Constructive Criticism (READ NOW, Instant bans Now In Effect)

[RamblinWreck21]

Quote: Originally Posted by Millennium

A poster saying "I love this game" will not be banned. A poster telling another poster "I love this game, you are a *****/fanboy/idiot" will be banned.

Gotcha

[Skyboxer]

I really am amazed at the level of the non understanding of simple instructions about being constructive.

If you don't like something or like something it's fine to say so but explain why and if applicable what you'd like to see changed etc..
Simply coming in and saying "Soooooo they put this in the game this year but don't touch franchise mode.......lol ok ?" is just another drive by "Look at me" post.

Just use this simple Form:

Explain what is it you dislike or like

If "Like" explain why- Like what it adds to the game

If dislike: why do you not like it and where does it hurts the game-Suggestions on how to make it better are always welcomed and can lead to some really good branched off discussions.

Simple Do Nots:
Do not argue another posters opinions. -Opinions are not right or wrong

Do not use any insults / be condescending etc. That's pretty much B & W

[fishepa]

This is such a simple concept that I really can't understand how some people just don't get it.

[thdudeabides]

[quote=fishepa;2041257849]This is such a simple concept that I really can't understand how some people just don't get it.[/quote]

Oh the irony!

[JohnDoh]

Sorry... this is a bit long.

I'm all for people being civil and not flaming one another over trivial things but these new rules are about as subjective as you can get. There is a high probability that these subjective interpretations by mods are going to be blown way out of proportion and people are going to be banned that aren't deserving.

Guys - this is a message board. Being a creator/moderator of message boards in the past I understand that you are going to get a certain amount of knuckleheads who are either legends in their own mind, full of "e-cred", or people who register only to make a couple posts bashing an OP's topic. As long as these annoyances are in the vast minority then there is no real problem. Placing everyone on the hot seat (versus that minority group of posters) by introducing a subjective, perception-based tolerance policy is not only unfair but I believe it to be very short sighted. This post is not intended to bash the admins/mods/owners of OS - far from it. It is, however, intended to send the message that you don't kill a fly with a shotgun and that is the message this zero tolerance policy is sending.

I know over the years OS has received more and more attention/credibility from the gaming industry and in a few cases has been a key source for input regarding development of some of the games we all know and love. Wanting to clean up the content of your message boards to be more "constructive" which portrays a more credible, objective-minded resource to these companies is fine; however, you cannot forget that some people can't get the words out of their mouths in such a way to necessarily meet your professional journalistic requirements of what you subjectively deem as "constructive". You have pasted what constructive means and that's great - but true meaning is still in the eye of the beholder. I'm just sayin' - not everyone communicates as well as you might like, but sometimes you have to look beyond the words to gain an understanding of their message. There are all kinds of barriers to effective communication and if OS starts automatically banning people (zero tolerance) because of their communication shortcomings then there will most certainly be missed opportunities to gain solid feedback from people who play the same games the rest of us do.

I have been a long-time member of this great site and it's usually the first place I stop each day. I think OS mods should continue to oversee the forums and weed out the repeat violators and keep the forums as productive and insightful as possible. With the amount of members at OS this will take constant observation and is a good amount of work. However, laying down the gauntlet and saying "ZERO TOLERANCE" when some posters get a little pissy with their words is not only the lazy approach to moderating (because it takes nothing into consideration) but it will also significantly reduce the amount of discussion which will lead to less feedback we can ultimately give the game companies that covet the OS member's insight.

I hope the mods hear my message instead of automatically defending a position. Seek first to understand before being understood.

[Pared]

Quote: Originally Posted by JohnDoh

...but it will also significantly reduce the amount of discussion which will lead to less feedback we can ultimately give the game companies that covet the OS member's insight.

I hear what you are saying and I'm purposefully selecting this snippet for a reason.

1) This isn't about game companies/developers being on OS. It's about the forum returning to what it was.

2) Game companies don't "covet" the insight of the individuals this will ultimately weed out.

There are plenty of individuals on this site that can provide solid insight and not have to worry about this. The focus is on making comments to improve a game, not making comments simply to make them or out of frustration.

[JohnDoh]

Quote: Originally Posted by Pared

I hear what you are saying and I'm purposefully selecting this snippet for a reason. 1) This isn't about game companies/developers being on OS. It's about the forum returning to what it was. 2) Game companies don't "covet" the insight of the individuals this will ultimately weed out. There are plenty of individuals on this site that can provide solid insight and not have to worry about this. The focus is on making comments to improve a game, not making comments simply to make them or out of frustration.

Pared - I didn't intend to imply that this is entirely about the perceptions of the gaming industry, but you have to admit, it's a real presence and OS has benefited from these inclusions, both directly and indirectly. When you said it is more about returning OS to what is was... which time period are you going back to? What was the membership at that point in time compared to now? OS has thrived in recent years and I have to think membership has significantly grown. Having said that, the difference in membership then compared to now will most likely hamper the effort to take it back to what it once was. Mo people, mo problems.

Also, the guy that comes on OS and says "Game Company X sucks and so do their games" will definitely not contribute anything. However, often times a few posters will get into discussions that may not always be tame in nature but still bring valid points to different aspects of a given game. If one of those guys gets a head of steam and doesn't use tact in one of his messages, it doesn't mean that his point is not valid and could ultimately benefit game "X". That's all I'm saying. Boneheads will weed themselves out but that isn't the vast majority of what OS has here - yet there are some spirited types and they shouldn't be in fear of getting banned because a little color pours through. Thanks!

[DonkeyJote]

Quote: Originally Posted by Pared

I hear what you are saying and I'm purposefully selecting this snippet for a reason. 1) This isn't about game companies/developers being on OS. It's about the forum returning to what it was. 2) Game companies don't "covet" the insight of the individuals this will ultimately weed out. There are plenty of individuals on this site that can provide solid insight and not have to worry about this. The focus is on making comments to improve a game, not making comments simply to make them or out of frustration.

I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement one here (and a lot of it), but as they say, you can't go home again. You can't really make these boards the way they were, because there are so many more users now. I believe the goal should be to move ahead, rather than to return to what it was. No matter how much anyone may want it, these boards will never be the way they were before.