About the massive loss of good manners

Chrynos1989Chrynos1989 Posts: 140 Tile Toppler
edited December 2019 in MPQ General Discussion
First off, I’m not going to defend that retroactive rewards, they were poorly made!
Although, retroactive rewards aren’t a must in a game, the way they were handled and especially communicated was horrible, that one’s  on you D3, take it as a lesson of how not to do it.
Am I angered too? Yes, of course! But...

What happens the last days here has reached a point of toxicity that’s unbearable

First
Justins comment on Discord
Was it not well-thought? Was it poorly written? Yes, but he was surprised from the feedback, maybe he was tired (from what I know about the timezones he might just have come to work in the early morn), maybe he tried to be funny but made things worse, doesn’t matter, he made a mistake and excused for it. But some of the guys here still have to bash on him. That’s like you step on my foot, excuse for it, but still I punch you in the face every time I see you the next 10 years. You call that excessive. It’s enough, everything has been said, just stop.

Second
Threats of clawbacks
First off, an unfounded clawback can lead to a ban of your account, that’s in tos, read it.
Then, where is your reason for a clawback? You bought a Stark during hp sale and got your 26k and your 7 CP, how you spend it is your thing and has nothing to do with retroactive rewards. There was no promise of certain champ rewards tied to that buy.

Third
1*-ratings in AppStore and google play
While I think that’s the right way to express your anger besides your comments here (as long as they are not insulting), how some people handle that option is super toxic.
I saw comments in which people nearly celebrated that the rating went down by 0.1.
You guys remind me of that little Grimmar guy Saruman sent to king Theodin.

*wheez*cough* The rating went down from 4.2 to 4.1! *snicker*wheez*

That‘s not helping the matter nor constructive just trolling and sarcastic!


While, as I already stated, the reward updates were poorly made, we all should calm down and act like civilized humans.

Last thing to the devs directly: you should think about changing the reward updates, that would only be fair. And in the future, try to make information easier to understand and make updates earlier, that would prevent such situations that are unpleasant for both players and you too I’m sure.



that are my 5 Cents to that situation, please accept that everyone has a right for an own opinion, please don’t flame and stay civilized



EDIT:
not gonna response to all single posts since that would take forever and create more responses to respond to

Just to make sure, I’m absolutely not content how that rewards were handled, I’m as pissed as you and see it as one off the greatest let downs in the history of this game
also I won’t defend the devs, they made mistakes here and before and they seem to repeat some of them

what i say is

Don’t  threat and insult people, won’t help, you probably get banned and said person is more likely to just block at all

About clawbacks, I still say you got what you paid for, but I won’t tell anyone what to do with their money/purchases. You earned it, you spend it, you just run the danger of getting banned and lose all, but that‘s a thing everyone has to know for himself/herself

And for the 1* movement, of course spread the word and the progress but I just think people won’t take you serious when you sound like the grinch, but again, that is a thing everyone has to know for himself/herself, not trying to tell anyone what to do
«1

Comments

  • Chrynos1989Chrynos1989 Posts: 140 Tile Toppler
    OJSP said:
    Good points, but I think you probably meant manners instead of manors? (although maybe some players lose some of their manors while playing and spending in this game too..)
    Lol, sorry my fault XD gonna fix that
  • DAZ0273DAZ0273 Posts: 4,395 Chairperson of the Boards

  • randomhero1090randomhero1090 Posts: 396 Mover and Shaker
    First:  He represents the company, the game, the brand.  The timing was extremely poor.  The audience was packed full of vets and spenders.  It was just bad.  Should he burn for the rest of time?  Of course not.  But it has been a couple of days.  Stepping on someone's foot is normally an accident.  His comment....  yeah, I don't think it was.

    Second:  People can do what they wish with their own accounts and money.  I will tell you this much, the forum post outlining 4* rewards screams misrepresentation.  "We want to ensure that players receive those rewards for the level they have reached."  Well, that wasn't done.  Personally, that post alone should force the hand of D3 to issue 5* feeder rewards based on the updated 4* champ levels.

    Third:  Ratings and reviews exist for a reason.  Voice of the customer.  You'll find ratings are usually 4.5 or 1.  That's it.  I could quote a number of studies that people are ~80% more likely to post a review after a negative experience than a positive one.  This happens all the time with mobile games.  Bad patch, resource change, whatever.  People flock to the review sites to voice their displeasure since they might not have a voice otherwise.


    I think the lack of manners came from the way this was handled.  Poor communication, odd timing of sales, some snarky comments in discord...  adds up to a very poor customer experience.

    I actually do this for a living.  I have been in the exact, THE EXACT, same position as D3.  Guess what we did?  We honored the customers' feedback and made changes.  But i'll tell you the impacts have been outgoing for 2+ years now.  I still have upset customers to this day.


  • OJSPOJSP Posts: 816 Critical Contributor
    edited December 2019
    It is obvious you are content with the current situation. It is not a lack of manners, or manors, to hold a different view and express it in the official forum.
    I agree with the rest of the comments, but he started the thread by acknowledging that the retroactive rewards were "poorly made". I don't think it's obvious at all whether someone is content or not from that post.

    What I saw was some attempt to criticise and critique the way some people was showing their displeasure, so the message don't get lost in all the anger and disapppointment.

    I noticed some posts were removed already for being abusive. Perhaps that's what triggered this thread? (I didn't see the actual posts, just the reminder from the mod about it).
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,033 Chairperson of the Boards
    Enh, generally speaking I view calls for civility as a tacit endorsement of the status quo (i.e., only those content with the way things are have the time to focus on niceties).

    I do not endorse personal attacks on demi/d3 personal (even if they make some unfortunate comments), and actual harassment or abuse is beyond the pale.  

    But being abrasive or angry on the forums?  That seems in-bounds to me, even though I personally don't think it's at all productive to rage and curse and swear. if people feel upset and want to express it that way, I don't see a good justification for saying they shouldn't.
  • AXP_ismeAXP_isme Posts: 721 Critical Contributor
    there’s a lot to be said for civility. Using inflammatory language tends to polarise debate and decreases the likelihood of finding common ground. There’s a trade-off, evident in a lot of politics at the moment, where using colourful, dramatic, inflammatory language tends to galvanise support amongst those who already agree with you and also reinforce the dislike amongst those who already dislike you. It doesn’t help if what you’re looking for is constructive discussion. You have to remain respectful and civil if you want the person, or people, you’re discussing with to do the same in return. 

    I like complaining loudly and colourfully as much as the next person, possibly more, but it doesn’t make it helpful. Expressing my complaint in a way that denigrates the person I’m complaining to, regardless of whether it’s their fault or not, will just make them feel victimised and feel bad. If they help me subsequently it will be because they feel they must, not because they want to. 
  • OJSPOJSP Posts: 816 Critical Contributor
    edited December 2019
    Vhailorx said:
    if people feel upset and want to express it that way, I don't see a good justification for saying they shouldn't.
    So, if OP is upset about the other people being upset and they post this suggestion? Who am I to say what people can and can't do in this anonymous forum. As long as they're not breaking forum rules, I don't think the mods mind either. I think this is a productive discussion to have, rather than just venting anger the wrong way. I know from personal experience that is just a waste of energy and people just tend to ignore it.

    A lot of angry posters have either been banned from the forum or left the game and I could see the actual improvement to the general atmosphere of the forum.

    I don't think this detracts from the actual problem that we're all unhappy about. It's a different thread and people can choose to ignore it.
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,033 Chairperson of the Boards
    I don't mean to suggest that I see no value in civility.  On the contrary, as I said in my post, I tend to think that rage and uncivil criticism is rarely productive.  And actual harassment or abuse is **** and should not be permitted.

    What I was addressing are general appeals to civility in the face of some other problem.  So for example, consider this:

    (1) person X says some thing truly hateful.

    (2) person Y calls X out for the reprehensible comment, but does so rudely.

    (3) person Z issues a general call for civility and laments the lapsing standards of the modern age.

    I would argue that person Z in my scenario is effectively supporting person X. Z's statement is a tactic that is used to seem impartial and above the pettiness.  But really is just protects the status quo by establishing a false equivalency.
  • DogfaceDogface Posts: 714 Critical Contributor
    Vhailorx said:
    I don't mean to suggest that I see no value in civility.  On the contrary, as I said in my post, I tend to think that rage and uncivil criticism is rarely productive.  And actual harassment or abuse is tinykitty and should not be permitted.

    What I was addressing are general appeals to civility in the face of some other problem.  So for example, consider this:

    (1) person X says some thing truly hateful.

    (2) person Y calls X out for the reprehensible comment, but does so rudely.

    (3) person Z issues a general call for civility and laments the lapsing standards of the modern age.

    I would argue that person Z in my scenario is effectively supporting person X. Z's statement is a tactic that is used to seem impartial and above the pettiness.  But really is just protects the status quo by establishing a false equivalency.
    I honestly can't see how person Z supports person X here. That's some strange mind step.
  • OJSPOJSP Posts: 816 Critical Contributor
    edited December 2019
    I've been reading about debating tactics and logical fallacies just earlier today and that feels like something that I found there https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/


    But, I don't know if this thread was meant to be a debate or not or even trying to convey that message. You're probably reading too much into the intention of the OP. Or, maybe I was wrong, which is also entirely plausible.

  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,033 Chairperson of the Boards
    OJSP said:
    I've been reading about debating tactics and logical fallacies just earlier today and that feels like something that I found there https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/


    But, I don't know if this thread was meant to be a debate or not or even trying to convey that message. You're probably reading too much into the intention of the OP. Or, maybe I was wrong, which is also entirely plausible.

    C'mon OJSP.  If you are going to accuse me of a classic logical fallacy, at least tell me which one!  ;)

    I don't mean to suggest  Chrynos was intentionally supporting demi/d3 by calling for civility.  I just think it's an almost inevitable result of the type of statement Chrynos made. 
  • randomhero1090randomhero1090 Posts: 396 Mover and Shaker
    OJSP said:
    I've been reading about debating tactics and logical fallacies just earlier today and that feels like something that I found there https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/


    But, I don't know if this thread was meant to be a debate or not or even trying to convey that message. You're probably reading too much into the intention of the OP. Or, maybe I was wrong, which is also entirely plausible.

    That's a great article.  I passed it on to the sales teams here.  I highlighted Equivocation and Bandwagon.
  • TherealsmkspyTherealsmkspy Posts: 246 Tile Toppler
    So we entered that phase where people are telling other people how they should behave. Should make for an entertaining thread.
  • OJSPOJSP Posts: 816 Critical Contributor
    Dogface said:
    I honestly can't see how person Z supports person X here. That's some strange mind step.
    Vhailorx said:
    C'mon OJSP.  If you are going to accuse me of a classic logical fallacy, at least tell me which one!  ;)

    I don't mean to suggest Chrynos was intentionally supporting demi/d3 by calling for civility.  I just think it's an almost inevitable result of the type of statement Chrynos made. 
    I'll try to answer both because I think they're the same.

    I wasn't trying to accuse you or anyone. It's just something that I'm just learning and I think you're both right that it could happen if we're not careful.

    I think that is why it's one of the logical fallacies: specifically one of the causal fallacies.

    So we entered that phase where people are telling other people how they should behave. Should make for an entertaining thread.
    I don't see why it can't be both educational and entertaining. If it's off topic, the mod will do something about it. If it turns sour, they can do something too. As long as we do it appropriately, we could self moderate our posts. How many mods are actively monitoring the forum now? I count one. Even they can't be present all the time with having real life things to do and MPQ to play...
  • Godzillafan67Godzillafan67 Posts: 184 Tile Toppler
    OJSP said:
    I've been reading about debating tactics and logical fallacies just earlier today and that feels like something that I found there https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/


    But, I don't know if this thread was meant to be a debate or not or even trying to convey that message. You're probably reading too much into the intention of the OP. Or, maybe I was wrong, which is also entirely plausible.

    That's a great article.  I passed it on to the sales teams here.  I highlighted Equivocation and Bandwagon.
    Because you want them to use those fallacies correctly? If I'm the sales team, that's what I'd get out of your forward.  ;)
  • brollbroll Posts: 4,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    First
    Justin’s Comment on Discord

    it showed the contempt that the Demiurge team hold for the people who pay their hard earned money so they can be successful game designers.
    As I said in a different thread that attitude doesn’t come from nowhere.
    I don't think that's necessarily the case.  I took it more as ignorance.

    When my alliance started freaking out I had a similar reaction, until someone explained to me what was missing (at the time I hadn't read the middle of the night not noted in the title update of what to expect and hadn't done any calculations on my roster on what to expect.  It's long suspected that most of the devs don't or barely play, he admitted later that day that his roster was so low he didn't apply for any retro rewards.  I think this was just ignorance and failure to think through tact.  I don't feel this shows that the devs clearly hate us.  That's an emotional response rather than a reasoned one IMO, as much of the last couple days have been.  
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,033 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2019
    Dogface said:
    Vhailorx said:
    I don't mean to suggest that I see no value in civility.  On the contrary, as I said in my post, I tend to think that rage and uncivil criticism is rarely productive.  And actual harassment or abuse is tinykitty and should not be permitted.

    What I was addressing are general appeals to civility in the face of some other problem.  So for example, consider this:

    (1) person X says some thing truly hateful.

    (2) person Y calls X out for the reprehensible comment, but does so rudely.

    (3) person Z issues a general call for civility and laments the lapsing standards of the modern age.

    I would argue that person Z in my scenario is effectively supporting person X. Z's statement is a tactic that is used to seem impartial and above the pettiness.  But really is just protects the status quo by establishing a false equivalency.
    I honestly can't see how person Z supports person X here. That's some strange mind step.
    Because Person X did something hateful/reprehensible, while Person Y did something appropriate, but in a rude fashion (and for purposes of my thought experiment, Person X's comments are indisputably bad).  By equating those two transgressionss, Person Z is minimizing the severity of Person X's transgressions.

    I can try to make the example even clearer using more specific examples:

    Person X: I really want to commit genocide against [insert racial/ethnic group here].

    Person Y: what the ****?!  That's a **** horrible thing to say?  Are you **** serious?  You are such a **** bigot.  You ****!

    Person Z: I strongly condemn this shocking lack of civility from all sides.  What is becoming of the modern world!?

    Whatever the intent, the effect of Person Z's statement is helpful to Person X.
  • DogfaceDogface Posts: 714 Critical Contributor
    That is the point. You talk about equating those transgressions, whereas it is never made clear that that is what person Z is doing. 

    How I see it, person X makes a horrible statement, person Y justifiably counters that, but in a inappropriate manner.
    Person Z says nothing about the horribleness of person X, but rather (as I see it) points out that a severe reaction to a horrible statement isn't going to help the cause. 
    I see it that in a debate, the person that first turns it into a shouting match loses. In this case, person Z is if anything more on person Y's side, cautioning him/her to make their point in a calm, constructive manner, thus making a stronger counterargument against person X.
  • VhailorxVhailorx Posts: 5,033 Chairperson of the Boards
    Dogface said:
    That is the point. You talk about equating those transgressions, whereas it is never made clear that that is what person Z is doing. 

    How I see it, person X makes a horrible statement, person Y justifiably counters that, but in a inappropriate manner.
    Person Z says nothing about the horribleness of person X, but rather (as I see it) points out that a severe reaction to a horrible statement isn't going to help the cause. 
    I see it that in a debate, the person that first turns it into a shouting match loses. In this case, person Z is if anything more on person Y's side, cautioning him/her to make their point in a calm, constructive manner, thus making a stronger counterargument against person X.
    Right, Person Z at has completely elided the horrible statement that Person X made, and has instead focused on a totally different, and less important, subject where Person Y is at least as culpable as Person X. 

    Person Z "should" politely refute Person X's  statement.  Refocusing on a different topic lets X off the hook.
Sign In or Register to comment.