We want Forum Feedback!

[olympe]

Well, that's what we were hoping for with the vampire thread. It didn't do us much good. (There are obvious changes, but TJ stated repeatedly that everything is fine. And nobody knows what is going on.)

 

Regarding "wanting to know how things work" and if I ever played a game that came with instructions like that: Yes, many games come with extra booklets that give this kind of information - among other things. Other games have fansites with all the stats and workings you might need. We have nothing but TJ's word, if he chooses to speak up.

(To quote the dragon cave wiki entry on vampires:

"Success percentages before June 2011 were: 50% chance the egg bite is successful and you get to keep it, 25% chance the egg bite is successful but automatically abandoned (however, if you move the egg you want to bite closer to your vampire dragon -or inbetween two of them- the chance that it will be automatically abandoned will almost never happen), and 25% chance the egg is killed. Since the introduction of the new 5-letter dragon codes, the success rates of biting have apparently been tweaked. TJ09 indicated that he never guaranteed the 50/25/25 ratios. Some have speculated that the current chances are approximately 90% kill, 5% keep, 5% repulse, but these numbers are still based on anecdotal evidence and must be taken with a grain of salt. ")

 

Regarding the issue of cheating/reverse engineering: Knowing the stats won't allow us to cheat them.

Edited July 18, 2011 by olympe

[~!~]

Regarding the issue of cheating/reverse engineering: Knowing the stats won't allow us to cheat them.

Just throwing this out there, but I for one have no idea how I'd go about cheating to get a certain kind of dragon simply from knowing how many there are. Unless, like, there's a certain time of day during which it's easier to get CB Silvers or something.

[JaziandCo]

Just a question, but what videogames actually give you statistics on rarity and percentages of creatures you can catch? Aside from players just noticing "oh these are rarer than others" and the game itself calling out a select few as "uber-rare/legendary/one of a kind"... there can't be many. People still play them and, with enough effort, actually obtain the critters they want. I'm not seeing a difference here =\

 

And no, I'm not including game guide books in that example purely because most kids don't have the money to spend on a $50 game and a $15 guide, and thus an overwhelming majority just deal with figuring things out themselves.

[Lythiaren]

Just a question, but what videogames actually give you statistics on rarity and percentages of creatures you can catch? Aside from players just noticing "oh these are rarer than others" and the game itself calling out a select few as "uber-rare/legendary/one of a kind"... there can't be many. People still play them and, with enough effort, actually obtain the critters they want. I'm not seeing a difference here =\

 

And no, I'm not including game guide books in that example purely because most kids don't have the money to spend on a $50 game and a $15 guide, and thus an overwhelming majority just deal with figuring things out themselves.

^ That.

 

Do any official Pokemon sites exist that state actual numerical statistics for the probability of, say, fishing a Dratini in the Safari Zone in Generation 1? Probably not. Are there fansites with statistics gathered by people who have literally fished in that pond a million times? Probably. The knowledge that it's impossible to legitimately obtain a shiny Zekrom/Reshiram comes from people decompiling the source code for Black/White, iirc.

 

I guess my point is, fans notice some things that are not posted on the official site, and fan observation may not reflect actual numbers. I could claim that splits give out eggs like halloween candy just because my two pairs do, or I could point at the long progeny list on my gold/black pair and claim blacks are breeding quite well, but that doesn't mean anyone else has had any success with them. RNG is RNG (and I think I've previously established how much I love RNG :V ). What we on the forum do on the site is only a small slice of what happens on the site overall.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Lythiaren

[JaziandCo]

Why do I get my signature removed if it quotes someone who claims to get censored? Censorship is happening on these boards, but I guess it shouldn't look like it. Nice going.

Probably because it looked like you were trying to incite drama. There's a line between "censorship" and stopping people from starting flamewars. I saw your signature, and while I can't speak for the mods, if this was my board to mod, I'd've given you a warn and removed your sig for good measure.

 

 

 

Lyth, you pretty much said exactly what I was trying to. Pokemon is the often-cited example, but there are other games where you catch things and other games that have rarity ratios, and the same applies. Occasionally you might get a "this monster is commonly found in _____", but usually it's pretty much up to the fans to figure out numbers for themselves. Even in MMOs that are constantly changing due to their userbase this happens. I don't see why TJ should have to give up what even big name companies don't, and I don't see why he should have to make the game open source just because some people want to know ratios. That's a bit ridiculous.

[Fiona]

Proprietary information for a game is proprietary for a reason. No game is going to hand out such information. Gamers can often deduce such info, and there are lots of hackers out there who reverse engineer the code to extract such things, but the game owners certainly aren't going to publish it. How could TJ protect his copyright if he just handed out such info?

 

I would be more than willing to go through the thread here and compile a list of questions/concerns. Um, I'm not sure I'd be the best for it, since I don't actually agree some of the things raised are a problem. But if you want someone to do it who's not emotionally involved in the issue, I'd be willing.

[olympe]

Well, what other way is there to make people aware of something going on if you cannot post a thing about it?

[Rally Vincent]

I think it is common courtesy in modding to not delete single posts out of a thread without a trace, but to edit the content should that be necessary. Any user can at least see that some modding was done to a thread. It is highly irritating to visit a thread and taking five minutes to check if that was what one wanted to reply on.

 

I know no forum that deletes the entire post - just the content that breaks a forum rule is edited to preserve the integrity of the thread as much as possible. It may not make much of a difference content-wise, but it gives the reader of a thread a hint that something was going on rather then letting him wonder why posts refer to things that are not to be found in the thread. If one sees that several posts were edited by mods, one can imagine that something was going on.

 

Disclaimer: This is a general statement and not a comment on whether there has been "censorship" or not.

[LadyLyzar]

I can assure you we are not out to "get" anyone. Mods have to abide by the same set of rules as members.

 

If your posts (or parts of, including signatures) are intended to cause drama and/or flame wars, they will be dealt with. Frequently, posts containing drama will be edited (and potentially deleted if all they contain is drama.) This is to keep it from cycling over and over again.

 

I would like to remind members reading this topic of this tidbit from the forum rules:

 

Respect Others

It isn't possible to get far in the world if you refuse to respect others. Treat others kindly, don't insult them, and others will do the same in return. If you refuse to treat others well, then you will get not only a warning, but a bad reputation, which opens the door for more negativity.

 

I don't think I can explain it any more clearly than that. Rudeness/drama/disrespect is an instant warn from me. It is completely out of place on DC's forums.

 

If you have a problem with another member, a mod, whomever... take it to PM and talk to them. If you can't resolve it that way, talk to a Global mod or TJ himself.

 

If you have a problem with the site and its mechanics, please don't blow up about it... explain it calmly and rationally. I personally am more inclined to listen if I am not being screamed at, and I'd venture a guess that applies to TJ as well.

[bluebell_rose]

Why do I get my signature removed if it quotes someone who claims to get censored? Censorship is happening on these boards, but I guess it shouldn't look like it. Nice going.

it's why I haven't been active in these boards lately.

[TikindiDragon]

http://forums.dragcave.net/index.php?showtopic=119317&st=240

 

There's one.

~ If you have a problem with a member or a moderator, do not call them out publicly. Please take it to PM. ~

Edited July 18, 2011 by LadyLyzar

[Nine]

Rudeness/drama/disrespect is an instant warn from me.  It is completely out of place on DC's forums.

Unfortunately all of the above is completely in perspective of the individual, so while something may appear rude to you, it may not have been the intention of the person. I find that when moderating forums and such, simply asking the person in question to change their signature/post/avatar before taking action can prevent a lot of misunderstanding and hard feelings in the long run. Instead of "WTF where'd my essay-sized post on vuvuzelas go? OMG rage." it'd be more like "Oh, I guess my post was found offensive to some people. I'll go edit it right now." Maybe a few hours leeway could be given until removal/warn, unless the content is breaking the rules without perspective (eggspam, profanity, huge signature that stretches the screen and causes epilepsy).

 

One may roll their eyes and state that people are never as compliant as that, but you'd be surprised. It may seem completely unfair, but moderators and those who hold significant power over others oftentimes need to be more flexible and sympathetic when it comes to things. I'm not suggesting total anarchy and usurping the rules here, but if you get down to the level of the person who you're having trouble with and give them superficial warnings first before action... it really leaves a good feeling with the person. It also creates a stronger connection between users and staff, this humility. Staff want to be treated with just as much respect, I fully understand that-- sometimes though, they have to be the ones to initiate the handshake. Even if the eventual knifefight with the user cannot be avoided, it still manages to set a good example to others.

 

Respect goes both ways, and if a large portion of the user base does not feel respected or seen in positive light, they are more likely to get defensive and irritable themselves. I'm not speaking just to the staff, of course, I think there are plenty of folks who need to take a step back and refocus.

 

I'll probably go back and edit this post once I realize I actually used a vuvuzela as an example. Give it a minute.

 

If there's a discussion going on between users that you feel is "drama-filled and rude", just take a minute and STOP hammertime. Look at it from a different perspective; chances are there is really nothing being said that could constitute an attack on another user. It may be heated, but that's just the passion of the topic and strength of opinions showing there, not pure hatred for one another. I may disagree with someone's opinion on something and point out flaws in their argument, but that does not mean whatsoever that I disrespect them for it. Once again I would recommend a very relaxed and open-minded approach to these situations, where waiting, watching, and maybe sending a message to the user before using decisive action could mean a world of difference.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Nine

[olympe]

Respect Others

It isn't possible to get far in the world if you refuse to respect others. Treat others kindly, don't insult them, and others will do the same in return. If you refuse to treat others well, then you will get not only a warning, but a bad reputation, which opens the door for more negativity.

But isn't it the worst kind of disrespect to remove people's posts or signatures? Isn't it unfair to do so, for people who just inform others that they are being censored (as with Cinnamin Draconna)? And isn't it insulting to be shut up like that? If this shutting up hadn't happened in the first place (closing threads and deleting multiple posts), this whole situation (= "more negativity") wouldn't have happened in the first place.

 

Who mods the mods? (I know that the official answer is "TJ", but does he, really?)

[Rally Vincent]

Nine has made an excellent post, and I agree completely with it.

[JaziandCo]

But isn't it the worst kind of disrespect to remove people's posts or signatures? Isn't it unfair to do so, for people who just inform others that they are being censored (as with Cinnamin Draconna)? And isn't it insulting to be shut up like that? If this shutting up hadn't happened in the first place (closing threads and deleting multiple posts), this whole situation (= "more negativity") wouldn't have happened in the first place.

 

Who mods the mods? (I know that the official answer is "TJ", but does he, really?)

Since when is it disrespect to moderate a forum? When a user is inciting drama, said user will be punished. If a user is sparking a flamewar, said user will be punished. The punishment might be as simple as a removed signature, but it's not really something "disrespectful" if it's done as a punishment.

 

Informing others about censorship (which I still question if that's even a valid argument) is different from saying "hey I don't like this and want to make it public for the world to hear so that I'll get my way". As with other dramafests, dragging issues out in public has caused chaos on the forums for months. I can see why the mods are deleting posts and signatures knowing that =\

 

The moderators moderate themselves, and TJ does as well. Perhaps not somewhere us non-staff can see, but I'm aware of at least two incidents (long past) where a mod might have toed the line and was called out for it by the other staff. Remember that just because we can't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

[Lythiaren]

You know, if you guys actually get enough warns to reach the point of needing personal monitoring... have you considered that maybe you need to tone it down? I won't lie and say my record is spotless; thing is, when I get a warn, no matter how superficial I think it is, I stop, think, and take some of the edge off. As a result I've never had more than the first level warning. *knocks on wood* (Of course, I fully expect to get level 2 for giggles now and I will laugh too if this actually happens.)

 

Some people (myself included) just have a habit of getting very confrontational and making other people grind their teeth and go straight for the report button. Part of that is due to the fact that modding felt very lax for a while and that let us gouge out a place for ourselves as the big bad wolves. Once the mods stepped it up I was frustrated when I was suddenly getting warns for things, but I was glad overall that they were modding in the first place. But those who get multiple warnings might want to consider being a little faster when it comes to heeding those warnings.

 

 

And to balance the overwhelming seriousness of this post:

I actually used a vuvuzela as an example

*bweeeehhhhhhhhh* Edited July 18, 2011 by Lythiaren

[LadyLyzar]

You are correct in that moderators can moderate themselves. If a mod is acting out of line, you can be your boots the other staff will call them out on it. Yes, mods even warn each other. However, final decisions rest with TJ.

 

I cannot comment on these removed signatures, as I am not the one who removed them. However, your signature counts as part of your post(s). If it contains incendiary content, it will be edited. This also applies to avatars, etc.

 

However, if I scrub a sig or avatar, I PM the user explaining why it was done.

[olympe]

Since when is it disrespect to moderate a forum? When a user is inciting drama, said user will be punished. If a user is sparking a flamewar, said user will be punished. The punishment might be as simple as a removed signature, but it's not really something "disrespectful" if it's done as a punishment.

It depends on how the forum is moderated. I had at least one post removed that even the mods could not think was inciting drama, sparking a flamewar or whatnot. Still, it got deleted just because 42 or something. So, since there was no punishment called for, it was highly disrespectful. Closing whole threads due to "drama" because people say that the breeding is out of whack and that they want an official statement, feels highly disrespectful, and not like a due punishment. Sure, the wording was not the nicest possible, but considering this happened after a closing-deleting-warning-rerouting the question session, it's somewhat understandable. And I still am of the opinion that, had the first closing and censoring not happened, the situation would not have escalated.

 

Regarding my current warn cum signature censorship, it's because of rudeness (???) and "intentionally provoking a reaction from members, against moderators". (I don't deny that one.) Since a lot of "If X, copy and paste this into your signature" things can be found in signatures, it must be the "against moderators" part. I guess sharing this bit is going to earn me another warn for "sharing private information", though. Wouldn't be the first time, either. Or the most stupid of warns I ever got.

[bluebell_rose]

If people feel oppressed and they can't breathe without fear, then you might see people leaving because they can no longer be themselves and ask questions that are normal without being oppressed

Edited July 18, 2011 by bluebell_rose

[Lythiaren]

Users in general oppress each other that way already, to be honest. Been happening since before I started here, that's for sure. What's the big deal when it's mods doing it when justified?

Edited July 18, 2011 by Lythiaren

[JaziandCo]

It depends on how the forum is moderated. I had at least one post removed that even the mods could not think was inciting drama, sparking a flamewar or whatnot. Still, it got deleted just because 42 or something. So, since there was no punishment called for, it was highly disrespectful. Closing whole threads due to "drama" because people say that the breeding is out of whack and that they want an official statement, feels highly disrespectful, and not like a due punishment. Sure, the wording was not the nicest possible, but considering this happened after a closing-deleting-warning-rerouting the question session, it's somewhat understandable. And I still am of the opinion that, had the first closing and censoring not happened, the situation would not have escalated.

 

Regarding my current warn cum signature censorship, it's because of rudeness (???) and "intentionally provoking a reaction from members, against moderators". (I don't deny that one.) Since a lot of "If X, copy and paste this into your signature" things can be found in signatures, it must be the "against moderators" part. I guess sharing this bit is going to earn me another warn for "sharing private information", though. Wouldn't be the first time, either. Or the most stupid of warns I ever got.

While it's true that I haven't seen the whole issue and that I'm not a mod here, from what I've seen coming from both you and Cinnamon, and from the little incident yesterday in the IRC, there's been nothing but rudeness and attempts to drag drama out into the public. As for your specific post, I'm not a mod so I have no comment on that. I don't doubt that occasionally mods step out of line, but as said when that happens the other mods let them know.

 

Your signature read as rude to me, and I'm not even a mod nor was it directed at me. It was definitely something that was trying to start a battle, and that's not censorship to have it removed, it's punishment for fanning flames. There's a difference.

 

Heck, I've got a stupid warn on my record too. Did I gnaw on the moderator about it a bit, sure did, in a private setting. I've been kicked from the IRC for stupid reasons, and you betcha I've gnawed on the OPs about it in private conversations. There's a difference between doing that and dragging out everyone's dirty laundry for all to see. Dragging out the issue of the fact that xyz member is unhappy with a warn they got and is now calling it censorship is never the proper way to go about doing this, imo.

[olympe]

It's the "when justified" bit I'm not so sure about, because the mods' actions don't seem quite justified recently.

[JaziandCo]

I'd say removing an inflammatory signature and warning said person for it is justified enough.

[futurelibkeeper]

It's the "when justified" bit I'm not so sure about, because the mods' actions don't seem quite justified recently.

I find it interesting that you lump every single mod into this group, instead of talking to the one -- note I said /talking/, not flaming -- that you have concerns with.

 

It's like saying you don't like restaurants because one once served you horrible food. It's incendiary and once you star generalizing your attacks, you lose the focus of your concern and quite a bit of respect and power over your own argument.

[RheaZen]

I find it interesting that you lump every single mod into this group, instead of talking to the one -- note I said /talking/, not flaming -- that you have concerns with.

 

It's like saying you don't like restaurants because one once served you horrible food. It's incendiary and once you star generalizing your attacks, you lose the focus of your concern and quite a bit of respect and power over your own argument.

 

Well it doesn't seem like we can mention the ones people tend to have trouble with without getting warned about it, and PMs don't seem to do much when they don't go through (full inbox or other, plus how do you reason with someone who has absolute say anyways?).

 

And quoting

Edited July 18, 2011 by RheaZen