We want Forum Feedback!

[Obscure_Trash]

I'd love to see a sticky in Suggestions and Requests detailing the various suggestions that TJ likes and is planning to implement someday.  It should be made clear in the OP of that thread that none of the suggestions are on any particular time-table and the changes will come when they come. 

 

I think a big list in one place of all of the suggestions TJ wants to implement would be useful because it would let people know not to suggest certain things because they're already going to be implemented eventually.  Also, it might cut down on a few threads that would be moot because some other idea is already in the works that accomplishes the same purpose. 

 

Plus, it would just be handy and fun, to be able to look in one place and see a grand list of all the changes that might come to DC in the future.

In the past, when there are things that have been suggested that are being worked on, TJ did release updates threads to warn people what was coming and when (with another post once they were implemented). I think we just haven't seen one recently because there's not a whole lot going on/nothing that can quite be released yet. If it hasn't been posted about it's probably still in secret and not ready to be announced yet, so I'm not sure a specific thread with a list of stuff to be implemented would help, as there wouldn't be much in it anyway and a news thread would probably beat it out.

 

~

 

As for people saying threads do often just disappear, can we get some examples beyond the two recent ones? Because mods usually close rather than delete. ^^;;

Edited February 17, 2014 by SockPuppet Strangler

[diaveborn]

In that thread, people seemed reluctant to have it split off into individual suggestions.

It didn't affect me personally but I did see multiple instances of people making statements that because the aspects of the split off threads affected each other, the particular suggestion they were making in one of the split off threads would also be applicable to another thread, or things from another thread were applicable to their suggestion, or saying that they weren't sure where to post things or, if I recall, saying they didn't remember where things had been posted.

 

Also because mods are so careful about closing or merging duplicate threads (which can be necessary), I wonder if there could be the perception that it's better to find an existing thread to post in if at all possible. Or maybe there are other things of this nature influencing people's posting decisions.

 

As for the thread we're in now, personally I don't mind the mixing. I'd probably be reading it all anyway, but more to the point, I can wait while other things are talked about as long as each topic that needs to be addressed will be addressed.

[Sheriziya]

In that thread, people seemed reluctant to have it split off into individual suggestions.

It didn't affect me personally but I did see multiple instances of people making statements that because the aspects of the split off threads affected each other, the particular suggestion they were making in one of the split off threads would also be applicable to another thread, or things from another thread were applicable to their suggestion, or saying that they weren't sure where to post things or, if I recall, saying they didn't remember where things had been posted.

Or things had already been discussed int he original thread and were now claimed as not to have been discussed/asked as it wasn't discussed/asked AGAIN in the new thread. After all, there's no point in discussing/asking things which have already been discussed/answered with a certain result. It did result in people becoming impatient/hurt or whatever, while that was never intended. It was an unfortunate sideeffect of one topic split into, I think, 5 topics which all came out of one combined suggestion.

And yes, it's exactly the raffle thread.....

 

From my personal experience it's not always good to have a topic been split up. I did (and still do) understand TJ's reasons for it, but it doesn't mean I agree with them and that I (and a few others with me) saw the results already coming..... which was too bad.

 

In this thread, I guess it's okay to have all things related to the forum in one thread, but if you do it for one thing (forum improvement), why not also for other things (like raffle improvement) to be consistent. But that's just my humble opinion

[Renorei]

Does this happen all that often? I don't really recall closing a ton of threads with "this is coming soon" (or equivalent).

I'm not sure I understand. Does what happen all that often? If you're referring to closing threads because an idea is already planned, I can only think of one example offhand, and that was a thread I made suggesting that our scrolls have a kind of "Pokedex" of all the dragon sprites we've collected, whether they were CB/lineaged, etc. One example of something happening isn't enough to consider it a broader issue, and I don't.

 

The possibility of threads being closed because an idea is already planned, or even the possibility of someone making a thread for an idea that is already planned and users discussing it for several pages unnecessarily, aren't the main reason why I want this. However, the latter (potential for users to needlessly discuss an idea that's already planned anyway) concerns me more.

 

I just think it would be really cool to have a big, easily accessible list somewhere with all the suggestions that you're planning to implement, so that if users are curious about the future of DC, they can just check the sticky rather than pour through all the S&R threads. The mere existence of a thread in S&R doesn't mean that a particular idea is someday going to come to pass. You (and by that I mean you specifically, not the general "you") have to like the idea and think it would be good for the game and worth the time to implement. So just browsing all of S&R doesn't really tell users what's going to happen in the future, unless you personally come into a thread and say that you're not going to do something or you are going to do something. Which is why I think it would be nice to just have a sticky somewhere with a list of all the "approved" ideas that are eventually going to be implemented.

 

I'd rather the "not going to happen" ideas not be listed anywhere because then users will use the idea's presence on the list as fodder to shoot the idea down if it comes up again, or if a similar idea comes up ("But TJ said..."). But seeing all of the ideas that will eventually be implemented in one place would be really cool and convenient.

 

(My suggestion of a sticky with a list of upcoming changes is an independent suggestion from the conversation about not being too eager to close or delete threads.)

Edited February 17, 2014 by Renorei

[kerrikins]

It's a little disappointing that even though in the past TJ has said that past 'no' answers doesn't mean discussion can't happen, the 'save the garden 2.0' thread was closed so abruptly. People were trying to come up with alternatives that still worked with what TJ had intended and had designed the event for, it wasn't just reopening the same discussion that he had shut down. I think dialogue is important on a site like this, instead of just 'well he said no to this, so that means no to ALL', etc.

 

I know there's the comment that TJ could reopen it, but the thing is, he's busy with work and life and that's not necessarily going to happen - and in the meantime the discussion has been smothered.

Edited February 18, 2014 by kerrikins

[RainDear]

Sometimes, apparently no does mean no. Just because he said no today doesn't mean that the discussion had no effect on him. It may be too late for him to change this, so further discussion on it could be futile, but that doesn't mean we can't bring up other subjects he has vetoed in the past in the hope he will change his mind about them.

[TJ09]

It's a little disappointing that even though in the past TJ has said that past 'no' answers doesn't mean discussion can't happen, the 'save the garden 2.0' thread was closed so abruptly. People were trying to come up with alternatives that still worked with what TJ had intended and had designed the event for, it wasn't just reopening the same discussion that he had shut down. I think dialogue is important on a site like this, instead of just 'well he said no to this, so that means no to ALL', etc.

 

I know there's the comment that TJ could reopen it, but the thing is, he's busy with work and life and that's not necessarily going to happen - and in the meantime the discussion has been smothered.

I closed the thread an hour after your post, so I'm assuming there was something I missed, but the original thread was closed because it's outside the intended scope of the event. The "2.0" thread then goes and proposes solving that by explicitly changing the scope of the event. That's not the way to go about it--events are short-term things, they're not going to be redesigned after they're launched.

[kerrikins]

Sock closed the 2.0 post, which is why I'd posted here, and then I assume either her or someone else re-opened it before you then closed it a second time, lol.

 

Anyway, fair enough, I just didn't like seeing it get shut down so quickly unless it was by you, tbh.

Edited February 19, 2014 by kerrikins

[Razorflame]

Forums have been working great for me! Thanks for all you've done to keep the forums up and running!

[Obscure_Trash]

Sock closed the 2.0 post, which is why I'd posted here, and then I assume either her or someone else re-opened it before you then closed it a second time, lol.

Don't worry; I'll keep my mitts off threads like that in the future.

[Vain.3805]

There's no guide to scroll burning. At all. It's the most secretive capital punishment I've ever seen on any game. WTH, devs? That's the feature I want to see - a guide to scroll burning. What it is, how it happens, how to make sure it doesn't happen to you. I didn't even know it existed until I got on the forums and saw someone's signature mentioning it. Great way to spread the word - through the signatures of people who no longer play the game or post on the forums. That's sarcasm, btw.

 

I've seen loads of conflicting things about it and I feel at risk (Hubby and both play, he introduced me several years ago and we both recently started playing again but we don't always make sure to use separate computers when logging in).

 

I mean, even the wiki has this pathetically inadequate description

When a user has done something against the rules that is bad enough for their scroll to be burned as punishment.

[TJ09]

Do you mean the site rules that you have clearly already read (because you checked the box saying you read and understood them when you signed up)?

 

Is there something missing there that doesn't give you enough information to tell how to avoid being banned?

[Fuzzbucket]

Do you mean the site rules that you have clearly already read (because you checked the box saying you read and understood them when you signed up)?

 

Is there something missing there that doesn't give you enough information to tell how to avoid being banned?

It might be wise to add a sentence there actually spelling out that if you contravene these rules your scroll may indeed be burned. But yes - it is a punishment for breaking the rules and if you follow all the rules there should be no problem.

 

Most of the charred scrolls I am aware of were burned were burned for multiscrolling. That rule is entirely clear. There is also information about it in the FAQs

 

Q: Why is my scroll "burned"?/Why is my account disabled or banned?

A: "Burned" is simply another term for when your account has been banned. Accounts may be banned for a number of reasons, primarily due to violations in the site terms that all users agree to upon registration. If you still do not understand why your scroll was burned after that, you may PM or e-mail TJ09. Please do not post public topics about this - the public will not know the answer to your question.

Edited March 10, 2014 by fuzzbucket

[cyradis4]

I'm not going on why the thread was removed, but I really don't think threads are removed-without-warning often enough for this to even warrant much of a serious reaction. I went through twenty pages of trashed topics and found no other cases of suggestions being removed, yet your post implies that it is being done too "eagarly."

 

I think the numbers and empirically-observed frequency imply that there is already a lot of thought put in before a topic is removed, and I would like to see why you disagree. Is one time too many? If so, that's not a request that can be honored, because there are going to be cases where the entire thread needs to be removed from view, so "never" as a definition of "less eager" isn't feasible.

 

Note that none of this was written with post removal in mind. That is a different subject altogether.

There's a particular topic, that deals with a work-around for a persistent bug in FireFox using one of FireFox's native abilities that is constantly and immediately deleted with no statement as to why it was deleted. This bug affects a lot of users, and to see posts / threads about it summarily deleted every time someone asking for help is given said help is... disquieting. I've never seen a statement as to why its deleted with such indecent speed, either.

 

I can only assume that something in the work around is against the ToS, but no matter how I bend my mind to it, the best I can come up with is, at best, rules-lawyering on the anal-retentive level. Particularly considering how much of a problem the bug can be, and it wouldn't surprise me if more than a few people have left the game because of it and their inability to deal with it.

 

So yea... There are topics that are deleted far too fast, with far too little feedback, and I can see how people would be... highly concerned when such happens.

 

C4.

[Vain.3805]

Do you mean the site rules that you have clearly already read (because you checked the box saying you read and understood them when you signed up)?

 

Is there something missing there that doesn't give you enough information to tell how to avoid being banned?

It sounded much scarier than that...

[Fuzzbucket]

It sounded much scarier than that...

So does life imprisonment for murder - but as long as you don't murder anyone you don't have to worry about it

 

I see no-one has actually spelt it out. What happens is that all your dragons are released (I think in REALLY bad cases maybe even killed but I don't know) and instead of a scroll full of dragons, when you go to your dragcave.net/user link, you get a message:

 

You pick up the scroll labeled "(YOUR NAME HERE," only to find that it is charred and impossible to read.

 

Be good and you will not have to see that.

[whitebaron]

Are mods supposed to answer, when you write a complaint about a warn?

 

If so:

- How long until you should go to someone else because they did not answer?

- Who should you contact then, a global or TJ?

 

thank you.

[Fuzzbucket]

Are mods supposed to answer, when you write a complaint about a warn?

 

If so:

- How long until you should go to someone else because they did not answer?

- Who should you contact then, a global or TJ?

 

thank you.

Not if they feel it was totally justified, and they reckon whoever is complaining knows it is, I think (and before you say of COURSE yours ISN'T justified - I am assuming you have one - lord knows I cop plenty myself - I am just now coming off a 20% spell. It is pretty easy to actually earn them without thinking...)

 

But try a global first, I would. Chain of command stuff. Personally I just suck it up

[RainDear]

Are mods supposed to answer, when you write a complaint about a warn?

 

If so:

- How long until you should go to someone else because they did not answer?

- Who should you contact then, a global or TJ?

 

thank you.

Are mods supposed to answer? I really don't know, I hope they are and that they would even if it's not written somewhere that they should.

 

Considering that this is a part time job for most, and things like sickness, finals, or other RL issues often trump DC, I would wait at least 72 hours (longer if I know this is a bad time for someone- like finals for example). I would also check their post history to be sure they have been on, and track the message to be sure it was read. Then, if you haven't had a response and really feel it is merited, I would pm again and spell out why I feel a response is merited, if you didn't do so in the first pm. Do you not understand the warn? Maybe it should be explained more clearly. Do you dispute that you did anything wrong? Maybe they should point out the rule and what they saw as warn worthy.

 

If after two pms of trying to contact the mod, I had no response and I really felt it was worth pursuing, I would pm a global. I would hesitate to pm TJ as much because I consider him pretty busy as because I know he seldom responds to pms, and one I sent him went months unread before I finally gave up and deleted it from my end.

[Fuzzbucket]

Are mods supposed to answer? I really don't know, I hope they are and that they would even if it's not written somewhere that they should.

Sock always does - but I believe she is without a computer just now and is operating on a phone - she posted yesterday that she couldn't look into something as she can't see it on a phone... So...

 

Do you understand it and just object ? Or is there more to it ?

[RainDear]

Are mods supposed to answer? I really don't know, I hope they are and that they would even if it's not written somewhere that they should.

 

Considering that this is a part time job for most, and things like sickness, finals, or other RL issues often trump DC, I would wait at least 72 hours (longer if I know this is a bad time for someone- like finals for example). I would also check their post history to be sure they have been on, and track the message to be sure it was read. Then, if you haven't had a response and really feel it is merited, I would pm again and spell out why I feel a response is merited, if you didn't do so in the first pm. Do you not understand the warn? Maybe it should be explained more clearly. Do you dispute that you did anything wrong? Maybe they should point out the rule and what they saw as warn worthy.

 

If after two pms of trying to contact the mod, I had no response and I really felt it was worth pursuing, I would pm a global. I would hesitate to pm TJ as much because I consider him pretty busy as because I know he seldom responds to pms, and one I sent him went months unread before I finally gave up and deleted it from my end.

Note: The bolded portion is intended to be rhetorical questions - not things I expect you to answer for us, but to consider for yourself in your interaction with the mod and perhaps the wording of your pms.

 

SockPuppet's situation is just one that I am aware of that mods are dealing with right now that would make this a tough time to deal with a situation like this.

 

By and large, I consider the mods I have dealt with to be fair and reasonable. If I faced a situation where I felt one was being unfair, I would probably give myself a day or two to work through my own feelings before trying to dispute it. I do tend to lose my temper sometimes and say/do things I don't mean, so I should review for myself before contacting someone else.

[Ashes The Second]

@whitebaron: I had the same issue, tried to dispute it with the mod, but instead was forced to attempt to dispute it with sock instead. I assume it's a case-by-case basis on whether they reply or not (don't expect them too -- all I tend to see are excuses made by both parties of sickness, real-life issues, etc, and I rarely see anyone trying to say "well, they are mods, they should be held accountable for doing their jobs" because they aren't being paid). At least they've sort of gotten a little less ban happy? (or were told to loosen the leash somewhere along the way? coming from FR, this place just feels hostile).

 

Just sharing my experiences before I get slapped by another warn, this wasn't intended rudely. Perhaps as a parallel, but not rudely.

[Shin'a'in]

Honestly...like on one of the RP chat sites I'm a user of...I'd like to see a similar usage method implemented of,once becoming a member of Dragcave,said member can automatically be able to post on the forum topics without having to...well...basically re-register to the site.Why not just simplify things by having members either re-enter the name they gave their scroll or re-enter all of the info needed to log on to one's scroll?

[Fuzzbucket]

Honestly...like on one of the RP chat sites I'm a user of...I'd like to see a similar usage method implemented of,once becoming a member of Dragcave,said member can automatically be able to post on the forum topics without having to...well...basically re-register to the site.Why not just simplify things by having members either re-enter the name they gave their scroll or re-enter all of the info needed to log on to one's scroll?

Probably because a LOT of young players are not allowed on forums at all. I know my grandson has a scroll but will not be allowed on here till he is a whole lot older.

 

It's not that much effort registering separately, and if it stops 10 y/o s seeing some of the things here that they probably shouldn't... (and yes a 10 y/o is allowed a scroll if their parents say OK.)

[RainDear]

@whitebaron: I had the same issue, tried to dispute it with the mod, but instead was forced to attempt to dispute it with sock instead. I assume it's a case-by-case basis on whether they reply or not (don't expect them too -- all I tend to see are excuses made by both parties of sickness, real-life issues, etc, and I rarely see anyone trying to say "well, they are mods, they should be held accountable for doing their jobs" because they aren't being paid). At least they've sort of gotten a little less ban happy? (or were told to loosen the leash somewhere along the way? coming from FR, this place just feels hostile).

 

Just sharing my experiences before I get slapped by another warn, this wasn't intended rudely. Perhaps as a parallel, but not rudely.

I was not in any way trying to say that mods shouldn't be expected to do their jobs. I was just suggesting that if you know it's finals time, or you see that the mod in question has not been on the forums, or has been less active on the forums it might be a good idea to give them more time to respond to you. Of course, they are expected to do their job, but they might not always be available in a normally timely manner, so might need more time. Sorry if my meaning was unclear. I will try to do better.