These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Restrict NPC Corporation Posting Abilities.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#761 - 2014-06-24 21:16:51 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:

Trolls will trolls. and I read the op it applies to 99% of the forums every thing but Q&A, F&I, the Bazaar and recruitment.
You claim that CAOD is better quality, no evidence of that.


from op: It is easily circumvented by players that wish to have a solo experience in EVE and wish to post via 10+ man corporations,

10 man isn't solo.

from op: It provides consequences/content for actions by exposing posters to retribution should their posts be deemed unpalatable by other players,

If someone's post is really that unpalatable that you want to take action it doesn't matter if they are an NPC corp or not.

from op: Leave newbies unaffected as they can still post questions, ideas and look for corporations

newer players are often posting more specific questions in the proper forums (skills, ships & mods and what not)


If you read the OP then you wouldn't have tried to claim it covered the entirety of the forums. You can have a solo experience in any organization an NPC corporation with 1000 members isn't solo either. Yep and by concentrating them on the answers already in New Citizens its much quicker for them to get the information they need and for that forum to become of more use to newbies.



nitpicking
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#762 - 2014-06-24 21:21:32 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
nitpicking


Do you have another point to raise or are you done?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#763 - 2014-06-24 22:35:05 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
That's for one subsection of the forums. CAOD just isn't worth any effort to post in.


That's the entire thought process I think is going to reduce npc alt trolling "it isn't worth the effort to put this fresh alt into a 10+ man corporation to troll."



if CAOD was applied to the whole forums it becomes worth the very little effort to put the alt in a corp. If the intent is to troll they will do it. What will be lost is the people who are not trolls and just like the NPC corp.
Hell this goes though I'll open my corp to allow applications , No tax all applications are approved. easy as pie. (I alone make this corp qualify for the 10 toon corp rule.)


You're showing your lack of reading the OP, it does not apply to all forums. There's no evidence historical or otherwise that supports your claim.
There is no evidence that supports the breadth of yours either. The claim the the effort wall remains equally effective for the majority of the forum as it is with CAOD does not exist. It effectively cannot exist unless the conditions to test it existed, which they do not and have not.

The claim there is no proof that the effort wall will be ineffective for the whole forum save a few sections that those you are trying to filter won't be using is meaningless because their exist that same lack of evidence that such an effort wall is effective when the scope of what is behind it is changed.

Further, since you can pretty well be assured that some of the NPC posters in this very thread will seek the resolution of fresh alt in a posting corp we at least know that of this small subset the effort wall of new character + posting corp is insufficient. For those true dedicated posting alts already out there the resolution will be even simpler as a new character is unneeded. Furthermore some of us would probably be willing to facilitate other excluded posters with dedicated corps making this easier still.

La Nariz wrote:
Community feedback means nothing when there is no consequence for your actions as can be seen by the voluminous amounts of npc alts in the first 3 pages of GD.
This suggestion creates no consequence in itself and thus, if a lack of consequence is the issue, solves nothing.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#764 - 2014-06-24 23:17:34 UTC
^^: My mistake, sorry.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:

There is no evidence that supports the breadth of yours either. The claim the the effort wall remains equally effective for the majority of the forum as it is with CAOD does not exist. It effectively cannot exist unless the conditions to test it existed, which they do not and have not.

The claim there is no proof that the effort wall will be ineffective for the whole forum save a few sections that those you are trying to filter won't be using is meaningless because their exist that same lack of evidence that such an effort wall is effective when the scope of what is behind it is changed.

Further, since you can pretty well be assured that some of the NPC posters in this very thread will seek the resolution of fresh alt in a posting corp we at least know that of this small subset the effort wall of new character + posting corp is insufficient. For those true dedicated posting alts already out there the resolution will be even simpler as a new character is unneeded. Furthermore some of us would probably be willing to facilitate other excluded posters with dedicated corps making this easier still.

This suggestion creates no consequence in itself and thus, if a lack of consequence is the issue, solves nothing.


There is historical evidence showing it worked for CAOD, a subforum, everything else is also a subforum. Once it was full of trolling then when the changes hit a considerable amount of it was curbed. Claiming "there's no proof of it not doing something" is an argument from silence. Working as intended the suggestion already created content, not of the quality of some other more prolific players but, still its more quality content and social interaction than we had before.

Lack of consequences is part of the issue but, not the whole nor the one this suggestion is intended to handle, low forum quality.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#765 - 2014-06-24 23:35:31 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
^^: My mistake, sorry.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:

There is no evidence that supports the breadth of yours either. The claim the the effort wall remains equally effective for the majority of the forum as it is with CAOD does not exist. It effectively cannot exist unless the conditions to test it existed, which they do not and have not.

The claim there is no proof that the effort wall will be ineffective for the whole forum save a few sections that those you are trying to filter won't be using is meaningless because their exist that same lack of evidence that such an effort wall is effective when the scope of what is behind it is changed.

Further, since you can pretty well be assured that some of the NPC posters in this very thread will seek the resolution of fresh alt in a posting corp we at least know that of this small subset the effort wall of new character + posting corp is insufficient. For those true dedicated posting alts already out there the resolution will be even simpler as a new character is unneeded. Furthermore some of us would probably be willing to facilitate other excluded posters with dedicated corps making this easier still.

This suggestion creates no consequence in itself and thus, if a lack of consequence is the issue, solves nothing.


There is historical evidence showing it worked for CAOD, a subforum, everything else is also a subforum. Once it was full of trolling then when the changes hit a considerable amount of it was curbed. Claiming "there's no proof of it not doing something" is an argument from silence. Working as intended the suggestion already created content, not of the quality of some other more prolific players but, still its more quality content and social interaction than we had before.

Lack of consequences is part of the issue but, not the whole nor the one this suggestion is intended to handle, low forum quality.
Yes, the evidence exists that it works for CAOD, and only CAOD. A single subforum is not multiple subforums, thus CAOD alone is at best analogous to any 1 subforum and even that makes assumptions since CAOD's focus was not an area of shared experience for those excluded from posting.

You already know from those here that the 2 differing conditions, CAOD and the proposed, have no equivalency for them. Do you think our conclusion on the matter and the effort wall will not translate to a significant portion of other affected posters?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#766 - 2014-06-25 00:45:42 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Yes, the evidence exists that it works for CAOD, and only CAOD. A single subforum is not multiple subforums, thus CAOD alone is at best analogous to any 1 subforum and even that makes assumptions since CAOD's focus was not an area of shared experience for those excluded from posting.

You already know from those here that the 2 differing conditions, CAOD and the proposed, have no equivalency for them. Do you think our conclusion on the matter and the effort wall will not translate to a significant portion of other affected posters?


So a subforum is a subforum but also isn't a subforum that's a crazy definition. They are all subforums and we know how it affects a subforum, it reduced trolling. There is no evidence showing it will only work in one specific subforum.

The suggestion is literally CAOD rules with a larger scope so there's definitely equivalency there. I think the effort wall will be working as intended and in concert with other suggestions will improve the forum's quality. I'm sure there will be people affected whom aren't trolls but, its still going to do more good than harm. Do you think more player corporation members use the forums than NPC corporation members, people using alts to post are not included in the NPC corporation members group?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#767 - 2014-06-25 01:17:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
La Nariz wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Yes, the evidence exists that it works for CAOD, and only CAOD. A single subforum is not multiple subforums, thus CAOD alone is at best analogous to any 1 subforum and even that makes assumptions since CAOD's focus was not an area of shared experience for those excluded from posting.

You already know from those here that the 2 differing conditions, CAOD and the proposed, have no equivalency for them. Do you think our conclusion on the matter and the effort wall will not translate to a significant portion of other affected posters?


So a subforum is a subforum but also isn't a subforum that's a crazy definition. They are all subforums and we know how it affects a subforum, it reduced trolling. There is no evidence showing it will only work in one specific subforum.

The suggestion is literally CAOD rules with a larger scope so there's definitely equivalency there. I think the effort wall will be working as intended and in concert with other suggestions will improve the forum's quality. I'm sure there will be people affected whom aren't trolls but, its still going to do more good than harm. Do you think more player corporation members use the forums than NPC corporation members, people using alts to post are not included in the NPC corporation members group?
That seems borderline intentionally obtuse. If all subforums held the same traits they would be indistinguishable and meaningless. Subforums are defined by their content and that content decides their value to individuals, and as a result the value of any effort walls you place around them.

We only know what the CAOD subforum will do with these restrictions becuase only the CAOD subforum is a focal point for CAOD content. Conversely if CAOD was open yet Ships and Mods closed I'd have a posting alt in a corp for it, yet still not care a bit about CAOD. So we know that for individuals the value of subforums is variable and inconsistent.

Furthermore some trolling doesn't bypass the effort wall because there is no need for it. GD is pretty much the highest traffic area on the forums and as such the prime focal point. For trolls and legitimate posters the gain:effort is much higher than in CAOD. That one subforum would have me in a new alt by the next login session.

So I must ask again, do you think my motivations so rare?

As to your question, I'm not sure I catch your meaning, if I understand your exclusion properly it means removing any player who has a character in a player corp, regardless of their posting characters status. If it does than it's probably a smaller number than a simple count would suggest. Seeing though that those individuals value anonymity from their other characters, with the means to keep posting being supplied eagerly why would we expect any behavioral change?

To that end, who knows, maybe this is a good thing since 1) I'll be freed from any reputational obligation to goodpost, 2) I'll still have the same access as now, 3) Socially my usefulness will increase by reintroducing others to the forum and 4) I can take out any frustrations I have for losing what little reputation I have out on CAOD.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#768 - 2014-06-25 01:42:07 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
That seems borderline intentionally obtuse. If all subforums held the same traits they would be indistinguishable and meaningless. Subforums are defined by their content and that content decides their value to individuals, and as a result the value of any effort walls you place around them.

We only know what the CAOD subforum will do with these restrictions becuase only the CAOD subforum is a focal point for CAOD content. Conversely if CAOD was open yet Ships and Mods closed I'd have a posting alt in a corp for it, yet still not care a bit about CAOD. So we know that for individuals the value of subforums is variable and inconsistent.

Furthermore some trolling doesn't bypass the effort wall because there is no need for it. GD is pretty much the highest traffic area on the forums and as such the prime focal point. For trolls and legitimate posters the gain:effort is much higher than in CAOD. That one subforum would have me in a new alt by the next login session.

So I must ask again, do you think my motivations so rare?

As to your question, I'm not sure I catch your meaning, if I understand your exclusion properly it means removing any player who has a character in a player corp, regardless of their posting characters status. If it does than it's probably a smaller number than a simple count would suggest. Seeing though that those individuals value anonymity from their other characters, with the means to keep posting being supplied eagerly why would we expect any behavioral change?

To that end, who knows, maybe this is a good thing since 1) I'll be freed from any reputational obligation to goodpost, 2) I'll still have the same access as now, 3) Socially my usefulness will increase by reintroducing others to the forum and 4) I can take out any frustrations I have for losing what little reputation I have out on CAOD.


Subforums are the same thing with a selected topic its the posters that make the difference. Much to the chagrin of the ISD people will post about anything anywhere so nothing makes any of the different forums special snowflakes aside from the exceptions I've already stated. Right now there is zero effort to get any sort of troll alt started; post suggestion there will be effort required.

The value of each forum is subjective to the player there is no way to quantify this. For example you're arguing that GD is of more value to players because it has a higher visibility than the other forums. I'd argue the opposite that CAOD has a higher possibility of affecting the metagame so its of far more value than GD.

I don't think your motivations are so rare but, I think the follow through on those motivations is much more dependent on the effort required than you are suggesting. I think NPC corporation members, not people using alts, are the lesser population of forum posters when compared to player corporations which means it will impact a lesser amount of people. Now that the people would have to find a corporation for their alt that alts utility will be gone and they'll either mothball it or climb the effort wall.

My question is simple, consider the entire population of eve-o forums posters, which subset do you think is larger and why, player corporation members or NPC corporation members? People using alts to post are not counted.

Aside from not good posting anymore the rest of those sound like they'd be a good thing end in content hilarity.

E: That last bit isn't worded well, I'm saying that we'd miss the good posting but, the rest of that would be good because it'd end in hilarious content.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Jade Blackwind
#769 - 2014-06-25 08:44:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Jade Blackwind
Malcanis wrote:
Rather than decrease player freedom, perhaps we could address the problem by increasing it.

Rather than blocking NPC corp members from posting, perhaps it would be better to allow us to ignore by corp. Thus rather than ignore TrollyMcAlt of The Scope, La Nariz would simply be able to ignore everyone in The Scope
I'd support this idea wholeheartedly, blocking thousands of prodigious trolls by one could be tiresome.

Ignore by corp - and ignore by alliance, please.
Another Altlol
Doomheim
#770 - 2014-06-25 09:00:30 UTC
I don't feel that going down the path of an Ignore feature is the way. Just because you can't see people posting ****, doesn't mean they aren't turning your thread into a clusterfuck and/or derailing it.
Egravant Alduin
Ascendance Rising
Ascendance..
#771 - 2014-06-25 12:59:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Egravant Alduin
Yes but some people like solo and like forums so why they won t be able to post in here if they are not in a pc corp?

Feel the wrath of the GECKO!
Chewytowel Haklar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#772 - 2014-06-25 14:31:30 UTC
And what if CCP added a new mechanic to the game whereas all new player on new accounts would be kicked out of NPC corporations after X days. Thus it would give the new players X days to get acclimated to EVE, and yet also forewarn them that finding a player corporation or alliance is now in their best interest. Therefore NPC corp members would largely be dissolved from the game entirely after a set time.

Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#773 - 2014-06-25 17:04:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Rift
La Nariz wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
nitpicking


Do you have another point to raise or are you done?



I was done work for the day so I had to leave eve forums.

The amount of effort for one small subforum to make alts isn't worth it, I agree with that for the majority of eve forums I believe It is worth the effort and there will be corps made just to put alts in for forum posting. making it take even less effort.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#774 - 2014-06-25 22:44:28 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.

The Rules:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.


EDIT: 11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.

The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category.

30. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.

CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, “outing” of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.
Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Michael Mach
Arx One
#775 - 2014-06-28 17:30:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Mach
La Nariz wrote:
E: All of you posting about play style please remember faceless NPC alt troll is not a play style its a forum rule/EULA/TOS violation.
 "but, but, but, I don't have a point but want to insist this is a play style!" No it really isn't read the forum rules:

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Forum_rules


Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but the only rules I saw regarding alt posters was ban evasion. Aside from the few forums where alt posting isn't allowed, alt posting is perfectly legal.

It's perfectly okay to have an anonymous posting alt, and I just don't think that should taken away without a really compelling reason.

If you want to address forum trolls who often use alts specifically, then address that issue separately - there's no need to create a blanket policy that would remove the ability for people to use a harmless forum alt.

--
For the record, this is not an alt, nor do I alt post.
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#776 - 2014-07-06 18:18:36 UTC
Yeah well, still worth a +1

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Transmaritanus
Exergy.
#777 - 2014-07-07 09:36:55 UTC
Plus 1'ing because some people have the testicular fortitude to stand behind what they say.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#778 - 2014-07-07 10:59:56 UTC
And the rest of the post? About elitism? That the COAD is questionable evidence at best?

No, let's not bother with that, let's sweep it aside under "Grr goons", for a switch.

It's like a tired, broken record.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#779 - 2014-07-07 11:03:10 UTC
afkalt wrote:
And the rest of the post? About elitism? That the COAD is questionable evidence at best?

No, let's not bother with that, let's sweep it aside under "Grr goons", for a switch.

It's like a tired, broken record.


Unless CCP are willing to enforce CAOD-like restrictions on another sub-forum we'll have to go with the data currently available, namely that the restrictions work. Not sure where you're getting elitism from so I really can't comment on that.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#780 - 2014-07-07 11:09:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Gully Alex Foyle
afkalt wrote:
And the rest of the post? About elitism? That the COAD is questionable evidence at best?

No, let's not bother with that, let's sweep it aside under "Grr goons", for a switch.

It's like a tired, broken record.
Rest of Dahq's post is fine, though I personally disagree with the elitism and can't comment on CAOD - never even read it iirc.

I was just pointing out that it's usually non-goons that bring goons into the discussion, almost always in a way that detracts rather than adds to whatever their argument is.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!