|
As someone who's been an extremely significant contributor to a very similar forum (so don't let this small post count fool you too much), I have to say that there were aspects of the OP here that bothered me like Strategos.
Mods talking about being particularly draconian when drunk or in a bad mood is worrisome, as are threats of mass bans, and lists that suggest just about every post type is against the rules. I understand and agree that there's a TON of junk on this forum right now. I agree that both cleanup and crackdown are necessary. I also think that the OP's threat would be a gigantic overreaction.
To be specific, the post cited in the OP, to me, is vastly more helpful that spammy. It's quick and non-specific, yet correct. There are plenty of pro-level instances of that very recommendation working, and it's the basis of a very viable ZvT (mech) style.
This forum is, among other things, a place where new and exciting strategies are revealed. For every iEchoic (someone capable and creative enough to come up with new strategy at a high level and willing to spend the time and energy to write it up well as a guide), there are just as many people who depend on their in-game status to overcome bad writing (Pride jumps to mind), and many clever, creative, lower-level players.
Especially as strategies for this game are so dramatically in flux, it would be a huge mistake to chase off people with good ideas because they haven't watched a replay.
TL;DR: A purge is necessary, but heavy-handed and quick-acting moderation is dangerous to the health of a forum.
|
On April 13 2011 21:55 sleepingdog wrote:
The point is: why on earth would you "suggest" something and not try it out at least a couple of times? Doesn't it strike you even a bit insulting to, say, make a thread that pretty much sounds like "hey I thought of this cool strategy that beats void/colossus, but I'm too lazy to try it out, so I just opened this thread, so you could test it and do the work for me"
Also if you suggest something that you've never tried (which, after all, is the definition of theory-craft), then the probability of you being wrong is also much higher.
Yeah I if you start a thread about an untried strat you deserve a ban  I just meant replying something like:
"I've tried A and B - didn't work. Maybe using C would help?"
But I guess it depends on how you define theorycrafting...
|
Strategos, I dont' get why you see not watchign replays and giving advice being banworthy is such an affront to you.
Honestly that's like asking someone to critique a piece of music without ever listening to the recording. Or a work of art without seeing it. Or proofreading an essay without reading it.
Giving advice about gameplay and NOT WATCHING THE GAMEPLAY IN QUESTION is just dumb and makes no sense. All it does is result in either
a. bad advice
or
b. generic advice that can be found on liquipedia or other parts of the forums
Also, this policy has been effect for much longer than you've been a member or even lurked these forums. Just go to the BW forums. For the most part, people adhere by these rules pretty closely and the BW forums are still a very good place to get advice and help despite these strict rules.
I think pretty much every long-time poster and mod can confidently say that the quality of the BW forums is better than that of the SC2 forums. Why? The rules are adhered to much more closely in those forums. No reason to not expect the same out of the SC2 forums.
|
Zurich15366 Posts
On April 14 2011 10:09 Strategos wrote:
[...]I'm not claiming to be entitled to anything so your paragraph about how you are disgusted blah blah is irrelevant, i am trying to offer meaningful suggestions to fix the problem we are having [...]
What exactly are you suggesting?
|
I'm glad the filthy posts are finally coming to an end in this section, maybe I'll start visiting it more 
|
On April 15 2011 00:59 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 10:09 Strategos wrote:
[...]I'm not claiming to be entitled to anything so your paragraph about how you are disgusted blah blah is irrelevant, i am trying to offer meaningful suggestions to fix the problem we are having [...] What exactly are you suggesting?
As I see it, he hasn't suggested anything. And not suggesting anything equals doing nothing. Which isn't acceptable.
Something HAD to be done, and what zatic and Saracen are doing seems more than reasonable to me. Some parts of it might be debatable, but in life there's rarely a perfect choice. And since the mods are responsible, they had to do something.
And @Strategos: As a person who is equally concerned by the quality of the community and the value of this site, allow me to question your point about thwarting quality posters in [H] threads who didn't bother watching a replay.
The quality from TL comes from effort. It's effort put in by the moderators, the writers, and of course the community. Effort in posting is highly welcome, lack of effort is sanctioned. And the reason is perfectly obvious: The more you think about your post and the more you try (have tried) out the advice you're giving, the more helpful your advice is. Now, if a thread is opened and the OPoster has not read the big recommended threads or liquipedia and watched theD9Ds concerning his issue, his thread will be closed (that's the forum law). It's a lack of effort, so no reason to leave a thread open whose question can be easily answered. But if the OPoster has actually considered all those sources of inspiration and can't figure out why he loses, he needs quality advice. And he deserves it. Effort demands effort. That's how quality forum interaction is born.
Following these principles, people not wanting to watch a replay and still giving advice aren't the kind of persons that should be welcome here. Either they don't care about possibly giving bad advice (and littering the forums) or are so egocentric that they think they found eternal truth. Why else should someone post without seeing the real problem (aka the replay). There's a reason doctors speak to their patients before prescribing them pills. It's the same thing on TL. The poster in question might be an incredibly intelligent, top-5-of-the-world-player. But if he just guesses the answer to a forum question that he didn't even conceive completely (aka not watching the replay), he's not contributing. If he doesn't know the answer for sure because he doesn't want to watch the replay, that's perfectly fine, no one's forcing him to post (except his ego, maybe). But if he does, he should be helping. And if he's not in this mindset, there's no reason he should be welcome here.
|
Y U MAD zatic ?
Just kidding :D will follow these guidelines accordingly
|
I feel like the Purge has lost steam. There was a week period where poor OPs got prompt warnings/bans, but I don't feel that the Banhammer is being thrown around vigorously enough right now to warrant the term "purge."
|
People are more likely to help if it's easier to help. The current rules make it more difficult to help; thus, less people will contribute.
It seems that those this may exclude those who are even mildly lazy (such a hassle to risk a ban while helping, don't you think). It also seems that those who will contribute must have a very high opinion of their own starcraft skills; why else make such an effort unless you think you're all that, hey.
@ Spek Strategos's suggestion is that we don't ban those who contribute without watching. That seemed pretty clear.
Edit: Oh, and the OP comes off as a jerk. Maybe he didn't mean it, but he did. It seems that the rule is not "follow the rules or be banned" but "don't piss me off, or be banned". Those two are really, really, not exactly the same thing.
|
Zurich15366 Posts
On April 25 2011 01:56 maryelizbethwinstead wrote:
People are more likely to help if it's easier to help. The current rules make it more difficult to help; thus, less people will contribute.
This is exactly what I was going for with this experiment. Less people spamming useless posts in good intention, few people actually contributing.
Edit: Oh, and the OP comes off as a jerk. Maybe he didn't mean it, but he did.
I probably meant it at the time. The forum was so bad I also considered swiping it completely. My impression though is that this experiment has worked so far. Useless posts have decreased significantly as far as I can tell.
On April 24 2011 12:11 Sleight wrote:
I feel like the Purge has lost steam. There was a week period where poor OPs got prompt warnings/bans, but I don't feel that the Banhammer is being thrown around vigorously enough right now to warrant the term "purge."
It was an experiment first to see if we can actually still rescue this forum with drastic measures. It seems to have worked at least somewhat. We are dialing down the aggressiveness to avoid collateral damage and a general bad mood around here.
On April 14 2011 14:25 Wren wrote:
A purge is necessary, but heavy-handed and quick-acting moderation is dangerous to the health of a forum.
The forum was in a desperate state. It needed desperate measures. I didn't initiate this for fun or out of pure frustration, I truly wanted to fix this forum and didn't see any way than relentlessly swinging the hammer.
|
I agree I think this has worked. In particular the [H] threads are much better/more well considered. However I still see a lot of responses to help threads that start with "I haven't watched your replays yet but..." I'm sure these people mean well but it's not really helpful.
|
Great initiative, I hardly ever venture into the strategy forum barring masochistic tendencies and boredom. Ideally, TL would hardly need to spotlight quality threads like Sheth's as disenchanted members frequent SC2 strategy once more.
|
The strategy thread seems to be cleaning up a little better now, still got a long path ahead but I'm enjoying myself in there quite a bit, and a vast majority of the guides are just really really well written.
|
There are only a couple things I don't agree with.
First is the inability to start a theory crafting thread in a strategy forum. If I am not mistaken it belongs in no other place but in the strategy forum, whether it is tried tested and true or not, it is still mathematical strategical theorizing.
As for the other thing, surveying. Surveying to find out downfalls of using a strategy other people have used in game play is very beneficial to know about ahead of time to newer players / players that have not used the strategies before listed in Liquipedia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
