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.
There is nothing unhealthy about it. Life and the world are not always nice and provide you with a safe space. Lacking any ability to cope with adversity or stress is far more detrimental in my opinion.
You're saying you should be free to say anything you want because what does not kill us, makes us stronger?
Not wanting to be insulted by someone who is unable to make their points without verbal abuse does not mean a person is incapable of withstanding that abuse.
I don't enjoy iced tea, so I don't drink iced tea. That doesn't make me a "delicate flower" who is too weak to stand up to the manly power of the chilled steeped leaves. I don't enjoy herbal or flavored teas either, no Earl Grey for me. That doesn't mean bergamot is just too rough for my over-sensitive palette.
When a comment like "I don't know why my previous post was deleted" is followed by "post deleted for discussing moderation" including the part that was relevant to the topic at hand things are a bit heavy handed. Just delete the offending comment which wasn't offensive to begin with.
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.
They absolutely were.
Except, this is not the Roman forum either. This is Cryptic's Star Trek Online forum and it has rules to be followed, which include not insulting other forum users. Period.
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.
There is nothing unhealthy about it. Life and the world are not always nice and provide you with a safe space. Lacking any ability to cope with adversity or stress is far more detrimental in my opinion.
Once again, I can agree with you when applying this to life in general, but with regards to this forum specifically, there are rules that must be followed and enforced.
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.
I can only speak for myself in how I do my job. In all honesty, I can admit that in the past, I have acted on emotion and without thinking too much about a given issue. I do my best not to do that anymore.
I do examine and re-examine my practices, including my thinking on issues that arise. Before taking any action, I question even my motivation for doing so. Believe me, I doubt myself before I doubt any of you. When in doubt I refer to the ToS, the forum rules, and the FCT to make sure that there is a rule that governs my action. In particularly troubling cases, I read and re-read the thread/posting in question, always trying to give the poster the benefit of the doubt, if possible. If still in doubt, I take the issue to the team, and if needed Kael, for discussion about whether and what action might need to be taken. Though the U.S. Constitution and its First Amendment right to free speech does not govern this forum, I do try to hold to the spirit of it whenever possible. You folks have no idea how many times I've gone to bat for you behind the scenes whenever you've been "upset" in here.
But at the end of the day, this IS Cryptic's forum and their house rules reign. If they say they don't want certain behavior here, then so be it. I believe most people would agree that if they invited a guest into their home, and said guest made an TRIBBLE of themself and insulted their host, said guest would be uninvited from the home. Same principle applies here.
I see a lot of threads get nuked for "Cryptic Bashing" Or complaining about things.
But I gotta ask, how are players supposed to let the company/devs/whoever is in a position to actually listen and make changes know that people are unhappy, if there is nothing but censors, deletions and whatever else?
And if someone tells me, go write a support ticket. Those are largely ignored. Entirely. So how does one actually go about letting cryptic be aware, that an individual, or even a community/segment of a community is unhappy?
I have to admit that at first glance, I considered locking this thread for discussion of moderation. But then I read it again, and read it a third time, as I often do with seemingly "difficult" topics, and determined that this appears to be more of a sincere concern about how to communicate feedback when one is displeased.
We literally have a thread in this subforum addressing that very thing:
Just to point out, I think it's very misleading and disingenuous to point to that thread as an example.
And I disagree, because it's coming from the host, who is telling you how to behave in his house. This thread's question was about how best to communicate. That opening post says exactly how to communicate and how the host wants you to behave when engaging here with them and each other. Your personal issue aside, there's nothing misleading about it.
When a comment like "I don't know why my previous post was deleted" is followed by "post deleted for discussing moderation" including the part that was relevant to the topic at hand things are a bit heavy handed. Just delete the offending comment which wasn't offensive to begin with.
If the offending comment wasn't offensive to begin with, then it would not have been moderated. If it was moderated, then it follows that the comment was offensive. If you can't be bothered to edit yourself to be non-offensive, why does it become my responsibility to edit you, so that your comment can be read without offense?
You're saying you should be free to say anything you want because what does not kill us, makes us stronger?
Not wanting to be insulted by someone who is unable to make their points without verbal abuse does not mean a person is incapable of withstanding that abuse.
You have the choice to not engage the other person who is saying things you do not like. Just because you are offended by what someone else says does not mean you are right. If anything, this antiquated forum software could use a simple ignore feature so you can can choose to block from your view anyone you feel necessary.
Interesting that you should say this, because if more people actually did this, then we'd have less flaming and trolling of each other here.
It's not a matter of who's right and who's wrong in an argument in this instance. We're talking about behavior. It IS unnecessary to be insulting to get one's point across. And I would argue that if you have to resort to insults, then you've lost the argument anyway. But right or wrong, if offense is given, it is breaking the forum rules to do so, and therefore must be dealt with accordingly.
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
When a comment like "I don't know why my previous post was deleted" is followed by "post deleted for discussing moderation" including the part that was relevant to the topic at hand things are a bit heavy handed. Just delete the offending comment which wasn't offensive to begin with.
If the offending comment wasn't offensive to begin with, then it would not have been moderated. If it was moderated, then it follows that the comment was offensive. If you can't be bothered to edit yourself to be non-offensive, why does it become my responsibility to edit you, so that your comment can be read without offense?
Just so we are on the same page....I made an angry comment that wasn't directed at any specific person that was removed. I made a casual comment about "not sure why the comment was removed" and then addressed the topic. That entire comment was also removed. This is what I am referring to as heavy handed. I would have appreciated it if my comment on the subject matter had at least been left.
Absolutely correct. I completely agree the rules here should be enforced. Sometimes how that enforcement is handed down is very questionable in my opinion. Just want to add, I believe you know I have a lot of respect for you and never had issue with you personally. Others, not so much.
Well, I'm glad that we can agree on that much. 😏 As I said, I can only speak to my thought processes on how I do my job. And I believe it's good that y'all should know those, so that you're aware that I'm not trying to make arbitrary decisions here.
Of course.
Verily.
I will disagree in that I believe this depends on the circumstances. If niceties are not working to help get a point across, why continue with them? Maybe a more aggressive approach is warranted and will help get the conversation moving along. Sometimes insults/harsh tone can work wonders.
Again, I have to say that the rules don't give me much leeway in this.
I would hope this rule extends to everyone, not just forum members.
Well, I'm not sure how I can apply or enforce this rule on anyone outside this forum. 😏 Or was there some persons in particular that you're referring to here?
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
Well, I'm not sure how I can apply or enforce this rule on anyone outside this forum. 😏 Or was there some persons in particular that you're referring to here?
I was not referring to people outside the forum. There are members and moderators here. I believe you know of whom I was speaking. If not, I am happy to discuss with you privately.
Well, moderators are members, so yes, I would say the same rules apply. If anyone believes that any one of us has been out of line, then I encourage you to contact Kael and let him know. If you disagree with how we've moderated an issue, then again, I encourage you to contact Kael about it. We're only human and just as prone to err as anyone else.
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
i mean, this convo has been nice to see take place, but look who has been absent...
Except THIS conversation has really been about how moderators are doing the job and how best not to get moderated in the first place, so that members CAN complain without censure. So, why would Kael necessarily need to be present for this? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that you just want to find fault.
I have, in the past, accused Cryptic of missing opportunities to meet us in the middle and extend an olive branch. The problem is that nobody on the community side seems to be moving towards the middle with olive branches of their own. So that is what I am doing. By choice. Cryptic knows my past hostilities, as this community does. I've been a part of this community for as long as there has been a community to be a part of.
Because - as I pointed out in the other thread, although (above) one of the mods labeled my comment a "personal issue" -
We're often ignored when we are civil. So it fades into the background.
I see a lot of threads get nuked for "Cryptic Bashing" Or complaining about things.
But I gotta ask, how are players supposed to let the company/devs/whoever is in a position to actually listen and make changes know that people are unhappy, if there is nothing but censors, deletions and whatever else?
And if someone tells me, go write a support ticket. Those are largely ignored. Entirely. So how does one actually go about letting cryptic be aware, that an individual, or even a community/segment of a community is unhappy?
I have to admit that at first glance, I considered locking this thread for discussion of moderation. But then I read it again, and read it a third time, as I often do with seemingly "difficult" topics, and determined that this appears to be more of a sincere concern about how to communicate feedback when one is displeased.
We literally have a thread in this subforum addressing that very thing:
Just to point out, I think it's very misleading and disingenuous to point to that thread as an example.
And I disagree, because it's coming from the host, who is telling you how to behave in his house. This thread's question was about how best to communicate. That opening post says exactly how to communicate and how the host wants you to behave when engaging here with them and each other. Your personal issue aside, there's nothing misleading about it.
My point being that later on the same page, it was pointed out that in the past, players who have followed those suggestions have been routinely ignored. Nothing was said or done to refute that, except for (after things got heated) Kael giving a reason why the one specific post being used as an example was missed. And a follow-up question on how to avoid that was also ignored.
If following the "how best to communicate" instructions results in silence, then it's actually not the "how best to communicate". It's a set of instructions that don't work.
And pointing to those instructions, is then misleading, because following them doesn't actually achieve the desired goal.
So you assume. I believe that you're conflating two different ideas. Posting here on the forum allows members to communicate their thoughts to the devs and each other. The devs prefer that you do this civilly. Nowhere are you guaranteed a response from a dev, but you have achieved your desired goal in communicating your thoughts to them. If you're expecting or demanding a response from a dev, then I'm afraid more likely than not, you will be disappointed most of the time, because they are actually very busy with developing and managing the game.
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
But what has flinging insults and scathing remarks gotten us? It has NEVER, as you suggest, served as any kind of wake-up call for Cryptic to do anything about anything we've expressed concerns about.
What has asking nicely done in getting the myriad of long standing, game breaking bugs fixed? That door very much springs both ways.
What may be important to realise is that most bugs simply don't affect enough people to warrant adressing them from a cost/benefit perspective. That's not an easy message to tell, but it may be true.
Players like myself who log on every day and spend many hours (too many perhaps) in the game on a daily basis, will probably notice many of the bugs that exist.
The average player who just logs on daily to do a quick event mission or perhaps not even that? Unlikely to experience the issues I'm experiencing.
Some things may be game breaking if you play a lot, but are far less serious if you just stop by once in a few days or weeks to play an episode, quick TFO or just go out and see what's new.
And while some issues are ignored for a long time, for most of the really game breaking stuff (instant crashes, complete breakdown of systems like the loadouts) I am truly convinced that they're fixed as soon as possible. Other game breaking things like the bug making Gravity Kills unfinishable remain unsolved longer - but how many people - besides me - are affected by that particular issue? While it's true that there is still no Dev or CM response on that, neither did many other people state that they're affected.
Although I'd love to see them tackle all issues faster, maybe this is simply the best they can physically do with the resources they have. And while far from perfect, it's not an unmitigated disaster either.
[4:46] [Combat {self}] Your Haymaker deals 23337 (9049) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother
But what has flinging insults and scathing remarks gotten us? It has NEVER, as you suggest, served as any kind of wake-up call for Cryptic to do anything about anything we've expressed concerns about.
What has asking nicely done in getting the myriad of long standing, game breaking bugs fixed? That door very much springs both ways.
What may be important to realise is that most bugs simply don't affect enough people to warrant adressing them from a cost/benefit perspective. That's not an easy message to tell, but it may be true.
Players like myself who log on every day and spend many hours (too many perhaps) in the game on a daily basis, will probably notice many of the bugs that exist.
The average player who just logs on daily to do a quick event mission or perhaps not even that? Unlikely to experience the issues I'm experiencing.
Some things may be game breaking if you play a lot, but are far less serious if you just stop by once in a few days or weeks to play an episode, quick TFO or just go out and see what's new.
And while some issues are ignored for a long time, for most of the really game breaking stuff (instant crashes, complete breakdown of systems like the loadouts) I am truly convinced that they're fixed as soon as possible. Other game breaking things like the bug making Gravity Kills unfinishable remain unsolved longer - but how many people - besides me - are affected by that particular issue? While it's true that there is still no Dev or CM response on that, neither did many other people state that they're affected.
Although I'd love to see them tackle all issues faster, maybe this is simply the best they can physically do with the resources they have. And while far from perfect, it's not an unmitigated disaster either.
And to add to that:
Maybe we overestimate how important it is that things are fixed, so to speak, NOW.
For many players it might simply not matter all that much, they're probably happy if they can just log on every now and then and do some new things every couple of weeks/months.
[4:46] [Combat {self}] Your Haymaker deals 23337 (9049) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother
Just so we are on the same page....I made an angry comment that wasn't directed at any specific person that was removed. I made a casual comment about "not sure why the comment was removed" and then addressed the topic. That entire comment was also removed. This is what I am referring to as heavy handed. I would have appreciated it if my comment on the subject matter had at least been left.
That was direct Discussion of Moderation, IE you questioning publically why you yourself were modded. And as you know, Discussion of Moderation is against Forum Rules. So it was a clear case on that one. Rule was violated, action was taken.
As for why we don't always edit out things... it depends on just how integrated the stuff that needs to be edited out is. If its most of a post... what's the point in being someone else's editor? We're not in your brain to be able to rejigger a post to follow the rules while maintaining the intended message written by the poster. If its a multi paragraph post and one paragraph breaks the rules, we'll nuke that paragraph. But if its only a single sentence or paragraph that has the rule breaker in it... that makes it much harder to the point we might as well nuke the whole thing.
Example A:
Paragraph
Offensive Content <- Easy to isolate and remove
Paragraph
Example B: Word Word Word Offensive Offensive Offensive Word
Not so easy to isolate and remove without making it swiss cheese.
Example C: Rant Rant Rant Rant Rant Rant Rant Usful but not complete information Rant Rant Rant Rant
Again not so easy to isolate, and doesn't even complete a full thought if edited.
But what has flinging insults and scathing remarks gotten us? It has NEVER, as you suggest, served as any kind of wake-up call for Cryptic to do anything about anything we've expressed concerns about.
What has asking nicely done in getting the myriad of long standing, game breaking bugs fixed? That door very much springs both ways.
What may be important to realise is that most bugs simply don't affect enough people to warrant adressing them from a cost/benefit perspective. That's not an easy message to tell, but it may be true.
I'm a software developer, and at the companies I've worked for and other companies I've read about bugs are given a priority that is not based on bug age. It's based on bug importance where that is some mix of effect on users and business reasons (sakes lost or gained, reputation lost or gained, "important" customers affected, etc.)
I doubt any company has the developer resources to fix every known bug, and Cryptic has less resources than Blizzard or Square.
If someone attacks the devs for not fixing bug X "because asking nicely didn't work" that isn't going to work either. The priority ordering for bugs is still going to mean bug Y gets fixed instead.
Other game breaking things like the bug making Gravity Kills unfinishable remain unsolved longer - but how many people - besides me - are affected by that particular issue?
Besides the priority ordering, two other reasons why a bug doesn't get fixed are "can't replicate on demand" and "can't find the cause."
Sometimes a frequent player runs into that bug X what feels like often, but if they tracked every time they played the content they might realize it is a fairly rare occurrence. That means developers might not be able to make it happen when they need it to, so they can't gather logs or other information to let them see what is happening to trigger it.
Sometimes even when you can make it happen on demand the cause is not clear or is in some black box code that isn't under your control like Microsoft's code in Windows. If a Windows API call fails for no obvious reason there might not be a good way to dig deeper.
I'm an outsider too so that's just speaking generally about why some bugs persist. In both of these cases yelling at the developers won't make them "do better."
I'm an outsider too so that's just speaking generally about why some bugs persist. In both of these cases yelling at the developers won't make them "do better."
well, asking doesn't seem to be working either.
True, neither approach will work for some bugs but insults might get you moderated.
When a comment like "I don't know why my previous post was deleted" is followed by "post deleted for discussing moderation" including the part that was relevant to the topic at hand things are a bit heavy handed. Just delete the offending comment which wasn't offensive to begin with.
If the offending comment wasn't offensive to begin with, then it would not have been moderated. If it was moderated, then it follows that the comment was offensive. If you can't be bothered to edit yourself to be non-offensive, why does it become my responsibility to edit you, so that your comment can be read without offense?
Just so we are on the same page....I made an angry comment that wasn't directed at any specific person that was removed. I made a casual comment about "not sure why the comment was removed" and then addressed the topic. That entire comment was also removed. This is what I am referring to as heavy handed. I would have appreciated it if my comment on the subject matter had at least been left.
Sorry I missed this comment earlier. I just looked into this particular issue and I would have to say that I'd have handled this differently, but like I said, we can make mistakes, too.
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
Comments
You're saying you should be free to say anything you want because what does not kill us, makes us stronger?
Not wanting to be insulted by someone who is unable to make their points without verbal abuse does not mean a person is incapable of withstanding that abuse.
I don't enjoy iced tea, so I don't drink iced tea. That doesn't make me a "delicate flower" who is too weak to stand up to the manly power of the chilled steeped leaves. I don't enjoy herbal or flavored teas either, no Earl Grey for me. That doesn't mean bergamot is just too rough for my over-sensitive palette.
Except, this is not the Roman forum either. This is Cryptic's Star Trek Online forum and it has rules to be followed, which include not insulting other forum users. Period.
Once again, I can agree with you when applying this to life in general, but with regards to this forum specifically, there are rules that must be followed and enforced.
I can only speak for myself in how I do my job. In all honesty, I can admit that in the past, I have acted on emotion and without thinking too much about a given issue. I do my best not to do that anymore.
I do examine and re-examine my practices, including my thinking on issues that arise. Before taking any action, I question even my motivation for doing so. Believe me, I doubt myself before I doubt any of you. When in doubt I refer to the ToS, the forum rules, and the FCT to make sure that there is a rule that governs my action. In particularly troubling cases, I read and re-read the thread/posting in question, always trying to give the poster the benefit of the doubt, if possible. If still in doubt, I take the issue to the team, and if needed Kael, for discussion about whether and what action might need to be taken. Though the U.S. Constitution and its First Amendment right to free speech does not govern this forum, I do try to hold to the spirit of it whenever possible. You folks have no idea how many times I've gone to bat for you behind the scenes whenever you've been "upset" in here.
But at the end of the day, this IS Cryptic's forum and their house rules reign. If they say they don't want certain behavior here, then so be it. I believe most people would agree that if they invited a guest into their home, and said guest made an TRIBBLE of themself and insulted their host, said guest would be uninvited from the home. Same principle applies here.
And I disagree, because it's coming from the host, who is telling you how to behave in his house. This thread's question was about how best to communicate. That opening post says exactly how to communicate and how the host wants you to behave when engaging here with them and each other. Your personal issue aside, there's nothing misleading about it.
If the offending comment wasn't offensive to begin with, then it would not have been moderated. If it was moderated, then it follows that the comment was offensive. If you can't be bothered to edit yourself to be non-offensive, why does it become my responsibility to edit you, so that your comment can be read without offense?
Interesting that you should say this, because if more people actually did this, then we'd have less flaming and trolling of each other here.
It's not a matter of who's right and who's wrong in an argument in this instance. We're talking about behavior. It IS unnecessary to be insulting to get one's point across. And I would argue that if you have to resort to insults, then you've lost the argument anyway. But right or wrong, if offense is given, it is breaking the forum rules to do so, and therefore must be dealt with accordingly.
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
If the offending comment wasn't offensive to begin with, then it would not have been moderated. If it was moderated, then it follows that the comment was offensive. If you can't be bothered to edit yourself to be non-offensive, why does it become my responsibility to edit you, so that your comment can be read without offense?
Just so we are on the same page....I made an angry comment that wasn't directed at any specific person that was removed. I made a casual comment about "not sure why the comment was removed" and then addressed the topic. That entire comment was also removed. This is what I am referring to as heavy handed. I would have appreciated it if my comment on the subject matter had at least been left.
Well, I'm glad that we can agree on that much. 😏 As I said, I can only speak to my thought processes on how I do my job. And I believe it's good that y'all should know those, so that you're aware that I'm not trying to make arbitrary decisions here.
Verily.
Again, I have to say that the rules don't give me much leeway in this.
Well, I'm not sure how I can apply or enforce this rule on anyone outside this forum. 😏 Or was there some persons in particular that you're referring to here?
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
Well, moderators are members, so yes, I would say the same rules apply. If anyone believes that any one of us has been out of line, then I encourage you to contact Kael and let him know. If you disagree with how we've moderated an issue, then again, I encourage you to contact Kael about it. We're only human and just as prone to err as anyone else.
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
And why assume that he doesn't say anything to us behind the scenes when someone reports something to him?
Except THIS conversation has really been about how moderators are doing the job and how best not to get moderated in the first place, so that members CAN complain without censure. So, why would Kael necessarily need to be present for this? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that you just want to find fault.
So you assume. I believe that you're conflating two different ideas. Posting here on the forum allows members to communicate their thoughts to the devs and each other. The devs prefer that you do this civilly. Nowhere are you guaranteed a response from a dev, but you have achieved your desired goal in communicating your thoughts to them. If you're expecting or demanding a response from a dev, then I'm afraid more likely than not, you will be disappointed most of the time, because they are actually very busy with developing and managing the game.
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
What may be important to realise is that most bugs simply don't affect enough people to warrant adressing them from a cost/benefit perspective. That's not an easy message to tell, but it may be true.
Players like myself who log on every day and spend many hours (too many perhaps) in the game on a daily basis, will probably notice many of the bugs that exist.
The average player who just logs on daily to do a quick event mission or perhaps not even that? Unlikely to experience the issues I'm experiencing.
Some things may be game breaking if you play a lot, but are far less serious if you just stop by once in a few days or weeks to play an episode, quick TFO or just go out and see what's new.
And while some issues are ignored for a long time, for most of the really game breaking stuff (instant crashes, complete breakdown of systems like the loadouts) I am truly convinced that they're fixed as soon as possible. Other game breaking things like the bug making Gravity Kills unfinishable remain unsolved longer - but how many people - besides me - are affected by that particular issue? While it's true that there is still no Dev or CM response on that, neither did many other people state that they're affected.
Although I'd love to see them tackle all issues faster, maybe this is simply the best they can physically do with the resources they have. And while far from perfect, it's not an unmitigated disaster either.
[3/25 10:41][Combat (Self)]Your Haymaker deals 26187 (10692) Physical Damage(Critical) to Orinoco.
And to add to that:
Maybe we overestimate how important it is that things are fixed, so to speak, NOW.
For many players it might simply not matter all that much, they're probably happy if they can just log on every now and then and do some new things every couple of weeks/months.
[3/25 10:41][Combat (Self)]Your Haymaker deals 26187 (10692) Physical Damage(Critical) to Orinoco.
That was direct Discussion of Moderation, IE you questioning publically why you yourself were modded. And as you know, Discussion of Moderation is against Forum Rules. So it was a clear case on that one. Rule was violated, action was taken.
As for why we don't always edit out things... it depends on just how integrated the stuff that needs to be edited out is. If its most of a post... what's the point in being someone else's editor? We're not in your brain to be able to rejigger a post to follow the rules while maintaining the intended message written by the poster. If its a multi paragraph post and one paragraph breaks the rules, we'll nuke that paragraph. But if its only a single sentence or paragraph that has the rule breaker in it... that makes it much harder to the point we might as well nuke the whole thing.
Example A:
Paragraph
Offensive Content <- Easy to isolate and remove
Paragraph
Example B: Word Word Word Offensive Offensive Offensive Word
Not so easy to isolate and remove without making it swiss cheese.
Example C: Rant Rant Rant Rant Rant Rant Rant Usful but not complete information Rant Rant Rant Rant
Again not so easy to isolate, and doesn't even complete a full thought if edited.
We're Moderators, not professional novel editors.
I'm a software developer, and at the companies I've worked for and other companies I've read about bugs are given a priority that is not based on bug age. It's based on bug importance where that is some mix of effect on users and business reasons (sakes lost or gained, reputation lost or gained, "important" customers affected, etc.)
I doubt any company has the developer resources to fix every known bug, and Cryptic has less resources than Blizzard or Square.
If someone attacks the devs for not fixing bug X "because asking nicely didn't work" that isn't going to work either. The priority ordering for bugs is still going to mean bug Y gets fixed instead.
Besides the priority ordering, two other reasons why a bug doesn't get fixed are "can't replicate on demand" and "can't find the cause."
Sometimes a frequent player runs into that bug X what feels like often, but if they tracked every time they played the content they might realize it is a fairly rare occurrence. That means developers might not be able to make it happen when they need it to, so they can't gather logs or other information to let them see what is happening to trigger it.
Sometimes even when you can make it happen on demand the cause is not clear or is in some black box code that isn't under your control like Microsoft's code in Windows. If a Windows API call fails for no obvious reason there might not be a good way to dig deeper.
I'm an outsider too so that's just speaking generally about why some bugs persist. In both of these cases yelling at the developers won't make them "do better."
True, neither approach will work for some bugs but insults might get you moderated.
Sorry I missed this comment earlier. I just looked into this particular issue and I would have to say that I'd have handled this differently, but like I said, we can make mistakes, too.
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