These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Do EvE Online players cyberbully CCP?

Author
Marsha Mallow
#41 - 2015-09-11 00:02:43 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
I dont see any constructive real solutions.

Actually I think there are. First step define the parameters of the problem. Thanks for taking the time to write up such a long post. You've highlighted a load of points I was thinking of with a completely different emphasis, which is useful. Chew over it for a bit and come back to it.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:
I think most Devs rarely, if ever, read these boards.

I disagree. I've been reading a lot of the material for years and see odd comments buried in threads being implemented without any fanfare. Devs themselves comment they are avid readers. You just can't see them because tbh if they did comment a lot they might be accused of favouritism here too. It's also worth remembering that they are (afaik) still allowed to use alt accounts on the official boards. For all we know, some of the forum regulars might be devs (which has always amused me).

A lot of the most high profile CSMs are elected because they're heavy commentors on various forums/blogs - but once elected their posting activity falls through the floor and they mostly disappear from public view even after their term ends. Hard to tell why, but it looks a lot like burnout, and realising that by engaging in cerain types of discussion they're being destructive towards CCP and undoing their own work. Which is a lot harder to do once you've met developers face-to-face.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Im just a scrub, and relatively new to the game, yet even I see the potential.

Sometimes being new allows people to see things more clearly. And you make your case for the dangers fairly well. There were very good reasons Devs refrained from getting too involved on kcom/failheap. Reddit looks, at a glance, to be a good spot for CCP/CSM to talk to players without the usual leadership filters (because they can register using any name, and in theory speak freely). But I don't think that's entirely true as there is an option to add a flair/use your ingame name. If anything it looks dangerous because players can unite in hostile ways without their normal leadership/authority figures to stop them from sliding into really bad behaviour. The silence from a lot of high profile figures there suggests they've already snubbed reddit as a potentially toxic area and are boycotting it, and CCP/CSM should pay attention to that.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:
To Devs: Not that you will read this, since its not on reddit, and Im nobody, and thisnwill be buried behind 10 shitnposts, but remember that in EVE, and anything related to it, trust NOBODY. If you read it, you are influenced by it. Never underestimate or forget that the influence meta is real, and you are its primary and penultimate target. Also never forget that some of the people you are talking to, are very, exceedingly, good at social/personal manipulation. You are a prominent and profitable target. Take precautions.

That's really good advice tbh. Fair enough CCP may like all of their players and want to talk to them as openly as possible. Might not be wise in an environment where people can be so easily manipulated (and where extremes of bad online behaviour) are common.

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
#42 - 2015-09-11 00:17:28 UTC
In general I find online forums to be pleasant places.

Sure they could be better, but if people truly wanted that they would change their forums.

For instance there is no reward system for good behaviour, sure there is usually a copy/paste "Like" system, but nothing really deep.

This extends further than these EVE forums, it's true of media like online newspapers who shy away from Comments sections because it's full of people with opinions and some of them are rude.

To me that indicates that not much thought has gone into the two-way nature of communication that has begun. Newspapers are used to telling people the news, not being involved in discussions about the news. And in the end that news is always opinion.

Same with online game companies, they still have the old models of running a shop and wanting a pristine shiny advert as their online face, but it gets grimy with all the customers' fingerprints typing away on forums.

But more than two-way the conversation has to recognise that conversation is multi-directional, chaotic. Players chat to each other here, then to other game forums, then to games media, then to social media and so on.

I don't see much happening to capture that.

But most importantly for the issues of trolling and bullying etc., I don't see reward systems for good behaviour.

What do you get from CCP for posting deep, funny or insightful posts? Nothing.

What do you get for dramatic posts? Heaps of heart stopping action in the cut and thrust with other people!

So no, players don't bully CCP, they just chat in the ways they find most enjoyable and rewarding.

~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~

Marsha Mallow
#43 - 2015-09-11 00:30:36 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
I'm talking about having select people act like best buds and kiss butt to gain favor with CCP Dev's who in turn support their suggestions.

This one always strikes as an odd accusation. Common sense seems to be, if you want a suggestion implemented in any arena (here, work, home) you stand a better chance of getting it done if you ask nicely and get on reasonably well with the person you're dealing with. I know it looks a lot like arse kissing, but it's effective. People don't react well to dickish commands. It seems to be people unwilling to make that time commitment, have an argumentative/hostile mode of communication or an irrational dislike for the people involved who make that criticism. And are then angry and resentful at being excluded or less successful getting what they want. Cronyism is always something to be aware of but it shouldn't get in the way of getting things done. Best bet, don't bang someone out of gratitude for doing what you want. That's my limit, anything below that is fine >.>

Nerath Naaris wrote:
Ultimately, bullies are still preferable to arse-lickers and snitches.

I've never bullied any of my mates.Once you get to know them you can have the odd outburst where you flip out and call them a knobhead, then ask for forgiveness and get it. But if you do it all the time they'll eventually ignore you or stop bothering. I can practically hear this one whooshing over the heads of a good portion of the world tbh. Don't get the snitches comment in this context, sorry.

Max Fubarticus wrote:
I know my view won't be well received!
I don't think CCP is cyber-bullied at all. In fact, the very concept of cyber-bullying is nothing more than a sociological argument gone awry. It is similar in nature to "microagressions" and verbal/nonverbal "triggers", social concepts spawned by the delicate snowflake culture that infests our world. I am not trolling this post, I simply don't agree.
Besides that, how exactly does one cyberbully the very Judge, Jury, and Executioner in the universe we call Eve?

I dont mind you having your own opinion and stating it, lol. No point even bothering having conversations where everyone agrees perfectly. Defining cyberbullying might be useful - I'll look for something tomorrow. Or if anyone else has something, feel free to link it. I agree it's not an easy one to define and some might argue it doesn't exist. I'd say it probably does because bullying does in the real world and online interractions reflect those. It's generally group behaviour towards a specific individual that dehumanises them with seriously destructive personal consequences (that the attackers may/may not be aware of).

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Salvos Rhoska
#44 - 2015-09-11 02:09:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Actually I think there are. First step define the parameters of the problem.

I agree, but its problematic.

CCP has, commendably, encouraged player/dev interaction on an unprecedented scale. Despite its shortfalls, Ive always found the CSM position in particular to be an outstanding extension of what used to be considered a good thing, in terms of community/company interface, in an 80s mindset :D

This is good, and would be excellent, were it not for the nature of the (EVE) players involved, and the evolved social network we currently live in. Drawing parameters, now, involves complicated social ambiguities. In Finnish, we call it "drawing lines in water". Id be hard-pressed to formulate even a superficial draft for CCP policy to its employees as to define the parameters of this problem.

Its no longer simply a systemic/company issue, its already extended itself into the personal lives and space of its employees.

Marsha Mallow wrote:
I've been reading a lot of the material for years and see odd comments buried in threads being implemented without any fanfare. Devs themselves comment they are avid readers.

1) "for years". Things have changed. Very recently. The social media landscape and reddit's prominence in particular, in relation to EVE, is a very new thing. I'm know you understand the difference, just reminding you of it so as to stress its commensurate lack of company oversight and regulation as a "new thing" before they react. Sooner or later, disaster will strike. Better to act per-emptively, now.

2) I certainly hope Devs still read GD and the rest of this forum. I've read reddit, and imo it still pales to what happens and is produced here. Though reddit may be more free in its moderation, GD carries qualities above and beyond. Who wouldn't read this board for entertainment, at least?

Marsha Mallow wrote:
A lot of the most high profile CSMs are elected because they're heavy commentors on various forums/blogs - but once elected their posting activity falls through the floor and they mostly disappear from public view even after their term ends.

I've noticed the same, and miss their input here. Very articulate and outspoken individuals. But there is a rather nasty irony that though they, as CSM, are supposed to represent the community, upon appointment as CSM and thereafter, their actual community involvement and expression takes a huge nosedive. You posit that it has to do with a degree of burnout and realizing that antagonising in opposition against CCP is counterproductive.

My perspective, rather cynically, is that the revolutionaries and "man of the people" stance they once had quickly converts into "closet aristocrat", and that their lack of community communication is simply because they now instead communicate directly and primarily with the source (CCP), rather than their basis (us). Arguably, and admittedly, that may also be exactly the purpose for which they were elected.

Marsha Mallow wrote:
There were very good reasons Devs refrained from getting too involved on kcom/failheap.... The silence from a lot of high profile figures there suggests they've already snubbed reddit as a potentially toxic area and are boycotting it, and CCP/CSM should pay attention to that.

Acknowledged.

However, I must again stress that CCP staff on non-official sites are at the mercy of its denizens, in all kinds of convoluted meta-gaming. Its a huge can of worms with all kinds of problems that can potentially escalate so far as to RUIN a company entirely.

I cannot overstate the risk of this severely enough.
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Fair enough CCP may like all of their players and want to talk to them as openly as possible.

Agreed, and very commendable on CCPs part. But people are merely human. And as human, subject to influence and error.

I dont mean to get all military upon in this thread, but a certain professional degree of separation is crucial to fulfilling just about every job imaginable. Its important to remember what your job is and maintain a professional distance from your customers/clients. I myself am working as a nurse, and I dread the day I might have a friend or relative as a patient...

Its eminently important, in almost all fields of work, to remember what your job is, and keep your personal feelings and attachments separate from that. Otherwise, you are, again, opening a whole can of worms you really really dont want to, and doubly so when its people who want something from you specifically because of your job.
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#45 - 2015-09-12 01:38:42 UTC
looking at the dev blog and dev post in F&I today I imagine fozzie was probably at home eating cheese and drinking whine and not worried about all the bleh going on.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#46 - 2015-09-12 01:42:32 UTC
Max Fubarticus wrote:
I know my view won't be well received!
I don't think CCP is cyber-bullied at all. In fact, the very concept of cyber-bullying is nothing more than a sociological argument gone awry. It is similar in nature to "microagressions" and verbal/nonverbal "triggers", social concepts spawned by the delicate snowflake culture that infests our world. I am not trolling this post, I simply don't agree.
Besides that, how exactly does one cyberbully the very Judge, Jury, and Executioner in the universe we call Eve?




There you go. Right there.

Cyber-bullying is just another socjus term used by goonybeards and twinkhairs to insult people who counter their opinions with logical arguments.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

beakerax
Pator Tech School
#47 - 2015-09-12 06:15:18 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Cyber-bullying is just another socjus term used by goonybeards and twinkhairs to insult people who counter their opinions with logical arguments.

¿inglés?
Previous page123