Lack of new people is killing the backroom and the entire forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo

So you clearly know who I am, yet you pursue this defamation thing? What are you trying to prove here?

---

I am not at all trying to defame your character. There was no indication of sarcasm in that final reply of yours (the discussion on swearing). Maybe you meant it to be but it was not at all clear to me. Lets put an end to that discussion...

Quote:

---

And yes, perhaps I have loosened up a little, perhaps looking at this place from outside and from a new perspective does change things. It doesn't mean that I've deserted my previous views. Someones it's only those looking in from the outside can see the real problems.

---

A little? In my eyes you were one of the more hardball Mods in here, so I can't really look at your current argument without wondering about the agenda. But that could be why you chose to create an alt to post this.

Personally I don't think I have warned a single member in my career. A single unofficial PM has always sufficed.
Most members are "mature" even if they are 13.
You can still moderate the way you suggest without changing "the rules". If you clearly suggest that you would like for the patrons in a forum to behave a certain way, you do so simply and not with a heavy hand.
I believe it has worked in the gameroom, with much help from the established clientele and former excellent Mods.
ACIN in the gameroom is an exemplar of maturity and a respected player. He was indeed worried about elitism in the start but has since joined the rank of players with his valuable contribution. I am mentioning him because he doesn't exactly have a clean record elsewhere.

The gameroom is currently not open to all - something from your points might be looked into again.

The Avatar thing is to me not important at all. All though I was awarded a unique avatar once for my exemplary behaviour. I don't think Tosa is against personal avatars, but I guess he likes them to conform to a certain theme. Both mine and Andres' avatars are custom made. You only have to ask Tosa to load them in to the portfolio.

When I first joined up here 8 years ago, there was a member system based on post count. You couldn't choose the avatar, but it changed with the post count. I remember I liked it and it encouraged me to post more to get to the next level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

When I first joined up here 8 years ago, there was a member system based on post count. You couldn't choose the avatar, but it changed with the post count. I remember I liked it and it encouraged me to post more to get to the next level.

---

Funny, same here. And when I finally reached the sufficient postcount to take the avatar I wanted, it was decided that all avatars should be available for everybody :mean: :laugh4:

I don't think avatars are the main issue here, though.

Getting rid of the junior member system is an important point and shouldn't be too difficult to solve (I assume, what do I know...). Gameroom should be open for all, for those who like forum games, it's an excellent place to be, really. Maybe not a selling point for a TW fansite, but certainly something that convinces members to stay until the next TW game is released. Heck, I think many members joined this place exclusively for the GR. If the BR is openend for all, the GR should be as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo

I think you misunderstood me, but I should have expressed myself better (not my strongest point), apologies. I was referring to this:



And I simply meant "honoured but, no need, thank you anyway - same to you".

On your point though, I do agree with what you say in theory, but we cannot force people to be polite, we can only make a good example and hope that some follow it. The .org should not be "forging and shaping young minds". The mods have a job to do. As I said to other staff members some months ago (not an exact quote): "a moderator's job is to remove offensive material, do the houskeeping and keep the board clean". When it comes to moderating, deleting the the huge porn image that has been posted on someone's profile is priority over issuing a warning to the one that posted it.

I'm glad you said my tone is starting to "grate", I think it's because I've said enough, for now anyway.

Regards

---

Ah, ok. Thanks for clarifying. Yep, you're right--behavior cannot be forced, and it's best to lead by example. I agree that forum maintenance is a primary function of a moderator. Behavior modification is best left to licensed psychologists. That being said, sometimes a well-presented suggestion can work wonders. I do think, though, that it falls within the responsibility of the moderation team to assure that the board's rules are followed. Herein lies the art and style--when to, when not to. But that is just my opinion, from the outside looking in.

Regards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

I am not at all trying to defame your character.

---

You could have fooled me. So far you have hardly addressed any points in this thread and your first post was in page four in response to me. This indicates to me that you were not interested in this thread or responding to my points but in attacking my character and trying to cast doubt on my credibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

There was no indication of sarcasm in that final reply of yours (the discussion on swearing). Maybe you meant it to be but it was not at all clear to me. Lets put an end to that discussion...
A little? In my eyes you were one of the more hardball Mods in here, so I can't really look at your current argument without wondering about the agenda. But that could be why you chose to create an alt to post this.

---

Whether you detected the sarcasm in my reply or not it irrelevant. Suppose I have changed my position? What business is that of yours? Do you see trolls and blackguards around every corner, if so you've been in this game too long. Why do you find it ethical to try to undermine my character and quote me from a private forum, that's what I'm having trouble understanding here?

To say I was a "hardball" mod is nonsense. I never believed in nannying, mollycoddling or playing social worker but I've always believe in fairness. Look for my posts around the time the EB Tavern was nuked and you'll surprisingly see that I was against it. My opinion on the social groups was that they should be moderated just like the rest of the board - moderation involves deleting porn (which was posted in there) and censoring swearing (due to the lack of a filter). That has not changed. I've already said that the .org does not have to turn into a flamefest.

I can only assume that you're deliberately misconstruing what I'm saying in order to portray me as some kind of hypocrite or someone with an agenda. If you have those suspicions, do you really think this is the right place to air them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

The Avatar thing is to me not important at all. All though I was awarded a unique avatar once for my exemplary behaviour. I don't think Tosa is against personal avatars, but I guess he likes them to conform to a certain theme. Both mine and Andres' avatars are custom made. You only have to ask Tosa to load them in to the portfolio.

---

This is a good example. It's "not important" to you. It may be to someone else, but more importantly it affects the perception of this place as seen by outsiders. It makes the .org appear overly restrictive. A prospective member will not be aware of this nor will he want to go through that hassle. Why on earth should a member have to ask an admin for a custom avatar, wait and get it approved. They can simply go to the TWC, upload their avatar and job done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

When I first joined up here 8 years ago, there was a member system based on post count. You couldn't choose the avatar, but it changed with the post count. I remember I liked it and it encouraged me to post more to get to the next level.

---

That's the usual veteran members attitude of "if it was good enough for me..." etc. Back in the day you had to use the basic avatars for IIRC emissaries and diplomats, but as your post count advanced you'd get access to kings and generals, etc. While this might have seemed like something to strive for back then, I don't think it cuts it today and reintroducing it would be a bad move. The "back in my day.." attitude is not going to help here and is one of the main issues that has been discussed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo

You can retain your current avatar, you won't be forced to upload an asian model or animated dancing goat, so how will it affect you? If people's avatars offend you for some reason, then that rules you out from viewing 99% of all other online messageboards, forums, blogs, etc. Other members here could have their own avatars, whereas you can still use the same one. Why stop everyone else from having something good just because it doesn't appeal to you?

You're not a moderator - though you're obviously dying to be one - so how can you possibly know who gets preferential treatment without inside information? There are certain backroom members that get off lightly time and time again, simply because the mod dealing with it can relate to them both politically and culturally, there are others that are routinely slapped for offences the former would have gotten off with. There was one old backroomer that had committed far more offences than your average member, yet was awarded Senior Membership for reasons unknown. I'm afraid that like anything else, it's simply "who the staff like" that counts.

---

I'm well aware that I can retain my avatar, in the situation that custom ones are allowed. All I meant by the comment was, that in the case of another poll (like the 2 that I can remember) going up asking the general opinion of if the avatars should remain restricted to TW themed, I would vote yes. The members did both times before. That may very well have changed now.

I identify people by their avatars here. I often read the threads and don't pay attention to the names, but can tell who it is based off the avatar. I like that everyone has a TW themed one. If they want another, the URL avatar system is there, why not use it? Its on by default for new members, so its not as if they can't see it. (or it was under the old board software)

No, I'm not a moderator, and you're wrong, I'm not dying, or even trying, to be one. I can't know, but I can make a judgement off behaviour I've seen, and conversations with moderators. I can't comment on the backroom, I don't understand politics enough, nor do I spend enough time there. As for the awarding of that SM to that member, it raised quite a few eyebrows, but not as much as the open disgust of quite a few members when the honourific was placed upon me. We had people 'vomiting' in the thread it was announced. Didn't make me feel too good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo

Calling an idea idiotic is mild and is not insulting CA staff.


Call a spade a spade. If an idea is idiotic, call it such. One of the problems with this forum is that over the years the staff have strived to create such a cushioned environment that everyone's senses are heightened. Some members know that even a slight snipe could warrant moderator action so they don't think twice about reporting the post or making a big song and dance about a perceived insult until it gets noticed.

---

Text can be read many ways. Who is to know what a person finds offensive? I've been offended by posts that wouldn't offend my grandmother.

Not sure what you're saying with that last sentence. Is it that people are hesitent to snipe because of moderator action, or hesitent to report a snipe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

Getting rid of the junior member system is an important point and shouldn't be too difficult to solve (I assume, what do I know...). Gameroom should be open for all, for those who like forum games, it's an excellent place to be, really. Maybe not a selling point for a TW fansite, but certainly something that convinces members to stay until the next TW game is released. Heck, I think many members joined this place exclusively for the GR. If the BR is openend for all, the GR should be as well.

---

Yes and yes. JM should go, not sure why Gameroom is join to post. That should go as well.

Edit: On the junior member note though, the restrictions have been greatly relaxed. Posting is opened up to most areas, more than 1 pm, dont have to wait 300 seconds between posts and 1500 between thread creations. Those are the restrictions I remember being under. It was annoying, I couldn't even replying to two threads in the space of 5 minutes.

It needs to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

I'm well aware that I can retain my avatar, in the situation that custom ones are allowed. All I meant by the comment was, that in the case of another poll (like the 2 that I can remember) going up asking the general opinion of if the avatars should remain restricted to TW themed, I would vote yes. The members did both times before. That may very well have changed now.

---

The thing is, that it's not about what the current "oldtimers" think of the system, but what potential new members would like the most. Would you leave the .Org if the avatar rule would change? Will a new member decide not to post when confronted with restrictions as having to pick from a set number of avatars that are seen as "silly" on the majority of other fora? Those who are here and decided to stay, won't leave for something as trivial as avatars. New people however, might decide not to stay for it.

Think future and further than current situation and membership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

The thing is, that it's not about what the current "oldtimers" think of the system, but what potential new members would like the most. Would you leave the .Org if the avatar rule would change? Will a new member decide not to post when confronted with restrictions as having to pick from a set number of avatars that are seen as "silly" on the majority of other fora? Those who are here and decided to stay, won't leave for something as trivial as avatars. New people however, might decide not to stay for it.

Think future and further than current situation and membership.

---

I probably shouldnt even be involved in this conversation. :laugh4:

I've been through a number of forums, and avatars has never made me leave/stay. Only the people. But thats just me.

Would I leave? Not the right person to ask. I've been on the verge of leaving for good for a few months now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibumi

As a last point, the Back Room seems very much to have turned into an old boys club. There are lots of references to different members that of course can not be understood by new members, as well as a general atmosphere of old timers kissing up to each other. From an outsiders perspective, it just looks like the forum has had its days, and now only a few people remain to validate each others worth. Has an aura of desperation around it, if you ask me.

All this sad and done, there once in a while flare up an interresting debate, and the general level of discussion is of a level more often found on a forum for history buffs, not gamers.

---

Red:
Are you sure we are on about the same backroom? If anything, everyone disagrees with eachother. No one kisses up to another, if anything, we hit eachother around the head with a baseball bat.

Blue:
So some intellectual discourse is a bad thing, opposed to "socialists are evil, burn them to a stake" ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

Blue:
So some intellectual discourse is a bad thing, opposed to "socialists are evil, burn them to a stake" ?

---

I think you completely misunderstood that part. I think he meant to say that he was impressed by the high level of the more interesting discussions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

I think you completely misunderstood that part. I think he meant to say that he was impressed by the high level of the more interesting discussions.

---

yeah, I think he means we should try to keep the blue but do away with the red (analogy to US politics anyone?*).

*N.B. this quip is not suitable for application to the UK :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

I'm well aware that I can retain my avatar, in the situation that custom ones are allowed. All I meant by the comment was, that in the case of another poll (like the 2 that I can remember) going up asking the general opinion of if the avatars should remain restricted to TW themed, I would vote yes. The members did both times before. That may very well have changed now.

---

Polls are unreliable on this site especially - in such polls those that really want to preserve things as they are, are more likely to vote. Vote turn out is very low, so a large percentage don't vote. Also polls are made from the current userbase - not from the new blood and the people that may be put off by the restrictive avatar policy. If we'd always had personal avatars and then had a poll asking people if they wanted to remove this right and restrict themselves to only a gallery of TW images, what do you think the outcome would be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

I identify people by their avatars here. I often read the threads and don't pay attention to the names, but can tell who it is based off the avatar. I like that everyone has a TW themed one. If they want another, the URL avatar system is there, why not use it? Its on by default for new members, so its not as if they can't see it. (or it was under the old board software)

---

Identifying people by their avatars will be easier with personal avatars. I really don't understand the resistance. Effectively you're saying "deny those people these simple things, just to suit me".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

No, I'm not a moderator, and you're wrong, I'm not dying, or even trying, to be one. I can't know, but I can make a judgement off behaviour I've seen, and conversations with moderators. I can't comment on the backroom, I don't understand politics enough, nor do I spend enough time there. As for the awarding of that SM to that member, it raised quite a few eyebrows, but not as much as the open disgust of quite a few members when the honourific was placed upon me. We had people 'vomiting' in the thread it was announced. Didn't make me feel too good.

---

I did not mean to offend, but that's how it comes across sometimes. In many of your posts you do come across as "playing staff". You've been awarded SM so you must have been seen as deserving it in the eyes of the staff at the time. I'll be frank with you in that I cannot see why you are a SM while some more longer term and arguably more deserving members aren't, but that's no reason for you to carry it uneasily nor does it mean that you don't deserve it. A member should be judged on his actions here not by a title.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

Text can be read many ways. Who is to know what a person finds offensive? I've been offended by posts that wouldn't offend my grandmother.

---

Someone will always be offended - wrapping everyone up in cotton wool to counter this is not the answer. Misunderstandings will happen. The .org cannot possibly cover all bases in trying to avoid offence but trying to do so it jeopardises the basic freedoms that one would expect. Basically the .org will cease to be fun, for many this is already the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

Not sure what you're saying with that last sentence. Is it that people are hesitent to snipe because of moderator action, or hesitent to report a snipe?

---

My point is that too much moderation intervention and enforced politeness means that individuals get trolling down to a fine art. Once member x knows that if member y calling his statement idiotic is a reportable offence, he will taken full advantage. You end up with silly reporting games, trolling and playing the moderators, plus a stifling, overly false and oppressive atmosphere. Etiquette can be part of guidelines but not enforced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

Yes and yes. JM should go, not sure why Gameroom is join to post. That should go as well.

Edit: On the junior member note though, the restrictions have been greatly relaxed. Posting is opened up to most areas, more than 1 pm, dont have to wait 300 seconds between posts and 1500 between thread creations. Those are the restrictions I remember being under. It was annoying, I couldn't even replying to two threads in the space of 5 minutes.

It needs to go.

---

I have no idea why the gameroom is members only?

I'm familiar with how the restrictions have changed. It's got the stage now where the JM is a member that cannot edit their posts. That is offputting for many new members - and not needed. It treats every new member as a potential troublemaker, bot, spammer or alt account to a banned member. This kind of paranoia is simply not needed and not present elsewhere and it gives a bad impression of the .org. This has been debated endlessly in the staff section and most staff came around to the idea that the JM should just go. Not sure what has happened since then though.

Quote:

---

*N.B. this quip is not suitable for application to the UK

---

I dunno, I could just about learn to live with that! :wink:

Interesting thread BTW.

Quote:

---

I'm familiar with how the restrictions have changed. It's got the stage now where the JM is a member that cannot edit their posts. That is offputting for many new members - and not needed. It treats every new member as a potential troublemaker, bot, spammer or alt account to a banned member. This kind of paranoia is simply not needed and not present elsewhere and it gives a bad impression of the .org. This has been debated endlessly in the staff section and most staff came around to the idea that the JM should just go. Not sure what has happened since then though.

---

Busy, so only repsonding to this.
For at least 4 years, JM's couldnt edit, so its hardly new.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

Busy, so only repsonding to this.
For at least 4 years, JM's couldnt edit, so its hardly new.

---

Ok you misunderstood me. A JM started off as a member that could not edit his post and could only post in the Entrance Hall. Much of this has changed and now only the restriction on post editing, posting in offtopic and smaller PM inbox size remains. With the EH system gone, JMs have been fully redundant for quite some time. Make sense now?

Later.

Ah yes, it does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

Personally I don't think I have warned a single member in my career. A single unofficial PM has always sufficed.
Most members are "mature" even if they are 13.
You can still moderate the way you suggest without changing "the rules". If you clearly suggest that you would like for the patrons in a forum to behave a certain way, you do so simply and not with a heavy hand.
I believe it has worked in the gameroom, with much help from the established clientele and former excellent Mods.
ACIN in the gameroom is an exemplar of maturity and a respected player. He was indeed worried about elitism in the start but has since joined the rank of players with his valuable contribution. I am mentioning him because he doesn't exactly have a clean record elsewhere.

---

The reason for my transition from being almost perma banned to a contributing member is because of one and only one particular mod who went out of his way to treat me with respect. From what I remember he wrote a fully explained and detailed PM in a respectful manner that elaborated on why everything me and the rest of the EB Tavern complained about would not have much of an impact. It was nice change from the attitudes of almost every other mod which flat out refused to consider some of our arguments and had a very disdainful attitude from the very beginning.

Back when the social group for the EB Tavern and for the year before that I was posting, I was a young idiot kid in his mid teens. This is the kind of age you would expect from new members just discovering the TW series. Many of these new members also have a high chances of being just like me and might be coming from a place where the dialogue would be a complete 180 from this place. When I joined, I was coming straight from YTMND. The way me and the rest were handled by the mods was in a very authoritarian manner which played right into our hands of being as disruptive as possible. Because we felt that we were targeted by the mods in the first place, we decided to no longer care about the rules at all anymore. This is why we loved making our own social group in the first place, because we specifically went out of our way to get out of your hair but instead we found that the mods had come and deleted the entire thing. Which is a incredible shame, because all you guys had seen was a bunch of spam and swearing, but you know what I got out of that social group:

1. Conversations between me and The Celtic Viking and the beginning of me discovering myself as an atheist.
2. Fun conversations between people like me and Subotan which now continue on a more regular and personal basis, which I am very grateful for.
3. Immense discoveries about the plight of other people next door to me. To this day, I still pledge that if I ever get into politics I will try to help out the troubles of the native Americans after learning about their standard of living from Methuselah.

But to everyone else, those conversations were a parasite on the org, because most of the conversation consisted of kids in their youth posting like kids in their youth. Now I can never re-read those conversation and it deeply saddens me.

If I were to grade the handling of the situation by the mods, I would say it gets a less then above average. I am very happy to see Miotas and Subotan posting in the backroom, but along with the social group being deleted, many of those I talked to got month long bans and simply never returned. Don't get me wrong, some people I agree should have been perma banned and were completely out of control (AP). However, at the end of the whole debacle I never saw posts from The Celtic Viking, A Terribly Harmful Name, AlexanderSextus, Celtic Punk (although he was always away for long periods of time), Che Roriniho, Fixiwee, gamegeek2, Novellus, Thermal Mercury, and Lz3. That's 10 people right there that all could be enhancing the experience of the org through their posts and perspectives.

So yeah, I am a contributing member now. I haven't gotten a warning or an I.P. in a while now, yet if it wasn't for the PM of one particular mod, I would have probably gone back to YTMND. Is that really a good sign of how our community is developed? Idk, maybe I am too extreme a case, but I really doubt that the majority of young kids who have all now been bombarded with 4chan memes since they first logged in will be much better then I was. You gotta take a different approach.

Bottom line, Shogun has to be awesome, or this is just going to become a nostalgia and mafia forum.

The gameroom is the last line of defense. I shall guard the inner keep to the last man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

Bottom line, Shogun has to be awesome, or this is just going to become a nostalgia and mafia forum.

The gameroom is the last line of defense. I shall guard the inner keep to the last man.

---

Well, Shogun I Total War got me here but the Tavern made me stay.

Of course it would be a shame if Shogun II is another crappy game. But does it really matter? Do you guys really think that an awesome new TW game is going to increase our (active) member count? Sure, it would attract lots of new members, but would they stay? 80% of our members never posted in the Tavern.

The reason ACIN started this topic is because there is a lack of new people killing the backroom and the entire forum (correct me if I'm wrong). This forum consists of more than just the modding community (that has moved to TWC) and STW guides. New members who never post in the other forums do not solve the problem. I never found the staff too authoritarian. Our moderators can be strict sometimes but they do make sure that the forum does not become like TWC: messy.

I think you have to be a certain kind of person to become part of the community. I think you have to be a certain kind of person to like the backroom. I think the best way to attract those people is the old Org. way. Do we want to attract thousands of new members and become like TWC? I would, and with me lots of other members, leave permanently.

Just my two cents

Thanks for sharing your point of view, Lord of Lent. Nice to see another Shogun 1 devotee here.

I would phrase it: certain kinds of people find the Org to their taste; certain kinds of people enjoy the Back Room. We don't expect people to be of a certain kind here--we encourage particular kinds of behavior which are a bit more, shall we say, thoughtful and considerate. That being said, the Org is pretty flexible from my point of view in that, within the rules, there's a lot of room to twitch and yap. Mostly it's just about remembering to be nice when addressing other members, and honoring the creators of the games that bring us together. One can despise a point of view without despising and berating those who hold it. It all boils down to respect.

Lull and swell happens between game releases. There are other forums out there, so we have to share the attention. The reception of a new release has a big impact on participation everywhere.

We have some control over certain things that can influence those who do come here to check things out: 1) assure that the Org contains useful, interesting content; 2) assure that the content is organized and easy to find; 3) assure that there are knowledgeable, friendly people around to answer questions and help solve problems; 4) assure that the Org interface is intuitive, aesthetically appealing, and as functionally comprehensive and efficient as possible; 5) assure a sense of freedom to express one's self within commonly accepted limits, and to participate without having to endure abuse from others; 6) provide obvious and interesting opportunities for people to get involved, without a lot of unnecessary hurdles, bell-ringing and whistle-blowing.

Finally, we need to kept this all 'alive.' None of this is static; it's never "finished." It needs us to flourish. What will the Org do? Well, I can't speak for the Org, but I've decided to get more involved to help out. What'ch'all gonna do? Chat is all well and good, but in the end, it's going to take more than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

You were an assistant mod Warman?!?!

Anyway, I think we should keep avatars the way they are. The .org is unique in all the internet forums I've seen in the way things are quite ordered. It helps keep the pages easy on the eye.

Plus I find the variety of shapes and sizes of avatars found elsewhere to be intimidating. :hide:

---

Many moons and many cycles ago Rhyfelwyr. Was fun for a time.

Quote:

---

People will always complain, the problem is that the complaining just got out of control for the last few titles and the complaining outweighed any good press the games might have got. This was mainly due to the ratio of old guard to new members. It's funny when you see people here talking about how the last games were a failure, when the sales figures were good very worldwide and TWC is teaming with life. The new games will always be worse if not outright crap to those of us that started with Shogun1, lets face it. Everyone else does not need constant reminding of this - I've been guilty of this myself. The problem is that for the most part the staff agree with these veteran players, so the bashing has been allowed to continue. This is a complex issue as while it's right that CA and their games should be criticised, it's wrong that the staff turn a blind eye to the veterans bashing the games, yet clamp down severely on the misdemeanours of newer, less mature members.

---

I argee. I also notice that a lot of old vetreans from MP come back recently to talk about the game, but there are some there have stated to me in private convo or on this fourm itself that they won't come back to S2TW no matter what. In that case, I asked them, and I ask now, not just for MP players who are elitists, but everyone else here;


If you not going to bother to play it, then why even come back to complain about it? Just go run away to your other MP games, BF2, WoW, G,whatever and don't waste our time with your negativie talk. That usually pisses them off, pardon my french, but you know, it's the truth.


I don't like TWC to much, there is a lot more favortism there (you can even become Forum Admin by buying yourself in..... I'm not lying. You got the money? Go take over the server payments from the current Admin. Now you think he became Forum Admin there? I got a lot of friends and know a lot about TWC) but they must be doing something right if they are killing us member and post wise.


I remember here when there was a alot of MP talk, Mod talk, Off-topic Frontroom/Backroom talk (my many days bashing my head in with Tribesmen, though I'm not saying he should come back)., a lot of Interactive Histories, Mafia games and so on. Now it is boring and even I am stuggling to keep myself intersted here.

Everyone here wants something by don't want to work for it, I think we need to change that thought.

Quote:

---

I don't like TWC to much, there is a lot more favortism there (you can even become Forum Admin by buying yourself in..... I'm not lying. You got the money? Go take over the server payments from the current Admin. Now you think he became Forum Admin there? I got a lot of friends and know a lot about TWC) but they must be doing something right if they are killing us member and post wise.

---

There isn't favouritism at all, it's a meritocracy.

BTW, why are there these large ugly avatars?

The really big ones are the URL avatars. You can turn them off in your profile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

Bottom line, Shogun has to be awesome, or this is just going to become a nostalgia and mafia forum.

---

This still ignores the fact that TWC is doing fine discussing these supposedly disastrously bad new TW games? You're a TWC member, so you of all people should know this.

Today's stats

Org:
There are currently 167 users online. 21 members and 146 guests

TWC
Currently Active Users: 1003 (212 members and 791 guests)

So the games are crap and that's what's driving away our members? Well it looks like they're being driven to TWC, which is also a forum dedicated to the same games series...

I'll say it again, it is both wrong and counter productive to blame the TW series for the problems here. Doing so won't help the .org and will just accelerate the decline. Members and staff alike can sit around blaming the game or CA for this, or the administration can actually do something about this problem. The first stage of solving the problem is acknowledging there is one. So far I don't see this.

Some important issues have been debated here, but so far only two moderators have become involved. As ever the mods have chosen to debate this in private - and we know what will come of that - instead of involving the members in how this affects their community.

The issue is simply that the lack of new members means that it's mostly only the fans of the older games that remain. The game will probably sell well and will attract lots of new players - I will be particularly interested in the figures for the first quarter after release. If the games sells better than either Shogun, Medieval or Rome (three titles that the .org and TWC based their communities upon) then Shogun 2 should be seen as a success by the staff and members here and other sources of the decline need to be looked for.

My feeling is that, as ever, a proportion of the new players, not a large one, will seek out an online community such as this one. Odds on they will mostly join the largest, most active and which awards the most freedoms. They will not come to the stuffy place that only welcomes the "maturer" member. This in itself shows how dangerous the decline here is in that it's a problem that can only get worse unless something radical and progressive is done.

If people dislike the avatar ideas or the ideas for the removal of JMs, then those people should come up with something else? They should also come up with better reasons as to why they oppose one or both of these ideas, because as far as I can see so far, it all boils down to snobbery and the "it was good enough for me..." type of attitude. Removing JMs or removing the restrictions on avatars won't affect the old members that like it the way it is, but will attract new people and improve perceptions of this place. Some of the long term members need to think like an outside rather than like an insider. Andres made some good points here:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

The thing is, that it's not about what the current "oldtimers" think of the system, but what potential new members would like the most.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

Will a new member decide not to post when confronted with restrictions as having to pick from a set number of avatars that are seen as "silly" on the majority of other fora?

---

People are fickle, we're all fickle individuals. If we weren't we would spend hours writing in depth critique of a computer game. If we weren't fickle enough, then we wouldn't have people modding the game to suite their tastes? If they weren't bothered about appearances, most would still be playing Shogun or Medieval 1. No one would buy a new graphics card and everyone would run on the lowest detail settings. This is because unfortunately appearances count.

Orgahs may see the ability to choose your own avatar as an unneeded luxury. There are many arguments, such as "it will mees up the layout of the board", "they won't be in keeping with the theme" (I hate to remind everyone, but we have a japanese theme with avatars from about 6 TW games, most of which are not from Shogun), "someone will use an animated avatar and that might annoy me", "they will be two big", etc, etc, etc. All of these complaints cater to what existing members want, and any poll will also cater to existing members. To an outside, being able to choose and upload their own personal avatar (especially on a gaming forum) is a basic right and I am wholly convinced that this along with the JM system is a huge deterrent to new people signing up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord of Lent

Well, Shogun I Total War got me here but the Tavern made me stay.

---

A good example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord of Lent

Of course it would be a shame if Shogun II is another crappy game. But does it really matter? Do you guys really think that an awesome new TW game is going to increase our (active) member count? Sure, it would attract lots of new members, but would they stay? 80% of our members never posted in the Tavern.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord of Lent

I never found the staff too authoritarian. Our moderators can be strict sometimes but they do make sure that the forum does not become like TWC: messy.

---

Many would disagree with you. In the past some of the staff here have gone beyond moderating IMHO to intervene, give warning points and close threads where it has clearly not been warranted. In the backroom especially moderation has gotten overly "scientific" and the frontroom has seemed almost redundant, because it doesn't seem like there's much you can talk about in there anyway. It's my opinion that the offtopic areas should warrant less moderators rather than more. What is considered an offence also needs to be looked at closely. Again, repeating myself, but members should sort out minor differences between themselves and moderators should only step in when it's obvious to all involved that they're needed. Moderators should also not decide what constitutes a thread and avoid locking a thread because they see it as spam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord of Lent

I think you have to be a certain kind of person to become part of the community. I think you have to be a certain kind of person to like the backroom. I think the best way to attract those people is the old Org. way. Do we want to attract thousands of new members and become like TWC? I would, and with me lots of other members, leave permanently.

---

I agree with you on many points but not on this. I've seen this fallacy repeated a lot here and it's sad to see it still persists. By attracting more members, the .org will not magically transform into the TWC.

Using statements like "you have to be a certain kind of person", is exactly the sort of elitist attitude I have been referring to. If the .org is only going to be open to a certain type of person it's going to get boring fast, in my opinion it's already reached that point, and passed it, about two years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Togakure

Well, I can't speak for the Org, but I've decided to get more involved to help out.

---

Congratulations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiKingWarmanCake88

Now it is boring and even I am stuggling to keep myself intersted here.

---

Yet during your ban you were eager to return I believe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiKingWarmanCake88

Everyone here wants something by don't want to work for it, I think we need to change that thought.

---

I think the opposite is the case. It is not sufficient for a few members or the staff to tell the majority of members they need to "work" to change this place. People won't post unless something holds their interest, people won't join unless something grabs their interest and lures them in.

Members are the blood that flows through the .org, by being here and posting they are doing what they are supposed to do and all they can do. Content is not the problem here.

People come here for recreational purposes, not to stress over reversing the .org's decline. A lot of quality posting still comes from those that are still here, much more in fact than you'll find on some other sites, so there is not much else a member can do for this site. It's really up to the staff and in particular the administration to turn this place around through new initiatives and some policy changes/relaxing of rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lysimachus

There isn't favouritism at all, it's a meritocracy.

---

As is fascism, so I'm not sure that's the best word to use.

//edit:- interestingly I can no long choose not to have an avatar...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo

//edit:- interestingly I can no long choose not to have an avatar...?

---

Probably has something to do with the new things Tosa did with avatars.

Pevergreen, I thought an idea was idiotic, and I wrote it was idiotic. Sure, I could have written that the idea was "bad", but bear in mind that I could also have written that the originator must be retarded. I do fully understand what you mean, but bear in mind this was one of my first posts, if not the first post. To then have a mod contacting me cause I used the word "idiotic"... I am rather sure it will make a lot of people look around for another forum. Specially since my post all in all was very constructive (offered solutions instead of just complaining).

And seriously, if you make a game and can not take that someone on the internet think some aspect of it is idiotic, well then maybe you dont belong on the internet. I am pretty sure 90% the of internet pop would consider the post I made well mannered. Oh, and I do not try to defend my post here, I just try to offer reasons as to why many people might shy away from this forum.


Andres, Thank YOU good sire :)


Beskar, as Andres pointed out, my reference to the level of debate was meant as a compliment, I think you misread me (or I wasnt clear enough).

As to:

Quote:

---

Are you sure we are on about the same backroom? If anything, everyone disagrees with eachother. No one kisses up to another, if anything, we hit eachother around the head with a baseball bat.

---

You are right, but at the same time utterly wrong.

This thread is a good example of what I mean.

Having debated some of the participants, I know that this thread offers layers of sarcasm and fun. However, that is only evident if someone has some prior knowledge. Try to look at this thread with the eyes of someone who visits the back room for the very first time. What impression will he get?

And yes, that thread is taking these tendencies to the extreme, but then again, I have seen lots more tendencies like it and it was one of the reasons I went back to lurking in the game area.

I do get, that if 9 out of 10 in a discussion has been debating each other for years, they will fall back to inside jokes and camaraderie. It is quite natural even! However, these same 9 should then not be so surprised when new members do not feel welcomed.

I stress to add that I have only been met with the out most friendliness and respect here, but specially in the backroom it is quite easy to feel frozen out.

Mods can of course in no way make rules about this, I just write this for old time members to think about, if they want their community to be a live and active one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo

This is a good example. It's "not important" to you. It may be to someone else, but more importantly it affects the perception of this place as seen by outsiders. It makes the .org appear overly restrictive. A prospective member will not be aware of this nor will he want to go through that hassle. Why on earth should a member have to ask an admin for a custom avatar, wait and get it approved. They can simply go to the TWC, upload their avatar and job done.

---

I am not a part of the Avatar generation - that's why it is not important to me. However, I would not begrudge others that are to be able to upload their artistic creations.

With the new Shogun game, and its new multiplayer features, I think we are in a position to grab the new players. We are back at our roots with clans.
Apparently you can play as a clan in a multiplayer campaign with players sharing control of units and clan leaders directing operations on special clan maps.
If we cater now for this system by allowing clans to operate from our site we could get a new influx of both old and new players.
The big question would be how to moderate this in a satisfactory way, agreeable to the majority of members. History has shown us that special little communities within a larger community spells trouble.

New players will be looking for a website that are centered on their new game. A place with the looks and feel of feudal Japan.
We should have all possible advantages in becoming that site.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibumi

Pevergreen, I thought an idea was idiotic, and I wrote it was idiotic. Sure, I could have written that the idea was "bad", but bear in mind that I could also have written that the originator must be retarded. I do fully understand what you mean, but bear in mind this was one of my first posts, if not the first post. To then have a mod contacting me cause I used the word "idiotic"... I am rather sure it will make a lot of people look around for another forum. Specially since my post all in all was very constructive (offered solutions instead of just complaining).

---

I was picked up earlier on this thread on my wording, with someone telling me, "you could have said it like this", followed by an example. I bear the poster no ill will whatsoever, but does he realise how this must appear? I've seen mods doing the same on numerous occasions, I've also seen warnings and "friendly PMs" sent to members offering the same advice. I've also sent a warning myself to a member in the past offering much the same kind of advice - the fallout from that was no where near worth the effort. My error there was in not letting the members - both adults - sort out their own issues. No one was swearing, so what the hell was I doing there...? Who wants to be part of a forum where staff try to direct behaviour and discussion, while enforcing politeness? It's not only staff doing this either, but long term members and especially some seniors also. It's daunting for a newcomer to arrive on the scene and witness all of this: "just what do I have to do here to fit in!?".

I've criticised the games in the past, extensively and never gotten a warning for it. I'm sure I've called CA and aspects of their worse than "idiotic", but I've gotten away scot free. It seems wrong when you get landed with a warning for something I got away with. The most likely cause is that you were posting in a different forum under a different moderator to me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibumi

[I stress to add that I have only been met with the out most friendliness and respect here, but specially in the backroom it is quite easy to feel frozen out.

---

It's easy to feel frozen out on the backroom especially if your posts in thread are simply being ignored while the regulars continue their banter and inside jokes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

I am not a part of the Avatar generation - that's why it is not important to me. However, I would not begrudge others that are to be able to upload their artistic creations.

---

That's all it needs. Most forums have a gallery combined with the ability to upload your own image. The .org needs to at least provide what other forums do, rather than simply denying certain features without good reason. Why should people come here and accept these restrictions when they can just as easily go elsewhere?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

With the new Shogun game, and its new multiplayer features, I think we are in a position to grab the new players. We are back at our roots with clans.
Apparently you can play as a clan in a multiplayer campaign with players sharing control of units and clan leaders directing operations on special clan maps.
If we cater now for this system by allowing clans to operate from our site we could get a new influx of both old and new players.
The big question would be how to moderate this in a satisfactory way, agreeable to the majority of members. History has shown us that special little communities within a larger community spells trouble.

---

The MP community has not been here for a long time and it will take a lot to win it back. Having said that it's still possible. Clans would also benefit from things like personal avatars and the abolition of the JM system. MP Clans are free to come here and no special tools are needed for this. You can set up special forums, etc, but if the same old .org system remains they will simply walk on by leaving those forums empty - advertising yet more inactivity. The reason MP clans deserted the .org in the past was due to how they were moderated. If the staff can nail fair and unbiased moderation with an emphasis on the clans mostly sorting out their own affairs, you may get some from the MP community coming back here. What will drive MP clans away though is the perpetuation of the obsessive hyper moderation we see in some parts of this site. I remember talk about the clans situation when I was a mod here, it won't go far if the main thing being discussed is how to moderate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd

New players will be looking for a website that are centered on their new game. A place with the looks and feel of feudal Japan.
We should have all possible advantages in becoming that site.

---

Very true, though if TWC were to install a sengoku jidai theme, that small advantage would be lost. What new members expect is somewhere that is active, informative and provides basic liberties/rights. I appreciate your post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibumi

pevergreen, I thought an idea was idiotic, and I wrote it was idiotic. Sure, I could have written that the idea was "bad", but bear in mind that I could also have written that the originator must be retarded. I do fully understand what you mean, but bear in mind this was one of my first posts, if not the first post. To then have a mod contacting me cause I used the word "idiotic"... I am rather sure it will make a lot of people look around for another forum. Specially since my post all in all was very constructive (offered solutions instead of just complaining).

And seriously, if you make a game and can not take that someone on the internet think some aspect of it is idiotic, well then maybe you dont belong on the internet. I am pretty sure 90% the of internet pop would consider the post I made well mannered. Oh, and I do not try to defend my post here, I just try to offer reasons as to why many people might shy away from this forum.

---

Unless I'm forgetting something, I've not read the post.

Having a mod contact you about it isn't something i can comment on. I don't know who it was, nor do I really care. Some moderators are stricter, some are looser. Thats what you get when you get volunteers.

As for the clan system, I don't know how it used to work, but the battle.net system of each clan got its own private forum, of which only moderators/admins and members of the clan could see and post in.

If each clan got its own area to talk in (moderated by clan leader and those he designates), with a communal area to organise stuff, it could be what the org needs.

The subforums would be hidden unless you join the clan, so moderation could be less strict. You could designate a 'clan moderator' who would simply remove things against site rules (porn etc) but leave the actual moderation to the clan itself.

Self moderation, free areas to discuss what they want. Not sure if its possible though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

Having a mod contact you about it isn't something i can comment on. I don't know who it was, nor do I really care. Some moderators are stricter, some are looser. Thats what you get when you get volunteers.

---

Whichever forum you go to, chances are you're going to be dealing with volunteer staff. While some mods are stricter than others, it's not strictness that's the issue here. I would much rather deal with a strict but consistent individual than e.g. with someone that lets friends off the hook or moderates according to their own political or religious beliefs. Strictness is not the same thing as overly pedantic or "hyper moderating".

I think it's important to ban the idiots that e.g. post pr0n or consistently cause trouble and stop wasting huge amounts of staff time on them, and leave those posting words like "idiotic" or engaging in minor spats alone to sort out their own issues.

The problem with the internet is that it's often very hard to come across in the way you intend especially when dealing with delicate matters. Also two members will read a warning in a different manner. While one may appreciate it as a "tip off" from the mod to check his behaviour before it gets worse, another may feel he's being unfairly singled out, while at the same time others are getting away with it. This is difficult for the mod to deal with also.

Interestingly if my post #124 had been in another forum, it would probably have been edited and/or the thread closed by now. There's nothing wrong with the post, no swearing and no flaming, but if it had been in e.g. the backroom, it would probably have been called "trolling", "baiting" or "getting a bit heated" I have no doubt that it would not have lasted long. For the record I suspect the staff here think my posts in this thread have been simply one big trolling session against them from start to finish. That's the problem with the internet - one person sees one thing in a post, another person or person see another thing altogether. Often people see what they want to see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pevergreen

As for the clan system, I don't know how it used to work, but the battle.net system of each clan got its own private forum, of which only moderators/admins and members of the clan could see and post in.

If each clan got its own area to talk in (moderated by clan leader and those he designates), with a communal area to organise stuff, it could be what the org needs.

The subforums would be hidden unless you join the clan, so moderation could be less strict. You could designate a 'clan moderator' who would simply remove things against site rules (porn etc) but leave the actual moderation to the clan itself.

Self moderation, free areas to discuss what they want. Not sure if its possible though.

---

Good ideas, but I think only for an established MP community. Setting up all of that now, with activity how it is would be unwise in my humble opinion. The .org would just have more empty areas to fill. New blood needs to come in first, then any ideas regarding new forums, etc could be considered. The first stage should be to give the .org a broader appeal. Not "dumbing down" to appeal to "idiots", but just generally brightening up adding uploadable avatars, getting rid of JMs and generally easing off on the moderation to give the place more of a laid back feel. That would be a good start.

I've said all I had to say here, it's up the .org now and it's staff to choose between bringing about real change or continuing as they are.

Over and out.