271 replies to this topic

[Void Angel]

Nowhere in the quoted text did I apply any of that to you - though you did inadvertently use a straw man (summaries of positions count.) So you haven't been insulted - correcting your definitions doesn't count. In fact, I was using the kind of thing you were complaining about as an example of the misconduct that constantly occurs on the forums.

So if this is what you mean by being insulted and denigrated, I can only respond with this:

However, to play the advocate to your devil... it could very easily be the atmosphere of toxic abuse on these forums that caused you to go off the deep end and accuse someone who agreed with you of insult and "denigration." =)

Edited by Void Angel, 09 September 2014 - 03:02 PM.

[Novakaine]

Just remember people negative opinions just don't appear out of thin air.
Opinions are form by cause and effect.
When opinions are ignored, they become louder.
When they are shunted and stifled they simply move to other venues.
And this seems to be the case.

[Kraven Kor]

After asking if I was stupid, and I responded, you said, and I quote:

Escef, on 09 September 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

In other words, you answered both of my questions in the affirmative.

Void Angel, on 09 September 2014 - 03:01 PM, said:

However, to play the advocate to your devil... it could very easily be the atmosphere of toxic abuse on these forums that caused you to go off the deep end and accuse someone who agreed with you of insult and "denigration." =)

No, I'm using the actual words you responded to me with.

Just sayin'.

I've been here for years and the "toxic environment" has never, not even once, caused me to insult another person. At least, not to my knowledge, and certainly not by my intent. Though I suppose I am only human and may have flown of the handle or "posted angry" or whatnot, I don't think I am a major offender there.

All I am trying to say is that the personal / implied insults need to stop, from everyone, because at the end of the day, this is just a game.

[Mawai]

Kraven Kor, on 09 September 2014 - 03:23 PM, said:

After asking if I was stupid, and I responded, you said, and I quote:





No, I'm using the actual words you responded to me with.

Just sayin'.

I've been here for years and the "toxic environment" has never, not even once, caused me to insult another person. At least, not to my knowledge, and certainly not by my intent. Though I suppose I am only human and may have flown of the handle or "posted angry" or whatnot, I don't think I am a major offender there.

All I am trying to say is that the personal / implied insults need to stop, from everyone, because at the end of the day, this is just a game.

Hi ... ok ... now I will express an opinion on the other side of the argument

Escef was clearly insulting.

On the other hand ...

Void Angel was talking in generalities commenting on the type of ad hominem and strawman attacks that are somewhat common on the forums. He did not specifically apply any of his comments to you. He simply said that attack arguments are much too common for various reasons whether deliberate or not. (Unfortunately, he did correct what he perceived as your misuse of the term "strawman" ... which made it less clear that the statements were general and not connected to you when he shifted from specific to general)

Your reply, which I cited above, seems to group Escef and Void Angel as one person ... unless your reply was addressed to both ... in which case it wasn't clear

[Mawai]

Dear Niko,

Many chat systems within games and social media have a "block" or "ignore" feature. One of the issues with trolls and those who argue with nothing to say on forums is that you can't usually just ignore them ... you have to wade through their diatribe to find the worthwhile posts.

Is it possible or feasible to add a forum block/ignore feature so that original posts by people whose voice you do not want to hear can simply not be displayed?

This might go some distance to helping with forum self-moderation since folks who repeatedly troll or who are so negative or caustic that they make themselves undesirable would simply have no voice at the individual discretion of the other people reading the forums.

Edited by Mawai, 09 September 2014 - 04:33 PM.

[Void Angel]

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

• It is often said to ignore those who actively ignore what you say or twist it towards their own ends. Given the prolific nature of some of these individuals, many of whom seem to spend whole work-weeks on the attack, should we make stronger efforts to remove those players who actively and repeatedly refute, deny, or ignore staff statements and announcements?
  
• Is our Name & Shame policy fair to the privacy of players, or should we be publicly flagging banned/restricted players who have been repeatedly abusive in the spirit of being more open? What about the potential risk of "bullying the bullies"?

The name and shame policy is a good thing - the last thing I would like to see on these forums is a move toward a "mob justice" system like RIOT's Tribunal.

However, the problem with "just ignore them" is that if people who know better just ignore the trolls, the trolls gain unrestricted access to those who do not know better, such as new players. This is especially the case with official announcements - and with guides. I've had people cut loose on me in the guides I maintain with fire and rage; incoherent objections, misquotes of Sun Tzu, and just bad arguments - and they won't shut up. They'll never give in, because they're not really even reading the rebuttals I give them. They skim every response for something they think they have a "logical kill" for, then blaze away without regard to fact, truth, or consequences.

I've had to resort to moderation with several of these posters, and those were just tactical discussions - Blake forbid I ever post an analysis supporting [Insert PGI Decision Here.] The ragers and conspiracy theorists view the onus of proof, and even courtesy, to rest squarely on the shoulders of PGI, always. They can say whatever irresponsibly unlikely thing that pops into their heads, hijack every thread with their complaints, and call names all the live-long day, but whenever they get moderated, it's:


Care must be taken to avoid an environment of truly restricted ideas, but a modicum of courtesy would be delightful.

[Void Angel]

Kraven Kor, on 09 September 2014 - 03:23 PM, said:

No, I'm using the actual words you responded to me with.

Just sayin'.

I've been here for years and the "toxic environment" has never, not even once, caused me to insult another person. At least, not to my knowledge, and certainly not by my intent. Though I suppose I am only human and may have flown of the handle or "posted angry" or whatnot, I don't think I am a major offender there.

All I am trying to say is that the personal / implied insults need to stop, from everyone, because at the end of the day, this is just a game.

Oh good grief; you're insulting me now, by insisting that I insulted you despite my clear statements to the contrary. You misread my post rather badly, and you keep going on about it. At the point you're told, "hey, those statements were generalities about these forums, and didn't apply to you," the proper response is "oh, well that wasn't clear to me, sorry," - not "no, you did! You did insult me, and you need to stop it; just sayin'."

In either case, we're derailing a thread we were specifically asked to keep on-topic (sorry!) so take it to tells or just let it drop. If you troll more, I'll simply ignore you.

Edited by Void Angel, 09 September 2014 - 05:35 PM.

[Sereglach]

Quote

-Would you agree with the idea that we should revert to a 3-strike system for most general misconducts in the aforementioned Blue category?

Completely, even if a third strike results in a temporary ban, followed by a permanent ban after another offense.

Quote

-It is often said to ignore those who actively ignore what you say or twist it towards their own ends. Given the prolific nature of some of these individuals, many of whom seem to spend whole work-weeks on the attack, should we make stronger efforts to remove those players who actively and repeatedly refute, deny, or ignore staff statements and announcements?

Yes.

Quote

-Do you feel it's more important for moderation to be fair and consistent (at the risk of seeming cold or authoritarian); or to handle matters on a case-by-case basis to offer individuals the benefit of the doubt (at the risk of seeming to offer favouritism or being manipulated)?

On any strike, be fair and consistent, but explain thoroughly what they did wrong, and point them back to the forum rules. This tells people that they broke the rules, and on a first strike they may not realize that they pushed the limits. This then directs them to go reread said rules to ensure comprehension. At that point they have been warned, and know what is and is not acceptable, even if they didn't know the first time around. Afterwards, do not hesitate to mete out appropriate punishments.

Quote

-Is our Name & Shame policy fair to the privacy of players, or should we be publicly flagging banned/restricted players who have been repeatedly abusive in the spirit of being more open? What about the potential risk of "bullying the bullies"?

Only flag a player once they've been perma-banned, and show WHY they were banned (for example, once a person clicks on that profile, they'll be shown a screen with their citations and how it lead to their banning). This allows them to stand as an example of others as to, "Hey, this is what not to do!"

Quote

-Do you feel that the creation and use of Kaetetoa has been a more open and productive way of handling simply unreasonable and unproductive threads? If not, should those be unproductive threads be un-approved or locked instead?

People don't typically collect all the dust, dirt, and trash cleaned out of their house and store it, thinking they might find something useful in it. That is personally how I view that section of the forums. Un-approve them, and dispose of them.

This game has the courtesy of having an off-topic forum section. Some other games and community forums don't have them. You're there to discuss that game, or that club/organization, or that hobby. If something is so unproductive or destructive that it cannot be put into the "Off Topic" section, then it shouldn't be permitted to stick around.

On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with taking a thread and saying, "Hey, it's a cool thread, but it isn't a real feature suggestion. It's more like a random discussion about general cockpit construction (or other random topic), so we're going to move you to the 'Off Topic' section. Hopefully you're still able to have your cool discussion about cockpits (or other random topic), there." If they haven't violated the rules, but misplaced their thread, then I don't see anything wrong with the simple thread movement and the explanation of why it was moved.

Quote

-What kind of "positive" moderation systems (e.g. Likes. Rewards) would you be interested in us investigating or improving?

The like system is pretty good. It's simple and straightforward. Maybe something to investigate is to take really well thought-out, or helpful, or creative posts and doing something similar to what other games have done with their weekly "MVP" (Most Valuable Post), and give a little highlight on good community content. For example, there have been really well constructed feature suggestion posts, tutorials, and mech guides that have been put together. Maybe highlight them once in a while and give them a little sidebar mention on the front page for a few days?

Quote

-What kind of "negative" moderation systems (e.g. Restrictions, Penalties) would you be interested in us investigating or improving?

I think my answers to your first few questions thoroughly address what I think about this.

Quote

-Given the increased use of alternate accounts at any time a player is suspended or banned, would you rather see the following: A) Increased thresholds on the Recruit restrictions. B ) Pay barriers placed on the forums for new accounts. C) [Your own recommendation].

For "A" or "B", it depends on what those barriers are. I could get behind this: Any investment in MC (for "B") or completion of their Cadet Games (for "A") to be able to post outside the "Training Grounds", "Support & Feedback" and "Off Topic" forums, but still able to view everything else.

I don't have any other real suggestions, outside perma-banning people from the game who use alternate accounts for the purpose of abusing other people/forum rules. People can always create junk email accounts, persistent abusers care little for typing in a few kaptcha characters to feed their trolling and/or abuse habits, and IP addresses can be masked or changed.

Quote

-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?

It's impossible to make everyone happy. However, people incapable of providing their discourse or feedback in a civil manner (and there's a difference between a perturbed post and an uncivil one), should be dealt with accordingly.

Quote

-Without naming individuals or citing cases; Do you have any general questions regarding the moderation system left unanswered by this post?

Negative. Thank you for the thorough explanation of what is going on in the moderation side of the forums and why it is happening. Developer posts are always appreciated.

EDIT: Typo cleanups.
2nd EDIT: Formatting for ease of reading.

Edited by Sereglach, 10 September 2014 - 08:42 AM.

[Cavendish]

Novakaine, on 09 September 2014 - 03:15 PM, said:

Just remember people negative opinions just don't appear out of thin air.
Opinions are form by cause and effect.
When opinions are ignored, they become louder.
When they are shunted and stifled they simply move to other venues.
And this seems to be the case.

Of course the negative opinions dont appear out of thin air, the list of grievances is long. However, harping on and on and on and on and on about the same bloody issues is pointless. Add to that, PGI has actually adressed a lot of the issues people post about week in and week out (loyality points springs to mind...) but yet a few posters seem incapable to read these replies, absorb the information and understand, prefering to just repeat their mantra like zealots.

Is PGI perfect? Heck no. Their handling of 2013 is one of the worst PR disasters I have ever witnessed. But there comes a point when keeping an infinite loop of the same people posting the same issues in more and more rude, insulting and childish ways is enough.

My main worry, and Niko I would appriciate an honest answer here, is that there has accusations made about some sort of hunt for what people post on other forums and using that as a reason to ban people on these boards. Is this true? If so, you have in my opinion WAAAAY overstepped your mandate for handling the forum moderation on these forums. To be frank, you have no rights to hold users here up to your forums standards when they chose to post on Reddit, twitter or wherever. If they post garbage here, fine, do what you will. If they use Reddit or other channels to post about MWO they are held to the standards of those channels, not yours.

Edited by Cavendish, 10 September 2014 - 12:46 AM.

[m]

I personally wouldn't mind Topic Restriction Options for Topic Creators that were either Founders or Former Closed Beta Testers.

Allowing these users the option to Limit who responds to their topic, by only allowing either Founders orFormer Closed Beta Testers, can alleviate the spam or trolling if it is controlled by these users whom literally Care about the franchise, have supported it Financially from the beginning, and/or have supported it Technically in pre-production. Also, a minimal character count option (150 characters) would be of benefit to prevent other nonsense such as page count flooding.

In my experience within these forums, an action implemented like what I had described above would decrease any noticeable spam or belligerance that would call for a need of excessive Moderation and social backlash. This would promote serious discussions among veterans of the franchise to be used for analysis to further production of this title in a more serious manner.

[Pjwned]

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

• Would you agree with the idea that we should revert to a 3-strike system for most general misconducts in the aforementioned Blue category?
  
• It is often said to ignore those who actively ignore what you say or twist it towards their own ends. Given the prolific nature of some of these individuals, many of whom seem to spend whole work-weeks on the attack, should we make stronger efforts to remove those players who actively and repeatedly refute, deny, or ignore staff statements and announcements?
  
• Do you feel it's more important for moderation to be fair and consistent (at the risk of seeming cold or authoritarian); or to handle matters on a case-by-case basis to offer individuals the benefit of the doubt (at the risk of seeming to offer favouritism or being manipulated)?
  
• Is our Name & Shame policy fair to the privacy of players, or should we be publicly flagging banned/restricted players who have been repeatedly abusive in the spirit of being more open? What about the potential risk of "bullying the bullies"?
  
• Do you feel that the creation and use of Kaetetoa has been a more open and productive way of handling simply unreasonable and unproductive threads? If not, should those be unproductive threads be un-approved or locked instead?
  
• What kind of "positive" moderation systems (e.g. Likes. Rewards) would you be interested in us investigating or improving?
  
• What kind of "negative" moderation systems (e.g. Restrictions, Penalties) would you be interested in us investigating or improving?
  
• Given the increased use of alternate accounts at any time a player is suspended or banned, would you rather see the following: A) Increased thresholds on the Recruit restrictions. B ) Pay barriers placed on the forums for new accounts. C) [Your own recommendation].
  
• 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?
  
• Without naming individuals or citing cases; Do you have any general questions regarding the moderation system left unanswered by this post?

1. I don't see why a 3 strikes policy is needed for relatively tame offenses.

2. This just comes across as being mad because PGI staff says something and then somebody else says they're full of crap or something, usually due to previous experience and them being right at the time.

3. I don't see the problem with being fair & consistent as long as moderation isn't too extreme.

4. Breaking your own rules (if I'm understanding the post correctly) just to call out certain people is ridiculous, it doesn't do anything except give people attention and let them know they're getting under peoples' skin; doing this would only make the issue worse.

5. I don't see how "K-Town" is productive at all, once a thread is sent there it might as well have just been deleted or locked if you wanted any real discussion to continue.

6 & 7. I don't see the point in looking into "positive" or "negative" moderation systems because I don't see how it needs to be changed from the way it is now really.

8. I don't consider people hopping onto alternate accounts to continue posting to be enough of a problem that warrants more restrictions for new accounts, and especially not with a paywall; that is a terrible idea.

9. I'm not particularly worried but don't turn this into a police state forum just because of some prolific trolls, and if it actually bothers you a great deal then maybe get some thicker skin.

[Escef]

Kraven Kor, on 09 September 2014 - 03:23 PM, said:

After asking if I was stupid, and I responded, you said, and I quote:





No, I'm using the actual words you responded to me with.

Just sayin'.

I've been here for years and the "toxic environment" has never, not even once, caused me to insult another person. At least, not to my knowledge, and certainly not by my intent. Though I suppose I am only human and may have flown of the handle or "posted angry" or whatnot, I don't think I am a major offender there.

All I am trying to say is that the personal / implied insults need to stop, from everyone, because at the end of the day, this is just a game.

If anything, he was implying that those words applied to me because I was the one that pointed out your intelligence issue, which might be considered an ad hominem. I'd offer you a shovel, but you're already doing such a good job digging that hole without one.

Edited by Escef, 10 September 2014 - 10:05 AM.

[Egomane]

I'll only ask nicely once.

Would you all be so kind and let the personal insults, accusations and ad hominem attacks be? Maybe even remove them yourself?

[BLOOD WOLF]

Egomane, on 10 September 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

I'll only ask nicely once.

Would you all be so kind and let the personal insults, accusations and ad hominem attacks be? Maybe even remove them yourself?

seriously guys, I have never seen more thread closings on a public forum in my life is argumentative-discussion that hard to have without making it personal.

[Kraven Kor]

Escef, on 10 September 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

If anything, he was implying that those words applied to me because I was the one that pointed out your intelligence issue, which might be considered an ad hominem. I'd offer you a shovel, but you're already doing such a good job digging that hole without one.

But... I don't understand.

I don't insult anyone here; I don't. I agree or disagree or whatever, so why insult me? It won't get rid of me, it won't win you points with anyone, I'm nobody.

This is why we can't have nice things, you know?

Carry on, Forumites. *sigh*

[Escef]

Kraven Kor, on 10 September 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:

But... I don't understand.

I don't insult anyone here; I don't. I agree or disagree or whatever, so why insult me? It won't get rid of me, it won't win you points with anyone, I'm nobody.

This is why we can't have nice things, you know?

Carry on, Forumites. *sigh*

I find it insulting that an ostensibly adult person would expect a post on a business's official Facebook page proclaiming that this person had reported them to the Better Business Bureau to be allowed to stay there. I mean, you had the the nerve, the gall, the naivete to expect they'd be cool with that? And when they took it down and blocked you, you had the nerve to be insulted and surprised?

[Kraven Kor]

Escef, on 10 September 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

I find it insulting that an ostensibly adult person would expect a post on a business's official Facebook page proclaiming that this person had reported them to the Better Business Bureau to be allowed to stay there. I mean, you had the the nerve, the gall, the naivete to expect they'd be cool with that? And when they took it down and blocked you, you had the nerve to be insulted and surprised?

Let's say I believe that them banning me there only fueled the flames.

Let's say I have an understanding of human nature and believe that censoring your critics can not, will not silence them, and that what a company should do is address the concerns, rather than dismiss them.

It is a philosophical difference; I believe in transparency. For instance, I forward both customer complaints about me, and customer compliments about me, to my boss, in the interest of full disclosure. Luckily, the compliments outweigh the complaints, so far as I am aware.

Nor was I insulted, nor surprised. Disappointed is the word I would use.

[Escef]

Kraven Kor, on 10 September 2014 - 10:49 AM, said:

Nor was I insulted, nor surprised. Disappointed is the word I would use.

I don't see how you had any cause to be disappointed, as they did the most logical, and most expected, thing they could have done. You had already started to engage with other organizations in an effort to injure PGI and MWO. If someone had done something like that to me I'd be filing harassment and/or libel lawsuits against them, file for a restraining order, and look into what else I could hit such a person with in the legal system.

[Kraven Kor]

Escef, on 10 September 2014 - 10:58 AM, said:

I don't see how you had any cause to be disappointed, as they did the most logical, and most expected, thing they could have done. You had already started to engage with other organizations in an effort to injure PGI and MWO. If someone had done something like that to me I'd be filing harassment and/or libel lawsuits against them, file for a restraining order, and look into what else I could hit such a person with in the legal system.

I've seen similar posts on other company's sites that were responded to, addressed, and became PR wins.

You cannot silence your critics; banning accounts won't help. It will just shuffle us off to voice our concerns / displeasure in other places where they have less control.

And they are welcome to try and sue me for slander or libel or stalking as I'm doing none of those things; they'd be laughed out of court. Especially given the number of complaints registered against them.

Bally's tried to sue me. I'm still laughing at them to this day, and they will still never see one red cent from me, and the whole reason the case was tossed? The sheer number of similar complaints against them.

[TygerLily]

Thoughts on Moderation
Personally, I'm all for freedom of speech here on this forum. But I think a forum's owner should have every right to delete and ban for whatever they want. There's no danger of being unable to criticize if you can do it without being a jackass. There's literally nothing you can't say politely...

I don't think that moderation here on MWOMercs should be dependent on posts from another site like Reddit, Facebook, etc. First, there's no way to establish positive ID. Second, those avenues have their own moderators that hopefully want their space to be productive, etc. If they fail at moderating and it becomes a brown sea...that's their fault and any self-respecting member of our community will probably cease going there anyway.

I'm all for a two-strike, super strict moderation. If the rules are publicly posted and you've been warned once for an infraction then you've had enough warning and we don't want you. I was the social media guru for a radio station for a while and I'd straight delete Facebook posts. Of course you see, "Nice, delete my post {Godwin's Law}," and my only response is "Try again but remember you're talking to a human being this time."

While I've never encountered pay-to-post before I think there is a valid point made earlier that mandating some investment would ensure people are attempting to get their money's worth from their access. I'd hate to see something monthly and I'd hate to see a high premium, something too low would be ineffective. $20 one-time to post wouldn't bother me (so long as reading the forum is free). If people want to discuss builds, complain, etc. for free...go to reddit. Anyone willing to shell out $20 here would then probably want it to be a place that doesn't waste their time. They care enough to be a part of this and make good posts and even have the knowledge that their complaints and criticism is welcome so long as it's civil. The overall number of posters goes down, meaning less drivel for devs and mods to sort through, etc.

I like the current "like" system. IMO there should also be a "dislike" which doesn't display and simply gives the mods a heads up if the dislikes pass a certain threshold. I'm not sure if the current "report" feature is like this but I wouldn't "report" something unless its cleary ****** up. The "dislike" is tool for a lesser degree of reporting and more casual/flippant. The threshold can be quite high and it simply lets you crowdsource some of the moderation. The dislikes never do anything more than call attention to a post...the community doesn't hide, nor move posts down the timeline, nor publicly shame the post/poster.

Thoughts on Rewards
I think there should be a unique camo for people who are productively prolific community members or those who contribute cool stuff:

- Lots of tutorials, entertainment (b33f, wauweli, and many others), streamers, etc.

- Creators of awesome 3rd party tools: Smurfy, etc.

- 90% of their 2,000+ posts are in the New Player area

- 3,000 minimum posts with more likes than dislikes (specifically 1.5 times more)

- etc.

Edited by TygerLily, 10 September 2014 - 11:15 AM.