Suggestion to "reduce" the amount of moderation for the forums

[Sectus]

Okay, I'll be blunt, I'm not completely happy how this forum is moderated. I see threads be closed for some rather obscure reasons and too many posts being edited for trivial matters. And when contacting moderators for an explaination, they say they're too busy moderating to properly handle each situation with as much thought as necessary.

Well... just don't do as much moderating then!

Okay, so one thread has a similar subject as one which was created 1 year ago. Give it a break, let it live.

Okay, a few people go a bit offtopic for a posts, it's not really necessary to make sure EVERY post is ontopic and delete all those which aren't.

So a thread has a long discussion with an identical subject to an old thread which no one posts in. It's not really necessary merge those two threads. The older thread is dead for a reason and it just creates confusion having multiple threads be merged into one.

So, someone links to another "rivaling" GW site's interesting thread/article. It's not gonna ruin your site. Links to all other GW sites are available on the official GW site anyway... so it's not exactly a secret there's other GW sites out there. And as well, you might find there will be less hostile competition and more willingness for others GW sites to be nice and link back to you if you stop looking at other sites as rivals. I promise, other GW sites won't bite, and it'll reduce the amount of moderation necessary.

As the first test for lighter moderation, I have one challenge... don't delete this thread.

[Lady Rhonwyn]

So, someone links to another "rivaling" GW site's interesting thread/article. It's not gonna ruin your site. Links to all other GW sites are available on the official GW site anyway... so it's not exactly a secret there's other GW sites out there. And as well, you might find there will be less hostile competition and more willingness for others GW sites to be nice and link back to you if you stop looking at other sites as rivals. I promise, other GW sites won't bite, and it'll reduce the amount of moderation necessary.

There is another reason for this one (beside the one that's in the rules)

GWOnline is an elite fansite, and to keep that status, they need to follow some rules. One of those is that it's not allowed to link to sites that sell in-game items or money.

To disallow and remove links or promotion of adult (pornographic) sites, sites that provide or support software hacking or piracy, sites that support, advertise or offer in-game items for real currency, and sites that encourage game cheating

So, what if you link to a site that has those links on it?

You can link to other sites, but you always have to ask permission for it, so a mod can check it out.

I agree with you with the thread merging, especially if the first thread is ages old...

[eowen]

I don't find there to be too much moderation really. My posts sometimes get edited for flaming, but its probably better that way, even if at the time I think "ah wtf". There are so many posts here it needs strict discipline. Also remember some people are very young here (saw one the other day said he was 13), so some links may be inapropriate for them.

As for links to competitors, you must remember gwonline was not made by, and is not owned by, Guildwars fans.
It is owned by Younger, Paul. (you can check on whois). He owns several gaming sites. I dunno if he does other things as well, but gwonline is a buisness. Its how he earns his money. (And judging by where he lives, looks like he isnt too badly off :p)


I really don't mind him becoming rich from his gaming sites, I would much rather my money went to him than to some shareholder in Lockeed Martin or something.

[Cérilia]

Okay, I'll be blunt, I'm not completely happy how this forum is moderated. I see threads be closed for some rather obscure reasons and too many posts being edited for trivial matters. And when contacting moderators for an explaination, they say they're too busy moderating to properly handle each situation with as much thought as necessary.

Well... just don't do as much moderating then!

Thanks for the advice... The thing is that we have people who complained (through PMs as should be done! ) that we are too lenient. That we let people repeat over and over again the same arguments on the same topics. That we let some threads go off topic. In short they complain because there is not enough moderating.
And we also receive complaints because we merge/close threads, because we don't let threads go off topic, because we are allegedly owned by Anet and so on.

Who to trust?

Our answer: us.
We are doing what we think is proper. We try to keep things nice, logical and in accordance with the rules the admins decided.

So, someone links to another "rivaling" GW site's interesting thread/article. It's not gonna ruin your site. Links to all other GW sites are available on the official GW site anyway... so it's not exactly a secret there's other GW sites out there. And as well, you might find there will be less hostile competition and more willingness for others GW sites to be nice and link back to you if you stop looking at other sites as rivals. I promise, other GW sites won't bite, and it'll reduce the amount of moderation necessary.

The linking to oher GW sites rule was decided by the admins and we (moderators) are here to enforce this rule. If you have a problem with it, I encourage you to talk to an admin.

As the first test for lighter moderation, I have one challenge... don't delete this thread.

Thanks for the lose/lose situation. Either we delete it and we are censors or we let it and undermine our own work. Yes thanks a lot.

[Serendipity]

I am glad of the level of moderation here.

This site has a lots of traffic and without "reckless moderation", it would be a real mess.

[Erasculio]

This is something extremely subjective. I would love the moderation here to be extremely harsher, but I don't even bother to complain because I have seen how the moderators here do their jobs a lot better than I would, if I had been in their place. Deep down, I think that's what the choice of a moderator boils down too: someone who knows how to keep the balance between being too lenient and being too harsh.

As the first test for lighter moderation, I have one challenge... don't delete this thread.

I also don't see the point in challenging the moderation.

Erasculio

[Aiiane]

I, personally, cannot recall of a time where, upon being PM'd by someone in regards to a moderation action I took with a request for an explanation, have not gone to great length to provide such an explanation.

Feel free to PM me in regards to any thread I close, or post I delete; I'm certainly not going to promise to reverse it, but at the very least I am perfectly willing to elaborate on the specifics for why such an action was taken.

At the same time, please don't waste my time asking me for explanations of obvious moderation actions - if I close a thread with 2 other identical ones on the front page of the forum, I really shouldn't have to tell you why.

In addition, if you send me a PM where there's nothing really to answer, along the lines of "You're stupid for closing this", I may not reply, given that there's no reason for me to. If I feel like it, I may explain why I believe it wasn't "stupid to close it", but at the same time if you don't show a willingness to converse, neither will I.

[Sectus]

Thanks for the advice... The thing is that we have people who complained (through PMs as should be done! ) that we are too lenient. That we let people repeat over and over again the same arguments on the same topics. That we let some threads go off topic. In short they complain because there is not enough moderating.
And we also receive complaints because we merge/close threads, because we don't let threads go off topic, because we are allegedly owned by Anet and so on.

Who to trust?

I'm sorry, I just find this extremely hard to believe. Are you sure you get an equal amount of complaints about you guys moderating too little? I've talked to a few people ingame who also browse gwonline forums and they agreed with me that the rules are enforced in a much too strict way. I've never heard anyone say there's too little moderation.

Thanks for the lose/lose situation. Either we delete it and we are censors or we let it and undermine our own work. Yes thanks a lot.

I'd only see it as "lose" if you actually deleted the thread. I'm sorry you think my thread would undermine your work just because I criticize some of the moderation which is done.

So, what if you link to a site that has those links on it?

You can link to other sites, but you always have to ask permission for it, so a mod can check it out.

I agree with you with the thread merging, especially if the first thread is ages old...

I think sites with that kind of content is extremely rare. And all sites listed on the official GW site is certain to not have that content anyway. So there would be no worry linking to other popular GW sites.

I'm rather disappointed to hear that the owner of the site is the one refusing this site to link to any other "rivaling" site. Is he an active member of the team? Or an admin on the forums?

I, personally, cannot recall of a time where, upon being PM'd by someone in regards to a moderation action I took with a request for an explanation, have not gone to great length to provide such an explanation.

Feel free to PM me in regards to any thread I close, or post I delete; I'm certainly not going to promise to reverse it, but at the very least I am perfectly willing to elaborate on the specifics for why such an action was taken.

At the same time, please don't waste my time asking me for explanations of obvious moderation actions - if I close a thread with 2 other identical ones on the front page of the forum, I really shouldn't have to tell you why.

In addition, if you send me a PM where there's nothing really to answer, along the lines of "You're stupid for closing this", I may not reply, given that there's no reason for me to. If I feel like it, I may explain why I believe it wasn't "stupid to close it", but at the same time if you don't show a willingness to converse, neither will I.

Well, I've had no experience with you personally. The times I've had to contact mods for explanations other mods has been involved. The first time it was regarding a thread which had a remotely similar topic as one which was a half year old. For that reason a mod decided to close my thread. I tried to pm him regarding the close so I could tell him the thread was different from the old thread in a substantial way, and that the old thread he linked would never get any new posts. I got ignored.

The other time was when a thread of mine got deleted without me getting any form of explanation. I had to persist asking a mod to get any clue why my thread got deleted.

I won't call names here, but these kinds of experiences just makes me feel less willing to post more on this forum because I got the constant bad feeling some mod may feel I've done a minor mistake, and then go off on a close/delete/ban spree.

[Erasculio]

I'm sorry, I just find this extremely hard to believe. Are you sure you get an equal amount of complaints about you guys moderating too little? I've talked to a few people ingame who also browse gwonline forums and they agreed with me that the rules are enforced in a much too strict way. I've never heard anyone say there's too little moderation.

It's not a democracy. The Moderators don't have to do what most people want, they have to do what is better for the Forum (and that "better" is defined first by those who own this forum, second by those who work on said moderation - when we come here we agree to follow such directives, not to have our own desires turned into the rules of this place).

Besides...So far, this topic goes against your "evidence". We don't have most people here complaining about the moderation, quite the opposite so far. Where are the "few people ingame" you talked to? Do these people make a significant sample of the population of the forum? Aren't they biased just because they agree with you? Aren't you biased when reporting their opinions because you want to reinforce your point? The arguments of "I'm right because people agree with me" doesn't really work out of a controlled environment.

Erasculio

[intent]

I am very happy with the amount of moderation in this forum. There isn't a lot of flaming yes it happens from time to time bit it usually put to a halt fast. A lot of other forums that I have been a member of were on the other side of the scale with not enough moderation and honestly I would rather have too much then too little.

Think about how much of a pain it would be to find information if the Mods didn't keep the forum running as well as they do....examples...spam everywhere (because yes forums are a key target for spam) flames on every subject and then some...no one using the search option and 10 threads on one page about the same subject. and much more...

I visit this forum for the exact purpose that the forums are kept neat and friendly.

As for linking to other sites...my opinion is a forum is sort of like a department store would you stand in the middle of a retail store yelling at the top of your lungs to shop at its competitor? I am sure if you did there would be a member of management there very fast asking you to behave properly. By posting links to other competitive sites it would be doing basically the same thing.


The bottom line is Administrators pay for the bandwidth and storage space plus put in the time of building a wonderful place for the Guild Wars Community to come for information and to chat with people from GW with the same interests. So instead of criticizing the Admin and Mods I think we should be thanking them.