[Poll] Sticky Server Advertisements

[pro4never]

Originally Posted by turk55

Not every server bumps there threads but it doesn't necessarily mean that it is bad. is one of the best servers to play at currently and the OP last posted almost 5 months ago (page 3).

I'll mention this here because I brought up play conquer extensively when we first brought up the complaint with epvp admins...

Play conquer is not a single developer, it's a lot of them. Those developers are either former members of the epvp community who got sick of the forum and left, or developers that were never brought into the section in the first place due to its issues. I'm not saying that as a "omg we cant lose members", just explaining that it's a lot of very talented developers behind that project.

After launching their project, they posted it on epvp, got no traction, no visibility even though they actually complied with the advertisement rules, obeyed the no self bumping rule, etc and therefor never bothered to update the thread with information on their updates, never joined in the community in any way.


If there is any server currently online that deserves a sticky in the CO section and if there were ever developers that our section needed to be able to attract, it is PlayConquer.

[Spirited]

Originally Posted by turk55

Not every server bumps there threads but it doesn't necessarily mean that it is bad. is one of the best servers to play at currently and the OP last posted almost 5 months ago (page 3).

Just the other day, a member asked me for a good server since he couldn't find one. One good server was on the first page; the rest just ****. The problem is, it takes time to try a server. Our members won't spend enough time to find a server before making poor assumptions about our section, especially when they donate to servers which go out in a week. They're loosing both time and money. Having that separation for stickied servers will help immensely, and not just for developers.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to reward our developers for not posting a copy-paste server from some Egyptian board purposed with modifying that broken to **** 2010 Trinity source. We want our members to do well here, and we need our staff to actually be on our side for once to help as do that.

[MrSm!th]

Originally Posted by CptSky

If the conditions are objectives, it doesn't affect the net neutrality, no? What about a sticky linking to the servers respecting these conditions? It would be a kind of index...

That's actually what we have suggested as an alternative. That's a solution we support.

Originally Posted by pro4never

My complaint is that every time we make suggestions based on what applies to our section in particular the answer we get back is either

"that's not how it works in other sections"
"I didn't read your suggestion but think its a bad idea"

Well, you have certainly not been told that by us.

The excuse I was given is that epvp wants to archive every post and is a forum, not a top site... that excuse is absolute trash though when you're literally saying that threads which completely break the rules of the section, are spammed or are utterly irrelevant should never be removed.

Wait, what? We are not saying that threads which break the rules should not be removed. We are saying the exact opposite. In fact, we enabled the moderation queue just so that threads which violate our rules may be removed before reaching even one single member.

We are saying that we don't want to delete threads, just because the servers have gone offline. They may be closed, but there is no reason to delete them entirely. How can a good and active server be buried by closed threads? How do closed threads actually prevent you from seeing active threads that usually reside on the front page while closed threads disppear on the back pages?

but having the ability for their projects to attract attention is a good thing to foster further discussion and development outside of that particular subforum as well.

Which is something we do support.

Originally Posted by Spirited

If linking to advertisements through a stickied thread is permitted, why not just directly sticky threads? Why should a non-moderator be expected maintain and own something like that rather than the active moderator based on section rules (since there will always be an active moderator)? The board needs to own this, not one member. It seems like a lot of dancing around a non-issue if this is truly the case.

You even offered your help personally, so I don't see the problem.

[Spirited]

Originally Posted by MrSm!th

Which is something we do support.
You even offered your help personally, so I don't see the problem.

It's not my responsibility to take ownership of a thread like that. A moderator can't own a thread like that, as you said. Why put that on a member of the community? A member who will leave at some point, rather than any active moderator. Why not just have it be section rules that a moderator can enforce? Why so much redirection?

[MrSm!th]

It's not my responsibility to take ownership of a thread like that

No, it's not your responsibility, but you want the situation to change and you offered your help, so where's the problem? You even offered to help out as a moderator, so what is hindering you from just creating such a thread?

[Spirited]

Originally Posted by MrSm!th

No, it's not your responsibility, but you want the situation to change and you offered your help, so where's the problem? You even offered to help out as a moderator, so what is hindering you from just creating such a thread?

To help as a moderator of that section enforcing such rules (and that was a month ago I suggested that). It's not the responsibility of a member to do something as critical as section rule enforcement. It's a moderator's job. If we can't agree on that, then maybe we can compromise on a stickied thread that I maintain to start with, but look at the feedback this has gotten so far. Our section wants and needs this. It's no longer about what I suggested, but what everyone is suggesting.

[MrSm!th]

It's not the responsibility of a member to do something as critical as section rule enforcement.

We are not talking about section rule enforcement. How comes you always bring that up? A server top list is in no way related to section rules.

[pro4never]

Originally Posted by MrSm!th

Well, you have certainly not been told that by us.

I posted my full set of suggestions and my reply was (and I quote)

"First of all, I didn't read everything in here (let's be honest: it's just way too much), but I'm still confused what you're so upset about."

I want to be clear on my opinion here, I'm not angry. I'm just frustrated that every time I make a suggestion or think of a compromise I get either a wall of silence or people who wont even read my posts fully before explaining why I'm 'wrong'.


The reason the inactive servers not being deleted bothers me is that it reflects poorly on the community. I view it sort of like litter in a (potentially) nice neighborhood. Even if the thread is closed, it's still visible and makes the section ugly and hard to navigate for users.

If I had no clue about conquer private servers, was not a regular user of internet forums and came into our section I'd be faced with literally hundreds of threads filled with dead links, a couple threads with working links but filled with people arguing about if it was "literal aids" or "worthless egy scum".

The reason I'm very much for stickying threads with a VERY low barrier to entry (online over a week, at least some players online and meet the advertisement requirements for epvp) is that it encourages people to bother posting worthwhile servers on epvp and at the same time makes it easier for users to find servers actually worth playing. Expecting server owners to come to epvp, follow the rules, post their advertisement and also come back and bump it every week so it doesn't get burred in filth is a bit of a heavy expectation for the trickle of exposure they might get as a result.

[Spirited]

Originally Posted by MrSm!th

We are not talking about section rule enforcement. How comes you always bring that up? A server top list is in no way related to section rules.

If they're not rules, then who enforces these requirements? A member? Right now as a member, I can go to that section and make a thread that actually judges servers based on bias, and it would be stickied just like the last one was (and be just as ineffective). This needs to be taken seriously as a change to how that section is *structured* and how members interact with that structure. Separation between servers that actually try and servers which are spam. That's why we need stickies. That's why we need rules. It also helps with exactly what Chris said above.

What needs to happen:

• Moderation queue (Done and appreciated)
• Either:
  • Delete all existing closed threads and delete advertisements if the servers are permanently closed. Hide current advertisement section and move still active servers to a new advertisement section.
  • Or, sticky threads for servers that are online for two weeks, have 50+ online players, and comply with epvp rules. Two or three of our servers currently meet those requirements.

[Tarissuis]

Originally Posted by pro4never

I posted my full set of suggestions and my reply was (and I quote)

I want to be clear on my opinion here, I'm not angry. I'm just frustrated that every time I make a suggestion or think of a compromise I get either a wall of silence or people who wont even read my posts fully before explaining why I'm 'wrong'.

As this was my statement I guess I should answer:
I wasn't adressing you, I was adressing the complaint topic starter, and that should be clear as day a few passages into my post. So grabbing this quote out of its original content and forcing it onto the epvp staff as a whole is just wrong. If I offended you with that that introduction I'm sorry, I only meant to say that I was mainly referring to the post that started the whole thing off.


Anyway, let's get to it then:

Originally Posted by CptSky

[...] If the conditions are objective, it's hard to say that the moderators are biased. Stickiing servers with more than 100 active players, running for more than 4-6 months cannot be biased, and in the CO2 world, you'll eliminate 95% of the servers that are advertised here. [...]

Which denies the "perfect" project just because it's new, regardless of its playercounter or content. Can you honestly say that a server with 1k online players (just assuming here) and the greatest gameplay you have ever seen doesn't deserve to be pinned, just because it's only been out of a month? So instead there's a pinned project with 50 online ppl that has been online for a year. That seems highly inappropriate.

Originally Posted by turk55

Not every server bumps there threads but it doesn't necessarily mean that it is bad. is one of the best servers to play at currently and the OP last posted almost 5 months ago (page 3).

As I've already stated somewhere else why doesn't a member of this comunity just take action and post patchlogs of said server into its topic? There's no global rule against that and if there was a local one, you guys should overthink that one.

Originally Posted by pro4never

[...] After launching their project, they posted it on epvp, got no traction, no visibility even though they actually complied with the advertisement rules, obeyed the no self bumping rule, etc and therefor never bothered to update the thread with information on their updates, never joined in the community in any way.

Regarding the first part: You make it seem like they did something extraordinary, matching the epvp requirements should be the norm (and actually is now, after the implementation of mod approval).
If they refuse to join the community and actively approach people, polish their topic, ... I don't see why they deserve special treatment (and pin a topic they don't even seem to care enough about to update it).

Regards
one of the 4 mods sent by the administration to vote no and rate 1 star

[Super Aids]

To be honest there has been numerous attempts on these kind of threads and they all seem to die pretty fast.

[Thorev]

Originally Posted by Super Aids

To be honest there has been numerous attempts on these kind of threads and they all seem to die pretty fast.

But it's in pro4never's best interest not to let the thread die so he <redacted to prevent deletion>

[pro4never]

Originally Posted by Thorev

But it's in pro4never's best interest not to let the thread die so he <redacted to prevent deletion>

I get virtually 0 traffic from epvp, I'm actually the one arguing for alternatives to stickying as I understand it's not what the epvp staff wants.

Do you honestly feel that having hundreds of threads in the advertisement section for servers that no longer exist and have dead links is good for anyone in the co community? To logic behind archiving a bunch of dead links is rather ridiculous.

[Ultimation]

i want to know why Spirited still gets a say around here.

Originally Posted by Spirited

My problem isn't that you closed the thread, it's that you and other moderators believe you can accurately represent us. We have a different perspective than you do and had to deal with a lot more than you have just to develop here. You say you're open to suggestions and ideas, but then prohibit our section for speaking for themselves. We have a unanimous vote on "sticky advertisements" without the 4 moderators who voted on this thread. Can you honestly say you think you understand the entire picture? This section is dangerously close to collapsing all together if it hasn't already, so let our section's members discuss this topic. Not other moderators. Our members.

You are not a moderator on this forum, what gives you the right to tell other moderators to fuckoff? you say other moderators believe you can accurately represent us? US? you are not a moderator, You disowned us for your own forum. So don't try and be some speaker of the house.

PS Spirted. Don't reply with an essay when 2 lines will work, i won't read the essay.

inb4 this gets deleted: i have a right to express my opinion on here, like everyone else does, no its not flaming, its topic related.

[Thorev]

Originally Posted by pro4never

I get virtually 0 traffic from epvp, I'm actually the one arguing for alternatives to stickying as I understand it's not what the epvp staff wants.

Do you honestly feel that having hundreds of threads in the advertisement section for servers that no longer exist and have dead links is good for anyone in the co community? To logic behind archiving a bunch of dead links is rather ridiculous.

I call horseshit on zero traffic from epvp.
If true, no need for moderator tag, signature and semiweekly bumps of your own threads with "guys i told somebody to make me a garment for my server" to ensure most visibility.

As for cleaning up the section:
- Drop down menu
- Select All
- Unapprove Threads

Take out 2-3 threads and you are done.

No need for back-up mod fang to start the usual drama.