Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

That the Intaki Assembly responded directly to Julianus Soter's and other's request for information regarding Ishukone and Mordus Legion around Intaki Prime? For more, read here

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 16

Author Topic: IC sections  (Read 58482 times)

Akikio L

  • Wetgraver
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
    • Akikio's Plog
Re: IC sections
« Reply #45 on: 23 Apr 2011, 02:45 »

I haven't read IGS for years. I think it would be very nice from an immersion point to have a whole IC forum with separate sections for things like IC market & trade, politics, announcements & news etc. It would probably demand a lot of work moderating but if it works it could enrich the RP a lot I think. The mud slinging on IGS break immersion for me completely. Hmm, actually when thinking about my issues with IGS I got an idea of what would be really cool. A portal page/site for GalNet, a kind of G'EVE'gle from where you can find your way to all alliance and corp sites with IC material. /crazy-ideas-for-others-to-implement  :P
Logged

Louella Dougans

  • \o/
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • \o/
Re: IC sections
« Reply #46 on: 24 Apr 2011, 08:27 »

1. What for?

What are the reasons to have IC sections here? What purpose would they serve?

How would it be different from IGS? A better net to keep ooc trolls out? more images? Is that all?


2. Critical mass

This is not the most visible of websites. How do you attract people here, how do you keep them here, and how do you get enough people to generate enough content to make it worthwhile?


3. access/moderation

What do you suggest here? Sub sections? who can view/post on them? access control? lots of different sub groups? Who controls membership of these subgroups?
Who moderates these sections? How would they be moderated?

Can Imperials see the Blood raider sections? If yes, how is that any different to IGS? If not, who manages the Imperial and blood raider groups? How do people gain/lose access to the different sections?

If 2 people conspire to say that a 3rd person shouldn't have access to X section, should their access be removed? 3? 4? How many? And how is that not cliquey?

Someone posts something highly inappropriate, someone else reports it using the relevant forum function. An admin takes action, and sees that the thread concerned relates to a plot against the admin's group. Conflict of interest there. You're placing admin staff under a lot more stress.

Logged
\o/

Saede Riordan

  • Immoral Compass
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2656
  • Through the distorted lens I found a cure
    • All the cool hippies have tumblr
Re: IC sections
« Reply #47 on: 24 Apr 2011, 08:49 »

I think having just one IC section, maybe two with everyone getting access to both of them, just as a troll free version of the IGS. There are plenty of people who would use something like that.
Logged
Personal Blog//Character Blog
A ship in harbour is safe, but that's not what ships are built for.

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: IC sections
« Reply #48 on: 24 Apr 2011, 12:09 »

What will be the difference, except the absence of trolls ? I still have difficulties to see what do we gain, but I definitly see what do we lose.
Logged

Saede Riordan

  • Immoral Compass
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2656
  • Through the distorted lens I found a cure
    • All the cool hippies have tumblr
Re: IC sections
« Reply #49 on: 24 Apr 2011, 12:34 »

What we gain is competent moderation, removal of trolls, images being allowed, and overall, just a better atmosphere.

Its like the difference between the summit and the New Eden Assembly.
Logged
Personal Blog//Character Blog
A ship in harbour is safe, but that's not what ships are built for.

Casiella

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3723
  • Creation is so precious, and greed so destructive.
Re: IC sections
« Reply #50 on: 24 Apr 2011, 12:40 »

I quite like The Summit, actually. So I'm less clear than ever about this proposal.
Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: IC sections
« Reply #51 on: 24 Apr 2011, 12:45 »

That is almost nothing compared to what is at stake. And I am pretty sure a lot of trolls alts are actual members of Backstage anyway, but maybe im a bit misanthropic.

Quoting a discussion I just had on corp chat :

Quote
Lyn Farel > this IC channel idea on backstage
Mister Screwball > y?
Kravasher Prime > ^^
Lyn Farel > roleplayers here want to create their own version of the IGS
Mister Screwball > this is bad why?
Lyn Farel > they will just split the community in 2
Esna Pitoojee > It's a knee-jerk reaction to the horrible new forums.
Lyn Farel > yeah
Lyn Farel > if it was IC forums for new stuff i wouldn't say that
Lyn Farel > but no, its just the IGS but on backstage
Lyn Farel > with l33t people you see
Esna Pitoojee > Basically, screwball, there are 3 major issues I can see:
Mister Screwball > the reason people want this is that ccp are kind of shit at moding the IGS
Lyn Farel > knowing that the most violent posters are actually members of backstage
Mister Screwball > ppl in backstage have proved they can do it
Lyn Farel > maybe yeah
Esna Pitoojee > 1, getting the word out to all the players, since not all the people who RP are on backstage. <br>2, dealing with the possibility that people would make OTHER alternate IGSes if they got modded on backstage and were Q.Q about it or something.
Esna Pitoojee > (and how to deal with the split issue 2 would create the community)
Esna Pitoojee > And 3, one of the major people pushing the IC sections on backstage is insistant that there should be some kind of "faction-specific" sections which you'd have to "prove yourself" to be part of that faction to be allowed to post in.
Mister Screwball > that i admit
Lyn Farel > yeah that too -_-
Kravasher Prime > hmm .. prove eh? how I wonder?
Mister Screwball > 2 isnt a problem
Mister Screwball > because no one has done that so far
Esna Pitoojee > Exactly, Krav.
Mister Screwball > and plenty of people have been modded on backstage
Lyn Farel > 2 can be a problem i think
Mister Screwball > 3 and 1 I understand
Lyn Farel > becauee basically what we have on backstage is only OOC stuff
Lyn Farel > when it will come to IC stuff, I won't be so sure to see people staying polite and respectufll
Lyn Farel > and not involved in drama stuff
Lyn Farel > imagine that with IC sections now
Lyn Farel > with the same IC wars, like IGS
Lyn Farel > im not so sure that people will keep the same reactions about moderation
Lyn Farel > moderation is going to be called biased and all
Lyn Farel > moderated factions could create coalitions of OOC opinions and we will have OOC lobbies behind, because the admin staff will get actual power on the IC stuff and what is said.
Lyn Farel > maybe im being pessimistic though
Esna Pitoojee > That's why if there's an IC section, I honestly think the only rule should be "no OOC in here. Evar."
Lyn Farel > there will always have OOC here
Lyn Farel > behind at least
Lyn Farel > moderation will be done on OOC basis
Esna Pitoojee > OOC posts, that is. SHould have said that.
Lyn Farel > if someones breaks the canon or whatever
Lyn Farel > and i see A CRAPLOAD of divergences of opinions regarding the lore in OOC discussions
Lyn Farel > so one will ask for a moderation on something he/she thinks dumb, while the other one will be like "wtf there is nothing wrong in what im doing"
Lyn Farel > if the mods censor it, it will be drama. If they don't, it will still be drama
Lyn Farel > I still remember the OOC post about us letting everyone enter the Keep
Lyn Farel > it was immersion breaking for some people
Lyn Farel > we were ofc able to discuss it on backstage
Lyn Farel > but it was not the end of the world because at the end nobody was able to do anything about that as backstage are just a forum for discussion
Lyn Farel > but if you start to include IC stakes... meh
Lyn Farel > on which the staff will have actual power on them...
Lyn Farel > but anyway if they do it they will have to change the name from backstage to something else :p
« Last Edit: 24 Apr 2011, 12:46 by Lyn Farel »
Logged

Saede Riordan

  • Immoral Compass
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2656
  • Through the distorted lens I found a cure
    • All the cool hippies have tumblr
Re: IC sections
« Reply #52 on: 24 Apr 2011, 12:53 »

I feel like a lot of the complaints people had about IC sections are the same complaints that were raised about backstage in the first place. It pulls people off chatsubo, it causes rifts in the community, etc. But in the end, I really don't think IC sections would be a bad thing, it would mean people who want to have forum type RP discussions can do so while avoiding the unmoderated mess that is the IGS.

The problem is that the IGS, at its root, its borked by being effectively unmoderated and is just a breeding ground for trolls, both IC and OOC, and is full of "your rp is wrong" type attacks and just ridiculous nonsense. I want to be able to do forum stuff IC, but I can't because the IGS is broken and anything I say will get trolled into oblivion, so I don't bother.
Logged
Personal Blog//Character Blog
A ship in harbour is safe, but that's not what ships are built for.

Kaleigh Doyle

  • Guest
Re: IC sections
« Reply #53 on: 24 Apr 2011, 13:06 »

I'd be curious about the if moderation rules before I got that hopeful gleam in my eye. How about creating a rough draft of what rules you'd like to see that you think would be an improvement over the IGS.
Logged

Z.Sinraali

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 912
  • You're a Jovian spy, aren't you?
Re: IC sections
« Reply #54 on: 24 Apr 2011, 13:33 »

I don't care about rifts in the community, I care about practicality, and this seems like feature creep to me. This was founded as an explicitly OOC board to dump all the IC/OOC crossover baggage. Adding IC boards seems, to me at least, to jeopardize that wall of separation.

Yes, the IGS blows pretty hard at times. But I suspect that IC sections here would create significantly more work for the mods, because a lot of our characters just aren't going to be polite to each other. Without a straight-up admission, how do you distinguish an OOC 'your RP is wrong' comment that's just made IC from a completely IC comment by a character that seriously thinks yours is mentally unbalanced? You can't tell me it's obvious, because it's very often not, and the moderation discussion board would blow up every time somebody got modded on those grounds.

The only way I see to do it is to be incredibly strict, even more so than we are now in the OOC sections. But then you risk choking off the inter-PC conflict that drives a lot of this game. And what's left then? Corp announcements?

One more minor issue, what about alts? Obviously we want to avoid sock puppetry, but what about people with legitimate alts that they RP with? Are they going to be posting under their main's name and just signing it with their alt's?
Logged
The assumption that other people are acting in good faith is the single most important principle underpinning human civilization.

Louella Dougans

  • \o/
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • \o/
Re: IC sections
« Reply #55 on: 24 Apr 2011, 13:59 »

I want to be able to do forum stuff IC

What stuff?
Logged
\o/

Ken

  • Will Rule for Food
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • Must Love Robots
Re: IC sections
« Reply #56 on: 24 Apr 2011, 14:26 »

I, for one, would prefer to keep the Backstage community and moderation effort completely separate from all in-character interaction.  I can appreciate the need for a general membership IC board with topical subforums, but I don't think Backstage is the place to realize that.  As always, I am open to being proven wrong.  Functionally, my biggest concern is:

what about alts?
Logged

Casiella

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3723
  • Creation is so precious, and greed so destructive.
Re: IC sections
« Reply #57 on: 24 Apr 2011, 14:36 »

My totally unofficial personal thoughts are that EVE-Inspiracy.com might be a cool place to host something, but not Backstage per se.
Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: IC sections
« Reply #58 on: 24 Apr 2011, 14:41 »

Be it backstage or not, you will not remove these fundamental issues.
Logged

Ken

  • Will Rule for Food
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • Must Love Robots
Re: IC sections
« Reply #59 on: 24 Apr 2011, 15:10 »

In the last two weeks or so, myself and some others have started laying the foundations for something that might fill the role.  It is particularly Gallente-themed, rather than trying to being something extremely broad-reaching and neutral like the NEA, but it is essentially a multi-forum IC board with corresponding in-client VR channel.  Thoughts?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 16