You, sir, are indeed a gentleman. Let's continue this down at the polo club and stop cluttering up this perfectly decent thread with our spam 
Instead I'll post this, an education on why we call net abuse, SPAM. Includes a history of email spam.
http://www.templetons.com/brad/spamterm.html
Intriguing! *strokes moustache*
Sure, some variety in members and their forum posts can be expected, from total spam to informative essays. But the topic in question was very clearly a topic to test the current patches and provide feedback on bugs and bug fixes relating to those patches.
We have a seperate section specifically dedicated to improvement suggestions for people to make their wishes.
When an online forum provides relevant categories neatly organised for the member's convenience then that forum can be a valuable resource indeed.
Scawen's test patch topics are always titled very clearly, leaving no mistake as to what the content of the discussion is about. Just like any other topic of this kind, if members have nothing relevant to contribute to the discussion then whatever they post is spam. In a topic about a test patch, if a member is not willing to test the patch and give relevant feedback then they are just getting in the way. Scawen's frustration is of course compounded by a bombardment of additional requests and comments not related to testing the current patch. He is trying to nail down existing bugs so that he can deliver a stable and comprehensive update for us. Any posts at all that don't address that need just add too much spaghetti to the plate and don't allow access to the tasty meat sauce beneath.
Members can help the devs, themselves, and each other by first reading the topic title and then all of the posts in the topic. Additionally, if you create a topic please name it sensibly so that members understand the nature of the discussion from the outset.
We have a seperate section specifically dedicated to improvement suggestions for people to make their wishes.
When an online forum provides relevant categories neatly organised for the member's convenience then that forum can be a valuable resource indeed.
Scawen's test patch topics are always titled very clearly, leaving no mistake as to what the content of the discussion is about. Just like any other topic of this kind, if members have nothing relevant to contribute to the discussion then whatever they post is spam. In a topic about a test patch, if a member is not willing to test the patch and give relevant feedback then they are just getting in the way. Scawen's frustration is of course compounded by a bombardment of additional requests and comments not related to testing the current patch. He is trying to nail down existing bugs so that he can deliver a stable and comprehensive update for us. Any posts at all that don't address that need just add too much spaghetti to the plate and don't allow access to the tasty meat sauce beneath.
Members can help the devs, themselves, and each other by first reading the topic title and then all of the posts in the topic. Additionally, if you create a topic please name it sensibly so that members understand the nature of the discussion from the outset.
Gunn - as suggested above, don't you think it would be acceptable in such threads for moderators to trim the fat where necessary? Even if it's just editing each useless post to trim the content so it only reads something like "Off-topic - moderated"?
I think this would be perfectly acceptable in this sort of thread. It's not like a normal thread, after all.
Incidentally (and a bit off-topic! oops!): One of my best friends just bought an S2 license today. He's probably the most intellectual person I know - also a programmer and a bit of a car nut - and he bought the sim because he's got a track day coming up and wanted to get an idea of what it might be like driving a car on the limit.
He was generally impressed with the sim and had a whole lot of fun, but wasn't at all aware of how deep it is until I demonstrated a bunch of stuff regarding the tyres and setup parameters and how the actual car models affect their weight distribution and so on - he was literally blown away by the demonstrable depth of the simulation. I then explained that this was an as-yet incomplete stage two of a three-stage development strategy, and told him about how much the sim had changed since S1.
Point being: We are blessed that we've got talented people who are dedicated to working on a product like this when it's such a difficult job to do and such a niche market they're selling to. Not only do they do all the work they think is necessary, but they include the stuff we think is necessary too! Sometimes within 24 hours! You just don't get this sort of service anywhere else in the game industry.
So yeah: I think hardcore moderating of Scawen's development threads is 100% acceptable.
I agree with that. Normal threads should be allowed to evolve (or de-volve) naturally, up to a point, as human behaviour is complex, unpredictable and often quite silly 
Patch threads, being different, should be treated differently. Often you'll see in skin threads (for example) someone asking people to quit going OT and keep discussion to a minimum, as the thread is specifically for skins. I think patch threads should be treated the same: keep discussion/questions/suggestions relevant to the patch in question. I don't think it's over the top to move/edit/mod posts which detract from what should be the focus of thread. After all, they're not general discussion threads. They're started for a specific purpose and should stay that way. There are enough other places on this forum to request and suggest and generally bollocks on about stuff
So, in short: +1
Patch threads, being different, should be treated differently. Often you'll see in skin threads (for example) someone asking people to quit going OT and keep discussion to a minimum, as the thread is specifically for skins. I think patch threads should be treated the same: keep discussion/questions/suggestions relevant to the patch in question. I don't think it's over the top to move/edit/mod posts which detract from what should be the focus of thread. After all, they're not general discussion threads. They're started for a specific purpose and should stay that way. There are enough other places on this forum to request and suggest and generally bollocks on about stuff
So, in short: +1
Again, I definitely agree 100%. Such threads deserve severe moderation to make Scawen's task as straighfoward as possible. I'm sure nobody wants to make him lose focus while he's working, but if he was choked about the thread then that's got to be at least mildy distracting if not more so, I guess it depends what he's like.
That being said, I should sincerely apologize for mentioning the idea to modify the speedometers.... Although I'm pleased as punch that it got implemented (:hide, I see in retrospect I should not have suggested it in that venue.
But again, I fully agree those threads could do with some "heightened security".
That being said, I should sincerely apologize for mentioning the idea to modify the speedometers.... Although I'm pleased as punch that it got implemented (:hide
, I see in retrospect I should not have suggested it in that venue. But again, I fully agree those threads could do with some "heightened security".
While I find the business about 'protecting the devs' a little amusing, I think one of the 'problems' that occured with that thread was that it was quite plain that requests and ideas were being implemented, some relevant ones were being taken into account, and it's one of the very few times I've seen that sort of instant response to suggestions. Seems fairly inevitable that on a big forum you're going to get people noticing this and sticking their own requests in. Not suggesting it's good, just that it's going to happen...
I'm sure the devs don't need protection as such, they're big boys and can look after themselves But I'm sure a zero-tolerance policy on spam in patch threads wouldn't be over the top. We don't get a new patch every day so I don't think it'd be excessive to actively moderate patch threads to keep irrelevant posts to a minimum...
But I'm sure a zero-tolerance policy on spam in patch threads wouldn't be over the top. We don't get a new patch every day so I don't think it'd be excessive to actively moderate patch threads to keep irrelevant posts to a minimum...Which is why, I suppose, moderators ought to be especially vociferous in chopping out off-topic or ill-informed posts.
Edit: Was in reply to Blowtus.
Edit: Was in reply to Blowtus.
I read through that whole thread and I was amazed at the off-topic stuff that had nothing to do with the patch and the large number of people repeating stuff that had already been covered in the thread or even in the first post.
I would have been agitated if I were a dev looking for viable feedback too!
Damn kids these days!
I would have been agitated if I were a dev looking for viable feedback too!
Damn kids these days!
Although I agree with all of you's opinions, I also have a flip side to this, in the U10 thread I believe (or U9) was when I posted the idea to have the ability to "script" your control settings for each car. There are some cases where its good when it could actually be used as a useful thing, but then theres just individualism, like "Can we have it so when I hit left, it clicks left instead of holds it, so I can turn better..." and "Zomg, I hate the new speedo, even after I've been asking for this for 2 years, gimme the old one back!!!". Theres Ideas, then theres just bloody picky.
I don't think anyone objects to requests or suggestions that are relevant to the patch being discussed. The random OT crap that people post without thinking is the issue.
Just to point out that to me two main issues are :
1) People who post without even reading the first post. Prime example : "Shock, horror, OMG, WTF, I installed the patch and my controller buttons need reassigning!!!" when there is this exact warning in BOLD CAPITALS in the FIRST POST. How stupid is that? I propose that people who make a post without even looking at the first post, should be banned for 6 months.
2) People who post the most obvious and first thing that they think of, without reading the thread (or even checking the first post). It's a pity that someone can be so stupid not to realise that if they notice something obvious, then it's probably already been mentioned. I propose that people who post obvious things without reading the thread, should be banned for 3 months.
Those two points are going to have to be enforced somehow, because we end up with double and triple length threads of repeated information. We need to raise up the maturity level a bit on this forum - it has been going downhill again. And that's no good, the LFS Forum was never intended to be a kiddies playground.
Another possible solution : I was thinking maybe we need to get a sort of "test patch beta team" a huge team of people (hundreds) who have vouched for eachother and have access to a hidden forum section. These people would have basically agreed to read the thread before posting. But that seems a sad way to go - the nature of test patches is they should be truly public. Anyway this would not solve the problem of idiotic posting on the main forum.
[ About feature requests in Test Patch threads - that is not the major issue for me - I would prefer people to attempt to keep it relevant to the subjects of the patch and not request clearly incompatible features in a compatible patch but that is not what made me angry ]
1) People who post without even reading the first post. Prime example : "Shock, horror, OMG, WTF, I installed the patch and my controller buttons need reassigning!!!" when there is this exact warning in BOLD CAPITALS in the FIRST POST. How stupid is that? I propose that people who make a post without even looking at the first post, should be banned for 6 months.
2) People who post the most obvious and first thing that they think of, without reading the thread (or even checking the first post). It's a pity that someone can be so stupid not to realise that if they notice something obvious, then it's probably already been mentioned. I propose that people who post obvious things without reading the thread, should be banned for 3 months.
Those two points are going to have to be enforced somehow, because we end up with double and triple length threads of repeated information. We need to raise up the maturity level a bit on this forum - it has been going downhill again. And that's no good, the LFS Forum was never intended to be a kiddies playground.
Another possible solution : I was thinking maybe we need to get a sort of "test patch beta team" a huge team of people (hundreds) who have vouched for eachother and have access to a hidden forum section. These people would have basically agreed to read the thread before posting. But that seems a sad way to go - the nature of test patches is they should be truly public. Anyway this would not solve the problem of idiotic posting on the main forum.
[ About feature requests in Test Patch threads - that is not the major issue for me - I would prefer people to attempt to keep it relevant to the subjects of the patch and not request clearly incompatible features in a compatible patch but that is not what made me angry ]
Unfortunately Scawen though it's a "sad" solution it's probably the only way to resolve the issue. Even 1-200 people would probably be sufficient, since what you'd be after is a wide variation of hardware (and even operating systems) to pick up any bugs/issues.
That way you get the answers you need without the requests, not to mention the many "thanks for the new patch - only" replies.
even if you wanted to have your 'test patch beta team special forum', would there be a reason not to release them to all paying customers?
Well it (test patch beta team special forum) would minimise the need for Scawen to wade through uneccessary posts in order to gauge patch feedback. It would also keep the relevant test patch discussion focused in just one place. Two fair reasons not to release it publicly in the event of a private test forum.
Gunn, releasing the patches publicly and having a private thread to read are two separate things. And people who aren't developers could wade through public discussion and pick out relevant parts without wasting the dev's time 
Oh thanks for the insight Einstein. Did you even read the topic?
I wasn't trying to attack you, or imply you're stupid, just from reading your post it seemed to me that you had misunderstood what Blowtus had meant. I think the suggestion made by Blowtus is sensible enough...
Edit: yeah, I read the topic. I think one or both of us has misunderstood the other's posts, and it's not worth arguing over. "Well it (test patch beta team special forum) would minimise the need for Scawen to wade through uneccessary posts in order to gauge patch feedback." <-- my point was that Scawen wouldn't have to wade through two threads (public/private), and that the public would get the benefit of the patch.
Edit: yeah, I read the topic. I think one or both of us has misunderstood the other's posts, and it's not worth arguing over. "Well it (test patch beta team special forum) would minimise the need for Scawen to wade through uneccessary posts in order to gauge patch feedback." <-- my point was that Scawen wouldn't have to wade through two threads (public/private), and that the public would get the benefit of the patch.
He didn't make a suggestion he posed a question. Do you think a publicly released test patch would not create numerous extra threads?
Yes it would (maybe one extra public one), but if there was a private forum, Scawen would only have to read that sane one. And the public would get the patch, and even possibly post extremely useful information that the beta testers may not.
It is a contradiction, but I am sick of arguing.
If Scawen hadn't beaten me to the punch I would have suggested the secret forum section. If Mr Scawen is going to get as involved and effected as he is (I'm not slagging that off, I think it's a refreshing change) by interaction with the userbase then there needs to be a quality control. I must admit on a personal note I feel that as LFS is a paid for by consumers for Scawen to react like he has in a public, open, forum shows to me that he (you, if your reading. I'm not writing anything I wouldn't say to you . . . my lord.) doesn't really recognise what he has here. LFS has grown. It has become a beast that just can't be governed by a gentile forum anymore. The kids have got involved and they are here to stay. Some will get the idea and fall into the LFS ethos but as popularity grows more and more people will be posting random remarks about a subject they really know nothing about.
It's not going to stop happeing just because Scawen has come on and talked about banning. Yes, its his Forum. Yes, he has ultimate power and control over LFS and it's affiliates. But reading Scawens post in this thread about the banning (Bearing in mind the pressure, scale of pissed off'ness, constant badgering. I would find it difficult not to react.) one of my first thoughts was that it was a bit unprofessional. I get the inpression that if a developer came on in one of the BF2 forums as much as Scawen did here then that developer would be open to so much abuse, random comments, stupid suggestions, crazy randomness that it would drive them crazy. Which is why many developers don't interact with their userbase, or if they do it's via 'news' releases and like. Certainly not through continued discussion like Scawen participates in.
But it's only going to get worse. Scawens market is us idiots here. Us that make the stupid suggestions. Us that wind him up. Us, all of us that make him wonder why he is doing it for because we are never happy. It's ain't going to get any better mate. I wish I could say it would. But it ain't.
So unless Scawen can gain the ability to step back from the drivel he reads and cherry pick what he can, but he appears to be an involved kinda chap; and wants to be, then prehaps the only way to go is a private forum and for Scawen to surround himself with dedicated luetenants.
Personally. I have paid for this product and I wouldn't want to be excluded. But, I also feel quite lucky to have the involvement witht eh developer that this community enjoys. It's not the done thing. And I think Scawen is beginning to see why it's not the done thing.
Prehaps another solution is for the community to really pull together and to protect the devs to some degree. Maybe indoctrinate more Mods, get the mods more involved. (I don't subscribe to censorship but for the protection of our Dev/player relaisionship I'm willing to seperate the wheat from the chaff).
If we cherish what we have here to any degree then we also need to take on the responsibilty to protect Scawen from the idiots out there.
But I stll think banning people is a little harsh. Pat them on the head and say bless, yes. Ban them, don't think so.
Edit - I just read through the Patch Thread. And that last comment by Steve about not reading throught the thread made laugh out loud. The preverbial straw that broke the camels back me thinks.
It's not going to stop happeing just because Scawen has come on and talked about banning. Yes, its his Forum. Yes, he has ultimate power and control over LFS and it's affiliates. But reading Scawens post in this thread about the banning (Bearing in mind the pressure, scale of pissed off'ness, constant badgering. I would find it difficult not to react.) one of my first thoughts was that it was a bit unprofessional. I get the inpression that if a developer came on in one of the BF2 forums as much as Scawen did here then that developer would be open to so much abuse, random comments, stupid suggestions, crazy randomness that it would drive them crazy. Which is why many developers don't interact with their userbase, or if they do it's via 'news' releases and like. Certainly not through continued discussion like Scawen participates in.
But it's only going to get worse. Scawens market is us idiots here. Us that make the stupid suggestions. Us that wind him up. Us, all of us that make him wonder why he is doing it for because we are never happy. It's ain't going to get any better mate. I wish I could say it would. But it ain't.
So unless Scawen can gain the ability to step back from the drivel he reads and cherry pick what he can, but he appears to be an involved kinda chap; and wants to be, then prehaps the only way to go is a private forum and for Scawen to surround himself with dedicated luetenants.
Personally. I have paid for this product and I wouldn't want to be excluded. But, I also feel quite lucky to have the involvement witht eh developer that this community enjoys. It's not the done thing. And I think Scawen is beginning to see why it's not the done thing.
Prehaps another solution is for the community to really pull together and to protect the devs to some degree. Maybe indoctrinate more Mods, get the mods more involved. (I don't subscribe to censorship but for the protection of our Dev/player relaisionship I'm willing to seperate the wheat from the chaff).
If we cherish what we have here to any degree then we also need to take on the responsibilty to protect Scawen from the idiots out there.
But I stll think banning people is a little harsh. Pat them on the head and say bless, yes. Ban them, don't think so.
Edit - I just read through the Patch Thread. And that last comment by Steve about not reading throught the thread made laugh out loud. The preverbial straw that broke the camels back me thinks.
Pehaps some of the more recent members of the forum and LFS haven't quite realised that Scawen is in fact a real person, with real feelings and a real life who just happens to fill his days making us a great racing simulator. He's not in it to satisfy OUR wishes (we can shout for skidmarks for years, but they'll never come), but to satisfy is own vision.
Of course sometimes we will suggest something that he hadn't thought of and likes, but those days are rare. I think LFS would improve at the same rate is is doing even if we got rid of the improvement suggestions forum.
As for a private test patch team and forum, I'm not entirely sure that is necessary as THE solution. Perhaps the test patches can be released as currently to the public, and a post is made in the normal way. But at the same time a private forum for the test patch team is posted on. Scawen can then get a public reaction, and some more trusted, thoughful opinions at the same time.
But as I said I have faith in Scawen. I don't believe he needs our help in telling him how to run his forum, or create his game, and I am quite happy to stand back and let that happen. The last thread from Scawen is a good case in point. I don't really understand the scripting thing yet, so I kept out of it. But lots and lots of other people who also DIDN'T understand the scripting kept posting that they wanted a horn remapping function and other silly things that the original system would have coped with.
Despite the fact that I have the most posts here, I don't feel the need to vent my brain in every thread of Scawens (or anybodies) if it is above me. I suggest a few more people here do the same.
Of course sometimes we will suggest something that he hadn't thought of and likes, but those days are rare. I think LFS would improve at the same rate is is doing even if we got rid of the improvement suggestions forum.
As for a private test patch team and forum, I'm not entirely sure that is necessary as THE solution. Perhaps the test patches can be released as currently to the public, and a post is made in the normal way. But at the same time a private forum for the test patch team is posted on. Scawen can then get a public reaction, and some more trusted, thoughful opinions at the same time.
But as I said I have faith in Scawen. I don't believe he needs our help in telling him how to run his forum, or create his game, and I am quite happy to stand back and let that happen. The last thread from Scawen is a good case in point. I don't really understand the scripting thing yet, so I kept out of it. But lots and lots of other people who also DIDN'T understand the scripting kept posting that they wanted a horn remapping function and other silly things that the original system would have coped with.
Despite the fact that I have the most posts here, I don't feel the need to vent my brain in every thread of Scawens (or anybodies) if it is above me. I suggest a few more people here do the same.
This thread is closed
Please, be more carefull with the devs
(131 posts, closed, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG