New Forum Code of Conduct

[johnty5]

This is incorrect analogy. Because behavior like this was already a punishable offence, even before new rules.

Stuff like that may have been notionally punishable, but it was rarely actually punished - which is why instances of abuse/snark/trolling/disruption have increased to the point where it's ubiquitous around here.

As the moderators have said in the thread, this is more about a change in enforcement of the rules than a huge change to the rules.

 

[Madzai]

Stuff like that may have been notionally punishable, but it was rarely actually punished

It totally was punishable. Previous "toxicity" rules do exactly that after you "overstep the boundary a little" a bit too often. The major flaw was you never knew you overstepping before it was too late. This is exactly why some may think rules weren't effective - they see some people act up and not being punished or even warned by moderators (and then those people just disappear). And other people though it was "not fair", as they were hit out of seemingly nowhere, as they didn't receive any prior warning about their behavior. And, in my personal opinion, this system had an issue of being used to punish for things that are totally a different offence than "toxicity".

which is why instances of abuse/snark/trolling/disruption have increased to the point where it's ubiquitous around here.

But should a single instance of any of those be punished heavily and instantly, especially if a lot of it is very subjective?

As the moderators have said in the thread, this is more about a change in enforcement of the rules than a huge change to the rules.

As I read them, they basically allow to punish anyone heavily after a minor misstep. I fully agree that people are much more rowdy this days, and that started even before COVID. If you going to squish anyone for a snark remark, soon there would be no one to discuss with. Much better solution, would be to make dedicated threads specifically to talk or leave feedback to Developers with heavy moderation, IMO.

 

[Tyon]

I'm not quite sure, why Reddit is mentioned. I like forums, specifically because they allow deeper and more leveled discussion than Reddit or Discord. I'm overall quite upset that forums everywhere are on decline. But with those new rules, there will be much less discussion, IMO. And discussion is that forums are for, no?

I mentioned Reddit because the use of strikes was unknown to me before I visited reddit.
Same with non-expiring strikes and a general "ban first, ask later" policy throughout the entire site.
I mean there's a reason everyone and their mom has a double account on reddit, not only for the NSFW stuff.

I've been on Forums for... almost 20 years.
The mods will laugh when he looks at my former infraction list but I've actually been in staff positions on big Forums back in the day.
And the idea of rehabilitation was omnipresent except for the hard cases.

So this idea of "three strikes and you are gone" is quite strange to me.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

With such complex rules, you never know when your way of expressing your opinion is no longer considered acceptable.

they're really not complex. be nice. that's it.

 

[johnty5]

It totally was punishable. Previous "toxicity" rules do exactly that after you "overstep the boundary a little" a bit too often. The major flaw was you never knew you overstepping before it was too late. This is exactly why some may think rules weren't effective - they see some people act up and not being punished or even warned by moderators (and then those people just disappear). And other people though it was "not fair", as they were hit out of seemingly nowhere, as they didn't receive any prior warning about their behavior. And, in my personal opinion, this system had an issue of being used to punish for things that are totally a different offence than "toxicity".

That's certainly not what I've seen. I've seen people post literally nothing but snark, disruption and other rubbish day in, day out, and never get a warnining, let alone be "disappeared".

But should a single instance of any of those be punished heavily and instantly, especially if a lot of it is very subjective? As I read them, they basically allow to punish anyone heavily after a minor misstep.

The post talks about minor infractions and major infraction and three strikes. It certainly doesn't look like people are going to be punished "heavily and instantly" for minor things. Looks to me like people will get a number of chances in most cases - allowing them to reflect on their behaviour and change it.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

i think it's fair enough that infractions have an expiry date. everyone has off days.

what about 6 months for a minor and 12 months for a major?

never get a warnining

well, you don't know that.

 

[johnty5]

well, you don't know that.

Fair enough.

 

[Madzai]

That's certainly not what I've seen. I've seen people post literally nothing but snark, disruption and other rubbish day in, day out, and never get a warnining, let alone be "disappeared".

I also saw people flamming and trolling the others who were trying to provide constructive criticism, derailing threads and making Moderators close them for "going off-topic", not punished for a long time. So maybe it's all about opinions and perspective? And now you'll be dealt with based on those personal opinions and perspective.

The post talks about minor infractions and major infraction and three strikes. It certainly doesn't look like people are going to be punished "heavily and instantly" for minor things. Looks to me like people will get a number of chances in most cases - allowing them to reflect on their behaviour and change it.

3 Strikes system you can never remove doesn't see that fair. And to reflect on something, you need to know that the thing you did was wrong. With such vague rules it's kind of hard. "Be nice" is so subjective, most people will never admit that they aren't nice enough. Not to mention cultural difference. I prefer being honest (honest, not rude!) than being nice for the sake of it.

 

[BrokenSky]

they're really not complex. be nice. that's it.

There are users on this forum who are often blunt to the point of rudeness and as a result have many posts which I would have a hard time describing as 'nice'.
The idea of actually banning someone like that just because of how they talk seems pretty alarming.

I feel like in general the onus is on the reader not to take offense as much as it is on the writer not to offer it.

 

[Choorus]

Based on the HOI4 forum specific rules, I think this may actually be related to German law, rather than a judgement about the various merits (or lack thereof) of specific ideologies? (I may be mistaken though - I'm just making an inference).

There are quite a few countries where communist symbols are treated exactly the same as Nazi ones, e.g. Ukraine and Indonesia.

 

[johnty5]

I also saw people flamming and trolling the others who were trying to provide constructive criticism, derailing threads and making Moderators close them for "going off-topic", not punished for a long time.

Well hopefully those people who flame and troll and derail constructive threads will now be banned, so we can have more constructive threads. I’m all for that.

So maybe it's all about opinions and perspective? And now you'll be dealt with based on those personal opinions and perspective.

I’m not sure what you mean by this. What makes you think these rules are more subjective/opinion based than the old rules?

3 Strikes system you can never remove doesn't see that fair. And to reflect on something, you need to know that the thing you did was wrong. With such vague rules it's kind of hard.

Well presumably people who get infractions will be told what they’ve done.

"Be nice" is so subjective, most people will never admit that they aren't nice enough. Not to mention cultural difference. I prefer being honest (honest, not rude!) than being nice for the sake of it.

“Be nice” isn’t one of the rules.

I don’t think there’s a trade off between honesty and civility. I do, however, think that people who can’t act civilly often claim they’re just “being honest” as an excuse/rationalisation for their childish behaviour.

Just like everyone who gets punished always claims they were punished “just for criticising the game”.

 

[BrotherJonathan]

I'm of two minds on these changes. On one hand, I definitely realize that their is a potential danger of legitimate, constructive criticism being taken down as a result of these new rules. On the other hand, I completely agree that bad behavior on here has become a serious problem, and that new rules and stricter enforcement are needed.

Here I mostly hang out in the HOI forums. While there are definite issues with the game and, legitimate points of debate in terms of content and development decisions, a good chunk of the feedback on these issues has started to cross the line from "constructive criticism" to "constant whining". I remember one particularly extreme case where someone made multiple posts threatening to have the devs arrested for fraud (somehow?) over the naval production bug.

Then again, one could argue that some of this behavior is the result of players feeling that their wishes and concerns are being ignored by the devs, and that does have some validity to it.

However, I do still feel that there is starting to be an issue of a toxic minority of self-proclaimed "hardcore" players who think that they know better about everything and that everyone should defer to them just because of account age or post count. I've seen other forums go down the drain because of people like this basically taking over and harassing everyone else away, and I don't want that to happen here.

 

[Madzai]

I’m not sure what you mean by this. What makes you think these rules are more subjective/opinion based than the old rules?

More things to get punished for. And a lot of those things are really vague and based on opinion. Also the penalty is harsher in a way.

Well presumably people who get infractions will be told what they’ve done.

Yes. I get one infraction for a vague rule based on specific Moderator opinion. Stopped doing that specific thing that is interoperated by Moderator in a specific way. In another subforum another Moderator judged based on his different opinion that a broke another vague rule. Now i'm one strike away from permaban.

I don’t think there’s a trade off between honesty and civility. I do, however, think that people who can’t act civilly often claim they’re just “being honest” as an excuse/rationalisation for their childish behaviour.

Just like everyone who gets punished always claims they were punished “just for criticising the game”.

This is absolutely true. But outside very obvious cases of intentional malice, i thinks going a bit overboard while stating a honest opinion shouldn't be punished that heavy. Because, let's be honest, a lot of things happen with PDX lately justify harsh criticism. Blaming unrelated people or people who can do nothing to change the thing that happens is the worst, but a lot of harsh criticism is deserved.

While there are definite issues with the game and, legitimate points of debate in terms of content and development decisions, a good chunk of the feedback on these issues has started to cross the line from "constructive criticism" to "constant whining".

If the issue isn't fixed for a long time without any explanation why, ofc. people will just start spamming about it. It one really want to communicate with playerbase, things like "why this isn't fixed" should be explained. If Developers want to talk only about things that can\will do it's absolutely their right. Trying to harass them for it should be punished. But people being discontent about things like this isn't going anywhere. And writing it off as "bad behavior" is dishonest.

I remember one particularly extreme case where someone made multiple posts threatening to have the devs arrested for fraud (somehow?) over the naval production bug.

This is not whining. This is someone being... Well, it's breaking the rules to tell my opinion on it.

Then again, one could argue that some of this behavior is the result of players feeling that their wishes and concerns are being ignored by the devs, and that does have some validity to it.

This is the core issue. I saw multiply times certain topics and gameplay mechanics being "quarantined" in a single thread. And not fixed in upcoming patches or even years after. How one expect people to "behave" if certain valid topic are ignored? You can't deal with those issues? Then communicate with your playerbase about it. You're not allowed to? Well, how that's a playerbase problem?

 

[HFY]

1 - What's meant by "Do not name and shame"? Is that just another way to say "no doxxing" or is it something else?


2 - I'm mostly active in the Stellaris forum, which is a game that includes a few minor references to Earth's history but mostly takes place in the future. However, the game makes use of many governments and civics and game events which are allusions to Earth's history. With that in mind, these two rules seem like they might get the Stellaris forum in disproportionate and inappropriate trouble:

• Real-world religion when not in the context of the game
• Real-world Politics or events when not present in the game

When discussing game concepts like a Succession Crisis or Indentured Servitude or Forced Labor -- or proposing a new game mechanic based on something else from Earth's history -- can we bring up historical examples to support our arguments about those sci-fil game concepts?


3 - Is there a list of profanity? A few words seem very obvious but there's a big grey area beyond that core.

Doesn't have to be hosted here if you don't want those words to appear on the site at all (though I suspect all of them do already exist on the site).

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

So this new PDX CoC is Real, and not an April Fool's joke?

 

[Pellaken]

how does one go about checking their current standing under the new rules

 

[prismaticmarcus]

how does one go about checking their current standing under the new rules

there's an email address in the rules

 

[karasis65]

To me this rules are ''Do not dare to talk if you are not going to praise us even when quality of our work do not match with what we promised''

 

[Jernau_]

It totally was punishable. Previous "toxicity" rules do exactly that after you "overstep the boundary a little" a bit too often. The major flaw was you never knew you overstepping before it was too late.

The idea that rude people dont understand that they are rude is something I find hard to believe. Maybe the aggressive tone of most gaming forums make people pretend that this is a normal way to interact with people, but most know they would never act like that if they were talking face to face. If they seriously dont know when they are rude society has a bigger issue with how we raise our kids.

 

[johnty5]

To me this rules are ''Do not dare to talk if you are not going to praise us even when quality of our work do not match with what we promised''

Which specific part of the rules give you that impression?

I’m seeing a lot of fairly reasonable stuff - don’t be racist, don’t spam, don’t attack the devs etc.