Post by Joe K on Mar 26, 2022 17:37:00 GMT
My signature is taken from one of various quotes which (used to?) come up while loading the game, 'Elite', and I've played it, in various iterations, for years.
For the last decade or so, I've played the latest version, 'Elite Dangerous', which has expanded into 'ED Horizons' (with planetary landings and ground vehicles), and 'ED Odyssey' (with on foot missions, borrowing from FPSs).
This has been a steep learning curve, and the discovery of Elite Dangerous Forums has helped with that greatly. Members provide the benefit of their own experience, which usually brings new players up to speed quickly, sparing them the frustration of having to make do with a lacklustre official playguide.
The one thing that does spoil enjoyment of the forum for many members, though, is the moderation, which follows the model for other, unfriendly, sites, in having moderators who make snap decisions with little regard for the actual forum rules, but worse than that, then treat any questioning of those decisions as further violations, often with lashings of salt directed towards the 'offender'.
I'm really just launching this thread as a placeholder for examples of the kind of salt I referred to, but here's one example of a (in my view) bad decision that has left me with a two week suspension (motivating me to create this thread, obviously).
On page 15 of the thread, 'Fleet Carrier “Full Acct Transfers” has made it to Rackham’s Peak, HIP 58832. Join the occupation today in protest for full account transfers!', EdzUp posted, 'I would just release a server side patch that makes FC damageable and jump in a couple of battleships to move the blockades simple 🤣'.
I responded with 'Tiananmen it? The pragmatists on this board are really knocking it out of the park...'
On revisiting the board a short while later, I discovered that my post had been removed, and I had received an infraction point, for 'Religious discussion'. I posted on the thread that this had happened. Note, I didn't challenge the decision, I simply stated that it had happened, but again, I returned a short while later, and the moment I clicked on a link, found that I had been 'banned' until 'April 8' (so technically suspended, but at this rate, it's a matter of either becoming entirely supine in the face of moderator abuse of authority, or quickly get a longer, perhaps permanent block).
@elitedangerous, on Twitter, have failed to respond to this, and I doubt I'm the only one affected. Another poster, who had been derided by a mod for his negativity, is now a 'deleted member'. One of the posters, who can be relied upon to stick up for the management, suggested he had 'rage quit', but no-one seems to have considered the possibility that he had no say in his going.
If anyone from the boards sees this thread, and thinks I'm skipping over anything, they are quite welcome to post this opinion, as a member or a guest (if the latter, putting a name in the guest box, even if it's a new pseudonym, would be helpful, to avoid a potentially confusing conversation). I don't forbid challenges to my opinion, as a poster, or a mod (and board 'owner'). It remains to be seen if the ED moderators will have a problem with any of their posters who express critical views on a 'third party site'.
But here's an example to kick things off:
Ian Philips, Volunteer Moderator: Can I complain about having to read tripe?
And for the record, with regard to the protest, I agree with Erei:
"Don't ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence". Fdev financial reports comes soon (may, if I'm not mistaken). It will also be the 1year anniversary of Odyssey release.
Imagine what it would have been if they could have announced Odyssey release on console, and sell it BEFORE the end of the financial year. Especially due to the state of Fdev shares atm.
Imagine the news in the press "1year after the catastrophic release of Odyssey, Fdev announce it's now fixed and will be sold on all platform". Good press, good money, people come back, everyone's happy, shareholders celebrate by lighting another cigar and Braben ride into the sunsete.
Now, imagine Fdev executives, who think a year of fixing is enough, and ask Sony and Microsoft if they can sell it on console. And imagine them saying "no cert". Well, that's kinda bad, because now they are kinda f***. They can't put odyssey on console. So they are forced to announce that to the public, and work super hard to find a way to make a transfer possible.
I obviously don't have proof, but that makes a lot of sense. And would explain why not even a "no DLC" odyssey can be put on console. It can certainly run without the FPS breaking DLC features. I'm sure of it. The FPS loss would be minimal on a platform that run at what ? 60 ? 30fps ? You wouldn't see it I imagine.
A "no dlc odyssey" would have let them keep updating console (one client) while keeping the door open for a future dlc release.
For the last decade or so, I've played the latest version, 'Elite Dangerous', which has expanded into 'ED Horizons' (with planetary landings and ground vehicles), and 'ED Odyssey' (with on foot missions, borrowing from FPSs).
This has been a steep learning curve, and the discovery of Elite Dangerous Forums has helped with that greatly. Members provide the benefit of their own experience, which usually brings new players up to speed quickly, sparing them the frustration of having to make do with a lacklustre official playguide.
The one thing that does spoil enjoyment of the forum for many members, though, is the moderation, which follows the model for other, unfriendly, sites, in having moderators who make snap decisions with little regard for the actual forum rules, but worse than that, then treat any questioning of those decisions as further violations, often with lashings of salt directed towards the 'offender'.
I'm really just launching this thread as a placeholder for examples of the kind of salt I referred to, but here's one example of a (in my view) bad decision that has left me with a two week suspension (motivating me to create this thread, obviously).
On page 15 of the thread, 'Fleet Carrier “Full Acct Transfers” has made it to Rackham’s Peak, HIP 58832. Join the occupation today in protest for full account transfers!', EdzUp posted, 'I would just release a server side patch that makes FC damageable and jump in a couple of battleships to move the blockades simple 🤣'.
I responded with 'Tiananmen it? The pragmatists on this board are really knocking it out of the park...'
On revisiting the board a short while later, I discovered that my post had been removed, and I had received an infraction point, for 'Religious discussion'. I posted on the thread that this had happened. Note, I didn't challenge the decision, I simply stated that it had happened, but again, I returned a short while later, and the moment I clicked on a link, found that I had been 'banned' until 'April 8' (so technically suspended, but at this rate, it's a matter of either becoming entirely supine in the face of moderator abuse of authority, or quickly get a longer, perhaps permanent block).
@elitedangerous, on Twitter, have failed to respond to this, and I doubt I'm the only one affected. Another poster, who had been derided by a mod for his negativity, is now a 'deleted member'. One of the posters, who can be relied upon to stick up for the management, suggested he had 'rage quit', but no-one seems to have considered the possibility that he had no say in his going.
If anyone from the boards sees this thread, and thinks I'm skipping over anything, they are quite welcome to post this opinion, as a member or a guest (if the latter, putting a name in the guest box, even if it's a new pseudonym, would be helpful, to avoid a potentially confusing conversation). I don't forbid challenges to my opinion, as a poster, or a mod (and board 'owner'). It remains to be seen if the ED moderators will have a problem with any of their posters who express critical views on a 'third party site'.
But here's an example to kick things off:
Ian Philips, Volunteer Moderator: Can I complain about having to read tripe?
And for the record, with regard to the protest, I agree with Erei:
"Don't ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence". Fdev financial reports comes soon (may, if I'm not mistaken). It will also be the 1year anniversary of Odyssey release.
Imagine what it would have been if they could have announced Odyssey release on console, and sell it BEFORE the end of the financial year. Especially due to the state of Fdev shares atm.
Imagine the news in the press "1year after the catastrophic release of Odyssey, Fdev announce it's now fixed and will be sold on all platform". Good press, good money, people come back, everyone's happy, shareholders celebrate by lighting another cigar and Braben ride into the sunsete.
Now, imagine Fdev executives, who think a year of fixing is enough, and ask Sony and Microsoft if they can sell it on console. And imagine them saying "no cert". Well, that's kinda bad, because now they are kinda f***. They can't put odyssey on console. So they are forced to announce that to the public, and work super hard to find a way to make a transfer possible.
I obviously don't have proof, but that makes a lot of sense. And would explain why not even a "no DLC" odyssey can be put on console. It can certainly run without the FPS breaking DLC features. I'm sure of it. The FPS loss would be minimal on a platform that run at what ? 60 ? 30fps ? You wouldn't see it I imagine.
A "no dlc odyssey" would have let them keep updating console (one client) while keeping the door open for a future dlc release.