[Discussion] G&C Cleanup Policies

[Lagmonster]

In an effort to improve moderation, I would like to solicit opinions on where the line ought to be drawn in G&C in terms of content. There will not necessarily be a vote; I'm looking to solicit opinions from Senate and staff alike which will then be discussed among the administration.


The issues in question are:

1) Threads where people try to organize gaming night sessions. These seem to be better suited to e-mail, but here I'm actually already going ahead and creating a single sticky where people can post requests for gaming sessions as they come and go. Is there any justification for people to continue to make individual gaming night planning/solicitation threads?

2) "Should I get this game" opinion solicitation threads. I'm inclined to separate out comments which provide no reasoning or criticism ("It rocks! / It sucks!" chatter). I realize that such threads are open invitations to subjectivity, but I would like to start expecting people to explain themselves rather than one-lining their opinion or head-nodding. Is this a poor idea?

3) "X Sucks!" technology/game rants. I intend on judging sharply between criticism and rants; the former is productive. The latter, to me, is just whining. Would it be unfair of me to penalize posters who chant about how bad something sucks without saying anything of value?

[Edi]

1) Using a sticky thread might clean that up some. Problem is, there are already a number of sticky threads in G&C, so clutter is a consideration. The Xbox and Wii tag code threads could be merged, though.


2) Not a bad idea at all. A lot of G&C content is basically worthless one-liner spam, which is why reading through those threads is nothing more than checking the OP and then an exercise in scrolling until you see the avatar or sig of someone whose posts you know are worth reading. A raised standard of discussion can only be beneficial. Flushing the spam gets a thumbs up from me.

3) I can see no possible downside in oppressing hurf-hurf rant content there. As you said, thoughtful criticism is good, explaining the why of things is good, but we have Venting threads in the HoS for ranting.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

All of this looks fine to me. I barely go into G&C, but when I do, I've noticed that I have to do a lot of scrolling and mental filtering before I see posts that were worth the electrons used in conveying them (and this is likely much of the reason why I don't go into G&C, because the discussion there is only a little above the level of "typical gamer forum.")

[Lagmonster]

All of this looks fine to me. I barely go into G&C, but when I do, I've noticed that I have to do a lot of scrolling and mental filtering before I see posts that were worth the electrons used in conveying them (and this is likely much of the reason why I don't go into G&C, because the discussion there is only a little above the level of "typical gamer forum.")

I aim to fix that. If you or anyone else can add to this, please do. I welcome any reasonable suggestions.

[The Yosemite Bear]

well I'm not against some purging of game help topics. some of my requests for information about EVE and other games have been booted to testing in the past. of course a reminder that speaking in game slang is confusing to non-players.

[Sea Skimmer]

Games are a highly opinionated subject and attempting to ‘cleanup’ discussion on this manner is just a dumb objective likely to lead down a road of biased oppression. I don’t see anything wrong with the way the forum is going now.

[AdmiralKanos]

I'm OK with the subjective discussion on what is clearly a subjective subject, like game likes and dislikes. However, comments like "LOL fatty nerdrage" are really useless.

[Lagmonster]

I received the following opinion via PM; reproduced below.

1) Threads where people try to organize gaming night sessions. These seem to be better suited to e-mail, but here I'm actually already going ahead and creating a single sticky where people can post requests for gaming sessions as they come and go. Is there any justification for people to continue to make individual gaming night planning/solicitation threads?

I think there is a good reason for it. I suppose you could consider it sort of like the various times people set up face-to-face meets through OT. Whereas while those tend to be a bit in the future, as opposed to, "Hey I'm starting a game tonight" (and thus tend to warrant their own thread I think; or so it's been in the past). Whereas the more transitory and immediate nature of such sessions would be better suited to a sticky, I'd think.

I mean, I think they're at least a little in advance (even if that advance is only a couple hours or so) and it's not like we all have each others e-mails. Plus, as with the OT style meets, they could be looking for anyone (rather than just a certain group) from SDN to join in; since some board-wide mass e-mail isn't really an option, what else is there but a post?

[Stark]

With regard to 'opinion' threads, anything that reduces the 'it rocks/it sucks' traffic is a great idea. These threads tend to go off topic sometimes, turning into a discussion of xyz game feature or abc developer or other related issue. Is this discouraged and will it be split?

[Mr Bean]

With regard to 'opinion' threads, anything that reduces the 'it rocks/it sucks' traffic is a great idea. These threads tend to go off topic sometimes, turning into a discussion of xyz game feature or abc developer or other related issue. Is this discouraged and will it be split?

Off topic is off topic and can be split as needed. The question is the it rocks/it sucks. Is it spam or discussion?


For example lets take two posts from one from the Farcry thread, one from ODST

Lets call post A good from the Farcry

People missing the point of the game aside, I think the pacing is what hurts the game. Now that I'm back in the headspace for the game, it's really not very frustrating at all. The problem is that at the start people think it's a 'normal shooter' (which it isn't) and you have shit guns. If you do the first 4ish convoys straight away and buy decent guns, the game is less frustrating. Once the player actually changes his playstyle (impossible for many) to the rhythm of the game - bouncing between savepoints, replenishing, planning movement to avoid hotspots, etc - it's actually quite easy.

In comparison to 4 hours for 3 missions at the start of the game, the last 3 missions took me much less than two hours, and only had a single 'oh dear 3 spawncars and a guard post attacked me from all directions'. I also did half a dozen cell towers in this time. I think the game was really hurt by not being more forward with the required approach to take - I mean shit, people are talking like they DRIVE ON ROADS! The roads are full of psychos who want to kill you! Why would anyone use roads more than absolutely necessary?

Because most players just apply their existing skills, and when they don't work get angry and quit. I actually find the game extremely pleasant now that I've changed the way I play the game.

And Post B is spam from the ODST thread(Which was not that great of a thread to begin with)
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 4#p3165964

With bunnyhopping.

[Stark]

I see your point. If the emphasis is on discussion rather than 'stating the obvious', most of the short posts in the ODST thread could easily be replaced with less lazy complete thoughts such as seen in the FC2 thread. For example, Zod could have put some substance into the Firefight/Horde comparison and I should have described twitch gameplay features and their impact. These standards seem like a positive thing to me.