Apologies to Obsidian

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

@aluminiumtrioxide: Sure. But, back to my initial post, you can't really civilize people (and that's not what we are here for anyway). You can either allow them to post their thoughts the way they come, while pruning the worst stuff and giving warnings here and there, or you can delete their feedback entirely and/or start flinging bans left and right.

 

Or you could just have a multi-tiered infraction system where repeated offenders and those responsible for creating a consistently toxic atmosphere quickly find themselves banned unless they change their ways, but occasional missteps don't draw serious consequences?

 

^A system like that works. I've seen it in action. Although usually it's a bit simpler than you're describing it.

 

Basically it's a 3 strikes rule. 3 strikes and you're suspended for a period of time (3 days, 5 days, whatever). 3 suspensions and you're gone for good.

 

 

Well, I was taking my example from RPG.net and its 17-tiered infraction system, but your idea also has legs. Thing is, I'm not sure permabans are mandated in but the most extreme circumstances; in most cases, topic bans should suffice.

Edited January 27, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Gorbag]

It's certainly something worth considering. Especially if there's another kickstarter project coming in the future. I think it may cause some heat for Obsidian though ("I'm a backer, I get suspended, they don't want to hear what I want to say, etc."). I think I'm going off topic.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I think it may cause some heat for Obsidian though ("I'm a backer, I get suspended, they don't want to hear what I want to say, etc."). 

 

On the other hand, Obsidian employers choosing to refrain from posting on their own company's forums because the community is so entrenched in bad attitudes is also untenable.

[Malcador]

 

I don't think there is a way to "civilize" a community aside from heavy moderation.

 

 

...Which would, presumably, be very bad, because...?

 

 

Run the risk of being a very stale place, people become reluctant to argue.  Also have to worry about the moderators being crap themselves and going on a trip.  Here though, I really fail to see a problem. This board is pretty civil, the worst people do is either the usual passive agressiveness or backhanded insults you see everywhere or minor scuffles. 

 

Then again, maybe others are more sensitive.

[Gfted1]

On the other hand, Obsidian employers choosing to refrain from posting on their own company's forums because the community is so entrenched in bad attitudes is also untenable.

Ah, that must explain the general lack of involvement these last 2+ years.

[Malcador]

I thought they were too busy, y'know, working to waste time on this forum.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

I don't think there is a way to "civilize" a community aside from heavy moderation.

 

 

...Which would, presumably, be very bad, because...?

 

 

Run the risk of being a very stale place, people become reluctant to argue. 

 

 

Look, if the only way certain people can argue is by spewing toxic bile, then they damn well should be reluctant to argue.

[Nonek]

It would be nice to see a focus on common courtesy and manners, with the usual accussations against developers and consumers not being indulged, but unfortunately we are in an age where it is seen as perfectly fine to insult and deride people, even for their choice of passtime. Or to accuse a vast and diverse majority of others actions without any proof whatrsoever, but that is the end result of one holding everyone in contempt, one feels no hesitation in judging them. In this respect I believe the good book does have a useful lesson, tell me not of the speck in mine eye for the log in thine own.

 

Standing in judgement and pouring out scorn and condemnation is very fashionable, but perhaps a little introspection might be warranted first as we are all equally flawed. Personally I also see this board as being full of civil, moderate and intelligent individuals with whom it is a genuine pleasure to converse. Still ones manners can always stand to be improved, I know mine are frightful.

 

Edit: For which I apologise.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Nonek

[Malcador]

 

Look, if the only way certain people can argue is by spewing toxic bile, then they damn well should be reluctant to argue.

Well heavy moderation could also mean cracking down on people being snarky, like you, right ? And that would make this place boring. Arguments can get pretty heated, especially if you have things people are passionate about. From a practical standpoint, heavy moderation is bound to end up with some martinet jagoff as the amount of work and focus required will really be worth it for that type alone, I feel. Y'know someone who takes online postings seriously.

 

I've not really seen 'toxic bile' here, but I'm sure you have a different standard for that.   Hm, perhaps the romance threads in the past but from what I recall those weren't too nasty.

[Gfted1]

I thought they were too busy, y'know, working to waste time on this forum.

That's what I thought too, who knew the dark truth? I guess the only conclusion that we can reach from this is that SA and the Codex are much more nurturing environments that don't spew toxic bile. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

[Malcador]

 

I thought they were too busy, y'know, working to waste time on this forum.

That's what I thought too, who knew the dark truth? I guess the only conclusion that we can reach from this is that SA and the Codex are much more nurturing environments that don't spew toxic bile. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

 

A conclusion from you that doesn't involve drones or pepper spray ? What the heck, man.

 

But anyway, I'm not really big on needing to interact with developers a lot, that way either leads to fanboyism or deluded folk giving direction (possibly some in between, but feh) and that is annoying to developers. They, presumably, know what they are trying to do and how to do it, so just content to read updates every now and then.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Malcador

[Blarghagh]

Heavy moderation is never our goal. I don't think anything we've done really qualifies (feel free to disagree if you want). I'd say the biggest source of tension is the PG-13 problem. Obsidian decided the content on the board must be PG-13 since their board isn't rated and they share responsibility for what happens on their board. Their games are rated, and a significant number of them go far over PG-13 level and the audience that the forum attracts mirrors that. In the end, it's frustrating for you guys and it's frustrating for us because it sometimes means we have to dissuade things that would otherwise be fine and we have trouble maintaining that line - the ratings boards are notoriously draconian and unfathomable. Take the movie "The Conjuring", the ratings board declared that would be rated R for intense atmosphere. I mean, what the hell is that all about?

 

Regarding the systems Nonek and alum were talking about, we do actually have a tiered system in place. We just don't discuss it and very few people ever get into the higher tiers.

[BruceVC]

Already kissed?

 

Yay a Romance discussion, I am a big supporter of Romance in RPG in case anyone didn't know 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

the only conclusion that we can reach from this is that SA and the Codex are much more nurturing environments that don't spew toxic bile.

 

 

Everything is perfectly fine, the community here is welcoming and positive, nothing needs to change at all. No sirre.

Edited January 27, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Emc2]

I feel like I have to apologise too, having offended at least one person with my careless posting (that's way too much with my post count  )

And I don't think there's been anything wrong with the latest Romance thread, though people have had very different opinions.

 

I've been part of one forum (been shut down already) which experienced pretty heated arguments to the point where people started to pick sides and insult the other people on every thread, making proper conversations impossible. This forum is fairly peaceful compared to that.

 

So i'll just Thank the people who have the patience to express their opinions without hostility and the patience to try to understand other people's viewpoints (as most people here have) and also Obsidian for reading the discussions here.

[Stun]

I thought they were too busy, y'know, working to waste time on this forum.

I was under the impression that engaging the community is part of the job... doubly so when it's a kickstarter project. But lets not open that can of worms again.

[Namutree]

I don't know why, but shortly after the beta was first released I was flippin' out. I'm normally so stoic in real life, but it seems the internet brings out the worst in me. 

 

At any rate I already owned up to my silly reaction before, but I feel an additional sorry Obsidian (and to the readers of my exaggerated indignation) is in order. My hyperbole has since calmed down and my feedback more constructive.

[Malcador]

Everything is perfectly fine, the community here is welcoming and positive, nothing needs to change at all. No sirre.

Yeah, saw that. Her problem to deal with, at least with her examples - threads you find irritating you don't have to read (promancers have said this in the past). I guess those two threads qualify as a 'microagression' ? Heh.

 

Thing is Obsidian gets flak and heat in the 'outside world' anyway, some of it may be deserved and some of it not. Sounds like her idea of 'welcoming' is just to be praising.

 

Needs a bit more than that if you want to condemn this forum as a place that 'needs to change', though I'd be amused to hear what you would say does.

 

 

 

I was under the impression that engaging the community is part of the job... doubly so when it's a kickstarter project. But lets not open that can of worms again.

I mean meaningful work as in completing the project they made, not getting into a back and forth with customers.

[TheisEjsing]

It's always nice when devs respond to your post, if you have a concern about the game. But personally I find it much more productive that devs read the forum and discuss the feedback internally most of the time. The difference between a dev and a backer in terms of information is big, and it is very time consuming to debate a mechanical issue if you a) have to explain the underlying problems and solutions in development to the backer or b) debate from the estimated information on which basis, the backer construct his/hers argument from.

 

No doubt it's fun to interact with the devs, and you feel a sense of recognision. But that should not be the main priority, when dealing with feedback.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Everything is perfectly fine, the community here is welcoming and positive, nothing needs to change at all. No sirre.

Yeah, saw that. Her problem to deal with, at least with her examples - threads you find irritating you don't have to read (promancers have said this in the past). I guess those two threads qualify as a 'microagression' ? Heh.

 

Thing is Obsidian gets flak and heat in the 'outside world' anyway, some of it may be deserved and some of it not. Sounds like her idea of 'welcoming' is just to be praising.

 

Needs a bit more than that if you want to condemn this forum as a place that 'needs to change', though I'd be amused to hear what you would say does.

 

 

Every decision incurs a tradeoff.

 

Thing is with different moderation policies, they create different forum environments, which, in turn, appeal to different subsets of people. On the face, it seems that if your goal is to have a diverse place with many different kinds of voices being heard, lax moderation policies are the way to go, because that's the only way to ensure that nobody's being shouted down for having the wrong kinds of opinions. On the other hand, by implementing lax moderation policies, you invite the kind of people who like lax moderation policies, and are, by extension, okay with engaging in the occasional bit of sh*t-flinging - because they were socialized to see it as no big deal. Thing is, not everybody is socialized that way, and those who think that even the occasional and comparably mild sh*t-flinging is still a pastime that entails getting poo all over you... will not want to participate in a community whose members are okay with throwing fecal matter on their fellow community members. Hence, up to a point, the amount of diverse voices lost by cracking down on sh*t-flingers is actually offset by the influx of new people who like being part of communities where no amount of sh*t is being flung.

 

Assuming that this is true, I don't see why anyone would want to have a sh*t-stained living space filled with the kind of people to whom proximity to fecal matter appeals, instead of having a cleaner living space, filled - to the same extent as the other one was - with people who are a bit more discerning regarding their surroundings.

Edited January 27, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Gfted1]

Every decision incurs a tradeoff.

 

Thing is with different moderation policies, they create different forum environments, which, in turn, appeal to different subsets of people. On the face, it seems that if your goal is to have a diverse place with many different kinds of voices being heard, lax moderation policies are the way to go, because that's the only way to ensure that nobody's being shouted down for having the wrong kinds of opinions. On the other hand, by implementing lax moderation policies, you invite the kind of people who like lax moderation policies, and are, by extension, okay with engaging in the occasional bit of sh*t-flinging - because they were socialized to see it as no big deal. Thing is, not everybody is socialized that way, and those who think that even the occasional and comparably mild sh*t-flinging is still a pastime that entails getting poo all over you... will not want to participate in a community whose members are okay with throwing fecal matter on their fellow community members. Hence, up to a point, the amount of diverse voices lost by cracking down on sh*t-flingers is actually offset by the influx of new people who like being part of communities where no amount of sh*t is being flung.

 

Assuming that this is true, I don't see why anyone would want to have a sh*t-stained living space filled with the kind of people to whom proximity to fecal matter appeals, instead of having a cleaner living space, filled - to the same extent as the other one was - with people who are a bit more discerning regarding their surroundings.

*nods sagely*

 

So you are saying the devs haven't been around for over 2 years because the forum has been a mean place the whole time?

[BruceVC]

 

Everything is perfectly fine, the community here is welcoming and positive, nothing needs to change at all. No sirre.

Yeah, saw that. Her problem to deal with, at least with her examples - threads you find irritating you don't have to read (promancers have said this in the past). I guess those two threads qualify as a 'microagression' ? Heh.

 

Thing is Obsidian gets flak and heat in the 'outside world' anyway, some of it may be deserved and some of it not. Sounds like her idea of 'welcoming' is just to be praising.

 

Needs a bit more than that if you want to condemn this forum as a place that 'needs to change', though I'd be amused to hear what you would say does.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't know Malc but your post just seems to me like an excuse to justify offensive or rude posting etiquette

 

And I find it strange because you don't really make rude posts or seem to get that worked up in debates so why you  would try to defend bad behavior is beyond me 

 

But yes I agree with you, a person could just ignore posts they don't want to participate in, like the important Romance thread but end of the day what you find is a certain perspective starts to permeate other threads and discussions and the overall tone of a forum gets dragged down. Now you may not believe this but I can guarantee you others have experienced it.

 

So I think a certain level of blocking or closing down toxic threads is needed. And I may be overly  critical because of my  SJ stance but the reality is  many other people obviously agree with my view ?

[Malcador]

Every decision incurs a tradeoff.

 

Thing is with different moderation policies, they create different forum environments, which, in turn, appeal to different subsets of people. On the face, it seems that if your goal is to have a diverse place with many different kinds of voices being heard, lax moderation policies are the way to go, because that's the only way to ensure that nobody's being shouted down for having the wrong kinds of opinions. On the other hand, by implementing lax moderation policies, you invite the kind of people who like lax moderation policies, and are, by extension, okay with engaging in the occasional bit of sh*t-flinging - because they were socialized to see it as no big deal. Thing is, not everybody is socialized that way, and those who think that even the occasional and comparably mild sh*t-flinging is still a pastime that entails getting poo all over you... will not want to participate in a community whose members are okay with throwing fecal matter on their fellow community members. Hence, up to a point, the amount of diverse voices lost by cracking down on sh*t-flingers is actually offset by the influx of new people who like being part of communities where no amount of sh*t is being flung.

 

Assuming that this is true, I don't see why anyone would want to have a sh*t-stained living space filled with the kind of people to whom proximity to fecal matter appeals, instead of having a cleaner living space, filled - to the same extent as the other one was - with people who are a bit more discerning regarding their surroundings.

There's an example of abusing a metaphor, if there was one. Anyway, the current moderation standards are fine, people can be a bit hostile, snipe at one another and generally get into what most people accept is a heated argument. Not necessarily "**** flinging" - though I guess that is just general abuse or something ? The degree to which this tradeoff is "good" (though this is ignoring the risk getting a horde of vapid idiots in response or something) does depend on what your standard is - if it is BruceVC for example, we're hosed.

 

I guess I assume most people in the world aren't made of tissue paper and can stand some degree of hostility without freaking out and leaving (then again some of the PE joiners had drama-queen exits )

Edited January 27, 2015 by Malcador

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

*nods sagely*

 

So you are saying the devs haven't been around for over 2 years because the forum has been a mean place the whole time?

 

 

I wasn't here around then, but I've heard of mass dev migration around the time the toxicity regarding KotOR2 has reached unbearable levels. KotOR 2 did indeed come out well over 2 years ago. Do correct me if any of these statements is untrue.

[Gfted1]

I wasn't here around then, but I've heard of mass dev migration around the time the toxicity regarding KotOR2 has reached unbearable levels. KotOR 2 did indeed come out well over 2 years ago. Do correct me if any of these statements is untrue.

 

Dunno, never played KotOR2. Im shocked and amazed to read that developers join and quit companies based on the forum posters. Id like to read up on this phenomenon, link?