Revenge feedback: Why is it ignored?

[MorsGotha]

I understand that all feedback cannot be moderated. Indeed most revenge feedback is understandedly missed simply because such a volumn cannot be looked through with such limited manpower. This is not my concern, I cannot expect the mods to read through all feedback.

But when reported on the cheat/abuse board it is ignored. My own feedback includes 3 neg's, one warranted, two are blatant revenge feedback's despite the feedback rules against it.

I complained on the cheat/abuse board about the second one simply because I took a look and saw that the player involved makes a habit of it. The first one was just too minor for me to even consider making a complaint.

I think I had a good case, perhaps not but there was seemingly zero investigation. If I was wrong then fine, I can handle that; I will not handle no action at all.

Should I ignore such things? Should I simply not leave any negative feedback and pretend that all CC players are happy cuddly teddy bears? Or should I leave negative feedback that I think are justified and end up having a bad record because losers cannot handle the truth of their bad game, and leave revenge feedback?

MG.

[wicked]

It's not being ignored, I just didn't see it. I typically only glance through the cheating section, and if I don't see "feedback" in the title, I don't read it. Also, you just wrote it two days ago, so give me a chance here... lol. We used to have a link for reporting bad feedback on the feedback page, but people never used that anyway.

You're right, we don't read through feedbacks, we investigate complaints.

[MorsGotha]

I apprieciate that, thank you. Should I label abuse reports of this kind in a specific way in future to help you notice it?

MG.

[MOBAJOBG]

I'm sure a title of "Retaliatory Feedback" is enough to do the job.

[wicked]

Just PM me with feedback complaints, it's the best way for me to see it.

[alster]

The problem is - what is "revenge feedback"?

Some people seem to believe that just because they made the first feedback, anything that comes afterwards are "revenge feedback".

Rarely, only one party would have a justified grievance if a game has turned sour.

Also, I can imagine that many people (including myself) hold back on the feedback. It simply takes to much time to start handing out feedback left and right for me to use it very often. This works both ways; both possible positive and negative feedbacks are left unwritten. But, if someone stabs me with a negative feedback, I may take the time to write a negative one myself if I believe that this is in order. Is that “revenge feedback”? No, of course not if I have a justified basis for leaving it. “Revenge feedback” can only be feedback left with no reasonably objective basis for it.

But then again, what is an “objective basis” for a feedback? Dunno. Here I think that the moderators in charge of the feedback section should give a certain margin of appreciation to the people writing the feedback. In many cases, there has been a sour game and people subjectively are in a negative state of mind. And, the term “feedback” can be defined as “the communication of responses and reactions to proposals and changes or to the findings of performance appraisals with the aim of enabling improvements to be made.” When it comes to responses and reactions in the context of the CC feedback system, well, there’s always an inherently subjective part to that.

But that’s just my two cents.

[lackattack]

If you were motivated to leave the feedback by the by fact that a person gave you a negative, then it is in revenge. As you described, such a feedback could contain valid points. But if we sense revenge we'll moderate it.

[alster]

If you were motivated to leave the feedback by the by fact that a person gave you a negative, then it is in revenge. As you described, such a feedback could contain valid points. But if we sense revenge we'll moderate it.

That doesn’t make much sense to me. That would in effect mean a race for the feedback, i.e. only the first person handing down a feedback would be considered to be the one having left a “non-revenge feedback”.

All in all, I think it would make more sense to just look at the actual feedback given, not when and why it was handed out. If the feedback contains valid points, fine. If not, away with it.

[SirSebstar]

It looks simple to me. If your sole reason for leaving feedback is because the other left you some bad feedback, then thats revenge feedback. If you make an inspired post with reasons why you think that particular player is bad, and only your timing is wrong (e.g. 1 minute after the bad feedback) well thats not retaliatory.

But if you wrote.e.g. He left me bad feedback but his sucks balls himself. well thats clearly retaliatory...

At least, thats how i see it

[alster]

It looks simple to me. If your sole reason for leaving feedback is because the other left you some bad feedback, then thats revenge feedback. If you make an inspired post with reasons why you think that particular player is bad, and only your timing is wrong (e.g. 1 minute after the bad feedback) well thats not retaliatory.

But if you wrote.e.g. He left me bad feedback but his sucks balls himself. well thats clearly retaliatory...

At least, thats how i see it

Hmmm… I agree partly.

What I meant in my post above is this: Usually I don’t bother to leave feedback since it takes time. But when I do, in 9 times out of 10, I leave a positive feedback. Leaving negative feedback, well, in some cases, sure. But I prefer to let bygones by bygones. After all, if there has been an issue in a game, usually both parties are to blame for it anyway.

But, I’ve been faced with a situation where I was handed a negative feedback in a game where I had been severely pissed off by the guy leaving the feedback. So, I handed down my own negative feedback (we had both been upset about different issues leading to a complete meltdown). Now, of course this feedback in a sense was prompted by the first guy’s feedback, so sure, it can be seen as “revenge feedback.” However, my feedback is neutral and stays to the point. Just the fact that the other guy was quicker to post something doesn’t make my feedback biased in anyway. (Especially considering that the moron left the feedback before the game was finished, using an old game number to post his feedback in.)

All in all, issues like this makes me take the position that the timing of the feedback really doesn’t matter, the important thing is what is stated in the feedback.

[SirSebstar]

mmm, I have a feeling I know what feedback you are refering too. I am not sure what to do in that case. For the both of you i would say no more feedback allowed after a period of time has expired is maybe a good idea.
When games have been archived there is really no need to still be able to leave feedback, is there?

[alster]

mmm, I have a feeling I know what feedback you are refering too. I am not sure what to do in that case. For the both of you i would say no more feedback allowed after a period of time has expired is maybe a good idea.
When games have been archived there is really no need to still be able to leave feedback, is there?

Yes. It’s not difficult to pinpoint it.

You don’t need to give us any advice on future behavior though.

The thing is that you cannot leave feedback for a game until it’s finished (or archived, if I understood you correctly). Which makes sense, why leave feedback before a game is finished? The feedback is just there as a community thing for people interested.

[SirSebstar]

What i meant to say was that it might be wise to not accept feedbacks (by the system) if a certain amount of time has elapsed- So if you heard nothing for 3 weeks, you should not suddenly be confronted with negative feedback. I dont know for sure how long it takes for a game to be archived, but maybe that is just long enough to allow everybody who has something sane to say do it, and otherwise not allow poeple to make up bad feedback weeks after an supposed incident occured...

`t was not future advice , but a suggestion on improving feedback.

[wicked]

However, my feedback is neutral and stays to the point. Just the fact that the other guy was quicker to post something doesn’t make my feedback biased in anyway.

Agreed. We look at more than just time stamp when determining if a feedback is retaliatory. In fact, that's the last thing I look at. If you speak to the other guy's gameplay, actions, etc... and it's what I consider "stand-alone", then I don't care if you left it one week after the game. Unless it's blatant you're responding to the feedback left you, often by mentioning said feedback in what you write, it'll stand.

[alster]

Oh. I see.

And, personally I think it sounds like a good idea for improving the feedback system.

[wicked]

On the contrary Sir, if you allow yourself time to cool off from the game, which I HIGHLY recommend, and it STILL bothers you a week later, then by all means leave it.

[Sammy gags]

Someone left me revenge feedback & it got deleted

[SirSebstar]

On the contrary Sir, if you allow yourself time to cool off from the game, which I HIGHLY recommend, and it STILL bothers you a week later, then by all means leave it.

Duelly note Wicked, thanks for the imput.

[Samus]

However, my feedback is neutral and stays to the point. Just the fact that the other guy was quicker to post something doesn’t make my feedback biased in anyway.

Agreed. We look at more than just time stamp when determining if a feedback is retaliatory. In fact, that's the last thing I look at. If you speak to the other guy's gameplay, actions, etc... and it's what I consider "stand-alone", then I don't care if you left it one week after the game. Unless it's blatant you're responding to the feedback left you, often by mentioning said feedback in what you write, it'll stand.

I really feel you're fighting a major uphill battle for a system that I think is pretty much useless. I've never played a single player that I couldn't find totally valid reasons to give negative feedback to if I wanted to. If I did, I suspect they could all find valid reasons for giving me negative feedback. Everyone knows this is the case, so nobody wants to leave negative feedback even when it's deserved. People only leave it when they're mad enough they want some form of revenge.

I'm not sure what function the feedback system is supposed to serve, but it doesn't.

[SirSebstar]

Well I do use the feedback when i come across something increadably bad. E.g. A player deadbeating 5 turns, out of chat alliances and particulary exceptional things absolutely excessive swearing and begging.
I find that it helps me avoid opponants I know i would not enjoy playing against. I guess I am doing them a service as well, since they would most likely not like to play against me either..

[Samus]

The ignore list works better, and doesn't risk getting negative feedback in retaliation. It prevents them from joining the same game as you. That's what most people use. But obviously the next person can't see that 400 people have ignored a player, only the 1 or 2 brave souls that actually left negative feedback. Those two people were almost certainly punished with return feedback for their trouble.

[SirSebstar]

I have yet to get neg feedback. And if it is retaliatory i would PM wicked. And if it is real, well then i guess i deserved it..
But weak knees because of feedback someone might give. Hell no, if you are an exceptionally particular( as in bad) player, then others have the right to know

[JOHNNYROCKET24]

play 2,300 games against unlimited different players and see how many negative feedbacks you get. Its amazing im only at 7 with the 7th still pending.

[SirSebstar]

170 positives tell me more then those mere 7 negatives.

Most positives and negatives tell me very little, save those with a coherent story thats repeated again and again. That shows a patern.

[detlef]

The one negative feedback I have was done in retaliation and I wear it like a badge because the jerk-off who left it just looks like an even bigger moron for having left it.