"Feedback" thread option: like "slow mode" for forums

[Replacement]

Basic idea: a type of thread that any given user can only post in once/day.

 

If possible, an extension to the idea would be the ability for site staff to use a reaction (probably Thanks) to unlock that user to supply an additional post before reset.

 

I envision this as staff-only, mainly for making focused feedback threads.

It could also feasibly be opened up to regular posters when creating new threads, but I think you would need to omit the "thanks, please continue" mechanism.

 

This is not a perfect idea, but it's something I think could really cut down on

1. The amount of loud minority posting
2. The amount of forum warrior battling that makes those threads stupid amounts of long.

[Glacier Peak]

This is already a thing on the HC Discord.

[Replacement]

On 7/18/2021 at 8:04 PM, Glacier Peak said:

This is already a thing on the HC Discord.

That is what I referenced, yes. Of course, the Discord wait on HC is set to something like 30s in most channels, and the general pace of Discord is not conducive to dev cycle feedback.

 

The goal is to take the idea of Discord's slow mode and dial it all the way up into something a developer can easily digest and reference (Discord's greatest weaknesses for feedback), a moderator can easily moderate, and a player can quickly understand and evaluate what is worth responding to.

 

It will definitely lead to very verbose posts, but I imagine it would easily knock 20 pages off the more controversial topics.

[Shenanigunner]

The advantage of forums over all the other two-thumb channels around is that they do permit long, detailed answers and preserve the conversation essentially indefinitely. I agree that seeing a forum thread turn into a Twitty thumb-war is annoying, but... there's always other threads. A pissing match over Kinetic Melee nerfs doesn't clog any but that channel and can be ignored with almost zero effort.

 

My observation is that few users have any tolerance for posts of more than a few lines, not that they object to a "too fast" exchange rate.

[Haijinx]

This would be kinda cool on a forum with some insane amount of traffic and a lot of regular posters.  Keep things from being drowned in the noise.

 

 Not really a problem here though.

[Haijinx]

Meaning this forums barely even has a pulse now.

 

Slowing it down more? Lol.

 

 

 

[Shenanigunner]

I see what you

[Shenanigunner]

did there.

[Replacement]

On 8/30/2021 at 4:38 PM, Shenanigunner said:

The advantage of forums over all the other two-thumb channels around is that they do permit long, detailed answers and preserve the conversation essentially indefinitely. I agree that seeing a forum thread turn into a Twitty thumb-war is annoying, but... there's always other threads. A pissing match over Kinetic Melee nerfs doesn't clog any but that channel and can be ignored with almost zero effort.

 

My observation is that few users have any tolerance for posts of more than a few lines, not that they object to a "too fast" exchange rate.

 

On 8/30/2021 at 5:52 PM, Haijinx said:

This would be kinda cool on a forum with some insane amount of traffic and a lot of regular posters.  Keep things from being drowned in the noise.

 

 Not really a problem here though.

 

I'm specifically thinking of Feedback threads, here.  Like this one:

 

[Luminara]

The purpose and function of forums like these is to promote open discussion.  Someone says something, another person responds, the first person responds to the second person, counterpoints are made as points are raised, new ideas and understandings are achieved, and so on.  This... this isn't a proposal for open discussion, because it removes the openness of discussion.  It's like telling people not to speak up unless they agree.  Not only would it fail to provide real feedback, which frequently leads to discoveries of potential abuses/bugs/oversights, it would be far more likely to engender the opposite effect as people who might have otherwise had nothing to add turn around and launch an all-out assault on the thread simply to voice their disapproval of being told to shut up and accept the status quo.

 

Furthermore, restricting posts to a 24 hour interval would slow discussions down to the point of taking months, instead of days, and people would bypass the restriction by starting new threads ten or a hundred times as frequently, or making alternate accounts (Gmail is free) and posting from those, fragmenting the feedback as a whole.  It wouldn't be less work for the moderators, it would be significantly more (and potentially more difficult, since there are limited ways to conclusively determine whether multiple accounts represent the same person (and even those methods aren't guaranteed to work)).  It isn't even humanly possible to conceive of everything one wants to say before making a post, nor to anticipate every possible response and include responses to responses in a post... that's why we engage in discourse in the way we do.  Right now, a few threads have to be merged, or closed with a final post directing players to the feedback thread, when an update is in testing.  Right now, the moderators have to excise an occasional sidetrack in a feedback thread.  With this proposal, they'd be closing threads all day, every day, because people are not going to sit and wait 24 hours to say something; and they'll be chopping out massive sections of threads, because people who disagree with the way they're being restricted will be that much louder and prolific in derailments.

 

Functionally, I see this as a bad idea, one which would backfire hard.

 

On a personal note, there are only so many limitations I will accept on my right to express myself, my individuality, my freedom to speak.  And the harder someone tries to quash those things, the more combative I will become.  I have a voice, and having spent my entire life struggling to use it in the physical world, I value the ability to speak online that much more.  Not only for myself, but for everyone, including the people with whom I disagree. 

 

Edited March 17, 2022 by GM Impervium
CoC adhearance

[Replacement]

@Luminara That's an interesting take but the more I read it, the less I'm sure you comprehended what was being suggested here.

 

14 hours ago, Luminara said:

With this proposal, they'd be closing threads all day, every day, because people are not going to sit and wait 24 hours to say something; and they'll be chopping out massive sections of threads, because people who disagree with the way they're being restricted will be that much louder and prolific in derailments.

 

You have painted this suggestion focused on focused feedback threads as something that will infect every thread and will choke all speech out of everywhere you go!

 

You have used this hyperbole to construct a perceived attack against your freedom!  Everyone to the polls!  Vote Luminara!

 

I don't think you need to worry about little ol' me -- I couldn't be this damaging to discourse if I tried.

[Luminara]

11 minutes ago, Replacement said:

You have painted this suggestion focused on focused feedback threads as something that will infect every thread and will choke all speech out of everywhere you go!

 

Because we already have evidence of that behavior.  A feedback thread is opened, players begin posting there, then they start new threads, the mods merge those threads with the feedback thread.  A feedback thread is opened, players post, the thread derails, the irrelevant posts are removed, players start new threads repeating their removed commentary from the feedback thread.  A feedback thread is opened, players post, then they go post the same thing in other existing threads, sometimes threads which aren't even relevant to the feedback they're posting in the non-feedback thread.  This is the cycle we already experience.

 

Example: the changes to the Sorcery pool, specifically Rune of Protection, sparked multiple additional threads (some of which are still floating around on the forums), and commentary and discussion in completely unrelated threads.  This happened despite the only posting restrictions on the feedback thread being "Don't be a dick" and "Try not to drag this too far off topic".

 

Example: one player has a particular passion for his pet project of having the Defense hard cap reduced to a value below the soft cap, and for several months, he would pop into threads and post his suggestion.  It started with threads about Defense, then it expanded.  A thread about something completely different, like a discussion of difference between the flavors of Oolong and Earl Grey teas, would suddenly have a post about nerfing Defense and how it would make both teas taste better.

 

When people have something to say, they're going to say it.  They'll say it by starting a new thread.  They'll say it by posting from another account.  They'll say it by jumping into different threads and posting off-topic commentary.  The harder you try to force people to "behave", the harder they'll fight back.  This is human nature.

 

55 minutes ago, Replacement said:

You have used this hyperbole

 

Your naïve portrayal of people as obedient and docile creatures who will calmly abide being caged is the problem here, not my response.  While there are ways to control certain behaviors, denying people the right to speak is not one which works.  It's never worked.  Throughout the entirety of human history, we've seen that, and in the short span of these forums' lifetime, we've seen it in real time and in person.  You cannot silence people when they want to speak, they always find a way to make their voices heard, and the more control you try to exert over their ability to speak, the more determined they will be to defy your authority, and the more there will be defying that authority.

 

Oh, and your own post history shows that you don't restrict yourself to posting once per 24 hours in feedback threads, yet you expect everyone else to abide by a restriction which you personally ignore.  And you lampoon me, paint me as running for Homecoming Queen, when I vociferously object to having my right to do the same thing you do stepped on, when I point out that human beings do not respond well to being constrained, when I stand up to defend your right to disagree with me without restriction?  That, sir/ma'am, is not only hyperbole, it's also hypocrisy.

[Greycat]

So. The proposal is to take a focused feedback thread and make it harder to give feedback or get clarification in a timely manner by artificially strangling peoples' ability to post.

 

No thanks.

[starro]

8 hours ago, Greycat said:

So. The proposal is to take a focused feedback thread and make it harder to give feedback or get clarification in a timely manner by artificially strangling peoples' ability to post.

 

No thanks.

 You are not scheduled to post again until December.  Keep your well thought out responses until then.

Edited March 19, 2022 by starro

[Alchemystic]

I support this, with the caveat that it is only an option, not the standard.

[TheZag]

I could see this as able to reduce some of the back and forth pissing matches that pop up on occasion on the focused feedback threads but not on a 24 hour timer.  Maybe something more like 30 minutes so people might have to think or cool down a tiny bit before they reply but arent locked out for the rest of the day.  And a thumbs up from staff to reset your timer would require too much staff time to review all those posts or have them play favorites as they are only able to review so many posts at a time.  They are volunteer after all and dont spend all their time on the forum and ingame.