Rauderi.8706 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > Let's remember the topic of this thread: general forum moderation and policies. This is not the place to talk about your personal issues, be they feelings of harassment or persecution, active dislike of another person, arguments with CS policies, or concerns about in-game behavior. > > Let's keep to the Big Picture and see what we can learn from one another. I'd like to leave this open for another day or two, then would like to revisit the topic at a later date. There's much to gain from the communication! I personally really appreciate the dialog. This is the kind of stuff the community craves. I know it's a big risk sticking your neck out for, so thanks, Gaile! :star: Hopefully, this helps us help you and your teams, inspires more considerate discussion, and leads to less reports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einlanzer.1627 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertthebard.8150 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Zedek.8932" said: > > @"coglin.1496" said: > > If you take offense, report it. So what? > > Here kicks my personal problem in. Some of my infractions were with no reason, and I also had an eMail conversation with Gaile about that in 2016 I think, and just with the aforementioned Shakespeare quote, things can be reverted. So if Shakespeare and saying "If you don't like the game, you can go elsewhere, Jesus Christ" [that was one of my my infraction....] is both worth an infraction, fine in that moment, I see where the limits are. > > However, when I see a post containing 500x kitten and I report that and nothing happens, because, as far as I recall the official response was something along the lines: "The kitten filter is there to soften swearwords and thus it's a fine [clean] post after the filter applied", a normal person can get angry at that kind of forum moderation. The sheer fact it triggers the filter should automatically consider it for moderation. Not a Shakespeare one-liner. > > Look, I know the forums are a privilige. But I've been infracted for mentioning my support requests are not answered, and thus the company is not as good as it claims when it comes to response times of requests and forum problems. (The thread was the "Is the support working" or something wich boiled down to "Does the support understand English", maybe you remember that). So the whole thread talks about the support, I do, too, but get infracted, because... I don'tknow. It also contained the part that I deserved some of the infractions, but eh, "talking about moderation" was worth 3 points I remember. With a thread full of the same stuff. > > I had several workshops in labour law during my time as shop chairman. Literally weeks of training about the German law to fight the stupid ideas of a multi-billion Euro company. But the forum rules and its infraction system - I just can't get them, a 27-year old like me can't make it out clearly when I can post something and be safe. Sometimes an infraction took several days after my post, despite the thread has been busy. So what was that all about? Not because of malicious thoughts, but just for constantly changing thresholds of the moderation, I feel that's my personal problem here. > > Right now, getting infracted or even banned does not necessarily mean that you are actually a "Bad Boy". > > Excelsior.. Here's the problem with using an appearance of "kitten" as a means to validate reporting a post, and this actually happened to me: The filter is sort of wonky, I used the past tense of whip, discussing making a batch of something in one of the crafting professions, and it came back "kitten". I've seen filters so aggressive **that it** would "kitten" groups of words as if they were on the censored word list, such as the bolded above. I've had some legit "kittening" too, it's the nature of who I am, I turn my chat filters off in MMOs where it's an option, and I hang out in the rated r section of my guild's discord, and yet, I have managed to only have one post removed here, and that post removal came with no infraction points, because it was for quoting a post that someone had found offensive, either as a poster, or a mod, I can't say. I know any reports on the comment didn't come from me. I like it when people have to result to insulting behavior in a debate, it shows that they're on the way to losing said debate, and they know it. Why would I want that removed? I tend to treat forum posting the same way I treat talking to my mom, or to my kids, when they were young, and grandkids: Yep, I'm free to use whatever language I like, but I have enough respect for my mom, and myself, to watch my language in those situations. I didn't monitor my language when I was working as a bouncer/bar tender in strip clubs, not much point in it, but this venue isn't the same as that, and so, I do monitor my language. The only time I've had an issue with a forum's moderation is when a community manager decided that the appropriate punishment for mentioning some moderation, not discussing it mind you, but bringing it up when asked why I had had to bow out of a conversation, was to permanently ban my forum account. I cancelled two game subs the same day, and while I have gone back to play the actual game on occasion, it's more because I'd been in the same guild for close to 10 years, and I really miss chatting with the friends I've made there. If not for that, I'd have uninstalled the game and never gone back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > It's posts like this that pave the way to infractions... posts that throw out some at first seemingly impressive statistics, yet in reality lack any kind of analysis, or even significance or even attempt to offer any. > > What exactly is the reader supposed to conclude from the contrasting of these two nearly incomparable numbers aside from the fact that one of the largest websites on the internet receives more traffic than this one? How does this at all lend to challenging or even relate to contesting that page views do not constitute activity? > > If I were to continue relating the merits, or lack there of, of posts like this, I'd no doubt end up being on the receiving end of said thread topic. > > It's understood that some level of moderation is expected and perhaps even necessary on these forums, but when it comes at the cost of allowing mis-information to be left unchecked, I personally question, and have questioned, this necessity. Is it better to leave a well spoken falsehood unattended while at the same time silencing a perhaps offensive truth? > What are you rambling on about? I already gave the argument as to why page views isn't a good indicator of forum activity, and instead gave the number of distinct visits as a substitute statistic instead. Also, you're completely ignoring my intent. I am responding to a person who is implying that strict moderation is driving everyone away from the forums, wherein the reality is that game dedicated forums aren't nearly as popular as they used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen.2907 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. Now that is funny. Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoSundown.5419 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. I have to admit I'm struggling with the idea of how my experience can be so different than yours. Across both the old and new boards, I've posted many thousands of times (600 :o since the conversion to the new board and I've cut back quite a bit). I've gotten points. A few were from rudeness. The rest were from calling out someone else's rudeness. Yet, I've been critical of ANet many times. As examples, I've (many times) said, "The daily task Events in [insert low-level zone name] are the most ludicrous gameplay I've ever seen an MMO developer enable."; and that, "It's hard to fathom how a game published in 2012 can be without an effects slider, especially when a design goal was to have players watch what's happening on the screen." None of my posts critical of ANet's game were censored in any way. Inconsistent moderation? Maybe that could account for some of it. Yet, if ANet censoring of criticism is prevalent enough to be a problem for the community, I think I'd have been censured for it by now. Maybe it's how the criticism is phrased rather than the act of criticism? I've seen you post many times, often being critical of game design. I don't remember any times when those posts were removed, but my memory is no longer what it used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > I have to admit I'm struggling with the idea of how my experience can be so different than yours. Across both the old and new boards, I've posted many thousands of times (600 :o since the conversion to the new board and I've cut back quite a bit). I've gotten points. A few were from rudeness. The rest were from calling out someone else's rudeness. Yet, I've been critical of ANet many times. As examples, I've (many times) said, "The daily task Events in [insert low-level zone name] are the most ludicrous gameplay I've ever seen an MMO developer enable."; and that, "It's hard to fathom how a game published in 2012 can be without an effects slider, especially when a design goal was to have players watch what's happening on the screen." None of my posts critical of ANet's game were censored in any way. > > Inconsistent moderation? Maybe that could account for some of it. Yet, if ANet censoring of criticism is prevalent enough to be a problem for the community, I think I'd have been censured for it by now. Maybe it's how the criticism is phrased rather than the act of criticism? I've seen you post many times, often being critical of game design. I don't remember any times when those posts were removed, but my memory is no longer what it used to be. I have an explanation. A lot of the criticisms that get censored were essentially just rants, born of rage. It could be PVP frustrations, it could be in response to a game update. Either way, a disgruntled player will go postal on the forums about something, and in usual rage style it is full of insults and threats. These get taken down, but the players don't get the message of "behave yourself". They get the message of totalitarian censorship of criticism. I've seen it happen... quite a few times, actually. The players remain bitter because the infraction under duress is the emotional equivalent of kicking somebody when they're down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inculpatus cedo.9234 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Tiny Doom.4380" said: > This is a fascinating thread. My question is this: how do you know you've had a Warning or an Infraction? I've been posting here since the game launched and I'm not aware of ever having had one, but reading the detailed explanations of what is and isn't acceptable I find it hard to imagine I haven't breached the guidelines at some point - probably quite a few times. > > When I've read about other people having Forum Warnings I imagined they'd get an email and, presumably, a suspension form posting for some period. The email addresses I use for my account are used for that purpose alone. One of them I don't believe I have ever looked at since the day I made them and the other two I look at only a few times a year. As for the little things at the top of the Forum page (Notifications and Inbox), I have never clicked on those since the day GW2 began. I seem to have 70 Notifications and 1 item in my inbox. I have no plans on ever opening those or looking at them. > > I'm wondering whether I'm getting Warnings and not knowing about it. If so, and if they are having no effect on my ability to post, what are they for? Besides, reading any Notifications or PMs/mails, you will get a message of any action posted at the top of your Profile page, and there is also a page to peruse all current and past Moderation actions found in Preferences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardenwolfe.8590 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 Remember, you want the forums to be a place for constructive conversation. Unfortunately, certain posters want the opposite. I found this out recently when I took someone's baiting post seriously and tried to help said poster. I'm sure he thought it hilarious, but it makes me now doubt a poster's intentions and curbs my desire to help the community any further. And all it took was one poster to take someone's serious question and turn it into a joke for his own amusement. That kind of doubtful or toxic environment kills forums and is definitely not something ArenaNet wants. And if you doubt that? Ask older posters what happened to the VN Boards. It's a case study of how trolls kill any interest in forum participation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcry.9428 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"Mourningcry.9428" said: > > It's posts like this that pave the way to infractions... posts that throw out some at first seemingly impressive statistics, yet in reality lack any kind of analysis, or even significance or even attempt to offer any. > > > > What exactly is the reader supposed to conclude from the contrasting of these two nearly incomparable numbers aside from the fact that one of the largest websites on the internet receives more traffic than this one? How does this at all lend to challenging or even relate to contesting that page views do not constitute activity? > > > > If I were to continue relating the merits, or lack there of, of posts like this, I'd no doubt end up being on the receiving end of said thread topic. > > > > It's understood that some level of moderation is expected and perhaps even necessary on these forums, but when it comes at the cost of allowing mis-information to be left unchecked, I personally question, and have questioned, this necessity. Is it better to leave a well spoken falsehood unattended while at the same time silencing a perhaps offensive truth? > > > > What are you rambling on about? I already gave the argument as to why page views isn't a good indicator of forum activity, and instead gave the number of distinct visits as a substitute statistic instead. Also, you're completely ignoring my intent. I am responding to a person who is implying that strict moderation is driving everyone away from the forums, wherein the reality is that game dedicated forums aren't nearly as popular as they used to be. The point of my "rambling" as you so graciously put it, was to express how statics are often thrown out there to paint a picture, or to provide some presumed credibility to an argument, when they actually do not. How does comparing the site traffic of a monolithic website to that of a niche game site do anything except restate the obvious - Reddit gets more traffic that the GW2 forums. This is a revelation? The post offers no additional analysis to conclude anything else, but alludes to the notion that somehow this is conclusive that GW2 forum activity is trivial - it in no way shows a decrease in popularity of the game forums. The further use of a daily statistic versus a monthly only serves to exaggerate this disparity is disingenuous. If the intent was indeed to show that the forums are no longer as popular as they used to be not due to strict moderation, but rather something else, or just in general, a more apt statistic to start with might have been a month over month, or year over year comparison of the traffic of the Forums themselves and continue the analysis from there. Not a month to day comparison to Reddit. Perhaps the intent of the post was to show a decrease in popularity, but the use of the statistic provided does nothing to support or demonstrate that intent in the least. And that, is the point of my rambling - posts that use statics inaccurately, or unsupported, or lacking of any analysis, server no point other than to dissuade or otherwise misinform less aware, or more easily influenced readers. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArenaNet Staff Gaile Gray.6029 Posted April 2, 2018 ArenaNet Staff Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > Now that is funny. > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen.2907 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** Agreed. To be clear, when I wrote, "funny," I meant in the, "something smells funny in here," sense. Not in the haha sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambros Augustus.6594 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 What we need are tiered forums in terms of rudeness. We do learn from rudeness, theres a flamboyance there, there is self worth there, there is a good laugh there. We have a god given right to be rude, with or without outrageous demands imposed on us. WWF's Tribute to Rick Rude 1999 [https://youtube.com/watch?v=j5HSyl8ktro](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5HSyl8ktro "https://youtube.com/watch?v=j5HSyl8ktro") David Guetta & Showtek - Bad ft.Vassy (Lyrics Video)[https://youtube.com/watch?v=oC-GflRB0y4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC-GflRB0y4 "https://youtube.com/watch?v=oC-GflRB0y4") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Lambros Augustus.6594" said: > We do learn from rudeness, theres a flamboyance there, there is self worth there, there is a good laugh there. We have a god given right to be rude, with or without outrageous demands imposed on us. Sure. Just not on these forums. Why is it so difficult for some people to grasp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einlanzer.1627 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** Oh, come on. It should be quite clear that was tongue-in-cheek. And, more importantly, it was also just a generalized comment (in other words, it specifically **wasn't** personal). This post from from Gaile is actually a precise example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, and several posters other than Ashen replied to mine with insightful comments that were ignored in favor of this one. The thing that's interesting is that this is not applied to players. Typically, only direct attacks that denigrate specific players are targeted for moderation, but generalized non-polite criticism of Anet is not tolerated because, it seems, that at least some moderators take personal offense to it and then decide it needs to be censored. I would consider this to be an inappropriate overreach of forum moderation. You can't force people to always be friendly. All you can do is stop them from harassing individuals. In a nutshell, it's inappropriate for you to use your personal offense meter as a barometer for deciding what comments need to be infracted and censored. Did I break any forum rules that are actually reasonable to police? I.e. like harassing an individual? No? Then leave it alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mewcifer.5198 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Cantatus.4065" said: > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > @"Healix.5819" said: > > > They have this policy where they're not allowed to edit posts, so if you quote someone, they'll delete your entire post if the quote is. It's pretty funny, since I've had it happen in the support forums a few times over the years when answering multiple people's problems at once. > > > > > > > Zedek.8932 said: > > > > This nothing was 1 infraction point. Great, isn't it? > > > > > > Just because there's nothing there doesn't meant it was nothing. They could have simply forgot to quote it. Maybe it was your post on March 7th in how many accounts? > > > > > You're right. We don't edit posts because doing so can open the door to concerns about "stealth edits" or unscrupulous intrusion into a person's own comments. Therefore we have a strictly hands-off policy on comments. We may edit a topic line to make it more topical -- not "Anet, look at this" but "Bug: Weapon issue" -- because that reduces click-bait posts and helps members know at a glance if they want to read a thread. But the body -- we try to be completely out of it. And that does mean that if someone quotes it, we are then required to remove their post, too, to eliminate the already-removed comments by the person who was quoted. > > > > I'm willing to consider another process, but this is awkward: > > > > * [Comments removed because they quoted a thread that was removed] > > > > * And here's my answer to that!.... > > > > I mean, what is the "that" there? :) > > > > > > I feel like this is something that should absolutely get more consideration. When someone writes several constructive paragraphs in response to someone else and crosses the line once, removing the entire post is often going to be seen as too heavy-handed. If someone responds to two different people in a single post, being helpful to one and a little rude to the other, anything in that post that could've been beneficial to the community is lost because it came with (potentially unrelated) rudeness. Removing rudeness from the boards makes sense and isn't something I'm going to complain about, but should it come at the cost of anything good that accompanies it? Like someone else said, it gives the perception of things being very black and white here. If your post has the slightest tinge of gray, it's gone. > > More than that, removing someone _else's_ post purely because they quoted the person and didn't break any rules themselves is ridiculous and strikes me as being over-the-top. I can understand why it's done (since it makes no sense to remove something that broke a rule one place but leave it visible somewhere else), but you're effectively punishing someone for nothing other than utilizing a board feature. I know I've had posts that have been removed because of this, and it has always rubbed me the wrong way (especially since I'm not even notified of it, which is sort of rude in itself). While I know I didn't break any rules myself, I still can't help but feel as though I'm being chastised. As a result, it's made me more reluctant in posting or responding to people, because I don't know if I'll come back to the board a couple hours later and have the post that I put a lot of thought into deleted because I accidentally quoted the wrong thing (or quoted the person who quoted the wrong thing). Not to mention it also has the effect of breaking up conversations and killing threads. I've come back to threads before that seem to become really disjointed when a conversation is going in an entirely different direction all of the sudden since several posts worth of context have been gutted. > > Frankly, I think this is something that does more harm than good because it's simultaneously removing a lot of productive things from the boards to scrub away the unproductive. While I can understand wanting to avoid being accused of making "stealth edits", I've been a member of _many_ forums where the moderators will edit out offenses while leaving anything that doesn't break rules (in fact, that's how most I've posted on operate). As long as there is full transparency and some oversight within Anet (which, based on my experience moderating forums in the past, I suspect already exists since software I've used before allows admins to access edit logs), it tends to work. Rather than deleting my post because I mistakenly quoted something that broke a rule, why not just edit out the quote and leave the response so long as it's not violating a rule itself? If someone posts something extremely helpful but says one rude thing, why not remove the rude thing with a note why? Or, why not warn the person and give them a chance to fix it themselves? > > Right now, though, you have a policy in place that is set up to remove helpful and productive posts as a consequence, often from people who haven't done anything wrong. Surely you can see how that would give people the perception that censoring here is too extreme. And honestly, even speaking as someone who I can't recall ever getting in trouble for violating a forum rule, it'd take a lot to convince me that removing the posts of people who don't violate rules is not an extreme action. If a post you wrote was removed because you quoted someone who had their post removed you get a copy of your post in the mail with the post they are talking about. That way you can still take what you wrote and repost it, just with cutting out what someone else said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 Making that type of comparison does nothing to advance the conversation/discussion. It is for that kind of reason that I would expect it to be removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mewcifer.5198 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** > > Oh, come on. It should be quite clear that was tongue-in-cheek. And, more importantly, it was also just a generalized comment. This post from from Gaile is actually a precise example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, and several posters other than Ashen replied to mine with insightful comments that were ignored in favor of this one. > > The thing that's interesting is that this is not applied to players. Typically, only direct attacks that denigrate specific players are targeted for moderation, but generalized non-polite criticism of Anet is not tolerated because, it seems, that at least some moderators take personal offense to it and then decide it needs to be censored. I would consider this to be an inappropriate overreach of forum moderation. You can't force people to always be friendly. All you can do is stop them from harassing individuals. You literally compared the forums to North Korea. You can claim it is "tongue in cheek" all you want but you still made the statement. Even if it was exaggerated for effect it was still said and that still implies that it is meant at least a little bit. If I was to make a similar "tongue in cheek" comparison of you to something similar it would be removed from the forums, and rightly so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einlanzer.1627 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > > > > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > > > > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** > > > > Oh, come on. It should be quite clear that was tongue-in-cheek. And, more importantly, it was also just a generalized comment. This post from from Gaile is actually a precise example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, and several posters other than Ashen replied to mine with insightful comments that were ignored in favor of this one. > > > > The thing that's interesting is that this is not applied to players. Typically, only direct attacks that denigrate specific players are targeted for moderation, but generalized non-polite criticism of Anet is not tolerated because, it seems, that at least some moderators take personal offense to it and then decide it needs to be censored. I would consider this to be an inappropriate overreach of forum moderation. You can't force people to always be friendly. All you can do is stop them from harassing individuals. > > You literally compared the forums to North Korea. You can claim it is "tongue in cheek" all you want but you still made the statement. Even if it was exaggerated for effect it was still said and that still implies that it is meant at least a little bit. > > If I was to make a similar "tongue in cheek" comparison of you to something similar it would be removed from the forums, and rightly so. That's not the point. The point is that it's inappropriate for Gaile or any moderator to use their personal offense meter as a barometer for deciding what deserves to be censored. Who cares if I used hyperbole to make a point? I didn't say anything that objectively warranted censorship or infraction. That would be things like harassing individuals or spamming topics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mewcifer.5198 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > > > > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > > > > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > > > > > > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > > > > > > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** > > > > > > Oh, come on. It should be quite clear that was tongue-in-cheek. And, more importantly, it was also just a generalized comment. This post from from Gaile is actually a precise example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, and several posters other than Ashen replied to mine with insightful comments that were ignored in favor of this one. > > > > > > The thing that's interesting is that this is not applied to players. Typically, only direct attacks that denigrate specific players are targeted for moderation, but generalized non-polite criticism of Anet is not tolerated because, it seems, that at least some moderators take personal offense to it and then decide it needs to be censored. I would consider this to be an inappropriate overreach of forum moderation. You can't force people to always be friendly. All you can do is stop them from harassing individuals. > > > > You literally compared the forums to North Korea. You can claim it is "tongue in cheek" all you want but you still made the statement. Even if it was exaggerated for effect it was still said and that still implies that it is meant at least a little bit. > > > > If I was to make a similar "tongue in cheek" comparison of you to something similar it would be removed from the forums, and rightly so. > > That's not the point. The point is that it's inappropriate for Gaile or any moderator to use their personal offense meter as a barometer for deciding what deserves to be censored. > > I didn't say anything that objectively warranted censorship. > Except she didn't remove your post. She disagreed with what you said and expressed that it is comments they have to hear all the time with varying levels of serious intent involved from the people saying them. You weren't 'censored' so what is your argument here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einlanzer.1627 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > > > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > > > > > > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > > > > > > > > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > > > > > > > > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** > > > > > > > > Oh, come on. It should be quite clear that was tongue-in-cheek. And, more importantly, it was also just a generalized comment. This post from from Gaile is actually a precise example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, and several posters other than Ashen replied to mine with insightful comments that were ignored in favor of this one. > > > > > > > > The thing that's interesting is that this is not applied to players. Typically, only direct attacks that denigrate specific players are targeted for moderation, but generalized non-polite criticism of Anet is not tolerated because, it seems, that at least some moderators take personal offense to it and then decide it needs to be censored. I would consider this to be an inappropriate overreach of forum moderation. You can't force people to always be friendly. All you can do is stop them from harassing individuals. > > > > > > You literally compared the forums to North Korea. You can claim it is "tongue in cheek" all you want but you still made the statement. Even if it was exaggerated for effect it was still said and that still implies that it is meant at least a little bit. > > > > > > If I was to make a similar "tongue in cheek" comparison of you to something similar it would be removed from the forums, and rightly so. > > > > That's not the point. The point is that it's inappropriate for Gaile or any moderator to use their personal offense meter as a barometer for deciding what deserves to be censored. > > > > I didn't say anything that objectively warranted censorship. > > > > Except she didn't remove your post. She disagreed with what you said and expressed that it is comments they have to hear all the time with varying levels of serious intent involved from the people saying them. You weren't 'censored' so what is your argument here? No, but posts like that get removed all the time, and she made it clear she wanted to and probably would under normal circumstances. My opinion is that she needs to check the moderation team's zeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mewcifer.5198 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > > > > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > > > > > > > > > > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** > > > > > > > > > > Oh, come on. It should be quite clear that was tongue-in-cheek. And, more importantly, it was also just a generalized comment. This post from from Gaile is actually a precise example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, and several posters other than Ashen replied to mine with insightful comments that were ignored in favor of this one. > > > > > > > > > > The thing that's interesting is that this is not applied to players. Typically, only direct attacks that denigrate specific players are targeted for moderation, but generalized non-polite criticism of Anet is not tolerated because, it seems, that at least some moderators take personal offense to it and then decide it needs to be censored. I would consider this to be an inappropriate overreach of forum moderation. You can't force people to always be friendly. All you can do is stop them from harassing individuals. > > > > > > > > You literally compared the forums to North Korea. You can claim it is "tongue in cheek" all you want but you still made the statement. Even if it was exaggerated for effect it was still said and that still implies that it is meant at least a little bit. > > > > > > > > If I was to make a similar "tongue in cheek" comparison of you to something similar it would be removed from the forums, and rightly so. > > > > > > That's not the point. The point is that it's inappropriate for Gaile or any moderator to use their personal offense meter as a barometer for deciding what deserves to be censored. > > > > > > I didn't say anything that objectively warranted censorship. > > > > > > > Except she didn't remove your post. She disagreed with what you said and expressed that it is comments they have to hear all the time with varying levels of serious intent involved from the people saying them. You weren't 'censored' so what is your argument here? > > No, but posts like that get removed all the time, and she made it clear she wanted to and probably would under normal circumstances. My opinion is that she needs to check herself a little bit. [citation needed] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einlanzer.1627 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said: > > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > > > > > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > > > > > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh, come on. It should be quite clear that was tongue-in-cheek. And, more importantly, it was also just a generalized comment. This post from from Gaile is actually a precise example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, and several posters other than Ashen replied to mine with insightful comments that were ignored in favor of this one. > > > > > > > > > > > > The thing that's interesting is that this is not applied to players. Typically, only direct attacks that denigrate specific players are targeted for moderation, but generalized non-polite criticism of Anet is not tolerated because, it seems, that at least some moderators take personal offense to it and then decide it needs to be censored. I would consider this to be an inappropriate overreach of forum moderation. You can't force people to always be friendly. All you can do is stop them from harassing individuals. > > > > > > > > > > You literally compared the forums to North Korea. You can claim it is "tongue in cheek" all you want but you still made the statement. Even if it was exaggerated for effect it was still said and that still implies that it is meant at least a little bit. > > > > > > > > > > If I was to make a similar "tongue in cheek" comparison of you to something similar it would be removed from the forums, and rightly so. > > > > > > > > That's not the point. The point is that it's inappropriate for Gaile or any moderator to use their personal offense meter as a barometer for deciding what deserves to be censored. > > > > > > > > I didn't say anything that objectively warranted censorship. > > > > > > > > > > Except she didn't remove your post. She disagreed with what you said and expressed that it is comments they have to hear all the time with varying levels of serious intent involved from the people saying them. You weren't 'censored' so what is your argument here? > > > > No, but posts like that get removed all the time, and she made it clear she wanted to and probably would under normal circumstances. My opinion is that she needs to check herself a little bit. > > [citation needed] No, it actually isn't. It's a common experience on this board, which is why this topic took off the way it did. I could provide examples from my own post history but there's no point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen.2907 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > No, but posts like that get removed all the time Good. Going onto someone else's property and comparing them to mass murderers... Yeah, its removing posts of that sort that is the problem. /s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darlgon.9273 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > @"Ashen.2907" said: > > > @"Einlanzer.1627" said: > > > My biggest issue is how direct criticism of Anet or developer handling of something carries significant risk of quick censorship, _often to a higher degree than comments directed toward other players_. As if this is North Korea or something. I get it if you're directly attacking individuals whether they be other posters or Anet employees, but making generalized comments that are critical of dev actions should not receive censorship and infractions. > > > > > > On some occasions I've challenged them and basically been met with defensiveness in the form of "no I found it offensive and I have the authority to censor you so lalalalala". > > > > > > It will usually drive me off the boards for a while. > > > > Now that is funny. > > > > Comparing moderation on a game forum to a totalitarian regime that tortures and kills its own people. > > I want to point out that we're trying very hard to leave all posts in place, but some of them truly are unacceptable. Referring to the moderation team in a pejorative way isn't necessary, and comparing them to North Korea is inexplicable. I see this a lot in appeals: "You guys are all commies," or "The mods are fascists," or the almost-inevitable reference to certain horrible political parties from WWII (which I can't say expressly because the word is rightfully filtered on the forums). > > Our message remains: **Argue with / debate an opinion, a position, a decision, an idea, but don't make it personal.** Just one thing to add. To the previous posters before Gaile. There is this thing called a PM, you may have heard of it called a "private message". It bypasses the forum part of feedback, prevents you from calling out an ANet person in the forums, and the forum CoC, that some seem to take issue. Interestingly, because you are sending it to a person, instead of a nameless "dev", most people will tend to be more civil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts