ToS update regarding Staff colours

[Ammy]

9 minutes ago, Janus DarkFox said:

The Declass Backlog, though Policy discussions are prioritised, Declass takes time, knowing personally that as a former DT.

I know that it takes time, but wouldn't it be possible to delay this type of amendment to the ToS by a few days, or however long it takes to declassify, before the ToS is amended? That way the amendment happens at the same time as related discussions are declassified. I understand why staff may want to get amendments out as soon as possible rather than delaying them, but if something's been happening for a while and it's starting to become a problem, a few more days may not hurt all that much in the grand scheme of things.

 

(That being said I understand that certain subjects are incredibly serious, and that for certain things, delaying really wouldn't be an option, and it has to change ASAP. For something like this though, it seems minor enough that it probably wouldn't hurt to delay it a bit.)

[Ammy]

Also @Kimmie. if my posts made you feel bad about yourself, that wasn't my intention and I'm sorry. I'm just hoping to clear things up and help people feel better about things.

 

And yeah, I'm not a part of staff I know, so I can't pretend to know what staff's intentions are, but if my interpretations of the rule were incorrect, that would indicate it may need to be edited for clarification.

[Lord Jade Cross]

1 hour ago, CBC said:

This makes me feel like crying, just looking at it. 😂

 

I've long wished that coloured posts weren't an option other than for staff, haha. I find them irritating to look at/read and I prefer uniformity.

*waits in colour*

[Skycaptain]

The significant point is "bold". Official staff communications in thread are always bolded to make them stand out. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Jade Cross said:

*waits in colour*

*waits in black, the true edgelord color*

 

[Guest]

Is bold white text allowed in posts?

[Qutenkuddly]

Basically, if it's a shade of colour that could easily be mistaken for the official one, it shouldn't be used. It's kind of an unwritten AVEN rule that we finally wrote down.

[Philip027]

rofl

 

might as well just take out the color feature for non-mods then.

 

Dunno why you guys can't just pick one.

 

Quote

This is a viable

Or this

Or that

This too , ow my eyes, this is better

Pastel pink is always cute too

Aside from the yellows which shouldn't be used by anyone against a white background anyway, all of them look similar to the colors we're told we can't use.

[daveb]

2 hours ago, Philip027 said:

all of them look similar to the colors we're told we can't use

Not to me.

(even with my minor partial color vision anomalies)

 

2 hours ago, Philip027 said:

might as well just take out the color feature for non-mods then.

Not sure if that is technically possible with the forum software.

[Philip027]

Since you're not able to see it, I'll lay it out explicitly -- first one looks very similar to the "Webmaster" color, second one looks almost exactly the same as the "Administrator" color, third one is similar to the "Project Team" color, and the fifth one is almost exactly the same as the PT color.

 

It would be one thing if you just took up the color of green or something (in line with the "greenie" posts used by mods) and said nobody can use any remotely green colors in their posts, but five of them?  Three of which are the extremely standard colors of RGB, which every other color takes some degree of influence from?

 

At this point you might as well just say nobody is allowed to use anything except the default black, despite the feature being inexplicably present.

[Skycaptain]

This is me speaking as an individual staff member, not on behalf of the whole staff here. Having read the comments everyone has made here, I have raised your concerns that this is limiting the availability of colours for the membership at large to use. 

[Ashmedai]

8 hours ago, Philip027 said:

rofl

 

might as well just take out the color feature for non-mods then.

 

Dunno why you guys can't just pick one.

 

Aside from the yellows which shouldn't be used by anyone against a white background anyway, all of them look similar to the colors we're told we can't use.

None of those are remotely similar

[Philip027]

Quote

None of those are remotely similar

They definitely are, I already explained how in my previous post, and this thread has already shown I'm not the only one to think that way, so:

 

Basically what I'm getting from this is that it's a total crapshoot as to whether or not a color is too "similar" enough to another to be allowed, and you're pretty much rolling the dice if you decide to use one.  Got it.

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, Skycaptain said:

This is me speaking as an individual staff member, not on behalf of the whole staff here. Having read the comments everyone has made here, I have raised your concerns that this is limiting the availability of colours for the membership at large to use. 

To be honest, I don't understand the insistence on members not typing in colour similar to admods because no one uses bold that I know of (which mods do), and actual admod posts always come with a signature like the mods name and the forum they moderate. In all my time here, I've never seen anyone mistake, say @Jade Cross for declass team, and my green (which I can only use on comp and I'm almost never on AVEN on my comp sadly) has never been mistaken for a mod message

[Guest]

On 9/29/2020 at 8:22 AM, Skycaptain said:

The significant point is "bold". Official staff communications in thread are always bolded to make them stand out. 

Yes so why not just say "members are not to type in bold while using colours similar to mod colours" ..most members don't type in bold anyway so there's no issue!

[Skycaptain]

 

 

I've started a thread for us to discuss this in site comments, rather than having a debate in the Announcements forum, Skycaptain moderator PPS 

 

 

[Catserole]

I don't really understand why you feel you need 5 staff colours. 

[Janus the Fox]

The point of this is that using these colours are reserved, reserved in a sense that specific staff groups need to use them to distinguish their functions for their respective voted in tasks.  The examples given are the formal colours used in code, what I interpret something similar is a hexadecimal code that’s similar and very much still would look like that reserved colour.  There are 256 different shades of Red, Green and Blue, some of these shades are going to look exactly the same and everybody will have a difference in colour perception and the screen and environment a member is in will change that colour perception.  This tries to cover members with the full range of colour blindness.

 

This don’t change very much, it’s been a rule for years for staff, first now written down in the terms of service.  As a common rule, to me, not as the team but interpret and expect in my Forums, I’d say, don’t colour posts in these reserved colours and bold it, don’t sign the post and don’t put a job title in there, sarcastic or not under that signed name.  That’s a lot of steps and not easy to accidentally do or something that’s gets bugged.  Anybody can still colour posts in different colours, just not in bold and there’s still W3C standards to take like the colour must be readable, W3C Standards governs website colours for perhaps 20-30 years.

[Qutenkuddly]

On 9/30/2020 at 3:27 AM, PanFicto. said:

Yes so why not just say "members are not to type in bold while using colours similar to mod colours" ..most members don't type in bold anyway so there's no issue!

On rereading the announcement, I can see where the bit about bold can be missed. I'll take that back to the team. 

 

Also, rereading some of the debate, I'm reminded that everyone's level of colour perception differs. My ability to discern subtle differences in colour is rather crazy, but others may be a lot more limited in their colour perception and a group of shades that are obviously different to me may register as all the same colour for others.

 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Qutenkuddly said:

On rereading the announcement, I can see where the bit about bold can be missed. I'll take that back to the team. 

 

Also, rereading some of the debate, I'm reminded that everyone's level of colour perception differs. My ability to discern subtle differences in colour is rather crazy, but others may be a lot more limited in their colour perception and a group of shades that are obviously different to me may register as all the same colour for others.

 

My teal was always fine though until a week ago, same with Jade's orange. So this isn't a rule which has always been in place as admods seem to be claiming. And virtually no one here (other than admods) writes in bold.

[Divide By Zero]

Not being able to use green is somewhat of a concern because it's the colour for aromanticism. On occasion I have used green text for referring to aro stuff, although I don't think I've ever put an entire post in green.

[Guest]

On 10/3/2020 at 3:08 PM, HairyFace said:

Not being able to use green is somewhat of a concern because it's the colour for aromanticism. On occasion I have used green text for referring to aro stuff, although I don't think I've ever put an entire post in green.

Well apparently I'm now being told that it's only bold text we can't use and the actual colour doesnt matter, as long as it's not bold.

 

@Qutenkuddly if that's the case, shouldn't this entire update have just stated "please do not write all in bold in any colour" which would have saved a lot of confusion? (And very few people, if any here, actually write in all bold anyway so it wouldn't even have made anyone feel slightly put-out if it was just the fact that all-bold comments are not allowed by the general membership)

[Guest]

On 9/29/2020 at 7:36 AM, Jade Cross said:

*waits in colour*

On 9/29/2020 at 8:22 AM, Skycaptain said:

The significant point is "bold". Official staff communications in thread are always bolded to make them stand out. 

 

On 9/29/2020 at 4:59 PM, Qutenkuddly said:

Basically, if it's a shade of colour that could easily be mistaken for the official one, it shouldn't be used. It's kind of an unwritten AVEN rule that we finally wrote down.

 

@Skycaptain and @Qutenkuddly it seems one of you are saying only bolded fonts are not allowed regardless of colour (which is fine), and the other is saying any font that could be mistaken for a staff colour is not allowed regardless of whether or not it's bold which is a bit restrictive for people who like to type in colour. Which is accurate?

[WünderBâhr]

On 9/30/2020 at 2:39 AM, Skycaptain said:

 

 

I've started a thread for us to discuss this in site comments, rather than having a debate in the Announcements forum, Skycaptain moderator PPS 

 

 

Methinks if it's an announcement, perhaps the discussion should be split into said thread and this thread locked, if it is to remain static info?

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, GreyinWonderland said:

Methinks if it's an announcement, perhaps the discussion should be split into said thread and this thread locked, if it is to remain static info?

But answers aren't forthcoming in either thread, and what I'm asking is literally regarding the ToS update itself. I'm not bringing up some random point to try to debate (which is technically what the other thread is for), I'm seeking clarification about the actual ToS clause itself; is it posts that are entirely bold font of any colour that are not allowed, or all font similar in colour to staff colour regardless of whether or not it's bold. Two staff members have given two different answers so I'm currently seeking clarification.

[WünderBâhr]

11 minutes ago, PanFicto. said:

...

is it posts that are entirely bold font of any colour that are not allowed, or all font similar in colour to staff colour regardless of whether or not it's bold. Two staff members have given two different answers so I'm currently seeking clarification.

Good questions. I have used colored font, before without the bold to lessen the impact as ppl scroll. I could see that being used with staff colors, by staff, for gentle reminders rather than "Abort! Abort!" posts for ppl to calm down or take some time away from heated topics. 

 

This clarification should probably be posted with a consensus of staff, and not one staff member's personal choice/habits. Maybe as (suggestion) an update to the OP? 

[Qutenkuddly]

4 hours ago, PanFicto. said:

Qutenkuddly if that's the case, shouldn't this entire update have just stated "please do not write all in bold in any colour" which would have saved a lot of confusion? (And very few people, if any here, actually write in all bold anyway so it wouldn't even have made anyone feel slightly put-out if it was just the fact that all-bold comments are not allowed by the general membership)

 

On 10/2/2020 at 2:28 AM, Qutenkuddly said:

On rereading the announcement, I can see where the bit about bold can be missed. I'll take that back to the team. 

 

[Guest]

On 10/5/2020 at 5:57 PM, Qutenkuddly said:

On 10/5/2020 at 5:57 PM, Qutenkuddly said:

On rereading the announcement, I can see where the bit about bold can be missed. I'll take that back to the team. 

 

Lol I feel maybe there's a language barrier or something. I didn't miss the part about the bold, I'm asking for clarification if it means ONLY bold colours are not acceptable. Because as I stated, apparently my teal font was an issue despite it not being bold (though the admin who mentioned it won't clarify one way or another).

 

If what you mean is; "We aren't exactly sure whether we meant only bold font, or if we meant all colours similar to staff colours regardless whether they are bold or not, and so are discussing this so we can decide exactly what we meant" then that's all good. But yeah different staff members are giving different responses and I think all anyone still following this thread (maybe only me at this point, lol) wants is a little transparency, or well, an answer. 

 

If you literally mean "only posts made in bold font that is similar to staff colours are not allowed" then that's all that need be said. It's not that I missed that part in the ToS update, I see it there. I'm just seeking clarification. 

[Kimmie.]

@PanFicto. It seems like it not clear based on this

 

[Guest]

We can’t give an answer until it’s finished being discussed. We’ve said we’re discussing it.