You know why threads get locked down??
Because people insist on responding to the trolls.
If people ignored them (with the ignore button) and/or stopped responding to them, threads wouldn't get closed.
If you feel that you absolutely must respond to them, go pound your head against a brick wall for a while, the feeling will pass. No good comes from responding to trolls.
I have also recommended that this thread be moved to the Community Business forum.
That said, just use the ignore function. Go to My Account, and on the left hand side, near the bottom, find a button that says "Buddy/Ignore Lists" or something to that effect. Type in the names of the ones you don't want to see again, and be happy about it.
Also, you probably shouldn't be opening up a thread about the locking down of another thread. I think it's frowned upon by the Wizos. Besides, the people who were trolling you in the other thread will probably just show up in this one, because they know they can get a reaction out of you. You might want to delete this thread.
I wouldn't stress over it, Hocus. The mods are in the process of deciding whether the power attack thread should be reopened, so I'm at least happy someone is looking into it. You never know, other disciplinary actions may be taken.
I have recommended to CM that the thread be cleaned up and moved to the appropriate forum.
That said, just use the ignore function. Go to My Account, and on the left hand side, near the bottom, find a button that says "Buddy/Ignore Lists" or something to that effect. Type in the names of the ones you don't want to see again, and be happy about it.
This. Click on the person's name, then click on View Public Profile. Then click on the button I have indicated below.
I have recommended to CM that the thread be cleaned up and moved to the appropriate forum.
This.
I'm sorry, this whole ignore thing doesn't work for me. I post here regularly and what goes on here is a reflection of me, and I can't abide some of what goes on with this. Either the powers that be need to take a stand, or people will start taking things into their own hands.
Again, just like in the bad old days. I know that this is what the troublemakers want, but IMO, there must be a response. If it isn't going to be mods, its going to be the rest of us.
I am sure that pedantic minority is bad business to the forum in general and sure as hell doesn't help with the whole gleemax initiative
It's odd, I'd never really had a problem with trolling on these boards till about 3 or 4 days ago. Sure, you'd get the occasional one, but lately...
It's kind of sad too. Just a few days ago I was encouraging a friend to start reading these boards. I kept telling him what a great community it was here, in comparison to the WoW forums, which he used to frequent uh... frequently.
Still, while the ignore button may work for me personally, I am a regular on these boards and I would like to see the boards stay clean. If people are free to dump all sorts of crap on them, and all the mods/community management can say is for me to ignore them, what about everyone else? What about somebody who comes to this forum for the first time? They get to read people posting inflammatory things, with(in theory) nobody refuting it.
I'm sorry, this whole ignore thing doesn't work for me. I post here regularly and what goes on here is a reflection of me, and I can't abide some of what goes on with this. Either the powers that be need to take a stand, or people will start taking things into their own hands.
Again, just like in the bad old days. I know that this is what the troublemakers want, but IMO, there must be a response. If it isn't going to be mods, its going to be the rest of us.
This.
About 80% of the reason I post here at all is to correct erroneous or misleading statments made on these boards, and I do this very much for the sake of lurking third-parties who may stumble upon that thread and not know any better. It's a big part of the reason I gravitated towards the C&C boards in the 4e forums. Ignoring people who are deliberately mischaracterizing or mis-stating the facts would completely defeat my purpose in posting at all, and as such, Ignoring such people (or simply not responding) is not really an option.
I'm sorry, this whole ignore thing doesn't work for me. I post here regularly and what goes on here is a reflection of me, and I can't abide some of what goes on with this. Either the powers that be need to take a stand, or people will start taking things into their own hands.
QFT.
None of us is as cruel as all of us.
Moderate :
1 : to lessen the intensity or extremeness of
2 : to preside over or act as chairman of
This does not mean, in the general course of action, to arbitrarily close threads instead of actually dealing with the problems. That's not Moderating. That's closing your eyes and pretending it's not happening.
Doesn't really look as if it needed to be closed to me. I think calling someone a troll because they say something sucks is a little silly. But hell, do what you like. I personally like to read everyones opinion, even if I don't neccessarily agree with it. A person doesn't have to agree with me for me to value thier opinions and insights. I would personally be pretty upset an probably quit visiting these boards if the mods decided to censor the community so it appeared as if everyone felt a certain way.
My advice is to not take it so personally if someone doesn't like the same things you do. We are all different folks after all and variety is the spice of life. So just enjoy it, would get pretty boring pretty fast if we had a hive mind.
Love,
malkav
You see, the problem with trolls is quite simple - they enjoy making people angry. They don't mind (and sometimes relish) breaking the rules to do this. When you ban a troll, it really isn't that difficult for them to just make a new account and keep trolling. Ban their e-mail address? They use a different one. Ban their IP? They use a different one. There are probably more exotic ways of dealing with them, but the legal ones are all able to be circumvented and/or cause problems for the people trying to join legitimately. In addition, when the trolls come back they can sometimes be worse. Far, far worse.
I think the best solution would probably be for people to stop responding and for the moderators to remove trolling posts ASAP. I realize this can be taxing on the mods, but I think that if trolls see that only a few people managed to see their posts prior to them being deleted, they'll get bored and head back to /b/.
Read the thread.
Doesn't really look as if it needed to be closed to me. I think calling someone a troll because they say something sucks is a little silly. But hell, do what you like. I personally like to read everyones opinion, even if I don't neccessarily agree with it. A person doesn't have to agree with me for me to value thier opinions and insights. I would personally be pretty upset an probably quit visiting these boards if the mods decided to censor the community so it appeared as if everyone felt a certain way.
My advice is to not take it so personally if someone doesn't like the same things you do. We are all different folks after all and variety is the spice of life. So just enjoy it, would get pretty boring pretty fast if we had a hive mind.
Love,
malkav
Hmm.
While I don't really feel the need to defend myself, the poster in question has been deliberately trying to get a reaction from people, in that thread and others. This is basically the definition of trolling. I'm perfectly fine with people having a different opinion than me, and in fact I looked at the other side of the argument, stating that power attack would be under powered if it did not scale at all with level. However, they way that this person voiced their argument was distressing. I pointed it out, but they played coy, then failed to respond entirely when I extrapolated. So, whatever. Ignore button.
I do hope something is done, but I in particular am not going to force myself to read those kinds of posts any more.
You know why threads get locked down??
Because people insist on responding to the trolls.
Mud, I know I've said this before, but I've had just as much, if not more experience modding forums as you have and this is a very bad attitude to have when it comes to trolls. You do not count on the other members of the forum to deal with the actions of one or two and you do not blame the victims of trolling. What you should do is deal with the symptoms; i.e. that people who are always the instigators.
Closing the thread does nothing but teach the trolls that they can get threads shut down with no consequences to themselves.
Is there such a thing as someone wearing out his or her welcome here?
Yes, there is.
Can someone accrue an unlimited number of moderated trolling/baiting/flaming posts without any chance of permanent consequences?
Unlimited, no. There is a limit.
Will these people continue to be dealt with on a post-by-post basis?
During this high tension, high frustration period of change and transition, the answer should probably be yes, folks will likely be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
IMO, this isn't good enough. I don't care if we're in the middle of an edition switch, WW3, or the Great Depression. Anyone of any viewpoint knows who the trolls are. There is nothing that could make it more obvious. Yes, we could all ignore-list them. They still don't deserve to be here shutting down and derailing threads.
Further, new people come to these boards everyday. Why should they have to read a bunch of troll posts and learn the hard way that certain people are here to push buttons rather than have reasonable conversations?
Nothing is lost by deleting these accounts. In fact, a lot is gained. I'd like these boards to be a more hospitable place. I like a lot of people here, and I wish we could have conversations with 4e designers. I wish I didn't have to go to ENWorld for that. But ENWorld has moderators that hand out bans to people who deserve them. And that makes it a place where Mike Mearls can go and not see his name dragged in the mud. It makes it a place where trolls don't bother to harass Massawyrm because they know they will lose posting privileges before they get too far. Why can't this place be just as good?
Hmm.
While I don't really feel the need to defend myself, the poster in question has been deliberately trying to get a reaction from people, in that thread and others. This is basically the definition of trolling. I'm perfectly fine with people having a different opinion than me, and in fact I looked at the other side of the argument, stating that power attack would be under powered if it did not scale at all with level. However, they way that this person voiced their argument was distressing. I pointed it out, but they played coy, then failed to respond entirely when I extrapolated. So, whatever. Ignore button.
I do hope something is done, but I in particular am not going to force myself to read those kinds of posts any more.
Actually in most cases PX doesn't really call out anyone. He states very clearly his opinions and is usually on topic despite his negative sentiment towards the edition. Its usually the 5-10 posters that come on afterwards and start trashing him and his views that takes the thread to the toilet. I thin its a very valid opinion to say something sucks. Its short and to the point, and directly conveys the posters thoughts. The correct respons to a post like that for me would have likely been: "oh yeah? why do you think it sucks? I kind of like it for his reason....". It takes two (or sometimes 10) to make things nasty.
I know many of you think hes full of it. I don't agree or care with half of his opinions. But then again I feel the same about many of the other strongly aligned anto or pro posters. Two sides of the same coin IMO.
Now there is certainly some trolling on this board (wouldn't even be considered a forum to me if there werent trols), its done by several posters in both camps. You should just ignore it. Trolls need replies to do thier thing. If you feel like you are being trolled, just dont reply. Kinda like a shark a good troll is, they only come around if you spill blood in the water, otherwise they just cruise on for another wounded target.
And there is no need to defend yourself from me. I may or may not agree with you. But I will never think less of another for a difference in opinion. I certainly wasn't trying to belittle anyone. just calling it like I see it, and chances are very likely we may see it very differently. And Im OK with that if you are
love,
malkav
Actually in most cases PX doesn't really call out anyone. He states very clearly his opinions and is usually on topic despite his negative sentiment towards the edition. Its usually the 5-10 posters that come on afterwards and start trashing him and his views that takes the thread to the toilet. I thin its a very valid opinion to say something sucks. Its short and to the point, and directly conveys the posters thoughts. The correct respons to a post like that for me would have likely been: "oh yeah? why do you think it sucks? I kind of like it for his reason....". It takes two (or sometimes 10) to make things nasty.
I know many of you think hes full of it. I don't agree or care with half of his opinions. But then again I feel the same about many of the other strongly aligned anto or pro posters. Two sides of the same coin IMO.
Now there is certainly some trolling on this board (wouldn't even be considered a forum to me if there werent trols), its done by several posters in both camps. You should just ignore it. Trolls need replies to do thier thing. If you feel like you are being trolled, just dont reply. Kinda like a shark a good troll is, they only come around if you spill blood in the water, otherwise they just cruise on for another wounded target.
And there is no need to defend yourself from me. I may or may not agree with you. But I will never think less of another for a difference in opinion. I certainly wasn't trying to belittle anyone. just calling it like I see it, and chances are very likely we may see it very differently. And Im OK with that if you are
love,
malkav
He has repeatedly stated that he is here to bash 4e AND THE PEOPLE WHO PLAY IT.
Sorry for caps.
That makes someone a troll, period. Nothing can mitigate that.
He has repeatedly stated that he is here to bash 4e AND THE PEOPLE WHO PLAY IT.
Sorry for caps.
That makes someone a troll, period. Nothing can mitigate that.
can you direct me to thread where he states that? A link would do. I have been around for a couple of months and I must have missed that one.
Ugh... this really isn't the place to be discussing this. If you really want to talk to me about Psionx, you can PM me, Malkov.
Interestingly enough, I wasn't referring to Psionx. He was just encouraging the other one. I never got to see his response to my announcement that I was putting him on ignore, and I don't much care to. He still managed to get one final response out of me, which I feel a little silly about now. He's on my ignore list. I shouldn't have lorded it over him, but the two of us are through now.
Ugh... this really isn't the place to be discussing this. If you really want to talk to me about Psionx, you can PM me, Malkov.
Its cool, I know who you were talking about. I just mention X because I thought some of the thems of this topic were pointed at him. I realize that the poster int he other thread who said the suck word wan't he (or she as the case may be). I am sorry if I ruffled your feathers it wasn't my intent. I just really wanted to post something in the power attack thread, and I didn't think there was any trolling going on in it from the parties that were being accused of trolling the thread. I tend to avoid conflict, and just wanted to offer my view of this topic as I was unable to post in a D&D topic
And I don't talk about others where they can't read it. something I got fromg ood ol mum. If I can't say something to someones face, then I don't deserve to say it at all (not saying this is your intent of course, I am assuming you are just respecting the ToS).Love,
malkav
can you direct me to thread where he states that? A link would do. I have been around for a couple of months and I must have missed that one.
It's not what you say or how you say it, it's whether or not you're on the same side as the mods. I'm also decent in working in my bashing of 4e and the people who buy it into my posts, but they still get moderated out.
Emphasis mine.
This is a direct admission of trolling.
There are more in the same thread.
Emphasis mine.
This is a direct admission of trolling.
There are more in the same thread.
Kinda hard to argue with that one....
Another thread locked down due to posting violations. Looks like the WizOs are on the ball tonight. Great to see, actually.
Of course, it does mean that the actual discussion got shut down, which was kinda his express goal in that thread. To shut down discussion.
Of course, it does mean that the actual discussion got shut down, which was kinda his express goal in that thread. To shut down discussion.
You almost have to admire how effective he can be in that regard. Almost.
Of course, it does mean that the actual discussion got shut down, which was kinda his express goal in that thread. To shut down discussion.
And that is the part I hate to see. While the rest of the people have to deal with their discussions getting shut down, the trolls are getting exactly what they want.
Of course that should include people who claim to "support" 4E and do their share of flaming, baiting, harassing, and replying instead of just reporting posts or accepting the presence of others.
Closing the thread does nothing but teach the trolls that they can get threads shut down with no consequences to themselves.
This.
It seems like there are some blokes who parachute into a thread, spam it with offensive comments (before someone is commits the unthinkable evil of speaking with positivity or excitement about a game they've never played that they nonetheless hate with the fire of a thousand suns, naturally) and succeed in getting the thread closed before there can actually be a discussion. It's shameful.
---------
It appears to go something like this:
Bob: "Hi. I'm Bob. I used to play D&D and I was thinking about trying it again. What should I look at in order to get started with the hobby again?"
Bystander: "Well, there's a new edition coming out. Maybe it would be fun for you to try that one. I think it will be fun and I'm looking forward to it."
HATEBOT_9000: "Bob, if you try 4E you will get cancer and mountain lions will attack and devour your whole family. 'Bystander' is actually a Communist who is trying to destroy Western Civilization. You can't trust him. Only I know that 4E is an evil plot hatched by the Stone Face of Mars as a preparatory bombardment before a full-scale invasion. Also, Optimist will show up in a few minutes to tell you about how much he is looking forward to 4E. Obviously he would say that because he's a fugitive nahtzi war criminal as well as being a mutant reptoid agent in disguise."
Optimist: "What the..."
Mod: "LOCKED."
-----------
Hyperbole? Maybe, except that user Massawyrm, who was kind enough to share his thoughts as a 4E playtester and cultural journalist, was not only attacked for his troubles... they even verbally attacked his wife. Things have gotten way out of hand, and I think that certain trolls (there's no reason to name them because surely the Mods know who they are) just need to be banned. They contribute nothing; they only kill off otherwise good discussions. Out of spite, maybe? I don't know or really care at this point. Ban them or they'll destroy the community.
This.
It seems like there are some blokes who parachute into a thread, spam it with offensive comments (before someone is commits the unthinkable evil of speaking with positivity or excitement about a game they've never played that they nonetheless hate with the fire of a thousand suns, naturally) and succeed in getting the thread closed before there can actually be a discussion. It's shameful.
And guess which thread is the new target, surprise, surprise.
Of course, the only thing we can do is report them and wait for the wholly ineffectual 'be nice to the guys trying to rile you up, guys' post and maybe some deletions if you're lucky. Because we play by the rules and the rules are pretty expressly against actually dealing with problems.
I just kind of wonder how things would go if we decided not to play by the rules anymore... I mean, what's the incentive to? Losing your SN after the ten thousandth time you threaten to harass someone via email, insult someone's wife or call someone a retard?
Edit: Whoa, wait... was that copyed and pasted? I mean that is exactly what we're pleading to the CM gods to help us with down here in plebe-land, ya know? That was the entire point of this thread: People coming in and derailing the thread expressly to get you to close it.
And in response, you're threatening to close it?
And guess which thread is the new target, surprise, surprise.
Of course, the only thing we can do is report them and wait for the wholly ineffectual 'be nice to the guys trying to rile you up, guys' post and maybe some deletions if you're lucky. Because we play by the rules and the rules are pretty expressly against actually dealing with problems.
I just kind of wonder how things would go if we decided not to play by the rules anymore... I mean, what's the incentive to? Losing your SN after the ten thousandth time you threaten to harass someone via email, insult someone's wife or call someone a retard?
Hey, I play by the rules.
Anyway, I think the mods need to expand their definitions of profanity to include even words that are TV appropriate, because those words don't add to the discussion.
I think saying that you can't use racial slurs, nor the 7 dirty words should be enough. Or just think of what you shouldn't say to a 12 year old and realize that the 12 year old is probably using that language anyway...
Wizo's! is it possible to get a number of how many closed threads GD has vs other forums on average?
I'm all for moderation in threads, but we can't take it upon ourselves to do it. If we all start breaking the rules, there is a possibility of the threads just being shut down. Nobody benefits. We're too close to the release of 4E to be taking these little jabs at each other. If we abide by the CoC, hopefully the mods will handle the issues. If not...I'm not sure what...
If things don't get better within a week of release, I've got an invitation for anyone for everyone else who's tired of this and WotC's refusal to deal with it: Abandon Ship The moderation may be slow, but hand to god, I won't let things get like they are here.
If things don't get better within a week of release, I've got an invitation for anyone for everyone else who's tired of this and WotC's refusal to deal with it: Abandon Ship The moderation may be slow, but hand to god, I won't let things get like they are here.
Looked at the forum. What's it supposed to be for? Seems pretty empty, but if things keep deteriorating here, I might pack up and leave.
...
Not that that's a threat or anything. I mean, come on, I'm not really well known on these boards or anything, no matter how much my immense ego would claim otherwise.
Vaal, if we do that, that means that *they* won.
Aye.
These ARE the official boards. They're where newcomers are going to end up, regardless.
Vaal, if we do that, that means that *they* won.
I don't see it that way. WotC obviously doens't want to foster good discussion or community unity here if they can't be arsed to deal with this. So why stay?
Looked at the forum. What's it supposed to be for? Seems pretty empty, but if things keep deteriorating here, I might pack up and leave.
It's the post-server-nuke Ledgermain Comics Forums, which haven't had much traffic as we've been on hiatus since last year. Currently, it's mainly host to some chat between me and a few fans of Descendants.
That said, I never knew you had forums. I think I'ma go make an account. I hope my username isn't taken there....
Makes no sense to me to move this thread.
Also, what's VCL? Is this something new in addition to CM?
This is another thing!! Why was this thread moved? We were talking about the General Discussion Forum, not community business. Why did VCL move it? I don't understand this move at all. It is similar to my question of what was appropriate for General Discussion being moved to community business, where it died.
Makes no sense to me to move this thread.
The general board is to discuss D&D, for issues with the community/boards, they go here.
And yes, I'm the VCL for the D&D area. (Including previous editions.)
That makes no sense at all. You have effectively killed this thread for anyone on the General Discussion board that hadn't already subscribed to this thread. How after the moved thing moves off of the first couple pages will anyone know its here? Many people would potentially be interested in talking about the subject on the General Discussion board, because its about the General Discussion board. Funny... we talk about not enough moderation, then this is a case of over moderation.
I do not like this move.
When can we expect to see bans? How many threads do the actions of 2-3 people have to end in the closing of before they're out of our hair for good?
Webster, since we have your attention, I do have to ask...
When can we expect to see bans? How many threads do the actions of 2-3 people have to end in the closing of before they're out of our hair for good?
I posted the answer I received above. Apparently we're in a transition period, meaning that blatant trolling is allowed. I understand making a few allowances for the folks whose emotions are aroused by the changing of the guard. But that doesn't make any excuse for those who are disrupting the forums in a deliberate manner.
So a thread that discusses the merits of edits and bans on the General Discussion board for D&D doesn't belong on the General Discussion board where the people that are most affected by the thread are?!?!?
Heya. I heard about the concerns in the general discussion forum and I am looking into ways to address them. So first and foremost, I want to say that I'm on board with your concerns.
But with that said, we have the Community Business forums specifically for these types of discussions, so that we don't have further interference with healthy discussion on the other forums, beyond that which this thread was created to talk about.
If you think people aren't aware of this forum, I'm sure you could work with folks like Webster to get a sticky thread at the top of the forum directing people to this one, and maybe even this thread.
Back to the matter at hand, this is a topic I personally feel very strongly about. We do NOT want to reward the behavior of disruptive posters by closing the threads they are trying to disrupt. All this does is reward and reinforce their behavior, and it's the last thing we want to see happen.
Our CS folks handle CoC violations on a post by post basis. They deal with individual violations, not with threads themselves. The only situation where they are able to close a thread are if the original post was a violation of the code of conduct, or if the thread was generating so many CoC violations for them that they had to temporarily close it down pending review by the Community Management team.
I'll be working with the VCLs and other interested community folks over the coming week to review how we're dealing with the discussion disruption currently, how our track record has been over the past couple months, and what we may want to change going forward.
However, please keep in mind that actions taken against a user's account are entirely and 100% at the discretion of our customer service department. Bans, suspensions, warnings, etc are entirely their domain, and neither the CM team (including me) nor anyone invovled in the VCL program has any input or influence on how those actions are taken.
I'll post more (or one of the folks involved in the VCL program will) on this subject over the course of the next week or so.
Thanks,
-Mike
Webster, since we have your attention, I do have to ask...
When can we expect to see bans? How many threads do the actions of 2-3 people have to end in the closing of before they're out of our hair for good?
Hopefully soon. There are a number of things in play.
For one, some of the T1 staff are in training. Thngs move slowly because of that, and I don't hold it against them.
I've already had a thread re-opened and cleaned up. (With the request that official warns be used rather than soft warns.)
THIS is the board to discuss board issues. This thread doesn't belong on the D&D general board any more than a "Looking for players" thread does. (If you go to the store to buy milk, you don't go to the cereal aisle, you go to the milk aisle.)
What if my cereal of choice comes with milk pre-packaged?
Forum moderation is a tricky thing. Maaaaany toes to step on with even the simplest things. If a mod starts going through posts and edits out all the flaming, someone will pipe in and say they removed actual content, or someone will start a sh~ sand storm of claims of oppression and censorship. Some flaming has to be left, or en even bigger problem will be created.
Bans are similar, they are big things to do, most often permanent. Despite someone's trolling, they may also contribute in other threads. They cause a fuss in your thread, but help a newbie out with grapple rules in another. Their whole posting needs to be examined and reviewed, not a fun task.
Between bans and editing posts lies a middle-ground that I think most people would be okay with: Suspensions to go with warnings.
If someone acts up continually, banish them for a few days to let them cool off.
What if my cereal of choice comes with milk pre-packaged?
Well...then we'd better hope they make the right call and store it in a fridge and not on a shelf with the dry cereal! =)
Forum moderation is a tricky thing. Maaaaany toes to step on with even the simplest things. If a mod starts going through posts and edits out all the flaming, someone will pipe in and say they removed actual content, or someone will start a sh~ sand storm of claims of oppression and censorship. Some flaming has to be left, or en even bigger problem will be created.
Bans are similar, they are big things to do, most often permanent. Despite someone's trolling, they may also contribute in other threads. They cause a fuss in your thread, but help a newbie out with grapple rules in another. Their whole posting needs to be examined and reviewed, not a fun task.
Between bans and editing posts lies a middle-ground that I think most people would be okay with: Suspensions.
If someone acts up continually, banish them for a few days to let them cool off.
As I touched on in my previous thread, CS handles code of conduct violations and may edit or delete posts as necessary, as well as issue suspensions, bans or other actions against a users account. The CM team, including the community members involved in the VCL program, are the ones who make editorial decisions. Such as should a thread remain open or closed, should a thread or post be moved to a different forum or different thread, etc.
So we have paid staff that deals with code of conduct violations and user accounts, and we have members of the community involved in making editorial content decisions.
Psionx, do you mean TV inappropriate? And during what times? before late prime time? during the day? Comedy Central appropriate?
I think saying that you can't use racial slurs, nor the 7 dirty words should be enough. Or just think of what you shouldn't say to a 12 year old and realize that the 12 year old is probably using that language anyway...
Wizo's! is it possible to get a number of how many closed threads GD has vs other forums on average?
I just want to say I think any words actually getting through the filter are not the responsiblity of the psoters. I find that section of TOA, etc quite funny. The forum software has feature to actually filter all sorts of words, and even HTML tags, and such so that harmful things do not come to the user.
Some forums would obsfuscate Dick Chaney's first name as obscene. as A parent I would blame the forum administration for not doing its job before worrying that someone got heated and actually posted a word on forums that may be seen as offensive by some. The software has the ability, so should the administration have the ability to properly administrate the forums software to make it work including adding all words needing to be filtered into a word filter.
The ESRB logo on the forums must mean that all words needing to be filtered have already been done so by their regulatutions or approval board.
Well it should, but that is just a privacy thing....so it is still the responsiblity of ANY forum administation to choose what words are inappropriate at the time the forums are created before going public, rather than worry some heating debate might just have someone post what they think prior to censoring themselves or editting a post to censor out something they may not have intended to type.
So I would hope that all things meant to be censored is already done by a competent team running a forum. This is my view on ALL forums, and not just this one. Something similar to what words are appropriate in the D&D books, then those not allowed by the ratings and target audience should be chosen and removed before getting to any viewers eyes as decided by the company.
THIS is the board to discuss board issues. This thread doesn't belong on the D&D general board any more than a "Looking for players" thread does. (If you go to the store to buy milk, you don't go to the cereal aisle, you go to the milk aisle.)
No my local Walgreens has both on the same aisle.
VA, there is Pms where you can hold conversation with specific people.
VCL, I think is an acronym for some title of a casual user in an offical postiion with the WotC forum, so what they say is oficial in relation to the forums.... I think.
gamileo: this isn't the proper place for this either but... I have made mention of users not knwoing where things belong and where to find them before as well. It sems the most logical place for users is not where WotC thinks things should be. While I agree that boards related business doesn't really belong in the forum, It is what I would do to place it where it most affects people. A problem might be this conbination of all these forums under the WotC umbrella, that means things that make the most sense wont work under this huge amount of forums present. So Cm is making things more manageable for them without regards for how it affects users. There is a thread about C&C for CM on the Gleemax side of the forums if you care to venture into that blue and green eyesore to find it.
Which is what I think this entire thread should be linked to/from since it does have to do with C&C about CM, and would request that someone with proper mod/admin abilites combine posts related to the actual topic to be merged into that thread or linked to here from it so that CM can see what people here are saying that may not be able to find the C&C for CM thread. I think most already know about it that are posting here, but are not posting there anyway....
Mike: I think your answer to my question about what you actually do would be helpful for people to see what the different aspect of CM is in regards to their duties. Sadly I can no longer find it where you explained your name change form Liason to its current form, but it may help in many of these discussions to know what the different positions do, or at least you part to play in it.
Words like crap and damn which aren't covered by the filter should be prohibited. Damn fine is ok, however, damn you is not. The word 'Crap' should be removed entirely, it is unacceptable. Stuff like that.
In advance: God forgive me...
Words like crap and damn which aren't covered by the filter should be prohibited. Damn fine is ok, however, damn you is not. The word 'Crap' should be removed entirely, it is unacceptable. Stuff like that.
Maybe it's just my Australian upbringing and culture, but those words are easily fine. It's the harder stuff like the F word (which I make obscene usage of when given the chance) and such that should be blurred out to stop the more sensitive from being too shocked.
Personally, I'd love an option to see the forums unfiltered, as it doesn't offend me at all, but have the filters set to 'strict' or something by default.
Damn you for being so sensitive to this crap! :P
P.S. I understand that these are friendly forums and obtuse usage of swear words would be bad for public image.
Damn you for being so sensitive to this crap! :P
I've seen him posting on another forum, and he is certainly not sensitive about it, or adverse about using such language myself. I figure he is just making this argument here in another attempt to get other posters suspended or banned.
I've seen him posting on another forum, and he is certainly not sensitive about it, or adverse about using such language myself. I figure he is just making this argument here in another attempt to get other posters suspended or banned.
Exactly :D.
Maybe it's just my Australian upbringing and culture, but those words are easily fine. It's the harder stuff like the F word (which I make obscene usage of when given the chance) and such that should be blurred out to stop the more sensitive from being too shocked. Damn you for being so sensitive to this crap! :P
FYI...
Telling somebody or calling somebody "over sensitive" is a CoC violation...
Silly, isn't it?
Nothing puts a forum on the straight and narrow like a mod being able to step into the thread and go 'hey you, Poster X, that was out of line. Don't do it again or you're out of there, understand?" That way, not only is there a definite knowledge that something is being done and a poster that knows he's done wrong, but more importantly, everyone else knows where the line is.
The CoC is so fixated on making the community as 'inoffensive' as whoever wrote it thought was possible, it focuses on things like users (and even the leads and mods) pointing out disruptive people and actions to the point that it's made dealing with trolling and harassment virtually impossible.
Nothing puts a forum on the straight and narrow like a mod being able to step into the thread and go 'hey you, Poster X, that was out of line. Don't do it again or you're out of there, understand?" That way, not only is there a definite knowledge that something is being done and a poster that knows he's done wrong, but more importantly, everyone else knows where the line is.
One of the issues with the current system is that it isn't very educational to the rest of the forum, as was stated in by Vaal. Here is an example:
1. Someone posts something offensive that violates the CoC.
2. This post gets deleted.
3. The member who posted it gets a warning and is suspended for 24hrs.
4. After those 24hrs have past, the suspended poster comes back and goes back to posting as before.
Unless you are looking at things closely, you wouldn't even know the above series of events happened, particularly #3 and #4.
This doesn't really educate anyone on what the standards really are. The CoC that everybody gets referred to is really vague. When things do get moderated and people do get punished, it happens in a way that its almost invisible. This leads to the impression that little is being done, and makes it very unclear how people are (and more specifically are not) supposed to act.
If only this weren't the exception to the rule. Maybe they are paying closer attention to D&D General?
The CoC is so fixated on making the community as 'inoffensive' as whoever wrote it thought was possible, it focuses on things like users (and even the leads and mods) pointing out disruptive people and actions to the point that it's made dealing with trolling and harassment virtually impossible.
Nothing puts a forum on the straight and narrow like a mod being able to step into the thread and go 'hey you, Poster X, that was out of line. Don't do it again or you're out of there, understand?" That way, not only is there a definite knowledge that something is being done and a poster that knows he's done wrong, but more importantly, everyone else knows where the line is.
The problem with that system is that it calls out posters and makes their offense visible. General warns keep things anonymous and make it less mean to the offenders. Besides, the people generally know who broke the rules without that person having to be called out right?
Impossible as the most blatant ones are edited out. This came up in the thread about the sorry state of C&C (where, by the way, I was told flame bait threads were fine; in direct contradiction to what GZ said above)
Actually it was GZ who established that posts in the C&C forum could go further because of how things were in the forum. If it went even further, then that is where you should look for why it was like that.
As for why you do not want posts pointing out that someone has, according to the current poster, violated the CoC, the reason should be rather blatantly obvious - it is not on topic. Threads are way too easily derailed with post and counter-post of he-said-she-said about who has violated the CoC, who did it first, why it has not been deleted, ad infinitum until the thread is a lost cause.
The solution is not to set people up to
I'm not all that concerned about being "less mean" to the offenders. Shame is a potent deterrent.
The reason why you do not want posts pointing out that someone has, according to the current poster, violated the CoC, should be rather blatantly obvious - it is not on topic. Threads are way too easily derailed with post and counter-post of he-said-she-said about who has violated the CoC, who did it first, why it has not been deleted, ad infinitum until the thread is a lost cause.
The solution is not to let people set themselves up official harassers and flamers of the various forums, although several people here seem to be advocating just that, but to let the WizOs have wider ability to delete posts or parts of posts that go off into such things, and to punish those self-proclaimed defenders of board civility as harshly as the people they claim to be protecting everyone from.
The reason why you do not want posts pointing out that someone has, according to the current poster, violated the CoC, should be rather blatantly obvious - it is not on topic. Threads are way too easily derailed with post and counter-post of he-said-she-said about who has violated the CoC, who did it first, why it has not been deleted, ad infinitum until the thread is a lost cause.
Yeah, this is the problem with it. So that's why it wouldn't work. I say the mods are actually a little too strict with my posts, but thats just me.
Tonight, at the very least, things appear to be working. I reported three posts tonight for CoC violations, and all three were deleted with a WizO comment within minutes of my report.
If only this weren't the exception to the rule. Maybe they are paying closer attention to D&D General?
Most WizOs are reasonably attentive and quick to deal with problem posts.
For the most extreme issue I ever reported, the post was deleted within minutes. (And it appears the account was banned - thankfully. What is disturbing is that several people who expressed admiration for the post are still active.)
For other issues, I think they need to pay more attention to other posts in a thread, noting when some people are building up to flames, or posting persistent violations. This particularly applies to certain community "supporters", who continue to appear to be immune to the CoC.
For recent threads, one violation was deleted as I was reporting it, so apparently someone else had already reported it. Another resulted in several posts being deleted, highlighting very nicely why both an entire thread needs to be considered, and why self-appointed guardians should not be allowed to harass people because they think they can make the boards "better" by violating the CoC themselves.
I say the mods are actually a little too strict with my posts, but thats just me.
Do you want a public response to that?
Do you want a public response to that?
I would consider direct discussion of a specific person to be questionable in respect to the CoC, which is an issue I have with the thread as a whole.
If that is "acceptable" because we are in the Community Business forum, and you want to be used as an example, I will offer additional comments.
You said you think the mods are being too strict with your posts.
I would consider direct discussion of a specific person to be questionable in respect to the CoC, which is an issue I have with the thread as a whole.
If that is "acceptable" because we are in the Community Business forum, and you want to be used as an example, I will offer additional comments.
Ah, I see. Well I don't think I did anything wrong, but the mods did so the did what they did and thats over and done. I'm just saying that sometimes they delete entire posts when only certain parts need touching up. Also, I think they play favorites with pro 4e posters, but thats my take on it.
The reason why you do not want posts pointing out that someone has, according to the current poster, violated the CoC, should be rather blatantly obvious - it is not on topic.
I would rather have one WizO's post be off-topic, than do what often happens now, where you have one WizO's off-topic post containing a general warn to the thread or an announcement that some unspecified poster's (or posters') posts have been removed, not mentioning which posts caused the warn of why. This confuses posters who don't know what was appropriate and what was inappropriate behavior.
In other forums in which I participate, public and specific warnings not only end the immediate problem, they often get a thread back on track after an abusive derail.
And I also think it is imperative that WizOs leave posts in the threads they edit so people aren't confused about why they can no longer see a post. Sometimes a thread gets further derailed by people asking "Where'd that post go?" Since the WizO has to leave a post behind anyway, he may as well leave one explaining whose posts were edited/deleted and why.
Threads are way too easily derailed with post and counter-post of he-said-she-said about who has violated the CoC
Agreed. Those posts should be deleted, with the WizO leaving a single post behind stating that discussions of a WizO's actions should be taken up with Customer Service, not posted to the thread, and that further references will be deleted without notice.
Vigilante modding (where posters who are not in CS tell other people they violated the CoC) should also be deleted, though, unless the vigilante modding is also being abusive, such a post should not be subject to further discipline.
Ah, I see. Well I don't think I did anything wrong, but the mods did so the did what they did and thats over and done. I'm just saying that sometimes they delete entire posts when only certain parts need touching up. Also, I think they play favorites with pro 4e posters, but thats my take on it.
Well, being as earlier today a post of mine that could in no way be viewed as being insulting or flaming was deleted, and other pro 4E-posters have mentioned the same, I doubt they are favouring us. In my opinion, they are going too far the other way, and allowing posts from anti-4E posters that would get any of the rest of us banned.
I would rather have one WizO's post be off-topic, than do what often happens now, where you have one WizO's off-topic post containing a general warn to the thread or an announcement that some unspecified poster's (or posters') posts have been removed, not mentioning which posts caused the warn of why. This confuses posters who don't know what was appropriate and what was inappropriate behavior.
A WizO posting a warning notice is fine. That is not the same as a member posting off-topic complaints with harassment.
In other forums in which I participate, public and specific warnings not only end the immediate problem, they often get a thread back on track after an abusive derail.
I thought the MKRealms method of having a warning point system with the points by a member's name that linked to the offending posts made such things clear.
Whether that is viable or legal is something I leave to WotC to decide.
And I also think it is imperative that WizOs leave posts in the threads they edit so people aren't confused about why they can no longer see a post. Sometimes a thread gets further derailed by people asking "Where'd that post go?" Since the WizO has to leave a post behind anyway, he may as well leave one explaining whose posts were edited/deleted and why.
Again, that has the issue of multiples posts with a great big:
DELETED FOR COC VIOLATIONS
stamp across them. Such a public smackdown is not always helpful.
Agreed. Those posts should be deleted, with the WizO leaving a single post behind stating that discussions of a WizO's actions should be taken up with Customer Service, not posted to the thread, and that further references will be deleted without notice.
I am not talking about things going that far. I mean:
Vigilante modding (where posters who are not in CS tell other people they violated the CoC) should also be deleted, though, unless the vigilante modding is also being abusive, such a post should not be subject to further discipline.
Such vigilante posting is a CoC violation. It should not need to have to include another violation, although it too often does, to merit penalties. The CoC is clear that being baited is not an excuse.
There is a perfectly good system in place for vigilante posts. It involves the little yellow triangle in the upper right hand corner. The WizOs read them, store them, and the thread is kept clean.
At least I would expect that is the theory.
And I would expect it would be preferred to keep it that way. Otherwise I foresee a rapid collapse of the current forums as everyone volunteers as a vigilante moderator to get in on the fun.
I think you might be misreading me.
I don't think any member's harassing posts should remain behind. I do think a WizO, when deleting and editing posts in a thread should leave behind a single post. That post should probably use a font only accessible to WizOs which says something like:
[highlight]Posts have been edited or deleted in this thread. These posts violated the Code of Conduct in that they contained inflammatory statements intended to bait the community. Other posts that responded to the bait with off-topic and insulting commentary have also been deleted. Such deletions have been noted on the profiles of members [insert members' names]. These actions will be periodically reviewed by Customer Service to determine if further action is required.[/highlight]
If these posts caused a member (let's say "John_Doe") to be suspended or banned, the following should be added.
[highlight]Because John_Doe continued to post inflammatory comments after repreated warnings, Customer Service has suspended John_Doe's account for X days.[/highlight]
The WizO posts should end with:
[highlight]If anybody has concerns or would like to appeal any action taken by Customer Service, they should contact Customer Service at the "Contact Us" button found at the bottom of the page. Discussions of any action by Customer Service, including the WizOs are off-topic for this thread and will be deleted without further notice. Such deletions will also be noted in that member's profile.[/highlight]
And that's it.
On a further note, let me clarify that I do agree that posts engaged in vigilante modding should be deleted. My only point is that it should not warrant further disciplinary action (such as suspension or expulsion) unless the post also included other violations of the Code of Conduct.
I do think public identification of who has committed a violation will in fact restore civility to the boards. Public shaming is one of the most effective means of correcting bad behavior. Usually, the poster either reforms or, in frustration, gets himself or herself banned. In my experience, the poster is more likely to reform, whereas lax enforcement encourages more and more outrageous behavior, until a ban is inevitable.
My dissents, to clarify:
1. I do not know if identifying suspended accounts can be done. There must be some reason for the statement that moderator decisions are noted in the CoC as not being made public.
2. I do not agree that vigilante moderators should be excused for "good intentions" provided they did not violate the code of conduct in another way. For the most part, such posts do violate another part of the code of conduct - they are overt baiting. Telling someone they cannot post something and that the WizOs will come to get them is inviting a response to take a long walk off a short pier, mind your own business, stop being a snitch, and a variety of other less pleasant comments.
Likewise they too often dive immediately into harassment. I would post to the examples in a recent thread, but fortunately the WizO deleted them all. Many of those posts were accusations of sock-puppeting and prior violation, as well as being by a banned member. That is harassment in addition to being baiting.
3. If there is one thing that will not make an internet loudmouth shut up it is an attempt at public shaming. If anything, that just inspires them to an even greater frenzy of obnoxious and destructive behavior.
Public identification of examples of improper posts is useful for demonstration purposes, if the posts are not messing up threads.
Public identification to try and humiliate someone into behaving is just throwing gasoline on the fire.
However, what I do agree with is:
1. A clear moderator notice that posts have been deleted. Mention of the specific rule violated depends on the circumstances.
2. A clear restatement of the rule that discussion of moderator action is not appropriate in the threads.
Oh, and a side note:
It should be kept in mind that people subscribing to threads often wind up with the full text of deleted or edited messages.
I would hope that is a factor that is kept in mind by the WizOs.
1. I do not know if identifying suspended accounts can be done. There must be some reason for the statement that moderator decisions are noted in the CoC as not being made public.
Good question. I've seen plenty of forums that do it, though.
2. I do not agree that vigilante moderators should be excused for "good intentions" provided they did not violate the code of conduct in another way.
You changed my mind. I agree.
3. If there is one thing that will not make an internet loudmouth shut up it is an attempt at public shaming.
Those people will be banned. I don't have a problem with it. For people whose only intent is to make noise and be disruptive, banning is the only thinkg that could feasibly shut them up. However, I think the vast majority of people who write inflammatory comments do so because they post quickly in the heat of emotion. A few public warns often shocks them into being more moderate in tone.
It should be kept in mind that people subscribing to threads often wind up with the full text of deleted or edited messages. I would hope that is a factor that is kept in mind by the WizOs.
Agreed. Another good reason to identify what was edited and why.
Good question. I've seen plenty of forums that do it, though.
So have I.
Until such time as someone from WotC clarifies it, I would rather not make it a major issue, mostly because I do not want to waste time and see useless arguments over something that the answer to is "We cannot for legal reasons."
Those people will be banned. I don't have a problem with it. For people whose only intent is to make noise and be disruptive, banning is the only thinkg that could feasibly shut them up. However, I think the vast majority of people who write inflammatory comments do so because they post quickly in the heat of emotion. A few public warns often shocks them into being more moderate in tone.
I have no problem with them being banned.
I just question the effect of public smackdowns.
I would also expect that more people post inflammatory comments when they expect there is no other way to retort. When people expect that reporting a post gets personal attacks deleted, they will report the posts and sit back smug in knowing they got the other person in trouble.
Agreed. Another good reason to identify what was edited and why.
Again, that is a higher management issue. I do not disagree, but it remains for someone higher up the food chain to comment on the viability.
Looks like we pretty much agree. What do you know, an internet discussion on trolling that ends amicably. Prepare for the endtimes, people!
:D
Actually, I will push it further:
Can it be bumped up for actual policy discussion?
There is also a discussion here on what Tier 1 CS can/should do about trolls.
Your input would be appreciated in either thread.
Samwise,
If these posts caused a member (let's say "John_Doe") to be suspended or banned, the following should be added.
[highlight]Because John_Doe continued to post inflammatory comments after repreated warnings, Customer Service has suspended John_Doe's account for X days.[/highlight]
I do think public identification of who has committed a violation will in fact restore civility to the boards. Public shaming is one of the most effective means of correcting bad behavior. Usually, the poster either reforms or, in frustration, gets himself or herself banned. In my experience, the poster is more likely to reform, whereas lax enforcement encourages more and more outrageous behavior, until a ban is inevitable.
I can tell you this will never happen. Conduct actions taken against posters will never be made public. It is part of the privacy policy.
I can tell you this will never happen. Conduct actions taken against posters will never be made public. It is part of the privacy policy.
If this is actually part of the policy and not just extrapolated, it needs to be removed. All it does is ties the mod's hands of an important tool while not actually protecting any privacy because all it is is saying a user name that everyone already knows.
Unless they say something like 'Ubertroll, aka Bill McJerkinreallife has had his account terminated', there is no threat to privacy.
What a "coincidence". WotC gets the last word, and the thread closes. Such immature and childish behavior.
It's "funny". Another thread that gathered 14 pages of replies, and had tons of CoC violations and should've been locked days ago, finally got closed 2 seconds after Scott Rouse came in and made some comments.
What a "coincidence". WotC gets the last word, and the thread closes. Such immature and childish behavior.
If by two seconds, you mean two and a half hours, and by WoTC getting the last word, you mean someone who was being harshly critical of WoTC got the last word, then yeah, you're correct.
Such immature and childish behavior.
Yeah. And they were allowed to continue such childish behavior for 14 pages!
It's "funny". Another thread that gathered 14 pages of replies, and had tons of CoC violations and should've been locked days ago, finally got closed 2 seconds after Scott Rouse came in and made some comments.
What a "coincidence". WotC gets the last word, and the thread closes. Such immature and childish behavior.
The thread was locked because it was generating lots of CoC violations. The thread has been brought to the attention of Community Management and they will decide whether or not the discussion is worth continuing. Though if they continue it and it gets a lot more CoC violations it will be locked again.
As it has already been point out, WotC did not get the last word as there are a few posts after his (and there were probably a few more than got deleted, I don't know I was asleep).