I’m not talking about the situation they are in. I agree that these two types of moderators function on very different bases. So when it comes to what the incentives and driving forces are behind the job, you are right.
But I’m was talking about how it will possibly be received by the community or especially by members that get moderated.
The situations they’re in is a massive factor in the potential levels of abusing/exploiting a position as a moderator
This is true, but you can’t say “it’s not the community’s fault that there are bad apples” if the moderation team is mainly drawn from the community, is what I was trying to ham-fistedly get across. But I agree with you that just saying “it’s up to us as a community to be less of a bunch of dicks to each other”, while true, can also be used to sweep crap under the carpet (but not always).
The community isn’t gatekept, its the devs/studios etc… responsibility to avoid bad apples being in a position to actively be bad apples. You’ll always have bad apples (who are unable to really do anything) unless you allow people into a community, as opposed to removing people from a community and have unobstructed entry.
Again: I agree with you. But this is not what I’m initially talking about.
I’m saying that we play a very important role here. In a very toxic community the moderation will be very harsh. In a nice environment it’s also easier for moderators to be friendly.
And if you already have the opinion that everything a moderator does is driven by bad faith, you are also 100% biased and non objective towards these people. All I say is “give it a chance and don’t be biased against it right from the start”.
I certainly understand the concern with such a highlighted case scenario where a community moderator program didn’t pull through for the community. However there is many cases where community moderator programs have flourished. One of which I’ve seen grow and flourish for the last eighteen years without any major incident, and continues. It is a program which will require a significant amount of oversight, and we will need to adapt as we grow.
We like to keep very close with our community, with open channels of communication, and always try to be as responsive as we can. I believe that with this approach, we can see the Beesfriends be one of the community guide systems that flourishes. The important part is that we listen to not just our community moderators, but to our community as a whole, so we can address any issues occurring with the community moderator program before they become significant issues. And I like to think we’ve shown that we have that commitment to openness with the community.
I dont think anywhere i’ve shared the opinion that everything a moderator does is driven by bad faith.
I do think that everything done towards creating a moderation system/structure should be done based on what someone acting in bad faith could do, and mitigating the potential damage there as well as ease of getting into a position to that.
That point also seems to be extensively shared based on the other posts in here.
Is there a difference between moderator and guide? Or is your intention that they’re the same thing?
And all I did was stating that it also partly depends on the community itself how bad moderation is needed. I don’t see how these two statements interfere with each other.
Yeah, EHG definitively earned quite some trust at the very least. I really hope EHG will be able to handle such an ambitious approach. Best of luck.
Is just about numbers, the moment (hopefully) the game gets a bigger player count, a MP competitive scene, or at launch, toxicity will come in bigger amounts. If it somehow became a mainstream ARPG, you will get all of it.
Same with “bad apples” you will get some no matter what, even with due diligence, some will slip in. Is more about staying always vigilant and act accordingly on the spot. Seems is EHG intention after all, lets see how it goes.
My first responses were based on your first line being about bad apples also being a thing within paid moderation teams as well.
My most recent point was responding to you saying ‘And if you already have the opinion that everything a moderator does is driven by bad faith’. I’m not really sure what you’re even referencing with ‘interfere with each other’ in response to that, my apologies if your comment about the opinion that everything a mod does is driven by bad faith had nothing to do with what I was saying (I just couldn’t see any other context for it).
I thin EHG and we as a community should give it a shot. Look at the community tester programm. A lot of people said this will be bad and force a lot of bad blood but so far everything is mostly civil and when Mike was asked about how helpfull the programm was he seemed VERY pleased. Sure some people were mad or tried to force “… because you are a tester…” discussion but everyone was civil with it.
If someone likes the game and want to put working hours for free into it I’m happy. If the outcome is bad get the next person in. Mods or guids or whatever can’t do that much harm if they are unofficial and can be removed from their “jobs” rather quickly. It’s a win for EHG and every person who want to help out.
We’ll know if it works after we tried it.
As per our three outlined principles, they are one in the same. “Moderation” is not simply addressing negative actions, as “mods” are in some games. Moderation is guiding conversations, providing an environment in which people are able to have a civil discussion regarding a topic. By being helpful members of the community, or “guides”, they are already actively contributing to the goals of what moderation is by contributing to the creation of that environment. “Our moderators are community guides and helpers first, moderators second.”
I mean, to take your point and apply it to concerns raised in this thread, theres definitely been cases of ‘because im a tester’ and similar used as reasoning for attitudes and arguments, so I don’t know that the tester program is a great example for what you’re trying to say.
On the other hand i’d imagine ehg will be looking for different personalities for their guides, than those who post stuff like that.
This opens up a whole new can of worms…
What is civil? It has a a whole different meaning for each individual.
Eg. This player Jabba, i don’t find him particularly aggressive but you guys have chat ban him a few times for discussing/arguing game mechanics. Where as ive seen players sprouting nonsense racist comments, spam off topic politics discussion and excessive vulgarity get away with it (And i am online ALOT)
We have a standing policy, included in the code of conduct not to discuss disciplinary actions.
Regarding players you may find in chat violating the code of conduct as you have outlined - First, I’m sorry you had to experience this. Making racist comments, spam, and excessive vulgarity are against the code of conduct. And while we certainly try to create the most welcoming environment we can in chat, we cannot guarantee all instances will be caught.
This is why we are both expanding our roster of community moderators, as well as introducing a report system with the coming chat system. Of course, you can always submit a screenshot with a support ticket if you feel something is going unaddressed, and we can ensure it is looked into and addressed appropriately.
As far as something being “civil”, it means to be courteous and polite, to follow conduct of good behavior. In other words, it’s a shorthand for following the code of conduct.
I want this as a GIF lmao
Civil is a very understood description. People who insult are not civil. People who are vulgar are not civil. People who are hostile are not civil. And if you are going to question the definitions of those 3 things, then you are probably just trying to find a reason be uncivil.
This could end up bad, very bad. You NEED to make a moderator a person who knows english very well, preferably whos english is 1st language, and who understand very well english (bad english) from people all over the world. Moderator CAN’T make a mistake interpreting something that was not said just because they are not so good in english. If they start to ban people just because they have misunderstood the message, that could make people leave the game and not coming back. And the option to appeal the ban is not that good. I’ve quit PoE because they have very , i will not say stupid, moderators who didnt understand what i have said and have deleted my post (s), I didnt get banned, but that deletion was stupid. I did fial a complaint but didnt get answer from the stuff. So i got mad and have deleted my PoE account. And good riddance, it saved me a lot of money
Again could mean different things.
Some people are overly sensitive, some are full of political correctness, some are easily butthurt, some take things very personal and some are easily triggered, some require you to say pls and ty in every sentence
I know there is an oxford cambridge definition of those 3 things, thanks.