271 replies to this topic

[Opus]

I come for popcorn and diet coke...


And to Watch Niko dance around the forums; It is quite entertaining..

I think Niko has redacted me enough that I don't give a crap anymore

[nonnex]

I think they would overthink the one or other point, especially the 3rd parity thing, as I have understood its a draft and suposed to be discussed, what is good. In general I like what I have read.

Edited by nonnex, 07 September 2014 - 10:44 AM.

[Decoy3]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 07 September 2014 - 12:53 AM, said:

This would all be well and good were it not for the fact that we have observed these same individuals openly mocking us and our players in third-party channels.

So now people can get banned for the stuff they say on Reddit?

[BLOOD WOLF]

DV McKenna, on 07 September 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

I think that's the point, i think Niko's idea is to withdraw from other sites like reddit and twitter like they have been relying on and getting everything put down here, in their domain, the place that they control.

Negative criticism won't be accepted.

How far does negative criticism go? How about having constructive negative criticism.

The kind of discussion that allows for disapproval that doesn't degenerate, is something that is lacking here on these forums.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 07 September 2014 - 10:40 AM.

[Knight_Invictus]

I'm so very tired of the trolls here in the MWO Forums and on Facebook etc etc. It's tedious and unproductive.

If criticism is constructive and given in a respectable manner I have no problem with it. However, if the criticism is just rude, disrespectful and or sarcastic it needs to stop. If bans are the only way to stop it, then do so without regret.

Thanks Niko!!!

[Oderint dum Metuant]

BLOOD WOLF, on 07 September 2014 - 10:38 AM, said:

How far does negative criticism go? How about having constructive negative criticism.

The kind of discussion that allows for disapproval that doesn't degenerate, is something that is lacking here on these forums.

If someone says i don't like your game, or i don't like the way PGI operate, they are totally within their rights to make that statement.
Just because you don't agree with it, does not mean they should be banned.

Now if someone sat here and said xyz dev is a C**T that's totally different.

[Novakaine]

Wow.

[Odins Fist]

DV McKenna, on 07 September 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

If someone says i don't like your game, or i don't like the way PGI operate, they are totally within their rights to make that statement.
Just because you don't agree with it, does not mean they should be banned.

I agree, where I live people have the right to speak their mind, BUT this is the internet, and more importantly this is PGI's website and forum.

I completely understand the need to weed out UNDESIRABLES, I have been doing that ALL of my adult life.... It makes sense to do, especially from a business standpoint.

However if any entity that does NOT have complete control over every aspect of it's community's lives, and then they try any sort of Stalinesque tactics in terms of limiting speech, then expect some sort of response from said Community.

Yeah it's a balance you can't keep everyone happy all of the time..

BUT, if you go to far then you get this..

[nonnex]

Quote

If someone says i don't like your game, or i don't like the way PGI operate, they are totally within their rights to make that statement.
Just because you don't agree with it, does not mean they should be banned.

Now if someone sat here and said xyz dev is a C**T that's totally different.

Aye, the internet is not a legal black hole. If someone do something (where ever) which contravenes legal rights thats one thing and a householder should have the right to hoof out such people to protect him self.

But if this should be an attempt to "control" the public mind... Nope, does not work.

Edited by nonnex, 07 September 2014 - 11:16 AM.

[Mawai]

Your description of the moderation plan seems fine. The main issue with moderation is deciding what is considered acceptable. Much of the material you mention is extremely clear ... threats, discrimination, vulgarity, personal attacks and insults ... these are all relatively easy to identify.

The difficulty lies in the gray areas ... "trolling" for example. Some people feel very strongly about this game and the IP associated with it and may strongly disagree with some or all of the design and development decisions taken by PGI. There are many hot button issues ... game balance, mech balance, weapon balance, pay to win, ECM, LRMs, slow pace of development, CW, new maps, focus on sellable content rather than content that improves the gameplay experience ... just to name a few. How and what to moderate (if anything) regarding these topics and others is where the challenge will lie. Some of these topics will refer to specific developers or designers since it is known that these people have the final responsibility for these decisions within PGI no matter how many others may contribute (e.g. as far as we know Paul has the final say on the weapon balance numbers).

Many forum threads may be influenced by players with negative feelings posting justifiable feedback ... do these folks get moderated or censored?

Anyway ... you asked one specific question that I will supply my suggested answer to:

"Without naming individuals or citing cases; If you could offer a simple, polite and constructive suggestion to the staff and/or volunteer moderation team, what would it be?"

COMMUNICATE. PGI has improved their communications skills from 2013 (when they were truly bad) but they are far from there yet. Players want to know not just what is changing but why since in many cases the changes may make no real sense from a player perspective ... and yet these changes implicitly impact the gameplay experiences of every player. It takes maybe 10 to 15 minutes to write up a paragraph covering why some of the decisions were made. Players would also like to be kept abreast of development to some extent and many would like to actively participate in testing and have the feedback provided be acted upon (as an example ... most of the feedback from public testing of UI2.0 in the fall of 2013 appeared to be ignored ... maybe it wasn't but a lack of a short communication listing the feedback extracted and what could and could not be addressed would have quickly and easily reduced negative comments from forum participants.)


Finally as another example where greater communication would not hurt. There was a recent post with clan weapon changes listed but no reasoning as to why these made sense. The DPS of most clan lasers was increased ... making them more effective in terms of "alpha" strikes since more of the damage is likely to be deposited in a smaller area. Heat was generally increased slightly ... but that can be somewhat mitigated with build changes that incorporate additional heat sinks. Ranges were dropped a bit ... but much of that change can be countered with weapon modules if folks can afford to buy them ... was this an initiative to drive module sales? ... or was it an attempt to reduce engagement ranges for clan mechs? Very small changes in cool downs were made both positive and negative. In one case a change in the C-MPL firing time of 1.3 to 1.25 seconds was made ... this is 50ms and is probably smaller than the average ping ... will that scale of change actually have an impact on gameplay?

[Dagger6T6]

The main reason I don't visit the official MWO forums is that I found it way to clunky after the 'reorganization' that occurred. There are too many subforums and no general discussion so I can't really get a feel for the pulse of the game at a quick glance. I feel like I have to sort through to many categories to gather together what might be the main issues affecting people or the game itself. Just my opinion from someone who used to spend way too much time on the MWO forum. If I'm looking for game info now I usually hit the outreachHPG reddit first or drop in on the NGNG forums.

Yes there are a number of trolls, but most of the good ones are well known and can be avoided.

[Novakaine]

Whew I made it.

[Wraith0177]

This is a slippery slope, my friends.... Banning people for 3rd party site activity is beyond wrong. Why are you not appealing to that particular area's/site's/forum's moderation for relief? Or have you, and they don't agree with you regarding your opinion of the material in question?

This may be your house and your rules, but trying to bring the rules for your house to bear in other places is a massive overstep that I encourage you to rethink. Your rules need to apply in your house, and stay at the door.

[Jacob Side]

Just sounds like any negative comment on the direction you guys are going or the failing that we guys have done in the past will result in bans from the forums.
White knight with be patted on the back and we who've seen the light will be kicked out.

Some of us who no longer have blinders on still spend money on this game and play just about everyday.

[NinetyProof]

FWIW ... I have never liked the "name and shame" policy as it pretty much gives abuses a "free pass" and doesn't even allow the community to shun those offenders.

As for censorship issue, most people don't understand that "free speech" is not really "free" and, in reality, only applies on the public corner, and not in private forums. They are merely part of the entitlement generation that have not grown up yet.

Moving on ... I think the number 1 *tool* you could give to the community at large is the ability to *know* which accounts are fake / dup accounts that are there to get around a forum ban.

How? A simple "hours / game" played stat on the forums under the users name. When we somebody with a post count of 1,000, yet a game count of 0, that speaks volumes.

So, if you *really* want to combat the troll factor, the show us game count / hours played right on the forum avatar. It's absolutely *amazing* how these simple numbers make it obvious what is going on and how the community at large will respond differently to those people.

Knowledge is power ... put more power in the hands of the community.

[MarineTech]

Thank you Niko.

Some of us in K-Town were getting so tired seeing the same posters over and over again.

[Treysef]

A paywall for the forums sounds like a bad idea, don't do that.

[Tor6]

Mass banning of all your vocal critics who are communicating about your game on external sites truly is the Final Solution to the malcontent question.


Of course.. trying to stifle peoples' negative opinions of a game by banning them en mass for infractions not incurred on your site is like throwing gas on a fire and is likely to simply generate MORE negative publicity for you and make you look unprofessional. Those people won't just disappear into the void when you ban them, and you can bet that they'll be encouraged to spread their negative opinion of you far and wide simply out of petty spite. People don't like to feel they've been treated unfairly, and it doesn't matter how justified -you- as a moderator feel about their banning.

[Cavendish]

While I am generally against limitations on the rights to voice ones opinions, some people seem to fail to recognize that these forums are not a place where you have the right to say whatever you want. It is a corporate board, not reddit.

Now I would like you to tell Russ, Bryan, Paul and others to stop this insane information dispersion on multiple medias. You have your own forums, having to chase down information on twitter, reddit and basicaly any other place then these forums is annoying as heck and does not exactly match a professional handling of communication. If you are serious about reforming the forums, first step should make them worth going to in the first place.

Currently Russ twitter is actually the best place to ask questions and get replies from PGI, do you really think this is how communication between your customers and your company should be handled? Tweeting the president of the company? While I do like that there is a channel for communication, it should be possible to ask a question on these forums (without the throng of trolls that usualy show up, something your new policy should help with) and get a quick reply.

[Chemie]

MX Duke, on 07 September 2014 - 05:51 AM, said:

No, IGP and PGI personnel can't be handing out punishment on this site for actions taken on Reddit or Twitter, or any other site. This would be a conflict of interest.

The moderators of those individual sites are in charge of that.

That's what I thought but Niko said
"...This would all be well and good were it not for the fact that we have observed these same individuals openly mocking us and our players in third-party channels. I have made the decision that we will no longer offer such individuals the right to use our own channels..."

which implies that conduct on third party sites is included in his bannable behaviour. He is gauging "the same players" on third party sites and targeting them on MWO site....but HOW do they KNOW they are THE SAME person?