State of the Board

Eric the Red

Team HuskerBoard
I will be posting this later tonight, probably around 10pm tonight - Out of respect to all of you, I wanted you guys to be able to read it first.

It’s amazing to think we are headed into Huskerboard’s 13th Husker signing day. I can remember the first one, taking the day off of work, scanning any website I could get to to see who committed and post it on our site to the nine or 10 members we had. Funny thing was half of those members were me and my partner Blackshirt, doing everything we could to get this site off the ground. To think, I wasn’t married, no family and living in a one bedroom apartment beginning a career. Now I’m pushing mid-life, going bald, grey hair and shuttling mi familia around in the minivan.

Now that is all an afterthought due to the tremendous support we have from many of our members who bleed Husker red and only want to help their fellow fan. Information is posted here quicker than ever. People are thankful they have a free place to view, participate and discuss their beloved Huskers. We are well over 10,000 members strong and there is absolutely nothing else out there like this message board that doesn’t cost a dime. This is something our whole team, members, moderators and administrators are very proud. Simply awesome!

It takes a lot to keep this thing afloat. It’s not just financially, but much more the time to keep things running smoothly. To think of all the generosity that has been handed over to this site it’s really phenomenal. Just last week Zoogies and AR Husker Fan amongst others freely donated their time to fix our malware intrusion. If we had to hire a private firm we’d be looking at a bill of several hundred if not several thousand dollars. Or when there is a potentially theft of ad space, someone trying to post for the competition, Knapplc is right there “Johnny on the spot” to cut them off. How about Mavric spitting out one tweet after another as soon as it leaves the recruits finger tips? We also have huskeraddict, who provides us with so much of the graphics that give Huskerboard its look, not to mention the yearly Schedule wall paper. BIGREDIOWAN and Rawhide and all the Moderators that keep the site clean from spammers. You can’t ask for anything more, certainly not anymore time. Every single one of these moderators has a career and obligations outside of this message board. All of these members are well educated, articulate, realistic and logical.

There is also the financial burden of running a board with this much whipping past us on a daily basis. We are almost our own worst enemy so to speak. We have grown so large it simply cost more to keep it up. This site is no cash cow by any means. There have been several months where Blackshirt and I have put in our own money to get to the next month. We used to have a steady flow from our clothing store partner, but we believe a “mistake” was made when the distributer sent out catalogs of their primary store to all of our members and we lost quite a bit of revenue to pay our bills. We are desperately looking for advertisers. We have recently purchased software to allow a very quick transaction to take place to get advertisers up and running on the board. Please reach out to me if you want to know more.

Of the recent bans, let me try and help.

What gets someone banned? I think it's simple, act as if you are face to face with someone meeting them for the first time, not as if your actions have no consequence because you’re sitting behind your computer. If you do, there is a chance you’ll be asked to leave.

We understand that you are curious as to what precipitated the bans. We will not allow anyone to personally attack anyone, ANYWHERE! This includes not only the forums, but also any aspect of the Huskerboard software, including the Personal Messenger (PM) service. And it was the PM service in which much of this took place. That’s the reason that this seems so abrupt. AR Husker Fan and I located several incidents of the PM system being abused, with acts that would be impermissible in the forums. This is about being civil to each other on a message board, including those you don't like, whether it’s the forums or the PM system.

Please know that there was considerable thought on these decisions made by AR Husker Fan and me that included lengthy correspondence with some of the members banned.

A member released what was a highly truncated, and very slanted, version of the full PM string between me and a few other members. I had politely asked them to modify their behavior. That request was directed toward the use of a phrase. The phrase itself was not the issue; had it been, we could have easily modified it as we have certain other phrases, such as vulgar or highly offensive terms, through the “bad word” filter. The reason we didn’t is that the term itself isn’t offensive; it was being used as a means of personal attack, outside the Woodshed, towards anybody that disagreed with the users’ opinions. Rather than use the “bad word” filter, those members were simply asked to refrain from using the term outside the Woodshed. We’ve done this before; we’ll probably do it again.

It was a reasonable request. It was made in a civil manner. We expected that we’d get a reasonable, civil response.

Instead a harsh, intense one sided backlash ensued with attempted bullying, most of which was conveniently left out of the document that was released.

Now, in that document I stated that the use of the term, in addition to being a personal attack in the way it was being used, sounded “gay.” I did say that, and not I’m not running from it. It was an attempt at levity. I try and bring humor to these things and my attempt at using a Seinfeld reference came off as an insult to some. Please accept my apology, I screwed up and I apologize.

Subsequently, other members – close friends and relatives of the first three banned – themselves started using the PM system in ways that were not permissible. For that, they were also banned.

At this point, AR Husker Fan and I need to clear up some points. Most of them understandable, given the circumstances. But they need to be addressed.

First, the Moderators were not involved in this. This was an action taken by AR Husker Fan and me.

Second, this did not result from a member complaining or reporting anything.

Third, the members that were banned know full well what led to their bans. They are the ones that used the PM system in ways they should not.

We understand that this response will elicit a number of different views. Some will be satisfied (although its human nature to want to know all the details); others will not. For the latter, it is their decision to stay or go. We sincerely hope they stay, but if they elect to leave, we understand and appreciate the time they have spent on Huskerboard. We ask two things. First, and foremost, that any discussion concerning this message be civil. Second, please confine that debate to here. It is certainly on-topic here; it is not elsewhere.

Again, we did not do this lightly. This is the third time in our history that, unfortunately, these steps had to be taken at this length, but for the good of the board, it was necessary.

This is the first time in over two years I personally felt someone had to be asked to leave. I hate doing it, it’s the worst part of this and I hope we can all get back to discussing the reason we are here. That is our love of all things Huskers.

Please realize we cannot and will not be able to be everything to everyone. We cannot and will not be able to be everywhere and see everything. Be our eyes and ears and lead by example. Huskerboard.com in the proud to be the Heartbeat of Huskernation. Or members are excited and many want to promote their passion for the Big Red. Do it here, do it loud, and do it often. I’m overwhelmed at what we have accomplished in the first 13 years, excited to see what the next 13 have in store for us.

 
Eric, thanks for the rundown. It's a more full explanation about what happened than what we usually give to other members. The people who are warned, suspended or banned know why they are being disciplined. Those who claim they don't are BSing themselves. It's been our practice not to discuss other members' discipline with the whole board because their discipline is their business. If they want to share, that's their choice. And if we need to fill in the blanks where they're omitting details (as happened with the PM RotoRiot released) it's fair game to disclose precisely what went on.

In this circumstance I also feel it's justified to give people a bit more information. Many are wondering how several prominent members suddenly got banned, and this should help some.

However. There's a very troubling thing disclosed in this "State of the Board" you've written, and there may be an even greater outcry by the remaining members over this disclosure. This has potential to severely damage HuskerBoard's reputation, and this needs to be addressed.

In your explanation you've disclosed that the Admin staff has read members' private messages. I cannot stress enough to you how poorly that is going to be received. Members have a presumption of privacy when using the PM system. It's inherent in the name: "Private Message."

This has to be looked at from two angles - one, HuskerBoard's best interests, which I believe you guys did when you made the decisions that led to the ouster of the guys abusing the PM system. Two, from the angle of the members, for whom a level of trust in the folks running this site is paramount to their continued membership.

The questions this will engender, for which HuskerBoard NEEDS to have good answers:

1) Whose private messages have been read, not just in this situation, but at any time?

2) How was this done?

3) How does HuskerBoard choose which members' messages they read?

4) Which members were banned as a result of reading their private messages?

5) What, specifically, did those people do that made HuskerBoard choose to read their private messages?

The inclination is going to be to view these questions from our perspective, the people who need to keep this board running properly. But I urge you in the strongest possible way to read these questions as if you were a member of this board with expectations of privacy in some things. Whether they should or should not feel this way is irrelevant - people feel that private messages should remain private. Even the most staunch supporters of HuskerBoard are going to be concerned over this.

You guys are going to have to have answers to these questions before this goes live. I would suggest one of two things:

1) Having a full explanation for all of the actions that led to the reading of the PMs ready and being prepared to roll with the punches of people being angered, and leaving the site as a result.

2) Not disclosing that we've read PMs, coming up with another explanation for why those latest members were banned, and perhaps rescinding the bans or changing them to suspensions.

Disclosing that we've read members' PMs is going to have long-term effects on this board. Privacy is a huge issue right now, and people will not take this well. If we disclose this, there will be consequences.

 
I agree with knapp about being a little too specific with the details. I think about 98% of that is great and - while it might not satisfy people - will at least be an olive branch. But I'm afraid the parts about the PM will not be well received at all. There is a pretty good split between those who support/understand the bans and those who are pretty upset. I'm afraid disclosing the information about the PMs will only anger the opposition further and probably swing some of the supporters to the other side.

 
Lance asked for my thoughts on the PM aspect of this post (we had discussed this previously), and may have forgot to mention it was only in the mod section of the board
default_biggrin.png


I came here prepared for a hell of a firestorm. That was something I did not consider Huskerboard.com could ever possibly recover from. Apologies for the ensuing book.

First, while administrators of every site have the ability to do a lot (both legally, and technically), it occurs to almost nobody that a select few of their fellow board members are able to read their PMs at will. We would be that one site that does this. Here's a small sampling of general online opinions on the topic.

Had this come out, I was prepared to offer the following suggestions publicly:

--That the "log in as user" link be removed from the ACP. That's far too easy, and perhaps tempting.

--That we require clear, binding terms in our board policy and terms of use that all administrators, EVERY time they read member PMs, whether punishment results from it or not, must disclose this to those members.

--That we conduct a review of the specific reasons that caused PMs to be read in this case, which, if not sufficient, should have the admin's ACP access revoked. (Sorry, ETR, but as much power as the mods and especially the admins have when it comes to user info, it only makes sense to have some kind of protocol in place to ensure we don't abuse it)

--A note that when the first three bannings came down, and I wanted to get another moderator's personal opinion on this, I felt I had to seek him out via e-mail. At that time I did not know there was even a "Log me in" link in the ACP, or that any member PMs were read (the second round of bannings had not yet happened). However, it did occur to me that the PM system was something other people could read if they chose, and anyone who has ever had even token access to the ACP has seen the SQL instructions for snooping member PMs jotted down in the notes. And while I had nothing to hide, I preferred not to use it in the hopes of frank and honest discussion. That is not the kind of environment we can foster here for the moderators, much less the membership.

--Express my concern that if these points aren't addressed, I don't know how I would be able to continue volunteering here. Sorry, I really am not one for dramatics, but this is really, really serious in my eyes. I really like this place, and especially like the owners, admins, and mods team, and I'd have no doubts that they would address this seriously and adequately. I do think a showing of pressure from within to make these changes, would have been necessary in restoring anybody's faith in Huskerboard (as opposed to a unified front).

Let me just say, I am very happy to have the chance to offer all of these thoughts privately, and I stand by them. It's been gnawing at me, the PMs issue since I learned of it, but I wasn't planning on bringing it up until after this issue had died down so as not to pile on the issues you guys (Frank & Eric) have already had to deal with.

Thats the reason that this seems so abrupt. AR Husker Fan and I located several incidents of the PM system being abused, with acts that would be impermissible in the forums.
This confuses me. Through the entire statement, what I am getting is that board rules -- just on things such as personal attacks -- are enforced in the PM system as well.

Now, I understand if we are talking about serious legal matters. If, for example, members were exchanging child pornography links through the PM system, or making death threats, and somehow it became a reasonable suspicion that this was ongoing.

But if I suspend a guy and he can't PM his buddy saying, "Goddamn that zoogs, what a c**t", what do we have the PM system for?
default_biggrin.png
(This is an attempt at levity; I know we are dealing with far worse)

I agree with knapplc that I am sure you guys were only looking out for HB's best interests and believe you must have had extremely good reasons. Though to reiterate, I feel again I've come to the conclusion that such powers, without some sort of protocol limiting their use, lend themselves at best to the perception of serious abuse, and at worst to the reality of it.

----

Onto the statement.

Given that the full sequence of PMs between ShawnWatson and AbdullahTheButcher and NUpolo8 are not being released (which seems right), it would probably be a better look to not characterize them. Leave it as "an incomplete set of PMs", rather than calling it "slanted" or saying things were "conveniently left out".

Of what was left out, maybe even stay away from describing it as "harsh backlash". I don't think we need to make these guys out to be the devil, and indeed if we try, I don't think we'll be successful.

It would suffice to make clear that with each of the three, there was extended discussion between them and an admin. The admin tried to advise them of some board standards of civility, and they balked. Showing no signs of cooperation, and indeed quite the opposite, they were banned.

Regarding "gay", I didn't know that it was a Seinfeld reference, but if I felt concerned about this -- and the banned members are full on attempting this "Eric the homophobe" thing -- that wouldn't be enough. I think what needs to be addressed head-on is you came off as having a VERY different view on gay people as you actually do, and you're deeply sorry for that because A) you don't feel any differently about them than anybody else, and B) you regret that anybody would feel uncomfortable at how you spoke. It would help to maybe say you expect more professionalism both from yourself, and the staff, in how we approach people to tell them about board rules.

The rest of the statement was earnest and lovely. Thank you Eric for taking the time to draft it up, for running it by us and allowing us to say our piece, and as always for your time and dedication to matters such as these. And AR as well, you must be just exhausted with all that's gone on lately. We are very lucky to have guys like you here taking care of business.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Very well said, zoogs. I, too, have serious concerns about continuing to volunteer my time as a Mod in light of the PM disclosure. We'll have to address this before moving forward, guys.

 
Question: Don't know the answer but does Facebook, police or an organization (PayPal, UPS) have to disclose when they view members/employees email, etc they take part in an investigation or wrongdoing or not?

 
Well, legally, I think I asked AR this a long time ago and his answer was the board would be in the clear to monitor at its discretion. It's about how trust between users and admins, though. Facebook has caught its share of uproar over privacy issues, but they are both much better equipped to handle a crisis, and a lot more indispensable to their users.

I think we'd find ourselves in rare company among message boards here, at least where it is known, and it wouldn't be hard for other Husker message boards to take the opportunity and proclaim much stronger stances on member privacy.

Regarding that suggestion specifically, Eric, maybe it doesn't need to be public policy (that would involve raising the PM issue, after all), but I do hope it becomes our policy. If we have to stick to this, it will form a pretty massive deterrent to any temptation to make use of the PM-reading ability. The only time anyone would be able to, would be the times where they know they have an airtight cause. (It seems to be always legally OK, so by that I mean, when/if it becomes known that the admins chose to do this, the justification would be publicly acceptable. E.g, if it had become a police matter, or we had received ISP notice, etc, just as hypotheticals. I don't know what reasons there actually might be, or have been)

Without that kind of built-in discouragement, I think that leaves too much room for doubt. If I have access to this, especially if it's known, I want people to be confident that I won't be able to misuse it without suffering consequences, rather than ask every member on the board to simply defer to my judgment. Few outside this team have any reason to place that amount of trust in me, nor should they.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I had no idea that you guys had the ability to read PM's until this whole situation went down. Having said that I've also never said anything in PM's that I'd find to be a problem throughout the board either. I agree with editing that part out and finding a different way to spin that. That WILL be taken wrong.............

 
Since I fail to comprehend the intricacies of the board and it's programming I've kinda taken a backseat to everyone. I know there are things I can do that most of you can't and my ego doesn't suffer in the least. That said, I do not have any qualms about how the admin run the board. If they can read the PM's everyone sends, so be it. I'm not too concerned about my privacy; since we really don't have any privacy if someone wants to hack the system, they will. I just take precautions that people recommend. I don't see how anyone can say they have absolute trust in using any type of communication in use today. Even if you encrypt your communiques; someone can decrypt them. I'm not really too paranoid about the subject I just feel that it's a part of life now.

If's a sports forum. Nobody should be making threats; exchanging nuclear codes and other vital info via the board
default_biggrin.png
Sorry, couldn't stay serious any longer.

I'm proud to be a part of this board and feel that it's far superior to other boards and think the admin/ mod team do a stellar job keeping the board running smoothly.

 
Did we modify phpbb to make admin's able to read PM's? It seems that by default, that functionality doesn't exist but you could extend the software to cover such functionality.

Just curious..

 
Did we modify phpbb to make admin's able to read PM's? It seems that by default, that functionality doesn't exist but you could extend the software to cover such functionality.

Just curious..
Woah, Dave, good to see you. We use Invision Power Board, not phpBB. I didn't know this before, but it looks like the "login as member" was built in to IPB 3.3.x and above. I don't know how long we've been above 3.3.x. We recently upgraded from 3.4.x to 3.4.6.

Here's a thread on it from the Invision community, including addressing some of these issues, as well as (scroll down to Pereira's post, some of the issues with it): http://community.invisionpower.com/topic/361284-log-in-as-some-members-threat-to-privacy/

Let me see if I understand, if we look at a PM we have to fully disclose to that person when, where, and why we did?
Eric, that's exactly what I am suggesting. In this way, an admin will never even attempt to look unless he is prepared to have the reasons be public knowledge. For example, "Dear Member A, we have received reports from Member B that you are sending him threats via the Personal Messenger system. Having confirmed this, we are banning your account."

 
Did we modify phpbb to make admin's able to read PM's? It seems that by default, that functionality doesn't exist but you could extend the software to cover such functionality.

Just curious..
Woah, Dave, good to see you. We use Invision Power Board, not phpBB. I didn't know this before, but it looks like the "login as member" was built in to IPB 3.3.x and above. I don't know how long we've been above 3.3.x. We recently upgraded from 3.4.x to 3.4.6.

Here's a thread on it from the Invision community, including addressing some of these issues, as well as (scroll down to Pereira's post, some of the issues with it): http://community.invisionpower.com/topic/361284-log-in-as-some-members-threat-to-privacy/
Duh, I knew that. Why did I have phpbb on my brain? Thanks man.

 
Back
Top