[11:00 AM]Dorktoast: Thanks. [11:01 AM]aismallard: (Asking here instead of in channel in case there's any sensitive information or things you don't want immediately exposed to the rest of staff) I'm not a fan of the hostile response from staff to your discussion about the policy issue, but other admins who saw the conversation would like to ask some questions, if that's okay. Can you clarify what you mean by "survey", as well as information about it (level of formality, where and how it was conducted, what the results are)? [11:07 AM]Dorktoast: So. I ran an informal survey after we had the staffcord discussion. It was an open-question survey with a couple of questions to gauge the responder's interaction with SCP media, and opinions on AI content with a goal of getting not only an overall 'temperature' from more than just the active-on-discord crowd, but the readers crowd. The survey was distributed quietly to avoid bandwagon responses. It was not posted in staffcord or SCPD. I did not post it under any of my personal accounts. I intentionally did not give it to the data analytics subteam because I have concerns about how they operate their surveys. Since it was not an official survey, and since it was research-focused, it was not even formally mentioned in the AI proposal. It showed that among readers, the AI issue is much less one-sided, particularly among people who identified as not spending time in the official discord or SCPD. [11:08 AM]Dorktoast: The survey's purpose was to get more opinions from people who are not on the most popular channels. it was not a poll and it was not a vote. it was research. [11:09 AM]Dorktoast: Additionally, I sent a modified version of the survey to non-SCP communities, particularly art communities. [11:10 AM]Dorktoast: It was a survey I was trying to run in a short amount of time, focusing on getting a normal distribution of responses without the attention of more vocal members of the community. [11:14 AM]aismallard: I see. When you were putting together this, what were you expecting in terms of responses? Can you provide some illustrative examples of the kinds of responses you received, and communities you floated this to? Regarding staff chat, what do you think would be appropriate to share regarding the research here and its applicability? I assume people will push for a high level of detail regarding the survey, specifically to dispute its results. [11:17 AM]Dorktoast: And I am not going to provide it. The responses themselves have the potential to be personally identifying, even if the fact it is a google form is not taken into account. [11:19 AM]aismallard: I am asking more for a selection of appropriately-censored responses to give a sense for what questions were asked and what a typical response looked like. This would be for the benefit for admins not staff as a whole unless you feel it would be productive to share it with them. [11:27 AM]Dorktoast: Sure. There were a couple questions for demographic/involvement in SCP media. Then the meat of the survey were four questions: 1. What is your opinion on programs that can generate images which emulate photography or other art without human oversight? 2. What difficulties could programs like the one mentioned in Question 1 present to content creators today? 3. What solutions would you propose to mitigate those difficulties? If the person identified as participating in SCP media, question 4 was: 4. If a program like the one mentioned in Question 1 was approved for generating images which could be included on the SCP wiki (assuming the result was compatible with the site license), what limitations do you think should be put on the output of the content? Otherwise, question 4 was: 4. If a program like the one mentioned in Question 1 was being considered for use in creating images to accompany text-based articles for a magazine, what limitations do you think should be put on the output of the content? [11:29 AM]Dorktoast: Is there anything else, officer, or can I go back to my thankless job [11:29 AM]aismallard: I'll port this to admins if that's okay [11:30 AM]Dorktoast: Sure, why not, let me know when the disc thread is up [11:31 AM]Dorktoast: Sorry for spending agonizing amounts of time trying to be thorough and impartial [11:31 AM]aismallard: If you feel like you need to take a break then I don't see any reason the staff chat conversation has to resume immediately after this [11:31 AM]Dorktoast: I love how when a stop is called, the same people just go to SCPD to continue to convo and toxically trash other staff [11:32 AM]Dorktoast: It is unhealthy and if this was a workplace it would be considered workplace harassment on any level [11:32 AM]Dorktoast: And staff literally go "they called a stop there but there's no stop here" [11:32 AM]aismallard: I wanted to get an understanding of what the survey actually was, and why it wasn't well known to other parts of staff, and I do understand what you described. Given this, what do you think we should explain about the research you did in staff chat? [11:32 AM]Dorktoast: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/819754286799912993/1075092270057017464/image.png [11:32 AM]aismallard: I wasn't aware of this, I've been looking between this DM and staffcord [11:33 AM]Dorktoast: I know it wasn't well known to other parts of staff. That was on purpose. [11:33 AM]aismallard: Yeah I understand that when you explained it [11:33 AM]Dorktoast: because some members of staff, particularly the ones running the "data analytics" subteam, have huge biases [11:33 AM]aismallard: But the rest of staff will want to understand why still, and are not primed to be very accepting from the start [11:34 AM]Dorktoast: I do data analytics IRl. The processes they have for surveys, and user info, and data analysis, is horrendous. [11:34 AM]Dorktoast: are not primed to be very accepting from the start That's not my fault. And you've been a part of this proposal situation too. [11:34 AM]Dorktoast: But I'm the one taking the heat. [11:37 AM]aismallard: Also to be clear, at this point I am not "holding" you here, but I wanted to talk and figure out an approach to bring back to staff chat to lessen the heat you've been getting over this [11:37 AM]aismallard: If you don't think this conversation is productive for that, I'm open to hearing what you think we should be doing now instead [11:42 AM]aismallard: To clarify my goal, I'd like to resume the conversation in staffcord, but taking this time to find something to shift it towards more productive discussion. [11:42 AM]Dorktoast: There isn't one. THis process—these years of process—have made me understand how toxic staff really is. But I have no power to fix it. [11:45 AM]Dorktoast: I can resume the conversation on discord, but I want to refer any and all "unfit to be captian" discussions to AHT. [11:45 AM]Dorktoast: Attacking someone because you disagree with their proposal is toxic shit.