|
On April 11 2011 05:13 loveeholicce wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2011 04:51 MementoMori wrote:On April 08 2011 11:11 Saracen wrote:
If I watch your replay and there are obvious flaws (macro, micro, etc.) in your game that contribute to your loss, you will be BANNED (Hint: read the Analyzing Replays thread and the How to Improve thread). Why? Because if you care enough about your gameplay to clutter up the Strategy Forum with another [H] thread, then you care enough to spend time by yourself to actually improve. Basically, this is if I feel you are being lazy and having others do work for you when you have put in minimal effort yourself.
Please take this as constructive criticism, but I mean.. That's the case for almost everybody who could post on here, including pros. Idra could post a game and a trained eye could probably find some flaws with his macro (granted those flaws would not classify as obvious flaws, but where is the line drawn). Plus this would pretty much eliminate everyone in lower leagues from ever posting a help thread, since certainly there are obvious macro/micro problems which led to the loss. I understand the sentiment of the rule and I agree that there should be a rule to make sure that at least the player was playing to the best of their ability. Also, I know that you cleared this up somewhat in the rest of the thread. I still think that this is going to scare off some people who might have a good contribution though (because they're the ones who are actually going to read the rules and get worried about it). My suggestion would just be to make this rule a bit clearer in terms of what you're looking for. Totally support the initiative and I do hope the strategy forums benefit. It applies mostly to low level players, and I think the point is if there's glaring flaws in your game its pointless to nitpick the specifics. Like if you're asking "help, TvZ how do I deal with a muta ling baneling composition" and the replay reveals you spent the entire game on 2 base while stacking 2k minerals then its just a silly question to ask
This is essentially exactly what they are working on. There were so many threads with low-level players screaming "FORCEFIELDS IMBA PvZ" then having a 2-line OP that says "i alwz lse forcfilds pvz hw do i fght thm?" After a few lines, he'll post a replay that shows that he lost because he had a grand total of 5 roaches at the 15 minute mark and was attacked by 2 Colossi, 15 Zealots, 20 Stalkers, and a couple Void Rays.
Honestly, I couldn't name a single game that I lost that I couldn't instantly say what I did badly, and what I needed to improve. Frankly, I couldn't name a single game that I won that I couldn't instantly know what I could do better. If you spend even 5 minutes looking at your game, you'll often see something you could have improved on. There's a big difference between IdrA style macro errors (ie being supply blocked for 1 second at 150 supply) and most players macro errors (ie getting supply blocked as you're being attacked).
It's not going to be a huge deal - if you put time into your OP, and search for other threads before posting it, it's doubtful that they'll ban you for it, even if it is in violation. More likely they'll simply close it and tell you what you missed.
|
why does TL.net moderators for years always have threads about how they're going to properly clean up the strategy forum but never do it?
If you say anything about imbalance, you will be BANNED.
If you give incorrect advice, you will be SHOT DOWN. If you aren't sure whether or not you should be giving advice, then don't. That doesn't mean don't give advice if you're not masters. But anyone (masters included) giving advice better be pretty damn sure of their advice before they give it.
If you give unhelpful advice, you will be BANNED.
If your post pisses me off or is just inappropriate, you will be BANNED.
this is the biggest problem i have with the strategy forum. "incorrect" advice being shot down is way too lenient period and i feel this is the absolute biggest problem with the moderaters and the strategy forum. first of all, bad topics doesnt make up the majority of the posts in the strategy forum, in fact it is a very small percentage. proof? at the time of posting, there are 30 topics in page 1 nonstickied, of these, 9 topics have over 100 posts. moderating posts in topic should be the priority rather than moderating topics. just like how moderators close threads? close posts but given the option to also read the post if you want, like how spoilers work
secondly, i don't want just "incorrect advice" being shot down, if the advice isn't great, it should be moderated. if a poster continues to post a number of posts below "great" standard in a specified amount of time, revoke his posting privilege in the strategy section.
The reason we have such strict moderation is we want people in this community to be self-sufficient, not dependent on others, and we want to keep discussion in the Strategy Forum at the highest level. That means quality guides, meaningful discussion about new builds and strategies, and asking for help only as a a last resort (but giving beneficial responses to any help threads). Being able to help yourself is key to becoming a better player, and it also, it reduces clutter in the Strategy Forum. Think about what your ideal Strategy Forum would look like.
like you stated, you want the highest level/meaningful discussion and quality posts. then remove things like the "thank you for the great post" or things that goes offtopic - posts which shows(note: i didnt add the word clearly) the poster didnt read the OP correctly. all they do is remove clutter especially in threads with multiple pages which takes a lot more time to find information that you actually need. only moderating posts which are "incorrect" simply isn't good enough, a lot of posts are only average but not necessarily of the absolute highest quality that TL wants. just because a post is "correct" may not be the answer someone wants. one way to do this is simply have high level players who are willing to moderate posts be given moderating rights in the strategy forum. honestly giving advice should also have guidelines just like how making topics has guidelines. making sure posts answers questions like:
why (eg. why build a certain composition vs another)
when (eg. when you should start building this composition given scouting clues)
how (eg. how to build this composition)
where (eg. where you position buildings/army)
what i want is this:
+ Show Spoiler +............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... if T all-ins you, continue building up your economy.......................................................................................................................................................................................
obviously that isn't good advice and there should be a mod edit to correct that post
|
Several people are expressing concerns along these lines:
So anyone below Masters can't engage in discussion applicable to their skill level pretty much, as there is plenty of discussion that is applicable to only lower levels (core demographic of this section).
To an extent, that's true. But should we - and by we I mean anybody, of any skill level, be concerned about it? I think not, and here's why:
Getting out of bronze/silver/gold leagues is a solved problem.
In other words, pretty much all useful discussion pertinent to improving low-level play has already been had. The distillation of those discussions is readily available in any number of excellent and entertaining guides and video tutorials.
That's why we (for the most part) don't need more low-level threads. But that alone is not enough to warrant discouraging them, so here's why we (again, for the most part) shouldn't allow them:
If someone comes to TeamLiquid.net, a supposedly authoritative resource for Starcraft strategy, and sees a strategy forum dominated by ongoing low-level discussion threads (as those pushing for a relaxation of the rules must admit would be the case, according to their own argument that low-level players constitute the bulk of the SC2 player-base), he will be slower to realise that improvement at low levels is a solved problem. Everyone (including me) likes to think that they are special, with special problems requiring special solutions. Indulging that fantasy, even tacitly, is counter-productive and will retard progress; it is a disservice to those who come here seeking to improve.
If exceptions do remain to these general rules - if someone genuinely does discover a new way to be bad at the game that isn't covered by existing guides - he can still ask for [H]e[L]p without fear of reprisals, and thus will the strategy forum become more complete.
I find it ludicrous to suggest that having my interactions with the strategy forum strictly policed makes me somehow unwelcome or excluded from the TL community. It's being done for my direct benefit; how could TL possibly make it clearer that they care about me, the player? No, they don't care about me, the attention-seeker. No, they don't care about me, the guy who secretly thinks he deserves special treatment. If I want those needs pandered to, I'll have to go elsewhere. What exactly is wrong with that?
|
On April 10 2011 23:05 DarkJirachi wrote:
EDIT2: this is a 30second response. should i get banned for posting it?
Since it clearly shows that you don't understand his intentions.....I've indeed thought about reporting you.  But then again you didn't troll, you did nothing bad on purpose.
The thing is, this forum is NOT supposed to be an all-cozy-feel-good-place where you could hang out, have sum phun, chat with your dudes in some threads about irrelevant stuff. Of course this is exaggerated, but due to the awful quality of like...99% of the stuff on the whole internet, I feel like that's what many expect from TL. A place to hang out, a place to just randomly throw down their thoughts whenever they feel like it.
Yes, TL is sometimes a cruel place, sometimes elitist. But that's NOT a bad thing, it's the only thing that keeps the gigantic amount of trash-posters in line. One bordline-justified ban could help prevent 10 others from posting borderline-bad stuff. And that's a good thing. Yes, maybe one out of ten decent, intelligent posters may be too afraid to post. In my opinion this is completely acceptable, if it helps keep the trash out. There are literally hundres of sc2-sites where you can also literally post whatever you want. Nobody "forces" anyone to post in TL - let alone TL-strategy. Yes, that's also a very important point, nobody gets prevented from cheering in TL-tournament or talking about random sc2-related stuff in general anyways.
Another thing is, that many have the feeling, that only grandmaster-like posters should be allowed to give advice or post anything but questions. I, myself can easily counter that argument: I'm highlighted and yet I'm a low master player. I haven't even had time to ladder in season 2 (I stick to customs to keep up) and in season 1 I was far from being a high-ranked player. And still, somehow the effort I had put into my posts convinced the mods that I was worthy of being even given the highlighted status. Therefore, don't pretend as if it was your gaming-skill that was the reason for you being - potentially - shut down. Trust me on that, it is 100% the quality of your posts and nothing else.
|
LOL but I dont post on the forums, like seriously. People either treat you not seriously enough, or they take you too seriously and you get yourself landed in some hot soup or heated argument.
You see. I agree with what HE is doing, and I get your point. HARSH ACTIONS like these are justifiable. But the manner the gets people to know and be prepared for the purges are like seriously O.o, I dont post on the forums, but I see lots of threads, both trash and high-quality ones, and I agree that this purge is much needed.
However, his words and language may not be as justifiable as his actions. Cursing and swearing in a post to make people understand how crossed you are is totally not right. If I went to post in that kind of tone and used such language, I undoubtedly would get banned for it. But him using such language on us to express his frustration/anger/pissed-ness? I am trying to get HIM to understand that him doing beneficial things for the community does not grant him the authority to use such language to reflect his anger or what not and mind his language since he IS a mod and should/would need to set examples for others to obey/listen to him.
|
hehehe... it must be hard to moderate such high user base
|
I think it bears clarifying for anyone to which this is somewhat unclear to. About what DarkJirachi is trying to say, that while he strongly agrees with what Saracen and other mod's are doing about this issue, as do any of us who want the strategy forum to become an idyllic place, he does not condone how this information is being represented/disseminated. It's not a matter of hurt feelings, or being too sensitive to the issue, it's about overstepping ones bounds, and those who go out of their way to insult someone to get their point across are overstepping their bounds.
Let me clarify, if I say something that is stupid, and it's been known to happen  , If I am to be corrected, should I be corrected, or corrected and insulted, if surreptitiously. A surreptitious insult is still an insult, and I could expect that from teenagers, but I'm assuming that most of the admins on this site are at least close to my age (28) and that this kind of behavior at this point is just unacceptable.
Here's an example:
If you give incorrect advice, you will be SHOT DOWN. If you aren't sure whether or not you should be giving advice, then don't.
The key words here are shot down obviously. The rest of this is worded perfectly, it's that the usage of those words goes just beyond what is required. It could've easily been re-worded to something like CORRECTED, something more precise and far less antagonistic. I'm not saying that those who give bad advice shouldn't be warned, in fact some will need to be as they will only learn from that, but these comments not only aren't necessary, but also undermine that persons authority. The problem with this is that by holding the community to high standards you expect certain things to come along with those high standards, including behavior. When that doesn't happen those high standards become modular, and that's a problem for reasons that I shouldn't need to spell out.
I'm not offended by what's been said per se, I just am very disappointed at the level of maturity that was originally shown by those moderating. I can completely understand where they are coming from, it's a tough job, but the hallmark of someone who's professional shouldn't let that bleed into their job, regardless of their personal feelings.
tl:dr; To reiterate, I agree with the necessity of this purge, just not how it's being verbally delivered at certain times.
|
On April 11 2011 22:50 DarkJirachi wrote:However, his words and language may not be as justifiable as his actions. Cursing and swearing in a post to make people understand how crossed you are is totally not right.
If I'm in a room with an angry bear, I'd much rather know it was angry.
|
On April 12 2011 00:59 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2011 22:50 DarkJirachi wrote:However, his words and language may not be as justifiable as his actions. Cursing and swearing in a post to make people understand how crossed you are is totally not right. If I'm in a room with an angry bear, I'd much rather know it was angry. We know it's angry because of the severity of the language, but the added repartee is not necessary for us to know that. This would be if say the bear attacked as a matter of course to get it's point across that it's angry, it's unnecessary, you know by its posture.
|
As a frequent reader and occasional poster, I think its great that the mods have decided to no longer put up with bullshit. I lurked here every day for months but I only signed up and began posting when a terrible OP caught my attention and I realized someone NEEDED a serious flaming for taking 30 seconds to write something that would rudely force itself into the lives of dozens of innocent readers.
IMHO if you think you need to confront Saracen and TL staff for being an elitest or suppressing the rights of nOObs you are missing the point. This forum should be a place for reading and learning, not promoting your own e-ego and your sense of self importance. Measure twice, post once (if needed).
|
I'm glad that there's a thread here like this. It's a great post that you can refer banned users to, because 90% of TLers aren't going to read it before they violate it.
|
Would it be impossible to implement a league forum. For example, you need to be Diamond+ in order to post in this forum or on this thread and legitimacy could be checked through sc2ranks or something. This would also stop banned people from getting new accounts.
|
If you have a problem with the way I moderate, take it to PM. Right now you're just shouting at thin air and not getting anything done.
Here's an example: Show nested quote +If you give incorrect advice, you will be SHOT DOWN. If you aren't sure whether or not you should be giving advice, then don't. The key words here are shot down obviously. The rest of this is worded perfectly, it's that the usage of those words goes just beyond what is required. It could've easily been re-worded to something like CORRECTED, something more precise and far less antagonistic. I'm not saying that those who give bad advice shouldn't be warned, in fact some will need to be as they will only learn from that, but these comments not only aren't necessary, but also undermine that persons authority.
You know, it used to say BANNED. Why? Because there is an overabundance of people who think their experiences at #1 in their division (regardless of which league it's in) gives them the qualifications necessary to post advice with impunity. We're not going to give them a little slap on the hand and say "try harder next time." We've been doing that for god knows how long, actually. If they actually think they're right, they'd better be willing to bet their life (or at least, their posting rights or their perceived reputation) on it. So yes, if someone posts incorrect advice, I'm going to edit his post with bold red letters and say "you're wrong don't listen to this guy." I think it's a little less ambiguous about what went wrong than "User was warned for this post." And it's a little more helpful to random people who want to learn from the thread when trying to filter out advice.
And reading your previous posts, it's obvious you haven't been around here for very long. You may carry your own standards of what you expect TL to be, and they may or may not differ from what the TL community expects. To be honest, TL has changed significantly every since SC2 was released, some for the better, and some for the worse. And as you have pointed out, with those changes comes changes to things like expectations from moderators. But believe it or not, there's also been a deep history and rich culture (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=119460) that affects the way we post perhaps as much as how we want to be perceived by others. Sometimes that means not always playing the role of the politician if that's what most effectively gets our point across. And when the same question's already been answered in a calm and tactful manner multiple times in the thread, I personally don't mind pushing someone's buttons with my response.
But as I said before, take it to PM.
|
I just found an interesting thread in the BW strategy forum.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=89134
Now tell me, have you ever seen anything like this in the SC2 forum? Do you want to? Then support the purge! I'd gladly trade my posting privileges for the chance that a progamer actually puts this kind of effort into the community. Yet whenever you watch a stream of a pro who reads teamliquid in between games, you see this:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/hFkCs.jpg)
Let's all do our part in making teamliquid.net a better place!
|
+1 for sure, modding the way it should be done. Enforce the rules well enough and things will fall into line. I'll start coming to TL a lot more if the forums are better organized.
|
|
|
I honestly never use the strategy forum ever, because of all the issues outlined above. I am very excited about this purge, and hopefully it might bring some of the tourny players back.
Remember when Artosis and Rekrul and iNcontroL and etc. used to do some heavy theory-crafting about certain builds and strong counters and all of that, like 5 years ago? I would love to see Sheth, Tyler, Sjow, and all of the current big name players return to the forums and do the same thing. Probably a pipe dream though...
|
United States17042 Posts
|
I don't follow SC2 threads enough to be bugged by the horrible posting personally, but I'm glad posters all over TL will be shared up by this or banned.
|
I love this forum. So nice to see moderators that care.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
