Locking threads because you disagree with the views expressed in them neither makes people agree with your views nor endears in them any goodwill for the purposes of agreeing with said views or for any other reason.
EDIT: Ah, website feedback. I missed that one. Thank you.
Director of Games
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cartigan,
As we have said many times, your adversarial tone and general disagreeable disposition, make for some very difficult threads. As a result, instead of wasting all of our time trying to, in vain, convince you of any of our ideas, it is better to just lock the thread and move on. We explained our position. You explained yours. We have a great number of threads to go through, not to mention other responsibilities.
You can either accept this as an occasional consequence of your tone and demeanor, or you can reevaluate the manner in which you behave yourself on these boards.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
At no point will I accept "disagreement" as a reason for closing a thread. That is all.
At no point will I accept "disagreement" as a reason for closing a thread. That is all.
I have no idea what threads got closed, but Jason was saying it was the tone of the conversation, not the disagreement itself that caused the issue.
I recall Ross Byers on several occasions reminding posters to ignore people whose tone they find irritating. "Flag and ignore," is the mantra.
I am exceedingly disappointed in the behavior of Jason Buhlman and other staff members for not following their fellow staff members' advice--and going beyond that to lock a thread for one posters' behavior (yes, there may have been other people being testy, but the quoted post on the lock thread is a direct response to an individual)--rather than do the more appropriate moderative action of deleting the offending posts (or, again, simply ignoring the offending post).
And if there is a person whose behavior is so offensive that the staff cannot abide by it--and I am NOT saying any such person exists--then they should ban that poster, not stoop to his or her level. (But personally, I hope no one gets banned.)
I have been very saddened to see, in the aforementioned thread and others, Jason Buhlman and other staff members go out of their way to argue with certain... shall we say, controversial posters, rather than ignore them (more examples can be found in this thread). It is extremely unprofessional and gives the impression that Paizo staff supports engaging in pointless argument over civil behavior. They cannot expect US to behave civilly and then behave in the opposite way. I actually find this a poor enough example to the degree I am questioning whether I want to continue to be a Paizo customer, whether I want to support these people's salaries when they seem unable to behave by their own standards, let alone by a general professional standard.
I am NOT saying that any cause for argument was right nor any given poster was in the right to say what they did--but I do think Cartigan was right to start this thread and it highlights what I perceive is a growing problem on this board.
I know I'm just one person and my opinion counts for little, and what little profit Paizo may make from my purchases are doubtless no incentive to listen to me, but I felt the need to say this.
|
Director of Games
|
In most other parts of the board, I completely agree with you. The playtest forums, however, are a different matter. They are here for us to get useful information from the players of the game. We use the playtest to get feedback about particular design decisions and wasting time on threads that are not, in our opinion, going anywhere is not an effective use of our time. As such, I am a bit more draconian in closing down threads that serve little purpose and are detraction from the usefulness of the playtest.
The rest of the boards are a different matter. I leave those to the standard process.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
If there was ever a time that I wish there were a like button on this forum its now. I laughed out loud when I read this.Alright folks... lets not start a thread to talk about how we feel about cartigan.
Back to the playtest boards number slaves. I need more data!
Jason
Ditto. Posts were all serious and the like, then BAM! Now out of my funk ^_^
Removed a post.
Removed a post.
Thanks. I couldn't help myself. He really is one of those, Liz.
Removed a post.
Given more thought, I find myself wondering if you removed it even though you agreed with it.
runs through thread waving a torch around
|
I recall Ross Byers on several occasions reminding posters to ignore people whose tone they find irritating. "Flag and ignore," is the mantra.
I am exceedingly disappointed in the behavior of Jason Buhlman and other staff members for not following their fellow staff members' advice--and going beyond that to lock a thread for one posters' behavior (yes, there may have been other people being testy, but the quoted post on the lock thread is a direct response to an individual)--rather than do the more appropriate moderative action of deleting the offending posts (or, again, simply ignoring the offending post).
And if there is a person whose behavior is so offensive that the staff cannot abide by it--and I am NOT saying any such person exists--then they should ban that poster, not stoop to his or her level. (But personally, I hope no one gets banned.)
I have been very saddened to see, in the aforementioned thread and others, Jason Buhlman and other staff members go out of their way to argue with certain... shall we say, controversial posters, rather than ignore them (more examples can be found in this thread). It is extremely unprofessional and gives the impression that Paizo staff supports engaging in pointless argument over civil behavior. They cannot expect US to behave civilly and then behave in the opposite way. I actually find this a poor enough example to the degree I am questioning whether I want to continue to be a Paizo customer, whether I want to support these people's salaries when they seem unable to behave by their own standards, let alone by a general professional standard.
I am NOT saying that any cause for argument was right nor any given poster was in the right to say what they did--but I do think Cartigan was right to start this thread and it highlights what I perceive is a growing problem on this board.
I know I'm just one person and my opinion counts for little, and what little profit Paizo may make...
I am curious as to what you think flagging does? Do you think it brings issues up to moderators and staff so that they can either remove a post or lock a thread not being productive? If so then you are right. If you think that this is a magic fairy dust to cleanse the threads when no one is paying attention, you are playing the wrong game.
Compared to the tone and actions of several posters who have had their threads locked, a response or two asking them to calm down. Is not in my opinion that big of an issue.
Thankfully mine doesn't matter. I like you do not own the website.
I am curious as to what you think flagging does? Do you think it brings issues up to moderators and staff so that they can either remove a post or lock a thread not being productive? If so then you are right. If you think that this is a magic fairy dust to cleanse the threads when no one is paying attention, you are playing the wrong game.
Compared to the tone and actions of several posters who have had their threads locked, a response or two asking them to calm down. Is not in my opinion that big of an issue.
I think you already know that I know it is not "magic fairy dust." The context of my initial statement is that is what we are advised to do--rather than engage with hostile posters.
In the case of the staff, they obviously don't have to flag (shouldn't that have to go without saying? Should I have to make that clear in what I said? Are we really that poorly skilled in reading comprehension and reaching conclusions on our own?), but they can respond with the administrative actions mentioned in my post: delete the offending post, ban the poster. Warnings and other moderative actions--like, indeed, asking the poster to calm down, is also of course what anyone here should expect.
Asking the poster to calm down is not what's happening, however. Look at the thread I linked to in my post. A poster made a brief, facetious remark ("when does the complaining begin?") that could have been easily passed by (and likely would have been had a more popular member of the forums made the statement). Two--TWO--staff members chose to engage that comment directly and build an argument ("You've filled your quota" for example)---not ask anyone to calm down, make it stop--or even point out that the initial comment was inappropriate. That's not moderating or administrating, that's troll-baiting. This was happening in the thread originally discussed here too. It's annoying enough when community members here engage in troll-baiting, but it's IMHO shameful when professional representatives of the company that owns this site do it too.
I appreciate the hours of work the staff put into gleaning valuable rules commentary out of the (often wonderful) mess of discussion on these boards--but then that's all the more reason that the actual game designers and developers shouldn't be posting unless absolutely necessary, because that's a waste of time for them. Take note of what's valuable, ignore what isn't, and move on, and leave the thread administration and moderation to their colleagues' whose job that is.
Thankfully mine doesn't matter. I like you do not own the website.
Indeed. But we both have our opinions, and it's nice to be able to express them. But what if all our threads were locked because we said something a staff member didn't want to hear--even if stated as civilly as possible? Where will the line be drawn?
I can understand--to a limited degree--a different policy in playtest threads, but the locked thread in question was not, in fact, in the playtest subforums (it was in the "General" section under Pathfinder RPG). Nor was the other thread I linked to where staff members were trollbaiting.
Thank god I don't own the Website. I'd be hideously draconian in my administration. ;p Like Gargamel with a flamethrower in a sea full of smurfs.
If was making a spring sale at my house, and some people started arguing saying thing i don´t want my kids to hear, i would invite them out, even if they were right in their discussion.
Right.
But that's different than joining the argument, and saying those things you don't want your kids to hear.
People are advocating the first, which is the mature thing to do.
And it's MY money, I don't have to buy things from your spring sale, and you're stuck with a garage full of stuff you can't sell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So by that reasoning, anyone should have the absolute freedom to kick, scream, spit, and curse, flooding the company-owed messageboards with negative post after negative post every time the designers present something they don't agree with (and even when they don't), all because they were one person among tens of thousands that spent a few bucks on books from this publisher?
Should people of that ilk just get chance after chance to stop the hostility (though they don't), or does it reach a point where they are no longer welcome on the messageboards they continue to poison with disrespectful, aggressive behavior to developers and other members of the community?
To use your "spring sale" analogy, if you keep letting aggressive people in that linger around consistently and drive others off, then eventually you don't have other customers, because those people drive everyone else away when folks come to expect a hostile environment. I own two retail businesses, and I don't hesitate for a second to escort loud, obnoxious people out of my stores. The folks left behind appreciate it, and are more likely to return if they see my stores don't put up with such behavior.
It is all about the environment the publishers and fans want to promote and flourish. I, for one, choose not to dump where I eat. Others may consider the same.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To put it another way, just because you bought food in a restaurant, and people talk in restaurants, does not mean you have the right to say whatever you want in a restaurant, especially if you're ruining other people's dining experience. It's the business of the management to decide if a customer is being too disruptive, to ask them to take it outside, or to offer to fix them a "to go" box so they can enjoy the food and their conversation in the privacy of their own home.
The customer is free to say "I'll never eat here again!" though if he says that before storming out, this can often be followed with "Thank the gods!" and applause from the other customers.
I, for one, choose not to dump where I eat. Others may consider the same.
Oh, man! [guffaw]
Unrelated note: Great interview on Chronicles, Brandon.
...but I do think Cartigan was right...
I disagree. Despite two civil warnings, he tested the dragon's patience and showed no trepidation in doing so, and his arrogance got the thread locked.
Paizo owns these forums. Their staff is the law here.
Ever been pulled over and got a warning from a cop for a minor traffic violation? They said not to do it again, right? Do you think for a second that if you pulled away and did the same thing seconds later that you would get another warning?
This thread lock was warranted (not that Jason needs my approval <_<;;).
...but I do think Cartigan was right...I disagree. Despite two civil warnings, he tested the dragon's patience and showed no trepidation in doing so, and his arrogance got the thread locked.
Paizo owns these forums. Their staff is the law here.
Ever been pulled over and got a warning from a cop for a minor traffic violation? They said not to do it again, right? Do you think for a second that if you pulled away and did the same thing seconds later that you would get another warning?
This thread lock was warranted (not that Jason needs my approval <_<;;).
I disagree. You have to follow the example you set even in your own house so to speak if you expect others to follow it. As for the cop example it annoys me to no end to see a cop speeding just because they can, no flashers, just speeding. I have seen them whip U-turns in the middle of the highway. Those who going to enforce the law/rule should be the first to follow the rule. I am not saying Cartigan is or is not argumentative, but if you realize a poster just won't ever give in then just don't ever respond to them.
Simply make a post saying that you will respond to the poster when you feel their behavior has changed.
As for the cop example it annoys me to no end to see a cop speeding just because they can, no flashers, just speeding. I have seen them whip U-turns in the middle of the highway. Those who going to enforce the law/rule should be the first to follow the rule.
As for the cop example it annoys me to no end to see a cop speeding just because they can, no flashers, just speeding. I have seen them whip U-turns in the middle of the highway. Those who going to enforce the law/rule should be the first to follow the rule.** spoiler omitted **
I don't think all cops break the rules. I did not want to come across as anti law enforcement I just felt like pointing out that being in charge of enforcing a rule does not allow one to break it at their convenience.
I think I'd die of shock if I saw a police car use turn signals on the freeway rather than thread lanes with no warning.
DeathQuaker isn't saying the wrong move was to lock the thread.
As I understood it, he(or she) meant that getting petty about it and arguing with the poster in question seems unprofessional, especially in light of the Paizo staff asking us NOT to do the same.
I have to agree.
DeathQuaker isn't saying the wrong move was to lock the thread.
As I understood it, he(or she) meant that getting petty about it and arguing with the poster in question seems unprofessional, especially in light of the Paizo staff asking us NOT to do the same.
I have to agree.
Yes, this. (She, for the record.)
The sale/restaurant analogies keep skipping context to miss the point. I agree with what nearly everyone's said here, but the issue at hand is getting buried for some reason. Let's try one more time. Please read carefully; if you disagree, fine:
Yes, people have the right to behave the way they want on their property (this is Paizo's site, and they can behave as they wish).
Yes, people have the right to boot out people they find distasteful (Paizo can and SHOULD delete offending posts and ban offensive posters).
But those same people are creating more work for themselves if they go out of their way to antagonize the distasteful visitors rather than simply ask them to leave or kick them out, as the fighting will inevitably escalate rather than cease. (If the Paizo staff start troll-baiting, and a FEW of them are, they are adding to the mess rather than fixing it.)
ETA: And while we're on it, if you're a bad host, you risk losing guests, helpful neighbors, and nice customers at your yard sales. You have the right to behave how you do, but that means you also must accept the consequences of your own behavior if it ends up reflecting poorly upon yourself. (Paizo has to bear in mind how it presents itself in its "home" and how that appears to people who spend money on their products. That's Customer Service and Marketing 101.)
And booting out everyone because of the behavior of one person means you risk irritating your neighbors and loyal customers, and the whole point of having your yard sale is lost. We call this "throwing out the baby with the bathwater." (Locking an entire thread because of a few snarky remarks from one person--rather than, say, having the Web Administrator delete the offensive posts--is not productive and shuts down the voices of loyal customers, not just the offensive poster.)
And, for that matter, saying "I can't let people into my garage if they act like that because I need to get my work done," is moot when the entire event took place out on the lawn. (Mr. Buhlman's response was to state that he needed to frequently lock unproductive threads in the playtest. This is completely fair, except the locked thread in question was not a playtest thread, but was in a different forum. I pointed to another thread where staff were acting like the people they object to, also not a playtest thread.)
If you disagree, fine. If you choose to ignore the contexts put forth by this post because... idk, you just want to disagree with me no matter what I say because I said something negative about Paizo or you don't like my shirt, that's fine too (I would just personally prefer that if you disagree, you disagree in context of the discussion, that's all). The world will continue to turn, somehow. I just want to be clear this isn't about the rights of ownership in general, this has to do with specific issues of professionalism and inconsistent standards set and applied by the representatives of the company that owns this board. I'll leave this be, now. Go about your day and enjoy it.
|
|
I just want to be clear this isn't about the rights of ownership in general, this has to do with specific issues of professionalism and inconsistent standards set and applied by the representatives of the company that owns this board.
Really?, you make it sound like this is a daily occurence that some Paizo staffer comes in here and steps on someone. I've rarely seen them pushed to the point of needing to lock a thread. I find it particularly amusing that to make your point, Trollbaiting, had to be added to the mix of Paizo sins.
Frankly, I'm glad the thread got locked - I find the poster in to be one of the Top 5 who generally can't play nice in any thread they jump in to, and I think it's fair that eventually someone comes in and asks them to play nice.
If we want to continue using restaurant anologies, it's not the one time they came into the restaurant that was the problem ... it's the fact that they come in daily, and every time they come in they start throwing hissy fits at the other guests and the chef at the back.
And to really take the restaurant metaphor to ridiculous levels in consideration of Deathquaker's concerns, even if the establishment has a sign in big, bold letters on the door that says "No Yelling," can the wait staff be really blamed for raising their voices when some customer is going around kicking tables, throwing frantic fits, and spitting in other people's food during every service?
Sure, the chef's brief lapse of civility my raise a hackle or two, but I think reasonable customers will be relieved that their food is free from excrement.
I like your shirt, for the record. =-)
We support and agree with Jason on this. We also have no problem with new alt classes or whatever you want to call them.
Really?, you make it sound like this is a daily occurence that some Paizo staffer comes in here and steps on someone. I've rarely seen them pushed to the point of needing to lock a thread. I find it particularly amusing that to make your point, Trollbaiting, had to be added to the mix of Paizo sins.
Frankly, I'm glad the thread got locked - I find the poster in to be one of the Top 5 who generally can't play nice in any thread they jump in to, and I think it's fair that eventually someone comes in and asks them to play nice.
If we want to continue using restaurant anologies, it's not the one time they came into the restaurant that was the problem ... it's the fact that they come in daily, and every time they come in they start throwing hissy fits at the other guests and the chef at the back.
+1
We support and agree with Jason on this. We also have no problem with new alt classes or whatever you want to call them.
*offers crate of marshmallow peeps to the Big Red Dragon as apology for kicking this dead horse one more time*
Ultimately, just because you can jump into a thread and be a Rabid Troll does not mean you should. There are several posters on the forums whom generate large amounts of eye-rolling and groans from the gaming group when we log on to check up on a favourite thread or to clarify a ruling.
We come to the forums for advice from, and to talk to, fellow gamers and, shock and horror, Paizo people who actually will come into a thread and jaw with their target audience, something akin to, if you'll pardon the useage of WoW, waiting for an Instance to 'pop' and Christ Metzen appears and asks if you'd like to do the damn thing with him. (( You show me a 'big' company in this industry that has people who take the time and effort to come out and do what Paizo does and I'll be amazed! )) Not trawl through page after page of some demented rules-lawyer or fire-resistant Troll come in and derails a topic, or creates a topic for no other reason than to say "I think this is wrong and Paizo should immediately change to suit my whims!"
Unlike a normal group of gamers, we're not in close proximity to each other. We do not have the ability to throw food/dice/manuals/chairs/smaller gamers at each other to get somebody to shut up and get on with the job at hand. We may not engage in Thumb Wars to see whose turn it is to pick up the pizza. There is no [sarcasm][/sarcasm] function on the boards. We may have to shun an Internet Tradition and actually speak to each other without resorting to "No U!" or contests of whose bile is the most toxic.
We support and agree with Jason on this. We also have no problem with new alt classes or whatever you want to call them.
I'd just like to take this moment to quote Jason from the specific thread being discussed:
And please lay off using "we". Please speak for yourself.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just want to be clear this isn't about the rights of ownership in general, this has to do with specific issues of professionalism and inconsistent standards set and applied by the representatives of the company that owns this board.Frankly, I'm glad the thread got locked - I find the poster in to be one of the Top 5 who generally can't play nice in any thread they jump in to, and I think it's fair that eventually someone comes in and asks them to play nice.
I agree with this 100%, quite frankly.
I actually find that the Paizo staff is VERY professional in dealing with problem posters ... if anything, they are probably a little TOO willing to let rude and obnoxious behavior continue.
Rarely do staff members lock a thread, and when they do, I've always found it to be more than warranted.
Also, regardless of your distaste for the poster, their perceived caustic tone, the subject matter of their debate - stop calling them a troll.
Trolling is disruption for the sake of disruption. Arguing/strenuously debating a point is not trolling.
Calling people trolls is a personal insult/abuse, and is against the rules here.
We support and agree with Jason on this. We also have no problem with new alt classes or whatever you want to call them.
I'd just like to take this moment to quote Jason from the specific thread being discussed:
And please lay off using "we". Please speak for yourself.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I think that the remark was meant to be "in character". Note the name.
More on topic, I agree that it is a bit unprofessional for Jason and Mark to have replied the way they did, however, I don't have a problem with it. They're human (i think), with all sorts of emotions and feelings and stuff. They can be provoked and baited just like anyone else.
As for law enforcement, about a year ago I fulfilled a life-long ambition to stop a police officer and tell him that his vehicle lights were faulty :)
That is what we have been doing here. :)