Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Felblood]

I apologize if this has been suggested before. Please provide a link to the appropriate thread, if it has.

The first thread I read in this suggestions area inspired this idea, but it almost intimidated me into not sharing it.

It consisted of a pack of  wannabe mods, vigilante flaming a newbie into the ground, for posting a redundant thread. The OP swore to never return to this elitist forum, where fresh faces are clearly not welcome.

Here's another example, from tonight:
http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?topic=30908.0

Redundant threads are a serious problem here. Vigilantism will not mitigate the problem in the slightest. Vigilante modding is an even more serious problem in it's own right.

Publicly crucifying the makers of redundant threads, as an example to others, is useless. They aren't going to read before they post anyway, or they would know to search, from the rules that they so often fail to read. You do scare off the newbie in question, as well as any other newbie, who has the sense to read a few threads, to feel out the culture of the forum, and the sense to not try to change it.

Instead, I suggest that, when correcting a person who has made a redundant thread, posters should be expected to politely provide a link to what they consider to be the best, still-viable discussion of the topic. Bonus points, if you point the newbie to the relevant item on the voting list, so that the vote can represent his desires as well as your own. Once this has been done, people should stop bumping the thread, particularly if all they intend to contribute is more derision and contempt.

This moves some of the burden of following the rules and keeping things orderly, onto those who already know the rules and conventions of the forum.

If a newbie's search would have turned up the relevant thread, it would surely be no real effort, for the veteran to provide him a useful link. Courtesy costs you even less time than that.

[Capntastic]

What I see in that thread is someone posting a very common suggestion, which would've been avoided if he'd searched.

And then Foa tells him to do so in the future.

And then I post saying "Man, people are still suggesting this?  It's such a blatantly obvious thing to suggest that it should be taken for granted it's been suggested.", and then asserting that future thread ventures should be prefaced by searching.

Also, the OP didn't 'swear to never return to the elitist forum', if anything he seemed to imply he'll lurk for a while before posting.

We didn't publicly crucify anyone, there was no ill will, etc.   You implying that I'm a wannabe mod and a vigilante flamer is more offensive than anything in that thread. 

I'll note that I do usually leave a link to previous threads, but even that has been decried as 'rude' and unhelpful.   There's really no pleasing everyone on this issue.

[Silverionmox]

spammer noobs!

I don't see how someone could think this of all things is an original idea.

Both of these are overly negative and ad hominem instead of ad rem. It's not really surprising that the guy felt personally attacked. As Felblood said, point him to a place where he can be more productive instead. Some encouragement is a nice extra, but just a dry referral to another thread would make the message clear. Otherwise, ignore a redundant thread, it will disappear much faster.

[Granite26]

I agree 200% that harrassing new users will not solve the problem, because 1: they aren't aware of the previous situation, and 2: The true value of harrassment(future prevention of the issue.) will not occur, because the NEXT person won't be aware of this situation.

So yes, it's pointless to harrass new users failing to search.

OTOH, that doesn't make it unacceptable to feel annoyed when 1: Items that have been discussed to death get brought up again and discussed to a similar death (especially when the new discussion needs guidance to understand limitations previously discussed).  2: Items that have fierce divides and raised tempers being brought up again, and 3: the feeling that the person is not respecting your or the forum at large's time.

It's a problem, but saying 'be nice' isn't going to solve anything either, because the next guy that gets frustrated won't have read this post either.  It's a viscious cycle.

My vote?  For all new topics to 1: Spellcheck the topic header, and 2: Search for that topic header before they are posted.  If it's spelled right and we know a search screen popped up before they clicked 'yes I still want to make this topic', a little bit of hostility might be in order.

[profit]

Dwarf Fortress is one of the rare games I really like *even with its diamond in the rough status* 

The idea of this elitism being leveled at new players of it really is kinda sad as it may chase some of them away.... and perhaps they could have grown to understand the game and grown to provide a breakthrough suggestion that would turn the game into 7th heaven... Which I am sure we would argue and decry but I digress...

Bay12 is one of the few companies where the suggestion board is read by a developer with any regularity, and in my humble opinion it is usually because gamers have no idea of what they really want in a game, just what they think they want.. But once again I digress... 

The point is-> Most game development boards I have been on, I had to sign a NON DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT, I had to agree to esoteric forum rules like a post has to have in it's topic a keyword to where it will be sorted to like this one does with "FORUM - " and I had to agree to a much stronger set of rules. 

The open nature of this development board means we will have redundant topics, and we will have bad idea's and we will have people who will patrol it harshly for any breech even though they have no authority to do so.

But to those on patrol, remember if you are trying to save toady time and keep the forums neat, one response to a duplicate post double's the number of useless posts. Making the problem worse, not better.

[Jay]

OP: If we just let the duplicate posts go free, then we'll have hundreds of duplicate posts that could be avoided if people actually searched.
Just letting it go is not the answer.
While I agree some of the people here can be a little harsh, we do have rules:

BEFORE POSTING A SUGGESTION

    * Check our development pages. You can find everything in one place at this link.
    * Search for an existing thread.

If people can't take a minute, read that, and actually FOLLOW it, they don't deserve to tell us about what they want in DF.
They're rules.
They're meant to be followed, not broken.

[winner]

Say "I really like this idea, it show [link to previous thread] in a new light"
that way the topics aren't separated and you haven't scared off a new user.

Or you could have moderators that merged duplicate threads but that would take so much work if you did that to the whole forum that I don't really want to think about it.

[Silverionmox]

OP: If we just let the duplicate posts go free, then we'll have hundreds of duplicate posts that could be avoided if people actually searched.
Just letting it go is not the answer.
While I agree some of the people here can be a little harsh, we do have rules:

BEFORE POSTING A SUGGESTION

    * Check our development pages. You can find everything in one place at this link.
    * Search for an existing thread.

If people can't take a minute, read that, and actually FOLLOW it, they don't deserve to tell us about what they want in DF.
They're rules.
They're meant to be followed, not broken.

Nobody intends just to ignore it. But, a gentle reminder sometimes is more effective in getting someone to follow a rule than harsh punishment.

[PTTG??]

I may not always live up to it, but I feel that the OP has the right idea. I for one will do that myself from now on.

[Felblood]

My phrasing up there might be a bit hyperbolic, due to the vicodin in my system when I wrote it, but the idea is still easily extractable.

I apologize for using a specific example. It would have been better not to name names, as that puts people on the defensive. Please, check your ego and your temper at the door; they will be liabilities here.

What I see in that thread is someone posting a very common suggestion, which would've been avoided if he'd searched.

And then Foa tells him to do so in the future.

And then I post saying "Man, people are still suggesting this?  It's such a blatantly obvious thing to suggest that it should be taken for granted it's been suggested.", and then asserting that future thread ventures should be prefaced by searching.

Foa could have done his part without flaming the newbie, and there was absolutely no reason for you to bump this thread, just to voice your agreement.

Also, the OP didn't 'swear to never return to the elitist forum', if anything he seemed to imply he'll lurk for a while before posting.

I wasn't referring to this example, but rather the first one I saw. I'd search it out, but I can't remember what idea he was getting flamed over, and there would naturally be a billion, nearly identical search hits.

We didn't publicly crucify anyone, there was no ill will, etc.   You implying that I'm a wannabe mod and a vigilante flamer is more offensive than anything in that thread.

Once again, I apologize for calling you out. Replace "vigilante flamers" with "unduly aggressive social activist."

I'll note that I do usually leave a link to previous threads, but even that has been decried as 'rude' and unhelpful.   There's really no pleasing everyone on this issue.

If this suggestion is made a rule, no one will be able to tell you not to post a link, since the law will be on your side. That's the real reason I suggested that part, as it gives activists something to do, that doesn't make things worse.

Useful links and helpful advice are all well and good, but neither of them does any good if it comes with an insult. Was the purpose of your post to express some useful input on the situation, or just to vent your frustration over the plethora of redundant posts. You're effectively bumping with, "I agree with Foa!"

People who are so exuberant and egotistical, as to think that getting their idea posted thirty seconds sooner is worth not reading the rules, are a serious problem. However, changing the rules to directly impact their behavior, is not going to work, as they haven't read them, yet. Thus, the burden of stopping these pointless confrontations must fall on the shoulders of people who have read the rules.

I'm asking all of you to have the courage and self control to be the better man, better woman, or better dwarf.

If you can't be polite, at least refrain from bumping the thread. Not bumping these things is the most important part of getting rid of them.

It might also be a good idea to sticky the topics that inevitably get posted every week. Mine cars, in particular, show up every Thursday, like clockwork.

[Granite26]

Hey!!! Clockwork would be a GREAT idea!!!!

[PTTG??]

Hey!!! Clockwork would be a GREAT idea!!!!

[z]->[stocks]->[stone]->[granite]->[d]

[Granite26]

I got dumped the day before Valentine's   (SOB)

[Sowelu]

Foa does need some serious calling out for that newbie treatment >.>

[Faces of Mu]

I know there's been times where I've posted a suggestion with my greatest motivation simply to get the title of 'the first poster with that idea'. I assume other posters might feel the same, too, particularly newbie posters.
Being shown, politely, with a link where that suggestion has been made before would keep forum goers interested in posting appropriate suggestions but with this other, "counterproductive motivator", in check.

The second behaviour people want to curb is flaming. What's a mature, reasonable, and effective way of dealing with that motivation?