Hall of... Fame?

Astonica · May 14, 2009, 10:22 AM

It's just crossed my mind, but perhaps RMS is not strict enough, so these kinds of players who'd post 'trashy' reviews just do it freely?
I hope I didn't offend any of you.

horo · May 14, 2009, 10:48 AM

That's my take on the situation which I communicated to yC. The problem of the review section is the lack of guidelines that a review has to adhere to which results in poor quality reviews, which in turn get put down by the 'bad guys' and end up in Soap Opera.

Descent · May 14, 2009, 10:58 AM

Quote from: Astonica on May 14, 2009, 10:16 AM
I've never thought that my simple suggestion turned out into a quite big topic. To be honest, I feel honored.
Seems like.. It had never been proposed before?
Another question that still lingers in my head is, why do people really like to submit 'trashy' (reviews) in RMS just to gain fame or to blame other servers? For their own server's popularity?

In this day and age with RO Private Servers, there seems to be little morality floating around. Hell...there's even talk of servers DDoSing other servers that they're in direct competition with. If it's going THAT far, anything is possible nowadays.

Cielte · May 14, 2009, 11:12 AM

Quote from: horo on May 14, 2009, 10:48 AM
That's my take on the situation which I communicated to yC. The problem of the review section is the lack of guidelines that a review has to adhere to which results in poor quality reviews, which in turn get put down by the 'bad guys' and end up in Soap Opera.

Which is us, apparently. Woo hoo.

horo · May 14, 2009, 11:20 AM

It would easily be resolved if the word limit for reviews on the main site was significantly increased and the review section was changed from 'I'm 50 letters over the website review limit, so I'll post my review/advertisement attempt lacking any depth, grammar and structure on the forums' to in-depth reviews only. It'll raise the quality of the forum overall and thus the quality of replies.

Hutchy · May 14, 2009, 11:30 AM

I don't know if "trashy" reviews can really be regulated. Even if the administration were to "tighten up" so to speak, people would still speak their minds about servers, and about others' reviews. This is a forum after all. While order is needed, censoring people just for the sake of sugarcoating things seems like a bad idea to me.

I don't mean to offend you, either; you have my respect. I just don't know if RMS is going to make a comeback any time soon, with the way things are going right now.

LiteX · May 15, 2009, 03:37 AM

Quote from: Hutchy on May 14, 2009, 11:30 AM
I don't know if "trashy" reviews can really be regulated. Even if the administration were to "tighten up" so to speak, people would still speak their minds about servers, and about others' reviews. This is a forum after all. While order is needed, censoring people just for the sake of sugarcoating things seems like a bad idea to me.

I don't mean to offend you, either; you have my respect. I just don't know if RMS is going to make a comeback any time soon, with the way things are going right now.

In other words, it's either how it is now(Opinions=Flames) or absolutely no freedom, anyway, RMS is pretty clean and flame-less compared to other sites where just saying an opinion will make flame wars, I mean, another gaming site that I used to visit people there were just so...uncivilized that the mods had to crackdown and delete all threads that had even a low chance of causing flames.

And @Descent; Nowadays, people really don't give a crap about what they are doing on the internet, like the kid who threatened to commit suicide because the GMs in WoW did not wanted to unban him, or the dude in Eve Online that caused a power outage on the opposite alliance's best player just to get a win.

Quote from: Cielte on May 14, 2009, 11:12 AM
Quote from: horo on May 14, 2009, 10:48 AM
That's my take on the situation which I communicated to yC. The problem of the review section is the lack of guidelines that a review has to adhere to which results in poor quality reviews, which in turn get put down by the 'bad guys' and end up in Soap Opera.

Which is us, apparently. Woo hoo.

Well, thing is, without objection, anyone can fib saying that X server is an utopia while it is literally a junkhouse, if we can't really reply negative things or lies about the server/review than anyone would pretty much create miraculous reviews and maybe even semi-ads to get pop. in their server

Hutchy · May 15, 2009, 04:29 AM

Mm, I'd rather read a bunch of flames than visit a forum and find that nobody has posted because they're scared of getting warned or whatever.

I guess there's no real middle ground.

LiteX · May 15, 2009, 05:30 AM

Quote from: Hutchy on May 15, 2009, 04:29 AM
Mm, I'd rather read a bunch of flames than visit a forum and find that nobody has posted because they're scared of getting warned or whatever.

I guess there's no real middle ground.

Exactly!

Astonica · May 15, 2009, 10:01 AM

Flames are, somehow, still considerable to me. I mean, flames STILL contain opinions. Even if it were contradicting the truth. However, I cannot stand reviews lacking grammar, proper punctuation, and spelling. It's more like a rushly made ad than a review. In addition, that kind of review is not understandable. =/ How are the players supposed to understand "so i herd u leik peenat bater" reviews? >.<
So, basically, we can't really do a prominent change about the flames, but how about the review requirements? I'm tired of people accusing other servers with no proof or witness.

Descent · May 15, 2009, 11:55 AM

Quote from: Astonica on May 15, 2009, 10:01 AM
Flames are, somehow, still considerable to me. I mean, flames STILL contain opinions. Even if it were contradicting the truth. However, I cannot stand reviews lacking grammar, proper punctuation, and spelling. It's more like a rushly made ad than a review. In addition, that kind of review is not understandable. =/ How are the players supposed to understand "so i herd u leik peenat bater" reviews? >.<
So, basically, we can't really do a prominent change about the flames, but how about the review requirements? I'm tired of people accusing other servers with no proof or witness.

You are quickly becoming one of my favourite people on RMS.

And yes. Flames or not, they are still opinions, and I also wholeheartedly agree with LiteX. Why should the reviewer gain special protection? They could be lying through their teeth as much as they wish. It's not fair to target the people who bring negativity to a server review, especially since Ratemyserver has changed in the last year from Fair Reviews to "ZOMGJOINNOW"!

I like the way you guys think. And I mean that with zero sarcasm.

Pandora · May 15, 2009, 12:30 PM

I'm sure the idea of the hall of fame comes from good intention, but it's not viable for many of the reason stated in the thread before its slight derail. It would just end up being an advertisement section, besides, no one here has the capacity to pass full judgment on any servers, they lack internal information and the staff singling out some servers by putting some server in the 'hall of fame' but some not would be seen as bias.

Hutchy · May 15, 2009, 02:27 PM

Quote from: Astonica on May 15, 2009, 10:01 AM
Flames are, somehow, still considerable to me. I mean, flames STILL contain opinions. Even if it were contradicting the truth. However, I cannot stand reviews lacking grammar, proper punctuation, and spelling. It's more like a rushly made ad than a review. In addition, that kind of review is not understandable. =/ How are the players supposed to understand "so i herd u leik peenat bater" reviews? >.<
So, basically, we can't really do a prominent change about the flames, but how about the review requirements? I'm tired of people accusing other servers with no proof or witness.

Astonica, marry me. This was the best post I've seen on RMS in a long time.

Scars · May 15, 2009, 03:18 PM

The most important part is the "credibility". RMS need to build its credibility before tightening rules.

Again as I said its not the users fault they behaving this way, and its no use to just really tighten the rules right now since what makes most of the RMS forum is our everyday habits of dramas and flames, with little constructive discussion.

What I am suggesting is, bring in something "new" or make a change on RMS and build the credibility back before tightening the rules where that alone would only makes things worst.

You can't expect by just tightening rules everything is magically solved and everyone suddenly became professional and constructive.

There's a bigger picture to it.

Edit: In response to Astonica.

Quote from: Astonica on May 15, 2009, 10:01 AM
Flames are, somehow, still considerable to me. I mean, flames STILL contain opinions. Even if it were contradicting the truth. However, I cannot stand reviews lacking grammar, proper punctuation, and spelling. It's more like a rushly made ad than a review. In addition, that kind of review is not understandable. =/ How are the players supposed to understand "so i herd u leik peenat bater" reviews? >.<
So, basically, we can't really do a prominent change about the flames, but how about the review requirements? I'm tired of people accusing other servers with no proof or witness.

Yes I personally like constructive flames, and for all my time here I've never seen or do not recall any arguments done without resorting to flame and many of them getting locked before reaching its peak, but I know that I am able to argue to the best of my ability without having to resort to a single flame. So I am perfectly fine either way.

Thing is if I am told to not resort to a single flame, I expect that everyone (not some or most) that flames will be punished, if not its simply unfair. Before that was often the case here on RMS, some people get punish others don't (not too sure now), not saying that the punishment work much...

horo · May 15, 2009, 04:30 PM

Scars I don't think that 'something new' you're looking for exists $:-\$