Gaeliannas wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Hi All, we wanted to follow up on the post here and the general sentiment about asking/discussing PvP in chat during livestreams. We agree that noting terms like "PvP" and "Cyrodiil" should not be timed out when players ask or referenced the topic in our livestream chat. The moderation shown in the clip was a bit heavy-handed. We have talked about this internally, updated our moderation training, and made sure everyone is clear that conversations around core functions of our game, like PvP, should not be timed out or banned.
The bigger question was why did the moderators reacted so strongly to these terms only, was there a previous memo because of what happened with Rich Lambert's stream, where the PvP community was made fun of, and the backlash that followed? It seems strange to hold an entire internal discussion for not banning mentions of core terms of the game, something which should be self-evident. In any case, thanks for the update.
There's been some pvpers that have been spamming streams for a while now asking about PvP. It's what lead to that comment in the first place. In their zeal to get rid of the spam so more topics than pvp could be discussed though, they overcorrected and also started banning completely innocent and normal questions about pvp that weren't being spammed or disrespectful.
Well that was kind of self inflicted by ZOS. You don't pin a post saying you are going to do this that and the other things for PVP, then go silent for months, all while not delivering on any of what you mentioned. This will obviously prompt people to inquire rather rigorously, as the silence on the matter continues.
I, honestly, don't think it's a big deal. If you are going into a live stream where they are talking about the new expansion so you can be salty about something that's not even on topic for the stream, you're a troll. There are more appropriate forums for that discussion.
I, honestly, don't think it's a big deal. If you are going into a live stream where they are talking about the new expansion so you can be salty about something that's not even on topic for the stream, you're a troll. There are more appropriate forums for that discussion.
The issue with that is that ZOS never talks about PvP, so there is never a good time to bring up the topic as ZOS is avoiding it.
The other issue is that they've also banned people for talking about PvP during the reveal stream, which is an appropriate time to talk about PvP as many people were hoping for new developments around it coming with the big chapter.
While I agree that spamming "PvP" or "performance sucks" in something like the cooking stream is totally out of place and free game to be deleted as disruptive chat behavior, banning people who tried talking about it during the big chapter reveal stream is absolutely not okay.
spartaxoxo wrote: »I, honestly, don't think it's a big deal. If you are going into a live stream where they are talking about the new expansion so you can be salty about something that's not even on topic for the stream, you're a troll. There are more appropriate forums for that discussion.
The issue with that is that ZOS never talks about PvP, so there is never a good time to bring up the topic as ZOS is avoiding it.
The other issue is that they've also banned people for talking about PvP during the reveal stream, which is an appropriate time to talk about PvP as many people were hoping for new developments around it coming with the big chapter.
While I agree that spamming "PvP" or "performance sucks" in something like the cooking stream is totally out of place and free game to be deleted as disruptive chat behavior, banning people who tried talking about it during the big chapter reveal stream is absolutely not okay.
They had already previously announced that there wouldn't be anything new for the big reveal, so I'm sure not everyone was acting in good faith. But not everyone reads those communications and they need to remember that. There's a difference between someone asking an innocent question and a spammer.
Gaeliannas wrote: »Gaeliannas wrote: »Not to change the discussion, but my personal favorite is when someone gets perma-banned for posting a "Conspiracy Theory" about the game. I have seen and know a folks that has happened to. How is this even a thing, there are basically three possibilities from someone posting a theory about how things are...
1. They are way off base.
2. They are partially correct.
3. They nailed it.
Which of these results in being banned for spreading a conspiracy theory? Because looking around it is obviously not all three.
Now the crux of the matter, a theory is just a discussion of possibilities among folks. Someone posts a theory on why they think something is the way it is, and the debate begins. This is a healthy activity, debating subjects, it starts in grade school and carries throughout life. It spurs thought, creativity and opens ones mind to new ways of thought. Why is this a bannable offense? Better yet, what turns a working theory/discussion into an evil "Conspiracy Theory"?
You would think those falling under #1 would be the conspiracy theorists (by definition), but it seems the ones whose posts look to fall under #2-3, and present well thought out arguments are the ones I never see post again. Regardless though, wouldn't ZOS just chiming in and setting the record straight on a discussion be more reasonable, than perma-banning someone for having a thought, thus also suppressing future posters who may also have thoughts, but are now in fear of sharing them?
This reminds me of the time when they made Rapid Maneuvers harder to get, but at the same time introduced Alliance War skill line XP scrolls to the Crown Store and put Crown riding lessons on sale. I "theorized" that it wasn't coincidental, and that perhaps ZOS was looking to make a profit from it. Now, one would think that the concept of a for-profit corporation like Zenimax would be widely accepted, and that their primary reason for existing is to make money for their ownership and shareholders. But apparently pointing that out is actionable, and a "conspiracy." Of course, they ended up making Major Gallop a passive after the intense blowback from the community, but is it really any sort of threat to a company's reputation to discuss potential revenue sourcing?
Like I said, it seems to be the folks who hit what appears to be close to the mark, that get actioned. Much like the question of why has Cyrodiil performance decreased steadily with the release of every new DLC, and why suddenly did it return, when the new hardware was to have no effect on performance? (and didn't in PVE) I pretty much think I know the answer (and have all along), but even discussing it would get me banned most likely, so there you have it.
SilverBride wrote: »I PERSONALLY don't think the forums should be a "safe place". Some will actually discuss. Some will troll. Some will be jerks. But anything short of the subjects I mentioned (threats, racial/gender slurs, real world topics, etc) shouldnt waste a mods time.
Community rules need a clear impartial standard that posters are expected to meet. Name calling is not appropriate regardless of what the name is.
However the punishment needs to fit the crime and with the current system it doesn't.
Sigh. As I said. Again. And again. My personal opinion. MY clear standards would be racial/gender/religion and political slurs and the like. Keep it game related. I've stated it's my OPINION many times and have never stated it as unquestionable fact. You're appropriate and mine don't match and I get that. Mean words, anything from cursing to kindergarten insults, send some people into fits and they can't tolerate it. Cool beans. Your clear standards would have mods chasing everything, while mine are more in line with hate speech only. My opinion.Yet you keep quoting me with the same thing over and over like you'll change my opinion or I'm not allowed to have one. End of the day you have yours, I have mine and it's a beautiful world. Hope you have a wonderful day.
FeedbackOnly wrote: »Chasing everything would also lead us back to situation with everyone banned all the time.
BlossomDead wrote: »Hi All, we wanted to follow up on the post here and the general sentiment about asking/discussing PvP in chat during livestreams. We agree that noting terms like "PvP" and "Cyrodiil" should not be timed out when players ask or referenced the topic in our livestream chat. The moderation shown in the clip was a bit heavy-handed. We have talked about this internally, updated our moderation training, and made sure everyone is clear that conversations around core functions of our game, like PvP, should not be timed out or banned.
Please keep in mind that spamming those terms (or any terms) will be treated differently, as the action of spamming is disruptive to the entire experience. We understand that spamming was not present in this clip, but we want to highlight that there is a clear distinction between asking about/referencing PvP and spamming text blocks of the term.
Thanks everyone for following up on the video and the concern around moderation. We will continue to strive toward better moderation overall and appreciate your feedback.
Yeah, lovely, you do you. But remember that when we're leaving, you're leaving too.
SilverBride wrote: »FeedbackOnly wrote: »Chasing everything would also lead us back to situation with everyone banned all the time.
Not if the poster was only given a verbal explanation and a chance to learn from their mistakes. This would actually help that poster from getting into deeper trouble down the road because they would then know more clearly what not to do in the future.
...
Please keep in mind that spamming those terms (or any terms) will be treated differently, as the action of spamming is disruptive to the entire experience. ...
Thanks everyone for following up on the video and the concern around moderation. We will continue to strive toward better moderation overall and appreciate your feedback.
Hi All, we wanted to follow up on the post here and the general sentiment about asking/discussing PvP in chat during livestreams. We agree that noting terms like "PvP" and "Cyrodiil" should not be timed out when players ask or referenced the topic in our livestream chat. The moderation shown in the clip was a bit heavy-handed. We have talked about this internally, updated our moderation training, and made sure everyone is clear that conversations around core functions of our game, like PvP, should not be timed out or banned.
Please keep in mind that spamming those terms (or any terms) will be treated differently, as the action of spamming is disruptive to the entire experience. We understand that spamming was not present in this clip, but we want to highlight that there is a clear distinction between asking about/referencing PvP and spamming text blocks of the term.
Thanks everyone for following up on the video and the concern around moderation. We will continue to strive toward better moderation overall and appreciate your feedback.
@spartaxoxo, so we'll touch on this also. First, please feel free to PM me your specific example. Happy to review and discuss. Also, that is something anyone on the forum can do. We can chat about an issue and we can always talk to customer service to reevaluate actions as needed.
Moderation as you probably can guess isn't an exact science. Actions are taken based on the circumstances of the current situation and the history of those involved. We won't always get that right for a variety of reason. But we will continue to strive to get better and address situations as they occur. What should be noted here is in those back and forth conversations that get actioned, often times those escalate because either the parties start to include personal attacks or one of the parties has reported the other and a mod needs to figure out context by reading through the interactions and make a call based on our community guidelines. So it's a bit of a different ball game compared to live stream moderation.
However, please remember that our mods are human at the end of the day and work hard to ensure the forum is a welcoming and approachable space for all players. If there is an issue with how anyone has been moderated, please make sure to place a ticket to challenge the moderation. For added measure, please feel free to PM me and I can get that number over to our customer service team for additional context.
When there is room for open dialogue, we're happy to have it. I hope this provides some context for forum moderation as well.
StevieKingslayer wrote: »@ZOS_Kevin
People dont feel safe talking on your forums, that's probably an issue tbh.
I definitely dont. I've been modded for something very very silly. Your mods also don't communicate at all. Who even are half of these people.
How can people feel safe in ESO forum?
My wife ask "Where can i buy ESO without morrowind" She got Permanent ban. lol Only because of this!? Yes. ONLY because she ask "Where can i buy ESO without morrowind" and she got permanent banned.
@spartaxoxo, so we'll touch on this also. First, please feel free to PM me your specific example. Happy to review and discuss. Also, that is something anyone on the forum can do. We can chat about an issue and we can always talk to customer service to reevaluate actions as needed.
Moderation as you probably can guess isn't an exact science. Actions are taken based on the circumstances of the current situation and the history of those involved. We won't always get that right for a variety of reason. But we will continue to strive to get better and address situations as they occur. What should be noted here is in those back and forth conversations that get actioned, often times those escalate because either the parties start to include personal attacks or one of the parties has reported the other and a mod needs to figure out context by reading through the interactions and make a call based on our community guidelines. So it's a bit of a different ball game compared to live stream moderation.
However, please remember that our mods are human at the end of the day and work hard to ensure the forum is a welcoming and approachable space for all players. If there is an issue with how anyone has been moderated, please make sure to place a ticket to challenge the moderation. For added measure, please feel free to PM me and I can get that number over to our customer service team for additional context.
When there is room for open dialogue, we're happy to have it. I hope this provides some context for forum moderation as well.
@ZOS_Kevin I have a question, and I don't THINK it would break any company rules for you to disclose the answer as anyone applying for work would be told, but as always it's up to yourself and your supervisors.
What are the rules regarding mods with a personal account on the forums? Do they have to disclose that information to Zos, and if so, are there consequences to say, not disclosing or actively hiding such an account? What steps are taken to ensure impartiality? I've worked in situations where company management are not even allowed to have hourly associates or lower ranking salary on their social media, and any breach is considered an instant terminating offense, even hidden accounts should they be found out. If mods ARE allowed their own account, what steps does Zos take to ensure that this person we disagree with today will be impartial in their role tomorrow. Or is it just honor system?
Hi All, we wanted to follow up on the post here and the general sentiment about asking/discussing PvP in chat during livestreams. We agree that noting terms like "PvP" and "Cyrodiil" should not be timed out when players ask or referenced the topic in our livestream chat. The moderation shown in the clip was a bit heavy-handed. We have talked about this internally, updated our moderation training, and made sure everyone is clear that conversations around core functions of our game, like PvP, should not be timed out or banned.
Please keep in mind that spamming those terms (or any terms) will be treated differently, as the action of spamming is disruptive to the entire experience. We understand that spamming was not present in this clip, but we want to highlight that there is a clear distinction between asking about/referencing PvP and spamming text blocks of the term.
Thanks everyone for following up on the video and the concern around moderation. We will continue to strive toward better moderation overall and appreciate your feedback.
Hi All, we wanted to follow up on the post here and the general sentiment about asking/discussing PvP in chat during livestreams. We agree that noting terms like "PvP" and "Cyrodiil" should not be timed out when players ask or referenced the topic in our livestream chat. The moderation shown in the clip was a bit heavy-handed. We have talked about this internally, updated our moderation training, and made sure everyone is clear that conversations around core functions of our game, like PvP, should not be timed out or banned.
Please keep in mind that spamming those terms (or any terms) will be treated differently, as the action of spamming is disruptive to the entire experience. We understand that spamming was not present in this clip, but we want to highlight that there is a clear distinction between asking about/referencing PvP and spamming text blocks of the term.
Thanks everyone for following up on the video and the concern around moderation. We will continue to strive toward better moderation overall and appreciate your feedback.
I am glad to hear this, but the fact that this did happen points to a major issue with the corporate culture you have developed. This is consistent with the recent gaff you had when a developer let a family member make wildly inappropriate comments about the pvp community on his publicly broadcast Twitch stream. Your obvious sense of distain and negative bias toward the pvp community is honestly quite shocking.
Alinhbo_Tyaka wrote: »I agree that it is a cultural issue. While it might be more commonly displayed with the PvP community the same attitude has also been shown by the same developer towards the PvE community. In that case it was on another streamer's Twitch stream in regards to questions about the decision behind the Maelstrom Arena weapon changes. In summary they said they ignored the complaints as nothing more than a bunch of useless whining and to get over it. So I think it is really just a general disdain for the overall player community that has seem to have grown over the years.
I, honestly, don't think it's a big deal. If you are going into a live stream where they are talking about the new expansion so you can be salty about something that's not even on topic for the stream, you're a troll. There are more appropriate forums for that discussion.
The issue with that is that ZOS never talks about PvP, so there is never a good time to bring up the topic as ZOS is avoiding it.
The other issue is that they've also banned people for talking about PvP during the reveal stream, which is an appropriate time to talk about PvP as many people were hoping for new developments around it coming with the big chapter.
While I agree that spamming "PvP" or "performance sucks" in something like the cooking stream is totally out of place and free game to be deleted as disruptive chat behavior, banning people who tried talking about it during the big chapter reveal stream is absolutely not okay.
They have already addressed the pvp issue. All of the testing and tweaking they have tried didn't have the desired results. Their conclusion is the only way they are going to improve performance is to rewrite the server base code. That will take a year., so they are adding nothing major to pvp or the game (i.e. new class, new skill lines) until that project is done sometime in 2023. What else can they say right now?
They have already addressed the pvp issue. All of the testing and tweaking they have tried didn't have the desired results. Their conclusion is the only way they are going to improve performance is to rewrite the server base code. That will take a year., so they are adding nothing major to pvp or the game (i.e. new class, new skill lines) until that project is done sometime in 2023. What else can they say right now?
They say alot but little comes from it, hence the constant questions. They have been saying "we're fixing it" for the whole of my time playing. Unfortunately we have reached the crying wolf level at this point.
No updates have come since January. Updates were hinted at, yet none materialised. There's a lot of frustration.
They have already addressed the pvp issue. All of the testing and tweaking they have tried didn't have the desired results. Their conclusion is the only way they are going to improve performance is to rewrite the server base code. That will take a year., so they are adding nothing major to pvp or the game (i.e. new class, new skill lines) until that project is done sometime in 2023. What else can they say right now?
They say alot but little comes from it, hence the constant questions. They have been saying "we're fixing it" for the whole of my time playing. Unfortunately we have reached the crying wolf level at this point.
No updates have come since January. Updates were hinted at, yet none materialised. There's a lot of frustration.
In January they said they are going to work on rewriting the base code and it will take a year. What kind of updates do you want?
February - rewriting base code. 1/12 done.
March - rewriting base code. 2/12 done
April - rewriting base code. 3/12 done.....
I don't think there would be much more to tell at this time...
Also they once said performance would be better after the 'year of performance'... it was far worse. So trust levels are low.
The team wants to be confident that the information shared does not create additional damage to trust for players who feel that way. So this is not an attempt to ignore or leave players in the dark. But given past feedback, we want to make sure shared information is accurate before sharing progress.
nightstrike wrote: »Otherwise, you'd be able to respond to criticism with something more substantial than "[snip]".
Also they once said performance would be better after the 'year of performance'... it was far worse. So trust levels are low.
Hey all, wanted to chime in here. We don't want this chat about moderation to be derailed. However, we did want to highlight this in particular.
The team wants to be confident that the information shared does not create additional damage to trust for players who feel that way. So this is not an attempt to ignore or leave players in the dark. But given past feedback, we want to make sure shared information is accurate before sharing progress.