These forums

[Rashidi]

Burnt out means we gently fade away...we do get older each year, hopefully wiser ;-)

[FrazT]

Originally posted by Dayle Wood:

Sean M - there is no roster, they just come on when they feel like it. I don't know what you mean by them getting burnt out? DO you mean they became abrasive with people?

Burned out for the Mods probably means the same as for all of us- They will get bored and tired of answering the same questions day after day, correcting those who choose to ignore the basic rules of the Forum and so their interest levels drop. There wont be many of the regular posters who can sustain say 6 months of continual posting in GQ especially without getting tired and wanting a rest for a while. We can turn off, they cant really.

[Sean M]

No, I mean they post a lot in GQ.

But then after a while they get tired, less enthusiatic and stop posting. They have to take a long break.

I think the same thing would happen to a fulltime GQ mod who was doing it intensely every single day. I think they need to make sure they get a break before the peak periods where it gets chaotic.

[gavnoble]

Originally posted by Sean M:

Also if you get new GQ mods. Only roster them on for a few days a week to prevent burnout.

I remember prodigious GQ posters from the past like Liam Harper, gavnoble, Herman Bloom, Smiley Dan etc. There was a certain point where they seemed to get burnt out.

I can only answer for myself here but I didn't get burned out. I got fed up with seeing and answering the same old questions and taking part in the same old arguments day in day out. I didn't feel burnt out, I just felt disappointed with the way the forum was heading and didn't want to be a part of its regular life anymore.

I still look on a regular basis but rarely post because I've noticed the levels of hostility gradually get higher and higher. I'd hazard a guess and say that since this thread appeared I've posted more in this forum over the last 3 days than I have at any point in the last 12 months. (Of course another reason could be that last year for the first time in a few versions I actually enjoyed playing FM more than talking aout it).

[Divinity]

The current situation is a product of the people that the game is marketed to. The older population tend to get a little frustrated when the same questions they've watched for ten years still get asked because the search function is inept or because people simply can't be bothered using it. I'm sure people wouldn't feel the need or desire to abuse others if the posting was made a little more difficult for those who only want to click new topic straight after registering.

And on another note, attempting to change the culture of a forum to one of following the rules will fail dismally when the people enforcing them can only be bothered to do so selectively, ala the piracy bans / free discussion of downloading TV shows debacle.

Everyone has bad days. It simply depends on how much you want to change things as regards how rigidly you want to enforce a standard - if you want to do so strictly, at a minimum you need impeccable, unquestionable, frequent supervision.

All the best with locating that.

[FrazT]

if the posting was made a little more difficult for those who only want to click new topic straight after registering.

Perhaps reinforcing the suggestion made earlier that before being allowed to post a new discussion or question, posters neded to fill out 2 or 3 questions about the relevancy of their post and whether it is in the right forum.

May be difficukt to implemet of course.

[port-ton]

dont know if theres already one or if its been suggested but maybe there could be a sticky Q&A thread at the top for anyone with questions about the game, which mods and SI could check regularly and help people out along with other posters. this would eliminate all insults to do with people not understanding the game.

this leaves the rest of the forum for general FM discussion which would be a lot easier to control.

[playmaker]

Originally posted by FrazT:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">if the posting was made a little more difficult for those who only want to click new topic straight after registering.

Perhaps reinforcing the suggestion made earlier that before being allowed to post a new discussion or question, posters neded to fill out 2 or 3 questions about the relevancy of their post and whether it is in the right forum.

May be difficukt to implemet of course. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can't see SI limiting new posters like this. They have as much right to just get on and ask a question as the rest of us.

[Dayle Wood]

I agree with playmaker, that would just alienate and drive away new members which is counterproductive to what we are trying to achieve.

The key issue is member behaviour.

a) people coming on and behaving like fools

b) other people exacerbating the problem by fueling the initial fools statement and replying wih abuse.

I think a thread at the top of the page listing the reasons people are getting carded should be started. If a person gets a card, next to that card is a number corresponding with the problem they are caused.

So in the thread there might be the following list:

1. Abuse of other members

2. Swearing

3. spammming

4. posting offensive material

5. etc etc.

Each offence carries a yellow card sentence period so that if you are guilty of 2) swearing it might be worth a yellow card for one months duration.

Spamming might be worth 2 weeks and so on.

This way there is a list of the offences and a visible punishment next to them.

These offences would be applicable to all, new or old so that there is no favortism.

Just an idea.

[Divinity]

Originally posted by playmaker:

I can't see SI limiting new posters like this. They have as much right to just get on and ask a question as the rest of us.

That shouldn't exempt them from being able to use a search function. On other forums I'm on it's mandatory for the first month of being a member - physically impossible to post a new thread unless you've searched for it beforehand.

[FrazT]

Originally posted by playmaker:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FrazT:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">if the posting was made a little more difficult for those who only want to click new topic straight after registering.

Perhaps reinforcing the suggestion made earlier that before being allowed to post a new discussion or question, posters neded to fill out 2 or 3 questions about the relevancy of their post and whether it is in the right forum.

May be difficukt to implemet of course. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can't see SI limiting new posters like this. They have as much right to just get on and ask a question as the rest of us. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok then make is mandatory for ALL posters to answwer the questions before having the thread authorised- it wont stop the idiots but it will at least make everyone who wants to post a serious question or discussion be aware that they have to fit in with the guidelines. No serious poster will mind this IMO.

[LFC Lloydy]

I like your idea FrazT, it doesn't have to be too time consuming but it will remind/inform users of whether they are right to be posting the thread in the forum. It would also mean that nobody would have the excuse of not knowing if it was the right place.

After a while most people will get used to it and it won't really be a nuisance to them, for new members though it is a good way of getting them used to things.

I am not too sure how easy it would be to implement though.

[Ter]

There isn't much we can do in regards to changing the way the forum software works to do stuff like having to answer a question before posting. I don't think that is necessary anyway.

[chopper99]

Originally posted by Divinity:

That shouldn't exempt them from being able to use a search function. On other forums I'm on it's mandatory for the first month of being a member - physically impossible to post a new thread unless you've searched for it beforehand.

I like this idea a lot, and if it could be done I think it would be of great benefit. However, the search function would need improving to make it worthwhile.

[Matthew Le God]

Originally posted by LFC Lloydy:

I like your idea FrazT

it was my idea, he used bits of my idea that i said 14 hours before him

whenever a new user clicks reply or start new thread for thier first 10 posts a screen comes up with frequently asked questions which they have to click through one by one. once the have posted 10 posts without problem this function is removed from their account and they post as normal.

if anyone breaks one of the house rules aswell as cards warnings etc this function is turned back on for their next 10 posts no matter how many posts they have previously made

[migwar]

ok, i havn't really entered this debate, as i'm pretty new, but i have an opinion, so here goes...

i actually hadn't read the rules of the forums until someone was flaming someone else about using text-speak. they said it was in the rules, so i read them...

i also actually thought that all the flaming, arguing and downright rudeness was just the way people spoke to each other here, and adopted a pose accordingly...

so anyway, i now realise that is not the case, but it wasn't until miles started this thread a couple of days ago. now my stance has changed. i'm being much more helpful, and answering questions politely to the best of my ability. i'm trying to adopt a friendlier attitude and by doing this i hope others will do the same.

bottomline. if everyone on here, seasoned veterans especially were just a little more patient, polite and helpful i truly believe the general board attitude would shift a lot and quickly.

finally, i think the rules need to be more prominently displayed and advertised...

that is all

[FrazT]

Originally posted by Matthew Le God:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LFC Lloydy:

I like your idea FrazT

it was my idea, he used bits of my idea that i said 14 hours before him

whenever a new user clicks reply or start new thread for thier first 10 posts a screen comes up with frequently asked questions which they have to click through one by one. once the have posted 10 posts without problem this function is removed from their account and they post as normal.

if anyone breaks one of the house rules aswell as cards warnings etc this function is turned back on for their next 10 posts no matter how many posts they have previously made

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Matthew- I have no desire to enter into any debate about whose idea it is but I did make the following suggestion earlier in the thread so perhapsd you should check the whole thread before suggesying things like this.

Posted 24 September 2007 07:49 Just had a thought to try and ensure that all new threads are reasonable-

After you click on New/Discussion and before you type in your thread title, what about a couple of questions which require a yes/no answer before the thread is allowed? No answers, no thread.

For example:

If you are asking a question, have you searched to see if it has been asked before?

Is your thread relevant to the General Questions Forum?

Is your thread relevant to the current FM game?

There may be other relevant questions but these are for example only. This will not stop all nonsense getting through but will at least make posters aware that the quality of their threrad is thought about before they post it.

[LFC Lloydy]

I've started an argument in a thread about stopping arguments

Lets just say you are both so creative that you both came up with such a great idea. Although based on current evindence provided FrazT deserves the credit

It really doesn't matter, the fact that you are both trying to find a solution is what is most important. You both get a thumbs up from me

Can you feel the love?

[migwar]

good save, lloydy...

[Rashidi]

actually kinda nice to see the old skool arguing in GQ been awhile..hmm methinks this thread has done more for GQ than any rule could have actually.

Call it a shot of awareness.

[FrazT]

Originally posted by LFC Lloydy:

I've started an argument in a thread about stopping arguments

Lets just say you are both so creative that you both came up with such a great idea. Although based on current evindence provided FrazT deserves the credit

It really doesn't matter, the fact that you are both trying to find a solution is what is most important. You both get a thumbs up from me

Can you feel the love?

Sweeping over me as wee speak

- Couldnt care less about credit or otherwise but am keen that all ideas are debated and hopefully some good come of them

[Divinity]

Originally posted by rashidi1:

actually kinda nice to see the old skool arguing in GQ been awhile..hmm methinks this thread has done more for GQ than any rule could have actually.

Call it a shot of awareness.

This is the part where I say I only came here because it was linked in OTF and I'll be scarpering back there just as soon I pick up my own seemingly inevitable warning.

Well, not quite, but GQ being what it is nowadays is the reason I don't come here, and probably still won't.

[Matthew Le God]

Originally posted by FrazT:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LFC Lloydy:

I've started an argument in a thread about stopping arguments

Lets just say you are both so creative that you both came up with such a great idea. Although based on current evindence provided FrazT deserves the credit

It really doesn't matter, the fact that you are both trying to find a solution is what is most important. You both get a thumbs up from me

Can you feel the love?

Sweeping over me as wee speak

- Couldnt care less about credit or otherwise but am keen that all ideas are debated and hopefully some good come of them </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

sorry frazt i think our ideas would work well in combination as weren't completely the same but do compliment each other

[Nicolai]

When will the bug forums and the likes be replaced with Fm08?

[Evon]

Flood control. It'd stop the spamming. It's one of the reasons why I'm not as active on these forums anymore. Most of the old GPTG crowd have left actually.

[birdy123]

Originally posted by Evon:

Flood control. It'd stop the spamming. It's one of the reasons why I'm not as active on these forums anymore. Most of the old GPTG crowd have left actually.

Flood control is in place.

And all the GPTG crowd have left because they have no GPTG OTF thread, and are scared to enter OTF.

[FrazT]

Originally posted by Nicolai:

When will the bug forums and the likes be replaced with Fm08?

Regrettably they will usually be superceded as soon as the demo comes out because all the questions and comments will be about the new game. It is a shame IMO that there is little or no support for FM07 within a year of its release but I can see why it happens.

[FrazT]

Originally posted by Matthew Le God:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FrazT:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LFC Lloydy:

I've started an argument in a thread about stopping arguments

Lets just say you are both so creative that you both came up with such a great idea. Although based on current evindence provided FrazT deserves the credit

It really doesn't matter, the fact that you are both trying to find a solution is what is most important. You both get a thumbs up from me

Can you feel the love?

Sweeping over me as wee speak

- Couldnt care less about credit or otherwise but am keen that all ideas are debated and hopefully some good come of them </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

sorry frazt i think our ideas would work well in combination as weren't completely the same but do compliment each other </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No problems mate-

[gangooly]

I've not been on the forum anywhere near as much as I used to be and it's probably for this reason.

I agree with the main consensus that a larger (and possibly a bit stricter) mod team would be a good first step.

[LRJ]

Ive never been a GQ/D guy and i never will for the following reasons:

1) the crowd aint nice, you say a stupid question and it seems like you have the whole forum on your back

2) its not active enough, the same thread will stay in the top 10 for a whole day sometimes, i like new threads where you can give good asnwers because after your first in here there is no point with other (as your giving advice)

[dafuge]

Originally posted by birdy123:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Evon:

Flood control. It'd stop the spamming. It's one of the reasons why I'm not as active on these forums anymore. Most of the old GPTG crowd have left actually.

Flood control is in place.

And all the GPTG crowd have left because they have no GPTG OTF thread, and are scared to enter OTF. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I always wondered why they had an off topic thread.

[gavnoble]

Originally posted by Liverpool Rule---Jehrome:

Ive never been a GQ/D guy and i never will for the following reasons:

1) the crowd aint nice, you say a stupid question and it seems like you have the whole forum on your back

2) its not active enough, the same thread will stay in the top 10 for a whole day sometimes, i like new threads where you can give good asnwers because after your first in here there is no point with other (as your giving advice)

1. Which is why this thread has been started by SI, to try and find a way of cutting down on the unpleasantness.

2. Sort out problem one and problem two will be sorted as well, as more people will be inclined to post threads.

[LRJ]

yeah GPTG is pretty dead

i remember when the Liverpool thread was going strong, new page almost every day

There was LSTB, OST, Me, YNWA loads of us, only ever see LSTB thesedays

[LRJ]

Originally posted by gavnoble:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Liverpool Rule---Jehrome:

Ive never been a GQ/D guy and i never will for the following reasons:

1) the crowd aint nice, you say a stupid question and it seems like you have the whole forum on your back

2) its not active enough, the same thread will stay in the top 10 for a whole day sometimes, i like new threads where you can give good asnwers because after your first in here there is no point with other (as your giving advice)

1. Which is why this thread has been started by SI, to try and find a way of cutting down on the unpleasantness.

2. Sort out problem one and problem two will be sorted as well, as more people will be inclined to post threads. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

but people are saying be more strict give more cards/bans but that will make even more people leave thus making number 2 even worse

[gavnoble]

Originally posted by migwar:

bottomline. if everyone on here, seasoned veterans especially were just a little more patient, polite and helpful i truly believe the general board attitude would shift a lot and quickly.

finally, i think the rules need to be more prominently displayed and advertised...

that is all

I will disagree and say there that your definition of seasoned GQ veteran and my definition would differ somewhat.

I think some of the seasoned veterans on here who haven't been around much for whatever reason would be quite ooffended at being lumped in with the mob you're referring to!

[birdy123]

Originally posted by Liverpool Rule---Jehrome:

yeah GPTG is pretty dead

i remember when the Liverpool thread was going strong, new page almost every day

There was LSTB, OST, Me, YNWA loads of us, only ever see LSTB thesedays

Called spam, mate.

[gavnoble]

Originally posted by Liverpool Rule---Jehrome:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gavnoble:

1. Which is why this thread has been started by SI, to try and find a way of cutting down on the unpleasantness.

2. Sort out problem one and problem two will be sorted as well, as more people will be inclined to post threads.

but people are saying be more strict give more cards/bans but that will make even more people leave thus making number 2 even worse </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Only time will tell. I personally believe that it will sort out the quality from the dross. Those that want to contribute will change accordingly to fit in with the rules, those that don't won't and in their case are no great loss, are they?

What I'm advocating here is not a total beat them with stick zero tolerance policy - I'm more in favour of a balanced approach.

Longer term users will remember the CM Forum and the, quite frankly, brilliant standard of moderating from Smiley Dan who was firm with his warnings when he needed to be but gave out stiffer punishments when warranted. I would say a lot of the users in there had a great deal of respect for Smiley Dan in the way he treated the users of that forum and because he was assigned that forum he was the figurehead that I've referred to a few times in earlier posts.

I still think there's room for the users of the forum to provide a friendly nudge in the right direction as well though. So long as people are re-directed to the right forums if they've posted in the wrong place or reminded that text speak or posting in capital letters is frowned upon in the right way then the forum users can be used as an asset in educating newer users in the board etiquette.

[LRJ]

alot of the problem in threads is, when one person insults the creator or somebody it starts a chain reaction which ends up in a big arguement

[Jimbokav1971]

I think part of the reason for that is that people have lost confidance in the moderating system.

It's not an excuse though.

[birdy123]

I think that people just get annoyed by bad threads with pages full of spam that aren't getting locked, the participating users banned, warned, etc.

Would just be nice to see some mods posting and helping out.

But I fully agree, most people also just want someone to blame, and the moderators are right in the firing line.

[Jimbokav1971]

To be honest birdy, I'm not blaming the moderators at all. That's why I worded it in the way I did.

I think they do a good job with the resources available but it has just been let get out of hand.

[migwar]

Originally posted by gavnoble:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by migwar:

bottomline. if everyone on here, seasoned veterans especially were just a little more patient, polite and helpful i truly believe the general board attitude would shift a lot and quickly.

finally, i think the rules need to be more prominently displayed and advertised...

that is all

I will disagree and say there that your definition of seasoned GQ veteran and my definition would differ somewhat.

I think some of the seasoned veterans on here who haven't been around much for whatever reason would be quite ooffended at being lumped in with the mob you're referring to! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you can disagree all you like, my point is still valid. i'm refering to people who have a rating above 'amateur'. these people are the one's that noobs such as myself watch to see how to act. if they're just flaming people for asking a question, which was answered yesterday, then everyone else will do that...

this is what i meant by seasoned veterans...

as you can see by my joined date, the guys you are refering to i probably wouldn't even know.

i certainly never meant any offense

[birdy123]

Originally posted by Jimbokav1971:

To be honest birdy, I'm not blaming the moderators at all. That's why I worded it in the way I did.

I think they do a good job with the resources available but it has just been let get out of hand.

I didn't say you were blaming the moderators, I was just agreeing with your point that people are using it as an excuse.

[dannyboy24]

I think what attracts a lot of members here (including myself is the reputation that SI do listen to the forum members ideas, and that the ones with the most consensus and requests do eventually make it in some form into the game.

Thats why I joined up, to give ideas etc. But when you do post ideas they most often getting buried in an avalanche, after having 2 replies.

I think we really need a seperate suggestions sub-forum, but one with a different set up to the current forums. An area where, members post there ideas, giving as much detail to them as they think neccesary. And While replies and discussion would be welcome, the point of subforum would be to rate the various ideas. So that hopefully the most liked ideas would float to the top.

The hope would be that with a good place to air ideas, it would reduce the load on the general forum.

[Jimbokav1971]

Originally posted by birdy123:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jimbokav1971:

To be honest birdy, I'm not blaming the moderators at all. That's why I worded it in the way I did.

I think they do a good job with the resources available but it has just been let get out of hand.

I didn't say you were blaming the moderators, I was just agreeing with your point that people are using it as an excuse. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok. Gotcha.

[FrazT]

I think we really need a seperate suggestions sub-forum, but one with a different set up to the current forums. An area where, members post there ideas, giving as much detail to them as they think neccesary. And While replies and discussion would be welcome, the point of subforum would be to rate the various ideas. So that hopefully the most liked ideas would float to the top.

The hope would be that with a good place to air ideas, it would reduce the load on the general foru

This is a good idea and certainly worth considering especially to take some of the load off the GQ forum.

[chopper99]

Something that just struck me as I was looking at the T&TT forum this morning is that the stickied threads don't stand out that much from the other threads really. Despite being in bold I think that because they are the same colour as the other thread titles it's sometimes easy for you to forget about them and move onto the main bulk of the forum.

I think something as simple as making the Forum Rules and FAQ stickies a different colour to the rest of the thread titles (as well as being bold) will draw newer members attention to them more effectively and may cut down on the number of rule breaks and repeated questions. The FAQ in the tactics forum is very useful and something like this made obvious in GQ could be also.

The search function could be more obvious as well.

[emgergo]

WHS ^

I also think that the stickied threads are not separated enough.

[Box]

Personally I happen to think the SI boards are among the best moderated boards I frequent.

I regularly check different forums,and have been on these forums since 2000(ish).I even run my own 600 user forum and base my forum admin policy from the example I have seen here.

What you have to rememebr is forum and internet activity is much more popular than it was 6-7 years back, and its getting more and more frequent all the time. A lot more people have internet access, especially kids.With more people frequenting the forums it's inevitable that you are going to see an increase in some of the idiots who don't bother reading rules or abiding by your codes of conduct.

I understand it's putting some members of the community off and I personally don't post much because of this, but it doesnt stop me visiting and reading the fourm.

I'm surprised at the attitude of the SI staff TBH, basically saying that its getting a bit too hostile so we basically wont come here anymore. I think thats a poor way to react to an increase in what we all see every day on the internet. Especially as this is exactly why SI's games have been so popular - because of the interaction with the community.

I would have expected SI to understand this increase in poor forum conduct. Whilst I agree it's a nightmare and it does grind you down searching through the pointless posts and sorting the chaff from the real gems of posts.

I think the only way to combat it is to just enforce the rules you have already, again as already suggested this is simply to increase the number of moderators.

The only other way to reduce the idiots signing up is to possible introduce subscribed boards, perhaps asking for a subscription donation or a small joining fee to subscribe to certain boards. I certainly would have no problem donating towards aboard that some of the idiot posters wouldnt/couldnt post on and perhaps your admins could prioritise these boards for moderation. The free boards could then perhaps be a little more "relaxed" with the moderation.

Also I would suggest doing AWAY with the forum ranking system! These only lead to an increase in spam!!! If you want to rank users and give them ratings introduce a KARMA system whereby people are rewarded/smited by their posts. Or you could also give "paying" members a rating system of their own so people can instantly see who are the more serious members of the forum.

Just my thoughts

[Dayle Wood]

People paying to come on the forums would cause an uproar I suspect. I doubt you would get much support for that.