PSA: Updates to Forum Rules (5/1/17)

Brigby

Hi Everyone,

With the recent forum change, we decided to look over and update the Forum Rules as well. If everyone could please take some time to get acquainted with them, it will help make the forum a much more constructive and friendly place.

In addition, you may see some posts or threads being removed or edited retroactively. Rest assured, we will not be issuing any warnings for these retroactive forum rule violations. This is merely to keep the forum clean, appropriate, and up-to-date with current standards.

Thanks for your cooperation and understanding!

Laeuftbeidir

Searched for the irony ban.
Was disappointed

Since changes to the old forum rules are not highlighted (and I actually don't know them by heart,) I don't know if this is new, but :
How is "being a jerk" defined?


Edit : (has the closing of the "bugs and technical issues" subforum anything to do with the new politics?
-> thanks for the update in the specific forum)

Brigby

@Laeuftbeidir

The "Being a jerk" rule was actually already implemented prior to my joining D3 Go, and I would imagine is there as a catch-all rule, in case there are any malicious or negative behaviors players might exhibit that we might not have anticipated.

And just for due diligence, even though it seems you've seen the update I posted in that forum, the Bugs & Technical Issues is not purposefully closed, but rather an unexpected error that we are working with the web designer on resolving.

losdamianos

an unexpected bug is preventing posting in bugs and Technical Issues, (oh the irony)
FORUM is acting like a jerk and it should be banned 

toastie

To be honest, I this is a bad change:

• Customer Support ticket conversations *New Update*

I feel like if you aren't comfortable with everyone being able to see what you are saying to customers, then you are probably not handling customer relations well in the first place. The only reason to remove these is if breaks another rule (particularly the naming a specific person one).

Froggy

toastie said:

To be honest, I this is a bad change:

• Customer Support ticket conversations *New Update*

I feel like if you aren't comfortable with everyone being able to see what you are saying to customers, then you are probably not handling customer relations well in the first place. The only reason to remove these is if breaks another rule (particularly the naming a specific person one).

I hope I didn't violate this today... I hadn't read the new rules... I only made a reference to something that happened and in a way it was about tickets. But no details were covered... no really specific or important details... Ih well.

EDIT: Does sarcasm count as a rule violation?

shteev

You're going to have to explain this one to us a bit.

8. We reserve the right to delete any material that we deem inappropriate for our forums, including, but not limited to:

• Customer Support ticket conversations *New Update*

Is the content of customer support messages confidential? Are we allowed to reveal what is IN messages to and from customer support, if we don't quote them verbatim? Will we still get a warning? What happens if we disclose the contents of customer support conversations outside of the forum, will there be ramifications? Will action be taken against us on the forum? Will be be banned from the game? Will we end up in Gitmo???

Is it usual for companies to place a cloak of secrecy around interactions with their customer support? If not, why have you chosen to do it at this time? Is it because so many people are being treated badly by your customer support?

bk1234

I'm going to need some guidelines on the being a jerk rule. It's a tad subjective. 

For instance -- there is a person who I think is a jerk every time she takes a breath (sorry, can't name her per the "don't use names rule) -- she's even worse when she touches a keyboard. Does this mean I can report her every time she posts because she is a jerk in general - or does she actually have to say something jerky? 

If so, I regret not paying attention to this rule sooner. 

Brigby

toastie said:

To be honest, I this is a bad change:

• Customer Support ticket conversations *New Update*

I feel like if you aren't comfortable with everyone being able to see what you are saying to customers, then you are probably not handling customer relations well in the first place. The only reason to remove these is if breaks another rule (particularly the naming a specific person one).

The reason we had to add that rule is because we've had instances in the past where CS ticket conversations and private messages were being publicized and presented out of context in order to support a player's claim / opinion, leading to outrage that was fueled by misinformation.

Froggy said: -snip-

EDIT: Does sarcasm count as a rule violation?

So long as the comment itself does not violate any forum rules, then sarcasm is perfectly fine. For example: "I don't think Nissa2 generates enough Energy. /s"

bken1234 said:

I'm going to need some guidelines on the being a jerk rule. It's a tad subjective. 

For instance -- there is a person who I think is a jerk every time she takes a breath (sorry, can't name her per the "don't use names rule) -- she's even worse when she touches a keyboard. Does this mean I can report her every time she posts because she is a jerk in general - or does she actually have to say something jerky? 

If so, I regret not paying attention to this rule sooner. 

It was implemented before my time, so I'd imagine it's more of a catch-all rule to address any negative/malicious behavior we hadn't thought of yet. When it comes to your example though, she would have to actually say something objectively offensive or rude in order to warrant violating this rule. 

shteev

Brigby said:

The reason we had to add that rule is because we've had instances in the past where CS ticket conversations and private messages were being publicized and presented out of context in order to support a player's claim / opinion, leading to outrage that was fueled by misinformation.

Now, when was this exactly? Obviously, you wouldn't want to repeat the dangerous misinformation yourself, but the player outrage itself happened in public, so I don't see how there could be a veil of secrecy over that?

bk1234

Brigby said:

toastie said:

To be honest, I this is a bad change:

• Customer Support ticket conversations *New Update*

I feel like if you aren't comfortable with everyone being able to see what you are saying to customers, then you are probably not handling customer relations well in the first place. The only reason to remove these is if breaks another rule (particularly the naming a specific person one).

The reason we had to add that rule is because we've had instances in the past where CS ticket conversations and private messages were being publicized and presented out of context in order to support a player's claim / opinion, leading to outrage that was fueled by misinformation.

Froggy said: -snip-

EDIT: Does sarcasm count as a rule violation?

So long as the comment itself does not violate any forum rules, then sarcasm is perfectly fine. For example: "I don't think Nissa2 generates enough Energy. /s"

bken1234 said:

I'm going to need some guidelines on the being a jerk rule. It's a tad subjective. 

For instance -- there is a person who I think is a jerk every time she takes a breath (sorry, can't name her per the "don't use names rule) -- she's even worse when she touches a keyboard. Does this mean I can report her every time she posts because she is a jerk in general - or does she actually have to say something jerky? 

If so, I regret not paying attention to this rule sooner. 

It was implemented before my time, so I'd imagine it's more of a catch-all rule to address any negative/malicious behavior we hadn't thought of yet. When it comes to your example though, she would have to actually say something objectively offensive or rude in order to warrant violating this rule. 

And being as this is a subjective rule -- if I find it offensive or rude, it is a violation, correct?

Brigby

bken1234 said:

And being as this is a subjective rule -- if I find it offensive or rude, it is a violation, correct?

If you find it offensive or rude, and provided sufficient reasoning why, then it could be considered a violation.

For example, "Someone I don't like said Hi to me on the forum. I'm offended" is not enough to qualify their post as a violation.

If for example though, they copied every one of your posts and replied to them with the exact same thing, then that could be considered enough to qualify their post as them being a jerk / trolling.

losdamianos

quick rule of thumb is that if you find something that you dont agree with just label it offensive like most of the current snowflake society does.
Also if someone is right but doesnt share your point of view, report him as troll/jerk just say it hurts your feelings and they will take care of whoever it is. 

shteev

@Brigby hey, I've been asking around facebook, and Slack, and no-one seems to remember this player outrage you're talking about? Obviously I'm not saying you're telling porky pies, but it might help if you told us who was outraged by this misinformation so that we can talk to them and clear this whole issue up? In the meantime, if anyone here on the forum remembers the outrage, then I'd love to hear your story, which I'm pretty sure should be on-topic for this thread.

losdamianos

I think D3/Brigby is referring to the same type of outrage as we've noticed when they increased animation speed which was slowed down in the next update. I am still looking for a single person who was complaining at that time about those super quick animation speeds.....

Porky Porky Lies.

AresOmega

losdamianos said:

I am still looking for a single person who was complaining at that time about those super quick animation speeds....

I personally hated playing the game at warp speed, just didn't see the need to complain about it. Much like hating the "Moar blue!!!" movement, just seemed like a petty thing to complain about.

shteev

AresOmega said:

Much like hating the "Moar blue!!!" movement, just seemed like a petty thing to complain about.

The point of the Moar Blue! movement is that the user interface has been redesigned many, many times, while bugs which go right back to the beginning of the game have not been fixed. It may be a petty thing to complain about, but when the resources of the dev team are channeled into cosmetic changes which do nothing to enhance, or even just fix, the experience of the players, it tends to make some snarkness bubble to the top of the player base alongside the more straightforward complaints and sighs of resignation.

Sarahschmara

bken1234 said:

I'm going to need some guidelines on the being a jerk rule. It's a tad subjective. 

For instance -- there is a person who I think is a jerk every time she takes a breath (sorry, can't name her per the "don't use names rule) -- she's even worse when she touches a keyboard. Does this mean I can report her every time she posts because she is a jerk in general - or does she actually have to say something jerky? 

If so, I regret not paying attention to this rule sooner. 

As I understand it, this is the reason we lost the "off topic" button; some "jerks" were using it as an attempt to censor discussions from people they don't like.

shteev

Sarahschmara said:

As I understand it, this is the reason we lost the "off topic" button; some "jerks" were using it as an attempt to censor discussions from people they don't like.

That's not really censorship. Censorship looks more like this: I explain to players how customer support invariably refuse to give prize cards to players because of crashes, and in response the moderation team delete the post, and change the forum rules to make the possibility of it happening again illegal.

Sarahschmara

shteev said:

Sarahschmara said:

As I understand it, this is the reason we lost the "off topic" button; some "jerks" were using it as an attempt to censor discussions from people they don't like.

That's not really censorship. Censorship looks more like this: I explain to players how customer support invariably refuse to give prize cards to players because of crashes, and in response the moderation team delete the post, and change the forum rules to make the possibility of it happening again illegal.

Ah. I missed that post! Well, then yes, your definition of censorship is correct and my use is hyperbole. I probably should have used "troll" or "grief" instead. 

Laeuftbeidir

shteev said:

Sarahschmara said:

As I understand it, this is the reason we lost the "off topic" button; some "jerks" were using it as an attempt to censor discussions from people they don't like.

That's not really censorship. Censorship looks more like this: I explain to players how customer support invariably refuse to give prize cards to players because of crashes, and in response the moderation team delete the post, and change the forum rules to make the possibility of it happening again illegal.

You know, I've always loved disagreeing with you..but the development of the board and game are pushing me closer and closer to your point of view

But really...changing rules and not highlighting the changes feels a bit weird