Just something I wanted to say... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [AE Forum Resources] >> Forum Support and Suggestions



Message

135 -> Just something I wanted to say... (11/5/2009 1:39:36)

Dear staff, I apologize for the harshness that follows, but I ask you to please bear with me. I might have been a bit overacting when typing this message, and things could sound much more bitter than they really are.

I think staffs are overusing, if not misusing (although very possibly to good intents) their powers a bit. This is a common situation: A thread is running happily, people are having a nice time, there is no spam, no observable rules are violated, the discussion is quite successful. Then, some staff comes, and locks it because they consider it boring, a bad discussion topic (even if the discussion is going along greatly), unfitting to be considered a discussion, or some other reason. I believe that these actions are disrespectful to both the thread starter and the participants. I believe this can be a self-righteous action, where lockage is not served because of breaking rules, but because of a personal dislike.

I am disappointed to see like this the staffs whom I once held utmost respect for - before I realized the entirety of their actions. In fact, I once bursted into tears at the oppression I perceived. I admit, I was overeacting. There was indeed something else bugging me at that time, but that something was the fact that one of my family members bore the slightest resemblence to the forum staffs, whom I am disappointed in.

Of course, a staff can come this way, be their own attorney, and lock this thread with a short closing argument. Of course, since "the staffs have final say", they can win any case against them with a single line of logic, which they may or may not do out of self-righterousness. And of course, I'd expect quite a few of them to be older than me, and thus reason better than me, and use their intellegence as a device to gurantee them a victory in their defenses. They may use the excuse of this being a "whine thread" to lock this to prvent "rebellion", but then again, most, if not all, forum issue thread contains a bit of whine stating the unsatisfaction of the user. So yeah, I'm probably not going to be satisfied if an AK comes and locks this thread with a single argument (or deletes this), for I do not have much trust in them right now. Admins *might* be slightly better, but then again, I do not have that much trust in them either currently. And please, I'm not a noob wanting mod attention just for the sake of it. I AM ready to be attacked also by non-staff forumites. In that case, I'm prepared to play the outcast in a "person v. society" setting, where people can stone me with words, while I can be torn apart, struggling, desparate to have a change for the better, or at least a change for the better as I perceive it.

I know that staffs still do more good than harm, but then again, so do tyrants. While they oppress the people, they at least keep order and prevent total chaos and anarchy. Please do not take me wrongly; I do not think the staffs are like tyrants. I was just using the example of an extreme case to drive my point home.

Let me say that I'm not mad simply because the staffs deleted my post. I got upset this time because I saw how the staffs locked other people's post, just as a advisor gets upset at the imperfect rule of his king. And in the same way, I wish my patent could be a help to both rulers and citizens. I'm not saying all staffs are this way. There are many out there who retains a decent level of humbleness.

I am making this thread partially because it saddens to see the staffs I once respected like this. I expected a little more out of them, and yearn to regain my trust for them. I would really like to see them living up to their name and reign in respectable prudence worthy of honor. I'm not saying that they aren't like that now, just that there's room for improvment in my opinion. Also, I understand how these problems could be highly unsensable to the staffs to the staffs, bacause they might have done all this out of good intentions. I think the forum is created for the use of the users, and wish for it to remain that way. That baing said, my main point is the wish for staffs to you know, "loosen up" a bit on the lockage of threads that does not cause any harm and stuff.

Thanks.



zeke50100 -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/5/2009 2:36:24)

quote:

I believe this can be a self-righteous action, where lockage is not served because of breaking rules, but because of a personal dislike.


That may seem true, but remember that moderators are picked for a reason; they are trusted to have discretion. For Admins, they obviously know what they want to see on their forums; most moderators would reflect that.


quote:

Of course, since "the staffs have final say", they can win any case against them with a single line of logic, which they may or may not do out of self-righterousness.


I agree with this; however, I'm glad that it isn't seen TOO often. I think that while staff should have final say, the members should have a chance to defend themselves (or their argument). Unless, of course, they're blatantly wrong.


For the rest of it, I don't really understand what you're getting at. I can tell you're displeased, but WHY? And not just generically why; specifically. Are there any particular examples of threads being deleted and whatnot that you dislike?

I may not speak for everybody, but many will argee it's a lot easier to fix problems when you can pinpoint the exact source.

I /think/ you're trying to say that moderators and admins should "loosen up" a bit, though correct me if I'm wrong. If this is true, then I would have to say that while I agree for SOME cases, the hammer should still be putting pressure on those who would break rules.

Just as a side note, this seems sort of like a Support or even a PM subject to me; I don't really see the "suggestion". Although, I'm wrong plenty of times :D
~Zeke~



Sir Gnome -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/5/2009 7:45:41)

Personally, I tend to use the 'Staff have the final say' argument only as a last resort, when someone really isn't being convinced by what I see as valid arguments for whatever moderating action is being questioned.
We don't lock threads for being boring, but we DO lock non-discussion type threads in clearly marked discussion boards, such as lists (ie, 'What level are you?' really isn't a discussion).


Basically, this sort of thing needs to be handled on a case-by-case basis, just as we Moderators/AKs handle these threads. Your first port of call should always be the person taking the Moderating action. If you have an issue with a particular thread delete/lock, or indeed Warnings etc, then its always ok to PM the person who took this action and ask for a more detailed explanation.



Traveler -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/5/2009 10:30:21)

While I find the opening post to be extremely overdramatic, I concur in finding this boards quite overmodded (in the case that word exists...).

I've roamed several forums over the years and I tend to find that the most lively and entertaining ones are the most chaotic, where off-topicness reigns. After all, the topics that don't have anything interesting to offer will end up falling from the first page.

It is true that game forums are a particular case, specially one organized like this. There are subforums that have to be strictly modded, that is evident: encyclopedias, character ratings and advice, Q&As... Those are "technical" forums, aimed to solving specific problems, and must be kept trimmed to serve their purpose. But general game discussion subforums are a different story and could use more free rein, IMO. Of course they should be modded, to avoid flaming, outright spam, etc. But lighter, "sillier" threads that tend to veer to offtopicness (and which generally are swiftly locked or deleted here) could offer spots of entertainment fo some players.

One specific example that has irked me more than once are war threads. One of the purposes of wars is to gather playes together for a common effort, and the natural expression of that is on the boards. But, due to the repetitive nature of wars, the true discussion possible about them is scarce. Once the enemies and the plot of the war are talked about on the first pages, and until some cutscene or the final boss and rewards arrive, all that is generally left (unless is a multi-sided war, which tend to attract more debate) are repetitive posts in the style of "200K left!" or "I've reached 1000 wins! Go me!". And when some player tries something different, like war speeches, war music suggestions or just random musings not directly related to the war, AKs and mods start warning against it, leaving the thread as numbing as before. Which is a policy that I've never really understood.



hector212121 -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/6/2009 5:48:22)

I concur with every word 135 said. FIrst thingss first... The admins deleted ZH.It was going perfectly fine until zorbak"lost his lease." Then, the next problem was Newbie Help. It iswas there so the people who had trouble to be answered! If the admins delete Ucag and JRP, that woud be cutting the rope to which i am tethered to these forums, and float to the new ZH completly. I am very disappointed.



Kain -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/6/2009 14:48:55)

Newbie Help was removed because 99% of the questions there could be answered in the respective game Q&A. However, the staff DID add something for forum questions which were going there too.

ZH was deleted due to the massive spam it was creating, and not having any actual purpose other than randomness. All those forums were removed for fair reasons, not because the moderators are mean and like to cause suffering on players (tip: they don't).



135 -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/6/2009 18:58:58)

Thanks hector.
Although not part of the main part of this thread, I also would like to defend ZH. The massive spam it was creating was due to inactive mods. For evey month, i usually do not see more than two mod posts. That said, I believe ZH's spamminess should be drastically reduced if the staffs tried to put at least ONE mod in charge there. It did have other purposes, if randomness dosen't constitute as one for you. It had excellent stories, friendly moglin discussions where basically every post was on topic, and SEVERAL very mature forumites fit to be Aks (I know this because they are moderators on other forums, they they are doing a great job).

Neither do I believe that the staff are trying to upset us. I know that they mean well - but like most humans, they could easily be oblivious to their little mistakes when they are doing it for the greater good of society (AKA they mean well, but had a slip).

I apologize for my lack of specific cases of threads that I'm displeased with. These locked threads are rather quickly vanishing because no one posts in them.



Circe -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/6/2009 19:04:21)

135, if you have a specific complaint with the actions of a particular staff member, your best bet would be to PM them to discuss it in private. If that doesn't work, feel free to come to me.

If this is a general comment about the overall forums, I'd like to disagree. While I understand Traveler's point, the forums aren't solely about fun - they also serve to support the AE games. Yes, it should be a fun place to spend time (and I think it is!) there are areas that need to be carefully regulated, such as the Encyclopedias to prevent misinformation or the Q&As to ensure that questions get asked appropriately and in a timely manner.

It's also important that we keep the forums clean - clean meaning free from inappropriate or offensive material that violates our PG rating. Part of being physically able to do that means keeping the clutter (spam) to a minimum. While I don't have a problem with spam in general, I do have a problem with it when it gets in the way of ensuring that inappropriate material doesn't sneak into the forums. Each forum is moderated to the specifications of its individual head moderator, so there may be some differences from forum to forum. Other than that, the entirety of the forums is bound to adhere to the PG rating, and I think we do an excellent job of keeping our content family-friendly without sucking all the fun out!

I appreciate the time you took in drafting your post, and if you'd like to discuss anything in particular with me, feel free to do so via PM. :)



Traveler -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/6/2009 22:35:26)

I wholeheartedly agree with many of the points you make. It is evident that some subforums (the Encyclopedias and Q&As are the most blatant cases, but there are others, such as Guides of Character Ratings & Advice) have to be very controlled, just like they are now, to fulfill their role. And I fully understand that mantaning a PG rating is extremely important for AE, which equals to a neccesity of constant moderation of the boards.

Certainly my idea of a board is one that puts more strain on the moderators, as with a more relaxed approach to offtopicness and spaminess comes a higher post count, and therefore longer threads to go through looking for inapropiate content (I should also note that -if only for a matter of age- I tend to visit forums mired to a more mature audience, so that also conditions my views on the subject. Not to mention coming from a culture that is in general more lenient about what is PG than the American). It would be a system more friendly to base users than to forum staff. The ZH is a fine example: I can't say I ever wrote there (I don't write much, due basically to a matter of deep laziness), but lately I was finding myself reading it quite often, since it was the most freewheeling area of the boards, which made it refreshing.

In the end the forum is a nice place in its current state, and it is just a matter of taste if there should be a slight change of style or not, but I felt that it was worth taking the chance to comment on the subject.



Raven Star -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/12/2009 0:14:13)

One needs to point out ... that though threads maybe happily running its course ... then a mods shuts it down ... I find it absolutely pointless when mods don't refer you to the correct place a thread should be posted.

Granted ... they explain why ... but they don't give solutions. I have run a muck trying to find the correct place to post threads sometimes ... I end up pming any mod ... such as today.

I had no idea that creating signatures for AE forumites then adding "Signature" at the end of my posts ..was not AE related question?






The Game -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/12/2009 0:40:41)

In the thread you linked, it was shut down for a valid reason. Creating signatures for other forumites is fine and all, and appreciated, but it bears no relation to any of the AE games. You posted in AQW Q&A, and signatures are not a part of in-game AQW. If it were, your thread might not have been locked. Signatures are purely for the AE forums; as such, those are forum-related questions. If you do, in the future, have a forum-related question, Forum Support is the ideal place to ask. ;) The Q&As for each game are for general questions about the respective game, not for the forum. This might help clear up any misconceptions concerning the uses for AQ/DF/MQ/AQW Q&A/Forum Support.

All Forums >> [AE Forum Resources] >> Forum Support

AKs and Moderators tend to be extremely busy, and might not always give an answer that answers every question the thread starter has. AKs and Moderators are humans as well, and errors or lapses in answers will be made or given. When this happens to you, and you are left with questions unanswered, simply PM the AK/Moderator in question politely, explain your situation, and I am sure you will get your answer.


As far as clan advertisement goes, linking your clan thread to your image signature is fine; however, I just checked it with Scakk, and linking your clan thread with the words "Signature" or "Peekaboo", as you did, may be advertising to a degree. I would just forget the words, and stick to linking your clan thread to your image signature without any words.



the fallen2 -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/12/2009 18:45:55)

quote:

I am disapointed to see the staffs I once help respect for.
Why are you saying this? They're doing they're job. I disagree on that matter.
quote:

I beleive this is a self-rightous action.
Agreeing is possible. But I simply don't agree.

Excuse my other post please. Delete it if you wish.



ironman550 -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/12/2009 18:56:36)

while i agree with the moderators about the way they state their reasons for locking the different threads i also more strongly agree with 135 out of reasons and mainly personal experience.One of my most recent points happened maybe 1 or 2 weeks ago, i don't quite remember the title but the discussion was going well until a moderator came in and randomly locked the thread. One more thing i would like to point out is that during a great thread with a lot of responses, the starter was trying to point out a decent point i believe and after a few responses the head moderator made a point and then one of those lower moderators came in and replied "Well the head moderator has spoken so as for this thread, locked."The point i'm trying make is that one of the moderators had spoken and they locked it before anyone could make a response.



Vivi -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/12/2009 19:04:26)

The number of posts a thread is getting has little bearing on whether or not it gets locked, if a thread isn't allowed it will be locked even if lots of people are posting. If you think that the lock was unjustified you're free to PM whoever locked it and ask for a more detailed explanation of why they locked it and/or appeal it being locked. Locks are never random, if an AK or moderator locks a thread they should have a reason for doing so.




ironman550 -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/13/2009 17:05:36)

like i said in my last post about the "reason"that the moderator had in a thread i was interested in he stated,
quote:

Well the head moderator has spoken so as for the thread, locked
. Part of me just doesn't think that is a good enough reason (to take this wrong) i can understand some other kind of reasons that would work i just think some aren't good enough because someone might have a response to the moderator





Vivi -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/13/2009 17:30:11)

If you're not happy with the reason given, PM the mod or AK who locked it and talk it over with them in private.



salyboyH -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/15/2009 21:18:39)

the staff will pick people capeable for the job / partly because they havent been in troulble with the staff and they help out allot on the forums. A moderator once told me this.



135 -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/18/2009 20:10:10)

IMO the staff should be a little less strict in the OOC.
So yeah, this was kind of what I was talking about, except it's less severe.



Vivi -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/18/2009 20:31:53)

You're going to have to explain yourself a little further I'm afraid. Wallo gave both a quote directly out of the rules of the OOC forum and an explanation for why he was locking the thread. It's not exactly evidence of "overuse/misuse of power" that AKs/mods are enforcing the rules.



Traveler -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/18/2009 22:08:40)

I'm going to agree with 135 on this one. That specific topic is about a somewhat amusing and unusual story. Is it an important topic? Obviously not. May an entertaining thread spawn from it? I would say yes: anecdotes about animals appearing in random places, lighthearted jokes... In fact, threads about that kind of stories always tend to be successful in forums.

I'm a journalist, and I can assure you that media appreciates that kind of news (unless the space on the page or the time on the news is needed for something more urgent, of course). They lighten the mood, attract the attention of the audience due to the novelty and provide some closure to make the transition from hard news to whatever the readers/viewers are going to do next. So deeming a thread about it "pointless" is at least disputable.

And there is another thing that worries me about that example: the thread was locked after two AKs (one of them with powers on that subforum) posted in it. To me that gives a strong feeling of the one locking implicitly putting down the opinion of the other AKs. After all, if they posted, they must have find it an acceptable -even more: interesting- thread. So the impression it leaves is that there is a lack of a general agreement about the rules between the forum staff. And that doesn't give exactly a good image of the board.



Vivi -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/18/2009 22:17:27)

We have varying definitions of success it would seem. Sure, people might have fun with the thread, but they're not going to discuss anything meaningful and more than likely such a topic is going to generate spam (as an example, "anecdotes about animals appearing in random places" would be spam even if it superficially appears to be on-topic). The thing about the media does not really apply here either.

An AK posting in a thread does not guarantee the thread is acceptable. We are only human after all and make mistakes just like anyone else. If you think it happens too often, that would be something to talk to the board's head moderator about - they can get in touch with the AKs and make sure everyone is on the same page.



Traveler -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/18/2009 22:32:43)

I strongly disagree with considering that spam. Spam would be messages with no content at all (just "noise"), devoid of content due to repetition or massively generated and inserted in multiple threads with no regards to the actual discussion at hand. What that topic might generate is some degree of off-topicness. And I have always considered off-topicness (until a certain point) something possitive for a forum.

Is the purpose of a board (specially in cases like an OOC room in a game forum) just to have meaningful discussions? Or is it primarely to have fun? I would say the latter.

In the end what bothers me here is that I have a deep dissagreement with the philosophy of this board on that respect. I guess there is nothing that I can really do about it.



Kinzdor -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/21/2009 0:39:54)

i am with 135 she is right the mods do overuse ther powers we need to stop this pretty soon allmost every thread will be locked but 135 must rembered not all ae staf are ae froum staff so ae not the problem it the froum staff



The Game -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/21/2009 1:09:02)

The interpretation of what constitutes "spam" as well as the interpretation of other rules a forum may have are at the discretion of the AK doing the moderating. Certain forums tend to be more stringent than others, and the stringency by which the AKs enforce the rules are, most often, in favor of how the Head Moderator feels the forum needs to be governed. Take, for instance, AQ CR&A and MQ GD. Scakk is in charge of AQ CR&A and he wants that forum to be more stringent as to better protect the interests of forumites asking for advice. MQ GD, however, is more relaxed because the interest of the forum is discussion.

With this being said, if anyone disagrees with an AK's interpretation of what constitutes spam, feel free to PM the AK in question regarding any concerns you may harbor. The chain of command is applicable here, so if you can't resolve any differences with the AK in question, move on up to the Head Moderator and so on. As Traveler stated, there is a general disagreement between the forum ranks on the rules, but that is bound to occur when humans are involved in the process. I disagree concerning the notion that it "doesn't give exactly a good image of the board." To err is human, and to disagree is salvation. Disagreement allows for a flexible interpretation of the rules and gives the forumite a chance to plead his case without stiff and adamant opposition. This notion actually fosters the ability to refine the rules of these forums as to better provide its citizens with the legitimate rights they may possess.



BGA -> RE: Just something I wanted to say... (11/25/2009 1:43:55)

Mods just didn't care about the Polls or ZH, which is why those two forums were deleted. The "Moglin Mods" of ZH were never ever on. When they actually did come on, they say they can't come on because they are too busy and have lives. True, but what's the point of having them then. Once a week should be the limit. I see mods take care of spam and flame in other forums in just seconds, which ZH's Spam and Flame took months.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.1113281