Moderator input needed

Sirs:

Our union (the Troll Hunters) wishes your input on some critical issues regarding the game forums. As a regular on the C&C3 and Warhammer: Dark Crusade boards, I have seen several topics that have become a haven for "trolls," and have often wondered what we, as a union, can do to reduce the trolling so information and logical debate can be exchanged in a civil manner.

While many inflammatory posts have been allowed to stand, and trolling threads as well, several calls to end the constant bashing of games (especially C&C3) have been deleted with no explanation. This has sent the message that we, the more "mature" individuals, have no power to affect the forums, while those who wish to taunt and berate are left free to do what they choose.

Any input we recieve would be appreciated, so that this:

1. It's funny but if you look at you own post, even you admit SC is 10 years old, yet it still delivered by the time the game was out. As for the recent posts defending the SC universe, we went by cut scenes in that game... You're the only one making it sound like we pulled our arguments out of our ass.

Snarky gameplay? Please tell that to the rest of the world still playing SC. I don't even know WHERE you got this angle from, but sure.

2. I never needed to prove to everyone how superior SC is, I only argued for the original topic (much as I hated the matchup) . Look at your posts again, you're the first one between you and me who brought anything up about CnC as a whole vs SC.

Finally... If you're a real RTS player, maybe it'd do you some good to try those cheats online. And please post a vid. I need a good laugh.OrkHammer007]

[QUOTE="Mundo_SD

SC was the only one of the 3 that I didn't like. Builder units that counted against a very restrictive cap; singularly un-fun gameplay; very ugly graphics (there are more colors out there than brown, purple, green, and orange; maybe if they'd actually used them...); by the time I got the game, even trying to play multiplayer was impossible, due to a non-inclusive online community (as in, if you're new, don't even try; it's impossible to learn anything in 2 to 3 minutes) and arrogant attitude of the opponents.

I know that my attitude towards SC is not universally held, and I respect the game as being a seminal moment in RTS development. The problem is, every new RTS is automatically measured against it, and the players who love it have to put up with a lot of $#@!heads who flood the forums with threads like this to try and prove how superior SC is.

Finally, you wouldn't catch me playing SC online; since I don't find it fun, I don't play it period.

...(which was posted on a C&C3 board in response to another troll) won't happen again.

Thank you.

Regardless of how you feel about things, there's one problem-- Gamespot mods can do nothing, absolutely nothing, regarding modding on game-specific boards. This needs to be addressed to the admins, not the mods. Your union is suspect because you don't seem to want to use the reporting feature to get things done, but the GameFAQs mods are the only ones who can do things on the shared boards. If you want that to change, then this needs to be addressed to CNet employees. If you wanted to address moderators, you should have gone to Ask the Mods.

 However, there's enough stickied threads around the forums that it should have been clear how this all works. Mods don't like this system with GS/GF either; I personally would rather the boards be completely split-- GS boards and GF boards, rather than the game-specific boards be mirrors of GF boards where GS users are treated like second-class citizens, but it's not my call, nor is it the call of our community managers, or even their boss. 

In the meantime, I hope you're reporting the trolls that you come across, rather than just arguing with them. 

Thank you very much for your replies. They have been very helpful.OrkHammer007

One thing that is nice, however, is that the mod history will finally start showing things that are done on the GameFAQs side. 

We weren`t against reporting :)

it was something like "what if there are suddenly n reports on some guy, all coming from here" :) it wouldn`ve looked bad.

Anyway, it doesn`t matter, the union got deleted for trolling :) Though there was no proof of it. and no warning.

I hope Gamespot improves their moderation logs.

Today i got my first moderated post (and i guess the guy was just tired or something, because it really wasn`t what he said it was :) ) and i want a link to the moderated post, not just a copy of it.

I know it was some news, it even said so in the report, but it didn`t say where :(

PS Since when posts like "YEY" are considered trolling and "this game will suck so much &#%^& it won`t even be funny" isn`t? :)

tekmet

The board that it was on is in your moderation history, I think you can find the link.

It doesn't matter what other message boards are like, this one is this one. The Terms of Use even explicitly labels post counting under disruptive posting.

There was also nothing that could have been done to make that union okay, so there was no need for prior notification. Everything that happens in the community here, including unions, is under GameSpots rule and the Terms of Use also explcitly states that they hold the right to  delete any content they see fit. Check out cluase 9 of it, it has all the details. Like I said, though, in your case there was no need for notification.

Since this is turning into a Q&A session that is off topic, I'm locking this thread.