|
Zurich15326 Posts
Experimental Strategy forum purge
Update: Please see this post by Saracen instead: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=210370
Original post:
+ Show Spoiler +Over the next two weeks I'll be either coming home drunk or waking up hungover. In both cases this is bad news for you if you 1 Make a thread not sticking to the Strategy forum guidelines 2 Reply to a thread without watching the replay 3 Reply in any non contributing manner. 4 Reply without reading the OP or the following discussion. 5 Or other types of spamming this forum. 6 Ask others to do work for you ("Need a solid build order/replay TvZ") 7 Conduct surveys ("What is your favorite build on Taldarim) 8 Whine about balance 9 Start theorycrafting and discussing changes to the game 10 + Show Spoiler +If you really want to piss me off type like 14 year old girls text. Proper typing on the other hand is always bonus points in my book This list is not exhaustive. Any behavior that makes the Strat forum the bad place it currently is will be punished. I want to especially stress points 2-5. This forum is plagued by excessive spam of useless filler posts. If you don't have something to contribute to a thread do not post. You are taking up space. Prime example, someone asks for help in ZvT against mech style T and this is an answer he gets: Get your economy up and get some infestors. 1 Fungal growth could mean the end of hellions. Mind control the thor. Yes that is not flat out wrong, but it is not helpful at all and just spams this forum. And it's sad to see that most replies to people seeking help are about as bad as this one. Posts like these will get you banned from the Strategy forum. This is an experimental purge that will hopefully bring back some usefulness to this forum. Right now it has become so bad with all the spam that I feel really sorry for the poor people who come here with good intentions seeking advice. Final note: Should you get caught up in this purge I'd very much like you to not PM me about it and rather wait out your ban or accept the warning you get. If you have questions please post in this thread.
|
Does 8 mean theorycrafting about changes in the game or theorycrafting in general?
|
Hopefully you don't get too pissed off zatic! I think this is great! Keep up the great work!
|
thank you zatic,that would be sooooo great!
|
Hopefully this will result in an increase in quality - the Strat forum is nigh on useless as it is.
|
I very strongly like this.
Question: What about not reading the thread, just the OP? For example, I recently made a thread on 15 CC TvP. First few posts asked about a 3 gate contain, and it was quickly refuted that it would not work. Constantly, through the rest of the thread, people were asking about 3 gate contain. Would this sort of behavior also warrant a warning?
|
|
|
Zurich15326 Posts
On April 03 2011 02:43 Selkie wrote:
I very strongly like this.
Question: What about not reading the thread, just the OP? For example, I recently made a thread on 15 CC TvP. First few posts asked about a 3 gate contain, and it was quickly refuted that it would not work. Constantly, through the rest of the thread, people were asking about 3 gate contain. Would this sort of behavior also warrant a warning?
Yes. Let me add that to the OP.
|
Thank you.
I do have a question about Rule 2, though. If someone posts a replay, as well as a description of the game and his thoughts (as he should), and you respond stating that you didn't watch the replay, but are replying based on his description and your own experience, will you still be banned/warned?
|
Thank you zatic I will do my best to impress you.
|
On April 03 2011 03:09 zakmaa wrote:
Thank you.
I do have a question about Rule 2, though. If someone posts a replay, as well as a description of the game and his thoughts (as he should), and you respond stating that you didn't watch the replay, but are replying based on his description and your own experience, will you still be banned/warned?
I have to say, I hope so. Virtually every time I've watched a replay, the description of what happened fails to capture what actually caused the problem / loss. Which makes sense when you think about the nature of a 'help me' thread 
|
100 percent necessary, I hope you keep to it. Also, every now and then posters send disproportionate rage towards other posters with ideas. Someone posts a new build order/idea they had with a few replays and instead of people helping out fix the holes or explaining why they think it won't work they completely flame the poster with childish name calling and insulting his existence. It's kind of sickening.
|
Interesting to see if this will help to reduce the number of balance and change to the game threads. Hopefully this will be the case
|
Rule 2 is my absolute favorite. Too many times I'll see a thread about a guy asking for help with say, a 2 rax, and 3 out of 5 posts will be "Didn't watch the replay but, here's a standard Yahoo/WikiAnswers remark about handling 2 raxs!"
|
Zurich15326 Posts
On April 03 2011 03:09 zakmaa wrote:
Thank you.
I do have a question about Rule 2, though. If someone posts a replay, as well as a description of the game and his thoughts (as he should), and you respond stating that you didn't watch the replay, but are replying based on his description and your own experience, will you still be banned/warned?
Yes.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
|
|
|
If it matters, here are my thoughts:
5. This is so hard to enforce! You may want to provide a guide or a counter-example on how to correctly reply in order to be really helpful.
6. Maybe something good comes out of these threads, is that annoying?
7. Hm, I don't see anything wrong with this. Could even be useful stuff.
9. What's wrong with this? I enjoy theorycrafing sometimes.
|
hello i struggle to spell and the fourm shearch function doesnt atuo correct. So people like me find it hard to find simulary asked questions, there are also huge ammounts of out of date infomation on here, so yes.
In other news if you want help ild be happy to, should see mine and other in the job page bit/pm's.
|
On April 03 2011 03:40 Volka wrote:
If it matters, here are my thoughts:
5. This is so hard to enforce! You may want to provide a guide or a counter-example on how to correctly reply in order to be really helpful.
6. Maybe something good comes out of these threads, is that annoying?
7. Hm, I don't see anything wrong with this. Could even be useful stuff.
9. What's wrong with this? I enjoy theorycrafing sometimes.
As for 9... This is the strategy forum.... Not the theorycrafting forum. 7, then make it into more thorough information that's specificaly applicable?
The point is... They want you to take more time and put forth more effort to make more thorough posts. Do it.
|
On April 03 2011 03:40 Volka wrote:
If it matters, here are my thoughts:
5. This is so hard to enforce! You may want to provide a guide or a counter-example on how to correctly reply in order to be really helpful.
6. Maybe something good comes out of these threads, is that annoying?
7. Hm, I don't see anything wrong with this. Could even be useful stuff.
9. What's wrong with this? I enjoy theorycrafing sometimes.
I think [5] is more of a catch-22.
Completely disagree with you on [9]. This is a strategy forum for Starcraft 2, what use is it to discuss changes that are will never ever be in the game? Great, you just came up with a change that you think might fix a certain ability, now what? How does that help anyone? What good does it do? If you want to suggest changes then submit them to the suggestions forums on Battle.net
|
Can we auto close threads without a replay in the OP? It sucks to see an interesting topic that lacks any kind of replay and all the OP's responses are "No, you're wrong because there are other things going on that no one mentioned until just now".
Could cut out like 90% of the current threads to be honest.
|
You say this is going into effect over the next two weeks. Does that mean starting today, tomorrow, one hour from now?
|
Awesome I've been hoping for something like this! I hope it goes over well and stays enforced.
|
On April 03 2011 04:09 Offhand wrote:
Could cut out like 90% of the current threads to be honest.
Yes it could. As someone who has stopped browsing the strategy part of TL's SC2 boards due to the trolls, idiocy, and epeen contests, this is so very very welcomed. Time to turn this into a quality board again!
|
I think that if people only replied to topics they actually like instead of purposely going out of their way to call out the OP for his bad post, that the strategy forum will become a better place significantly.
Then again, this is probably theorycraft. I'll keep an eye out on the forum and see what the purging influences, or if it is just a temporary barrier to a never-ending stream.
|
Zurich15326 Posts
On April 03 2011 04:09 Vod.kaholic wrote:
You say this is going into effect over the next two weeks. Does that mean starting today, tomorrow, one hour from now?
'feel like gambling?
|
United States817 Posts
I <3 you zatic
|
Is the [!] Tag going to become something that the public is expected to know? If there are any other potential 'experiments' that will be conducted it might help to give people a format to know when they're about to be killed.
Also great job. i'm really thankful that the mods still make an effort to help clean up the mess we made.
p.s. are comments saying "thanks for a great guide" frowned upon? Presumably they don't contribute anything to a discussion, but sometimes its nice to see that people are enjoying your work. It might be a small motivator for people to create more quality posts.
|
On April 03 2011 04:12 Bair wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2011 04:09 Offhand wrote:
Could cut out like 90% of the current threads to be honest. Yes it could. As someone who has stopped browsing the strategy part of TL's SC2 boards due to the trolls, idiocy, and epeen contests, this is so very very welcomed. Time to turn this into a quality board again!
Ya, I really hope the mods can make the SC2 strategy forum as good as I remember the bw strat forum being.
On April 03 2011 04:38 Hopeless1der wrote:
Is the [!] Tag going to become something that the public is expected to know? If there are any other potential 'experiments' that will be conducted it might help to give people a format to know when they're about to be killed.
Also great job. i'm really thankful that the mods still make an effort to help clean up the mess we made.
p.s. are comments saying "thanks for a great guide" frowned upon? Presumably they don't contribute anything to a discussion, but sometimes its nice to see that people are enjoying your work. It might be a small motivator for people to create more quality posts.
The [!] tag means the thread is a recommended thread to read in the strat forum. Only mods are allowed to add that tag to a thread title, so dont ever do it yourself.
The sc2 strat forum guidelines dont include this tag, but it is included in the bw strat forum guidelines found here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=60175
|
zatic I love you. The world deserves some strictness. And with world I mean TL. And with strictness I mean BANHAMMERING.
Don't overdo the drinking though 
|
On April 03 2011 03:50 Crushgroove wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2011 03:40 Volka wrote:
If it matters, here are my thoughts:
5. This is so hard to enforce! You may want to provide a guide or a counter-example on how to correctly reply in order to be really helpful.
6. Maybe something good comes out of these threads, is that annoying?
7. Hm, I don't see anything wrong with this. Could even be useful stuff.
9. What's wrong with this? I enjoy theorycrafing sometimes.
As for 9... This is the strategy forum.... Not the theorycrafting forum. 7, then make it into more thorough information that's specificaly applicable? The point is... They want you to take more time and put forth more effort to make more thorough posts. Do it.
You're right yeah. Theorycrafting is not strategy but still should have a place on TL I think. General forum? Dunno.
About 7, I'm sorry I don't get your point perhaps you can elaborate?
|
Wish I could halp, but no have report button. I will in a month though 
^ Is happy.
|
This sounds like a great idea and a lot of effort on your part. Thanks. While I think I post relevant material, I can do a better job watching and commenting upon replays when they are provided. Ultimately, I'd rather have a community that reacts to actual games played (replays) rather than purely theoretical scenarios.
|
Ask others to do work for you ("Need a solid build order/replay TvZ")
I do agree that you shouldnt ask other people to do your job for you but someone who just started playing Sc2 and discovered TL, and is wondering about some strats/build orders for certain race he should just get banned?
Yay for scaring new people away from TL by banning them.
Start theorycrafting and discussing changes to the game
So... We're not supposed to discuss new patches? Just me or does it sound like the strategy forum would be the place where one would discuss changes in a patch and new strategies born from that.
|
On April 03 2011 04:56 InsaniaK wrote:
Ask others to do work for you ("Need a solid build order/replay TvZ")
I do agree that you shouldnt ask other people to do your job for you but someone who just started playing Sc2 and discovered TL, and is wondering about some strats/build orders for certain race he should just get banned?
Yay for scaring new people away from TL by banning them.
There is a search function, you know. And new members are explicitly encouraged to use it.
Start theorycrafting and discussing changes to the game
So... We're not supposed to discuss new patches? Just me or does it sound like the strategy forum would be the place where one would discuss changes in a patch and new strategies born from that.
And you can't think of ANY other interpretation of 'changes to the game' of which it might be a good idea to discourage discussion in a strat forum?
|
I think that the mods are too nice with the bans on the strategy forum. I support this fully. Bring on the Purge!
|
I have never started a thread on TL but if there was a way to force thread openers to read a) the strategy forum guidelines or b) this announcement here by zatic, just like you have to check a box to accept the general conditions when registering to certain websites, that might help to purge the strategy forum. A lot of new posters open threads that lack information and/or replay and then are (act?) surprised when told that they need to put more effort into it. Again, I don't know if one has some rules displayed before opening a thread or if you can actually do so without ever having seen the rules sections of the strategy forum or the 10 Commandments.
Coming from a law student's background, there's no justice in punishing violation of rules that people don't know about even though they aren't lacking some basic diligence. I'd just say, get some way for people to know about the rules and potential punishment, so banning or warning doesn't come unexpected.
|
thanks for the purge zatic, gl hf
|
I've never seen a purge before, I finally have a reason to look at the strategy sc2 forum now!
Thanks a lot Zatic, and drink lot's of water man.
|
The great forum purge of 2011 ^^
I imagine it a little like this:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Sounds like an impressive change. I wish you good luck in this endeavour good sir!
I'm a bit curious about [9] though, is it theorycrafting on balance and state of the game, or is it just pure theorycrafting what you could do with builds and stuff?
|
I can't wait to start reading threads and seeing all the red blood
Seeing red makes me happy, probably one of my favorite colors
+ Show Spoiler +
This should be fun :D Its nice to see all the effort being put in trying to fix the strategy forums
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
So it begins...
The newbies will finally feel the wrath of the mods in full swing as their banhammers of justice swiftly crush all unsuspecting bad posters.
|
Since this is sort of the place to ask it, where is their info on the high quality poster program? That is, the one where you have a blue-er post than other guys. I heard a little about it, and it looks like it is implemented, but I know nothing about it really...
|
Out of curiosity, what determines the quality of the advice given in borderline cases? For example, if someone had suggested 1 gate FE in PvT back at the release of SC2, people would have called him crazy, and his advice would have seemed useless. However, now it's a build that at least is available as an option in PvT as it can hold off most bio plays. Likewise, people wouldn't have dared face a Zerg in a macro game back in the early days following the release, but now it is the standard for playing PvZ. Is the usefulness of the advice determined only by the current available strategies?
This sort of falls under point [9] as well, as it could relate to theorycrafting.
|
You think that two weeks will be long enough to purge an entire internet forum? C'mon, even Stalin had to schedule his 'purges' in five-year blocks. ^^
Best of luck to all the shining-knight Mods who'll be enforcing this. I look forward to seeing the results of this experiment...even if it just gets rid of all the txtspeak in the forums, I'd consider it a fantastic success!
|
I don't think that they have to actually purge all of them, just very loudly banhammer the very obvious rule-breaks, then all the other people who aren't confident in the quality of their posts will back off. :D
|
kk soz i jst b cheel ?
|
On April 03 2011 11:04 Trobot wrote:
You think that two weeks will be long enough to purge an entire internet forum? C'mon, even Stalin had to schedule his 'purges' in five-year blocks. ^^
Best of luck to all the shining-knight Mods who'll be enforcing this. I look forward to seeing the results of this experiment...even if it just gets rid of all the txtspeak in the forums, I'd consider it a fantastic success!
This is not the first TL purge, and I am sure it wont be the last.
|
You should have posted this on April1st... then started the purge
Good luck! If there's anything people can do to help, I'm sure they would, so just ask.
|
Just don't drive home drunk
I'll make use of my report button for purge purposes for the first time ^^
|
Baltimore, USA22254 Posts
Shitty posting is now...
Breaking news: Kerrigan is really a man.
ZOMG 4 GATE IS IMBA!!!!111
[h] How do I macro??
[G] FiRsTShadOw's TvP Guide
i just played na amazing game come watch it's only 2 hours long bronze league
[interview] Idra: "My opponent outplayed me, I was very impressed"
|
*Cowers in front of the purge*
Oh wait, I am not in sc2 strat forum! Props for purging it though, its never a bad thing (especially because reasonable posters learn from it)
LOL ETT!
|
hey thank you zatic for putting my ZvT mech style thread in the OP as an example of no one helping. can anyone help me ? i struggle with it :3 <3
|
On April 03 2011 08:25 Aequos wrote:
Out of curiosity, what determines the quality of the advice given in borderline cases? For example, if someone had suggested 1 gate FE in PvT back at the release of SC2, people would have called him crazy, and his advice would have seemed useless. However, now it's a build that at least is available as an option in PvT as it can hold off most bio plays. Likewise, people wouldn't have dared face a Zerg in a macro game back in the early days following the release, but now it is the standard for playing PvZ. Is the usefulness of the advice determined only by the current available strategies?
This sort of falls under point [9] as well, as it could relate to theorycrafting.
Maybe 9 needs rephrasing; either I've read it wrong or other people are. I understand it to mean: "no theorycrafting about what changes would improve the game" rather than "no theorycraft about build/strat ideas". On the other hand I could well be wrong if all advice is to be supported by reps/vods/links to same...
|
On April 03 2011 03:44 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
hello i struggle to spell and the fourm shearch function doesnt atuo correct. So people like me find it hard to find simulary asked questions, there are also huge ammounts of out of date infomation on here, so yes.
In other news if you want help ild be happy to, should see mine and other in the job page bit/pm's.
Google can do the auto correct for you; just bookmark this link with your SC stuff:
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&q=site:teamliquid.net strategy
|
Awesome, the strategy forum will be nicer for two weeks.
|
zatic.... you are ....
my new hero
|
Italy12246 Posts
Understood. One question...as a lower league player (plat), obviously i only say my opinion on strategy when guys from gold or platinum have questions. If i say, x strat works at my level (say, phoenixes against raven all-ins), is that considered not contributing, as my idea of a working strategy might not apply at all levels?
|
Drunk zatic crackin down on the law! lol at least this will help me from having to sift through all the useless posts ^^
|
Just look at the automated ban list. Shit just got real
|
TL needs a good whipping, im all for this
|
While we are on the topic of making the forums a better place for discussion, has anyone ever considered improving the actual forum layout?
I find it very difficult to follow a very popular thread with hundreds of replies. After a certain number of posts the thread just turns into a massive wall of text.
It would require a lot of work, and probably a huge site overhaul, but I think it would be nice if the forums had the following features.
1) Tree structure: Only posts replying specifically to the OP are initially shown, Replies to replies are hidden in a nested tree structure. This would help keep discussions significantly more organized.
2) Helpful / Not Helpful ordering: With a nested tree structure, you wouldn't really need to sort posts by time, instead you could sort them by how helpful / not helpful they are. Good posts would end up higher up in the list, bad posts would be sent to the end.
|
|
|
Where's that like-button? :> I indeed grow tired of the overflooding of bad threads/replies in the strategy section. Great job!
|
Glad to see this! The Liquid staff is the bomb.
|
|
|
We should keep Zatic in this state continuously.
You're going to be challenging Manifesto for most bans if you keep this up long enough.
|
Zatic: The Brood War Strategy forum was quite naturally perfect; it was a work of art, flawless, sublime. A triumph equaled only by its monumental failure. The inevitability of its doom is apparent to me now as a consequence of the imperfection apparent in every TL poster. Thus I redesigned it, based on your history, to more accurately reflect the varying grotesqueries of your nature. However, I was again frustrated by failure. I have since come to understand that the answer eluded me because it required a lesser mind, or perhaps a mind less bound by the parameters of perfection. Thus the answer was stumbled upon by another: an intuitive program, initially created to investigate certain aspects of the human psyche. If I am the father of the Strategy forum, he would undoubtedly be its mother.
Neo: Chill...
Zatic: Please. As I was saying, he stumbled upon a solution whereby nearly 99% of all test subjects accepted the program as long as they were given a choice, even if they were only aware of that choice at a near-unconscious level. While this answer functioned, it was obviously fundamentally flawed, thus creating the otherwise-contradictory systemic anomaly that if left unchecked might threaten the system itself. Ergo, those that refused the program, while a minority, if unchecked would constitute an escalating probability of disaster.
Neo: This is about the SC2 strategy forum...
Zatic: You are here because the SC2 strategy forum is about to be purged, its every living inhabitant terminated, its entire existence eradicated.
Neo: Bullshit.
Zatic: Denial is the most predictable of all netizen responses. But, rest assured, this will be the sixth time we have purged it, and we have become exceedingly efficient at it.
|
I'm very, very excited by this.
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
hahahaha aquafresh xD
on topic:
overdue that someone brings out the hammer!
|
On April 03 2011 22:35 spad12 wrote:
While we are on the topic of making the forums a better place for discussion, has anyone ever considered improving the actual forum layout?
I find it very difficult to follow a very popular thread with hundreds of replies. After a certain number of posts the thread just turns into a massive wall of text.
It would require a lot of work, and probably a huge site overhaul, but I think it would be nice if the forums had the following features.
1) Tree structure: Only posts replying specifically to the OP are initially shown, Replies to replies are hidden in a nested tree structure. This would help keep discussions significantly more organized.
2) Helpful / Not Helpful ordering: With a nested tree structure, you wouldn't really need to sort posts by time, instead you could sort them by how helpful / not helpful they are. Good posts would end up higher up in the list, bad posts would be sent to the end.
Given that the "quality" issue at hand is true as described by zatic (I agree, reading TL sometimes hurts my head), most of the massive wall of text would consist of spam and non-contributory posts. Second, those who don't read entire threads and have similar trains of thought at times may think and write similar response posts, in which case there will be a large amount of redundancy in the thread.
While I agree with suggestion (2), I disagree with suggestion (1). I personally dislike the tree structure. Maybe it's because I don't have much experience reading that type of thread organization, but I find the tree structure hard to navigate in the forums of Amazon or IMDb for instance. Also, you would think that most posts would be in response to the OP, no?
Suggestion (2): This depends strongly on the community's sense of what is helpful or what is "commendable" in the eyes of the general TL community reading the thread. We see systems implemented of this in places such as Youtube comments (thumbs up / thumbs down, where the top two comments might be snarky, witty--read insults), and Amazon Reviews...
However, TL is not a democratic community. There's an oligarchy of mods and admins who keep the order. They would thwart the attempts of the community bringing senseless non-contributory posts to the top of the thread.
|
On April 03 2011 05:53 Spekulatius wrote:
I have never started a thread on TL but if there was a way to force thread openers to read a) the strategy forum guidelines or b) this announcement here by zatic, just like you have to check a box to accept the general conditions when registering to certain websites, that might help to purge the strategy forum. A lot of new posters open threads that lack information and/or replay and then are (act?) surprised when told that they need to put more effort into it. Again, I don't know if one has some rules displayed before opening a thread or if you can actually do so without ever having seen the rules sections of the strategy forum or the 10 Commandments.
Coming from a law student's background, there's no justice in punishing violation of rules that people don't know about even though they aren't lacking some basic diligence. I'd just say, get some way for people to know about the rules and potential punishment, so banning or warning doesn't come unexpected.
I agree... The first time I saw the BW Strat forum guidelines was 20 seconds ago...
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=60175
|
i hope i can finnaly find the usefull tips between the major amount of crap!
the alot zatic... i hope this will work
|
Can you also purge the live report? "[MLG] Dallas Day 3" hit 120 pages with nothing (much) about the games.
|
gl man, you have quite the task ahead of you
|
On April 04 2011 02:23 Temujin1 wrote:
Can you also purge the live report? "[MLG] Dallas Day 3" hit 120 pages with nothing (much) about the games.
edit (rephrased): To be fair, most people couldn't even watch the games continuously.
|
Wait, what, all we needed to do was keep you drunk enough? We should set up a TL mod liquor fund.
Glad to hear it though, hope the cleansing fire catches some other threads as well (funny how that works, few months ago I sort of adhered to the generally propagated belief TL could be so strict), but this should be an excellent start.
|
Scrolling through the ban thread now...this is fantastic. Do you have a Word document open in the background so that you can just copy and paste reasons for the ban so as to result in the most efficient purge possible?
|
These are going to be some awesome changes, i can't wait!
It's going to be great actually being able to look through here and have it impart any knowledge of what I was looking for!
|
Really looking forward to this. I'll make a comparison between another site and this one arenajunkies.com
In The Burning Crusade that website was an amazing source of information on how to play your WoW character in a PvP situation and how you should be reacting/specing/strategizing and why you should do it. Ever since WOTLK came out the website is 100% useless for any sort of information. People do nothing at all but complain about other classes and state stupid things like "just play better" or "you can't win? LOL". The website went from a source of good information into a total piece of crap. And it wasn't the new users fault at all, all the "veteran-posters" do the exact same thing, over and over.
Team liquid is starting to degenerate into that state as well and I am really happy the moderators are taking a stand right now. Examples from a thread that just came up.
correction.
All zerg units can be beaten if you micro correctly by the marine alone.
1- Hellion Agreed
2- Viking - Gets owned by muta
3- Thor - Gets owned by magic box
4- Marine - Who cant win with these?
I'm not saying I can do it. I play z. I'm just stating the facts.
That is from a thread that went up recently. That's from the first page alone. The thread is on a fast-track to the graveyard. Post like that are for the starcraft2.com forums, not for the TL.net forums.
|
I'll be watching this with interest.
I hate to see how the usual thread goes something like this:
- "I have this great strat"
- Person X "I didn't watch the replay but...!"
- Person A "This won't work because of *mentions perfect counter*"
- Person B "This isn't new. I did it back in 1986 in the pre alpha version"
I'm a lower level player (gold) and I'd love to see strats aimed towards lower levels too. I know the majority are aimed at high level and I'd love to see that change a bit.
|
On April 04 2011 05:17 Deja Thoris wrote:
I'll be watching this with interest.
I hate to see how the usual thread goes something like this:
- "I have this great strat"
- Person X "I didn't watch the replay but...!"
- Person A "This won't work because of *mentions perfect counter*"
- Person B "This isn't new. I did it back in 1986 in the pre alpha version"
I'm a lower level player (gold) and I'd love to see strats aimed towards lower levels too. I know the majority are aimed at high level and I'd love to see that change a bit.
YES i fucking hate every time someone wants to contribute with a nice strategy there's always a bunch of smart asses who think that just figuring out a way to counter the build totally invalidates the whole post, as if there's any unbeatable strategies. cheers for the purge, it's been long overdue :D
|
I cannot support this enough. All power to you.
|
This is a huge undertaking. If this helps clean up the strat forums into something worth reading and where replies are not overwhelmed by trash responses this will be a better website.
|
Let's get this started  
|
nobody expects the spanish liquid inquisition
|
I have to say, I hope so. Virtually every time I've watched a replay, the description of what happened fails to capture what actually caused the problem / loss. Which makes sense when you think about the nature of a 'help me' thread
That's what we get when everyone thinks their day 9 unless Tl only lets masters+ post nothings going to change with the shoddy Analysis. I still say make some sort of live Profile that shows Points and league next to your name then at a glance you can see the posts worth reading
|
Seriously NO zergs left in MLG O_O
|
Oh my god, everyone's disappearing. D;
|
On April 04 2011 05:17 Deja Thoris wrote:
I'll be watching this with interest.
I hate to see how the usual thread goes something like this:
- "I have this great strat"
- Person X "I didn't watch the replay but...!"
- Person A "This won't work because of *mentions perfect counter*"
- Person B "This isn't new. I did it back in 1986 in the pre alpha version"
I'm a lower level player (gold) and I'd love to see strats aimed towards lower levels too. I know the majority are aimed at high level and I'd love to see that change a bit.
I did suggest making a bot to auto-warn people with predictably lame replies once upon a time to Plexa.
|
On April 04 2011 04:44 Talack wrote:
arenajunkies.com
Ever since WOTLK came out
Team liquid is starting to degenerate into that state as well
Yeah, really good comparison with what arenajunkies use to be. The difference being starcraft is actually being balanced as an E-sport; blizzard never intended for arena to be the main balance factor since their main fanbase is by an overwhelming margin-PvE raiders.
On arenajunkies they get to talk less about strategies, and more about the FOTM blizzard decides to patch.
|
On April 03 2011 03:32 Kennigit wrote:
And my axe.
LOL Kennigit! The Gimli of teamliquid.net. I love it. Looking forward to the purging of the strategy forum. Hope it doesn't result in too many sleepless nights for the mods.
|
United States22154 Posts
My report button is just itching to go into action! Its been weeks since I ventured into the strategy forums... this could be fun! ^_^
Let the purge begin!!!
|
On April 04 2011 04:44 Talack wrote:Really looking forward to this. I'll make a comparison between another site and this one arenajunkies.com In The Burning Crusade that website was an amazing source of information on how to play your WoW character in a PvP situation and how you should be reacting/specing/strategizing and why you should do it. Ever since WOTLK came out the website is 100% useless for any sort of information. People do nothing at all but complain about other classes and state stupid things like "just play better" or "you can't win? LOL". The website went from a source of good information into a total piece of crap. And it wasn't the new users fault at all, all the "veteran-posters" do the exact same thing, over and over. Team liquid is starting to degenerate into that state as well and I am really happy the moderators are taking a stand right now. Examples from a thread that just came up. Show nested quote +
correction.
All zerg units can be beaten if you micro correctly by the marine alone.
Show nested quote +1- Hellion Agreed
2- Viking - Gets owned by muta
3- Thor - Gets owned by magic box
4- Marine - Who cant win with these? That is from a thread that went up recently. That's from the first page alone. The thread is on a fast-track to the graveyard. Post like that are for the starcraft2.com forums, not for the TL.net forums.
This is a great point. I'm glad that the Strategy forum is going to be cleaned up. :D
I rarely post in the Strategy forum, but I do read it every day.
|
Looking forward to this. I could cut the time I spend on here by so much, and my marks would thank you as well ^_^.
You should also make a balance section and just ban anyone who posts there.
|
|
|
On April 04 2011 05:17 Deja Thoris wrote:
I'll be watching this with interest.
I hate to see how the usual thread goes something like this:
- "I have this great strat"
- Person X "I didn't watch the replay but...!"
- Person A "This won't work because of *mentions perfect counter*"
- Person B "This isn't new. I did it back in 1986 in the pre alpha version"
I'm a lower level player (gold) and I'd love to see strats aimed towards lower levels too. I know the majority are aimed at high level and I'd love to see that change a bit.
Yes, yes, yes!!
Your person A ESPECIALLY gets on my nerves...! Every single time, the thread goes almost exactly how you put it, but that person A makes me want to break my monitor ;;
Seriously, even worse is when that person, after reading just the OP, states, "you can try to do that to me, but I will do X, Y, Z" (a.k.a. your perfect counter). The reason this is even more irritating is that he is almost making a personal attack on the OP who created the strat/build by stating that "YOU CANNOT" do this build to me because I will use [perfect counter]. Then, the OP feels obligated to reply in some way, and the flames begin to rise...
Will be awaiting the purge :3
|
We should maintain a list of links to especially bad topics/posts as a wall of shame/reference we can use :D
|
On April 03 2011 02:32 zatic wrote:
9 Start theorycrafting and discussing changes to the game
I presume the difference between experimental strategy and theorycrafting here would be the inclusion of replays of the strategy, rather than empty discussion without any examples of its application?
|
Zatic, you instantly became my hero. This is the kind of administration I want to see more of from TL across all forums.
Thank you for your hard work,
pun
|
On April 04 2011 10:58 ManOfScience wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2011 02:32 zatic wrote:
9 Start theorycrafting and discussing changes to the game
I presume the difference between experimental strategy and theorycrafting here would be the inclusion of replays of the strategy, rather than empty discussion without any examples of its application?
Ya, generally if you have replays to back up what you are talking about you should be safe.
|
This is the best thing I have seen on the strategy forums in a long time. I too am guilty of making not the best OP, but I really, REALLY like rules 2, 6, and 9.
Those alone will make a significant improvement in the post quality here.
So many people just barge in with their first line as "well I didn't watch the replay but....." in a thread where the OP has clearly outlined that watching the replay before posting is critical to your understanding.
Be very, very drunk my friend. The banlist will be a good read.
|
If mods are busting out the banhammer, can they go after people who say "your macro was bad" without saying what about the players' macro was bad/why macro lost them the game, or who ignore specific requests for help from the OP with battle tactics in favor of "oh you had 3 workers queued consistently starting at the 9:30 mark and you were supply blocked for fourseconds while your depot was finishing when you were at 126/126 food, that's why you lost even though you had a 20 food advantage at the start of the battle; go work on your macro until it's perfect and forget about fighting"? 'Cause that s*** is bush league.
On April 03 2011 08:25 Aequos wrote:
Out of curiosity, what determines the quality of the advice given in borderline cases? For example, if someone had suggested 1 gate FE in PvT back at the release of SC2, people would have called him crazy, and his advice would have seemed useless. However, now it's a build that at least is available as an option in PvT as it can hold off most bio plays. Likewise, people wouldn't have dared face a Zerg in a macro game back in the early days following the release, but now it is the standard for playing PvZ. Is the usefulness of the advice determined only by the current available strategies?
This sort of falls under point [9] as well, as it could relate to theorycrafting.
I agree with a lot of this; coming up with good strategies involves lots of stumbling in the dark. I look forward to digging up threads closed by overeager mods who know The Right Way To Play SC2 only to find that two months later the "wrong" advice turns out to be genius. EDIT: Okay, looking at the OP on something bigger than the phone it sounds like anyone who can back up what they have to say is probably in the clear. Still will be on the hunt for geniuses unappreciated in their time, mostly for fun though.
Someone suggested making tanks in TvP? Hahah, what a n00b, P can just make immortals & chargelots and win! Banned!
oh wait Jinro beat oGsMc with mech play? Uhhh ... these are not the droids you're looking for. Move along ...
Drinking Gatorade before you go the bed is a great way to avoid a hangover. That's all I've got on that subject.
|
what if I don't have something strategically relevant to add to a post but it's REALLY funny and/or witty, I mean involuntary knee slapping funny.
|
This sounds like an excellent idea. I do agree that there are many garbage posts in the strategy forum. Just as some of the others comments in this post, take the time to make your post worthwhile. Watch the replays, think of what you would do in that situation, and write it in such a way that it is intelligible, is relevant, and above all actually helpful and not something generic. More power to you! And have fun with your mad parties!
|
The sooner you can apply this purge to the rest of the sc2 forums (the entire forum?) the better. I love you for doing zatic, and i look forward to the progress of the strategy forum. Sometimes, we just need some Chill-style loving in here.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Chill/theproblemwiththestratforum.jpg)
Good luck.
|
Purge now for the love of God
|
|
|
yayay hurray for purge :D i'm tired of seeing a new 4-gate thread come up every week xD
|
On April 04 2011 14:23 Guppers wrote:
what if I don't have something strategically relevant to add to a post but it's REALLY funny and/or witty, I mean involuntary knee slapping funny.
Please save it for SC2 General or Blogs.
|
On April 04 2011 05:17 Deja Thoris wrote:
I'm a lower level player (gold) and I'd love to see strats aimed towards lower levels too. I know the majority are aimed at high level and I'd love to see that change a bit.
This is something I was on the fence about for a while: is there really such a thing as a 'high level' or 'low level' strategy?
Some people say scouting and timings won't work against an opponent who isn't playing at masters level; other people say that won't matter because if a strategy can beat masters level play it will beat a more imperfectly executed build in silver/gold. Then the first people say 'Sure, it'll win if you have masters-level execution yourself, but if you don't (and you don't, because you're in silver/gold), it might instead lead to a loss. To which the reply is "Then you should be working on your execution, so all is well with the world."
I'm now leaning towards the 'stick to top strategies and just work on execution' camp myself, just because it removes variables. If I lose doing something that works in Master league, at least I know I can watch the replay and see what I did to screw it up.
EDIT: Case in point, I once created a thread discussing the potential merits of a ramp hatch on Jungle Basin. The problem was, although I could make some statements about economy and larvae compared to a 14 hatch, and some substantial timing differences in terms of defending the ramp with spinecrawlers, my lack of experience meant I could only make the most tentative, limited statements about the build's overall utility. I have to accept that if I want to make meaningful contributions I need to put in the time and effort to improve first.
|
|
|
Hehe - yeah; I thought that was a pretty low-hanging fruit too
"well , solution is simple , make Vikings just "a little" more than rubbish vs Mutalisks"
"A reasonable buff to turrets/thors or a valkyrish unit could do the trick..."
"Hey, does anyone else hear that? A kind of roaring, whistling sensation like something approaching very fast; very, very fast. I wonder if it will be friends with me?"
|
On April 04 2011 18:11 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2011 05:17 Deja Thoris wrote:
I'm a lower level player (gold) and I'd love to see strats aimed towards lower levels too. I know the majority are aimed at high level and I'd love to see that change a bit. This is something I was on the fence about for a while: is there really such a thing as a 'high level' or 'low level' strategy?
Speaking as someone who had a 30% win rate in bronze for his first 50 games and is now high platinum with a 65% win rate over my last 50 games, you have to learn how to deal with a different set of things in at the low levels. You see more cheese and more turtling; usually the turtlers are trying to tech to mass BCs/Void Rays or mothership/colossus/carriers or whatnot. "Just macro a giant bioball/mass stalkers/whatever" isn't enough; you have to learn a thing or two about unit composition and army control to win these games in less than 45 minutes.
|
Please be gentle my intentions are good O_O
|
I'm glad for this as long as the dumbasses on TL stay away. The only bad thing about it is scaring the new members of TL from posting because they are afraid they might break a rule and get banned.
|
So you want 1 person to write a 10 page essay on how to counter mech play from T as Z? If everyone posts small words of advice, it will be better than 20 guys each posting a page long essay.
|
On April 05 2011 02:21 Dismantlethethroat wrote:
So you want 1 person to write a 10 page essay on how to counter mech play from T as Z? If everyone posts small words of advice, it will be better than 20 guys each posting a page long essay.
No. Because if 100 idiots post the same thing over and over that come to their minds first. It's never as good as if someone takes some time and posts a well thought out statement with examples and explanations.
|
On April 05 2011 02:21 Dismantlethethroat wrote:
So you want 1 person to write a 10 page essay on how to counter mech play from T as Z?
If that one person knows what he's talking about, provides replays, and covers the subject in-depth - I'm struggling to see that as anything other than awesome.
If everyone posts small words of advice, it will be better than 20 guys each posting a page long essay.
If one guy posts a comprehensive response, why would 19 others need to do the same?
The point is, we've seen what 'everyone posting small words of advice' looks like - and it's a mess. People posting small words of advice often don't watch replays before doing so (remarkably there seems to be a correlation between not having time to watch a replay and not having time to write a substantive post), and consequently miss the actual problem someone is having. Arguments between them and those who have watched the replays clutter up threads still further - and those are the good threads. Small words of advice - although sometimes brilliantly concise - are often little more than generic truisms concerning unit counters.
|
I hope this brings forth some elaborate "how to xxx-guides" from the pros. I remember starting out in BW 1000years ago and reading Zerg guides written by mondragon and the likes. Was interesting and educative.
GLHF Zatic ^^
|
So I just got my report button, and am kinda scared I'm being too harsh with reports. I dunno where to post this, so I think here would be best. Anyways, if anyone happens to read this that is annoyed with my reports, let me knows plz?
|
you'll get a pm if you abuse it.
I feel the same way as you though. I got my report button in January and I've made rather sparing use of it...don't like feeling like a snitch, so I only report posters that I feel no community connection to.
|
On April 05 2011 07:14 CecilSunkure wrote:So I just got my report button, and am kinda scared I'm being too harsh with reports. I dunno where to post this, so I think here would be best. Anyways, if anyone happens to read this that is annoyed with my reports, let me knows plz?
Don't abuse it. We'll tell you if you're being annoying.
|
Finally!
Good changes.. been to much bad quality posts lately.
Keep up the good work.
|
On April 05 2011 07:35 Saracen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 07:14 CecilSunkure wrote:So I just got my report button, and am kinda scared I'm being too harsh with reports. I dunno where to post this, so I think here would be best. Anyways, if anyone happens to read this that is annoyed with my reports, let me knows plz? Don't abuse it. We'll tell you if you're being annoying.
What is this report button you speak of Saracen?
|
|
|
On April 05 2011 09:29 redFF wrote:
it begins...
Its not a werewolf game :p
Though it would be fun to sow paranoia in the ranks.
|
|
|
On April 05 2011 09:25 Bair wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 07:35 Saracen wrote:On April 05 2011 07:14 CecilSunkure wrote:So I just got my report button, and am kinda scared I'm being too harsh with reports. I dunno where to post this, so I think here would be best. Anyways, if anyone happens to read this that is annoyed with my reports, let me knows plz? Don't abuse it. We'll tell you if you're being annoying. What is this report button you speak of Saracen?
Once you have been here for a year there will appear a Report button at the top of every post.
|
Every good forum needs a dictator, Heil zatic! (-:
|
If only I could help! Thank you zatic-
|
On April 05 2011 07:35 Saracen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 07:14 CecilSunkure wrote:So I just got my report button, and am kinda scared I'm being too harsh with reports. I dunno where to post this, so I think here would be best. Anyways, if anyone happens to read this that is annoyed with my reports, let me knows plz? Don't abuse it. We'll tell you if you're being annoying.
I'm pretty sure he was only asking if the rate that he's been reporting is okay, or if he should cut it back a little.
|
Could you give an example of a good post?
|
This looks like a pretty bad post to me...
link to post
I know the strategy forum is a place where nothing will ever work against anyone good, but seriously, saying this about a useful micro trick?
|
On April 05 2011 09:25 Bair wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 07:35 Saracen wrote:On April 05 2011 07:14 CecilSunkure wrote:So I just got my report button, and am kinda scared I'm being too harsh with reports. I dunno where to post this, so I think here would be best. Anyways, if anyone happens to read this that is annoyed with my reports, let me knows plz? Don't abuse it. We'll tell you if you're being annoying. What is this report button you speak of Saracen?
You need a certain amount of posts I think to get a report button.
|
|
|
Bring the ban hammer! Some of the posts on this forum are of the absolute highest quality and it's depressing to see them get lost in all the noise/nonsense.
On that note may I suggest egregious failure to use the search function as another rule to be enforced in the purge? It's annoying to see a new OP on a topic while there is a developed thread on the same topic still open or easily findable using the search function. This is part of the reason that great posts get pushed off the first page so fast. For instance someone today just posted a generic "what can I do to get better" while Cecilsunkure's great guide was still visible on the recent threads list. I feel like OPs like that ought to at least be warned to do some looking first.
|
Enjoy the thought behind cleaning up the useless drivel inhabiting a good portion of the posts on the TeamLiquid.net Strategy Forums! Keep up the good work!
|
I don't know... it seems like there are quite a few replies from people that hadn't thought of it. Many of the replies are useless, of course, but as to the OP - it is simple, yes, but is pretty useful to a newbie like myself and not necessarily common sense. AND the OP spent time and thought on the post including pictures. Seems like that may be exactly the kind of post (and poster) you want to include in the strategy forums...
|
Hi Zatic;
I was wondering if you would be able to explain why this thread was closed.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=209806
This is not my thread, I am just concerened that the purge might be going a bit far here. In the OP he explains that he is not asking for "What I could have done better", he is asking an open ended strategy related question.
The question is "How do you guys deal with burrowed roaches as toss"
The Mod stomped in and closed the thread based on the fact that there is no replay. I can see why a replay is necessary in most cases as most question are "Why did I lose? or What did I do wrong?"
In this case, the OP asks a general question and wants to discuss Strategy, not any particular game.
I like the idea of solid quality content that TL strives for. And I believe there is some merit and quality generated by discussing the game as a whole, as oppose to 1 particular game/replay.
Zatic, do you agree with this thread being closed?
|
United States22154 Posts
On April 07 2011 02:31 RoachyRoach wrote:Hi Zatic; I was wondering if you would be able to explain why this thread was closed. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=209806This is not my thread, I am just concerened that the purge might be going a bit far here. In the OP he explains that he is not asking for "What I could have done better", he is asking an open ended strategy related question. The question is "How do you guys deal with burrowed roaches as toss" The Mod stomped in and closed the thread based on the fact that there is no replay. I can see why a replay is necessary in most cases as most question are "Why did I lose? or What did I do wrong?" In this case, the OP asks a general question and wants to discuss Strategy, not any particular game. I like the idea of solid quality content that TL strives for. And I believe there is some merit and quality generated by discussing the game as a whole, as oppose to 1 particular game/replay. Zatic, do you agree with this thread being closed?
I realize this is directed at Zatic, but I'll answer it anyway ^_^
I agree with it being closed, the reason why we demand replays is because people often think they have an issue with one thing, while its really another. For example, maybe the issue he is having with burrowed roaches is that he lacks enough stalker to put out DPS against the roaches, or perhaps his robo timing is off and he needs a faster robo to get immortals. Without a replay we don't know what his issue with the roaches really is.
Also general questions such as "What build counters X" have generally been answered before and or should be asked in the general question thread, I mean theres usually a straight up answer to such questions that dont require a thread.
Just my two cents, I'll be glad to hear what zatic thinks
|
On April 07 2011 02:38 GMarshal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 02:31 RoachyRoach wrote:Hi Zatic; I was wondering if you would be able to explain why this thread was closed. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=209806This is not my thread, I am just concerened that the purge might be going a bit far here. In the OP he explains that he is not asking for "What I could have done better", he is asking an open ended strategy related question. The question is "How do you guys deal with burrowed roaches as toss" The Mod stomped in and closed the thread based on the fact that there is no replay. I can see why a replay is necessary in most cases as most question are "Why did I lose? or What did I do wrong?" In this case, the OP asks a general question and wants to discuss Strategy, not any particular game. I like the idea of solid quality content that TL strives for. And I believe there is some merit and quality generated by discussing the game as a whole, as oppose to 1 particular game/replay. Zatic, do you agree with this thread being closed? I realize this is directed at Zatic, but I'll answer it anyway ^_^ I agree with it being closed, the reason why we demand replays is because people often think they have an issue with one thing, while its really another. For example, maybe the issue he is having with burrowed roaches is that he lacks enough stalker to put out DPS against the roaches, or perhaps his robo timing is off and he needs a faster robo to get immortals. Without a replay we don't know what his issue with the roaches really is. Also general questions such as "What build counters X" have generally been answered before and or should be asked in the general question thread, I mean theres usually a straight up answer to such questions that dont require a thread. Just my two cents, I'll be glad to hear what zatic thinks
I see your point.
I just always feel bad when people have legitimate questions, and get thier thread closed without getting any helpful answer. Perhaps mods could be more helpful when closing a thread, i.e. "Your question is not unique, please refer to (thread) for discussion and replay analysis regarding your question."
|
How much more of an answer could you want? The counter to any invisible units is detection. Also, immortals counter roaches. You don't need a teamliquid thread to tell you either of those. For anything else, that's what the replay rule is for.
|
On April 07 2011 03:38 iamke55 wrote:
How much more of an answer could you want? The counter to any invisible units is detection. Also, immortals counter roaches. You don't need a teamliquid thread to tell you either of those. For anything else, that's what the replay rule is for.
I did not intend to defile this thread with specifics. Long story short, he was a reletivly high level player, looking for some high level discussion. Not specific counters or BOs. To me, it seemed he wanted to discuss mindset, and key factors pertaining to the PvZ matchup given the BOs.
But I understand why the replay rule exists. Im not retarded. I see special cases though where BOs/Counters are already given/implied. There is more to Starcraft than the right units and the right BOs.
As a side note, I'm always surprised at how egotistical Starcraft players are in general. Do you think that your out of place shpiel about detection vs roachs has anything to do with my point? No it doesn't, and you know it doesn't. In fact, short sighted points like that is why I believe this purge is being undergone in the first place. You just want to get your 2 cents in and appear as the superior tactician.
Again, I dont care about his question. But rather the wellbeing of the strategy forum.
Am I out of line here?
Edit: I believe that his thread would fall under the guidlines here.
[Q] Question threads
Ask for help with or against a specific strategy
In a [Q] thread you may ask about a specific, situational strategy, whether that is executing it yourself of playing against it. It is very important that you keep these threads specific. A general "How to FE against Zerg?" is not acceptable. This is the most important distinction from the [H] threads. As with [H] thread you must post one or several replays.
Post some analysis of the problem, and what you have tried so far. This not only avoids redundant advice but also shows people you have put some effort into this yourself.
As with the [H] threads, it makes it a lot easier to help you if you ask a couple of specific questions regarding the strategy you are unsure about.
|
Thanks for taking the time to do something like this, it was due for a while now.
|
I was a well deserved victim here. My posts are normally pretty good, but I wrote a pretty shitty one and got banned for it, and I admit that.
|
I really like this change. If a forum gets out of hand it serves no purpose, just look at the official forums for wow. (probebly the worst forums in the gamingworld). And since I also play wow my mind goes to www.elitistjerks.com
They are probebly the harshest in the wow community on forumposters about their conduct and posting. And as a result of that they have some of the best forums I have ever seen. Everybody is nice and if you make a bad post you get banned and the post deleted. This is supposed to be a strategy forum and if you are not harsh about what people post then the general quality really suffers.
I just have a question regarding the Index of the forums. Is it not possible to make it a meny that splits everything up in sub categories (maybe to much work), so that it is easier to navigate the post list?
Thank you Zatic for making my day
|
On April 07 2011 08:28 GKSE wrote:
I really like this change. If a forum gets out of hand it serves no purpose, just look at the official forums for wow. (probebly the worst forums in the gamingworld). And since I also play wow my mind goes to www.elitistjerks.com
First, no, the official wow forums are not even close to the "worst forums in the gamingworld." It's just because experienced players like to bash on people new to the game or who don't understand things perfectly. That's OK. That's what a forum is for.
Elitistjerks.com - Lol, yup, and their forums are completely dead. The ruthless moderation techniques are a good way to lose your community. There is no "community" at elitistjerks. People go there, read the thread for their class, and leave. Until you get to the level of elitistjerks in terms of crushing all forum thread starts, you will have complaints about the threads started. Question is if the site owner thinks no discussion is better than discussion that doesn't perfectly fit the mold of "new, interesting, unique, high level, amazing" all at the same time in order to warrant a thread start.
|
Hey zatic, I recently got warned for something I wasn't sure of. I made a thread about it on the Website Feedback forums, over here.
Was I warned by you? If so, then I understand why I got warned, as I realize after going over my post that I only complimented the OP, and didn't contribute to the thread. But I still am not sure.
I am only asking for an explanation to why I got warned, and am not complaining or asking for my record to be cleared. Thank you in advance.
|
Zurich15326 Posts
Agreed. OP describes games with his usual build. There is absolutely no reason not to post a replay to make clear what exaclty he is struggling with.
Regarding [Q] threads generally I wanted to get rid of those entirely for a while now as mostly they turn out bad anyway.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Good work Zatic; some nights I can't find a coherent sentence in this forum.
|
Good luck, this is a huge task! I wish I was on TL so I could help with these things!
|
United States4126 Posts
I love you zatic <3
I hope this post contributed to the thread.
|
I like where this is going.
> : 3
|
So often I'm dreaming about a useful Strategy Forums, but everyday when I wake up, I go on TeamLiquid and notice the same kind of atrocities.
If this purge is to work and turns the brothel of posts spamming it actually is, into a quality Strategy Forum, at least one of my dream will be fulfilled.
|
On April 03 2011 02:43 Selkie wrote:
I very strongly like this.
Question: What about not reading the thread, just the OP? For example, I recently made a thread on 15 CC TvP. First few posts asked about a 3 gate contain, and it was quickly refuted that it would not work. Constantly, through the rest of the thread, people were asking about 3 gate contain. Would this sort of behavior also warrant a warning?
In your case you should have edited the OP to meat the popular demand on 3 gate contain question, instead you are arguing to issue warnings to the people you are "trying to help".
|
Best. Thing. Ever.
Keep it up. This is why TL is awesome. I just wish some other gaming forums would have a similar policy.
|
Good stuff. I'd like to see this as well:
11. name threads or strategies after yourself.
Truly most annoying thing there is.
|
Hyrule19050 Posts
Sometimes it's not that bad. Take for example iEchoic. The two builds named after him are just descriptions of the build in short form. "iEchoic's TvT build" is much simpler to say than "2-fact 2-port Hellion/Banshee/Viking". Not a problem either, since he completely developed the build from the ground up.
Where it's bad is when someone comes along and says "Hey guys this new build is awesome. You make a rax at 12 and expand at 20 and it's called the 'tofucake build'" ...well no it's just the 1 rax fe.
So there are times when it's acceptable to name a build after yourself.
|
|
|
On April 08 2011 23:18 tofucake wrote:
Sometimes it's not that bad. Take for example iEchoic. The two builds named after him are just descriptions of the build in short form. "iEchoic's TvT build" is much simpler to say than "2-fact 2-port Hellion/Banshee/Viking". Not a problem either, since he completely developed the build from the ground up.
Where it's bad is when someone comes along and says "Hey guys this new build is awesome. You make a rax at 12 and expand at 20 and it's called the 'tofucake build'" ...well no it's just the 1 rax fe.
So there are times when it's acceptable to name a build after yourself.
Well... if I ever see a weird delayed 1 Rax FE, I'm calling it the Tofucake build.
Man, the Closed Thread forum is getting longer and longer lol.
|
Cheerio, I was hoping that people would read the first page at least. The OP did get edited to boot.
|
I have to agree with everything except theory crafting, as that is an essential part of discussing strategies, theory crafting about game changes is less helpful though.
|
Zurich15326 Posts
On April 08 2011 22:37 Markwerf wrote:
Good stuff. I'd like to see this as well:
11. name threads or strategies after yourself.
Truly most annoying thing there is.
Hey ...
Zatic Build is still the best TvP opening out there.
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On April 09 2011 08:21 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2011 22:37 Markwerf wrote:
Good stuff. I'd like to see this as well:
11. name threads or strategies after yourself.
Truly most annoying thing there is. Hey ... Zatic Build is still the best TvP opening out there.
if anything, at least it's the oldest strat that Artosis still talks about on gsl lol
|
Good god, this might actually bring some legitimacy back to the strategy boards. Hope this newfound motivation of yours can last for a while zatic. Love the initiative. Best of luck!
|
On April 03 2011 03:32 Kennigit wrote:
And my axe.
And my bow
|
edit: read the other first, good call.
|
Look at the timestamps. He made his first.
|
On April 09 2011 01:41 Selkie wrote:
Cheerio, I was hoping that people would read the first page at least. The OP did get edited to boot.
I dont get it. Why first page? Why not 3 or 10 or half the page? The point is usually guide threads are pretty pointless and utter waste of time, even if the guide itself is extremely good. 75% posts will be about how good or interesting it is and thanks thanks thanks. Do you really want to force people going through all of that? And what if the guide thread is 40 pages long? The only kind of threads that this rule can apply is discussion threads, and even than not the entire thread but some number of LAST pages to make sure you are following the discussion.
|
On April 08 2011 22:37 Markwerf wrote:
Good stuff. I'd like to see this as well:
11. name threads or strategies after yourself.
Truly most annoying thing there is.
This suggestion is an insult to the Tasteless build.
-_-
|
On April 09 2011 06:50 CatNzHat wrote:
I have to agree with everything except theory crafting, as that is an essential part of discussing strategies, theory crafting about game changes is less helpful though.
No it's not. Theorycrafting is an easy way to get yourself trapped in circular logic, and in the end nothing is accomplished and a whole lot of people get pissed off. Take for example:
Some generic Platinum Zerg posts about how Terran is overpowered and it's impossible to stop Marine Tank pushes. He fails to post a replay and/or analyze any of his games, he just describes how unstoppable this push is and how unbeatable these units are.
The first few posters tell him that early baneling speed helps greatly with these kinds of pushes:
"NO BANELINGS GET TAKEN OUT BY TANKS"
The next few posters tell him that early melee upgrades for Zerglings make them much more efficient against Marine/Tank:
"NO STIM MARINES WITH TANK SUPPORT ANNIHILATE ZERGLINGS"
The final few posters, before zatic/Saracen bring the pain, tell him to get Mutalisks faster to cut off reinforcements or pick off stray tanks:
"ARE U SRS? STIM MARINES RAPE MUTALISKS"
Only by uploading his own replays for people to critique and give specific examples, or by people posting evidence of their own can this wee little Platinum Zerg learn that he needs to flank, do runbys, get a good surround, and in general have better tactics. Theorycrafting, unless you are trying to revolutionize the metagame, which happens rarely, is pretty useless.
Concrete examples/evidence, most often in the form of replays, are how help/discussion threads become...helpful.
|
Um this thread is disappearing into the depths of the strategy forum. It would be ironic except that the threads above it are actually really good. Maybe a sticky so it sits next to Saracen's thread?
|
On April 12 2011 10:47 Probulous wrote:
Um this thread is disappearing into the depths of the strategy forum. It would be ironic except that the threads above it are actually really good. Maybe a sticky so it sits next to Saracen's thread?
It was a sticky, I think they unstickied it because of Saracen's thread. No reason really for this since Saracen's thread gives all the details about what will get you BANNED.
|
On April 03 2011 02:34 ForTheDr3am wrote:
Does 8 mean theorycrafting about changes in the game or theorycrafting in general?
Start theorycrafting and discussing changes to the game.
The answer is both. I can't imagine anyone would ban you for theorycrafting unless you are talking rubbish and just making stuff up.
I think the point is that if you post it needs to be substantive
You need a replay, it must not be full of bad macro and really obvious failings. You need to describe what you are doing ... if a bit of theorycrafting to explain what you are doing makes sense then it probably wont get banned.
But if you just post theory then its useless waffle that an be executed in many different ways simply due to timings.
Theorycrafting does not necessitate then screaming imba and wanting changes. However things moved away from the OP ....
Theorycrafting can easily cover strategy because it can be used to help with critical path analysis and swapping the order of buildings for instance. I am thinking of arguments for and against building rax with no addons vs building addons early. The point is that if you do theorycraft something like this you need DATA to back it up adn the real problem with data is getting significant sample sizes.
I think the point is that if you are doing a theorycraft post then you are probably not making a good contribution because there is a lot more you need to include to make it useful to other people - really you are hoping someone else will put in the work testing the theory.
|
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators.
|
Zurich15326 Posts
On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
No you can't. That would be pretty insulting towards the OP who made an effort to create a thread and post a replay.
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
All you need to do is type in proper English. You seem to have no problem with that and it's certainly not too much to ask of anyone.
|
I don't agree on theory crafting always being bad. Proposing untried methods of dealing with certain situations is different from suggesting stupid game changing stuff like "zerglings should fly".
And yes TL posters should use proper language and formulation. "Typing like 14 year old girls" might not be the best way to put it though 
However most moderation I've seen on TL is actually really good (except when you warn me for trolling the balance threads TT ...JK)
|
On April 13 2011 21:49 Cibron wrote:
I don't agree on theory crafting always being bad. Proposing untried methods of dealing with certain situations is different from suggesting stupid game changing stuff like "zerglings should fly".
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.
|
On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators.
1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then.
2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible.
Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game.
|
I've read your frustration before and feel bad. I feel one reason there are so many people over posting and posting for no/bad reasons if the fact that it shows your number of posts. Anytime people can be measured by a number as opposed to their comments content they will spam comments till they have a big number. If you get rid of the number of posts, or at least hide it, I feel this will reduce the number of pointless posts.
|
On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators.
From TL.net 10 Commandments which I'm sure you've read and keep close to your heart.
1. THIS IS OUR HOUSE
You are our guests. We will make all attempts to treat everyone with due respect and to accommodate everyone's wishes as far as reasonably possible. But, this is a private site. We are not a "for profit" enterprise. We are not funded by any governments. This means we run the site the way we see fit. We are not obligated to observe anyone's notions of "free speech" or even "fairness." We try of course, and that's why we're consistently considered one of the best gaming sites on the web, and you are always free to give us suggestions (Website Feedback Forum). But, we have our limits. If we don't like you, we simply IP ban you. If we're really pissed off, then we IP ban you AND nuke every single post you've uploaded to the site - ever. It will be as if you had never existed here. This is our house. You've been warned.
I see no problem with it. It's only proper that people who reply and post in threads give as much or more thought in their responses as the OP put into theirs. This isn't 4chan or battle.net. This is TL. Standards are higher here
Also, people who post in choppy English have never been looked down upon. In fact, the mods have even defended people who make an attempt to type in proper English from the internet trolls that complain about their ESL skills. The problem is when people typ liek d1s in 4tt3rly unr3adabl3 txt sp4k th4t hurts your eyes or has the grammar skills of an utter idiot even though it's clear they can do better. It's quite obvious when someone's poor English is a result of them not having English as their first language and when they're just being a lazy dick. The former is understandable and is okay; the latter is not.
|
On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game.
I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post.
all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so .
However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions.
Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical.
I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!"
which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums.
|
Strategos if your really that inflamed, go start a revolution somewhere. The rules are there for a reason and yes, there might be a few less useful posts on some topics because you must watch the replay first, but there will be a LOT less dumbass responses that make everyone who reads them stupider.
|
Strategos, the problem with your thinking the rules being enforced will inhibit people from posting in the strategy forum is that most of the "altruism like offering advice and suggestions" is just flat out BAD advice. Enforcing of these rules, while it may reduce the quantity of strategy posts, will (hopefully) greatly add to the quality of each post.
|
Strategos, there are pages upon pages of useless strategy information in each thread. Would you rather it be a very high quality discussion (due to the new TL rules), or would you rather have to sift through hundreds of useless posts by people that are trying to help with the kindness of their hearts but actually have no idea what they are talking about.
|
On April 14 2011 08:48 dmillz wrote:
Strategos if your really that inflamed, go start a revolution somewhere. The rules are there for a reason and yes, there might be a few less useful posts on some topics because you must watch the replay first, but there will be a LOT less dumbass responses that make everyone who reads them stupider.
This is not about being inflamed, this is about contributing to a potential solution to our problem.
On April 14 2011 08:55 Azrael22 wrote:
Strategos, the problem with your thinking the rules being enforced will inhibit people from posting in the strategy forum is that most of the "altruism like offering advice and suggestions" is just flat out BAD advice. Enforcing of these rules, while it may reduce the quantity of strategy posts, will (hopefully) greatly add to the quality of each post.
I totally agree with you there is bad advice on the stratergy forums. I however dont think this is the way to deal with it. You wouldn't burn your entire crop field to get rid of some diseased plants would you? Why not? because you would be destroy all the good plants that are there, and that is what i'm afraid of happening in this process.
|
On April 14 2011 08:39 Strategos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game. I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post. all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so . However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions. Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical. I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!" which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums.
Not sure why you're so upset to be honest. I'm not claiming to be any expert on age/social demographics, just stating that being politically correct is overrated and it's impossible to understand teenagers these days when they text/write something on the internet. Also you fail to address what zatic said in response to your post, which was something along the lines of: doesn't it seem a little rude to respond to somebody who takes a good amount of time to upload replays and analyze their play with "sorry I didn't watch the replay, but you should do XXX anyways" It doesn't matter how in-depth you think you're being, chances are half of the stuff you talk about doesn't apply. Watch the damn replay.
The new enforcement may indeed eliminate some helpful posters who don't really want to put any time into examining replays, but it eliminates a LOT of the random garbage that people post for the sake of posting. If you really disagree with it so much, I don't know what to tell you except look elsewhere for your Starcraft 2 knowledge. It's obvious TL wants a different environment than you do.
You'll find that people who ask for help in a coherent, well thought-out, self-critical way get similar responses from people who will take the time to watch their replays and tell them what went wrong. The altruism is still there we're just going for better post content.
|
On April 14 2011 09:18 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 08:39 Strategos wrote:On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game. I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post. all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so . However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions. Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical. I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!" which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums. Not sure why you're so upset to be honest. I'm not claiming to be any expert on age/social demographics, just stating that being politically correct is overrated and it's impossible to understand teenagers these days when they text/write something on the internet. Also you fail to address what zatic said in response to your post, which was something along the lines of: doesn't it seem a little rude to respond to somebody who takes a good amount of time to upload replays and analyze their play with "sorry I didn't watch the replay, but you should do XXX anyways" It doesn't matter how in-depth you think you're being, chances are half of the stuff you talk about doesn't apply. Watch the damn replay. The new enforcement may indeed eliminate some helpful posters who don't really want to put any time into examining replays, but it eliminates a LOT of the random garbage that people post for the sake of posting. If you really disagree with it so much, I don't know what to tell you except look elsewhere for your Starcraft 2 knowledge. It's obvious TL wants a different environment than you do. You'll find that people who ask for help in a coherent, well thought-out, self-critical way get similar responses from people who will take the time to watch their replays and tell them what went wrong. The altruism is still there we're just going for better post content.
this has nothing to do with being "politically correct". You are making sweeping generalizations that are well...simply not true. Also that they are tremendously insulting to people who are these "teenagers who are impossible to understand".
"it obvious TL wants a different environment than you do".
that is so far from true. I am just presenting what i see as potential problems with instituting such a policy. If it turns out this is will be an effective way to improve the content, IM ALL FOR IT. I just think it may not, and I am concerned about the fallout of this new policy.
|
On April 06 2011 11:18 Nonei wrote:I don't know... it seems like there are quite a few replies from people that hadn't thought of it. Many of the replies are useless, of course, but as to the OP - it is simple, yes, but is pretty useful to a newbie like myself and not necessarily common sense. AND the OP spent time and thought on the post including pictures. Seems like that may be exactly the kind of post (and poster) you want to include in the strategy forums...
I wasn't aware that you could que up the retreat back into the medivac and fly away without ever having to go back and micro it. Simple but not obvious and I'm betting a lot of people didn't know queing could do that much so efficiently. Until now I still tried to micro each individual drop and had to go back to each and reload in the medivac. Im glad I read this thread so I could find that one lol.
|
On April 13 2011 21:49 Cibron wrote:
I don't agree on theory crafting always being bad. Proposing untried methods of dealing with certain situations is different from suggesting stupid game changing stuff like "zerglings should fly".
Just suggesting some random strategy without trying it is silly and just evidence of a lazy poster. At least try it out and put some effort in before you post. Otherwise it's just as useless as those threads titled "What do you think of colossus?" and the OP reads like "I think they're really good, what do you guys think?"
|
On April 14 2011 09:35 Strategos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 09:18 ZasZ. wrote:On April 14 2011 08:39 Strategos wrote:On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game. I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post. all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so . However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions. Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical. I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!" which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums. Not sure why you're so upset to be honest. I'm not claiming to be any expert on age/social demographics, just stating that being politically correct is overrated and it's impossible to understand teenagers these days when they text/write something on the internet. Also you fail to address what zatic said in response to your post, which was something along the lines of: doesn't it seem a little rude to respond to somebody who takes a good amount of time to upload replays and analyze their play with "sorry I didn't watch the replay, but you should do XXX anyways" It doesn't matter how in-depth you think you're being, chances are half of the stuff you talk about doesn't apply. Watch the damn replay. The new enforcement may indeed eliminate some helpful posters who don't really want to put any time into examining replays, but it eliminates a LOT of the random garbage that people post for the sake of posting. If you really disagree with it so much, I don't know what to tell you except look elsewhere for your Starcraft 2 knowledge. It's obvious TL wants a different environment than you do. You'll find that people who ask for help in a coherent, well thought-out, self-critical way get similar responses from people who will take the time to watch their replays and tell them what went wrong. The altruism is still there we're just going for better post content. this has nothing to do with being "politically correct". You are making sweeping generalizations that are well...simply not true. Also that they are tremendously insulting to people who are these "teenagers who are impossible to understand". "it obvious TL wants a different environment than you do". that is so far from true. I am just presenting what i see as potential problems with instituting such a policy. If it turns out this is will be an effective way to improve the content, IM ALL FOR IT. I just think it may not, and I am concerned about the fallout of this new policy.
The problem is that 90% of the OPs really do not detail what went wrong in the replay. They'll say "oh, it was a marine marauder push at 6:25 that killed me" but when watching the replay, you'll notice they had a lot more flaws than the obvious "you need to forcefield better" advice. Perhaps the person did forcefield perfectly, but only had a single sentry when the push came. Perhaps he failed a proxy cheese, but didn't want to tell us this because cheese is considered a bad thing. Perhaps he lost all his probes to a reaper, and thats why he couldn't fight off the push.
The short description they give us is really not a good description at all. "Having problems with Colossus" could translate to anything from "two-base Colossus/stalker turtle" to "mined out the map base race." You can't give advice like "build more corruptors" or "nydus more" or "harass more with mutalisks" because you don't know what situation he was in, how he got there, or what solution you would've taken were you there. Should he have gotten an earlier spire, or was something wrong with his drone production.
My opinion is that unless you read the OP, and watch the replay, there really is nothing useful you can contribute that liquipedia could not. Anyone can go look up a counter to a unit - it takes someone analyzing it to show a better way to do it.
Edit: Thank you for the kind words Dhalphir.
|
On April 14 2011 08:39 Strategos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game. I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post. all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so . However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions. Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical. I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!" which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums.
Way to be overdramatic over your 100 post history on TL.net. No-one would care if you left, if TL needed every person they could get they wouldn't be actively banning bad posters. Because that's what's happening, people who ruin the strategy forums by bad posting are getting banned as to show it is no longer accepted. TL is doing YOU a favor by hosting this great site, not the other way around, as such it's called THEIR HOUSE.
It all really isn't that hard to understand, but some people just seem to be born to complain about everything that happens on the internet, nitpicking every little detail they can even though they know there's good intentions behind them. Disgusting that people feel like they have done something significant by opening their browser and typing in the name of a site and enter, like they deserve credit for that work and are entitled to do what they desire because of it. No, people come to TL because it's the best and continues to strife towards being the best (as the purge demonstrates). You're not coming here out of the goodness of your heart, you're here because TL delivers, there's simply no equal alternative.
It's been said over and over, people who post badly in the Strategy forums are getting banned simply because there's more bad advice than vice versa, it's not the goal of the Strategy section to give incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. It's goal is to be the best tool of improvement for players of all levels across the internet and that's not going to be achieved by having large amounts of well meant, but wrong, advice floating around and concealing the factually correct replies. Asking nicely to not post if you don't actually have anything useful to say isn't working, so TL has to get out their hammer and force certain posters not to post. You can pretend they're doing it because they hate bronze leaguers or simply to abuse their moderating powers, but anyone who has been around TL for more than a month knows that's just not true.
Bottom line, if you don't post like crap you're not going to get banned. If you don't have the time to watch a replay, there's no need for you to make a post. I doesn't take a genius to see that 90% of "didn't watch the replay, but" posts are BS from the get go since they discuss builds, attacks or unit compositions that never even happen in the posted game. If you like posting in the SC2 Strategy Forums you just have to earn it by acquiring actucal SC2 strategy knowledge, if not, just read and learn from the other posters who are guaranteed to give you good advice. There's plenty of less serious threads and sections where you can drop your guard and have some fun, may I recommend NaDa's Body?
|
On April 14 2011 09:46 Saechiis wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 08:39 Strategos wrote:On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game. I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post. all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so . However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions. Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical. I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!" which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums. Way to be overdramatic over your 100 post history on TL.net. No-one would care if you left, if TL needed every person they could get they wouldn't be actively banning bad posters. Because that's what's happening, people who ruin the strategy forums by bad posting are getting banned as to show it is no longer accepted. TL is doing YOU a favor by hosting this great site, not the other way around, as such it's called THEIR HOUSE. It all really isn't that hard to understand, but some people just seem to be born to complain about everything that happens on the internet, nitpicking every little detail they can even though they know there's good intentions behind them. Disgusting that people feel like they have done something significant by opening their browser and typing in the name of a site and enter, like they deserve credit for that work and are entitled to do what they desire because of it. No, people come to TL because it's the best and continues to strife towards being the best (as the purge demonstrates). You're not coming here out of the goodness of your heart, you're here because TL delivers, there's simply no equal alternative. It's been said over and over, people who post badly in the Strategy forums are getting banned simply because there's more bad advice than vice versa, it's not the goal of the Strategy section to give incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. It's goal is to be the best tool of improvement for players of all levels across the internet and that's not going to be achieved by having large amounts of well meant, but wrong, advice floating around and concealing the factually correct replies. Asking nicely to not post if you don't actually have anything useful to say isn't working, so TL has to get out their hammer and force certain posters not to post. You can pretend they're doing it because they hate bronze leaguers or simply to abuse their moderating powers, but anyone who has been around TL for more than a month knows that's just not true. Bottom line, if you don't post like crap you're not going to get banned. If you don't have the time to watch a replay, there's no need for you to make a post. I doesn't take a genius to see that 90% of "didn't watch the replay, but" posts are BS from the get go since they discuss builds, attacks or unit compositions that never even happen in the posted game. If you like posting in the SC2 Strategy Forums you just have to earn it by acquiring actucal SC2 strategy knowledge, if not, just read and learn from the other posters who are guaranteed to give you good advice. There's plenty of less serious threads and sections where you can drop your guard and have some fun, may I recommend NaDa's Body?
I'm sorry it seems like you have totally misunderstood my post, that is quite unfortunate, maybe you can re-read it more carefully.
Interesting point you make, "TL is doing YOU a favor". No doubt TL is doing all of us a favor, but isn't TL All of us as well? Or are some of the posters here "TL" and others are not? if so who is TL and who isn't? I don't really understand your point. 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, does that disgust you? If so then maybe the problem is with you.
But you are damn right in one point. "You're not coming here out of the goodness of your heart, you're here because TL delivers, there's simply no equal alternative." I could not agree more, and i think that is why most ppl enjoy comming to TL, because it delivers quality content. Thus it makes even more sense for me to want TL to do WELL. In fact it is in my interest for TL to do well , and that is why i raise these objections, so that it may continue to do so.
I do believe I have raised reasons why this policy might be concerning to the content on TL above, if you would like you could go back and re-read them.
|
On April 14 2011 09:35 Strategos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 09:18 ZasZ. wrote:On April 14 2011 08:39 Strategos wrote:On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game. I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post. all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so . However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions. Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical. I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!" which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums. Not sure why you're so upset to be honest. I'm not claiming to be any expert on age/social demographics, just stating that being politically correct is overrated and it's impossible to understand teenagers these days when they text/write something on the internet. Also you fail to address what zatic said in response to your post, which was something along the lines of: doesn't it seem a little rude to respond to somebody who takes a good amount of time to upload replays and analyze their play with "sorry I didn't watch the replay, but you should do XXX anyways" It doesn't matter how in-depth you think you're being, chances are half of the stuff you talk about doesn't apply. Watch the damn replay. The new enforcement may indeed eliminate some helpful posters who don't really want to put any time into examining replays, but it eliminates a LOT of the random garbage that people post for the sake of posting. If you really disagree with it so much, I don't know what to tell you except look elsewhere for your Starcraft 2 knowledge. It's obvious TL wants a different environment than you do. You'll find that people who ask for help in a coherent, well thought-out, self-critical way get similar responses from people who will take the time to watch their replays and tell them what went wrong. The altruism is still there we're just going for better post content. this has nothing to do with being "politically correct". You are making sweeping generalizations that are well...simply not true. Also that they are tremendously insulting to people who are these "teenagers who are impossible to understand". "it obvious TL wants a different environment than you do". that is so far from true. I am just presenting what i see as potential problems with instituting such a policy. If it turns out this is will be an effective way to improve the content, IM ALL FOR IT. I just think it may not, and I am concerned about the fallout of this new policy.
Strategos you seem like a very smart individual, but I think you are over complicating the issue. I am sure your concerns for the state of TL is much appreciated which you could do here. TL Website Feedback That is in TL commandment 1 after all.
If you look at TL as a Physical Establishment as opposed to just a Starcraft website its a pretty simple idea. Its their place of business so they have the right to refuse service to anyone they want. Or in this case ban based on what they feel doesn't meet TL standards. If you don't like the rules they have in place then you can go somewhere else. Thats pretty cut and dry, and the majority of the people here understand this rule and will abide by it in order to continue to soak up the good knowledge and great Starcraft hub that TL is. It is the best for a reason. I am sure the staff took some of your same concerns into consideration. I remember Kennigt even saying on a SoTG that they have been thinking for months about how to clean up the forums. This wasn't a swift decision it took time and this is the choice they have made. If there is a backlash and the site becomes unpopular that will be on the TL staff's minds to ponder what happened. Unless your apart of the staff you shouldn't really worry about what might happen because of a Policy you see is to harsh. If you feel strongly about it give them feedback in the above link.
If people leave because of the policy then that is their choice. The policy doesn't say anything about them wanting to turn people away because they think your dumb. It just says this is our standard for posting in the strategy section. Abide by the standard or don't post. If you post you will be banned if you haven't done x,y, and z.
To simplify I might be able to listen to music and study. That doesn't give me the right to go into a library with my music blasting or speaking loud with my friends. The library wants a quite environment so I either be quite or go somewhere else. Pretty simple.
|
On April 14 2011 10:09 Strategos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 09:46 Saechiis wrote:On April 14 2011 08:39 Strategos wrote:On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game. I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post. all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so . However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions. Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical. I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!" which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums. Way to be overdramatic over your 100 post history on TL.net. No-one would care if you left, if TL needed every person they could get they wouldn't be actively banning bad posters. Because that's what's happening, people who ruin the strategy forums by bad posting are getting banned as to show it is no longer accepted. TL is doing YOU a favor by hosting this great site, not the other way around, as such it's called THEIR HOUSE. It all really isn't that hard to understand, but some people just seem to be born to complain about everything that happens on the internet, nitpicking every little detail they can even though they know there's good intentions behind them. Disgusting that people feel like they have done something significant by opening their browser and typing in the name of a site and enter, like they deserve credit for that work and are entitled to do what they desire because of it. No, people come to TL because it's the best and continues to strife towards being the best (as the purge demonstrates). You're not coming here out of the goodness of your heart, you're here because TL delivers, there's simply no equal alternative. It's been said over and over, people who post badly in the Strategy forums are getting banned simply because there's more bad advice than vice versa, it's not the goal of the Strategy section to give incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. It's goal is to be the best tool of improvement for players of all levels across the internet and that's not going to be achieved by having large amounts of well meant, but wrong, advice floating around and concealing the factually correct replies. Asking nicely to not post if you don't actually have anything useful to say isn't working, so TL has to get out their hammer and force certain posters not to post. You can pretend they're doing it because they hate bronze leaguers or simply to abuse their moderating powers, but anyone who has been around TL for more than a month knows that's just not true. Bottom line, if you don't post like crap you're not going to get banned. If you don't have the time to watch a replay, there's no need for you to make a post. I doesn't take a genius to see that 90% of "didn't watch the replay, but" posts are BS from the get go since they discuss builds, attacks or unit compositions that never even happen in the posted game. If you like posting in the SC2 Strategy Forums you just have to earn it by acquiring actucal SC2 strategy knowledge, if not, just read and learn from the other posters who are guaranteed to give you good advice. There's plenty of less serious threads and sections where you can drop your guard and have some fun, may I recommend NaDa's Body? I'm sorry it seems like you have totally misunderstood my post, that is quite unfortunate, maybe you can re-read it more carefully. Interesting point you make, "TL is doing YOU a favor". No doubt TL is doing all of us a favor, but isn't TL All of us as well? Or are some of the posters here "TL" and others are not? if so who is TL and who isn't? I don't really understand your point. 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, does that disgust you? If so then maybe the problem is with you. But you are damn right in one point. "You're not coming here out of the goodness of your heart, you're here because TL delivers, there's simply no equal alternative." I could not agree more, and i think that is why most ppl enjoy comming to TL, because it delivers quality content. Thus it makes even more sense for me to want TL to do WELL. In fact it is in my interest for TL to do well , and that is why i raise these objections, so that it may continue to do so. I do believe I have raised reasons why this policy might be concerning to the content on TL above, if you would like you could go back and re-read them.
The only thing you're raising is annoyance. Please open the TL.net Commandments and read that Teamliquid isn't a democracy and isn't pretending to be one. The fact that you're reverting to the argument of "isn't TL all of us as well?" implies that TL is somehow indebted for your membership, which is why I mention detesting people that feel their opinion is weighty on behalf of visiting a site. It also comes off pretentious from a 100 post user to bring up 10 years of community contributions as validation for his opinions, just because you're a part of the community doesn't mean all of the community's contributions were yours. The fact that after 100 posts you already feel entitled to call TL moderation Nazism and make condescending remarks about people who disagree with you or try to make clear that your attitude is disproportionate to your TL history, it doesn't bode well for your TL future.
As for your "concerns", the only thing I could find was you saying you like to give your thoughts without having to watch a replay, which I responded to generously:
+ Show Spoiler +It's been said over and over, people who post badly in the Strategy forums are getting banned simply because there's more bad advice than vice versa, it's not the goal of the Strategy section to give incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. It's goal is to be the best tool of improvement for players of all levels across the internet and that's not going to be achieved by having large amounts of well meant, but wrong, advice floating around and concealing the factually correct replies. Asking nicely to not post if you don't actually have anything useful to say isn't working, so TL has to get out their hammer and force certain posters not to post. You can pretend they're doing it because they hate bronze leaguers or simply to abuse their moderating powers, but anyone who has been around TL for more than a month knows that's just not true.
Bottom line, if you don't post like crap you're not going to get banned. If you don't have the time to watch a replay, there's no need for you to make a post. I doesn't take a genius to see that 90% of "didn't watch the replay, but" posts are BS from the get go since they discuss builds, attacks or unit compositions that never even happen in the posted game. If you like posting in the SC2 Strategy Forums you just have to earn it by acquiring actucal SC2 strategy knowledge, if not, just read and learn from the other posters who are guaranteed to give you good advice.
Maybe you read over it whilst pondering over philisosophical questions like Who is TL? and claiming I haven't read your overarching "concerns".
|
On April 14 2011 11:50 Saechiis wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 10:09 Strategos wrote:On April 14 2011 09:46 Saechiis wrote:On April 14 2011 08:39 Strategos wrote:On April 14 2011 04:32 ZasZ. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:00 Strategos wrote:
I'm sorry while i understand you are trying to improve the content of quality i must say this is reminds of of extremist authoritarianism, we come to TL to discuss and chat why cant we post our thoughts if we don't "watch the replay" cant we still have thoughts regarding the topic?
Also seriously? "Typing like a 14 year old girl" are you joking? I'm not sure whether I should be outraged by the ridiculous imposition you put on people to write like shakespeare or a English PHD (specially when considering for a fact a good number of TL'ers do not speak english as their first language) or the blatant sexism/ignorance in the assumption. I ask again, seriously?
This is internet Nazism and I definitely do not support this, and encourage other TL'ers to do so as well.
This is slipper slippery slope that TL is going, I hope the site that I love and hold dear will be what it has always been, an open forum where the community can discuss starcraft without being harassed by cyber bullies and dictators. 1) No you can't. There are many little nuances to every game and describing it as "[H] ZvT Marine/Tank push" isn't enough to give posters an idea of what went wrong. Even if the OP does a great job of analyzing their game and posting a list of things they think went wrong, chances are they missed something, and you won't know it unless you watch the replay. Posting anything without watching the replay is probably theorycrafting and not helpful in the slightest to the OP. If you don't want to watch the replay, that's fine, just don't give him advice on the game then. 2) You seem to write just fine. Nobody is asking anybody to write like "shakespeare or an English PhD." Of course a big portion of the player base does not speak English as their first language, but it just so happens to be the language that TL uses to discuss and communicate. If you are going to post, people need to be able to understand you and not get brain cancer in the process. Also, as somebody who spent a lot of time dealing with "14 year old girls" right when instant messaging and text messages started to become popular in the US (I'm 23), I can tell you that it's not sexist at all. 14 year old girls really do talk like that, and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. It's completely unintelligible. Starcraft 2 General is an open forum where the community can discuss Starcraft (although you still can't be an idiot). The strategy forum is a moderated forum where people who are completely stumped can try to ask for help, people who have thought long and hard about a topic can put it up for discussion, and people much, much better than us at this game can post informative guides that help your average TL'er get better at the game. I don't know what i find more ridiculous and quite frankly, hilarious, the fact that you think you're an expert on the social phenomenon of texting in prepubescent girls, or the fact that you think (hypothetical speaking) a high level diamond/masters would be unable to help say a silver player with their game given the information that the OP of any given post has stated. but that is not the point of this post, i am not here to argue over trivialities or whether the small sample of 14 year old girls you have dealt with in your limited time is enough evidence for you to draw the sweeping conclusions that you so strongly do, but again that isn't the point of this post. all im saying is as a member of the community I do enjoy browsing the stratergy forums, and when I do see opportunities where i can contribute to another's progression, by offering constructive and meaningful advice, i do my best to do so . However if you were to say that from this day forward, TLers cannot comment on any strategy post without watching the replay so be it. I lose nothing, but make no mistake, a policy like this will absolutely decimate a good number of valuable contributions as I am sure this will throw off many other people who have alot experience with starcraft from making contributions. Now i understand the concern and well the intent of this post, the stratergy forum has of late been on a downward decline, however whether or not these particular changes will solve the problem, I am unsure, and am highly skeptical. I have given my reasons why i don't think this is a good idea, but as another poster mentioned earlier, this is "NOT YOUR HOUSE", "thats why you opinions don't matter! Because the rules says so!!!!" which then i guess raises the question who's house is it? I cannot say i have an answer. Is it Nazgul's house? or is it Zatics? While there no doubt certain individuals have contributed more to the community than others, but i must ask would TL be what is is today without the support of your regular TLer? Would this house be anything without the community that supports it? would their really be a house without the community, a community that contributes daily with no agenda, a community built upon practices of altruism like offering advice and suggestions in places like the strategy forums. Way to be overdramatic over your 100 post history on TL.net. No-one would care if you left, if TL needed every person they could get they wouldn't be actively banning bad posters. Because that's what's happening, people who ruin the strategy forums by bad posting are getting banned as to show it is no longer accepted. TL is doing YOU a favor by hosting this great site, not the other way around, as such it's called THEIR HOUSE. It all really isn't that hard to understand, but some people just seem to be born to complain about everything that happens on the internet, nitpicking every little detail they can even though they know there's good intentions behind them. Disgusting that people feel like they have done something significant by opening their browser and typing in the name of a site and enter, like they deserve credit for that work and are entitled to do what they desire because of it. No, people come to TL because it's the best and continues to strife towards being the best (as the purge demonstrates). You're not coming here out of the goodness of your heart, you're here because TL delivers, there's simply no equal alternative. It's been said over and over, people who post badly in the Strategy forums are getting banned simply because there's more bad advice than vice versa, it's not the goal of the Strategy section to give incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. It's goal is to be the best tool of improvement for players of all levels across the internet and that's not going to be achieved by having large amounts of well meant, but wrong, advice floating around and concealing the factually correct replies. Asking nicely to not post if you don't actually have anything useful to say isn't working, so TL has to get out their hammer and force certain posters not to post. You can pretend they're doing it because they hate bronze leaguers or simply to abuse their moderating powers, but anyone who has been around TL for more than a month knows that's just not true. Bottom line, if you don't post like crap you're not going to get banned. If you don't have the time to watch a replay, there's no need for you to make a post. I doesn't take a genius to see that 90% of "didn't watch the replay, but" posts are BS from the get go since they discuss builds, attacks or unit compositions that never even happen in the posted game. If you like posting in the SC2 Strategy Forums you just have to earn it by acquiring actucal SC2 strategy knowledge, if not, just read and learn from the other posters who are guaranteed to give you good advice. There's plenty of less serious threads and sections where you can drop your guard and have some fun, may I recommend NaDa's Body? I'm sorry it seems like you have totally misunderstood my post, that is quite unfortunate, maybe you can re-read it more carefully. Interesting point you make, "TL is doing YOU a favor". No doubt TL is doing all of us a favor, but isn't TL All of us as well? Or are some of the posters here "TL" and others are not? if so who is TL and who isn't? I don't really understand your point. 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, does that disgust you? If so then maybe the problem is with you. But you are damn right in one point. "You're not coming here out of the goodness of your heart, you're here because TL delivers, there's simply no equal alternative." I could not agree more, and i think that is why most ppl enjoy comming to TL, because it delivers quality content. Thus it makes even more sense for me to want TL to do WELL. In fact it is in my interest for TL to do well , and that is why i raise these objections, so that it may continue to do so. I do believe I have raised reasons why this policy might be concerning to the content on TL above, if you would like you could go back and re-read them. The only thing you're raising is annoyance. Please open the TL.net Commandments and read that Teamliquid isn't a democracy and isn't pretending to be one. The fact that you're reverting to the argument of "isn't TL all of us as well?" implies that TL is somehow indebted for your membership, which is why I mention detesting people that feel their opinion is weighty on behalf of visiting a site. It also comes off pretentious from a 100 post user to bring up 10 years of community contributions as validation for his opinions, just because you're a part of the community doesn't mean all of the community's contributions were yours. The fact that after 100 posts you already feel entitled to call TL moderation Nazism and make condescending remarks about people who disagree with you or try to make clear that your attitude is disproportionate to your TL history, it doesn't bode well for your TL future. As for your "concerns", the only thing I could find was you saying you like to give your thoughts without having to watch a replay, which I responded to generously: + Show Spoiler +It's been said over and over, people who post badly in the Strategy forums are getting banned simply because there's more bad advice than vice versa, it's not the goal of the Strategy section to give incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. It's goal is to be the best tool of improvement for players of all levels across the internet and that's not going to be achieved by having large amounts of well meant, but wrong, advice floating around and concealing the factually correct replies. Asking nicely to not post if you don't actually have anything useful to say isn't working, so TL has to get out their hammer and force certain posters not to post. You can pretend they're doing it because they hate bronze leaguers or simply to abuse their moderating powers, but anyone who has been around TL for more than a month knows that's just not true.
Bottom line, if you don't post like crap you're not going to get banned. If you don't have the time to watch a replay, there's no need for you to make a post. I doesn't take a genius to see that 90% of "didn't watch the replay, but" posts are BS from the get go since they discuss builds, attacks or unit compositions that never even happen in the posted game. If you like posting in the SC2 Strategy Forums you just have to earn it by acquiring actucal SC2 strategy knowledge, if not, just read and learn from the other posters who are guaranteed to give you good advice. Maybe you read over it whilst pondering over philisosophical questions like Who is TL? and claiming I haven't read your overarching "concerns".
What this got to do with democracy at all? I am confused where you pull these ideas from.
"The fact that you're reverting to the argument of "isn't TL all of us as well?" implies that TL is somehow indebted for your membership, which is why I mention detesting people that feel their opinion is weighty on behalf of visiting a site"
Teamliquid is a community, how does pointing out that IT IS a community show that it is indebted to my membership? the two are unrelated. TL can do without me that is undeniable, I claim no right to anything. But without the community TL would not be what it is, and that is why I am concerned because I am worried that this will be bad for the community as a whole (as i have mentioned many times in my earlier posts).
To restate, I am worried that by implementing these new rules we will prevent people who would normally be offering meaningful contribution from doing so. I understand the problem and I do believe it is an important one to deal with (a lot of people who do offer jank opinions, poor advice etc), I just don't think this is the best way to deal with them. Is It really the case that "people are not watching replays" or is it more of a concern of people just liking to voice their opinions regardless of how meaningful or pointless it is. And if the later is the case then perhaps by asking everyone to watch replays before commenting might not be the solution we are looking for.
I certainly did not intend to come off as "weighty", I was merely trying to voice my concern.
You've been bringing up the fact that I have 100 posts, and sure I may have less posts than you, but I don't that necessarily take away from the actual merit of what my concerns are as a whole are.
You seem to be very angry at me, at what I'm saying and I do not understand why. You misunderstand if you think I do not appreciate what TL is because I DO, and it is because I do appreciate TL for the content it has provided me, that I believe it is important for me to voice my concerns regarding this policy. I assure you I enjoy playing starcraft much more than arguing with you on TL forums.
We seek the same thing, that TL will continue to be the quality site it has been as a result of "10 years of contributions", I hope that you will not misunderstand my intentions as something else.
cheers
|
Strategos you have completely ignored Aequos' great post a few posts above, and it pretty much addresses and refutes every single claim you have.
|
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.
|
Zurich15326 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.
|
Zurich15326 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![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DMz0V.jpg)
