Title: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 20, 2008, 02:20:12 PM Here's the bit that was cut out of the interview due to length. Figured it was topical here. As such, posted!
Quote Eric Schild: Which brings me to another topic I wanted to discuss. Community Management. Recently, with Hellgate and Age of Conan (or further back with Vanguard and Star Wars Galaxies), we've seen how bad community management can destroy a games image. Do you think that people don't understand the position? Or is there something more that you learned after going into the industry? Scott Jennings: Well, all of those games had issues well beyond what community management could solve. I mean, Hellgate WENT OUT OF BUSINESS. A forum mod isn't going to help there. But yes, very very few understand what community management is. They think it's public relations, or board moderation, or rumor management. Good community managers are none of these - they are canaries in the coal mine. They are in your office saying "HEY YOU MADE A MISTAKE AND YOUR PLAYERS ARE GOING TO KILL YOU IF YOU SET FOOT OUT OF YOUR BUNKER." They also have to be able to put up with a ton of very, very, vile shit and just chin up and take it with a smile. Few can do that, and almost NO developers can, which is why the position exists to begin with. Someone has to be able to represent the community - delivering the concerns they have - without BEING part of the community. They have to have the seperation there necessary because they are not a partisan - they are your company's representative to the player base. Eric Schild: Admittedly, that's the hardest part, not being part of the community, hell, even the developers you work with want to be part of the community! it's fun to be a frothy dipshit! I know that! You know that! Scott Jennings: Yes. And one of the community person's biggest hassles is telling the developer who just wants to be loved that no, you can't go out on the boards and be a frothy dipshit. I know! I often am that frothy dipshit! Eric Schild: It's an interesting position though. In the industry, many companies have community management but the dynamic in MMORPGs is entirely different. Players want information. They want to know what's coming up, what's coming after that, the exact second they'll be able to play it, and why you nerfed their <insert imba class here>. Obviously they expect these things because developers continually screw up and start feeding this information, whether it be through the odd interview, magazine article, convention conversation. Everything gets out there. Do you think it's about time developer's adopted the idea that maybe, maybe, the only people that should be talking to the public are community managers or a PR mouthpiece? Scott Jennings: Well, ideally from the developers' standpoint that exactly is what will happen. But of course the players would HATE that and rightfully so. it's a very fine road to tread, and probably involves a lot of boring planning of what to talk about, who to bring out to talk about, and when. Eric Schild: Players hating you for that, in my opinion is OK, as long as you deliver. It's that 'delivering' part where things often go to hell, fast. In some ways, players knowing you really do HAVE A PLAN, is a good thing. Or I would hope so, if you got that across to them. Scott Jennings: but just being able to hassle the class balance guy on the boards about your Panzerfaust class is a dying art - because there's just too many players and they're all turning into Xbox Live denizens - shouting for their mom to bring milk in between telling you what a complete fuckup you are. It's very important, when talking about your game, to be absolutely sure that what you talk about WILL be in the game, and WILL be the way you talk about it. Which, again, is why you won't see much bloviating about games before release - too much can change in the interim. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Nonentity on August 20, 2008, 02:26:09 PM Ah, community management.
:oh_i_see: I salute those of you who do it. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Ingmar on August 20, 2008, 05:08:07 PM You are getting rave reviews as an interviewer in Scott's comment thread over at brokentoys, Schild.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 20, 2008, 05:18:52 PM Yea, it's pretty awesome.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Engels on August 20, 2008, 06:08:19 PM Maybe I have rose coloured glasses, or just feel I know what Scott's gonna say, since A) I've been reading his stuff for years and B) his sense of humor is identical to my sisters, but I don't see how schild did that interview 'wrong', or asked the wrong questions, or didn't probe deeply enough, or something. What's the complaint? Just schild suxxorz? I mean, we all knew that. But the interview seems pretty good to me.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Ingmar on August 20, 2008, 07:16:06 PM Given that one of the complainers used the word 'journalist' I assume its something about professionalism or something. Interviewers injecting their own opinion into the process is apparently VERBOTEN for some people.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: NiX on August 20, 2008, 07:34:14 PM I prefer Schilds style to anything else out there.
Question for anyone who knows, red names included, but how does one get into Community Management? What makes you qualified? Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Trippy on August 20, 2008, 07:52:26 PM I prefer Schilds style to anything else out there. Managing a forum is one way.Question for anyone who knows, red names included, but how does one get into Community Management? What makes you qualified? Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: MahrinSkel on August 20, 2008, 08:04:26 PM The most effective community managers have been people who rose out of it in one way or another. You have to be an effective communicator, both online and in-person, and able to operate with one foot in the bunker and one in the weeds. Empathizing with the community without forgetting you're no longer one of them, and never losing your temper when anyone is watching (that last being where I fail at community management).
IOW, the best way to show you can manage a community is to manage one. Trying to manage communities purely by PR/Marketing methods has not worked out well. The closest parallel is to an Ombudsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman#Organizational_ombudsman). Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 20, 2008, 08:18:15 PM Question for anyone who knows, red names included, but how does one get into Community Management? What makes you qualified? (http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm144/TrixisforRabbits/LOLcats/suplolcats.jpg) Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: sam, an eggplant on August 20, 2008, 08:49:07 PM Qualifications for a MMO CRM job:
- female - grew up with lots of brothers - can take a punch - overpowering sense of self-esteem Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: NiX on August 21, 2008, 05:35:16 AM (http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm144/TrixisforRabbits/LOLcats/suplolcats.jpg) If you're implying you, I don't know. You're pretty jaded.Thanks for all the replies. Was always something of interest to me, but never quite found out what made someone qualified. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 21, 2008, 05:52:48 AM Quote If you're implying you, I don't know. You're pretty jaded. Compared to what? Other CRMs? Yea, not really. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Kirth on August 21, 2008, 05:53:44 AM According to (community releations):
http://eu.blizzard.com/en/jobs/com-frenchonlinecomrepresentative.html Quote Excellent written and spoken communication skills in French and English combined with a passion for gaming In-depth knowledge of World of Warcraft Strong customer-service skills and a professional attitude Diligence to consistently follow up on open subjects in the forums Proficiency with MS Office http://eu.blizzard.com/en/jobs/com-englishassistantcm.html (Community managment, assistant): Quote Strong written and spoken communication skills in English combined with a passion for gaming Strong time-management and organization skills Ability to efficiently produce high-quality web site announcements and updates Strong customer-service skills and a professional attitude Diligence to consistently follow up on open subjects in the forums A strong motivation and high level of commitment, willingness to work long hours, and be available on call Available for occasional travel Proficiency with MS Office Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 21, 2008, 05:55:39 AM Those jobs aren't community manager.
They are: Moderator Community Manager's Bitch Here's a better one: Quote Primary Responsibilities • Assists and oversees a vibrant pre and post-ship website that features franchise content, community-generated content, forum discussions, downloads, and other interactions. • Collaborates with internal departments to ensure that community feedback is addressed. • Helps develop community assets such as podcasts, developer interviews, product updates, game tips and tricks. • Maintains consistent presence and promotes user-friendly environment on community message boards. • Works in collaboration with the Quality Assurance and Customer Support teams to ensure a positive player experience. • Helps conduct private and public tests to gather community feedback that will help improve final product quality. • Drafts and distributes community reports including community reaction, metrics, and research. • Assists with the company's involvement in trade shows, exhibitions, and other events. • Assists other members of the community team with community-related tasks. • Generates reports regarding the online community and customer reviews; analyzes the results. Qualifications • BS degree in Marketing, Communications, Public Relations or equivalent experience • 3+ years Massively multiplayer community experience or social networking community experience required • Familiarity with Web 2.0 experience • Technical knowledge of online community platforms, systems and software • Strong understanding of popular social networking trends • Knowledgeable on latest technologies and techniques used in building and maintaining successful gaming communities • Drive to innovate community practices and bring community management to the next level • Proven history of maintaining and developing an online community • Excellent written and verbal communication skills • Ability to work collaboratively in a team environment • Demonstrated initiative and positive spirit in a rapidly changing environment From Bioware (Assistant Community Manager). Of course, given what they've titled the job and the pay that goes along with it, they're going to get a burnt-out cretin or worse. That job simply doesn't pay enough for someone with a BS and 3 years of experience. And I'm fairly sure the actual community manager position had the same if not lower requirements. Edit: Ok, done with the stealth edits - added job title and removed a word for clarity. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Yoru on August 21, 2008, 06:10:14 AM Quote • Familiarity with Web 2.0 experience Like, ohmygod, I, like, totally once knew a guy who had totally worked on Web 2.0 stuff! :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Yoru on August 21, 2008, 06:11:52 AM (http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm144/TrixisforRabbits/LOLcats/suplolcats.jpg) If you're implying you, I don't know. You're pretty jaded.Thanks for all the replies. Was always something of interest to me, but never quite found out what made someone qualified. Given that this immediately preceded it: Qualifications for a MMO CRM job: - female - grew up with lots of brothers - can take a punch - overpowering sense of self-esteem I think he's implying he lacks a penis. Kitchen knife accident, mayhaps? Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 21, 2008, 06:14:39 AM Quote Given that this immediately preceded it: Precede doesn't mean what you think it means. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Yoru on August 21, 2008, 06:15:22 AM It's funnier my way.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 21, 2008, 06:16:33 AM Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Yoru on August 21, 2008, 06:19:15 AM Did someone mention Hope? (http://www.spacebutler.com/Smileys/sa/emot-obama.gif)
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 21, 2008, 06:20:12 AM Oh god damnit. No more emotes. Vetoed.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: kildorn on August 21, 2008, 06:52:15 AM The hardest part of being a CRM must be the overpowering urge every morning as you sip your first cup of coffee to not ban the whole fucking lot of your customers.
This is likely why I'm never allowed near customers, even on con calls. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Kirth on August 21, 2008, 07:20:46 AM The hardest part of being a CRM must be the overpowering urge every morning as you sip your first cup of coffee to not ban the whole fucking lot of your customers. This is likely why I'm never allowed near customers, even on con calls. This is why I'm a fan of nonofficial forums that can be run like the worst kinda of dictatorship, EJ vs the WoW general boards is a good example of this. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Stephen Zepp on August 21, 2008, 07:34:50 AM The hardest part of being a CRM must be the overpowering urge every morning as you sip your first cup of coffee to not ban the whole fucking lot of your customers. This is likely why I'm never allowed near customers, even on con calls. You have no idea. The peak of my career as Torque Community Manager: I took on Serek Dmart (http://www.garagegames.com/mg/forums/result.thread.php?qt=68143) about InstantAction. Theoretically at least, I won. The mantra of an outstanding community manager is, in my opinion, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer". In today's intardnet when any idiot can blog, it's better to keep the blogging where you have authority, and can edit it if absolutely required. Once they start posting about you in their home court, you're screwed. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: kildorn on August 21, 2008, 07:37:51 AM I figured the mantra would be closer to "it's a crime to kill them, it's a crime to kill them, it's a crime to kill them.."
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: cevik on August 21, 2008, 07:47:52 AM The peak of my career as Torque Community Manager: I took on Serek Dmart (http://www.garagegames.com/mg/forums/result.thread.php?qt=68143) about InstantAction. Theoretically at least, I won. Why would you say that name? Why!? Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: sam, an eggplant on August 21, 2008, 07:54:33 AM bloody mary bloody mary bloody mary
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Slayerik on August 21, 2008, 08:25:10 AM Quote • Familiarity with Web 2.0 experience Like, ohmygod, I, like, totally once knew a guy who had totally worked on Web 2.0 stuff! :awesome_for_real: Hahah, thanks for the laugh. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Ironwood on August 21, 2008, 08:36:28 AM I always thought the point of an Interview was to ask questions and let the subject answer them.
Where's the rest of this one ? Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 21, 2008, 08:36:57 AM Joke post?
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Ironwood on August 21, 2008, 08:39:59 AM Nope. Found it by heading to Brokentoys tho.
Reading it at the moment. Lol. Shit. Didn't realise it was frontpaged. Which makes my whole post and subsequent edits look like jokes as well. Not intended. Arg. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Khaldun on August 21, 2008, 08:51:36 AM This is where my standard obsessive point about the need for live management teams to see themselves as involved in governance of their worlds (or governace + godhood) comes in. "Community management" is a failed term from the outset because it doesn't capture how players look at development teams, how they form groups and constituencies, and it implies that all you're doing is managing (e.g., placating or schmoozing) your players. There's a whole raft of misfires embedded in the entire idea and it leads even the competent community managers into trouble now and again, when they fundamentally misunderstand what they're hearing or seeing. Once a game goes live, developers are sovereigns. You can be an autocratic sovereign, or even a cruel one, and probably still flourish in some ways. But live management has got to understand: they have responsibility for these worlds, and the players are citizens or a body politic of some kind. When you make "community management" into nothing more than a few people who reply noncommitally to forum complaints, even if your forum respondents are good at their jobs, you're still going to negatively affect your potential retention. Because players can't really relate to or engage with the future of the gameworld in that fashion. They sense a vacuum, an absence: they don't know what the stewards of the world intend, or what their core design principles really are.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: kildorn on August 21, 2008, 08:54:35 AM Nope. Found it by heading to Brokentoys tho. Reading it at the moment. Lol. Shit. Didn't realise it was frontpaged. Which makes my whole post and subsequent edits look like jokes as well. Not intended. Arg. oblig "there's a front page" post? Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Signe on August 21, 2008, 09:02:41 AM (http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm144/TrixisforRabbits/LOLcats/suplolcats.jpg)
God, that kitty makes me laugh. The very first time I ever saw it, I named it Schild which I then re-named Mr. Whiskers. Now they are both Mr. Whiskers to me. PS You can only see the top of him because he is also Eric the Half-A-Cat. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Nonentity on August 21, 2008, 09:07:24 AM HI SIGNE OMG :awesome_for_real:
The only firsthand experience I have with CRMs was that I used to go have cigarettes with one of the WoW CMs (Eyonix). There was this guy who was a senior GM, who always seemed kind of stressed out, but he went on to do a Community Manager. I always liked the guy. It was Tseric, heh. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: HaemishM on August 21, 2008, 11:24:50 AM This is where my standard obsessive point about the need for live management teams to see themselves as involved in governance of their worlds (or governace + godhood) comes in. "Community management" is a failed term from the outset because it doesn't capture how players look at development teams, how they form groups and constituencies, and it implies that all you're doing is managing (e.g., placating or schmoozing) your players. There's a whole raft of misfires embedded in the entire idea and it leads even the competent community managers into trouble now and again, when they fundamentally misunderstand what they're hearing or seeing. Once a game goes live, developers are sovereigns. You can be an autocratic sovereign, or even a cruel one, and probably still flourish in some ways. But live management has got to understand: they have responsibility for these worlds, and the players are citizens or a body politic of some kind. When you make "community management" into nothing more than a few people who reply noncommitally to forum complaints, even if your forum respondents are good at their jobs, you're still going to negatively affect your potential retention. Because players can't really relate to or engage with the future of the gameworld in that fashion. They sense a vacuum, an absence: they don't know what the stewards of the world intend, or what their core design principles really are. So the community managers are in essence priests? EDIT: That would certainly explain the boyfucking then. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Draegan on August 22, 2008, 07:32:12 AM Any interviewer that asks a question with the words "frothy dipshit" is ok in my book.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: tazelbain on August 22, 2008, 08:08:26 AM Whether or no the should, most Community Managers are firefighters trying to keep the forest fire from burning the town down. This adversarial relationship is doomed to fail because the fire pays taxes the town needs. These strategies of not "don't add fuel to the fire" and creating firewall in an attempt to create a well-behaved fire laughable and counter productive.
I say let the community burn and put all your resources into Community Analysis. The industry is rife with examples were massive resources are wasted on something the Community had no interest in or simple fixes that would have gone a long way to keep the Community growing are ignored until it is too late. These are all failure of community analysis or ignoring community analysis. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Rishathra on August 22, 2008, 12:11:53 PM Any interviewer that asks a question with the words "frothy dipshit" is ok in my book. Any interviewer that gets the interviewee to say "frothy dipshit" not once but twice, is an excellent interviewer in my book.Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Modern Angel on August 22, 2008, 06:39:30 PM I like the last bit of the cut part. It was brought up a little while ago in a different thread about the various MMO communities getting worse and worse. Some folks said that it's always been that way but I disagree. They've always been completely shit but, as Lum implied, the past two years or so have seen them get even worse. They're stream of consciousness now. I literally cannot recall the last time I read an official thread started by a player, even one where the topic is perfectly rational and worth discussing, which hasn't turned into a weird exchange of insults for the sake of insults within a page. They're useless, completely useless whereas once upon a time they tended to be 2/3 useless.
Community Managers are... they're crazy. They have to be. There is no fucking way I could stare into the mouth of hell like that all day, everyday. Modern MMO boards are like Finnegan's Wake constantly being written and rewritten in real time by people with massive, seeping head wounds. It's just a sad state of affairs because there are always things in this game that NEED to be expanded upon and changed but there's no way to get decent feedback. Even with zero tolerance banning sprees, you can't keep up anymore. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 22, 2008, 06:46:43 PM If you set the tone of the boards early enough with clearly defined rules, yea, you can in fact keep them manageable. Most people aren't willing to do that early on though, probably for fear of bad press. Maybe because someone told them not to, or sometimes they're under the thumb of marketing. Who knows why, point is, it's possible.
For most CRMs though, no, it's probably not worth the hassle. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Modern Angel on August 22, 2008, 06:52:59 PM It's theoretically possible, yes, but with how big these games are now it's just not feasible. Posting on the boards has become a hobby within the hobby. When it was a game with 100k subs and 5k posters, sure, but now you're talking 500k+ with 50k posters as a conservative estimate. And even if half of that 50k wants to be constructive the other 50k wants to slam the shit out of anyone and everything with no rhyme or reason. It's just so vast.
I guess more than the sheer volume of noise it's just the style of it. It honest to god has no context or sense. The posts are just words. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: NowhereMan on August 22, 2008, 07:00:14 PM There's certainly a line to be trodden, start banning people for every thread that's critical of your game and there's no point to having an official community. I definitely think that CRMs at most official boards should be a bit more ban happy though, if all someone really contributes to a thread is calling everyone who has a grievance a crybaby or everyone else jacktards for not agreeing that their class is totally nerfed, I think they should get hit with the banstick. Do it often enough and ideally make it public which post(s) led to a banning and you can get a community under control. Like Schild said doing it early makes things easier, if the CRM has the leeway and the balls (as well as basic judgement capacity) to do it. Of course there's also the physical capacity for reading and moderating the sheer number of posts, getting a stable of decent volunteer mods helps a lot but that's extending the judgement capacities of the CRM to not only people's posts but to judging other people's character and capacity for good judgement. It's still possible and starting early when things are still small is the way to go but on something like the WoW forums... I don't think there's any real hope for getting constructive feedback out of that. I prefer reading our politics forum :awesome_for_real:
Also sticking in a board that's free-fire for stupidity can help just because there's somewhere for people to vent and be able to post without thinking that it seems is required for people on the internet. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 22, 2008, 07:04:41 PM Yea, you can't be a pussy about banning people. Important rule pretty much every CRM ignores. They may THINK they're banning enough people, yea, they're wrong. I don't care if you have 1 post or 10,000. You deserve a ban, you get one.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Venkman on August 22, 2008, 07:43:46 PM This is the part I've often wondered about:
Why can't companies take a heavier hand at banning players from the forum without also banning them from the game? Seriously, especially with something like WoW, you could just flag that person's entire account from forum posting even if you let them continue playing. Way I figure it, if they get to the number of retarded posts needed to prompt a ban consideration, they're going to keep their account active and paying anyway even if they can't post. I'd think this route is better than not having official boards at all and therefore letting any target message you want to get out there be drowned out by whatever noise exists in the fansite boards. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Modern Angel on August 22, 2008, 08:11:56 PM They CAN just ban forum accounts, though. Honestly, I really like Mythic's beta handling of the situation where they seemed pretty merciless about banning people posting retarded things. These people who post aren't dumb. They know what they're doing. So they hit post knowing full well they're being assholes.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: naum on August 22, 2008, 10:14:31 PM Problem is, where the line between foul and obnoxious behavior and posts that just bear unfavorably upon the product. When bans start flying, they usually encompass as much of the latter, if not more, than the former… …then the "official" forums resemble an edition of Pravda…
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: WindupAtheist on August 22, 2008, 10:44:51 PM Problem is, where the line between foul and obnoxious behavior and posts that just bear unfavorably upon the product. QQ MOAR FAGGOT LOL EPIC POST There's a lot of ground that could be covered before you even came within sight of the line. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Daeven on August 22, 2008, 11:59:57 PM Like, ohmygod, I, like, totally once knew a guy who had totally worked on Web 2.0 stuff! :awesome_for_real: You spelled "Web 2.0!" wrong.Unfortunately, I did as well. There's no flash, or way to leave out vowels. Or 'Swoosh' logo there. So that's just about as non web2.0 as you can get. Anyway. What was the question? Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 23, 2008, 12:02:06 AM I would like to replace the phrase "Web 2.0" with the word "webr."
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: MahrinSkel on August 23, 2008, 12:10:52 AM I would like to replace it with GeoCities.
Wikipedia is a wonderful thing. Just about everything else being called Web 2.0 strikes me as a repeat of Web 1.0 around 1996, this time with effectively unlimited bandwidth. --Dave Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 23, 2008, 12:15:09 AM I would like to replace it with GeoCities. Don't forget rounded corners.Wikipedia is a wonderful thing. Just about everything else being called Web 2.0 strikes me as a repeat of Web 1.0 around 1996, this time with effectively unlimited bandwidth. --Dave Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Venkman on August 23, 2008, 06:34:47 AM Problem is, where the line between foul and obnoxious behavior and posts that just bear unfavorably upon the product. When bans start flying, they usually encompass as much of the latter, if not more, than the former… …then the "official" forums resemble an edition of Pravda… A good point. But that's where you'd say only people with registered accounts can read and post. I really don't get why companies would continue to allow their forums to be public. The very VERY worst marketing tool any company has is their non-accountable player base. Shut that noise down asap.Just some quick thoughts:
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Modern Angel on August 23, 2008, 06:34:57 AM Web 2.0 is a term people over 50 cooked up to sucker people under 20 into thinking they and their "new frontier" of internets were relevant. It's a punchable term.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: UnSub on August 23, 2008, 06:59:01 AM Problem is, where the line between foul and obnoxious behavior and posts that just bear unfavorably upon the product. When bans start flying, they usually encompass as much of the latter, if not more, than the former… …then the "official" forums resemble an edition of Pravda… A good point. But that's where you'd say only people with registered accounts can read and post. I really don't get why companies would continue to allow their forums to be public. The very VERY worst marketing tool any company has is their non-accountable player base. Shut that noise down asap.Just some quick thoughts:
I disagree on some of the above. - Let the public read the boards and be able to exert some level of control over what is said. On a separate rant site you don't have that control. Also, if you talk to the rant site once, you give the veneer of respectability, which turns around and bites you in the ass when they start saying how much your game sucks now. - You can try to rate players / rate posts, but groups of players learn how to game the system. In reality, it comes down to a mod going "That's not right" and warning the player / banning the player. - Also, a jerk with good opinions is still a jerk who deserves bannation. I can think of a few cases of well-known player members of some MMOs getting the idea that all the people agreeing with them gave them some sort of power so they then started to cross the line. Ban them if they do that, regardless of how good some of their thoughts were. Perhaps they can be given a touch of extra leeway, but in the end they are probably replaceable. - Agree on the third point. They might be a pain in the ass on the boards, but it should be a separate thing unless they, the player, wants to try to combine the two. Your forum community is not your game community. I would say: - Make bannings public to a degree, or at least some indication of what they were banned for. Yeah, that gives the asshat a public spotlight, but it stops them becoming a martyr when they just 'disappear'. When you can actually point to the person acting like a jerk as the reason, it makes it easy to justify why they were banned. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: NiX on August 23, 2008, 10:37:21 AM the best way to show you can manage a community is to manage one. Not such an easy thing to start doing though or is that the point? I'd think if you could start a new community and make it flourish, your talents are better off elsewhere anyway. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Venkman on August 23, 2008, 11:16:11 AM Manage a community, not inspire the creation of a new one. There are many community managers that evolve from the management of existing communities.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Ratman_tf on August 23, 2008, 01:17:14 PM Maybe it's not for me but I gave up on communities a long time ago. Back in the UO and EQ days, people had interesting things to say about these games. Now it's all *Rehashes of ancient arguments. *Ascii pron and links to Rick Astley. *Theorycraft that makes my eyes glaze over in boredom. *Retarded smack talk.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Tmon on August 23, 2008, 02:25:10 PM I still think the best way to handle official boards is not to have them. Why let people trash your game on your dime? Have your community people monitor the fan site boards and make sure that you have a version of the Herald so you can publish useful information in a way that doesn't get submerged in the sturm and drang of the boards.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Kirth on August 23, 2008, 03:34:03 PM I still think the best way to handle official boards is not to have them. Why let people trash your game on your dime? Have your community people monitor the fan site boards and make sure that you have a version of the Herald so you can publish useful information in a way that doesn't get submerged in the sturm and drang of the boards. This, I'm a strong advocate of it. Official forums do not work, splitting the community over a number of "fan sites" that your CM's or whatever can monitor and post in occasionally is definitely a better way to go. I've said it before, boards like EJ, WHA, work because the people who run it don't want to alienate the employees of whatever game they represent and are still able to swing the ban hammer hard. While something like eq2flames is a good lesson on keeping the fan site owners at arms length (re: the hartsmen thing ) . Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: WindupAtheist on August 23, 2008, 04:18:29 PM A decent moderation team handing out one-week bans left and right for the more obvious "LOL QQ FAGIT" nonsense could improve the tone of the WoW boards immensely. Blizzard just doesn't give a shit.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: NiX on August 23, 2008, 04:59:45 PM Manage a community, not inspire the creation of a new one. There are many community managers that evolve from the management of existing communities. Fair enough.Schild, I am to manage this place! Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Vetarnias on August 23, 2008, 05:54:43 PM I still think the best way to handle official boards is not to have them. Why let people trash your game on your dime? Have your community people monitor the fan site boards and make sure that you have a version of the Herald so you can publish useful information in a way that doesn't get submerged in the sturm and drang of the boards. On the other hand, not having official forums just allows some other board to fill the void, and it being beyond your control, you have to live with whatever moderation it decides to apply. Furthermore, I'm wondering whether the decision of a MMO company not to maintain regular forums might give the impression that it is callous towards its customers and does not care to hear about player feedback. It is true that, for the most part, forums are just as a previous poster wrote, namely "*Rehashes of ancient arguments. *Ascii pron and links to Rick Astley. *Theorycraft that makes my eyes glaze over in boredom. *Retarded smack talk". And let us not forget those Bombay TV clips; I remember on the Pirates of the Burning Sea forums, there was an entire thread just dedicated to answering the previous post with such a clip. No need of further argument. A few were funny; the others just made me roll my eyes. I guess in the end it all has to do with how the forums are moderated. Funcom, for instance, shot itself in the foot with its heavy-handed yet erratic forum moderation, locking perfectly reasonable threads discussing valid points while leaving flamefests wide open, then going as far as making verboten any discussion of forum moderation itself. I used to believe that forums would help create a community around a game. But how much of a community can we expect when the same gamers come with pre-formed guilds, and leave whenever a new MMO comes along? Unfortunately, they are for the most part the type of player whom I am expecting to see post on the forums; casuals usually don't bother, except to post a very specific question. So it is a bit naive to expect to create a community out of generally very fickle players who will start stabbing you in the back soon enough. I can't forget one of the members of a "hardcore" cross-game guild going around on the PotBS forums claiming the game was "dying" while spreading the gospel for Warhammer. Well, I fear PotBS is dying, that's not my point, but only a few weeks before, his guild was proudly defending PotBS against the evils of "carebearization", and suddenly, just as it seemed the developers had changed course to steer away from "no crying in the red circle", poof, the game is dying. It just had whiffs of that favourite hardcore excuse, "UO died after Trammel". Not to mention that while said "hardcore" players might not care whether they develop their e-peen with broadswords, lasers or cannonballs, not everyone playing a game set in the Age of Sail is going to be interested in yet another fantasy MMO with dwarves. In a way, official forums can capture the zeitgeist of a game (take a look at the PotBS forums (http://www.burningsea.com/forums/) and tell me about it), but the danger, for developers (if they read their forums at all) and players alike, is to believe that a vocal small minority speaks for the silent majority. In most cases, the whiners are entirely self-interested, but if you want an example from the other end of the spectrum, look up the forums (please don't laugh) over at Puzzle Pirates (http://forums.puzzlepirates.com/community/mvnforum/index): The majority of players posting there are not what you might call ordinary players. They are the elite players and the political heavyweights of each ocean -- everyone knows them. They are regulars who will enter every contest and win them. Will their concerns reflect those of the majority? I doubt it -- in fact, they have grown into a nice little cheerleading band that approves of everything the developers do, while remaining very conservative otherwise -- and I doubt that ordinary players read the forums at all. In fact, any dissent is immediately dismissed, ignored, or drowned in a flurry of spam posts. (Apparently, this was also the case for the beta-period PotBS forums.) So it would seem forums are condemned to move to one of two extremes: Whiners who can never be satisfied drowning out everyone else, or sycophantic elites who rose to the top under the current system and whose concerns give you no clue whatsoever as to what might be wrong with your game. But I will defend the use of official forums, for in the end, I suspect we are using them to get a glimpse of company mentality. PotBS, for instance, got some very high marks early on because of developer interaction with the community (Flying Lab Software's CEO regularly posted on the forums, and not just in those announcements locked to replies); it's one of those things, even though that interaction has dwindled to practically nothing in recent months, which got me to care about the fate of PotBS despite my not playing it anymore. In comparison, I wouldn't care if Funcom sank to the bottom of the Atlantic with Age of Conan, precisely because of their treatment of their player base. So when it comes to the question of having official forums, I would use an old cliché: The worse thing than having them is not having them. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Bzalthek on August 23, 2008, 08:40:52 PM The "fan sites beyond their control" argument would imply they have any control over the forums they already do run. I have seen little in the way of such evidence.
Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Moorgard on August 23, 2008, 08:50:17 PM Official forums do not work, splitting the community over a number of "fan sites" that your CM's or whatever can monitor and post in occasionally is definitely a better way to go. I disagree completely. Official forums, for all the babysitting they require, are still the best place for controlled interaction with the players. The CRM needs a place where the tone can be managed, and no matter how close the relationship is with a fansite, it's still kind of like visiting foreign soil. That said, I think official forums need to be minimal enough to still encourage the growth of external communities. There's a lot of value to be had in a close relationship with approved fansites, but core messaging should still come from official forums. And yes, you need to ban troublemakers. I tried to evaluate someone's post history before I took that step, and I weighed previous contributions against the drama they caused. In a few cases it was a tough call, but most of the time it was easy. Idiots aren't hard to spot. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 23, 2008, 08:53:07 PM I've found that these days, if my first thought is to ban somebody, I'm probably right. it would take one HELL of a contribution for me to even consider not banning them.
But yes, official forums > all. Unofficial forums are entirely unmanageable. Unless you have a better CRM there then you do at the official ones. The whole camelot herald thing is just stupid to me. Ok, no official forums. But there's these unofficial ones that are de facto official forums. That's just silly. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: taolurker on August 23, 2008, 09:34:01 PM Official forums, for all the babysitting they require, are still the best place for controlled interaction with the players. The CRM needs a place where the tone can be managed, and no matter how close the relationship is with a fansite, it's still kind of like visiting foreign soil. I also agree it's better to have official forums because then the devs can really be connected with their players, as well as get more direct feedback. The only difference with an official forum and one that is foreign from "the company" is the MMO operator's ability to moderate. The company has less contact with the posters on an outside forum, will still need forum people to visit the external sites, plus when posting end up being visitor celebs, instead of a piece of "the community" with their player base. Quote That said, I think official forums need to be minimal enough to still encourage the growth of external communities. There's a lot of value to be had in a close relationship with approved fansites, but core messaging should still come from official forums. I've actually thought MMO companies should allow external communities to grow within an "official forum"... and MMOs should grant guilds their own forum and management system right on the MMO's website, directly connected to an official forum. Quote And yes, you need to ban troublemakers. I tried to evaluate someone's post history before I took that step, and I weighed previous contributions against the drama they caused. In a few cases it was a tough call, but most of the time it was easy. Idiots aren't hard to spot. This goes without saying, and bans should always be handled with kid gloves, but most of the time they are necessary to enforce rules. It also is something that should be visible to the rest of the forum, and not hidden in the background, so that other posters know there is consequences to their actions. I also think that forum bans and gaming bans should be linked, unlike others here (maybe a single forum ban before it affected the game account though). Also, official forums should only allow subscribed people to post, and the access to the forums should be restricted for non-account holders. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: schild on August 23, 2008, 09:35:46 PM I've actually thought MMO companies should allow external communities to grow within an "official forum"... and MMOs should grant guilds their own forum and management system right on the MMO's website, directly connected to an official forum. This is something I'm surprised hasn't happened yet. I suppose though, it's only a matter of time. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: UnSub on August 23, 2008, 10:19:14 PM The "fan sites beyond their control" argument would imply they have any control over the forums they already do run. I have seen little in the way of such evidence. I do... but then I tend to hang around the CoH/V or Cryptic forum pages. While there are moments of friction, generally those communities are pretty well managed. In both cases the devs believe that commenting on things directly to players is the best way to go. Yeah, sometimes the devs get angry at what they read and comment on it... then the forum mods / CMs delete it as inappropriate. The problem with having only fansite forums to read is instead of having one place of angry commentary you are meant to sift through, you've got 9, all of which may be saying the same thing. Also, you could make a strong argument that games like TR aren't very well served by not having one official forums as a contact point for all players. Regardless, it is up to the CMs to set the standard they wish to see the forums adhere to. Looking at Cryptic, you've got ChampO that tries to be friendly and locks threads using a gimmick moderator (Foxbat) and STO where Razor is incredibly appropriately named in how he chooses to deal with controversial threads. Overall I have to say more conservative is better than not conservative enough. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Ratman_tf on August 24, 2008, 03:10:47 AM This is something I'm surprised hasn't happened yet. I suppose though, it's only a matter of time. Allegiance came close. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: Venkman on August 24, 2008, 06:35:43 AM I've actually thought MMO companies should allow external communities to grow within an "official forum"... and MMOs should grant guilds their own forum and management system right on the MMO's website, directly connected to an official forum. Isn't that what SOE has been doing with eq2players? I think this presents more challenges than its worth though, for the company and the players. What happens when the guild or a significant part of it eventually moves to a new game, as always happens? Does SOE for example need to be expected to keep the guild's one and only forum destination even though the majority of conversation is about, say, WAR? There's also the question of content rights. Does SOE want to sign up to be the target of an RIAA or MPAA probe when a whole bunch of copywrited content gets distributed through their system? All in all, I think it's best the guilds build their own game-agnostic destination. With all of the free tools out there, it's a joke to set something like this up anyway. And doing so internalizes the social problems to the one group who should be accountable to fixing them and suffering the consequences. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scot Post by: taolurker on August 24, 2008, 08:45:58 AM EQ2Players, wasn't the first, and SOE also has the same deal for Vanguard and EQ1, for an extra $3 a month. It IS the first with guild management tools available, including a nice little roster and tracking information, but it doesn't exactly allow you to use it unless you pay for the additional cost per month, and that's for each person wanting to access it.
What I meant is that MMOs should do more for the guild communities, without additional costs, and it should be working in concert with official forums and MMO home pages. There is more that can be done for guilds than most MMOs offer currently, but what SOE is offering is at an additional cost, when GamerDNA/GuildCafe does that for FREE (although with a subscription that allows expanded options). I don't think there is that much of a challenge for the company, in SOE's case, especially not for copyright or forbidden content because only the guild membership can access their specific forum... If a guild leader allows that to happen, and doesn't moderate his own forum section then he bears the responsibility. If a guild discusses other games, but still maintains a guild with paying subscriptions, then I fail to see why that would that would be an issue either.. A guild with no active subscriptions would have their guild site archived, or removed, but as long as they are part of the game and paying, then this would equate to more value for their subscription dollar. I spoke at length one time with a game company's Community Manager, and he also didn't understand what I was saying about value for the subscription dollar in something more than just the game. Obviously, if a game is making money, giving free stuff to canceled accounts, or trials to people who never played, then why can't they give something extra to make customers really feel like a community and make them feel like they're truly getting value for their subscription dollar? Refer a friend and in game rewards don't count. Title: Re: Director's Cut: The Community Manager Discussion from My Interview with Scott Post by: Venkman on August 24, 2008, 09:03:49 AM This is not about me or others "not getting it". Maybe 10 years ago you'd have a valid argument worth bolding about. But these days anyone who plays an MMO has the basic skills needed to build their own guild site. And heck, even 10 years ago there was EZboard. Not the best by any stretch, but there, customizable and usable.
As a former guild leader of the same group of folks who traveled between games, I do not see the benefit of tying things to one game and one game company's whim. People come and go all the time, just as they travel between games all the time. Eventually even a meta-game guild is going to give up on the original game that they all met in. Further, in any guild with potential, there's always someone who's got the basic skills required to do their own site and forums. Between the size of the guilds (bandwidth) and the number of freebie hosts out there, it's really just as easy as paying the extra $3 per person. So even if eq2players was free, what happens when the guild does go away? Hope that at least one person is keeping an active eq2, eq1 or VG account? Sure in a guild the size of FOH maybe that's a foregone conclusion. But for anyone smaller, what would be the point of even taking the chance. The reason more companies don't do this though is two-fold. It does cost them more money (there's a big difference between buying more servers through your procurement group in a large company and just opening up an account with 1&1) and they figure the players are going to go do it themselves anyway. Finally, on the copyright thing: SOE is not absolved of copyright infringement any more than YouTube/Google is, because the raft of lawyers behind such actions aren't going to just go after the minor guild leader. As we see weekly, they're still going after the enablers. Guilds happen for the same reasons older games grew player economies: players who want and aren't getting services go out and do it themselves. This genre has ALWAYS been about the community that surrounds the GENRE, not just the guild stuck in one game. A whole third party industry exists just because of that fact alone. The only difference between what you and I are talking about is the way things are right now absolves the game company from having to own the guild and the guild from having to throw all their eggs in one basket. |