Minimal

*wanders by and releases 2 dozen angry garden gnomes into the Rookery without entering himself.*

I found some hawt cat "girls" but they all had surprises hidden in their pants.

Screenshot + Bio + Character Name

Otherwise I automagically assume that you aren't supplying them because it's a blatant knock-off rather than being "inspired by" this cartoon character.

That doesn't excuse someone bugging you for an extended period, however. They should either ignore you and leave the team or shut up and move on after the initial comment.

I'm exercising the "This meme sucks option" and not playing much for the next few days because I genuinely dislike double XP weekend, so if I'm in game I'll be taking my ******* time and doing what I'd normally do... or logging in to dump a load of salvage when the prices hike.

Probably not going to be here long enough to think about SG/VG joining or such, but some of us have had steampunk creations walking about for quite awhile.

I run Steam Guardian, a 'steam powered soldier' created mostly as a publicity stunt during World War II.



A bit more about Steamy if anyone cares

I found Alan Pink through his TED talk about intrinsic motivation. The guy is a hell of a good speaker.

Yeah, 's me but I wouldn't necessarily say I'm back. I re-upped for a month because I needed something to do. I probably won't be around the forums much, but I saw you were back and figured I'd drop in to complain for a second.

Life is interesting around here. On the other hand, not having a job atm is shite. I hate not working.

I see your Enzyme Man and raise you Johnny Bunko, the world's first manga guide to business.

You lot have gone soft and flabby in my absence. I look in these forums and see some little snot whining that he was treated poorly for not only being unable to spell or type a complete sentence but using illegible colors.

In my day we'd have laughed at him and taunted mercilessly. The sympathizers and lightweights that showed up to support this kind of idiocy would have been herded into his detention camp with him and we'd have fired up the gorram showers!

Instead I see a bunch of boot-licking weak-willed apologists telling the little scab how they were wrong and asking please sir for his forgiveness. What happened to the Virtue spirit of drama? What happened to feeling life with your battle gonads (or ovaries) and taking no guff from the whining and the illiterate? Are things in that dire of straits that you feel the need to be nice to everyone to such a degree?

Is that a jelly donut in your footlocker boy?

Some of these incidents (in particular the two that cause me the greatest concern) would be easily recognizable without naming names and impossible to discuss in such a manner as to remain completely non-specific. Moreover, in the past leaving things completely non-specific has always gotten a response (possible legitimately) stating that the staff had no recollection of such an event. This makes discussing past events in a completely non-specific way less than ideal and in fact wholly useless for illustrative purposes.

I do understand why it would generally be preferable, but it is not always possible while retaining meaning.

One last attempt at clarity:

I'm apparently having a hard time expressing my concerns about the impartiality of moderation. Part of the cause of this is that bringing up examples of past actions involving staff which seemed to be wholly partial to one group or another even to explain why I was concerned would be a violation of the rules and cause for banning. Unfortunately, the concern itself would then be more properly taken up with board staff. In the past, I have attempted this with those who my concern regarded with little actual success or rational discussion in response. Unfortunately the stock reason given for this lack of response is that their time is limited. However, I receive multiple responses on the subject until I point out that none of these responses have actually addressed the initial question.

I have not, nor do I know of anyone who has, ever received other than a canned and non-specific response from the NCSoft support e-mail bandied about regularly as the next phase of having concerns addressed. The few times I have attempted to use it in fact I have often received responses that appeared to be in response to a completely different e-mail than the one I sent in given that they addressed a completely unrelated issue in as much as they addressed anything.

Can we bring up specific examples of past incidents in this discussion for purposes of illustrating our concerns?

No, I'm asking for an overriding bulletin of the nature of:


[ QUOTE ]
[b]This is a proprietary board and all rules are subject to interpretation by the moderation staff. Any and all posts may be removed or allowed by NCSoft and its staff.

The general guidelines governing most of these decisions are as follows:

[/ QUOTE ]

That note at the top of the rules clarifies the guideline, rather than rule based, structure of moderation and action on these forums. The current structure of putting that far down the list with no special highlighting creates a false impression that every other rule is equally important as that one.

Please do not attempt to add meaning to what I've written or what I want. I put the words I mean to be there and am happy to clarify when someone has a question about my meaning. Rarely do I need a mouthpiece to assemble my words for me.

I guess that our issue is that this list invalidates itself. As Koschej pointed out, all of these 'rules' are merely guidelines aside from #17. That is the only rule that is actually enforced. The rest of them may or may not be enforced based on the whims of that particular rule. No place in the rules is it mentioned that Pwnz is immune. No place in there is the fact that some forms of /signed are acceptable mentioned. No place in there is any form of actual rule structure really set forth aside from the 'proprietary rule' as Koschej called it.

Yet we are still presented with the impression that board rules are enforced equally and fairly, neither of which is so much as implied after Koschej's clarification of:

[ QUOTE ]
As for consistency, I will remind you once again that these are proprietary forums and we can allow or disallow any posts on these forums at our discretion. The other rules are the guidelines to be followed, the proprietary rule is the overall rule there.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's the actual governing rule of the forums and the others are overridden with out so much as a cursory thought whenever this fact is called into play then why continue attempting to make these rules? If these are meant to be guidelines then should not this overriding rule be the single most important thing on the page by appearance rather than being presented as simply another rule with less impact given to it thanks to its placement so far down the list?

Enforcement on this board has never felt truly impartial, and I've never suspected it actually was. The new clarifications essentially state that they were never intended to be. If this is the case could that fact be made more apparent instead of constantly justifying and re-justifying actions though knots of circular logic?

It all seems to, after reading this entire thread, boil down to that one singular rule which offers no true guidance for our actions aside from 'don't annoy the mods'. This is my concern and has been all along. If that's truly the case, then why not just call a spade a spade and say so?

Edited by poster after realizing he had made a joke in a serious thread and referenced past moderation all at once.

*dodges the banst-... errr... edits the post pre-emptively*

Anyway, got the answer I wanted to see someone finally give.

The other issue brought up that I thought was crucial:

Is Pwnz going away or are these rules going to start applying to Pwnz? Leaving an area that only thrives as a breeding ground for the activities you prohibit seems rather against the whole idea of refreshing the rule set.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First: Koschej, I've been trying to get anyone in a position of authority to just bluntly state that for awhile now. It's why I keep asking about policies and major respect for finally seeing someone just state it. I've always gotten prevarication and dodges instead every time before this that it came up. Since that's in a public post, can I quote it as my signature?


[/ QUOTE ]

This is actually stated by, I believe, rule 17 of the new rules. If you feel the need to quote it, I would request you quote that instead of what I have said in the discussion of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Placing it 17th on the list gives the false impression that the other rules are enforced impartially. Your statement had no such illusion. If that is the primary rule of the board then shouldn't it be first with a notation that this rule supersedes all other rules? That said, I'll just keep it for my own amusement instead of making it a signature since you responded so nicely. It still gives me more respect for you than most of the other responses I've seen (or had sidestepped) on the subject

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for consistency, I will remind you once again that these are proprietary forums and we can allow or disallow any posts on these forums at our discretion. The other rules are the guidelines to be followed, the proprietary rule is the overall rule there.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly the reason things got into the state they are/were in. This is also the reason why nobody around here has a clue what is ok to post on any given day.

Make some rules, stick to them, change them if needed but this moderation on a whim hasn't been working very well for a while now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two things.

First: Koschej, I've been trying to get anyone in a position of authority to just bluntly state that for awhile now. It's why I keep asking about policies and major respect for finally seeing someone just state it. I've always gotten prevarication and dodges instead every time before this that it came up. Since that's in a public post, can I quote it as my signature?

Second: DevilChilde is right. That hasn't worked so far. The community here has become more factional and antagonistic (Again, this is only my opinion) over the past couple of years along a pretty steady curve. Perhaps setting an overriding policy by which personal preferences and feelings play a completely valid role in deciding actions taken isn't the best way to go? Allowing personal discretion to be the overriding guideline is neither a way to appear impartial or fair. Everyone's judgment gets cloudy when something they feel proprietary about is threatened or insulted. Everyone has moments where, not even realizing it, they play favorites and perhaps take that extra stab at the 'troublemakers'. That's why you have rules instead of guidelines in the first place. From what you just stated, there are no hard and fast rules. I'm as likely to be hit because I said something that flipped someone's switch as I am because I did anything actually out of bounds of those guidelines. I'd say I've seen it happen more than once in fact.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At the same time others, usually being insulting and rude to forum posters concerned about changes or actions on the part of the NCSoft staff, specifically devs and moderators, have been allowed to make personally insulting remarks and profane statements blatantly against rules.

[/ QUOTE ]
Although I don't remember any community reps making "personally insulting remarks", I have seen one or two developers violate the rules. And they were moderated just like anyone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

See? This is why I need to make clarifications.

I have repeatedly in the past seen someone start a topic in a constructive manner bringing up a concern about a developer decision about the game.

I then watch someone insult the person who brought up the concern in a blatantly personal manner. Something along the lines of: [insert name] must be smoking the [substance]. He needs a tin-foil hate seeing conspiracies everywhere where does he get such a stupid idea .

Someone then posts after this second post, calling the second poster a troll or stating that they are being an apologist or something of this manner.

A flame war begins.

Now, in many cases not only the third, but all three of these posts are reported.

The third one is moderated. The second, containing a post breaking the 'personal attack' rule is left alone. This has happened repeatedly and rather often. I assume it is because moderators are told to use 'their own judgment' rather than being told to 'enforce the rules as stated'.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Quoting DevilChilde

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
10. Avoid using profanity.

Profanity in any form is discouraged. Using any means to bypass the profanity filter (for example: partial masking, such as asterisks or punctuation marks) is prohibited.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you clarify this more specifically? Is typing [censored] disallowed? Is there an actual "limit" to profanity? At times I tend to be slightly profane, but I never circumvent the filter and typically confine myself to hells and damns, or at most a [censored] or two.

(Sorry if this was already clarified, but I didn't see it...)

[/ QUOTE ]

Their moderation of posts using [censored] has been completely inconsistent up to this point.


If I do it, it's bad. If others do it, it is sometimes ok.

[/ QUOTE ]

While it usually doesn't hit me, this is exactly the sort of thing I was thinking about when I asked for a copy of the actual guidelines and rule restrictions used by the moderators for their duties.

Enforcement of policies in the past has always been inconsistent in many ways. Several people that I know, and myself a good while back, essentially seemed to be being tracked to the point of having their posts moderated with little or no provocation due to statements that some staff may have taken offense to previously. At the same time others, usually being insulting and rude to forum posters concerned about changes or actions on the part of the NCSoft staff, specifically devs and moderators, have been allowed to make personally insulting remarks and profane statements blatantly against rules.

DevilChilde and I certainly bare no love for each other I suspect, but I've seen the same thing he's implying when reading his posts. (Gender in this statement was not assumed. The English language defaults to the male pronoun.)

Note: QR used because the forum keeps telling me I have no right to post in this section of the forum

[/ QUOTE ]

Aww Mins, I love you. You're fun to play with! We may have had disagreements but nothing I take seriously.

Gender assumption was correct even if you didn't actually assume.

You and I see some of the same stuff and are on the same page about these things. There is no rhyme or reason to the moderation of a lot of things. When reported, by button and PM, nothing gets done. Even when a moderator has been to the thread and deleted posts of the exact same nature but left quotes and copies in the thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh, I don't dislike you. I just don't know you enough to like you.. My default for most people is not to like them until I have reason. The truth is, I don't much like people in general.

That said, I do see the exact same things you talk about. I got subjected to it awhile back and made it into a game for myself until that passed. Last time I was moderated I specifically replied with a question about the consistency of moderation. The response I got told me that I should make sure to report posts. In point of fact, I had reported the start of the chain I later got moderated for so I responded and clarified my question.

I got a read receipt but no actual response to the second one. This is not the first time. Of course, I've also managed to get partial answers to my concerns here without having the questions regarding consistency or guidelines used for moderation even addressed. though they were in the same area. I suppose without hard rules in company documents it becomes a judgment call whether or not to respond to our concerns regarding the new rule set itself. That's funny in a way.

[ QUOTE ]
Errr, but isn't that like saying we should cancel Thanksgiving because it makes it hard for the business travellers to use the airplanes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not much. Whether I can get on the plane or not I can still get Turkey and Cranberry sauce.

I suspect he/she is saying they'd rather have a 100% chance of playing the game normally with whatever character they choose than a 40% chance of playing for double experience.

That said, had a great weekend. I do believe they need to do something about the server setup because so many people had issues and I was in entire teams mid-TF when the entire team got kicked and couldn't get back in (we were all back in with less than 15 minutes effort on Virtue the several times this happened) and of course lag was worse than usual along with at least one entire zone crash that I got to take part in.

I still had fun though.

[ QUOTE ]

If it's a genuine agreement, it doesn't detract from the thread there is a good chance we are going to leave it alone. But if it looks like the behavior is prevalent, we may take steps. It all comes down to the constructive nature.

[/ QUOTE ]

So once again we're back to the whim of whoever happens to glance at the post? This is how we end up with inconsistency in moderation. Rules should, in my opinion, be rules rather than guidelines for when the moderation staff might do something if they decide to.

If I post a string of profanity there should be a list someplace stating which words are profane and cause for moderation. If I /signed a post then either that should be allowed or not allowed. I don't see a reason why it's impractical to draw a line in the proverbial sand and state "This is the line. Do not cross it." without having to resort to qualifications and personal judgments for many of these rules.