Development Cycle Archive
Thread: Community Relations Follow-up
Novock wrote:
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
Novock wrote:
I ceratinly understand a desire to keep things in line but i inherently see a problem with this to which you didn't address and would hope that you would. In the past i have had some negative feedback posts deleted. They contained no offense language name calling or Nazi comparisons. they were simply a critique of what I believed was wrong and need to be fixed. They were then deleted by a moderator. The problem is I recieved no message as to why they were deleted.It seems if you are going to have a policy of deleting posts you deem "flaming" as opposed to "constructive criticism" you are implementing a very subjective policy. What maybe be consisder constructive-criticism to one Mod maybe going to far to another one. Anywho thats the nature of the beast, my problem is when we get a post deleted we recieve no notice of why the post was deleted. If you are going to delet a post I believe you should tell us why and not just say it was inviolation but say exactly what in teh post was in violation. i believe that to be only fair otherwise how do we know in such a subjective policy that we are not simply being silenced for bringin up something SOE doesn't want brought up. I had a post deleted why, all it contained was quotes from TH's posts LOL
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
Stricter moderation
Yes, this is a good thing. One of the biggest problems we face as community representatives is sifting through flames in order to find the useful posts. We are going to be more diligent with our moderation. That doesn’t mean you can’t post constructive criticism, but calling us Nazis, writing rants, and posting off-topic in an attempt to derail threads where we ask for specific information doesn’t help us or help you. In truth, we aren’t changing our board posting guidelines at this time (if we do change anything we’d let you know) we are simply going to start enforcing them a little more diligently.
Another change to moderation is we are going to be tying board accounts directly to in-game accounts. What I mean by this is infractions for board conduct can become a mark on your account. To be clear, NOBODY is going to get a mark just for writing criticisms or posting negative feedback. These marks will act just like an in-game infraction and will be used to determine if an account needs further discipline or not. Understand that we are not out to “get” anyone. We aren’t going to mark someone’s account just because they post a topic to the wrong board once or anything like that. But in order for moderation to really have an impact it must have teeth.
Note that the Community Relations team and board moderators will NOT be making decisions on whether an account is actually banned. That will be left up to the same people who have always made decisions on player discipline in order to ensure that we are consistent. Our primary job will remain to communicate with you and take your concerns to the Development Team. We WANT your constructive feedback, positive or negative, and we want to make these boards the best tool possible for you to give us that feedback.
An official announcement will be posted to the site in the very near future once this policy goes into effect. I expect this will cause some people to bristle, but I can promise you it will make the boards a better place to visit and post ideas, criticisms, and feedback for those who are genuinely interested in affecting positive change for SWG.
Keep in mind that we aren't going to mark someone's account every time we have to delete a post. Marking accounts is mostly reserved for really offensive stuff or continual poor behavior. So if someone posted off-topic in a post asking for specific feedback, we might delete the post and leave it at that. If that same person did it over and over again and was repeatedly temp-banned for doing it and just kept doing it, eventually that would lead to a mark.
OK I understand that much but my comments were directed towards giving us some notification of how or why we violated a policy rather than deleting and having no comment why the post was deleted. Will this still be the policy on boards, some Mod finds it violates the rules and deletes but will not tell us why it was deleted we just have to guess? Again this means a Mod can delete any post he/she feels like deleting and since there is no mechanism for challenge or even for knowing who deleted or why the post was deleted there is nothing we can do about it. It sounds to me, especially since you dodge my first comments, that what you are saying is that if we are unhappy with something being done or not have been done and voice those feelings those posts will simply be deleted more often and more frequent than in the past. My guess is that with recent gaming magazines pointing at the comments on the forums as proof of problems in SWG SOE is now actively campaigning to eliminate them and hide the true feelings of many of its customers.
I hope that SOE would address the concerns of its customers rather than simply delete posts and pretend like they don't exist. Anywho i guess that probably qualifies as a "flame" or a "rant" so imagine it will be deleted, by like so many flames and rants they don't start that way they end that way when you have been dodged. Would have been nice though if you answered my original concern. Will you notify why a post was deleted or will you continue on a policy of ... we'll delete what we want and don't have to give a reason?
Currently we do not send notifications. However, that is a good point and we will discuss it.
Leana_Txorana wrote:
if you are going to have a policy of deleting posts you deem "flaming" as opposed to "constructive criticism" you are implementing a very subjective policy.
============================================
It is not only and in most cases rarely the original poster that gets a thread deleted. It is very likely a general direction by many replies or even a couple of truely horrible posts. The moderator has been very upfront, if you get a post deleted, PM them for an explainatin.
That's true. Moderation by its very nature is subjective. Once you get past the obvious stuff like foul language, racial slurs, etc. the rest falls to the judgement of the moderators to decide if a post breaks our ToS. One thing to keep in mind is that TH does read through the removed posts (they go to a board that we can read) and I am going to start looking at them as well. While moderation is subjective there are ways we can create a good level of consistency.
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
It's funny, because I thought about creating two separate posts and splitting that out. But, I decided to keep it all in one thread because it is so tightly connected to many of the other initiatives. Stricter moderation will make the boards a better place to visit and interact. It's not about bashing players at all. Fact is, the vast majority of players will never get a mark on their account for message board conduct. But it only takes a tiny minority of problem posters to ruin a thread or make it more difficult for us to find useful information.
In my original introduction post, I promised players an update about the upcoming community relations initiatives. To leave a new moderation policy (a critical component of expanding and improving communication) out of that follow-up would have broken that promise. I fully expected some players to bristle at the new policy and I am here to explain it. So sure I could have just posted about the stuff that I knew wouldn't cause any controversy and then hide the controversial stuff, but I prefer being upfront and puttng out the entire plan.Again, to do anything less would be doing you a disservice.
As far as the message boards go, as I said in my original post this is not a closed issue. In fact as I was typing this, Thunderheart came into my office and we discussed it a bit. We agree there are holes in the message board set up but we also feel that a General Discussions forum is not the solution to filling those holes at this time.
I'm not sure I see the humor at present. But I appreciate that someone's considering the inadequate nature of the forums as a feedback mechanism. I also can't help but recall that burrying the general forums into the profession's core system category was a purposeful act and not a simple oversight.
Thank you though for considering the gap in the structure.
Leana_Txorana wrote:
if players have issues with the game,the bottom line is that if its not a specific issue to a Profession (Forum), there's no appropriate place to post about it, and that's a fact..."Game Economy & Balance,""Game Interface," and "Game Performance,"
===================================================
Hmmmm... every hear about the Core Systems board. If fact all of these fit quite will in this forum
The one great idea I saw was move the Core Systems out of professions. Many people (see above) dont seem to know about it so they post in the first forum they see. Move Core Systems to the main forum listing.
Covered this already a few times now... and I agree with your solution anyway, so nm
Message Edited by BleuDestiny on 01-11-2005 02:32 PM
BleuDestiny wrote:
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
It's funny, because I thought about creating two separate posts and splitting that out. But, I decided to keep it all in one thread because it is so tightly connected to many of the other initiatives. Stricter moderation will make the boards a better place to visit and interact. It's not about bashing players at all. Fact is, the vast majority of players will never get a mark on their account for message board conduct. But it only takes a tiny minority of problem posters to ruin a thread or make it more difficult for us to find useful information.
In my original introduction post, I promised players an update about the upcoming community relations initiatives. To leave a new moderation policy (a critical component of expanding and improving communication) out of that follow-up would have broken that promise. I fully expected some players to bristle at the new policy and I am here to explain it. So sure I could have just posted about the stuff that I knew wouldn't cause any controversy and then hide the controversial stuff, but I prefer being upfront and puttng out the entire plan.Again, to do anything less would be doing you a disservice.
As far as the message boards go, as I said in my original post this is not a closed issue. In fact as I was typing this, Thunderheart came into my office and we discussed it a bit. We agree there are holes in the message board set up but we also feel that a General Discussions forum is not the solution to filling those holes at this time.
I'm not sure I see the humor at present. But I appreciate that someone's considering the inadequate nature of the forums as a feedback mechanism. I also can't help but recall that burrying the general forums into the profession's core system category was a purposeful act and not a simple oversight.
Thank you though for considering the gap in the structure.
Unfortunately, putting the Core Systems forum in the main section of the boards would lead to the same problem as opening a General Discussion forum. At the same time, we certainly don't want to make it difficult for players to find where to post. I expect this will be a pretty big topic of discussion again at our Community Relations meeting.
Oh and just to be clear, funny as in "coincidence", not funny as in "ha ha". I tend to post with a fairly conversational voice.I'd hate to have to stop that because my choice of words gets used against me.
Message Edited by Calandryll_SOE on 01-11-2005 02:48 PM
Oh, trust me, I've been doing this long enough to know that!
TheRealTK421 wrote:
Man....you came to the wrong place.
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
Oh and just to be clear, funny as in "coincidence", no funny as in "ha ha". I tend to post with a fairly conversational voice.I'd hate to have to stop that because my choice of words gets used against me.
You'll want to start assuming your words will be used against you...probably safer that way.
Ask TH. I know whereof I speak.
/bow
Respectfully,
Message Edited by TheRealTK421 on 01-11-2005 02:43 PM
I just don't want to ever feel like I have to post like a robot.You got a problem with droids, buddy? Cause I'd hate to have to call in the 'Droid Mafia' to explain our...'restraining bolt' policy.
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
Oh, trust me, I've been doing this long enough to know that!robotdroid.
/bow
Respectfully,
Message Edited by TheRealTK421 on 01-11-2005 02:53 PM
I have submitted bugs (/bug in game) but never receive feedback. Is there any way to implement a system where we, players and customers, can rank certain bugs? For instance, I think fixing the broken mods in the game is more important than correct the -1 use DOT weapons. I know the ultimate decision is left to Product Management, but I don't think enough people are logging bug reports as to give leverage to certain, prominent, issues.
Great stuff, Jonathan. Not only are the specific actions you've described all very good ideas, but yourcommunication of them is extremely well done and augurs well for the future of SWG.
Naturally, I have some questions. 
A "Forum Issues" Board
The first one is easy: Will you also be adding aboard to discuss forum features? Now that most of the login issues have been addressed, I'd expect that most messageson aForum Issues boardwould be useful suggestions.
For example, although the recent change to forum rankings was discussed in a message, most forum users weren't aware of the discussion and didn't know where to look forthis messagewhen the rankingsystem changed. A Forum Issuesboard would have been the obvious place to go.
As another example,I've been asking for months now for improved and corrected Advanced Search features... but where is the appropriate place for me to do so? If I ask in the Technical Issues board, that messge is considered off-topic... but it's not an unreasonable request, since good search features will help to reduce people asking the same questions over and over again.
I recognize (and share) your concern that new forums shouldbe limited to minimize places where random flamage can occur... but honestly, you already have that problem, and will have it no matter what boards you create or maintain. The solution -- as you correctly observe -- is to consistently enforce the rules about being courteous and on-topic.
By providing an appropriate location for useful suggestions your customers are motivated to make, anew Forum Issues boardwould help toimprove our communication with you... and, as forum features are implemented, our communicationamong ourselves.
Bug Lists
With respect to particular items you mentioned, I am especially looking forward to the bug lists. As someone who got into project management a few years ago, I found that a public list of items being worked --including their severity and status -- was the single most effective action I could take to improve communication between my developers and our customers. So I applaud your decision to improve this; I think you'll find it helps all of us.
I do havea question regarding the specific implementation of this feature. Let me quote you:
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
Bugs
We’re currently planning on creating bug list posts along with information on the status of the bug. On a regular basis, we are going to compile “Top 3” bug lists for each profession and post these in a thread. This post would also include information about the bug’s status, such as whether it is assigned or not, an ETA for a fix (if there is one), if we can’t reproduce it and need more information, etc.
We’ll be working with our Correspondents, our Customer Support Representatives, and the posts from the Professions boards to create these lists. This bug list will not be a list of EVERY bug we are working on though.This bug list thread will also detail fixed bugs from the top 3 lists and general bugs sent in through other means so that you can see we aren’t just concentrating on the top 3 lists.
Will the Core Systems board be one of the boardsincluded in this list (since it'smaintained in this forum alongsidethe Professions boards)?
Encouraging Customer Ideas
I also have a question concerning ideas. Let me quote you again:
General Discussions or Idea Forums
...
Ideas forums are a little trickier. On the surface, these seem like a good idea. But in practice they are an invitation for a lot of hurt feelings. The fact is there is no way we could ever implement every idea posted on this board. In fact, we’d be lucky if even 1% of the ideas made it in the game. The reasons for this can be anything from the idea just wouldn’t work, doesn’t fit our current goals, is too complicated, etc. Most of the really useful feedback we get from you all is on designs that are in concept, in development, or even in testing. It is that feedback that has the best chance to catch our attention and affect change. So what usually happens with these forums is that while they may be read by developers, we rarely have the time to respond to them because we have to focus our efforts on the threads that have the most immediate impact.
I sense that you're treading carefully with these remarks. 
While I understand that this is your decision, I hope you'll remain open to reconsidering it. Bearing in mind that there's a customer perception issue to be navigated here, from the point of view of a developer I've found that it's useful to allow (and even encourage) anopenness to"crazy ideas." Of course you can't implement every idea; of course you'll spend time slogging through repetitive or even bad ideas; of courseyou can't even implement 1% of the good ideas... but is it really true that customers don't need to be encouraged to independently come up with ideas?
My experience has been that it's worthwading through a lot of bad ideas to encouragethat oneoutstandingly innovative idea thatmy teamwould never have imagined. It is absolutely in no way a criticism of the clever people working on SWG that they can't think of everything themselves -- it's just not possible for people close to a system to see all the opportunities for improving that system. So why limit the vastly larger number of your customers from proposing ideas beyondmere tweaks to the few concepts you can offer in the In Concept and In Development boards?
Furthermore, it's worth soothing the occasional ruffled feathers of those whose ideas aren't used or specifically encouraged to get the one really great idea. In fact, I've found that it's not even necessary to encourage each and every person who offers an idea -- just the occasional "well done" to someone who comes up with a novel idea and communicates it effectivelyis enough to encourage others to follow suit for weeks to come. Months of neglect, on the other hand, can only lead your most positive customers to conclude that you just don't care about constructive, positive engagement, and to leave the forum and possibly even the game. And that's a loss to the entire community.
But it doesn't have to be that way! The bottom line is that one "insanely great" idea can make a product so much better for all of its usersthat as a cost/benefit tradeoff, it's worth dealing with a lot of junk to get thatidea. Consequently, I respectfully disagree with the decision that an idea forum (whether a new forum by that name or the Core Systems forum) doesn't need to exist, and that those forum users who consistently offer constructive new ideas don't need to be actively encouraged. I think you're missing a valuable opportunity to improve SWG (and your bottom line) by not adopting a policy ofregularlyencouraging your forum users to "think outside the skillbox."
Analytical, "why-it-can't-work" thinkingcan definitely be useful... but so can constructive, "this-could-attract-more-users" thinking. In fact, it is constructive thinking that leads to theorder-of-magnitude improvements in products that in turnlead directly to increased revenues andindustry leadership. The companies that excel recognize this.
I hope you'll consider this suggestion in the constructive spirit in which it's offered.
Meanwhile, thanks again for taking this positive step toward improving community relations!
--Flatfingers
Let's just say they're sensitive to light, so we install them somewhere where it won't be an issue...
TheRealTK421 wrote:
You got a problem with droids, buddy? Cause I'd hate to have to call in the 'Droid Mafia' to explain our...'restraining bolt' policy.
Calandryll_SOE wrote:
Oh, trust me, I've been doing this long enough to know that!
/bow
Respectfully,
Calandryll, I am very encouraged by your post. It sounds as though you are listening to the users and responding. One of the user requests was for more information about your plans, and this message seems to be a good job of communicating those plans.
Patch 12 also seems to indicate some responsiveness. I can't believe as old an icon as the sliding bug is being fixed. I honestly think there may be changes afoot.
While I am in agreement with nearly everything you wrote, I have a couple of mild concerns:
Stricter moderation: While in the context of the current message board situation, I have to agree that this is essential, I do hope the pendulum doesn't swing too far the other way, and we lose the ability to freely express our ideas. A small amount of side conversation, particularly on relatively quiet boards, is a way to keep the posting population on friendly terms and keep some important threads in the forefront without actually bumping them. While no one really wants to read a "final rant before slamming the door" post, a goodbye post to forum-based friends letting them know that you will not be posting any more seems like a tribute to the forum friends more than an off-topic rant. I would, however,be happy to see threads more than six months old locked (but not deleted. Some contain very useful references.)
Idea forums: I think player ideas should be strongly encouraged. I understand that only a tiny fraction are workable in any way, but many times they contain important elements that point out problems in the game along with potential solutions. A central method of tracking these game-change ideas would be nice.
Polls: I agree that I DO NOT want the game design to be dictated the simple vote of the majority. We all have opinions. Some of us have rather strong opinions. Still, the game design is so complex that I don't think any of us can accurately predict all the potential consequences of our opinions. An example of this are cheat codes for home games. Nothing seems to kill the interest in the game as fast as the cheat codes, and yet while one is playing one feels that if only we could tweak one thing or another, the game would be more fun. I think polls are great. But I do not believe they should be in any way binding.
Dev tracker: I am sorry to see fewer shoulder-rubbing posts. Honestly, I wish the Dev Tracker weren't such an important tool for finding out game information. Better central communication may make this a non-issue. If we didn't have to resort to the Dev Tracker to learn what is coming, then the friendly posts wouldn't be a problem. In the meantime, several good alternatives have been suggested: subject line changes, Alt posting names, importance flags, etc. Please don't stop the friendly posts. But in deference to the people who depend heavily on the Dev Tracker, any of the options suggested would be fine with me.
One final suggestion is to encourage anyone who has direct contact with the customer base to play the game with the users. This would go a long way toward correcting irrelevant CSR responses, and it would help game designers make priority decisions.
Message Edited by skywalker007l on 01-11-2005 02:56 PM