| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
These threads will always remind me of the Kids in the Hall.
| 19 people marked this as a favorite. |
I suppose you're welcome to get your own website where you never lock any threads.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Last thread was locked prior to the weekend, this gets posted just before what is a long weekend for a lot of folks in the States.
I assume this was a purposeful move to prompt another lock. Self-fulfilling and all that, no?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to treat everybody fairly and justly, unless they're from Finland, Australia or Texas.
Whew! Out before the ban!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is a game, it is in gamer talk, it was being talked about, why was it doomed?
You know why - hostile posting.
Stop railing against the symptom and do something about the disease.
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 31 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to keep threads from not being locked, encourage discussion participants to avoid hostile attacks toward one another. And most of all, set an example for the community by not being a jerk yourself.
I'll be frank.
3.5 Loyalist and kmal2t, both of you frequently post in a combative style that encourages other people to be hostile right back at you, creating a cycle that expands until it draws the attention of the moderators. You are both frankly a big part of the problem—and currently, the two biggest problems on the boards. More than one person here thinks you should both be banned.
I believe that you have both shown that you have interesting ideas, and I really really believe that if you would just stop antagonizing people, your contributions to the community would be valued by a lot of people.
The choice is up to you—and it *will* be resolved, one way or the other, very soon, as our patience is running thin. You need to either improve your behavior pronto, or go away. I want you to choose the former.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I frankly don't remotely care what Liz, Jessica, or Chris think because I'm sure its one of them that's said it. When they add to the creative of a game and it's design and aren't replaceable like other logistical businessmen to a product then maybe I'll value their opinion.
Do you even know who Liz is?
EDIT: Thought better of it.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're only making yourself look foolish.
I hope that they pull the ban trigger. You're enjoying the negative attention far too much.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I frankly don't remotely care what Liz, Jessica, or Chris think because I'm sure its one of them that's said it. When they add to the creative of a game and it's design and aren't replaceable like other logistical businessmen to a product then maybe I'll value their opinion.
MANY barbs are thrown back and forth on here by a NUMBER of different people. When one is directed at me, yes, I generally send one right back. That being said, these arguments (before mods have gotten to them) have never devolved into "Your momma is so.." or "I hope you die in a ..." . Even the heated discussions are still about the thread.
In FACT, many times by the time a mod gets to it the conversation has already gone back to the discussion and the argument is gone...but then they come back and delete posts so it makes the conversation confusing for those trying to catch up. It's un-derailing threads that have already corrected themselves.
You make it sound like these people begrudgingly mod threads out of some martyred sacrifice for justice. I think they like the authority they have to do it and if they have it want to exercise it occasionally instead of doing nothing at all. I guarantee if I wasn't here, other lesser offenses would get moderated just to use mod privileges.
Wow ... this post is unbelievable! Not only was it rude and disrespectful, it demonstrates exactly the kind of negative behavior Vic was just taking about. It also shows a pretty big lack of understanding anout the level of creativety and contribution folks like Liz et al bring to the game and the hoby.
Honestly, i'm actually shocked at this response!
Also ... "Ya, herp-derp. Don't care." Really???
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
@kmal2t: 16 products where Liz Courts has "added to the creative of a game and it's design".
You make it sound like these people begrudgingly mod threads out of some martyred sacrifice for justice. I think they like the authority they have to do it and if they have it want to exercise it occasionally instead of doing nothing at all. I guarantee if I wasn't here, other lesser offenses would get moderated just to use mod privileges.
You really aren't in a position to make that guarantee. I've been posting here for a few years now and the level of moderation is clearly dependant on the behaviour of the posters.
Of course, I'm an accountant so my opinions are not worth valuing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or, you could simply do a search for "Liz Courts" in "Products" like Bearded Ben did. Would have probably taken less time than posting a "plz repost" response did.
| 16 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or, you could simply do a search for "Liz Courts" in "Products" like Bearded Ben did. Would have probably taken less time than posting a "plz repost" response did.
Or look at the list that I created just for that sort of thing (and it's currently at 45 products...mostly because I haven't updated it recently).
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or, you could simply do a search for "Liz Courts" in "Products" like Bearded Ben did. Would have probably taken less time than posting a "plz repost" response did.Or look at the list that I created just for that sort of thing (and it's currently at 45 products...mostly because I haven't updated it recently).
*MIC DROP*
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There was a reason given for the thread lock in the post that announced the lock.
It was that people continued to get hostile after two previous warnings not to be hostile.
If it appears that there is no hostility, it's probably because they mods delete the hostile posts prior to posting warnings or locking threads. As evidenced by statements along the lines of "Removed several posts that were hostile."
If someone attacks you and you feel the need to shoot back, see above in re: not engaging people who post inflammatory statements and threads remaining open as a result.
The mods patrol the forums and lock threads because they HAVE TO, not because they want to. This is probably the worst part of their jobs because they have to clean up the messes everyone else makes. And I say "have to" not because of a legal responsibility (though maybe it is that; I'm not an expert) but because they don't want THEIR forum, discussing THEIR product, on THEIR website to have mud-slinging, rudeness, or other negativity attached.
If people want the mods to stop locking threads, issuing bans, or otherwise enforcing the rules (that, again, WE ALL AGREED TO WHEN WE SIGNED UP), people need to stop giving them reasons to do so.
Including me...who has already said too much. Sorry, folks.
|
| 21 people marked this as a favorite. |
I frankly don't remotely care what Liz, Jessica, or Chris think because I'm sure its one of them that's said it. When they add to the creative of a game and it's design and aren't replaceable like other logistical businessmen...
The fact that you treat other members of the community as 'replaceable' speaks volumes.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I frankly don't remotely care what Liz, Jessica, or Chris think because I'm sure its one of them that's said it. When they add to the creative of a game and it's design and aren't replaceable like other logistical businessmen...The fact that you treat other members of the community as 'replaceable' speaks volumes.
Very military mindset. *rimshot*
|
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I frankly don't remotely care what Liz, Jessica, or Chris think because I'm sure its one of them that's said it. When they add to the creative of a game and it's design and aren't replaceable like other logistical businessmen to a product then maybe I'll value their opinion.
Christ.
mod privileges.
Who the hell thinks of moderating being a privilege? Burden, extra headache, thankless job, #%^* that makes people have to leave their loved ones during Christmas to clean up(I still feel awful that Gary Teter was put in that situation). THAT'S closer to the mark.
I can guarandamntee that moderating the boards is not the high point of their day.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I frankly don't remotely care what Liz, Jessica, or Chris think because I'm sure its one of them that's said it. When they add to the creative of a game and it's design and aren't replaceable like other logistical businessmen to a product then maybe I'll value their opinion.
MANY barbs are thrown back and forth on here by a NUMBER of different people. When one is directed at me, yes, I generally send one right back. That being said, these arguments (before mods have gotten to them) have never devolved into "Your momma is so.." or "I hope you die in a ..." . Even the heated discussions are still about the thread.
In FACT, many times by the time a mod gets to it the conversation has already gone back to the discussion and the argument is gone...but then they come back and delete posts so it makes the conversation confusing for those trying to catch up. It's un-derailing threads that have already corrected themselves.
You make it sound like these people begrudgingly mod threads out of some martyred sacrifice for justice. I think they like the authority they have to do it and if they have it want to exercise it occasionally instead of doing nothing at all. I guarantee if I wasn't here, other lesser offenses would get moderated just to use mod privileges.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guarantee if I wasn't here, other lesser offenses would get moderated just to use mod privileges.
As one who was a moderator at a reasonably large forum for a period of 4 years, I guarantee you that any day where I didn't have to perform any kind of moderating were far better than those where I did.
Which was in no small part because those were the days when I would actually be able to fire up my non-moderator hat and engage with the community, as opposed to having to spend the entire day putting out flame wars, removing hatespeech, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Set an example for the community by not being a jerk yourself. Both of you frequently post in a combative style that encourages other people to be hostile right back at you, creating a cycle that expands until it draws the attention of the moderators. You are both frankly a big part of the problem—and currently, the two biggest problems on the boards. More than one person here thinks you should both be banned.
I believe that you have both shown that you have interesting ideas, and I really really believe that if you would just stop antagonizing people, your contributions to the community would be valued by a lot of people.
The choice is up to you—and it *will* be resolved, one way or the other, very soon, as our patience is running thin. You need to either improve your behavior pronto, or go away. I want you to choose the former.
My posts in the other thread and other threads in general dont seem to be modded much, so I presume I'm not one of the 'biggest troublemakers'... or at least am able to keep my posts far enough out of 'fighty' territory to have my posts unedited... so thats a good thing... Knowing there are such consensuses in moderator/public opinions about such things... I cant help but wonder what my 'reputation' is...
There did seem to be a lot of emotional charge in the thread though so I agree with the locking... Not a taboo subject, just an opportunity to shut down getting so riled and fighty about that particular subject. And in this case I didn't find any posts in the specific thread to which 3.5 Loyalist is referring to included any fighty posts by him so to be named here he must be up to some interesting stuff in other threads I don't get in to much... Ironically kmal2t posted early on to keep the fighty posts down to avoid a threadlock and then HE is also named as a troublemaker... I imagine even on my best behavior i've made some trouble on these threads myself...
I agree I liked the subject of the thread in question... Mods make the call though. Even if 3.5 Loyalist didn't appear uncivil in that thread and my posts were to a degree an emotionally charged response to a poster I thought was being particularly uncivil for a while already... Still no excuse. Maybe next time I'll do better! If I wasnt a contributing factor to the threadlock then all the better (and I hope my posts not being modded is an indication of that). I'm a codgery old grognard whos kinda set in his ways so I hope most of the time my stuff is up to snuff.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In general, if your posts are a problem, the Paizo staff will send you a message, either via email or boards PM.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I myself, and I suspect alot of others, have held back from posting my honest opinion that two posters need to be out and out banned, because somehow it feels inappropriate to post about another forum member in that way.
But this is just not somebody losing their temper in the moment, or feeling in a snarky mood for the day, but consistently and intentionally acting like a jerk and directly trying to subvert what Paizo has offered to the community here, to see what they can get away, daring Paizo to enforce it's own standards for it's own site with the constant allegation that doing so will prove Paizo to be unreasonable and narrowminded. Constantly restarting threads "because they can", directly ignoring Paizo's own intervention on the matter, to top it off with dismissing the value of Paizo employee's work here. It really beggars belief. If people's behavior is asking for a ban, give it to them, don't feel guilty about that.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow this thread went to a dark place...
Liz is super Awesome with lashings of Awesomeness coated in a hard shell of Awesome served up with a side of Awesome... She is a packet of Tim Tams soaked in Kahlua and Baileys and served with Macadamia and butterscotch icecream Awesome.
Liz has freely given so much of her time to this community and contributed more here than most of us combined ever will.
So don't go dissing her dude.
I would like to know my rep - I do like to press buttons and watch things go boom ;-)
I myself, and I suspect alot of others, have held back from posting my honest opinion that two posters need to be out and out banned, because somehow it feels inappropriate to post about another forum member in that way.
But this is just not somebody losing their temper in the moment, or feeling in a snarky mood for the day, but consistently and intentionally acting like a jerk and directly trying to subvert what Paizo has offered to the community here, to see what they can get away, daring Paizo to enforce it's own standards for it's own site with the constant allegation that doing so will prove Paizo to be unreasonable and narrowminded. Constantly restarting threads "because they can", directly ignoring Paizo's own intervention on the matter, to top it off with dismissing the value of Paizo employee's work here. It really beggars belief. If people's behavior is asking for a ban, give it to them, don't feel guilty about that.
By all means, express your opinion. There is nothing wrong with that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. I didn't start this thread to draw attention. Someone else created it.
"I didn't shoot the guy, I'm just rubbing mace in his wounds. Why would you group me in with the guy who shot him?"
2. The fact he brought up people wanting to ban me just makes me want to speak my mind while they push on banning me. I'm not going to kiss people's rear on a FORUM (or anywhere else for that matter). I never attacked their character and said they were evil or something. I said what I thought about his post toward me.
um...
I frankly don't remotely care what Liz, Jessica, or Chris think because I'm sure its one of them that's said it. When they add to the creative of a game and it's design and aren't replaceable like other logistical businessmen to a product then maybe I'll value their opinion.
feels kinda hostile to me and, you know, other people capable of reading.
It would make sense just to have one On going thread discussing thread locks just as there is one for spam bots. This is where people could at least get an EXPLANATION for a thread lock. If you're going to lock a thread that has gone on pages the least you can do is give a one or two sentence explanation. If people are spending SO much of their time moderating I'm sure 10 seconds could be spared for this.
you know I agree an explicit reason given wouldn't be a bad thing, too bad you gotta ruin it for the rest of us.
If you want to keep threads from not being locked, encourage discussion participants to avoid hostile attacks toward one another. And most of all, set an example for the community by not being a jerk yourself.
I'll be frank.
3.5 Loyalist and kmal2t, both of you frequently post in a combative style that encourages other people to be hostile right back at you, creating a cycle that expands until it draws the attention of the moderators. You are both frankly a big part of the problem—and currently, the two biggest problems on the boards. More than one person here thinks you should both be banned.
I believe that you have both shown that you have interesting ideas, and I really really believe that if you would just stop antagonizing people, your contributions to the community would be valued by a lot of people.
The choice is up to you—and it *will* be resolved, one way or the other, very soon, as our patience is running thin. You need to either improve your behavior pronto, or go away. I want you to choose the former.
Thank you for your reply Vic.
Frank is good, I like to be frank too. Alas I have not changed my name, but frankness is a good thing.
I am not a jerk, I am not trying to be a jerk. I think you are seeing me as this enemy, when I am just a long-time player like yourself. The threads I really like are in gamer talk, the 101 threads, story threads, games that are at risk, that sort of thing. Now since I am a bit like you, in that we are gamers and we both care about gaming, when the threads I like get locked, this agitates me, and I want to complain. As I have shown through many threads (especially the last one, high on evidence) I have reasons to protest, and the locking has been overzealous and quite unnecessary.
Here kmal, makes much the same point:
“In FACT, many times by the time a mod gets to it the conversation has already gone back to the discussion and the argument is gone...but then they come back and delete posts so it makes the conversation confusing for those trying to catch up. It's un-derailing threads that have already corrected themselves.”
When a thread is good and really worth being on these boards and worth our time, to lock it because a few people said some offensive combative things is insulting to those posters that remain and are trying to post. Imagine someone took away the pad you were writing on. You would be angry right Vic? Would you continue what you were writing on another pad? Would you be angry about your writing pad being taken? Like I said, I’m not an alien hate-bot, LOYALIST 3.500070000X2. Just a concerned poster wishing the locking would slow riiiiight down.
As for me being a major problem, one of the two great threats facing the Shire, well that is good for my ego, but I am not “all that”. By complaining I have become public enemy no 1, targeted especially by the mods, told to shut up or get out, including by mods, but you don’t have to shoot/ban/tar the messenger, a critic or the discussion thread starter.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Imagine someone took away the pad you were writing on. You would be angry right Vic? Would you continue what you were writing on another pad? Would you be angry about your writing pad being taken?
Now imagine someone said "Here, use my pad. Just please dont draw rude pictures all over it, okay?" and you then proceeded to draw rude pictures on it. When they repeatedly take it away, give you a clean pad and say "Please stop doing that." do you see how it might be considered jerkish to continually take their pad and ignore their wishes as to what they are giving it to you for?
What you call 'evidence' for overzealous or unnecessary thread locking is always just evidence of a thread being locked. It doesnt speak to whether the locking was necessary or heavy handed. How could it? The putative level of acceptable moderation (which you continually portray as objective fact) is merely your opinion - I know that because I generally disagree with you on pretty much every case. That doesnt mean you're right and it doesnt mean I am - it is a subjective question, not a matter of fact.
By definition, what paizo declare to be an acceptable level of moderation is an acceptable level of moderation. Hostile posting results in thread locking and/or post deletion. Them's the rules - you're using their pad, it's not yours. You can say "please change the rules" but you can't keep saying "those arent the rules" without looking both stubborn and silly.
So, in a previous incarnation of THIS EXACT THREAD, I noted that I thought it was hilarious that you were under the impression that once a thread is locked, no one can ever talk about it again. I made some sarcastic statement like "Oh no! They locked a thread about monks! Now no one can ever talk about monks again!"
I'm pleased to see that you took my message to heart, but continuing a rant that you started in a now-locked thread :tongue:
Ohhh calm and wisdom on them thar intarwebz that isn't allowed. ;-)
Don't get mad get civil, take a step back refocus let the heat die down and re start the conversation in a new thread with out the vitriol...
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
3.5 Loyalist, I do not think it is complaining, or speaking one's mind that is the problem. I think the problem is general disregard to other people, particularly an intentional disregard of the staff of Paizo. You can be frustrated with threads being locked, and directly express that frustration. In fact you did, the discussion was resolved by the moderators explaining part of their rationale for locking threads. You started a second thread, this time looking specifically for exceptions to the few examples the moderators gave for locking threads. Either you thought that they were lying about their rationale and were specifically trying to make your life a hassle, you were so annoyed that the reply to initial discussion on thread locking was not resolved by them bowing to your wishes that you wanted to try again, or you were sincerely confused, and did not realize how the action would look to to the people watching. They told you to cut it out, explaining that they do not need to account for every decision, but that they clearly had reasons they thought were urgent enough, and you started a third thread. At this point the effect is antagonizing the staff here. You picked a time where it would not be moderated for a while, and you dared them to lock it before 100 posts. Now you start a fourth thread. This is not just being frustrated with them for unclear replies, that could be resolved through email or PMs. This is an attempt to prove how victimized you were when they ignored you three times, and did not change their practices because you personally felt that a few threads should be locked and they did. You have also explicitly stated that the threads are locked on pure whim, and explicitly stated that you think the staff here actively enjoys locking threads as a power trip. The issue is not the directness of what you say, but that you are openly and directly showing what little opinion you have of the people who work here.
kmal2t, you are a blunt and direct speaker as well, and you also speak your mind. Did you intend to say that you do not care about the opinions the owners of the forum have about how people behave in their forum? Did you mean to betray your lack of real concern about the company by calling out a productive and creative employee for not adding to the creativity of the company? If this is what you meant to say, then I think it is clear that you are disrespectful or ignorant. Either you called out Liz simply because she has an active presence on the board, and know nothing about her except her name (ignorant), or you deliberately attacked the reputation and performance of a very hard-working creator of game material (disrespectful). The lashing out in ignorance or disrespect is what causes the problems, not the frankness.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Imagine someone took away the pad you were writing on. You would be angry right Vic? Would you continue what you were writing on another pad? Would you be angry about your writing pad being taken?Now imagine someone said "Here, use my pad. Just please dont draw rude pictures all over it, okay?" and you then proceeded to draw rude pictures on it. When they repeatedly take it away, give you a clean pad and say "Please stop doing that." do you see how it might be considered jerkish to continually take their pad and ignore their wishes as to what they are giving it to you for?
What you call 'evidence' for overzealous or unnecessary thread locking is always just evidence of a thread being locked. It doesnt speak to whether the locking was necessary or heavy handed. How could it? The putative level of acceptable moderation (which you continually portray as objective fact) is merely your opinion - I know that because I generally disagree with you on pretty much every case. That doesnt mean you're right and it doesnt mean I am - it is a subjective question, not a matter of fact.
By definition, what paizo declare to be acceptable level of moderation is an acceptable level of moderation. Hostile posting results in thread locking and/or post deletion. Them's the rules - you're using their pad, it's not yours. You can say "please change the rules" but you can't keep saying "those arent the rules" without looking both stubborn and silly.
Well that analogy would work, if I was drawing rude pictures.
Instead I'm bringing up the problems with all this locking, where it is wrong and unnecessary, and that they have denied there are problems and tried to lock all threads discussing them.
You really go to bat for them here, insisting they can only define what is right, but I'm contesting that. And what do you know, turns out what is acceptable, right and warranted can be argued. Now what you are doing is technically an appeal to authority. It is common, easy to do, don't worry about that for now. The flaw is that by saying the rule makers are right, you are side-stepping whether what they are doing is right ethically and where they have broken their own rules, or enforced their rules without real reason. As in, locking an off topic thread when it is already back on topic, locking a thread for hate-filled posts when the hate-filled posts have already been deleted, and the discussion has continued on with merit.
I hope that helps communicating my position.
3.5 Loyalist, I do not think it is complaining, or speaking one's mind that is the problem. I think the problem is general disregard to other people, particularly an intentional disregard of the staff of Paizo. You can be frustrated with threads being locked, and directly express that frustration. In fact you did, the discussion was resolved by the moderators explaining part of their rationale for locking threads. You started a second thread, this time looking specifically for exceptions to the few examples the moderators gave for locking threads. Either you thought that they were lying about their rationale and were specifically trying to make your life a hassle, you were so annoyed that the reply to initial discussion on thread locking was not resolved by them bowing to your wishes that you wanted to try again, or you were sincerely confused, and did not realize how the action would look to to the people watching. They told you to cut it out, explaining that they do not need to account for every decision, but that they clearly had reasons they thought were urgent enough, and you started a third thread. At this point the effect is antagonizing the staff here. You picked a time where it would not be moderated for a while, and you dared them to lock it before 100 posts. Now you start a fourth thread. This is not just being frustrated with them for unclear replies, that could be resolved through email or PMs. This is an attempt to prove how victimized you were when they ignored you three times, and did not change their practices because you personally felt that a few threads should be locked and they did. You have also explicitly stated that the threads are locked on pure whim, and explicitly stated that you think the staff here actively enjoys locking threads as a power trip. The issue is not the directness of what you say, but that you are openly and directly showing what little opinion you have of the people who work here.
kmal2t, you are a blunt and direct speaker as well, and you also speak your mind. Did...
Timing? No I am in a different time zone. The Vladivostok time zone.
Well that analogy would work, if I was drawing rude pictures.Imagine someone took away the pad you were writing on. You would be angry right Vic? Would you continue what you were writing on another pad? Would you be angry about your writing pad being taken?Now imagine someone said "Here, use my pad. Just please dont draw rude pictures all over it, okay?" and you then proceeded to draw rude pictures on it. When they repeatedly take it away, give you a clean pad and say "Please stop doing that." do you see how it might be considered jerkish to continually take their pad and ignore their wishes as to what they are giving it to you for?
What you call 'evidence' for overzealous or unnecessary thread locking is always just evidence of a thread being locked. It doesnt speak to whether the locking was necessary or heavy handed. How could it? The putative level of acceptable moderation (which you continually portray as objective fact) is merely your opinion - I know that because I generally disagree with you on pretty much every case. That doesnt mean you're right and it doesnt mean I am - it is a subjective question, not a matter of fact.
By definition, what paizo declare to be acceptable level of moderation is an acceptable level of moderation. Hostile posting results in thread locking and/or post deletion. Them's the rules - you're using their pad, it's not yours. You can say "please change the rules" but you can't keep saying "those arent the rules" without looking both stubborn and silly.
No. If you were drawing rude pictures it wouldnt be an analogy. It would be a description.
What you're doing is accepting their conditional invitation and repeatedly refusing to comply with their conditions.
I hope that helps communicating my position.
Its difficult to accept a reasonable position after the damage is done.
I.e. once you throw a couple punches, people can be reluctant to sit down and talk it out.
I get that, but posts are not punches. I hope Vic can see that I am not the next big threat, and he can move away from such labeling.