Forum Moderation - give me suggestions and feedback

[Parabola]

19 minutes ago, gameboy1234 said:

My honest thoughts on those emoji is that we really don't need more ways to be passive aggressive at each other.

I couldn't agree more. I've always thought having reactions is a bad idea and I believe they contribute to many of the problems we see on the forums.

[tidge]

3 hours ago, DrRocket said:

The spirit that I was trying to convey is that if this is going to be a useful "suggestion" outlet for normal players to make suggestions, it needs to facilitate doing that, and even encourage it. The problem is that there is a handful of players, that tend to be very negative about whatever is being proposed (regardless if the concept was good/bad/indifferent), that gives me the perception of maliciousness in the activity.

 

I'm trying to imagine a suggestions forum where no suggestion is allowed to have potential shortcomings pointed out, and then folks who made the suggestion are left wondering why they didn't get what they wanted... and then I remember a local church with a "silent prayer" wall. Of course, I don't get to read those prayers so I have no idea what folks are praying for or if their prayers are answered.

[Super Atom]

4 hours ago, gameboy1234 said:

My honest thoughts on those emoji is that we really don't need more ways to be passive aggressive at each other.  The pizza and moose emoji work fine for stuff like eye rolls.  The skull seems like a way to encourage folks to necro threads, so no good there too.

 

 

 

The skull sure, but whats wrong with 👀 ? It's suppose be like, interested like dis

 

edit: eyeroll is this one  🙄

 

Edited April 5 by Super Atom

[Jacke]

@GM_GooglyMoogly, I'd like to have a Thinking/Hmmm feedback emoji, if that's possible.

[DrRocket]

3 hours ago, tidge said:

 

I'm trying to imagine a suggestions forum where no suggestion is allowed to have potential shortcomings pointed out, and then folks who made the suggestion are left wondering why they didn't get what they wanted... and then I remember a local church with a "silent prayer" wall. Of course, I don't get to read those prayers so I have no idea what folks are praying for or if their prayers are answered.

Lets not make a point of extremes, if you please, and this is exactly the point I been trying to make. I never said, do not let corrections, enhancements, etc not be made

[Rudra]

24 minutes ago, DrRocket said:

Lets not make a point of extremes, if you please, and this is exactly the point I been trying to make. I never said, do not let corrections, enhancements, etc not be made

You said if someone disagreed with a suggestion, they should be banned for a while. Guess what corrections to an idea are typically taken as. Even when posters say "I like your idea, but this part should be tweaked in this manner", the response from others has too often been that the person saying they like the idea but think it should be changed or improved is just disagreeing.

 

You also said there are a players that tend to be negative to suggestions, and you have the perception that they are being malicious in intent. So how does that translate or differ?

 

People have different views on things. And everyone is as entitled to their opinions and the opportunity to express those opinions as anyone else. Not just for the sake of agreeing with someone else, but to disagree or even say "I don't like it". Even if people say "I don't like it" to absolutely everything that could ever be presented, they still have the right to do so just as much as anyone else saying "I like it". And if you don't want to deal with that person any more? Ignore is always an option.

[Ridiculous Girl]

[shortguy on indom]

•  

[Aracknight]

On 4/5/2025 at 8:12 PM, Rudra said:

You said if someone disagreed with a suggestion, they should be banned for a while. Guess what corrections to an idea are typically taken as. Even when posters say "I like your idea, but this part should be tweaked in this manner", the response from others has too often been that the person saying they like the idea but think it should be changed or improved is just disagreeing.

 

You also said there are a players that tend to be negative to suggestions, and you have the perception that they are being malicious in intent. So how does that translate or differ?

 

People have different views on things. And everyone is as entitled to their opinions and the opportunity to express those opinions as anyone else. Not just for the sake of agreeing with someone else, but to disagree or even say "I don't like it". Even if people say "I don't like it" to absolutely everything that could ever be presented, they still have the right to do so just as much as anyone else saying "I like it". And if you don't want to deal with that person any more? Ignore is always an option.

 

Corrections to an idea. 

 

You know, I can accept "i don't like your idea" and "i dont think your idea will work" and even "have you looked at it thru this lens"  but the phrase "correcting an idea" steps right on my goddamn nerves and puts the finger right on the pulse of the experiences some people have on this particular subforum.  This statement, to me, implies not that someone thinks an idea is bad, but rather compels me to believe that one thinks that the idea is wrong and both it, and the person who had the idea, require correction.

 

This is why people might take "corrections to an idea" negatively. I like the idea? Fine.  I don't like the idea?  Fine. Your idea is good? Fine.  Your idea is bad?  Ouch, but fine. Your idea needs work?  Fine.

 

But your idea is Wrong?  Fuck that.

Edited April 10 by Aracknight

[Rudra]

10 minutes ago, Aracknight said:

 

Corrections to an idea. 

 

You know, I can accept "i don't like your idea" and "i dont think your idea will work" and even "have you looked at it thru this lens"  but the phrase "correcting an idea" steps right on my goddamn nerves and puts the finger right on the pulse of the experiences some people have on this particular subforum.  This statement, to me, implies not that someone thinks an idea is bad, but rather compels me to believe that one thinks that the idea is wrong and both it, and the person who had the idea, require correction.

 

This is why people might take "corrections to an idea" negatively. I like the idea? Fine.  I don't like the idea?  Fine. Your idea is good? Fine.  Your idea is bad?  Ouch, but fine. Your idea needs work?  Fine.

 

But your idea is Wrong?  Fuck that.

Then you are choosing to find a reason to be offended. Because whether a change is called an adjustment or a correction, the result is always the same, the idea (or other relevant thing being dealt with) was corrected. If a correction wasn't necessary, then the change wasn't either. That correction is not a dig on the idea itself. Neither is that correction a dig on the person that originated the idea. The correction is a change to the idea for whatever reason those seeking that correction have for desiring (or even needing) the change.

[Aracknight]

2 minutes ago, Rudra said:

Then you are choosing to find a reason to be offended. Because whether a change is called an adjustment or a correction, the result is always the same, the idea (or other relevant thing being dealt with) was corrected. If a correction wasn't necessary, then the change wasn't either. That correction is not a dig on the idea itself. Neither is that correction a dig on the person that originated the idea. The correction is a change to the idea for whatever reason those seeking that correction have for desiring (or even needing) the change.

 

No, I believe that I gave a reason why I feel a certain way.  And now I'm being told that the way I feel is my own fault, due to a choice I've made?  

 

I think we aren't using the word wrong in the same context.  I think you are using the "2 + 2 = 5 is wrong"  context, whereas the context I was using was the "Eating babies is wrong wtf is wrong with you" version.  I suspect you believe you are educating me and others in a helpful way, but please accept that very, very often the perception is quite the opposite.

[Rudra]

1 minute ago, Aracknight said:

I think you are using the "2 + 2 = 5 is wrong"  context,

Except I'm not using it in that context. I'm using it in the "12 volt output is functional for the part being worked on, but 10 volts is correct for the components using that voltage" context. However, this argument is a derailment, so I will not be engaging further. Feel free to feel however you do. Lord knows given the way I feel about patrol xp, I sure as hell can't comment on the way others feel. However, I will end with the statement that claiming people calling for a correction to an idea are calling the idea itself, let alone the originator of said idea, wrong, is in need of correction.

[battlewraith]

34 minutes ago, Rudra said:

However, I will end with the statement that claiming people calling for a correction to an idea are calling the idea itself, let alone the originator of said idea, wrong, is in need of correction.

 

In other words, "hair of the dog that bit me"

 

42 minutes ago, Aracknight said:

I think we aren't using the word wrong in the same context.  I think you are using the "2 + 2 = 5 is wrong"  context, whereas the context I was using was the "Eating babies is wrong wtf is wrong with you" version.  I suspect you believe you are educating me and others in a helpful way, but please accept that very, very often the perception is quite the opposite.

 

I think there is a large contingent of people that play coh who are in an engineering related field or are diy hobbyists who like to delve into the mechanics of things. Which makes sense given the mechanics of the game and the way you tweak variables to get desired results. Unfortunately, that kind of person can be a real pain in the ass when it comes to spitballing ideas or coming up with something new. Conversations tend to be "let me evaluate your idea in terms of efficiency or practicality." If you communicate that you don't want that, you'll get an argument about why they're being helpful and you're being unreasonable.

[Skyhawke]

[Super Atom]

[Zappalina]

Not everyone knows what Spam is or is familiar with tech slang - I thought Spam as an example; was having emails from a Nigerian prince and the like or the meat gel in a blue can.  I did not realize that Spam is posting jokes many times one after another in the same forum.  Also the calls that come in are spam calls which means they're fake calls or solicitious. It wasn't until these boards that it meant posting things over and over in a row. So if you warn someone for that or anything really make sure it's terminology that everyone would understand, explain what you mean in simple terms that do not include any jargon.

[GM_GooglyMoogly]

On 4/10/2025 at 6:24 PM, Aracknight said:

But your idea is Wrong?  F^@k that.

 

On 4/10/2025 at 6:38 PM, Rudra said:

Then you are choosing to find a reason to be offended. 

 

On 4/10/2025 at 6:48 PM, Aracknight said:

I suspect you believe you are educating me and others in a helpful way, but please accept that very, very often the perception is quite the opposite.

 

Both of these positions can be true simultaneously.  A posted idea may get a comment that the poster takes offense to when no offense was intended.  Sometimes, it seems to me, that the poster needs a thicker skin; sometimes I think the critic could have phrased it better; on occasion I find that both parties would benefit from seeing the issue from the other person's perspective.

 

On 4/10/2025 at 8:28 PM, Skyhawke said:

 

This glass is more than half full of what appears to be room temperature, flat, Coke.

 

On 4/10/2025 at 10:11 PM, Super Atom said:

 

Is that a whirling dervish cat?

 

On 4/11/2025 at 6:10 PM, Zappalina said:

Spam . . .

 

How did spam get so many meanings anyway?  This is my new, favorite explanation: "a colorful bit of Internet jargon meant to evoke the effect of dropping a can of Spam into a fan and filling the surrounding space with meat."

Edited April 13 by GM_GooglyMoogly

[lemming]

17 minutes ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

How did spam get so many meanings anyway?  This is my new, favorite explanation: "a colorful bit of Internet jargon meant to evoke the effect of dropping a can of Spam into a fan and filling the surrounding space with meat."

I have always thought of it as a repeated item that has the tendency to drown out other input.  Examples, lots of unsolicited emails, or a repeated phrase in chat.  (Like someone forgetting that they have general selected and they keep hitting their f10 key....)

[Super Atom]

5 hours ago, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

 

Is that a whirling dervish cat?

 

That's a moogle, here is a pile of the cuties

 

[shortguy on indom]

• TELETUBBIES.

[DrRocket]

On 4/5/2025 at 9:12 PM, Rudra said:

You said if someone disagreed with a suggestion, they should be banned for a while. Guess what corrections to an idea are typically taken as. Even when posters say "I like your idea, but this part should be tweaked in this manner", the response from others has too often been that the person saying they like the idea but think it should be changed or improved is just disagreeing.

 

You also said there are a players that tend to be negative to suggestions, and you have the perception that they are being malicious in intent. So how does that translate or differ?

 

People have different views on things. And everyone is as entitled to their opinions and the opportunity to express those opinions as anyone else. Not just for the sake of agreeing with someone else, but to disagree or even say "I don't like it". Even if people say "I don't like it" to absolutely everything that could ever be presented, they still have the right to do so just as much as anyone else saying "I like it". And if you don't want to deal with that person any more? Ignore is always an option.

Back to the need to score a point by exaggerating shall we? I said if the negativity was malicious they should be ban for awhile big difference for banning due to disagreement

[biostem]

1 minute ago, DrRocket said:

if the negativity was malicious

And who determines this?  The OP?  A 3rd party?  What if I view anyone who disagrees with me as a malicious actor?

[Rudra]

  

10 minutes ago, DrRocket said:

On 4/5/2025 at 8:12 PM, Rudra said:

You said if someone disagreed with a suggestion, they should be banned for a while. Guess what corrections to an idea are typically taken as. Even when posters say "I like your idea, but this part should be tweaked in this manner", the response from others has too often been that the person saying they like the idea but think it should be changed or improved is just disagreeing.

 

You also said there are a players that tend to be negative to suggestions, and you have the perception that they are being malicious in intent. So how does that translate or differ?

 

People have different views on things. And everyone is as entitled to their opinions and the opportunity to express those opinions as anyone else. Not just for the sake of agreeing with someone else, but to disagree or even say "I don't like it". Even if people say "I don't like it" to absolutely everything that could ever be presented, they still have the right to do so just as much as anyone else saying "I like it". And if you don't want to deal with that person any more? Ignore is always an option.

Expand  

Back to the need to score a point by exaggerating shall we? I said if the negativity was malicious they should be ban for awhile big difference for banning due to disagreement

What exaggeration? The things I commented on in the post you quoted happened. On these forums. You were even a participant on some of those threads.

 

As for what you said? You did not say "if they are malicious". You said:

On 3/25/2025 at 12:44 PM, DrRocket said:

To begin, thank you for moderating! Big Hug

 

As I try to post or read other posts, you can categorize respondents into supportive or just down anti whatever you post, ask for a QoL and they tell you work around it, at times they are polite enough to tell you how, despite you described the how and the why you want relief from that specific work around.

 

Perhaps my suggestion, since folks are trying to influence the game in a positive manner to their style of play which may be not quite unique but quite popular; to actually put the stops to the negative nannies, even bar for a day or two to get them to be more supportive or just have them say nothing if they can't be supportive. I am fine, if the response is to tell you there is already a way to do it, seemslessly but the player simply did not know.

I highlighted your ban comment.

 

As for the malicious part? It came up as:

On 4/5/2025 at 1:16 PM, DrRocket said:

GooglyMoogly, I tend to agree with you, especially since it would take a lot of GM oversight, which is a sad thing. The spirit that I was trying to convey is that if this is going to be a useful "suggestion" outlet for normal players to make suggestions, it needs to facilitate doing that, and even encourage it. The problem is that there is a handful of players, that tend to be very negative about whatever is being proposed (regardless if the concept was good/bad/indifferent), that gives me the perception of maliciousness in the activity. And as the suggestion gets hit by the negative nanny, other players responds to the negative nanny, and becomes a never ending rant and the original suggestion got lost in the maelstrom and becomes to chaotic for a potential developer to even pay heed to the request. Frankly, as sad as it is, I agree with you, would take too much GM policing, and thus the suggestion forum is pretty much moot.

Emphasis again added. So no, you did not say to ban for a few days for malicious posts. You said to ban for a few days for not being supportive.

[Rigged]

How can we expect the mods to make constantly judgement calls on what constitutes negativity? That's a really manpower-intensive way to trim spam, and the mods have to sleep sometime. If you want to trim spam you could set a max number of posts daily to this forum. If you're concerned about people posting in every single topic every day then maybe a max number of posts per month. If you're worried about widespread spam, limit replies to one topic (but unlimited within that topic) a day.

[Ghost]

Why is disagreeing being called negativity, and now spam?