Contradictions in forum policies.

Hello, there is a strong emphasis on not having even vaguely similar topics for discussion. This is a great anti-spam detterent, but at the same time it also probably repels alot of discussions that may have otherwise developed, due to people not wanting to "research the forum" to find out if their is a previous thread SIMILAR to their topic.

Wanting to discuss a similar thread that was locked I realized that a system warning directly contradicts the policy about "duplicate threads".

It states; "Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 30 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic."

This system warning actually asks to consider starting a new topic, this is a contradiction to the anti-duplication policies of the website. Please change the main policy or the system warning, because this could easily cause confusion amongst users.

Please also consider being more lenient about posting similar threads, as it really can strangle creative idea making, and probably wards off a larger community that may have much less interest in doing historical forum research before being able to post a thread...this would also take a burdern off of the moderators. Just a suggestion.

THank you.

 

I agree with that. So many threads have been closed recently (ahem joneagle ahem). I would hate if this turned into one of those forums where every new thread gets locked.

 

First off, dead threads should remain dead. That's the reason for this "anti-spam" deterrent. It's not telling you NOT to post in these threads, it's telling you to think twice. So next time, before complaining about a "contradiction," you should think about the purpose and meaning of the words.

You also might take notice of the fact that threads are often closed because of discussion veering miles off topic or a dead horse being beaten in a clear attempt to boost posting counts.

I think the current moderators have done a great job of keeping the forums as clean as possible and it reflects in the relative success we're enjoying in a period where the news releases from Blizzard are incredibly low.

Of course, there's always the alternative of us adopting the policy that you've suggested. Users could simply post in whatever topic they like and respond to months-old topics that have no relevance to current information. That sounds like a lot of fun with inflated post counts and hundreds of active threads rather than a more manageable 50 or so. We'll constantly be discussing topics that have been hit from thousands of angles as new posters won't go through the effort of reading the previous posts in a thread. Not to mention the fact that we would need 10-15 moderators instead of 5 to handle the topic load.

Sure, your plan sounds great.

As for the threads that I've locked, I've only locked about 4 in the past week. Two of which were in the forum questions section and were answered. The other two topics fell in the above categories of irrelevant or beaten to death. I encourage the both of you to adopt your policy of posting in dead threads, and I assure you the topics will be immediately locked.

Thank you.

 

Yeah, I made a new topic about new news not long ago and it got locked because some other thread was talking about it 2 months ago and it wasnt comfirmed. Doesnt make sence moderators.

 

...Um. Yes. Yes it does. If there's already a thread about it, why make a new one? That's called spam and it's bad.

 

Just to add to what Jon has said (and in response to the fact that I think this topic was partially directed at me). While locking duplicate topics may in fact prevent some discussion most of the discussion that a duplicate topic will had has been said before. The Mothership is an excellent example of this, it has been discussed in at least 5 page+ threads and one at least being 10 page+, but if you actually look through the threads there is a massive amount of overlap because didn't look to see what has been said in the past. I am probably the most vehement defender of a super unit Mothership on this site but I will lock any new topic surrounding it without hesitation because it has been discussed so many time in so many threads. If you want to discuss what is the problem with bumping an old thread? That warning is just there to remind you, that you are in fact bumping an old thread, not to discourage the posting of new ideas.

The idea of a Zerg super unit is another example of a topic that has been discussed to death just looking at the first page of the Zerg board I count 4 threads surrounding that topic (2 of them already locked), why would need or better yet want a 5 thread on the same topic there is nothing stopping you from posting in an older thread and having the ideas more focused in one area instead of spread everywhere throughout the forum.

Also like Jon said it is a lot easier to moderate 50 10 page threads than 500 1 page threads, and the 50 10 page threads make the forum cleaner as well. Also the 50 10 page threads probably will have more creative ideas because there will be a lot less overlap because people are more likely to read 1 10 page thread than 10 1 page threads.

Finally, there is a partial connection to the shop system that is set up here. If a lot of duplicate topics were allowed it would allow for people to more easily abuse the system, which would ruin it for everyone else. 

P.S. If there is a thread that you think has been locked unfairly none of the mods have any problem listening if you send us a PM.

 

I am just going to repeat LK's P.S.

If you want a thread unlocked, tell someone. Seriously, do it.

 

Um, that is what we're supposed to be doing *glares at his peers*

I usually just merge duplicate topics into the appropriate topic and pretend it never happened.

 

I often do such a thing, but only when I actually find the duplicate topic, not when I receive a complaint.

I will try to do so more frequently if it is a help.

 

To follow up with what everybody has been saying:

This forum is a step above the others. We pride ourselves on being an up-to-date, sophisticated, and spam-free forum. This means that the website itself is cleaner, more regulated, and in general held to a higher standard. I know it sometimes is hard work to check if a topic has already been discussed, but honestly guys, don't be lazy. This forum is the BEST Starcraft II forum out there - and as a result has to look the part.

 

My personal experience is that the "duplicate topic" policy of locking threads can be over-generalized when it is applied. For example the mothership was/has been a very hot topic, but in its current build it has been changed relatively drastically. I made a post about a creative balanced method of how blackhole could be incorporated into a self-destruct mechanism for the mothership. I admit the thread was directly related to mothership, but the idea was creative and differentiated from other earlier topics on the mothership. Their is definitely a need to deter spam, and this is a great forum, but at the same time we shouldn't have to resurrect older threads to discuss in, especially in when the OP was based on an earlier version of the game for example, meaning although the topic is based on the same face value, the actual content of the discussion would be very different. I'm just thinking it might not hurt to be a bit more lenient. Spam = bad, but having to do research and then resurrect a multi-month old thread just so your new idea thread doesn't get locked...well thats just something I've been running into lately. Just some ideas, thanks for listening.

Prodigal.

 

Always nice ot hear from you Prodigal. Do you really want to know why your topic was locked? It was locked because the only thing that it was, was the fact it was yet another Moterhsip topic. It was not creative and differentiated from other earlier topics on the mothership. It wasn't even close. I spent less than 5 mintues using the search and looking at a couple of threads to tell you that. If you would like I will happily provide you with 20+ pages worth of stuff directly related to the Mothership, and atleast 5+ pages of disscussion surounding the Black Hole ability. We have not had any new information about the Mothership since Blizzcon, besides the fact the Mothership can now attack air again. Before you start preaching to others while don't you try following the brilliance of your own advice.

Also if you would like to debate the merits of certain threads being locked I would suggest you do it via PM, or if you would like to continue to use yourself as a public example I will more than happily direct you to posts dierectly stating some of the "new" ideas you think have been unjustly locked.

 

LordKerwyn, I was unable to find a thread about the Blackhole ability being used specifically as a distressed self-destruct last resort attack. This thread was made specifically to be constructive, please try to address the primary issue, instead of trying to discredit me in this regard. If you can find a thread about Blackhole as a self-destruct ability then I will stand corrected. Thank you,

Prodigal

 

Hey Prodigal,
Before I begin I'd like to thank you for having the courage to stand up and address us to say that you felt something was wrong with the forum. This is, unfortunately, one of the only ways we can get feedback from members, and it is appreciated in most cases.

That being said, what you need to understand is that, as niner said, we are one of the, if not the, highest ranked SC2 fansites available, and as such, we have a higher standard than usual that needs to be upheld. Keep in mind that Blizzard hasn't released impactful information in a long time, and as such we don't have as much traffic here as we usually do. Yet, even with the lessened traffic, there's still tons of members making tons of posts every day that need to be organized and presented in a friendly, inviting manner. You can picture what the forum is like, and how much more difficult it is to maintain order, when Blizzard actually does release information. As a result, I'm sure you can imagine how we would need to be very 'on-the-ball' regarding clutter in the forum. Hence why you will see threads locked and merged.

You are completely correct in saying that none of us could go out and find a thread pertaining to the Black Hole being used as a suicide ability. But I'm sure you'll agree upon further consideration that this discrepancy is far, far too specific. We can't green-light every thread with a minor difference saying "Well, what if Black Hole did [this]?", especially when you consider how many little details, abilities, units, stats, etc. are potentially involved in a game like Starcraft 2. So, to reduce clutter, we like all these threads to be grouped into a single one, referencing the Black Hole ability in general, or, if that itself is even to cluttered, the Mothership in general. This keeps the forums cleaner and enables people to find information much quicker.

I hope this clears things up. In the future, I encourage you to take a look around for a little bit before starting a new thread. Not only will it help us keep the forum free of clutter, but it will help you as well, as you will likely find additional tidbits of information floating around the brains of our members that will help to shape and mold your own ideas.

Have a good one.

 

Bizarro_Paragon hit it on the dot.

In other words, we are locking duplicate topics. While your Black Hole thought was a new idea Prodigal, it still belonged in the Black Hole topic.

Edit - Nevermind, your idea wasn't new either (post below this one). Point still stands for similar cases.

 

IT WAS NOT A NEW IDEA. Here is a link to an exact post where I have seen it before http://www.starcraft2forum.org/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=0&topic=1980.msg51065#msg51065

Also check out that threads title "POLL: BlackHole Suggestion" And thats not even mentioning the 30+ page thread disscussing the Mothership prior to Blizzcon or the 10+ page thread disscussing it after the changes at Blizzcon. Would you like any other proof? Oh, and by the way I am addressing the topic, I am doing so by discrediting your agruments, since I have already responded to your general post. Do you have any other proof? If you do please post it all at once so I can either discredit it al at once or on the off chance I can't, unlock the topics that were "unjustly" locked because god forbid someone may make a mistake.

 

There aren't many new ideas around here actually. Most of the good ones have been buried beneath all the speculation which is exactly why we don't like repeat topics or to have the ideas spread around