BLOG Discussion - Absent Moderators

I'm glad we all understand satire here!

This is more inflaming
m.imgur.com/0xwmqsc


Look at those shithouse graphics with Frankenstein art work.

8 million bucks people

You mean a thread that has no real point?

I dunno

ON another note how does one review on steam put Shroud back into Mostly Positive?

Steam's way of rating reviews is a very "all or none" kind of approach.

The way it breaks down is:
Currently, SotA has 437 positive reviews and 187 negative reviews, for a total of 624. Its percentage of "negative" reviews is 187/624 = .2996 (29.96%) and its percentage of positive reviews is 437/624 = .7003 (70.03%). Because Steam is very cut and dry with the numbers (and doesn't round up or down), SotA's current numbers means any one review one way or the other tends to tip the scales between "mixed" and "mostly positive."

For example, if another negative review came along, that would mean 188/625 = .3008 (30.08%) <-- tipping the scales back into the "mixed" status. But if that were to happen, then another TWO positive reviews would be needed tip things back to "mostly positive" status: 439/627 = .7001 (70.01%).

This is the problem for SotA and its water-carriers. I was a teacher for 5 years, and after crunching many numbers and seeing how grades work (especially seeing first hand how relatively few missing assignments can drag down an otherwise solid grade), SotA is currently in an uphill battle that they can't possibly win given the current situation they are in....

Think of it this way... they are currently a C- student just hovering at the 70% mark. However, in this class, the grades are either "pass" (100% credit) or "fail" (0% credit). When you are on the edge of one category or another, even receiving two "passes" for every "fail" you receive won't cut it (2:1 = .6667, or 67%). Ultimately, if you keep averaging two "recommended" for every "not recommended," the score will still drop into the "mixed" status (D+) range. SotA will be lucky to get 2 "passes" for every "fail"... in fact, I'd guess it's more likely they will average 1:1 instead.

Right now, SotA needs 3 positive reviews for every 1 negative review they receive to make any headway (and even then, they are only 3:1, 75%), so the best they could hope for is gaining 1-3% points from where they are at currently. Even with 4 positive reviews for every 1 negative review, they won't achieve "very positive" (80+%) status again because there is simply too much dead weight from the negative reviews and 4 positive reviews to every 1 negative review is still only an overall score of 80%.

They are behind the eight ball right now. They are a student who didn't turn in too many assignments and now they are frantically trying to turn in work to keep their score from dropping. But, since they have very little hope of achieving a 3:1 positive:negative review ratio, they have almost no hope of even getting a few percentage points breathing room.

While, for the time being, the "pod" can throw in some positive reviews here and there (and Port can possibly delete some of the negative ones), unless their game really improves drastically, the fall into mixed status is inevitable. Releasing such an unfinished product so early has piloted their ship straight into a whirlpool, and things like Starr's "Steam Review Request" and the pod's attempts to throw in some positives when needed and down vote negative reviews as unhelpful are little more than vain attempts to rally those on board to row against the current. In the short term, it gives the appearance that they are making some headway and avoiding being swallowed up. But, over time, even a 2:1 ratio will sink them.

Sorry if my explanation was convoluted and unclear. Was just trying to point out that just like a kid who doesn't do most of their homework (but gets 100% on every test and major project), even though things are on the edge right now, they've had a slow, inevitable slide from "very positive"  (80+% at the beginning of the Steam Review Request) to teetering on the edge between "mostly positive" and mixed. It's only a matter of a month or two before they sink under the "mixed" status and won't ever recover, mostly likely. Like I said before, it will take DRASTIC improvements to change the review trends if they even want a hope of staying "mostly positive."

I do actually understand why Starr asked what he did, because when you see the way these numbers trend, it was obvious SotA's score was going to drop to "mixed" (and/or worse) months ago. But, I still don't agree with him doing what he did because it is just putting a bandaid on a mortal wound (and the energy could have been directed elsewhere, like actually improving the game and being more honest about its imperfect state). Instead, they tried to dissemble for MONTHS and only changed the description on their store page to a disclaimer recently. They really should have focused more on improving their game and less on banning people, writing snarky comments on reviews and in the Steam discussion threads, and dressing up the review score to hide the ugly truth.

The only good thing for them is that when the game hits "mixed" status, it will dissuade many "fair-weather" buyers from buying it (helping to stem the number of negative reviews). However, as I tried to warn them before, they will still have to deal with many negative reviews coming out of the woodwork from those who bought the game based on the overly positive reviews that Starr solicited (and who are disappointed by the lack of progress). If you read through most of the recent negative reviews, and underlying theme is a lack of progress made.

Anyway, sorry for the wall of text. I made something very simple (i.e., "because math") into something way too wordy.

The feminism thread that IM mentioned in his recent article was about gamergate, an issue on which Port's higher-ups made clear their stance (they don't support campaigns of hate against women).  The irony is that, despite siding with the promiscuous girl over the hateful man, Port then moderates the pro-feminism thread, only to leave talk of selling and using women untouched.

You are correct, I am the same WrathPhoenix that registered on your site that made those statements. The statements that were made were made in jest in a monty python esque humor that would be period humor to the middle / dark ages etc. Honestly, When i realized that some may take offense on a modern level i removed my posts and self moderated. Obviously (to me) it wasnt meant to be offensive. That said, Im not sure others thought the same way either though I cant speak to them.

I joined your site because of the blake blackstone postings, but I refrained from speaking on that as Blake is a friend of mine one way or another though we may not agree on everything. I also, frankly, dont agree with your site or most of the things you post which are knee jerk material and meant to more or less instill instant rage without any sense of context to the situation. That said, youre free to have your opinions and I know as I am a player owned town owner, I will have mine and none of you will probably agree. But please remember that not all people who post on SotA forums are devils. TBH, I wasnt thinking when i joked as I did and it is what it is - but I made sure to remove that honestly before I even saw this.

I understand you all have your view points, and I respect them (though not always your approach, if i were being honest) but do remember that not everything that happens on the shroud forums is a sub story to some overarching story of tyranny and betrayal on the end of portalarium. Sometimes, people are just people - and people can goof up.

I wish you all the best. And hope you do not wish to skewer me just because I posted here.

Firstly, thank you for posting. I would hope nobody here would skewer you just for posting here, what would that even get us?

That is exactly the point of the blog, it is a little in your face, knee jerk... Insane. It caters for the yang to the yin.

As for the bloody fucking moderators. InsaneMembrane used joke about white male privledge all the time when he was still on the forum, that was deleted. Other people do the same, it is deleted. GamerGate was brought up and it was deleted. No, it seems like you can only have a one sided conversation at Shroud of the Avatar forums on every single subject. In this case, women come off the poorer for it. Despite the jokes at women's expense and the "interesting" OP they are all off topic trolling anyway! 

You can't talk about money there. You can't talk about faults in the game. You can't talk about feminism. You can't talk about anything. Except, how fucking awesome Portalarium are for selling us snowmen in the add-on store.

Guys come on, organized reporting or not I think you can all agree that more things should be seeing the light of the day over there. Recent Steam & reddit jabs go towards saying how bad the hiding and changing of the narrative is over there, it isn't just me saying it. Most of us here have felt that wrath, it is the only reason I wrote a quick shitty post from my Insane past, I like to have a little fun at the moderators expense. They deserve it, and I have to poke the bear once and a while folks 

And I will finally admit wrathphoenix, I did mention you there in hopes to drive you to come in here and post 

First off, glad you made a post to voice your opinion. In fact, I wish more people would express displeasure here when they read something they feel is unfair. I disagree with some of what I read here as well and I feel free to express when I disagree. Mordecai and Myrcello often post when they disagree with topics. I'd say both of their opinions are well respected here, at least they are for me.
Perhaps, but this is not the middle ages and as much as the game appears to be the middle ages, the developers have stated you are an avatar entering that world. I would imagine treating women in game as though they were pieces of property to be traded and bartered for or treating people as though they were slaves, against their wishes, would not be deemed appropriate. Additionally, racist treatment of individuals should then be acceptable, as it would fit your description of period humor and I don't think that should be deemed appropriate either. At least I would hope not. Maybe your opinion on that differs. We're free to disagree there. I would also state that if you believe those things, you are certainly not a player I would care to engage with in or out of it.

Anyway, good on you for providing your perspective here. I sincerely appreciate it and wish it happened more often. Alas, none of the issues that arise here are considered of value to the majority of folks there, so we'll most likely continue living separate lives. Sad. I feel there should be more open debate about the game, its direction, and the community. I can't have that there without my opinions being attacked for being critical. One need only look at any critical thread Drocis posts to see how dissent is treated. Agree with him or not, he's repeatedly told his opinion is irrelevant and that his town will be a failure by (for example) Envy. I myself was threatened to be banned for reporting Mata spamming a thread despite the devs specifically asking that users post a single post in that thread. I was $800 into this game and sold it off because of what I felt was poor customer service. They threatened my investment in the game for reporting a violation of a popular member of the community. Is it tyranny? No. Its poor customer service from a company that pleads its open and transparent community interaction.

Again, I'm glad you posted here. I hope you do in the future if you feel inclined to disagree with something said here.

"It worked for ArcheAge, and that game sucks!" - Portalarium, probably