• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

DNSL update/removal needed

DeletedUser34893

The current DNSL was created almost 8 years ago, last modified by a moderator in Nov. 2019. It was started by scarecrow if anyone remembers him/her, what was his title and who was giving direction when it was created? Also, where does the direction come from for updates other a general statement that it is Inno?
In the note section it reads: These are things that InnoGames are not looking for currently. (8 years ago).
Anyone who has been playing for any length of time knows this game has changed in 8 years. There are bullet points in the list that Inno has made changes to and some of the examples are "Changes/Additions to GvG ", "Changes to size of Forge Point bar or changes to where Forge Points earned/won are placed. (FP bar or inventory.) " and "Changes to existing rewards". These changes have occurred and I do remember there being posts about these topics asking for changes (usually shut down by a moderator after several members responded "it's on the DNSL!").
If Inno has this "Black list" of suggestions where do they get feedback for implementing these improvements? Beta provides user acceptance testing and feedback after the changes have already been decided on and developed into their test environment.
It is redundant to see the same suggestions being proposed many times but a one time suggestion and discussion could be productive and improve game play. To completely dismiss an idea because it might fall into a set of guidelines established 8 years ago is counter-productive.
As a company I am quite certain Inno values consumer opinions and I would like to believe the forum is monitored for new ideas or removing negative aspects of the game.
Lastly, I see nothing in the forum's terms and rules that prohibit or limit suggestions of any kind or a term stating that users must acknowledge and adhere to a particular post. The DNSL seems antiquated. Forum users do not appear to use city building guides that were created 8 years ago or remind new users to follow those guides. I am having trouble understanding the adherence of the DNSL and the reminders to new posts that they must also follow this post other than reading a reply that states "it's always been done like that".
I would like to hear any comments or concerns on why the DNSL still exists or what steps can be taken to modify or delete it.
 
Graviton

Graviton

Well-Known Member
The only issue I have with the DNSL is I think that sometimes it's interpreted too broadly. For instance, changing the text of an existing GvG popup is not making a change to GvG. Otherwise I think the list itself is fine. The devs don't want to be bombarded with things they either don't plan to do or, as you mentioned, things they're already planning. And I don't want to have to wade through a bunch of useless proposals; that wastes everybody's time, so deletion is a non-starter.

If you want to discuss an idea, start a Forge Hall thread. If it passes our muster and that of the DNSL, then create a proposal for it.
 

DeletedUser

As stated in the thread devoted to it, the DNSL is there because the developers do not want to be bothered with certain types of suggestions. I can only speculate on the specific reason for each, but when they were last modified it was to bring them in line with the list that other international server Forums were using. And that list originates with the developers. So the reference to "8 years ago" is not accurate. Some of the things on the current list have been on the list for a long time, others are newer. What they all have in common is that they are still relevant. Most of them prevent players from proposing things that don't take the entirety of the game into consideration. Developers consider game balance, players generally don't.

As far as Forum rules, they state that Inno reserves to its moderating staff the right to take such actions as they see fit. That would clearly cover the DNSL and its enforcement. The other thing to keep in mind is that suggestions can be made and discussed in Forge Hall, where the DNSL does not apply. It only applies to suggestions posted in the Proposals section. (And there's nothing stating that a moderator can't mention to a CM that a certain idea might be worth passing on, even if it is technically on the DNSL.)
 
RazorbackPirate

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
The entire list was reviewed and updated by Inno in Nov. 2019. It doesn't matter when the original post was created, there would be no difference in the list had they deleted the original post and created a new one.

Yes, there have been changes to the game, and yes, some of them have overlapped user suggestions that were shut down by being on the DNSL. DNSL does not mean Inno will forever decide to never change any of those areas, it means they're not interested in hearing suggestions from the users on those topics. Hence the name DO Not Suggest List.

If you monitor the Beta forums you'll see that they do get suggestions in these areas from Beta players all the time on improvements or changes to the game. However, many of those items get shut down there as well for the same reason DNSL. There's certain topics they simply don't care to hear about, over and over and over again. On Beta, many Inno employees monitor those discussions and interact with players regarding them. The rewards for many event buildings have changed while on Beta due to user feedback.

Take the Olympic Treasury for instance. When it was originally introduced on Beta for the testing of Forge Bowl, the OT's military boost was attack for your defending army. Based on user feedback, the reward was changed to defense for the attacking army. In fact, changes to rewards are pretty common while the new features are being tested. However, once it goes to the live servers, those rewards are baked, and Inno doesn't want to hear it. Hence the DNSL.

I get that you don't like the DNSL, but I understand why it's there. I also understand that since it's reviewed and updated periodically by Inno, there's nothing players or forum users can do to change it, and it will never be deleted.

If discussion is what you're after, any topic can be debated in Forge Hall. But regardless of the discussion, if the topic is DNSL, the moment it becomes a proposal, it will be shut down as being on DNSL.

Given the recent review and update to the DNSL list by Inno staff, I'm good with it. The fact that they updated a post originally created 8 years ago is irrelevant. What's relevant is this is the list that Inno wants. It's their game, and they get to choose what topics they want to hear about, but more importantly, which ones they don't.

I could agree however, that in many cases the DNSL is too strictly enforced. Especially in the area of 'making the game easier.' That statement is way too subjective and IMHO, too strictly enforced. That problem however, doesn't require a change to the DNSL list, it requires a change to the Mod's interpretation.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser

Let me briefly address the interpretation point brought up by both @Graviton and @RazorbackPirate. And I will preface my remarks by saying that I am not perfect, nor claim to be, and the same applies to the other moderators. I think all would agree that it is many times a judgement call on whether the DNSL strictly applies or not. First you have to make a judgement on what exactly the proposal entails, and then make a judgement on whether one or more of the DNSL items covers it in whole or in part. I wish it were always clear and agreed on by everyone, but that's not the real world. So, a large part of the job of a moderator is to make judgement calls, whether it's the DNSL or whether it's posts or other content that has been reported.
 

DeletedUser34893

Thanks for the comments. Razorback, I think you gave me the answer I was looking for as the Beta forum would be the logical starting point. I agree it doesn't make sense to solicit changes on a live server after being thoroughly tested and analyzed . I admit I have not spent much time, if any, in the Beta forum. It also makes sense it would be a better use of resources by Inno to staff the test environment rather than the end-users. I apologize for over-looking such an obvious detail.
Thanks again for the replies.
 
Agent327

Agent327

Well-Known Member
There are 25 language servers and they all have their own forum. Many ideas forwarded are duplicates an need to be sorted out. The DNSL can be seen as the list of most popular ideas that get proposed again and again. Beta never had a DNSL, but has one now since november 2019.
 

DeletedUser

Crollito said:
Of course it's annoying to see redundancy, but I do think the current state is far too stifling to get an appropriate amount of innovative proposals. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
So you're saying that there's an objectively appropriate number of "innovative" proposals that we should be getting? Praytell, how many should we be getting? And in a game that is rapidly changing and evolving, how does a mere player get ahead of the professional development team on a regular enough basis to come up with this fictitious number of innovative proposals? And what is the standard for what is innovative? Surely the glut of proposals for better guild control of their members after GBG was introduced would not be considered innovative. Adding more confirmation popups is surely not innovative. When was the last time you saw more than one innovative proposal in a week? A month? And if they're innovative, wouldn't they clearly fall outside of the DNSL? Especially considering that many of the DNSL items have been there for 7 or 8 years. Personally, I would welcome some truly innovative ideas. Ones that benefit the entirety of the playing community and not just one player or group. Ones that make the game more interesting, while still keeping the overall theme and direction of the game in mind. Do you have any of those? I would love to see them. Until I do, however, I will continue to do my job and shut down the endless ideas to "fix" GvG, to introduce an aid-all button, to allow players to be safe from plunderers, to introduce new buildings that clearly do not fit into any area of the game, and so on, and so on.

Post some innovative proposals, it would be a nice change. But don't blame the DNSL for the lack of imagination in the proposals we do get.
 

DeletedUser32973

Stephen Longshanks said:
So you're saying that there's an objectively appropriate number of "innovative" proposals that we should be getting? Praytell, how many should we be getting? And in a game that is rapidly changing and evolving, how does a mere player get ahead of the professional development team on a regular enough basis to come up with this fictitious number of innovative proposals? And what is the standard for what is innovative? Surely the glut of proposals for better guild control of their members after GBG was introduced would not be considered innovative. Adding more confirmation popups is surely not innovative. When was the last time you saw more than one innovative proposal in a week? A month? And if they're innovative, wouldn't they clearly fall outside of the DNSL? Especially considering that many of the DNSL items have been there for 7 or 8 years. Personally, I would welcome some truly innovative ideas. Ones that benefit the entirety of the playing community and not just one player or group. Ones that make the game more interesting, while still keeping the overall theme and direction of the game in mind. Do you have any of those? I would love to see them. Until I do, however, I will continue to do my job and shut down the endless ideas to "fix" GvG, to introduce an aid-all button, to allow players to be safe from plunderers, to introduce new buildings that clearly do not fit into any area of the game, and so on, and so on.

Post some innovative proposals, it would be a nice change. But don't blame the DNSL for the lack of imagination in the proposals we do get.
Click to expand...

Jeeze what an overreaction, it’s like you thought I was attacking you. It’s simply my opinion that they’re too limiting in the current state. I didn’t mention a quota of proposals because that’s ridiculous. I don’t think I should have to express specific numbers to have an opinion that the current system is likely limiting potentially good proposals from being put forward.
 

DeletedUser

Crollito said:
Jeeze what an overreaction, it’s like you thought I was attacking you. It’s simply my opinion that they’re too limiting in the current state. I didn’t mention a quota of proposals because that’s ridiculous. I don’t think I should have to express specific numbers to have an opinion that the current system is likely limiting potentially good proposals from being put forward.
Click to expand...
So here's my point in a nutshell: The system isn't limiting potentially good proposals, the lack of imagination by players is. The system only limits repetitive or niche proposals. Repetitive proposals like the aid-all button. Niche proposals such as either a change that only benefits a specific playing style or a building or item that doesn't fit into the balance or direction of the game.

Another point I would like to make is that Inno has no obligation at all to even allow suggested changes to the game. They could just rely on the feedback threads for any player input. So in my view, the very fact that they have a proposal process should encourage players who are so inclined to be innovative in their thinking and suggestions. I would rather have one well thought out and interesting proposal a year from the players than the current string of repetitive and shallow ones we get all the time.
 
RazorbackPirate

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
Sorry @Stephen Longshanks, that doesn't quite fly. You shut down far too many proposals under the broadest, most subjective category, of "makes the game easier." Which virtually any proposal will do in some way, shape, or form.

You've gone far beyond just shutting down repetitive proposals and those that cater to niche playing styles. You use this broad interpretation to shut down any proposal you personally don't like. You seem to think you're the final arbiter, when it should be Inno.

We don't need more of your blah, blah, blah, to further justify your actions, but when virtually everyone says you've gone overboard and become far too strict, it's not everyone who's wrong. While I don't expect you to agree, or change your behavior, it still doesn't change what everyone else is saying, and it still leaves you standing alone in your opinion.
 
Last edited:
Agent327

Agent327

Well-Known Member
RazorbackPirate said:
Sorry @Stephen Longshanks, that doesn't quite fly. You shut down far too many proposals under the broadest, most subjective category, of "makes the game easier." Which virtually any proposal will do in some way, shape, or form.

You've gone far beyond just shutting down repetitive proposal and those that cater to niche playing styles. You use this broad interpretation to shut down any proposal you personally don't like. You seem to think you're the final arbiter, when it should be Inno.

We don't need more of your blah, blah, blah, to further justify your actions, but when virtually everyone says you've gone overboard and become far too strict, it's not everyone who's wrong. While I don't expect you to agree, or change your behavior, it still doesn't doesn't change what everyone else is saying, and it still leaves you standing alone in your opinion.
Click to expand...

I totally agree.

Now we will go to the point again where he brings up the subject, does not like the answers and will start deleting posts, cause they question a moderator's actions. With ofcourse the statement that we can always contact a CM.
 

DeletedUser

RazorbackPirate said:
You use this broad interpretation to shut down any proposal you personally don't like.
Click to expand...
There have been 13 proposals make it through the process to being sent up the chain since I've been a moderator. One I seriously disliked, and a couple more that I was not supportive of at all. Several of the rest I thought were unnecessary or I was apathetic towards. Maybe 2 or 3 out of those 13 were proposals I actually supported. As far as those I have "shut down", I know that there were a few that I said I would be supportive of if they weren't violations of the DNSL. I also know that there have been several that I seriously disliked but let stand (most did not get enough support to get to voting or the OP never nominated them) to go through the process because the DNSL did not apply to them.

You (and anyone else) can think I'm wrong all you want, but don't you ever again accuse me of shutting down a proposal simply because I don't like it. I do not work that way. And there are two options for those who think I'm wrong too often. Contact the CMs and get me fired, or become a moderator yourself and do a better job.

Now if you want to continue debating the DNSL itself, I will leave this thread open. But if you're going to continue attacking me personally, I will shut this down.
 
Agent327

Agent327

Well-Known Member
Stephen Longshanks said:
There have been 13 proposals make it through the process to being sent up the chain since I've been a moderator. One I seriously disliked, and a couple more that I was not supportive of at all. Several of the rest I thought were unnecessary or I was apathetic towards. Maybe 2 or 3 out of those 13 were proposals I actually supported.
Click to expand...

That only means you could not shut them down for "making the game easier".

Stephen Longshanks said:
As far as those I have "shut down", I know that there were a few that I said I would be supportive of if they weren't violations of the DNSL. I also know that there have been several that I seriously disliked but let stand (most did not get enough support to get to voting or the OP never nominated them) to go through the process because the DNSL did not apply to them.
Click to expand...

Again, you just could not find the stick to beat them with

Stephen Longshanks said:
You (and anyone else) can think I'm wrong all you want, but don't you ever again accuse me of shutting down a proposal simply because I don't like it. I do not work that way. And there are two options for those who think I'm wrong too often. Contact the CMs and get me fired, or become a moderator yourself and do a better job.
Click to expand...

You think you do not work that way. Others see it different.

Stephen Longshanks said:
Now if you want to continue debating the DNSL itself, I will leave this thread open. But if you're going to continue attacking me personally, I will shut this down.
Click to expand...

As predicted.

You made this about you. We didn't. Don't see any other forum mod taking it personal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top