EPTA Plea To Mods And We As A Community - Page 9
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
brian
United States9593 Posts
| ||
|
ohampatu
United States1448 Posts
THIS IS NOT A THREAD ABOUT DESTINY. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ About my original complaints: Mods: Im still seeing balance complaints like crazy. Why is it now standard for any thread to have some type of statement about 'so and so race is op', or 'lets be honest 6 gates is op and lategame tvp is a joke'. Its like if enough people complain you guys just go ahead let it become 'standard'. Its just like 'the sad zealot' from 6 months ago, your letting balance become a part of the community when it shouldn't be. The community: Were not getting any better still. We are nothing but a lynchmob. We seem to love being tattle-tales and complaining to sponsors. And our strategy forum (and every other thread) is filled with countless balance complaints. Im ready to give up on us. Too many people from reddit and b.net pages have migrated to tl I guess. | ||
|
ohampatu
United States1448 Posts
For 1 month, adopt a zero tolerance rule on any balance complaint For 1 month, any poster (regardless if its me or some other noob complaining or jinro doing one of his epic complaints about protoss) who breaks this rule is insta banned for 1 week. The punishment doubles everytime they 're-break' the rule when the ban is lifted I understand the game is not balanced, but it not being balance has absolutely no effect on the running/cohesion of this website. During the beta (i have been on this site since beta patch 13) if a person complained about FF they got banned. Now its acceptable to call it op for some reason. Same with calling 6 gates op. Same with calling infestor/brood op. Im positive if TL adopted a zero tolerance rule the strategy forum could become usefull. And i could finally read a main TL article without seeing so many balance and racial complaints. We as a community love to go overboard and try to ruin people lives (email sponosors, etc). If the community feels it can use this type of power and abuse it, why not try and bring the bad posters more in line with an iron fist? | ||
|
ohampatu
United States1448 Posts
How many mods are their on TL currently? How many were on TL 6 months before the actual release of SC2? If the first number isn't almost double the second thats prolly partially what could be contributing to TL becoming so toxic. I actually visit reddit more than TL these last few weeks especially. Even the pitchforks/lynchmob posts on reddit are less toxic than here. | ||
bkrow
Australia8532 Posts
On May 09 2012 09:11 ohampatu wrote: PLEASE STOP DERAILING MY THREAD THIS IS NOT A THREAD ABOUT DESTINY. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ About my original complaints: Mods: Im still seeing balance complaints like crazy. Why is it now standard for any thread to have some type of statement about 'so and so race is op', or 'lets be honest 6 gates is op and lategame tvp is a joke'. Its like if enough people complain you guys just go ahead let it become 'standard'. Its just like 'the sad zealot' from 6 months ago, your letting balance become a part of the community when it shouldn't be. The community: Were not getting any better still. We are nothing but a lynchmob. We seem to love being tattle-tales and complaining to sponsors. And our strategy forum (and every other thread) is filled with countless balance complaints. Im ready to give up on us. Too many people from reddit and b.net pages have migrated to tl I guess. My brain literally hurts when you say things like it's become a "standard" and that there is some sort of conscious decision to allow balance whine if too many people are doing it. You obviously have ZERO idea how the moderation on this website works. They are people, with lives and commitments, do you expect them to catch EVERY SINGLE balance whine? If you have such an issue with it, which you clearly do, instead of wasting your time posting about it, send a PM to a moderator with the post and a link and i am sure you will get a response. The moderation standard on this site has not changed; if anything over time it has become infinitely more stringent. The strategy forum in particular has had many reforms and action taken by dedicated moderators such as: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=210370 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=208101 Instead of whining about things; look to help solve the problem! The staff roster can be found here http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/TeamLiquid.net_Staff As to the number before the release of SC2 i do not know. As for this: Even the pitchforks/lynchmob posts on reddit are less toxic than here Everyone is free to an opinion, but yours is a bit warped and seems like it is borne out of frustration. But at the end of the day, go enjoy reddit and the b.net forums  edit: there is also a little "edit" button on the top right of your post allowing you to edit your post so you don't have to make 3 separate posts | ||
|
ohampatu
United States1448 Posts
You are right. My posting is coming out of frustration, but isn't yours? Your post seems to be nothing but frustration and negativity towards me. Please don't use 3 posts of mine (that are actually in the correct forum) to make assumptions. I haven't been spamming this thread or any other thread at all. I honestly don't expect the issues that are arising to get fixed, but i love the community enough that I am at least going to try and make a thread before I end up giving up completely. I have been apart of 3 'internet communities'. The 2 that aren't TL no longer exist, and essentially killed themselves for many of the reasons I'm complaining about. You tell me to stop whining, Im posting issues concerning the website/how the website is ran in the correct place. That is what the point of this thread is for correct? Its actually concerning to me that your brain hurts because Im posting feedback in a forum meant for feedback. In Lie of you mentioning the strategy forum. Your strategy forum is still filled with balance. Id love if you would tell NRGMonk to spend half the time he does deleting un-needed threads to read the ones that are needed, so as to keep them clean. Please dont take this as something against NRGMonk. He is the only person in this thread who hasn't flamed me. I love his strats, and he does a great job. I just see more feel like threads worth reading aren't moderated enough. Maybe lower the rate at which new members get the report button? I can spam report and PM's all you want, but honestly, if 3 posts of mine in this thread made you mad, seeing me spam PM's of people breaking the rules would make your brain explode instead of just hurt. I appreciate the links you gave me, they help with me affiliating my self with TL's members/rules. So thank you. The reason I didn't edit my posts, is because they weren't all related, and were like 8 minutes apart. If that was incorrect I apologize. Im sorry if my opinion is warped in your eyes. But honestly everybody's opinion is warped in another's eyes. I know this sounds blunt/mean, but really what you said to me does too and there's not a nicer way of me replying to you. Sorry I dont want to go reddit and b.net, im trying to stop TL from becoming the shit hole that those 2 websites are. Open up the 'closed' thread and 'auto-ban' thread, take note of what people are being banned for, what types of threads are being closed. Then go spend the next 15-20 minutes in the General and Strategy guidelines. You will understand what I mean, and if you dont, i'll be happy to spend 15-20 minutes and forward you the 50+ instances I can find. I dont expect every balance whine to get addressed. But itd be nice if there was an effort. The community takes turns deciding what is currently op/up, and the mods seem to go along with it. The Sad Zealot. Terran Vs 6 Gate. Siege tanks Vs Toss, i can go on and on about posts I've read today that didn't even get a warning. As a non member of your moderation staff, 'whining' in the feedback thread does help solve the issue, or it should, since that's what this forum is meant for. If people aren't doing their jobs, or their are too many jobs and not enough people, this forum would show that if it was used correctly. I use this website for roughly 6-8 hours aday, so yes I care, and yes I get frustrated. I dont want it to die like the last 2 communities I was involved in. But if I'm gonna get flamed by moderators for actually following the rules and posting feedback and called a whiner; then im prolly running in circles. | ||
Falling
Canada11218 Posts
I'm pretty sure balance whine is auto 2 day temp in a live report thread. And if they persist, their history plays a role in increasing the harshness until we get to perm. We do hope that we can get posters learn from their mistakes rather than blasting them a 1 week ban for their first error. Do you have a report button? Because mods can't be everywhere at once and particularly something like SC2 Strategy is going to be a little more niche for moderator competency. I've played SC2 maybe 3 times in the last year so I'm not going to be browsing Strats for fun and will rely on reports. Furthermore, unless it's a clear cut case of balance whine, flaming, or low content, I'm probably going to leave it to someone that actually plays SC2. For that reason, it's very good we have NrGmonk amongst our ranks now. Maybe lower the rate at which new members get the report button? I can spam report and PM's all you want, but honestly, if 3 posts of mine in this thread made you mad, seeing me spam PM's of people breaking the rules would make your brain explode instead of just hurt. Are new members getting report buttons slower? If anything we are starting to get flooded with people that use reports to complain about annoying people rather than actual rules broken. However, if you see rules broken, report them. It's the easiest way for us to deal with them. | ||
monk
United States8476 Posts
Also, personally I though the Sad Zealot Club was pretty cute. | ||
|
ohampatu
United States1448 Posts
On May 09 2012 12:45 NrGmonk wrote: I warn/ban people for balance whines in LR threads, but Strategy Forums are a bit more difficult to deal with. Many times you have to let there be some form of balance whining when you discuss strategy. To quote some recent examples, how it can be harder to defend maxed roaches than execute maxed roaches or how late game TvP is perceived as difficult. Mild balance complaints like this are fine in context. I do look at balance whining, but I only moderate it in the strategy forums only if it's either blatant or doesn't contribute to the discuss. Perhaps you have examples of bad posts that went unmoderated? Also, personally I though the Sad Zealot Club was pretty cute. It was hilariously cute, it just seemed to open up alot of sideways 'protoss up' quotes. Hearing your thoughts behind it make it quite a bit better, as now I get how/what/why your doing it. Knowing that those 'sideways/mild' ways of balance complaints are overlooked at times makes it easier, cause i was assuming they just weren't seen or nobody cared. If your away of them and keeping an eye on them, and just being lenient then thats all I can ask of ya | ||
|
bkrow
Australia8532 Posts
 associated with it had a number of balance whines to follow. I think somewhere along the line the hard line that zatic and saracen took has become a little less stringent. I feel that if the balance whine adds nothing to the discussion the user should be met with at least a warning and persistent whining with strong moderation.The strategy forum is a demon in itself and doesn't reflect the posting from the rest of the site however i feel if the purge threads that i linked above are actually followed as a standard, things will get better. When they were first introduced the effect was incredibly noticeable. I think it is just a matter of finding the time to moderate the strategy forum with so much content  | ||
|
ohampatu
United States1448 Posts
i appreciate the time you guys have taken reading my walls of text, i think everything i needed/wanted/asked for was addressed thanks alot, maybe i complain too much, for a long time i was only ever in the LR threads, so maybe i got babied with how strong you guys monitor that lol | ||
zatic
Zurich15306 Posts
But generally, as has been pointed out here, non of the issues you make out are in any way tolerated by the mod staff. And, as far as I can tell you have a mod report button. If you really find that many balance complaints then be part of the solution. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 09 2012 12:45 NrGmonk wrote: I warn/ban people for balance whines in LR threads, but Strategy Forums are a bit more difficult to deal with. Many times you have to let there be some form of balance whining when you discuss strategy. To quote some recent examples, how it can be harder to defend maxed roaches than execute maxed roaches or how late game TvP is perceived as difficult. Mild balance complaints like this are fine in context. I do look at balance whining, but I only moderate it in the strategy forums only if it's either blatant or doesn't contribute to the discuss. Perhaps you have examples of bad posts that went unmoderated? Also, personally I though the Sad Zealot Club was pretty cute. Very much agree with this. It is difficult to strike a fruitful middle ground between balance whine and acknowledging that somethings are just difficult for a race to do. Although some of the PvT/TvP threads of late have been tending towards the 'balance whine' end of the spectrum. | ||
|
bbm
United Kingdom1320 Posts
On May 09 2012 17:53 zatic wrote: If that has really become worse then I guess it's time to get out the warhammer and clean the strat forum once more. I am currently a bit restricted though since I don't have many posts left before my 10k. After that I will be more active I promise. But generally, as has been pointed out here, non of the issues you make out are in any way tolerated by the mod staff. And, as far as I can tell you have a mod report button. If you really find that many balance complaints then be part of the solution. Hahah, like all good moderation, constrained by arbitrary personal decisions. (Don't worry, I've been guilty of exactly the same before on a forum I mod on) | ||
|
hillman
United States162 Posts
Go read any thread in the strategy section, particularly "TheMista's anti-stephano roach thread" (or whatever its called). People get warned for suggesting specific and legitimate faults in the build - which Morrow himself comes in and echos a few pages later! TheMista even admits that some of the faults are valid....Morrow gets no warning, but the people who were correct before him do? Wow...favoritism? I have no idea. Its not a big deal honestly, but I got warned for pointing this out on the very thread that it was happening. Some of the mods should take a good hard look at their actions and ask if they really need to warn some of these posters...Sure the assholes out there, the nasty ppl., and perhaps even myself occasionally, need to be warned...but the bias is very unprofessional. I still can't for the life of me understand why the people on the first page of that thread were warned, after reading the forum rules AGAIN (which were cited in my warning message - as if I had not read them)...Whatever, still a great site, but they told me to go to feedback and this seemed the most relevant post to add to regarding my criticisms. I understand life isn't fair and this isn't a democracy...but it is unprofessional, a bit hypocritical, and pretty pathetic. | ||
|
monk
United States8476 Posts
On May 17 2012 02:11 hillman wrote: To whoever says the mods are fair...don't delude yourself. Are they maybe doing the best they can? Sure, probably for most of them, who knows. Either way, they are unconsciously biased or selective enforcing their rules. Go read any thread in the strategy section, particularly "TheMista's anti-stephano roach thread" (or whatever its called). People get warned for suggesting specific and legitimate faults in the build - which Morrow himself comes in and echos a few pages later! TheMista even admits that some of the faults are valid....Morrow gets no warning, but the people who were correct before him do? Wow...favoritism? I have no idea. Its not a big deal honestly, but I got warned for pointing this out on the very thread that it was happening. Some of the mods should take a good hard look at their actions and ask if they really need to warn some of these posters...Sure the assholes out there, the nasty ppl., and perhaps even myself occasionally, need to be warned...but the bias is very unprofessional. I still can't for the life of me understand why the people on the first page of that thread were warned, after reading the forum rules AGAIN (which were cited in my warning message - as if I had not read them)...Whatever, still a great site, but they told me to go to feedback and this seemed the most relevant post to add to regarding my criticisms. I understand life isn't fair and this isn't a democracy...but it is unprofessional, a bit hypocritical, and pretty pathetic. First of all, website feedback is always welcome, but your language is particularly harsh and won't elicit the best response from moderators. To make it clear, you were warned solely for posting your feedback in the wrong section as well as your abrasive way of phrasing it. Although I didn't personally administrate most of the warnings, I stand behind them. about 50% of the warnings in that thread were for posting one-liners without fully understanding the build. Most of them say, "lol mutas auto win" when they don't understand that Mista never claims that it's a solid build; he solely markets it as a blind stephano style roach max counter. My further thoughts on this can be found here. Yes, Mista could have done a better job of explaining it, but it still doesn't excuse the massive amounts of one-liners. After all, Rule No 1 in the Strategy Forum Guidelines is that everything must be backed up by evidence. The other 50% of warnings was for miscellaneous things such as going off topic, posting stuff like "+20", and this little gem from someone that needlessly bashes the build, doesn't understand the build, and makes useless comments that don't contribute. And yes, there is favoritism on TL towards professional players and respected posters. This is not a secret. Check the ten commandments, particularly Rule #6. Also look at this quote from the current strategy forum guidelines: That said, there are already people much more qualified to talk about strategy than others. You will see their posts in this forum highlighted with a darkish blue background. Statements by these individuals will be weighted differently than had they be posted by complete unknowns. Thus, the less reputation you have the more you need to back up your claims as described further up (Note however that this does not excuse outrageous claims by a good player – in the end everything will need proof). Morrow did not get warned, but if you look at most of the posts that were warned, they made one line criticisms without backing up their claims while Morrow explained his thought process with many many more lines than most people did. His only fault was not understand the purpose of the build, which can be slightly blamed on Mista not explaining it as best he could, but at least he tried, put effort into the most, and backed it up. TheMista is also a professional player and we want to encourage professional posting on the forums, so we care much more if he posts than random poster #12822. Grubby puts it really well in this post: On May 14 2012 19:40 Grubby wrote: (In my opinion), there is nothing wrong with a guy who has actual experience playing Europe's GM Zergs, who posts a build that has worked on occasion (even if it's only on occasion!), who tries to offer general help. It's easy to poke holes in builds or call it bad because of your opinion of how the game should be played, but also irrelevant to actual results. Sure, this is not an all-purpose build, but then again no build is. I've seen little appreciation and much theory crafting (some of it probably correct, others wrong). I would be scared to post a build if the reception would be mostly negative. If someone posted a Diamond build without replays, then okay I get it. But he's beaten Stephano. Sure, it's only ladder, but it's something. I want to be one element of grateful reception at least. Thanks for posting this thread Mista ^^ Your other criticism was that there were much worse things said in other guides by non pro-players such as in Tang's guides.Yes, I agree that this is a valid criticism, but what you don't know is that previously the strategy forums weren't being moderated very heavily at all, with the vast majority of it coming from reports by regular forum members and not by moderators combing through threads. About 3 weeks ago, I was brought on to specifically monitor those forums, checking everything much more closely. A few other moderators have begun looking more closely at the strategy forums as well in the last week or two. The supposed inconsistency in moderation was mostly not brought out by favoritism, but by lack of staffing. In addition, we are aware of current problems in the strategy forums and have begun discussing them in length over the past week. In fact, there will be a major strategy forum restructuring/reform coming VERY soon. The mass amount of warnings in that thread were a precursor to the revamp that will be released and with the release, there will be much less inconsistency and many more warnings and bans. I suggest you hold further criticism till you see the new rules come out and then judge. For more comments about the strategy forum, check other mod quotes in this very thread. | ||
|
JBright
Vancouver14381 Posts
On May 17 2012 02:11 hillman wrote: To whoever says the mods are fair...don't delude yourself. Are they maybe doing the best they can? Sure, probably for most of them, who knows. Either way, they are unconsciously biased or selective enforcing their rules. Go read any thread in the strategy section, particularly "TheMista's anti-stephano roach thread" (or whatever its called). People get warned for suggesting specific and legitimate faults in the build - which Morrow himself comes in and echos a few pages later! TheMista even admits that some of the faults are valid....Morrow gets no warning, but the people who were correct before him do? Wow...favoritism? I have no idea. Its not a big deal honestly, but I got warned for pointing this out on the very thread that it was happening. Some of the mods should take a good hard look at their actions and ask if they really need to warn some of these posters...Sure the assholes out there, the nasty ppl., and perhaps even myself occasionally, need to be warned...but the bias is very unprofessional. I still can't for the life of me understand why the people on the first page of that thread were warned, after reading the forum rules AGAIN (which were cited in my warning message - as if I had not read them)...Whatever, still a great site, but they told me to go to feedback and this seemed the most relevant post to add to regarding my criticisms. I understand life isn't fair and this isn't a democracy...but it is unprofessional, a bit hypocritical, and pretty pathetic. If you think you found a hole in a posted guide, describe your findings and why you think the guide is weak there. It makes your point incredibly more believable if you post a replay along. Also don't be lazy: Make a suggestion on how to adapt the guide to address your criticism. This is how the best guides that stand the test of time are created. This is posted in the strategy forum guidelines. The people who got warnings in the first page were not all that constructive -"Looks like a rly late 2 base all in that is going to die vs muta play" -"So you're counting on the zerg not pincering with overlords to scout? Looks beyond gimicky =\ no way in hell you should need the 10 gates unless you're banking ofc which you shouldn't be since you won't be maxxing out." -etc And it is well known that pro players (i.e. Morrow) get more leniency for their posts on TL because they don't need to explain their thought processes to everyone all the time. There's a difference between a relatively unknown player saying a build/guide sucks without evidence and a pro player the build has holes because he has faced it before and took advantage of them. | ||
| ||
