Offtopic Anvil Discussion

[Guest!]

Indeed, complaints are handled differently. "It's not for everybody" is said many more often, true. And indeed, topics (regardless if they are complaints or anything else) are moderated or closed if they are off-topic or the author made the final decision. And indeed, comments (regardless if they are complaints or anything else) may be moved or removed if they don't meet some basic criteria (e.g. if vulgar speech or trolling is done). And yes, we usually don't spend precious minutes to settle a dispute which ended in vulgar speech or provoking -- it's simply removed if the warnings were not listened to. (We aren't as nice as Weimer, then. But only with those who don't intend to accept the guidelines which are mostly based on common sense.)

 

So the whole "controversy" is also due to the different moderation policies. (It would be off-topic, so let's not discuss how "good" or "bad" these policies are.) To sum up, IMHO:

- Some people feel their IA problems are ignored all the time, and this disturbs them.

- Some people feel offended by BWL's moderation policies, and cannot accept them.

 

So IMO the "controversy" isn't about "how IA is made", rather about "how IA complaints" are handled. Well, as someone pointed out, there is no need to repeat the same thing 10 times, so let this be the last: I'm afraid BWL & IA won't change, no matter how many long threads will deal with them. Don't get me wrong, I've no way nor intention to prevent these.

 

All in all, I admit complaints may be handled differently by us, but it's not necessarily incorrect. Just different from the usual. Those who managed to get friendly with that different approach, are now happy users of IA forum (too). Their number isn't high (though increasing), but that's not the goal either. Everyone can freely decide whether to join the community or not.

 

There are two "controversies": one's about the way IA is made (and personally I think it's a collection of some of the worst design decisions I've seen since Improved Battles or so), and another's about Skiret's receptiveness - to put it euphemistically.

 

From what I've seen at the IA forum, criticism isn't handled at all. It's usually dismissed with a standard response:

a) "It's a disgusting lie."

b) "It's already been discussed in the FAQ/in another thread/etc. *topic closed*"

c) (last resort) "If you don't like it, don't play it."

 

Which, incidentally, I also believe to be the reason why there are so few "complaints": it's the least feedback-friendly environment I've seen in the BG2 modding community. And it's not simply because of the mystical magical f-word: take a look at SixOfSpades' review of Tactics and Weimer's answer. That kind of debate has been extremely fruitful for Tactics, but I've never seen anything similar at IA's home forum. Of course Sikret can administer his forum the way he feels more appropriate and discuss or not discuss his work, he doesn't have any obligation whatsoever. But, like it or not, in the end this kind of attitude is gonna backlash (actually, it's already doing that). Less feedback = less ideas and less imput = autistic mod.

[Baronius]

While I disagree that criticism isn't handled at all, I respect your opinion -- its style differs from many of the previous posts in this thread. So while there is (a.), (b.) and (c.) indeed, there is a (d.) as well when a brand-new suggestion is examined.

 

As for the input, I wouldn't worry about less ideas. Most of IA's ideas come from Sikret himself, and the rest of them are player requests -- if they comply with the fundamental IA concepts, they are added.

[Evaine Dian]

I'm so happy that my calling Sim "cute and fluffy" seems to meet with your general approval!

[Guest Mr. X]

From my lurking on the IA forums, I actually have to agree that Sikret is open to receiving criticism, provided that the person posting the criticism does both of the following:

 

1. Prior to making the criticism, the poster has stated that he/she very much likes IA overall, and how appreciative he/she is of Sikret’s work.

2. The poster accepts whatever response Sikret makes to the criticism, and doesn’t try to start a debate over why he/she disagrees with Sikret’s position in an attempt to change his mind.

 

From my observations, if the above two guidelines are followed, you'll do fine. Otherwise, Sikret is likely to become annoyed with and dismissive towards the poster, effectively shutting down any further discussion on the matter.

 

I am convinced that the "controversy" surrounding IA is derived nearly entirely from the vehemence with which IA is defended

 

I think another reason for the "controversy" is the fact that IA can't be installed in components (see the disclaimer at the end here). With other mods, if you don't like a particular component, you don't install it, and so you can tailor-make an installation you're happy with. With IA, however, it's all or nothing, and so people have to take the parts they enjoy along with the parts they don't; this is more likely to lead to debates about whether IA is good or bad overall, since you can't get rid of the stuff you don't like. (Disclaimer - this is not intended to revisit the debate over whether IA should be broken down into components. I'm not a programmer, and so I don't know whether it's reasonably doable or not. Plus Sikret's vision of IA precludes it from being installed in pieces, and it is his mod, after all.)

[berelinde]

From my lurking on the IA forums, I actually have to agree that Sikret is open to receiving criticism, provided that the person posting the criticism does both of the following:

 

1. Prior to making the criticism, the poster has stated that he/she very much likes IA overall, and how appreciative he/she is of Sikret’s work.

2. The poster accepts whatever response Sikret makes to the criticism, and doesn’t try to start a debate over why he/she disagrees with Sikret’s position in an attempt to change his mind.

 

I respectfully disagree. Those who are familiar with my posting habits know me to be rather moderate in my views, and inoffensive in my language. I am not given to inappropriate dialogue on any forum, nor am I excessively judgmental or inclined to go too far off-topic. Nevertheless, I have learned that respectful, constructive criticism will be summarily deleted. I'd link posts as evidence, but the point is that I can't. They're gone.

[icelus]

I'd link posts as evidence, but the point is that I can't. They're gone.

 

Hee!

 

(Yes, this is an utterly useless post, but berelinde pretty much hit the nail on the head. Both sides of this debate can't link to threads to back up their arguments because some threads have vaporized, which allows the other side to say that paranoia and conspiracies are running rampant. Good times.)

[Guest Mr. X]

Well, I can’t say that I am overly familiar with your posts, berelinde, but from what I’ve seen in this (and the now-off-topic thread), as well as IA’s “Disgusting Lies†topic, I’m inclined to agree with you as to your posting habits - you appear to be impartial and inoffensive. So if you say that your respectful criticisms have been deleted, I’m willing to accept your claim. Although again, if you didn’t follow the guidelines I posted above, that might explain why. (Note that I’m not suggesting those guidelines need to be followed in order to remain respectful; it's just that following those guidelines will get you acknowledged on the IA forums.)

[dizzyorange]

From my lurking on the IA forums, I actually have to agree that Sikret is open to receiving criticism, provided that the person posting the criticism does both of the following:

 

1. Prior to making the criticism, the poster has stated that he/she very much likes IA overall, and how appreciative he/she is of Sikret’s work.

2. The poster accepts whatever response Sikret makes to the criticism, and doesn’t try to start a debate over why he/she disagrees with Sikret’s position in an attempt to change his mind.

 

I respectfully disagree. Those who are familiar with my posting habits know me to be rather moderate in my views, and inoffensive in my language. I am not given to inappropriate dialogue on any forum, nor am I excessively judgmental or inclined to go too far off-topic. Nevertheless, I have learned that respectful, constructive criticism will be summarily deleted. I'd link posts as evidence, but the point is that I can't. They're gone.

 

 

I had really thought those claims of posts being deleted were exaggerated. But I can't help but notice that DavidW's thoughtful comparison of Tactics-type mods was deleted only 2 days after it was posted in the IA forum.

 

EDIT: whoops my mistake for jumping to conclusions. Thanks thebigg for pointing that out.

[the bigg]

I had really thought those claims of posts being deleted were exaggerated. But I can't help but notice that DavidW's thoughtful comparison of Tactics-type mods was deleted only 2 days after it was posted in the IA forum.

As much as I hate playing the devil's advocate, that thread wasn't deleted, but moved: http://forums.blackwyrmlair.net/index.php?showtopic=3064. Of course, the "moved thread" notice isn't there, but it's certainly possible that this is the default setting on BWL.

 

EDIT: Of course, back in the day the deletion policy was comically far-fetching (E.G. Sikret stated that he didn't want spoilers and thus deleted any post discussing the mod's content). I'm unsure if Berelinde is speaking about recent or old deletion though.

[Guest Mr. X]

I'm glad you pointed that out, the bigg. Otherwise, I might have been inclined to retract my earlier comments. (As a related aside, I know that on SP, for example, when a thread is moved, there is no public notification given; only the originator of the thread is notified, and that is by way of an email.)

[jastey]

[This is a rant post.]

 

From my lurking on the IA forums, I actually have to agree that Sikret is open to receiving criticism, provided that the person posting the criticism does both of the following:

 

1. Prior to making the criticism, the poster has stated that he/she very much likes IA overall, and how appreciative he/she is of Sikret’s work.

2. The poster accepts whatever response Sikret makes to the criticism, and doesn’t try to start a debate over why he/she disagrees with Sikret’s position in an attempt to change his mind.

 

Reading those "guidelines", one can think all people complaining about IA/BWL forum policies exaggerate, since it reads quite acceptable.

 

Yet, and that's the fascinating point, what happens usually in those discussions that lead to deleting is

 

2b. The poster does not accept Sikret's reply but points out why he/she disagrees with Sikret's opinion.

 

3. Baronius posts a long post, arguing pro-IA and why all people should leave Sikret alone.

 

4. A discussion between the original poster, Baronius, several spam and troll posters and other posters with relevant arguments starts. You can have a taste of this in this resp. the "off-topic" thread.

 

5. The next day, all relevant posts, especially Baronius' rants, are deleted.

Optional: One of the posters that didn't stop to post arguments, not necessarily insulting or off-topic, but contradicting the opinion of BWL head admin, which would be Baronius, gets temporarily banned.

 

This might sound exaggerated, but I have seen this happening exact this way. As already stated: I can't link to a thread to proof it.

 

But, yes, as long as you stop at point 2 in Mr. X's guideline you should be fine.

 

 

dizzyorange, Mr.X: Don't worry. Browse the BWL forums regularly, read discussions at real time while they are happening, and you'll see this soon enough.

[Western Paladin]

Oh, man. If someone wasn't expecting me to be somewhere tomorrow that wasn't in the Matrixnet, I would now have to go and hang around BWL all day pressing "Reload" every three seconds.

[Meanfred]

I am not sure why this is such a sensitive Topic, and why so many people seem to be attracted to it. But being new to this forum, I need to start interacting with the community, as I hope to become a Gibberling one day myself.

 

Here is my opinion:

 

First off, From what I understand, IA is just a mod created by Sikret. It was created by him with the intentions of improving the game, and possibly making it more fun and challenging for players whom are tired of kicking the dead horse, and want something new to do with the Baldur's Gate Series. With that being said, whether the mod was to your liking or not, for example, the mod not being broken down into components. Then you should not feel the dire need to post a thread criticizing even if it is constructive.

 

There are two mature ways to go about it.

 

1. If you played the mod, and enjoyed it. Take it for what it was, maybe post a little praise, and maybe a thank you for the efforts of the creator.

 

2. If you did not enjoy the mod. Then take it with a grain of salt, and just keep it to yourself. As the mod has already been created, and the views and opinions of a single person are most likely not going to sway the outcome of the situation one way or another.

 

In closing, the only conclusion I think I can draw from this, is that this is less about the mod "IA", and more about the people involved with it. Whether any of us get anything out of this or not. It always makes for good drama on the forums for all of us readers, =P. Thanks a bunch, and take it easy all. God Bless, and Later Days....... =P

[berelinde]

I'm unsure if Berelinde is speaking about recent or old deletion though.

It happened to me this year, and it resulted in a temporary suspension of posting privileges that I did not contest. After that, I pretty much gave up on posting anything at all on the IA forum. It has happened to others within the last few months.

 

But this has gone on too long, already. DizzyOrange has his answer, everybody's made their points. DavidW put a wonderful analysis together, and that's still posted on both forums.

 

There's no need to keep slinging mud.

[Guest temujin]

2. If you did not enjoy the mod. Then take it with a grain of salt, and just keep it to yourself.

I disagree. Why should I keep it to myself? So if somebody asks me what I think of the mod, you're saying I should pretend I never even heard of their question and continue to just ignore them?. Hell no. I speak my mind. Besides, I never said I didn't enjoy the mod at all. There were some parts that I did like. I was giving an honest answer.

 

The way I look at it is like this. If you're a modmaker, you should walk the higher ground and not let the petty bickerings about your mod get to you. Just try to take only the constructive parts and ignore the rest. Don't stoop to the naysayers' level. Only by showing some maturity and class is how you gain respect. What others said about the post deletions and Sikret's angry retorts and negative attitude are completely spot on. To make matters worse, he sends out his lackey, his number 1 right-hand man to defend his mod on various forums.

 

You are right that players should show maturity and be thankful for something given for free (I am thankful. THANK YOU VERY MUCH Sikret!). But how can you expect players to be mature when the mod author himself is not?