New forums = George Orwell's 1984?

Community General Discussion
181
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.
182
As long as they allow the Picard facepalm I'm in, lol.

Already bookmarked.
183
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.
184
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.
185
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!
186
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.
187
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.
188
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.
189
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?
190
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.
191
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.
192
You do understand that these Forums are a business tool, right? I felt for the longest time that that it was to flexible.
193
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
194
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.
195
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.
196
The First Amendment

There is not now, nor has there ever been a "Freedom of Speech" in the delusional fashion which the OP and many of his supporters argue for. We have Libel Laws, as well as Copyright and Trademark protection laws. That these laws exist at all shows that you cannot just say anything you want any time you want.

Cities and states in America restrict your ability to say and write and display anything you want any time you want. There are obscenity laws about what you can display on a magazine cover, or publish. There are city ordinances in many resort towns that allow for cursing and obscene language to be fined. There are laws in most states that forbid advertising of cigarettes and alcohol within one hundred yards of a school or place of worship.

More to the point, a private institution on their private website is allowed to restrict anything it wishes. If they chose to, Blizzard could exercise it's First Amendment Right to freely express their dislike of My Little Pony by banning anyone who posted anything about it. And it would be 100% legal.

So quit the false patriotism, you do not understand Constitution and sound as if you have never even read the First Amendment. As I pointed out before, the OP did not even understand that the Constitution has been amended 27 times.

Edit
And by "We have libel laws" I mean the entire world does. There are international treaties that cover the protection of copyrights, trademarks, and fight libel and plagiarism. But the rest mostly applies in the US.
197
Careful comrade, dissension will lower your social credit score.

“It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
198
I'm glad they are focusing on such important things like this instead of providing engaging game play and fixing that steaming smelly turd called BFA.
199
11/12/2018 10:04 AMPosted by Jimrockford
I'm glad they are focusing on such important things like this instead of providing engaging game play and fixing that steaming smelly turd called BFA.


Good point. Because the person that deals with the forums is the same one that designs and implements gameplay mechanics.
200
I think is a bad comparison, but your point is valid OP, it's hilarious how this company is managing the increasing criticism, like asking if we have phones and later blaming Trump for being booed, now they are just going to form an army of white knights to pretend everything is fine and censor other opinions. But they will accomplish nothing, people will complain in different places. But now we know exactly what are we dealing with.
#notmyblizzard