An Open Dialogue Regarding Forum Moderation

I agree that is the stated reason for the thread but honestly there should have been no need to have this thread the updated information should have already been presented at the time of the change. They already knew that when banned you can not read PM's so the send to registered email should already have been in use. That really is a no-brainer.

The fact they perma banned someone then reversed it less then 48 hours later is absolute prof that they do give knee jerk reactions and use heavy handed moderation. If there was a valid reason for a perma ban what changed?
What changed was the outrage from the community and to potential for seriously lost revenue.

Instead of trying to spin it, I would have been much more likely to continue to support them had they stood up said hey we goofed it was an over reaction, and we want your feedback on how to improve community/moderator relations and communication.

Welcome back! I don't understand the context unless this was a subtle "RadarX is reading your PMs!" If someone says they weren't warned, I absolutely checked. In NIck's case he's had plenty.

No I was not warned you were going to read my PMs until after you already had done so.
Not that I have any objection since it proves to me you only respond in ways to spin it your way.
I did respond to the unknown mod number 4 and he never answered my request for more information or to explain how it was a violation so again spin away we are right back where we started.....

So I was curious as to why the thread and Interview with a DBG Executive was closed and figured since discussing moderation is only allowed in PM and in this thread I would start a dialogue of transparent communication with RadarX.
I was concerned about the clearly fast closure of the thread that was presented as satire a humors way to express concern of the direction of the game recently in a light hearted albeit Mocking manner... Satire has always been and should always be an acceptable form of making a point.
So I asked this question... and got this answer.

So I assume that means negative commentary/concerns anything not showing DBG in the best possible light belongs on a third part web site where posting off topic trash threads is acceptable.

Ok But wait we were asked to post real player feedback about the newest DLC there as well.
I think we must read between the lines here and I see that as equating all Player feedback as being equal unless it portrays DBG in the best light possible.

Oh come on, that's a ridiculous example and you know it. Of course that thread was going to be closed, as well it should be.

If we can draw anything from that example it's that DBG/Radar DO have a sense of humor. They didn't delete it, just locked it.

I don't see anywhere where he said you'd be warned about him checking your pms just that people who claimed they were NOT warned whom he believed had been warned about behavior he did double check to see if they had been. Which to me shows accountability. Meaning he double checked to make sure your case did not fall through the cracks. Cause if it had that would likely spell out another issue he'd need to look into and likely retract/amend his statement.

You seem to have a very negative spin your tossing on things too so I'm not sure what your accomplishing here? If indeed you did message that mod and he didn't respond then that would be something I think Radarx would want to look into, him giving you the answer to that investigation would not be more spinning but responding the issue you are putting forward.

to be clear i'll break down the sentences here

The weren't warned part clearly to me means that you claimed you weren't warned or sent messages regarding the behavior. So he absolutely checked because you said you weren't.

To me this is just a misunderstanding of the statement. Also I can understand your concern that you weren't warned he would be checking your messages if that was indeed something that upset you.

Well I agree that I did misunderstand and agree he did mean warned about the infractions being sent as PM's.
however a warning must come prior to the action since the warning came after and can not even be accessed during a ban then in a very by the letter sense no warning was given.

As for checking PMs I have no issue with that I brought forth a concern and a complaint I must assume they will look into it and that includes checking PM's.
The issue is not how they did it but when they did it and the lack of ability to get them in a timely fashion due to the limitations of the forum software that they chose to use and knowing those limitations and admitted policy change (no appeal of bans process) that they have not corrected the information, the broken links and found away to send the info in a timely fasion, Perhaps to the registered email has has been suggested.

That's a nice thought but unfortunately I get the feeling that what Pipsissiwa said is closer to the reality of the situation...

No nothing ridiculous about it. RadarX clearly said that off topic trash threads that do not show DBG in the best light belong on Reddit.
They have asked that legit feedback about the beta be posted on Reddit. I find it safe to draw the conclusion they view all player feedback in the same light if they ask us to limit trash threads to Reddit and that is where they asked us to post player feedback about the beta.

Just pointing out the dichotomy and clear disconnect between the Team and the Player Base or at least how they misinterpret what we say we get banned, we misinterpret what they say and we have to learn to know better and just accept it.

I made that little jab because of your ridiculous remark about being transparent. How can you say anything constructive about a comment that you and I both know was very fabricated. Those in charge of EQ2 have been for years now about as transparent as granite. You make changes to the game without telling us all the time, the so called phantom changes. And for years these same people have outright lied to us, remember the following?;
~ banned for even speaking the term "Beastlord" in forums.
~ "We will never sell anything with stats on it on the SC."!
~ "Nothing from LoN will ever make it into the game with any kind of stats on it"
Shall I go on? So yes, instead of spending a lot of time telling you that your "transparent" comment was full of bull, I made a little snarky comment, a comment that apparently caught your eye since you posted about it. The reason for the snarky comment has proven it's effectiveness of letting you know I wasn't buying what you where shoveling.

So this "open dialogue" thread has been rumbling on for a while now and I'm not seeing much in the way of concrete outcomes from it.

To date, it has been a golden opportunity for Radar X to go into players accounts and point out how beastly we've all been, how many PM's we've all ignored or what nasty things we said to the moderators.

Conversely from the DBG side, I'm not seeing any type of "mea culpa"/"fair point, we were wrong" or " we must change that process to ensure it doesn't happen again".

If you want to look at my account by the way, please do so. My only warning (to date) should be a good example to you of the kind of inconsistent moderation that occurs, because I still see the transgression I had my post pulled for repeated in literally hundreds of other posts that remain in place on the forums, unmoderated. Perhaps it was in one of your "we had to calm people down" moments? My response back to the moderator was unacknowledged and unanswered. I may as well have spoken to the wall.

It was insinuated a few pages earlier that the entire reason you have allowed this thread to exist is a combination of a PR exercise to make it look as it you care and to give the players a tiny pressure valve to have their whinges and moans in a more loosely moderated environment. It would be fairly non-productive if, when you feel this has run its course, you simply lock it up and then its "business as usual" again.

Therefore I will ask the pointed question - Are you, as a result of this thread, going to summarise what learnings DBG has taken out of it and what changes you are either going to make or consider making to the DBG moderation policy?

Frankly, without some positive outcome or conclusion to this thread, it will prove to have been a pointless exercise for all of us and will reinforce some peoples opinions that it was just a PR exercise only.

I don't have an issue with the moderation. I do know that my hubby has gotten his hand smacked a few times, but he is a bit more...direct than myself

My only concern on Reddit: I've just signed up for an account...it was rather easy, but it does not tie to my game acct. I understand the visibility Reddit brings to the table for EQ2 and visibility is powerful--but couldn't players get multiple accounts to push an agenda...or just trolls in general take part to skew the threads, etc?

Kitty

The key thing you should be getting from this thread, RadarX and the Mods, is that regardless of whether you guys think moderation here is fair, transparent and well-communicated, the community on the whole does not.

As this thread lengthens, more and more people are commenting about it in game, on other sites and social media and the common theme is "I'm too scared to post on the official forums any more as I can't tell what will get me warned or banned". Something needs to change. It is that simple. The current system is no longer fit for purpose.

It is completely irrelevant if the Mod team think everything is fine as it is - Community perception is what should be important, not the feelings of individuals, and overall community/customer perception is overwhelmingly negative about moderation on these forums, rightly or wrongly. It is going to take significantly more than some explanations of previous bans and an insistence that current moderation is fair to overturn that perception. Actions are needed.

I came to this thread not just to vent my spleen about one unfair ban I had. That was a bonus. I came here with enthusiasm to try to work with you, RadarX and the mods to help improve public perception and make this boards a welcoming place again. Sadly that goal doesn't seem possible - it appears that nothing will change or any change even be considered.

I am a very sad, but not surprised Ratonga. (Female, despite my enforced male rat Avatar)

I am all for rules and feel daybreak has the right to make whatever rules they see fit. The rules though should be enforced equally as well. I have seen many, many posts that clearly had no constructive content at all but only posted to put down a person that may have found some choice by daybreak unsatisfactory. It seems at least from this prospective that those who defend the company line don't face the same rules.

I have seen people insulted cause they cant afford the extra 15 bucks and told they need to get a job. They are called whiners and that they are hurting the game because they don't support it. This happens all the time. Tell me what is so constructive about that? As far as I have seen many of these posts go unchecked. Yes I am sure many need to think before they type but it needs to be understood as well since daybreak took over there has been one disappointment after another for many of us. I myself have seen nothing positive at all and trust me I am looking for it as I love the game. The fact is deleting and banning is not improving anything especially if its done to censor negative feedback. These opinions are open discussion in game and that is far more damaging in the long run.

I look at all these changes over the past few years and wonder what the heck is going on. You guys go from feature packs and free content back to expansions and now to campaigns which from what I have read and heard will be content broke up into a bunch of chunks we have to pay for separately. We are told they will add up to the same as an expansion but if you charge for a adventure campaign, a crafter one, a decorator one, and whatever the heck a collector one is and then this large one in the fall seems that is adding up quick. People are unhappy, confused and really not given a whole lot of information on what to expect. Is it really any surprise that this explodes in the forums.

Oh dear Jake,

I think you've just crossed the boundary of what will be regarded as acceptable in this thread. It's being loosely moderated (by DBG's standards) not un-moderated. This verges on the point of a personal attack and, hand on heart, isn't constructive to the discussion.

I don't like how DBG moderate but this type of post isn't warranted and is blantant trolling.

I suggest you edit it if you are still able to.

Appreciate the pointed question so I'll provide a pointed answer. My goal in this thread was not to make sweeping changes to how we do moderation, and I do apologize if at some point I gave that impression. . I'm certainly not against change and I've certainly seen some concerns about how we handle warnings which I'm going to ensure works a little more accurately.

Beyond that unfortunately i haven't seen many ideas which are feasible to execute. At the end of the day forum moderation is one of the least effective tasks we do to reach the community..

If I can be honest, this seems a little dramatic of a response after not even 48 hours of this thread.

Let me list out what I've seen so far (and someone please feel free to point out what I missed):

• We should list ever person who gets banned and why.:This is not only negative reinforcement but I'm not sure what purpose it serves.
• Email everyone who gets banned and tell them why. This is outside the bounds of what we've done over the years but given how few suspension we do per week on average here (No more than 2 or 3) I'm not completely opposed to it.
• PM people before we actually suspend them. They get warnings about behavior before the suspension, so this is the existing process.

I'm positive I missed something.

Yes he did and yes I had to remove it. I'm a little disappointed in Avithax.

In general for transparency sake we'd normally contact the individual to ensure they understood we can usually see they are using a secondary account to avoid moderation. We take both accounts into consideration when moderating a primary account.

Something I hope is within reason:

Anyone who is moderated/suspended/banned, needs to have the capacity to send a PM or email to further discuss the action. At the current time, I am of the understanding that people who are suspended or banned are unable to make contact?

A suggestion would be to send suspension/ban advice to the email address listed on the users account, from an address which can be replied to should they wish to further discuss the action. While I suspect the majority of suspensions are well deserved, and a large portion will not bother to reply/appeal, it will give others the means to engage in communication to better understand what transpired, and/or appeal the decision.

And here I'm personally disappointed in you and the standard of moderation. What value has been added by stating that these two accounts are linked and naming the primary account holder publically???

Other than proving that you've got the all-seeing eye (which we already knew) this display of power is a little vulgar and a little creepy. I acknowledge that action was required but your embellishment was unrequired and adds zero value.