To clarify, this post is on topic. The moderator spoke about people in this thread, and other threads, saying they were advocating that women are slaves and breeding stock. This isn't true... and it is necessary to address this and other falsehoods, which have a LOT of bearing on this topic. @FrozenArthas Also has the right to decide what is on topic for his thread, and is engaging in this discussion, so I have every right to reply to the moderator, unless he was demanding I give him the last word and lie about people without being contested.
I find it troubling that this statement [snip] is considered an insult by anyone.
...Then why did you edit it out of your post? It's a very obvious and childish insult, suggesting that people with interest in historical authenticity or whatever their reasons are just akin to young children who think girls are "jucky" and have cooties or the like. I'm VERY concerned that you tried to defend this behavior.
I don't really care about your obvious solution, I cared about the insult. I didn't include the one that accused most of the people who disagree with you as being sexist, which is still in your post. I do sort of care, actually... as telling people if they don't like the game, mod it, is a bit close to saying, "we won't respond to player feedback, fix it yourselves if you want to."
It's not editorialising, it's moderating. These threads, of which we had several already. Try the search function and set it to "women" and "female" and you'll be swamped with threads.
Yes... lots of CLOSED threads... I've seen them. So why was MINE specifically
targeted and deleted before the second page, instead of closed? Mine had a useful poll, I put a lot of work into a proper intellectual atmosphere instead of saying something to the lines of your post, "girls are jucky," and I received quite a few reasonable comments in turn. It's nothing like the other threads, where 90% of the comments are insults and bickering.
I reported the one trouble-maker in the thread, and that should've been enough... but instead of helping the thread and the discussion, the moderators decided discussion wasn't allowed in that one case. That is editorializing... it's not that the rules say no discussion of female warlords is allowed, or moderators would be breaking the rules by joining into these discussions in some of these threads. So, arbitrarily, my thread was editorialized, deleted despite not having offensive content, and taking a non-biased stance on the issue.
The argument is usually "breaking my immersion" and devolves quickly into "women should just be there to breed and be used as slaves" which is not feedback regarding a video game, it is deeply offensive and sexist and not tolerated on this platform. Everything else regarding that topic is perfectly fine and is not in requirement of active moderation.
What disgusting lies. My thread had nothing of the sort. Two of us were discussing how sword sisters should be brought back to the game, and I mentioned how the idea of female soldiers was popular in the poll. It's also disgusting to suggest that a female noble is nothing more than a breeding-machine in this game... you don't need to be a warlord to be a worthy person or character.
I would like to say again that anyone who considers there to be no bias, when moderators are accusing users of imaginary arguments that they think all women in games need to be SLAVES and BREEDING STOCK... what's more biased than creating horrible strawmen of people? I looked through this thread, and a couple of others, and didn't see anything like that. Did you see one person suggest that, perhaps, and hold onto that case, applying his view to anyone who disagrees with you on this subject?
Your own posts have either been edited or deleted, because they were further derailing the topic from it's original starting point. You might have noticed that all of your argumentation for a more unique role of the female warlords in game still stands, because you are fortunately not resorting to to misogynist behaviour expressed by several other users.
So you agree my argumentation is not misogynistic... yet, for some reason, my thread was deleted before 1 page was full, while others were merely closed after several pages, despite apparently suggesting women are breeding stock and slaves? The content in the thread is not different from the content in these posts in this thread, except it was probably MILDER. The only issue is because of the user who should've been muted or banned prior to that incident, since he insulted me and others directly many times.
That sort of feedback is fine, though I will add that it's not entirely a priority and if TW decides to design their fictional world that way it's entirely up to them. Which is why I suggested people that feel the need to stray from that presented world can use or create a mod instead.
In that case I'll repost the thread, since such feedback is fine. It's a pity it can't be reopened, since it was deleted, but I'll take that as moderator error.
Furthermore and just for clarification: moderators may or may not have opinions on topics as well and may certainly express that. However we're very aware of our red little flags and pay special attention not to break rules we are meant to enforce.
It's good to hear you're exceptional moderators. Many communities I've known, the moderators tended to be biased and abuse their power. It is rare indeed to see moderators who take their jobs seriously, and don't try to editorialize or get away with insulting behavior.
If you still would like to report it, be my guest. If you have questions, write a pm. But that's enough regarding that topic in this thread.
You make it sound like you're demanding the last word, which is troubling when you have accused people of wanting women to be breeding stock and slaves. Do you want to be able to say whatever you like of people, on a subject, and then no one is allowed to disagree or disprove your claims?
Furthermore and just for clarification: moderators may or may not have opinions on topics as well and may certainly express that.
If a moderator is going to post their personal opinions on a subject, people have EVERY RIGHT to respond to those. Otherwise, moderators would have NO RIGHT to express their personal opinions and views on things or people.
So it's no wonder that the OP and ANOTHER MODERATOR responded in a "chatty" manner to your post, as it does not read like an official, unbiased conclusion to a subject. But since the
OP and
another moderator have continued the discussion, it is clearly not ended.
I would recommend not editorializing the discussion here, however, ending it the moment you don't like the way it is going. It's definitely on topic...
@FrozenArthas thinks it is worth discussing, and
you have made it VERY relevant with your comments,
unless you want to delete your comments as spam and say they were off-topic.
The developers should edit the game accordingly to please the PB as much as they could.
even aside from the more controversial stuff this is a terrible idea. most people know jack **** about game design.
Anyone can give useful feedback, they don't need to be a game developer. Many people on this forum are modders and game developers anyway. In fact, moderators are so confident of this, that they figure the people who want changes are capable of just modding them in.
I have spoken out against this before... most people are NOT modders. The number of people who mod M&B, from what I recall, is a lot less than the total player base. So, any features one person doesn't like, it is generally not within their knowledge to change through modding, and it is ridiculous to tell people to just mod the game.
It is ridiculous in general for developers to use mods for a justification of their game's features, and suggests no confidence in them! That sounds similar to what Bethesda was doing, with their terrible attempt to monetize mods, where you are relying on mods to satiate the player base. M&B did do a lot of that in the past... but that was back when they were a small indie team, who could be excused for their lack of resources.
NoVa summarised it nicely.
The argument is usually "breaking my immersion" and devolves quickly into "women should just be there to breed and be used as slaves"
No, he didn't summarize it nicely at all.
Like people, listen, games are here for fun and I as everyone else here just want to have fun. So why would we argue here about some beliefs and other bs when we are here just to play a game?
Interestingly, I never heard even one person suggest having female warlords at this level for the sake of fun. It's always been for the sake of politics. You can make a lot of arguments for fun in making them more rare, but generally it has been upscaled to a bland level. It's to the point where you might even be better off making them 50% of lords and soldiers in the setting, as any pretense of there being sexism in this setting has disappeared.
That was why I recommended a slider, an easy fix for all players, where you could make all warriors women if you wanted to. That would be the most fun solution for everyone.
Yes, which is why there is even a pinned mega thread listing all kinds of discussions
right here. What we do not want is a constant creation of several threads debating the same thing. Be aware though that moderation is currently going through the thousands of threads already created and that the list, as it states itself, is incomplete. We're also merging topics that deal with the same issues to centralise debates in order to avoid the resurgence of already debated topics just like the one this thread has been derailed by.
You speak of the thread being derailed, which is ironic... since I originally asked you to ask people to stop insulting Arthas and respect his wishes on what the thread's topic was.
I think I will recap the events that lead up to this point, as I'm starting to reminisce, and some people may be interested in knowing what is going on:
The ironic thing is, this was a minor issue to me, a problem of sloppy writing. What got me interested in the subject, is moderators talking about, "just mod the game if you don't like it," and literally telling their players to "Deal with it," as if the company had no responsibility in the matter of player feedback to deal with it themselves.
When I got involved, I got annoyed by the extreme perspectives, and so offered a more moderate view. As I saw more people allowed to insult anyone who was against female warlords, using terrible fallacies and a hatred of history, I felt the need to try and end the mudslinging and suppress it, especially since poor Arthas really wanted people to stop attacking him over 1 suggestion out of 143....
When I asked the moderators for help in this, I got a very biased response that only encouraged one user to insult me in a very barefaced manner, saying he wouldn't allow anyone to marry me or some-such delusional threat. Strangely, that user was not punished for spamming the thread with insults, despite my report, and was allowed to go on and attack the thread I started to clear up this biased issue. Then, after the user had to be muted for their many cases of attacking people out of nowhere... my thread was deleted minutes later, and everyone in the thread was insulted as being the reason for this necessary deletion "based off the replies you were getting".
When I dared mention these issues, while discussing the topic of female warlords with someone here, two moderators swiftly jumped in to argue with me.
Perhaps the next stage is that I will be banned without warning, for daring to criticize moderators, or replying to their personal opinions they post in the thread? If so, I have kept all the posts of this correspondence, and will see if I can convince anyone, community or community manager, that censorship is not a great tact to take for an EARLY ACCESS game, and to revoke such actions.
