Posts undeleted
 

I'd like to thank Xerihae for restoring the deleted posts
in the thread:


I can see that the intent was good, and I'm delighted that
everything worked out.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Indeed. I know the tenor and the bickering in the posts didn't exactly scream "This is a fantastic tool for helping newbies," but it's good to keep the thread alive for posterity's sake, I think.

I was reminded, if nothing else, that text doesn't convey mood well all the time (and that some people can jump to conclusions that I'm just being a jerk, when in fact I'm just not being a huggybear - there IS a difference ;)).

Ask anyone on the jointhesaga.com games: When I want to come across as a hard-nose, I come across as a hard-nose. There's no maybe about it. I really WAS showing some restraint in responding to that thread.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

The whole incident just confirms what we'd established in another thread last week - that we need more help here for people completely new to MUDs.

Can only solve one thing at a time however and right now the most frustrated group of TMS users are MUD owners trying to navigate the MUDinfo/voting databases and flaky links between the two.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

The impression I get is that people aren't overly concerned (myself included) when it comes to helping newbies, unless of course it's their own mud the newbie wants to connect to.

I'd reconstruct what happened as following:

1) Newbie wants to play a mud.
2) Newbie fails because the website isn't working.
3) Newbie googles for info but being a newbie he fails.
4) Newbie googles for newbie mud help and finds TMS.
5) Newbie bothers to create an account and posts a message.
6) Newbie sees a lot of people view his message but do not bother to respond.
7) Newbie gives a shout out
8) Newbie is told he's impatient and is told to google it up.
9) Newbie gets ****ed. (see 3 and 4)
10) Newbie gets a link to the broken website. (see 2)
11) Newbie gets even more ****ed. (see 9)

This all could be avoided if people actually try to be helpful and do not assume total and utter incompetence on the side of the newbie.

Since I have nothing better to do I give a reconstruction of the possible existence of a Good Scandum:

1) Good Scandum sees a newbie who needs help.
2) Good Scandum googles up the webpage and tries to connect.
3) Good Scandum double checks the telnet addy on TIC using a proxy to bypass his ban.
4) Good Scandum posts a reply giving the correct addy of the mud.
5) Evil Scandum takes over and adds to the reply that the newbie should use tintin++ to connect because all other means to connect suck.
6) Newbie thanks Good Scandum and Evil Scandum for their lovely advise and quick help.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

There's only one thing wrong with your reconstruction of this specific situation, though: That's not at all how it happened. If we had a post from a newbie who had exhausted every avenue before posting, I don't think it would have been received in quite the same way. Instead, it went something more like this:

1) Newbie wants to play a MUD. Posts a vague how-do-I-do-it question on TMS.
2) Newbie doesn't get an immediate response. Posts a bit of a whine about that.
3) Newbie still doesn't get an immediate response. Posts ANOTHER complaint.
4) Brody (neither good nor bad, just Brody) happens upon the thread. Yeah, Brody's a tad irritated by the impatient textual jumping up and down of said newbie, but Brody doesn't unload on the guy. Brody first tries to explain the local standards a bit, just in case the newbie hasn't really used forums much before. And then Brody suggests Googling for the MUD website.
5) Newbie makes a post suggesting the Brody post isn't helpful.
6) Brody, so far the only person even trying to help the newbie, reiterates that he's trying to help.
7) Newbie calls Brody a jerkoff.
8) Brody, despite being called a jerkoff, investigates the MUD website and determines that said MUD appears to be broken or, at the very least, has bad information on its main site.
9) Some people post to say it's wrong to call Brody a jerkoff.
10) Some people post to say it's true, Brody's a jerk.
11) Thread is off the rails.

I don't care much for the suggestion that all sweetness and congeniality must flow first from us. It may sound a little snobbish, but I don't react well to people who are clearly 1) impatient and 2) rude about their impatience, as if they're entitled to something from a total stranger just for existing.

It goes both ways.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

New players/mudders/forum visitors often get frustrated when they don't get an immediate answer to their question, especially if it's on a forum such as this where, let's be honest, a lot of people don't read that Newbie section. As they're new here, how are they supposed to know that though? You go on other forums and replies to topics are flying around every couple of minutes, whereas here it can take a few hours to get the answer you want. Is it their fault if their expectations of this forum are a little high because of their experience elsewhere? You could argue it is and it isn't. At the end of the day though, the Newbie Help section exists to help newbies. If you cannot be bothered to do this in a courteous and verbose manner then you shouldn't really be trying to help. One of my own personal bugbears is people who reply with things like "RTFM" or "Use search n00b". Yes, doing one of those things can often bring some answers, but it can also often bring a whole load of useless information that the person just doesn't want or have time to wade through. People post topics because they know there are people on a forum who will answer the same question a thousand times over without a gripe, the sort of people who make excellent greeters in supermarkets or newbie helpers on MUDs.

To address a few criticisms I seem to have received via reputation:

"I still don't see what the problem with Brody's OP was"

The problem was in the perceived tone of the reply. Brody has kindly clarified what he meant and admitted, as we all know, that text is terrible at conveying emotions and the nuances of speech which make the difference between a rude answer and an informative one. I myself read Brodys original post as somewhat curt and borderline insulting, so is it hardly surprising that the original poster did? Yes, we now know that he didn't mean it that way, but the benefits of hindsight etc etc.

"Horrid moderation." and "totally over the top and unnecessary. noob admin behavior."

As for those, well, where to start? The topic was a thread about how to connect to a MUD that due to what we now know was a misunderstanding ended up being mostly full of replies to do with the argument rather than the question. I removed these. I didn't know this particular forum software would leave behind stubs, otherwise it would have read a lot better. Too many topics on here and other forums wander off on a complete tangent or descend into petty arguments between regulars, and I saw no reason to allow that to happen here. Again, all I did was remove the posts that caused or continued the argument, and left the informative, neutral-or-friendly toned ones that answered the original question. You might not be used to this kind of moderation, which in many other places is considered the norm, but that is down to your expectations alone. It's not the first time I've removed posts that were just arguments in a thread on the Newbie Help section, but it's the first time I've come across a complaint.

I don't really care what reputation you give me to be fair, but I always feel it's nice to have an open discussion about problems as long as it's in the correct place. This thread, for instance, I feel is the correct place to discuss this. The topic I removed posts from was not the place to have that particular argument.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I, on the other hand, think that we can spare ourselves typing the same answers over and over again because I do think our time is valuable. If we can point newbies to resources that are more in line with what they need (such as information about how to log in to a specific MUD, as opposed to how to get involved in MUDs in general), I don't see why that has to be dressed up with long-winded rhetoric to make sure it's clear we mean no harm.

If I say: "Use Google to track down the Dawn of Ages website" - well, that should be taken to mean "Use Google to track down the Dawn of Ages website" before it's taken to mean "Use search, n00b." I refuse to be responsible for the inferences other people make based on their own prejudices ;)

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I should have been more clear. I didn't have an issue with your suggestion to use Google, just the first point about it being a forum not a chatroom was, to me, put across in a somewhat abrupt manner that could be construed as rude. You and the people who know you on here understand you didn't mean it that way, but as someone who doesn't know you (or pretty much anyone on here) I didn't and it's not unreasonable to assume that others would take exception to it too.

Saying "It's not my fault what they infer" isn't really much of a defence... As a poster on the Newbie Help section you should always keep in mind that a friendly front to new members is needed and try to avoid posting things that may be misunderstood so people don't get the wrong impression or misconstrue what you meant. At least that's my take on things. That's not so hard is it?

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Telling an impatient newbie this isn't a chat room and not to expect immediate responses isn't rude. Good heavens, are we supposed to assume people like that are merely Very Special Olympians and pat them on the head?

The fact that you're suggesting I *need* a defense for what I said points to some pre-established notions on your part about what I intended, and I maintain that I'm not responsible for your inferences (or anyone else's) in that regard.

Why we're having a discussion about how nice I should have been as opposed to how the newbie could have been a little less of a spaz is a bit surprising to me. I tried to help and got called a jerkoff by the newbie and, effectively, by at least two veteran forumgoers (including you, by implication).

What message does it send to people who want to help when their words are taken out of context in this fashion?

I daresay it's not any better than what you're suggesting I did through my "terse" (yet oddly not at all insulting) reply.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Phrased the right way, no it isn't. I maintain that the phrasing you used could, and was, misunderstood. This led to an argument which had little bearing on the original question.

Defense was probably a poor choice of words... Easily done isn't it? I had no pre-established notions of what you intended with that post, though my view of it I've already stated.

The newbie could have been a little more patient, a little less abrupt, a little more understanding etc etc. The reason we're discussing your reply is because he has yet to contribute to this thread and so rebuffing him seems a little pointless. I should make clear that yours was not the sole post that caused me to prune the thread, as others (including the OP) posted things later on that continued the argument. For some reason we've become locked on the issue of yours though, perhaps because you're the only one willing to discuss/argue it? ;) I also have no feelings as to whether you're a jerkoff or not, I simply felt that your post, along with the others, had no real place in the thread. Whether your original post or the newbies reply started the war has little real bearing on the outcome, I was just trying to point out how yours could have been misunderstood since obviously you didn't think there was anything wrong with it because you knew the original intention behind it.

If anything can be learned from this it should be that a few extra words and a different turn of phrase go a long to towards avoiding these kinds of misunderstandings.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I think I'll just agree to disagree on this. You're the Newbie Help forum moderator and you can run it your way. I'll reserve my newbie helping for other arenas to avoid the problem and leave it to you. Should avoid any further problems about clarity.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I'm not particularly interested in "running it my way" and you can continue to post there as much as you want. I'm a moderator, not an admin. It's my job, as far as I've always understood it, to keep threads on track and remove posts that have no bearing to the original question. In this case, with this forum software, it left a bunch of stubs that made the thing look horrible and unreadable. If it hadn't, all that would have remained would be the original question and a bunch of answers to it, without the name calling. Surely that's the whole point?

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I am a big fan of newbies. I love them,
because without them my codebase does not
thrive. I tend to them, I nurture them,
I bestow upon them the gifts of my knowledge
and code asking nothing in return but that
they enjoy the codebase and help others when
asked. It is a lovely ecosystem of productivity
and mutual assistance.

In fact, among LP oldtimers, I've earned some
resentment for how vigorously I defend newbs
from the depredations of bored trolls. I
went so far as to set up my own intermud
router to help them avoid being eaten before
they had a chance to open their eyes and
gulp the clean, fresh air that is mudding
and LPC. I am, for all practical purposes,
the patron saint of LPmud noobs.

Perhaps most probative of my qualifications
to handle mud noobs is that I am parent to
a 3 year old.

So believe me when I say I have nothing but
warm affection toward those who seek help
on mudding, be it players, coders, be it
LP or Diku, whatever.

The thing is that whether it's a mud noob
or a 3 year old, "he can't help it, he's new"
only goes so far. Eventually some line has to
be drawn, and some correction must be applied.

The newer the person, often the less they
enjoy the correction. But without the
establishment of basic norms to give new
people a sense of how to conduct themselves,
there's no point in talking with them, and
there's no point being anywhere near them.
Noobs are corrected for their own good, and
for the benefit of the entire community.
Worrying about the one guy who runs away crying
because he doesn't like being told the
local standards of conversation is short-sighted.
If he can't handle it, let him go.

Coddling every lazy person who can't be bothered
to read docs results is populations of lazy
losers. Maybe that's something you find
desirable. I do not. Whether it is done gruffly
or syrup-laden, taking a noob by the hand
and walking them back to their homework is
not only good for them, it's good for us, and
if the person doing the correction is truly
out of line, his peers will handle correcting
*him*. That's how a community works.

If he breaks *rules*, that's where you step in.
But enforcing *politeness* is on the quick and
short path to a forum devoid of clever people
who won't be subject to your fine sensibilities.

And I think that would be counter to the
potential for general usefulness TMS has.

You're the mod for that topic and it's your right
to moderate it as you see fit and
nobody (afaik) is disputing your authority to
employ your own your discretion in the
exercise of that role.

Having said that...

I think that selectively deleting posts in
a thread is along the same dark path of
editing the content of a post (which I do
not claim you did here). It undermines the
integrity of the information on the forum,
not only because it disrupts the continuity
of the flow of that particular dialectic,
but because it also serves the more
counterproductive likelihood that experienced,
insightful members of the community will
choose to avoid participation.

That is not good. That is bad.

I find this insulting (whether Brody finds it insulting is
up to him). I also find this to be a symptom of the problem.
Technical people answer in technical ways. If you want to
**** them off, tell them that their help is unwelcome unless
they gild it with pink fluffy clouds.

To "avoid this kind of thing" all you need to do is
lay off the Miss Manners RP and let people who know what they're
talking about help people who ask for help. If they
do it wrong, *they* will be corrected. If there is
question about where the lines of propriety stand,
the community is in a position to exert authority over that.

Unless crafting turns of phrase that suit *you* is a
rule, I am free to express my help in a way that conforms
to the rules without your interference. If you interfere,
*that's* how "this kind of thing" happens. Blaming Brody
is a poor excuse for hasty overmoderation.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

It seems that a lot of the friction between the two viewpoints on that thread was caused by two different methods of helping newbies. To generalize, one method has its roots in RTFM, , and to put it more bluntly, think-before-you-speak discourse. The other method has its roots in 'customer-obsessed', 'bend-over-backwards', etcetera.

Now oddly, and I don't really know why this is myself, when I'm asking questions I believe in the first method. When I'm answering questions I like the second approach. This is mostly why I saw Brody's OP as rude to the newbie, and what sparked my reply to the thread.

Rather than going back and forth essentially arguing the correctness of people's personal viewpoints, it seems like this is the perfect opportunity to use some kind of neutral objective reference point.

Maybe what TMS could use is a newbie FAQ, and I think Lasher sort of mentioned this in passing, but noted his priorities. I find it hard to believe that there isn't a newbie FAQ somewhere in mud land that couldn't be donated/submitted to TMS, such that Brody could have easily replied something like:

1. Check out This FAQ Mr. Noobiest.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

But how did the Newbie find TMS? Probably with google entering "mud newbie help forum" as a search query. To me it seems more trouble to register to a site and ask than using google. If basic physics apply, mainly the law of the path of the least resistance, you can conclude there's a large probability that the newbie did try alternative means to help himself.

Also, the newbie seemed more annoyed about people viewing his thread and not responding, than the time it took for someone to respond. Even if, truth be told, most people on this site could have helped him out by spending 10 minutes of their time. Image you need directions IRL and the first ten people passing by just ignore you and pretend they don't hear you. Though you probably have to go to Amsterdam for that to happen, you'll quickly find out that 'excuse me' isn't going to help much and try a different approach, which is exactly what Mr Noob ended up doing.

Of course there's blame at the noob as well for being overly vague about what he had tried so far and losing his patience rather quickly. Though I find your response to be comparable to someone telling you to go buy a city map when asked for directions, not to mention it's my own general response to tell people to google it up when I feel like being rude or inconsiderate.

Anywho, Mr Noob succeeded in the end by getting some useful information out of you after all. Not only didn't he take s**t, he made you his b***h while at!!

We should really be more concerned about socially aggressive noobs taking advantage of us and turning this tight knit community's members against each other!

Re: Posts undeleted
 

That's a giant jump in conclusions on your part. I guess my legs just aren't springy enough to make that leap. Had he posted: "I've been to DoA's website and I can't find any useful information there, can anyone HERE help me?" Well, that'd be a safe jump to make.

That'd be HIM jumping to conclusions then. This forum has at least a dozen bots visiting it at any given time and spiders leafing through threads, causing views to inflate. It's his fault if he mistakes that for people checking out his message and ignoring it.

Actually, no, it's comparable to someone walking up to me in front of City Hall and asking, "How do I get to Le Chateau Magnifique?" And he's jumping up and down, clearly trying to get people to answer his question, but I've never been to Le Chateau Magnifique. However, I do know that if one consults an online directory for the city, one can get specific directions to La Chateau Magnifique. So, I suggest that he quit jumping up and down like a crazy person and consider another reference source that might be helpful.

It's not just the newbs who are socially aggressive ;)

Re: Posts undeleted
 

It's not coming across too well!

Here's the difference between a 3 year old and a mud newbie: The three year old is three years old. The mud newbie may be an intelligent adult who is simply unused to the social conventions here.

I'll also note that I, at least, find the term 'noob' to be inherently patronizing and derogatory, though I realize that's subject to personal viewpoint.


Ok, so, you sound exactly like a newbie administrator to me in this thread. Should I take this opportunity to correct you, "for your own good?" Clearly, you need some instruction for the good of both yourself and everyone else.


Beware the newbie admin who considers it his duty to reform society because he thinks he knows better.

Are your hackles up yet?

Why?

Don't you like being treated like a 'noob' and being told how it is when you're off-base?

I can't blame you. Nobody does.

--matt

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Which leads to forum members correcting other forum members in a thread, which leads to said forum members arguing their point back again, which leads to the thread going more and more off-topic, which leads to forum members arguing with forum members constantly.

As for enforcing politeness, there is such a thing as common courtesy. Allowing everyone to bitch and flame at each other repeatedly is a quick and short path to a forum full of people who constantly argue and spend more time insulting one another than answering the question of the poor bewildered sod who just came here for help. Oh wait... ;)

We'll have to disagree there. When I selectively deleted the posts, the thread read as someone asking a question and getting an answer clearly, concisely, and without any bother. The only reason you guys know different is because of the stubs and the fact you read it before it was moderatated. Anyone else reading the thread for the first time would have hard a hard time spotting small, if any, discrepancies that would indicate a deleted reply. I was very careful to ensure the continuity of the thread was preserved whilst removing the argument. This, I believe, is the heart of a mods job. Otherwise we end up with what was there, a question asked and a couple of helpful answers swamped by a bunch of arguments. This may happen all the time in other sections of TMS (and does) but that does not mean I have to let it become the norm.

If they're not having posts deleted because they're getting into silly arguments in the middle of threads, why would they even have to worry about it?

For a start, this wasn't aimed specifically at Brody. I also fail to see how it's a symptom of any problem. Techical people can answer in technical ways without a problem, my only hope was that perhaps this little issue would highlight the need for a bit of common courtesy and thought when replying to someone, even (or especially) if they're trolling.

People who know what they're talking about are free to help people who ask for help. People who lace said help with insults (and this is NOT aimed at Brodys initial reply, just a general thought) because they're fed up of the general ignorance/stupidity/laziness of the world at large should not bother replying. Telling someone the best way to help themselves is excellent and a good way of helping them grow. Telling them how to do it whilst bemoaning the fact you have to tell them to do it at all is counter-productive and doesn't put a very good front on the community.

People can turn their phrases as they wish, as long as it doesn't involve insulting or rude behaviour. There's simply no need for it and I'm relatively certain there's a rule against it somewhere, there usually is on these types of forums.

I never blamed Brody for anything. The thread got pruned because of the argument irrespective of the cause. I pointed out to Brody which post of his I felt might have been misconstrued, but at the end of the day the argument as a whole was what prompted me to action. If you want to lay blame, I personally would lay it at the foot of the original poster for replying to Brody in a sarcastic way, and then at Brody for lowering himself to his level and replying in a sarcastic way, and then back with the OP for calling Brody a jerkoff. I've done similar prunings before and never had a problem, which is why I found it so strange to have all this fuss kicked up this time. Perhaps we're all just that bored?

I also replaced the posts because I agreed with someone that the stubs made the whole thing look terribly messy, not because of the numerous complaints. I've had long years of things where people complain about everything to me and am not likely to be bothered about it unless I look back at what I did and see a fault. I stand by the moderation I did and wouldn't hesitate to repeat the same thing again. A thread should stay on topic and stay civil, and it is the job of a moderator to ensure this happens. If people don't want their replies deleting, they can keep them on-topic and at least moderately polite. I fail to see how this is a Bad Thing.

Should I mention this whole discussion is terribly fun? ;)

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Good thing we're not still antagonizing each other...

...Oh, wait.

C'mon. Drop it :)

Re: Posts undeleted
 

matt/sarapis/thelogos/whatever wrote:
A CHALLENGER APPEARS!

I was actually kind of puzzled about what you
were on about, since you seemed smart enough
to understand the silliness of what you were
saying, until I read this part:

And then I started giggling. You were trying to
get my goat, you naughty troll!

Since folks here seem to be tired of sniping, I'll
switch off the merciless mockery that lame troll
attempt deserved.

Instead I'll just limit myself to remarking that
the things I said, I meant. Unlike others, I wasn't
being confrontational just to pick a fight, but
was honestly expressing what I really thought.

Perhaps my touch is not the softest, but I
have to my credit the virtue of having
been sincere in my words and articulating
them with a good-faith belief that my
communicative act was constructive in nature.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I was mainly pointing out that before you get down on newbies or people who sound like newbies, understand that you may sound like them yourself to other people, and that you probably would not enjoy a patronizing attitude aimed at you either.

Newbie-ism is relative.

--matt

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Now we see the violence inherent in the system. Moderator,
he's calling me a noob, I'm soooo angry! Help! Help! I'm
being oppressed!

Seriously dude, that's the best you can do? Let's
take it to The IRE Connector and really duke it out.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I'm not sure what you think I'm trying to do exactly, so I'll explain a little more clearly. I'm not trying to insult you at all (nor do I think you're a newbie).

1. The newbie who posted didn't understand he sounded like a newbie in saying what he did.
2. You don't understand that you sound like a newbie when you say that you have to come down on "lazy" newbies "for their own good."
3. The newbie that was the cause of this discussion reacted poorly to a perceived patronizing attitude.
4. You are reacting poorly to a perceived patronizing attitude.

Now do you understand why the newbie reacted like he did or are you just unable to put yourself in his shoes?

--matt

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Heh, ok.

Of course he did. Read the thread title again.
"Noobiest noob that ever noobed"

You're just rewriting history to suit your backpedaling rhetoric.

Given that trying to come down on me to teach me a lesson is
the thing you supposedly were doing, does that mean you also
look like a noob? Or are you just doing anything you can to talk your way out
of the now valid charge of hypocrisy?

He reacted poorly. Everyone else kept their cool. As it should be.

I'm climbing out of my trollbag at being trolled by you. I can see you
don't like my reaction. Maybe you should see about taking your own
advice. My "poor reaction" is an entirely justified response at your
admitted intentional act of hassling me. I'm sorry your object lesson
backfired, champ, but you should have known better. Trolling is always
dirty, and you got down here to troll me, now you're trying to get back
on your high horse. Nice try.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

My bad, you are correct there.

This is exactly what I mean. You're being quite hostile because you didn't like my patronizing attitude. Why is it so surprising that the newbie didn't like that kind of attitude either?

Same.

At least two moderators disagreed so I hope you'll accept that this is subjective.


Case in point.

Later on perhaps you'll read this again and think, "Oh snap, THAT'S what he meant." If not, well, such is life.

--matt

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Ah, the dreaded "You'll understand when you're not hysterical" riposte.
I am done for, good game, sir.

Having intentionally trolled me to show how lame
intentional trolling is, you have indeed proven that
intentional trolling is lame.

What can I say but, bravo.

However, just out of curiosity....how does that prove anything?

That a noob gets mad at Brody somehow justifies
you trolling? My argument has been that noobs sometimes require
correcting, and it is true. Your argument is...what, I'm lame
for thinking that? That people who correct noobs look
like noobs to you?

Personally I think you didn't like how I put things
and decided to teach me a lesson. It's funny that your
mouth bought more fight than you were willing to back up,
but in the end, your point is a bit empty and silly.

Of *course* noobs don't like being corrected. I said that
myself. Proving that people can be made hostile by
trolling them is completely moot. I didn't advocate harshing out noobs.

In the process of making an obvious point, you managed to
get yourself in exactly the sort of spiteful crap that folks have
been trying to prevent.

I don't think that's a "way homer". I think you understand
that completely, right now. And my guess is that the discomfort
you feel at having been an unnecessary troll is what's making
you maneuver dishonestly to disentangle yourself from my
justified response.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I'm not going to get dragged into flinging insults back and forth, sorry.

I tried to explain my point but you're still reacting to being treated like the newbie was. I guess I'm out of this thread and will just apologize to everyone for dragging this thread out apparently pointlessly.

--matt

Re: Posts undeleted
 

This is exactly what I mean. It is either a lie, or proof you
paid as little attention to the thread as you did to its title.

Brody did not troll the noob. Period. Pretending he did is
either dishonest or foolish.

And trolling me to make the point that noobs feel bad
when trolled is therefore doubly pointless, and
yes, makes you the bad guy.

I'm sorry you lack the guts to face up to the mess you yourself made.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I agree with this 100%. I think we all would like the community to grow, but I rather see a modest growth of quality posters than a large influx of people that will produce a lot of noise.

Also, the part that really bothered me about the other thread was I thought Brody DID provide useful information in his first post. Perhaps I'm pessimistic, but people who complain about help they receive on the internet generally get more annoying as time goes on, rather than less, be it on a forum, MUD, mailing list, etc.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

This is exactly how I view the situation.

Why does this random, petulant "newbie" get all the benefit of the doubt and not Brody? That makes no sense to me. Being new is not a free pass to be a jerk.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

This confused me a bit. It makes it sound as if "Dawn of the Ages" may have just hopped, fully grown, onto his computer screen. He has no client, so he hasn't actually been on the mud. Did he pull it off the database here? Right now, its 39 on the list, so it has to be dug for...and when you click it, it takes you to the website. The website mentions two different ways of logging in. This makes it a bit of a mystery to me, so if someone can explain it, I'd be very grateful.

Mud isn't a term that non-mudders instinctively know. When people ask me what I do for all those hours on the computer, if I answer "I mud", they get all confused and start trying to figure out dirt and stuff. We've all been there, haven't we? So, you find there's an interesting game out there, called Dawn of Ages, and its a mud, but you aren't on any page about muds that describes what muds are and how to use them? Personally, if I accidentally tripped over a website that described an interesting sounding game, I'd probably google the name of the game, rather than "mud newbie help forum". This may reflect a personal problem though, since I never consider a forum as first stage of information. Also, I can't see the word "newbie" coming to mind at all, unless I read it on the same page (something like: "Dawn of the Ages is a mud that welcomes newbies" while refusing to give any information that would help said newbie).

My next point is that I have to agree with Cratylus about his treatment of newbies. I'm admittedly biased, since I've never been to IRE, but I've been to Dead Souls. When I say that he was surprisingly patient and helpful, I don't mean that he doesn't come across that way. What I mean is that I didn't understand a single thing going on which must have been very irritating to him. To help me with anything required him explaining something else first, which must be very frustrating. He spent a lot of time going over things that must have been extremely basic and that he had probably been over many times. In fact, during the time I spent there, he was equally patient and helpful to many other newcomers.

My final observation here is that Brody's second post was more helpful than his first, although I totally agree with the first one. To my mind, considering the response of the OP, the second post went above and beyond what I would have expected from anyone.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Two things bother me with this thread.

1. That many of the posters use the term 'Newbie' as a derogative.

To me, 'Newbie' just means new. It doesn't even have to mean 'new to Muds in general', it could just as well mean 'New to this particular game'.
All Newbies are not jerks. Some of them certainly are, but no more than the average percentage among all players.
A horse is an animal. An animal is not necessarily a horse.

2. That no real Newbie would label himself 'Noobiest noob that ever noobed'.

You have to have played Muds to be familiar with the term 'Newbie', let alone 'Noob'.
My theory is that the OP is not a Newbie at all, and consequently, that he probably was trolling.
If so, he certainly got the effect he was looking for.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I completely agree.


Not at all. Newbie and 'noob' are both used generically when speaking about internet-based activities (and even some real-life activities).

I'm reluctant to refer to Wikipedia, especially articles that are locked because of vandalism (and are thus controversial) but the zeitgeist seems to be captured here.

Note in particular that the national US tv show 'Scrubs' has a character that frequently refers to another character as 'Newbie.' (A more senior doctor referring to new doctor.)

--matt

Re: Posts undeleted
 

And how likely do you think a new doctor would be to refer to himself as 'Noobiest noob that ever noobed', while posting a question on a general Medicin-related board about where the entrance to the hospital he was about to start work in was located? A much more liklely title would have been; 'Need some help to connect'.

I think Molly has got a point. Actually I remember having the same kind of gut-feeling when I first saw the thread. And possibly this would also accoiunt for Brody being a bit less kind and helpful than usual, while responding to it. Most of those that have followed these boards for some time would testify that Brody generally is among the nicest posters here.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Actually I'm not that sure I agree. Maybe I was so
distracted by the rude assaults of matt/sarapis/thelogos/whatever
that I didn't notice, but it seemed to me that where people
used the term [noob|noobie|newb|newbie] it was in a
literal descriptive sense, rather than a deprecative,
pejorative sense.

In my mind it's only an insult when hurled as a
direct epithet, and even *then*, it's more of a
referent joke (I am mocking people who mock newbies
by pretending to be mocking you) than an actual insult.

If I am talking with a third party about a
newbie, my reference to the [noob|noobie|newb|newbie]
is typically not meant as belittlement, but as a
simple description of the person's most relevant
characteristic in the conversation at hand:
being inexperienced.

Maybe that's what matt/sarapis/thelogos/whatever
was taking umbrage at....maybe it sounded like I
was trashing new people by slapping them around
with the "noob" label. In my defense I can only say
that if you interpreted my use of the word negatively,
that's your baggage and your problem, not my
responsibility to fix.


I have to disagree here too. There are
lots of places that a person can run across that
terminology before blundering onto this forum.
If, for example, they play Half-Life 2 deathmatches
online, they will quickly learn lots of terminology
we take for granted. If on a chat program (where
one also can become familiar with basic net terms) they
are told to visit TMS because of some awesome game
they can play, that's a way of finding yourself here.

I think we may never *really* know if noob guy
was truly a noob, but in my opinion it is just
as plausible he was as he wasn't.


At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I think this
assumes an intentional decrement by Brody of
his nice-a-trons, and I feel this is an unwarranted characterization.

Let's look agan at what he literally said in response to
noob guy jumping up and down hollering for attention:

If folks find that less than kind or less than helpful, seriously, I
don't know where we can find common ground.
And reading hostility, or even lack-of-courtesy, into it is
an excess of imagination on the part of the reader.
IMO.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I never gave the newbie much benefit of the doubt. He was wrong to respond to Brodys initial post sarcastically, after which Brody responded in a sarcastic way himself (and no-one can tell me there's no implied insult in his second post in the thread, regardless of whether it was justified) and then people started arguing. As Brodys first post was the one to cause the initial response by the new member, it got deleted along with the others which held no useful information that wasn't contained in other posts. Perhaps it would have been better to delete all the ones I did but not Brodys initial response, but either way the moderation would have happened. I'm not really interested in laying blame, and the only reason Brodys initial response has come up for such an examination is because he's an active, vocal member of the forum and also the first to reply to the thread, and since the new member appears to have wandered off again it seems pointless to argue about how he should have been less sarcastic and not called people "jerkoff" etc.

I pointed out that, to my mind having visited more forums than I care to remember, helped to run a number of them, and seen the sort of implied malice people can lace their comments with even whilst seeming innocuous, Brodys first response about this not being a chatroom could be misunderstood by us somewhat jaded individuals ;) It was not the cause for the deletion of posts, nor was Brody solely responsible for the moderation.

I don't really see why this is still being debated, but it's interesting nonetheless. :)

Re: Posts undeleted
 

No denying, my response to being told my first helpful response was anything but helpful led to a degree of snarkiness (deserved, I think) for the impatient newcomer. (There. Not noob. Not newbie. Hopefully, not at all offensive to anyone.)

In any event, I've learned my lesson about trying to be helpful in the Newbie Help forum. (Are we changing that name so it's not potentially offensive to newcomers?)

I doubt SteveStevenson was a "n00b" at all. I agree with others who suspect he was a troll from the outset. And I'm bemused that I end up being, for all intents and purposes, punished for trying to help and when that help got snark, gave a little snark back (but not nearly as much as could have been dealt).

Re: Posts undeleted
 

At the risk of sounding too authoritarian, I think the moderation of the thread was entirely appropriate. It never ceases to amaze me how much "freedom" people on TMC, TMS, or any other MUD related forum think they're entitled to when most other forums I've been to are moderated regularly and it's considered perfectly normal.

Removing posts from a thread while maintaining its flow isn't always easy, or even possible. But if the forum is supposed to be "newbie friendly" leaving a bunch of argumentative responses that have nothing to do with the question behind for all to see doesn't do much for advancing that.

And further, when the usual suspects complain about censorship and oppression and the moderators cave in and reverse everything, it leaves people who are unfamiliar with our anarchist ways with a feeling that there's no authority in place at all. This is especially evidenced by how Cratylus challenged Matt to take the argument to TMC, where he knows "the law" doesn't exist.

That said, I agree Steve was rude and deserved what he got - but that should have been left in the hands of the moderators to put a stop to it. Not in the hands of a bunch of vigilante posters who think they're the moderators.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

The problem I had with it (and perhaps others had the same problem) is that there is a severe lack of consistency in the moderation on TMS. If the real goal is to maintain a sense of civility on these forums (a laudable goal), then a lot more personal attacks need to get moderated throughout the forums.

In other forums, you have outright, off topic personal attacks being left alone with the explanation "we want to let things play out and resolve themselves." Then you have this forum, where some random twit acts up and posts get moderated for simply telling the guy he needs to tone it down and stop being a nuisance.


Enforcing community standards and applying positive peer pressure is not being a vigilante. The "noob thread" poster was an immature jerk, and deserved a lot worse than the gentle instruction he received.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Agreed. Moderation is a good thing, not a bad thing. Freedom of speech is a right in the public sphere (in some countries), not the private sphere.

--matt

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I think the unedited thread is more educational to
a newbie than the edited thread. Someone now reading
that thread will see an example of transgressive
behavior by a newbie, and know to avoid it.

She will also see the community actually caring
about the way it responds to newbies and attempting
to establish norms.

And she will also see that strong disagreement
can be registered and competing opinions debated
about interesting topics, even in the newbie area.

Also she'll learn a bit about what's expected of
her before she asks a question, and how she should
ask it, and also some information about a
particular mud.

All in all, I think that restoring the posts leads
to a thread that is of good value to a newbie. The
thread may contain material that some folks consider
irrelevant, but such people can start developing
the filters they will need to navigate elsewhere
here and on other forums and on the internet, where
meta-discussion and digression is as normal in
text communication as in spoken conversation.

To believe that newcomers need meta material removed
infantilizes them, and I don't think there's a
lot of point to it. If they really really can't
handle scanning past tangents (and really, if
they asked a question, they should be expected to
put in a little bit of effort in reading the
result) then perhaps they're just not ready to
handle the internet at all, and I don't see this
forum's mission involving such fundamental education.

I think I resent being lumped in as a "usual suspect"
complaining about censorship because I don't
believe that is a fair characterization of me
or what I was doing. I believe I was defending
the value of the thread which *benefited*
from the digressions. Making me sound like a member
of a group of anarchists agitating against
oppression has the insidious implication that my
argument is invalid because my position is fundamentally
political. I reject this implication and point
to the facts of my arguments, which have been
reasonable and made in good faith.


I'd got the feeling people wanted to avoid the
sort of bitchslapping that matt/sarapis/thelogos/whatever
seemed intent on engaging in. Taking it elsewhere
seemed the polite thing to do.

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with that
sentence other than explicitly paint me as someone
interested in anarchy. If that is what you were
up to, I have to say I'm a little disappointed in the
disregard you apparently have for the validity of
my specific arguments, washing them away with the
sort of "YOU want ANARCHY" dismissal of a Fox News
commentator.


"That said, I agree Steve was rude and deserved what he got "

I think he got much better than he deserved, and I
think Brody deserves kudos for that, not deletion
of his posts.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I disagree. Someone who is truly a newbie will more likely see the unedited thread as an example of hostility toward newcomers to mudding. First impressions are everything and if that thread had been mine, despite Steve being a jerk first, the massive off-topic bickering about it that came afterward would cause me to go elsewhere. That's where good moderators come in handy and should be allowed to step in.

I don't agree with this opinion of moderation. It implies that doing so is a negative activity with no value. I think it's more of a disservice to have a question asked, rudely bumped, and then have 5 million chattering posters debating why the newbie was a jerk, and why telling him so was mean spirited and wrong. It serves no purpose other than to inflate post counts and bloat up the database with useless crap.

This kind of elitism and condecsention is exactly what drives people away and ends up breeding more and more of the same pile of troll postings and bitter flamewars to begin with. The kind of person it takes to overcome that type of treatment is often not going to then make a very good source of help for a newbie. If the goal of this site is to be informative, then one of two things needs to happen:

1. People need to shape up and behave themselves and stop bickering with each other at the drop of a hat. So far I don't see this happening on its own.

or,

2. Moderators need to step in and enforce whatever policies they deem appropriate for their sections. All I see when this comes up is resistance and talk of censorship and oppression. Which is just plain silly.

It wasn't terribly hard to understand. The tone of your challenge to Matt to take it to TMC came off like the "lets go where the evil liberal censor freaks won't be able to stop me" tone of a CNN commentator.

It is when you appoint yourself as the enforcer of those standards and you aren't a staff member for the site.

Granted, moderation policy here is inconsistent at best. But the solution is not to turn the masses loose for mob justice. The solution is to reign things in to where they should have been had the rules been enforced consistently from the start.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Was there a golden age when no discord occurred
in mudland? There must have been, because if
discord had been around when we were noobs,
surely we all would have fled mudding.

Newcomers are not infants. They can be expected
to handle pointful topic drift just as well
as anyone else. And if they can't, deleting
posts by experienced folk who mean well isn't
going to cure them of their feebleness.


I'm sorry if it implied that. This was not my intention.
I think it is patently obvious that there are
cases of good moderation. This is so obvious I did
not think it was necessary for me to state it.
However, apparently that need exists, and I so do state.


I do not believe that expecting newcomers to
take some responsibility for their integration
is elite or condescending. I think it is
common sense. My experience when joining a
community is that it is my job to make an effort
to conform to their standards, and in return they
can be expected to try making it easy. But it's
a two way street.


So then you *are* resorting to that dishonest rhetoric.
I'm very surprised because you'd seemed like a good sport.
This swift reach for the ad hominem bat, I'd hoped, was
just a misunderstanding. Instead, to you I actually am one
of these "usual suspects" you can just dismiss with
a conflation of authority and justification. In all candor,
rhetorical jousting aside, I'm genuinely disappointed in you
for it. While siding with authority does seem in character
for you, doing so reflexively and with me as your target
makes me question the care with which you've considered
this thread and the judgment you've used in the manner
you joined it. Forgive me for holding out hope I've
simply misunderstood your intent in some way.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

I'd just like to address this point.

Firstly, I have no idea what sort of moderation goes on in other parts of the forum. I rarely visit them these days because I got sick of the bickering, although I have been told once or twice that very little goes on. I think part of this might be down to the fact that moderators on here are drawn from the community, are often well known, and they don't want to have people accusing them of taking sides (even if they weren't). I, however, don't care what people accuse me of. None of you really know me, I don't really know more than one or two of you except by reputation, and I just come here to do my job if and when it's required because I offered to help Adam out if it was needed and he knew I've had a lot of experience moderating forums. I'd agree that if we're going to maintain civility on TMS then a more consistent moderation approach could be needed, but that's something down to Lasher to sort out I guess.

My last real point in this thread is mainly directed at Brody and everyone who seems to think I was victimising him because I "think he's a jerkoff". Brody's initial post WAS NOT the reason the thread got moderated. If all posts after his first had stayed on topic, avoided insults, and just been information, then I'd have happily left it alone even if I personally think his first point could be misunderstood. The argument as a whole caused the moderation, and I felt it best to remove the whole thing. The information given out in the posts that were deleted was covered in other posts left behind, and if you ignored previous knowledge of what was there and those ugly stubs then it scanned perfectly fine.

Random twit or long-standing community member, I don't care. If the thread goes off-topic and descends into a flamefest it's going to get moderated if it's in Newbie Help or Mud Humour. Some people will agree with my style of moderation, some won't. You can't please 100% of people 100% of the time, and I gave up trying long ago.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

This comes down to how badly you're interested in bringing new people into the MUD community. Given how difficult it is, I'm all for making it flat-out as easy as possible for newbies to come in and feel welcome. If that means we grin and smile even when someone has not immediately adjusted to the community standards, so be it. Text MUDs need them while they do not need text MUDs, which are just one entertainment option out of many for them. It behooves us to make this option the most attractive possible.

The last thing someone wants is to be treated with a condescending attitude "for their own good," as you put it. Telling someone this is "for your own good" is inherently patronizing, after all, as it assumes that you somehow know more about what is good for them than they do. That might be the case for your 3 year old child but that is not the case for newbies to MUDs.

--matt

Re: Posts undeleted
 

You are exactly correct in this. Newcomers are not infants and we can expect that they make a certain amount of effort. I never said they were or that they shouldn't. I am objecting soley to the subsequent derailment of the post that drew the moderator action ( appropriately so ). Once Steve had asked his question, bumped his post, got some help, then rudely replied and got more help that should have ended it. There was no need for the mob style session that followed. It's not about newbies being infants. It's about us being adult enough to know when to let it go and stop responding, or ignore it entirely. Had that happened, the thread would have died. Xerihae would not have needed to delete posts. Everyone would have walked away happy. If Steve was a troll, he woudln't have gotten the rise out of everyone he was looking for. And other newcomers wouldn't have seen Flamewar #14,736 erupt.

You said that in response to something Matt said in response to you. How else was I supposed to interpret the meaning when it sounds pretty much like you wanted to goad Matt into heading over to TMC ( despite the veiled insult even there ). "and really duke it out" is a pretty clear attempt to say "where nobody will moderate me for being an ass to you".

Given the previous statements, I'm not sure where you think I'm being dishonest. It seemed perfectly clear to me what you were after. In this particular case, yes. I lumped you in with the "usual suspects". If that makes me dishonest, so be it. I spoke my mind and I gave up caring what people think of me when I do a long time ago.

I find it ironic that you would note I tend to favor authority over anarchy when you yourself got into quite the mess over on the I3 router because you wanted your channels to have some measure of civility when the refugees from gjs showed up. I seem to recall several people objected, raised a big stink, and ultimately you refused to budge. Frankly, I respected your position greatly for it and for not backing down. Even when it resulted in splitting off another router for the anarchists.

Yet, here you are, agitating for the moderators of this forum who are attemtping to impose civility to back down and let the mob rule. Do you not see some element of hypocricy in that? I'm not trying to be a jackass here but you've got to admit it seems a bit odd.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Then so it is. I know you are not foolish enough to actually confuse
the advocacy of admin restraint with the advocacy of
anarchy, so what can I presume on your part other
than bad faith?


I was wondering if you'd bring this up. I think that the episode you refer to
is a perfect example of the community being allowed to discuss and debate
policy to its heart's content, let the chips fall where they may.

Since you bring it up, let me enlighten folks with a url that explains
what you're talking about:



On the old router, newbies were victimized so violently they
were actually talked into deleting their muds. Literally, this
actually happened. I set up a router to avoid violence against
newbies, and to enhance i3 availability. When people used
channels to hassle newbies and spew racist language, I
banned them from the channels they abused *until* they agreed
to follow the rules of the router they connected to. This is a
far, far cry from deleting posts for aesthetic reasons.

You seemed to want to pretend that I was advocating anarchy.
I was not.

Now you want to pretend that my disagreement with the
moderation in a thread means I'm a hypocrite because of
that alleged anarchy.

I can't stop you from using misleading rhetoric, but I
will certainly call you on your dishonesty. For shame, sir.

The reason I think that router incident supports my position
is that it demonstrates my willingness, eagerness, and
enthusiasm for soliciting and engaging the opinions of those
opposed. I did not fear their open defiance, and I did not
seek to suppress their ideas. I asked for input and votes:




And I have posted logs of the vigorous debates that ensued:




I didn't hide from a fight, I didn't try to silence
debate (and in fact actively encouraged it), and I
have stood firm in my belief that getting things in
the open is healthy, and that protecting newbies is
important and worthwhile. You can do both without
resorting to deletion of non-violatory posts.

Thank you for letting me prove my bona-fides as a
champion of newbies. I'm telling you as someone who's
fought tooth and nail to keep them alive and keep
them coming, that their protection does not require the
deletion of posts from veteran contributors you
think are less-than-polite.

I thought that Xerihae's moderation was excessive and
I said so. That you've found the need to stomp
on me and try distort my reputation as a result says a
hell of a lot more about you than it does about me.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

You know as well as I do that vigorous debate that's on point is something I'm not opposed to. If I'm supposed to be dishonest for taking issue with your dislike for the moderation here, then I take issue with your attempt to make it out like I'm in favor of stifling debate when the issue gets heated.

You also missed one very critical detail in your attempt to paint me as the bad guy: The router dispute happened on your watch, in your territory. How you chose to handle it is entirely up to you. Allowing people to be rude and abusive while debating the issue is apparently fine to you. That's great and wonderful. Had you decided to permanently ban the offenders, delete their forum accounts on lpmuds.net and refuse to engage them in the matter further, it would have been your site, your rules. Regardless of how you decided it, it would have made you look weak to back away from the decision made and give in to the demands coming from the other side.

My impression is that being rude and abusive wasn't acceptable to Xerihae and he made that clear. He took what action he deemed appropriate. Which I quite frankly think was pretty restrained. He could have simply deleted the entire topic forever. He might even have been able to ban the offenders from that forum, I don't know how much power vbulliten gives moderators. It's not hiding from a fight to choose to remove abusiveness.

When you agitated for the moderation decision to be reversed, it sure looked to me like you were favoring mob anarchy over moderator authority. How else was it supposed to be taken? I think the fact that you ( and others ) successfully got Xerihae to back down makes moderation authority here look weak and ineffective. If all it takes is some loud shouting and a mob mentality to reverse a decision, then what does that truly tell newcomers ( and trolls ) about who is in control?

The fact that Xerihae guided the discussion of this issue here rather than simply cutting it off suggests to me he's not "hiding from a fight" either. It just wasn't appropriate to carry this out in the newbie forum. The debate hasn't been silenced. It's simply been moved to an appropriate place. That's the only real issue here, isn't it? Why are you trying to make this into a lot more than it needs to be? I only raised the router issue as an example of authority in action. Not as a means to pick a fight with you over it.

Re: Posts undeleted
 

Ok. I was talking about suppressing adverse opinions
in general by deleting posts. I can see that it seems
like I was accusing you of doing that. I was not
being specific like that, and I agree you seem
pleased enough to scrap on TMC. And here :)


Exactly as I said. That the newcomer was not
hassled, the moderation was excessive, and
the meta-discussion constructive. If your
position is that you misunderstood what I said
as a call for anarchy, fine. We can just roll
with that. But my argument was that
the thread was in compliance with the rules
of the site and intent of "helping newbies",
not that the rules should be tossed.

And questioning the judgment of figures of
authority is not the same as advocating anarchy.

I accept that it looked like the advocacy
of anarchy to you at the time. I hope you
see now that it in fact was not.


We can roll with that, too. As I said before,
I'm much happier interpreting your posts as a
misunderstanding than intentional trolls
with attached vendetta.

For the record, I understand that Xerihae acts
with the confidence of Lasher and as such
represents the authority of this site. As I
stated in my first post I also understand Xerihae's
intent was good.

-Crat

Re: Posts undeleted
 

50!

-Crat