Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a thread I had created several days ago, I had touched on suggestions for GW to help avoid situations like this past week's. That thread served its purpose and I have no interest in perpetuating any residual bad blood that it's relation to an even hotter thread might cast into the future. Though I hope mine was a bit more productive, or at least not as contentious, they can all spiral down into the forum abyss, and I will be happier for it. As we bid them farewell, I hope we have learned from them, if nothing else.
Getting back to the constructive suggestions, I would like to see us take what we have learned, and fashion together what we hope to create, in the way of community crowdforging - primarily, how GW will collect our views on a given topic.
I know Ryan has posted that he thought the "thread that shall not be named" was helpful. Though I disagree on several points, I will move forward with the hope that it at least instilled within us a desire to avoid such future conflicts, and rather, hold truly productive debates. I have no problem with a heated debate when we keep to the topic, know the desired end result, and clearly know what will be done with those results. To me, debate brings the possibility of educating others, which leads to the further possibility of reinforcing opinions or even changing opinions. Arguments, especially volatile arguments, involve far too much emotion, which is not, to me, the same as being passionate (and still rational) about a topic.
Here were my suggestions from that other thread:
I would suggest that when GW seeks our community input on topics as potentially heated as the Land Rush, that the parameters of the discussion topic, the desired end result, and their intended reaction to those results are clear. I would further suggest that GW allows the community an opportunity to ask clarifying questions before the trigger is pulled on such a discussion, and that the discussion is moderated in a fair and consistent manner.
I am not suggesting that discussions be so narrowly defined as to eliminate the value of tangent discussions, but every decently run meeting (these discussion seems akin to meetings on a large scale) begins with an agenda so that participants know the objectives and the moderator can corral less focused participants back on task.
As a final thought, it is true that the most frequent and vocal posters may seem to monopolize the discussion, but an experienced Community Manager reads every post and keeps a tally of how many people they are hearing from and how on target each comment is to the discussion at hand. Barring comment does very little to foster the perception of inclusion.
----------------------------
I welcome my fellow PFO community members to share your thoughts on how we can help GW better garner our opinions in the future.
PS: Someone had suggested earlier that I change my avatar so that it not include EoX, thus making it clear that I'm only speaking for myself when that is the case. If I'm speaking as the EoX Ambassador, I make it very clear at the beginning of any post. Regardless, should it matter what tags any of us wear if our posts are sound and our intentions sincere?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the biggest issue that caused those threads to devolve into personal attacks is the fact that people were allowed to question the motives of the posters. People also stated how much weight their voice has due to how well known they are. When a person states "People should listen to me because I'm so reasonable and well known", it leads to "Don't listen to him, he has an ulterior motive and is being disingenuous". Instead of debating the topic it turns into debating the posters. I believe this goes against the spirit of Crowd Forging. Those comments should be moderated and removed.
As a caveat, I feel this only applies when a thread starts out or is designated very early on that it intends to be used as a Crowd Forging thread. Doing it halfway through the thread is too late. In normal threads it should be expected that your motives will be questioned and players should be expected to counter that without moderators help. I feel the moderators have done a great job of stepping in only when people have crossed the line into personal attacks. I also feel the community has done a great job of setting their own boundaries and admonishing those who do not follow them.
Guessing people's true motives and trying to convince others of yours is apart of a nation building game.
Just my two cents!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Firstly, thank you Hobs for your even keeled, level-headed, steady, and consistent approach in everything you do here and as the EoX Ambassador. You are a true asset to this community and I greatly appreciate your input.
Regarding your question on tags, I concur that what tag we wear should not matter if our intentions are sincere.
Regarding the crowdforging suggestions- Some of what I saw that I thought was unproductive were the same posters, posting the same opinions, again and again and again. From a crowdforging perspective, this makes it more difficult (I would think) for the moderators to tease out the new points of view and new arguments for or against a particular position.
My suggestion would be to have some statement up front to encourage posters to state their positions, with supporting info, once and leave it at that. Understandably there will be debate on a topic, so if the poster forms a new opinion or position or can clarify something as part of that process, OK to post again, but don't just reiterate what you had already said previously.
Make your posts "meaningful", think to yourself "does this post add to the conversation? Does it clarify a statement? Does it offer and alternative solution to the issue?" If the answer is yes, post. If its no, don't post.
And lastly, I agree with Kirane; posters should refrain from the "I'm right, your wrong" and instead focus on the "I think it should be this because that."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Two suggestions I have to make threads less toxic.
1. When the vast majority of the posters in a thread repeatedly convey that they understand Option A has already been ruled out, don't introduce the idea that the only remaining option is Option A and then chastise the developers for allowing confusion to reign when they come back in and clarify that Option A was never an option.
2. Don't pat the most vilely insulting posters on these forums on the head and say "good boy" while decrying all the incivility on these forums.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Repeatedly posting the same exact message time and time again should be avoided. Especially during the midst of heated discussions where it will serve no purpose other than to spam that message and further inflame matters.
Also, I often see posts that ask for clarity on other posts in a way that seems to be an attempt to instigate. Simple misunderstandings or questions for clarity like that would usually be better handled in private message form, and the unclear poster to edit their post to be more clear. Instead what happens now is misunderstandings happen, both sides jump to the defensive, and everything escalates.
People should also try to avoid speaking for the community or on behalf of the community. The only people one should speak for is oneself, or a group that has appointed one to speak for them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My suggestion would be to have some statement up front to encourage posters to state their positions, with supporting info, once and leave it at that. Understandably there will be debate on a topic, so if the poster forms a new opinion or position or can clarify something as part of that process, OK to post again, but don't just reiterate what you had already said previously.
I agree with this, but not until a certain point has been reached. Some back and forth I think is good but there always reaches a point where people are just talking in circles, or it starts to get personal.
At that point I think is a good time for "Closing Arguments." 1 more post per person.|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two suggestions I have to make threads less toxic.
1. When the vast majority of the posters in a thread repeatedly convey that they understand Option A has already been ruled out, don't introduce the idea that the only remaining option is Option A and then chastise the developers for allowing confusion to reign when they come back in and clarify that Option A was never an option.
2. Don't pat the most vilely insulting posters on these forums on the head and say "good boy" while decrying all the incivility on these forums.
I am attempting to move forward, having learned from all our potential past mistakes - players and GW employees alike. Whether you believe me or not (I have no ability nor desire to change your mind), I am attempting to get as many different voices into this discussion to come up with guidelines we can all agree to. We don't all have to, but then, we'll end up right where we are, which doesn't seem like a very productive place. And I mean productive for every one of us as players of a game we've all waited a very long time to enjoy, not just productive for this or that side as competitors.
I would appeal to anyone who attempts to keep grinding the ax of recent or even long past events to set those issues aside, at least in here. If we can't try to agree - not demand of each other, but agree - on how we can help GW better garner our opinions and discuss that which we are asked to discuss for all our mutual benefit, then why are we on these forums at all? My guild, your guild, whomever - most of the squabbling truly produces very little net benefit. If you're bent on attacking each other, wait until the game, where we actually will have tangible reasons to compete. But if the game isn't going to be toxic, it has to begin with the players not treating each other in a toxic fashion. All of us who have been on these boards this long have some amount of blame to bear, but we can all start agreeing to a short list of, "I'll at least not do this <fill in the blank> while we try to help GW make the game better by our input."
I'm not even asking to agree on what kind of game or what playstyle or any commitment affecting in-game anything, just a short list of our version of Robert's Rules that those who want to participate (and that doesn't mean a council or privileged few, but anyone) can agree upon.
Again, if we can't agree upon something this simple, something only to benefit the game and everyone equally, we will never be able to compete in-game without equally attacking the player behind the characters. What a lost opportunity that would be.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Avari,
Thank you for contributing. I agree with all of these, especially Team Speak. Something about hearing who you are debating with and being able to correct misconceptions in a heartbeat is hugely valuable. Organized public discussions on topics the Devs have asked us to discuss would be super.
Less spamming - certainly. Less babysitting, I also agree, so long as providing us an outline of the topics to discuss, the objectives to cover, and possible end results when those ojectives are met are not being viewed as babysitting.
PMs to clear up questions or even disagreements are fine, so long as too many interested participants aren't kept out of the loop because they are not included in the PM.
Thank you again.
1. When the vast majority of the posters in a thread repeatedly convey that they understand Option A has already been ruled out, don't introduce the idea that the only remaining option is Option A and then chastise the developers for allowing confusion to reign when they come back in and clarify that Option A was never an option.
3. Remember that being passive aggressive is toxic
4. Being overly aggressive is just as toxic.
5. Looking at four and realizing that its meaning was in one and two.
0. Make sure your post isn't some b~*&#@$% disguise for more bickering.
I'm going to drop the theater masks for a moment and say: NO. NO. Like I'm talking to a dog who just peed on my rug. NO. Move on. If you really think we need to keep arguing, go back to the Pax thread.
And now the people in my AoW PbP are probably giving dirty looks at the subforum I apparently have time for, so I'm gonna do that thing where I say I'm leaving, leave, and then come back, except I'm actually gonna leave this time. It's Sunday, after all, the day where no excuses fly.
NO. NO. Like I'm talking to a dog who just peed on my rug. NO.
This is a reference, by the way. It's also me talking down to people, but I'm talking down to their attitudes, not them themselves. I just want to clarify that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
NO. NO. Like I'm talking to a dog who just peed on my rug. NO.This is a reference, by the way. It's also me talking down to people, but I'm talking down to their attitudes, not them themselves. I just want to clarify that.
Good, because I was having trouble with the whole kobold-talking-down-to-people image.
I'm very concerned that Nihimon and others are simply not going to drop the issue. That is childish behavior, and I want to call it out as such, but I don't want people to think I no longer respect them. I just don't respect how they're behaving right now. :P
I'm not at my most cogent right now, of course, as I'm going between the browser and Open Office writing up a presentation for Monday.
General posts asking for civility have been derailed. Attempts to ignore the repeated instances of passive-aggressive or outright-aggressive remarks have amounted to nothing.
So I'm going to call out Nihimon and ask him to display his well-known community-mindedness and common sense. Enough. He's been heard, he made some good points. It's over. I truly have no idea what is going to be accomplished by this.
I do apologize for the dog thing, though. I couldn't find a clip, so I probably should've just passed on the reference. Without Jontron delivering it, it just comes off as an insult.
No entiendo la frenchyspeaky. Pero, I really think the fact that you think I'm saying "let it go" too often is evidence enough that the people I'm talking to ain't taking my advice.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No entiendo la frenchyspeaky. Pero, I really think the fact that you think I'm saying "let it go" too often is evidence enough that the people I'm talking to ain't taking my advice.
Perhaps, but does the fact that they aren't taking it mean that it's helpful to keep giving it when trying to get people to stop talking about it?
And considering that Nihimon hasn't posted anything in nearly six hours points me toward giving him a chance to have stopped talking about it.
I find it much more helpful than standing back and letting them bash their heads against walls.
Then again, I'm starting to get the sense that I've been losing my rustic charm ever since I stopped only doing jokes. So maybe I should cut back on giving people advice. As I just said in a PM where I took offense at a remark not directed at me: Blarg.
I need to get some fresh air. And finish the g#~*&+n presentation. I'm gonna hide this thread for now so I'm not tempted to hang around waiting for a response anymore.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Kobold,
We'll be fine. Personally, I have a thick skin and a determination to move ahead regardless, but thanks for the concern. :)
What are you suggestions for how we should attempt to structure discussions? I know you chaotics would rather not have any rules, but at least a few, just to make the rest of us more secure? ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
A strategy I have adopted when posting:
1) I do not try to convince others of either their wrongness or my rightness.
2) I share whatever I have to share and then STFU about it. Once my point has been made, which might take a couple, three posts if I fail I initially to express my thoughts clearly, I don't belabor the matter any further.
3) I respect that other people have opinions different from mine and that they have every right to express them.
4) I don't give a... care... whether others agree or disagree, even violently, with my opinions. I simply express them and move on.
5) I remind myself to listen to and consider the thoughts and opinions of others; I try to listen more than I talk.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thanks, ArchAnjel.
I'd like to hear from a few more groups, and again, this is nothing binding...simply people attempting to explore some basic structure within which we can share ideas and even agree to disagree, if at least it generates productive feedback for GW when they ask for it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll show my Southern US farming roots and lead with a simple phrase we use hereabouts: Cull Your Nuts. We don't need a "police force" to go around and ensure posts are staying on a strict course. That will likely just lead to calls of censorship, suppression of dissenting voices, etc. What we could most definitely use is "internal policing" by groups of their own members. I don't have the pull to tell anyone from any other group that their posts are wrong or unhelpful. The general population simply won't listen to me. But if a Keeper of the Circle steps out of line or starts derailing conversations I (and any other Keeper) can take this up on our internal forums. We discuss topics there, come to reasoned conclusions (not always with full agreement), and encourage all our members to consider their posts on this and other public forums. We can't, obviously, force any of our members to take an action, but we have much more "pull" with our own members in this regard.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Simple forum rules that I occasionally adhere to. (Also possibly applicable in politics).
- A bad idea is a bad idea because of reasons, not because of who presents them. A good idea is a good idea because of reasons, not because of who presents them.
- People want different things. What is a good idea to me may be a bad idea to you, even if we agree on what the consequences will be.
- Sometimes we try to achieve good things by doing the completely wrong things. What seems a good idea to you may seem a bad idea to me, even if we agree on the goal.
- Sometimes (such as saturday nights) ideas are just poorly formulated and easily misunderstood. Sometimes ideas are just complicated (or in a complex context) and easily misunderstood.
- presenting ideas you think are bad does not imply that posters are evil, trying to undermine the community or 'ruining' the game we are all so excited about.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
- A bad idea is a bad idea because of reasons, not because of who presents them. A good idea is a good idea because of reasons, not because of who presents them.
Reminds me of Day One in an Art History class I had. The professor was clear, "You're not here to learn what to like. You can like or dislike anything you want, but, in order to do well in this class, you're going to say *why*".
I was 19 at the time, but it's a lesson I've applied to most nooks and crannies of my life since.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Personal attacks are what derail conversations, with that said I WILL call people out if I think they are causing issues but my intent when doing so will not be to pick a fight or abuse them. Back and forth between a few is fine as long as its more than yes no yes no YES NO and down in flames. Also be willing to engage in a debate not bludgeon the opposing view into submission. I hope that as my contributions to the forum accumulate people will realize that I have strong opinions and a willingness to defend them but also try to understand the viewpoints of others. Its no fun for me to drown out others because I shout louder than them. It is fun when I get someone im arguing with to stop and say 'you know what you might have a point' even if they don't agree completely.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But if a Keeper of the Circle steps out of line or starts derailing conversations I (and any other Keeper) can take this up on our internal forums. We discuss topics there, come to reasoned conclusions (not always with full agreement), and encourage all our members to consider their posts on this and other public forums. We can't, obviously, force any of our members to take an action, but we have much more "pull" with our own members in this regard.
Fist, sorry for the delay in my reply. This was the last week of school and I have been stupidly busy.
Thank you for your comments, and I agree. No one wants to seem like they are censoring anyone, but at the same time, for the good of their own guild, let alone the community engaged in the debate, some internal control would likely be useful all around. Certainly, individuals might get emotional and knee jerk posting can occur, but too often from the same posters, and its likely to have a detrimental effect not only on themselves but their guild as well.