MOUL Forum Moderation [Split from RAWA...]

[BAD]

You know what shrank this community? A lack of a game to play!

So, what are you doing about that? being sarcastic? I mean, I know, you hate Cyan Worlds. You hate Uru. You hate the MOUL forums, and you hate the Uru community. I don't really care about that, hate whoever you want. The good thing you do to this community is building ages. You give more things to do. Thank you, thank you very much. But you also got to see the bad side of things: you complain a lot. A LOT. You are over sarcastic and many of you, like BAD, are "not nice". So next time you see people going against you, know that being "not nice" has a big part in things (there are other reasons which personally I don't agree with but here I'm just talking about not being nice). It keeps people away. Am I telling you to not criticize things? no, criticize. It's good. I do that myself. But I hope you stop being so over-sarcastic and arrogant, because it's only bad for the guild.

She in this post is complaining about people being negative.

It's quite obvious she didn't. Read her post again:

just weariness with the sarcasm, unpleasantness and 'cleverness'

Seems reasonable. Already stated my opinion above.

This proves my thoughts. Never had I said I hated anything, yet you assume because I am "not nice" I hate everything you like. I like Uru, I like Myst, and I like Cyan Worlds. Sure I have lost a lot of respect for Cyan over the years, but I still believe they can make amazingly beautiful and deep games.

This assumption that certain people in this community has hurt Uru's chances for success is not only ridiculous, but self destructive.

[The stranger]

I was talking, again, to the writer overall. Not just you. Some of you *do* strongly dislike Uru (or the MOUL forums or Cyan Worlds), and those who don't usually don't like it very much. But again, that's not what bugs me. Like or hate whatever you want. What bugs me is that you show these opinions by going to the MOUL forums and start with the sarcasm and insults. How productive was that? how did it help to make the image of hacking or the GoW better? the only thing it did was making more people don't like you. Sometimes you actually gave a respectful criticism, but your usual policy is "go to the MOUL forums, drop a clever and sarcastic comment, go out". Again, I'm not talking specifically about you, but about the writers as a whole.

This assumption that certain people in this community has hurt Uru's chances for success is not only ridiculous, but self destructive.

Hacking or not-nice behaviour won't kill Uru, I'm just saying that it won't help a lot. Being not nice may not kill Uru, but it certainly won't help in anyway, to Uru or the guild.

[Chuckles58]

The "not-nice" behavior that may send people away from the community is happening from those with "negative" opinions of the current state of things (info from Cyan, MOUL forum moderation) as well as those "defenders of everything Uru/Cyan" with the constant drum of "why so much negativity" or "if you don't like Uru then leave". It takes both sides to not play nice, and unfortunately, even after RAWA asked folks to play nice, you've got one side trying to define what playing nice is and accusing the other side of not playing nice.

I think RAWA meant both sides, personally.

I love the game Uru, the company Cyan Worlds and the Uru Community. I think there are problems on both sides, but I see that the "positive" people may actually cause more damage to the community despite their beliefs that if they purge the community of the negative folk it will make the community better, mostly due to the difficulty in dropping their disputes. Addition by subtraction rarely works.

[The stranger]

If you are not talking about me than I'll gladly delete this post, but:

"why so much negativity" or "if you don't like Uru then leave"

Did I personally got angry at someone about being negative (and please don't take examples from 2008, things changed)? did I ever claimed anyone who doesn't like Uru to leave?

(and I know you are probably thinking about the hoikas thing where I told him to leave, yet as I told you at MOUL forums, if you look at his posts you find statements like "playing Uru is like hell to me". He clearly said he is not interested in anything considering Uru, and he is only here because he has plasma skills. Don't think it's the best for him to leave?)

I know you didn't talk directly about me, but I just feel you got the wrong idea of why I told hoikas he should leave. I wasn't banishing him because he is negative. I did him, you could say, a favour. Just look at his post. Unless hoikas will come here and prove me wrong, it appears to me he said he wants to leave but stays here only because of his position.

And I really hope you don't see me as one of the sunshine-positive-cyan-can-do-no-wrong people.

[Nalates]

The "not-nice" behavior that may send people away from the community is happening from those with "negative" opinions of the current state of things (info from Cyan, MOUL forum moderation) as well as those "defenders of everything Uru/Cyan" with the constant drum of "why so much negativity" or "if you don't like Uru then leave". It takes both sides to not play nice, and unfortunately, even after RAWA asked folks to play nice, you've got one side trying to define what playing nice is and accusing the other side of not playing nice.

Chuckles58, I agree. I also think you do not go far enough and leave out some considerations. Karma is often used to describe the concept that what one puts out is what one gets back. Yell at someone they and tend to yell back. Toss of a smart remark and you’re likely to get one back.

I definitely am on the side of trying to define what playing nice means. Rawa’s sentiment is nice. The concept of not saying anything if you have nothing nice to say is way ambiguous. Is bringing up for discussion problems with story, game play, changes to Plasma, the client side engine and more –not nice- or is it in how we bring it up and respond?

I think RAWA meant both sides, personally.

I suspect your right.

I love the game Uru, the company Cyan Worlds and the Uru Community. I think there are problems on both sides, but I see that the "positive" people may actually cause more damage to the community despite their beliefs that if they purge the community of the negative folk it will make the community better, mostly due to the difficulty in dropping their disputes. Addition by subtraction rarely works.

I disagree on the purging issue because purging people from a community is a standard practice for many online communities. It is done for a reason. It seems communities that pay attention to the health of their community grow. Those that ignore the health issues seem to stagnate. Those that allow flamers eventually seem to end up as a small core of like minded individuals.

I can’t see where a negative or positive viewpoint on an issue is the deciding factor for playing nice. My belief is that if either flames, mounts personal attacks, ignores facts, jumps to unfounded conclusions, fails to respect opposition to their ideas and generally displays poor behavior they poison the community and those behaviors are a problem and what is meant by playing nice.

Some people will only participate in reasonably civil communities. Communities that cannot remain civil drive off those people. I don’t see civil discussion of controversial issues driving people off. The Uru fan forums are a good example. My perception is posting in and views of controversial topics show an increase in interest until the flames start. My experience is controversial issues that end in locked threads are locked because the debate turns into flaming, loss of civility. That is the only consistently common attribute I see in locked threads. Not to say threads aren’t locked for other reasons, but that loss of civility is a consistent reason for locking.

I have to wonder why that loss of civility happens. Is this because people don’t know how to be civil? Did they choose to flame another because they were losing the debate and it is a sure way to stop the debate before a consensus could be reached? Were they incapable of controlling their emotions? Do they have deeper psychological issues?

If one wants to improve the civility of a forum or even general discourse in all situations, what can be done?

[Chuckles58]

Nicely put, Nalates, with one exception:

I disagree on the purging issue because purging people from a community is a standard practice for many online communities. It is done for a reason. It seems communities that pay attention to the health of their community grow. Those that ignore the health issues seem to stagnate. Those that allow flamers eventually seem to end up as a small core of like minded individuals.

But whose job is to do this purging? One reason we have such a need for forum moderation is the fallout from self-appointed caretakers of the community.

Again, rather than seeing how much better the community can be by selectively driving off certain less desirable characters, it would be more constructive to find ways to disagree without being disagreeable.

My main point is that it is a big community with many areas allowing for room to do things differently. The MOUL forums are the central hub of the community, so that seems to be where most of the fighting, intolerance and forum moderation occurs. All of this is by choice. It takes a choice by each participant to either be a part of it or not. But I return to my comment earlier, RAWA asked people to play nice, so we should do that. Choose to disagree in a civil way. It is this point that I can't agree with you more.

I personally have both a positive and negative view of the current state of Uru. I am positive about the game, the community and the company that owns the future of our game. I'm negative about the black or white, my way or the highway intolerance out there, which ever side of an issue. In other words, chill.

[Trylon]

Okay, I could write down a whole sensible/-less speech here, but I'll keep it down to a few points.

1) I am very much part of this community, and feel very offended by the previous blanket statement that most, if not all witers here hate, or don't like Uru, Cyan and all. You include me in your statement, without knowing my position.
It does you no credit that you take the voiced opinions of a relatively small number of people and apply them to everyone here.

2) The whole cyan proponents vs cyan opponents boils down to this:

• Most perceived opponents love myst, uru, and were really enthousiastic with that, but had some bad experiences with Cyan that damaged their enthousiasm.
• When so-called proponents come and voice their enthousiasm about cyan, the perceived opponents remember being as enthousiastic, and also remember their bad experiences.
• Perceived opponents reply, but emphasize their bad experiences
• So-called proponents feel like someone tears down their heroes and react intensely
• Fights result, and people are put in tiny little boxes called "Hates Cyan" and "Adores Cyan", and to be frank, neither of them is small enough to actually fit in those boxes.

Oh, and there are some people around who are smart enough to keep their mouth shut, because they know it will accomplish nothing. But for some reason everyone seems bent on putting them in those tiny little boxes as well.

But guess what: Nobody fits in them, and actually trying to squeeze people into them only gets people hurt!

[Nalates]

But whose job is to do this purging? One reason we have such a need for forum moderation is the fallout from self-appointed caretakers of the community.
[…]
Again, rather than seeing how much better the community can be by selectively driving off certain less desirable characters, it would be more constructive to find ways to disagree without being disagreeable.

Good points.

Who’s job is it? There are several considerations and possibilities. In any forum it is ultimately the owner of the forum that gets to decide. A fact of forum life is the owner does not get to decide in a vacuum. Most owners realize the community has a say too. Tick off the community and they leave and forum dies.

The MOUL forum being owned by a business promoting a product has a certain set of goals and needs that have to be tempered with the community’s desire. On some points they have to be inflexible to meet their business goals or the community’s standards. For instance one will never change the MOUL forum to allow adult content. One has to understand the needs of the forum owner and the community.

Cyan gets to set their rules and decide when a person is banned from the forum. I doubt any single moderator gets to do more than recommend a ban.

by selectively driving off certain less desirable characters … I think this suggests that forum members or moderators do something to someone to make them leave. I understand that driving off people can be done and there are people that attempt it. But, that is not the goal of civil discourse. In a well run forum people are banned for repeated offenses just as we lock up criminals for their socially unacceptable behavior. This is not a ‘do-it-to-them’ thing but a ‘they-brought-it-on-their-self’ situation.

In general society does not condone vigilante behavior. We devise what we consider a just system and use it. We require facts and do what we can to insure decisions are made based on facts rather than emotions, bias, prejudice, misunderstandings, lies and/or agendas. We generally do not like dictators and Star Chambers.

Oh, and there are some people around who are smart enough to keep their mouth shut, because they know it will accomplish nothing. But for some reason everyone seems bent on putting them in those tiny little boxes as well.

There are several ways one could take this considering the preceding posts.

That people believe their comments could not accomplish anything, I think, suggests the general level of discourse is lacking much. Also since a charge of passive aggressive behavior was brought up and silence is often a means of exercising such behavior keeping one’s mouth shut might not be a matter of wisdom.

Considering the several posts about painting with a broad brush to label everyone and then seeing the action repeated again, suggests several of us may be slow learners.

[The stranger]

Okay, I get it. Some of you take things to literally, and you are disturbed that I used the word "hate" to show a strong dislike. So I deleted it. The point still stays, BTW.

[J'Kla]

With reference to earlier posts regarding sycophants and cynics.

With all the forums I have felt the need to participate in I have found the ones moderated by cynics and pessimists strangely more tolerant of contrary views than those where moderation was run by sycophant moderators.

I get the feeling the sycophantic viewpoint cannot tolerate any view that fails to conform where a cynic accepts that there's always going to be some grovelling toady around having a sad day. The cynic may lock a thread but the sycophant appears to want to expunge the world of all nonconformity.

There is a lot to be tolerant of in this world and the one thing I hate (and the word stands) is intolerance. We live in a world of diversity GoW appears to thrive in this diverse world long may it do so. (I hope I am not becoming sycophantic about GoW)