Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

rename-memes are an overused, ancient disease, driving new players away

7 posts, 311 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
sort

4 months ago
title
+7 / -0
I agree that renames are confusing to new and old players!

also when will downvotes be removed?

downvotes encourage an echo chamber of group think which drives new and different ideas and new and different people away

please see this article on why downvotes encourage a toxic community:

https://www.thenational.ae/arts-culture/comment/dislike-why-the-thumbs-down-option-on-facebook-is-a-fundamentally-flawed-idea-1.757836
quote:

The most common reason, by some distance, was because they disagreed with the opinion being expressed – nothing to do with civility or abuse whatsoever.

“This surprised us,” ­Disqus’s Tony Hue admitted in a blog post – but it shows that downvoting systems designed to tackle bullying could end up facilitating it instead. A journalist for Slate, Rachel Withers, found herself included in one of the Facebook trials, and concluded that it’s “the perfect feature for trolls and bots, lefties and conservatives… to silence opinions through effective organising and well-policed echo chambers”.
+3 / -3
4 months ago
an example of this "disagree = downvote echo chamber" can be seen here

https://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/183853#183853


Let me ask you, if you silence or hide the posts you disagree with, will your community grow or diminish?

15 months after my post was I wrong? in another 15 months?
+3 / -3
A fairly wide variety of opinions gets posted on the forums without being downvoted, let alone hidden. I strongly doubt the existence of downvotes has a measurable effect on the community.

These rename threads are indeed a waste of time. No further renames or reversions are planned or expected... especially reversions to TA names we went to such efforts to remove.
+3 / -0
It is strange how it are always players that have many more down then upvotes want them removed...

Also common, we aren't children that can't take an: "I dont like your idea".
I mean, -10years, you may had that in school where you couldnt get a bad grade.

Also shall now every person that doesnt like an idea be forced to write a comment just to precise that they are against it? That would make threat unreadable. Half would only be: "I disagree with XXX"



Also a post that got downvoted at a certain point doesnt have to be "correct" for the next 15 months, it only represents the opinion that the community had back then.
(Oh and sry, i still disagree with your ideas back then. I mean, you are basically saying that i shall give metal to bad players, by default....)

USrankBatman,just dont take downvotes to personal, because they arent against you. Its just people saying i disagree with what you are saying.
+2 / -0
4 months ago
I would say citation needed for "driving new players away". Seems there are still quite some players https://steamdb.info/app/334920/graphs/ (ignoring the bump from steam release).

Would in fact be curious how is the forum population related with the new player count. Many new players probably never reach the forum, but maybe I am wrong...

off-topic: "renames are confusing" and "remove downvotes" is not was this thread was about at start.
+0 / -0
4 months ago
quote:
give new players more metal, and give pro players less metal
high skill players should be nerfed vs low skill players


This must be the source of all the downvotes. It definately makes me want to downvote it, considering that these things aren't cast as a joke. Those ideas are stupid.

You've probably heard about people complaining about the balancer, and people like Firepluck saying, "Loosing is ok because that means I get better teammates in the future." Droping rank means that the higher skilled players end up on your team. I guess that's an incentive to lose games in teams, but it's silly and doesn't sit as 'just' to me. The balancer exists to sort teams for a reason. Your rank exists for the balancer to adequately judge your relative skill. It splits the high skill players between the 2 teams and it splits the low skill players between the 2 teams. If you are high skill you have fewer high skill alies than if you were low skill. That's how it works.

As your skill increases, you get lower skilled allies. That's 'just' and balances the games. Actually changing the game itself baised on the skill rating of players--- that's bullshit. That's 'unjust.' I don't understand how you could feel any different.
Being a good player means you would no longer play the game, because the game would be designed to be stacked against you, literally. Saying that the downvotes silence dissenting opinions and pointing to this is utterly foolish. This is not a dissenting opinion, it is a worthless opinion, worthless for zero-k. It can be a good idea in a different context, like an entirely different game where that idea is the selling point, and most stratagy is devised around the idea that when you do good you get punished. But not zero-k, where the strategy comes from territory, resource spots, and most importantly units interacting with eachother and terrain.
+5 / -0