I think all the reaction scores should be reset to zero. Then from now on, if people post interesting or informative things then they'll have a high score, and if they post drivel it will soon show in the disagrees.
Why should the Points be any less valid before now? If people were given them before it was a thing, their comments are no less deservant.
If you want an honest answer, then at the risk of being accused of navel-gazing, I believe the 9400 points I had on Friday was a more accurate measure of my forum presence than the 10,000 points I have today because my points used to be a measure of how often I was uprated relative to how often I was downrated. That's a measure of credibility. It isn't a great one or a foolproof one, you still have to read my posts to see if I'm someone that fishes for rating or not and artificially boosted those points. But given that I don't do that, and I'm often disagreeing with the devs, the players, and sometimes the entire community, it says something if I can maintain a large net positive score. It doesn't mean a lot by itself, but it means something. With the downratings removed, fair or not the positive score now means a lot less, because it is basically impossible to not have a positive score. The only people without a positive score have a score of zero.
In many ways, the best measure of a member of a community doesn't come from the people who agree with him or her, it comes from the people who disagree with him or her. Anyone can get people who agree with them to like them. But I think earning the respect, or at least the lack of enmity from the people who disagree, says more.
I think all the reaction scores should be reset to zero. Then from now on, if people post interesting or informative things then they'll have a high score, and if they post drivel it will soon show in the disagrees.
Why should the Points be any less valid before now? If people were given them before it was a thing, their comments are no less deservant.
If you want an honest answer, then at the risk of being accused of navel-gazing, I believe the 9400 points I had on Friday was a more accurate measure of my forum presence than the 10,000 points I have today because my points used to be a measure of how often I was uprated relative to how often I was downrated. That's a measure of credibility. It isn't a great one or a foolproof one, you still have to read my posts to see if I'm someone that fishes for rating or not and artificially boosted those points. But given that I don't do that, and I'm often disagreeing with the devs, the players, and sometimes the entire community, it says something if I can maintain a large net positive score. It doesn't mean a lot by itself, but it means something. With the downratings removed, fair or not the positive score now means a lot less, because it is basically impossible to not have a positive score. The only people without a positive score have a score of zero.
In many ways, the best measure of a member of a community doesn't come from the people who agree with him or her, it comes from the people who disagree with him or her. Anyone can get people who agree with them to like them. But I think earning the respect, or at least the lack of enmity from the people who disagree, says more.
This is something we have a different view on. The Flag Function was used as a negative metric in a way it was never intended to be. It was never implemented to counter-balance the amount of positive votes people had. That wasn't the objective. It was there for Moderation. That abuse stems from a larger issue. Even this Thread is evidence that the impulse to Disagree with people we don't like regardless of what they say will persist. By that measure, you can't really trust how many people disagree because that's just a normative when people don't like who it's coming from. The positive on the other hand, are much less likely to be given frivolously because people don't agree very often unless they actually agree. I respect that you feel that way, but I don't trust the negative feedback from others. Given my situation, I'm sure you can understand why.
I think all the reaction scores should be reset to zero. Then from now on, if people post interesting or informative things then they'll have a high score, and if they post drivel it will soon show in the disagrees.
Why should the Points be any less valid before now? If people were given them before it was a thing, their comments are no less deservant.
If you want an honest answer, then at the risk of being accused of navel-gazing, I believe the 9400 points I had on Friday was a more accurate measure of my forum presence than the 10,000 points I have today because my points used to be a measure of how often I was uprated relative to how often I was downrated. That's a measure of credibility. It isn't a great one or a foolproof one, you still have to read my posts to see if I'm someone that fishes for rating or not and artificially boosted those points. But given that I don't do that, and I'm often disagreeing with the devs, the players, and sometimes the entire community, it says something if I can maintain a large net positive score. It doesn't mean a lot by itself, but it means something. With the downratings removed, fair or not the positive score now means a lot less, because it is basically impossible to not have a positive score. The only people without a positive score have a score of zero.
In many ways, the best measure of a member of a community doesn't come from the people who agree with him or her, it comes from the people who disagree with him or her. Anyone can get people who agree with them to like them. But I think earning the respect, or at least the lack of enmity from the people who disagree, says more.
This is something we have a different view on. The Flag Function was used as a negative metric in a way it was never intended to be. It was never implemented to counter-balance the amount of positive votes people had. That wasn't the objective. It was there for Moderation. That abuse stems from a larger issue. Even this Thread is evidence that the impulse to Disagree with people we don't like regardless of what they say will persist. By that measure, you can't really trust how many people disagree because that's just a normative when people don't like who it's coming from. The positive on the other hand, are much less likely to be given frivolously because people don't agree very often unless they actually agree. I respect that you feel that way, but I don't trust the negative feedback from others. Given my situation, I'm sure you can understand why.
If that was the case then:
1- being a moderation tool it would have been used solely by moderators, and not made public.
2- if it was a mod tool, and public, then they used it terribly given as you were so far free to derail every topic of the forum (and dont take it personal, i have no clue who you are but i ve read my fair share of topics to have noticed your trend over and ober repeating again)
3- The “LoL” option has been and will alwais be the downvote equivalent. Aside clicking lol on a joke, the hundreds of “LoL” someone earned are a quite precise clue of the overall thought about the poster, being it “we dont take you seriously cause what you say isnt remotely trustable”. Unless you re a joke magician or live just on the meme thread, that s a good measure too.
4- im pretty sure aswell the downeating was removed due to your specific behaviour.
I think all the reaction scores should be reset to zero. Then from now on, if people post interesting or informative things then they'll have a high score, and if they post drivel it will soon show in the disagrees.
Why should the Points be any less valid before now? If people were given them before it was a thing, their comments are no less deservant.
If you want an honest answer, then at the risk of being accused of navel-gazing, I believe the 9400 points I had on Friday was a more accurate measure of my forum presence than the 10,000 points I have today because my points used to be a measure of how often I was uprated relative to how often I was downrated. That's a measure of credibility. It isn't a great one or a foolproof one, you still have to read my posts to see if I'm someone that fishes for rating or not and artificially boosted those points. But given that I don't do that, and I'm often disagreeing with the devs, the players, and sometimes the entire community, it says something if I can maintain a large net positive score. It doesn't mean a lot by itself, but it means something. With the downratings removed, fair or not the positive score now means a lot less, because it is basically impossible to not have a positive score. The only people without a positive score have a score of zero.
In many ways, the best measure of a member of a community doesn't come from the people who agree with him or her, it comes from the people who disagree with him or her. Anyone can get people who agree with them to like them. But I think earning the respect, or at least the lack of enmity from the people who disagree, says more.
This is something we have a different view on. The Flag Function was used as a negative metric in a way it was never intended to be. It was never implemented to counter-balance the amount of positive votes people had. That wasn't the objective. It was there for Moderation. That abuse stems from a larger issue. Even this Thread is evidence that the impulse to Disagree with people we don't like regardless of what they say will persist. By that measure, you can't really trust how many people disagree because that's just a normative when people don't like who it's coming from. The positive on the other hand, are much less likely to be given frivolously because people don't agree very often unless they actually agree. I respect that you feel that way, but I don't trust the negative feedback from others. Given my situation, I'm sure you can understand why.
If that was the case then:
1- being a moderation tool it would have been used solely by moderators, and not made public.
2- if it was a mod tool, and public, then they used it terribly given as you were so far free to derail every topic of the forum (and dont take it personal, i have no clue who you are but i ve read my fair share of topics to have noticed your trend over and ober repeating again)
3- The “LoL” option has been and will alwais be the downvote equivalent. Aside clicking lol on a joke, the hundreds of “LoL” someone earned are a quite precise clue of the overall thought about the poster, being it “we dont take you seriously cause what you say isnt remotely trustable”. Unless you re a joke magician or live just on the meme thread, that s a good measure too.
4- im pretty sure aswell the downeating was removed due to your specific behaviour.
1. They've stated the purpose for it since the beginning of this Forum. I was here. 2. The Moderators do their job. Claiming someone derails and calling their words Spam doesn't count unless that's actually the case. It's their job to tell the difference. 3. LOL has never counted towards metrics. I have no comment towards the rest of that. 4. I've always respected the Flags for what their intended purpose was. So no. It wasn't my fault.
@GroundedWisdom I think they meant how people reacted to you. Not you directly abusing the Flag system, but others abusing it by 'disagreeing' with you.
I think all the reaction scores should be reset to zero. Then from now on, if people post interesting or informative things then they'll have a high score, and if they post drivel it will soon show in the disagrees.
Why should the Points be any less valid before now? If people were given them before it was a thing, their comments are no less deservant.
If you want an honest answer, then at the risk of being accused of navel-gazing, I believe the 9400 points I had on Friday was a more accurate measure of my forum presence than the 10,000 points I have today because my points used to be a measure of how often I was uprated relative to how often I was downrated. That's a measure of credibility. It isn't a great one or a foolproof one, you still have to read my posts to see if I'm someone that fishes for rating or not and artificially boosted those points. But given that I don't do that, and I'm often disagreeing with the devs, the players, and sometimes the entire community, it says something if I can maintain a large net positive score. It doesn't mean a lot by itself, but it means something. With the downratings removed, fair or not the positive score now means a lot less, because it is basically impossible to not have a positive score. The only people without a positive score have a score of zero.
In many ways, the best measure of a member of a community doesn't come from the people who agree with him or her, it comes from the people who disagree with him or her. Anyone can get people who agree with them to like them. But I think earning the respect, or at least the lack of enmity from the people who disagree, says more.
This is something we have a different view on. The Flag Function was used as a negative metric in a way it was never intended to be. It was never implemented to counter-balance the amount of positive votes people had. That wasn't the objective. It was there for Moderation. That abuse stems from a larger issue. Even this Thread is evidence that the impulse to Disagree with people we don't like regardless of what they say will persist. By that measure, you can't really trust how many people disagree because that's just a normative when people don't like who it's coming from. The positive on the other hand, are much less likely to be given frivolously because people don't agree very often unless they actually agree. I respect that you feel that way, but I don't trust the negative feedback from others. Given my situation, I'm sure you can understand why.
If that was the case then:
1- being a moderation tool it would have been used solely by moderators, and not made public.
2- if it was a mod tool, and public, then they used it terribly given as you were so far free to derail every topic of the forum (and dont take it personal, i have no clue who you are but i ve read my fair share of topics to have noticed your trend over and ober repeating again)
3- The “LoL” option has been and will alwais be the downvote equivalent. Aside clicking lol on a joke, the hundreds of “LoL” someone earned are a quite precise clue of the overall thought about the poster, being it “we dont take you seriously cause what you say isnt remotely trustable”. Unless you re a joke magician or live just on the meme thread, that s a good measure too.
4- im pretty sure aswell the downeating was removed due to your specific behaviour.
1. They've stated the purpose for it since the beginning of this Forum. I was here. 2. The Moderators do their job. Claiming someone derails and calling their words Spam doesn't count unless that's actually the case. It's their job to tell the difference. 3. LOL has never counted towards metrics. I have no comment towards the rest of that. 4. I've always respected the Flags for what their intended purpose was. So no. It wasn't my fault.
1- then it was a horrible choiche followed by even worse mechanics. But if we talk bad mechanics i am not really surprised.
2- they do when it is convenient to do so as in any game. Else you would not see main bugs issues going for pages and pages without answer and a simple “hey i dropped this champ ty kabam” being answered without problem.
Leaving moderation up to a flag system is pretty much like running beta testing live and not on a beta server.
Oh wait.
3- how very convenient of you. But let’s suppose we are talking about rankup materials and you ppst something getting 50 “lols”. Would you think you cracked a joke by accident, or that people are considering your post hilarious for mayyyybe some other reason? I will leave the answer up to your common sense.
4- true. You are and were alwais able up to today to safely navigate on the borders of that. But istigation to something is in my eyes as bad as doing that something. And the many times you literally force your opinions on grounds you do not know about, causing uprising and usually ending up in a troll war and the thread closing is, again in my eyes, the same thing. Which leads me back to first points where i state Mods do not alwais do their jobs.
I have been a Mod for a VERY well known and wide game made by a VERY big AAA company and i can understand how hard and tiring it can be. There is alwais a thin line between keeping “complainers” at bay or stepping into the “censoring” territory hence going too far as a Mod. But the same applies to the opposite situation. Extremely complacent people sticking to supporting the company even in absurd scenarios were alwais the main reasons for uprising on forums, and were silenced and moderated as fast as complainers. Which doesnt happen here.
Too much bad or too much good are both bad on online forums. What you want here is balance between who complains and who supports to the point of being seen as “puppets”. When you punish the first but let go the second, not only you re doing a poor mod job, but you also literally letting the main cause of uprising stay around and literally making your job harder and more painful.
Lol. Well, that's not something I've ever paid attention to. I'm very active, but it's always been just a number to me. I don't comment to boost the numbers or anything like that. I'm usually just involved in the conversations I'm having. Other people notice but it never crosses my mind.
@GroundedWisdom I think they meant how people reacted to you. Not you directly abusing the Flag system, but others abusing it by 'disagreeing' with you.
I know what the implication was. People have been abusing it with or without me. I'm positive they abused it concerning me, but that's still not my fault. People make their own choices.
Oh, absolutely. They chose to do that, and no, not your fault they chose to express themselves in such a manner. We all have that much control over ourselves (lest there be demonic possession 😂, or someone threatening your life in some manner as a means of controlling you). In general I never understood why many comments got flagged. In any case really. It's a rarity I've seen something so offensive it deserved to be 'flagged' as it were. However, tis a thing of the past. Let's now look forward to simply disagreeing, eh?
Lol. Well, that's not something I've ever paid attention to. I'm very active, but it's always been just a number to me. I don't comment to boost the numbers or anything like that. I'm usually just involved in the conversations I'm having. Other people notice but it never crosses my mind.
That is somewhat contraddictory, as many times you post ln topics you do not know about.
I mean how would you feel involved into a topic talking about 6.2, 6.1 or variant if you did not run or yet even gotten access to that content?
By definition being involved means wanting to share one’s thoughts about a common experience and confront opinions, but how can you if you did not have said experience?
I mean i could post here all topics you joined, derailed to closure which were talking about something your current ingame capability has not yet allowed you to try out, but that would mean going through at least 70% of your 7k posts... And i am not a masochist.
Lol. Well, that's not something I've ever paid attention to. I'm very active, but it's always been just a number to me. I don't comment to boost the numbers or anything like that. I'm usually just involved in the conversations I'm having. Other people notice but it never crosses my mind.
And sorry, somehow cant edit first post.
I suggest you to start paying attention to it then, cause you may finally understand why you arr the only user on these forums being treated the way you are. Not a single other user ever had the “problems” you did, to the point mods had to remove flagging completely from forums.
You don't win anything, really. Until this change, it was meaningless. Now it affects your Rank, but again that's just cosmetic.
Until this thread, I didn’t even know there were points and a rank. Now I need to figure out where this is. The fact that you know there are points and a rank and how you seem to understand how to earn points/increase rank speaks volumes
Lol. Well, that's not something I've ever paid attention to. I'm very active, but it's always been just a number to me. I don't comment to boost the numbers or anything like that. I'm usually just involved in the conversations I'm having. Other people notice but it never crosses my mind.
And sorry, somehow cant edit first post.
I suggest you to start paying attention to it then, cause you may finally understand why you arr the only user on these forums being treated the way you are. Not a single other user ever had the “problems” you did, to the point mods had to remove flagging completely from forums.
You joined June 11th. How exactly would know about his "problems"? How would you also know the history behind the flagging and abuse? 2nd forum account maybe?
The "flag" button hasnt meant what it's supposed to mean for well over a year. It wasnt disabled because of him, it was disabled because it wasnt being used like was supposed to be used..
The flaws of this system are displayed so perfectly in this thread.
You go after GroundedWisdom you get points. Explain to me how this wont be abused again?
Plus, frequent posters in the meme thread make them more credible because they get a stack of likes?
At the end of the day, the stars are more in line with people who simply post a lot. Regardless of what you post, you're bound to earn yourself points (assuming you're not banned)...
The flaws of this system are displayed so perfectly in this thread.
You go after GroundedWisdom you get points. Explain to me how this wont be abused again?
Plus, frequent posters in the meme thread make them more credible because they get a stack of likes?
At the end of the day, the stars are more in line with people who simply post a lot. Regardless of what you post, you're bound to earn yourself points (assuming you're not banned)...
That entirely depends on the content of what you post. At least it should. Posting many times isn't really useful if it's just for the sake of it.
I'm not engaging in a conversation about me and my behavior. That's not what this Thread is about. .
To be fair, this is what every thread you post in turns into because you insist on responding to everything.
This is like your sibling teasing you. They do it because they know they'll get a response out of you, and you oblige EVERY TIME. Pages upon pages of "GW is a poopy head" "No I'm not" "Yes you are" ad nauseum. You can quit dragging this on just as much as they can.
Take a step back and observe the insane amount that it becomes a target for absolutely inappropriate and abusive behavior. Multiply that by the amount it takes place in other areas besides the Forum. Factor in the fact that I'm Human and can't always have my guard up. No other individual has had to deal with the amount that I have. Most days I don't bother with it. Some days I defend myself. It shouldn't be taking place, period. Much less be causing me to be the one held responsible for when things go awry. I can do my best to walk away from it most days. I'll be GD'd if I'm going to listen to someone try and tell me it's all my fault.
As if to prove my point, you respond despite not having a reason to do so.
It's one thing to defend yourself, I get that. A lot of what is thrown your way is grossly unnecessary from the community. I know you post your thoughts and they aren't always popular. I've read most of them. And that's when I usually stop reading the thread because it instantly turns into page after page of back and forth you insist on partaking in.
It's another thing to defend yourself in a video game forum online. You're surrounded by trolls who have nothing better to do than to bait. Yes they attack, but what exactly are you defending yourself from? Your honor? Your pride? It's a chat forum with a similar civility to global chat...
I'm not engaging in a conversation about me and my behavior. That's not what this Thread is about. .
To be fair, this is what every thread you post in turns into because you insist on responding to everything.
This is like your sibling teasing you. They do it because they know they'll get a response out of you, and you oblige EVERY TIME. Pages upon pages of "GW is a poopy head" "No I'm not" "Yes you are" ad nauseum. You can quit dragging this on just as much as they can.
Take a step back and observe the insane amount that it becomes a target for absolutely inappropriate and abusive behavior. Multiply that by the amount it takes place in other areas besides the Forum. Factor in the fact that I'm Human and can't always have my guard up. No other individual has had to deal with the amount that I have. Most days I don't bother with it. Some days I defend myself. It shouldn't be taking place, period. Much less be causing me to be the one held responsible for when things go awry. I can do my best to walk away from it most days. I'll be GD'd if I'm going to listen to someone try and tell me it's all my fault.
As if to prove my point, you respond despite not having a reason to do so.
It's one thing to defend yourself, I get that. A lot of what is thrown your way is grossly unnecessary from the community. I know you post your thoughts and they aren't always popular. I've read most of them. And that's when I usually stop reading the thread because it instantly turns into page after page of back and forth you insist on partaking in.
It's another thing to defend yourself in a video game forum online. You're surrounded by trolls who have nothing better to do than to bait. Yes they attack, but what exactly are you defending yourself from? Your honor? Your pride? It's a chat forum with a similar civility to global chat...
It's a Video Game Forum played by people. Same reason anyone else defends themselves. We're all Human and there's only so much you can take. If people push enough buttons for long enough, it's bound to trigger sometime. Lol.
Lol. Well, that's not something I've ever paid attention to. I'm very active, but it's always been just a number to me. I don't comment to boost the numbers or anything like that. I'm usually just involved in the conversations I'm having. Other people notice but it never crosses my mind.
And sorry, somehow cant edit first post.
I suggest you to start paying attention to it then, cause you may finally understand why you arr the only user on these forums being treated the way you are. Not a single other user ever had the “problems” you did, to the point mods had to remove flagging completely from forums.
You joined June 11th. How exactly would know about his "problems"? How would you also know the history behind the flagging and abuse? 2nd forum account maybe?
The "flag" button hasnt meant what it's supposed to mean for well over a year. It wasnt disabled because of him, it was disabled because it wasnt being used like was supposed to be used..
Magic. Am i not allowed to use one of my accounts to post here? Last time i checked you re not limited to one :smirk
I'm not engaging in a conversation about me and my behavior. That's not what this Thread is about. I have no time for your abusive synopsis of why I'm the problem on the Forum. I'm not responsible for the inappropriate behavior others contribute.
I was trying to let you understand how people feels when having to deal with you. Hold on to that feeling at the time you replied me and before posting next time, think back at this moment.
That said and as someone said before me, this was merely proving the point of flag / no flag points/no points being flawed.
I could be like you and keep answering or pointing out your contraddictions and in the span of a week i would probably have a 5* account!
But alas it was a mere test of how you are able to turn anything you put words on in a Contest of Pointlessness.
For once that we derailed thread and it wasnt you, i am very curious to see what happens, as further test.
I'm not engaging in a conversation about me and my behavior. That's not what this Thread is about. .
To be fair, this is what every thread you post in turns into because you insist on responding to everything.
This is like your sibling teasing you. They do it because they know they'll get a response out of you, and you oblige EVERY TIME. Pages upon pages of "GW is a poopy head" "No I'm not" "Yes you are" ad nauseum. You can quit dragging this on just as much as they can.
Take a step back and observe the insane amount that it becomes a target for absolutely inappropriate and abusive behavior. Multiply that by the amount it takes place in other areas besides the Forum. Factor in the fact that I'm Human and can't always have my guard up. No other individual has had to deal with the amount that I have. Most days I don't bother with it. Some days I defend myself. It shouldn't be taking place, period. Much less be causing me to be the one held responsible for when things go awry. I can do my best to walk away from it most days. I'll be GD'd if I'm going to listen to someone try and tell me it's all my fault.
As if to prove my point, you respond despite not having a reason to do so.
It's one thing to defend yourself, I get that. A lot of what is thrown your way is grossly unnecessary from the community. I know you post your thoughts and they aren't always popular. I've read most of them. And that's when I usually stop reading the thread because it instantly turns into page after page of back and forth you insist on partaking in.
It's another thing to defend yourself in a video game forum online. You're surrounded by trolls who have nothing better to do than to bait. Yes they attack, but what exactly are you defending yourself from? Your honor? Your pride? It's a chat forum with a similar civility to global chat...
It's a Video Game Forum played by people. Same reason anyone else defends themselves. We're all Human and there's only so much you can take. If people push enough buttons for long enough, it's bound to trigger sometime. Lol.
Fair enough.
My point is that I do agree with you. If this played out in person there's no way it would have devolved to this point. The anonymity of the interwebs brings out the worst in too many.
Comments
In many ways, the best measure of a member of a community doesn't come from the people who agree with him or her, it comes from the people who disagree with him or her. Anyone can get people who agree with them to like them. But I think earning the respect, or at least the lack of enmity from the people who disagree, says more.
I don't agree with most of what you say, but the flagging was out of control.
Edit: directed toward GW
Edit 2: I say this as a former admin of a forum. It's a pain in the ace to wade through unnecessary flags.
1- being a moderation tool it would have been used solely by moderators, and not made public.
2- if it was a mod tool, and public, then they used it terribly given as you were so far free to derail every topic of the forum (and dont take it personal, i have no clue who you are but i ve read my fair share of topics to have noticed your trend over and ober repeating again)
3- The “LoL” option has been and will alwais be the downvote equivalent. Aside clicking lol on a joke, the hundreds of “LoL” someone earned are a quite precise clue of the overall thought about the poster, being it “we dont take you seriously cause what you say isnt remotely trustable”.
Unless you re a joke magician or live just on the meme thread, that s a good measure too.
4- im pretty sure aswell the downeating was removed due to your specific behaviour.
2. The Moderators do their job. Claiming someone derails and calling their words Spam doesn't count unless that's actually the case. It's their job to tell the difference.
3. LOL has never counted towards metrics. I have no comment towards the rest of that.
4. I've always respected the Flags for what their intended purpose was. So no. It wasn't my fault.
2- they do when it is convenient to do so as in any game. Else you would not see main bugs issues going for pages and pages without answer and a simple “hey i dropped this champ ty kabam” being answered without problem.
Leaving moderation up to a flag system is pretty much like running beta testing live and not on a beta server.
Oh wait.
3- how very convenient of you. But let’s suppose we are talking about rankup materials and you ppst something getting 50 “lols”.
Would you think you cracked a joke by accident, or that people are considering your post hilarious for mayyyybe some other reason? I will leave the answer up to your common sense.
4- true. You are and were alwais able up to today to safely navigate on the borders of that. But istigation to something is in my eyes as bad as doing that something. And the many times you literally force your opinions on grounds you do not know about, causing uprising and usually ending up in a troll war and the thread closing is, again in my eyes, the same thing. Which leads me back to first points where i state Mods do not alwais do their jobs.
I have been a Mod for a VERY well known and wide game made by a VERY big AAA company and i can understand how hard and tiring it can be.
There is alwais a thin line between keeping “complainers” at bay or stepping into the “censoring” territory hence going too far as a Mod.
But the same applies to the opposite situation. Extremely complacent people sticking to supporting the company even in absurd scenarios were alwais the main reasons for uprising on forums, and were silenced and moderated as fast as complainers. Which doesnt happen here.
Too much bad or too much good are both bad on online forums. What you want here is balance between who complains and who supports to the point of being seen as “puppets”. When you punish the first but let go the second, not only you re doing a poor mod job, but you also literally letting the main cause of uprising stay around and literally making your job harder and more painful.
I mean how would you feel involved into a topic talking about 6.2, 6.1 or variant if you did not run or yet even gotten access to that content?
By definition being involved means wanting to share one’s thoughts about a common experience and confront opinions, but how can you if you did not have said experience?
I mean i could post here all topics you joined, derailed to closure which were talking about something your current ingame capability has not yet allowed you to try out, but that would mean going through at least 70% of your 7k posts...
And i am not a masochist.
Feel free tho to explain me the rest.
And sorry, somehow cant edit first post.
I suggest you to start paying attention to it then, cause you may finally understand why you arr the only user on these forums being treated the way you are. Not a single other user ever had the “problems” you did, to the point mods had to remove flagging completely from forums.
The "flag" button hasnt meant what it's supposed to mean for well over a year. It wasnt disabled because of him, it was disabled because it wasnt being used like was supposed to be used..
At the end of the day, the stars are more in line with people who simply post a lot. Regardless of what you post, you're bound to earn yourself points (assuming you're not banned)...
It's one thing to defend yourself, I get that. A lot of what is thrown your way is grossly unnecessary from the community. I know you post your thoughts and they aren't always popular. I've read most of them. And that's when I usually stop reading the thread because it instantly turns into page after page of back and forth you insist on partaking in.
It's another thing to defend yourself in a video game forum online. You're surrounded by trolls who have nothing better to do than to bait. Yes they attack, but what exactly are you defending yourself from? Your honor? Your pride? It's a chat forum with a similar civility to global chat...
That said and as someone said before me, this was merely proving the point of flag / no flag points/no points being flawed.
I could be like you and keep answering or pointing out your contraddictions and in the span of a week i would probably have a 5* account!
But alas it was a mere test of how you are able to turn anything you put words on in a Contest of Pointlessness.
For once that we derailed thread and it wasnt you, i am very curious to see what happens, as further test.
Too good can be too bad remember?
My point is that I do agree with you. If this played out in person there's no way it would have devolved to this point. The anonymity of the interwebs brings out the worst in too many.