It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionForum etiquette (discussion) and welcome to a new CM(779 posts)(779 posts)
(779 posts)
Pages:
1
9
10
11
12
13
20
30
40
52
This is my favourite topic
Posted November 16, 2016
avatar
JMich: You seem to have forgotten the GameRager incident.
avatar
dtgreene: GameRager incident?
Yes. User got either banned or deleted (I think banned, since he later returned), along with all the posts he had done up to that point. Back in the time when rep didn't have a daily cap. Not sure if it was automatic due to reports or done by the staff.
Posted November 16, 2016
low rated
avatar
PetrusOctavianus: The only thing that makes the GOG forum worth posting in is the lack of heavy handed moderation.

Moderation always leads to arbitrary moderator rulings.

Introduce an Ignore button instead, so that the individual user can decide what to read or not read. I find it offensive that some third part should be the judge of what I can say to others and what others can say to me.
There is actually one problem with an ignore button: There are users who sometimes post useful information, but other times post offensive/bigoted posts. An ignore button will throw out the useful posts. With light moderation, the really bad posts can be removed, while the good posts can be allowed to stay, and the user can be asked (by a moderator) to stop the bad posts.
Posted November 16, 2016
low rated
avatar
dtgreene: There is actually one problem with an ignore button: There are users who sometimes post useful information, but other times post offensive/bigoted posts. An ignore button will throw out the useful posts. With light moderation, the really bad posts can be removed, while the good posts can be allowed to stay, and the user can be asked (by a moderator) to stop the bad posts.
More to the point, an ignore button just threatens to disrupt the continuity of a conversation when you see everyone else reacting to a troll/extremist and you have no idea what's going on. Lessons learned from JerkMuter.
Post edited November 16, 2016 by jamyskis
Posted November 16, 2016
high rated
avatar
JMich: The one part I would ask for with insults is for the person being insulted to be the one to complain. If someone calls me a retard, a fag, an asshole, or any kind of slur (are there racial slurs for Greeks btw? Which ones?), I should be the only one to say if it was or wasn't an insult. That would also take care of any fake accusations, assuming of course a user doesn't insult any alts/impersonators.

And do recall that some countries do use quite a bit of profanity during social interaction, as was evidenced with UnEpic and the game's profanity. What you deem an insult may not be one for the person being addressed.
This is a very good point. Cultural differences often come to be the deciding factor between whether something is insulting or offensive, or not. Personal attitudes and opinions is another one. I am, for example, quite open minded and quite often a lot of what the social construct I have been brought up in would deem offensive (and I do rationally know that it is offensive too), I don't personally take as offensive. Another thing is that, and that applies to online communication tenfold, we can only read what we see, so jesting and bickering might often seem quite offensive for someone who's not aware it was only harmless messing around - but again, it has to be deemed as harmless by both sides, especially the receiving one.
Posted November 16, 2016
high rated
avatar
DaCostaBR: How about adressing that first, like requiring at least $5 spent on the account before it can post in the general forums, before even worrying about bans?
avatar
JMich: No. Hiding the forum behind a paywall is not a good idea, for various reasons. What happens with developers that wish to bring their game to GOG, what about various user accounts used to run things, what about the new people who wish to learn about the store before spending money? What about people who join to take advantage of connect or a free game offer and have questions?

Paywalls for forums are bad.
Agreed. Paywalls for creating accounts is something I would never personally support, so I'm not sure if this will even make it on the list of suggestions. I need to speak to tech first and see what can be done, but again, agree with what's been said above that multiple and alt accounts and impersonators is something that probably needs dealt with first as it could potentially also be the first step to solving other issues.
Posted November 16, 2016
high rated
avatar
jamyskis: an ignore button just threatens to disrupt the continuity of a conversation when you see everyone else reacting to a troll/extremist and you have no idea what's going on. Lessons learned from JerkMuter.
You could always have a "show ignored content" button if you are curious.
Better to decide for yourself what to do, than have som net nanny decide it for you.
Posted November 16, 2016
high rated
avatar
DaCostaBR: How is that supposed to deter anyone when they'll be back to posting in less than two minutes with a new account?
avatar
JMich: I think we have a different view as to what the forum's purpose is.
Since GOG is a store, a user should be able to make an account and use the store and the forum within two minutes. If the user has to pass through multiple hoops before being able to do so, the user is much more likely to skip the whole registration part and ignore GOG, which does mean GOG will lose customers. Considering that the forum users are a minority of the whole users (and they are a vast minority), saying the forum should take priority over the store is not a viable approach.

Edit: Just a number example. Back in 2012, Legend of Grimrock was reported to have sold ~20.000 copies on GOG.com. I don't think I can name 2.000 forum users, let alone 20.000 ones. Not to mention that in the last 4 years, the number of users has risen by quite a bit. I still think the forum users I have encountered, old and new, are no more than 5.000 ones.
Again, good point, and I'm glad you guys understand this. It would be foolish of me to say that we are now making the forum our priority, because everyone knows that's not and never will be the case. But I think making resources available to at least have someone (sorry you're stuck with me! :)) try and re-ignite the discussion between GOG and the community is a good step forward by GOG. To put this bluntly, if they really did not care, I wouldn't be here either. So all we can do now is try and make the most of it.

So, selling games is always the priority. The community doesn't constitute a necessary part of the selling aspect, but it does sit well with what the ethics behind GOG is.
Posted November 16, 2016
low rated
avatar
fables22: This is a very good point. Cultural differences often come to be the deciding factor between whether something is insulting or offensive, or not. Personal attitudes and opinions is another one. I am, for example, quite open minded and quite often a lot of what the social construct I have been brought up in would deem offensive (and I do rationally know that it is offensive too), I don't personally take as offensive. Another thing is that, and that applies to online communication tenfold, we can only read what we see, so jesting and bickering might often seem quite offensive for someone who's not aware it was only harmless messing around - but again, it has to be deemed as harmless by both sides, especially the receiving one.
Which is fine, but the problem with this rule is the very reason why hate speech legislation exists in the first place. If you defame a person, or a company, or an organisation, that person/company/organisation is a legal entity that can file suit, in the same way that an insulted person could submit a complaint here.

Religions, races, genders, sexual orientations have advocacy groups, but you cannot expect an entire race, religion or gender to submit a complaint.

Just as an example, one of the biggest problems on this forum is Islamophobia. We have very few Muslims here (I know of just one), and your rule would necessitate that an insulting post be specifically directed at him in his capacity as a Muslim.

Personally, as a German, I don't give two fucks about Nazi jibes from people like Regals, especially given the irony of his statements relative to his own political views. But the fact of the matter is that, by failing to act pre-emptively on hate speech, GOG has discredited itself and also alienated a good number of potential clients. I myself don't buy nearly as much as I used to on GOG simply because I no longer feel the desire to stick around on these forums and be motivated towards impulse purchases. I keep coming back because I hope things will change, but in reality it just gets worse.

And, as I pointed out elsewhere, because GOG specifically directs its services to British, French and German buyers (among others), it is LEGALLY required to remove hate speech (I mean actual hate speech as defined by the law, not just stuff that is deemed "offensive").
Post edited November 16, 2016 by jamyskis
Posted November 16, 2016
welcome fables22.
Congrats on new job.
I hope you will enjoy time with us (and with gog staffs of course).
Posted November 16, 2016
avatar
Leonard03: So where's Konrad gone? He seemed like an ok dude, even if he didn't change the forum.
He's still around :)
Posted November 16, 2016
avatar
jamyskis: an ignore button just threatens to disrupt the continuity of a conversation when you see everyone else reacting to a troll/extremist and you have no idea what's going on. Lessons learned from JerkMuter.
avatar
PetrusOctavianus: You could always have a "show ignored content" button if you are curious.
Better to decide for yourself what to do, than have som net nanny decide it for you.
I'd like a ignore feature (official), as long as i can turn it off and on at will that would be useful.
As long as it had no negative effect on the ignored individual...that would be most useful.
Add to that ignoring complete topics and all within.
Post edited November 16, 2016 by DampSquib
Posted November 16, 2016
avatar
zeogold: And the people that do use this place like, as previously stated, a "hate speech echo chamber", same thing happens, we ostracize them and treat them appropriately.
avatar
Telika: This is not true. Beyond a certain critical mass (of mutual legitimation), the "them" become the "we". Self-moderation in a group is the enforcement of a certain norm, and norms evolve with the components of that group.

This forum has long left the times where there was a consensus against "hate speech". It left it with gamergate and the greek crisis, it left it in front of islamism and forced migrations. And Trump's election redefines it even further.

GOG's self-moderation is a thing of the past. "Hate speech" is respectable in the eyes of too many forumgoers (and voters, in case you didn't notice), and most of those who used to balance this have left as a result. The question is how to deal with that (even : to deal or not to deal).

It won't be an easy question. But denial won't solve it either.
I agree. I don't think self-moderation will work, at this stage.
Posted November 16, 2016
avatar
fables22: Agreed. Paywalls for creating accounts is something I would never personally support, so I'm not sure if this will even make it on the list of suggestions. I need to speak to tech first and see what can be done, but again, agree with what's been said above that multiple and alt accounts and impersonators is something that probably needs dealt with first as it could potentially also be the first step to solving other issues.
I'm also strongly against paywalls. But I think to prevent people with an army of alt-accounts gaining too much power, new accounts should be somewhat limited. Especially not be able to up/downrep posts. This would prevent people from creating alt-accounts and cross-uprep their ghost-posts in some forgotten Aqua Kitty forum...

Another thing that I would consider is making (+)/(-) public, so that people can see, who clicked that button - other forums do this as well. I'm all for anonymity in other cases, but since the system gets abused so badly...
Also I personally don't have a problem with publicly standing for posts I like or dislike.
Posted November 16, 2016
avatar
fables22: Agreed. Paywalls for creating accounts is something I would never personally support, so I'm not sure if this will even make it on the list of suggestions. I need to speak to tech first and see what can be done, but again, agree with what's been said above that multiple and alt accounts and impersonators is something that probably needs dealt with first as it could potentially also be the first step to solving other issues.
Well for imporsonating gog could integrate features that some of us already have thanks to Adalia into the main gog chat. Showing the name of the persont that is contacting you as it is actually shown in forum and not all in capital letters as well as showing the join date of the person.
And in regards of alt accounts, I know this will not hinder determined people but I'm still wondering why gog never introduced the feature that you need to verify your email address before you can post etc. Last time I checked you can just enter whatever you want in the email field (as long as it contains an @ somewhere) and a few seconds later are free to visit the forum.
Posted November 16, 2016
avatar
amrit9037: welcome fables22.
Congrats on new job.
I hope you will enjoy time with us (and with gog staffs of course).
Thanks!
Pages:
1
9
10
11
12
13
20
30
40
52
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionForum etiquette (discussion) and welcome to a new CM(779 posts)(779 posts)
(779 posts)