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

SilverBride · May 2022

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

starkerealm · May 2022

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

starkerealm wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

I'm gonna be honest, I don't think your specific situation is a typical one. And I would absolutely submit a ticket or send a private message to Kevin about it. I think you in particular are being harassed by someone out there, but the vast majority of reports in any forum are just from users reading a thread.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

I'm not really referring to flight or fight, but rather studies about human communication especially online. I won't get into them here, because we're getting a bit off-topic. But it's generally consistently shown that people by and large simply leave discussions and places where they encounter a lot of hostile speech. And instead seek out places that reaffirm their existing beliefs. This is resulting in increased echo chambering online, and deepening polarization of views.

I don't think you're for literally no moderation, but what is illegal for users to speak on an online forum is very little. Even a lot of hate speech that would not fly at a workplace can be said without care online. The US does not have laws against hate speech on private property, and companies are not responsible for users personal comments to that effect.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

VaranisArano · May 2022

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Correct. I have no way of knowing if the snipped post was reported by someone else or even if it was reported to a mod at all. Those tend to be rather combative threads in general, so it's entirely possible the mods were already keeping an eye on proceedings or swept through because of an unrelated report.

FeedbackOnly · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

I'm gonna be honest, I don't think your specific situation is a typical one. And I would absolutely submit a ticket or send a private message to Kevin about it. I think you in particular are being harassed by someone out there, but the vast majority of reports in any forum are just from users reading a thread.

It's not as rare as you think it is. People do abuse report system. It can't be just the mods that were the problem. It was the players too

spartaxoxo · May 2022

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

I'm gonna be honest, I don't think your specific situation is a typical one. And I would absolutely submit a ticket or send a private message to Kevin about it. I think you in particular are being harassed by someone out there, but the vast majority of reports in any forum are just from users reading a thread.

It's not as rare as you think it is. People do abuse report system. It can't be just the mods that were the problem. It was the players too

I don't think it's at all typical for users to be getting reported for years old posts. Although it's a simple fix, they can just not take negative action against an account for comments that are over a year old.

FeedbackOnly · May 2022

Lumenn wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

I don't need to run to a mod because someone (hypothetical example here mods, don't nail me please) calls me a stupid doo Doo head. Mods shouldn't have to waste their time on adults dealing with that.

It doesn't matter if the name is what some consider mild or if it's hate speech, it still is not appropriate to call someone names in a forum discussion. Besides being inappropriate it lends absolutely nothing constructive to the conversation.

If one can't be civilized, they aren't taking the topic seriously and are not worth my time. Now hate speech I mentioned due to legal liabilities zos may have to cover. You are absolutely right that a forum of adults should have open and civilized discussions. I also don't think we need an army of mods snipping and editing for every word that one person or another may find offensive today at any given time. One way is a personal nightmare for Zos and constant work, second guessing, and judgement calls. Just worrying about the legal stuff slims it down, narrows what has to be acted upon, and maybe frees up resources for Zos. But again this is just a personal opinion.

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

I've agreed with you on MANY of your comments on other posts but on how a video game forum should be policed we'll simply have to agree to disagree. Still respect ya though! 😉

I agree with. I missed a lot of things. Some things shouldn't be policed. The rules weren't like this 2 years ago.

@Lumenn

starkerealm · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

FeedbackOnly wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The person tossing insults is ultimately the one who is wasting the mod's time by posting inappropriate content in the first place. This is something I believe a mod would address even if no one reported it. Otherwise it may continue and could escalate into something worse.

Indeed, even though I don't report it, I do often find that a mod has snipped the insult later.

This brings up a point I'd like to reinforce. The poster being baited isn't necessarily the one who reported the post, yet it is often assumed that they are.

Which somewhat supports the idea that someone is fishing for things they can pin on a user. (More realistically, "...some people are fishing..." but you get the meaning.) Now, it could be someone unrelated was offended, or has a compulsive need to report bad behavior when they see it. But, what I've seen with this leaves me suspicious. At least in some cases.

I'm gonna be honest, I don't think your specific situation is a typical one. And I would absolutely submit a ticket or send a private message to Kevin about it. I think you in particular are being harassed by someone out there, but the vast majority of reports in any forum are just from users reading a thread.

It's not as rare as you think it is. People do abuse report system. It can't be just the mods that were the problem. It was the players too

I don't think it's at all typical for users to be getting reported for years old posts. Although it's a simple fix, they can just not take negative action against an account for comments that are over a year old.

And, that's not normal for me either. When that happened, it seriously caught my attention. What was more significant, but less obvious, was when my posts were getting consistently reported within minutes of being published. Sure, it could be legitimate, and and I didn't face any serious blowback from that (I know that it happened from the frequent ZOS edits that were occurring.) But it doesn't stand out as much, and could, in theory, be the product of legitimate reports. However, when someone was digging into old posts, that's where I was able to say, "this was an intentional misuse of the system."

SilverBride · May 2022

How does anyone know that a particular poster is abusing the system? We can't see who reported what and don't even know if a post had been reported. I imagine the mods keep a close eye on controversial threads and catch many of these infractions themselves.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

SilverBride wrote: »

How does anyone know that a particular poster is abusing the system? We can't see who reported what and don't even know if a post had been reported. I imagine the mods keep a close eye on controversial threads and catch many of these infractions themselves.

Yes. A lot of times that is indeed the case, back when I did modding people didn't think I was actually reading threads. But I was.

That said, I think it's pretty obvious what's happening if you get a reports surrounding odd dates. Most users don't leave the first page, and then a large chunk falls even further after pages 2-3.

So if you're suddenly getting actioned for stuff that isn't in that timeframe, and it's multiple reports hitting you at once, someone has probably targeted you in particular. It's extremely rare but it does happen.

Most of the time when you get multiple reports it will be in a heated thread. And those could come from anywhere and anyone, and often don't require a report at all.

Lumenn · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

FeedbackOnly · May 2022

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

Yeah part of problem goes back to being afraid to chat at all

Dragonnord · May 2022

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

@SimonThesis Just to close the loop on this, we also addressed the first thread closing internally and made adjustments there as well. It's also why we wanted to make sure to respond in this thread.

And to put emphasis on this, these adjustments in moderation will be an ongoing conversation. Adjustments can always be made to make the experience better and we understand that.

@ZOS_Kevin Since you mention "...to make the experience better...", could you please respond in this thread (link below) in my comment #2469 and so make our experience better?

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/7595908/#Comment_7595908

Thanks in advance.

starkerealm · May 2022

SilverBride wrote: »

How does anyone know that a particular poster is abusing the system?

We don't. Seeing that someone is abusing the system isn't easy in the first place. Definitively identifying them is basically impossible.

That's part of what makes it so useful as a tool of harassment, it is completely anonymous (on the user end, and I assume the moderators are obliged to withhold that information.)

So, there's no, "that guy over there is reporting me." At least, not beyond stray suspicions. Who have I offended recently? Is someone trying to take revenge for some perceived slight? Is someone just trying to remove me from the board so they can get the last word in some random dispute?

The ineffectiveness of their efforts amuses me somewhat, but it's a real problem for the community.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

Lumenn · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

? Not sure where the disconnect is but I never said there should be no limits. In fact I've said many times that I do not believe in a free for all. From a business view do I think mods should be called for every single infraction? Nope. Do I think every little name caller, or even someone who loses their cool for a moment, needs banned? Again nope. But if it gets to spamming a thread then yeah, take some time off. Not only is it flooding the thread with out of game topics but repeat attacks can be considered harassment. Fairly certain I've said that as well. As for politics or religion being less malicious than a grown adult calling another adult a cootie...well, we'll just say that's a matter of opinion and agree to disagree. My whole point is mods shouldn't be called for every little thing in an adult forum. If someone calls me a cootie on a video game forum, they aren't worth my time. If someone spams threads with it, then mods clean it up.

We keep circling with the same things here. And we're probably not going to agree.

We both believe in moderation. The level of control is entirely up to zos. Some would like to see less, and some would like to see more. We'll just agree to disagree on what level we (who have no say in it) think is appropriate in our own, personal, opinion.

As for the memento/flag, that's an interesting question. Having a sibling that's Bi, I asked them. (As we all are being civilized and not baiting or trolling I'll spare you their response.) Where would YOU personally draw the line? Would a BLM flag be good for you? Alot of people still support it. Alot are upset with it as well. You good with black history month? My own children hate that term and find it offensive, yet my stepfather marched Selma and was in the riots in Alabama. Should we include white Jesus on Easter? I'm sure that would go over well. Maybe just leave real world topics out of Zos's little playhouse yah? And in game/forum politics I see argonians needing some love.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

? Not sure where the disconnect is but I never said there should be no limits.

Right. But you said within legal limits. But when I talk about what the law actually allows, you say that's not what you want. You tell me you want it to be like limited to game topics, but then also say users should be allowed to make each other the topic of conversation so long as it's not spammed constantly.

So I'm trying to determine where you actually think it should be, because for me it seems a bit contradictory and hard to pin down.

No, I think a BLM flag would be inappropriate because it's got nothing to do with Tamriel. It's also about an explicit out of world political movement, unlike a rainbow. There are LGBT people in Tamriel and also rainbows in Tamriel, so it would be entirely possible for them to make such an item within the confines of the lore.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Prismatic_Banner_Ribbon

And in fact we already have such an emote a player could use that way if they chose. It's not explicitly connected to pride, people can use however they wish. I've seen some people to use it like "The More Your Know" instead.

Lumenn · May 2022

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

? Not sure where the disconnect is but I never said there should be no limits.

Right. But you said within legal limits. But when I talk about what the law actually allows, you say that's not what you want. You tell me you want it to be like limited to game topics, but then also say users should be allowed to make each other the topic of conversation so long as it's not spammed constantly.

So I'm trying to determine where you actually think it should be, because for me it seems a bit contradictory and hard to pin down.

No, I think a BLM flag would be inappropriate because it's got nothing to do with Tamriel. It's also about an explicit out of world political movement, unlike a rainbow. There are LGBT people in Tamriel and also rainbows in Tamriel, so it would be entirely possible for them to make such an item within the confines of the lore.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Prismatic_Banner_Ribbon

And in fact we already have such an emote a player could use that way if they chose. It's not explicitly connected to pride, people can use however they wish. I've seen some people to use it like "The More Your Know" instead.

Actually what I said from the start was threats, hate speech, any of the "isms"(no racial slurs, gender slurs, etc) and to keep it game related. When I said "legal stuff" later, after again repeating myself, does not only include criminal as you assumed(such as certain types of ***, threats) We do have civil as well, something a business would have to watch for. While we here in the U.S. have the first amendment we also have areas that are "diminished protection" or not protected by the first(such as fraud, some copyright, false currency, advertising, even inciting lawless behavior just for a few.) I'm not typing everything out and will just say legal stuff. If you are REALLY interested you can certainly do some research on supreme court cases just in the last 50 years. And that's just the U.S. if you've got a few years check out lawsuits for places like Walmart, Target, Costco, restaurant etc as well. But again, you'll forgive me if I don't write every case down and just say legal stuff.

Looks like I owe my sibling some $. As you said, LGBT(you're missing a few letters my friend. You should include everyone)people exist yes. The movement doesn't. In fact so far they seem quite accepted compared to our real world. Racism however, runs rampant.

I really think I'm finished repeating myself to you. I have given examples, repeated, and have said agree to disagree often enough. Legal apparently only means criminal, you conveniently left out my statement on harassment, and ignore examples I've given to "clarify" Yet here you are again. Obviously I can't explain it in a way you personally can understand (and I'll take the L and claim it's my own communication skills that are limited rather than your ability to comprehend or that you're no longer discussing in good faith) on that note I'll say we part ways in a civil manner and I at least have finished the discussion with you.

Agree. To. Disagree.

And as always have a wonderful day.

Elsonso · May 2022

The intersection of "real world" and "game world" is a touchy one when it comes to politically and socially charged topics, and this is not a problem just in the forum, but in the studios that make the games. This goes way beyond the game, or even a request or discussion in a game forum. Game studios voluntarily join, or are under pressure to join, these real world events. The studio may or may not express this in the game, and when they do, it is probably going to spill over into the game forum, if such discussions are allowed.

I'd rather not see that sort of thing in the forum, even if it is some item/trinket/doodad that could be added, or removed, from the game. My view is that nothing good comes from these discussions and the game I am playing is rarely a mirror of the real world. Not everyone will be able to ignore baiting, or agree-to-disagree, on these subjects. These topics are too charged for that.

Here, I expect the studios to hold the line and make sure that in-game features, lore additions, and forum discussions, follow the game, not what is a hot topic in the real world because it is a hot topic in the real world.

To that end, my suggestion for moderation is that they close down real world discussions not tied to the game immediately. They close down game requests for real world events if it appears that the conversation is turning ugly.

I would like to tie this in with improved communication, as well. Frequently, the forum is allowed to debate features, requests, bugs, and stuff so long that camps are formed and sniping happens between the camps. My feeling is that there is nothing more that anyone has to contribute, but they don't want ZOS to do what the other camps wants. My thought is that ZOS can close this with a simple statement about whether it is something they will consider, or something they are not planning to do, at the time of the statement.

For all debated requests, especially charged real world topic, ZOS should include a statement on the subject that closes the topic, not just a moderator action for ToS/CoC violations. This would be repeated each time a similar thread is closed.

Speech over.

spartaxoxo · May 2022

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lumenn wrote: »

Fight or flight is subjective on who's study you use and what conditions they're in. Having a fondness for psychology and taken extra college courses above my degree just out of a life long interest, there are more fight than you'd think(at least there used to be. I'll admit to being years out of the loop and that my whole world growing up was surrounded by fighters may have skewed my views) but I made my living off of manipulation and planning. It's ugly but it's true.

You're basically talking about limiting to stuff like credible threats of violence when you only get rid of what is illegal. The US gives some of the largest amount of leeways to these companies. I know you wanted hate speech added to that.

That's because many of us especially older generation, civil rights generation, and military still believe in free speech, even if they just prove to everyone they're a window licker. 😂
I also wanted to keep things game related. It'll cut down insult-spam.

I mean, I believe in free speech too. But, free speech doesn't mean that private people or businesses can't have their own limits on what they host. I think you understand that as well, since you acknowledge that limiting it to In-game topics only is a reasonable limitation they are placing on speech that wouldn't make sense elsewhere. If they had to allow pretty much everything that is legal, then there should be an off-topic discussion section and politics should absolutely be allowed to be discussed. Alongside all manner of other topics that have nothing to do with the Elder Scrolls. But I don't think that is reasonable to demand of the Elder Scrolls forums, this is not a public square. It's a private website with a specific purpose. It's got little resemblance to a site like Twitter.

So I wonder then why you think "name calling" should be an exception to keeping it on the topic of the game (Spartaxoxo is a cootie queen and a lint licker is not a statement related to the game) but something less malicious like bringing outside politics into the discussion shouldn't be? I find that a little contradictory.

Also would a discussion like "They should add a Rainbow Memento for gay rights on Pride Month?" Be acceptable under your ideal paradigm?

As it currently stands, I would personally think that name calling goes against the express purpose of the forums. It hinders civil debate, and your opinion of another poster is not Elder Scrolls related. Personally I think their current stance of it's not Elder Scrolls related it don't belong is pretty simple to enforce. If you're talking politics, you're not talking about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking mostly about another user, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. If you're talking religion or about some other game etc, that is not about the Elder Scrolls. And therefore It doesn't belong.

? Not sure where the disconnect is but I never said there should be no limits.

Right. But you said within legal limits. But when I talk about what the law actually allows, you say that's not what you want. You tell me you want it to be like limited to game topics, but then also say users should be allowed to make each other the topic of conversation so long as it's not spammed constantly.

So I'm trying to determine where you actually think it should be, because for me it seems a bit contradictory and hard to pin down.

No, I think a BLM flag would be inappropriate because it's got nothing to do with Tamriel. It's also about an explicit out of world political movement, unlike a rainbow. There are LGBT people in Tamriel and also rainbows in Tamriel, so it would be entirely possible for them to make such an item within the confines of the lore.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Prismatic_Banner_Ribbon

And in fact we already have such an emote a player could use that way if they chose. It's not explicitly connected to pride, people can use however they wish. I've seen some people to use it like "The More Your Know" instead.

Actually what I said from the start was threats, hate speech, any of the "isms"(no racial slurs, gender slurs, etc) and to keep it game related. When I said "legal stuff" later, after again repeating myself, does not only include criminal as you assumed(such as certain types of ***, threats) We do have civil as well, something a business would have to watch for.

Well, a professional corporate work environment is already the current enforcement level, so that's why I had excluded it from consideration as it seemed you wanted less than what we currently have. And thought you might be discussing about the bare minimum the law allows websites to run by. If you wanted what flies in corporate America, then I understand what you wanted now. You want we have now but with the ability to openly insult people. I thought you wanted something like Reddit. I understand now, a bit late, but better late than never.

Looks like I owe my sibling some $. As you said, LGBT(you're missing a few letters my friend. You should include everyone)people exist yes. The movement doesn't. In fact so far they seem quite accepted compared to our real world. Racism however, runs rampant.

The flag doesn't represent only the movement, but also LGBT+ people as well, which is why it's a pretty safe choice to be able to incorporate without disruption, which is why I suspect that memento was subtly brought back last year during Pride Month. Similar to how they have dye packs that reference some real world holidays without being overtly political or religious. I was trying to understand whether the same kind of vague, Tamriel focused discussion as items like that would be alright to you or if you wanted moreso zero tolerance for it.

And as always have a wonderful day.

You too.

deleted221106-002999 · May 2022

My experience is that the forum moderation is both draconian and Orwellian. Satire of any sort is generally misinterpreted and often mistakenly invites censure.

The appeal system, in my experience, is a farce and seems only to exist to rubber-stamp the original decisions.

In a recent conversation with Terry White, cs manager, zenimax I mentioned specifically my view that the forum moderation was 'Orwellian and draconian' to which he replied, "Yes, it's deliberate and by design." He also stated no software is used, all decisions are human. When I asked Terry White, cs manager, zenimax if 'good' posts were recognised and went into the process of evaluating whether a comment should merit editing or a ban I was met with stony silence; I took this to mean that they were not and that forum moderation proceeds strictly from a negative perspective per account - in short if your forum account is flagged as problematic, expect the perma-ban as an inevitability. I was advised by Terry White, cs manager, zenimax to avoid satire in the forum; this is disgraceful to say the least given how relevant a form of comment - with all its wonderful wit - satire can be. I asked Terry White, cs manager, zenimax to review the terms to avoid invidious wording regarding 'intent' - which only the poster can truly know - to reflect that moderation decisions are stated as based on opinion and not as currently written, false assertion: he agreed to pass this on to their 'legal team'.

Trying to get a moderator to answer a straight question regarding redactions is useless - if you get a reply (very rare) it'll be a stock copy&paste of the terms which does nothing to illuminate what the specific issue was.

I agree with others that the 'report' option is misused; my first temp ban was for calling out a straw man argument which did NOT troll/bait the individual but the false logic of the comment used - this distinction was not recognised nor acknowledged and I'm still unsure to this day if the qualitative distinction between an attack on a person (which is NOT ok) versus an attack/defense on a comment (which is definitely ok) is understood by moderators.

Despite trying very hard to follow the Orwellian requirement to stick to the implicit newspeak required I've found I cannot even laugh at the irony of recent advertisements without facing instant, reactionary censure.

If you [zos] really want to improve the forum ambience and get away from the reality of draconian redaction, then change that 'Orwellian' policy and start to answer legitimate questions sent asking for fuller explanations/expositions of moderator decisions, get a separate team to do the appeals so appeals are not shut-down or ignored and review those decisions and absolutely add in positives when flagging forum accounts. In the latter case, if 90%+ of forum posts are neutral or positive then a user should not be banned unless and until any perceived negativity has been explained to the user and persists to the extent that it offsest neutral/positive contribution.

Also, if you are using some sort of score-card on accounts this should be transparent to us as individual users - if I know [-10 mod pts] means the next time I say something regarded as dodgy means a perma-ban then at least I can make an informed choice whether to rein in my comments or cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. The consequences under a transparent system are on me, rather than wondering each time I type a comment if some arbitrary moderation decision is going to result in censure.

Thanks to @ZOS_Kevin for permitting this feedback/discussion - that is very much appreciated.

SilverBride · May 2022

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

...if 90%+ of forum posts are neutral or positive then a user should not be banned unless and until any perceived negativity has been explained to the user and persists to the extent that it offsest neutral/positive contribution.

This is my biggest issue with the current system. A poster can have several thousand constructive posts but get permabanned for 3 to 5 infractions (not sure how many) all made over a span of several years.

Out of thousands of posts the law of averages pretty much guarantees that there will be a few mistakes. But this isn't taken into consideration. And many of the actioned infractions are so mild that an educational warning should have been sufficient.

We are losing long time posters to this, many of whom have been active and constructive posters since this game launched. This really needs to be reevaluated.

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

Thanks to @ZOS_Kevin for permitting this feedback/discussion - that is very much appreciated.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Jaraal · May 2022

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

Satire of any sort is generally misinterpreted and often mistakenly invites censure.

Yes, one of my bans was for likening Update 33 and the revocation of individual achievements to the Titanic, and portraying the thousands of players unaware of the upcoming changes to the passengers sleeping soundly in their berths.

Lumenn · May 2022

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

My experience is that the forum moderation is both draconian and Orwellian. Satire of any sort is generally misinterpreted and often mistakenly invites censure.

The appeal system, in my experience, is a farce and seems only to exist to rubber-stamp the original decisions.

In a recent conversation with Terry White, cs manager, zenimax I mentioned specifically my view that the forum moderation was 'Orwellian and draconian' to which he replied, "Yes, it's deliberate and by design." He also stated no software is used, all decisions are human. When I asked Terry White, cs manager, zenimax if 'good' posts were recognised and went into the process of evaluating whether a comment should merit editing or a ban I was met with stony silence; I took this to mean that they were not and that forum moderation proceeds strictly from a negative perspective per account - in short if your forum account is flagged as problematic, expect the perma-ban as an inevitability. I was advised by Terry White, cs manager, zenimax to avoid satire in the forum; this is disgraceful to say the least given how relevant a form of comment - with all its wonderful wit - satire can be. I asked Terry White, cs manager, zenimax to review the terms to avoid invidious wording regarding 'intent' - which only the poster can truly know - to reflect that moderation decisions are stated as based on opinion and not as currently written, false assertion: he agreed to pass this on to their 'legal team'.

Trying to get a moderator to answer a straight question regarding redactions is useless - if you get a reply (very rare) it'll be a stock copy&paste of the terms which does nothing to illuminate what the specific issue was.

I agree with others that the 'report' option is misused; my first temp ban was for calling out a straw man argument which did NOT troll/bait the individual but the false logic of the comment used - this distinction was not recognised nor acknowledged and I'm still unsure to this day if the qualitative distinction between an attack on a person (which is NOT ok) versus an attack/defense on a comment (which is definitely ok) is understood by moderators.

Despite trying very hard to follow the Orwellian requirement to stick to the implicit newspeak required I've found I cannot even laugh at the irony of recent advertisements without facing instant, reactionary censure.

If you [zos] really want to improve the forum ambience and get away from the reality of draconian redaction, then change that 'Orwellian' policy and start to answer legitimate questions sent asking for fuller explanations/expositions of moderator decisions, get a separate team to do the appeals so appeals are not shut-down or ignored and review those decisions and absolutely add in positives when flagging forum accounts. In the latter case, if 90%+ of forum posts are neutral or positive then a user should not be banned unless and until any perceived negativity has been explained to the user and persists to the extent that it offsest neutral/positive contribution.

Also, if you are using some sort of score-card on accounts this should be transparent to us as individual users - if I know [-10 mod pts] means the next time I say something regarded as dodgy means a perma-ban then at least I can make an informed choice whether to rein in my comments or cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. The consequences under a transparent system are on me, rather than wondering each time I type a comment if some arbitrary moderation decision is going to result in censure.

Thanks to @ZOS_Kevin for permitting this feedback/discussion - that is very much appreciated.

I honestly would love to hear the reason behind "deliberate and by design". I have to admit the forums on this game compared to other mmo's seem light. With obvious exceptions(chapter release, a brief flood on free week etc) we see the same people as we cycle through beaks in the game etc. I'll admit it's been years since I've played another one, and of course they were PC only so I suppose that could make a difference. But "deliberate and by design" seems odd. Of course I don't know anything about how zos operates beyond as a customer, and what I can read in "Glass door(and similar) reviews, looking for similarities in the positive and negative (like a very tight core group). Nor do I have the companies P&L reports, but can guess they are making profits. This whole thread and many customers...confusion?....could have been avoided if they'd just made a statement that they INTENDED to be heavy handed, inconsistent, Orwellian from the start.

Edit: typo.

Eormenric · May 2022

Thank you for making this thread. I saw the video and just shake my head at what ZOS is doing to this game. They really have abandoned it in favor of their new AAA IP. This game is losing all support, financially and creatively, as it has turned into a censoring cash cow. This saddens me because it was a game I really hoped to be different. Just waiting for this to be sold to Gamigo now.

Elsonso · May 2022

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

My experience is that the forum moderation is both draconian and Orwellian. Satire of any sort is generally misinterpreted and often mistakenly invites censure.

The appeal system, in my experience, is a farce and seems only to exist to rubber-stamp the original decisions.

In a recent conversation with...

Interesting story about the customer service manager. I know that it was presented in a negative light, but I would seriously like to sit down with him informally and just talk about his job. I guess that have been critical of him in the past, without knowing who he is or what challenges he faces, and that is part of the reason why I'd love to just sit down and hear what he does and understand his job better. Of course, my guess is that if I ever did get a chance to talk to him, it would not be informal.

Anyway... About moderation... Satire, humor, and sarcasm are touchy subjects here. I do know people who have been warned and suspended for it. I use it a lot here. Use with caution.

I do not think the appeal system is a farce. However, I do think that a successful appeal is not as beneficial as it sounds. If I read things correctly, it only gets the door opened, it does nothing to repair misunderstandings. That suggests to me that the very next time the person runs afoul of a moderator, it will be another ban. That ban will probably not win an appeal, as now the person is a repeat offender that wasted their second chance.

jaws343 · May 2022

Elsonso wrote: »

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

My experience is that the forum moderation is both draconian and Orwellian. Satire of any sort is generally misinterpreted and often mistakenly invites censure.

The appeal system, in my experience, is a farce and seems only to exist to rubber-stamp the original decisions.

In a recent conversation with...

Interesting story about the customer service manager. I know that it was presented in a negative light, but I would seriously like to sit down with him informally and just talk about his job. I guess that have been critical of him in the past, without knowing who he is or what challenges he faces, and that is part of the reason why I'd love to just sit down and hear what he does and understand his job better. Of course, my guess is that if I ever did get a chance to talk to him, it would not be informal.

Anyway... About moderation... Satire, humor, and sarcasm are touchy subjects here. I do know people who have been warned and suspended for it. I use it a lot here. Use with caution.

I do not think the appeal system is a farce. However, I do think that a successful appeal is not as beneficial as it sounds. If I read things correctly, it only gets the door opened, it does nothing to repair misunderstandings. That suggests to me that the very next time the person runs afoul of a moderator, it will be another ban. That ban will probably not win an appeal, as now the person is a repeat offender that wasted their second chance.

The problem with the appeal system is with how slow it moves. A 3 day suspension can literally take that entire 3 days time just to have a back and forth through the ticket system. It was taking 20 hours between responses one time I was appealing and by the time they doubled down on the suspension, the suspension time was like 2 hours from being over. That is entirely unacceptable imo.

deleted221106-002999 · May 2022

Would just like to add regarding trigger-happy forum abusers of the 'report-post' option....

Most enlightened civilisations provide a mechanism for the 'right to face your accuser'. While I'd accept that may not be practicable in terms of an online community - although I certainly think it would significantly reduce the hostility of others and prevalence of reports if their anonymity was removed - I would think it prudent and fair that the text of any complaint is forwarded to the account of any post reported, regardless of moderator action.

At least that way, any trends - such as a complete ignorance of irony or other forms of satire or, indeed, failures to recognise that inference is entirely the responsibility of the inferrer - could be easily recognised and going forward, the complained-against account holder could modify their posts to use very small words, tiny sentences and insipid literal language.

Thanks.

deleted221106-002999 · May 2022

[edit] Also want to give huge thanks that the forum warning level is now part of the [edit]forum[/edit] account interface - thanks for listening! Based on observations of others following this post, it would seem that the warning level has always been a feature but I had not noticed it before, possibly due to be shut in room 101 for the duration. [/edit]

It would be useful to have some 'readme' or other explanation of what the points mean, though. [edit]An exposition of their derivation/deployment would be informative, too[/edit].

[edit]Thanks again - huge improvement.[/edit]