192 replies to this topic

[Kilo 40]

Thirdstar, on 14 September 2014 - 09:12 PM, said:

I'd like to point out that the policy to ban people for being critical of PGI on 3rd party sites is actually enshrined in the new community rules as outlined by Niko.

link or direct quote please.

Thirdstar, on 14 September 2014 - 09:12 PM, said:

It's not false information by any yardstick.

my comment was about niko using real names. you have only talked about "worrying reports" and haven't shown any evidence that he has indeed done that.

Quote

I think it's disingenuous of you guys to cherrypick the points I was making.

whatevs

[Russ Bullock]

TLBFestus, on 14 September 2014 - 09:20 PM, said:

Now see? What was the purpose of that comment?

I'm pretty sure that 90% or better of us can read the original post and understand exactly what he was saying without needing to reply because "worrying reports" sounds too much like it's a fact.

As much as those who are big supporters of the game and PGI claim that it's the detractors stirring the pot in the forums, here is a perfect example of it coming from those who support the game. It's not a big deal this time, but it's a great example of what NOT to do.

If you seriously want to see the forums improve, then I suggest everyone, one either side of a position, take a minute to review just why they are responding in a certain manner. He11 I'm guilty of it, it's my bread and butter, but I'm going to try to make an effort NOT to provoke those I'm in disagreement with for the foreseeable future.

^^^

This is a reasonable man.

[Kilo 40]

TLBFestus, on 14 September 2014 - 09:20 PM, said:

Now see? What was the purpose of that comment?

to point out that is all that it is. a rumor.

of course even after pointing that out some people will read that comment and continue spreading that rumor as fact.

[Thirdstar]

Kilo 40, on 14 September 2014 - 09:27 PM, said:

continue spreading that rumor as fact.

Could you point to where I did that?

Again, you're doing PGI no favors by undermining concerns. Even Russ agrees with the sentiment that an investigation is warranted.

Edited by Thirdstar, 14 September 2014 - 09:31 PM.

[Aym]

Kilo 40, on 14 September 2014 - 09:24 PM, said:

link or direct quote please.

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3697227

"[color=#00FFFF].[/color][color=#00FFFF] 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"[/color]
You don't even have to read that far down.

[color=#00FFFF]You don[/color]

[Paramemetic]

I think it's good that this is being done, because I think a lot of people have been banned unjustly, and a lot of those people have been major contributors to the community and the IP generally. Chronojam, for example.

So on the one hand, this is a very good thing.

On the other hand, I think it's kind of troubling the way that PGI seems to interact with its customers. It's almost parental, with PGI as a company taking a kind of "our customers are children who don't know what they really want" stance. This gesture almost reads like "we sent you all to your rooms, but if you beg and tell us you learned your lesson, we'll let you out before bedtime."

I understand that community moderation can be challenging and oftentimes takes on a role where players, behaving like literal children, need to be treated like that. What doesn't work is when the community moderation are tied up very closely to the corporate image, because whereas I'm sure PGI understands that the paying customers are the ones who actually have the power in a transaction, the appearance to me in the last few months has been that PGI thinks of its players as beggars who will get what they get and like it, rather than the very reason for its own existence.

It does not seem like a respectful relationship, but rather like PGI merely tolerates these insolent customers, and might deign to let some of them speak, but only if they don't say the wrong words, and only if they buy the product As Is and accept any decision PGI makes as gospel.

I somewhat expect this post to disappear, but I can only hope that the fact that I've never spoken in anger or in any disruptive manner on this forum would spare me an unjust ban for expressing a reasonable opinion in a respectful manner, since that opinion doesn't reflect well on Niko.

Edited by Paramemetic, 14 September 2014 - 09:40 PM.

[Jonathan Paine]

Thirdstar, on 14 September 2014 - 08:21 PM, said:

http://www.reddit.co...orums_for_your/

Would be nice if Russ could comment on allegations that people were being banned for criticizing PGI on 3rd party websites. There are also worrying reports that Niko is using real names that he has no business having access to.

I clicked on that link, and now my eyes are bleeding! Holy bleep! The level of paranoid ranting is immense!

[Thirdstar]

Kilo 40, on 14 September 2014 - 09:24 PM, said:

link or direct quote please.

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3697227

"The players who had been removed were all with prolific long histories of being moderated by various members of the team. 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."

[Kilo 40]

Aym, on 14 September 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3697227

"[color=#00FFFF].[/color][color=#00FFFF] 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"[/color]
You don't even have to read that far down.

[color=#00FFFF]You don[/color]

that does not say they were banned for being critical of PGI. he goes on to say they were banned so they can't "[color=#00FFFF]drive away new players, denigrate the positive experiences of fans, derail the constructive feedback of the average player, and just plain heckle us;"[/color]

Thirdstar, on 14 September 2014 - 09:41 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3697227

"The players who had been removed were all with prolific long histories of being moderated by various members of the team. 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."

see above

[Hawk819]

Two thumbs way up in the air, Russ. Keep it going and they may elected you as the Moderator of the Year! NOT!!!

[Kilo 40]

anyway, whatever. I'm done.

[Thirdstar]

Kilo 40, on 14 September 2014 - 09:43 PM, said:

anyway, whatever. I'm done.

That's a rather petulant attitude to have. I thought the intent was to have constructive dialogue and to help communication improve. That will not happen if you stamp your feet and leave.

[Paramemetic]

Kilo 40, on 14 September 2014 - 09:42 PM, said:

that does not say they were banned for being critical of PGI. he goes on to say they were banned so they can't "[color=#00FFFF]drive away new players, denigrate the positive experiences of fans, derail the constructive feedback of the average player, and just plain heckle us;"[/color]

Yes, but he's the only arbiter of what that means. I know one poster who was banned for asking about staff relocations. He didn't make any accusation, he did so in an appropriate thread (the thread announcing a new project), and was banned because asking what PGI does with its development assets in a public forum is apparently criticism.

Niko believes that any post short of "PGI is the best team and these forums are wonderfully managed" might drive off new players. Commenting on the gameplay experience in a negative way might denigrate the positive experiences of fans. Saying "ECM isn't quite where we want it" might derail the constructive feedback of a player who says "ECM is the bessstttt!" and so on.

If Niko alone is the ultimate authority on what his vague guidelines mean, which if you cross by daring to disagree with him you will be subject to his will and his will alone, then these guidelines could say anything. And, as the situation is right now, this post I am writing right now could be said to potentially "drive away new players" or even to "just plain heckle us." And that doesn't sit well.

[Ken Fury]

Russ Bullock, on 14 September 2014 - 09:05 PM, said:

I will investigate it tomorrow. I certainly believe this is false information, but its worth investigation for sure.

Basically you've been moderated in the past, and still are mocking us on third-party channels. Please be happy with your preemptive banning. At least that's how it reads to me. Though english ain't my mother tongue and I might have missed a sub meaning:

Emphasis mine
Link: http://mwomercs.com/...-on-moderation/

Quote

Greetings MechWarriors,

"I don't come onto the forums, it's full of trolls."
This is a quote of a player from when I asked if they could send me their feedback and bug report through the forums, since chat logs are often a bit more work to sift through. I've heard variations of this phrase time in and time out for over two years now whenever I drop into a match..

As you may have recently heard, a few prolific forum-goers have been permanently forum banned. The average player has nothing to be afraid of out of this. I personally delivered those sanctions, and here's why...

The players who had been removed were all with prolific long histories of being moderated by various members of the team. 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 as a means to drive away new players, denigrate the positive experiences of fans, derail the constructive feedback of the average player, and just plain heckle us; Even if it means someone resorting to proving Godwin's Law correct every once and a while.

Edited by Tank Boy Ken, 14 September 2014 - 09:51 PM.

[Crunk Prime]

http://mwomercs.com/...27#entry3697227

Quote

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

Quote

Nobody has or ever will be banned exclusively for something they have said on a third party site. This has never been the case, nor will it ever be.

Niko directly contradicting himself.

"We will never ban people for things they say on 3rd party sites, but I totally tracked these guys names around to 3rd party sites and banned them."

[Paramemetic]

I'm really also curious about how players who were preemptively banned are supposed to know what they were preemptively banned for.

[ApolloKaras]

Paramemetic, on 14 September 2014 - 09:55 PM, said:

I'm really also curious about how players who were preemptively banned are supposed to know what they were preemptively banned for.

Quite a few of the prolific posters would resort to personal attacks to get a point across. That's not something I want nor does the community need. Some of the posters after being banned have just fallen off the rocker and seem out of touch with reality... If they were banned they already earned it.

I'm up for giving folks a 2nd chance but I believe that leash should be short. I don't want this to be a sling fest.

Edited by Saxie, 14 September 2014 - 10:02 PM.

[Domenoth]

Crunk Prime, on 14 September 2014 - 09:55 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...27#entry3697227






Niko directly contradicting himself.

"We will never ban people for things they say on 3rd party sites, but I totally tracked these guys names around to 3rd party sites and banned them."

I don't see a contradiction. You left out the word exclusively. "We will never ban people exclusively for things they say on third party sites." Do it on the forums and third party sites and you will get in trouble (consider also that #MWO shows up on the main page, so that might count as not just 3rd party posting--that's another issue).

Just reading what you quoted and it didn't seem like it jived with what you wrote. Now what Niko says and what Niko does aren't infallibly tied together. But if you are condemning him solely on your interpretation of what he said in two different threads I don't think you've been entirely fair in your synopsis.

Edited by Domenoth, 14 September 2014 - 10:07 PM.

[Thirdstar]

Saxie, on 14 September 2014 - 10:02 PM, said:

Quite a few of the prolific posters would resort to personal attacks to get a point across.

I've seen that sort of behavior from both sides. Are you implying that only the 'banned' ever displayed this? I find that very to believe.

In fact you are taking part in what is known as an Ad Hominem attack i.e. attacking the messenger instead of the message. Specially since you're attacking people incapable of defending themselves in this venue.

Edited by Thirdstar, 14 September 2014 - 10:10 PM.

[o0Marduk0o]

Thirdstar, on 14 September 2014 - 07:44 PM, said:

Could you pass that onto your mods? They didn't get the memo previously and had been banning people for giving criticism 'without playing the game recently'.

Nobody got banned for fact-based criticism. They got banned for being unable to do so in a civil way. They well deserved it.