prevent necros

[r4pt0r]

perhaps a pop up could come up, something along the lines of:

"are you sure you want to post in this thread? the most recent post is _______days/months/years old"

[KvickFlygarn87]

Only if the last post is more than, say, 6 months old.

[Tex]

I actually think that 3 months is the cutoff point most moderators lock threads using. Hey, I might be wrong

[vexx32]

Whilst we do frequently lock 3-month-old and older necros (even sometimes one month is enough for us to consider locking it, depending on the thread), we don't lock them all. If the necro isn't bringing back a thread which is no longer relevant, and actually contributing to the thread and starting further constructive discussion, we're usually okay with leaving it be. However, a large majority of the time there are several people who post to do nothing more than scream "hey, don't necro" or some variant thereof, which is basically stifling any potential discussion and ensuring that the thread be locked.

Necroing is not against the rules -- yep, go ahead and check -- but it is considered bad form, as it most commonly is done without real reason, and we've even had some people post in a dead thread to call "lol, necro" on themselves. Thus, we tend to lock them unless the thread seems to be capable of being peacefully revived. Auto-locking them is not a solution which can be effective in this situation.

[WinkAllKerb'']

Newcomer can always find interest in some thread. Not always true or false, it can just happen.

[Souper]

What's a necro? a dead thread or something?

[Dodgey]

It's where someone posts in a thread where the conversation has long since died. Bringing it back to life of you will. The name necro stems from the word necromancy.

[vexx32]

And, much like necromancy, it is heavily frowned upon by a lot of people. We try to keep pointless necromancy to a minimum.

[Dooz]

What's a necro? a dead thread or something?

"Necro" When someone Posts on a old inactive thread, bringing it to the top Of the thread list. Sounds like necromancy?

[Camacha]

However, a large majority of the time there are several people who post to do nothing more than scream "hey, don't necro" or some variant thereof, which is basically stifling any potential discussion and ensuring that the thread be locked.

I have said this again and again and will keep saying it: the moderating policy here is sometimes a bit ridiculous. There seems to be this obsession with killing off good but old threads. If that does not happen right away, there will be people posting useless posts (like you indicate), prompting a moderator to close the thread anyway.

The only proper response is to delete the offending posts, as they are not per the forum rules, and reprimande the users. By killing off the thread you deny the community a useful thread and reward the offenders by confirming their posts - even though they themselves were ruining the thread. This is a surefire way of stimulating unwanted behaviour. Punish those that misbehave and leave old but good threads to contribute to the community.

The same goes for people that complain about a thread in the thread itself. This can only lead to derailment and unwanted behaviour. We have a great community and it will understand that reporting unwanted behaviour and refraining from posting about it in the thread will be to everyone's benefit. Those few people that cannot resist should be informed that their behaviour is unwanted.

Really, if this policy does not change, we will see the same behaviour over and over, as there is no incentive to change it. At the same time the community loses good content.

[Red Iron Crown]

I have said this again and again and will keep saying it: the moderating policy here is sometimes a bit ridiculous. There seems to be this obsession with killing off good but old threads. If that does not happen right away, there will be people posting useless posts (like you indicate), prompting a moderator to close the thread anyway.

The only proper response is to delete the offending posts, as they are not per the forum rules, and reprimande the users. By killing off the thread you deny the community a useful thread and reward the offenders by confirming their posts - even though they themselves were ruining the thread. This is a surefire way of stimulating unwanted behaviour. Punish those that misbehave and leave old but good threads to contribute to the community.

The same goes for people that complain about a thread in the thread itself. This can only lead to derailment and unwanted behaviour. We have a great community and it will understand that reporting unwanted behaviour and refraining from posting about it in the thread will be to everyone's benefit. Those few people that cannot resist should be informed that their behaviour is unwanted.

Really, if this policy does not change, we will see the same behaviour over and over, as there is no incentive to change it. At the same time the community loses good content.

They usually don't delete the thread though, so the content is still there. The only real situation I see the current handling of necros being detrimental is when a thread is necroed for no reason and later some other poster would have "legitimately" necroed it at some later point. I have no idea how often that happens, but I suspect the number is quite low.

I'd rather see older threads autolocked, if someone really has something new to contribute then a new thread, possibly with a link to the old one, is an adequate solution.

[vexx32]

I have said this again and again and will keep saying it: the moderating policy here is sometimes a bit ridiculous. There seems to be this obsession with killing off good but old threads. If that does not happen right away, there will be people posting useless posts (like you indicate), prompting a moderator to close the thread anyway.

The only proper response is to delete the offending posts, as they are not per the forum rules, and reprimande the users. By killing off the thread you deny the community a useful thread and reward the offenders by confirming their posts - even though they themselves were ruining the thread. This is a surefire way of stimulating unwanted behaviour. Punish those that misbehave and leave old but good threads to contribute to the community.

The same goes for people that complain about a thread in the thread itself. This can only lead to derailment and unwanted behaviour. We have a great community and it will understand that reporting unwanted behaviour and refraining from posting about it in the thread will be to everyone's benefit. Those few people that cannot resist should be informed that their behaviour is unwanted.

Really, if this policy does not change, we will see the same behaviour over and over, as there is no incentive to change it. At the same time the community loses good content.

One thing at a time~

We don't "kill" anything. If the thread is too old to be of use (which we usually judge by informal vote and discussion amongst ourselves), we either delete the useless posts, or close the thread. If the topic is relevant enough to be brought up again, there's nothing stopping anyone making a nice shiny new thread and linking to the old one. Most of the time, that doesn't happen, because the old thread was resurrected for no real purpose anyway.

Because KSP is a constantly evolving game, it is extremely uncommon for any old threads to be actually relevant anymore, regardless of how good they are. (Which, if I may gently remind you, is a completely subjective judgement; if we based everything on how good or bad we thought the threads were, moderation quality would be very poor indeed, for we are all people and not robots, each with our own opinions, and thus it is better for us to be as objective about it as possible.) The majority of necromancy is done by new users who are largely unaware of the forum rules. As such, we will often give them a warning notice, as punishing them for something like that is extremely heavy-handed anyway.

We inform people periodically that posting complaints within a thread is both useless and often destructive. It is up to them to listen, but as with anything, if we see it becoming a problem for specific users, we will take care of it as we see fit. We are not about to start handing out punishments to first-time offenders merely because it's becoming a little more common amongst the forum users in general.

[WinkAllKerb'']

Necromancer tend to be dis/liked due to dot (damage over time), if you don't get it play any fantasy mmo (i tend to miss the he=> "that class saying": "i hate this nemesis "randomclass"" sentences)(anyway dealing with damage over time is a very important thing for human being not too hurt anyone wich is not that easy due to quantum thing) +125.53% @ vexx if you don't like it just ignore them else learn the basics about dot and there uses, tools to do so, do not miss at all.

Addendum:(also notice that druid thing often use heal over time etc.)

Edited June 2, 2014 by WinkAllKerb''

[Camacha]

They usually don't delete the thread though, so the content is still there. [...] I'd rather see older threads autolocked, if someone really has something new to contribute then a new thread, possibly with a link to the old one, is an adequate solution.

This is a perfect way of scattering information over numerous threads and having the same subject discussed over and over again. By concentrating posts about the same subject in one thread you make it a much more valuable repository of knowlegde, while creating less duplicate junk.

[sal_vager]

Closing a thread does not remove it from view, also Camacha, when we remove offending necro posts and reprimand the poster, regular members such as yourself do not see it, this does not mean that it does not occur.

[Camacha]

We don't "kill" anything. If the thread is too old to be of use (which we usually judge by informal vote and discussion amongst ourselves), we either delete the useless posts, or close the thread. If the topic is relevant enough to be brought up again, there's nothing stopping anyone making a nice shiny new thread and linking to the old one. Most of the time, that doesn't happen, because the old thread was resurrected for no real purpose anyway.

I firmly disagree. I have seen good threads being killed off (and I use that harsh term intentionally) because of nonsensical moderation. Yes, opinions differ and it is a matter of personal interpretation, but it seems a matter of policy. As already mentioned, making new threads for every couch and sneeze is not making things clearer or easier to find. On the contrary. Only in the case of grossly outdated threads a new start is a good option, but that should only happen when a new thread has been made and a relevant link has been posted. Instead, I have seen it happening with threads that were not outdated (which is not the same as old!) and not linked to a new one.

I have also explained numerous times that it is a lot less likely for someone to start a new thread than to continue an old one. Like it or not, that is how it works and killing off older threads is costing the community good ideas and discussions. I have never seen any real argument that takes that into account.

We inform people periodically that posting complaints within a thread is both useless and often destructive. It is up to them to listen, but as with anything, if we see it becoming a problem for specific users, we will take care of it as we see fit. We are not about to start handing out punishments to first-time offenders merely because it's becoming a little more common amongst the forum users in general.

I can only say that your moderation policy appears to be ineffective, as the behaviour - as admitted in this thread - occurs regularly. I am not for banning for minor offences or heavy handed punishment, but you should go after the offenders, not the rest of the community. And to be honest, my suggestions are not made lightly: I have seen a proper policy with proper moderation all but eliminate the unwanted behaviour described here, on a forum much, much larger than this one. That community is mostly self policing, kind and pleasant. It is really something that can be done, but only if you reward the good and reprimande the bad. By doing the opposite you will never see any change in behaviour.

I think the basic KSP community is pretty great, and it could be even better without turning it into an unpleasant beginner-hostile place.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Camacha

[Camacha]

Closing a thread does not remove it from view, also Camacha, when we remove offending necro posts and reprimand the poster, regular members such as yourself do not see it, this does not mean that it does not occur.

Of course I might not be aware of what goes on behind the scenes, but I've seen quite a few threads that get a decent post, followed by loads of Don't necro posts which are subsequently closed by a moderator. If the bad posters (with the Don't necro messages) get warned that is a good thing, but I have not seen the posts removed and the thread does get closed. This means a loss for the community because of the bad behaviour of a few.

Even if the bad posters get reprimanded behind the scenes, they get what they want in the end by closing the thread. Bad posts should not have such a relevant impact.

[sal_vager]

Camacha, you can disagree all you like of course, it's a mark of the community here that such posts are visible and are not hidden away, like so many members incorrectly assume (some kind of knee-jerk defence mechanism from other forums maybe?)

I will ask you however to bring your grievances to us (the Moderators) via PM, so we can properly address your concerns

I'll just add a note on our policy, it seems to work pretty well for the vast majority of the KSP forums, not bad going to be honest.

[Camacha]

Camacha, you can disagree all you like of course, it's a mark of the community here that such posts are visible and are not hidden away, like so many members incorrectly assume (some kind of knee-jerk defence mechanism from other forums maybe?)

That is fine too, but in that case it is probably best to add a modbreak (or whatever you call it) indicating that the relevant post is unwanted, and why. That way it can serve as a lesson and warning for others.

I will ask you however to bring your grievances to us (the Moderators) via PM, so we can properly address your concerns

I feel this is a matter that is best served by public discussion, to be honest I understand that some of the criticism might sound a little harsh, but I feel that I am being frank and constructive.

I'll just add a note on our policy, it seems to work pretty well for the vast majority of the KSP forums, not bad going to be honest.

I am not saying it is bad, but there seem to be a couple of things that could be better. Do not get me wrong, I do not feel things are terrible and that you are doing nothing right. It is just that I have seen it work differently elsewhere and that the same approach might very well end some issues here.

The KSP community is gentle and nice, but also very young. It is not suprising that there might be some things that still need to be worked out.

[WinkAllKerb'']

yup that s the point, you can turn it the way you want, now days, young receive far more various & random visual(others:else/whatever) stimuli from tv, pub, game, etc. than us ... you can't just ignore that and so i *shrug* & *yawn* & *grumpf* & *keep smiling* & and &

also languages evolve faster, in number and inner variation, melting etc ... it s like the 2ww industrial boom but applied to languages and far more, DictionnaryS/else HAS to follow ...

Edited June 3, 2014 by WinkAllKerb''
call me mister edit ... our text are never finished neither all black or white they just escape ...

[Camacha]

Here we have an example of failing policy. Instead of adressing the offending posters and or posts, a general warning is issued and the thread is possibly closed because of one or two forum members that do not know how to act in accordance with the rules. As far as I can tell, the offenders are free to continue their behaviour up to the point where other forum members suffer the consequences.

I do not know why I even try anymore, but I guess it is because I care. With just a couple of simple rules, things could be a lot better:

- Forum members are discouraged from replying to bad posts, whether they are a real reply or a warning that the behaviour is unwanted ('Dude, don't necro!'). Any such reply is treated as a bad post too.

- Instead, forum members are expected to help moderating staff by reporting the thread and waiting until a staff members has time to look at the thread, refraining from escalating the problem by a personal response.

- In case of an unwanted post, the post is edited with a topic warning, describing the problem and why it is unwanted. Editing out the problematic part is optional, but recommended for posts without content ('Dude, don't necro!') or with highly offensive content to prevent further escalation. Bad posts will provoke bad posts in some of the other users.

- Personal messages are sent to the offending posters, explaining that their behaviour is unwanted. No other consequences are attached, unless the behaviour is frequently displayed. In that case, temporary or permanent bans might be in order.

Another basic idea is to have one thread per subject. When they grow very old or irrelevant a successor could be started with a link to the old thread, but keeping all the eggs in one basket helps keep the forum tidy and information easy to find. Now, some threads keep on reappearing in another form every few weeks.

It really boils down to basic psychology: help people along, discourage bad behaviour, reward good behaviour and prevent escalation.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Camacha

[Javster]

If it's a mod thread for a compatible mod with current version, don't lock. If it's a thread called "0.30 speculation" and it's 0.32, lock.

[Camacha]

It seems the questions raised in this thread are still relevant. I would love to hear an official response to them

[KasperVld]

I don't see any unanswered questions in this thread, though there are a lot of statements. We've had a revision of the Community Rules last week in which our position on necroposting has been added to the rules very clearly:

Posting in a thread that has not received a new message in a defined span of three months is known as “necroposting”. Necroposting is often frowned upon but not forbidden provided that your post does not break the other rules in this post, most notably rule 2.3a. These threads may be closed at the discretion of the staff.

What exactly is the question you'd like to see answered?

[BadRocketsCo.]

Here we have an example of failing policy. Instead of adressing the offending posters and or posts, a general warning is issued and the thread is possibly closed because of one or two forum members that do not know how to act in accordance with the rules. As far as I can tell, the offenders are free to continue their behaviour up to the point where other forum members suffer the consequences.

I do not know why I even try anymore, but I guess it is because I care. With just a couple of simple rules, things could be a lot better:

- Forum members are discouraged from replying to bad posts, whether they are a real reply or a warning that the behaviour is unwanted ('Dude, don't necro!'). Any such reply is treated as a bad post too.

- Instead, forum members are expected to help moderating staff by reporting the thread and waiting until a staff members has time to look at the thread, refraining from escalating the problem by a personal response.

- In case of an unwanted post, the post is edited with a topic warning, describing the problem and why it is unwanted. Editing out the problematic part is optional, but recommended for posts without content ('Dude, don't necro!') or with highly offensive content to prevent further escalation. Bad posts will provoke bad posts in some of the other users.

- Personal messages are sent to the offending posters, explaining that their behaviour is unwanted. No other consequences are attached, unless the behaviour is frequently displayed. In that case, temporary or permanent bans might be in order.

Another basic idea is to have one thread per subject. When they grow very old or irrelevant a successor could be started with a link to the old thread, but keeping all the eggs in one basket helps keep the forum tidy and information easy to find. Now, some threads keep on reappearing in another form every few weeks.

It really boils down to basic psychology: help people along, discourage bad behaviour, reward good behaviour and prevent escalation.

KasperVlf, he probably wants your opinion on this post (I guess)