Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
James Snowscoran
Caldari Coreli Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:01:00 -
[1]
The United Libertarians of EVE
Reaffirming that a free exchange of ideas is necessary for constructive debate and progression,
Recalling forum rule number 20, which states that "negative feedback can be very useful, provided that it is presented in a civil, factual manner",
Welcoming signals from CCP that input from the EVE-Online Community plays a part in game development decisionmaking,
Recognizing the need of CCP to keep the EVE-Online forums free of profanity for game rating purposes,
Further recognizing that the hard work of volunteer moderators is necessaryfor the functioning of a constructive and friendly forum,
Applauding the CCP business model of catering for repeat business and long-term customer loyalty as opposed to short-term profit based business running based on high retail box prices,
Keeping in mind that personal conflicts about moderation might be easier solved outside of public communications channels,
Acknowledging that the deprivation of the right to state disagreements with forum moderating rules and practices causes frustration and resentment among free-thinking and democratic individuals,
1. Condemns the current forum moderation leadership for *****ing down upon attempts at constructive debate about and criticism of the forum rules and their practical implications;
2. Urges the forum moderator team to protest against these debate-hampering rules by refusing to moderate discussions of moderation;
3. Calls upon all community members to utilize their forum posting priviledges to voice their dissatisfaction with the current moderating rules and regime,
4. Maintains that the "10 strikes and you're out" policy unfairly punishes high forum activity, posts that generate attention and debate, and veteran forum posters;
5. Requests that CCP review the forum moderating procedures and policies and attempt to encourage more community input on their developments;
6. Recognizes that e-mail conversations with the moderator team will never come close to generating fruitful debate with constructive input from many sides;
7. Decides to remain active on the issue.
My fellow community members,
For several years, the forums of eve-o have grown along with the game, sparking intense and furious debates between players foremost, but also to an extent between players and developers. For three years, players have criticized CCP decisions on a variety of levels, anything from game mechanic bugs to fundamental organizational problems and gameplay change decisions. These debates have been furious, sometimes bitter, yet unfathomably useful, constructive and fruitful.
Yet there's one thing we cannot discuss; forum moderation. It seems tha the moderator team, in its fervor to maintain law and order on the forums, have neglected to see the difference between two things; personal grievances and structural criticism. While it is understandable that moderators would like to handle individual cases in private, it is inexcusable that they on the same tangent dissuade and silence any attempts at discussion of the underlying procedures and rules behind their decisions. This tradition of restricting freedom of posting is characteristic of a regime which is afraid to lose power; it conveys an image of a command structure whose inner mechanics work only to preserve its own power at the expense of progress and evolution towards better methods of management.
This is discussing about the rules behind moderation. Will the thread be classified as discussing moderation, locked, and moved to a faraway cellar? I'm not sure. It would not be beyond the moderators to do so.
If we are to develop the forums as a...well, forum for constructive sharing and criticism of ideas, it is necessary that we allow discussion of the rules and regulations of the forums to find out whether they work as intended.
-James -----
|
Kenz Rider
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:11:00 -
[2]
This isn't the United Nations James.
Nice post though.
/signed - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - - Little known fact: 95% of DS's signatures have nothing to do with EVE. |
Guillame Herschel
Gallente Cheers Restaurant and Bar Nova Republic
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:12:00 -
[3]
Post is too long. I fell asleep after the 3rd or 4th "wherefore." Get to the friggin point already.
-- Guile can always trump hardware -- |
Hatuk
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:15:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Kenz Rider This isn't the United Nations James.
Nice post though.
/signed
agree... its the USA
btw, good post
|
James Snowscoran
Caldari Coreli Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:16:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Kenz Rider This isn't the United Nations James.
Nice post though.
/signed
I know it's not, but it was the most civil way I could think of to get my point through. If even this post has to get moderated/deleted it just proves that this issue about keeping the forums civil from the moderators point of view, it is about keeping criticism in check. -----
|
Usotsuki
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:17:00 -
[6]
in the first line of the second paragraph, you left out a t in "that"
|
James Snowscoran
Caldari Coreli Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:19:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Usotsuki in the first line of the second paragraph, you left out a t in "that"
Thank you for your constructive ciritcism, I went ahead and fixed that. -----
|
Guillame Herschel
Gallente Cheers Restaurant and Bar Nova Republic
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:27:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Guillame Herschel on 06/09/2006 00:30:49 Your post is so freaking long I can't even quote it. It exceeds the message character limit when the quoting markup is added, so I am unable to edit anything.
But what I wanted to say is this: surely a libertarian understands the concept of private property. This forum is CCPs private property. If you don't like it, leave. That is your sole recourse under libertarianism. Do not try to compel others to do the "right thing" with their property against their will. Listening to you on their forum is their option at their pleasure, and it is not yours to force on them.
You want a socialist solution, not a libertarian one.
-- Guile can always trump hardware -- |
James Snowscoran
Caldari Coreli Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:33:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Guillame Herschel Edited by: Guillame Herschel on 06/09/2006 00:29:56 Your post is so freaking long I can't even quote it. It exceeds the message character limit when the quoting markup is added, so I am unable to edit anything.
But what I wanted to say is this: surely a libertarian understands the concept of private property. This forum is CCPs private property. If you don't like it, leave. That is your sole recourse under libertarianism. Do not try to compel others to do the "right thing" with their property against their will. Listening to you is their option at thei pleasure, not yours to force on them. You want a socialist solution, not a libertarian one.
You're right, I should've made two posts. Ah well. Next time I guess.
And I'm not arguaing in any way that CCP has to do anything at all here. I'm not primarily arguing that the forum moderating policies should be changed because they are infringing on people's rights, I am arguing that it would be in EVE's best interest to ensure a free exchange of ideas can happen on the forums. -----
|
Liegus
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:42:00 -
[10]
Without specifically getting into each long-arsed point, I'd like to agree in general that the moderation of these boards is sometimes overzealous, seemingly randomly applied, and sometimes quite inexplicable. The rules as laid out and the rules as enforced are rather different things. (Thanks to eve-search.com, you can see just how strange it gets sometimes.)
I further agree that such a situation is not really conducive to an even enforcement of any given ruleset or to a happy user community.
I doubt it will drive CCP out of business, but it's definitely led quite a few of their customers to seek alternate places to discuss EVE.
|
|
Ubersquid
Minmatar Culture Twenty
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 00:43:00 -
[11]
very long indeed, and i couldn't read it all in one, cause it contains so much t2-english it makes my head spin, took me i while to figure out you're not from the united librarians guild or whatever but i think i know what you are talking about now...
basicly i think this rule exists because mods have to make a lot of decisions, additionally they are people, not robots, so their decisions vary. the prohibition of moderation-discussion is there to protect the mods from undermining each others authorities. -- no sig for you today!
oh my god! it's an Ubersquid
|
Gonada
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 01:06:00 -
[12]
why do you care?
seriously man quit whining. this board is not a democracy as far as moderation goes.
if you want that , goto VN boards
CCP own the game, CCP doesnt even have to have a board for discussion.
CCP uses the board for its own purposes, : to guage public opinion, glean new trends, and maybe get an idea or two.
obviously CCP doesnt like too many whiney confrontational people such as you.
so to sum it all up:
tissue?
-I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.-
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 01:28:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Hatuk
Originally by: Kenz Rider This isn't the United Nations James.
Nice post though.
/signed
agree... its the USA
btw, good post
No, its Iceland.
But more on topic, I mostly agree. A lot of changes to the moderation system were supposed to have been proposed by Wrangler to CCP after the last discussion, but it has been nearly a year and nothing has happened.
I think it is time for us to at least get a message on the issue.
--[23] Member--
Originally by: DB Preacher The only time BoB's backs are to the wall is when Backdoor Bandit is in local.
|
DukDodgerz
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 01:42:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Gonada why do you care?
seriously man quit whining. this board is not a democracy as far as moderation goes.
if you want that , goto VN boards
CCP own the game, CCP doesnt even have to have a board for discussion.
[red] CCP uses the board for its own purposes, : to guage public opinion, glean new trends, and maybe get an idea or two.]/red]
obviously CCP doesnt like too many whiney confrontational people such as you.
so to sum it all up:
tissue?
OP has a valid point as to there being a mystery as to why the mods do things at times, that are counter to the rules at times even, so you have to act like a jerk and troll ???
notice the red part, the part YOU wrote?
How can they get an honest and accurate gauge of what the playerbase wants if any post or idea can be instantly wiped off the boards and bans/warning handed out for having posted it?? the playerbase has since the begining complained about mod abuse of power because there is no way to discuss it and they do not feel WE are capable of understanding (rather insulting they think the majority of the playerbase is to dim to understand)
New players see the locks run rampet, no logic behind the locks or deletions, and no way for the masses to be informed of a mod action, because the mod will ban/wipe any post (and poster) that questions their actions. (history has many examples of this same tactic to retain power and silence ideas that embarrass the rulers)
IF the masses are to understand and comply, then mods should have clearly defined rules, those rules should be open to the public so WE can guage our own actions to work within rules that even the mods must comply too.
When the police are above the law there is no law, only tyrany.
...pointing to vague rules, silencing the questions, has never proven to be an effective way to LEARN...so can we assume CCP has no desire to learn how we think or feel, in a forum that clearly says "GENERAL DISCUSSION"???
FRODO HAS FAILED; BUSH HAS THE RING!!! The HippoKing spots a new post |
DukDodgerz
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 01:48:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Hatuk
Originally by: Kenz Rider This isn't the United Nations James.
Nice post though.
/signed
agree... its the USA
btw, good post
No, its Iceland.
But more on topic, I mostly agree. A lot of changes to the moderation system were supposed to have been proposed by Wrangler to CCP after the last discussion, but it has been nearly a year and nothing has happened.
I think it is time for us to at least get a message on the issue.
Wrangler is one of the best IMHO, and we can hope CCP listens to him.
FRODO HAS FAILED; BUSH HAS THE RING!!! The HippoKing spots a new post |
Kurren
Farscape Mining
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 01:49:00 -
[16]
You and I may live in a Republic... but these forums are not part of that republic. These forums are technically "private property." Therefore, wherefore, whofore, threefore, we abide by the rules, or we leave or get kicked out. Nuff sed. --- --- --- ---
My Sig Is Not Too Big... Eris is the holder of the pink so you get orange for now - Xorus TEH POWER OF PINK COMPELS J00!1 - Immy |
DukDodgerz
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 02:14:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Kurren
You and I may live in a Republic... but these forums are not part of that republic. These forums are technically "private property." Therefore, wherefore, whofore, threefore, we abide by the rules, or we leave or get kicked out. Nuff sed.
no one has argued otherwise.
many have asked for reference to the rules that govern the actions so as to understand the reasoning.
abuse may not be present but how would the masses know if there is no reference they can see?
FRODO HAS FAILED; BUSH HAS THE RING!!! The HippoKing spots a new post |
Malthros Zenobia
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 02:50:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Hatuk
Originally by: Kenz Rider This isn't the United Nations James.
Nice post though.
/signed
agree... its the USA
btw, good post
Actually, if you had a clue, it'd be Iceland.
Sorry you can't afford a dev so you get me instead ^^ - Xorus I hear Xorus is only 50 isk an hour - Immy Oooh that could get Suvetar for the day! - Cathath |
Clementina
Eye of God Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 03:18:00 -
[19]
I would like to be a signatory to this resolution.
|
Michiyo Daishi
Royal Knights of Khanid
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 03:31:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Guillame Herschel But what I wanted to say is this: surely a libertarian understands the concept of private property. This forum is CCPs private property. If you don't like it, leave. That is your sole recourse under libertarianism. Do not try to compel others to do the "right thing" with their property against their will.
/QFT
There are limits to how far you can take a supposedly liberal community with topics such as forum moderation. Its CCP's own property, and as such, they have all the right, as owners of said private property, to enforce whatever rules in whatever way they wish. It may not be the morally or generally accepted "right" way, but at least, so far, they've done their best to adhere to such.
I for one, am content with such :P -
want a sig like mine? 5m! Woot first, maybe Eris will poke it later - Xorus IŠll be gentle *WHIPS* that was me being gentle -eris I'm in an eris whips and chains sig - RAWR! - Immy |
|
Rabbitgod
Gallente Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 05:01:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Rabbitgod on 06/09/2006 05:04:01 Only if freedom of speech let's call people **** donkey **** anal ****** mother ****** **** who wants to drop the soap in prison. Each and evey time someone whines about anything.
Oh wait...
Quote: Recognizing the need of CCP to keep the EVE-Online forums free of profanity for game rating purposes,
Mother ******.
But I will say this: *snip* and that should sovle every single issue in EvE.
Nothing to see here move along. - Imaran Not really tho. - Rabbitgod
---{24th member of the 23}---
|
Death Kill
Caldari direkte
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 05:28:00 -
[22]
Libertarians?
Please take your non-parlamentaristic politics OFF my internet! Two party system, thats only one part away from dictatorship.
Recruitment |
Admiral Feelgood
Even-Flow
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 05:41:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Death Kill Libertarians?
Please take your non-parlamentaristic politics OFF my internet! Two party system, thats only one part away from dictatorship.
But libertarians are a third party.
|
Death Kill
Caldari direkte
|
Posted - 2006.09.06 05:44:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Admiral Feelgood
Originally by: Death Kill Libertarians?
Please take your non-parlamentaristic politics OFF my internet! Two party system, thats only one part away from dictatorship.
But libertarians are a third party.
In theory yes.
Recruitment |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |