New forums = George Orwell's 1984?

General Discussion
Prev 1 9 10 11 26 Next
11/12/2018 08:14 AMPosted by Ohgodmyeyes
11/12/2018 08:10 AMPosted by Hayhey
SO what if the supply chain is totally controlled by one side, IE, they are all based in one nameless state with the same belief system and enjoy being the thought police?

We are once again back at start your own bakery to know if the bread is good. The new system wont be good.

Wow, what? Way to drop the analogy on its backside.

No, no we're not back to knowing if the bread is good. It is and always has been a case of, "If you don't like the bread, bake your own and you can make it however you like."

But what if the bread is actually bad and it's not just a case of liking it on a person to person basis?
11/11/2018 11:19 PMPosted by Cyouskin
I can't wait to link memes with embedded images.


As long as they allow the Picard facepalm I'm in, lol.

11/11/2018 11:27 PMPosted by Tyralone
11/11/2018 11:22 PMPosted by Arisran
How does the trust system work? Is that like a social credit score? Can it go up and down or just up?


Good god it better not. I saw the Orville episode of that and it was horrible to think society could become that, your life determined on Likes and Dislikes:

http://orville.wikia.com/wiki/Majority_Rule


We are already like that, remember that facebook thing about the dentist who shot this famous lion on a preserve, and how everyone was told to go dislike him, let your opinion be known etc. It was like watching a pool of piranhas in a feeding frenzy.
Doxxing is now illegal but public opinion now makes or breaks people's careers regardless of whether they are guilty or innocent of what they are being accused of.
It's no longer innocent until proven guilty, it's become the other way around.
I don't think the new forums will be like this, I'm just saying that we're already on the road to achieving the orville thing irl.
I believe this will help alleviate these kinds of threads.

Back in my day, forums were strictly moderated, and random arguments/personal attacks were met with swift suspensions/bans.

This forum is polluted with nothing but that. I hope this new forums combats that behavior.

There are plenty of places on the internet to sit and be awful to people. The WoW forums shouldn't be one of those places.
Every time we've had the forums changed, it's been a little bit of pandemonium beforehand with worries about the changes.

We'll adapt, folks. The sky won't fall.
11/12/2018 08:18 AMPosted by Gloriosity
This forum is polluted with nothing but that. I hope this new forums combats that behavior.


It doesn't. WoW's GD is carebear central compared to Overwatch's GD.

People are just being dumb about this. WoW forums will be the exact same. You're not going to get muted for having the "wrong" opinion. Trust levels will accrue naturally by participating on the forums, not by having the "right" opinion.

The flagging system is identical to the reporting system. Don't break any rules and it's toothless with false reports being against the CoC.

The trust system is designed to increase participation and engagement, not have the "right" or "wrong" opinion. You can still get level 3 while thinking BFA is garbage and LFR should be removed.
11/12/2018 08:17 AMPosted by Baltharn
But what if the bread is actually bad and it's not just a case of liking it on a person to person basis?

Well, then the bakery will fail, and they'll either change the recipe or go out of business.

The bread won't be bad, though, no matter how many people whine about it in advance out of ignorance.
As long as they allow the Picard facepalm I'm in, lol.

Already bookmarked.
11/12/2018 08:28 AMPosted by Cyouskin
As long as they allow the Picard facepalm I'm in, lol.

Already bookmarked.


Yay! I wouldn't mind if we got to use battletags with avatars like they do on Diablo forums it still shows my post count there. I also like my avatar, lol.
11/11/2018 11:19 PMPosted by Cyouskin
I can't wait to link memes with embedded images.


But the moment you post anything slightly negative "poof" it's gone.
11/12/2018 08:53 AMPosted by Nùb
But the moment you post anything slightly negative "poof" it's gone.

Uh huh, sure.

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/overwatch/t/the-sym-torb-bob-problem-do-we-really-need-more-auto-aiming-garbage-in-this-game/248171

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/overwatch/t/fix-quickplay-already/248162

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/overwatch/t/you-have-killed-your-own-game-by-adding-so-much-cc/247868

Negative threads, there just aren't any!
11/12/2018 08:06 AMPosted by Awkward
11/12/2018 07:46 AMPosted by Brewenor
Is it possible you are arguing against a point I never made or believe?


My argument is against the following points you've made.

11/12/2018 06:56 AMPosted by Brewenor
Disagreeing in full view is more civil than anonymously trying to silence someone because you disagree with them.


You've posted probably about half a different variations of "flagging is silencing people" when in reality there is zero difference between the flagging system and the report system. They're simply different names for the same feature.

Here's a post where I outlined how they're identical features (and I also quoted you!)

11/12/2018 06:28 AMPosted by Awkward
...

Flagging is just a different name for reporting.

This is what it looks like when you flag someone on the Overwatch forums.

http://puu.sh/C0y3v/1b5c3a26e8.png

This is what it looks like when you report someone on the WoW forums.

http://puu.sh/C0y49/384b9e81f4.jpg

Literally just different names for the exact same feature.


https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20769659730?page=2#post-39

11/12/2018 07:00 AMPosted by Brewenor
But you are in full support for people hiding behind a keyboard and controlling someones else's ability to speak in a forum - simply because they disagree? Flaggers having 0 consequences for THEIR actions?


False flaggers will face the exact same punishment that false reporters do.


Ok, I never made the point that the new system is the same and/or different than the current system. So to continue the discussion.

My issue is with the system, whether thats how it exists now or will in the future. The timeframe is irrelevant. Creating silo'd safe spaces of groupthink will do nothing to improve the quality of the game.

Diversity is our strength or so I am told daily. Except for diversity of thought. Diversity of though = ejection of the heretics (old church or new tech theology). Just because a Blizzard mod agrees that any comment against Sylvanas is a ban able offense, doesn't mean it should be.

If Blizzard wants to GROW its playerbase it needs to be inclusive of everyone, even people who don't like Sylvanas. Or those who love her. Or Casuals, or those who hate casuals.

Unless its a blatant threat, or a command like go kill yourself, it should be open.

Hate on any side should be squelched. Most of the time, though, people can only see the hate they dislike and not their own.
11/11/2018 11:18 PMPosted by Tyralone
11/11/2018 11:13 PMPosted by Shudder
...

Don't trash post and you'll be fine.


Just the question of whom decides what is and is not trash?
If you don't already know, you might be in trouble.
11/12/2018 08:57 AMPosted by Brewenor
Diversity of though = ejection of the heretics (old church or new tech theology). Just because a Blizzard mod agrees that any comment against Sylvanas is a ban able offense, doesn't mean it should be.


If you want to take things to extremes, you're kind of out there on a limb begging for it to break. The CMs and mods around here aren't running around squashing people who disagree. Unless you're disagreeing by rampant profanity, hate speech, and calling people names.

It's not that people are disagreeing that causes them to be moderated. It's because they seem to be unable to create posts that don't contain profanity, hate speech, call other posters names or otherwise act inappropriately in order to simply disagree with them.

The whole "people disagreed with me so I got banned" thing? Isn't because people disagreed with them. It's because the poster couldn't post like a civilized human being.

11/12/2018 08:57 AMPosted by Brewenor
Unless its a blatant threat, or a command like go kill yourself, it should be open.


No. These forums have rules that are appropriate for the community of the game. If you can't follow those simple guidelines? Perhaps it's best you simply move on. Because they're not onerous. They're not difficult. And you can disagree with people all you wish. Just disagree about the idea instead of attacking people.
11/12/2018 12:24 AMPosted by Lahgtah
You are an example of the exact type of lemming I'm talking about; you don't care, you don't want to care, and no one can make you care because you're easily satisfied and happy with what you have.
So if that's true, if she is happy what is the problem? The fact that she doesn't think like you, she is simply a lemming?
11/11/2018 11:07 PMPosted by Viscaro
    Trust Levels

    We want to reward users who are positively contributing to the forums. Over time, these players will be rewarded with the ability to post more often, embed images/links, and more.


    Flagging

    We’ve removed the “thumbs down” button and replaced it with a flagging system with multiple options.


Sounds like a mixture of Orwellian "Big Brother is watching" as well as Black Mirror's "Nosedive" episode that depicts a society where everything you do is dictated by your rating.

Thoughts?


I am going with Occam's Razor here and argue it makes moderating these forums easier.

Anything else and you are going to crazy conspiracy land where you have to make outlandish explanations as well as play connect the dots. It is not a conspiracy against you.
11/12/2018 08:57 AMPosted by Brewenor
Ok, I never made the point that the new system is the same and/or different than the current system. So to continue the discussion.


Then why did you refer to it as flagging and not reporting? Surely you can understand the implication that you're not talking about the current system, and only the "new" one?

11/12/2018 08:57 AMPosted by Brewenor
My issue is with the system, whether thats how it exists now or will in the future. The timeframe is irrelevant. Creating silo'd safe spaces of groupthink will do nothing to improve the quality of the game.


And how does this relate to the new forums at all? Do you think it will increase censorship and promote areas where only groupthink can survive?

If so, why?

11/12/2018 08:57 AMPosted by Brewenor
Diversity is our strength or so I am told daily. Except for diversity of thought. Diversity of though = ejection of the heretics (old church or new tech theology). Just because a Blizzard mod agrees that any comment against Sylvanas is a ban able offense, doesn't mean it should be.


Do Blizzard mods believe this though? I've been banned plenty of times from both the current forums, and in the style of the new system on the Overwatch forums.

None of them has been for speaking the "wrong" opinion, only for being uncivil and breaking the forum rules.

What reason do you have to think that the current or future style of moderation is one that leads to "wrongthink" being disallowed?

11/12/2018 08:57 AMPosted by Brewenor
If Blizzard wants to GROW its playerbase it needs to be inclusive of everyone, even people who don't like Sylvanas. Or those who love her. Or Casuals, or those who hate casuals.


Again, do you think Blizzard are not doing this? If so, why?

Because I've seen what actual echo chambers look like and I gotta tell you, there's a whole lot less disagreement than you see on either the WoW forums or the Overwatch forums. If you want to see what an echo-chamber looks like, post a right-wing opinion on a subreddit like LateStageCaptialism, or a left-wing opinion on a subreddit like The_Donald. You'll get flamed, brigaded and banned faster than you can say "both sides". Not so on the WoW forums. On the WoW forums you can:

You can dislike Sylvanas or you can love her.

You can dislike the "casuals" that Blizzard "caters" to, or you can like it.

The only caveat is that you must do so civilly.

Blizzard is under no obligation to create a forum where ALL opinions must be heard. As a private forum, they're more than allowed to create their own rules and ban those who can't follow them without violating free speech.

So to reiterate, do you have any specific grievance? Or are you just airing your concerns about a system you don't fully understand? I genuinely don't mean that in a bad way. There is nothing wrong about ignorance so long as you're willing to remedy that ignorance.
You do understand that these Forums are a business tool, right? I felt for the longest time that that it was to flexible.
11/12/2018 08:06 AMPosted by Ohgodmyeyes
11/12/2018 08:03 AMPosted by Baltharn
Ahh the good old "you have to be a baker to know if the bread is good" fallacy

Uhh.. no. That's not what that is. If we're using the baker analogy, it's more like, "If you don't like the bread, go bake your own."
Yes
Okay, since the OP and nearly all of his supporters do not have the first clue about The First Amendment or George Orwell, I simply cannot quote all of the wrong information being presented in really poorly constructed, and mostly self defeating, debate point. Let us instead settle for clearing up a few issues. And one post at a time to artificially inflate my post count.

Easy one first. George Orwell.

The OP needs to actually read the book 1984, and perhaps Animal Farm too. Either way, his debate points make it clear that he misunderstands Orwell's condemnation of a totalitarian state. Instead, the OP appears to be in favor of an Ayn Rand style of social anarchy. Though I suspect strongly what he really is pushing for is more Lord of the Flies than anything else.
11/12/2018 09:49 AMPosted by Romanna
Instead, the OP appears to be in favor of an Ayn Rand style of social anarchy. Though I suspect strongly what he really is pushing for is more Lord of the Flies than anything else.

To simplify:

If your exercise of personal freedom at any point impinges on the personal freedom or well-being of others, you shouldn't have the freedom to so impinge.

Re: Owning human beings is bad. Assaulting people is bad. Taking things that belong to others is bad.

You know, common sense, golden-rule stuff.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum