Posted by mamxet on 8/21/2017 11:47:00 AM (view original):
positive action to communicate with users and to make even small improvements (e.g, considering list fix) would improve tone and usefullness of forums, energize users in positive directions.

One or two small wins in the near future would be major.

I'm rooting for seble, I hope he has time for non-HR work in the coming weeks.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 12:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mamxet on 8/21/2017 11:47:00 AM (view original):
positive action to communicate with users and to make even small improvements (e.g, considering list fix) would improve tone and usefullness of forums, energize users in positive directions.

One should keep in mind that they didn't buy HD. They bought the whole deal. HD is not the only game where improvements are requested. Although, honestly, HD is the hotbed for complaints.

One would expect that they would put their resources into the games with the most revenue.

If a game generates more complaints than revenue (real and potential), it will get back burnered.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:35:00 AM (view original):
rogleo seems to think users actually using the site is a bad thing. My guess is SportsHub might feel differently.

Hard to see how "users" must include trolls that do not actually play. Those are usernames maintained for the sole purpose of disruption.

Seems pretty clear...you don't actually play, then why are you posting?

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Still LOL-y.

Alienating any user is poor business sense. But, yes, the forums could be improved. Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense. WHAT they're posting matters. I'd start in this thread. You have plenty of negativity about the change and seble himself. From "users" with no teams. Start there. Who cares is spud posted under his alias? Block him. Block me. This isn't a safe space for snowflakes. It's a somewhat public forum.

How much can you contradict yourself!!!

You are for viewpoint censorship, but pro-alias abuse. Folks that cannot handle alias abuse are snowflakes, but you are concerned about censoring "what" people are posting?!

If you are not playing, then you aren't a current user entitled to post. If you are playing, then you will have games played and will be able to continue posting. Simple.

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Still LOL-y.

Alienating any user is poor business sense. But, yes, the forums could be improved. Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense. WHAT they're posting matters. I'd start in this thread. You have plenty of negativity about the change and seble himself. From "users" with no teams. Start there. Who cares is spud posted under his alias? Block him. Block me. This isn't a safe space for snowflakes. It's a somewhat public forum.

How much can you contradict yourself!!!

You are for viewpoint censorship, but pro-alias abuse. Folks that cannot handle alias abuse are snowflakes, but you are concerned about censoring "what" people are posting?!

If you are not playing, then you aren't a current user entitled to post. If you are playing, then you will have games played and will be able to continue posting. Simple.

Translation - do whatever you want... unless MikeT doesn't like it.

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Still LOL-y.

Alienating any user is poor business sense. But, yes, the forums could be improved. Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense. WHAT they're posting matters. I'd start in this thread. You have plenty of negativity about the change and seble himself. From "users" with no teams. Start there. Who cares is spud posted under his alias? Block him. Block me. This isn't a safe space for snowflakes. It's a somewhat public forum.

How much can you contradict yourself!!!

You are for viewpoint censorship, but pro-alias abuse. Folks that cannot handle alias abuse are snowflakes, but you are concerned about censoring "what" people are posting?!

If you are not playing, then you aren't a current user entitled to post. If you are playing, then you will have games played and will be able to continue posting. Simple.

Didn't you also suggest that the number of posts should be limited to 25 over the number of games you have played?

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Still LOL-y.

Alienating any user is poor business sense. But, yes, the forums could be improved. Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense. WHAT they're posting matters. I'd start in this thread. You have plenty of negativity about the change and seble himself. From "users" with no teams. Start there. Who cares is spud posted under his alias? Block him. Block me. This isn't a safe space for snowflakes. It's a somewhat public forum.

How much can you contradict yourself!!!

You are for viewpoint censorship, but pro-alias abuse. Folks that cannot handle alias abuse are snowflakes, but you are concerned about censoring "what" people are posting?!

If you are not playing, then you aren't a current user entitled to post. If you are playing, then you will have games played and will be able to continue posting. Simple.

Sigh.

1. We KNOW new users aren't flowing in. A reasonable time to re-up is fine. 30 days, 60 days, whatever. But removing a user from the "rotation" so speak, in all likelihood removes a potential returnee. That said, if a user with no teams is being abusive to other users or **** talking the games itself, remove his posting rights immediately instead of the 30/60/90 day waiting period. I'm sure that $4.95 introductory price will be a deterrent from signing up to resume the same behavior(sarcasm).

2. All users can be blocked if they are simply annoying. Block them. The words behind the block won't harm you any more, or less, than the ones you can't help but read. And, if they're being abusive to others or the game, remove their posting rights. But don't let every snowflake dictate what can be posted. Me saying "Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense" is not abusive. It's a differing opinion. Even saying "Sweating the forums while there are so many other things that need attention is stupid" is not abusive.

There is no contradiction. I've complained about colonels and kcsundevil because they were **** talking the game and had no teams. I've also said there's no place in the forums for mully or lakvin because their only contributions are "You suck" or "The game sucks". They have teams but are "quitting when credits run out."

All that said, I spent more time addressing your terrible idea than SportsHub should spend on addressing the forums. The site needs users not ways to restrict users.

"Don't let every snowflake dictate what can be posted"

Pretty funny coming from the most thin skinned poster on here.

Posted by tecwrg on 8/21/2017 7:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Still LOL-y.

Alienating any user is poor business sense. But, yes, the forums could be improved. Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense. WHAT they're posting matters. I'd start in this thread. You have plenty of negativity about the change and seble himself. From "users" with no teams. Start there. Who cares is spud posted under his alias? Block him. Block me. This isn't a safe space for snowflakes. It's a somewhat public forum.

How much can you contradict yourself!!!

You are for viewpoint censorship, but pro-alias abuse. Folks that cannot handle alias abuse are snowflakes, but you are concerned about censoring "what" people are posting?!

If you are not playing, then you aren't a current user entitled to post. If you are playing, then you will have games played and will be able to continue posting. Simple.

Didn't you also suggest that the number of posts should be limited to 25 over the number of games you have played?

Sure, the number above games played could be more or less, but that isn't censorship, it is simply limiting the use of the forums to actual users.

That limits abuse, not opinion. Why should the forums be subject to constant trolling?

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 7:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Still LOL-y.

Alienating any user is poor business sense. But, yes, the forums could be improved. Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense. WHAT they're posting matters. I'd start in this thread. You have plenty of negativity about the change and seble himself. From "users" with no teams. Start there. Who cares is spud posted under his alias? Block him. Block me. This isn't a safe space for snowflakes. It's a somewhat public forum.

How much can you contradict yourself!!!

You are for viewpoint censorship, but pro-alias abuse. Folks that cannot handle alias abuse are snowflakes, but you are concerned about censoring "what" people are posting?!

If you are not playing, then you aren't a current user entitled to post. If you are playing, then you will have games played and will be able to continue posting. Simple.

Sigh.

1. We KNOW new users aren't flowing in. A reasonable time to re-up is fine. 30 days, 60 days, whatever. But removing a user from the "rotation" so speak, in all likelihood removes a potential returnee. That said, if a user with no teams is being abusive to other users or **** talking the games itself, remove his posting rights immediately instead of the 30/60/90 day waiting period. I'm sure that $4.95 introductory price will be a deterrent from signing up to resume the same behavior(sarcasm).

2. All users can be blocked if they are simply annoying. Block them. The words behind the block won't harm you any more, or less, than the ones you can't help but read. And, if they're being abusive to others or the game, remove their posting rights. But don't let every snowflake dictate what can be posted. Me saying "Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense" is not abusive. It's a differing opinion. Even saying "Sweating the forums while there are so many other things that need attention is stupid" is not abusive.

There is no contradiction. I've complained about colonels and kcsundevil because they were **** talking the game and had no teams. I've also said there's no place in the forums for mully or lakvin because their only contributions are "You suck" or "The game sucks". They have teams but are "quitting when credits run out."

All that said, I spent more time addressing your terrible idea than SportsHub should spend on addressing the forums. The site needs users not ways to restrict users.

Right. You want folks banned when their opinions disagree with yours or when they post "negative" opinions about the state of the game.

Like a sedition act...you may post anything you like as long as it agrees with the preferences of the moderator or maybe just the most vocal trolls. However, those are not "users" of the game!

The forums have been filled with abusive trolling to the detriment of the game, but it's completely antithetical to an open forum to say "you may only express positive thoughts.". It is not antithetical to that to say, this forum is not open to everyone, it's only open to people with actual investment in the game. $4.95 or otherwise. Your time, actually playing, is undoubtedly...well...for most of us...way more valuable than the money spent playing.

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 9:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 8/21/2017 7:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Still LOL-y.

Alienating any user is poor business sense. But, yes, the forums could be improved. Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense. WHAT they're posting matters. I'd start in this thread. You have plenty of negativity about the change and seble himself. From "users" with no teams. Start there. Who cares is spud posted under his alias? Block him. Block me. This isn't a safe space for snowflakes. It's a somewhat public forum.

How much can you contradict yourself!!!

You are for viewpoint censorship, but pro-alias abuse. Folks that cannot handle alias abuse are snowflakes, but you are concerned about censoring "what" people are posting?!

If you are not playing, then you aren't a current user entitled to post. If you are playing, then you will have games played and will be able to continue posting. Simple.

Didn't you also suggest that the number of posts should be limited to 25 over the number of games you have played?

Sure, the number above games played could be more or less, but that isn't censorship, it is simply limiting the use of the forums to actual users.

That limits abuse, not opinion. Why should the forums be subject to constant trolling?

By imposing an arbitrary limit on posting, you're essentially shutting people up.

Let's say you've reached your limit, and you're in that dead period at the end of the season where you're not playing games. You're now shut out from the forums.

How is that a good thing?

Posted by tecwrg on 8/21/2017 9:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 9:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 8/21/2017 7:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/21/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Still LOL-y.

Alienating any user is poor business sense. But, yes, the forums could be improved. Worrying about volume or who's posting is nonsense. WHAT they're posting matters. I'd start in this thread. You have plenty of negativity about the change and seble himself. From "users" with no teams. Start there. Who cares is spud posted under his alias? Block him. Block me. This isn't a safe space for snowflakes. It's a somewhat public forum.

How much can you contradict yourself!!!

You are for viewpoint censorship, but pro-alias abuse. Folks that cannot handle alias abuse are snowflakes, but you are concerned about censoring "what" people are posting?!

If you are not playing, then you aren't a current user entitled to post. If you are playing, then you will have games played and will be able to continue posting. Simple.

Didn't you also suggest that the number of posts should be limited to 25 over the number of games you have played?

Sure, the number above games played could be more or less, but that isn't censorship, it is simply limiting the use of the forums to actual users.

That limits abuse, not opinion. Why should the forums be subject to constant trolling?

By imposing an arbitrary limit on posting, you're essentially shutting people up.

Let's say you've reached your limit, and you're in that dead period at the end of the season where you're not playing games. You're now shut out from the forums.

How is that a good thing?

What number would satisfy your concern? 100 over? 200 over? There are several folks that toech the forums with bile that either have no team or have hundreds or even thousands more posts than games played. Have you ever considered whether that might make other users disinterested in continuing posting?

Every site has this problem now, but this isn't twitter. You are either playing or not!

BTW, if someone is that urgent to make 1000s of posts, pay for the privilege. $0.05 each above the limit. Even better.

Posted by rogelio on 8/21/2017 9:49:00 PM (view original):
BTW, if someone is that urgent to make 1000s of posts, pay for the privilege. $0.05 each above the limit. Even better.

Wtf lol

No one would do that