Reinstate Feedback

by **The Neon Peon** on Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:27 pm

I agree, except why do 3 things? Only one change is needed to get to where you are going with this:

1. Take the current system we have, remove the ratings, leave the tags.

Simple as that. No moderating needed, ratings system finally gone, and you can't swear in a tag (seen my share of feedbacks even even if I joined the site when the ratings were here.)

by **Simon Viavant** on Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:14 pm

Yeah, that does sound simpler, except with feedback you could tell at a glance who was good to play and who was a problem. Here you'd have to scan through their ratings to see it. I was just proposing feedback, except with all the attributes of ratings that made it replace feedback.

by **Jeff Hardy** on Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:25 am

the ratings system sucks
i either give people 5s or 1s depending on if i hate them or not :lol:

by **blakebowling** on Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:44 pm

exactly what I do jeff

by **redhawk92** on Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:08 pm

me too

by **3Asefa** on Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:33 pm

i agree with u and i will write before u about the rating system in the forums and i think is bad and feedbacks is better

by **JOHNNYROCKET24** on Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:37 pm

the feedback system was removed in my opinion to make less work for mods.....and for a good reason if you ask me. All the non stop e-tickets and PM's must have been a real hassle. The new rating system lets players leave a rating without a mod needing constant monitoring and deciding if it is valid or not.

by **Simon Viavant** on Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:00 pm

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:the feedback system was removed in my opinion to make less work for mods.....and for a good reason if you ask me. All the non stop e-tickets and PM's must have been a real hassle. The new rating system lets players leave a rating without a mod needing constant monitoring and deciding if it is valid or not.

Which is exactly what I was suggesting. Feedback with tags instead of a message, and no feedback removed, so no moderation needed.

by **sailorseal** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:54 pm

Reinstate Feedback and remove ratings. I think rating isn't working why not give feedback a try again?

by **GrimReaper.** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 5:23 pm

i wasnt here for this but from what Ive been told there has been a very long argument between the community members and the mods over this...

EDIT use a form next time.

by **Martin Ronne** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:24 pm

sailorseal wrote:Reinstate Feedback and remove ratings. I think rating isn't working why not give feedback a try again?

I agree, I never was here for feedback, but it seems like the way to go.

by **captainwalrus** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:29 pm

I liked feedback, I found it usefull. When I thought someone was bad at one ting I would say like, "Good Player but needs to work on this." And sometimes people would do the same for me and it would be very helpfull. I didn't use the forum back then so I don't know why they got rid of it, but I would love to see feedback back.

by **jpcloet** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:30 pm

I was here for feedback. It was seriously abused by a large number of people and that's why they went looking for a better system. The current system has flaws but is better overall.

by **sailorseal** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:50 pm

jpcloet wrote:I was here for feedback. It was seriously abused by a large number of people and that's why they went looking for a better system. The current system has flaws but is better overall.

I looked at it and I am not sure how it was abused. Can you enlighten us?

by **AndyDufresne** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:03 pm

Mostly, because you were able to write *Anything*--- this lead to conflict with feedback moderators deciding if something was factual and within the guidelines. Too much time was taken to moderate feedback---which lead to the current Ratings system.

--Andy

by **jpcloet** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:03 pm

Thanks Andy, Let me find a few examples.

by **sailorseal** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:07 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:Mostly, because you were able to write *Anything*--- this lead to conflict with feedback moderators deciding if something was factual and within the guidelines. Too much time was taken to moderate feedback---which lead to the current Ratings system.

--Andy

Andy your feedbacks were what gave me this idea! Also maybe a new feedback mod team should be created?

by **jpcloet** on Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:08 pm

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... _big_easy_

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... e=sanosuke

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... Wild_Tiger

There was more opinions than actual facts. These are 3 random players.

Said offensive words about my mother.
_big_easy_'s response: I resent this feedback. I said many things about you, but nothing about your tramp of a mother.
Deleted by moderator for this reason: Not game related

by **Optimus Prime** on Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:50 pm

sailorseal wrote:
AndyDufresne wrote:Mostly, because you were able to write *Anything*--- this lead to conflict with feedback moderators deciding if something was factual and within the guidelines. Too much time was taken to moderate feedback---which lead to the current Ratings system.

--Andy

Andy your feedbacks were what gave me this idea! Also maybe a new feedback mod team should be created?

Ratings are here to stay I believe. They may get adjusted somewhere down the line, but I don't think they will be replaced.

by **ManBungalow** on Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:08 pm

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?mode=feedback2&username=codeblue1018
18 of out 26 feedback comments made had to be deleted by a mod in that example page.

Imagine being a moderator and having tens of messages coming in a day demanding that negative feedback be removed.

Ratings are also a lot more efficient because they are so easy to leave. Many people never bothered typing out feedback, meaning that there was less response.

Ratings are pretty well settled into Conquer Club now

by **Kotaro** on Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:19 pm

Good idea. I was here for feedback. Yes, some people abuse it, but they can explain their feedback and, when obvious that their explanation is bullshit, it can be deleted. However, with this rating system, people can give all 1's, and there's no arguing it, you're fucked with a bullshit feedback.

Imagine how many people in this community would volunteer to look through abuse cases, and do a good job, rather then have a supershitty system of feedback.

by **AndyDufresne** on Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:48 pm

We most likely will not move back to any dedicated Feedback Moderating Team, as it just sucked resources out of the site.

As for Community Moderated Feedback---this option was initially discussed but was turned down most due to general early enthusiasim that didn't seem like it would correlate into persistent enthusiasim.

--Andy

by **Kotaro** on Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:59 pm

I don't see how this could suck resources. It would take only a few minutes to properly set up a single usergroup and 1 small private forum for them. After that, only 2 or 3 moderators would be needed. Complaints would go through PM forms only. Their decisions would be considered final, and no way to argue them. They could use the small forum so that Admins could check in from time to time and see what they're doing. This current system is rubbish, and I can point out hundreds of unfair ratings. Here's just one:

Ratings Given: 1 star each
Tags: Deadbeat, Suicider, Cheap Tactics
Games played together: Game 4388421

I played someone, I beat them easy. They tag me as a Suicider, even though I won. A deadbeat, when I missed no turns. Cheap tactics, in a one on one. And can I argue it? No, because this system leaves no room for argument, only bullshit.

by **AndyDufresne** on Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:58 pm

You can respond to ratings, and argue there.

--Andy

by **jiminski** on Mon Mar 30, 2009 6:11 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:We most likely will not move back to any dedicated Feedback Moderating Team, as it just sucked resources out of the site.

As for Community Moderated Feedback---this option was initially discussed but was turned down most due to general early enthusiasim that didn't seem like it would correlate into persistent enthusiasim.

--Andy