Forum restructuring - discussion

[irrevenant]

My argument there was that I think what we are trying to avoid is people who have little or no experience in the area or the game, coming in and being able to criticize developers for something they don't like. Even in the development forum, contributors have not been happy for their work or ideas to be subject to criticism to the extent that it has.
I think the ability for high level contributers to be able to post their work for addition without open criticism is a good thing. It keeps them happy and involved in the project. I think that the very real side of letting people criticize their work will be the experienced people leaving, to a great detriment to the project. I don't equate the ability to complain about other people's work as being helpful for recruiting new artists, because thats not what new artists are looking for. They aren't looking for a place to argue, rather, they are looking for a place to contribute.

Noy, like you, the last thing I want is for the artists to be unhappy. But I don't think you're giving the general community enough credit; I've found them to be a pretty responsible and considerate bunch.

In my experience, the people offering criticism of artworks are just trying to help develop Wesnoth; wanting to give back through their input to the game they love. People have historically tended to assume that if an artwork is posted, then it's implied that the poster wants comment. This is often wrong, but it's also a misunderstanding rather than a malicious act.

I believe that the problem isn't that the forum is open, but rather that its unclear when critique is wanted (and when it isn't), and what sort of critiques are desired (and which aren't). I strongly believe that, if the critiquers knew the artists desires re: critiquing, then they would comply with them.

I've created a draft document here to develop a common understanding between the artists and everyone else re: critiquing. I would greatly appreciate your input into it.

Thank you.

[Noyga]

Well the problem is also the amount of comment. If there are too much comments, and you don't have a lot of time, you would probably zap the whole thread and/or miss the most interesting comments. Too much comments impede the readability, that is why a more restricted forum is interesting.

[Noy]

Noy, like you, the last thing I want is for the artists to be unhappy. But I don't think you're giving the general community enough credit; I've found them to be a pretty responsible and considerate bunch.

In my experience, the people offering criticism of artworks are just trying to help develop Wesnoth; wanting to give back through their input to the game they love. People have historically tended to assume that if an artwork is posted, then it's implied that the poster wants comment. This is often wrong, but it's also a misunderstanding rather than a malicious act.

I believe that the problem isn't that the forum is open, but rather that its unclear when critique is wanted (and when it isn't), and what sort of critiques are desired (and which aren't). I strongly believe that, if the critiquers knew the artists desires re: critiquing, then they would comply with them.

I've created a draft document here to develop a common understanding between the artists and everyone else re: critiquing. I would greatly appreciate your input into it.

Thank you.

I think I'm giving the community the due regard. It was a persistant criticism of many artists prior to the forum restructuring that they were getting criticism that they didn't want. Even today the problem exists in the restricted forums, the troll thread and this thread are examples. Remember these are supposed to be "respected users" who are good contributors and it still happens today.

I don't think making an FPI thread will help the situation, we've got an FPI thread in the Ideas forum and look at it today, I count four threads on traits, like before the restructuring, all but one of them are good. As Eleazar pointed out, art critiquing is really difficult and people aren't going to understand the nuances of that. I think devs (specifically art ones) are happy they can now post their work without having to deal with this. the art development forums will be a place where special projects and work that will be committed to the game is posted.

In conclusion, I think current system as is, is fine.

[irrevenant]

Well the problem is also the amount of comment. If there are too much comments, and you don't have a lot of time, you would probably zap the whole thread and/or miss the most interesting comments. Too much comments impede the readability, that is why a more restricted forum is interesting.

If people follow the principles in the art critiquing document, there should be a significant reduction in quantity, as well as a significant increase in quality.

Noyga, your input input into the document would be greatly appreciated. (Actually, everyone's input is appreciated, but I've always found your posts particularly insightful).

[Darth Fool]

This thread is drifting into complete irrelevence. I have tried to restrain my urge to lock it several times, as it is important to communicate with the users of the forum what the restructuring is and why it is being done the way it is being done. As such serious questions about the forum restructuring will still be entertained, but if you are just posting about your bruised ego, or you feel the need for a pat on the back, take the discussion elsewhere. A very simple rule of thumb to realize about how things will operate in this restructuring is that people's whose posts need to be modded are not going to be allowed to post on the development forum. People who demonstrate that they can self moderate will be allowed to post. The rest are just implementation details.

[Noy]

Given that the forum restructuring has occurred, and is likely to be permanent, locking the thread might not be a bad idea. Important breakthroughs have been made, like Irrevenant's writing of an art FPI... so maybe this thread has served its purpose.

[Ranger M]

but there could be more, if this thread wasn't here then irreverant's thread would never had been made. Something like this thread allows the input of others to affect or help the restructuring (irrevenants thread being the prime example, coming under help).

ps, I hope that I don't count as a having wounded ego

[irrevenant]

Noy, as you point out, users are now divided into separate 'trusted' and 'untrusted' groups but the problem is still occuring. This supports my position that setting up a culture of considerate and empathic feedback will work better than any technical solution.

I'm not naive enough to think that adding a charter will make everything magically okay. But it's something that people can (and seem willing to) use as a cornerstone of the culture.

I've noticed that the Wesnoth community is generally self-regulating. Historically, when someone new has posted an FPI, an existing member has quickly replied with "Please see the FPI list". Generally, the newbie then apologises abashedly and the thread dies. If they don't, then a moderator gets involved. My aim is to help enhance this self-regulating culture.

Conversely, I think this thread demonstrates what happens when you create 'special' users; they act special. Toms has effectively been given access that says his opinion is more valuable than most people's. It's no surprise he acted in a self-important way.

To address your specific points:

I don't think making an FPI thread will help the situation, we've got an FPI thread in the Ideas forum and look at it today, I count four threads on traits, like before the restructuring, all but one of them are good.

Firstly, I don't think you can compare 'Art Contrib' & 'Ideas'. 'Art Contrib' is about posting (and seeking feedback on) finished art & WIPs. Feedback needs to be targetted and tactful. Conversely, 'Ideas' is about brainstorming; people bounce ideas back and forth as they refine them and occasionally veer off on promising tangents. It's a lot more collaborative than 'Art Contrib', and it's going to necessarily be more verbose.

Secondly, yes, there are four threads on traits, but traits is a broad topic. One thread is general discussion on what makes a good trait (appropriate, IMO). Ane was a bad idea (now locked) that spawned a new (good) idea thread. Another is the aforementioned good idea thread. The final was a bad idea that quickly died. The chaff is quickly falling into oblivion while the wheat is being improved or finalised as we speak. It's working pretty well, IMO.

As Eleazar pointed out, art critiquing is really difficult and people aren't going to understand the nuances of that. I think devs (specifically art ones) are happy they can now post their work without having to deal with this. the art development forums will be a place where special projects and work that will be committed to the game is posted. In conclusion, I think current system as is, is fine.

I don't expect you to reverse the change on my say so. I have faith in my suggestions; I expect that the 'Art Contrib' forum will prove my point for me; that if you trust the community they will prove trustworthy. Then hopefully the segregation will be ended.

And Eleazar is right. No matter how you divide people, giving art critique is always going to be hard. But as you've pointed out, the 'trusted users' seem to be no better at it than the 'untrusted' users. There'll always be the odd crossed wire. IMO, the best that can be done is to set out expectations clearly, encourage tact, and encourage people to limit their critique to what's requested (include when what's requested is "nothing")

This thread is drifting into complete irrelevence. I have tried to restrain my urge to lock it several times.

I personally believe that my posts are on topic as they are aimed at redressing the core concerns that resulted in the forum restructure. However, if you feel they are inappropriate for this thread please feel free to split them into a separate thread.

Thanks.

[Darth Fool]

This thread is drifting into complete irrelevence. I have tried to restrain my urge to lock it several times.

I personally believe that my posts are on topic as they are aimed at redressing the core concerns that resulted in the forum restructure. However, if you feel they are inappropriate for this thread please feel free to split them into a separate thread.

Thanks.

I would agree that your posts are exactly what this thread needs, and in fact, your posts and the related discussion have helped me resist the urge to lock it! I have already split the most recent posts that were detracting from the purpose of the thread.

[Maeglin Dubh]

As far as the Ideas thread goes, I've been doing my level best to keep the chaff under control, though I'm never really sure if I'm actually getting things done when I lock threads. That's why I usually put up a disclaimer as well, allowing people to understand why I do it, and letting them know I'm willing to reconsider, given enough evidence. But I know that not all people will have such an approach... Some people, given a title, immediately try to get what they can out of it while they can still enjoy it.

These people, obviously, will find themselves under review for their titles.... But it will probably continue to happen as people are added to the trusted list.

[Skippy]

... though I'm never really sure if I'm actually getting things done when I lock threads. That's why I usually put up a disclaimer as well, allowing people to understand why I do it...

It makes the world of difference. Unexplained lockings can easily lead to a perception of capriciousness, arbitrariness or spite.

[Maeglin Dubh]

Thanks, Skippy. Good to know someone appreciates it.

[irrevenant]

As far as the Ideas thread goes, I've been doing my level best to keep the chaff under control, though I'm never really sure if I'm actually getting things done when I lock threads. That's why I usually put up a disclaimer as well, allowing people to understand why I do it, and letting them know I'm willing to reconsider, given enough evidence.

I think you're doing a great job. But then your approach is quite similar to mine so I may be biased.

I agree with Skippy; the community are basically decent and will support you if you make it clear what you're trying to do.

But I know that not all people will have such an approach... Some people, given a title, immediately try to get what they can out of it while they can still enjoy it. These people, obviously, will find themselves under review for their titles.

Ironically, the more this happens, the more fickle the system will seem, and the likelier people will be to act that way.

[toms]

Conversely, I think this thread demonstrates what happens when you create 'special' users; they act special. Toms has effectively been given access that says his opinion is more valuable than most people's. It's no surprise he acted in a self-important way.

*deep sigh*

Please read all sharing to this stuff, think about it, find logical conherences, and imagine that you are me. (the recent issue) Think about how you would react. Probably better since you are calmed down and a bit more distanced.
I think you can empathize. Else I give it completely up.

[irrevenant]

*deep sigh*
Please read all sharing to this stuff, think about it, find logical conherences, and imagine that you are me. (the recent issue) Think about how you would react. Probably better since you are calmed down and a bit more distanced.
I think you can empathize. Else I give it completely up.

I only referenced that thread because it was the one Noy was using an example. I'm not familiar with the whole history, and I apologise if I jumped to inaccurate conclusions, and failed to properly consider the circumstances leading up to your comment.