Lurker Lounge now a hack site

[TaiDaishar]

I really don't understand this entire 'discussion'... so they do not allow links because they can't check them all and seperate the good from the bad... I understand this.

I especially understand this because I am a mod at the Warcraftiii.net map making forum and believe me, it at times can be hell, some times I log in to find 20+ reports in my e-mail and having to check through them all is a time-consuming task, need I mention that the warcraftiii.net community is far better troll-wise and I can't imagine the work they have to do in the diabloii.net community to keep it more or less civil...

Some one said that it's like killing all humanity just to get rid of Charles Manson I can see why you said it but you seem to not understand the amount of work they put into the sites, they have work as well (for some of them at least) and it's a hard job to do (when talking at the amount of times they do it in).

A better analogy to describe it is:

Try to imagine you left a box full of apples in the hot sun and most of them were destroyed by the hot sun, there's a possibility that a few may have survived and are still eat-able but to find them you need to get through the entire box which is HUGE, will you check the apples to find the good ones which will most likely not be above 10 if at all or you will throw the entire 200 apples because you believe the 10 is simply not worth it? That's more or less what they do, you may be missing a golden apple on a few occasions and it is sad but it just doesn't worth the entire effort...

[Ice]

But how about the manual deletion of links in certain forums carried out by certain mods?

While the removal of links in general can be explained by what you've just mentioned (too much trouble to sift through for the good stuff), is there a need to manually delete each and every link, even to genuinely sites which provide information not available at dii.net?

There are often several links leftover by the automated process (there's one that turns some links into "http://********.xx" right?). Quite a fair bit of those are good helpful links and it's basically left to the mods what they want to do with them... to leave it there for the benefits of the forum users or to chuck it cos it is an offsite link.

Based on your analogy, it's like somehow finding a golden apple that somehow escaped the elimination process and then throwing it away because the elimination process is based on "all apples are bad". Why not keep the golden apple instead (since you have found it without effort) and let ppl benefit from it?

[Jarulf]

>I really don't understand this entire 'discussion'... so
>they do not allow links because they can't check them
>all and seperate the good from the bad... I understand
>this.


No, they don't allow links, period!!! Doesn't matter to what it is or if it is good (actually, the better the less they allow it really). Why? Because they feel that bleed of visitors from their site to other sites, thus in effect making their site a sort of "jump site" for people to leave for other places. They feel that will make less people come to their site and hence they get less money from adds (supposedly) and can't pay their bills (no idea why they bills at least in part doesn't correspond to ammount of people though).

That is the basics of it. So really have nothing to do with good or bad sites and with that in mind,, the better the site, the less they would probably like it.

[TaiDaishar]

Based on your analogy, it's like somehow finding a golden apple that somehow escaped the elimination process and then throwing it away because the elimination process is based on "all apples are bad". Why not keep the golden apple instead (since you have found it without effort) and let ppl benefit from it?

I think you got it wrong, basedon my analogy, even if there was a golden apple somewhere, it just doesn't worth the bother to look for it...

I find it odd though that this policy is only in the diabloii.net forums, probably because they're the worst forums among all of the .net forums (check warcraftiii.net or others and there's no restriction to links)

[TheDragoon]

No, have you read their guidelines? That rule is in place largely for exactly the reason that Jarulf just mentioned.

3. Thou Shalt Not Advertise. We do not intend to serve as a linking service or a search engine to other sites. Links that wouldn't be allowed anywhere on the forums (including signatures) would be to links to sites (commercial OR personal) that have:
1. Pornographic, racist or illegal materials, including game cheats or hacks
2. Profit sites (any get rich quick sites). This is sites that earn the poster a profit/commission or sites that give points for incoming links
3. Sites that are competitive to any of the fan sites here. (We've spent a long time putting together all the information sections here and so have the guide writers, we are not here to point people elsewhere when so much work has gone into the in-house content)
4. Sites carrying ad-busting software

Notice that NO WHERE in there do they mention that links are removed just because they don't know if they are "good" or "bad."

[jondifool]

Greetings
Personal I remember and where involved in Ices first strife in the Diabloii.net very well as it was also a story about trying to correct information there have been distorted true time! It was a very difficult task!

As I see the situation now it comes down too
Basicly not accepting links to other sites is one big problem.
The other big problem is not generally, being good at/or willing to, correcting misinformation!

Those 2 together does not look good for the future off that site! I sincerly hopes that they would changes policy/strategy as I think its a dead end for any kind of site/knowledgebase/enclopedia trying to providing information of some quality.

Maybe its time to ask the responsible at diabloii if they think that they can become "bigger" without getting "better"? If they answer yes to that question, the case is solved, and I think all here can move on as there is properly no reason too look back.
If they answer no, it would then be time for discussing the steps in how work at the "getting better part". And then I think that accepting links to other sites providing quality answers, and improving skill in correcting misinformation would be a very good (or just plain needed ) place to start! And certainly worth a discussion where I would like to hear their counterpoints to that!

With regards
jondifool

[Sourskunk]

My problem is with their policies and the attitudes they display as a result of them. If someone runs up and pees on your leg then expects you to be gratful for it, the response they should expect certainly wouldn't be cordial.

That said, I express my dislike by doing the one thing I can, not going there to give them revenue (and blocking their ads when I do go =p). While they do have some good posters over there, that quickly gets squelched by the intervention of their own admins. Hasn't been the first time a good place has fallen by weight from the top, won't be the last.

[south]

I go less, but still click on their ads, its one of the things they ask for, and if I am there I am enjoying their benefits, so why not click.
Its just that when you have to go there, it can be like being in a uncomfortable place you go in click their ad (be nice), check , read your stuff , get out and wish there was a similar place( the administrators at dii.net have put a lot of work in there) with a nicer atmosphere.
Its like going to the house of a very strict relative that keeps their shelves full of goodies when you were(or are a kid), I mean you like the goodies but you also feel uncomfortable.
Anyways we should try to keep our good manners. :D :)

[CelticHound]

Sorry CelticHound, this isn't aimed at you, just the thread in general.

Considering that - the way I read your post - you pretty much agree with me, I take that as license to jump on my own bandwagon! :D

And if there are areas where you disagree with me, then I'd like to understand them.

I'm not that interested in discussing dii.net. There is stuff there - including the item generation tutorial and some of the guides - that I've found useful. Also, my impression is that Ruvanal was posting there before starting to post on the LL as well. Enough said. :)

But the Lounge! Now that is a fertile topic for discussion!

All I do is maintain this website.

But the choices you make have ramifications. Even if the effects were subtle, the choices you've make have shaped what the LL has become. Yes, it's been formed by contributions by scads of other people - from Jarulf's hints about new cube recipes to Sirian's debates to Occhi's ribald poetry. I won't discount that. But why here? Why not on another forum or on a.g.d?

How can you say the dii.net admins have the right to run their site as they please, yet, "it doesn't give me the right to just boot off someone I disagree with" on the LL? I'll assert that you could, indeed, choose to boot people who disagree with you. In fact, if the disagreement is over cheating, you do claim that right.

You know you took some grief over the "whole new game" thing, yet I don't recall you nuking your critics. Same thing goes for the "Ten Things I Like About You" rant. I've posted that I disagreed, and I don't think you nuked those posts.

Choices, choices.

I think I'll accuse you of being consistent. What you wrote in LoungeRant #3 seems to apply here.

(Note to Jarulf - more fence-straddling by me)
Jarulf, like I said earlier in this thread, in my opinion, if you need to blow off some steam, then it's fair to give you some space to do so. On the other hand, if you object to the policies at dii.net, then perhaps you should take the admins up on their suggestion to go someplace else. You know you're welcome here and several other forums. And if that's not enough to occupy your time, then I'll suggest you either start writing a guide to D2 or that you join Occhi, Hawk, Zed & I for our regular games... :D

(Besides, Jarulf, you have to be here. CNN linked to your guide on the LL. ;) )

-- CH

(edit: minor edits)

[Sir_Die_alot]

Sort of like The Lounge back in Dii's heyday . . . and during the LoD Beta.

Don't remind me. Dupes were part of just about every character build people posted. *groan* Worse they were almost never called on it, or people who did call them on it were flamed and never supported. :angry: I quit reading/posting in LL forums altogether in the few months before it shut down because I was so disgusted with the content.

...Though it's all better now, and anti-cheating is strictly enforced. :D

[Ruvanal]

... Also, my impression is that Ruvanal was posting there before starting to post on the LL as well.  Enough said. :)

Actually I was posting only at the LL well before I ever posted at diabloii.net. My first couple of posts were on the Network54 forums. I did not post a lot at first and most would not have noticed many of my posts at that time.

The only set that was at all notable was right after the release of v1.09 when I made a reply to one of Spireas posts that some of the cube formulas now had some interesting changes in them, in particular the 3 chipped gem+sword formula (that thread was the one that started off the cubing cruel swords craze). I did not see anyone on the other forums (like diabloii.net) even aware of the change to the formula until almost a month after that.

I did not even sign up at any of the other forums until a couple of weeks after the sudden closure of the LL forums. When the LL forums were quitetly brough back up, I resumed some of my postings here. One of the first was this thread...
http://www.lurkerlounge.com/cgi-bin/forum/...&forum=Workshop
I wonder how many players know were the (in)famous list of 6 swords that can get "Cruel" with the chipped gem formula even came from? ;)

As for when I 'started' at the LL; I began a long Lurking spell starting around the release of the v1.03 patch.

[Bolty]

How can you say the dii.net admins have the right to run their site as they please, yet, "it doesn't give me the right to just boot off someone I disagree with" on the LL?

Because that's the way I've chosen to run the forum. I try to be as fair as possible. I might not agree with what someone is saying, but if they say it in an intelligent way then I gotta deal. People can sometimes get confused though. If they say something I disagree with but then use profanities or personal attacks, they'll think I'm censoring them because I disagree with them. That's the way it goes. You make few friends as a forum moderator.

In fact, if the disagreement is over cheating, you do claim that right.

True. I do. I also let people know in advance about that rule, so they're duly warned. I believe that most posters here appreciate the moderators' enforcement of it as well. Let's face it, if you post here you WANT a multiplayer cheat-free environment (single-player cheating I have no problem with and never have; you're only cheating yourself).

You know you took some grief over the "whole new game" thing, yet I don't recall you nuking your critics.  Same thing goes for the "Ten Things I Like About You" rant.  I've posted that I disagreed, and I don't think you nuked those posts.

Haha, that was a debacle, wasn't it? Blizzard went ahead and proved me wrong on a number of counts, especially when they applied the changes to D2C and really screwed it up. I took my licks there for sure. That's what happens whenever you stick your neck out so far. Or maybe it was a conspiracy to make me look bad, and you're all against me! *looks around furtively*

Without free discussion, a forum is of little use IMHO. However, completely free discussion is useless. It is up to each site to develop a game plan for what is and isn't allowed on their forum, and try to stick to it as best they can. We tend to be pretty lenient here and let some people hang themselves with a LONG rope when they don't seem to be getting the point. Sometimes that has actually helped, giving people enough time to correct their early mistakes. Other times it just aggravates the regulars and doesn't help at all, leading to eventual ban long after everyone wanted it.

Believe it or not, but I think I have the shortest fuse of the moderating team here (myself, Griselda, Elric, and Mavfin). I am sometimes amazed at the patience those three possess, and it helps me be a cooler head when making decisions. In the end, though, sometimes the best way to be a mod is to keep a distance from discussions. When you get personally involved, it's much harder to be impartial. So when people make posts that disagree with my writings/opinions, I just usually stay out of it.

Then there's the most important factor: sometimes it's better for me to stay silent and be thought an idiot rather than speak and remove all doubt.

Ok, I'm blathering, but you get some idea of my thought process sometimes.

-Bolty

[Mavfin]

Funny you should say that, Bolty. I thought I was the shortest-fused mod. I guess some types of people just irritate me. :D

[Elric of Grans]

Hail Mav,

Perhaps we should have some sort of Moderator's Duel, where we line up various kinds of posters, and see who does the worst to them: that way we'll know the REAL gradings here. Now, where are we going to find some unwilling posters that we can attack? Hmm...

[Obi2Kenobi]

*Raises Hand*

Pick Me! Pick ME! :angry:

[Jarulf]

>(Note to Jarulf - more fence-straddling by me)
> Jarulf, like I said earlier in this thread, in my opinion, if
>you need to blow off some steam, then it's fair to give
>you some space to do so.

Well, I don't do it often but at least once in a while I think I should be allowed to do it without everyone geting all shocked. I mean it is not much steam.


> On the other hand, if you object to the policies at
>dii.net,

Again, this thread was NOT started based on policies. I have NOT brouight up policies except as replies to people. I have handled my opinions on policies in the past allready with them. The thing is I can hardly post ANYTHING without they assuming I do it because I want to "bash" the policies again.

>then perhaps you should take the admins up on
>their suggestion to go someplace else.

Do you mind telling were you have seen this sugestion?

For the record, why do you think I started this thread here and not over at diabloii.net.

> You know you're welcome here and several other
>forums. And if that's not enough to occupy your time,
>then I'll suggest you either start writing a guide to D2
>or that you join Occhi, Hawk, Zed & I for our regular
>games... :D

I don't have a computer where I can play the game for the moment :(



>(Besides, Jarulf, you have to be here. CNN linked
>to your guide on the LL. ;) )


???

[Obi2Kenobi]

>(Besides, Jarulf, you have to be here. CNN linked
>to your guide on the LL.  )


???

On the CNN page, they had a Diablo 1 thing. And for a good guide, they linked to yours (or am I thinking of something else?) :D

[Jarulf]

>(Besides, Jarulf, you have to be here. CNN linked
>to your guide on the LL.  )


???

On the CNN page, they had a Diablo 1 thing. And for a good guide, they linked to yours (or am I thinking of something else?) :D

Ohh, never heared of that...

[Zitta]

I disagree with dii.net's latest policies as well, but I can see the reasoning behind them.

The various D2 sites have all different identities the evolution of which has been greatly influenced by those who run the forums and their vision of its purpose. Those who run dii wanted it to be the biggest, most know d2 site. They got it, but it didn't come without a price. I think it's an important clue that they also ban all links to sites with ad busting software. Dii is a commercial site and their income comes from adds and posters clicking on them. Running a big site comes with expenses and who knows they might even want to make a profit. To attract the ad revenues they need to attract a lot of posters, offer something for everyone. The drawback is that they achieve quantity at the cost of quality. Over time dii became to resemble public battlenet itself, and gained a bad reputation.

This latest policy is actually not new at all. The first mass exoduses from dii happened sometime between 1.03 and 1.06, and the admin then removed url's and nuked posts asking for the addresses of other forums. This latest shows their desperation, and will in my opinion have no significant effect, negative or positive. They simply fail to understand the basic economics: they created the forum equivalent of walmart, and while the masses go to walmart, the connoisseurs don't. I know it sounds incredibly snobbish, but what I mean by it is that the dii environment does not nurture community spirit well. People are much more likely to find that in small, nonprofit "specialty" forums. Zapping links will do little keeping people at dii. Anyone capable of using Google can find the other places. I'm sure diinet's traffic is dropping, but it is the same for all d2 forums - it's an old game. Forbidding outside linking will not save them, only make them look ridiculous.

[Striker]

There are those who place WAAAY too much stock in my opinion.

<snip>

That's why I sometimes hesitate before posting.&nbsp; I worry that if I post my opinion on something gaming-related, I'll stifle the opposing viewpoint and/or encourage anyone with my viewpoint to feel they can "jump on the bandwagon" simply because I said it.

I think one of the reasons why people "jump on (Bolty's) bandwagon" is because you're a well-known entity in the Diablo community. If you were to ask people on B.net who Bolty is, there are quite a few who would either know you or the Lounge. It's all about the network that you have. One of the benefits is that you sometimes get info before the public even hears whispers about it. However, once someone famous like you states an opinion, people feel it's the truth due to these same connections with the experts and Blizzard itself. Those that are wavering in their opinions are sometimes those that are the most "blinded". Unfortunately it's the price of fame. Same applies to Jarulf, Ruvanal, et al. Those that have intimate knowledge of something are treated as having "inside info" that the rest of us don't have. Whether it's true or not, that's what many people think and believe.

As for Conner, he was..enthusiastic, to say the least ;). Not necessarily saying that it's a bad thing, but there are times when enthusiasism must be tempered with experience, and that was part of his downfall, if you want to call it that. There was also the matter of the sexist remarks, but I'll save that for another day :)

FenrisWulf (aside): Just curious, but where did you start posting first? Dii.net or the Lounge? Also, where do you do most of your posting? I'm just wondering if that is part of the reason why you have a good relationship with Elly and the others. More contact over a long period of time = Good Thing ™

Yeah, stop giving him so much credit, he is just the janitor of the site&nbsp; :P

Come on Jarulf. Give Bolty some credit. He's a sanitation engineer. :lol: