These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

The future of Community and CCL

First post First post
Author
CCP Navigator
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2012-06-26 16:42:48 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Gargant
It has become apparent over the last 24 hours that players are upset at the perceived locking of legitimate discussion threads on the forums. The CCL have been set up to assist the Community team in talking to players, assisting them with queries and moderating the forums to ensure that EVE related discussions remain on-topic in a relatively calm environment.

So let me talk a bit about what is happening with this team historically, what is happening now and what we expect to happen in the future.

The Past – Formation of the team.

The concept for what the CCL team was outlined in a Dev Blog back in 2011. Our goals at that time were to establish the leadership of the volunteer program and let it grow to service the needs of the EVE forums. During its inception we had several volunteers join and subsequently leave for a variety of reasons, always their own choice. This meant that the program did not grow quite as we expected so we went back to the drawing board.

The Current – Growing pains

Our current Admiral, ISD Eshtir, has a long and established history with the volunteer program. Working with CCP Spitfire, he sent out a call for new volunteers which resulted in an influx of new and eager batch of recruits. Coming on to a large and vocal forum can be somewhat daunting and we expected that there would be growing pains. The volunteers we have are doing this because they have the best interests of EVE at heart. Will they make some mistakes? Sure, I still even do that despite being here almost six years. Should they expect threads calling for their disbandment and summary execution? No, they should not. The CCL is here for the long haul and the Community team will be aiding them to become better moderators and chill bros you want to hang with. We have a series of plans listed below to ensure that happens.

The Future – Posting Nirvana

Our aim is to provide a discussion platform that allows players, volunteers and developers to talk about EVE and how we can make it better, what you like and what you want to see more of in the future. I will be totally candid and tell you that this does not happen when any of these groups becomes abusive and vindictive. That type of discussion only ever results in one or more of those groups becoming more distant and non-communicative. That is not good for you, the players, and it is definitely not what our developers and volunteers want to see happening. So here is our plan for taking the EVE Community team and ISD forward:

• We have at least one vacant position on the Community team and hope to add more people in the short to medium term. If you are interested in applying, please see this link.
• The Community team will hold regular Skype voice chats with volunteers and address their concerns, assist them with any training they may require and help answer any of their queries
• We will aim to have an ISD Seminar for the CCL at the earliest opportunity. Hopefully this can be sometime in July but may run over into August due to vacations and Alliance Tournament.
• We will provide moderation log access to the Admirals and Captains so that they can fully see what the ISD team are editing/deleting. This access does not compromise any of your personal information or show any warning or ban history. It literally shows the content of deleted posts, edited/original content and who carried that out.
• Increase the volunteer team by a further six people over the coming weeks and provide a stable structure for an easier flow of communication between CCP and the volunteers so that they can get advice on moderation actions if they are required.

These are just some of the first steps we will take to improve the communication process to you. This is a two way street and you also need to be a part of for it to work. This means we will still deal with abusive posts decisively and firmly. If you wish to discuss a hot topic issue we will expect you to do so in a calm and reasonable manner. Duplicate threads will still get locked, threads in the wrong sections will still be moved etc. It is also worth noting that using EVE mail to contact ISD about moderation will result in nothing happening. The correct process is to submit a petition under ‘Forums’ and we will investigate for you.

Our goal at CCP is to provide you all with a fun and vibrant discussion area and we will not stop working to attain that. There will be growing pains and there will be times we drop the ball. This is not deliberate and when we do drop the ball we will aim to correct those mistakes.

Finally, the Community team will be locking the myriad of threads on criticizing ISD. You can direct all comments to this thread only as this is the only one we will be following and answering.

Thank you for your time.

The EVE Community and CCL teams
Blawrf McTaggart
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2012-06-26 16:46:53 UTC
cool thanks
daveo911
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2012-06-26 16:47:14 UTC
in before lock?
Arcturus Archangel
Archbreed
#4 - 2012-06-26 16:47:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Arcturus Archangel
+1 for effort.
CCP doing something right. Hopefully this turn out into something that will make all parties satisfied.

[Insert witty quote here]

AFK Hauler
State War Academy
#5 - 2012-06-26 16:47:50 UTC
Thank you for placing this here.

Will update later with more opinion later.
Alaya Carrier
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2012-06-26 16:49:52 UTC
Very nice initiative, guys, keep going with the good work! :thumbsup:
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2012-06-26 16:57:35 UTC
Wow, that's nice to see, CCP Navigator.
Ituhata
Killboard Padding Services
#8 - 2012-06-26 16:59:23 UTC
Reposting my opinion from another thread unedited

Quote:

Unfortunately I didn't actually see what happened, but it sounds like a thread was posted, replies were made that devolved into trolling, and the entire thread was locked wholesale without the OP getting an answer. Then a repeating feedback loop was created as subsequent threads were made to get that answer and of course, threads were locked for duplication and/or discussing moderation (first thread locked, continued BZZT! discussing moderation, etc.)

What probably should have happened was the moderators should have taken the time to remove or edit the offensive posts and make a post reminding people to politely stay on topic. Afterwards if the thread continued on course it could be locked wholesale and the forum users would not have much of a leg to stand on if they opposed the action.

I also feel there is a language barrier issue and the 'personal attack' angle of locking or editing posts is, quite frankly, used too liberally. Combined with discussing forum moderation, it seems to be quite an effective way to curb any open criticism whatsoever, which I feel is a bad precedent to set.

Having individuals file petitions which in all likelihood will be ignored individually rather than having a community discussion is alot like Walmart being able to fight discrimination cases on a case by case basis rather than a class action basis. The results are the same, anyway....but that is purely my opinion on the matter.


I thank you CCP Navigator for this thread, as I feel it negates my last paragraph for the most part. I understand the complexity of the issue but I felt it necessary to have a platform to openly voice our concerns on the matter in a generally constructive manner, however criticism must be allowed to some extent if we are to have a legitimate discussion about it.

Also I got a warm and fuzzy feeling, this was well written and I thought it was heartfelt. But then again I get the same feeling sometimes when I read advertisement letters addressed to me. Lol
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#9 - 2012-06-26 17:01:35 UTC
Might I suggest a subforum for OOPE in which politics, religion, and all those other forbidden topics are no longer forbidden? This is a community, and sometimes such things are relevant to some members of the community. We'd probably be better off throwing such topics into their own forum than simply locking them and silencing the conversation.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.

Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#10 - 2012-06-26 17:01:48 UTC
Oh hey look, we're having a discourse about the ISD and forum moderation.

Was that so hard? Blink Having forum moderation is great, it streamlines discussion and gets rid of (most) of the badposting/spam. However, the line between moderation and outright censorship is a dangerous one, and sometimes I've seen sincerely legitimate threads, with actual discussion about EVE, be locked for rather odd reasons.

One of the most prominent is seeing word "Jew" edited out,even if the word isn't being used in a negative connotation or with any hatred/anger behind it. If this is offensive to some, or against CCP's forum rules, then so be it, but things like this need to be clearly defined for all parties, and defined in a way that doesn't just seem robotic. (IE: Thread Locked, Generic Reason, Don't Try Contacting Me)
CCP Navigator
C C P
C C P Alliance
#11 - 2012-06-26 17:04:00 UTC
Ituhata wrote:
Reposting my opinion from another thread unedited

Quote:

Unfortunately I didn't actually see what happened, but it sounds like a thread was posted, replies were made that devolved into trolling, and the entire thread was locked wholesale without the OP getting an answer. Then a repeating feedback loop was created as subsequent threads were made to get that answer and of course, threads were locked for duplication and/or discussing moderation (first thread locked, continued BZZT! discussing moderation, etc.)

What probably should have happened was the moderators should have taken the time to remove or edit the offensive posts and make a post reminding people to politely stay on topic. Afterwards if the thread continued on course it could be locked wholesale and the forum users would not have much of a leg to stand on if they opposed the action.

I also feel there is a language barrier issue and the 'personal attack' angle of locking or editing posts is, quite frankly, used too liberally. Combined with discussing forum moderation, it seems to be quite an effective way to curb any open criticism whatsoever, which I feel is a bad precedent to set.

Having individuals file petitions which in all likelihood will be ignored individually rather than having a community discussion is alot like Walmart being able to fight discrimination cases on a case by case basis rather than a class action basis. The results are the same, anyway....but that is purely my opinion on the matter.


I thank you CCP Navigator for this thread, as I feel it negates my last paragraph for the most part. I understand the complexity of the issue but I felt it necessary to have a platform to openly voice our concerns on the matter in a generally constructive manner, however criticism must be allowed to some extent if we are to have a legitimate discussion about it.

Also I got a warm and fuzzy feeling, this was well written and I thought it was heartfelt. But then again I get the same feeling sometimes when I read advertisement letters addressed to me. Lol


It is heartfelt but your last line did make me chuckle. Thanks Smile
Holy One
Privat Party
#12 - 2012-06-26 17:04:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Holy One
Spin. What you want CCP is a closed environment where naysayers and critics can be snuffed out in favour of rabid fanbois.

You want to avoid what has happened the last three years with your terrible expansions - people vocally and vociferously criticising your business decisions and the individuals responsible for them.

You want censorship and control and those two things will only result in a polarisation of game design and false confidence in your feedback quality and bias. Historically the Eve 'community' has been quick and sharp to point out your poor business and game design decisions and has been highly critical at key times in your business direction - which has saved you on several occasions.

The new 'direction' is merely going to result in an extension of the hubris bubble we see historically you like to perpetuate internally. Over time you will drive away anyone who disagrees with the 'herd' and force them to take their concerns and their passion to 'other' forums which your staff have no interest in monitoring.

Every entertainment media developer who has in the past opted for a highly moderated environment has seen their communities stagnate and whither. If you deny Evil Online's true nature and ignore those many tens of thousands of individuals who decry the constant and ham fisted attempts to destroy their faith in you, instead opting to surround yourself with sycophants, pedants and casuals: goooood fight.

Eve is hard. It is also full of foul mouthed bad people. Your business model as a niche product catering to Evil Online wannabes, results in an libertarian, highly vocal and irreverent player base. If you allow the closed ranks of the bears to drone out any dissenters then I predict sad and embarrassing things for you as a company going forward.

You won't make Eve stronger or the game better or attract more carebears by excluding the very hard core nucleous of angry, anti social and vocal nerds who prop up this mmo from populating and shitting up your forums. Whoever it is that has had this brain fart of 'micro' managing away all criticism of your operating procedures, policies and decision making processes, doesn't get it. In just the very same sad and predictable way people like me would be quick to point out before ISD n3rd edits it away.

It starts with an attempt to order and ends with complete censorship. The worse most subjective and inconsistent sort.

:)

CCP Navigator
C C P
C C P Alliance
#13 - 2012-06-26 17:05:48 UTC
Rer Eirikr wrote:
Oh hey look, we're having a discourse about the ISD and forum moderation.

Was that so hard? Blink Having forum moderation is great, it streamlines discussion and gets rid of (most) of the badposting/spam. However, the line between moderation and outright censorship is a dangerous one, and sometimes I've seen sincerely legitimate threads, with actual discussion about EVE, be locked for rather odd reasons.

One of the most prominent is seeing word "Jew" edited out,even if the word isn't being used in a negative connotation or with any hatred/anger behind it. If this is offensive to some, or against CCP's forum rules, then so be it, but things like this need to be clearly defined for all parties, and defined in a way that doesn't just seem robotic. (IE: Thread Locked, Generic Reason, Don't Try Contacting Me)


Ok, here is what I will say about the use of 'Jewgold', Jewing' and other terms of that nature. They don't add anything of value to a discussion. The very terminology is offensive to many and completely unnecessary. There are many of our players who are Jewish and they should not be subjected to phrasing which makes them and others feel uncomfortable.
Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#14 - 2012-06-26 17:08:24 UTC
CCP Navigator wrote:
Ok, here is what I will say about the use of 'Jewgold', Jewing' and other terms of that nature. They don't add anything of value to a discussion. The very terminology is offensive to many and completely unnecessary. There are many of our players who are Jewish and they should not be subjected to phrasing which makes them and others feel uncomfortable.


All I needed to hear. Understood loud and clear. o7 That was just one example that came to my head faster than others. I do want to thank you though for being candid about this entire discussion and letting us voice our opinions on this. (Plus the folks making silly locked threads were running out of funny one liners)
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#15 - 2012-06-26 17:09:23 UTC
I appreciate the outline and the open communication.

I also recognize and accept the the ISD moderation is both for the improvement of the community and in any case, a fait acompli.

However, there were not "mistakes" made.

There were serious breaches of even the most basic and fundamental principles of customer services.

A particular ISD member I will not mention should NEVER be allowed to deal with the the public, unless deep training is done, and even then, the lack of common sense shown was not something that is usually easily fixed.

His or her behavior, at the very least, was petulant and condescending. At worse, it seemed he or she was engaged in a personal vendetta against a particular user, who then proceed to unsubscribed after various attempts to communicate his displeasure.

That is as far from good moderators and chill bros as you can get, and felt more like someone enjoying the power.

I guess my point is, this was not mistake, not a serious mistake, it was a game breaking bug in the system.

I do not understand why a hard introduce was needed. Even in real life, when new public area rules are introduced, the police are instructed to give warnings and educational summons before fines, for a period of months, to get people accustomed to the new rules.

I smoke, and live in a city that has banned smoking almost anywhere, and they took 6 months to introduce actual fines and interventions. In the meantime, the police told you to turn it off, and gave you a citation without a fine (to keep it on record in case you then got a fine later, it could be used to make the fine harsher).

So for example, instead of dumping new rules, and an obviously unprepared (And possibly unqualified) ISD team on us with full powers and full responsibility, a better way would have been to put the rules and have a period of education in which they wouldn't be enforced except in harsh/obvious cases (And of course, the old rules would be enforced normally), but instead they got a feel for the forums, the regulars, the trolls, the lines of demarcation, the coming and goings, you know, SITUATIONAL AWARNESS, and then after a few months, when the community already comfortable with the constant presence, then unleash the fury of the banhammer.

Of course, the cat is out of the bag, but there is a lesson here, which is that patience and understanding works both ways. And that just because one can do something, doesn't mean one should do it: that ethos is perfect for the game, not so perfect for customer service, which is what the ISD moderation is.

The only reason I do not volunteer is because I do not volunteer for for-profits. My accountant would kill me. But I know how CS works, and you did it wrong. And that is surprising, because CCP is consistently awesome in CS, even when failing at almost everything at some point or the other.
Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
CCP Navigator
C C P
C C P Alliance
#16 - 2012-06-26 17:10:45 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Navigator
Holy One wrote:
Spin. What you want CCP is a closed environment where naysayers and critics can be snuffed out in favour of rabid fanbois.

You want to avoid what has happened the last three years with your terrible expansions - people vocally and vociferously criticising your business decisions ad individuals responsible for them.

You want censorship and control and those two things will only result in a polarisation of game design and false confidence in your feedback quality and bias. Historically the Eve 'community' has been quick and sharp to point out your poor business and game design decisions and has been highly critical at key times in your business direction - which has saved you on several occasions.

The new 'direction' is merely going to result in an extension of the hubris bubble we see historically you like to perpetuate internally. Over time you will drive away anyone who disagrees with the 'herd' and force them to take their concerns and their passion to 'other' forums which your staff have no interest in monitoring.

Every entertainment media developer who has in the past opted for a highly moderated environment has seen their communities stagnate and whither. If you deny Evil Online's true nature and ignore those many tens of thousands of individuals who decry the constant and ham fisted attempts to destroy their faith in you, instead opting to surround yourself with sycophants, pedants and casuals: goooood fight.

Eve is hard. It is also full of foul mouthed bad people. Your business model as a niche product catering to Evil Online wannabes, results in an libertarian, highly vocal and irreverent player base. If you allow the closed ranks of the bears to drone out any dissenters then I predict sad and embarrassing things for you as a company going forward.

You won't make Eve stronger or the game better or attract more carebears by excluding the very hard core nucleous of angry, anti social and vocal nerds who prop up this mmo from populating and shitting up your forums. Whoever it is that has had this brain fart of 'micro' managing away all criticism of you operating procedures, policies and decision making processes, doesn't get it. In just the very same sad and predictable way people like me would be quick to point out before ISD n3rd edits it away.


I find I have to disagree with you on quite a few of your points, Holy One.

Firstly, your post was well written and should not be subject to edits in any way. You disagreed with me but did so in a polite and fair way. For that you should not be edited.

I understand the concept of EVE is hard and full of bad mouthed people but my feeling is that people use that as an excuse to be vitriolic and downright rude unnecessarily. I will ask you in all honesty, would you want to hold a conversation with me if I was being abusive to you and making you feel unwelcome? Do you find that having discussions of that nature is more or less productive?

Once again, we want you all to be vocal. We want you discussing EVE, why you love it, why you hate it, what you would like to see in the future and more. Our only request from you is that you do it in a way that makes your fellow players and our Developers comfortable in having that discussion with you.

I do not feel that this is an unreasonable request Smile
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#17 - 2012-06-26 17:15:24 UTC
Holy One wrote:
Spin. What you want CCP is a closed environment where naysayers and critics can be snuffed out in favour of rabid fanbois.


I will say I cautiously optimistic that is not the case.

Contrary to the the themeparks, EVE has always been way more open on its forums than other places, except for the annoying censoring filter, which I never got.

In fact, the threads here have been locked, not deleted, which they are in many other places.

And some of the stuff here, you couldn't get away with even in Something Awful.

So lets have a sense of proportion, and lets be patient.

That said, I do expect CCP to be more clear as to their intent, and this posting is a good step, but insufficient.

Yes, we are crybabies, and you cannot moderate that away. And we are crybabies that buy lots of etc, subs, and plexies with real money from CCP, so we are entitled crybabies. That will not change. Adapt or perish.
Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
CCP Navigator
C C P
C C P Alliance
#18 - 2012-06-26 17:16:03 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Navigator
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
I appreciate the outline and the open communication.

I also recognize and accept the the ISD moderation is both for the improvement of the community and in any case, a fait acompli.

However, there were not "mistakes" made.

There were serious breaches of even the most basic and fundamental principles of customer services.

A particular ISD member I will not mention should NEVER be allowed to deal with the the public, unless deep training is done, and even then, the lack of common sense shown was not something that is usually easily fixed.

His or her behavior, at the very least, was petulant and condescending. At worse, it seemed he or she was engaged in a personal vendetta against a particular user, who then proceed to unsubscribed after various attempts to communicate his displeasure.

That is as far from good moderators and chill bros as you can get, and felt more like someone enjoying the power.

I guess my point is, this was not mistake, not a serious mistake, it was a game breaking bug in the system.

I do not understand why a hard introduce was needed. Even in real life, when new public area rules are introduced, the police are instructed to give warnings and educational summons before fines, for a period of months, to get people accustomed to the new rules.

I smoke, and live in a city that has banned smoking almost anywhere, and they took 6 months to introduce actual fines and interventions. In the meantime, the police told you to turn it off, and gave you a citation without a fine (to keep it on record in case you then got a fine later, it could be used to make the fine harsher).

So for example, instead of dumping new rules, and an obviously unprepared (And possibly unqualified) ISD team on us with full powers and full responsibility, a better way would have been to put the rules and have a period of education in which they wouldn't be enforced except in harsh/obvious cases (And of course, the old rules would be enforced normally), but instead they got a feel for the forums, the regulars, the trolls, the lines of demarcation, the coming and goings, you know, SITUATIONAL AWARNESS, and then after a few months, when the community already comfortable with the constant presence, then unleash the fury of the banhammer.

Of course, the cat is out of the bag, but there is a lesson here, which is that patience and understanding works both ways. And that just because one can do something, doesn't mean one should do it: that ethos is perfect for the game, not so perfect for customer service, which is what the ISD moderation is.

The only reason I do not volunteer is because I do not volunteer for for-profits. My accountant would kill me. But I know how CS works, and you did it wrong. And that is surprising, because CCP is consistently awesome in CS, even when failing at almost everything at some point or the other.


Hi Crunchie Attuxors,

I want to address a few of your points if I may. Firstly, the ISD team have absolutely no banning powers whatsoever. All bans from the forums are issued by the Community team as are all new forum rules. The latest rules we have are to provide a better environment for Developers and players to talk. That is our primary goal.

It is to be expected that some volunteers (even seasoned CCP staff for that matter) will drop the ball from time to time. In regards to ISD members, I view this as a training opportunity to make these guys and girls better and ensure they communicate much more effectively with the Community.

Obviously we will continue to conduct audits and ensure that CCL members revive the best support possible from us to do the best possible job for everyone.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#19 - 2012-06-26 17:17:12 UTC
Holy One wrote:
Spin. What you want CCP is a closed environment where naysayers and critics can be snuffed out in favour of rabid fanbois.

You want to avoid what has happened the last three years with your terrible expansions - people vocally and vociferously criticising your business decisions and the individuals responsible for them.

You want censorship and control and those two things will only result in a polarisation of game design and false confidence in your feedback quality and bias. Historically the Eve 'community' has been quick and sharp to point out your poor business and game design decisions and has been highly critical at key times in your business direction - which has saved you on several occasions.

The new 'direction' is merely going to result in an extension of the hubris bubble we see historically you like to perpetuate internally. Over time you will drive away anyone who disagrees with the 'herd' and force them to take their concerns and their passion to 'other' forums which your staff have no interest in monitoring.

Every entertainment media developer who has in the past opted for a highly moderated environment has seen their communities stagnate and whither. If you deny Evil Online's true nature and ignore those many tens of thousands of individuals who decry the constant and ham fisted attempts to destroy their faith in you, instead opting to surround yourself with sycophants, pedants and casuals: goooood fight.

Eve is hard. It is also full of foul mouthed bad people. Your business model as a niche product catering to Evil Online wannabes, results in an libertarian, highly vocal and irreverent player base. If you allow the closed ranks of the bears to drone out any dissenters then I predict sad and embarrassing things for you as a company going forward.

You won't make Eve stronger or the game better or attract more carebears by excluding the very hard core nucleous of angry, anti social and vocal nerds who prop up this mmo from populating and shitting up your forums. Whoever it is that has had this brain fart of 'micro' managing away all criticism of you operating procedures, policies and decision making processes, doesn't get it. In just the very same sad and predictable way people like me would be quick to point out before ISD n3rd edits it away.

It starts with an attempt to order and ends with complete censorship. The worse most subjective and inconsistent sort.


This game is mostly populated by middle age, educated males... yet your post makes it sound like it's populated by unruly, pre-pubescent tantrum throughing morons....

I'm sure there is a middle ground, where the obnoxious minority are limited in a reasonable manner.... CCP has a history of letting long, venomous threads vent player frustrations over their business decisions and game design choices. Why do you think this is going to end??? If anything, setting up a clear set of guidelines on how ISD is to handle player outcry is a good thing, so long as it's not a blatant censorship of disenfranchised sentiments.
Price Check Aisle3
#20 - 2012-06-26 17:17:48 UTC
I'd like to see posts taken in context before moderation. I caught a one month ban for "trolling someone being helpful" when, in fact, that someone was just being a jackass in a criticism thread and what I posted was something I would have considered a "gentle ribbing". Honestly, sometimes I feel like the actual reason for the ban is hidden elsewhere.

Second, some posters here seem to have found how to "game the system" by posting vitriol and insults in a very general manner. I find that highly offensive in light of the "personal attacks" rule and the bans generated by that rule.

Also, please change your link to contact about the ban to something other than a mailto link. For instance, maybe the petition area? Mailtos don't work on any of my computers because I don't have default mail clients.
  • Karl Hobb IATS
123Next pageLast page