Question regarding NW behavior.

M

Miros

Guest
So, I keep reading that this really isn't a new flameboard at all, and it's just used to keep people updated on actions by some people as of late...what bothers me is the fact that people who are not -directly- involved are posting their opinions on the subject or the person/people in question.

I guess what I'm getting at is, is it proper for any player not directly involved in the subject in question or the mods to post their opinions at all on these boards regarding anything? If this isn't a flameboard anymore, then I really see no need for anyone to come to the aid to their friends unless they were involved.

Just trying to get a handle on this.
 
I don't know Miros, but it seems to me that if input from outside is not necessary, then this is a pretty useless section and defeats the whole purpose of a forum. It shouldn't be Flameboard: take 2. But if outside opinions are not wanted/needed, then maybe this section is a bad idea and/or not what it was intended to be and removing it is something that maybe Sculli should consider.

I thought that this section was for resolving problems and opening issues up for discussion so that maybe people could see all sides of an issue to help bring it to a good conclusion. But from what I've seen so far, "you aren't the one we're talking about so you should shut up" seems to be a recurring theme. Imho, these problems can and probably should be handled by these people on their own instead of posting here and then they wouldn't be open to the conjecture and editorial of others. Just a thought...
 
Neighborhood Watch is a total reversal of the Flameboard. Instead of everybody flaming each other, we have everybody telling everyone to stop flaming them. I don't know if it's humorous or annoying, but now everyone's a lawyer around here. Once everyone stops mod-whoring, this could be a more useful forum. Of course, In their defense, I'm not sure anyone really knows what the heck is even allowed here. It's so close to Flameboard #2 in content coverage, but with a very politically correct overtone that doesn't seem to mesh. Noone's quite sure what they can do here. Right now, I'm just keeping track of which posts get deleted so that I don't make posts like them. Once NW gets a handle on its schitzophrenia/identy crisis, I'm sure everything will smooth out. NW just doesn't know what it is at the moment.
 
Any input from those above? <_<;

It just seems pointless to have people come in and say "I've seen playerx and he's a good player" in defense of an accusation. But then Zyndara is right, what is the main point of the board? Not bashing the idea, just trying to get a handle on it.

xoxo
 
To put it simple, the board is to sort out problems that couldn't be cleared up in game. It is not to attack the reputation of others. Its a very fine line and hard to keep define at times.

Easiest way to determine if it is acceptable is to consider if there is a possible solution you might reach through discussion. If there is no solution because of the type of problem, then it likely doesn't belong here. For example, someone was a bad party member or a jerk. You can't really fix that. Its not a problem with a possible solution.

As for replies and outside opinions: Discussion of the facts presented and analysis are good. However, outside opinions and flames of the people involved are not. Like Sculli says in his discription thread for this forum, stick to the facts. If you aren't involved and don't want to discuss the facts presented, then please don't post your opinion. Take note of those involved if you feel it is important, but don't add wood to the fire.

About the only exception to this is scamming. A possible solution in that case is to fix the deal or act as a warning to others. Cases of scamming are different because they are more easily defined in fact and less on opinion. For example, your opinion of a bad rdm and desire to warn him is based on your opinion of him rather than pure fact.

The board is something of an experiment. If it works, great. If not, we can try something else.
 
When the discussion of removing the FB came up, a number of people suggested that three board be made to fill in the gap of the few functions the FB did serve... They were:

1. a debate board, where people could calmly discuss the merits, or lack thereof, of things such as melee rdms… this board was not made....

2. an endgame discussion board, which would allow linkshells to bring up their grievances in an environment that wasn't titled with "anarchy reigns supreme here". This is not what the board has, turned into at least not yet...

3. and last but not least, a Neighborhood Watch of sorts, where people could report factual accounts of misdeeds, and perhaps facilitate the process of resolution.

How to actually implement the NW board is a bit of a quandary… Personally I agree with Miros, if you are not the OP or the Subject of their complaint, you probably have little business to be posting here… To answer Zyndara’s question… That is, what is the purpose if others are not to post here… well, it serves as a warning… it may also serve to facilitate discussion. I am aware of instances on the FB where someone would refuse to resolve a dispute until their reputation was put on the line in front of the qcdn community. Bad publicity is, unfortunately, sometimes the best and only incentive one can give to another when seeking resolution…

Anyway, those are some of my thoughts on this board… As Pompidou said, this is a new board, a new concept, and it will eventually grow into its own… maybe, or maybe it will be proven more or less useless and tossed out.

btw... moving to suggestions/whatever section of the forum. this is more in-tune with that board '-';
 
Last edited:
I lost my first post cause Nasya moved it all swift like.. but mostly.. well said.. and I especially agree with it not working sadly..

It is made to show people who have petty resolvable problems.. involving no one but the two? Send eachother a message.. why do we all care?

On that note if we SHOULD all care.. should it not be moral decisons too? I rather PT with a shady debt-payer than a jerkoff sleezy person.. :/

Personal opinion I guess.. but I think NW as is will not work.
 
On that note if we SHOULD all care.. should it not be moral decisons too? I rather PT with a shady debt-payer than a jerkoff sleezy person.. :/
Click to expand...
That is likely true of many of us. However, proving that (jerkoff sleezy person) is what caused all the drama that made the flameboard famous and what we want to avoid. There is no way we have found or has been suggested that can handle that without creating all the drama and flames we are trying to avoid.
 
The role of uninvolved oppinions will make or break the NW board. If Shaidalyn's 2nd thread is any indicator, the people in power don't really want outside posting at all really. I can kind of see what their intent is but some nonstaff posters also brought up a good counterpoint: If the OP doesn't want QCDN oppinions then posting a public thread isn't the appropriate venue. I personally believe any thread I'm not barred from accessing is fair game for my posting in. In fact, the number of posts in topics relevant to me is miniscule compared to the number of posts where I'm just throwing in my $.02 for the heck of it. I think there needs to be a balance. On one hand, NW isn't the Flameboard, and it shouldn't be FB#2 by any means. On the other hand, potential OPs to come should remember the phrase: "if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen." It's not the flameboard, but it's still going to be controversial. I think it should be controversial. Controversial, but civil. I don't think there should be Flameboard style, anything goes putdowns, but I also think that the staff have to be a little more reserved on the delete-post button. Somewhere in between Flameboard-free-for-all and neutering threads down to a 2-way conversation is a happy medium. The NW can work, it'll just take more self control on both sides of the community: staff and regulars.
 
Pompidou said:
If Shaidalyn's 2nd thread is any indicator, the people in power don't really want outside posting at all really.
Click to expand...
The NW status is still in flux, nothing is set in stone.

Pompidou said:
It's not the flameboard, but it's still going to be controversial. I think it should be controversial. Controversial, but civil.
Click to expand...
I am all for that. Controversy is good if it doesn't slip into flames.
I think it may just take me banning a few people to make others realize that flaming is really not an option anymore instead me or mods deleting threads. Let me get right to that.
 
Something about the NW that makes me sorta worried, is that the poster's history of who their warning is not really taken into account. I mean you get i will /blist this person from everyone left and right and often the one who is the subject of NW doesn't really post.

Do we know why the subject did so and so? Was it "justified"? Does the history of the OP and the subject have anything to do with the subject's "justification"?

Does the OP's relationship with the subject affect the succintness of the the post?

Maybe I am looking too far into it but i have asked myself that ? when i have read several threads on NW. It's sort of like the news, you have to consider what you are reading or listening to...

Often for w/e reason the subject usually doesn't reply to the nw thread about them if they use QCDN,embarrassed,etc. so it seems like a one sided bashing
 
Last edited:
When I think "Neighborhood Watch", I think of a community that collectively is trying to keep an eye out for any problems that could disrupt said community. RL NWs are created on a system that you watch your neighbors' houses for something suspicious and then you report it to them or the local authorities.

Transferring that idea to a message board, my thought is that the board was created to warn our community of people that might cause them problems in-game. If you look at my topic on the board about Rabufa, I state the problematic person's name and then proceed to explain why people should be careful when dealing with him (because he bots instead of participating in a pt).

Are my assumptions about this concept incorrect? Someone earlier in the topic said the board was created to try to work out differences out of the game that you couldn't work out in-game. To me, that isn't by definition what a "Neighborhood Watch" does, that's what a "mediation session" does. But if that's the purpose of the board then I'm not entirely sure I used it correctly. Either the name needs to change for better clarification or the board should be used for what the name implies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top