Updated Forum Rules and Proposed Forum Changes
By
afocks,
Posted on: 2011-09-22 18:22 in News, Events and Announcement Discussion
Going to throw my own two cents on for keeping the ATs to separate forums. You identified what AT does what at character creation (a step I always skip), and that's good enough. What a Tank wants is different from a Brute, and what a Controller wants is different than a Dominator. The separation works and makes sense, because each AT does play different.
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
Merging the AT forums is an extremely bad idea. Please do not treat your populace like they are idiots that dont know how to look or find things.
The biggest thing COH has going for it is an extremely strong and helpful community of experience players who I have found over my seven year run more than willing to help people out and help them figure out what to do and make suggestion on how to do it.
Merging the AT forums will simply cause confusion and it is completely unnecessary.
The hard things I can do--- The impossible just take a little bit longer.
If numbers are so much more important than a teammate who is fun to play with, forget about the game altogether and go play with a calculator instead. -Claws and Effect-
Quote:
I like this format
|
Originally Posted by Seldom
Quick suggestions for a revised layout:
Game updates:
Game Design:
Help:
Archetypes & Gameplay:
Game System Discussions:
Culture:
Servers:
|
The hard things I can do--- The impossible just take a little bit longer.
If numbers are so much more important than a teammate who is fun to play with, forget about the game altogether and go play with a calculator instead. -Claws and Effect-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Texas Justice
You may want to read the current Message Forum Rules and Guidelines. The ones posted by theOcho in August 2010. That very same section about lobbying is in the existing rules. It's been in the forum rules for quite a long time. I believe it was in the rules back before we went to the vBulletin forums.
Much of what is in the proposed Updated Forum Rules is simply an update. A rewording or re-organization of the various points at times, but mostly just updating a tiny bit. If you look at the current version of the forum rules and compare it side-by-side with the proposed updates, you'll see that not much has changed. If you could go back and look at the previous forum rules as they were posted over the past several years, you'd find that there's not much new under the sun. As to whether the Updated Forum Rules will finally have consistent moderation, unlike what we have now and have pretty much always had, that is the real question. |
I agree with pretty well all of this.
I was not pointing out a difference. I was trying to highlight a potential issue but I realised that this is the first opportunity I've ever had to discuss the forum rules on the forum so I wanted to state my opinion.
I have personally fallen foul of inconsistent moderation and it seems to me that the basic policy seems to be "seat of pants/gut instinct" rather than consistency. Some moderators use a "broad brush" while others use a scalpel. This isn't a failure of individuals, but it does seem to be a failure of policy and a more consistent application of policy would be welcome
Thelonious Monk
Quote:
A few things.|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
A couple of things:
- Keep in mind, the above proposed forum changes are *just that* - Proposed. Nothing is set in stone and is part of the reason I brought this hear to discuss with the Community. - When proposing changes, keep two things in mind: 1. Less is better: The less you have to scroll down the page, the fewer forums there are, the simpler it's going to be for a new user/someone unfamiliar with the forums. 2. Less clicks is better: Creating more parent/child forums isn't the solution. Things need to be one click away (Web Design 101 IMO). 3. The purpose of improvement is to grow our forum Community and to make the experience better for everyone, overall. Thanks for keeping the discussion on track! -Z |
1.) Optimal web design is accessing anything within 3 clicks, not 1. Otherwise, you have a long, seemingly never-ending list of stuff to wade through, relying on message title to identify if it may be relevant.
2.) Categorization is important and the wealth of knowledge under each AT is immense (a credit to the development team's design and the communities work to assemble it).
3.) "Inactivity" in knowledge-based forums shouldn't necessarily be the driver for altering their organization and consolidating them. For fun, non-game related things like multi-media, sure. But being able to browse those knowledge-based forums to pick through information is huge, otherwise you create a situation where the same questions get asked again and again because they get lost on pages that get pushed back -- consolidation of some forums will exacerbate this.
Therefore, the organization of sub-forums for ATs and Servers should not be altered as their contents really are discrete to their topics and self-explanatory as far as finding them. Anything else is fair game.
@Texarkana
@Thexder
Quote:
Most people probably go to the English listing by default (or User CP favorited forum sections), but you also have to remember that the actual boards start at boards.cityofheroes.com so getting to the English listing is already 1 click. and getting to the post you want to read is another click. Which brings you to 3 clicks, the optimal web design.
|
Originally Posted by Texarkana
A few things.
1.) Optimal web design is accessing anything within 3 clicks, not 1. Otherwise, you have a long, seemingly never-ending list of stuff to wade through, relying on message title to identify if it may be relevant. |
Quote:
I thought the suggestions pointed more towards relocating/consolidating them not getting rid of them. Player Events and SG/VG recruiting should be under whatever server they're on while the Mac issues should be located under the Tech forums as its own Parent forum.
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
I've been taking some notes:
|
Quote:
This can lead to the "Internet Explorer Error 500" screen btw. ;-)
|
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike
You're talking to a guy who has his forum preferences set to 500 posts-per-page.
|
I should probably be quoting somebody to reference why I am typing this, but... oh well...
I just wanted to echo something that Zwill has said, about how the rules are outlined well, but there is discretion on their part in acting upon such things (or not acting, as it may be).
While I think he has said it (and will say it again, I'm sure) much better (and more carefully) than I just did...
I want to both commend Zwill and the team on maintaining such a reasonable approach and state that I very much believe that this is the right way to handle things.
This is a fun and good forum environment. A lot of the rules are common sense. And, yet, sometimes rules can easily be broken by very commonly appreciated acts of humor. You don't want to see rules being followed to a T when it means the removal of character from this place. So, don't judge the team too harshly when they don't cut down on each and every rule-infraction to the letter.
There's got to be a reasonable amount of give and take... Otherwise, this place would be a lot less fun.
It's not a lack of authority, either (they've got plenty and proven it).
It's just a simple, and important, human aspect and an intelligent understanding that not all situations are the same and each and every scenario and individual can be handled accordingly (when time and resources permit).
So, also don't worry that the rule states such and such won't be tolerated. I don't think they're going to be moderating me for posting an RP story about my villain stealing a car... Nor are they likely to stop any commonly occurring harmless rules-infractions without communicating such a change clearly (and I mean clear communication beforehand as in "No more talking about pancakes from now on! We mean it!").
Anyway... that's enough of a ramble from me on that irrelevant tangent...
On to another one!
Quote:
While this is all (more by means of me replying to it here) bordering on offtopicville, I really have to agree with what you've said and comment that I have observed this as well and it leaves me somewhat concerned for what the in-house thinking is regarding this false facade of presentation.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I always, by policy, read an entire thread before posting. Believe me, that rule was a pain for AASQ. However, I believe my post has relevancy because there's no guarantee they won't restructure the archetype forums, or at least revisit the question down the road. I think its important to note that even by Zwill's priorities, and also by general user interface principles, the *methodology* and therefore *mindset* that triggered the thought to merge them in a certain way is problematic. It would be problematic no matter where it was applied, elsewhere in the forums or elsewhere on Earth.
|
CoH's atypical approach to these game mechanics is one of its greatest strengths.
I honestly just hope that it is not 1) taken too far to the point that it does indeed create problems with new players' expectations and 2) taken farther into the development of this game to produce changes along those lines.
Anyway... I was glad to see your comments on this subject, because parts of my brain have been quietly having this very conversation for a while now.
@Zethustra
"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Quote:
And that is where the rules start to break down. One (wo)mans humor is twelve (wo)mens trolling. And thanks to the internet being nothing but bits, there really is no proving that a smiley at the end of an insult is to indicate true humor, or to get away with maliciousness.|
Originally Posted by Electric-Knight
There's got to be a reasonable amount of give and take... Otherwise, this place would be a lot less fun.
|
And with human nature as it is, people (in this case moderators) will always be more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to people they know (in this case forum regulars) as opposed to strangers.
So, at least with other forums I have been a part of, you get the rather wide disparity of "forum regular A" saying one thing, and "forum n00b B" getting reprimanded for saying virtually the same thing.
And that causes more trouble than it helps.
If, rules are going to be enforced at all, it has to be across the board for everyone. Even those you (the moderator) know "are just joking."
To do otherwise promotes elitism and resentment.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Electric-Knight
So, also don't worry that the rule states such and such won't be tolerated. I don't think they're going to be moderating me for posting an RP story about my villain stealing a car...
|
Using anything but your real name on the internet is illegal in the US thanks to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Damn near all of us (including Paragon staff) are committing potential felonies for using false identities. (Note: I'm not claiming this is a fair or reasonable law - or even ruling on said law, just pointing it out there. All it takes is one bored/desperate enough prosecutor to get it tried.)
So where can Paragon forum authorities draw the line?
"Poster A's" story is okay because we do not know if s/he lives outside of "state Z," but since we know "poster B" does live in "state Z," that one has to be removed?
Human nature being what it is...
If these rules are not leveled evenly across all users, it will not end well. (I've seen multi thousand user forums cut under half population due to "uneven" rulings getting people to quit.)
Quote:
Yet, this team (as well as past teams) have moderated this community thusly... And it is widely regarded as one of the best mmorpg forum communities in the realm of ever.|
Originally Posted by Morgan Reed
And that is where the rules start to break down. One (wo)mans humor is twelve (wo)mens trolling. And thanks to the internet being nothing but bits, there really is no proving that a smiley at the end of an insult is to indicate true humor, or to get away with maliciousness.
And with human nature as it is, people (in this case moderators) will always be more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to people they know (in this case forum regulars) as opposed to strangers. So, at least with other forums I have been a part of, you get the rather wide disparity of "forum regular A" saying one thing, and "forum n00b B" getting reprimanded for saying virtually the same thing. And that causes more trouble than it helps. If, rules are going to be enforced at all, it has to be across the board for everyone. Even those you (the moderator) know "are just joking." To do otherwise promotes elitism and resentment. And here, again, we have a form of discrepancy. In some US states, the very act of writing "disturbing" material (and I do not mean as defined by the desensitized internet regulars) is illegal. Kentucky case example. Using anything but your real name on the internet is illegal in the US thanks to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Damn near all of us (including Paragon staff) are committing potential felonies for using false identities. (Note: I'm not claiming this is a fair or reasonable law - or even ruling on said law, just pointing it out there. All it takes is one bored/desperate enough prosecutor to get it tried.) So where can Paragon forum authorities draw the line? "Poster A's" story is okay because we do not know if s/he lives outside of "state Z," but since we know "poster B" does live in "state Z," that one has to be removed? Human nature being what it is... If these rules are not leveled evenly across all users, it will not end well. (I've seen multi thousand user forums cut under half population due to "uneven" rulings getting people to quit.) |
While I understand where you're coming from, I do not subscribe to those standards of adhering to the extremist interpretation of the letter of rules.
Also... What I was referring to (and what Zwill better referred to) is not a matter of looking the other way for some people over others... (fact is, I think newcomers/strangers will get away with more than regular pains-in-the-whatsits around here... simply because people lose patience with them)...
It is a matter of stating bold rules so that they may act upon them if they see fit. Meanwhile... if there is no harm being committed, they do not feel the need to overreact.
Somewhat related to the current rule of "No talking about any other video games"... vs. "no dedicated discussions about other video games".
If I mention really enjoying online backgammon... Zwill doesn't feel the need to thwap me (not for that, at least)... But if I start a thread, that runs a league, that has several tournaments of us playing online backgammon against each other... Zwill and the team will make their judgment call and can nuke it.
It's simple.
If you want military rules and kindergarten treatment... This may not be the forum for you!
@Zethustra
"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Quote:
I hate it when people just make up stuff like this. There is no US law that makes it illegal to use pseudonyms, anonymous handles, or even fictional names and identities on the internet. The act in question above deals with unauthorized access to computer systems that lead to unauthorized access to protected government systems, certain classes of protection financial and other information, damage, and the furtherance of acts of fraud. It says nothing about anonymous access to the internet, nor does any other US law have any provision that could be interpreted in that way.
|
Originally Posted by Morgan Reed
Using anything but your real name on the internet is illegal in the US thanks to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Damn near all of us (including Paragon staff) are committing potential felonies for using false identities.
|
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
My point was that the potential issue you were pointing out has been in the rules for quite a while. |
Originally Posted by Scarlet Shocker
I agree with pretty well all of this.
I was not pointing out a difference. I was trying to highlight a potential issue but I realised that this is the first opportunity I've ever had to discuss the forum rules on the forum so I wanted to state my opinion. I have personally fallen foul of inconsistent moderation and it seems to me that the basic policy seems to be "seat of pants/gut instinct" rather than consistency. Some moderators use a "broad brush" while others use a scalpel. This isn't a failure of individuals, but it does seem to be a failure of policy and a more consistent application of policy would be welcome |
Also, as to the last paragraph, I think it is more a failure of individuals as well as policy. There is inconsistency in how the rules are enforced by the same individuals. That's been the heart of my arguments anytime there are proposed rule changes.
If the game spit out 20 dollar bills people would complain that they weren't sequentially numbered. If they were sequentially numbered people would complain that they weren't random enough.
Black Pebble is my new hero.
Quote:
20KB is very generous for avatar images, most come in under 10KB, yours is 4!|
Originally Posted by Father Xmas
First 20KB is a little small for an Avatar. It was fine for 80x80 but 100x100 needs a bit more for a uncompressed image. Say 40KB (100x100x4 bytes per pixel).
|
Uncompressed images are for print, not t'internet...
Personally I would ban animated .gifs.
Not just from this forum: outright ban them.
Another voice against merging AT Forums.
Any other merging or cutting would be appropriate, but leave the AT specific forums alone.
Quote:
I admit that it isn't as clear cut as, say, posters suggesting that player make a fake Facebook account (which, among other things, is even against Facebooks' Terms of Use) - which was allowed - to get in on a giveaway.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I hate it when people just make up stuff like this.
|
So hate all you want... Unless that is considered a personal attack, or trolling against me... Then you can't do that.
Quote:
It is perfectly clear cut. The law doesn't say that, period. Anyone who might think there is even a tiny chance that any reasonable person could interpret the law that way can stop worrying.
|
Originally Posted by Morgan Reed
I admit that it isn't as clear cut as, say, posters suggesting that player make a fake Facebook account (which, among other things, is even against Facebooks' Terms of Use) - which was allowed - to get in on a giveaway.
So hate all you want... Unless that is considered a personal attack, or trolling against me... Then you can't do that. |
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
Seriously: That law doesn't say what you think it says. By no possible interpretation does it say what you think it says. It is quite narrow in its scope.|
Originally Posted by Morgan Reed
I admit that it isn't as clear cut as, say, posters suggesting that player make a fake Facebook account (which, among other things, is even against Facebooks' Terms of Use) - which was allowed - to get in on a giveaway.
So hate all you want... Unless that is considered a personal attack, or trolling against me... Then you can't do that. |
Facebook's terms of service are not laws.
Cracked.com is not a good source for legal issues.
Comrade Smersh, KGB Special Section 8 50 Inv/Fire, Fire/Rad, BS/WP, SD/SS, AR/EM
Other 50s: Plant/Thorn, Bots/Traps, DB/SR, MA/Regen, Rad/Dark - All on Virtue.
-Don't just rebel, build a better world, comrade!
Someone has clearly been reading Cracked and taking it as fact rather than comedic hyperbole.
Also, The Onion is not a real newspaper.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sugar_Rush
20KB is very generous for avatar images, most come in under 10KB, yours is 4!
Uncompressed images are for print, not t'internet... Personally I would ban animated .gifs. Not just from this forum: outright ban them. |
Murphys Military Law
#23. Teamwork is essential; it gives the enemy other people to shoot at.
#46. If you can't remember, the Claymore is pointed towards you.
#54. Killing for peace is like screwing for virginity.
Side note: I am not a laywer, this is not legal advice, but: My lawyer has in the past advised me that, in my part of the US, there is no such thing as "your legal name", a unique thing which denotes you. A name you use which is not used to defraud people is legal. This is helpful for me since, for historical reasons, I have two different arrangements of names one of which many computer systems won't process. So some people know me by one name and some by another.
And in fact, no one who actually knows me except my mom ever calls me anything but "seebs". Spouse, lawyer, friends, coworkers... I'm just "seebs". This name is arguably more real than the one on the government ID.
Quote:
Yes, but are VIPs going to have to pay higher prices? I don't think you guys have been clear enough on this. |
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
I've been taking some notes:
|
. 
I heard from a friend who has a friend who knows this guy who has an uncle that once heard that this was all a ruse while they started locking the forums behind the new pay structure and that it was going to take 1600 paragon points to unlock access.
Quote:
Except I wasn't posting it as fact.|
Originally Posted by Smersh
Seriously: That law doesn't say what you think it says. By no possible interpretation does it say what you think it says. It is quite narrow in its scope.
|
I was pointing out that common sense and laws do not have to intersect, ever.
That all it takes is one forum viewer, with the right set of circumstances, to force NCSoft to make a ruling on things "that are outright silly," and that "were allowed in the past."
And that the belief that "small infractions will be overlooked" can end up being very naive.
Hell, considering Arcanaville has a reputation (deserved or not) of quoting posters to make them look foolish, opens the possibility of cyber bullying since she quoted me twice in this thread. (No, I won't be pressing charges.)
Just because "it would be silly," or "has been allowed before," isn't a refuge for people to ignore what the rules can be used for.
Nor is it unreasonable for posters to be concerned, and ask for more clear guidelines.
I agree with what appears to be the majority. I would prefer seperate AT folders. The categories are confusing and not particularly accurate or helpful.