Well, actually I give out a warning to anyone who uses the term 'newbie' or any derivation of it in a derogatory manner in the forums I moderate. Of course, I don't have to moderate the General Discussions forum for Civ3...
Need an Announcement and a general crackdown
- Thread starter cracker
- Start date
Well, actually I give out a warning to anyone who uses the term 'newbie' or any derivation of it in a derogatory manner in the forums I moderate. Of course, I don't have to moderate the General Discussions forum for Civ3...
Napoleon Hitler
Ruler of Europe
I just wanted to say that I agree 100% with what Raijer had to say. I'm not a n00b by any stretch of the word, but at these forums, I might as well be. I think these forums suffer from over-moderating...largely due to people that are not mods thinking they are, and giving their constant opinions on where a thread should be moved to, and doing it with a "stupid n00b" sort of snotty attitude.
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2001
- Messages
- 3,136
Raijer, cracker's comments were meant only sarcastically, and towards those new members who do, in fact, decide to disregard the rules. As for my forums, I don't allow any newbie flaming that i see. Of course it's up to the person being flamed to report it if they have a problem since the mods cannot read each post.
And thank you
And thank you
Gonzo, you're welcome. This is a great site, please don't get me wrong. In
fact, of those non-mod, experienced players from which I've learned so much,
cracker was among the best. His insight into the game, is in my mind,
priceless.
I realize that it was sarcsam, as opposed to any type of real violence being threatened. But one can see an over-riding attitude in cracker's theory of newbie management, and it is one that is common among many of the high posters. If many of your vets are going into these threads carrying this type of chip on their shoulder, it gives your site the crusty old sheen of a privileged aristocracy, or worse, some kind of teenaged lunchroom clique, where, if you're a newbie, either shut up or go away. I think this runs contrary to the democratic principles found in the Forum Rules (and even the most noob Civ player knows that Democracy is better than Monarchy ) That being said, I'll be the first to admit I may have overstated my initial response to provoke serious thought, and it's nice to see that's precisely what I recieved. There was a glass-half-empty part of me that was expecting a total mod-flame aimed in my direction. That would've hurt! 
Really, whenever a newbie posts something kinda, well, newbiesque shall we
say, it's not only the tone (which does at times, like Napolean
H. says, get a bit snotty). What gets ridiculous is that every vet feels
the need to pipe in, and straighten the noob out. So what should be a
quickly dead thread, due to lack of interest, turns out to stay on the front
page long enough for all the vets to reprimand the poor bastard.
I'd also like to say that, due to time constraints, I can't read through the
long long long history of threads that is CFC. Often enough, I'll see a
thread that catches my eye - something that crosses my mind during the
course of my admittedly limited play. What becomes immediately apparent,
upon visiting CFC, is that it has crossed the mind of everyone else who
plays the game as well. These wind up being topics discussed again and
again - to such a degree in fact, they've become "cliche" Civ topics
(Topic: What Civ is missing from the game and why?). Well, some of the vets
may have seen such topics a million plus times, but for noobs like me, the
subject is fresh and interesting. Of course, this comment applies to vets
far more than mods. From what I've seen, these threads seem to enjoy a long life, despite the protests of those that have seen it all before. From my
newbie POV, I really appreciate you letting them run their course.
And finally, to cracker himself: I hope you don't take offense to my
comments. I mean it when I say you're one of the more productive and
insightful posters on this site. Really, it wouldn't be the same without
you. All I ask is for a little respect due me as a human being. Yes, we
newbies can be annoying, but like you, the site wouldn't be the same without
us.
To eyrei: Man, you run a tight ship. In General Discussion, the very first
thread (and it always STAYS the very first thread) is, in fact titled
NEWBIE THREAD!
fact, of those non-mod, experienced players from which I've learned so much,
cracker was among the best. His insight into the game, is in my mind,
priceless.
I realize that it was sarcsam, as opposed to any type of real violence being threatened. But one can see an over-riding attitude in cracker's theory of newbie management, and it is one that is common among many of the high posters. If many of your vets are going into these threads carrying this type of chip on their shoulder, it gives your site the crusty old sheen of a privileged aristocracy, or worse, some kind of teenaged lunchroom clique, where, if you're a newbie, either shut up or go away. I think this runs contrary to the democratic principles found in the Forum Rules (and even the most noob Civ player knows that Democracy is better than Monarchy
) That being said, I'll be the first to admit I may have overstated my initial response to provoke serious thought, and it's nice to see that's precisely what I recieved. There was a glass-half-empty part of me that was expecting a total mod-flame aimed in my direction. That would've hurt! Really, whenever a newbie posts something kinda, well, newbiesque shall we
say, it's not only the tone (which does at times, like Napolean
H. says, get a bit snotty). What gets ridiculous is that every vet feels
the need to pipe in, and straighten the noob out. So what should be a
quickly dead thread, due to lack of interest, turns out to stay on the front
page long enough for all the vets to reprimand the poor bastard.
I'd also like to say that, due to time constraints, I can't read through the
long long long history of threads that is CFC. Often enough, I'll see a
thread that catches my eye - something that crosses my mind during the
course of my admittedly limited play. What becomes immediately apparent,
upon visiting CFC, is that it has crossed the mind of everyone else who
plays the game as well. These wind up being topics discussed again and
again - to such a degree in fact, they've become "cliche" Civ topics
(Topic: What Civ is missing from the game and why?). Well, some of the vets
may have seen such topics a million plus times, but for noobs like me, the
subject is fresh and interesting. Of course, this comment applies to vets
far more than mods. From what I've seen, these threads seem to enjoy a long life, despite the protests of those that have seen it all before. From my
newbie POV, I really appreciate you letting them run their course.
And finally, to cracker himself: I hope you don't take offense to my
comments. I mean it when I say you're one of the more productive and
insightful posters on this site. Really, it wouldn't be the same without
you. All I ask is for a little respect due me as a human being. Yes, we
newbies can be annoying, but like you, the site wouldn't be the same without
us.
To eyrei: Man, you run a tight ship. In General Discussion, the very first
thread (and it always STAYS the very first thread) is, in fact titled
NEWBIE THREAD!
Ayatollah So
the spoof'll set you free
But... but ... this is exactly why it would be a great thing if redundant threads could be consolidated into one! You would still get to see what others have said about, say, culture flipping. Only you would get to see all of it, all in one thread! You would then get many more useful tips and explanations, while at the same time, there would be fewer repetitions of the same tip or explanation. If you decided to scan all threads from the last month for the subject, say, "nuclear missile", you would have an easier time of it as there would be fewer threads. What could be more newbie-friendly than that?
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
Raijer,
Don't take things to seriously and remember that this medium does not let you see the face or the body language of "the other guy".
I think we all take on different persona's and fill niche roles in the community that is here.
I can tell you for certain that I behave differently and post differently in the different subforums.
This thread, for example would be inappropriate in both tone and content for the General Discussions forum.
One point I have been trying to make is that tolerance is really very appropriate in most cases, but that in certain forums the axe should fall much quicker.
The Strategy Articles Subforum is a great example, if the thread is not a link to or discussion of a posted Strategy Article then it should absolutely be closed or moved quickly.
In the Strategy and Tips forum, if the thread is just absolutely stupid strategy or some sort of general poll like the (who's the best UU ..." type threads, then close these asap. Bad threads in these forums are nucleation sites for bad behavior. Also some minimum quality control has to be applied in these technical areas or we just end up passing the flaws on down to subsequent generations of players. Poly has a lot more of this problem than we have here because there is a very broad cadre of good players here at CFC.
The chatty factor is also one issue that is very dominant right now. We have a very high concentration of new 12 to 14 year old players because the market direction for Infogrames and Firaxis has been tilting strongly in that direction. These behaviors are not self correcting in the big picture because they have the power to wipe away the critical mass.
If everytime you asked a question all you got was 30 lame one-liner replies, then that may not be the result your were hoping for.
Balance is the issue and at the same time having Gonzo try to manually fix all the problems does not recognize that something suffers when our few mods are tied up dealing with extra heavy loads of problems that would normally not be tolerated.
I sometimes have to go back to my first severla posts to set perspective.
I also use the search function to look at teh recent posts of someone who may seem to have not read and understood the reasons for good posting behavior. You will often see flashs of 20 or 30 one-liner posts for the current target market for PTW and that may not be indicating a strong match for the basic strategy game genre.
We'll have to see.
----
I have to add that many thread that should die are not dying at all because of ongoing newbie chat and misinformation posts. The typical process is that a bad thread may start and one or two vets will post a focused reply very early, but we will see the thread continue to stink around for weeks on end because it keeps getting "chatted up". (CG et al are your reading this )
It id very rare that you will see more than just a couple vet types respond to try and quell the same bad thread, but the average "other" posts are well in the 10s and 20s without adding any content.
Don't take things to seriously and remember that this medium does not let you see the face or the body language of "the other guy".
I think we all take on different persona's and fill niche roles in the community that is here.
I can tell you for certain that I behave differently and post differently in the different subforums.
This thread, for example would be inappropriate in both tone and content for the General Discussions forum.
One point I have been trying to make is that tolerance is really very appropriate in most cases, but that in certain forums the axe should fall much quicker.
The Strategy Articles Subforum is a great example, if the thread is not a link to or discussion of a posted Strategy Article then it should absolutely be closed or moved quickly.
In the Strategy and Tips forum, if the thread is just absolutely stupid strategy or some sort of general poll like the (who's the best UU ..." type threads, then close these asap. Bad threads in these forums are nucleation sites for bad behavior. Also some minimum quality control has to be applied in these technical areas or we just end up passing the flaws on down to subsequent generations of players. Poly has a lot more of this problem than we have here because there is a very broad cadre of good players here at CFC.
The chatty factor is also one issue that is very dominant right now. We have a very high concentration of new 12 to 14 year old players because the market direction for Infogrames and Firaxis has been tilting strongly in that direction. These behaviors are not self correcting in the big picture because they have the power to wipe away the critical mass.
If everytime you asked a question all you got was 30 lame one-liner replies, then that may not be the result your were hoping for.
Balance is the issue and at the same time having Gonzo try to manually fix all the problems does not recognize that something suffers when our few mods are tied up dealing with extra heavy loads of problems that would normally not be tolerated.
I sometimes have to go back to my first severla posts to set perspective.
I also use the search function to look at teh recent posts of someone who may seem to have not read and understood the reasons for good posting behavior. You will often see flashs of 20 or 30 one-liner posts for the current target market for PTW and that may not be indicating a strong match for the basic strategy game genre.
We'll have to see.
----
I have to add that many thread that should die are not dying at all because of ongoing newbie chat and misinformation posts. The typical process is that a bad thread may start and one or two vets will post a focused reply very early, but we will see the thread continue to stink around for weeks on end because it keeps getting "chatted up". (CG et al are your reading this
)It id very rare that you will see more than just a couple vet types respond to try and quell the same bad thread, but the average "other" posts are well in the 10s and 20s without adding any content.
I never once argued against this. I think it's a great idea. My post concerned the negative tone and/or attitude that many vets convey when dealing with newbies. I'm all for management of the forums, and I'm sure the mods are doing their best to implement the very ideas in this dicussion - my point is that it needs to be done without all the vitriolic condesension that seems evident in many of the veteran posters. I was concerned with courtesy and not policy.
But that's enough of that. I'll heed your advice cracker, and not take it too seriously. So it's back to GenCiv for more fun. Thanks
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
Oh, and Raijer, you'll really enjoy the game and go far on this site, but I get a strong sense that you start with more tools than some.
Remember the Steve Wrightism "Half the people are always below average".
... (don't expect me not to tell you when I think "That might leave a mark" or chuckle in the background at a lot of stuff.)
I'll be out of range this afternoon because I am reading stories to the Kindergarten classes at my son's school. Today we are reading stories about dragons.
Remember the Steve Wrightism "Half the people are always below average".
... (don't expect me not to tell you when I think "That might leave a mark" or chuckle in the background at a lot of stuff.)
I'll be out of range this afternoon because I am reading stories to the Kindergarten classes at my son's school.
Today we are reading stories about dragons.
It is a thread to help newbies, though. There is nothing wrong with the word itself, other than it being mildly annoying. It can, however, be used in a derogatory sense, which is when I start to slap people on the wrist.
Lt. 'Killer' M.
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2001
- Messages
- 7,475
eyrei:
Similar threads
