We want Forum Feedback!

[Kaini]

21 minutes ago, blah said:

It’s unfortunately impossible to foresee every possible topic that people could come up with and have the rules be comprehensive in that way. 

 

This. It would be literally impossible to lay out every instance in which something could be considered spam, or closed. 

 

As for the site coding thread, it was closed for reason of... well, reverse engineering the site is not permitted via the TOS and TJ is not about to divulge how the site works, thus it was closed. There was nothing to discuss.

 

At the time the forum was having issues and I was unable to close threads without using the auto-created 'CLOSE AS SPAM' tool. It's a separate button than 'lock'. My lock button works now. 

 

Users are more than welcome to reach out to moderators for clarification, which both examples here did and received it. 

Edited November 14, 2023 by Kaini

[eeep]

I think it can come across as dismissive when a newly created topic is closed immediately because "there is nothing to discuss". Why not, instead, wait a few posts and see if anything constructive can come from it? I would expect that, even if the original post isn't helpful, at least some interesting topics can come from it.

 

Currently, the policy of closing newly opened threads actively discourages people from creating new threads because they are afraid it will be closed. It's been a concern even since the 2016 post I referenced.

Edited November 14, 2023 by eeep

[TJ09]

40 minutes ago, Kaini said:

As for the site coding thread, it was closed for reason of... well, reverse engineering the site is not permitted via the TOS and TJ is not about to divulge how the site works, thus it was closed. There was nothing to discuss.

 

Reverse engineering isn't a concern in that case. Knowing that the site runs on PHP doesn't give you any material knowledge.

 

However, as others have pointed out, that thread was not set up to be a discussion. It asked a specific question (that only one person--me--can definitively answer), and any followup topic ("where to learn") doesn't fit into Site Discussion.

 

The same is true for "we should have a Banana Dragon." There's not much room for anything other than "Sure!"--it's more of a suggestion (which you have been pointed to Dragon Requests for) than a "topic starter." If you're looking for a place for lightweight discussion without the overhead of threads, check out the Discord (or long-running forum tradition "Compulsive Posters' Anonymous":

[KageSora]

14 minutes ago, Kaini said:

This. It would be literally impossible to lay out every instance in which something could be considered spam, or closed. 

 

Right, but, again, there's no real reason rules can't be amended or re-worded after the fact to better clarify, is there?  Not necessarily for every instance because that would definitely be overkill, but there's gotta be times where it can be useful to refresh the wording in the rules for clarity and such, I think.

Edited November 14, 2023 by KageSora

[Fuzzbucket]

24 minutes ago, eeep said:

we have to rely on the subjective opinions of the moderators to go off of when it comes to what topics are allowed and what aren't?

 

The moderators operate under terms set by TJ,. It isn't very long ago that one of them tried to loosen things up - and is no longer a player or a forum member. It's TJ;s game and TJ';s rules. And as it's such a fun game, I can very much live with that.

 

Here's an official post on spam:

 

=================================

2. Spam in Duplicate/Incorrectly placed or Spam topics:

 

Posting spam in topics is unacceptable, but the wave in pointless spam in duplicate topics is even worse, and becoming a real problem. Examples of spam in topics include:

 

• inb4givemeawarning.
• OBJECTION! (links)
• Quoting the original post in question and saying Lol or something equally pointless afterwords.
• Proceeding to have a conversation in the topic you already know is a duplicate or against the rules.
• If someone has already stated it's against the rules, someone proceeding to just say: Rule breaker!/Eggspam! Reported (or similar) is also equally spammy. There is no need for a wall of posts saying Eggspam or Duplicate! It made sense the first time.
• This also includes posting to inform the OP that their topic is in the wrong section, is spam, etc if it has already been pointed out by someone else. If you notice that a topic has already had what rules it is breaking pointed out, the most you should do is report the thread using the Report button and leave the moderating to the moderators.

 

However it is acceptable if the first person after the OP's post merely states that it's against the rules, explain why and where applicable give an alternative course of action. This single post after the OP will help those who perhaps don't know where they've gone wrong or that it is a duplicate.

 

Those who see the topic and recognize it's a duplicate/against the rules, do not need to reply with the above examples of subsequent spam. Reporting the OP's post with an explanation it's a duplicate (or whatever) is more than enough.

 

Members that spam topics in these manners will receive warnings for spam, with a link to this topic as explanation.

 

~Trading/Gifting Topics~:

 

Due to members continued spam bumping posts in trading/gifting topics, we will allow one (1) bump every 24 hours. All other bumps/reposts will be treated as spam, the member will receive a warn.

 

Example:

Member posts trade on the 17th, member can not repost/bump the same trade until the 18th.

 

~All other topics~:

Bumps are spam in Site discussions and Sub-forums. Multiple posting is spam, please use the edit tool.

 

Codes : We seem to be having a problem with members posting censored codes. Please remember if the word/code is censored by the forum, do not use censor evasion to get around the censor. You will receive a warn.

[eeep]

3 minutes ago, Fuzzbucket said:

 

The moderators operate under terms set by TJ,. It isn't very long ago that one of them tried to loosen things up - and is no longer a player or a forum member. It's TJ;s game and TJ';s rules. And as it's such a fun game, I can very much live with that.

 

Here's an official post on spam:

 

=================================

2. Spam in Duplicate/Incorrectly placed or Spam topics:

 

Posting spam in topics is unacceptable, but the wave in pointless spam in duplicate topics is even worse, and becoming a real problem. Examples of spam in topics include:

 

• inb4givemeawarning.
• OBJECTION! (links)
• Quoting the original post in question and saying Lol or something equally pointless afterwords.
• Proceeding to have a conversation in the topic you already know is a duplicate or against the rules.
• If someone has already stated it's against the rules, someone proceeding to just say: Rule breaker!/Eggspam! Reported (or similar) is also equally spammy. There is no need for a wall of posts saying Eggspam or Duplicate! It made sense the first time.
• This also includes posting to inform the OP that their topic is in the wrong section, is spam, etc if it has already been pointed out by someone else. If you notice that a topic has already had what rules it is breaking pointed out, the most you should do is report the thread using the Report button and leave the moderating to the moderators.

 

However it is acceptable if the first person after the OP's post merely states that it's against the rules, explain why and where applicable give an alternative course of action. This single post after the OP will help those who perhaps don't know where they've gone wrong or that it is a duplicate.

 

Those who see the topic and recognize it's a duplicate/against the rules, do not need to reply with the above examples of subsequent spam. Reporting the OP's post with an explanation it's a duplicate (or whatever) is more than enough.

 

Members that spam topics in these manners will receive warnings for spam, with a link to this topic as explanation.

 

~Trading/Gifting Topics~:

 

Due to members continued spam bumping posts in trading/gifting topics, we will allow one (1) bump every 24 hours. All other bumps/reposts will be treated as spam, the member will receive a warn.

 

Example:

Member posts trade on the 17th, member can not repost/bump the same trade until the 18th.

 

~All other topics~:

Bumps are spam in Site discussions and Sub-forums. Multiple posting is spam, please use the edit tool.

 

Codes : We seem to be having a problem with members posting censored codes. Please remember if the word/code is censored by the forum, do not use censor evasion to get around the censor. You will receive a warn.

 

But I don't think this counts as spam according to the rules as written...?

 

Honestly, I don't care how the forums are kept clean or what-not. Just right now the "spam" rules are very vague and seems to count for a very wide range of topics.
 

 

Edited November 14, 2023 by eeep

[seventeendeer]

28 minutes ago, KageSora said:

Just to mention, this isn't super clear because by some interpretations users trying to discuss how to make Neglecteds could be seen as a form of reverse-engineering and yet at least some discussion on them is permitted.  I think a little extra clarification on what counts as reverse-engineering vs what counts as more general discussion of mechanics and stats (such as, say, % of vamp bites or breeding attempts that get specific results).

 

Yeah, I'm actually surprised at how much more lax the rules surrounding talking about Neglecteds are these days, this has definitely changed over the years. I seem to remember a time where discussing how to make them at all was prohibited? If I'm remembering correctly? Either way, a more in-depth rules section would be nice, especially for newcomers - and potentially also for the mods? If a bit more explanation for closing a topic was needed, they could copy-paste the rule so the OP would know exactly which one was broken?

 

5 minutes ago, eeep said:

 

But I don't think this counts as spam according to the rules as written...?
 

 

 

The issue with this one is that, as I myself point out in that very topic, it belongs in another thread. There is already a thread with the same theme, so this person starting their own is a duplicate. This post also doesn't pose any topic of discussion for other users - this person is hoping people will respond to their questions, but again, questions go in the 'Help' section.

Edited November 14, 2023 by seventeendeer

[KageSora]

I think the issue with that is that it wouldn't be considered a "general" discussion thread and instead considered more of a "personal" discussion thread about their first adult.  The content of that post would be better split between something like the congrats thread and the help section.

 

That's something experienced users can figure out, but as can be evidenced by the existence of posts like that isn't really obvious to newer users.  I definitely think something like "no personal discussion threads such as talking about your own first dragon or lineages you specifically want" might be useful to include.

1 minute ago, seventeendeer said:

I seem to remember a time where discussing how to make them at all was prohibited? If I'm remembering correctly?

 

I recall that as well, but I'm not sure if it was actually forbidden then changed or if it was users misunderstanding and assuming it was forbidden then learning it wasn't.  Either one would be a case for adding clarity to the rules, though.

[eeep]

4 minutes ago, seventeendeer said:

 

Yeah, I'm actually surprised at how much more lax the rules surrounding talking about Neglecteds are these days, this has definitely changed over the years. I seem to remember a time where discussing how to make them at all was prohibited? If I'm remembering correctly? Either way, a more in-depth rules section would be nice, especially for newcomers - and potentially also for the mods? If a bit more explanation for closing a topic was needed, they could copy-paste the rule so the OP would know exactly which one was broken?

 

 

The issue with this one is that, as I myself point out in that very topic, it belongs in another thread. There is already a thread with the same theme, so this person starting their own is a duplicate. This post also doesn't pose any topic of discussion for other users - this person is hoping people will respond to their questions, but again, questions go in the 'Help' section.

 

This is going to sound like I'm splitting hairs here, but the post was marked for being closed because it's "spam". However, as you rightly pointed out, it belongs in another forum. Why is it being marked as spam when it's obviously not "textbook" spam? It's just in the wrong forum.

[blah]

13 minutes ago, KageSora said:

 

Right, but, again, there's no real reason rules can't be amended or re-worded after the fact to better clarify, is there?  Not necessarily for every instance because that would definitely be overkill, but there's gotta be times where it can be useful to refresh the wording in the rules for clarity and such, I think.

You’re not wrong. I think many of us have simply been here a while so for us it’s obvious that chatty threads with no real topic and no real room for discussion won’t be allowed and we also know the threads where that stuff does go. But maybe a small paragraph to that extent should be added to the rules. It’s a slippery slope though, you can’t cover every eventuality and some people like to argue to death.

[Kaini]

1 minute ago, eeep said:

 

This is going to sound like I'm splitting hairs here, but the post was marked for being closed because it's "spam". However, as you rightly pointed out, it belongs in another forum. Why is it being marked as spam when it's obviously not "textbook" spam? It's just in the wrong forum.

 

I just explained that I only have so many buttons for auto-closing topics. I'm sorry you took offense to the auto-created 'SPAM' tag, but it's just the button I chose. It's auto-flagged that way. 

 

The pinned rules threads in each section are pretty old and I laugh a bit at the outdated terminology. I should make new ones. I'll find the time one of these weekends, I'm just an adult with a day job I'm currently taking a few seconds out of to be here, hah. It's the slow season. 

[eeep]

I appreciate the understanding. I know quite a few neurodivergent people who actually get extremely anxious about breaking rules, and I am making a deal out of it because it's a real issue a lot of neurodivergents face daily (expecting to follow rules that aren't defined properly).

Edited December 1, 2023 by eeep

[seventeendeer]

Just now, eeep said:

 

This is going to sound like I'm splitting hairs here, but the post was marked for being closed because it's "spam". However, as you rightly pointed out, it belongs in another forum. Why is it being marked as spam when it's obviously not "textbook" spam? It's just in the wrong forum.

 

Because it is not just the wrong forum. It is also a duplicate, it asks questions on the wrong board, and it does not invite other people to discuss anything pertaining to people other than the user themselves. That specific board also forbids "chatter."

 

As TJ explained - topics on site discussion need to actually invite to a proper discussion. This is just a user reacting to their own experience playing the game, then going off-topic with questions. There's nothing for other members to add other than "good for you."

[Kaini]

I am neurodivergent. I understand. But it is also on us to moderate our own feelings.

 

The pins are pretty outdated though and the rest of us just kinda got used to it. So honestly that needs to be done. 

Edited November 14, 2023 by Kaini

[eeep]

4 minutes ago, seventeendeer said:

 

Because it is not just the wrong forum. It is also a duplicate, it asks questions on the wrong board, and it does not invite other people to discuss anything pertaining to people other than the user themselves. That specific board also forbids "chatter."

 

As TJ explained - topics on site discussion need to actually invite to a proper discussion. This is just a user reacting to their own experience playing the game, then going off-topic with questions. There's nothing for other members to add other than "good for you."

 

The problem is that isn't not defined in the board rules that "site discussion forbids chatter" so how is anyone supposed to guess that as a newbie? Some people get very rattled by being told off (even if it's gentle) so why not just avoid the problem in the first place by defining rules properly?

Edited November 14, 2023 by eeep

[Kaini]

5 minutes ago, eeep said:

 

The problem is that isn't not defined in the board rules that "site discussion forbids chatter" so how is anyone supposed to guess that as a newbie? Some people get very rattled by being told off (even if it's gentle) so why not just avoid the problem in the first place by defining rules properly?

 

I said above that I would edit the SD rules, as looking at them now, they are rather outdated. I would like to make this change. 

 

Your reaction to (as you said, gently) being told you violated rules is not our responsibility. Again, I am also neurodivergent, I understand, but not everything in the world can cater to your reactions and it is up to us to moderate our own feelings. Considering you also became rather heated with me when I clarified privately, I don't feel my feelings particularly respected either. 

[seventeendeer]

9 minutes ago, eeep said:

The problem is that isn't not defined in the board rules that "site discussion forbids chatter" so how is anyone supposed to guess that as a newbie?

 

Because the forum rules also say this:

 

Certain sections have their own, more specific rules. Those rules are displayed on a per-forum basis. Topics that do not belong in a section will be moved, closed, or deleted. Duplicate topics will be closed.

 

The Site Discussion rules are pinned over in Site Discussion.

 

9 minutes ago, eeep said:

Some people get very rattled by being told off (even if it's gentle) so why not just avoid the problem in the first place by defining rules properly?

 

I'm in favor of defining the rules more closely too, I'm just answering your questions.

 

Anyway, cool to hear that updates are on the way! Good luck to Kaini on the tidying-up.

[purpledragonclaw]

5 minutes ago, Kaini said:

 

I said above that I would edit the SD rules, as looking at them now, they are rather outdated. I would like to make this change. 

 

While you're on that I'll get on the FAQ in Help, it's been on my radar for a bit and agree it needs another update.

[_Charky]

19 minutes ago, eeep said:

 

The problem is that isn't not defined in the board rules that "site discussion forbids chatter" so how is anyone supposed to guess that as a newbie? Some people get very rattled by being told off (even if it's gentle) so why not just avoid the problem in the first place by defining rules properly?

The rules thread in site discussion DOES say that, pretty plainly:

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm of the opinion that ALL of the rules on ALL areas of the site need to be updated - I don't think that "we can't cover all eventualities" is a good excuse not to state some things which are established rules (such as "don't talk about other users because they might see it and get sad") - but in this particular instance the rules very much do cover chat topics beind disallowed.

[KageSora]

8 minutes ago, purpledragonclaw said:

 

While you're on that I'll get on the FAQ in Help, it's been on my radar for a bit and agree it needs another update.

 

I think SkyWolf mentioned intending to take a look at that?

[Kaini]

6 minutes ago, _Charky said:

such as "don't talk about other users because they might see it and get sad") 

 

This definitely falls under 'respect others'. Anything that needs to be said behind someone's back that might make them 'sad'.  Respect others just applies whether or not they're on the forum. 

[purpledragonclaw]

20 minutes ago, KageSora said:

 

I think SkyWolf mentioned intending to take a look at that?

 

Oh drat, you're right! I won't step on her toes, but I'd be happy to help @SkyWolf25 if you'd like!

 

Thank you Kage, totally forgot.

[eeep]

1 hour ago, Kaini said:

 

I said above that I would edit the SD rules, as looking at them now, they are rather outdated. I would like to make this change. 

 

Your reaction to (as you said, gently) being told you violated rules is not our responsibility. Again, I am also neurodivergent, I understand, but not everything in the world can cater to your reactions and it is up to us to moderate our own feelings. Considering you also became rather heated with me when I clarified privately, I don't feel my feelings particularly respected either. 

 

I did bring up the outdated rules in the PMs and tried to resolve the issue there, but I don't think they were addressed so I brought it to Suggestions. I apologize if I came across as abrasive. Regardless, I am happy something constructive came out of all of this

[_Charky]

50 minutes ago, Kaini said:

 

This definitely falls under 'respect others'. Anything that needs to be said behind someone's back that might make them 'sad'.  Respect others just applies whether or not they're on the forum. 

... I'm not entirely sure where going behind people's backs comes into this, but that's probably off topic.

 

I think if this thread has proven anything, it's that the "makes me sad" threshold is very subjective. One person's nonpartisan/objective/blunt/measurable fact or gentle correction can be another person's personal attack. You can't cover all of those circumstances, but you can look to definite the difference between situations which are "disrespect" and which are "it is up to us to moderate our own feelings" (Kaini, 2023).

[purpledragonclaw]

12 minutes ago, _Charky said:

... I'm not entirely sure where going behind people's backs comes into this, but that's probably off topic.

 

I think if this thread has proven anything, it's that the "makes me sad" threshold is very subjective. One person's nonpartisan/objective/blunt/measurable fact or gentle correction can be another person's personal attack. You can't cover all of those circumstances, but you can look to definite the difference between situations which are "disrespect" and which are "it is up to us to moderate our own feelings" (Kaini, 2023).

 

There is a difference between a user being sad about constructive criticism or gentle correction vs. outright hostility aimed at them. If someone is trying to rationalize telling someone their work is ugly, or they're too stupid to understand what's being discussed is being respectful, it's pretty easy to see that's not. And someone getting offended if someone says "I disagree with your opinion" when that's in no way offensive is that person taking things too seriously. Everything I just mentioned has come up in the past, and we warn to show what's respectful and what's not.