I must have misunderstood, I didn't take your comment to mean you thought their sales/reputation would suffer if they took sides, I thought you were making some kind of normative claim about how moderation "should" be done.Both actually. But when you use agenda, it has all sorts of meanings. I we just use it in connection with moderating, moderating is SUPPOSE to be even handed. If your promoting an agenda(whatever it is) then you cant be even handed.
Well, this is what I was querying. Why is it "supposed" to be even handed? I don't think it's desirable to allow all points of view equal airtime (happy if they silence people who are aggressive, for example). I don't see why evenhanded moderation is desirable.
I don't really agree it will be net negative for them, even if they alienate some customers. I'm not in any position to argue the point though.
Business job is to attract customers. If moderating problems(and there appears to be some given the thread that was started) then it can drive folks away. Businesses tend to err on the side of what keeps cutomers(unless you are games workshop, which is a completely different argument).
To use CGL as an example, their battletech boards have issues in moderation. It HAS driven folks away, myself included. Speaking to others driven away, we all had planned on buying but not anymore.
Its a minor example. I could us GW just as well. Where as say, privateer press forums are an excellent example of whats going right.
What I was referring to was the net benefit of running their forums the way they do. I spend much more money here due to the style of moderation (and other ways they interact with the community). Taking a stance will drive some customers away or reduce their enjoyment of the company, but it will also attract some and increase their enjoyment.
I have no idea whether its a net positive overall to prosecute an agenda beyond selling your product.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would generally prefer that as well. I have no idea how well their software supports it compared to the messageboard software that other sites like ENWorld have.
I do wish they would edit posts rather than delete them, the way other boards do (edits are noted in another color that others cannot post in, like red, so people know they have been modded), but they've stated several times that they're not going to do that.
If we did that, it could easily (and likely) turn to posters accusing us of putting words in their mouth, or changing what they said, etc.
Can o' worms better left unopened.
It's less a question of editing the post's content, more of sticking in a moderator comment in a differently colored text calling out the bad behavior and telling people to play nice. There's no can of worms or slippery slope and no need to delete it and follow-up posts leading people to wonder what just happened here. The bad behavior becomes an example which, I think, makes it clearer what the boundaries of behavior are. The ambiguity of why some posts disappear, I think and I hope you're understanding from our comments in this thread, is a can of worms itself. If you think moderating in-post is one, then it's a question of which can of worms produces better results for the board.
|
Bill,
Removing the posts is the best way to NOT promote bad behavior. If they leave it up all it does is cause more inflammatory comments to be said about the post. A flame is a flame... once said it spreads just like a flame needs oxygen to survive so does an inflammatory comment. It needs to be put out and removed.
Having been a moderator once before (commenting on the even handed moderation posts above Bill's coment) for WotC, even handed does not happen when you have humans doing the moderation. It is a judgment basis and as a human we are going to apply our own agenda when doing so, even though we as a moderator might not try to sometimes. That is the same for Paizo. They have been very good at moderation for this site and it is one of the many reasons I come here to this site as do others I know. If a person replies in a controversial topic, one might expect your comments to be heard so to speak but it might also be removed because it caused problems too. Expect it and if it comes to happen then you have no one to blame but yourself. Like it or not that is always the case.
To be honest I think this site has some of the most even handed moderation I have seen across other forums. They allow fairly for some fairly meaty topics on here, even about their own products and good or bad they allow them to happen for the most part. Of course there are always going to be topics where the thread will either get locked and or removed and I know this and hope others do too. This is fair and spelled out in their Terms of Service agreement we all agree to when we come here and post. Sure some people will never agree with Paizo on how they do things but one only has to look at the popularity of these forums to know that people keep coming back!
This is one of the best run sites I have seen in the RPG industry. If I were to go over to another RPG site I do not see the type of even handed moderation existing, in fact it is so bad the forums are mostly inflammatory and dispassionate by the users it is almost pathetic to see and one of the main reasons I no longer go to those forums. I for one am glad moderation is done the way it is and to be honest I would keep going the way they are.
We only have to look at this thread to see they listen to us and the fact this discussion is even happening shows they care!!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How many employees do you think Paizo has?
Not only do I entirely doubt any of that would occur on Paizo's boards, I don't even know how you are possibly coming to that conclusion. I don't think your prediction is even remotely realistic. *shrug*(They could even participate in 'heated' threads - well, all but 1 could, theoretically. They just couldn't moderate anyone else in there with them. The one(s) who aren't in there, could moderate as usual.)
Not very many. Though I have seen a rather surprising number of Paizo employees taking part in various thread - way more than I thought there would be, and more than I though would have time and/or be available. Hence my measured comment above.
They have jobs to do, of which moderation is only one. Probably not their most important one either. If the involved staffer doesn't moderate there is a longer delay in moderation. Maybe much longer. More replies get eliminated as a result, the thread becomes less coherent (many posts contain a lot of information beyond replying to something in another post that initially gets moderated). More information lost due to delaying moderation.
Indeed, a possible trade-off. (Though nothing close to what Deanoth suggested, which was what my comment above was specifically addressing.)
(Please be aware that nowhere did I say they have terrible - or even poor - moderation. I do think, however, that there is definitely room for improvement.)
|
|
Arnwyn,
With human moderation there is always room for improvement. But there should be the adverse too, room for being able to make some mistakes or I dare say heavier handed decisions with bias. This is not to say that it should happen, but moderators/developers are human after all and prone to doing so.
Paizo has done well with their moderation and while you may or may not agree with me, I would not change the way they do things at the moment. I want them to be able to participate in threads, as this promotes discussion. All staff members regardless of participating in threads or not, upon seeing a post where a person is being inflammatory, needs to be able to stop said poster and deal with it immediately. You may not agree with me, but they have been able to do so thus far without a problem in my opinion. If the discussion is on a controversial topic, a poster needs to be aware that their post can be removed for any number of reasons. One where Paizo does not necessarily need to tell the poster the reason why. That is the nature of posting in a thread that is controversial.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
So since I'm a blue tentacle dog, what does that make me?"It"
Although your name sounds vaguely like it's derived from norse mythology and female.
Actually, you're a lion, at least if the fluff-text can be believed, and inherently closest to the "male" gender (as is the entire race) as you [url=http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/templates/zombie#TOC-Void-Zombie-CR-1-]implant your spawn in other creatures to grow (though it doesn't conform to our standard model). That said, all this is a pedantic way of noting that The Dragon is correct, you'd most accurately be identified as "it".
I don't think that shackles designers or mods and leaves them unable to post or engage with the community...There's no attempt to be anything but forthright and to the point. I don't think such comments go against the message board rules simply because they don't come off as friendly, but I see an awful lot of flagging going on in those threads and moderation usually lands on a post no more egregious than any other.
Well, except that in general, I like it when Jessica does it, even when we don't agree. She is so open and honest that I appreciate her viewpoints even when I disagree with them.
Same with SKR.
I think too much of the flagging is done to get rid of posts with good arguments that the "other side" wants deleted.
I do miss Ross, tho.
This is a very good point. I am quite fond of the staff posting all over the place, even when they have a horse in the race.
The big debates just aren't for me anymore. I used to get a lot of enrichment and edification out of them, but thread locks and post deletes stifled that for me.I think part of this is the big debates have gotten, well, bigger. Even the ones that stay relatively civil get more and more likely to have people in them that will argue anything to death, and a large enough pool of participants that the same arguments will be repeated ad nauseum.
I've spent time on long, thoughtful posts in a lot of these threads, only to have it turn out to being like shouting into a thunderstorm. No one offended or hurt, just no return on my investment.
This, I think, is really the relevant point here.
The moderators are, ultimately, human. I kind of think of it as similar to parenting - you can tell your child "no" only so many ways before you start to get grumpy about it. The child means no harm, but you're tired, and, frankly, you just get frustrated.
This does not mean that they are entirely excused from bad moderating - but this does mean that we need to understand where they're coming from.
Anyone who's read my post history or even my "About Tacticslion" page knows that I'm a right-wing nut-job. I'm pretty much everything the more liberal side of anything in the U.S. would loath, from my religion, to my politics, to my ethics, to my morals.
In many other forums (and occasionally real life), it has been made known to me that not only was I a horrid human being (due to gender/race*/religion*/politics*/etc) but I would do the world a favor if I died in a fire, but preferably slowly and painfully.
That has almost never occurred here on the Paizo forums, or if it has, it's either been moderated very quickly, or altered by the poster in question after realizing they were out of line. And it has never been true of the staff.
I do disagree with the staff - I disagree with many of their decisions, and politics (and methods of espousal), and game-mechanics, and moderation choices, and so on.
I'm vocal about that disagreement.
But I think they're all great people, and I'm grateful that they're here. I deeply respect them and the work they do. I appreciate the fact that they (or many of them) can take that disagreement with a grain of salt, recognize the lack of ill-intent behind it, and not tell me I'm a degenerate scum-bag whom they would rather see die than continue to spew my "hate speech"* i.e. disagreeing with them on something.
I know I can come off as overbearing and annoying - it's something I seek to avoid, but something that happens anyway*. DQ is right: I'm a passionate geek. I love this place, the people, and the game that we all have in common; I love that this is a place that is so open to others, even when they have opposing view points. I love that people here are actively open to discourse and disagreement and that there are people that I strongly disagree with that I love to see post, because it's always well thought-out and well-spoken.
I'm even kind of fond of some of the jerks around here*.
Do I think there is a moderation bias? Yes.
Do I think it's a problem? Sometimes, but not for the most part.
The use of vulgar language (as in the example of the OP) is one thing that is offensive to me, personally, and harms my enjoyment of the forums as a place of discourse, and also makes me hesitant to ever bring my son here**. Not because I disagree with the view expressed, but the manner of expressing them is inappropriate. To that end, I agree with the OP. I also agree with the poster who made the otherwise linguistically offensive post: I'm really glad the hobby has moved beyond those horrid days and has diversified and become something more and something better as a result. That form of misogyny (or any similarly hateful speech or cultural leaning*) is actually really hard for me to fathom is exactly the kind of thing I want gone, from this forum, from our hobby, and from our culture in general.
And, for the most part, I think the moderation staff does that.
(Similarly, if anyone of you are reading this, the development team, or any other team or group: if I disagree with you, it's for the purpose of discourse, not the purpose of yelling at you, tone-deaf as the internet may be. I'm really, really grateful you talk to and respond to us, please don't ever feel that I'm putting on you, and if I seem to be, just let me know.)
What I want for our hobby is that I can proudly tell people that I play Pathfinder.
* Which is one of those great ironies, really. (This phrase applies to so many things!)
** Super ultra conservative, remember? Look, I warned you I was a nut-job...
I think others have noticed this, they then flag posts which they disagree with, in the hopes they will go bye-bye in the general purge.
In at least one case, one poster even stated they were doing this and encouraged others to Flag.
I really don't know if you mean me or not, however I've noted in the past when I've flagged things for being offensive and have encouraged others (on both sides of any given debate) to do the same - either to the post I flagged or just for a set of posts that revolved around that issue in the first place.
For me, I want to clarify: I do not do such things to silence opposition. In general, I'm glad if I'm proven incorrect, because then I learn. The reason I encourage such things (usually my encouragement includes flagging the post that I encourage flagging posts) is because something is offensive behavior in general, is cluttering up the thread, and/or was being handled badly by all parties involved.
(I think my posts on this line are something very similar to, "I find this offensive and am flagging it. Please feel free to flag this one as well." or "I would generally encourage people to flag this post and the ones preceding it, as they are offensive <and/or> off topic." sometimes with, "If it was not intended to be offensive, than my apologies, as it comes off that way to me.")
If that is bad behavior, please let me know. Again, I'm interested in improving myself as well.
If that's not me you're referring to... okay then.
:)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Tacticslion
I would never judge you for your gender, race, or religion. I judge people solely on their politics!
(Edit: maybe their sense of humor too)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@ Tacticslion
I would never judge you for your gender, race, or religion. I judge people solely on their politics!(Edit: maybe their sense of humor too)
... well played, sir. Well played. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't judge. Out loud.
TOZ! You're not supposed to say it!
That's just vulgar.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it time to say "OFF WITH THEIR HEADS" yet?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...I really don't know if you mean me or not, however I've noted in the past when I've flagged things for being offensive and have encouraged others (on both sides of any given debate) to do the same - either to the post I flagged or just for a set of posts that revolved around that issue in the first place.
If that's not me you're referring to... okay then.
Great post, except that it's too long. ;-)
No, I most emphatically don't mean you. Even when I disagree with your posts, I respect your viewpoints. Same with DQ. I mean, we both post rather controversially, so disagreement is to be expected.
You guys obviously love the game and respect the devs- even when you disagree with their calls.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Great post, except that it's too long. ;-)
You just described, like, all of my posts!
EDIT:And the same to you, sir! :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone who's read my post history or even my "About Tacticslion" page knows that I'm a right-wing nut-job. I'm pretty much everything the more liberal side of anything in the U.S. would loath, from my religion, to my politics, to my ethics, to my morals.
But– but– How can this be? We've favorited each other's posts before! :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Great post, except that it's too long. ;-)You just described, like, all of my posts!
EDIT:And the same to you, sir! :)
You know humor doesn't come across well in the internet, and a lot of people don't get my sense of humor... kudos to you, sir.
(Bows and doffs his hat, gives secret pompous self-important wind-bag handshake.)
The secret shake!
Sssshhhhhhh! We shouldn't let these... these... plebeians know!
(Replies in kind.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone who's read my post history or even my "About Tacticslion" page knows that I'm a right-wing nut-job.
I thought I knew you, man.
Anyone who's read my post history or even my "About Tacticslion" page knows that I'm a right-wing nut-job.I thought I knew you, man.
:(
*sniff*| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone who's read my post history or even my "About Tacticslion" page knows that I'm a right-wing nut-job.I thought I knew you, man.
:(
*sniff*
Look what your website has wrought, Paizo!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*checks Tacticslion's profile*
Hey he seems to be a really nice guyyyyyaaaaAAAAAMURICAN NUTCASE! SET EURO RAYS FOR FULL DEBAUCHERY! AIM! FEUER!
Hey! I'll have you know I lived in Europe*! Once**!
Also: ow! Euro-rays! They sting the eye-balls!
* (Lithuania, to be precise. It was just post-Soviet Union, though, so it was kinda rough sometimes.)
** (Slightly-less-than-a-decade on-and-off counts as "once", right?***)
*** (I mean, I missed the existence of the Spice Girls - among other things - because of our life there. That's... apparently really weird.)
EDIT 1 and 3: on a related note, Denmark was probably the most magical place on earth. I mean, dudes, Legos. Entire shops of them! And they spoke English (and usually seven other languages, at least) with no accent... at Burger King!
And as for all you Poles, yes, I've heard all those jokes, but they were about you. I know they're about Lithuanians where you come from (or at least that's what all the Poles I knew told me, but I am gullible). It's generally hilarious that way. :)
EDIT 2: I really don't know how this thread suddenly became all about me, but, you know, self-important windbag that I am, I'm totally cool with this. Also speaking of moderation, I'm kind of expecting a lot of these things to get deleted soon. Which is totes okay. I understand - it's pretty far off topic by now... <.<
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What were we talking about, again?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Works for me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What were we talking about, again?We were affirming that everyone but me is totally wrong about whatever we were talking about!
()
"Works for me!" -
OR
"You said it, I didn't!"
OR
"Hey, this derail is supposed to be all about me! Don't derail my derail by trying to make it all about you!"
OR
"Actually, you're wrong!"
OR
"Your face is wrong about whatever we're talking about!"
OR
"No! I'm always wrong, not you!"
...
...
...
... and so on. I've forgotten more than I wrote up above in the process of writing those. Heh.
EDIT:
I know that some movie titles are not allowed here on Paizo....like "Faster "Kitty" Cat! Kill! Kill!"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, the Paizo messageboard ecosystem in all its splendor.
Fawtls are like mushrooms, breaking down dead material into humus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
WE ARE EVERYWHERE.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, the Paizo messageboard ecosystem in all its splendor.
Fawtls are like mushrooms, breaking down dead material into humus.
What's a FAWTLS?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What's a FAWTLS?Ah, the Paizo messageboard ecosystem in all its splendor.
Fawtls are like mushrooms, breaking down dead material into humus.
What's happening to this thread is a FAWTL. TOZ is a FAWTL.
Somehow, against all odds, I am not a FAWTL. I know not why. I am spiritually aligned with FAWTL, I just never drank the cool aid or battery acid or whatever it is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can you define the term, please.
Thanks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Forums Are Way Too Long!
Also, SMURF!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Forums Are Way Too Long
and its not a drink
we just eat wall candy
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe we were just moderated without bias
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you passionate about something, you're not impartial. Moderation has to be applied EQUALLY.
Why? I don't see any rational basis to argue that all opinions are equally valid or acceptable.
|
Why? I don't see any rational basis to argue that all opinions are equally valid or acceptable.
If you passionate about something, you're not impartial. Moderation has to be applied EQUALLY.
Just curious, but what is the ration basis that all opinions are not equally valid or acceptable? And further who is to decide that. That's pretty far outside of a mods place or , I don't know, qualification. So who decides? Isn't that basically the point of a forum, to discuss different views, opinions and experiences, and to be able to see that of others, and decide for yourself?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why? I don't see any rational basis to argue that all opinions are equally valid or acceptable.
If you passionate about something, you're not impartial. Moderation has to be applied EQUALLY.
So much this.
You are entitled to your opinion.
Just because you are entitled to it doesn't mean it is actually a valid point or worthy of consideration. It certainly doesn't mean that the opinion equal to every other opinion out there.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just curious, but what is the ration basis that all opinions are not equally valid or acceptable? And further who is to decide that. That's pretty far outside of a mods place or , I don't know, qualification. So who decides? Isn't that basically the point of a forum, to discuss different views, opinions and experiences, and to be able to see that of others, and decide for yourself?Why? I don't see any rational basis to argue that all opinions are equally valid or acceptable.
If you passionate about something, you're not impartial. Moderation has to be applied EQUALLY.
Simpey -- an idiot's opinion that the world is flat isn't equally valid as an expert's researched position that the world is more of a roundish shape (approximating a sphere).
Everyone is allowed an opinion -- just because you have one doesn't mean that opinion is the equal to another.
It's one of the biggest fallacies out there, and goes by the name of false equivalency.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just curious, but what is the ration basis that all opinions are not equally valid or acceptable? And further who is to decide that. That's pretty far outside of a mods place or , I don't know, qualification. So who decides? Isn't that basically the point of a forum, to discuss different views, opinions and experiences, and to be able to see that of others, and decide for yourself?Why? I don't see any rational basis to argue that all opinions are equally valid or acceptable.
If you passionate about something, you're not impartial. Moderation has to be applied EQUALLY.Simpey -- an idiot's opinion that the world is flat isn't equally valid as an expert's researched position that the world is more of a roundish shape (approximating a sphere).
Everyone is allowed an opinion -- just because you have one doesn't mean that opinion is the equal to another.
It's one of the biggest fallacies out there, and goes by the name of false equivalency.
Only real difference here is that we aren't dealing with learned experts in many of these discussions, but rather folks on the internet with spare time hashing out whether X ruling is right or why can't crossbows do a zillion points of damage because of an article I read on wiki or the various alignment/religion/sex/race threads floating about, which is pretty much opinion. Some opinions are more popular, have more followers, or have people that have zero problem shouting down the other side.
but that was not what was asked. he asked what the rational basis for claiming all opinions are not created equal.
i provided that.
now what opinions are or are not equal is a subject for its own thread.
but that was not what was asked. he asked what the rational basis for claiming all opinions are created equal.
i provided that.
now what opinions are or are not equal is a subject for its own thread.
Very true, my apology. And that new thread would likely be a huge one as well. :/
agreed.