listen to and accept feedback regardless of format (i.e. courteous or not) and it is fair for us to put up boundaries and tell the community when it's starting to stray toward uncharitable.

I think everyone needs to breathe, walk away, come back and hug each other. <3 I don't think anyone meant for this to turn into an argument. You can be appreciative of CM work while still offering constructive feedback. I know I am! 

I love that we are working toward ADA compliance. My eyes are getting worse with funky contrast/colors as I age and not being able to read links clearly does affect my enjoyment of the game. It is non-negotiable that we are inclusive. That means more than outrageous hues. 

I, too, apologize if any of my questions or suggestions came off as combative. My intention was never to attack, just to clarify! But I know tone can be hard to read over the internet and I've been a butthead before.

I feel like my comment specifically was a catalyst here.

To be completely clear: I, personally, have absolutely no problem with the change. My issue was with how this has been handled, and what I felt was a continuing dismissal of prior concerns even while acknowledging communication could be improved. So, yes, I was essentially tone policing. I did not intend to dismiss the hard work that goes into running, moderating, and maintaining a website of this size and activity; I understand the CMs are busy people and have much, much larger worries than hex color contrasts.

I am not assuming bad faith and I do not expect perfection. I apologize that my reply suggested I do. My intention has been to bring up concerns and keep the discussion open, not to accuse or jump to conclusions about anyone’s personal character.

Thank you for the clarifications on the relationship between member feedback and CM decisions, both here and in the Spirit of WOLF announcement. I think misunderstanding on that front is the core issue here—not because I expected democracy, or for an all-member vote to be the final say, but because talk about previous significant changes (such as polls and discussions over the breeding season and mature content) has been so open, and because you don’t want to discourage feedback.

I took an issue with tone because I read earlier replies as immediate counter-backlash, which is not encouraging.

But again, I appreciate the clarifications. On balancing CM role and member input moving forward, best of luck.

The issue seems to stem from being told "no".

That is not the same as being dismissive of member concerns, and it is not reflective of how all suggestions are handled. I don't want any one to feel discouraged from speaking their mind politely. Like Starr mentioned up thread, we like feedback and we do want to encourage suggestions.. However, members should operate under the understanding that not all suggestions are entitled to automatically being forced into site policies just because enough voices are backing them. <3

That's not the same as not listening. I listen to a lot of complaints, daily. I will listen to anything - but listening is not the same as enforcing or enacting change. There are some things that are going to be non-negotiable. For example, even if we had influx of players that decided that a jaguar or tiger should be allowed and a poll was put up with majority in favor of allowing jaguars/tigers, the CMs would be very unlikely to alter the rules because it doesn't fit into our current game setting or policies.

In reading the replies on this thread, there were not many replies I would call overtly rude or even discourteous.. But the overarching tone that seemed to be set up from most of these replies was that the CMs were being unfair and not transparent, along with a certain expression of unhappiness directed at the CMs.

At the end of the day, members feel they should be able to voice their opinions and feelings, including about how CMs handle things, and I agree -- but remember, CMs are members too, and are just as entitled to expressing their own feelings, including about member conduct.