Forum:Evalutation of Chat's current state

Forums: Index → War Room → Evalutation of Chat's current state

Hello CoD wiki people. I'm here to discuss something that's been on my mind for a while now, and that is the current state of the chat. As most of you know, I'm a rather laid back admin, letting rule breaks slip often...if they're by the regulars. I joke kick certain users on occassion, and I usually partake in particular discussion that is certainly not appropriate for the chat at all. My views on the status of this have changed. About a half a year ago, I would completely just say to abandon the rules and let people have fun, but now my opinion has changed. Chat is a lot like IRC, which itself isn't a bad thing. The bad thing is the fact we're too laid back, and certain behaviors are the norm, such as offensive jokes (racism, sexism, disasters and controverisal topics), talking about NSFW things (references to porn, making excessive detailed innnuendos, etc), and blatant, extreme amounts of UTP being broken. An example of such things can be seen here:

8:05 Azuris do some porn for the wiki
that will get us views
8:05 YellowLucario Now we're fucking talking
8:05 N7 me and kim k sex tape and i'll write cod wiki on my ass8:05 Azuris n7 i like it
8:05 N7 i should probably point out im going out in like 15 mins and am slightly refereshed
8:06 Azuris except her ass will be in the way
8:06 YellowLucario N7 take a banner down to Havant v Preston on Monday night
it's live on global TV
8:06 N7 my dad works in havant
8:06 Damac1214 Why don't we just film someone jacking off in front of a camera for ten minutes and at the end he just whispers CoD Wiki
8:06 N7 im 500lb azuris
8:06 Azuris oic
8:06 N7 im on it damac
8:06 Azuris well thats a lot of canvas
8:06 N7 NO I GOT IT DAMAC
what about we film this guy jackin off
and like
8:06 Azuris how about we draw a life size picture of kevin spacey on it too
8:06 N7 u think he watchin porn
then it turns out
he browsin cod wiki
8:07 YellowLucario HAHAHAHAHA
8:07 N7 "call of doot wiki: better than porn"
yah yah yah i am lorde
8:07 Damac1214 ^
You are now away.
8:08 N7 so whats goin on in cod wiki land
does it still suck

This is all good between a few people in MultiPM or something, but this isn't the case. There are users who are not comfortable with such topics, and also importantly, it really, really casts out new users. A new user joins, and they see discussion about drugs/sex, and in general something that is awkward and uncomfortable to walk in on to a chat when you're a new user. Firt impressions are important, and a lot of users probably choose to rarely ever come back, if ever again. Another important thing to note is that if a user joins, and is not intimdated/creeped out by the topic, and they try joining in, they'd most likely get banned themselves. And we all know how much drama that would cause. Because our chat is so less active than it used to be, a lot of users (previously including myself) feel "the hell with the rules, the wiki is dead". To be honest, the reason some have this mindset to even some degree is the reason why the wiki is becoming less and less active, especially chat-wise. So I propose that the rules get reinstated, for the benefit of the chat. No more discussion of the above topics, and if a user, even a regular, popular user, breaks these rules, they will get kicked and banned, just like before. No more NSFW conversations, no more bashing other users, (Though I wouldn't care if it was a little joke every once in a while, e.g. jokingly calling another user something like a "loser", as long it's clear they're joking.) no more offensive jokes, and no more joke kicks. I'm not trying to sound like a no-fun bad guy here, you all know damn well that this is not something I'd usually propose. But I feel we've all taken it too far, and it's damaged our chat. I just ask for us to be more civil, and more appropriate. I don't think it's too hard, there's tons of discussion. Music, games, whatever. It's not too hard, and if it is hard, then that's how sad we are. A chat where talking about such things is normal and accpetable, and without if, there's nothing to talk about? That's pathetic in my eyes. Besides, if we don't do this soon, it'll be too late. With AW just released, we should get at least a few new users, which means this is great time to try and turn everything around for the better. Give me shit if you want, I'm just stating how I feel about this. It needed to be said.

Opinions below, as usual. Madnessfan34537 http://i.imgur.com/lL5xjBH.png 21:03, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Well, last night was certainly one of the best nights we've had on chat in a long time, and there's no arguing that. I've honestly never laughed so much, because y'know, that's my type of humour? And of course if the chat isn't funny and becomes too strict then obviously it's going to go stale and people are going to refrain from going on there to discuss matters with people. That's common sense. But definitely, I've seen some awful things on chat that have slid, including plenty of 9/11 jokes (which I always react badly to) and of course the ruling on really bad jokes needs to be made stricter. We really need to find the right balance for what the majority want without everything going absolutely mental.

Chat definitely needs to be more civil, as I've literally just picked up on. Chat can definitely be improved and if we as a wiki feel that making it more civil will make it better, then I'm all ears to these proposals. However I feel we have bonded as a community partially due to our offensive nature, especially the likes of N7 (who has recently returned to the chat) and to a lesser extent myself, who often post reasonably funny things that may be seen as offensive. I'm certain that even if we do make the chat a bit stricter, it will be for the better even though it may not be as funny, we do have to keep new members welcome and Madness is 100% right. Imagine a 13 year old joining chat for the first time, looking for information and bang, he sees a group of us talking about what porn film we should make next. It just isn't going to work, and IIRC somebody new joined but left without barely talking. That may have been the case unfortunately.

I know this probably made very little sense to you, but the bottom line is that we need to find the perfect balance guys. Keep chat funny, but be welcoming and please for the love of god let's not go overboard if we can help it.

I also agree with Firebird-'s comments. But hey, the rule for Wikia is that you have to be only 13... YELLOWLUCARIO ^TALK  21:33, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

We have gotten used to some users behaviour, and that's half the problem. We know what N7's behaviour is like, and for a while we simply left it be. But after time it got to a level where we were receiving more complaints than praise. Yes some users act in a certain way, but if we allow it to continue for too long without doing anything it spreads, and becomes the norm. By the time N7 got a ban for his behaviour it caused such a drama people tried to decrat me just for doing my job of enforcing our policies and listening to complaints. I understand people have their fun sometimes, and for the most part, I try to let it slide because it never really gets too bad. But we also need to understand if we keep going the way we're going we're going to have more users doing things that upset the majority than good users that actually care about the Wiki. Furthermore, if anyone outside the wiki saw that transcript how would it look on us? Sure some people would find it funny, but would they think we look professional? And how would it make our chat look? THe behaviour of our users is paramount, because it reflects us a whole. I know I have a reputation of being "overly strict", but that's just because I do my best to keep up with following policy, regardless of whom breaks the policy, or for what reason. I would have a made a forum like this myself, were I not worried that people would simply dismiss it as me being overly strict. I'm aware of what people think of me, and I know what I can and can't do because of it. Giving out warnings to some people actually takes asking users for back up because sometimes people react aggressively, or their friends try to defend them. What we need to do is look at where we're going, and look at where we cam from, see the issue, and return to what we had. If we keep goign the way we are, I fear we risk losing users, in fact some users seem to spend more time PMing me then talking in chat that they find it that uncomfortable, and some users who sued to be regulars, just don't seem to join any more. And if a user as laid back as Madnessfan has seen this as an issue, it's clear sign something is wrong.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

21:46, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Well, this is a chat in the wiki about a 18+ rated game. I think we are mature enough to be free and have such NSFW conversations, but I just think they happen too often. I've seen new users back out because of the topic in chat, no wonder it's slower than it was an year ago. We could work on a policy limiting these conversations, maybe?  FireBird-_{Pinkie Pie!}  21:25, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

The rating is also dependant on area. It's R16 in NZ and Wikia has a base age requirement of 13. Meaning maybe limiting around to R15/16? Rift Cyra Puppysmiles 21:28, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

That's what I mean. We can have these convos sometimes, and I should've noted that in my proposal. But it's just that it happens so often. Madnessfan34537 http://i.imgur.com/lL5xjBH.png 21:34, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

We might be an 18+ rated game Wiki, but that isn't an excuse for the crudeness we show in our behaviour. The Fallout Wiki used to use the exact same excuse for their behaviour all the time, and that behaviour was one of the reasons why I left. Just because the game we represent might be 18+ doesn't mean we can start talking about things such as that. I may be 21 at the stage of writing this, but that doesn't mean all I think about all day is porn and telling people to fuck off because it's funny. Age is irrelevant in the case of civility. I've had countless complaints in the past about the behaviour of users and the content being posted. And we've even lost users because of it. I do not believe the 18+ excuse works. Just because we represent an 12+ game means nothing. We're allowed to swear, but overdoing it ends in a block. A game rated 18 may contain nudity, but posting nudity is a violation of ToS. The age rating of the game we represent is not an indication of how we should act or what is acceptable. What is acceptable is acting in a manner where everyone is happy, and right now, everyone is not happy.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

21:35, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Not to mention CoD is an 18+ game for violence, not sexual content. There is a pretty significant difference, especially for most Americans. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 21:44, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Penis/vagina/boob emblems disagree. And so does the kid telling me he's gonna have sex with my mom. --Azuris(talk) 22:04, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Because every penis/vagina/boob emblem is made by an American, and every kid who says he's going to have sex with my mom is an American too, and they are representative of everyone to live in the US. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 22:42, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

No, because every penis/vagina/boob emblem you see is sexual content, and is clearly as representative of the games that they were in to be made a common joke. This is why ESRB says "Includes online features that may expose players to unrated user-generated content" when it comes to multiplayer games - because they are unpredictable. --Azuris(talk) 23:03, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Ah. Okay. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 23:18, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

But, also bear in mind anyone using emblems like that are liable to be banned by the devs. It may be an 18+ game, but even they don't stand for nudity. The only reason it's so prevalent is because CoD doesn't stamp it out all that effectively.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

23:30, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Comment/Opinion - *ahem*

• "There are users who are no comfortable with such topics . . . casts out new users." - I would like to use this as an opportunity to say that this wiki is about a mature game, implying that most people that visit this wiki - and by extension, chat - are either adults or capable of handling themselves in an adult environment. Since everybody in the chat is either one of those two, they should be able to have an adult conversation (or use adult jokes) between themselves. If a new user were to feel intimidated or whatever, then odds are that they shouldn't be in the chat anyways.
• The reason some have this mindset . . . is the reason why the wiki is becoming less active." - Not at all! The fact of the matter is, when the wiki was most popular chat-wise is when most of the highly active users were between 14 and 16 years old. These users have grown up now, and are much busier in real life than they used to be. This also affects a majority of new users as well - it's hard to be active on the wiki when you have to manage school, work, and other crap as well.
• ". . . rules get re-instated."/other stuff - From what I can tell, the rules that the chat should follow are still being enforced. Which means that anything excessively breaking either UTP or DBAD will still result in either a kick or ban. Again, we are all (mostly) adults here - we can handle the occasional NSFW conversation or offensive jokes, because that's what adults do. These discussions are just a bit of fun, and have done nothing to "damage" our chat. With AW released, we still talk about the game. We still talk about music, or other games, or news, or whatever the hell we want - because we are adults.

I hope I've addressed most of your concerns. I'm not disregarding them or anything, but I'm just giving you a reason for most users' behavior and inactivity. --Azuris(talk) 21:54, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Like I stated in my above topic. Just because we represent an 18+ game doesn't give us free reign to to talk about anything remotely sexual. I may be 18+ myself, but that doesn't mean I want to see in chat a joke about someone whacking off. some adults make jokes like that, but not all adults. Hell, I've heard children make jokes about masturbation and sexually related things, because it's crude humour. It's fine on occasion and at the right level, it's what makes shows like Robot Chicken and Family guy so popular. But when you star taking it overboard, like in the above transcript, then it becomes an issue. Yes, some people may have found that funny, But I personally didn't, the entire conversation just made me cringe, and I couldn't have said anything to make it stop, because I'm pretty certain the people involved in the conversation would have just turned on me for being "too strict". The game may be rated M for mature, or 18+, but that's not a free pass to start dishing out insults, or openly joking about masturbation, or anything sexually related. Fallout wiki tried the same excuse, and while better now, I once witnessed someone in their chat comment how they enjoyed swallowing their own semen, and no one there did anything. Chat rules so far only seem to be getting used on the users that can be banned. Attempting to quote them against anoher chat mod or admin results in aggression much of the time. If you want an anecdote of that, just look at the tie I gave N7 a ban from chat. The game may be rated M for mature, and what we say in chat might also receive that same rating, but that doesn't mean what we are saying is mature.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

22:04, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

And I agree 75%. But, for the majority of people, sex jokes are funny - even poop jokes are fucking hilarious - because they are crude humor. While I understand being unamused by some of the discussions in chat - being involved in those conversations is not required by any means. Trying to severely limit what people can talk and joke about is more of a turn off than it is welcoming. People are different, and they have different senses of humor. Placing strict rules on some of the conversations that people have is like banning r/nsfw, or r/circlejerk - it's unnecessary. --Azuris(talk) 22:20, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Well, discussions like that would have likely been banned from the get go, it's only now they're prevalent. I don't mind a level of crude humour, in good doses, I can find it funny also. But the above transcript is a good show of what can happen when it goes too far. And from past experiences, simply asking it t stop, can sometimes lead to a hostile response for "ruining a joke". Tightening the rules does not necessarily mean removing all forms of crude humour, but, it will mean that on the occasions it does get out of hand we can step in with knowing we have our rules to back it up, or the people doing it, can look at what their doing, realise it might be going too far and pull back a bit. Also, While I'm not a Reddit user, I'm willing to believe r/nsfw and r/circlejerk are just thread types on Reddit, and can be avoided by users if that's not what they want. But we only have 1 chat, and if we tailor it for just the one type of user and tell others to simply avoid it, we risk losing users who feel at unease in the chat. The issue here is, we need to find a new middle ground, we need to make sure when it gets out of hand, we lower it, but at the same time, we need to make sure we aren't overly enforcing rules on the new users, because to be honest, if that convo listed above happened by new users, they would likely have been banned from chat. What we need is basically a complete reset to the chat, where we put everyone on the same level, and everyone gets the same treatment from policies, to ensure no one takes it too far, and we're not warning people that have yet to go far enough. I'm willing to let the odd crude joke slide, but we need to make sure that the jokes are not getting out of hand, or else we risk alienating people.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

22:35, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately with this issue there are two sides of the same coin. I agree that taking things too far (which is highly subjective anyways) can be uncomfortable for users, but if those users are in the minority then there shouldn't be that big of an issue at all. If it happens only on occasion than people can just ignore it if they so choose. Everybody on the chat is equal, but that doesn't mean that they are the same and should be treated the same regardless of their sense of humor and personality. That doesn't mean that you should be yelled at for stepping in and telling people to calm down if, say, an inappropriate conversation is actually interfering with a legitimate discussion - but the extent of punishment (or any other reaction) towards any inappropriate conversation is, and should be, highly situational and also carries the risk of alienating new and older users. --Azuris(talk) 22:55, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Since you've only just come back, you may not be aware of previous occurrences. Sometimes, simply asking a specific conversation to stop can lea in hostility. We should be at a stage where everyone is equal, and if someone feels uncomfortable they can ask it to stop, and they will, but we're not at that stage any longer. Right now, even asking users to stop a line of conversation can lead to hostility, since they may not want to stop, and others may back them up, causing whomever asked them to stop feel outnumbered, and there is little they can do. There have been a few times in the past this has happened, which is why now it happens less often. I understand banning people for forms of humour can be wrong, but the issue is there, that if we can't ask people to stop talking about something due to a feeling of unease, what can we do? I admit, a complete stomp down on everything will be a bigger hinderance than anything, but we ned to understand one of the reasons we're here, is because people simply can't ask others to change a subject when they feel at unease. And if this leads to simply ignoring what is going on, then many users may find themselves being more AFK than actually talking, at which stage, they may not see any point in joining chat. There was a brief time when I was like this (also chat was very laggy, and I couldn't maintain a PM without refreshing ever few lines), and if it can happen to myself, any user may be feeling this way. We need to go back to when a user could ask another user to drop a subject due to unease, adn the other users would respect that, rather than act aggressively towards said user.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

23:30, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

My main gripe with this forum is with "No more NSFW conversations, no more bashing other users, (Though I wouldn't care if it was a little joke every once in a while, e.g. jokingly calling another user something like a "loser", as long it's clear they're joking.) no more offensive jokes, and no more joke kicks." This proposition(?) comes off as a drastic attempt at turning chat into what it used to be like, what, a year or two ago? I've already explained my (and probably other peoples') absence. The point I'm trying to make is that, since our chat consists mainly of adult folk, we should be able to talk about what we want as long as it isn't legitimately going against our DBAD or UTP. If people in the chat go way too far, even those who are more seasoned users, then they should be warned. A kick should only be used if the warnings are ignored, and a ban should be an absolute last resort (unless of course it's a troll account or w/e - you know how this works). If people try and argue with you, even though you are simply enforcing the rules, then put on some gloves and slap some sense into them. However, strict regulations (and unnecessarily strict reactions) completely ruin the fun and personal nature of both the wiki and chat and is a huge turn off for wanting to stay and participate more as well. --Azuris(talk) 04:06, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

The reason the wiki has become less active is because we've made it a pain in the ass to actually Edit here with our plethora of draconian rules and less than user friendly policies. Saying porn or ass in chat has nothing to do with it. KλT 22:02, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

What rules are draconian and what policies are less than user friendly exactly? Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 22:42, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

I've discussed this in length in other forums so - Our image policy is so god damn complicated and strict, the fact that we block people for making (granted, a large number of mistakes) is absurd, and I've been opposed to it since it was put up into a forum. some of the other policies are moreso ignored by users now. Honestly a brunt of the problem is the wiki as whole. We've just generally become less open and friendly. Its an accumulation of small problems here and there that have really bogged us down. To go into it in greater details, and how to rectify that would have to be brought up in its own forum honestly. KλT 23:09, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

"the fact that we block people for making (granted, a large number of mistakes) is absurd" If they're making a large number of mistakes and have already received a verbal warning, that means the verbal warning didn't work and something stronger is needed. Raven's wing ^Talk23:14, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

What policies are ignored by users exactly Kat? And I don't see the problem of blocking users for making a large number of mistakes, especially when they don't appear to be learning from said mistakes. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 23:18, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

new users don't give a shit about policies, they don't care about message warnings because they don't read them. Instead of trying new ways to help people, we block them. All of these edits by new users are done in good faith, sure they may be shit but we have so many people here whom are quick to judge and block and make fun of why they don't know anything about policies or proper editing. This is a horrible attitude to have that both of you perpetrate by what you've both said. Its easy to write people off when you don't have a modicum of interest of who they are. This is a direct problem with our policies. And to really understand the issue, you have to forget that you're some awesome admin with tools. You need to think like someone who's just found this place, they want to help, and sure, they're not doing it right according to our policies. But instead of blocking people for fucking up, we should figure out better ways to tell them they're fucking up. Blocking people is too harsh for someone who might be a future contributor. Back when i first joined I made some stupid ass edits and i uploaded some crappy images, and if i we're blocked i'd probably say "fuck it" and never come back. People wont get invested if we're rude. And it should start by being nicer to people.

This place used to be a friendly, open, caring, empathetic and genuine place for people. Now its just policies, brutal rules and people here aren't nice to new users. I can't make you all see this, its quite honestly up to whomever's reading this to change their attitudes for the better and realize this. Like i said, its not just that one policy i mentioned. Its a plethora of smaller issues, and our current admin teams attitude to people which makes the wiki inhospitable. And if anyone wants to bother with a reply, please don't single out the image blocking thing, its a small issue but its not the sole reason for how the wiki is. KλT 23:46, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Blocking users for images is not that common. We commonly leave customised messages to help them get them right in the future, we tell them if they need help they can contact us. If they do not contact us, and they continue to do things wrong, there's little we can do. We can offer our hand to help these new users, but it's up to them to take it. Blocking people can well seem like it puts people off, but giving them warning after warning can also put people off editing if they just keep getting warnings. But something that strikes me in your comment is how you claim we should start being nicer to users, but you yourself have, quite recently, been criticised for over aggressive tendencies, and I have on more than one occasion seen you start an argument over personal matters. You seem to place much of the blame on our policies, but many of our policies are in place to ensure we treat other users kindly, and I've seen you insult Raven's Wing in the past over a minor incident, you got incredibly hostile towards myself, and other admins, after that instance with that joke forum, and in fact, just today I saw you get very agitated with Twig over a personal opinion regarding Skyrim. This is what this forum represents, the issue lies not in our polices, but in our users. We try to treat new users as kindly as we can, but if one had joined while you were arguing with Twig, how would that have looked? Comment's regarding your aggression have been made before, many of the times ignored, so I hope you can see that this forum aims to help that, if we can curb our behaviour in chat, then we can all maintain a much more friendly face in chat.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

00:34, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

I'm not quite understanding what you're saying Kat. So becasue new users don't read or follow policies and guidelines we shouldn't have them? We shouldn't ban new users after multiple warnings because they choose to not read or care about the policies or guidelines? We shouldn't have rules and regulations because some users may think they're hostile? None of that makes any sense. How users themselves act towards new users is a different story, but does related to the forum itself. The conversation that started this forum may scare off new users, as does the many other forms of jokes that may be seen as crude, offensive or in bad taste. Instead of ranting about our policies and ignoring questions, let's get back on topic. If you really have such an issue about our policies, take it up in another forum. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 00:45, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

I don't recall saying i was the sole light in a sea of darkness sam, and personally attacking me in a forum is a tad hypocritical when talking about treating people better. Don't act like you've never argued or have been a dick towards people. Ridicules. KλT 00:58, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

Can this petty feud stay out of the goddamn forums? And Kat, don't call someone "hypocritical" because you feel they've attacked you and just attack them right back. I read what Sam said and there was no attack in what he said, just him pointing out that even though you say that we should be nicer to new users, you don't follow your own advice. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 01:10, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

This is why the wiki is shit. KλT 01:11, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

I mean seriously, I've apologized for all the times I've made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. I've never in my life had people feel the need to constantly remind people of their mistakes. Its fucking vicious and mean. You guys are just mean. And ha, CoAZ you talk about me being hypocritical and then you lash out at me for a thought out comment on the wiki's problems. Paint me out to be a villain all you want, but go look in a mirror first. KλT 01:30, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

(Reset indent) After talking to some users, I do believe the section regarding Kat's behaviour was an attack on him. For that reason, I would like that line of debate ended, and not brought up again. If you want to continue talking about policies as this started, then you may, but I would like to stop responding to this particular line of debate for now.

Crazy sam10 • Talk

01:40, November 10, 2014 (UTC)

By definition, the chat is supposed to be a friendly environment to discuss various topics, but I do personally think some of it has gotten out of hand. It has been discussed above that the wiki is a mature (18+) environment and such topics can be discussed in moderation, but Wikia's policies allow users as young as 13 to use the chat. Knowing that there are technically Teen (13+) rated games in the franchise, we should respect any users who come here by not discussing adult content. These conversations will most likely have negative effects on the wiki towards newcomers, and will also paint a bad picture if trusted users are doing so. http://i.imgur.com/4XBy83R.pngAntiScootaTwo^talk  01:34, November 10, 2014 (UTC)