[Guide] Forum Etiquette

[Graviton]

My point in bringing up the OP's history isn't to impugn the idea of being nice, it's to question what basis the OP has to believe that being nice to new bad posters is gonna do any good.

That is not at all what your post implies, let alone says straight-up, so thank you for the clarification, we'll go with that.

I guess that depends on what your definition of "doing some good" is. I think it will eliminate the general atmosphere of negativity that many have mentioned, and it won't chase off players who have a bad first experience here.

If your idea of "doing some good" is the elimination of bad or repeated proposals, or rude defensiveness when those proposals are critiqued, well nothing is going to help that. But that was never the goal of the OP. In your first post you dismissed this whole idea as "providing excuses" for new posters, as if it's our job to punish them or as if their ignorance and laziness is an excuse for us to be rude. That's the very attitude that is the topic.

But as I said before, we don't all have to be mindful of our replies, as long as most of us are. At the very least it's a conversation that's been worth having.

 

[DeletedUser36326]

Well, I guess I'll put my two cents in....Like Grav there, I too, have flung my share of poo over the years. That being said, I can see a partial solution to many of the issues that plague the proposal threads. the first being a template form for the forum to ease the process. Imagine NOBODY having to be the Proposal Police 9 out of 10 entries. The consistency of failed formats by new posters screams that the system is flawed. That alone would reduce the amount of negativity that new posters experience when they join. Unaware that a format system even exists but a big inviting + sign that instantly shows a thread starter is clearly available is also a flawed opening page. I don't blame new posters who start invalid proposals for doing so and how can they be blamed for being attacked for not knowing the "secret" formula that is several rows down out of view...? Erase this boondoggle of a page and I'll bet dollars to donuts most of the snark and attitude will disappear with new members and membership will actually increase..which is good for the game and the forum...Uhh..try not to step to my left...there is some..uh....ahh...er...poo there...

I think the issue in general is about who people talk to one another in all threads, not just proposals.

 

[DeletedUser32389]

There will always be rude people, you need to learn how to put these things in proper perspective.
So lets find perspective shall we? First we'll click on a player at random, we'll use the last post on this thread.

Take note of the number of messages, and compare that to the number of likes received. 1,100 messages to 1676 likes.
This is a person you can communicate with.

Lets do another one, we'll use @Algona this time because he's one of the longest standing members (with @Stephen Longshanks )

Starting to see a pattern...
How about these?

Note that Algona has been around YEARS longer than Agent, but only has 3k posts. Agent has been here less than a year, chimes in on everything, and is only helpful (or maybe funny) around 40% of the time. (which is actually proof he's not a true troll, just a poor communicator)

Nothing you can do but educate yourself. Some voices aren't worth being offended by

 

[DeletedUser36326]

I don't think I buy the idea that the attitude of the experienced toward new players is due to their laziness and ignorance. I can see this as a source of frustration, sure, but it seems that the posts that have been made after a request for civility reveal contempt and arrogance more than anything else. I could be wrong, but go back and read some of them.

I don't think the problem is going to go away if this idea that "it's all the noobs fault" and they started it doesn't get questioned either. I think this contempt says that blaming noobs is just an excuse for people to act or react how they want to.

 

[DeletedUser36326]

There will always be rude people, you need to learn how to put these things in proper perspective.
So lets find perspective shall we? First we'll click on a player at random, we'll use the last post on this thread.

Take note of the number of messages, and compare that to the number of likes received. 1,100 messages to 1676 likes.
This is a person you can communicate with.

Lets do another one, we'll use @Algona this time because he's one of the longest standing members (with @Stephen Longshanks )

Starting to see a pattern...
How about these?

Note that Algona has been around YEARS longer than Agent, but only has 3k posts. Agent has been here less than a year, chimes in on everything, and is only helpful (or maybe funny) around 40% of the time. (which is actually proof he's not a true troll, just a poor communicator)

Trolls will troll! Nothing you can do but educate yourself. Some voices aren't worth being offended by

I think this is subjective at best.

 

[DeletedUser32389]

I think this is subjective at best.

And you're entitled to your opinion, but that's kind of what I'm talking about. You've got 23 posts here, so your opinion isn't representing a lot of experience. The post to like ratio doesn't tell you how experienced someone is at the game, or that they're guaranteed to have the best ideas, but it does signify that they're generally agreeable. If you find yourself arguing with one of these people, you should take a moment to question your understanding of their point.

If you find yourself getting rude comments from someone, it's likely a person with a low likes to post ratio. You're not going to convince these kind of people to be nice, they're miserable people IRL.

It's not hard and fast, you're new for example so you're yet to be decided. Start paying attention every time someone offers an opinion you respect, look at their numbers. You'll see

Some voices aren't worth being offended by

 

[DeletedUser]

I think this is subjective at best.

While not exact, the ratio of likes received compared to total posts gives you a good general idea of whether a person's posts are entertaining at the very least, and probably also whether their posts are generally helpful and/or informative.

 

[DeletedUser36326]

While not exact, the ratio of likes received compared to total posts gives you a good general idea of whether a person's posts are entertaining at the very least, and probably also whether their posts are generally helpful and/or informative.

Likes are given for many reasons. They can be given to like a person or spite another, for instance. They had a study on this concerning Facebook.

Edit: The reason I don't like it is because it puts us right back into old versus new- an elitism of sorts. A person could have been playing for years, but just joined the forum a week ago. Or they might post infrequently simply because they have no questions to ask. Besides that, I don't think we should begin "ranking" people in this sort of way. A general open-mindedness to experience, sure, but not based on these types of numbers. This is why I called it very subjective.

I think the post is a terrible standard to rely on.

 

[DeletedUser]

Likes are given for many reasons. They can be given to like a person or spite another, for instance. They had a study on this concerning Facebook.

I think the post is a terrible standard to rely on.

This isn't Facebook, so that study (if it even exists) isn't relevant here. Those of us who are frequently on the Forum, reading as well as posting, don't need the stats to tell us who is worth listening to. There are names that I know from experience are mostly going to have something worthwhile to say, and others where it is more rare. And believe me, it doesn't take long to tell which camp a new poster is probably going to be in. Again, this is all generally speaking. There are exceptions on both sides. But when I do look at the stats, they bear out my impressions.

 

[DeletedUser36326]

This isn't Facebook, so that study (if it even exists) isn't relevant here. Those of us who are frequently on the Forum, reading as well as posting, don't need the stats to tell us who is worth listening to. There are names that I know from experience are mostly going to have something worthwhile to say, and others where it is more rare. And believe me, it doesn't take long to tell which camp a new poster is probably going to be in. Again, this is all generally speaking. There are exceptions on both sides.

I agree with the idea of experience in general being a quality worth considering, but not the likes-to-posts ratio.

 

[DeletedUser36624]

People only give me likes so I don't plunder them, so yes, likes-to-posts ratio can be misleading.

 

[DeletedUser32389]

I agree with the idea of experience in general being a quality worth considering, but not the likes-to-posts ratio.

And again, you're entitled to an opinion, but your basing it on an objective lack of proof or experience.
A little challenge if I may: Find some examples of someone that has a high likes to post ratio being REALLY rude.

Most of the rude comments come from a few players, all with a low likes to post. It's not elitism, it's math. Lower post counts just mean lower sample sizes and the result becomes less accurate.

Just another opinion on the boards, take it or leave it. I know who's respectable around here and who's not, and again it's not subjective, it's quantifiable

VV See these two Below VV

They're perfect examples. Click on the avatar and read their old posts, everything you've ever said is saved here. I'm not saying they're NEVER helpful, just that they're argumentative. Take a second to compare them to @Titris Thrawns who's always ALWAYS polite.

The proof is in the pudding boys. You can make like it's some "boys club", but I've argued with all of them at one point; we don't always agree. We're just respectful when we argue. I could make the case that you have as many likes as you have because you've formed a little "trolls club" where people think it's funny when you're a tool

 

[Agent327]

While not exact, the ratio of likes received compared to total posts gives you a good general idea of whether a person's posts are entertaining at the very least, and probably also whether their posts are generally helpful and/or informative.

It doesn't say a thing. It's "the old boys club" that likes eachother with everything they say, every time all the time.

 

[mamboking053]

It doesn't say a thing. It's "the old boys club" that likes eachother with everything they say, every time all the time.

Exactly.

 

[DeletedUser]

It doesn't say a thing. It's "the old boys club" that likes eachother with everything they say, every time all the time.

If that were true, our likes received would be more than 4 times our total posts.

 

[Freshmeboy]

I'm not sure I would describe the forum as an "old boys club" ..I've had my fair share of arguments with many of the regulars here and respect them regardless of whether we came to a conclusion or just agreed to disagree because they have some shared traits..A love of the game and a desire to be a part of the process of its evolution. Even if we never achieve any change through our efforts at least there is a feeling of voice and unity through the process. Again, reading through pages in the past, most arguments seem to start and blossom in the proposals thread.....My advice to the OP is to contact support and explain our forum page is flawed and needs a revamp so the forum can grow. Explicitly stating the desired template and that DSNL needs to be at the TOP of the page or directly linked when clicking the proposal + button...

 

[Graviton]

Take note of the number of messages, and compare that to the number of likes received. 1,100 messages to 1676 likes.
This is a person you can communicate with.

First, thanks for using me as a positive example. I have gotten better over the years so hopefully my ratio will improve even more.

Having said that, I agree that there isn't necessarily a direct correlation between "like" count and amiability. I have liked posts that would be considered snarky, so those would invalidate your theory to a degree, but I do think it's a good starting point.

Nothing you can do but educate yourself. Some voices aren't worth being offended by

This, all day long. They only have the power you give them.

It doesn't say a thing. It's "the old boys club" that likes eachother with everything they say, every time all the time.

That's nonsense. I like posts that I agree with and don't like those I don't. There is no conspiracy.

... but it seems that the posts that have been made after a request for civility reveal contempt and arrogance more than anything else. I could be wrong, but go back and read some of them.

I don't think the problem is going to go away if this idea that "it's all the noobs fault" and they started it doesn't get questioned either. I think this contempt says that blaming noobs is just an excuse for people to act or react how they want to.

I agree, we can't blame it on noobs unless they start something. And even then I think ignoring them goes further than going back at them does.

 

[DeletedUser36326]

If that were true, our likes received would be more than 4 times our total posts.

It's not simply an "old boys club", it's just one of the factors that would go into a number of likes, I'd imagine. People who have become friends on this forum (long-time friends I imagine) will likely like each others posts and present a front in a dispute when it presents itself based more on camaraderie than the issue.

Besides...that number you just stated, that your likes would be more than 4 times the total post if that was true. Do you know that to be true, or is it just your opinion? Seems subjective to me, but you offer it as a fact. A person liked your comment. Does he consider what you said a fact or an opinion?

That's why I said the likes are subjective.

 

[DeletedUser36326]

That's nonsense. I like posts that I agree with and don't like those I don't. There is no conspiracy.

Maybe. But you wouldn't be speaking for everyone anyway.

It's still relevant since it's also about what a person is agreeing with. If we are talking about abusive or disrespectful posts, go back to them. Do they have any likes? Well...if an abusive person is well liked, and he has a lot of likes...what does this mean? There are plenty of people who say abusive people are not abusive...in their opinion. Meryl Streep defended Harvey Weinstein before going on to advance the feminist movement. Applause, lol.

I'm just saying these things are very subjective. Better to base your idea of the person on the person standing before you rather than the medals and stripes.

 

[DeletedUser]

Besides...that number you just stated, that your likes would be more than 4 times the total post if that was true. Do you know that to be true, or is it just your opinion? Seems subjective to me, but you offer it as a fact. A person liked your comment. Does he consider what you said a fact or an opinion?

The quote I was responding to said we...

likes eachother with everything they say, every time all the time.

So if that were true, that we all like every single post of every other one of us, then it is a mathematical fact that our likes to post ratio would be noticeably higher than it is.