Jump to content
Homecoming is temporarily down due to network issues with our provider. We've opened a ticket and hope to resume service as soon as possible. We apologize for the inconvenience. ×

Game Master / Community Helper Application


Recommended Posts

Just now, Crisis said:

My understanding would be that 'Private' in this context means that only one person can read the message in contrast to 'Public' where it can be read by many people.  Maybe if it had always been known as 'Direct Tell' instead of 'Private Tell' it might be seen a bit differently.  I wouldn't expect there to be anything protected or confidential using this function of the game. 

I think that is what is happening with some folks - they are interpreting 'Private' tells as protected information, when in reality, if these same folks read the Homecoming Privacy Policy they would know better. 

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a bit since I checked in on this thread, and I see that we really haven't progressed too much on the issue.  Still debating the semantics, the intent, and the outrage over something that is voluntary. 

 

Here is where I am, and have always been.  Nobody is being forced to play, and certainly nobody is being forced to sign-up for becoming a GM.  If you do either, it is best to do so in an informed manner, understanding exactly what acknowledging the agreement to play, or go down the GM road, really means.  But, it is by no means mandatory.  You have a choice.  Apparently, some are advocating for others to choose "No" to one, or the other, or both.  I think if you personally have an issue with it, then don't do one, or the other, or both.  But, allow others to educate themselves, and make their own decisions.  Interpretation of the tenets of these agreements seems to be all over the place, according to folks personal bias on the subject.  Varying levels of "expertise" have been offered, debated, dismissed, and refuted.  But, none of that has changed the FACT that this is all voluntary, and that like everything else in life, one should not commit without being well informed about what that commitment entails.  That's really all there is to it.

 

I'll check back in a couple of weeks.  Perhaps there will be more progress made towards discussing the benefits, as opposed to going down the rabbit hole of theories about subterfuge, and ulterior motive. 

Edited by Abraxus
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

What was no more, is REBORN!

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mezmera said:

 

5. HOW YOU USE YOUR INFORMATION AND THIRD PARTIES?

Please remember that any communications you have via the City of Heroes Services may reveal details about you. Also, any information you post publicly will be publicly available to other people. We are not responsible for your use of any otherwise private personal information which you make available, or the activities of other users or other third parties to whom you give or make available your information or content.

 

 

6. DATA RETENTION

How long do we retain your data for? As long as necessary for the purpose for which the data was originally collected. For any data received in relation to crash reports or data logging, we hold this information for up to 30 days. For any chat-logs, we hold this information for up to 30 days (unless they are part of an ongoing support request, in which case the relevant chat log will be deleted once the request is closed).

 

 

Could we maybe get @GM Impervium to weigh in on how this information applies to the application process? I feel as though it may clarify a few things and help prevent the discussion from relying too much on cyclical speculations and arguing over semantics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Tyrannical said:

 

Could we maybe get @GM Impervium to weigh in on how this information applies to the application process? I feel as though it may clarify a few things and help prevent the discussion from relying too much on cyclical speculations and arguing over semantics.

 

To preface: I have no ill intent.  I want this to be a relaxing area we can all feel safe to enjoy.  I have high regard for those bringing back this game to us  , giving us new powers to play with, and great new stories (and letting me speak as best I can civilly).  I just don't want anything nefarious happening that at the very least would cause anyone here (HC staff or users) or the game harm.  

 

If legal was aware of the privacy concerns chat-logs could present and their directive was that they would be deleted in a timely fashion, then if rules are followed as directed then great, nothing to see here. 

 

If legal saw how chat-logs could be a privacy concern surely there should be some pause to maybe ask them how you want to handle bringing people on board through reviewing chat-logs.  Or just don't go into those muddy waters in the first place since it's only 30 days of chat anyways.  

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mezmera, the law sections you are quoting above tell me that you are conflating two related, but distinct things.

 

  • Using logs or other "limited access" information about a person to learn information about them.
  • Discrimination against persons based on information learned about them.

Various laws define the second thing as illegal.

 

They do not define the first thing as illegal.

 

With limited exception, no one is disallowed from inspecting information that they may have valid control over to learn information about a person whose details are captured in that data.

 

What they are not allowed to do is use that data to discriminate against protected classes of persons.

 

The Homecomeing team is not allowed to discriminate based on anything regarding the ethnicity, nationality, religion, age, disability, or gender-related status (in ways that vary from state to state), or several other potential classes.

 

Yes, if this kind of discrimination were to happen based on log data, this can be hard for the discrimination victim to prove. However, the law does not prevent discovery of these details about a person by means of general information gathering.

 

Employers are often disallowed by their own legal departments from asking about someone's status in these categories, because asking about them and then not hiring can lead to the impression that the employer did discriminate against the person. However, if information about someone's membership in protected classes is available as part of general information about a person they have access to, there is nothing disallowing an employer from knowing this information at all. For example, looking up a person on their social media accounts and seeing photographic evidence that they have disability is not disallowedThe act of discrimination based on it is.

 

You seem to be arguing that just looking at non-public chat logs is illegal. It seems to me that it is not. I think the argument could be made that it opens a path, no matter how tenuous, for someone to attempt legal action against the HC team. The scenario would the that an applicant knows that they have revealed protected status information about themselves only in non-public conversations. If they apply and are rejected, they could conceivably claim that they were discriminated against because of their protected status, simply on the basis that the HC team could have discovered that. The validity of the case would depend on what other evidence the HC team could present about their reasons for turning down the applicant, or, obviously, discovery of any direct evidence (such as chat logs from places like Discord - irony) that the Homecoming team really did discriminate.

Edited by UberGuy
  • Thanks 2
  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tyrannical said:

Could we maybe get @GM Impervium to weigh in on how this information applies to the application process? I feel as though it may clarify a few things and help prevent the discussion from relying too much on cyclical speculations and arguing over semantics.

 

 

Both found on Page 1:

On 5/30/2021 at 7:43 AM, GM Impervium said:

I'm not 100% sure what the leads are looking for when they review chat logs, but the let ME in of all people, and I'm a hot mess who embarrasses themselves on the daily! So unless you're literally breaking our rules by engaging in hate speech, RMT, underage ERP, have an account full of copyright violations, or you're just a pedantic asshat in chat, you should be fine. It's less about being a good fit, and more about making sure we're not putting a rule-breaker in charge of enforcing said rules. We don't want literal corrupt cops on our team. That's fair, isn't it?

But we ARE corporately structured in other ways. We sign NDAs, we're compartmentalized, we have to log our actions and report things to higher ups... Homecoming is a very tightly run ship, it's not just a bunch of slackers doing whatever they want. And this is for the players' benefit. We can't have GMs abusing their power or authority, after all! You can appreciate that, can't you? We have rules in place so that we DON'T BECOME the tyrants that you're so concerned about. And speaking of tyrants...

 

On 6/1/2021 at 3:43 PM, Jimmy said:

The log checks are for the protection of both ourselves and for the project as a whole. To be candid, we need to know that you aren't going to be an asshole to people and abuse your position in any way. This has happened before, and we would like to avoid it happening again.

 

Checking logs, while not perfect, is one of the few ways we're able to gain some knowledge about an applicant, and we're absolutely going to use it to help avoid potential problems. An immense amount of trust is placed in everyone who joins the team, as the consequences of a staff member going rogue are potentially catastrophic. Remember we're on the path to legitimacy here - for example, what do you think would happen if a GM decided to expose details of a personal dispute between players? Not only would it look bad, but there's data protection issues to consider as well.

 

By joining the team you are asking all of us - The admin team, the other volunteers, and the playerbase as a whole - to trust you. I don't think it's unreasonable for us to ask you to trust us as well.

 

For reference: the Contributor Agreement (which all volunteers sign) does not prevent individuals from disclosing the fact that they've signed the agreement.

  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Lead Game Master

All, Jimmy already explained earlier in this thread how the chat records are used and why; there is nothing more to add to this exchange. Replies to this topic are now closed.

  • Thanks 5
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...