Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => The Summit (IG Channel Discussion) => Topic started by: Silas Vitalia on 01 Mar 2013, 11:51
-
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2687952&#post2687952
Very curious about this.
This is NOT to detract from summit, this is just a little experiment to change a few variables and see if people still want to act like idiots.
-
You're basically looking at exactly what the Summit was a few years ago before Ashar came back and Graelyn took over. The place was utter shit and largely unusable before then - similar in many ways to Chatsubo, before it eventually kicked the bucket. God forbid the Goons decided to swarm into the channel and fuck shit up - there was nothing that could be done except spend an hour filling your block list.
As Tib and I told you last night, the majority of your disagreements with the other moderators are primarily due to you having spent almost no time in either Summit or OOC at all prior to becoming a moderator - which means that as a result you lack the background and history that govern our decisions, as well as the experience with the older forms of "moderation" it used to have that would show you why things are the way they are now.
We don't ban people for lying to a mod about whether they're an alt or not.
We do punt people out of the channel for extended tears of crude language and direct personal attacks, which is in the MOTD as one of the few explicitly-written rules, and is in fact one of the oldest rules the channel has.
There just wasn't anyone to enforce it back in the days before Ashar or the current team led by Graelyn.
-
Yup, I remember those days. The Summit was mostly un-usable, and people had to go to other channels (Le Maison was pretty active then, for example) and many more faction-themed channels appeared (like the Amarr Basilica, or something like that) because inter-faction interaction wasn't working mostly, only degenerated into trolling.
But I am interested in your experiment, and wish you luck on it. EVE has changed, we have changed, maybe we can do it right this time. Well, in this case "we" doesn't include me, but that's because a blooder organized it ;)
-
I'm looking forward to it personally.
-
I really want to stress this is not a repudiation of the Summit or its methods of control.
I honestly want to give people a chance who feel things are a certain way to prove me wrong.
-
Interesting. I hope it will probe fruitful but as I tend to believe in strict moderation since self moderation is a joke for 95% of the people, I do not hold very big hopes on it though.
I will try to join and see how that experiment goes.
However I agree OOCly with Niraia first IC answer.
1. Don't be a sh*t. If you feel a need to use foul language, make threats, act in a certain way, you do what you need to do. HOWEVER if myself, or a majority of the patrons feel you are sh*tting up the channel with your nonsense you will be banned, no questions asked, no recourses.
I hope you know what you are doing. Ostracizing by the majority is often dangerous. That's already one of the flaws I personally hold the Summit responsible for.
I agree with Jinari IC remark about that as well. Popularity contests are like plague, especially since they often mix IC and OOC stuff together.
-
While I agree that the moderation in the Summit is far, far too heavy (people really shouldn't be banned or muted for having heated IC arguments, nor for using "bad" words or attacking other members. As long as it's IC, it should be allowed to continue, IMO. Conflict is good), having no moderation whatsoever isn't good either. The best kind of moderation is a light-handed approach, IMO, present and available but only stepping in when it's a very clear disturbance.
Personally won't be participating in the experiment for IC reasons, due to Silas being the founder. Sorry.
-
Samira, there is a difference between a heated argument, and, for example, the incident that happened yesterday after the live event. Heated arguments are fine, and we welcome those. They become not-fine when people stop arguing and just resort to little more than personal attacks and lots of swearing.
Silas, you were proven wrong in this case several years before you came up with the idea, as I stated before. You're setting up a channel that is identical in function and form to what the Summit (and Chatsubo) was several years ago.
You would not be doing so if you had exposed yourself to things back then.
-
Wasn't something similar attempted already with Saede's channel The Undercroft?
-
Samira, there is a difference between a heated argument, and, for example, the incident that happened yesterday after the live event. Heated arguments are fine, and we welcome those. They become not-fine when people stop arguing and just resort to little more than personal attacks and lots of swearing.
If they're IC personal attacks and IC swearing, I don't see the problem. It's RP.
I saw Andreus get muted the other day for 3 hours just for ICly calling someone a bad word. There was no protracted, heated argument disrupting the channel. Just one bad word. Someone made a jibe at him and he responded with an insult in return, and got muted for it. That's just ridiculous IMO, no matter how "bad" the word might have been. As long as it's IC there shouldn't be any action taken IMO unless it's seriously disrupting the channel (in which case it should be just a temporary mute of all parties involved so people can calm down, not a several-day ban).
-
Samira, there is a difference between a heated argument, and, for example, the incident that happened yesterday after the live event. Heated arguments are fine, and we welcome those. They become not-fine when people stop arguing and just resort to little more than personal attacks and lots of swearing.
Silas, you were proven wrong in this case several years before you came up with the idea, as I stated before. You're setting up a channel that is identical in function and form to what the Summit (and Chatsubo) was several years ago.
You would not be doing so if you had exposed yourself to things back then.
I was a member of chatsubo for a long time, as was I in the Summit on and off as well.
It's not 'right' or 'wrong.' Some people like and need to be coddled, some people need to be grown ups and handle their IC interaction without running to the mod shields for being called a bad name.
-
It wasn't just that, it was the protracted rant of abusive language that was directed at multiple people that resulted in his (temporary) ban.
Keep in mind that the channel is primarily a diplomatic discussion channel.
Calling people whores, among other things, is not appropriate for such an environment. There was a history of prior behavior that was taken into account with that situation. I personally suggested less time than was given, but was overridden by a more senior moderator, for the record.
Karm: You're thinking of The Underdepths. Not sure what the status there is.
-
Let the many flowers bloom.
(Morwen, it's okay if people want something different and they're willing to make it happen. We don't all like the same things. Even when there are things that we do like, we don't necessarily want those things all the time. I may have missed some context, but it doesn't seem that this does anything harmful to The Summit. Instead it provides an alternative, and possibly a safety valve.)
-
I for one, welcome our Summit Overlords. I advocate stronger moderation, harsher. You guys can lose entire ships (OOC) and crews (IC) to a lethal and overreactive police force... but you can't take a slap on the wrist from a moderator?
Y'all got your priorities messed up. EVE is harsh. Let's see some summary ganks for 'RP suspect flags'!
-
That's not the point I'm getting at, Mata. Not at all.
If you want context, it's in my first post, and I provided a few examples. Silas has a fundamental lack of understanding how the rules in both channels are enforced, largely due to not having spent very much time in them in his time prior to becoming a moderator. If he had spent more time in the channels, we wouldn't be having this discussion in all likelihood, because he wouldn't be as (effectively) uninformed as to how things have been done since Graelyn took over.
This is not to say that the moderators never have differences in opinion on how to enforce things. We do - very regularly I have had to step up and say "no, we shouldn't ban/mute X person (yet)" when someone else is chomping at the bit, and vice versa - but we still discuss it with each other openly.
Some joke that trying the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result each time is the definition of insanity. We've seen this sort of thing several times before, and we've seen it fail too. He's welcome to try, by all means, but I think his reasons for doing so are misguided and partly based on his frequent hesitation to sit down and discuss things with other moderators at length on TS when they come up.
I expect it to fail like other attempts before, and I also expect it to fail -faster- than other attempts.
I'm not going to stop him from trying, but I'm also not going to sit there and not put my 2 ISK on the table regarding his decision-making process when he's part of the moderation team for the Summit and OOC.
-
As an individual who has participated in roleplay for a considerable number of years in numerous virtual chat environments, I can say that moderation, or the lack thereof, is not the sole reason for the failure of a channel. Providing a positive roleplay environment is a collaborative effort between players in a contained space, and moderation's presence in the equation can either be positive or negative influence, depending on the audience they are trying to reach.
I know many who feel that the presence of moderation creates a negative atmosphere to constructive roleplay, and would welcome this opportunity. While I don't have any personal issues with the Summit staff, I am looking forward to exploring an environment that is a bit less restrictive than what the Summit offers at the moment. Hopefully I can be a constructive participant in Silas' project, and help facilitate a positive rp environment.
-
I would recommend changing Rule 1 to simply "Keep it IC." This provides sufficient basis to throw out folks like Goons without encouraging a new mobocracy that will exclude people that aren't in their tribal moral group.
-
There's no mobocracy, I'm the only one with any mod stuff, and frankly won't be in channel most of the time.
I could use spiffy names though if anyone has anything.
-
I would recommend changing Rule 1 to simply "Keep it IC." This provides sufficient basis to throw out folks like Goons without encouraging a new mobocracy that will exclude people that aren't in their tribal moral group.
The more you talk about Goons crashing a channel, the more they are going to want to do it.
-
Wasn't something similar attempted already with Saede's channel The Undercroft?
The Underdepths? Yeah kind of, but at the same time, that channel hasn't gotten nearly as much traffic and was never intended to compete with the summit, just provide an interesting kind of cyberpunky backroom area to chat in. Feel free to pull it into this though, our moderation style of tUD is basically what Silas is proposing.
-
Samira, there is a difference between a heated argument, and, for example, the incident that happened yesterday after the live event. Heated arguments are fine, and we welcome those. They become not-fine when people stop arguing and just resort to little more than personal attacks and lots of swearing.
If they're IC personal attacks and IC swearing, I don't see the problem. It's RP.
I saw Andreus get muted the other day for 3 hours just for ICly calling someone a bad word. There was no protracted, heated argument disrupting the channel. Just one bad word. Someone made a jibe at him and he responded with an insult in return, and got muted for it. That's just ridiculous IMO, no matter how "bad" the word might have been. As long as it's IC there shouldn't be any action taken IMO unless it's seriously disrupting the channel (in which case it should be just a temporary mute of all parties involved so people can calm down, not a several-day ban).
It's also their channel ICly, so their rules are IC and following the same reasoning, totally legit.
EDIT : of course though, since they also moderate on an OOC basis as well, things tend to get shady.
-
I think the case of IGS before moderation gives no statistically sound basis for 'proving' that a channel can't be a nice environment without moderation.
I agree with Mercy, that moderation can be a positive as well as a negative factor, depending on many other things, as I firmly believe that there are interacting factors that make up how good a channel goes. I think that is also true for RP channels, though of course I do say so merely from experience and have no statistical basis to firmly ground my opinion in.
-
Expecting roleplayers to moderate themselves is like trying to mix oil with water. When you put a bunch of entitled egotistical wankers and cunts in one pool of people you get extraordinary levels of asshattery. If there's no one to tell these muppets every once in a while that they should play nice and share the toys it's gonna end up a total shitfest. Been there, seen that, got a swanky quafe shirt.
Of course you are welcome to try and prove me wrong, I however reserve the rights to endless tirades of "I told you so."
Yeah I know, I know... Could have said all this with more eloquence. Didn't. Why? (http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/31374378.jpg)
Inb4 the mods gonna moderate.
(http://www.aucollegedems.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/I-regret-nothing-2.gif)
-
Expecting roleplayers to moderate themselves is like trying to mix oil with water. When you put a bunch of entitled egotistical wankers and cunts in one pool of people you get extraordinary levels of asshattery. If there's no one to tell these muppets every once in a while that they should play nice and share the toys it's gonna end up a total shitfest. Been there, seen that, got a swanky quafe shirt.
Of course you are welcome to try and prove me wrong, I however reserve the rights to endless tirades of "I told you so."
Yeah I know, I know... Could have said all this with more eloquence. Didn't. Why? (http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/31374378.jpg)
Inb4 the mods gonna moderate.
(http://www.aucollegedems.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/I-regret-nothing-2.gif)
Vincent, the odds are certainly in your favor. If it works, super fantastic. if it doesn't I tried, and I won't entertain arguments from people about their opinions on how terrible summit mods are ever again
-
I don't see all the fuss.
If you'd like to play with other styles, more power to you.
Summit, ofc, is this way for a reason. We remember the Years of Blood.
I use them all at one point or another. The Summit is the 'front door/diplomacy hall' and as such we'll look to keep the poop off the porch. So what if others don't? You're allowed to enjoy the symphony and the mosh pit.
-
I think that everything needs some moderation. I honestly see this collapsing quickly. People are going to take advantage of the lack of rules.
Best of luck though. Prove me wrong!
-
The funniest part is on the OOC channel.
When something heated starts to get out of control, people start spamming like if they were possessed or something and even a mod yelling to shut the hell up will have a hard time to get heard.
-
Expecting roleplayers to moderate themselves is like trying to mix oil with water. When you put a bunch of entitled egotistical wankers and cunts in one pool of people you get extraordinary levels of asshattery. If there's no one to tell these muppets every once in a while that they should play nice and share the toys it's gonna end up a total shitfest. Been there, seen that, got a swanky quafe shirt.
So, instead of roleplayers moderating themselves, you suggest that some roleplayers that still are "a bunch of #*%$$$§()" by your words, just a smaller bunch moderate the other "bunch of #*%$$$§()"? o.ô I honestly don't see the logic in this.
-
Expecting roleplayers to moderate themselves is like trying to mix oil with water. When you put a bunch of entitled egotistical wankers and cunts in one pool of people you get extraordinary levels of asshattery. If there's no one to tell these muppets every once in a while that they should play nice and share the toys it's gonna end up a total shitfest. Been there, seen that, got a swanky quafe shirt.
So, instead of roleplayers moderating themselves, you suggest that some roleplayers that still are "a bunch of #*%$$$§()" by your words, just a smaller bunch moderate the other "bunch of #*%$$$§()"? o.ô I honestly don't see the logic in this.
I believe it's an example of inductive reasoning.
-
Would you be able to make the inductive reasoning you see in it explicit?
-
Yes, I would. :D
-
Would you then be so kind to do it in text here, as I still don't see the reasoning of the post, neither deductive nor inductive? :P
-
Sent
-
Wish nothing but the best on this project.
Good luck Silas.
-
We're up as "The Sphere"
Good attendance so far, derp levels remain low. But much like radiation, it's the slow burn that can get ya :bear:
Also as this is a summit spin-off it is likely inappropriate to keep it in 'the summit' category of backstage. If a mod wants to move this elsewhere that is super cool.
-
Wasn't something similar attempted already with Saede's channel The Undercroft?
The Underdepths, and my channel. We have very low footfall but it does cater to a particular IC audience unlike The Sphere/The Summit which are set up for a place for all kinds to mingle. The fact that you know neither it's name or who owns the channel betrays how tiny it is. :P There's essentially no moderation and so far this hasn't created any problems.
I don't see The Sphere as directly competing with my channel or The Summit. As far as I'm concerned it's a completely different purpose, delivery and reception.
-
Updates for those not-participating:
Numbers are lower than summit, but things can be lively when people are online and talkative.
Content seems to be occasionally more sexual and more profanity laden, but I haven't seen any extreme derp a lerp derails yet.
The risque typings that have happened have all seemed pretty boring to me though. More like when a kid starts cursing because they -can- not because they need to.
Still no major issues yet.
-
Yeah.
I hear all the time "Moderation keeps good content away!"
Then, you go to where there is no moderation, and said content turns out to be LOL SPACEDICKS
-
Yeah.
I hear all the time "Moderation keeps good content away!"
Then, you go to where there is no moderation, and said content turns out to be LOL SPACEDICKS
I think you just found the name for my next pvp corp Graelyn :)
-
Ticker 8DB=D
-
The problem is one or two of your moderators, and your refusal to do anything about it
I look into anything brought to my attention. Most people don't, because they know what I'll find.
When someone does, 95% of it is "I just don't like them." I've also removed mod rights from one of them for a few months when I thought they were being too aggressive.
So many of the blocks and bans we hand down come directly from me, with the mods you hate simply sending me logs. Since whining at me in public is, for some reason not 'popular', my mods literally tank all the hate.
So, pardon me if I roll my eyes a bit at that one.
-
I look into anything brought to my attention. Most people don't, because they know what I'll find.
I'm not sure how you could possibly know that without communicating with those people. I know that some have felt it would be pointless, and just leave.
When someone does, 95% of it is "I just don't like them."...
...So many of the blocks and bans we hand down come directly from me, with the mods you hate simply sending me logs. Since whining at me in public is, for some reason not 'popular', my mods literally tank all the hate.
So, pardon me if I roll my eyes a bit at that one.
When you see mods causing needless hassle over things that would otherwise go unnoticed, it's hard not to resent the people doing the banning (or snitching, I guess). More so when they seem to get excited as something punishable happens in the channel. That doesn't make anyone's complaint less valid, does it?
Further, I'd expect that some would be unhappy with you assuming that they're complaining because they simply don't like the mods. Could you be mistaking frustration and anger for hatred?
-
I'm still giving cash gifts (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2692756#post2692756") to people that make the switch and give it a fair shake.
-
I've made the switch, and so far it just seems like another version of the Summit. I haven't yet seen issues of derp and drama... but then I haven't been watching it too closely. Kat had a bit of fun playing with it.
After reading the link Norrin posted, I'd like to clarify that I will not be 'excluding' the Summit completely. Sorry, but I don't need to not be in the Summit to enjoy The Sphere.
-
Further, I'd expect that some would be unhappy with you assuming that they're complaining because they simply don't like the mods. Could you be mistaking frustration and anger for hatred?
It's certainly possible. However since ALL (with maybe 2 exceptions) of the cases that have eventually led to bans finally got to that point through blatant "I dare you to ban me, let's see how many rules I can break before the hammer comes" episodes in The Summit, that all got to witness, the difference seems academic at best.
That said, I watch and correct more than you may think.
-
I saw someone beat someone else to death on channel (special snowflake, 2 days old)
I have seen endless "so and so pets a bunny".
Lots of "Slave brings <enter name> drinks".
Other than that, not terrible.
I am a fan of allowing whatever people want to do IC to fly in the Summit, EXCEPT people will just make random nonsequitur attacks and comments (Tarq) and say "But my character is like that IC!"
Your roleplay should never be a cover for you simply being a trollish asshole. Prove to me that we can determine one from the other, and I will push for that change.
-
The quality of RP in The Sphere is really low, and that's a really low bar, considering what The Summit tends to offer.
But then again, I'm not too surprised.
-
I kinda have to agree with Davlos, but The Summit never was fully interesting to me either.
-
A channel is only as good as the content its members bring to the table. Perhaps a generic RP comm channel isn't conducive to the type of roleplay you're looking for.
-
A channel is only as good as the content its members bring to the table. Perhaps a generic RP comm channel isn't conducive to the type of roleplay you're looking for.
Even for a generic RP comm channel, it still is really, really atrocious. I've seen better content in an elementary school-equivalent creative writing class.
-
I've got no complaints. Sure, there's plenty of derp for all. Is it atrocious? I don't know if I'd go that far, but if I decide that something is, I can filter it out myself, either by ignoring it or pushing my own block button.
I can filter out kindergarten-esque content without kindergarten-esque supervision.
-
I still have to experiment the Sphere content, but considering the low interest I usually have for 80% of the summit content, I am not expecting much.
One of the main issues with the Summit is that most politicaly oriented discussions or actual interesting stuff often gets either :
1) mingled in the usual *hugs* *kiss* *hugs* chit chat
2) out of control, so gets moderated
I do not see a rational reason to expect better of non moderated channel, except that 2) will continue to get out of control instead of getting back to the usual *hugs* *kiss* *hugs* chit chat.
The issue is not the summit, it's the overall quality of the content, as Mercy said.
-
Lots of "Slave brings <enter name> drinks".
I imagine some players have been waiting a long time to publicly show off how they can have slaves bring them a drink. :lol:
-
Lots of "Slave brings <enter name> drinks".
I imagine some players have been waiting a long time to publicly show off how they can have slaves bring them a drink. :lol:
If it makes them happy. vOv
So far, I have seen nothing much that would make the Sphere a place that one can't frequent.
-
So far, I have seen nothing much that would make the Sphere a place that one can't frequent.
So far, I have seen nothing much that would make the Sphere any better than the Summit.
-
The issue is not the summit, it's the overall quality of the content, as Mercy said.
Bingo.
-
I imagine some players have been waiting a long time to publicly show off how they can have slaves bring them a drink. :lol:
Hmm, I had no idea this was not possible in The Summit.
Anyway, the most noticable advantage The Sphere has offered me so far is to function as a B-channel for The Summit. If a lot of people are talking in The Summit at the same time, it's nice to be able to have a B-channel. It could function as a place to have sidetrack discussions that are inspired by a fast-paced discussion in The Summit without disrupting that discussion or vice versa.
-
I imagine some players have been waiting a long time to publicly show off how they can have slaves bring them a drink. :lol:
Hmm, I had no idea this was not possible in The Summit.
Some told it was not in the past, some argued that rule never actually happened, I am not even sure now if that's still forbidden or not.
All i know of is that it leaded to :drama:.
-
If you do it, you'll be asked not to do that. It's rude and a bit war-starting. Even the Holder running the channel thinks so; how crass and uncivilized, to flaunt your holdings in such a way! Pish-posh!
If you do it just for lulz on the other hand, you'll be a mod's hate-pinata, and I will not save you. :|
-
So I understand certain people who are banned from the summit for cause are using the sphere to accuse other people of beastiality.
Ah, the wonders of self moderation.
-
So I understand certain people who are banned from the summit for cause are using the sphere to accuse other people of beastiality.
Ah, the wonders of self moderation.
And those who are bothered by said person have all blocked her. Working as intended.
-
First, to whomever post is blatantly deleting my posts, could you be a darling and send me the quote of my post via forum mail before deleting it? Muchas gracias.
So I understand certain people who are banned from the summit for cause are using the sphere to accuse other people of beastiality.
Ah, the wonders of self moderation.
And that person got ostracized by everyone in the channel, albeit not given much relevance to start with. So I have to correct Norrin, there was no need for the block button even.
My point is, you're kind of barking up the wrong tree, trying to say the Vea incident is something that proves the Sphere is a failed concept where it actually proved the maturity of the people involved in it and its ability to function without the need of any moderation.
-
First, to whomever post is blatantly deleting my posts, could you be a darling and send me the quote of my post via forum mail before deleting it? Muchas gracias.
Your post wasn't deleted, it was moved to the Catacombs forum. That's how moderation is done on Backstage, except in extreme circumstances.
-
First, to whomever post is blatantly deleting my posts, could you be a darling and send me the quote of my post via forum mail before deleting it? Muchas gracias.
Your post wasn't deleted, it was moved to the Catacombs forum. That's how moderation is done on Backstage, except in extreme circumstances.
[mod]To confirm: Except in cases of things like ISK buying spam or porn, all moderated posts are moved to the Catacombs, and generally a post from the mod taking the action will also be attached there with a short explanation of the reason for moderation. We don't really delete posts outright.[/mod]
-
I don't see why either side is trying to destroy the other.
Those who enjoy the Summit moderation can stay in the Summit happily.
Those who enjoy the Sphere anarchy can stay in the Sphere happily.
We each stay out of each other's hair, and maybe this bickering about the other channel on Backstage can stop. Looking at you Tiberious, Norrin, and Leopold.
-
Seriously.
-
I'm personally more fond of the Sphere than The Summit. Sphere seems a lot more relaxed and there appear to be fewer arguments there. Yes there was a hiccup a couple of days back but that incident only really proved the maturity of most of the role-players involved.
-
So, how we doing?
-
So, how we doing?
I'm good. Just listening to music and eating some chips. There's a movie on TV but I've got it muted and I'm not really paying attention.
How about you?
-
So, how we doing?
Personally, the (admittedly) few times that I've logged into the channel, I've been driven to close it pretty quickly. I'm sure the participants are having fun, but it's not the sort of content that I'm interested in. (I will qualify this entire statement by saying I'm not particularly interested in 90% of what the Summit produces, but I'm rarely driven to close the summit in disgust.)
-
Sorry but the Summit, while moderated, keeps the RP quality high. Even is I RP Anslo as tired of the same old tired political debates, it's still more interesting than people trying to be edgy or hard core or just general derpness happening. I've kept both channels open and when Sphere IS active, it tends to be...odd. Summit activity is at least engaging.
Sorry :S
Note: I'm not trying to be super critical or YDIW or anything, but if my post IS coming off that way (though I didn't mean for that to happen), I understand if mods Catacomb it.
-
In my opinion I have similar experience, for the few hours I play by week... I already find the Summit content boring as hell and not interesting, but sometimes it gets interesting, when characters actually want to have a serious discussion.
It has yet to happen on the Sphere in my experience, which is kind of even more shallow.
Of course as I said, since I do not play a lot, I am probably missing all the good things.
-
I don't see why either side is trying to destroy the other.
Those who enjoy the Summit moderation can stay in the Summit happily.
Those who enjoy the Sphere anarchy can stay in the Sphere happily.
We each stay out of each other's hair, and maybe this bickering about the other channel on Backstage can stop.
This. Ten times over, this.
-
[18:12:41] EVE System > Channel default access set to Blocked by Silas Vitalia. This channel will now only accept people on the allowed list.
:lol:
-
Yup, experiment over.
Essentially just like I said in the IGS:
Conclusions:
1. Lack of moderation was highly successful, and channel occupants seemed to do quite well.
2. This did not translate into interesting content or conversation. Being able to be unfiltered in content and commentary does not equate to interesting or worthwhile content.
Done with this for now.
-
Not much surprise on my side, the content is the realm of players, not moderation, and moderation is certainly not going to create better content.
-
Not much surprise on my side, the content is the realm of players, not moderation, and moderation is certainly not going to create better content.
On the same note, moderation certainly isn't stifling content. That no better content was found in the Sphere is a telling example. This is ignoring the whole issue of it being a very short one-time experiment.
-
Definitly. I often endorse a strict moderation.
The issue with the Summit is that the channel is moderated both ICly and OOCly, which makes things very confused.
ICly, the owners can do whatever they want moderation wise, since it's IC.
OOCly, it's an entirely different matter.
And both get often intermingled as hell.
-
Definitly. I often endorse a strict moderation.
The issue with the Summit is that the channel is moderated both ICly and OOCly, which makes things very confused.
ICly, the owners can do whatever they want moderation wise, since it's IC.
OOCly, it's an entirely different matter.
And both get often intermingled as hell.
Would you propose eliminating OOC moderation in favor of more comprehensive and even stricter IC moderation to make up for it? I'm sure the mods could shoehorn in any number of reasons why someone would get banned or muted.
I feel that it's better as it is now, that mods clearly state if there is an OOC reason for an action taken, or if it's IC. If mods had to make up IC reasons to enforce the rules, I can only imagine things getting even more confusing.
-
Yes, it's exactly the problem, and I have no clear solution to it in mind.
-
Why do OOC reasons and IC reasons have to be separate? What rules that apply to any chat OOC can be applied to IC (i.e. courtesy, nothing too offensive, no spam, purposeful aggression, trolling, etc).
-
Why do OOC reasons and IC reasons have to be separate? What rules that apply to any chat OOC can be applied to IC (i.e. courtesy, nothing too offensive, no spam, purposeful aggression, trolling, etc).
I actually dislike engaging in OOC interaction when in game, though I'll sometimes do it for the sake of being friendly and social (or for more practical reasons, such as that my squad is OOC and trying to talk as Tarquin would be, um, awkward). However, much as I'd love rules and enforcement of those rules in places like The Summit to be 100% IC, there are some rules that can only exist, and only be enforced, OOC.
For example, "No OOC." From the characters' perspective, it doesn't exist, so the rule cannot be enforced from that point of view.
That's an unsubtle example. There are other possibilities that blend IC and OOC problems, such as godmoding, breaking the fourth wall, and flagrant trolling that only has "punch" OOC (pulling in RL topics, for example. Characters get confused; players get annoyed).
Some OOC controls are necessary. Irritating, but true.
-
Why do OOC reasons and IC reasons have to be separate? What rules that apply to any chat OOC can be applied to IC (i.e. courtesy, nothing too offensive, no spam, purposeful aggression, trolling, etc).
Because moderating someone ICly out of OOC reasons definitly sounds completely wrong to me. Or even worse, the other way around.
-
OOC moderation is useful because the player might be willing to compromise and communicate when the character isn't.