Reinstate Feedback

[Kotaro]

You can respond to ratings, and argue there.


--Andy

No, we can post one line about how dumbass their rating is, and it'll still be a nice large blemish on your overall rating, and still affect your overall rating.

[jiminski]

You can respond to ratings, and argue there.


--Andy

No, we can post one line about how dumbass their rating is, and it'll still be a nice large blemish on your overall rating, and still affect your overall rating.

have a look at the thread i just bumped Kot.. it is about community feedback.

I let it die due to it transpiring that the site never had any intention of meaningful consultation with the community and certainly none to alter decision they made.

heh i put in a lot of time and Andy's flippancy raised my dander again but in honesty if i were you i would never give this another thought mate. you are on the losing team.

[Kotaro]

It doesn't mean shit if we respond to their feedback. They are still giving us 1 stars, and since some people use ratings to determine players worth, people are getting bad raps because the mods put an easily abused system into place, and now they're refusing to moderate that system.

[hecter]

I liked feedback... It was way more personal and could be pretty fun. This new crap is just drab, plain and boring... But, as it's been stated, I'm pretty sure it's here to stay.

[jiminski]

I liked feedback... It was way more personal and could be pretty fun. This new crap is just drab, plain and boring... But, as it's been stated, I'm pretty sure it's here to stay.

yeap it is wallpaper where once we had art!
but it is here to stay, as drab, lazy and pointless as it is, you are flogging a dead horse Kot.

[lancehoch]

I don't see how this could suck resources. It would take only a few minutes to properly set up a single usergroup and 1 small private forum for them. After that, only 2 or 3 moderators would be needed.

One moderator spent 40 hours a week, every week moderating feedback disputes and nothing else. How is that not a drain?

[sailorseal]

I don't see how this could suck resources. It would take only a few minutes to properly set up a single usergroup and 1 small private forum for them. After that, only 2 or 3 moderators would be needed.

One moderator spent 40 hours a week, every week moderating feedback disputes and nothing else. How is that not a drain?

I would do it and I might post less
Now lets not bash Andy everyone
You see ratings are meaningless because the tags can't really say anything and this number is just a number

[Kotaro]

One moderator spent 40 hours a week, every week moderating feedback disputes and nothing else. How is that not a drain?

...Which one or two brand new random, everyday community members would gladly volunteer to do all of, for no recognition and/or compensation, just a rating system that doesn't suck nuts, and would not drain any of current teamcc, other then to get them started.

[sailorseal]

One moderator spent 40 hours a week, every week moderating feedback disputes and nothing else. How is that not a drain?

...Which one or two brand new random, everyday community members would gladly volunteer to do all of, for no recognition and/or compensation, just a rating system that doesn't suck nuts, and would not drain any of current teamcc, other then to get them started.

I kind of agree with Kotaro

[Kotaro]

I kind of agree with Kotaro

...And that person would never be you.

[AndyDufresne]

I think you've made your point, Kotaro.


--Andy

[lancehoch]

...Which one or two brand new random, everyday community members would gladly volunteer to do all of, for no recognition and/or compensation, just a rating system that doesn't suck nuts, and would not drain any of current teamcc, other then to get them started.

Here is the thing, it cannot be just any random community member. As someone has pointed out, you need to use your email address to send an eticket. This means that the person handling the etickets must be trustworthy enough to handle that information and not take any actions such as posting personal information in the forums or selling it, or harassing members. To this point, very few moderators/admin have been entrusted with this information, so why would lack choose "...one or two brand new random, everyday community members..." with that much information?

[PLAYER57832]

First, if the e-ticket privacy issue were the main hold up, it seems like that e-ticket system could change. That is, why would it be necessary to use the current "e-ticket" system? What about creating a pm type box instead. pms could enter the box and then be randomly referred to specific community members (on a rotating basis). They would only judicate. If an issue was deemed worthy, THEN the jury would send a specific request to the mods to delete/take action on an issue.


On that note....
I did start a new thread on this recently. Anyone interested might find it a decent and up to date summary. If you have better ideas... comment. If we can come up with more of a consensus, it might have more potential.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... =6&t=81521

[SirSebstar]

I have read the previous pages. Upon termination of the feedback i had no hard feelings or thoughts. Now i have come across a few people I even had to add to my foe list!.
It appears they are general jackasses and nobody should play them, or would want to play them if thay were warned. Now I understand its too difficult to reinstate feedback, no matter how much i would like to give it. Hover maybe a sulotion if to see how many people have someone on their foe list? That too might be an indication of total wrongness and much more appopriate then just a series of 1.

[PLAYER57832]

You can respond to ratings, and argue there.


--Andy

No, you really cannot.


The ratings are too limited and used with way too much variability.

Furthermore, a few bad ratings won't even affect the overall rating of anyone who has been rated more than a few time.... something about to happen, though because fewer and fewer people are now USING the system.

A big problem is that because re-rating someone is just such a pain, most people who play more than a few games will simply give all 5's or nothing at all.

When you have someone like myself who has rated just about everyone, only a few exceptions AND re-rated most over and over ...Saying I WON'T be rating anyone and won't be paying attention... you have a PROBLEM!

I discuss this much more fully in the thread I mentioned in my previous post (just 2 posts back before this one)

[Kotaro]

Here is the thing, it cannot be just any random community member. As someone has pointed out, you need to use your email address to send an eticket. This means that the person handling the etickets must be trustworthy enough to handle that information and not take any actions such as posting personal information in the forums or selling it, or harassing members. To this point, very few moderators/admin have been entrusted with this information, so why would lack choose "...one or two brand new random, everyday community members..." with that much information?

Uhh, it's an email address, so I fail to see the huge point. Email addresses have filters, so any harassing email would get put into the junk box almost immediately. On top of that, half of the members on this site have the "show email address" button on; they wouldn't need to use the e-tickets to get them.

However, who said we would even be using e-tickets for this idea? There are numerous ways this could be done. Them supplying their own emails, a show of good faith, and using that to handle the tickets. Do you think anyone would send out harassing letters if the entire community knows it's them? We're talking about low priority moderators, that won't get access to anything except the ability to handle these ratings. They don't need to see your "supersecretninja" forums, or any of the tools, they just need to beable to fix these ratings.

And besides, the incentive to not abuse would be from the idea that we'd finally have not shitty ratings.

[Rocketry]

No no!! Keep ratings. Returning to feedback will just be a return to ALL the old problems. Ratings are far better - thats why ebay uses them.

Rocket.

[Kotaro]

No no!! Keep ratings. Returning to feedback will just be a return to ALL the old problems. Ratings are far better - thats why ebay uses them.

Rocket.

And you like the new problems?

A - f*ck Ebay
B - I have, on average, 100 active games, usually with random maps and settings, so I play just about everybody. You would like it if I played you and gave you all 1 Stars for no valid reason? Maybe I didn't like you post, and will now rate you all 1's. Maybe I don't like your avatar. Or hell, maybe I'll just, from now on, give everyone I play 1 stars. Lots of people do it, and I don't see them getting punished.

Unwritten Rules

Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games or deliberately benefiting from thrown games, intentional deadbeating, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts, systematically "farming" new members.

I call bullshit on your rules. People leave 1 stars and abuse the rating system constantly. You put in an easily abused system and now you refuse to moderate it.

[Kotaro]

No no!! Keep ratings. Returning to feedback will just be a return to ALL the old problems. Ratings are far better - thats why ebay uses them.

Rocket.

And you like the new problems?

A - f*ck Ebay
B - I have, on average, 100 active games, usually with random maps and settings, so I play just about everybody. You would like it if I played you and gave you all 1 Stars for no valid reason? Maybe I didn't like you post, and will now rate you all 1's. Maybe I don't like your avatar. Or hell, maybe I'll just, from now on, give everyone I play 1 stars. Lots of people do it, and I don't see them getting punished.

Unwritten Rules

Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games or deliberately benefiting from thrown games, intentional deadbeating, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts, systematically "farming" new members.

I call bullshit on your rules. People leave 1 stars and abuse the rating system constantly. You put in an easily abused system and now you refuse to moderate it.

edit: oh, and lance, if you're worried about abuse and harassment, then CC shouldn't have made a flame wars section.

[sailorseal]

Please stop Kotaro

[Kotaro]

Sailor, shut up. You've offered nothing to this debate other then to post "hey, look at me, I can spam!". If they want to give reasons that are worth nothing, I'll argue them as damn much as I please. Go back to your corner and cry, kid.

I will continue to post here until i get a reason other then "we're too damn lazy to moderate our own system", and "it'll be abused and we can't deal with that specific abuse, other abuse is fine", arguing as I wish.

[cicero]

I will continue to post here until i get a reason other then "we're too damn lazy to moderate our own system", and "it'll be abused and we can't deal with that specific abuse, other abuse is fine", arguing as I wish.

Either that or until your aggressive, trollish style of posting gets the thread locked.

Seriously Kotaro if you wish to engage in reasonable, constructive debate with other users then - within the bounds of the topic - this is the right place to do it. I'm happy to join such a debate with you and anyone else who cares to contribute.

[Kotaro]

Either that or until your aggressive, trollish style of posting gets the thread locked.

Seriously Kotaro if you wish to engage in reasonable, constructive debate with other users then - within the bounds of the topic - this is the right place to do it. I'm happy to join such a debate with you and anyone else who cares to contribute.

Then maybe you mods should put up an argument other then "we're too lazy, it's not our job, we're just volunteers". You volunteered. You claim to be against abusing systems and against harassment. And then you allow an abusing, harassment system to take place unmoderated. Do your own jobs, follow your own damn rules.

[sailorseal]

I will continue to post here until i get a reason other then "we're too damn lazy to moderate our own system", and "it'll be abused and we can't deal with that specific abuse, other abuse is fine", arguing as I wish.

Either that or until your aggressive, trollish style of posting gets the thread locked.

Seriously Kotaro if you wish to engage in reasonable, constructive debate with other users then - within the bounds of the topic - this is the right place to do it. I'm happy to join such a debate with you and anyone else who cares to contribute.

What he said is what I meant just didn't feel I had the authority to tell you

[blakebowling]

Either that or until your aggressive, trollish style of posting gets the thread locked.

Seriously Kotaro if you wish to engage in reasonable, constructive debate with other users then - within the bounds of the topic - this is the right place to do it. I'm happy to join such a debate with you and anyone else who cares to contribute.

Then maybe you mods should put up an argument other then "we're too lazy, it's not our job, we're just volunteers". You volunteered. You claim to be against abusing systems and against harassment. And then you allow an abusing, harassment system to take place unmoderated. Do your own jobs, follow your own damn rules.

I'm not sure which rules they're not following... do whatever Kotaro says or let all little kids control the site (they seem to be doing a good job of letting ramned/manimal do it for them)

I will continue to post here until i get a reason other then "we're too damn lazy to moderate our own system", and "it'll be abused and we can't deal with that specific abuse, other abuse is fine", arguing as I wish.

Either that or until your aggressive, trollish style of posting gets the thread locked.

Seriously Kotaro if you wish to engage in reasonable, constructive debate with other users then - within the bounds of the topic - this is the right place to do it. I'm happy to join such a debate with you and anyone else who cares to contribute.

What he said is what I meant just didn't feel I had the authority to tell you

Why do I always feel more confused after reading your posts?