These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The future of Community and CCL

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
None ofthe Above
#281 - 2012-06-29 15:56:37 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
This post is a good example of what the ISDs are doing wrong. Something completely relevant to the topic at hand was edited out as off-topic.


Again, we need a discussion on how to change policy to improve for the future.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1552432#post1552432

Mea culpas are all very heartfelt and appreciated but without policy changes we are fated to come right back here again.

Lets have some straight talk on this subject. Sorry to say but it appears that CCP and CCL aren't interested in having a frank discussion on this. Apologize and act as if it never happened? Sorry but that's uncool.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#282 - 2012-06-29 16:19:44 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
This post is a good example of what the ISDs are doing wrong. Something completely relevant to the topic at hand was edited out as off-topic.


Again, we need a discussion on how to change policy to improve for the future.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1552432#post1552432

Mea culpas are all very heartfelt and appreciated but without policy changes we are fated to come right back here again.

Lets have some straight talk on this subject. Sorry to say but it appears that CCP and CCL aren't interested in having a frank discussion on this. Apologize and act as if it never happened? Sorry but that's uncool.

I think the problem on the post I linked was a failure to understand the intent. He/she didn't "read between the lines." Stating that I have to pee seems non sequitur, but the implication of the post was that I'm in dangerous space and need to step away, so I cloak up to take a few minutes' break. As that would technically be "AFK cloaking", according to the OP I would be botting.

I suspect much of the excessive editing going on is due to a lack of comprehension.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
None ofthe Above
#283 - 2012-06-29 17:34:46 UTC  |  Edited by: None ofthe Above
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
This post is a good example of what the ISDs are doing wrong. Something completely relevant to the topic at hand was edited out as off-topic.


Again, we need a discussion on how to change policy to improve for the future.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1552432#post1552432

Mea culpas are all very heartfelt and appreciated but without policy changes we are fated to come right back here again.

Lets have some straight talk on this subject. Sorry to say but it appears that CCP and CCL aren't interested in having a frank discussion on this. Apologize and act as if it never happened? Sorry but that's uncool.

I think the problem on the post I linked was a failure to understand the intent. He/she didn't "read between the lines." Stating that I have to pee seems non sequitur, but the implication of the post was that I'm in dangerous space and need to step away, so I cloak up to take a few minutes' break. As that would technically be "AFK cloaking", according to the OP I would be botting.

I suspect much of the excessive editing going on is due to a lack of comprehension.


Possibly. I was sticking you under point 4 of what is rapidly becoming my "reform CCL manifesto":

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1552432#post1552432
Quote:

4, Moderation needs to back off at least a little, IMHO, when substantive topics are being discussed. It really sucks to see valid points squashed just because the poster got a little heated. Forums become useless if people can't communicate.


In either case, the defaults and policies need to be reset. While moderation can be a boon, over zealous moderation squelches valid communication. I don't think "I don't understand how this adds to the topic" is a valid reason to moderate. If it clearly detracts substantially from the thread's topic, well then maybe it deserves moderation.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#284 - 2012-06-29 18:09:54 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
This post is a good example of what the ISDs are doing wrong. Something completely relevant to the topic at hand was edited out as off-topic.


Precisely.

And some here are more keen on repeatedly raising abusive points against others in this forum without bothering (Apparently) to read what is being said.

The bottom line:

1) Rules - excellent!

2) Forum mods - acceptable!

3) Implementation - less than stellar...

For me examples like that are huge, and then there was the incident in which all the topics opened by one player were locked by the same ISD repeatedly.

There needs to be rules for the rulemakers. Common sense things like, when in doubt, ask another mod. Or do not lock more than 1 topic from the same toon in X amount of time, ask another ISD instead. And so on.

Perception is a powerful thing.
Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#285 - 2012-06-29 20:49:06 UTC
"It has become apparent over the last 24 hours that players are upset at the perceived locking of legitimate discussion threads on the forums."

Don't confuse an extremely loud minority of forum warriors and meta gamers with the players of this game.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#286 - 2012-06-29 21:07:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Cutter Isaacson
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
This post is a good example of what the ISDs are doing wrong. Something completely relevant to the topic at hand was edited out as off-topic.


Precisely.

And some here are more keen on repeatedly raising abusive points against others in this forum without bothering (Apparently) to read what is being said.

The bottom line:

1) Rules - excellent!

2) Forum mods - acceptable!

3) Implementation - less than stellar...

For me examples like that are huge, and then there was the incident in which all the topics opened by one player were locked by the same ISD repeatedly.

There needs to be rules for the rulemakers. Common sense things like, when in doubt, ask another mod. Or do not lock more than 1 topic from the same toon in X amount of time, ask another ISD instead. And so on.

Perception is a powerful thing.



Perhaps then we should move on a little, stop incessantly rehashing who did what and why, and move on to find solutions. Otherwise we are going to be caught in this loop of "He started it...No he started it" and that's no good for any of us.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#287 - 2012-06-29 21:28:11 UTC
Cutter Isaacson wrote:



Perhaps then we should move on a little, stop incessantly rehashing who did what and why, and move on to find solutions. Otherwise we are going to be caught in this loop of "He started it...No he started it" and that's no good for any of us.


Oh you mean something like this:

Crunchie Attuxors wrote:

There needs to be rules for the rulemakers. Common sense things like, when in doubt, ask another mod. Or do not lock more than 1 topic from the same toon in X amount of time, ask another ISD instead. And so on.

Perception is a powerful thing.


Please read what is being said, and not only what you want to read is being said.

Of course, if you go further up, you will see more concrete proposals and solutions - and support for other's proposals and solutions.
Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#288 - 2012-06-29 21:40:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Cutter Isaacson
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
Cutter Isaacson wrote:



Perhaps then we should move on a little, stop incessantly rehashing who did what and why, and move on to find solutions. Otherwise we are going to be caught in this loop of "He started it...No he started it" and that's no good for any of us.


Oh you mean something like this:

Crunchie Attuxors wrote:

There needs to be rules for the rulemakers. Common sense things like, when in doubt, ask another mod. Or do not lock more than 1 topic from the same toon in X amount of time, ask another ISD instead. And so on.

Perception is a powerful thing.


Please read what is being said, and not only what you want to read is being said.

Of course, if you go further up, you will see more concrete proposals and solutions - and support for other's proposals and solutions.



My post was not an attack on you Crunchie, so I apologise if it seemed I was doing so. I did read what you wrote, and I should have made it clearer that I was agreeing with you. It is just a shame that other people are so willing to hold back proper discussion. Now all that needs to be done is to stop talking about making those rules and actually start drawing up some Big smile

EDIT: Not an excuse, but I'm just feeling rather tired, hence my lack of clarity in my previous post.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Crunchie Attuxors
Always Another Corporate Venture
#289 - 2012-06-29 22:29:17 UTC
Cutter Isaacson wrote:



My post was not an attack on you Crunchie, so I apologise if it seemed I was doing so. I did read what you wrote, and I should have made it clearer that I was agreeing with you. It is just a shame that other people are so willing to hold back proper discussion. Now all that needs to be done is to stop talking about making those rules and actually start drawing up some Big smile

EDIT: Not an excuse, but I'm just feeling rather tired, hence my lack of clarity in my previous post.


Ok, I am sorry for being curt, but I am indeed interested on this become a better forum, and are a bit tired of people not reading and just metagaming...
Eve forums official anthem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pudOFG5X6uA Real men tank hull. Fake women shield-tank Gallente.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#290 - 2012-06-29 22:37:51 UTC
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
Cutter Isaacson wrote:



My post was not an attack on you Crunchie, so I apologise if it seemed I was doing so. I did read what you wrote, and I should have made it clearer that I was agreeing with you. It is just a shame that other people are so willing to hold back proper discussion. Now all that needs to be done is to stop talking about making those rules and actually start drawing up some Big smile

EDIT: Not an excuse, but I'm just feeling rather tired, hence my lack of clarity in my previous post.


Ok, I am sorry for being curt, but I am indeed interested on this become a better forum, and are a bit tired of people not reading and just metagaming...


I happily accept your apology, even though you didn't really need to Smile And we definitely agree on what needs to happen, now lets hope other people get on board.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Rats
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#291 - 2012-06-29 22:51:22 UTC
Cutter Isaacson wrote:
Crunchie Attuxors wrote:
Cutter Isaacson wrote:



My post was not an attack on you Crunchie, so I apologise if it seemed I was doing so. I did read what you wrote, and I should have made it clearer that I was agreeing with you. It is just a shame that other people are so willing to hold back proper discussion. Now all that needs to be done is to stop talking about making those rules and actually start drawing up some Big smile

EDIT: Not an excuse, but I'm just feeling rather tired, hence my lack of clarity in my previous post.


Ok, I am sorry for being curt, but I am indeed interested on this become a better forum, and are a bit tired of people not reading and just metagaming...


I happily accept your apology, even though you didn't really need to Smile And we definitely agree on what needs to happen, now lets hope other people get on board.



Ahhhh true love ...


Tal

I Fought the Law, and the Law Won... Talon Silverhawk
Graic Gabtar
The Lemon Party
#292 - 2012-06-30 06:20:56 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
This post is a good example of what the ISDs are doing wrong. Something completely relevant to the topic at hand was edited out as off-topic.


FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
I think the problem on the post I linked was a failure to understand the intent. He/she didn't "read between the lines." Stating that I have to pee seems non sequitur, but the implication of the post was that I'm in dangerous space and need to step away, so I cloak up to take a few minutes' break. As that would technically be "AFK cloaking", according to the OP I would be botting.

I suspect much of the excessive editing going on is due to a lack of comprehension.
I think you are bang on mate.

Language can be subtle and detail is important.

Things like this happen. People are only human, but there's a lot of humanity going on the in forums of late.

Graic Gabtar was forum banned based on a similar lack of comprehension on a moderator's behalf. The ban was lifted and CCP sent me an apology I was happy to get. However, that didn't happen until two weeks of back and forth emails including the "petition" being escalated.

I could have simply given up and voted with my wallet as others have stated. A forum is just a forum, but to some it's an extension of the game.

I don't know why they just don't have forum channels you can only see via the IGB and unless your post contains content that is illegal it's just left be. Thus it would be a proper extension of the game in forum form. And there are already separate rules for the different forums, so it wouldn't be ground breaking in that regard.

They already have unmoderated corporation forums so it could be a logical extension of that.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#293 - 2012-06-30 11:54:39 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
This post is a good example of what the ISDs are doing wrong. Something completely relevant to the topic at hand was edited out as off-topic.

I think the problem on the post I linked was a failure to understand the intent. He/she didn't "read between the lines." Stating that I have to pee seems non sequitur, but the implication of the post was that I'm in dangerous space and need to step away, so I cloak up to take a few minutes' break. As that would technically be "AFK cloaking", according to the OP I would be botting.

I suspect much of the excessive editing going on is due to a lack of comprehension.

http://eve-search.com/thread/126324-1/page/3#70

Quote:
Posted - 2012.06.27 14:33:00 - [70] -
brb guys, I gotta go pee

*banned for botting*


Nobody is a mind reader and that definitely looks like it's off-topic to me. It actually looks like a fail attempt to be funny and derail the thread. "Read Between The Lines"? "Lack Of Comprehension"? Maybe if you had clarified your statement like you're doing now, then the intent would have been clear and it wouldn't have been removed.

I see no wrong doing from the CCL in that yet you're trying to turn it into a Federal Case. Looking at Eve Search definitely paints a different story from what's being presented here in this thread by the same 4 people on a war path looking to scalp someone.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#294 - 2012-06-30 13:00:02 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
Again, we need a discussion on how to change policy to improve for the future.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1552432#post1552432

Mea culpas are all very heartfelt and appreciated but without policy changes we are fated to come right back here again.

Lets have some straight talk on this subject. Sorry to say but it appears that CCP and CCL aren't interested in having a frank discussion on this. Apologize and act as if it never happened? Sorry but that's uncool.
What's uncool is all the demands and accusations being made in this thread by the same 4 people with blood-lust in their eyes. What I see here is players trying to control and dictate how moderation should be conducted. The rules have already been established which everybody needs to abide by.

As for your list :

1 - This is a difficult job, and not everyone is cut out for it. You do need to be prepared to get someone to stand down and get off the team. Not sure if that's applicable to the last couple of days, but in spite the urge to circle the wagons when one of your own gets in trouble, the option to thank someone for their time and telling them that its not a good fit needs to be on the table.

Sorry, this is just wrong and counter-productive. This looks like you're asking for a scapegoat to hang. All people make mistakes in all professions. The point is to allow them to learn from it and progress. That's like saying if you do one wrong thing at work, you should be fired.

2 - I won't be using the word censorship here, as its inappropriate. This is a private forum and CCP has the right to set the rules of the forums. But it also needs to set them in a way that fosters the kind of community it wants. Setting policies are actions, and actions have consequences. Its perfectly reasonable that the community would want to discuss or protest policies and and specific moderations, and get upset if they feel they are prevented from doing so.

The rules and policies have already been established. If the community has an issue with it they can voice their opinion and protest it in the correct venue, such as file a petition with Customer Service and or contact Internal Affairs.

3 - The no discussing moderation rule makes some sense, but causes more difficulties than just about anything else on the forums. Perhaps a moderation discussion forum? All that in one place so discussions (something like this fine thread) can take place but not overwhelm everything else. Clear ability to dispute specific incidents and moderation policy is needed in environments like this.

Again this is another bad idea. Basically this can be easily exploited by players trying to gain control and dictate how moderation should be conducted as well as openly crucify moderators. That is not our place to decide that. CCP set's the rules and policies. This is their house. Again as in the previous point, if the community has a problem or issue, they need to voice it in the correct venue, Customer Service and Internal Affairs.

4 - Moderation needs to back off at least a little, IMHO, when substantive topics are being discussed. It really sucks to see valid points squashed just because the poster got a little heated. Forums become useless if people can't communicate.

No, the community needs to follow the policies as set forth in the Forum Rules. If Moderation backs off, the forums will just go back to how it was before. Too many times a topic has quickly derailed into a massive flame war due to posters becoming a little heated. There's a big difference between constructive communication and verbal assault. Where there's smoke, there's a fire and as such, it needs to be put out asap.

5 - Threads should probably not be locked because other posters are spamming it and its gone off topic. This opens the door to abuse as people who do not want something discussed can "shiptoast" up the thread and get it locked.

This I agree with, those replies should be removed and the thread put back on track. The offending character should be warned via Eve mail along with account Email address. If they continue after being warned, they should be banned. A good rule for that is the 3 strike count. However, if the thread continues to derail, it should be locked. Again the 3 strike rule could apply. If it's in the wrong sub forum, it needs to be moved. Also if the thread is non conforming to forum rules, it needs to be deleted.

6 - There are times when a truly offensive post needs to stand. For example, during the last CSM election season several candidates made posts so bad they had to be removed by moderation (not sure that was ISD at that point, but I am sure the issue is bound to come up next year). The problem with this is it essentially white-washed the incident from the voters mind. At least one of said candidates went on to win a seat. Imagine if the news suppressed American presidential candidate Perry's "OOPS" moment as a mistake, or refused to discuss Romney's bullying incident? Lets not let moderation overwhelm important points and information. (While personal attacks against candidates, if not properly substantiated, are probably off limits and rightly moderated.) Alternatively, if it's so bad you can't leave it on the forums, maybe that person should be removed from the ballot.

There's a very fine line here. Letting an offensive post stand only breeds discontent and rage. There was an excessive amount of trolling happening in candidates threads trying to derail them right and left. A lot of mud slinging going on as well as posting off topic replies intended to berate, demean and incite rage. All of which is against the forum rules. If there is factual truth to counter their candidacy platform, it should be presented in a civil manner as per forum rules.

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#295 - 2012-06-30 14:50:50 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
This post is a good example of what the ISDs are doing wrong. Something completely relevant to the topic at hand was edited out as off-topic.

I think the problem on the post I linked was a failure to understand the intent. He/she didn't "read between the lines." Stating that I have to pee seems non sequitur, but the implication of the post was that I'm in dangerous space and need to step away, so I cloak up to take a few minutes' break. As that would technically be "AFK cloaking", according to the OP I would be botting.

I suspect much of the excessive editing going on is due to a lack of comprehension.

http://eve-search.com/thread/126324-1/page/3#70

Quote:
Posted - 2012.06.27 14:33:00 - [70] -
brb guys, I gotta go pee

*banned for botting*


Nobody is a mind reader and that definitely looks like it's off-topic to me. It actually looks like a fail attempt to be funny and derail the thread. "Read Between The Lines"? "Lack Of Comprehension"? Maybe if you had clarified your statement like you're doing now, then the intent would have been clear and it wouldn't have been removed.

I see no wrong doing from the CCL in that yet you're trying to turn it into a Federal Case. Looking at Eve Search definitely paints a different story from what's being presented here in this thread by the same 4 people on a war path looking to scalp someone.


No one here is on a war path. We are trying to get this matter fixed to everyone's liking (not an easy thing since everyone wants something different). I personally want better communication between the ISDs and us lowly folk. Death to one-liners!!

Also, anyone with an understanding of the English language should be able to put 2 and 2 together. The thread was about AFKing being botting. The joke was very on topic, and very clear even to myself, and I have Asperger's.


I myself have no problem with moderation. I'm a moderator on another forum, though with only 700 users it is much easier there. However there comes a time when things get out of hand.
And unfortunately, the continuing recommendation of filing a petition does not seem to work most of the time. Since the Incarna incident (maybe before but I wasn't paying much attention in my early EVE years) CCP has reinforced the idea in our (the community) mind that the only way to get things done is with a storm of insanity.
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
#296 - 2012-06-30 14:54:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Yonis Kador
After reading through this sassy lil Cutter & DMC vs. the banned alts saga, I just don't agree DMC.

Sure this is CCP's house but we're not just along for some ride. We are the ride. People don't have blood-lust because they think others should be held accountable for their mistakes, especially if it were proven to be intentional provocation. I mean, I just read:

"That's like saying if you do one wrong thing at work, you should be fired."

Well it depends on what the wrong thing was. But yes, people get fired from jobs for doing one thing wrong all the time.

For example: when I was in college, I walked into my manager's office at a Subway restaurant near campus and discovered her riding one of my co-workers around the room in an office chair. The next day, I was told I wasn't "Subway material." So you see, yes, that one mistake was all it took for me to have to honestly admit being told that.

There is no power more absolute in a forum than the power to determine content value. That determination shouldn't ever be made lightly so it is little wonder chaos ensued from the frequency of its casual application.

What troubles me about this situation is that the differences between the sides appear irreconcilable. For the forum to function as CCP apparently envisions it on paper, the level of moderation seen thus far would have to be at minimum maintained or increased, (they're adding 6 members) threads locked, posts deleted, topics relocated, on and on and on... there would be no end to that.

But that vision is sure pretty square compared to the culture that exists here now. EvE breeds rebels. It's a game of cutthroat consequences and of being more clever than the next guy. Being clever in the forums can be entertaining. It's relative. But good luck with gagging the rebels. What's next? Bagging cats?

I can appreciate CCPs desire for intelligent persons to discuss things intelligently and I know this game has serious brainpower. So an argument could be made that supporting forum moderation is also supporting increased efficiency in our think tank.

But I also think its important for the CCLs to remember that they aren't here to build perfect forums. They are COMMUNITY communication liasons, implying that they are here to build bridges between players and CCP.

If by their own actions, they undermine the trust of the community, they fail.


Yonis Kador
Kyshonuba
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#297 - 2012-06-30 21:13:55 UTC
I try a short summary of the discussion.

CCL failed at the start because ...

1.Didn't annouce the changes in forum rules
2. Started the discussion about the changes after the changes had already started

Crunchie Attuxors wrote:


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.

So for example, instead of dumping new rules, and an obviously unprepared ISD team on us with full powers 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.




We had some arguments about formal issues.....

1. How to snip posts and when
2. When to close threads
3. How to communicate with the CLL team
4. Should eve players accept voluntier forum moderators ?

We learned something from Eve players who themself moderate forums or use other forums then eve offical forum

1. Malcom Vincent told us how forum software monitors verbal abuses.
2. I learned something from Vera Algert about the reasons why other eve forums exits and what offical WOW forum did wrong.

Vera Algaert wrote:


Bad forum moderation is what drives people to 3rd party sites and by doing so threatens to fracture the eve community. I think the most impressive negative example of such developments are the Blizzard' battle.net forums.

If I am interested in SC2 I go to teamliquid.net.
If I am generally interested in WoW I go to mmo-champion.com.
If I am interested in WoW PvE & theorycrafting I go elitistjerks.com.
If I am interested in WoW PvP I go to arenajunkies.com.
If I want to recruit for my WoW guild I go to tankspot.com, elitistjerks.com and mmo-champion.com.
If I am interested in Diablo 3 I go to mmo-champion.com or diablofans.com.

Left on the battle.net forums are only the newbies and a couple of MVPs who desperately try to keep the forums alive.

(Also notice how one company [Curse] operates three of the sites I just mentioned .)

Now, luckily EVE is not in that state just yet - a lot of the relevant eve-related discussion still happens on eve-o itself.
I attribute this (partial) success mostly to the flexibility with which the forum moderators have handled the enforcement of forum rules in the different subforums in the past, accomodating the individual "style" of each one.
Sadly the new ISD moderators seem to lack this crucial sensitivity.

And, as the German/Russian language communities show, once you lost one subcommunity to a 3rd party site it won't come back even if you have fixed the issue that caused them to leave.


Some guys want "forum wars" (with some extent of abusive language)

Mara Tessidar wrote:


Seriouspost: This is a very good question for The Mittani. He literally makes this sort of thing his business (not calling people stupid, mind you, although he is very good at that, which is arguably mostly how he came to leading Goonswarm). That is to say, he spends his time winning the metagame. While the metagame* involves other things like outing spies and planting our own, often enough it comes down to persuading or beating down members of opposing alliances over public forums--the only place where both sides can see what the other has to say without being able to silence each other. There is a reason Goonswarm takes its posting seriously.**


Beating people in this game does not rely solely on blowing up their ships. It means getting them to not log in when they need to defend their stuff, or getting them to play other games because that's more fun than the thought of losing, or making them realize their leadership is utterly incompetent and corrupt and that they, the average Joe Poster, are being used and tossed aside by their supposed friends, or that their friends are idiots and Joe Poster should find a new home. Goodposters aim to destroy an enemy's morale through words. Making someone appear stupid to others or making them feel as though they have done something stupid is incredibly handy in accomplishing this.

So yes, being able to call people stupid is very important.



Some people dont want changes at all

Holy One wrote:
Let people determine who is and who isn't annoying and/or offending them. They can ignore, filter and disseminate their own prejudices, based on their *own* subjective perspective. We don't need a ministry of thought .

Censorship = suppression.


Velicia made a prediction how this thread gonna evolve....

Velicia Tuoro wrote:
Nice OP CCP Navigator. I think it's great that CCP are experimenting with this. The key to its success so far has been clear rules and an open dialog between the moderators and the moderation decisions being made.

One of the struggles this forum has is the sheer number of people who seem to simply enjoy trolling and just generally being argumentative. I sympathise with how difficult it must be to make the right decisions in these situations. You can't really win as you are going to upset someone now matter what you do, and having a policy of dialog around those decisions would be unworkable based on the volume. I watch with interest as to how you tackle it!
Kyshonuba
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#298 - 2012-06-30 21:14:59 UTC
I also like this statement..

Tony Two Bullet wrote:
Your first objective is to identify that all people are different in this forum.

Yes, we all play EVE and are EVE players but we're all very different, and being a subscriber does not set us to the same cultural standards.

That doesn't excuse inappropriate behavior, but a "ONE RULE TO BIND THEM ALL" is NOT going to work.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#299 - 2012-06-30 21:15:44 UTC
Yonis Kador wrote:
After reading through this sassy lil Cutter & DMC vs. the banned alts saga, I just don't agree DMC.

Sure this is CCP's house but we're not just along for some ride. We are the ride.

I am sorry to say but you are incorrect. We are not the ride, the game is, and we pay to ride it. We only have as much control and access as CCP see's fit to give to us, people seem to have forgotten that very salient fact, and because of that have started to develop delusions of grandeur.

Yonis Kador wrote:

There is no power more absolute in a forum than the power to determine content value. That determination shouldn't ever be made lightly so it is little wonder chaos ensued from the frequency of its casual application.

This is a moot point to be honest, as CCP and the ISD have already clearly stated here and in numerous other places that more training will be given to ensure that the CCL will find their feet quicker and perform better.

Yonis Kador wrote:

What troubles me about this situation is that the differences between the sides appear irreconcilable. For the forum to function as CCP apparently envisions it on paper, the level of moderation seen thus far would have to be at minimum maintained or increased, (they're adding 6 members) threads locked, posts deleted, topics relocated, on and on and on... there would be no end to that.

As I and many others have noticed and noted, there has been an ever increasing number of people coming here whose sole aim appears to be to sow the seeds of discontent, not only amongst different player groups, but between the players and CCP. I see nothing wrong with weeding out those "bad apples" and bringing some semblance of order to the proceedings. If adding 6 new moderators is what it takes (and clearly CCP feels it is) to achieve this balance, then so be it.

Yonis Kador wrote:

But that vision is sure pretty square compared to the culture that exists here now. EvE breeds rebels. It's a game of cutthroat consequences and of being more clever than the next guy. Being clever in the forums can be entertaining. It's relative. But good luck with gagging the rebels. What's next? Bagging cats?

The culture that exists is not an awful lot different to the one that has always existed here, the only difference being the recent upsurge in a vocal minority who think that because they pay CCP to play EVE, gives them the automatic right to berate, belittle and attack anyone they deem unworthy.

This is why I mentioned delusions of grandeur earlier. Part of the blame for that lies with CCP, as they have already admitted, but the rest lies with the perpetrators. Now CCP can do one of two things, they can allow this vocal minority to roam freely, abusing everyone and everything in sight because they "want to" or because "its part of the game man", or they can try to find a way to deal with them effectively. They have already admitted that merely curb stomping these people is ineffectual and unfair and that brings us to where we are now, with CCP, the ISD and the more calm and collected forum users looking to find an appropriate solution.

Yonis Kador wrote:

I can appreciate CCPs desire for intelligent persons to discuss things intelligently and I know this game has serious brainpower. So an argument could be made that supporting forum moderation is also supporting increased efficiency in our think tank.

But I also think its important for the CCLs to remember that they aren't here to build perfect forums. They are COMMUNITY communication liasons, implying that they are here to build bridges between players and CCP.

If by their own actions, they undermine the trust of the community, they fail.

CCP have never said anything about having a desire for only intelligent people to post here, or even to post overly intelligently, what they ask for is a certain level of respect and decency to be upheld. That should be something everyone wants. Another fact is that the CCL was not designed, created or implemented in order to "build the perfect forum", it was put in place to try and ensure that the ones we have don't devolve in to a cesspit of spam, racism, personal attacks and trash.

On the last point, regarding trust, you are absolutely right when you say that the CCL has to earn the communities trust, they know this, but trust is a two way street. If, every time someone from the CCL or ISD moderates the forums in any way, all they get is verbal abuse, suggestions of personal vendettas and downright rudeness, then why should they care about having the trust of such people?

Mutual respect is what we need here. Once that is achieved the road ahead will be clear and we can finally move on.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#300 - 2012-06-30 22:53:13 UTC
Cutter Isaacson wrote:
Mutual respect is what we need here. Once that is achieved the road ahead will be clear and we can finally move on.

This I fully agree on (even though I am at times guilty in this regard).

Unfortunately, since the Incarna incident, folks have this idea that forum craziness is the only way that things get done. And so when something comes up that isn't liked (whether justified or not), we get... well, spam and rage posts.