I'm being completely serious when I say that I feel the moderators are being lazy. Someone NEEDS to be deleting troll posts and banning users who are contributing to the deconstruction of the forums. Us members can't do much about it.
It seems like the standard response to reporting posts has become "lock the thread and shut down the conversation, thus letting the trolls win."
Frankly, at this point, we need more with the banning and less with the locking.
It seems like the standard response to reporting posts has become "lock the thread and shut down the conversation, thus letting the trolls win."
The problem is that not everyone deserves a ban and people may get offended. Let's just let the mods do the damage control to keep the forums clean okay? Letting the trolls win... sheesh. You make the false accusation that people whose views oppose your own are deliberately trying to lock threads. Far from truth. Really far.
The problem is that not everyone deserves a ban and people may get offended. Let's just let the mods do the damage control to keep the forums clean okay? Letting the trolls win... sheesh. You make the false accusation that people whose views oppose your own are deliberately trying to lock threads. Far from truth. Really far.
Dissenting view are fine, meaningless babblry, illogical half-thought arguments, flame wars and off topic posts are not. Oh wait.. I just remembered something.
Dissenting view are fine, meaningless babblry, illogical half-thought arguments, flam wars and off topic posts are not. Oh wait.. I just remembered something.
I disagree, I think you're misinterpreting valuable and credible views of what 4e is as these undesirable things. In my opinion, these guys are just expressing their views on what 4e is to show other people the truth about 4e and give them a more complete view. Its just reasonable debate, and since this is a forum, it is perfectly natural. They are just communicating in the best way possible their feelings on these issues, that's all.
Dissenting view are fine, meaningless babblry, illogical half-thought arguments, flam wars and off topic posts are not. Oh wait.. I just remembered something.
I just can't believe how easy it is to make a new account when you get banned. The mods really don't know how to make punishment stick. At best, they convince someone to play nice for a few days and pretend to be decent until the urge grows and the fangs sprout again.
I just can't believe how easy it is to make a new account when you get banned. The mods really don't know how to make punishment stick. At best, they convince someone to play nice for a few days and pretend to be decent until the urge grows and the fangs sprout again.
I think you're being too harsh, some people like me spend upwards of 3 to 4 hours a day on these forums. Permanent banning like you speak of is far too harsh on people who are simply passionate about the game they discuss. That and some of these people use library computers which means that the library could get banned. As it is, the permanent banning of a username makes it so that the user can't edit old posts and that should be enough of a punishment IMO.
I disagree, I think you're misinterpreting valuable and credible views of what 4e is as these undesirable things. In my opinion, these guys are just expressing their views on what 4e is to show other people the truth about 4e and give them a more complete view. Its just reasonable debate, and since this is a forum, it is perfectly natural. They are just communicating in the best way possible their feelings on these issues, that's all.
They're not showing people "the truth" about anything. They're expressing an opinion as you said. That's fine, but many take it a step further, such as yourself, PsionX and others whose names I can't remember, and ram that opinion down our throats. Before you even opject to this, look at your sig.
They're not showing people "the truth" about anything. They're expressing an opinion as you said. That's fine, but many take it a step further, such as yourself, PsionX and others whose names I can't remember, and ram that opinion down our throats. Before you even opject to this, look at your sig.
there are few i can think of that constantly derail thread.. see the 4th ed motivators being closed twice now.. largely because of one person, and all the other threads that a certain 4th ed basher has derailed by logging in a leaving a two line post about how people shouldn't try 4th ed because it sucks. This is not being passionate, it is trolling pure and simple, there are at least 3 or 4 people who log in on a daily basis to do nothing other than try and start fights on the boards and generally make a nuisance of them selves.
The motivational thread (at least the second one) is being cleaned up and re-opened. (And moved.)
They're not showing people "the truth" about anything. They're expressing an opinion as you said. That's fine, but many take it a step further, such as yourself, PsionX and others whose names I can't remember, and ram that opinion down our throats. Before you even opject to this, look at your sig.
Actually, psionX has been a real inspiration for me. Great guy. Not afraid to tell it like it is. My sig is perfectly fine I think. Though I wonder why I would choose it as a badge of pride if I weren't the one who made the thread it is linked to...
@webster, an excellent idea. If it is moved and opened, most of the anti 4e people will not disrupt it. Very good solution.
BTW:
In about 4-5 hours from now, I'm going to start reporting all the posts on this thread that are calling peoples posts trollish or people trolls or their behavior trolling. In this very same sub forum I have noted that using these terms is a violation of the CoC. So I guess this is just advance notice in case you want to edit your posts.
If someone is a troll, report it.
If someone is just disagreeing with you, that's not a CoC violation.
There needs to be a 'no anti-4E threads in the 4E forums' policy... such threads are by nature as provocative as a white-pride march through the middle of Harlem, and about as subtle.
After all, isn't inciting a riot a bigger crime that participating in one?
Uh, the report post button is for CoC violations, and not an "I win" button to get people in trouble.
If someone is a troll, report it.
If someone is just disagreeing with you, that's not a CoC violation.
Actually, for *certain people* it kind of is.
A bunch of threads have gotten locked with the reason being "We got a lot of reports and I don't want to read anymore reports, so I'll lock it and then sometime in the distant, distant future, maybe the thread will be cleaned and opened or buried. Don't expect any confirmation on anything unless you complain about it though"*
Since these people's purpose is to disrupt and destroy threads, reporting the thread a lot rather neatly do the job for them because the moderation doesn't seem to evaluate validity if enough reports come in.
*Translated from its original Moddish
In any case Trolls like Psionx and leshracnuker will not stop without decent moderator. I've been explicitly told this in a PM form one of these so called "truth showers" themselves.
But seriously, a few good mods could pull this place into line if they tried.
P.S. Organize the forum properly dammit!
some people like me spend upwards of 3 to 4 hours a day on these forums.
That should tell everyone everything they need to know
They're not lazy, they're just part of CS now (since January, I beleive) and Cs just doens't care as long as the forums are working (which they aren't) and not filled with porn.
You and I apparently have different interpretations of the word lazy, perhaps I should phrase it "CS's Lazy Policy" to put more focus on the cause, however I prefer a mod focused complaint because I don't believe anyone besides actual community member can do good moderation.
A lot of forums have mods that will ban accounts immediately for being alts of banned accounts. We need that here.
Oh my god. Remember what I said before about the CoC being the real problem?
Apparently, at some point,t hey removed the thing about new accounts. There's really no teeth at all in bannings anymore. Look down at the bottom of the CoC -- the ONLY consequence is the termination of the account. Not even the pseudo forced anonymity it used to have.
I didn't think it was possible to make the CoC here any less useful...
Okay, VCL's who's in charge of the CoC? They need a letter writing campaign aimed at their job.
No wonder someone is so blatant about who he used to be -- there's no reason not to be.
It's just demoralizing to see the progression of name changes some times, because it's just a huge neon sign that says, "There are no rules here!" When you see a guy called "User_Name" and then one week of hardcore trolling later it's "_User_Name_" and then a week later "-User_Name-" you know CS is not on your side.
EDIT: I wonder how long it will be until someone tells us to be civil. This is such ********.
I mean even a monkey could tell you that working CS is such a soul killing experience that people who have to do it shouldn't be in charge of your major social network.
I think, instead of banning people, they should change their avatar to something embarasing and stick a title on them, like the gamemaster or moderator titles, which says "Forum Troll".
Barring the occasional laugh here and there, I think this might be viewed more as segregation. I don't think anyone wants this. Banning disruptive people seems, in my humble opinion, more mature than segregating them.
Barring the occasional laugh here and there, I think this might be viewed more as segregation. I don't think anyone wants this. Banning disruptive people seems, in my humble opinion, more mature than segregating them.
Yes, but the problem is that banning keeps people from posting their feelings.
Yes, but the problem is that banning keeps people from posting their feelings.
Actually, the problem with banning is that it doesn't incorporate any means of rehabilitation. Posting one's feelings is not wrong, in itself. It's how one communicates these feelings that warrants banning.
Actually, the problem with banning is that it doesn't incorporate any means of rehabilitation. Posting one's feelings is not wrong, in itself. It's how one communicates these feelings that warrants banning.
Sometimes there are only a few ways to express certain feelings. Banning should only be reserved for people who call others trolls and stuff like that.
Sometimes there are only a few ways to express certain feelings. Banning should only be reserved for people who call others trolls and stuff like that.
That's a completely immature view. There is always at least two good ways to express your opinion. The reasonable way, which is constructive, and the emotional way which can be good, unaligned or evil.(Reference intended). Everyone knows what a troll is, and the fact that you defending trolling is somewhere between laughable and pitiful.
Sometimes there are only a few ways to express certain feelings.
Maybe some feelings don't need to be expressed. The forums are not your personal form of therapy where you get to let off steam. The forums are a community where people other than you are trying to enjoy themselves. If the only way you can express your feelings is by making everyone else on the forum miserable, then you probably need to just go away.
Banning should only be reserved for people who call others trolls and stuff like that.
That would be great for the trolls because then they can just keep on trolling. Personally I think the moderators should start by banning those trolls, instead of letting them use the CoC as a free ticket to troll.
Sometimes there are only a few ways to express certain feelings.
Actually, there are quite a number of ways to express any kind of feeling. The entire artistic world is practically built on these.
Banning should only be reserved for people who call others trolls and stuff like that.
I disagree. As a user of these forums, I expect that everyone should have an enjoyable experience and not have to suffer venting that is in no way conductive to a better appreciation of D&D, in any of its incarnations. If someone keeps disrupting this, then I'm in full support of banning this person.
Perhaps a three-strike system could work? Damage control takes a lot of time. If someone is repeatedly causing damage, despite damage control, then it's obvious this person should be banned.
Kind of like demerit points for a driver's license.. the only problem is that the moderators may have their hands full keeping track of all the ban phases. And the offender can always create a new account.
Here's an idea that takes advantage of automation and democracy, and puts less manual burden on the moderators. However, it will require some extra programming, so I don't know...
Every post includes a link like 'Did you find this post helpful? Yes/No'. Only logged in members see this. If the number of No links exceeds a certain threshold, the member is automatically put on temporary probation (can't post for x minutes or x hours). If the number of No links gets too high, a moderator is notified to take possible manual action (ie., permanent banning). Now I can forsee scenarios where a pro-4E or anti-4E post is disproportionately targeted by the other camp, so that's where the 'Yes' link comes in. Any Yes votes are deducted from the No votes, and so democracy overrules. Demerits expire in x days, so an offender who has 'reformed' will eventually have their record cleared, and it's all automated.
Of course, everyone has their personal ignore list, but I don't use it, because I feel like I might be missing out on something important. But this is like a democractic universal ignore list.
I don't know, maybe this is too complicated and/or too much programming, I don't have any experience whatsoever in forum moderating, but just an idea.
Oh my god. Remember what I said before about the CoC being the real problem?
Apparently, at some point,t hey removed the thing about new accounts. There's really no teeth at all in bannings anymore. Look down at the bottom of the CoC -- the ONLY consequence is the termination of the account. Not even the pseudo forced anonymity it used to have.
Maybe I don't understand your point, but...
1. Choose your account’s screen names carefully. Screen names that are deemed offensive may be modified or deactivated without notice. For example:
* Names of offensive or notorious persons, controversial political figures, references to cultural tragedies or of significant religious or occult meaning
* Names containing profanity, obscene slang, graphic anatomical references, racial, ethnic, sexist, or religious slurs
* Names with word combinations that produce an offensive result
* Names of or references to illicit substances or drug-related paraphernalia
* Names with the intent or effect of harming the reputation of another
* Names including protocol prefixes and domain suffixes (e.g. http://, .org, .com)
* Names that impersonate the representation of a specific business or website, including any business or website you may operate or represent
* Proper names of Wizards of the Coast staff or their titles
Misspellings, phonetic, and alternative spellings of prohibited names are subject to modification or deactivation. Variations of a deactivated screen name, as may be evidenced by your declarations under a new screen name that you are "really" the deactivated name, may also be deactivated and the account holder may have his or her account terminated.
As best as I can recall, the wording of that is about the same as it always has been.
So, it's just an issue of enforcement. So people *shouldn't* be repeatedly referencing their past IDs
Ah. It used to be at the bottom under Discipline.
So, it's just an issue of enforcement. So people *shouldn't* be repeatedly referencing their past IDs
And yet I've seen a lot of reincarnations of multiple banned posters. Zherog, can we report a post simply because it seems to be from someone who is banned? That would save a lot of trouble
Maybe I don't understand your point, but...
As best as I can recall, the wording of that is about the same as it always has been.
I knew I'd seen it before, so I was right then.
I knew I'd seen it before, so I was right then.
It's ironic that you would post here again. As we're discussing this.
Not really, Anthro. Consider the purpose of all these posts and threads under various names on this board. I can't spell it out, but I'm sure you see.
Your right, ironic is the wrong word, It's just kind of. "Wow"
And yet I've seen a lot of reincarnations of multiple banned posters. Zherog, can we report a post simply because it seems to be from someone who is banned? That would save a lot of trouble
I can give you my opinion. But I'm not a moderator.
In the past, I've reported obvious instances of it. For one example, we had a troll on the Castle of Fun two summers ago; after his first account was banned, he went out of his way on his second account to make it clear who he was. I reported it. And never saw him again, so I assume Shadow or Autumn (the mods assigned to the forum at the time) took care of it.
So yes, you can report it. As with anything you report, the more information you provide the better chance of something getting done.
Hey but don't ignore me..i have lots of deep philosophical stuff to say! Like gee, how many tattletale threads do we need? And gee i think the Wizo crew do their job pretty well. You want them to hold your hands, instead of utilising the ignore feature? They aren't kindegarten teachers. Press the button and get on with the discussion. I don't know what some of you guys discuss more. 4th edition or,people who don't like 4th edition. ;)
Hey guys! I have an idea! Put people you think are trolls on ignore! Then you read one bad post and ding! YOU DONT EVER HAVE TO READ ANYTHING FROM THAT USER AGAIN! Some of us like parts of the new edition, others hate it in its entirety. And somepeople think its their g/f. We can all co-exist peacefully.
Hey but don't ignore me..i have lots of deep philosophical stuff to say! Like gee, how many tattletale threads do we need? And gee i think the Wizo crew do their job pretty well. You want them to hold your hands, instead of utilising the ignore feature? They aren't kindegarten teachers. Press the button and get on with the discussion. I don't know what some of you guys discuss more. 4th edition or,people who don't like 4th edition. ;)
Just because I can't read a post from a troll doesn't stop them from completely derailing a thread.
Hey guys! I have an idea! Put people you think are trolls on ignore!
It is possible to use the ignore and report features in equal measure. One does not cancel out the other, in fact they enhance each other.
If someone is breaking the CoC, they need to be reported.
What you seem to be saying, from my vantage point at least, is that if I look out my window and see a robber, I shouldn't call the police but I should lock my doors and windows.
I don't see why I can't do both, one as a service to myself and the other as a service to my community.
It is possible to use the ignore and report features in equal measure. One does not cancel out the other, in fact they enhance each other.
If someone is breaking the CoC, they need to be reported.
What you seem to be saying, from my vantage point at least, is that if I look out my window and see a robber, I shouldn't call the police but I should lock my doors and windows.
I don't see why I can't do both, one as a service to myself and the other as a service to my community.
Because what you see as a troll may not be a troll to someone else. What if that robber was really just a guy from the moving company?
Because what you see as a troll may not be a troll to someone else. What if that robber was really just a guy from the moving company?
Well then that guy better have a good lawyer, because his eyes were shifty. If that wasn't enough, he was wearing suspicious clothing, AND he was walking funny.
What if that robber was really just a guy from the moving company?
Then the police won't arrest him.
Just like the Mods shouldn't (and I hope, wouldn't) ban someone without first finding out if they are really breaking the CoC.
What if that robber was really just a guy from the moving company?
Unlikely, unless movers love telling everyone within earshot that they *are* robbers and allude to how much fun it is to rob people.
Then the police won't arrest him.
Just like the Mods shouldn't (and I hope, wouldn't) ban someone without first finding out if they are really breaking the CoC.
But they do.
But they do.
Then, just like a person who has been falsely arrested, there are perfectly legal avenues to redress the issue.
In the interest of being honest, there are a few issues that we have seen and are discussing. One of those is the ease with which new accounts can be created. Tracking accounts by email has helped, but it is not always enough. The idea is that people get a bit of time to cool off, and come back with a clearer head. We genuinely don't anticipate nor understand people coming back time after time just to have their posts deleted and accounts banned. We really don't want to kick anyone off the forums permanently. We want people to be able to contribute in a meaningful way. Some people, however, don't seem to have any desire to contribute in any meaningful fashion. Regardless of all of that, the discussion of past violations and disciplinary action IS against the code of conduct and should always be reported.
The other major issue that we have faced is the loss of what would be called "editorial moderation", which includes closing/moving threads, but also includes eliminating posts for "off-topic". A lot of the biggest problems these days are a result of not taking action on what would have formally been labeled as simply off-topic (things like Anti/Pro 4e talk in a thread asking a 4e rules question). That one is a bit tougher to solve. However, we have come to the point where it is safe to say that type of post is baiting. So again, report it. When you report it, make sure you note that the thread is NOT about pro/anti 4e, and that they are derailing the conversation. The more specific you are in your report the better we are able to address it.
Hopefully that is helpful for everyone involved.
A lot of the biggest problems these days are a result of not taking action on what would have formally been labeled as simply off-topic (things like Anti/Pro 4e talk in a thread asking a 4e rules question). That one is a bit tougher to solve. However, we have come to the point where it is safe to say that type of post is baiting. So again, report it. When you report it, make sure you note that the thread is NOT about pro/anti 4e, and that they are derailing the conversation. The more specific you are in your report the better we are able to address it.
Hopefully that is helpful for everyone involved.
Most helpful thing I've seen in a long time. This needed to happen.
To be completely candid, these past few months have been challenging for those of us in the WizO program. There have been a lot of external changes that have necessitated changes internally with the way we deal with things. That doesn't mean we don't care. Nor does it mean we are any less qualified than we were a few months ago. Most of us are the same people we were back then (though a few of us have been replaced by evil cyborgs from the future). And we all still care very much about the community.
In the interest of being honest, there are a few issues that we have seen and are discussing. One of those is the ease with which new accounts can be created. Tracking accounts by email has helped, but it is not always enough. The idea is that people get a bit of time to cool off, and come back with a clearer head. We genuinely don't anticipate nor understand people coming back time after time just to have their posts deleted and accounts banned. We really don't want to kick anyone off the forums permanently. We want people to be able to contribute in a meaningful way. Some people, however, don't seem to have any desire to contribute in any meaningful fashion. Regardless of all of that, the discussion of past violations and disciplinary action IS against the code of conduct and should always be reported.
The other major issue that we have faced is the loss of what would be called "editorial moderation", which includes closing/moving threads, but also includes eliminating posts for "off-topic". A lot of the biggest problems these days are a result of not taking action on what would have formally been labeled as simply off-topic (things like Anti/Pro 4e talk in a thread asking a 4e rules question). That one is a bit tougher to solve. However, we have come to the point where it is safe to say that type of post is baiting. So again, report it. When you report it, make sure you note that the thread is NOT about pro/anti 4e, and that they are derailing the conversation. The more specific you are in your report the better we are able to address it.
Hopefully that is helpful for everyone involved.
Thanks, I figured it was when the WizO's lost the ability to moderate content as well as code of conduct violations that the problems like this could happen.
Most of us are the same people we were back then (though a few of us have been replaced by evil cyborgs from the future).
You don't get it do you?!? He's a machine, it's what he does, IT'S ALL HE DOES!!! You can't stop him! He'll find you and ... /reese from terminator 1.
On a more serious note, does pro 4e talk include advertising the product with an answer to a question? Because if it does, the problem of being able to report only one post every 60 second arises. I'm telling you, the fanboys are rabid when they post pro 4e stuff. Just saying.
You don't get it do you?!? He's a machine, it's what he does, IT'S ALL HE DOES!!! You can't stop him! He'll find you and ... /reese from terminator 1.
On a more serious note, does pro 4e talk include advertising the product with an answer to a question? Because if it does, the problem of being able to report only one post every 60 second arises. I'm telling you, the fanboys are rabid when they post pro 4e stuff. Just saying.
I don't think you're going to get permission to flame 4th edition without fear of a response. The forum is called D&D General. If you want to talk about playing 4E in general, and the thread has nothing to do with the edition war, bringing the edition war into the thread is off topic.
Posting a thread in praise or in criticism of 4E is an edition war thread, and the edition war(both sides of it) is on topic in that thread.
I just find this community to be very well behaved, if a little passionate.
Well, I spent most of my time lurking, but I have notice very few out right trolls on these forums. I have notice some of the dabate get a little heated, but very rarely have seen "4e iz 4 n00bs!" type nonsense.
I just find this community to be very well behaved, if a little passionate.
The outright trolls are a little hard to miss. As for "4e iz 4 n00bs!" that is mostly a relic of the 4E Concerns and Criticism days, when you did see it. Both then and now, you see it more when people are making fun of the argument they disagree with.
As for the community, aside from the trolls and a few unbalanced people who go beyond passionate, mostly I agree. However, there is a definite edition war going on, and people are trying to help their game "win".
Yes, but the problem is that banning keeps people from posting their feelings.
If people are trolling and flaming people, generally running around and just slagging off 4th edition on the 4th edition forums, then these people have expressed their opinion, and no one has really listened to them. So they continue to express their opinion in the most annoying and childish way possible: By trolling.
I assume you're a 3.5 player. How would you like it if every chance I got I said "Yeah hey, 3.5 sucks."?
How would you like it if, in my sig, I linked to a thread called "3.5 is crap: a badge of pride"?
You wouldn't, I can tell you that right now. You would instantly retaliate, saying that 3.5 is fantastic, and great system, fun to play and run and that I was most certainly wrong.
It's nothing more than opinion, and I except that people have a right to express it, but how about being mature and saying something like: "Hey guys, I have tried 4th ed, and I wasn't very impressed, I'm going to go to the 3.5 forums. Just posting this here in case anyone wants to find me, now you know: I'll be httin' up the 3.5 forums." There's nothing wrong with that. No one would say, "Oh but you should stay here and play an edition that you don't like."
All we're asking is that, those who don't like 4th ed, go to the forum of your chosen edition instead of just being negitive about 4th all the time. It's happened, it's been released. No amount of trolling or crying is going to change that. However, there IS a wealth of material for your chosen edition, no matter what it is.
Just be mature about this, 4th ed naysayers. Please.
Well, I spent most of my time lurking, but I have notice very few out right trolls on these forums. I have notice some of the dabate get a little heated, but very rarely have seen "4e iz 4 n00bs!" type nonsense.
I just find this community to be very well behaved, if a little passionate.
Their are really only about 3-5 outright trolls, but they are prolific enough that they can completely crap up a thread on their own, and banning hasn't stopped them because they keep re-registering.
how about being mature and saying something like: "Hey guys, I have tried 4th ed, and I wasn't very impressed, I'm going to go to the 3.5 forums. Just posting this here in case anyone wants to find me, now you know: I'll be httin' up the 3.5 forums." There's nothing wrong with that. No one would say, "Oh but you should stay here and play an edition that you don't like."
Better yet, instead of posting that and stirring up drama, just quietly switch over to those boards.
NEVER EVER RESPOND TO THEM, IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM.
Do not quote them, for they will respond.
Do not reference them, for they will accuse you of veiled attacks.
Do not say you agree with them on a point, because they will gloat.
Just ignore them. No matter how much it makes you mad what they said. No matter how much you need to be heard.
A troll only wants a reaction. It doesn't matter if it's good or bad.
Trying to get them banned is no good. It's not your call, and they just find ways to come back.
Simply ignore them. It's the most 100% effective way to deal with them. If they don't get the attention fix they are after, they will either step it up till they get banned, or more likely, find better waters to fish in.
It's all up to you, really.
The other major issue that we have faced is the loss of what would be called "editorial moderation", which includes closing/moving threads, but also includes eliminating posts for "off-topic".
Note: Emphasis added.
I know that I haven't been following any of the administrative changes around here, so I'm a bit out of the loop, but...
- When did this happen?
- Why did this happen?
- Who thought that this was a good idea?
Note: Emphasis added.
I know that I haven't been following any of the administrative changes around here, so I'm a bit out of the loop, but...
[LIST=1]
[*]When did this happen?
About a year ago.
[*]Why did this happen?
Because Mike Lescault made a power grab.
[*]Who thought that this was a good idea?
Mike. And, as best as I can tell, nobody else.
From the Community Management C&C thread:
I wish this was true, but it isn't. One of our team's core missions is to educate the rest of the company about just how important things like the health of the forums are. It's an uphill battle at times, like it is at most companys, and in many ways, WotC is much better off than most.
Before the launch of 4E and the recent MTG announcement, I spent a lot of time preparing a report warning people internally of a few things.
- The focus on Magic Online and D&Di had caused normal dev maintainance on the forums to come to a halt 6 or so months back, and each day we're seeing additional problems on the forums
- The announcement and 4E launch would drive enough traffic to our forums that they will likely go down, and possibly down hard. And we may end up measuring the outage in weeks rather than days.
- Asking everyone to reflect on the situation and let the community team know how important the business considers the forums and how much downtime is acceptable.
Unfortunately, we still ended up with the situation I feared, but the report is serving as more than just an "I told you so." We've managed to get the sign off that the forums *are* important, and that a formalized system should be in place to make sure that CM team's requirements for the level of stability and uptime for the forums can be documented, measured, and provided by other departments as necessary.
Since the decision was made over a year back, I don't mind also telling people that I was entirely against the idea of moving the WizOs to CS, for most of the reasons you've all been citing. I understand why the call was made to do so, and supported the call once it was made. However, before the decision was made, I did the best I could to explain to people why I thought it was a bad idea.
Back in 2007 we announced the VCL program and invited the community to take a part in helping the program grow and evolve. Back then, before we even had our first discussion, it seemed pretty clear to me that what we'd eventually end up with a recreation of the original WizO program. I think we're getting fairly close, as the discussions now are starting to become focused on what level of moderation powers VCLs have themselves, should they be able to ban people temporarily from specific forums in their area, etc.
From the outside looking in, I understand that some things seem blindingly obvious. From inside however, that's rarely the case and we have to justify and support lots of things to try to get (what we believe to be) the right thing to happen. But we'll never be able to give the community the entire picture that we have available internally, so we try to do the next best thing and give as much of a picture as we can, knowing that it's incomplete, and understanding that people will usually fill in the remaining parts of the picture themselves, often by drawing in the most visible target as the one wearing the black hat.
Emphasis mine.
Note: Emphasis added.
I know that I haven't been following any of the administrative changes around here, so I'm a bit out of the loop, but...
- When did this happen?
- Why did this happen?
- Who thought that this was a good idea?
WizO_Tao shouldn't be posting personal opinions about this stuff on the forums. I've asked that the post not be removed, since it'd just stir up more controversy if it disappeared, but I can't really comment on what was said.
If you have questions or suggestions about how to improve the forums, you may want to check out the discussions going on in the VCL forum.
About a year ago.
Because Mike Lescault made a power grab.
Mike. And, as best as I can tell, nobody else.
Zherog, please stop with the personal attacks. If you disagree with a decision Wizards of the Coast has made, feel free to post. But it's time we start toning back the attacks on individual WotC employees. The fact that one person from the company may come out and provide the community information about something, doesn't mean it was that person's decision. This holds true whether is is Scott Rouse, Linae Foster, Ken Troop, myself, or anyone else.
Thanks,
-Mike
Someone has pretty much boned us royally and I'd really appreciate knowing who I should be calling on Hasbro to discipline. I never even expected GZ because frankly the people that operate this way never show themselves and take the blame. They rely on the 'good soldiers'.