Hello all.
So here we are. WP, the new community. And I find myself posting in the section that serves as the ultimate judge to the merit of any serious video game community site: THE STRATEGY FORUM. /s
It seems that the creators of our new sandbox have chosen to take Reddit's free love, nudist, acid abusing, self moderation approach to the forum; as opposed to TL's despotic, corporatist, iron-fisted , elitist approach.
I have no opinion one way or the other on that.
What I do have an opinion on is that the bnet strategy forum sucks ass. There is not only a lack of moderation (hierarchical, self, or otherwise), but there is also what a find more troubling: a lack of pride.
So what I propose is that as a community, we agree to only acknowledge and/or upvote strategy threads that are worthwhile.
Theory crafting threads should have:
- Replays
- Evidence (a ton if replays are unavailable)
Guide threads should have:
- Replays
- A statement of credentials (a silver players guide is definitely worthwhile, but what will work in silver league may or may not work higher up)
- Evidence
- A sufficient sample size (just because it worked once doesn't mean it will work again)
tl;dr upvote good shit.
But yeah, I don't know about you guys, but I'm excited as fuck about WP. I really want to see it flourish, but it's up to us to make sure that the Strategy Forum isn't overrun with bullshit. WE KNOW WHAT CAN BECOME OF A FORUM WITH NO FUCKING PRIDE.
Peace! -Tre
A+ post.
We plan to introduce both some features and guidelines to ensure that the strategy forum is as quality as possible, including enforced tagging and mandatory replay uploading to keep it as high quality as possible. We don't want it to just be any strategy forum, we want it to be the strategy forum, and would love to see some suggestions in this thread about how we can do that.
16and mandatory replay uploading to keep it as high quality as possible. by FearGorm
Err. I don't know about that. Replays are not essential to all kinds of strategy threads. Say for example that someone writes a post about how to improve your macro. Should they be forced to post a replay saying "ok, this replay has some good macro.", even if that is not the central point of their post?
I'd rather just see that bad threads dissapear due to downvotes, and that good threads stay, and then let the community decide what constitutes a bad thread.
2and mandatory replay uploading to keep it as high quality as possible. by FearGorm
Err. I don't know about that. Replays are not essential to all kinds of strategy threads. Say for example that someone writes a post about how to improve your macro. Should they be forced to post a replay saying "ok, this replay has some good macro.", even if that is not the central point of their post?
I'd rather just see that bad threads dissapear due to downvotes, and that good threads stay, and then let the community decide what constitutes a bad thread. by Red
I think it's a good idea to have a balance between the two.methods of moderation. While we shouldn't enforce replays, but tagging should definitely be a requirement. It's also important to have some guidelines that people can see before posting a new thread to the forum. The rest can be taken care of by karma.
1and mandatory replay uploading to keep it as high quality as possible. by FearGorm
Err. I don't know about that. Replays are not essential to all kinds of strategy threads. Say for example that someone writes a post about how to improve your macro. Should they be forced to post a replay saying "ok, this replay has some good macro.", even if that is not the central point of their post?
I'd rather just see that bad threads dissapear due to downvotes, and that good threads stay, and then let the community decide what constitutes a bad thread. by Red I think it's a good idea to have a balance between the two.methods of moderation. While we shouldn't enforce replays, but tagging should definitely be a requirement. It's also important to have some guidelines that people can see before posting a new thread to the forum. The rest can be taken care of by karma.
by XMO
It's not explicit if FearGorm means it has to be a pro tournament replay. I hope not because new ideas would be impossible to introduce. As far as it being 'any' replay, it's no big deal to up load a personal replay to say SC2Replayed.com. There really isn't any excuse not to. If your testing something out, your going to have a replay of it. To me, it's the scientific method in action. Your hypothesis isn't good enough. Show me your lab results so I can try to duplicate or improve upon them. I don't even care if it is 'wrong.' If the idea seems sound, it's probably worth refining the strategy. I'm not a fan of "tell me." I rather you "show me." You can tell me all day but I'll believe it when I see it.
Take a gander at Day[9]'s Steal This Build featuring Liquid Tyler's PvP build. In it, he shows a replay of him just figuring out the mineral loss of one probe scouting. He claims he spent 20 hours refining the build. How much you want to bet he has a reply for every hypothesis he tested related to that build?If you go through the same process you will too. If you don't, nobody should put much stock in your unproven idea. You already have the replays! Upload them!
tl:dr: It's too easy to upload a replay showing your idea in action and it's too lazy not to.
1I would agree that perhaps having a mandatory replay attachment is a bit too far for the entire strategy section, but what if the strategy section is split into two parts: one that is about general discussion and theorycrafting and another that is for replay discussion or replay proof of a specific strategy. I would agree that not all strategy discussions need visual proof via a replay, but I would really encourage a replay always be attached when it is viable to do so.
1Not gonna lie I just stumbled upon this site and figured it was just a TL clone until I read this post. I think if we all keep this kind of moderation in mind then we can all see WP flourish. Great post!
6Honestly, I think this approach is way way better than Teamliquid; I don't want to scour through a million shitty comments to find something of value, or even good threads at that matter, I like that the community decides what's valuable and what's not. I can't stand the way TL organized their content. So, yeah. :D
5Honestly, I think this approach is way way better than Teamliquid; I don't want to scour through a million shitty comments to find something of value, or even good threads at that matter, I like that the community decides what's valuable and what's not. I can't stand the way TL organized their content. So, yeah. :D by ggnewbz
+1 agreed
4Agreed! I just don't want to see another TL. If you don't like what someone posts, DON'T REPLY the thread will die on it's own. TL is like Hitler youth, seriously.
4I know people very rarely actually obey voting guidelines when votes are private but on the subject of moderation I would like to see something similar to the reddiquite section on Reddit that tells you to vote on what's contributing to the conversation and not to down-vote because you disagree.
At the moment I'm just up-voting what's good quality, well written and somewhat insightful.
Strategy section sounds pretty nice if it has the features FearGorm mentions.
3Sounds fantastic. Creating guidelines like these sounds like a great start. Just have to make sure everyone reads and abides by them.
2I honestly only decided to register on WP to keep up with tournaments and channels. TL will probably be my home for strategy threads for a long time, but who knows?
If every post is formatted similarly to what the OP outlined, I may switch over.
1I love the information that I obtain from /r/starcraft..but I have to sift through shit to find the diamonds the dog swallowed and pooped out. I hope well played will not become like this...it's already to a great start and far from this..so yes. QUALITY CONTROL.
1I love the information that I obtain from /r/starcraft..but I have to sift through shit to find the diamonds the dog swallowed and pooped out. I hope well played will not become like this...it's already to a great start and far from this..so yes. QUALITY CONTROL. by insidethesun
I think that is mostly because r/starcraft isn't devided into sections. I'm sure we'll be able to pull off voting up quality posts without that many rules regarding their content.
I'd like to keep things grass roots in here. ;)
2It''l be interesting to see how this site plays out. It's true that maybe TL's moderation staff is a little wack, but is it for the better? We sure don't need another B.NET forum.
1
Upvoted for good shit.
25Apr 6th 2011 2:29 AM