I've posted many times in defense of Cryptic, usually pointing out something-that-would-be-nice doesn't make sense for a for-profit business, or that something development-related is most likely harder than a "five minute fix" or too far down on the task list.
I've also posted many times being critical of Space Barbie failings like the tailor palette mess, tailor uniform restrictions, omni beam restrictions, and showing with basic probability rules how bad the odds are for gamble boxes.
The only times I've been moderated have been when I got too salty about something, quoted someone else who was way too salty, or was clearly going against the forum rules, and the moderation has just been to edit out the offending content.
I've posted in many threads that have been closed, but they were closed for either FCT topics like STO 2.0 or clear bashing of Cryptic or staff (personal attacks against Cryptic staff are not ok, do you think it's OK for customers or co-workers to attack you?). Not for posts saying "I don't like X because Y" but for posts of "Cryptic's mother was a hamster, and its father smelt of elderberries.”
[Be civil
Be respectful
Be honest
Be factual
Be concise
Be constructive in your criticism
and finally...follow the rules of the forum!
I have been here long enough to say with absolute certainty that this is not always true. I have seen many a constructive, civil threads get locked in my time here.
It is also my experience that on some occasions, stronger wording or tone is warranted. When civil request after civil request after civil request politely asking for changes and/or fixing of longstanding issues seems to fall on deaf ears, stronger wording is needed to get a point across.
These forums seem to be for affirmation and praise only. I could say more in a very polite, civil way, however there is not much point. The thread would get locked and my post edited anyway.
I disagree, unless you mean "say it again while remaining civil."
Going full Karen and asking to see Cryptic's manager is not ever the right approach in my opinion.
theres some good replies in here, but sometimes I do feel like, you just gotta let em know your mad. I suppose you can be mad without slinging insults and stuff.
let me give you all a nugget of knowledge from my nearly 20 years of online gaming.
Forum Moderators and ingame moderators are not apart of the development team. they were originally normal players like you and I but got a special promotion and a bit more power. now they answer to someone on the development team called the Community Manager but at the end of the day they don't know more than the player base on development on the game as well as what the developers are considering. people don't seem to understand or even care to understand about that in the last decade or so.
Been a user of Perfect World Entertainment since 2009.
theres some good replies in here, but sometimes I do feel like, you just gotta let em know your mad. I suppose you can be mad without slinging insults and stuff.
Of course you can. It's entirely possible to express one's anger without resorting to name-calling and insults.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
theres some good replies in here, but sometimes I do feel like, you just gotta let em know your mad. I suppose you can be mad without slinging insults and stuff.
Insults are not always necessarily a bad thing. On some occasions, they can be a very much needed wake up call that inspire someone to improve. All depends on the individual.
In your own house or if you own the company, maybe. My employer would reprimand someone who insults co-workers to "improve" them, and I wouldn't work for a company that allowed people to do that.
theres some good replies in here, but sometimes I do feel like, you just gotta let em know your mad. I suppose you can be mad without slinging insults and stuff.
Insults are not always necessarily a bad thing. On some occasions, they can be a very much needed wake up call that inspire someone to improve. All depends on the individual.
You're actually going to try and justify insulting someone. 😒
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
theres some good replies in here, but sometimes I do feel like, you just gotta let em know your mad. I suppose you can be mad without slinging insults and stuff.
Insults are not always necessarily a bad thing. On some occasions, they can be a very much needed wake up call that inspire someone to improve. All depends on the individual.
You're actually going to try and justify insulting someone. 😒
again, boot camp. (back in my day)
you would be amazed at how well people can improve if "they" can take the "insults" and learn from it. plenty of good leaders and people have been improved because of boot camp.
i guess hotel hell and TRIBBLE kitchen didnt improve anyone?
Yeah. Been there. Done that. And you're right, it can work. For some. But boot camp is a very particular example, for a very select segment of society, who volunteered for that treatment and knew what they were getting into. This ain't boot camp.
You're actually going to try and justify insulting someone. 😒
Sure, why not? If they are being used as the wake up call I mentioned to inspire someone to do better, they are not necessarily a bad thing. Watch any of the various programs with Gordon Ramsey as examples.
Not everyone in the world is a delicate little flower and can take a kick in the pants every now and again when they need it. That is a perfectly normal, healthy thing.
Do people insult others just to be mean, malicious and utter TRIBBLE? Of course, no question. There is a difference. You seem to be a reasonable, intelligent fellow. I would think you could understand that point.
Point taken. And personally, I can agree to a point. Maybe some folks could use some "tough love" to toughen up. I, though, am tasked with the unenviable job of determining when someone is being malicious or not. And sometimes, my hands are tied.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
The problem with the "Boot Camp" comparison is that is military training. Not a public forum. Drill Sergeants are basically breaking recruits down to improve them, adding pressure to the training to help recruits better deal with the stress of the battlefield. Also note that Drill Sergants are authority figures. Person A on the forums does not hold such authority sitting behind a keyboard.
There is no such battlefield conditions on a public forum.
And again... there are ways to express yourself without devolving into attacks. And there is a difference between what I'll classify as normal "asking questions" and "Tucker Carlson asking questions". One is clearly requesting information, while the other is just a defense to hide behind to launch carefully worded attacks. We mods have to try and figure out if something is legit or an attack all the time. And when something basically encourages attacking the Devs for not doing something under the guise of "just asking questions"... that's a problem because it is NOT asking questions, its veiled attack encouragement.
I could have closed this down due to discussion of moderation, like Baddmoon said. However as this was not questioning any particular action and came across as honest, I let it go and even tried to explain some reasoning as to recent activity. The fact we have some people in this thread trying to justify attacks as "expressing discontent" or "a way to make the devs improve" is a bit of a problem because the Devs don't frequent the forums, mostly because of the toxic attitude some show when they DO show up. So most of the attacks just bounce around the community itself and don't make their way to the Dev Office. It also shows a lack of respect if someone believes that screaming profanities and flames will improve the situation. Usually the result is either the exact opposite, or the situation devolves to the point we have to step in because of rule violations.
If something is of concern and many players bring it up (preferably in a civil manner), we'll actually pass it up the chain. Information is important after all. But when its buried under rage posts... that's a problem because it will either obscure the actual issue or just result in "Why hasn't X been done nao?! I DEMAND THIS ISSUE BE LOOKED AT BECAUSE I SAY SO!" posts which provide NO usable information other than Person A is in rage mode over something. IMO the "my wallet is closed until X happens" statements also provide no usable information other than said individual is publically making a choice not to spend any money. That is fine and said individual's choice, but honestly... why do you need to annouce it to the internet?
Ramsay is allowed to abuse his staff because he has power over their careers and it is entertaining to the watchers, not because it is the best way to educate people.
And as Rattler says, boot camp is a terrible example. It is a form of brainwashing to indoctrinate people into giving up normal, civilized behavior to prepare them to obey orders, fight, kill, and risk death instead of following more rational "cowardly" behavior of running away to live another day while letting other people die for their country. It's a necessary evil to achieve an effective fighting force. This forum is not fighting the Cardies or Dominion, though I was once like you until I took a phaser to the knee.
The problem with the "Boot Camp" comparison is that is military training. Not a public forum. Drill Sergeants are basically breaking recruits down to improve them, adding pressure to the training to help recruits better deal with the stress of the battlefield. Also note that Drill Sergants are authority figures. Person A on the forums does not hold such authority sitting behind a keyboard.
There is no such battlefield conditions on a public forum.
And again... there are ways to express yourself without devolving into attacks. And there is a difference between what I'll classify as normal "asking questions" and "Tucker Carlson asking questions". One is clearly requesting information, while the other is just a defense to hide behind to launch carefully worded attacks. We mods have to try and figure out if something is legit or an attack all the time. And when something basically encourages attacking the Devs for not doing something under the guise of "just asking questions"... that's a problem because it is NOT asking questions, its veiled attack encouragement.
I could have closed this down due to discussion of moderation, like Baddmoon said. However as this was not questioning any particular action and came across as honest, I let it go and even tried to explain some reasoning as to recent activity. The fact we have some people in this thread trying to justify attacks as "expressing discontent" or "a way to make the devs improve" is a bit of a problem because the Devs don't frequent the forums, mostly because of the toxic attitude some show when they DO show up. So most of the attacks just bounce around the community itself and don't make their way to the Dev Office. It also shows a lack of respect if someone believes that screaming profanities and flames will improve the situation. Usually the result is either the exact opposite, or the situation devolves to the point we have to step in because of rule violations.
If something is of concern and many players bring it up (preferably in a civil manner), we'll actually pass it up the chain. Information is important after all. But when its buried under rage posts... that's a problem because it will either obscure the actual issue or just result in "Why hasn't X been done nao?! I DEMAND THIS ISSUE BE LOOKED AT BECAUSE I SAY SO!" posts which provide NO usable information other than Person A is in rage mode over something. IMO the "my wallet is closed until X happens" statements also provide no usable information other than said individual is publically making a choice not to spend any money. That is fine and said individual's choice, but honestly... why do you need to annouce it to the internet?
Exactly on point there. If I spoke to anyone the way some posters do on here, my mother....heck my nan would slap me back to the 70's, and I'm 47!
But to back up your point of being civil, I reposted a bug, for the third time, in my usual civil and constructive manner (yes, I'm patting my self on the back, cause it's how I am in real-life too ) that's been an issue with the Legendary Intrepid, and I actually got Dev feedback from it and a resolution is incoming, although it did take over a year to get fixed. I was pleasantly surprised though.
For some reason, I only seem to spot bug that affect play, and those I report do tend to get fixed, however, persistance is key. I do shake my head when someone bemoans not fixing 'clipping' on uniforms however.
"You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
Ramsay is allowed to abuse his staff because he has power over their careers and it is entertaining to the watchers, not because it is the best way to educate people.
Not sure what specific program you are referring to, but I do not think this is at all true. Most series I have seen with him are Ramsey working with owners of failing restaurants or hotels. He has no authority over anyone there.
And as Rattler says, boot camp is a terrible example. It is a form of brainwashing to indoctrinate people into giving up normal, civilized behavior to prepare them to obey orders, fight, kill, and risk death instead of following more rational "cowardly" behavior of running away to live another day while letting other people die for their country. It's a necessary evil to achieve an effective fighting force.
The "authority" excuse falls totally flat. Military or not, the methods work and achieves their objective, regardless of the circumstance. You see the same being used in sports and the corporate world too.
Again, not everyone is a special, delicate little flower. Some people need a good kick in the pants to get them motivated.
Yes, brainwashing through mental battery is effective, and is even accepted in some contexts, but thankfully not in this forum.
It doesn't make someone a "special, delicate little flower" (code words for much harsher insults) to not want to endure verbal abuse. Hazing survivors go on to justify it and haze others but that's not really healthy behavior.
Sure, why not? If they are being used as the wake up call I mentioned to inspire someone to do better, they are not necessarily a bad thing. Watch any of the various programs with Gordon Ramsey as examples.
Not everyone in the world is a delicate little flower and can take a kick in the pants every now and again when they need it. That is a perfectly normal, healthy thing.
Do people insult others just to be mean, malicious and utter TRIBBLE? Of course, no question. There is a difference. You seem to be a reasonable, intelligent fellow. I would think you could understand that point.
This right here is the problem. Who gets to determine who needs a kick in the pants and who doesn't? Who gets to determine who needs a wakeup call and who doesn't? Even if you feel someone needs a wakeup call you can do so while also behaving like a civilized person. Also doesn't address the big elephant in the room. What if someone thinks you are the one in need of a wakeup call but you don't agree?
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
Just to address a couple people that addressed me..
I have not had a thread I started be locked, you are correct. I have however, seen several threads of which I was part of the conversation, get locked and edited for forum violations that were, at least in my opinion, invalid. The reason is usually to defend Cryptic from perceived attacks, we have had a few recently that were actually respectful and were locked/removed very pre-maturely. This gives the image that criticism was not tolerated on the forum. The criticism was negative, but it was not untrue or invalid, most pertained to the games aggressive monetization.
There have been stretches when moderators have let things go, this thread is a great example. This time it wasn't locked and the conversation was allowed to progress as long as it remains respectful, this is great.. but there have been other times where something like this gets shut down immediately, the moderation has been inconsistent at times.
My opinion is not intended to personally attack anyone, I get along with most of the mods here most of the time, this was just what I have observed as I have actively been posting less here for other reasons. Regretfully, I cannot give specific examples because most of the things I am referring to have been removed from the forum. I will also though, take some personal responsibility and say that there were times that I have been edited or even infracted and to be fair.. yeah, I deserved it. I have tried to be better about that recently, and so far it's gone fairly well. My issue isn't about direct interaction with me, I have had discussions with BadMoon and Rattler in the past about moderation questions and the dialogue was friendly and productive.
I am not going to press this issue for fear that I come across as attacking people personally, but in conclusion, I will just say that sometimes threads are closed because of the perception of where they are going and this is done before any replies have even been given. I understand the desire to remove abusive comments and many times that moderation is badly needed and it's appreciated. I would just prefer to see a little less sensitivity when it comes to determining when something is feedback and when it's 'insulting.' Yes, sometimes the comments will be a little more aggressive, and this is a byproduct of the fact that Cryptic doesn't listen to anything else. The reason for that is, if we get nasty enough, Kael will come here and tell us all to 'chill out,' when's the last time he reacted to positive feedback? At least if we're mean enough we know he'll read the feedback, even if it angers him. That however, is not the fault of the moderators, I am just explaining why some of us feel the need to be more abrasive at times. That is a Cryptic problem though, not a Moderation problem, and I understand that.
Thanks for your time and your allowing this discussion to progress.
In my real life I present sociopolitical commentary and often commented about how I've observed how one of the failings of our society in the last several decades (at least) is that we've raised successive generations in a manner that has robbed them of the ability to cope. Everyone getting a trophy, treating everyone as if they are special, being coddled and sheltered from anything that might provide a challenge.
Then they enter adulthood emotionally stunted and needing profanity filters and applying rules to everyone but themselves.
How this applies to the topic at hand is that I've seen a pattern of behavior in this thread that confirms my observations about our society as a whole.
Now I'm left wondering why those of us who can function in the adult world continue to cater to those who cannot.
RE: This is a forum, not a Boot Camp (There's a Dr. McCoy joke in there somewhere...)
Neither is a fish a shoe, but under the right circumstances one may smell just as bad as the other.
J
There have been stretches when moderators have let things go, this thread is a great example. This time it wasn't locked and the conversation was allowed to progress as long as it remains respectful, this is great.. but there have been other times where something like this gets shut down immediately, the moderation has been inconsistent at times.
Its based on how things are presented. Again, as I mentioned before, how things are said will affect how things are viewed. Presented in a civil manner, its more likely to stay open. Presented with an air of aggression, even hidden behind "just asking questions", tends to get shut down because right off the bat its clear its only gonna go down hill from there, and we're trying to keep things from turning into flame wars, either between players or aimed at the Devs.
The problem with the "Boot Camp" comparison is that is military training. Not a public forum.
What does that have to do with anything? Some of the very first known public forums were a product of the Romans (or more likely, the Greeks and that was just another thing the Romans stole and claimed credit for) and if you think the insults weren't flying by the hundreds every time they saw use, I have some very bad news for you.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
J
There have been stretches when moderators have let things go, this thread is a great example. This time it wasn't locked and the conversation was allowed to progress as long as it remains respectful, this is great.. but there have been other times where something like this gets shut down immediately, the moderation has been inconsistent at times.
Its based on how things are presented. Again, as I mentioned before, how things are said will affect how things are viewed. Presented in a civil manner, its more likely to stay open. Presented with an air of aggression, even hidden behind "just asking questions", tends to get shut down because right off the bat its clear its only gonna go down hill from there, and we're trying to keep things from turning into flame wars, either between players or aimed at the Devs.
Sorry, but I think we need to clarify some things here...
Having gone back and reading the original post again, I am under the impression that the topic of this discussion is about the forum moderators far more than it is about the game developers who, by many accounts including in this very discussion, rarely if ever visit the forums.
I know that it's the nature of conversation to go swimming down a tangent or two, but if we're going to be sincere about addressing a concern, if that's what we're doing, then should we not try to stick to what that concern is?
So I guess the first question for the forum moderators is are we sincerely trying to address a concern here with some self reflection and a examination of practices or are we all going away from this discussion like so many law enforcement agencies with their mantra, "We investigated ourselves and have determined that we have done nothing wrong."
It would be quite the waste if we all went away from this with that attitude.
The people engaging in the discussion. Civilized people can have heated debates.
Ah so you get to arbitrarily decide who needs a wakeup call and who doesn't even though you think moderators arbitrarily decide what should be modded and what shouldn't. good to know.
I am not a delicate little flower, so it is not going to bother me and I am more than capable of handling myself.
So in your mind you get to arbitrarily decide who needs a wakeup call and who doesn't, and arbitrarily decide what rules you will abide by when responding to someone on here, even though you decry what you believe to be arbitrary decision on moderation? Once again good to know. So I suppose this means we won't be seeing any reports from you about other users breaking the rules for us to arbitrarily decide?
Once again, if someone feels they have been modded unfairly, they can make an appeal directly to Kael, or pm the moderation team and have us link him into the discussion. Simply because people don't get the outcome they want doesn't automatically mean it was decided arbitrarily.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
Okay, kids, an example of the sort of thing I think we're talking about here (and the sort of thing I've seen on the forums, that frequently leads to flaming and locked threads).
"I disagree with game decision A. It seems like a bad idea for reasons Alfa, Bravo, and Charlie. Some even think Delta and Echo. And sometimes it seems like our complaints fall on deaf ears."
VS
"The TRIBBLE idiots who run this TRIBBLE-show ripoff are only interested in stealing our money, and don't care about the game, the players, or Star Trek!!"
The first one is reasoned disagreement. The second is something that comes up far too frequently, and is of little if any help.
Comments
I've also posted many times being critical of Space Barbie failings like the tailor palette mess, tailor uniform restrictions, omni beam restrictions, and showing with basic probability rules how bad the odds are for gamble boxes.
The only times I've been moderated have been when I got too salty about something, quoted someone else who was way too salty, or was clearly going against the forum rules, and the moderation has just been to edit out the offending content.
I've posted in many threads that have been closed, but they were closed for either FCT topics like STO 2.0 or clear bashing of Cryptic or staff (personal attacks against Cryptic staff are not ok, do you think it's OK for customers or co-workers to attack you?). Not for posts saying "I don't like X because Y" but for posts of "Cryptic's mother was a hamster, and its father smelt of elderberries.”
I disagree, unless you mean "say it again while remaining civil."
Going full Karen and asking to see Cryptic's manager is not ever the right approach in my opinion.
Forum Moderators and ingame moderators are not apart of the development team. they were originally normal players like you and I but got a special promotion and a bit more power. now they answer to someone on the development team called the Community Manager but at the end of the day they don't know more than the player base on development on the game as well as what the developers are considering. people don't seem to understand or even care to understand about that in the last decade or so.
Of course you can. It's entirely possible to express one's anger without resorting to name-calling and insults.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
In your own house or if you own the company, maybe. My employer would reprimand someone who insults co-workers to "improve" them, and I wouldn't work for a company that allowed people to do that.
You're actually going to try and justify insulting someone. 😒
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Yeah. Been there. Done that. And you're right, it can work. For some. But boot camp is a very particular example, for a very select segment of society, who volunteered for that treatment and knew what they were getting into. This ain't boot camp.
Point taken. And personally, I can agree to a point. Maybe some folks could use some "tough love" to toughen up. I, though, am tasked with the unenviable job of determining when someone is being malicious or not. And sometimes, my hands are tied.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
There is no such battlefield conditions on a public forum.
And again... there are ways to express yourself without devolving into attacks. And there is a difference between what I'll classify as normal "asking questions" and "Tucker Carlson asking questions". One is clearly requesting information, while the other is just a defense to hide behind to launch carefully worded attacks. We mods have to try and figure out if something is legit or an attack all the time. And when something basically encourages attacking the Devs for not doing something under the guise of "just asking questions"... that's a problem because it is NOT asking questions, its veiled attack encouragement.
I could have closed this down due to discussion of moderation, like Baddmoon said. However as this was not questioning any particular action and came across as honest, I let it go and even tried to explain some reasoning as to recent activity. The fact we have some people in this thread trying to justify attacks as "expressing discontent" or "a way to make the devs improve" is a bit of a problem because the Devs don't frequent the forums, mostly because of the toxic attitude some show when they DO show up. So most of the attacks just bounce around the community itself and don't make their way to the Dev Office. It also shows a lack of respect if someone believes that screaming profanities and flames will improve the situation. Usually the result is either the exact opposite, or the situation devolves to the point we have to step in because of rule violations.
If something is of concern and many players bring it up (preferably in a civil manner), we'll actually pass it up the chain. Information is important after all. But when its buried under rage posts... that's a problem because it will either obscure the actual issue or just result in "Why hasn't X been done nao?! I DEMAND THIS ISSUE BE LOOKED AT BECAUSE I SAY SO!" posts which provide NO usable information other than Person A is in rage mode over something. IMO the "my wallet is closed until X happens" statements also provide no usable information other than said individual is publically making a choice not to spend any money. That is fine and said individual's choice, but honestly... why do you need to annouce it to the internet?
And as Rattler says, boot camp is a terrible example. It is a form of brainwashing to indoctrinate people into giving up normal, civilized behavior to prepare them to obey orders, fight, kill, and risk death instead of following more rational "cowardly" behavior of running away to live another day while letting other people die for their country. It's a necessary evil to achieve an effective fighting force. This forum is not fighting the Cardies or Dominion, though I was once like you until I took a phaser to the knee.
Exactly on point there. If I spoke to anyone the way some posters do on here, my mother....heck my nan would slap me back to the 70's, and I'm 47!
But to back up your point of being civil, I reposted a bug, for the third time, in my usual civil and constructive manner (yes, I'm patting my self on the back, cause it's how I am in real-life too
For some reason, I only seem to spot bug that affect play, and those I report do tend to get fixed, however, persistance is key. I do shake my head when someone bemoans not fixing 'clipping' on uniforms however.
Yes, brainwashing through mental battery is effective, and is even accepted in some contexts, but thankfully not in this forum.
It doesn't make someone a "special, delicate little flower" (code words for much harsher insults) to not want to endure verbal abuse. Hazing survivors go on to justify it and haze others but that's not really healthy behavior.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
I have not had a thread I started be locked, you are correct. I have however, seen several threads of which I was part of the conversation, get locked and edited for forum violations that were, at least in my opinion, invalid. The reason is usually to defend Cryptic from perceived attacks, we have had a few recently that were actually respectful and were locked/removed very pre-maturely. This gives the image that criticism was not tolerated on the forum. The criticism was negative, but it was not untrue or invalid, most pertained to the games aggressive monetization.
There have been stretches when moderators have let things go, this thread is a great example. This time it wasn't locked and the conversation was allowed to progress as long as it remains respectful, this is great.. but there have been other times where something like this gets shut down immediately, the moderation has been inconsistent at times.
My opinion is not intended to personally attack anyone, I get along with most of the mods here most of the time, this was just what I have observed as I have actively been posting less here for other reasons. Regretfully, I cannot give specific examples because most of the things I am referring to have been removed from the forum. I will also though, take some personal responsibility and say that there were times that I have been edited or even infracted and to be fair.. yeah, I deserved it. I have tried to be better about that recently, and so far it's gone fairly well. My issue isn't about direct interaction with me, I have had discussions with BadMoon and Rattler in the past about moderation questions and the dialogue was friendly and productive.
I am not going to press this issue for fear that I come across as attacking people personally, but in conclusion, I will just say that sometimes threads are closed because of the perception of where they are going and this is done before any replies have even been given. I understand the desire to remove abusive comments and many times that moderation is badly needed and it's appreciated. I would just prefer to see a little less sensitivity when it comes to determining when something is feedback and when it's 'insulting.' Yes, sometimes the comments will be a little more aggressive, and this is a byproduct of the fact that Cryptic doesn't listen to anything else. The reason for that is, if we get nasty enough, Kael will come here and tell us all to 'chill out,' when's the last time he reacted to positive feedback? At least if we're mean enough we know he'll read the feedback, even if it angers him. That however, is not the fault of the moderators, I am just explaining why some of us feel the need to be more abrasive at times. That is a Cryptic problem though, not a Moderation problem, and I understand that.
Thanks for your time and your allowing this discussion to progress.
In my real life I present sociopolitical commentary and often commented about how I've observed how one of the failings of our society in the last several decades (at least) is that we've raised successive generations in a manner that has robbed them of the ability to cope. Everyone getting a trophy, treating everyone as if they are special, being coddled and sheltered from anything that might provide a challenge.
Then they enter adulthood emotionally stunted and needing profanity filters and applying rules to everyone but themselves.
How this applies to the topic at hand is that I've seen a pattern of behavior in this thread that confirms my observations about our society as a whole.
Now I'm left wondering why those of us who can function in the adult world continue to cater to those who cannot.
RE: This is a forum, not a Boot Camp (There's a Dr. McCoy joke in there somewhere...)
Neither is a fish a shoe, but under the right circumstances one may smell just as bad as the other.
Cheerio!
Its based on how things are presented. Again, as I mentioned before, how things are said will affect how things are viewed. Presented in a civil manner, its more likely to stay open. Presented with an air of aggression, even hidden behind "just asking questions", tends to get shut down because right off the bat its clear its only gonna go down hill from there, and we're trying to keep things from turning into flame wars, either between players or aimed at the Devs.
What does that have to do with anything? Some of the very first known public forums were a product of the Romans (or more likely, the Greeks and that was just another thing the Romans stole and claimed credit for) and if you think the insults weren't flying by the hundreds every time they saw use, I have some very bad news for you.
They absolutely were.
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Sorry, but I think we need to clarify some things here...
Having gone back and reading the original post again, I am under the impression that the topic of this discussion is about the forum moderators far more than it is about the game developers who, by many accounts including in this very discussion, rarely if ever visit the forums.
I know that it's the nature of conversation to go swimming down a tangent or two, but if we're going to be sincere about addressing a concern, if that's what we're doing, then should we not try to stick to what that concern is?
So I guess the first question for the forum moderators is are we sincerely trying to address a concern here with some self reflection and a examination of practices or are we all going away from this discussion like so many law enforcement agencies with their mantra, "We investigated ourselves and have determined that we have done nothing wrong."
It would be quite the waste if we all went away from this with that attitude.
So in your mind you get to arbitrarily decide who needs a wakeup call and who doesn't, and arbitrarily decide what rules you will abide by when responding to someone on here, even though you decry what you believe to be arbitrary decision on moderation? Once again good to know. So I suppose this means we won't be seeing any reports from you about other users breaking the rules for us to arbitrarily decide?
Once again, if someone feels they have been modded unfairly, they can make an appeal directly to Kael, or pm the moderation team and have us link him into the discussion. Simply because people don't get the outcome they want doesn't automatically mean it was decided arbitrarily.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
"I disagree with game decision A. It seems like a bad idea for reasons Alfa, Bravo, and Charlie. Some even think Delta and Echo. And sometimes it seems like our complaints fall on deaf ears."
VS
"The TRIBBLE idiots who run this TRIBBLE-show ripoff are only interested in stealing our money, and don't care about the game, the players, or Star Trek!!"
The first one is reasoned disagreement. The second is something that comes up far too frequently, and is of little if any help.