"PVP" and "Cyrodiil" Gets you Banned on Twitch

spartaxoxo · May 2022

Destai wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Destai wrote: »

I shouldn't have my words changed. Ever. Not only is it censorship but it borders on impersonation. They can ask us to remove or reword our post, but no we instead get treated like children.

It doesn't border on impersonation at all, because everyone knows it's a moderator action. You agreed to conduct yourself in a certain manner or have your words edited when you created a forum account. And yes, they absolutely should be removing content that breaks the TOS. Enforcement is too heavy handed atm, but that doesn't mean it should be entirely without rules either. Moderation is a normal part of structured debate, and is also a normal part of keeping a website focused on what that website was built for.

I'm not saying we should have no rules, there's a more respectful way to enforce them. I think we're in agreement that it's too heavy handed, though.

When you say that mods should have to ask permission to enforce rules, you're basically asking for no enforcement of them. And without enforcement, rules are pretty much meaningless. Imagine if cops had to ask your permission before issuing a speeding ticket. There'd be basically no speeding tickets, because almost nobody is going to say "okay, ya got me." They are going to make excuses about why it doesn't really apply to their circumstance, if they admit speeding at all, and then reject the ticket. Even on this thread, there are posts saying that users should be able to openly insult each other and it not be considered baiting. The moderators are the neutral third party that enforce the rules, and when they determine a rule violation has occurred, they remove the offending content. They could just remove it without saying a word, but that is much worse. It means the person who was moderated may not even know the content of their post was changed, or if they do, what was changed and why. -snip- and then -edited for: reason- gives very clear information. I have been on forums that don't do that, and people are always much, much more confused and angry when you just delete their posts with no rhyme or reason indicated. Yet, not every offense deserves to get someone banned, so you don't want excessive documentation that is impossible to sift through and does nothing but make the user look bad.

Informative and transparent warnings that don't get put on your permanent record are vastly superior to every other form of moderating of very minor infractions. It's not even a contest IMO.

SilverBride · May 2022

Destai wrote: »

Many rules could be automated or loosened - like swearing and auto-closing old threads. One of the things I appreciate about reddit is the community polices itself, which is really what I'd expect for a game rated M.

ESO was given a Mature rating for Blood and Gore, Sexual Themes, Use of Alcohol, and Violence in the game. This has nothing to do with the forums or what is appropriate forum behavior.

The problem is the punishment only takes into account that an infraction occurred while giving no consideration to all the player's constructive posts. This leads to heavy handed moderation and excessive punishments.

nightstrike · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

nightstrike wrote: »

Otherwise, you'd be able to respond to criticism with something more substantial than "[snip]".

There seems to be some confusion about what a moderator does. AFAIK, moderation does not do any development on the game (edit: or work with them), and their moderating should not be misconstrued as official ZOS developer statements. They are a customer service agent who's primary focus is to keep feedback civil and constructive.

There's no confusion at all, and I stated that forum staff aren't developers. The point here is that their job is more than just moderation. They are the only reasonable communication point between players and developers, and they routinely state that they are sending our feedback to the development team. So while yes, they do on occasion need to edit posts and ban users, that should be infrequent.

And more to the point is that there is a fundamental difference between moderating two users arguing with each other and moderating users angry at ZOS. The latter is where I see the biggest issue, as mods simply delete any negativity towards the company instead of finding an effective way to change the root cause of that negativity. The reality is that if ZOS acted differently, there would be a whole lot less to moderate. Not zero, of course, but a substantial reduction.

Destai · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Destai wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Destai wrote: »

I shouldn't have my words changed. Ever. Not only is it censorship but it borders on impersonation. They can ask us to remove or reword our post, but no we instead get treated like children.

It doesn't border on impersonation at all, because everyone knows it's a moderator action. You agreed to conduct yourself in a certain manner or have your words edited when you created a forum account. And yes, they absolutely should be removing content that breaks the TOS. Enforcement is too heavy handed atm, but that doesn't mean it should be entirely without rules either. Moderation is a normal part of structured debate, and is also a normal part of keeping a website focused on what that website was built for.

I'm not saying we should have no rules, there's a more respectful way to enforce them. I think we're in agreement that it's too heavy handed, though.

When you say that mods should have to ask permission to enforce rules, you're basically asking for no enforcement of them. And without enforcement, rules are pretty much meaningless. Imagine if cops had to ask your permission before issuing a speeding ticket. There'd be basically no speeding tickets, because almost nobody is going to say "okay, ya got me." They are going to make excuses about why it doesn't really apply to their circumstance, if they admit speeding at all, and then reject the ticket. Even on this thread, there are posts saying that users should be able to openly insult each other and it not be considered baiting. The moderators are the neutral third party that enforce the rules, and when they determine a rule violation has occurred, they remove the offending content. They could just remove it without saying a word, but that is much worse. It means the person who was moderated may not even know the content of their post was changed, or if they do, what was changed and why. -snip- and then -edited for: reason- gives very clear information. I have been on forums that don't do that, and people are always much, much more confused and angry when you just delete their posts with no rhyme or reason indicated. Yet, not every offense deserves to get someone banned, so you don't want excessive documentation that is impossible to sift through and does nothing but make the user look bad.

Informative and transparent warnings that don't get put on your permanent record are vastly superior to every other form of moderating of very minor infractions. It's not even a contest IMO.

No, what I'd expect is something like,

"Your statement of <whatever> isn't up to community standards and has been snipped. Please reword and edit your post".

It's not until it gets to official warning or worse that you get a sense of what you did wrong. I guess I wasn't clear on that.

But honestly though, what happens if something says someone doesn't like? I don't get it. I get there's a line with harassment and obvious bigoted speech, but I've seen baiting interpreted as any question that engenders further discussion. Or threads closed because "the conversation ran its course" despite people still being actively engaged on it. The conversation's done when people say it's done.

They could collapse comments and label them as offensive, allowing the user to choose to read it. I don't trust that the rules are interpreted fairly - especially with how visible and vocal many people's frustration with it is.

SilverBride wrote: »

Destai wrote: »

Many rules could be automated or loosened - like swearing and auto-closing old threads. One of the things I appreciate about reddit is the community polices itself, which is really what I'd expect for a game rated M.

ESO was given a Mature rating for Blood and Gore, Sexual Themes, Use of Alcohol, and Violence in the game. This has nothing to do with the forums or what is appropriate forum behavior.

The problem is the punishment only takes into account that an infraction occurred while giving no consideration to all the player's constructive posts. This leads to heavy handed moderation and excessive punishments.

Agreed, I do think the person's contributions should be taken into consideration. There's no way to tell if it's not, and I think that would vary from person to person.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

nightstrike wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

nightstrike wrote: »

Otherwise, you'd be able to respond to criticism with something more substantial than "[snip]".

There seems to be some confusion about what a moderator does. AFAIK, moderation does not do any development on the game (edit: or work with them), and their moderating should not be misconstrued as official ZOS developer statements. They are a customer service agent who's primary focus is to keep feedback civil and constructive.

There's no confusion at all, and I stated that forum staff aren't developers. The point here is that their job is more than just moderation. They are the only reasonable communication point between players and developers, and they routinely state that they are sending our feedback to the development team. So while yes, they do on occasion need to edit posts and ban users, that should be infrequent.

You're conflating the moderation team with the community team. Kevin, Gina, etc relay our feedback to developers, communicate with us, etc. The moderation team's primary focus is just to moderate the forums. The majority of what we see them do is simply editing posts. It's not supposed to be infrequent, it's the primary focus of their public facing work. They are customer support.

nightstrike wrote: »

And more to the point is that there is a fundamental difference between moderating two users arguing with each other and moderating users angry at ZOS. The latter is where I see the biggest issue, as mods simply delete any negativity towards the company instead of finding an effective way to change the root cause of that negativity. The reality is that if ZOS acted differently, there would be a whole lot less to moderate. Not zero, of course, but a substantial reduction.

I agree that they are over-zealous in their enforcement, especially in regards to what's considered bashing the company. Unlike when users discuss each other, the actions of ZOS is a relevant topic of conversation. Things like "they don't see to care about PVP because we've gotten no new content" shouldn't be actioned, and yet I see that happen quite a bit. And it's not okay. However, there is also definitely a way to phrase those statements that don't devolve into bashing the company. Stuff like "so and so should be fired," or "they are just bunch of lazy greedy jerkmobiles" are different than "they need a new approach," or "they aren't doing enough to convey information to us." It's not just what you say, but how you say it.

Moderation undeniably and blatantly needs to find a better middle ground so that people can communicate with one another. Nobody is perfect and we all make mistakes. Users shouldn't be getting permanently banned for being human beings, who sometimes will say negative things. They need to be more judicious in their approach to what gets an infraction and what does not. But, at the same time, I think users also sometimes don't understand how negative feedback ought to be worded to avoid triggering these violations. And thus, they don't understand how they got them and get upset, even though it's actually pretty fair. Which is why I think their communication about what got infractioned needs to be improved as well.

Right now, when you ask what you did wrong, you're met with extremely unhelpful copypaste responses that don't actually tell you much of anything.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

Destai wrote: »

No, what I'd expect is something like,

"Your statement of <whatever> isn't up to community standards and has been snipped. Please reword and edit your post".

It's not until it gets to official warning or worse that you get a sense of what you did wrong. I guess I wasn't clear on that.

Ah, I see. Yes, they used to make more use of unofficial warnings but they stopped at some point, I think. Or maybe they limit the number you can receive over the entire lifetime of your account or something. IDK.

Perhaps ZOS is different, but when I did moderation work for another company we had a few different levels of severity.

lowest level = snip/delete with a brief message or none at all about why it was snipped/deleted. This was used for very minor infractions. Stuff like "bump," or "you're just a noob that's why you don't get it," or swear filter bypasses in posts that are otherwise not profane.

medium-low level = snip/delete and an unofficial warning sent to your account. This was for stuff that was less gray in it's rule breaking or maybe needed further explanation, but wasn't necessarily something that anyone deserved to be even suspended over. Stuff like derailing a thread [because this kind of comments might not be against the rules in another thread], insults that can't just be excused as thoughtless but are ultimately mild and not necessarily harassing individual users: such as "Ugh, anyone who thinks that this item isn't overpowered is a complete idiot! What kind of mouth breather do you have to be to think this is okay?", or other such moderate infractions.

medium-high level =snip/delete and official warning sent to your your account. This was stuff that was serious but not enough to warrant immediate suspension, or you've gotten too many messages from the medium-low level category in too short a timespan. Stuff like posts where a user's primary goal is to call out another user "This person was cheating in my guild!" or they were bashing the company.

High Level Suspension= snip delete comment and immediate suspension for X number of days. Stuff like racial slurs, harassing another user, etc. Also used for people who had too many official warnings in too short of a time span, as they were repeat offending often enough to be an issue.

Permanent Ban = too many high level suspensions in too short of a time period, or especially outrageous posts such as real life threats.

The stuff that didn't even merit a response, we still sent one when asked. When sent a message about why something was changed, we could go that comment and see the edit history. And then provide guidance. But we didn't send out messages because we used messages as a way to track the moderation history of an account. We didn't want people losing their accounts for stuff like "ITBL", when they really aren't a problem user. It didn't mean we wanted those non-constructive posts as part of the thread either, as they had a tendency to derail productive conversation. So we edited it, but didn't keep track.

SilverBride · May 2022

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Another reason a lot of companies prefer their official forums be more professional than any Reddit communities they interact with or even their in-game chats is because they use the feedback gathered as part of their job, to improve the product design. It's not that they don't use the input from those other communities, because they absolutely do especially if a particular social media platform is popular. But they like having an area with more professional standards that might encourage some people to speak about the product they are doing, but wouldn't necessarily on other social media platforms.

Gaeliannas · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

You're conflating the moderation team with the community team. Kevin, Gina, etc relay our feedback to developers, communicate with us, etc. The moderation team's primary focus is just to moderate the forums. The majority of what we see them do is simply editing posts. It's not supposed to be infrequent, it's the primary focus of their public facing work. They are customer support.

The fact ZOS employ's people specifically to moderate their forums says a lot about how they feel about customer service. And to be clear, moderation is not customer service, it is the exact opposite in fact, it is customer suppression. The forums are a community, so why isn't the community team here engaging the community on more than sporadic intervals and only when they have something to say? Maybe if the community team actually engaged and interacted with the community, as opposed to simply talking at us, or attempting to put out some fire someone at ZOS created, the community would have a lot less angst and the need for moderation would be considerably lowered or completely disappear?

To be quite honest, I don't even see the point of these forums, because they are pretty much nothing more than a place to come and shout into the wind.

Alinhbo_Tyaka · May 2022

Gaeliannas wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

You're conflating the moderation team with the community team. Kevin, Gina, etc relay our feedback to developers, communicate with us, etc. The moderation team's primary focus is just to moderate the forums. The majority of what we see them do is simply editing posts. It's not supposed to be infrequent, it's the primary focus of their public facing work. They are customer support.

The fact ZOS employ's people specifically to moderate their forums says a lot about how they feel about customer service. And to be clear, moderation is not customer service, it is the exact opposite in fact, it is customer suppression. The forums are a community, so why isn't the community team here engaging the community on more than sporadic intervals and only when they have something to say? Maybe if the community team actually engaged and interacted with the community, as opposed to simply talking at us, or attempting to put out some fire someone at ZOS created, the community would have a lot less angst and the need for moderation would be considerably lowered or completely disappear?

To be quite honest, I don't even see the point of these forums, because they are pretty much nothing more than a place to come and shout into the wind.

One philosophy of customer management is to provide a means for customers to shout into the wind and blow off steam rather than have the company face it directly. Forums are one of the tools used to accomplish this and IMO is their main purpose with the ESO community.

Ratzkifal · May 2022

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Gaeliannas · May 2022

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

Gaeliannas wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

They do have an age check, and they'd still need moderators. They are needed at the bare minimum to ensure nothing illegal is posted, such as credible real life threats.

Ratzkifal · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Gaeliannas wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

They do have an age check, and they'd still need moderators. They are needed at the bare minimum to ensure nothing illegal is posted, such as credible real life threats.

Obviously. But the question is, why does the forum have a different age rating than the game and why. I've once quoted King Camoran and because he had something to say about Prince Naemon that wasn't fit for the forum, it got removed - the explanation, the forum has a different age rating. Why is that necessary?

FeedbackOnly · May 2022

[

Ratzkifal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Gaeliannas wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

They do have an age check, and they'd still need moderators. They are needed at the bare minimum to ensure nothing illegal is posted, such as credible real life threats.

Obviously. But the question is, why does the forum have a different age rating than the game and why. I've once quoted King Camoran and because he had something to say about Prince Naemon that wasn't fit for the forum, it got removed - the explanation, the forum has a different age rating. Why is that necessary?

Because someone reported it. The reporting system needs to be redone

Ratzkifal · May 2022

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

[

Ratzkifal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Gaeliannas wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

They do have an age check, and they'd still need moderators. They are needed at the bare minimum to ensure nothing illegal is posted, such as credible real life threats.

Obviously. But the question is, why does the forum have a different age rating than the game and why. I've once quoted King Camoran and because he had something to say about Prince Naemon that wasn't fit for the forum, it got removed - the explanation, the forum has a different age rating. Why is that necessary?

Because someone reported it. The reporting system needs to be redone

Not everything bit of moderation comes from reports. Moderators actively browse the forums to check for violations. That's how they determine if a thread needs to be moved too, because you cannot report a thread for the purpose of moving it. There just isn't a report category for that.

FeedbackOnly · May 2022

Ratzkifal wrote: »

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

[

Ratzkifal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Gaeliannas wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

They do have an age check, and they'd still need moderators. They are needed at the bare minimum to ensure nothing illegal is posted, such as credible real life threats.

Obviously. But the question is, why does the forum have a different age rating than the game and why. I've once quoted King Camoran and because he had something to say about Prince Naemon that wasn't fit for the forum, it got removed - the explanation, the forum has a different age rating. Why is that necessary?

Because someone reported it. The reporting system needs to be redone

Not everything bit of moderation comes from reports. Moderators actively browse the forums to check for violations. That's how they determine if a thread needs to be moved too, because you cannot report a thread for the purpose of moving it. There just isn't a report category for that.

Some of the more mild ones is reports though. Like asking about Morrowind had to be reported

spartaxoxo · May 2022

Ratzkifal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Gaeliannas wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

They do have an age check, and they'd still need moderators. They are needed at the bare minimum to ensure nothing illegal is posted, such as credible real life threats.

Obviously. But the question is, why does the forum have a different age rating than the game and why. I've once quoted King Camoran and because he had something to say about Prince Naemon that wasn't fit for the forum, it got removed - the explanation, the forum has a different age rating. Why is that necessary?

My guess would be to have a more "Professional" setting, for lack of a better term, so that they can pull in feedback from people that they wouldn't get from other social media channels. The more "official" atmosphere can help create an environment where a broader group of people may appear, whereas some other social media channels may skew towards different groups, say for example you might find a more competitive oriented crowd on some channels (e.g. Twitch).

This wasn't about this game, but a community manager from Overwatch once talked about how he viewed forums as someone who had made a career in community management for that and other games. I think it could be insightful here, I'll edit out the stuff about Overwatch.

There’s a general rule of thumb that’s known by most community professionals:

Less than 10% of all players will ever even look at your forums or owned channels

Of that 10%, less than 10% will ever be an active participant in the conversation on these owned channels

It’s important to understand that this in no way diminishes the usefulness of community discussion hubs (like forums). Forums serve as a microcosm of the larger OW community, representing viewpoints from many different segments of players; casual, what we call “Core Players”, competitive players, representation from marginalized groups such as BIPOC or LGBTQIA+, the list goes on.

I have seen similar sentiments expressed by community management leads in other games, though their quotes are less easy to find.

I don't know how the developers at ZOS view this forum, or why they chose the age range that they did for this website. But I would imagine it's a similar reason that other official, corporate-run forums try to keep a similar tone.

SilverBride · May 2022

Whatever the age rating the community rules still make sense. Being "mature" doesn't mean "anything goes".

SilverBride · May 2022

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

Some of the more mild ones is reports though. Like asking about Morrowind had to be reported

Asking about Morrowind isn't a violation of the forum rules. I don't understand what happened in that case.

Agenericname · May 2022

Ratzkifal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Gaeliannas wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

They do have an age check, and they'd still need moderators. They are needed at the bare minimum to ensure nothing illegal is posted, such as credible real life threats.

Obviously. But the question is, why does the forum have a different age rating than the game and why. I've once quoted King Camoran and because he had something to say about Prince Naemon that wasn't fit for the forum, it got removed - the explanation, the forum has a different age rating. Why is that necessary?

They can somewhat control who has access to their game, but less so who has access to their forums. They can control who posts, but not necessarily who reads.

Destai · May 2022

SilverBride wrote: »

Whatever the age rating the community rules still make sense. Being "mature" doesn't mean "anything goes".

There's mature and controversial content in the game that cannot be openly discussed here for long. That's a weird disconnect IMO.

Alinhbo_Tyaka wrote: »

Gaeliannas wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

You're conflating the moderation team with the community team. Kevin, Gina, etc relay our feedback to developers, communicate with us, etc. The moderation team's primary focus is just to moderate the forums. The majority of what we see them do is simply editing posts. It's not supposed to be infrequent, it's the primary focus of their public facing work. They are customer support.

The fact ZOS employ's people specifically to moderate their forums says a lot about how they feel about customer service. And to be clear, moderation is not customer service, it is the exact opposite in fact, it is customer suppression. The forums are a community, so why isn't the community team here engaging the community on more than sporadic intervals and only when they have something to say? Maybe if the community team actually engaged and interacted with the community, as opposed to simply talking at us, or attempting to put out some fire someone at ZOS created, the community would have a lot less angst and the need for moderation would be considerably lowered or completely disappear?

To be quite honest, I don't even see the point of these forums, because they are pretty much nothing more than a place to come and shout into the wind.

One philosophy of customer management is to provide a means for customers to shout into the wind and blow off steam rather than have the company face it directly. Forums are one of the tools used to accomplish this and IMO is their main purpose with the ESO community.

It's super helpful to have an official place to talk about the game. I think letting people vent is constructive, but I think there's an expectation it'll sway development decisions. There's so many cases where I wish it had, like the Bosmer changes, perfected weapons, etc., and I think that immovability really sours it for a lot of people.

Gaeliannas · May 2022

Agenericname wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Gaeliannas wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A mod pointed out in another thread that the game is rated M but the forums are public. This is why the standards are stricter here.

I actually agree with all of the community rules. I just don't agree with how heavy handed the punishments can be.

Agreed.
I'm not sure why the forums are differently rated either. After all this means is that there must be certain parts of the game that cannot be brought to the forums under any circumstances, which is weird, and it also means that if the forum is meant to be used as advertisement it's advertising in the wrong age group, which is just as odd.
Perhaps the original intention was to just keep it sanitary here so that nobody can say "but it's M-rated" as an excuse to talk about inappropriate topics, but now it's enforced like people who wouldn't be allowed to play the game are coming to this forum to read things about a game they shouldn't even be playing yet.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could also have an age check on the forums like the game has, and if you haven't joined or are underage, only show the "OFFICIAL NEWS AND UPDATES" section to the viewer.

But I guess hiring a small army of moderators makes more sense than a hour or two of website coding to them.

They do have an age check, and they'd still need moderators. They are needed at the bare minimum to ensure nothing illegal is posted, such as credible real life threats.

Obviously. But the question is, why does the forum have a different age rating than the game and why. I've once quoted King Camoran and because he had something to say about Prince Naemon that wasn't fit for the forum, it got removed - the explanation, the forum has a different age rating. Why is that necessary?

They can somewhat control who has access to their game, but less so who has access to their forums. They can control who posts, but not necessarily who reads.

They can absolutely control who gets to read what, based on access levels. I am guessing there is a forum here just for their Stream Team members that none of us have access to, nor can we see. Probably quite a few others as well, like one only the mods have access to for discussing things.

Varana · May 2022

To be clear, I definitely don't want this forum to descend into the vile cesspit that is Reddit (except for the, surprise, very heavily moderated ones). Self-policing does not work. And I'd rather have a moderation that errs on the side of heavy-handedness when that means that the forums stay a place for civilised and mostly polite discussions.

I'm not sure why the game has an M rating, tbh. There's very little in it to warrant that. If it's for graphical violence, then that's hard to transport to text. There's barely any sexual content to speak of. So the risk of discussing ingame content that would break the forum rules is ... basically nil.

newtinmpls · May 2022

BlossomDead wrote: »

We shall be known as the PVπ players from now on.

I don't know how to get that to display, so I will have to say PvPie

starkerealm · May 2022

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

One poster on the forums excessively abusing the reporting system.

Maybe it's not them, but it's ridiculous that I think it's in the moment I give up on the forums.

We can't even mildy disagree or it's reported. I really had hopes, but it feels like discussion really doesn't exist except with fake smiles.

I apologize, but this is my feelings that environment on the forums isn't healthy for discussion.

P.S

What happened is harassment and I believe they will continue to do so with other players under pretense of baiting

Can confirm.

I'm not 100% sure it's a single individual, or simply a segment of the community, but there are serious issues with people using the reporting system to bully other posters. It's actually worse than it sounds, because they will intentionally harass and torment the individual, waiting for an opportunity to report their victim to moderation.

EDIT: Part of the problem is that when a post does get reported (at least historically), the moderator who picks up the ticket doesn't examine the larger context of the post. This is understandable, following up with an in depth investigation of every ticket wouldn't be feasible, but it has resulted in some really bad moderation calls in the past.

FeedbackOnly · May 2022

starkerealm wrote: »

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

One poster on the forums excessively abusing the reporting system.

Maybe it's not them, but it's ridiculous that I think it's in the moment I give up on the forums.

We can't even mildy disagree or it's reported. I really had hopes, but it feels like discussion really doesn't exist except with fake smiles.

I apologize, but this is my feelings that environment on the forums isn't healthy for discussion.

P.S

What happened is harassment and I believe they will continue to do so with other players under pretense of baiting

Can confirm.

I'm not 100% sure it's a single individual, or simply a segment of the community, but there are serious issues with people using the reporting system to bully other posters. It's actually worse than it sounds, because they will intentionally harass and torment the individual, waiting for an opportunity to report their victim to moderation.

EDIT: Part of the problem is that when a post does get reported (at least historically), the moderator who picks up the ticket doesn't examine the larger context of the post. This is understandable, following up with an in depth investigation of every ticket wouldn't be feasible, but it has resulted in some really bad moderation calls in the past.

They get to play victim while the rest of have to stay silent.

Elsonso · May 2022

starkerealm wrote: »

Can confirm.

I'm not 100% sure it's a single individual, or simply a segment of the community, but there are serious issues with people using the reporting system to bully other posters. It's actually worse than it sounds, because they will intentionally harass and torment the individual, waiting for an opportunity to report their victim to moderation.

How can we know this happens? It would seem to me that someone doing this would actually attract moderator attention towards them, yielding the tactic ineffective. At best, I would expect the moderators to ignore them, at worst, ban them. Or.. maybe that should be the other way around.

Beilin_Balreis_Colcan · May 2022

Gaeliannas wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

You're conflating the moderation team with the community team. Kevin, Gina, etc relay our feedback to developers, communicate with us, etc. The moderation team's primary focus is just to moderate the forums. The majority of what we see them do is simply editing posts. It's not supposed to be infrequent, it's the primary focus of their public facing work. They are customer support.

The fact ZOS employ's people specifically to moderate their forums says a lot about how they feel about customer service. And to be clear, moderation is not customer service, it is the exact opposite in fact, it is customer suppression. The forums are a community, so why isn't the community team here engaging the community on more than sporadic intervals and only when they have something to say? Maybe if the community team actually engaged and interacted with the community, as opposed to simply talking at us, or attempting to put out some fire someone at ZOS created, the community would have a lot less angst and the need for moderation would be considerably lowered or completely disappear?

To be quite honest, I don't even see the point of these forums, because they are pretty much nothing more than a place to come and shout into the wind.

I respectfully disagree with your statement that moderation is not customer service. As someone else pointed out earlier in the thread I think, everyone should be able to feel welcome in the forums. A very lightly-moderated forum would encourage some of the more vociferous and aggressive posters to dominate the forum, and discourage a lot of people from using the forum.

I would, however, prefer that the moderation was toned down a bit, because quite frankly I feel hesitant to express my opinions sometimes, and it's due more to the moderators than the aforementioned posters.

starkerealm · May 2022

Elsonso wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Can confirm.

I'm not 100% sure it's a single individual, or simply a segment of the community, but there are serious issues with people using the reporting system to bully other posters. It's actually worse than it sounds, because they will intentionally harass and torment the individual, waiting for an opportunity to report their victim to moderation.

How can we know this happens? It would seem to me that someone doing this would actually attract moderator attention towards them, yielding the tactic ineffective. At best, I would expect the moderators to ignore them, at worst, ban them. Or.. maybe that should be the other way around.

You'd think, but no.

I saw it happen when I was suddenly getting notified by the moderators on a semi-regular basis, and also in seeing the quiet edits to my own posts.

One particular example, and the reason I know this is happening, was when I went from receiving around half a dozen moderator edits a year over profanity filter bypasses (I usually just star out the word and let the reader figure it out), to every post I make with self-censored profanity being edited within the hour. Yeah, someone is reporting every post I make, on the hope that they can get moderator action to stick.

I half expect this post to get dinged for discussing moderator activities, even though this is explicitly a thread discussing missteps in moderation overreach.

Also, I've got about 31k posts on these forums, so you could say I have a bit of familiarity with how the forum ticks. There are people in the community who are bullying via the report button. I've seen it, and I've been on the receiving end.