|
I strongly disagree with this "rant". There is no doubt that there are alot of bad posts, and whether they are from people that are at work or not is irrelevant. There will be bad posts from people saying that they are at work, but this doesn't necessarily mean that any post made at work has absolutely no value and is as "rude" as you stated. This is just being obnoxious and bashing for bashing.
When an OP gives enough details about their issue and is very clear about the matter, it is NOT necessary to watch a replay to give SOME constructive and helpful advice. Yes, you can't talk about everything because you missed some things, BUT relevant help is easily handed out without having to watch replays.
I find many flaws in this argument and I thought I would add my 2 cents. I'm not condemning either side, but I do think constructive and relevant help can be given without viewing replays, especially when most of the people seeking help are below masters. If anything, master players and up would be the only ones that would require in-depth replay analysis, because mechanics don't change and constitute 99% of lower level players' issues.
|
On July 18 2011 15:15 Legion710 wrote:
I strongly disagree with this "rant". There is no doubt that there are alot of bad posts, and whether they are from people that are at work or not is irrelevant. There will be bad posts from people saying that they are at work, but this doesn't necessarily mean that any post made at work has absolutely no value and is as "rude" as you stated. This is just being obnoxious and bashing for bashing.
When an OP gives enough details about their issue and is very clear about the matter, it is NOT necessary to watch a replay to give SOME constructive and helpful advice. Yes, you can't talk about everything because you missed some things, BUT relevant help is easily handed out without having to watch replays.
I find many flaws in this argument and I thought I would add my 2 cents. I'm not condemning either side, but I do think constructive and relevant help can be given without viewing replays, especially when most of the people seeking help are below masters. If anything, master players and up would be the only ones that would require in-depth replay analysis, because mechanics don't change and constitute 99% of lower level players' issues. Although most people are nice when posting from work, sometimes the advice they give is not nearly applicable to the question. Here's one of the thread types that makes me cringe reading, [H] PvT against banshees:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=240586
Sure, the first question was solved quite well with manners. But it is obvious only one person who responded watched the replay and could answer the second, which was probably the more important for Canadaeh.
|
On July 18 2011 12:14 Tektos wrote:
"Haven't watched the replay cause I'm at work, but marauders are a strong unit against protoss, building a number of these and keeping good macro / micro with concussive shells can hold off most protoss aggression."
... replay shows the guy getting void ray rushed
Yeah seriously, this warning should have happened a long time ago.I remember one guy who just simply got outmacroed but he posted his thread as ¨having trouble with deathball¨ and people posted millions of compositions and tactics because they were at work.
Seriously, it feels more like if you guys just want to feed your own ego rather than actually help.If you want to help do it right or don´t do it at all. And I don´t see this thread on the website feedback section nor does it have a poll so I don´t know why people are arguing.
Of course I think that some people(they are surely at wok) didn´t even bother reading the OP. He doesn´t give a crap about people posting on TL while they are working, he just doesn´t want people giving advice without even bothering to look at the problem.
|
On July 18 2011 11:02 Otsuka wrote:
9 pages of uptight dudes debating over what contributions are worthy enough for them? I don't get it, aren't we all friends here in this SC2 COMMUNITY who want a place to come and stimulate each-other with SC2 discussion?
How about, since it seems like a number of us (me included) DONT have a problem with someone wanting to contribute to our thread, and DONT want mods baning/warning people who do contribute while not being able to view a replay, can it at least be up to the OP? I don't think it's right to penalize people who contribute their time to help me for free.
And before I myself get banned or warned or deported for speaking up, I just wanna say to those with opposing opinions, I get it.. I get why your annoyed and I get why you want this strict, structured community to make sure the quality of information is maintained. I'm a guest here as all of you are so I want to respect the rules, but I gotta speak up this time.
User was temp banned for this post.
Responses to the post not only help the OP, but it also helps other people so it is necessary that it is up to the quality of TL in general, not only the OP
P.S. anyone else wathcing GSL at the same time lol, or just posting on this thread??
|
On July 18 2011 11:02 Otsuka wrote:
And before I myself get banned or warned or deported for speaking up...
User was temp banned for this post.
I know, right? How ridiculous is it that TL mods have the power to deport people?
I for one am in complete agreement with OP and am grateful for the amount of work that's been going into slowly ratcheting the strategy forum toward being a good place to find cogent discussions of strategy. It's still a long way from perfect, but it's been getting constantly better the last few months.
Those posting here who don't agree with the issue with saying "I'm at work" in a post have in large part misunderstood the problem. Posting from work (as I do occasionally myself) isn't in itself the problem. It's that the only reason people say they're posting from work or school or their iPod from the train or their brain implant from the summit of K-2 is to provide an excuse for not adhering to forum guidelines.
|
Zurich15366 Posts
On July 18 2011 13:43 Silfurstar wrote:
The fact is that debating this warning by Zatic is pointless.
TL is not a public democratic forum, as far as I know. It's a private community that is kind enough to, basically, "let everyone in". The mods decide, we oblige. That's all there is to it !
That's not entirely correct. I love to hear feedback and suggestions. So far none of the arguments in favor of laxer posting standards have been convincing though.
|
Im at work so I cant read the full thread but generally I agree that you should watch the replay before posting advice. When I see comments like "how many units did you had?" or "at what timing did you attack?" just pisses me off when the poster made the effort to post a replay.
|
On July 18 2011 19:44 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2011 13:43 Silfurstar wrote:
The fact is that debating this warning by Zatic is pointless.
TL is not a public democratic forum, as far as I know. It's a private community that is kind enough to, basically, "let everyone in". The mods decide, we oblige. That's all there is to it ! That's not entirely correct. I love to hear feedback and suggestions. So far none of the arguments in favor of laxer posting standards have been convincing though.
Correct me if I'm worng, but most of the mods and other staff emerge from the community anyway?
Democratic... a bit tricky. By democratic do you mean solely driven by the will of the majority - surely if this was the case with TL we'd have anarchy (reddit)?
There is a particular 'vision' of what TL can and will continue to be. Above all TL is about establishing a high quality esports/SC2 community base, and what Zactic is doing here and what he says above is a democratic (or at least very transparant) means of acheiving this: opening up the forum for debate and inviting feedback but also disclosing information on what is and isn't acceptable.
TL is certianly no more or less democratic than, well most western governments, like most governemnts TL needs its wardens, police and other repressive state apparatuses (not to suggest that I support all on these in their IRL contexts). But I see TL staff and TL community (posters?) to both be heading in the same direction in terms of what they want from the site, I don't think anyone is really at odds.
EDIT: I am actually at work btw
|
I agree exactly with OP, but zatic... do you come across this angry and scary in real life?
|
On July 18 2011 19:44 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2011 13:43 Silfurstar wrote:
The fact is that debating this warning by Zatic is pointless.
TL is not a public democratic forum, as far as I know. It's a private community that is kind enough to, basically, "let everyone in". The mods decide, we oblige. That's all there is to it ! That's not entirely correct. I love to hear feedback and suggestions. So far none of the arguments in favor of laxer posting standards have been convincing though.
Don't lax the standards. Tons of times I see people posting in these [H] threads with just generic advice but when I go watch the replays the advice is meaningless and there are far more fundamental issues going on than what the OP even mentions. What happens is people get this warped sense of how things work and then never progress because all they know is the bland generic information getting spewed at them.
I think it's just an issue where people want to feel good about helping someone. They don't actually want to take the time to really help the person but they want to say "hey look I helped him by posting X" or use the person as an excuse to push their own strategy whine.
|
On July 18 2011 15:15 Legion710 wrote:
I strongly disagree with this "rant". There is no doubt that there are alot of bad posts, and whether they are from people that are at work or not is irrelevant. There will be bad posts from people saying that they are at work, but this doesn't necessarily mean that any post made at work has absolutely no value and is as "rude" as you stated. This is just being obnoxious and bashing for bashing.
When an OP gives enough details about their issue and is very clear about the matter, it is NOT necessary to watch a replay to give SOME constructive and helpful advice. Yes, you can't talk about everything because you missed some things, BUT relevant help is easily handed out without having to watch replays.
I find many flaws in this argument and I thought I would add my 2 cents. I'm not condemning either side, but I do think constructive and relevant help can be given without viewing replays, especially when most of the people seeking help are below masters. If anything, master players and up would be the only ones that would require in-depth replay analysis, because mechanics don't change and constitute 99% of lower level players' issues.
If you disagree with the need to provide replays with help posts, I don't think this thread is the place to voice your concern. This is more about people bypassing forum rules under the excuse of "I'm at work"
|
I'm all for this if it means no more "macro better" posts.
|
On July 18 2011 15:15 Legion710 wrote:
When an OP gives enough details about their issue and is very clear about the matter, it is NOT necessary to watch a replay to give SOME constructive and helpful advice. Yes, you can't talk about everything because you missed some things, BUT relevant help is easily handed out without having to watch replays.
Let's break this down one last time:
1. If you don't watch the replay, you are simply assuming the OP has given enough details. Is that really a safe assumption in a situation where someone is openly confessing ignorance?
In my experience, no. Almost without exception, when I've watched a replay the OP has overlooked or downplayed a factor crucial to the outcome of the game. Sometimes they've described themselves as ahead when they were in fact massively behind.
2. There is already a huge amount of readily accessible and useful advice, from the very general to the specific, for all races.
By posting more of the same in response to a [H] thread, you are assuming the OP has not done what they are absolutely required to do which is to first attempt to help themselves via that resource. That's rude. And if by some chance they haven't done what they're absolutely required to do, then you shouldn't be helping them, because by doing so you're giving a green light to everyone else who can't be bothered helping themselves to clutter up the strategy forum with lazy [H] threads.
3. If you aren't willing or able to watch the replay - relax. Someone who can will be along shortly.
So why clutter up the thread with advice that's only going to be superceded?
|
On July 18 2011 15:15 Legion710 wrote:
I strongly disagree with this "rant". There is no doubt that there are alot of bad posts, and whether they are from people that are at work or not is irrelevant. There will be bad posts from people saying that they are at work, but this doesn't necessarily mean that any post made at work has absolutely no value and is as "rude" as you stated. This is just being obnoxious and bashing for bashing.
When an OP gives enough details about their issue and is very clear about the matter, it is NOT necessary to watch a replay to give SOME constructive and helpful advice. Yes, you can't talk about everything because you missed some things, BUT relevant help is easily handed out without having to watch replays.
I find many flaws in this argument and I thought I would add my 2 cents. I'm not condemning either side, but I do think constructive and relevant help can be given without viewing replays, especially when most of the people seeking help are below masters. If anything, master players and up would be the only ones that would require in-depth replay analysis, because mechanics don't change and constitute 99% of lower level players' issues.
You make one major flaw in your argument, and that is that the players' issues that you think can be resolved without watching their replay is always gonna be the issue they think it is and post in their OP.
Many times "I can't deal with cloak banshee" actually is "I have horrendeous probe production so even though my build has a well timed observer to deal with cloaked banshee normally, I delay the build by 1 minute and thus lose". (Possibly a bad example, but you get the idea)
In fact I'd say that nearly at all times the problem that the player think he has is not the one he really have. Because if the player had done a correct problem analysis in the first hand, he'd probably not have needed to post his shit here, it's usually identifiying the problem that is the hard part for a player having one, not actually solving it. And obviously you can't in most cases indentify a problem that a player have if he can't himself do it, using only his own analysis, then you do need to watch his game yourself.
Also if you so dearly want to give advice without watching the replay, and do think that your advice will always be advantageous of the receviver anyway, then you can still do so, but don't use your work as an excuse to do so. But you'll also have to be prepared to take the ban when a mod who've watched the replay realises you haven't, as your advice is so off. (Or you could just don't and spare the mods the work to ban you ;D).
Oh and by the way, I'm guilty of doing the same when I was bored and had no acess to sc2. But I'll at least admit I'm not seeing myself as a honorful protector of the weak that disputes my worthful time helping newbies and who now is deeply hurt getting reprimended because I didn't put in more time than I did doing so (which seems to be the viewpoint of some of the defenders of the "I am at work" excuse). I knew myself that my advice would at times be off when I posted without watching the replays, but instead I mostly did it because thinking and writing about starcraft related things was way more entertaining than the other options of activites I had access to at that specific time.
|
I applaud zatic and the other mods for their patience and endurance (explaining stuff and making their point clear time after time). Having said that, I surf TL daily and comment on all kinds of stuff in all kinds of subforums. BUT I very rarely post in the Strategy forum - for several reasons.
1. I often AM at work and don`t have the time to give an in-depth answer.
2. I can`t watch replays there.
3. Sometimes I am not sure if my advise would be 100% correct and therefore I remain silent.
4. When the OP is presented in a poor way, or the question is such basic knowledge that you can only answer it with a large portion of sarcasm, I just dont post. They don`t deserve a good answer and I don`t want to start to troll/flame on TL, because I hate to read such comments by others. (hi @ "in b4 closed"-posters)
5. Often my advise has already been given and there is no point in quoting (with a "this" under it) or rephrasing someone elses post with no additional information. It just blows a thread up and in the Strat Forum you (or at least I) want to see facts, without having to filter out all the post that lack substance.
Nobody is that important that he HAS to give his opinion and often it is just this - a personal opinion (due to lack of prove). Lets hope this thread serves its purpose.
|
On July 18 2011 19:44 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2011 13:43 Silfurstar wrote:
The fact is that debating this warning by Zatic is pointless.
TL is not a public democratic forum, as far as I know. It's a private community that is kind enough to, basically, "let everyone in". The mods decide, we oblige. That's all there is to it ! That's not entirely correct. I love to hear feedback and suggestions. So far none of the arguments in favor of laxer posting standards have been convincing though.
Of course, I feel like we can still give feedback and suggestions, no doubt about that.
I just meant that, in the end, it's you and the other mods that get decisive power (which I think is a good thing).
I like the fact that teamliquid tries its best to set a high standard of quality when it comes to posting and contributing. I think it is, in the end, what differenciates it from (for instance) the official battle net forums (which is always painful to read, the very few times that I tried).
Some people (mostly old schooler from what I understood) even seem to think that the standards should be even higher. I've not been part of the community for so long, so I don't really know how it was before, but on paper I'm all for it.
|
While I understand the rationale behind this (and other recent "do not do this" rules), are y'all not concerned that you're providing extreme disincentives to post *at all*?
It's not as though we're all forced to provide advice, or to post on teamliquid, or to visit teamliquid. And all these events are related. If I posted here at TL less, I would probably visit less, which I think would ultimately hurt the site with less traffic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't TL want as much traffic here on the site as possible? That's how you earn revenue with ads, etc. right?
I mean, I'll obviously follow this rule, but admins / mods / owners - really *think* about the repercussions of your actions. Most forums would kill to have lots of chatter (posts, traffic), and you're actively discouraging it. Be careful.
|
Totally agree with this.
I almost feel like we don't have as high of a standard for responses as we do for ops. For the op always require good self analysis and replays, for both [H] and [G] threads, but for responses we require virtually nothing other than you watch the replay, which is the simplest requirement if people can't even follow that.
I would suggest that we need higher requirement for response. Right now if you post a guide we require that you back your claims up with replays, and yet many times in the response section, we have much lower level players challenging the op with theorycraft and no proof whatsoever. Master player post a guide with analysis and replays, gold player challenges the op's guide by pulling shit out of his ass without anything to back it up. I don't think that's fair.
|
I agree wholeheartedly with the OP. It seems simple to me:
--- Most people are looking for feedback and advice on the biggest faults in THEIR gameplay, as opposed to general advice (which is easy to find). Furthermore, often people either DON'T KNOW what their biggest problems are, or they are actually focusing on the WRONG THING. Watching replays is the only way to gain a true insight into that player's problems.
--- Watching the replay should therefore be a mandatory prerequisite to giving out advice, as otherwise the advice may be inappropriate.
--- "I'm at work" isn't a valid excuse for not watching the replay (there isn't a valid excuse).
I absolutely want to be able to post a question on TL and get fabulous, well written, concise and accurate replies, and I don't see how that can happen when many people don't even bother to watch the replay.
|
I'd post an insightful reply to the OP, but sadly I'm at work atm.
On a serious note, I approve of this policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
