Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Feedback / Criticism and the Forums

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Feedback / Criticism and the Forums
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

EricMusco's Avatar


EricMusco
07.01.2017 , 05:16 PM | #1 Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. Next  
Hey folks,

You may have been participating in the other story thread in GD which got a little derailed based on the discussion of feedback, criticism, and the SWTOR team (well everyone, but especially the SWTOR team). If you want to continue that discussion, please do so in this thread. This is a topic that we as a team are very interested in from your perspective, so keep it coming.

Standard reminder, please keep it civil! I know we are talking about criticism and feedback and those topics can get heated. Just please remain respectful.

-eric
Eric Musco | Community Manager
Follow us on Twitter @SWTOR | Like us on Facebook
[Contact Us] [Rules of Conduct] [F.A.Q.]

MeNaCe-NZ's Avatar


MeNaCe-NZ
07.01.2017 , 05:48 PM | #2
Quote: Originally Posted by EricMusco View Post
Hey folks,

You may have been participating in the other story thread in GD which got a little derailed based on the discussion of feedback, criticism, and the SWTOR team (well everyone, but especially the SWTOR team). If you want to continue that discussion, please do so in this thread. This is a topic that we as a team are very interested in from your perspective, so keep it coming.

Standard reminder, please keep it civil! I know we are talking about criticism and feedback and those topics can get heated. Just please remain respectful.

-eric
Could we perhaps get your or Keith's thoughts and feelings on the topic to perhaps kick things off ... as I posted in my last post in the old thread ...

Quote:
I would be interested in your thoughts on forum decorum with examples as I often myself find it hard to find that line between vehement arguing and possibly going a little bit too far into the realms of rule breaking.

Often it's like "well they are clearly making personal remarks so I will too" yet one person just ends up over line (not talking outright abuse here) and gets sanctioned or has posts removed whilst the other other does not. Where is this line? Ideally many of the posts that outright seem to attack Charles and yourself in this thread as opposed to the content itself should be deleted should they not? Warnings issued? I get you have painted yourself into a corner by actually responding now and it would seem heavily bias to do so but ... rules are rules are they not?
I guess the last part isn't pertinent as much now as new thread and all but it would still be nice to know why perhaps those posts weren't jumped on?
What made them any less personal and not warranting moderation vs perhaps posts I've seen/experienced moderation on in the past (again not talking blatant rule infractions , I accept and own those but some post deletions imo are iffy when others get to stay and I'm sure Ive had some that stay and others have theirs removed that are equally iffy)? What is the line?

Xo-Lara's Avatar


Xo-Lara
07.01.2017 , 05:57 PM | #3
I'm gonna skip the topic of the originating thread for the moment to say that I appreciate the attempts by the team to communicate and try to reconcile desire with what can be reasonably done within time constraints. I may not always agree with what is said, but I hope that you will continue to do so, and that you have access to excellent health care because high blood pressure is no joke... ok, maybe a little joke.

I know tempers can flare and tension is already high, BUT overall I believe we all want the game to succeed and be the best it can be. That said, I hope that those given to lashing out at "opponents", regardless of what side of any argument they are on, will try to hold off on that for the sake of the game.

How you say things can be more damaging to your point than what you say. Do it for the good of the game, contribute thoughts in a way that makes it easier for people to focus more on the concept and less on defending themselves. By the same token, don't worry. If you are making a valid point, you don't have to wage war to defend yourself. A valid point can stand on it's own.

Hopefully going forward everyone will be able to contribute to the upbuilding of the game regardless of what they feel is more important to the game.

That said, I'll stop speaking in general and let the thread continue normally.
If you like my stronghold threads such as this and this, please consider using my referral link. It will reward us both. Or you could post your support for one of my threads.
{Ξ(Θ)!!██████████████████

ZionHalcyon's Avatar


ZionHalcyon
07.01.2017 , 06:00 PM | #4
If we are going to start fresh, and in the spirit of what Keith posted in the original story thread, might I suggest the community do is come together and draft a rules of etiquette for the forums, above and beyond what the terms of service state.

Even though not everyone will agree, if we can come to enough of a consensus then perhaps we can start to police ourselves, with the help of the Forum moderators.

If anyone wants to attempt this I'll throw in my rules first and people can follow up with their own and we can hash them out and discuss them.

1) Criticism of an idea or a concept is not the same as a personal attack, nor is a personal attack a valid criticism.

2) Tone matters when posting. Posting in a derogatory manner even when free of typical banned forum words, should be reported to the moderators if the derogatory post is made in an effort to personally demean someone else.

3) Putting someone down or regarding them as inferior is not a valid way to win an argument and instead contributes to a toxic Forum atmosphere.

4) Pointed attacks, i.e. phrases beginning with the words "You Are" should be shouted down and disregarded as a personal attack on a person. If our form is to be an exchange of ideas then all ideas should be welcome, and all ideas should be subject to criticism. But at no point should the person doing either be subjected to he pointed attack. In debate terms these are often referred to as a straw man attacks or ad hominem.

kodrac's Avatar


kodrac
07.01.2017 , 06:06 PM | #5
Quote: Originally Posted by ZionHalcyon View Post

2) Tone matters when posting. Posting in a derogatory manner even when free of typical banned forum words, should be reported to the moderators if the derogatory post is made in an effort to personally demean someone else.
You can not discern tone from text. Tone is applied by the reader. if you're in a pissy mood or just a plain ol drama queen you'll apply whatever tone you want and most likely take the comments out of context.

LtGeneralGezlin's Avatar


LtGeneralGezlin
07.01.2017 , 06:08 PM | #6
Quote: Originally Posted by ZionHalcyon View Post
If we are going to start fresh, and in the spirit of what Keith posted in the original story thread, might I suggest the community do is come together and draft a rules of etiquette for the forums, above and beyond what the terms of service state.

Even though not everyone will agree, if we can come to enough of a consensus then perhaps we can start to police ourselves, with the help of the Forum moderators.

If anyone wants to attempt this I'll throw in my rules first and people can follow up with their own and we can hash them out and discuss them.

1) Criticism of an idea or a concept is not the same as a personal attack, nor is a personal attack a valid criticism.

2) Tone matters when posting. Posting in a derogatory manner even when free of typical banned forum words, should be reported to the moderators if the derogatory post is made in an effort to personally demean someone else.

3) Putting someone down or regarding them as inferior is not a valid way to win an argument and instead contributes to a toxic Forum atmosphere.

4) Pointed attacks, i.e. phrases beginning with the words "You Are" should be shouted down and disregarded as a personal attack on a person. If our form is to be an exchange of ideas then all ideas should be welcome, and all ideas should be subject to criticism. But at no point should the person doing either be subjected to he pointed attack. In debate terms these are often referred to as a straw man attacks or ad hominem.
Can I also add "If you disagree with someone, don't call them names." But, I guess that goes with #3 or #4.

Joke: Actually, I think we should just talk like HK. That way we can convey our tone without misinterpretation!

Musing: Although that might get frustrating after a while.
CE Owner - The Gallifreyan Legacy - Squad 238 Tester
65 Gunslinger, 65 Commando, 60 Sentinel, 65 Shadow.
53 Operative, 54 Mercenary, 65 Marauder, 63 Juggernaut, 54 Sorcerer.

Forren-Midosea's Avatar


Forren-Midosea
07.01.2017 , 06:09 PM | #7
My 2 cents. I will say what i have said in original thread. Focus on major story this time. Do it fully, greatly, and make it epic. Leave companions as a side stuff this time.

MeNaCe-NZ's Avatar


MeNaCe-NZ
07.01.2017 , 06:16 PM | #8
Quote: Originally Posted by ZionHalcyon View Post
If we are going to start fresh, and in the spirit of what Keith posted in the original story thread, might I suggest the community do is come together and draft a rules of etiquette for the forums, above and beyond what the terms of service state.

Even though not everyone will agree, if we can come to enough of a consensus then perhaps we can start to police ourselves, with the help of the Forum moderators.
No, I feel we've got more than enough rules in place to ensure conversations, discussions and arguments flow fine. There is a report button for anything deemed to breach rules, we don't need more rules and restrictions on free speech.

LtGeneralGezlin's Avatar


LtGeneralGezlin
07.01.2017 , 06:16 PM | #9
Quote: Originally Posted by Forren-Midosea View Post
My 2 cents. I will say what i have said in original thread. Focus on major story this time. Do it fully, greatly, and make it epic. Leave companions as a side stuff this time.
I both agree and disagree with this, I want a major story. But I always want to see those companions we're missing come back in a meaningful way (IE I want to see what Risha has to say to my Smuggler for romancing Lana). BWA could bring back non romanceable companions*** through Alliance Alerts, but players are going to want to see the romanceable companions return in the "normal" story, and the dev's know that.

***Except Khem Val. For Khem's situation, maybe a return in the normal story might be good.
CE Owner - The Gallifreyan Legacy - Squad 238 Tester
65 Gunslinger, 65 Commando, 60 Sentinel, 65 Shadow.
53 Operative, 54 Mercenary, 65 Marauder, 63 Juggernaut, 54 Sorcerer.

MeNaCe-NZ's Avatar


MeNaCe-NZ
07.01.2017 , 06:17 PM | #10
Quote: Originally Posted by kodrac View Post
You can not discern tone from text. Tone is applied by the reader. if you're in a pissy mood or just a plain ol drama queen you'll apply whatever tone you want and most likely take the comments out of context.
I COMPLETELY AGREE! or ... I completely agree? or I completely agree

ARG, what do I mean?!