Community Notification Discussion!
By
Aura_Familia,
Posted on: 2007-10-05 16:59 in News, Events and Announcement Discussion
It's not so much championing Jranger as a folk hero as disagreeing with the overall approach to moderation that seems to be in evidence.
Vicious personal attacks go unnoticed, unmodded, and unpunished. Responding to suggestions you dislike with a simple "No," however, is now grounds for punishment -- even retroactively, it appears.
On the one hand, I don't want to tell the moderators how to do their job, because it's their job, not mine, and I'm sure it's a difficult, frustrating, and often thankless job. I don't want to denigrate the effort that they put into maintaining the forums, nor do I doubt for a second that whatever Ex Libris does is motivated entirely by a love of the game and of the community. (And I mean that in all sincerity.)
On the other hand, I've spent a pretty huge amount of time on the forums over the last couple years; I have no less of an interest in the health of the community than the moderation team, except insofar as I'm not actually emplyed by the forums. And if I see the community being directed in a direction that I consider harmful, even for the best of reasons, I feel like I owe it to myself and everyone else who spends time on the boards to say something about it. I will remain calm, I will remain courteous, but I will not remain silent.
If that means I'm somehow "banging on about teh ebil debs and censorship" and making baby Jesus cry, then so be it.
If that means I end up running afoul of the mod team and have to accept the consequences, then I can live with that, too.
It's not that 'a simple no is grounds' it's more 'just saying 'no' and not being a useful member of society and explaining WHY with atleast links to the fifty other threads about this stupid idea, or atleast adding 'the devs said no already' explantation.'
I really don't think it's too much to ask that people actually contribute.
@Shotgunbadger
Hero Main: Bright Arrow
Villian "Main": Jack the Scrapper
Proud Altoholic and Virtueite RPer
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are right, however, Ex has stated with the number of posts everyday they cannot search every single one. Therefore, until they CAN search every post for violations, let's give this a chance - shall we?
[/ QUOTE ]
I slept on this, but you know what? There's still one major, massive problemw ith the whole program:
It relies on counting up times a Moderator edits posts made by a given account. So ... if the Moderators never get around to editing (including outright deletion) of someone's posts ... they get a free pass.
Which makes it a LOTTERY OF DOOM: are you the unlucky person whose minor, not really important infractions get editted enough times to be Warned ... while the true, outright trolls go un-edited and un-deleted, thus getting a bonus "get out of jail free" card ...?
It's like playing Russian Roulette, with a permaban at risk rather than a bullet to the head!
Flawed execution of a flawed concept. This "tracking system" would only work properly if the moderation team responded - in a timely manner! - to each and every Notification, and took action every time it was within the rules to do so.
...
Anyone want to start a pool on who draws the Short Straw next?
[/ QUOTE ]
Apparently, you miss the point of any law enforcement situation in the whole world because they all operate on the principle of Dissuasion rather than punishment of every perpetrator. It's not that people don't do illegal things because they know they will be caught, they don't do illegal things because of the potential to be caught (of course, that's hopefully not the only reason).
As for "/no" posts being singled out, I think it should be obvious to anyone who thinks about the situation. It's not like we're running some kind of democracy here where you're voting on these issues; what we're doing is having a conversation and saying "no" is about as childish and argumentative as you can get. If someone said that to me in conversation I'd be baffled and annoyed. Meanwhile saying "yes" is not troll-like because it's not trying to start an argument. (Although I think you could hit the notify moderate button on those as well.)
Does this mean I have to stop telling people who post crash issues in tech support without suppling any system information to check their flux capacitor?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which makes it a LOTTERY OF DOOM: are you the unlucky person whose minor, not really important infractions get editted enough times to be Warned ... while the true, outright trolls go un-edited and un-deleted, thus getting a bonus "get out of jail free" card ...?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yet if you're not breaking the rules, you've got nothing to worry about. Know how worried I am about being banned? 0%. Because I understand the rules and I will abide by them, even if I don't 100% agree with them.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've gotten Moderator Edit notes in the past, because I quoted someone else, to respond to them civilly and politely ... but I missed that they used a three-letter abbreviation for a verboten string of words, buried in the middle of a wall-o-text. IOW, I didn't break the rules, I wasn't hypervigilant enough to catch the violation in the wall of text I quoted to reply to ... and now, that's another Edit on my oh-so-permanent record ... and I didn't even do anything wrong!
So don't rely on those edits being only for your own violations. Now, you really DO have to be your Brother's Keeper!
[ QUOTE ]
As for "/no" posts being singled out, I think it should be obvious to anyone who thinks about the situation. It's not like we're running some kind of democracy here where you're voting on these issues; what we're doing is having a conversation and saying "no" is about as childish and argumentative as you can get. If someone said that to me in conversation I'd be baffled and annoyed.
[/ QUOTE ]
That, however, is not a universally-held opinion. You cannot even (with a straight face) claim to know with any certitude that it is a majority opinion.
Here's an idea. Let's just wordfilter the word "no" to:
Your idea is bad. If you use the search function, you'll find out why.
This entire thing just feels like they're trying to secure the new players who are getting alienated by the vets who have heard their crappy and/or unlikely/impossible ideas 100 times before. Yeah, you're getting shot down, but if you took a look at the field, there are quite a few Anti-Aircraft guns that should have taken into account before you started barrel-rolling.
If people would actually read the suggestion board stickies, this wouldn't be an issue.
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, you're getting shot down, but if you took a look at the field, there are quite a few Anti-Aircraft guns that should have taken into account before you started barrel-rolling.
[/ QUOTE ]
Heh. Heheh. Bwahahahaha!
Aaah, that cracks me up.
Pax has a 271-word version of /no somewhere that I'm too lazy to look up at the moment, but that will, I suspect, be getting quite a bit of use in the future.
Nah, only 270 words. And six sentences. ^_^
I'm planning to tweak it a bit, though. Maybe aim for 300 words.
EDIT: made it to 376 words before reaching, I think, the "stretch limit" for the format selected.
[ QUOTE ]
So don't rely on those edits being only for your own violations. Now, you really DO have to be your Brother's Keeper!
[/ QUOTE ]
You're being asked to be responsible for your own posts -- and that post does include anything you may be quoting. If someone uses a slur or profanity or an insult and I quote it without edit, I'm guilty of propagating the offending element. It's my post and therefore my responsibility lies for everything in it. You might just need to divert some of your italics/bolding time to proof reading any quotes. 
Frankly, I don't see people being held a better standard regarding quotes as being a bad thing. Maybe it will cause a decline in the lazy people who quote 7 paragraphs to respond with 3 words, or the endless, needless quote pyramids.
Kid Lazarus, 50 empath Defender
Freek, 50 mind/psi Dominator
Black Khopesh, 43 db/wp Scrapper
Circuit-Boy, 40 elec Brute
Graf von Eisenfaust, 38 db/wp Brute
Blue Banshee, 35 sonic Blaster
Blood Countess, 33 mind/storm Controller
Dr. Radon, 32 rad Corruptor
Phantom Pirate, 32 db/wp Stalker
So ... you advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia towards your fellow posters? You advocate a climate in which we must suspiciously eye every single word or letter posted by someone to whom we wish to respond, on the merest off chance that they might have slipped up?
...
That's not a community.
[ QUOTE ]
So ... you advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia towards your fellow posters? You advocate a climate in which we must suspiciously eye every single word or letter posted by someone to whom we wish to respond, on the merest off chance that they might have slipped up?
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you always so overly dramatic about everything? Sheesh, it must be exhausting.
"Suspicion and paranoia?" You have to make sure you're not directly quoting something that's offensive or a violation of the rules, not ensure your fellow forumites aren't plotting your death.
And all of this is, at this point, purely your conjecture. I have yet to see any official word that you can be punished or even held accountable for quoting something.
Kid Lazarus, 50 empath Defender
Freek, 50 mind/psi Dominator
Black Khopesh, 43 db/wp Scrapper
Circuit-Boy, 40 elec Brute
Graf von Eisenfaust, 38 db/wp Brute
Blue Banshee, 35 sonic Blaster
Blood Countess, 33 mind/storm Controller
Dr. Radon, 32 rad Corruptor
Phantom Pirate, 32 db/wp Stalker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you're goin to disagree with the premise, you have to provide the reasons because they have not already been presented. Simply posting "No" doesn't do that.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think I'm just gonna start posting, "I do not like this idea" That should get the point accross. [censored] whiners. I don't owe you, or anybody else and explanation for anything.
[/ QUOTE ]
Same here, I dont owe any of those whiny little feces factories a damned thing. Besides, some of the dummies who post a suggestion wouldnt accept any kind of disagreement, no matter how well thought out, because they cant accept they are wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So ... you advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia towards your fellow posters? You advocate a climate in which we must suspiciously eye every single word or letter posted by someone to whom we wish to respond, on the merest off chance that they might have slipped up?
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you always so overly dramatic about everything? Sheesh, it must be exhausting.
"Suspicion and paranoia?" You have to make sure you're not directly quoting something that's offensive or a violation of the rules, not ensure your fellow forumites aren't plotting your death.
And all of this is, at this point, purely your conjecture. I have yet to see any official word that you can be punished or even held accountable for quoting something.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, if it's basically automatic and they just base it off of how many time you've been edited during whatever time period, then it sounds like you would get nailed, even if the reason for the modding is a portion of a long quote that you somehow overlooked.
I would hope that this new system is just a first pass, and that once they have their five names on the watch list, that they go and actually examine the nature of the violations which required their editing. For example, if someone got edited once for posting links to some hate group, and someone else got edited five times for basically harmless fluff posts, I would hope that the priority is on dealing with the first poster.
It's not obvious from the Notification that this is what would happen. In either case, some red name clarification would be welcome.
Censorship in any form is wrong, but i dont make the rules here do i? Oh and you can get unbanned, just make a phone call to customer service. Now if the Mods are tired of hoping from the beta forum to lives forum, well thats tuff...it's there job. They should do there job without needing ny help from the playerbase, but im also tired of testing for them, thats there job also. Sorry just a rant. And my own opinion.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So ... you advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia towards your fellow posters? You advocate a climate in which we must suspiciously eye every single word or letter posted by someone to whom we wish to respond, on the merest off chance that they might have slipped up?
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you always so overly dramatic about everything? Sheesh, it must be exhausting.
"Suspicion and paranoia?" You have to make sure you're not directly quoting something that's offensive or a violation of the rules, not ensure your fellow forumites aren't plotting your death.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which means a fine-toothed comb for those "wall of text" quotes, because it was a three-letter-acronym that got editted out. And regardless, I got tagged, because I was insufficiently vigilant about someone else's post.
I am not my brother's keeper. Cryptic and NCSoft don't pay me enough to be.
[ QUOTE ]
And all of this is, at this point, purely your conjecture. I have yet to see any official word that you can be punished or even held accountable for quoting something.
[/ QUOTE ]
I. Got. A. NOTICE. For. That.
And my post was editted. Furthermore, as it was explained to me by Ex Libris herself:
"These are based on edits which are performed by our moderation team, each time a post has to be edited it is tracked, the violation is the inability to post on a regular basis without the need of editing. "
So yes, Virginia, any edit meets the criteria.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nonetheless, despite all the strife the issue of "if /no is disallowed, then /yes shoudl be too" ... Ex elected to ONLY single out the negative half of that particular pairing.
[/ QUOTE ]
negative (adj.) 1. Containing, expressing, or implying a denial or refusal; that says "no" [a negative reply] 2. Opposite to something regarded as positive; specif., a) lacking in positive character or quality; lacking evidence, affirmation, etc.; having the effect of diminishing, depriving, or denying [a negative personality] (Webster's New World College Dictionary Third Edition)
The key word being negative. You can disagree all you want, doesn't have to mean being negative. That is what all of this is about. The negativity in these forums is off the chart. This is supposed to be a place where discussion rules, not /jranger or /no answers. If you stop and think about it, you have to admit that it has gotten way out of hand lately and this is a step in the right direction. The community needs to come together and start helping each other instead of trying to insult each other. We can all help by being less "negative". That is all. 
[/ QUOTE ]
I find what you have writen here to be PC BS. I am not attacking you but what you have writen.
I feel i had every right to state my opinion here about what you have writen, which is pure politically correctness [censored].
No harms meant.
I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire
[ QUOTE ]
Which means a fine-toothed comb for those "wall of text" quotes, because it was a three-letter-acronym that got editted out. And regardless, I got tagged, because I was insufficiently vigilant about someone else's post.
I am not my brother's keeper. Cryptic and NCSoft don't pay me enough to be.
[/ QUOTE ]
No one is asking you to be your brother's keeper. It's your post, and you're responsible for everything in it. Can't comb through those "wall of text" quotes? Then don't quote a wall of text; it's a terrible habit anyway. I know you're determined to turn these ant hills into mountains, but most of these problems you're having are of your own creation. The new rules are not that difficult to adapt to. If you're so inflexible that you can't, then that's on you.
Kid Lazarus, 50 empath Defender
Freek, 50 mind/psi Dominator
Black Khopesh, 43 db/wp Scrapper
Circuit-Boy, 40 elec Brute
Graf von Eisenfaust, 38 db/wp Brute
Blue Banshee, 35 sonic Blaster
Blood Countess, 33 mind/storm Controller
Dr. Radon, 32 rad Corruptor
Phantom Pirate, 32 db/wp Stalker
So yes, you do advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia directed at one's fellow posters, because you do think one should have to go through any possible quotes with aforementioned fine-toothed comb.
Thank you for confirming that sad fact.
[ QUOTE ]
So yes, you do advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia directed at one's fellow posters, because you do think one should have to go through any possible quotes with aforementioned fine-toothed comb.
Thank you for confirming that sad fact.
[/ QUOTE ]
I advocate being responsible for what is in your post when you hit the submit button. That you need to turn that into yet another overly dramatic crusade is indeed sad.
Kid Lazarus, 50 empath Defender
Freek, 50 mind/psi Dominator
Black Khopesh, 43 db/wp Scrapper
Circuit-Boy, 40 elec Brute
Graf von Eisenfaust, 38 db/wp Brute
Blue Banshee, 35 sonic Blaster
Blood Countess, 33 mind/storm Controller
Dr. Radon, 32 rad Corruptor
Phantom Pirate, 32 db/wp Stalker
Whereas I advocate being responsible only for what I actually write. Once again, I am not my brother's keeper. Nor do I wish to be.
<QR>
Something else that's been bothering me about this that I think I've now figured out how to put into words.
There's a pretty consistent trend among some posters to consider any criticism of their idea to be "trolling." Any negative feedback, according to these individuals, is by definition unconstructive and should be disallowed.
I know that Ex doesn't agree with this position. Bit I worry that this new policy will lend support to those that do subscribe to that position, especially given that very few people will likely be reported for posting "/signed," whether that's technically within the rules or no.
The question that arises is how much detail one has to give in a negative response before it becomes "constructive feedback." "No" is now considered "unconstructive." How about "I'm afraid I don't agree with that idea, for reasons that I can't quite put into words right now?" How about "/unsigned, for the reasons given above?" How about "/unsigned, for the reasons given above, particularly X, Y, and Z?"
I very rarely post outright rejection of a suggestion. But I will now be less likely to respond to an idea that I don't like, because there's a non-trivial possibility that one of the "Don't say \no!" crowd will report it, and the acceptability of my response will at that point be left to the discretion of the moderator. Frankly, at this point, I don't have that much faith in their judgment, so it's easier and safer just not to respond unless I like an idea.
I doubt I will be the only person to have this response; therefore, the free flow of legitimate discussion is impeded by this new policy.
Posting "No" or "/unsigned" might not be the most constructive feedback possible. But disallowing this feedback has the unfortunate side effect of inhibiting other, more desirable discussion. Even if one were to concede that one-word responses are "wrong" -- and I don't -- it's pretty clearly a situation where the cure is worse than the disease.
Sometimes it's okay for something to be "wrong" without making it against the rules.
[ QUOTE ]
We have improved our moderation tracking process to track the most commonly edited and “problematic” posters.
[/ QUOTE ]
Uh-oh... *Hides*
Virtue Server
Avatar art by Daggerpoint
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what does /jranger stand for anyways? I never understood that one.
[/ QUOTE ]
JRanger would reply to every thread he disagreed with:
[ QUOTE ]
no
[/ QUOTE ]
He was then banned. /jranger is now used in memory of his permeating dissent.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh wow, he got banned? I was wondering when that would happen... Although I really don't like that people are trying to "immortalize" his inane nonsense.
Virtue Server
Avatar art by Daggerpoint
This thread is rich. Not only are people banging on about teh ebil debs and censorship, some are actually championing JRanger as...what, a folk hero? Jesus wept.
Good luck Ex, you'll need it.
I do agree that when someone hits the "Notify Mod" button, that should be acted on sooner rather than later. Yes, I've no doubt there are those who hit it all the time, and you know, I'm pretty sure the mods know who they are.