On the purpose of a public forum (and its moderation)

+

227

Forum veteran
secondchildren said:
Anarki has been suspended for explicitly advocating piracy. Please, remind that when you subscribe to this forum, you are supposed to accept and agree (and respect) the rules. But if you want to discuss it, contact any of us (Keth actually) whenever you like.
Ah, that's... really strange. Whenever piracy would come up over at the GOG forums, he was always the one arguing fanatically (not an exaggeration) against it. Wonder why he had a sudden change of heart.

secondchildren said:
227,
you're right that topic was not about piracy itself, but about how company deal with it. But the fact is that still lots of people where sublty\less subtly advocating it. You can't deny that those few example I've listed above weren't there.
Of course not, and like I told Tommy in another thread, I totally understand why he closed it after seeing what got the first one closed. What I wrote was more to express my displeasure with those people who were saying that stuff than any of the moderators, because the ones who went off-topic with that stuff and got it locked really ruined it for the rest of us.

Honestly, I don't think many of us are in the wrong here. The mods are trying to keep things from crossing over into bad territory, which is their right (and technically what they're there for). Some users were having a good debate about the efficacy and potential repercussions of CDP's methodology when it comes to fighting piracy, which was our right. A few users started to head in a direction that I could see being uncomfortable for mods, and a mod locked it to be on the safe side. A lot of us wish that he hadn't, but I'd imagine that not enforcing the rules puts a lot of pressure on you all.

So we're all still good people. Attractive, too.
 
227 said:
Honestly, I don't think many of us are in the wrong here. The mods are trying to keep things from crossing over into bad territory, which is their right (and technically what they're there for).
Pretty much the latter

So we're all still good people. Attractive, too.
No doubt on this.
 
secondchildren said:
I also wonder what's all this needing on CDP word about it. I mean: maybe they do not have much to say or it's simply pointless being covered with things like: "I won't never buy any of your games, if you do this! Action like yours are immoral, you want to do the big bad company scaring the poor customer! C'mon CDP, you wanna make extra bucks, coz you know that eventually pirates are potential customers! Piracy is not hurting for companies, they're simply greedy beaurocrats."
What do you expect CDP replies to this?
Well to answer for myself, since I brought this wish up, it was pretty much along the lines of what was written in the RPS article. 'Coz the main concerns (for me) that were mentioned here were answered there:
1. Why only Germany?
2. How can it be 100 % accurate?
3. What if there is a false positive?

So now I have to thank 227 for bringing up that article.

(Sorry for the little delayed answer. I only now got the time to read the whole RPS article.)

~edit: Sorry, wrong quote~
 
Closing a topic on the assumption it might escalate isn't wrong or dictatorial especially when previous threads about the same topic went off course, even if a new threads about this topic is worded slightly different…what do we gamers think of piracy / what do we gamers think of CDPR's attitude towards fighting piracy…you can't avoid that an author expresses his/her personal view

My stance in this piracy topic is: I'm against it – no legal grey area and I'm not very fond of threads where piracy is justified. But on the other hand I'm not very fond of closing threads which are about piracy discusses CDPR's methods in this case because everybody should have a right to express his/her opinion.
So I would say if Tommy, secondchildren or any other moderator thinks this or that thread should be closed because it's on the edge of insults he/she should do it – regardless of the topic btw.
Let it run (until flame war breaks out) is worse because then we probably have to give warnings to people we actually like and who are helpful and communicative but just in this case he/she couldn't control his/her temper.

I used to be moderator on a Diablo / LoD website. Every time Blizzard closed or deleted accounts which used hacks and cheats we had hot discussions in our forums. And we had the same situation: let the people discuss Blizzard's recent clean-up in the Battle Net or close it because of flame war was in full swing? Mostly we had to close because the fronts were hardened and weapons loaded with insults and rants. Luckily here you all are wiser ;)
 
PetraSilie said:
Let it run (until flame war breaks out) is worse because then we probably have to give warnings to people we actually like and who are helpful and communicative but just in this case he/she couldn't control his/her temper.
This sentence rubs me the wrong way, and leaves an after-taste of something akin to favouritism. In my opinion, you cannot close down topics as a precaution, worried that someone you personally like might be getting out of hand with their replies, and that if things escalate, you might feel obligated to issue a warning to this person.

I think the point is that pro-activeness is all well and good, but it also runs the risk of applying censorship to what people want to say or do, and you'll be hard-pressed to find people on the internet who take kindly to such actions. Either way, it seems to me that the closing of at least the last thread felt like it kind of came out of nowhere. Rather than pro-actively shutting it down like that, I had expected more evidence of various people being reprimanded by moderators, either of their own accord, or due to reports that keep coming in. It gave me the impression that no user was complaining about this or that person's way of discussing (insults, nasty flaming or what have you), but the moderator(s) themselves taking offence, vicariously.
 
I do not like handing out warnings to ANYONE but if the general consensus is keeping threads open no matter the consequences and handing out warnings then so be it , i won`t lock one unless it`s necessary . Do keep in mind however there is a limit to the amount we hand out before it escalates to something more serious .
 
Tommy said:
Do keep in mind however there is a limit to the amount we hand out before it escalates to something more serious .
I expect nothing else. If a specific user is not listening to warnings, they should expect a ban; either temporary or permanent.
 
Kindo said:
Rather than pro-actively shutting it down like that, I had expected more evidence of various people being reprimanded by moderators, either of their own accord, or due to reports that keep coming in. It gave me the impression that no user was complaining about this or that person's way of discussing (insults, nasty flaming or what have you), but the moderator(s) themselves taking offence, vicariously.
I wouldn't call it offence and moderators are not machines. They have their own minds. They don't need to rely on reports. Also, I would rather have the warnings given secretly as opposed to public, of course if there is any need to do so. No need to embarrass a person by heralding his/her name that they were given a warning.
 
e-ahmet said:
I wouldn't call it offence and moderators are not machines. They have their own minds. They don't need to rely on reports. Also, I would rather have the warnings given secretly as opposed to public, of course if there is any need to do so. No need to embarrass a person by heralding his/her name that they were given a warning.
Nah a warning isn`t made public as it`s a private issue and unless that user makes it public then no one will be the wiser . The user that is given the warning will receive a PM immediately as the warning is given .
 
Well, when I said "give warnings to people we actually like" I didn't mean there are certain members we personally favour or prefer toward others. I meant all members who are usually very helpful in the forums and get on well with others.

I prefer now as before to close a thread for the sake of all involved poeple than giving out warnings e.g. to poeple who provoke and opponents who are normally nice to everyone, or the other way around. Giving out warnings is always in the last instance when all previous advices aren't respected. Warning issues which are also reported by others and deserve a warning poison the atmosphere of the entire community. It gets tensed and you tend to have an eye on those members who attract negative attention.
So it's better to close a thread when it's obvious it will escalate and previous threads about a certain topic already failed.
 
PetraSilie said:
I prefer now as before to close a thread for the sake of all involved poeple than giving out warnings e.g. to poeple who provoke and opponents who are normally nice to everyone, or the other way around. Giving out warnings is always in the last instance when all previous advices aren't respected. Warning issues which are also reported by others and deserve a warning poison the atmosphere of the entire community. It gets tensed and you tend to have an eye on those members who attract negative attention.
"For the sake of everyone," you say. To me it sounds like it's for the sake of the moderators, as they won't have to deal with handing out warnings or in general keeping an eye on and moderating an active topic full of passionate posts. Since I have yet to hear about any reports coming in regarding posts that offended or harmed one or more individuals, I can only assume no-one was actually relieved that it was locked. Well, except for the moderators, of course, who now don't have to worry about observing users' behaviour in the thread. I'm not really looking for conspiracies or anything of the sort, but I'm still stuck thinking locking the last topic helped the moderators more than it did the regular users. The general impression I get from reading these arguments, is that you are looking to lock down topics in advance - just in case - simply to avoid having to do your job in the future. Ah, maybe I'm sounding too harsh and accusatory, here, but I'm man/woman enough to stand and take responsibility for my thoughts and opinions.

Oh, and handing out warnings can be done via PM's, of course, and need not be done in public - as you mentioned, it might poison the atmosphere for others to see that openly.
 
CostinMoroianu said:
I would personally want the topic reopened, since just because something can become very heated and a shitstorm doesn't mean it should be closed before it does.

I want it reopened too. I think the community deserves another chance on the topic, but I'm a little dismayed at so many folks getting their panties in a bundle when it's happened a grand total of two times in recent memory. Topics like this get shut down at BSN all the damn time and everyone just moves on; they don't pull out the pitchforks and torches.
 
Kindo
you are misunderstanding a lot of things about our job and our attitude with the community.
Believe me, we-mods simply love to stay here and reading your stuff, no matter good or bad, no matter how much work it takes. We are 4, as you know, and if someone does not have the time to read a long thread and doesn't wanna get involve in a matter, the other comes in effort.
Just to explain, Petra Silie is our lead moderator and she moderates the community since 2007, so you could imagine how many shitty topics she went through since 2007. She has experience, and I doubt she has no intention of taking care of hot topics or not reading them.

Specifically, that piracy topic has not been locked for prevention, it has been locked because flaming and advocating piracy were already in there.
You see, you weren't here before the releasing of W2 (maybe DelightfulMcCoy, Eskimoe, E-ahmet and Slimgrin do remember), but we used to have this very very hot topic about CEO and DRM, that was a nightmare, a real nightmare to us. Call it the land of flaming and "yes, I support pirates". We had to daily deal with people insulting us, insulting the Devs, threatening of piracy etc. We had some terrible moments, when CDP and mods (by exetensions) were the "public enemy n.1" and people went flowly throwing their poo in our face. We never locked that topic, actually it is still unlocked somewhere deep in the pages of General Discussion. We didn't even ban anyone of the people involved. Actually it wasn't even the only "very hot topic" at the time: we had the "fix the ratio for any monitor" thread, the "remove censorship from the game", the "you're dumbing down consolising the game", the "why dahell Geralt has his pants on", the "I will never buy this game" and so on. Same story, with all of them: flaming, insulting, trolling, threatening etc. If you don't believe me, you can search them and read. They're still here. So you'll have a sketch of what I'm talking about.

Now, regarding Petra's word: I am more on her side, I also would rather to lock a topic (even temporarly) instead that spreading warnings and terrorism here and there.
Anyway, I'm an open minded person and I do listen to your request. So, speaking for myself, I can say that I will put a gentle warning (as I always do) into a thread whenever I spot an infraction of the rules. If that only warning will be ignored, then it's all user's responsability and it'll lead to a less gentle warning-action. Three warnings and that user is outta here. But this doesn't mean that a thread can not still be subjected to lock when necessary. Say when the flaming still goes on (you know we cannot ban any single person coming in this place, or the forum will be empty in short).

Also, please remind that some users are specifically sensitive to certain topics, like Petra said. For you can be piracy, for me for example is sexism and racism (sorry, but they're my flaws I can't really stand with that). So some users that are commonly friendly, change their face in a blink, go berserk if you touch that topic. I can be a real "bitch" whenever I come into a sexist scum, believe me :)
 
I just wanted to reply to make sure you know I have read your post, secondchildren, and I definitely appreciate that we have moderators on this forum who are at the very least ready to discuss these things candidly, even though you are not obligated to do so. This is not something a user can take for granted on most forums. I also realise that I am most likely coming off as ungrateful, by the tone of my recent posts, which is of course understandable. As you mentioned, certain subjects may engage the hyper drive for some people, and while piracy definitely is one of those subjects for me, what caused my reaction this time was the hint of a possibility of biased censorship. Together with the issues of sexism and racism that you mentioned, free speech is right up there in the top of my list.

Anyway, I'm not going to get worked up and compose another reply, here; at least not today of all days (or the rest of the holidays). Even if there are disagreements to be found, I don't want to be a grinch and spread discontent. Thanks again for your replies, all of you, showing that you care.
 
I think I have to explain... because there are two types of hot topics, one with lots of participation, different opinions, objections and respect for each other. And an other type with the same passion but no tolerance for others and the whole discussion turns into a flame war. Moderators can interfere and remind poeple to relax and avoid rude language. And if this doesn't help, give out warnings. Nevertheless this thread is spoiled and I doubt that new poeple who see this topic, want to join but stay away when they see the aggressive atmosphere in this thread.
Then we close topics like that when it starts to rumble and previous threads about this certain topic have failed for the same reason. It has nothing to with moderators avoid contradictable topics and don't want to do their jobs.

I want to point out that these are extreme cases.

and... Happy Christmas to all in this thread and all who're just reading
 
Top Bottom