[Reddit discusses forums] Chris has now posted

"

HeroOfExile wrote:

"

lethal_papercut wrote:

Interesting to see this thread full of the posters whose constant drivel has pushed people over to reddit. You people apparently don't realise the harm you do the community, you have literally pushed people away from the official forums because they are sick of reading your banal spam & yet you seem absolutely oblivious to fact.

People have left this place because of you.

you nailed it.

ino, berma1nwhatever, boem, shag, nait24k, goetzjam ... CHARAN made ppl leave.

cant wait for the voting system. most postings will never see any daylight, muahaha.

I suppose we should ignore the endless amounts of useful and helpful posts that some of those people make because some people find them annoying?

Ive read some great posts from people like Shags, Charan, Boem and others who are labeled as trolls or "the reason people are leaving the forum". People complain that these guys are in every thread injecting their opinions yet the people complaining are the same one who arnt helping out in sections like Gameplay help or making meaningful posts in Feedback. Id really like to see how many people who are of greater assistance to the community and truly care for the game more than say Charan have left because of him.

The point im trying to make is that if good posts get buried because they are made by an unpopular poster then this forum and its community have failed. You may disagree with how a person represents themselves but to dismiss the validity of their argument based on this alone is foolish.

"

Dethklok wrote:

The point im trying to make is that if good posts get buried because they are made by an unpopular poster then this forum and its community have failed. You may disagree with how a person represents themselves but to dismiss the validity of their argument based on this alone is foolish.

A voice of reason amidst the mass insanity. Thank you.

Well Bars, I just don't know...

I guess, I do feel like the majority of a community can decide who they are, and what they want to see, and I think that's okay. I don't think this bars dissenting opinion, if it's presented well. A highly abusive or aggressive approach will not go over well if you're in the minority, however. It's just the way things work.

I'm not quite on the same page as you, and that's fine. But I'll share something I posted on Reddit shower thoughts (that got no interest), which will at least show I somewhat am:

"If upvotes make me feel good for preaching to the choir, and downvotes make me feel bad for being contrary, can an equal number of both be an important statement that may never be heard?"

I think that's a testament to voting systems not being perfect. And I still think voting systems are a pretty good form of community moderation where the members are, as a majority, being represented.

Edit: To the above quote. Unfortunately, once someone gets an unpopular reputation - it's on them to change that. I don't believe a person becomes unpopular in a community for frivolous reasons, but once they gain it, they may receive frivolous dismissal until they show a long term ability to fit in without tweaking people the wrong way.

I think it's completely fair to dismiss someone for poor presentation. And I don't mean grammar - I mean respect.

"

Bars wrote:

Shaihai, today I read the reddit thread. I almost never read Reddit, as I said, I can't deal with the way the site is arranged. Anyway, I saw everything posted by Charan being downvoted - regardless of what he said. I'm willing to bet my balls the same comments wouldn't have been downvoted if written by an anonymous account. He himself said the same: when he posts with an unknown account, he doesn't get downvoted.

This is not a fair or objective system. This is a system which gives a good idea of popular opinions - and that's all there is to it.

If you think popularity itself is the best measure for quality, check the top 20 most popular Youtube videos. Or think of the most financially successful movies. To quote Chekhov (I don't know if there's an accepted translation), There are a thousand idiots for every intelligent person and their voices smother his.


@Drumheller: Yes, everyone hates Charan, got that. My personal opinion is that reaction is way overblown and I wrote a wall of text earlier explaining why. Anyway, let's assume he's horrible and the mods cover for him.

I will repeat myself: is it really so difficult to ignore the posts of someone you find unpleasant? I really don't get it. Why let this unpleasant person drive you away from the forum? Isn't that a concession of their victory over you?

I don't think I'm getting my point across clearly. It's not about Charan or any one person. It's about the favoritism. Charan has publicly shit all over people on this forum for years (I've been here since Jan 2013) and the mods, for the most part, handle him with kid gloves. Others are not treated the same way. The entire reason I, and several others, learned about Charan was because we witnessed the uneven moderation and wondered why he was given special permission to treat other people like shit.

I agree on the upvote / downvote system being abused. It shouldn't be about who is posting. It should be about the content of the message.

So, if you TL;DR my message, it's the biased moderation and heavy handed moderation towards most people that I take issue with. I would prefer a free-for-all with no moderation over what I've witnessed here.

It's funny that in a sense the trolls have won when it comes to downvote/upvote sysetms, because the trolls care more than others.

I think a upvote-only system defeats trolls, but it doesn't necessarily defeat malicious posters. But we already have the report system to defeat the truly malicious stuff. The reason I think upvote-only is good is that in order to drown-out a post you don't like for illegitimate reasons, you have to upvote all other posts. Or if the ranking system is based on time, not only will you have to upvote all other posts, but you'll have to create them yourself: something that would easily be detectable/preventable by allowing at most 1 thread/hour to be opened in relevant subforums.

"

Drumheller wrote:

I don't think I'm getting my point across clearly. It's not about Charan or any one person. It's about the favoritism. Charan has publicly shit all over people on this forum for years (I've been here since Jan 2013) and the mods, for the most part, handle him with kid gloves. Others are not treated the same way. The entire reason I, and several others, learned about Charan was because we witnessed the uneven moderation and wondered why he was given special permission to treat other people like shit.

I agree on the upvote / downvote system being abused. It shouldn't be about who is posting. It should be about the content of the message.

So, if you TL;DR my message, it's the biased moderation and heavy handed moderation towards most people that I take issue with. I would prefer a free-for-all with no moderation over what I've witnessed here.

Yes, seems I misunderstood. I have no issue with that, I actually agree completely. While the mods are people and they can't be completely objective moderation machines, a significant bias is problematic and I also didn't like how the forum was moderated until recently. I have been pretty vocal about that at times.

Anyway, in the past 1-2 weeks I've observed a noticeable change in the moderation policy:
- much, much less probations - I should've been probated once or twice; a guy in this thread wrote something pretty nasty which would've landed him in probation immediately
- much, much less locked threads

So, I think the change in moderation GGG has been talking about is not only on paper. Let's hope the forum will steer back to better days and calmer waters.


@Shaihalud222: The above actually covers what you're talking about to some extent. Both the forum and reddit's systems have their pros and cons, the forum's problem wasn't that a few select individuals ruined it singlehandedly, it was the terrible moderation policy.

"

Sarah_GGG wrote:

Hey there guys,

We do value and encourage open and constructive discussion, but the key word in that sentence is constructive. The last few pages of this thread have demonstrated that it has the potential to devolve into a series of personal attacks, name calling and blame placement.

We don't want to close this thread, we want to hear your opinions and there's been some very insightful and useful posts thus far. It really would be a shame to need to close the thread because the discussion couldn't be kept civil.

Something to keep in mind as the discussion continues. ;)

With all due respect Sarah, you, the other mods and the mod policy is as much to blame for the decline of the forums as the spam artists. You are in the top reasons as to why people no longer want to come here, your moderation has pushed people away to 3rd party sites as they do not want to deal with you or your OTT policies. What you have done to me today is precisely the type of thing that has made people give up on this place, rather than let people say their thing you probate them and that usually means the comment or person that antagonized them stays. It feels like injustice and the fact that the antagonists are so prolific has meant people need to leave this place or face a lifetime on probation.

You need to weed out the trash of this forum, give them the probations and then just maybe the regular folks would start to return and you wouldn't need to be so heavy handed as there would be less BS here to begin with.

What you are doing isn't working, you need to change it, you have pushed people away.

Lethal_papercut: Dude, you used an incredibly ugly expression which was edited out without otherwise affecting your post in any way. If you want a forum where such nasty, malicious and ugly words remain untouched, boy, am I glad you were pushed away.

"

lethal_papercut wrote:

You need to weed out the trash of this forum, give them the probations and then just maybe the regular folks would start to return and you wouldn't need to be so heavy handed as there would be less BS here to begin with.

So, what do you want? Them weeding out the trash or them not being heavyhanded? Because you can't have the pie and eat it, too.

Seems to me, you don't actually complain of moderation bias, you just want the bias to be targeted at the people you dislike and to favor you.

"

Bars wrote:

Lethal_papercut: Dude, you used an incredibly ugly expression which was edited out without otherwise affecting your post in any way. If you want a forum where such nasty, malicious and ugly words remain untouched, boy, am I glad you were driven away from here.

Come on bud, if saying verbal diarrhea is an "incredibly ugly expression" then I don't think the internet is the place for you.