A complaint

[Salomo]

sorry for making a new thread, but somehow the masked multihunter thread was closed before i could reply, and after reading up to page two i had the irresistible urge to post what it says in the thread title



btw, this habbit of closing threads that get somehow long is pretty annoying for people only dropping by these boards now and then... any chance threads could just be allowed to live through their natural lifespan without somebody deciding when a topic has been discussed enough in 1 thread? If there are inaprorpiate posts can't you just leave the thread and delete the inaprorpiate ones?




Thread title changed as i found it offensive - Ashknight

[Mushroom]

Originally posted by Salomo
sorry for making a new thread, but somehow the masked multihunter thread was closed before i could reply, and after reading up to page two i had the irresistible urge to post what it says in the thread title



btw, this habbit of closing threads that get somehow long is pretty annoying for people only dropping by these boards now and then... any chance threads could just be allowed to live through their natural lifespan without somebody deciding when a topic has been discussed enough in 1 thread? If there are inaprorpiate posts can't you just leave the thread and delete the inaprorpiate ones?

I think the thread was closed because there were requests for it to be closed as the main points had been dealt with.
Your opinion is noted, btw...

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Mushroom
I think the thread was closed because there were requests for it to be closed as the main points had been dealt with.
Your opinion is noted, btw...

As you've dealt with the main point, perhaps this thread should now be closed as well?

[Mushroom]

Originally posted by Tactitus
As you've dealt with the main point, perhaps this thread should now be closed as well?

I'm sure it will, though i don't have the access to do it myself.
Just letting him/her know that we're not trying to silence people's opinions!

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Mushroom
I'm sure it will, though i don't have the access to do it myself.

Ah, a new policy then.

Just letting him/her know that we're not trying to silence people's opinions!

Not until they've been "dealt with," anyway.

I never saw any harm in the old policy of just letting people followup with their own comments as long as they had something to say--but that's just me.

[Aryn]

Originally posted by Salomo
sorry for making a new thread, but somehow the masked multihunter thread was closed before i could reply, and after reading up to page two i had the irresistible urge to post what it says in the thread title



btw, this habbit of closing threads that get somehow long is pretty annoying for people only dropping by these boards now and then... any chance threads could just be allowed to live through their natural lifespan without somebody deciding when a topic has been discussed enough in 1 thread? If there are inaprorpiate posts can't you just leave the thread and delete the inaprorpiate ones?

and here we have the classic case of people who don't bother reading a thread through. i suggest you go do so, then perhaps you'd understand why it was closed.

[Mushroom]

Originally posted by Tactitus
I never saw any harm in the old policy of just letting people followup with their own comments as long as they had something to say--but that's just me.

I know what you're getting at, but the fear was that it was just going to turn into petty arguments, which it was doing

[see]

luckly my friend and closer LESHY is dead in bed atm , so we can spam all we want.

point being that multihunters have no clue and close who they like
ppl dont have to even report it for the hunters to close a planet ;-)
so good luck with ur hunting
hire Xtothez as a multihunter next round , coz he do i good job ;-)

and to u leshy, u closed the other thread before i could say something too hahaha



Critters lives on

p.s leshy is my god and I obey his every wish ;-)

[Aryn]

see.. don't be stupid ok?
the multihunters aren't allowed to 'close whoever they want'
i suggest you go read that thread all the way through as well.

incompetent fools indeed. :\

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Mushroom
I know what you're getting at, but the fear was that it was just going to turn into petty arguments, which it was doing

Indeed. Petty arguments have no place on these forums.

[Elevator]

Originally posted by Salomo
sorry for making a new thread, but somehow the masked multihunter thread was closed before i could reply, and after reading up to page two i had the irresistible urge to post what it says in the thread title



btw, this habbit of closing threads that get somehow long is pretty annoying for people only dropping by these boards now and then... any chance threads could just be allowed to live through their natural lifespan without somebody deciding when a topic has been discussed enough in 1 thread? If there are inaprorpiate posts can't you just leave the thread and delete the inaprorpiate ones?

And what were your opinion (sorry to say, but you forgot to post the important note concerning the "revealed multihunter" thread)?

Sorry to say, never thought it would go that far...but please...if you are going to start discrediting the game creators and team more so we'll end up losing the very few players we have left..do it in a proper way. Stop making posts about you not having a point.

[Redissal]

I warned Leshy this would happen. People want a place to vent their anger at what happened if they just found out about it. Don't censor the players, pateam

Originally posted by Aryn
incompetent fools indeed. :\

I suggest you as pa-team, crew or squad whatever it is do not insult PAYING customers, tyvm.

[Razorback]

Originally posted by Aryn
incompetent fools indeed. :\

didnt you say you work in Customer Support irl ?
When did you last call one of your customers "incompetent fool" there, or do you think "i mod stuff" is enough to insult ppl who actually have a point ?

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Razorback
didnt you say you work in Customer Support irl ?
When did you last call one of your customers "incompetent fool" there, or do you think "i mod stuff" is enough to insult ppl who actually have a point ?

I see you have cought on to the customer arguement. Just because you are a customer in this game that doesn't give you the right to abuse the PA Team in any way you want and then when god forbid someone 'talks back' you throw it on unproffessionalism and tell them to be nice to their customers.

From where I am standing Aryns comment could have just as easely been a sarcastic reflection of the original comment with which she was saying 'No we are not fools, the thread was falling into repeat and petty arguements'.

Edit: Also Salomo, if you have a complaint about how these boards are run you will get a better reply if you give JJ or Ashknight a private message or an email.

[RealJames]

Originally posted by Tactitus
Indeed. Petty arguments have no place on these forums.

hehe

[Razorback]

Originally posted by ParraCida
I see you have cought on to the customer arguement. Just because you are a customer in this game that doesn't give you the right to abuse the PA Team in any way you want and then when god forbid someone 'talks back' you throw it on unproffessionalism and tell them to be nice to their customers.

From where I am standing Aryns comment could have just as easely been a sarcastic reflection of the original comment with which she was saying 'No we are not fools, the thread was falling into repeat and petty arguements'.

Edit: Also Salomo, if you have a complaint about how these boards are run you will get a better reply if you give JJ or Ashknight a private message or an email.

Infact i didnt catch up on anything, i just voiced my opinion.
And tbh your arguments are abit sloppy. Simply if any customer (even ones not beeing involved in the discussion at all) sees a company representant insult another customer it throws a bad light on the company. "he did it first" or "it was just sarcasm" wont change this impression. And yet again, i personally think professionalism could be exspected in dealing with any paying customers, may they be nice or not. Thats customer support and service 101 btw so please dont try to argue it.
You could now say "well aryn isnt payed so she has no obligations to follow any rules or professional behaviour" which is only partly correct because then spinner and his company should appoint ppl to do this job who can treat paying customers correct or who show professionalism.

The whole issue is not really about aryn as a person but im not entirely sure why pateam feels the need to threat their customers like stupid sheep and even go down to insult them, is it that hard to act abit professional if you try to represent this game ?

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Razorback
Thats customer support and service 101 btw so please dont try to argue it.

I was not argueing otherwise. I'm simply stating that just because you are a customer it doesn't give you a right to abuse someone who is PA Team as a person. In this case two people immediatly jumped on Aryn after she posted a comment that could be interpreted in different ways. I don't actually feel you are trying to be constructive, you expect proffessionalism from us but when it comes down to it you don't use the opportunities that are available to let us do it. If you disagree with aryns comment you file a complaint to JJ or Ashknight. Posting on the forums like this will serve nothing and only gives the impression you are more anxious to criticize the PA Team than actually do something about it by going through the proper channels. The same goes for Salomo who created this thread, a pm to one of the forum chiefs will work 10 times better than an accusatory thread on these boards.

The whole issue is not really about aryn as a person but im not entirely sure why pateam feels the need to threat their customers like stupid sheep and even go down to insult them, is it that hard to act abit professional if you try to represent this game ?

We try our best to treat the players as best as possible, 95% of the replies made by the PA Team on these boards are constructive and polite. Seeing as we are merely humans don't expect us to ever get a flawless track record, but in the mean while we will take note of your reflections and keep trying to improve ourselves.

[Razorback]

Originally posted by ParraCida
I was not argueing otherwise. I'm simply stating that just because you are a customer it doesn't give you a right to abuse someone who is PA Team as a person. In this case two people immediatly jumped on Aryn after she posted a comment that could be interpreted in different ways. I don't actually feel you are trying to be constructive, you expect proffessionalism from us but when it comes down to it you don't use the opportunities that are available to let us do it. If you disagree with aryns comment you file a complaint to JJ or Ashknight. Posting on the forums like this will serve nothing and only gives the impression you are more anxious to criticize the PA Team than actually do something about it by going through the proper channels. The same goes for Salomo who created this thread, a pm to one of the forum chiefs will work 10 times better than an accusatory thread on these boards.

I did with no word say Salomon was right in doing so. Just 2 wrong doesnt make it right for Aryn either. That i saw Aryns reply and wrote a short answer to it which happend to be at the same time the other poster did, just i got busy during posting. Most likely if i would have seen its already mentioned i wouldnt have commented on it. About your reference to JJ or Ashknight, i believe that Aryn could have edited her prior posting and saved her alot of hassle by doing so without even doing it "official".

We try our best to treat the players as best as possible, 95% of the replies made by the PA Team on these boards are constructive and polite. Seeing as we are merely humans don't expect us to ever get a flawless track record, but in the mean while we will take note of your reflections and keep trying to improve ourselves.

Thats all i was requesting, even if i dont agree with your % estimation but who would count that
With no way i said pacrew is doing a bad job in general, just the Customer area is and always was for pa a red flag. Im happy you are decent enough to admit that and i hope with you in the team not only hunting but also professionalism will increase.

[Leshy]

Right.

I just already replied to Salomo in PM, but as this thread is about a closure I did, I might as well explain my reasons in here as well

I did not close the 'secret multihunter unmasked' thread on a whim because I decided that it was discussed enough. Shortly after the thread was posted, it was already being reported by board users, and during the discussions several people on IRC told me that it should be closed - I denied because I wanted to give people the chance to openly discuss matters, and to give PA Team the chance to properly reply. At it's current stage I felt the thread was moving off-topic, and that any further comments would be things that were already stated or people accusing each other of taking sides, as already happened once or twice. Hence, I made the decision to close the thread.

Now, after several days I've received a fair amount of 'complaints' in my PM inbox. It seems there are still a good amount of people who feel that discussion is being regulated, and who want to give their opinions about this case. I cannot help but agree with this point of view, as I personally do not like to close threads and because I do not want anyone on this board to feel as if they're being censored.

While I still stand by the reasons why I closed the thread, I have to admit that in this case I may have acted too soon or didn't think of the consequences enough. As such, I am reverting my earlier decision to close the thread and will reopen it to allow further discussion to take place. I will, however, keep an eye on it to ensure that it stays civil and on-topic - don't make me regret this decision

[Miccksey]

Originally posted by ParraCida
I see you have cought on to the customer arguement. Just because you are a customer in this game that doesn't give you the right to abuse the PA Team in any way you want and then when god forbid someone 'talks back' you throw it on unproffessionalism and tell them to be nice to their customers.

Actually, when talking customer support etc, someone is never allowed to talk back in a manner which is disrespectfull or contains bad language.

By definition, a customer always needs to be talked to in a normal proper fashion without the use of "foul" language.

However, a customer also has to abide by some rules. Should they not follow these, they can lose the right to support.

Examples of customers not following rules are f.i. bad language, offending the customer support employee at which time the employee is entitled to inform the customer that he or she is not happy with the kind of language and that f.i. the telephone call hereby stops. After which a customer can get red flagged or enter a so called black book. When being in the black book, all right to support falls away and superiors are informed of the issue that has risen.

In the end, the superiors/managers make the final call of what to do with a certain customer who has offended etc etc the employee.

Now when looking at the situation of the PA customer desk, what kind of options do you have ?

In the current set up not much. Anyone can make comments and even use offending words, posts etc and the only means is to edit a post. A ban isnt effective since someone simply makes another forum account and can continue with his actions.

Restrictions can be made however, so everyone has simply one forum account. Only allow the use of trusted email addresses and forget about the yahoo, hotmail etc ones.

Just a thought but one that could prove usefull, should the Customer Support start to play a full role within PA. Which means SLA's, guidelines and procedures are needed.

Anyway, a lot more can be said about customer support desks and how they could function within PA.

If you have the urge, need to discuss that, make a thread and im ready for that nice discussion ehhe

Take care for now

TheMicks

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Miccksey
Actually, when talking customer support etc, someone is never allowed to talk back in a manner which is disrespectfull or contains bad language.

By definition, a customer always needs to be talked to in a normal proper fashion without the use of "foul" language.

I never said that, talking back doesn't have to mean disrespectfull or foul language. Simply having a different opinion is enough, the problem is however that often on these boards that the PA Team is hardly allowed to have an opinion that differs from the community or they will get flamed badly

Also, on the internet relations are a lot more informal, because of forums and IRC chats there is more contact between the players and the developpers. Examples can be seen all over the internet, MMORPG's and other games have a much more informal relation with their consumer base than other companies. The same applies for planetarion, not that that's a valid excuse for treating your customers poorly, but it does give a little leeway on some things.

[Miccksey]

Yeah I know m8, if I indicated that you mentioned that, soz since it was definately not meant like that.

One thing that might need to be looked into, for any future claims, complaints etc by the paying customer, are guidelines by which the Customer Support needs to operate.

It might take questions/discussions away regarding the way customer support works, or the way people complain about support here in general

I know about the more informal contact there is , due to irc/forums etc ( not that informal contact on customer support desks isnt possible, while maintaining a professional attitude ).
Nevertheless, PA support is ok allthough there is always room for improvement and clearity

One of the most important issues imo is simple. What can we expect from customer support, how should they respond and what happens when abuse is taking place. Much more ofcourse can be added, but just taking out a couple of important points

No i dont use spellings checkers hehe

[Salomo]

hmmm... i have the impression that the first part of my post may have been misinterpreted. I did not mean to call the moderators incompetent fools, as i apply a far lower standard to them based on them actually only being responsible for the boards, not the game itself, and them not being part of the game management. "Incompetent Fools" rather was my condensed criticism for the way the secret multihunter problem was handled, especially Bricks atempts at excusing and justifying it. Before this is misinterpreted as well though, I also did not intend to single our Brick and call him an incompetent fool (in that case i would have called the thread "Brick is an incompetent fool"), but rather express my displeasure at how the upper levels of management handled this, including leaving brick to deal with the angry wolves on his own when he was (at least imho) obviously failing.

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Miccksey
One of the most important issues imo is simple. What can we expect from customer support, how should they respond and what happens when abuse is taking place. Much more ofcourse can be added, but just taking out a couple of important points

MrBrick is in charge of support and the PA Team and he's been quite busy with these things. I doubt there will be an announcement on what to expect or anything, but he's sorting it internally

[JonnyBGood]

Just because pateam/whatever other group is being currently blamed don't post on the boards "I agree, all the people I work with are total **** ups!", doesn't mean they're not actually listening to you. However you do not build a team on publicly slagging off your fellow team members on an online forum.

[Salomo]

Originally posted by Leshy
Right.

I just already replied to Salomo in PM, but as this thread is about a closure I did, I might as well explain my reasons in here as well

I did not close the 'secret multihunter unmasked' thread on a whim because I decided that it was discussed enough. Shortly after the thread was posted, it was already being reported by board users, and during the discussions several people on IRC told me that it should be closed - I denied because I wanted to give people the chance to openly discuss matters, and to give PA Team the chance to properly reply. At it's current stage I felt the thread was moving off-topic, and that any further comments would be things that were already stated or people accusing each other of taking sides, as already happened once or twice. Hence, I made the decision to close the thread.

Now, after several days I've received a fair amount of 'complaints' in my PM inbox. It seems there are still a good amount of people who feel that discussion is being regulated, and who want to give their opinions about this case. I cannot help but agree with this point of view, as I personally do not like to close threads and because I do not want anyone on this board to feel as if they're being censored.

While I still stand by the reasons why I closed the thread, I have to admit that in this case I may have acted too soon or didn't think of the consequences enough. As such, I am reverting my earlier decision to close the thread and will reopen it to allow further discussion to take place. I will, however, keep an eye on it to ensure that it stays civil and on-topic - don't make me regret this decision

I applaud your decision to reopen the thread and thank you for the replies.

My comment in here about closing threads was more than just a complaint about this specific thread being closed though, it was a complaint about the general practice of closing threads.

Threads being closed because people - no matter whether these people are mods or normal forum users - think that the issue has been discussed enough has annoyed me for a while allready, but with me not checking these boards as regularly anymore and hence in this case not being able to reply to an intersting thread makes it even more annoying.

As I allready asked Leshy in PM and now want to ask you all, why do threads need to be closed?

- because the issue has been thoroughly discussed? No, no one can know when an issue has been discussed enough, at any time new and relevant aditions to the discussions could come up, and it should be the decision of those discussing when they have discussed enough as long as they follow the forum rules

- because people requested it to be closed? No, not all requests have to be fullfilled if they make no sense, like e.g. requests to close threads

Clsoing threads is a bad habbit that developed from moderators being too lazy (or having too little time, etc.) to moderate posts by deleting inapropriate posts. The simply solution to such a thread that was too much work to moderate manually was closing it. Usually these threads too difficult to moderate were those that had developed into flame festivals or personal fights, and since usually it was longer threads where a lot had been posted that turned into flame fesrtivals at some point the closing was justified with the topic having been discussed enough when it turned into flaming.

Why can't we get back to the way it should be with

- Threads being moderated on a post by post basis
- No closure of threads unless the whole thread deserves to be deleted, in which case it should be deleted and not closed
- A thread being allowed when a moderator first sees it staying allowed and open forever unless it becomes obvious that the moderator made a mistake with not deleting the thread at the start.

[Salomo]

Originally posted by Aryn
and here we have the classic case of people who don't bother reading a thread through. i suggest you go do so, then perhaps you'd understand why it was closed.

in response to this post, i have read the last page (and now that it is reopened will read some more of it later), and still fail to see any reason why it should be closed, even if assuming clsoing threads is in general apropriate. People were still adding their opinions, people were posting new contributions to the topic.

Sure, many people there probably had the same opinion and hence some posts were becomming repetitive, but why does that make it neccessary to close a thread?


A thread is an offer to people to join a discussion. If people are interested they can join, if they are not interested in what is discussed they don't have to. What need is there to close this offer for discussion when no one is damaged by the offer not being closed?

[Redissal]

Good call Leshy. (See we do point out when you do things right).

I agree with everything Salamo is saying about thread closures. There's no justification for closing a thread on the grounds that "several players asked for it to be closed".

[Parthos]

This thread is getting repetitive and all points have been made, time to close it.

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Redissal
I agree with everything Salamo is saying about thread closures. There's no justification for closing a thread on the grounds that "several players asked for it to be closed".

However, a thread that had all questions answered and was likely to erupt in petty squabbles and had received a closure request by multiple users a lock is justified, which is exactly why it was closed.

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by ParraCida
However, a thread that had all questions answered and was likely to erupt in petty squabbles and had received a closure request by multiple users a lock is justified, which is exactly why it was closed.

Um, so you think reopening it was a mistake?

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Tactitus
Um, so you think reopening it was a mistake?

That's not what I said.

I haven't seen any of the mails leshy got, it's not my job to get them nor my job to judge them. I don't know if I would have reopened it in leshys case, quite possibly I would've. But in the meantime I'll just trust leshy's judgement

[Redissal]

Originally posted by ParraCida
However, a thread that had all questions answered and was likely to erupt in petty squabbles and had received a closure request by multiple users a lock is justified, which is exactly why it was closed.

Clearly Leshy noted that some people wanted it closed, but what he didn't do was note all the people that didn't want it closed. Presumably they were in the majority but they weren't all telling him "By the way, leave that thread open". If we had to do that for every thread it would get a bit tedious.

The thread hadn't erupted into petty squables, if it had perhaps the close would have been justified. Repetitive discussion is no reason to close and the idea that the thread was over because all questions had been answered is ridiculous. Yes, the questions asked in the original post had been delt with, but the discussion was evolving and new points were coming up. If anyone found the new points too similar to old ones they were completely at liberty to stop reading the thread, but there's no reason to spoil it for everyone else who feels the thread is worthwhile.

Thankfully we have at least come a long way since round 5 when entire threads would be nuked if someone posted so much as a single coordinate in them.

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Redissal
The thread hadn't erupted into petty squables, if it had perhaps the close would have been justified. Repetitive discussion is no reason to close and the idea that the thread was over because all questions had been answered is ridiculous. Yes, the questions asked in the original post had been delt with, but the discussion was evolving and new points were coming up. If anyone found the new points too similar to old ones they were completely at liberty to stop reading the thread, but there's no reason to spoil it for everyone else who feels the thread is worthwhile.

The thread wasn't closed because the main issue had been dealt with, threads are never closed for that, and this particular thread was no exception on that rule.
It was not developping new discussion and was prone to catch on fire so to speak (which it partly already had) so the decision was made to close it. If over the past few days other reasons have developped thats something entirely different, which is why it was reopened. But the thread was originally closed for the right reasons.

[Salomo]

Originally posted by ParraCida
However, a thread that had all questions answered and was likely to erupt in petty squabbles and had received a closure request by multiple users a lock is justified, which is exactly why it was closed.

why is a lock justified when a thread "erupts into petty squabbles", or even when it is likely to do so?

1. As i mentioned above, a thread is an invitation to discussion. If you don't like the discussion because you consider it to consist of "petty squabbles" you don't have to accept the invitation.

2. If the thread degenerates so far that mainly insults or "illegal" content is posted, those posts being too offensive or breaking the forum rules can be deleted and those posting these things can be warned and banned if they continue breaking the rules.

3. If a thread can be closed simply because it contains "petty squabbles" this gives the power to anyone to destroy a discussion simply by starting or provoking such petty squabbles. Nobody (besides the mods) should have the power to destroy someone elses discussion and to deprive others of their freedom of discussion that way.



(btw, thanks for changing the thread title, that's moderating the way i like it: Trying to restore order using the least severe method)

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Salomo
1. As i mentioned above, a thread is an invitation to discussion. If you don't like the discussion because you consider it to consist of "petty squabbles" you don't have to accept the invitation.

Petty squabbles, flames, are against the forum rules. If it was nothing but petty squabbles then there is no big problem. I ofcourse meant the flaming/trolling aspect of it.

2. If the thread degenerates so far that mainly insults or "illegal" content is posted, those posts being too offensive or breaking the forum rules can be deleted and those posting these things can be warned and banned if they continue breaking the rules.

3. If a thread can be closed simply because it contains "petty squabbles" this gives the power to anyone to destroy a discussion simply by starting or provoking such petty squabbles. Nobody (besides the mods) should have the power to destroy someone elses discussion and to deprive others of their freedom of discussion that way.

A thread like that requires continued moderation, round the clock.
If the thread is going to give nothing but flames/trolls and the main arguement has been depleted, it is not completely uncommon for the thread to be closed to avoid having to edit out 20 flames per page. Closing the thread gave the opportunity for everyone to read the discussion, I personally recommended a sticky, but the thread stayed on the top page just fine.

Also, the discussion was getting very intense, now it has had a few days to cool down and give everyone a chance to think about it a few times it will be less prone to attract flames.

[KoeN]

imho it's just the attitude of a few pa-teammembers that pisses some people off, and what motivates them to react on every tiny mistake they make.
ofc was it a mistake to let parracida play pa at the highest level, and let him be multihunter at the same time. and ofc it was a mistake of aryn to insult people on the boards, regardless what they've said about her. but isn't the reaction of everyone here just a little bit exagerated?
if you ask me the agressive attitude of some fanatic forum-users is caused by this 'new' pa-team trying to do too well (especially when it's concerning the forums) ;


- threads get closed whenever some mod thinks the discussion is over, and people are repeating themselves (what is wrong with that, for crying out loud? why not just let these people have the arguement they so obviously want?).
- on IRC everything is lead by the pa-team, in a very strict, for some irritating way.

i don't think the pa-team made any big mistakes yet. in fact, i think they're doing pretty well. but i guess this community doesn't appreciate big changes too much; not when it's about the game, and not when it's about people organsing the game.
i'm sure things will change though soon enough though..

[Coffee]

The problem is although its 'answered', its done in a piecemeal and scattered way.

Copy and paste this, and sticky it (if you want).

A Note On Multihunters.

It was decided in round 9 to anonymise the multihunters, to help stop outside influence. Only a few people had knowlege of who was actually doing the job, and the multihunter in question ran a small relativley inactive planet. In round 9.5 the multihunter, who due to the confusion surrounding the upcoming round 10, kept his job and unfortunaley did better than average at the game.

Although no evidence of cheating was present, and no claims have even been made on the integrity of the person in question, we realise the possible doubts our customers could have over the state of affairs.

From now on it is now PA Crew policy for multihunters not to have an active involvement in the game, and would like to assure you that this oversight in policy is not reflecting a new change in our multihunting procedures.

[Andy_r]

Am I alone in thinking that's a much better title for what goes on here than "Planetarion Discussions"?

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Andy_r
Am I alone in thinking that's a much better title for what goes on here than "Planetarion Discussions"?

No, you're not alone. PA has shot themselves in the foot so many times it's hard to imagine how they can still stand up (to the extent they can[*]). But in keeping with current Forums conventions, I'd suggest amending it slightly to Incompetent Fools Discussions.



[*]<Spinner> But if we go below 5.000 players I will be very surprised. <-- Was he referring to paid players???

[Aryn]

i would just like to point out that this thread was to complain about the 'multihunter revealed' thread being closed because people still wanted to have a discussion... yet no one's replied since leshy opened it :\

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Aryn
i would just like to point out that this thread was to complain about the 'multihunter revealed' thread being closed because people still wanted to have a discussion... yet no one's replied since leshy opened it :\

The discussion moved over here instead.

Sue us.

[Salomo]

Originally posted by Aryn
i would just like to point out that this thread was to complain about the 'multihunter revealed' thread being closed because people still wanted to have a discussion... yet no one's replied since leshy opened it :\

I would like to point out (as the person starting this thread) that this thread was to post my displeasure about how the secret multihunter affair was handled by the PA-crew and to complain about the malpractice of closing threads in general.



But since you mentioned it now, as you can see by the lack of improper replies in the original multihunter thread the closing was obviously unneccessary, as is the closing of threads in 99% of the cases.... yet you seem to completely ignore this fact and seem to see this as reason to close it rather than to leave it open, once again showing how perverted the opinion of some mods on when to close threads is. :-/

[Salomo]

Originally posted by ParraCida
Petty squabbles, flames, are against the forum rules. If it was nothing but petty squabbles then there is no big problem. I ofcourse meant the flaming/trolling aspect of it.

Doesn't change the fact that things violating forum rules should be dealt with on a post by post and user by user basis.

Originally posted by ParraCida

A thread like that requires continued moderation, round the clock.

In the initial phases (see below) you're probably right. But is there really such a shortage of people willing and able to moderate? And don't forums in general require continued moderation around the clock?

Originally posted by ParraCida

If the thread is going to give nothing but flames/trolls and the main arguement has been depleted, it is not completely uncommon for the thread to be closed to avoid having to edit out 20 flames per page. Closing the thread gave the opportunity for everyone to read the discussion, I personally recommended a sticky, but the thread stayed on the top page just fine.

I know that thats common, but thats exactly the problem. The closing of threads unfortunately is very common in fact, but that just makes the problem worse, not better.

Closing isn't really an alternative to editing out the flames, as in that case the flames, the posts that violate the forum rules, still remain present and the rules hence remain violated. You ARE right in so far that it is a way to prevent such flames from comming up in the first place, sort of like Blair prevented Saddam from bombing the UK - a preemptive strike against possible flames with the freedom of discusion as colateral damage.

Independent of whether you agree with preemptive strikes in general though, you have "softer", less severe, measures to prevent rules violations. If you changed how posts/threads are dealt with and instead of closing threads trying to avoid flames actually let the flames appear in order to delete/edit them, lecture the offender and punish him if he repeats the rules violations too often you could probably reduce the chance of flames appearing significantly without closing threads.

Yes, that would require more work from the mods.
Yes, this would show no imediate results.
But the reward of this would be more freedom of discussion, more real interaction between mods and posters (more actual moderating instead of janitoring as jester put it), and hopefully a better overall thread quality.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Oh do shut up

[Parthos]

Originally posted by Mushroom
I think the thread was closed because there were requests for it to be closed[…]

Originally posted by ParraCida
However, a thread that had all questions answered and was likely to erupt in petty squabbles and had received a closure request by multiple users a lock is justified, which is exactly why it was closed.

Squeaky wheel gets the grease?

Makes things easy then. If someone posts a thread exposing something negative about you or your alliance, or casts you in a bad light, get several people to send PMs to moderators requesting that it be closed. For good measure, you could post a few denials of the allegations in the thread itself so that it can be considered that the questions posed in the thread were answered as well.

I realize you want to keep threads from degenerating into insults and flame wars, but when did closing threads for that reason suddenly get put into a wider net of "it might erupt into petty squabbles at some point" and "the question was answered" as a reason to close them? You walk a fine line between moderation and censorship, which is difficult, but it appears with this expansion of reasons to close a thread you come nearer to managing content rather than simply managing discussion.

[ParraCida]

The thread was not just closed because people asked for it, I pointed that out earlier. In fact, just re-read the entire thread parthos and I'm sure you'll find all your questions answered.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by Salomo

Hi.




We know.




Have a nice day.








PS There is no line between moderation and censorship. I censor threads that I deem inappropriate. That's what we do. On occasions however we've been known to listen to people.

[Aryn]

i was just thinking. this is the way it's always been. we used to close threads once the original question has been answered ALL THE TIME and it was just concidered standard procedure... we've ended up relaxing the rules recently.
and now suddenly everyone's upset about it.