Let's say you put your finger on fire. The fire itself contains about the same amount of destructive damage overall, by itself.
Now if someone keeps touching it and getting small hits, he will eventually start to feel a greater pain, no? (cells being detroyed little by little, Destructive energy gathering until fire sets on the finger)
I want to see a forum user to educate himself just by repeating NORMAL PROBATIONS until he start feeling greater pain(He actually do not want to be prevented from bumping his trade threads, he wants to discuss peacefully some new poe HYPE, he wants to make a suggestion..)
Right now Greater probations = the fire becomes greater each time your finger touch it.
No let the skin/user feels the pain/probation by it/himself. No need to expand the probation/fire.
Now let us use your analogy for maybe you'll understand the underlying issue:
Imagine there are people who feel only a tickle when touching said fire. Maybe they got a tough skin, maybe their pain perception is far off, either way, their complete hand is on fire and they simply don't care. They won't stop touching others with their burning hands, thou because they think it's funny how the others react to fire. They only start to get mildly conscious when they fully ignite.
You claim to be all human around your suggestion but you seem to dismiss that people have significantly different perception. The 1 week probation might seem a strong point for one user but a weak one for another user. To reeducate that other user, that especially deviant user, you'll need to pull bigger guns.
Well i think we ahve to deal with them. You get the community you deserve, if your game encourage some humans to spend their time breaking forum guidelines then find a way to make that action irrelevant. No need to pull bigger guns. If you do that then you are just showing your weakness.
"
Nightmare90 wrote:
The suggestion you made was that we put all users equally on strong fire for their first action. This would lead to much frustration given that people not conscious of a certain rule in place will be outright banned for the misbehavior they did not knew anything about. You would burn out many casual offenders and strong, deviant offenders will reign free. Good job!
If you still don't understand this with your own chosen example, I can't really help anymore, sorry. I can see craving for more justice but the suggested system is not just, especially not if not executed on straight rules but only the guidelines given in the ToU support needs to work with. A ToU nobody reads on top of that.
No i am all for "punish less" less then what the user deserve, unless it's 1. A clearly hostile comment, no doubt. 2. HIGHLY hostile.
i am just against "punish more" because of probation history. Punish a user with a expanded probation for a little misdeed.
"
jaxxxson wrote:
How funny would it be if op got on prohibition?
Prohibition?
Interesting.
"
InexRising wrote:
"
iamstryker wrote:
I still say its common sense to increase punishment on someone who purposely ignores the rules. Someone who broke a rule 100 times deserves more than someone who did it once or twice. This protects the person who wants to follow the rules and punishes those who don't care.
What exactly is wrong with that?
Not believing in the ability of the user to get better.
No i found a good answer.
What is wrong now is : there is no opposite system.
I want to see a "decrease punishement on someone who purposely follow the rules".
"
iamstryker wrote:
"
InexRising wrote:
And if they don't.. are :
community
Support
GGG
going to be upset? ('feelings')
How are you trying to make this about feelings? Its a strategy to keep players from consistently ignoring the rules. It doesn't have anything to do with feelings. If a player ignores the rules then he deserves the consequences. Its not complicated.
Exaclty.
NO MORE.
I don't see any rule saying : If a player continue to break a rule he will get more consequences.
"
Crystalgate wrote:
"
InexRising wrote:
This needs to be changed. Discuss
I think that almost everyone here has agreed that this does not need to be changed at all. So far this is looking like a one person crusade against the rest. This is assuming this topic isn't just an example of trolling.
I have waited for players to rally to my side. I think i am not the only one and i still think i am right 'somehow'.
"
Dizrupt wrote:
The act of disobeying Forum Guidelines/Terms of Service is not a forum mechanic, it is a punishable offence.
The act of dying in Path of Exile is not an offence, it is a game mechanic with set consequences(League Transfer/XP Loss)
A mechanic with consequences is not the same as a punishable offence, this is where your analogy falls apart. Yes there are similarities, (Do thing, bad thing happen) but ultimately they are different at a core level.
Someone must explain to me the purpose of XP loss then.
"
Startkabels wrote:
You don't believe in common sense? Well I live in a country that has a government with common sense. When somebody steals something from a shop he will get a fine for example, this is to give him the chance to learn it was wrong. If he does it a second time the fine is higher, maybe the third time again higher but there will be a point he will go to jail. And I live in Holland where justice is soft on criminals.
Yeah and what happens next ? Let's say he does it again. Will he get a bigger punishement than what he had.
And will happen next? Weill he get a 20 years jail sentence if he/she continues to steal candy from shop?
"
Startkabels wrote:
Same goes for driving a car: Driving and drinking will get you a fine, the second time maybe the same fine. But there will be a point you will be sent to an education about alcohol which you have to pay for.
Same reply.
"
Mark_GGG wrote:
A point for consideration: Inex, do you believe that there's any room at all in the system of responding to posters breaking the rules for support to merely warn a player that an action they've taken is against the rules?
Because I definitely do. I think someone could genuinely not know the rules (in an ideal world, of course, everyone would read the rules before posting, but I'm not naive enough to believe that'll happen), and could do something which, though against the rules, isn't serious enough to warrant any action more than a warning that it's against the rules and they should thus refrain from doing it in future. I like that our system can be that lenient when appropriate.
.
Sorry for the late answer.
Yes. I like the idea, i want users to get warnings and prevent innocent users from being hit by the support hammer.
But what do you do the ones who :
1. Have a clean probation history, new or not.
2. Make a hostile misdeed, no doubt it is one, 100% chance is it.
3. Make a HIGHLY hostile one.
I don't think there is a warning to give here.
First weakness of your system.
Is it simple if you did something VERY VERY STUPID and it's CLEAR you knew it, then the warning system should by 'bypassed'.
"
Mark_GGG wrote:
But under your system where no previous actions can be taken into account, and repeated actions must receive the same punishment every time, warnings can't exist. Because the basic nature of a warning is such that it must be escalated on the next offence.
Saying "This is against the rules, so please don't do it again or we'll have to do X" is a warning.
Saying "This is against the rules, so please don't do it again or we'll send you this exact message again" is not a warning by any reasonable working definition.
And the warning doesn't work as a warning unless it actually is followed up with X the next time that rule is broken (or at least, while it might work on that particular user, not following up warnings as policy means users as a whole will learn warnings aren't followed up on, which removes the point).
To put it in another context, I have no problems with a policeman being able to pull someone over for speeding, point out how fast they were going over the limit, and then let them off with a warning not to do it again.
I do have a problem with the kind of person who, on being given such a warning, speeds past the same cop 10 minutes later and when presented with a fine says "WTF is this bullshit, last time I did the same thing I just got a warning, how can you justify giving me a fine now just because it's a second time?"
While i can see the benefits and necessity of enabling moderation history, i want it to be deleted.
Is must stay because of players who are naive about forum guidelines.
It must go because it's counter productive.
So what must be done?
Let's think again, let's have a common goal : finding the best answer and road leading into best forum experience possible.
What can make your moderation system better/best?
I have something to suggest.
I think that an opposite syetem to the one we have must be established and added. You need to make it possible for users to erase their probation/moderation history.
Why? To make the system productive. Users will behave positively.
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
The way I see it, GGG owns this place, and any whim of theirs regarding how we should conduct ourselves while we are guests on the property they own should be respected by us, at least in terms of what we do on said property. We can go elsewhere if we don't like it.
.
Don't care, i play/played with players who gave GGG lot of money.
@Isbox1:
How is your problem related to this thread? I know how:
Getting an expanded probation for a little misdeed you did WAS CLEARLY OUT OF PROPORTION, the probation history should not matter in this case.
Your probation history should have been deleted or decreased over time.
This way your probatiohn history would have been the same as the others and you would have got your comments just removed like others.
Let's stay on topic and give a 'general feedback' which means let's not discuss specific cases, just say general truths gathered from your experience you believe in.
Last edited by InexRising#5976 on Aug 6, 2014, 3:10:58 PM
I still say its common sense to increase punishment on someone who purposely ignores the rules. Someone who broke a rule 100 times deserves more than someone who did it once or twice. This protects the person who wants to follow the rules and punishes those who don't care.
What exactly is wrong with that?
Not believing in the ability of the user to get better.
No i found a good answer.
What is wrong now is : there is no opposite system.
I want to see a "decrease punishement on someone who purposely follow the rules".
[...]
Not touching the other stuff you said:
The "Favor-System" you might suppose as the anti-probation history thesis would spawn a horrible evil: People who police others constantly, maybe even in an aggressive or annoying way. This would lead to many more arguments because you don't simply take that push you received by some random user playing police, don't you? No, you give it to him back!
Fun-fact: Policing as a normal user in the Steam Forum is even a offense and might get you in trouble. You are just encouraged to use the report function there instead of trying to talk some sense into a user and possibly start an argument.
If I misunderstood you and you just mean that the influence of probation history shall expire after some time, just like crimes do expire in real life, then yeah. I can see that. But we don't know exactly how GGG handles this and if they do it this way already.
Let's say you put your finger on fire. The fire itself contains about the same amount of destructive damage overall, by itself.
Now if someone keeps touching it and getting small hits, he will eventually start to feel a greater pain, no? (cells being detroyed little by little, Destructive energy gathering until fire sets on the finger)
I want to see a forum user to educate himself just by repeating NORMAL PROBATIONS until he start feeling greater pain(He actually do not want to be prevented from bumping his trade threads, he wants to discuss peacefully some new poe HYPE, he wants to make a suggestion..)
Right now Greater probations = the fire becomes greater each time your finger touch it.
No let the skin/user feels the pain/probation by it/himself. No need to expand the probation/fire.
Now let us use your analogy for maybe you'll understand the underlying issue:
Imagine there are people who feel only a tickle when touching said fire. Maybe they got a tough skin, maybe their pain perception is far off, either way, their complete hand is on fire and they simply don't care. They won't stop touching others with their burning hands, thou because they think it's funny how the others react to fire. They only start to get mildly conscious when they fully ignite.
You claim to be all human around your suggestion but you seem to dismiss that people have significantly different perception. The 1 week probation might seem a strong point for one user but a weak one for another user. To reeducate that other user, that especially deviant user, you'll need to pull bigger guns.
Well i think we ahve to deal with them. You get the community you deserve, if your game encourage some humans to spend their time breaking forum guidelines then find a way to make that action irrelevant. No need to pull bigger guns. If you do that then you are just showing your weakness.
"
Nightmare90 wrote:
The suggestion you made was that we put all users equally on strong fire for their first action. This would lead to much frustration given that people not conscious of a certain rule in place will be outright banned for the misbehavior they did not knew anything about. You would burn out many casual offenders and strong, deviant offenders will reign free. Good job!
If you still don't understand this with your own chosen example, I can't really help anymore, sorry. I can see craving for more justice but the suggested system is not just, especially not if not executed on straight rules but only the guidelines given in the ToU support needs to work with. A ToU nobody reads on top of that.
No i am all for "punish less" less then what the user deserve, unless it's 1. A clearly hostile comment, no doubt. 2. HIGHLY hostile.
i am just against "punish more" because of probation history. Punish a user with a expanded probation for a little misdeed.
"
jaxxxson wrote:
How funny would it be if op got on prohibition?
Prohibition?
Interesting.
"
InexRising wrote:
"
iamstryker wrote:
I still say its common sense to increase punishment on someone who purposely ignores the rules. Someone who broke a rule 100 times deserves more than someone who did it once or twice. This protects the person who wants to follow the rules and punishes those who don't care.
What exactly is wrong with that?
Not believing in the ability of the user to get better.
No i found a good answer.
What is wrong now is : there is no opposite system.
I want to see a "decrease punishement on someone who purposely follow the rules".
"
iamstryker wrote:
"
InexRising wrote:
And if they don't.. are :
community
Support
GGG
going to be upset? ('feelings')
How are you trying to make this about feelings? Its a strategy to keep players from consistently ignoring the rules. It doesn't have anything to do with feelings. If a player ignores the rules then he deserves the consequences. Its not complicated.
Exaclty.
NO MORE.
I don't see any rule saying : If a player continue to break a rule he will get more consequences.
"
Crystalgate wrote:
"
InexRising wrote:
This needs to be changed. Discuss
I think that almost everyone here has agreed that this does not need to be changed at all. So far this is looking like a one person crusade against the rest. This is assuming this topic isn't just an example of trolling.
I have waited for players to rally to my side. I think i am not the only one and i still think i am right 'somehow'.
"
Dizrupt wrote:
The act of disobeying Forum Guidelines/Terms of Service is not a forum mechanic, it is a punishable offence.
The act of dying in Path of Exile is not an offence, it is a game mechanic with set consequences(League Transfer/XP Loss)
A mechanic with consequences is not the same as a punishable offence, this is where your analogy falls apart. Yes there are similarities, (Do thing, bad thing happen) but ultimately they are different at a core level.
Someone must explain to me the purpose of XP loss then.
"
Startkabels wrote:
You don't believe in common sense? Well I live in a country that has a government with common sense. When somebody steals something from a shop he will get a fine for example, this is to give him the chance to learn it was wrong. If he does it a second time the fine is higher, maybe the third time again higher but there will be a point he will go to jail. And I live in Holland where justice is soft on criminals.
Yeah and what happens next ? Let's say he does it again. Will he get a bigger punishement than what he had.
And will happen next? Weill he get a 20 years jail sentence if he/she continues to steal candy from shop?
"
Startkabels wrote:
Same goes for driving a car: Driving and drinking will get you a fine, the second time maybe the same fine. But there will be a point you will be sent to an education about alcohol which you have to pay for.
Same reply.
"
Mark_GGG wrote:
A point for consideration: Inex, do you believe that there's any room at all in the system of responding to posters breaking the rules for support to merely warn a player that an action they've taken is against the rules?
Because I definitely do. I think someone could genuinely not know the rules (in an ideal world, of course, everyone would read the rules before posting, but I'm not naive enough to believe that'll happen), and could do something which, though against the rules, isn't serious enough to warrant any action more than a warning that it's against the rules and they should thus refrain from doing it in future. I like that our system can be that lenient when appropriate.
.
Sorry for the late answer.
Yes. I like the idea, i want users to get warnings and prevent innocent users from being hit by the support hammer.
But what do you do the ones who :
1. Have a clean probation history, new or not.
2. Make a hostile misdeed, no doubt it is one, 100% chance is it.
3. Make a HIGHLY hostile one.
I don't think there is a warning to give here.
First weakness of your system.
Is it simple if you did something VERY VERY STUPID and it's CLEAR you knew it, then the warning system should by 'bypassed'.
"
Mark_GGG wrote:
But under your system where no previous actions can be taken into account, and repeated actions must receive the same punishment every time, warnings can't exist. Because the basic nature of a warning is such that it must be escalated on the next offence.
Saying "This is against the rules, so please don't do it again or we'll have to do X" is a warning.
Saying "This is against the rules, so please don't do it again or we'll send you this exact message again" is not a warning by any reasonable working definition.
And the warning doesn't work as a warning unless it actually is followed up with X the next time that rule is broken (or at least, while it might work on that particular user, not following up warnings as policy means users as a whole will learn warnings aren't followed up on, which removes the point).
To put it in another context, I have no problems with a policeman being able to pull someone over for speeding, point out how fast they were going over the limit, and then let them off with a warning not to do it again.
I do have a problem with the kind of person who, on being given such a warning, speeds past the same cop 10 minutes later and when presented with a fine says "WTF is this bullshit, last time I did the same thing I just got a warning, how can you justify giving me a fine now just because it's a second time?"
While i can see the benefits and necessity of enabling moderation history, i want it to be deleted.
Is must stay because of players who are naive about forum guidelines.
It must go because it's counter productive.
So what must be done?
Let's think again, let's have a common goal : finding the best answer and road leading into best forum experience possible.
What can make your moderation system better/best?
I have something to suggest.
I think that an opposite syetem to the one we have must be established and added. You need to make it possible for users to erase their probation/moderation history.
Why? To make the system productive. Users will behave positively.
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
The way I see it, GGG owns this place, and any whim of theirs regarding how we should conduct ourselves while we are guests on the property they own should be respected by us, at least in terms of what we do on said property. We can go elsewhere if we don't like it.
.
Don't care, i play/played with players who gave GGG lot of money.
@Isbox1:
How is your problem related to this thread? I know how:
Getting an expanded probation for a little misdeed you did WAS CLEARLY OUT OF PROPORTION, the probation history should not matter in this case.
Your probation history should have been deleted or decreased over time.
This way your probatiohn history would have been the same as the others and you would have got your comments just removed like others.
Let's stay on topic and give a 'general feedback' which means let's not discuss specific cases, just say general truths gathered from your experience you believe in.
The thing is that in the end the forum is the propriety of GGG and you accepted to follow their rules when you created your account. GGG are free to edit or delete posts as they see fit and are the sole judges as who deserve a probation and how long it should be.
If you really have that big a problem with the rules you agreed to follow and how they enforce them, maybe it's time you stopped using the forum and/or move to another game/forum.
Last edited by thefredz#0620 on Aug 6, 2014, 3:28:36 PM
The thing is that in the end the forum is the propriety of GGG and you accepted to follow their rules when you created your account. GGG are free to edit or delete posts as they see fit and are the sole judges as who deserve a probation and how long it should be.
If you really have that big a problem with the rules you agreed to follow and how they enforce them, maybe it's time you stopped using the forum and/or move to another game/forum.
I really don't like this line of thinking - could you imagine a world that was in perpetual non-advancement? Uggg - we would still just be working with fire and outside in loin clothes. None of the amenities we all currently enjoy like the internet and computers. Just stop advancement and betterment in it's tracks.
I really think that there needs to be some kind of improvements in forum moderation - I like the idea of wiping out negatives - and even letting those posters know with positive feedback: "Hey - congrats! Thanks for being a more positive influence in the community, we have taken 1 mark off your account."
A clear and concise plan should be implemented with no hidden vagueness. Methods to redeem yourself by behaving over time otherwise no matter what, you'll just suffer probation for tiny infractions.
just because you don't like it doesn't make it less valid.
But following the logic in any sort of honesty would mean you wouldn't use internet or computers or anything, really. So even you don't subscribe to your own line of thinking. You discredit your statements by simply posting on the internet. You invalidated it yourself, I didn't even really have to say much but to just point out the flaw in your logic.
I prefer thinking the same way you do: making improvements on existing systems. This is the actual logical pattern you subscribe to as proven by your actions of posting online via computer/cellphone.
Last edited by Isbox1#3280 on Aug 6, 2014, 3:49:22 PM
Not believing in the ability of the user to get better.
No i found a good answer.
What is wrong now is : there is no opposite system.
I want to see a "decrease punishement on someone who purposely follow the rules".
[...]
Not touching the other stuff you said:
The "Favor-System" you might suppose as the anti-probation history thesis would spawn a horrible evil: People who police others constantly, maybe even in an aggressive or annoying way. This would lead to many more arguments because you don't simply take that push you received by some random user playing police, don't you? No, you give it to him back!
Fun-fact: Policing as a normal user in the Steam Forum is even a offense and might get you in trouble. You are just encouraged to use the report function there instead of trying to talk some sense into a user and possibly start an argument.
If I misunderstood you and you just mean that the influence of probation history shall expire after some time, just like crimes do expire in real life, then yeah. I can see that. But we don't know exactly how GGG handles this and if they do it this way already.
You did well by quoting this part of my comment because this is the final solution i found, for now.
Yes you misundertood.
I want a system where probation history cleanse itself with time. And the system must explain that to you,
"If you don't get a probation/warning during 5 days, your are clean" (increase or reduce number of days"
"If you don't get a probation/warning for 10 days, your probation history will be half clean" " If you continue for 7 days, you are clean"(he will be get a warning for next misdeed)"But if you break the 7 days then you get a probation with a lower duration than you would have got if you did not the 10 days good behavior.
(Good behavior = No breaking of FG)
"
thefredz wrote:
The thing is that in the end the forum is the propriety of GGG and you accepted to follow their rules when you created your account. GGG are free to edit or delete posts as they see fit and are the sole judges as who deserve a probation and how long it should be.
If you really have that big a problem with the rules you agreed to follow and how they enforce them, maybe it's time you stopped using the forum and/or move to another game/forum.
[Removed by Support]
I know very well this is GGG's property, but if i started this thread then i am continuing it.
Last edited by Jared_GGG#0000 on Aug 6, 2014, 4:18:58 PM
just because you don't like it doesn't make it less valid.
But following the logic in any sort of honesty would mean you wouldn't use internet or computers or anything, really. So even you don't subscribe to your own line of thinking. You discredit your statements by simply posting on the internet. You invalidated it yourself, I didn't even really have to say much but to just point out the flaw in your logic.
I prefer thinking the same way you do: making improvements on existing systems. This is the actual logical pattern you subscribe to as proven by your actions of posting online via computer/cellphone.
yeah because human technological evolution as a whole is a good analogy to following rules on a video game forum.
amright?
Last edited by thefredz#0620 on Aug 6, 2014, 4:02:10 PM
Yes you misundertood.
I want a system where probation history cleanse itself with time. And the system must explain that to you,
"If you don't get a probation/warning during 5 days, your are clean" (increase or reduce number of days"
"If you don't get a probation/warning for 10 days, your probation history will be half clean" " If you continue for 7 days, you are clean"(he will be get a warning for next misdeed)"But if you break the 7 days then you get a probation with a lower duration than you would have got if you did not the 10 days good behavior.
(Good behavior = No breaking of FG)
[...]
In this case I'll leave it at that and let this thread RIP on my personal list. One might argue about numbers at this point but GGG is probably able to decide on that best based on their moderation experience.
Yes you misundertood.
I want a system where probation history cleanse itself with time. And the system must explain that to you,
"If you don't get a probation/warning during 5 days, your are clean" (increase or reduce number of days"
"If you don't get a probation/warning for 10 days, your probation history will be half clean" " If you continue for 7 days, you are clean"(he will be get a warning for next misdeed)"But if you break the 7 days then you get a probation with a lower duration than you would have got if you did not the 10 days good behavior.
(Good behavior = No breaking of FG)
[...]
In this case I'll leave it at that and let this thread RIP on my personal list. One might argue about numbers at this point but GGG is probably able to decide on that best based on their moderation experience.
But do you support it?
I guarantee you it's not already implemented.
