Woodruff wrote:Well done, General...this is an outstanding example of why a GameChat filter simply won't be very effective.
And why ultimately a game chat filter is not practical to implement on this site when everything is geared towards the lowest possible requirement for maintenance! It's not going to happen, if by some miracle it were implemented it would receive next to zero mod time in monitoring it.
Oh I hope that is not so and that this will prove to be a cynical reading of policy. If that does prove to be the reality and the extent of change to clean-up CC will only reach a very small minority of the users. (i.e. more respect in the Forums and nowhere else.) then what is the point and what of the poor people who have to suffer abuse and foul language in their games! (as a percentage gamers almost make forum goers '0%' of the whole)
If we see no GameChat filter and no Gamechat moderation, then tighter moderation here; positively affecting barely more than a handful of people, is purely superficial.
It is essential that in-game moderation (as outlined in this thread) is instituted!
Woodruff wrote:Well done, General...this is an outstanding example of why a GameChat filter simply won't be very effective.
And why ultimately a game chat filter is not practical to implement on this site when everything is geared towards the lowest possible requirement for maintenance! It's not going to happen, if by some miracle it were implemented it would receive next to zero mod time in monitoring it.
Oh I hope that is not so and that this will prove to be a cynical reading of policy. If that does prove to be the reality and the extent of change to clean-up CC will only reach a very small minority of the users. (i.e. more respect in the Forums and nowhere else.) then what is the point and what of the poor people who have to suffer abuse and foul language in their games! (as a percentage gamers almost make forum goers '0%' of the whole)
If we see no GameChat filter and no Gamechat moderation, then tighter moderation here; positively affecting barely more than a handful of people, is purely superficial.
It is essential that in-game moderation (as outlined in this thread) is instituted!
But what if I wanted to say "Jiminski you stupid arse-troubler. It would be easier to survive prision unmolested than teach you how to play Risk."
Or
"Go blow your load on a cheap bangkok strumpet."
How would your GameChat filter handle that?
Genuinely concerned about the moral upkeep of this good site as always,
Woodruff wrote:Well done, General...this is an outstanding example of why a GameChat filter simply won't be very effective.
And why ultimately a game chat filter is not practical to implement on this site when everything is geared towards the lowest possible requirement for maintenance! It's not going to happen, if by some miracle it were implemented it would receive next to zero mod time in monitoring it.
Oh I hope that is not so and that this will prove to be a cynical reading of policy. If that does prove to be the reality and the extent of change to clean-up CC will only reach a very small minority of the users. (i.e. more respect in the Forums and nowhere else.) then what is the point and what of the poor people who have to suffer abuse and foul language in their games! (as a percentage gamers almost make forum goers '0%' of the whole)
If we see no GameChat filter and no Gamechat moderation, then tighter moderation here; positively affecting barely more than a handful of people, is purely superficial.
It is essential that in-game moderation (as outlined in this thread) is instituted!
But what if I wanted to say "Jiminski you stupid arse-troubler. It would be easier to survive prision unmolested than teach you how to play Risk."
Or
"Go blow your load on a cheap bangkok strumpet."
How would your GameChat filter handle that?
Genuinely concerned about the moral upkeep of this good site as always,
Mr C
good points all, Chang!* And i am glad that you have joined this debate to help clean-up CC. (though i have turned my irony filter on so i am not certain about anything i am saying in that regard)
The above examples you offer are why it is absolutely essential for the Mods to be significantly involved in this, without them this whole exercise is pointless. Indeed GameChat moderation is the single most essential aspect to cleaning up CC. Though i was not immediately happy or on-board, I now see that Flamewars was a good start. (i, more than most, resist change unless i am at its forefront!)
However without the Gamechat moderation one could be tempted to take Artemis's cynical stance; if it stops there, it could be perceived as little more than a means of showing tough, without actually doing anything and only offending a tiny minority of people whilst playing to the crowd without a real strategy or meaningful final goal.
But if it is the first stage in cleaning the whole site up, then excellent, i am now behind it 105%!
*however, I do assume that 'Risk' will be one of the 4 words which will be first in the 'dirty dictionary' along with the names: 'Scunthorpe', 'Phuket' (pronounced [Poo-ket] so it is doubly obscene!) and Hasbro (pronounced '[fash-ist-fuhk-nuhts]) (We must also consider those from 'Clit' in Romania and the poor folk of 'Felch', Michigan!)
Coming to you direct from the fountain of eternal cynicism!
I don't think the 'new direction' is the real reason Flame Wars was removed, neither do I think it's a reason to expect a clamp down on game chat. Lets look back at the last time a change was made without running it by the customers first.
NOTE: This is just a reminder of the way things are done when the shit hits the fan, this is NOT an attempt to derail the topic.
So I suspect there was a sudden and urgent corporate need to remove Flame Wars, possibly of a legal nature also. Hence I don't think that game chat moderation will be considered much less implemented, unless an outside legal stimulus is provided.
================================================== This post was sponsored by Far-Q Industries.
Far-Q Industries: Telling you where to go since 2008.
Artimis wrote:Coming to you direct from the fountain of eternal cynicism!
I don't think the 'new direction' is the real reason Flame Wars was removed, neither do I think it's a reason to expect a clamp down on game chat. Lets look back at the last time a change was made without running it by the customers first.
NOTE: This is just a reminder of the way things are done when the shit hits the fan, this is NOT an attempt to derail the topic.
So I suspect there was a sudden and urgent corporate need to remove Flame Wars, possibly of a legal nature also. Hence I don't think that game chat moderation will be considered much less implemented, unless an outside legal stimulus is provided.
Well the Classic shapes and Blobs debacle was certainly a legal thing, no doubt in my mind.
Let's look at the FW debacle (heheh they are very good at turning dramas into crises) As i think that this is a genuine, if badly executed attempt to do what is best for the site.
Chain of events :-
-Twill has his location changed to UK and takes the name Hyarsey (poor fella could not even introduce himself in gamechat when the filter comes in!) This is done as Twill is almost universally disliked (i like the chap though) and it gives him a clean start in new more enigmatic clothes (check the meagre offerings in the way of the new Community managers posts - sentence structure and vocabulary are camouflaged but inescapably the Twill - right down to the use of 'MmKay' .. slightly altered in spelling to throw off the more meticulous post searchers) 'they'll never suspect a thing' *chortle chortle* (this could be the plot to Da Vinci code III)
-April fools arrives, cuddly-bunny-barstard-pink toss-pot-forum dawns around CC. this is done to cloak the removal of Flamewars in an hilarious gag upon us all, thus delaying the putrid and worthless flamers ire. 'The sting is taken from the situation and aren't we all so very clever!' *sniggers with self-satisfaction*
-A section of our lives is arbitrarily deleted as a joke. The usual suspects spray verbal faeces throughout the forums, randomly attacking the 'establishment' picking fights with all comers! The anarchists without a cause spew-out; no leader, no reason, no respect for or from the common man! 'heehee aren't we clever; the normal people hate these guys! Those with any credibility are long gone, those left have no prestige or tools to argue against our champions!' *more sniggerring*
-The joke is not well received; a dying entity is revitalised beyond its fenced and facile remit. The war on 'Flame Terrorism' calls to arms old campaigners and a new generation flocks to the battle cry! If left alone they would surely have died in ridicule and obscurity. 'heh be patient; this'll blow over it always blows over in the end.. look at all the times before we treated these idiots like crap .. they'll fall in-line .. they always fall in-line!' *forced snigger*
Anyway, back from the brink I think that the opportunity was taken, i think it was handled badly, very badly, but i also feel that this was done to kick start a new type of CC; ushering in more respect and niceness in general. Making this a place where kids can come to play a game and not be corrupted. If this is not the case and it stops in the forums, then it is merely a pointless and spiteful exercise which has galvanised the practically defunct flamers.
So i say again, we need to move to the next phase now, if we can all flame with gay abandon in the games we play, what was the point in sterilising the least populated and frequented aspect of the site?
We need game chat moderation as quickly as possible.
Is there any one semi-optimistic person that sees how immaculately clean this place has become? Such a smooth transition from April to May as if it were some premeditated Spring cleaning dwelt upon all Winter long. Well executed too, I might add.
The windows are open and a fresh breeze has blown away the once putrid smell of stale air, the scuzzy dust has been tidily swept underneath the living room rug, with the decrepit dishes conveniently stored away in the dishwasher, all the squalid laundry tucked away under the couch cushions, wretched jack-mags neatly stacked beneath the bed and our rotten garbage has been shoved off into the garage.
Now we're certified/fit to baby sit(at the low low introductory rate of 25$ a head) each and every one of the internet's offspring. Any previous mess is out of sight, out of mind. That's the way we handle things 'round here. "Now which one of you lucky shits wants to play Duck-Duck-Goose with King Herpes?!"
Sorry about your little butt ✪ Dumb fucking e-lambs the lot of you
King_Herpes wrote:Is there any one semi-optimistic person that sees how immaculately clean this place has become? Such a smooth transition from April to May as if it were some premeditated Spring cleaning dwelt upon all Winter long. Well executed too, I might add.
The windows are open and a fresh breeze has blown away the once putrid smell of stale air, the scuzzy dust has been tidily swept underneath the living room rug, with the decrepit dishes conveniently stored away in the dishwasher, all the squalid laundry tucked away under the couch cushions, wretched jack-mags neatly stacked beneath the bed and our rotten garbage has been shoved off into the garage.
Now we're certified/fit to baby sit(at the low low introductory rate of 25$ a head) each and every one of the internet's offspring. Any previous mess is out of sight, out of mind. That's the way we handle things 'round here. "Now which one of you lucky sh*ts wants to play D*ck-D*ck-G**se with King H*rpes?!"
King_Herpes wrote:Sold to the incredulous space chimp in the front row with a stern look of zeal slapped across his face. Going once! Going twice....
i'd already sold it to ya twinkle .. this is neither sale-or-return nor dutch auction...
Smack! Strikingly similar with the pre-tense of this entire concept. Raising one's hand in favor of the item on display will have little to no effect upon the outcome of our collective evening. We can't all go home with a 19th century oil painting of the Boston Tea Party, so why tease us? We can all oooh,ahhh, or sneeze at the topic of haggling but in the end only the people in charge get to decide whether or not they want to sell. They don't care about our individual petty thoughts or concerns Jim. I thought that was clear by now.
King_Herpes wrote:Sold to the incredulous space chimp in the front row with a stern look of zeal slapped across his face. Going once! Going twice....
i'd already sold it to ya twinkle .. this is neither sale-or-return nor dutch auction...
Smack! Strikingly similar with the pre-tense of this entire concept. Raising one's hand in favor of the item on display will have little to no effect upon the outcome of our collective evening. We can't all go home with a 19th century oil painting of the Boston Tea Party, so why tease us? We can all oooh,ahhh, or sneeze at the topic of haggling but in the end only the people in charge get to decide whether or not they want to sell. They don't care about our individual petty thoughts or concerns Jim. I thought that was clear by now.
indeed senor! I had thought it clear, at least to the initiated, that that is the whole point.
I read your analogy loud and clear, just letting you know that it wasn't my intention to derail the thread off its inevitable course. The bottom of our forum with the rest of the people's constructive thoughts and concerns. It is funny though that the mocking threads, disguised in serious tone last a bit longer.
King_Herpes wrote:I read your analogy loud and clear, just letting you know that it wasn't my intention to derail the thread off its inevitable course. The bottom of our forum with the rest of the people's constructive thoughts and concerns.
never a derailment if it has flavour and panache... but as to its inevitable course; this thread is a swirling eddy, delving beneath and above the currents of convention, entwining itself in the floating weed of common perception. The thread is learning that nothing is inevitable as the sea can at once be solid, fluent or even dry.
King_Herpes wrote:I read your analogy loud and clear, just letting you know that it wasn't my intention to derail the thread off its inevitable course. The bottom of our forum with the rest of the people's constructive thoughts and concerns.
never a derailment if it has flavour and panache... but as to its inevitable course; this thread is a swirling eddy, delving beneath and above the currents of convention, entwining itself in the floating weed of common perception. The thread is learning that nothing is inevitable as the sea can at once be solid, fluent or even dry.
You just blew my mind! *ears, eyes, and nose begin to bleed*
GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:by jiminski » Tue May 05, 2009 5:41 pm We need game chat moderation as quickly as possible.
We need to curb posters like yourself, who'd rather bend over for the establishment.
Thank GOD, we had people on this planet, who fought against the establishment, otherwise we'd still be slaves to warlords and such.
The difference is the rationale. Fighting against the establishment for the sole reason of fighting against the establishment makes no sense at all.
Fighting against the establishment due to actual, potential or perceived wrongs is an entirely different matter. There seem to be a lot of people who fight against the establishment simply so they can say that they do so.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:by jiminski » Tue May 05, 2009 5:41 pm We need game chat moderation as quickly as possible.
We need to curb posters like yourself, who'd rather bend over for the establishment.
Thank GOD, we had people on this planet, who fought against the establishment, otherwise we'd still be slaves to warlords and such.
The difference is the rationale. Fighting against the establishment for the sole reason of fighting against the establishment makes no sense at all.
Fighting against the establishment due to actual, potential or perceived wrongs is an entirely different matter. There seem to be a lot of people who fight against the establishment simply so they can say that they do so.
The same old stale replies from Woodruff. Hey, do you always make replies, just so you can read your nonsense?
GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:by jiminski » Tue May 05, 2009 5:41 pm We need game chat moderation as quickly as possible.
We need to curb posters like yourself, who'd rather bend over for the establishment.
Thank GOD, we had people on this planet, who fought against the establishment, otherwise we'd still be slaves to warlords and such.
The difference is the rationale. Fighting against the establishment for the sole reason of fighting against the establishment makes no sense at all.
Fighting against the establishment due to actual, potential or perceived wrongs is an entirely different matter. There seem to be a lot of people who fight against the establishment simply so they can say that they do so.
The same old stale replies from Woodruff. Hey, do you always make replies, just so you can read your nonsense?
I would think that if you found my posts to be "same old stale replies", you'd stop reading them. But clearly my posts are so engaging and informative, that you just can't tear yourself away from them! Thanks for the compliment!
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
GENERAL STONEHAM wrote:by jiminski » Tue May 05, 2009 5:41 pm We need game chat moderation as quickly as possible.
We need to curb posters like yourself, who'd rather bend over for the establishment.
Thank GOD, we had people on this planet, who fought against the establishment, otherwise we'd still be slaves to warlords and such.
The difference is the rationale. Fighting against the establishment for the sole reason of fighting against the establishment makes no sense at all.
Fighting against the establishment due to actual, potential or perceived wrongs is an entirely different matter. There seem to be a lot of people who fight against the establishment simply so they can say that they do so.
Some do it to fight some do it coz it's fun some do it to wind up idiots who take it seriously some do it coz they have too much time on their hands some do it for the holy cause (though there isn't one in cc) some do it coz it's all they know how to do some do it to feel ALIIIIIIVE some do it coz they're twats
remember this - every leader needs an enemy to measure themselves against. The CC leaders got gypped.
The world needs fools or how would we measure ourselves!? (Ancient Twattish rhetorical axiom)
So the vote is stacked against the introduction of a Gamechat filter, is this because you feel that it is not required if there were to be Gamechat Moderation?
There's quite the exaggeration going on with so-called foulness in game chat.
The problem I believe, is that those who want some type of "moderation" on game chat, are the ones who play badly in games and are called idiots and worse.
This would of course, include those who opposed Flame Wars, due to them being picked to pieces there.
Boy-O-boy, do I feel like FLAMING big time right now.
