Support Team Feedback!

[PromethiusTM]

Fantastic Thanks, this I belive is a massive step in the right direction. Once again though this thread seems to be going slightly off point.

Ok everyone, here are our first efforts to respond to some of the constructive feedback offered.
We are starting with these suggestions from PromethiusTM as we all feel these are well stated suggestions that can help to improve support for the Community.



So lets start with the first two, which involves members of the team being more identifiable.



We will be posting a list of all support staff with their in-game names, with links to where some of this information can already be found on the forum. We will also be listing individual mods on the worlds threads in the forum so players can easily see the primary in-game moderator for their world. Of course players will still have the option to contact level 2 or level 3 members of the staff if they feel they need further assistance.

Now to address the next point.



We are going to take this idea a step further and add identifying prefixes (tags) to all staff names in the game so they are easily identifiable. We have previously asked for colored text for staff names but have not been able to achieve that yet. So for now we feel this is a reasonable alternative and we will still continue to ask for colored text names for staff.
So for example some prefixes on staff names would be:

FM - Forum Moderator
SFM - Senior Forum Moderator
IGM - Ingame Moderator
SIGM - Senior Ingame Moderator
CCM - Co-Community Manager
CM - Community Manager

Tags will appear before the staff members name, example: SFM-ModeratorName

When any member is present in chats on their play server, they will state that they do not moderate that world.



We are going to implement some mechanism to accomplish this goal, though whether it will be an actual form or not has not yet been determined. This will need to be worked out with the LCM as they will be involved as well. However, we are going to make sure we come up with a solution.

So that is where we are starting. We will of course be updating the community on progress in these areas, and still making efforts to be responsive to other useful suggestions for improvement.
Thank you.

 

[DeletedUser653]

Re post 138 on page 14 (still got 6 more pages to read!)

..............
As mentioned Zarok has been brought in to provide a better communication with the BETA and EN teams. There are planned things which will prove this, but as with everything it takes some time and patience.

Darkstar - I have to say we are getting better feed back from beta to EN since BYEORDIE has been modding on both servers then at any time in the past, so why have you bought Zarok in? Its got nothing to do with improved feedback between these teams as BYEORDIE is already treading a very difficult line between what he would like to say and whats allowed to be discussed in this forum about Beta issues. I am sure he would like to give more feedback to EN players but we are banned from discussing Beta here (as we are repeatedly reminded).
WE do a massive problem with Major faults being reported in BETA, being ignored and then implemented in the main servers so if Zarok has been bought in to improve matters perhaps you can ask her to deal with all the issues that are raised in BETA and ensure that these are resolved before transporting to Production servers.

onto the remaining 6 pages - nice to see some honesty from ex mods, just a pity they got banned and you hid the fact that star was banned by not crossing out his name. Not good that.

 

[DeletedUser108405]

Re post 138 on page 14 (still got 6 more pages to read!)


Darkstar - I have to say we are getting better feed back from beta to EN since BYEORDIE has been modding on both servers then at any time in the past, so why have you bought Zarok in?

Judging from this thread, it appears to be so that she can shield the CM from some very unwelcome attention.

onto the remaining 6 pages - nice to see some honesty from ex mods, just a pity they got banned and you hid the fact that star was banned by not crossing out his name. Not good that.

Agreed, shockingly bad show on that score.

Btw, I'm still hoping my suggestion of making the entire support team aware of the procedures for new forum registrations has made the list. It still has not been addressed by any of the staff members; is it being dodged for some reason?

 

[DeletedUser108406]

Btw, I'm still hoping my suggestion of making the entire support team aware of the procedures for new forum registrations has made the list. It still has not been addressed by any of the staff members; is it being dodged for some reason?

Hi poppinjay! I registered on the forum nearly a week ago but was only validated today. A member of support informed me that accounts need to have progressed to the Iron Age in order to have their account validated and that the procedure had been in place for some 9 months?

 

[DeletedUser16026]

Re post 138 on page 14 (still got 6 more pages to read!)

Darkstar - I have to say we are getting better feed back from beta to EN since BYEORDIE has been modding on both servers then at any time in the past, so why have you bought Zarok in? Its got nothing to do with improved feedback between these teams as BYEORDIE is already treading a very difficult line between what he would like to say and whats allowed to be discussed in this forum about Beta issues. I am sure he would like to give more feedback to EN players but we are banned from discussing Beta here (as we are repeatedly reminded).

Byeordie does this on the forum, yes, but we also needed someone who can cover that front for ingame moderators, as well as assist us with ideas we have for improving the link between Beta and EN.
Beta is allowed to be discussed in Ideas, Discussions, and Bugs.

I'm still hoping my suggestion of making the entire support team aware of the procedures for new forum registrations has made the list.

All suggestions have been noted.

A member of support informed me that accounts need to have progressed to the Iron Age in order to have their account validated and that the procedure had been in place for some 9 months?

The validation of accounts as a procedure has been in place for several months. The requirements for an account to be validate vary.

 

[DeletedUser108405]

Hi poppinjay! I registered on the forum nearly a week ago but was only validated today. A member of support informed me that accounts need to have progressed to the Iron Age in order to have their account validated and that the procedure had been in place for some 9 months?

Well that's strange... I registered around the same time but was validated in about 2 days once I raised a ticket to ask what was up. No one ever told me about this requirement, as I was certainly not in the Iron Age at the time.

Curiouser and curiouser...

 

[DeletedUser108406]

The validation of accounts as a procedure has been in place for several months. The requirements for an account to be validate vary.

So why did your Senior Ingame Moderator lie to me and tell me that the requirement was to have reached the Iron Age? What are the requirements? As I told the other CCM, I don't know how things can 'slip through the cracks' with regards to this; either its a policy or its not, either everyone is aware, or they are not. If everyone is not aware, it is NOT policy, it is the singular working of a few members of the team.

If the policy is that a player cannot post on the forum until they have reached the Iron Age (as per your senior support representative), then players who have not should simply not be validated. It is not a difficult concept so I would hope someone would be disciplined for this.

 

[DeletedUser16026]

What are the requirements?

Currently, reaching Iron Age.

If the policy is that a player cannot post on the forum until they have reached the Iron Age (as per your senior support representative), then players who have not should simply not be validated.

You two may have registered over the same few days period but that does not necessarily put the two registrations in the same group. There's gonna be a cut off date for any change of that type.

 

[DeletedUser653]

Re post 159 page 16 re Poppinjays posts #151, #156 & #158

the need to have noobs register/become validated arose from the many times noobs come on with opinions that cannot be formed as they have zero experience in the game, let alone in the EN server. so there is as they say something rotten in denmark and now noobs will have to earn their FoE/EN chops to actually form an opinion
..........

lol you at least make me laugh, noob!
..........
Nope. i am actually seen as a very informed and helpful player. but i WILL come at noobs who 1/ havent been on the game and think they know how to play it and mislead others and 2/ have not been in EN long enough to know anything about the history or the politics here, yet try to talk with authority on things they could not POSSIBLY know!

QueenStacy - thats a little out of order to the tune of downright rude. Anyone is allowed to post on the forum and Poppinjays posts #151, #156 & #158 do not deserve your spite and ill feelings. We were all beginners once and all had opinions then and thats allowed. Anyone reading this thread and joining FOE today could quite reasonable have asked the same questions. Remember you were a noob too.
This game needs new players and people like you will drive them away, your not helping at all.

(only 4 page left to go!)



Re validation of players joining forum

many of us refer players in our teams (who are not on the forum) to posts with links and tell them you only have to join if the link does not work. If this is now going to take days for a non forum member to join no one will bother to follow up any links to the forum, even TE members. Personally why have a vetting procedure ? maybe a anti bot or a must play the game auto check I can understand but a vetting system before a player can read a post sound like someone is trying to stop ex mod or banned players reading posts as guests.

(back up to 5 pages - not keeping up with new posts even!)

Ok I can see a new post confirming that player must be iron age, but can you confirm that a player can view posts as soon as we give them a link but I have no issue with posting being stopped till they get into Iron. but a week is a little too long.

 

[mrbeef]

Someone brand new to the game may want to ask questions about gameplay and as there is a button on the orange interface bar which links directly to the forum (from the very start of someone playing the game), its seems illogical that new players are unable to post questions on the forum until AFTER they have played for a while (as in reaching Iron Age).

 

[DeletedUser653]

I don't like the new prefixes being applied to in-game accounts. Firstly, it could give the impression that a moderator is playing in the same world they moderate, and secondly, it does create a sort of 'them and us' distinction.

Agreed, we have the posting listing all the mods and as long as thats upto date i am happy

Someone brand new to the game may want to ask questions about gameplay and as there is a button on the orange interface bar which links directly to the forum (from the very start of someone playing the game), its seems illogical that new players are unable to post questions on the forum until AFTER they have played for a while (as in reaching Iron Age).

Agreed and posted as much above your post

 

[DeletedUser16026]

Most of the forum is visible to guests (non-registered folks) and the rest is visible to non-validated accounts, so any information already present here is still available. Not being validated would only prevent posting till the account is validated.
There is also the game support for any questions, as well as global chat. An anti-bot would not prevent spam accounts operated by a person, but we will look into alternatives to preventing that.

 

[DeletedUser101150]

So why did your Senior Ingame Moderator lie to me and tell me that the requirement was to have reached the Iron Age?

It would seem no one lied to you, as was pointed out by the CCM.

 

[DeletedUser108406]

Most of the forum is visible to guests (non-registered folks) and the rest is visible to non-validated accounts, so any information already present here is still available. Not being validated would only prevent posting till the account is validated.
There is also the game support for any questions, as well as global chat. An anti-bot would not prevent spam accounts operated by a person, but we will look into alternatives to preventing that.

With all due respect, Darkstar, this still does not explain why players are being given misleading and conflicting information about their forum registrations by your support team and it seems like you're talking around that point.

The defining property of a game-related forum or messageboard or ANY forum is that it is not the players that are responsible for the content, it is the site administrator. It is unfair and frankly, lazy to shift that responsibility on to the player side. If there are rule breaches on your forum or misinformation spread, it is the responsibility of the site admins to react to it as it happens, you should not be assuming all new players are out to spam your forum and therefore assume they are guilty until proven innocent; it's a shocking way to run a forum. What new player wants to continue reading a forum that they are effectively banned from posting on and be reminded each day that they are considered nothing more than a potential nuisance?

 

[DeletedUser16026]

With all due respect, Darkstar, this still does not explain why players are being given misleading and conflicting information about their forum registrations by your support team and it seems like you're talking around that point.

The defining property of a game-related forum or messageboard or ANY forum is that it is not the players that are responsible for the content, it is the site administrator. It is unfair and frankly, lazy to shift that responsibility on to the player side. If there are rule breaches on your forum or misinformation spread, it is the responsibility of the site admins to react to it as it happens, you should not be assuming all new players are out to spam your forum and therefore assume they are guilty until proven innocent; it's a shocking way to run a forum. What new player wants to continue reading a forum that they are effectively banned from posting on and be reminded each day that they are considered nothing more than a potential nuisance?

I believe I already explained why someone was given one information and someone else a different information - because in between the procedure has changed. If there is something in there I'm missing, please point it out.

Seeing how most of the team members are volunteers and our numbers are limited, it should be understandable why we cannot possible monitor things 24/7 to prevent such occurrence.

I have also already noted that we are discussing alternatives to the existing procedure.

 

[DeletedUser108406]

It would seem no one lied to you, as was pointed out by the CCM.

Well, Zarok, in all fairness someone is lying here. If the policy has been that new forum accounts need to have progressed to the Iron Age before they can be validated for the last 9 months, why are players not meeting that requirement being validated? Did the policy change overnight?

EDIT: Apparently it did change overnight then, overnight around this time last week, that's curious. Suggest then that you properly brief your staff before implementing such policy change so that they are able to deal with player enquiries. Properly informing your players would also be a improvement.

 

[DeletedUser16026]

Well, Zarok, in all fairness someone is lying here. If the policy has been that new forum accounts need to have progressed to the Iron Age before they can be validated for the last 9 months, why are players not meeting that requirement being validated? Did the policy change overnight?

The validation of accounts as a procedure has been in place for several months. The requirements for an account to be validate vary.

I have already answered you in that regard.

 

[DeletedUser]

It would seem no one lied to you, as was pointed out by the CCM.

It would seem your only purpose here is to dish out provocative responses in order to antagonise the player base.

 

[DeletedUser101150]

It would seem your only purpose here is to dish out provocative responses in order to antagonise the player base.

No provocation intended, my apologies if I made you feel that way.
It was a simple statement of fact in direct relation to the comment suggesting a staff member had possibly been untruthful with you. It is absolutely appropriate for the staff to respond to suggestions we are lying.

 

[DeletedUser]

No provocation intended, my apologies if you I made you feel that way.
It was a simple statement of fact in direct relation to the comment suggesting a staff member had possibly been untruthful with you. It is absolutely appropriate for the staff to respond to suggestions we are lying.

Sadly it seems you cannot look objectively at your own posts and see how you come across. I do understand though that a moderator is not a paid position, so maybe professionalism should not be expected. It would be wiser not to post at all however, that being the case.