Thank you very much for this information, Open Source.
I, too, received an infraction much earlier today for a post that I had made.
After much careful inspection of the Forum TOS, I found that I had in no way, shape or form infringed upon any of their rules. I therefore sent off a PM requesting the appeals process. That PM was completely ignored.
If that is true I am on your side and I hope you get justice.
If that is true I am on your side and I hope you get justice.
I can't verify in his case if it's true; but in mine it is.
I asked for clarification so I'd know what to avoid in the future (I was cited section 8 when even I think it'd be more akin to section 11; even though the celebrity I mentioned in jest is prominent in other posts that are still up). No response whatsoever.
No appeals process is mentioned, the infractions never expire, nothing. I realize it's all pointless (I'd have to accrue 4 more to even earn a 45 minute ban) but it's the principle involved for me. In my case no vulgarity was mentioned, and I'd even went to the trouble to make a 'fake' expletive (much akin to what's been used in comics for decades).
I can't verify in his case if it's true; but in mine it is.
I asked for clarification so I'd know what to avoid in the future (I was cited section 8 when even I think it'd be more akin to section 11; even though the celebrity I mentioned in jest is prominent in other posts that are still up). No response whatsoever.
No appeals process is mentioned, the infractions never expire, nothing. I realize it's all pointless (I'd have to accrue 4 more to even earn a 45 minute ban) but it's the principle involved for me. In my case no vulgarity was mentioned, and I'd even went to the trouble to make a 'fake' expletive (much akin to what's been used in comics for decades).
But hey, posts with lewd sexual innuendo is A-OK!
You have my sympathy. I participate in a different forum where it became clear that a couple of the MODs had it out for me. They kept locking threads I would start, and warned me several times not to do things that were not only harmless, but that other people in that forum were doing freely. Other MODs there were friendly to me and couldn't see my fault, so in the end nothing happened to me - but I ultimately stopped trying to participate in the public part of the forum because I was tired of being harassed.
In my case no vulgarity was mentioned, and I'd even went to the trouble to make a 'fake' expletive (much akin to what's been used in comics for decades).
You just posted this...but don't know why you got an infraction??
"8. You may not use vulgar, harmful, harassing, fraudulent, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, hateful, sexually explicit, racially/ethnically charged or otherwise objectionable language. Abbreviations, self censoring, and attempts to circumvent our censure software also violate these Guidelines. If your post contains a word that is censored by our software, you must remove that word or the post will be removed. If you feel that the software censor is acting in error, please contact us."
Seems pretty clear to me.......
I agree that it may be a bit overboard, but Cryptic is trying to prove something right now, and they are infraction crazy. Best way not to get an infraction....is to not post anything that will get you one!!
You just posted this...but don't know why you got an infraction??
"8. You may not use vulgar, harmful, harassing, fraudulent, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, hateful, sexually explicit, racially/ethnically charged or otherwise objectionable language. Abbreviations, self censoring, and attempts to circumvent our censure software also violate these Guidelines. If your post contains a word that is censored by our software, you must remove that word or the post will be removed. If you feel that the software censor is acting in error, please contact us."
Seems pretty clear to me.......
Yet this happens ALL THE TIME and THOSE people dont ALL get their words cut out and hit.
Yet this happens ALL THE TIME and THOSE people dont ALL get their words cut out and hit.
Yes, but as I posted in my last post....Cryptic is trying to prove something now, or is just trying to clamp down the forums. I imagine alot of things that folks got away with are now being moderated heavier.
Also...how do you know if that person got an infraction or not?
Yes, but as I posted in my last post....Cryptic is trying to prove something now, or is just trying to clamp down the forums. I imagine alot of things that folks got away with are now being moderated heavier.
Also...how do you know if that person got an infraction or not?
Its just one moderator giving out all the infractions. Looking at the forums closely you can tell exactly who Im talking about.
Whether those infractions are really that valid or not is a matter of debate.
Yes, but as I posted in my last post....Cryptic is trying to prove something now, or is just trying to clamp down the forums. I imagine alot of things that folks got away with are now being moderated heavier.
Also...how do you know if that person got an infraction or not?
They would have had the post removed and "this post has voilated cryptic standards" mesasage put in.
Its just one moderator giving out all the infractions. Looking at the forums closely you can tell exactly who Im talking about.
Whether those infractions are really that valid or not is a matter of debate.
I got 3 from 3 different people. The third one I definitely deserved, I was abusive and circumnavigated the swear filter to make some choice comments about an idiot who deserved it. I knew what I was saying and was making a point. I'll be banned before I let idiot kids mouth off to me.
The forst was from the guy you most likely mean and that was for calling an Irishman 'Paddy' (very commonplace in my home city and not at all considered an offensive comment ) The guy tried to defend his actions but when I argued a little too sensibly I was told there would be no further comment from him on the matter.
The second one is interesting, firstly I have no idea what it was for, it seemed to happen days after the comment I made and when I noticed it I could no longer remember what I had posted. The mail I got informing me that i had an infraction was blank (as was the last one. Way to inform your community of what you expect of them Cryptic ) and most interestingly when I click the name of the guy who gave me the infraction and I'm taken to his profile page it turns out he's not even a moderator. http://forums.startrekonline.com/member.php?u=237180
They would have had the post removed and "this post has voilated cryptic standards" mesasage put in.
That's not an indication of an infraction being given, just that the post has been removed for violation. Not all violations get infractions handed out.
That's not an indication of an infraction being given, just that the post has been removed for violation. Not all violations get infractions handed out.
re-read that post and tell me that again with a straight face
Yeah see, I had issues with the "sneaky" mods when I first got here cause that dont seem quite honest to me
re-read that post and tell me that again with a straight face
My point is that a post removed for violation does not necessarily need to be accompanied by a punishment. It can be removed for all manner of things that does not mean that the poster needs to be punished for.
I had this discussion with a Cryptic employee after my first infraction.
People can break terms and genuinely ot be aware they had breached a rule. The post may need removing but a reminder of the rules is better than a heavy-handed slap on the wrist in minor situations.
My point is that a post removed for violation does not necessarily need to be accompanied by a punishment. It can be removed for all manner of things that does not mean that the poster needs to be punished for.
I had this discussion with a Cryptic employee after my first infraction.
People can break terms and genuinely ot be aware they had breached a rule. The post may need removing but a reminder of the rules is better than a heavy-handed slap on the wrist in minor situations.
Well I think this is just another sign that these guys have no vision for what theyre doing past whats written on the forums.
Think about the way they react to stuff; Ive noted all this in other posts so ill gloss over it but:
Difficulty; CE; most of the "oh TRIBBLE that was a bad thing?" type responses theyve been having since the "OMG THIS ISNT MY TREK" types came out.
Its all pendulum swinging knee jerk type stuff. "Oh this is wrong? Hows this *makes the thing the opposite of what it was*?"
We complain forever that theres no moderation, so they clamp down on the forums.
knee jerk again
I just realised the bad grammar above and I just want to say i know the difference between an infraction and the punishment given for said infraction. It's just very late here (or early, 3am)
Well I think this is just another sign that these guys have no vision for what theyre doing past whats written on the forums.
Think about the way they react to stuff; Ive noted all this in other posts so ill gloss over it but:
Difficulty; CE; most of the "oh TRIBBLE that was a bad thing?" type responses theyve been having since the "OMG THIS ISNT MY TREK" types came out.
Its all pendulum swinging knee jerk type stuff. "Oh this is wrong? Hows this *makes the thing the opposite of what it was*?"
We complain forever that theres no moderation, so they clamp down on the forums.
knee jerk again
Sorry if this comes off wrong, but is that sarcastic? I can never tell. Even in real life.
Not at all. You mentioned how the post could be removed, which I had forgotten. And ZootCadillac mentioned how post removal and infractions are not mutually exclusive, which was another good point.
I agree with you re: Cryptic's yo-yo'ing, as I call it. I blame it on newness.
It's like the new employee at work, who is so nervous about doing well that it causes them to...goof up.
I didn't have this sense during either beta's, in fact I thought they were being a little too laid back. I think they will find their balance and loosen up a little, eventually.
We can put a positive spin on it however......since Cryptic is going thru this extremities stage...maybe we'll go from little content to a lot of content!!!!!!
Er, nothing to do with the rest of the thread, but it's actually likely that they're still paying back the money they used to make the game.
MMOs typically don't make back the money they spent til about 18 months after launch, if they ever do.
The money they take in SEEMS a lot to the average player, but compared to the costs of development it's really not.
-np
I found this an odd comment ( not yours, the one you quoted about making tons of money that won't appear in my post )
Many people here are confused about how the Atari/Cryptic thing works.
At the time of acquisition, Cryptic's total revenue ( income, not profit ) was $9M
Infogrames ( the small French software house that bought the defunct Atari name and used it to rebrand themselves ) were 100M euros in debt when they had a 40M Euro bond issue ( basically a loan against the company value which waters down the stock and company worth ) to buy out Cryptic and make them their in house development team.
Atari are not the Atari of old. They are not the huge company they were, they are a small debt-ridden French company. Cryptic are not their own company. Revenues will go solely to Atari who pay the wages to their employees which includes everyone at Cryptic as they are a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of Infogrames.
Now Jack Emmert has said that 100000 subscribers will make this game above break even but it was not clear if that was subscriptions over a period of time or box sales.
If it was box sales I suspect that STO has already made it's money. However it has not dented Infogrames massive debt.
Hmmm "unfair warnings" hmmm, I wonder where I've heard that before. Oh wait, oh-so "competent" GMs and mods vaguely using the term "trolling" and handing out infractions. Like as in labeling stuff they don't like "trolling" :rolleyes:
lol....funny thing is usually the people complaining about unfair punishments are those who got them. Most others read what you say and laugh. I know when I read someone was upset for getting punished for using the racial slang paddy I almost died laughing. That term is in many areas going to start a fight.
As for consistency in the punishments. First no two people moderate the same even when referring to the same set of rules. Second when you post something it is viewable by all players and most threads have tons of readers who don't post. If one of them gets offended and hits the report icon a mod\gm will examine your post and not necessarily the whole thread.
If you want to go see poorly moderated forums go to navyfield.com they have forum mods that are players from the largest fleet in the game that run around and bully all other players with differing pov's.
All of the people I have spoken with who have placed GM tickets have told me that they have never received a reply from the GMs. Sometime this is expected (ie tech support, bug reports, etc). However, when someone submits a ticket asking about the Code of Conduct or an unfair warning, the GMs should respond. I am told they do not.
Atari does. If you go to: http://www.atari.com/support/contact they will respond and look into the matter for you. I hope that Atari knows how much we appreciate their knowing that customer communication is just good business.
Oh I had an infraction warning from a dev on this site, so I responded, and I got a response back, so yeah I agree with that.
Considering I got an infraction for using the word 'TRIBBLE' (context as in: "people who brag in pvp are TRIBBLE" as an offhand remark, not even at a specific person), I'd say their mods are smoking something.
OH NO I USED THE WORD TRIBBLE TWICE I'M HEADING FOR THE BAN TRAIN AGAIN. OH NO THREE. THEY'RE COMING FOR ME SAVE YOURSE
Um, considering its a derogatory term used to reference mentally challenged people, yea I'd say thats a violation of the forum/ToS rules..
Comments
If that is true I am on your side and I hope you get justice.
I can't verify in his case if it's true; but in mine it is.
I asked for clarification so I'd know what to avoid in the future (I was cited section 8 when even I think it'd be more akin to section 11; even though the celebrity I mentioned in jest is prominent in other posts that are still up). No response whatsoever.
No appeals process is mentioned, the infractions never expire, nothing. I realize it's all pointless (I'd have to accrue 4 more to even earn a 45 minute ban) but it's the principle involved for me. In my case no vulgarity was mentioned, and I'd even went to the trouble to make a 'fake' expletive (much akin to what's been used in comics for decades).
But hey, posts with lewd sexual innuendo is A-OK!
Ya KNOW!? I am kind of astonished at what some people get away with. I was under the impression they never enforce TOS here.
For example, one poster disagreed with another about a minor complaint, and their way of saying so was to tell them to go be in a Tijuana donkey show.
That's kind of an extreme reaction I thought, to a minor complaint. Kind of like swatting a fly with an atom bomb.
(I can't imagine why some people get so hot over such tiny issues. )
But others in the thread seemed to think it was just funny. So, maybe it's good I am not moderating the forum.
:eek:
You have my sympathy. I participate in a different forum where it became clear that a couple of the MODs had it out for me. They kept locking threads I would start, and warned me several times not to do things that were not only harmless, but that other people in that forum were doing freely. Other MODs there were friendly to me and couldn't see my fault, so in the end nothing happened to me - but I ultimately stopped trying to participate in the public part of the forum because I was tired of being harassed.
And I had no real recourse, and still don't.
You just posted this...but don't know why you got an infraction??
"8. You may not use vulgar, harmful, harassing, fraudulent, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, hateful, sexually explicit, racially/ethnically charged or otherwise objectionable language. Abbreviations, self censoring, and attempts to circumvent our censure software also violate these Guidelines. If your post contains a word that is censored by our software, you must remove that word or the post will be removed. If you feel that the software censor is acting in error, please contact us."
Seems pretty clear to me.......
I agree that it may be a bit overboard, but Cryptic is trying to prove something right now, and they are infraction crazy. Best way not to get an infraction....is to not post anything that will get you one!!
Yet this happens ALL THE TIME and THOSE people dont ALL get their words cut out and hit.
Good example of this:
http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?p=2191695#post2191695
post 151
Yes, but as I posted in my last post....Cryptic is trying to prove something now, or is just trying to clamp down the forums. I imagine alot of things that folks got away with are now being moderated heavier.
Also...how do you know if that person got an infraction or not?
Its just one moderator giving out all the infractions. Looking at the forums closely you can tell exactly who Im talking about.
Whether those infractions are really that valid or not is a matter of debate.
Well, it's certainly happening now.
Who said Cryptic doesn't listen??
They would have had the post removed and "this post has voilated cryptic standards" mesasage put in.
I got 3 from 3 different people. The third one I definitely deserved, I was abusive and circumnavigated the swear filter to make some choice comments about an idiot who deserved it. I knew what I was saying and was making a point. I'll be banned before I let idiot kids mouth off to me.
The forst was from the guy you most likely mean and that was for calling an Irishman 'Paddy' (very commonplace in my home city and not at all considered an offensive comment ) The guy tried to defend his actions but when I argued a little too sensibly I was told there would be no further comment from him on the matter.
The second one is interesting, firstly I have no idea what it was for, it seemed to happen days after the comment I made and when I noticed it I could no longer remember what I had posted. The mail I got informing me that i had an infraction was blank (as was the last one. Way to inform your community of what you expect of them Cryptic ) and most interestingly when I click the name of the guy who gave me the infraction and I'm taken to his profile page it turns out he's not even a moderator.
http://forums.startrekonline.com/member.php?u=237180
Crazy.
That's not an indication of an infraction being given, just that the post has been removed for violation. Not all violations get infractions handed out.
Yeah see, I had issues with the "sneaky" mods when I first got here cause that dont seem quite honest to me
re-read that post and tell me that again with a straight face
My point is that a post removed for violation does not necessarily need to be accompanied by a punishment. It can be removed for all manner of things that does not mean that the poster needs to be punished for.
I had this discussion with a Cryptic employee after my first infraction.
People can break terms and genuinely ot be aware they had breached a rule. The post may need removing but a reminder of the rules is better than a heavy-handed slap on the wrist in minor situations.
Well I think this is just another sign that these guys have no vision for what theyre doing past whats written on the forums.
Think about the way they react to stuff; Ive noted all this in other posts so ill gloss over it but:
Difficulty; CE; most of the "oh TRIBBLE that was a bad thing?" type responses theyve been having since the "OMG THIS ISNT MY TREK" types came out.
Its all pendulum swinging knee jerk type stuff. "Oh this is wrong? Hows this *makes the thing the opposite of what it was*?"
We complain forever that theres no moderation, so they clamp down on the forums.
knee jerk again
Sorry if this comes off wrong, but is that sarcastic? I can never tell. Even in real life.
Not at all. You mentioned how the post could be removed, which I had forgotten. And ZootCadillac mentioned how post removal and infractions are not mutually exclusive, which was another good point.
I agree with you re: Cryptic's yo-yo'ing, as I call it. I blame it on newness.
It's like the new employee at work, who is so nervous about doing well that it causes them to...goof up.
I didn't have this sense during either beta's, in fact I thought they were being a little too laid back. I think they will find their balance and loosen up a little, eventually.
We can put a positive spin on it however......since Cryptic is going thru this extremities stage...maybe we'll go from little content to a lot of content!!!!!!
(wishful thinking....I know.....)
Er, nothing to do with the rest of the thread, but it's actually likely that they're still paying back the money they used to make the game.
MMOs typically don't make back the money they spent til about 18 months after launch, if they ever do.
The money they take in SEEMS a lot to the average player, but compared to the costs of development it's really not.
-np
See, I dont get this as this ISNT their first MMO, right?
I found this an odd comment ( not yours, the one you quoted about making tons of money that won't appear in my post )
Many people here are confused about how the Atari/Cryptic thing works.
At the time of acquisition, Cryptic's total revenue ( income, not profit ) was $9M
Infogrames ( the small French software house that bought the defunct Atari name and used it to rebrand themselves ) were 100M euros in debt when they had a 40M Euro bond issue ( basically a loan against the company value which waters down the stock and company worth ) to buy out Cryptic and make them their in house development team.
Atari are not the Atari of old. They are not the huge company they were, they are a small debt-ridden French company. Cryptic are not their own company. Revenues will go solely to Atari who pay the wages to their employees which includes everyone at Cryptic as they are a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of Infogrames.
Now Jack Emmert has said that 100000 subscribers will make this game above break even but it was not clear if that was subscriptions over a period of time or box sales.
If it was box sales I suspect that STO has already made it's money. However it has not dented Infogrames massive debt.
MMOs cost anywhere from 30 to 80 million dollars to develop.
They also can cost upwards of 2 million a month or more to maintain and continue post-launch development.
When people hear about 5 million here and 10 million there, they think "that's a lot of money!"
Not in business it ain't.
-np
That's about the size of it.
As for consistency in the punishments. First no two people moderate the same even when referring to the same set of rules. Second when you post something it is viewable by all players and most threads have tons of readers who don't post. If one of them gets offended and hits the report icon a mod\gm will examine your post and not necessarily the whole thread.
If you want to go see poorly moderated forums go to navyfield.com they have forum mods that are players from the largest fleet in the game that run around and bully all other players with differing pov's.
and yet.........
Oh I had an infraction warning from a dev on this site, so I responded, and I got a response back, so yeah I agree with that.
But the TRIBBLE moderators will give you points for that! You cannot talk about them, they believe they are gods! :mad:
Run! Before they give you an infraction point!
*runs*
Was it a good response?
Um, considering its a derogatory term used to reference mentally challenged people, yea I'd say thats a violation of the forum/ToS rules..
Especially as there ARE developmentally disabled individuals HERE