Realistic Cards Comments & Suggestions - How can we make our section better?

[I Hate Snatch Steal]

If a thread gets locked, tell the poster of the thread why it was locked... People can't improve if they don't know what they did wrong.

[Zazubat]

If a thread gets locked, tell the poster of the thread why it was locked... People can't improve if they don't know what they did wrong.

Here's some nice tips on why your thread might be closed: Spam, no card, impossible to read the card effect, wrong forum (can be moved), OP effect, not using common sense. Just follow those are you should be fine about your locking.

 

EDIT: I think there should be a rule that if the card is completly unable to review, either because it's a normal, or because the effect is so plain that you really can't review it, we should be able to report it so admins can lock it.

[D.A._Sakuyamon]

I'm finding the two changes to RC somewhat annoying.

 

The split is dropped activate in Archs which actually was decent before but now its like Oh you made an Arch-type. To bad cause I wont post a comment since it's to inconvenient to post in that section."

 

Then of course the lock if a card is to oped. This just fs new members because odds are there going to make something they think is balanced only to find it got locked because it was oped without any real explanation.

 

Just my two cents.

[Blake]

I'm finding the two changes to RC somewhat annoying.

 

The split is dropped activate in Archs which actually was decent before but now its like Oh you made an Arch-type. To bad cause I wont post a comment since it's to inconvenient to post in that section."

 

Then of course the lock if a card is to oped. This just fs new members because odds are there going to make something they think is balanced only to find it got locked because it was oped without any real explanation.

 

Just my two cents.

The first is in no way true. Even someone against the split has admitted that Sets have MORE attention than before. Separating them has reduced clutter and has increased activity, due to the fact that people go to the section they are ACTUALLY in the mood for. Otherwise, people went in, saw archetype full of too much, left. 

 

It's not OPd. It's badly designed. And you should really look at the rules and the new rule before commenting, because that was already changed to require an explanation =/

[D.A._Sakuyamon]

The first is in no way true. Even someone against the split has admitted that Sets have MORE attention than before. Separating them has reduced clutter and has increased activity, due to the fact that people go to the section they are ACTUALLY in the mood for. Otherwise, people went in, saw archetype full of too much, left. 

 

It's not OPd. It's badly designed. And you should really look at the rules and the new rule before commenting, because that was already changed to require an explanation =/

I did before commenting. Otherwise I wouldn't have commented in the first place. I still feel these changes are hardly necessary and just in general not needed.

[Blake]

So you're complaining that there's a slight boost in activity, less clutter, and insanely bad design isn't being rewarded with people bitching about how broken/badly designed it is?

[D.A._Sakuyamon]

So you're complaining that there's a slight boost in activity, less clutter, and insanely bad design isn't being rewarded with people bitching about how broken/badly designed it is?

For the Locking topics.

 

How does that help, even if an explanation is given upon lock will that completely help the user. No. One thing I like about making cards is feed back. Even if the feed back is "blarg  you card is oped and can never be balanced" ( I tend to ignore these comments anyways). Simple because at least 1 person will give good constructive feedback on how I can improve the balance of the card. It's that interaction that important in RC and even more important to new users. 

 

On the other topic, never once did I run into any cluster fs when I made topics either for arch or Singles when the forum wasn't split so I cant say that it was clustered. It was fine.

[Blake]

For the Locking topics.

 

How does that help, even if an explanation is given upon lock will that completely help the user. No. One thing I like about making cards is feed back. Even if the feed back is "blarg  you card is oped and can never be balanced" ( I tend to ignore these comments anyways). Simple because at least 1 person will give good constructive feedback on how I can improve the balance of the card. It's that interaction that important in RC and even more important to new users. 

 

On the other topic, never once did I run into any cluster fs when I made topics either for arch or Singles when the forum wasn't split so I cant say that it was clustered. It was fine.

Here's how: You're making an example. Yes, you are helping the user. You're explaining why their card isn't okay. Saying that there are diamonds in the rough doesn't change the fact that spam exists. Catering to those in the wrong is an awful idea.

 

It was cluttered at times, especially when there was higher activity. This makes it neater and lets people know exactly what they're in the mood for. You don't click a topic and find an archetype you aren't in the mood to critique anymore, unless you click from new topics. There's no legitimate reason to remerge them when separating them has made more activity and has reduced the amount of clutter in the forums. Hell, it makes twice the front page space, which means more chances for people to see their cards.

[Not-so-Radiant Arin]

One thing that's always been bugging me, though...

 

...do we really, legitimately need an Advanced Clause? Most of the people that comment in RC are already familiar enough with the rulings that there should be no one-word reviews anyway, and if new members show up, there should just be a sticky at the top of the forum saying "no one word reviews" or something like that, so that people will get it.

[Blake]

One thing that's always been bugging me, though...

 

...do we really, legitimately need an Advanced Clause? Most of the people that comment in RC are already familiar enough with the rulings that there should be no one-word reviews anyway, and if new members show up, there should just be a sticky at the top of the forum saying "no one word reviews" or something like that, so that people will get it.

The current Advanced Clause is a bit of a... touchy topic. Each of the CC moderators have different views on it.

 

The aim of the older advanced clauses was to push people to learn more about design, to think harder about what they're saying, and so on. The current Advanced Clause caters to word count over quality, so I can see your point with it.

[D.A._Sakuyamon]

Here's how: You're making an example. Yes, you are helping the user. You're explaining why their card isn't okay. Saying that there are diamonds in the rough doesn't change the fact that spam exists. Catering to those in the wrong is an awful idea.

 

It was cluttered at times, especially when there was higher activity. This makes it neater and lets people know exactly what they're in the mood for. You don't click a topic and find an archetype you aren't in the mood to critique anymore, unless you click from new topics. There's no legitimate reason to remerge them when separating them has made more activity and has reduced the amount of clutter in the forums. Hell, it makes twice the front page space, which means more chances for people to see their cards.

So in regards to locking your pretty much intent on letting new people die off completely? Well okay then, not fair for them but you dont seem to want to change your mind.

 

Also besides if you care so much about spam just make the post count not go up. The Advance Cause would still be up so users that spam would get hit by it anyways. (mind you I support the Advanced clause)

[Blake]

So in regards to locking your pretty much intent on letting new people die off completely? Well okay then, not fair for them but you dont seem to want to change your mind.

 

Also besides if you care so much about spam just make the post count not go up. The Advance Cause would still be up so users that spam would get hit by it anyways. (mind you I support the Advanced clause)

How does it kill off new people? Oh my, you tell them how they messed up and gave them a smack on the wrist without a warn, they're gonna quit. That's a WEEEEEE bit of a generalization.

 

... The Advanced Clause is up, unless someone knocked it out without my knowledge. I've been warning people based on it, so don't know what you're on about.

[D.A._Sakuyamon]

How does it kill off new people? Oh my, you tell them how they messed up and gave them a smack on the wrist without a warn, they're gonna quit. That's a WEEEEEE bit of a generalization.

 

... The Advanced Clause is up, unless someone knocked it out without my knowledge. I've been warning people based on it, so don't know what you're on about.

How do I put it simply to make you understand.

 

You don't blame the monkey with a gun duck-taped to ts hand on shooting someone. You blame it on the person that duck-taped the gun in the first place. The monkey is the new member unknowingly posting a broken card and the person that duck-taped the gun is the one how made the spam comment. 

 

As for the advanced clause mention, should post count no longer applying in rc should still apply. I have no problem with that.

[Blake]

How do I put it simply to make you understand.

 

You don't blame the monkey with a gun duck-taped to ts hand on shooting someone. You blame it on the person that duck-taped the gun in the first place. The monkey is the new member unknowingly posting a broken card and the person that duck-taped the gun is the one how made the spam comment. 

 

As for the advanced clause mention, should post count no longer applying in rc should still apply. I have no problem with that.

The member who posted an insanely badly designed card isn't innocent, even if they don't understand. When you post in this section, it is your OBLIGATION to learn what card design is and to know how cards interact. Are mistakes allowed? Of course, but when you, say, ignore the existence of Prophecies as a whole, that's another matter completely.

 

You give them a smack on the wrist to show them how that's bad and you lock it. Why? To avoid other members spamming and to make an example of why such horrible design isn't allowed in this section. They're not a monkey, they're completely self-aware. You're degrading their intelligence by comparing them like that.

 

By giving them a smack on the wrist, not even warning them, and locking it, everyone benefits. They learn what not to do, other members see what not to do, and there's no unsightly, worthless spam. If there's spam before it gets locked, it will be dealt with.

 

Also, just gonna say, that analogy was total shit. The problem is the awfully designed card, not the spammers. Given the fact that the spam in a given thread like that is more people spewing the same thing as people before that, it's not their fault that they're trying to intensify how awful the card is.

 

This doesn't drive new members away, and you have no proof that it does.

[Sora1499]

Black, you're forgetting one crucial thing: these people who have posted cards think that they did nothing wrong.  To them, the card design that they're employing is perfectly fine, completely balanced.  So when you lock their threads, their reactions aren't "Gee, I did wrong and I KNOW why I did wrong.  I will never do that again!", they're "Why did my topic get locked?!?!  I wanted to share my cool cards with everyone!  Fuck this, I'm done with this section."  which drives people AWAY by intuition. By prematurely locking someone's topic, you're completely cutting off many crucial steps in turning a shitty card maker into a stellar one, which go as follows:

 

1.  Reviewer 1:  Dude, your card is broken!  It needs fixes because (etc., etc., etc.)

2.  Poster:  Oh shoot!  What can I do to fix it?

3.  Reviewer 1:  Well, you can start by doing this, this, and this.

4.  Poster:  Thanks!  I'll do that!

 

And then the cycle sometimes repeats again if we get anther reviewer who disagrees on a fix or suggests a change.

 

By cutting the process short, these people aren't learning anything, they're just getting butthurt that their poor, innocent topic was locked.  And don't give me some bullshit response like "You have no proof!  They're fine stopping at step 1!" because that method above is how I went from creating broken, poorly designed shit to being an overall decent card maker.

[Blake]

Black, you're forgetting one crucial thing: these people who have posted cards think that they did nothing wrong.  To them, the card design that they're employing is perfectly fine, completely balanced.  So when you lock their threads, their reactions aren't "Gee, I did wrong and I KNOW why I did wrong.  I will never do that again!", they're "Why did my topic get locked?!?!  I wanted to share my cool cards with everyone!  Fuck this, I'm done with this section."  which drives people AWAY by intuition. By prematurely locking someone's topic, you're completely cutting off many crucial steps in turning a shitty card maker into a stellar one, which go as follows:

So... explaining why they did wrong doesn't count? Seriously, all of the points you guys are putting forward treat it as if they aren't getting an explanation. They are.

1.  Reviewer 1:  Dude, your card is broken!  It needs fixes because (etc., etc., etc.)
2.  Poster:  Oh shoot!  What can I do to fix it?
3.  Reviewer 1:  Well, you can start by doing this, this, and this.
4.  Poster:  Thanks!  I'll do that!

And basically unbalanced/badly designed cards are fine for this. When we get DMoC retrains that are even MORE broken in Spellbooks, OTK-or-die cards, and otherwise stupid shit, there's no reason to keep it alive when it becomes a series of the SAME POST over and over.
 

And then the cycle sometimes repeats again if we get anther reviewer who disagrees on a fix or suggests a change.

... So it becomes the spam in most cases, where the brokenness is reiterated over and over?
 

By cutting the process short, these people aren't learning anything, they're just getting butthurt that their poor, innocent topic was locked.  And don't give me some bullshit response like "You have no proof!  They're fine stopping at step 1!" because that method above is how I went from creating broken, poorly designed shit to being an overall decent card maker.

I wouldn't call anyone in the section truly decent. Maybe... a handful of people on the site, at best.

[Sora1499]

So... explaining why they did wrong doesn't count? Seriously, all of the points you guys are putting forward treat it as if they aren't getting an explanation. They are.

They get an explanation, yes, but they don't get proper insight on how to make the card better or decent, which is what ultimately makes good card makers.  Not saying that your explanations are bad (they're actually quite eloquent), but you can't compare one hothead stating the obvious to a bunch of people constructively debating on how to improve a card with interactions with the poster.

 

And basically unbalanced/badly designed cards are fine for this. When we get DMoC retrains that are even MORE broken in Spellbooks, OTK-or-die cards, and otherwise stupid shit, there's no reason to keep it alive when it becomes a series of the SAME POST over and over.

This may sound far-fetched to someone as close-minded as you, but yes, yes they are.  Because what happens is that members suggest a nice little thing called fixes or they provide more points that the other reviewers missed, which makes the poster a better card maker for having more insight and makes the initially wrong members better as well.

 

 ... So it becomes the spam in most cases, where the brokenness is reiterated over and over?

You have provided no proof that this occurs.  If you show me 2 topics in which something of this nature happened, then I will give you this point.

 

 I wouldn't call anyone in the section truly decent. Maybe... a handful of people on the site, at best.

Based on my CC record, I think I have the right to call myself decent, thank you very much.

[Not-so-Radiant Arin]

Sora,

 

1. Black doesn't have to prove anything to you because he's Black.

2.

Based on my CC record, I think I have the right to call myself decent, thank you very much.

Irrelevant because you and I are the only ones who post in CC.

[Aix]

Sora,

 

1. Black doesn't have to prove anything to you because he's Black.

2.

Irrelevant because you and I are the only ones who post in CC.

Stop spamming. That does not help anyone.

 

OT: I suggest making it so that after the first person has posted under Advanced Clause, the rest of us do not have to post 45 words provided that we are making fixes and suggestions, excluding OCG fixes. This way, we are not just paraphrasing what has been mentioned above to pump out words and actually bring out genuine suggestions. Sometimes there isn't all that much that a person notices wrong with a card and they just have one or two things to point out. Also, this way the person doesn't just go tl;dr as some go (yeah, I sort of realize you're a bad person if you do that, but still).

 

As for the lock issue, my only problem is that THERE IS NO CHANCE FOR FIXES!!! They still do not know what to fix! That is the one point which Sora has merit with. Also, my above point helps with people not just repeating that something is broken. If the mod is willing to point out fixes, then, that would work. They can make the card better and repost it, the memories of the atrocious card is literally locked away.

[Blake]

They get an explanation, yes, but they don't get proper insight on how to make the card better or decent, which is what ultimately makes good card makers.  Not saying that your explanations are bad (they're actually quite eloquent), but you can't compare one hothead stating the obvious to a bunch of people constructively debating on how to improve a card with interactions with the poster.

But that's why you only lock the things that are OUT THERE. I'm not gonna lock a card that is, say, Stratos, because as bad design it is, it depends on what it's a Stratos for. If it's a Stratos for Mermails/Atlanteans (PSSSSST), I'mma flip. If it's a Stratos for, say, Burning Knucklers, I'll be much more lenient. One of them is obviously awful design that would have to be all but remade to be even passable design, while the other one wouldn't take much at all to make it passable. A card that needs to be made from all but scratch is the type of card that gets locked.

Either that, or one that is fundamentally awful, anti-interaction design at the core.
 

This may sound far-fetched to someone as close-minded as you, but yes, yes they are.  Because what happens is that members suggest a nice little thing called fixes or they provide more points that the other reviewers missed, which makes the poster a better card maker for having more insight and makes the initially wrong members better as well.

See last point.

You have provided no proof that this occurs.  If you show me 2 topics in which something of this nature happened, then I will give you this point.
 
Based on my CC record, I think I have the right to call myself decent, thank you very much.

Don't have any off of the top of my head, but I've seen it more than a few times. It's not uncommon in the least, when they're left unhindered.

I'm gonna say no to that, considering that:
A. Self-assessments are almost never right
B. To be a better cardmaker, you have to be better at the actual game.

[Not-so-Radiant Arin]

As for the lock issue, my only problem is that THERE IS NO CHANCE FOR FIXES!!! They still do not know what to fix! That is the one point which Sora has merit with. Also, my above point helps with people not just repeating that something is broken. If the mod is willing to point out fixes, then, that would work. They can make the card better and repost it, the memories of the atrocious card is literally locked away.

About the no chance for fixes thing, even if we were to put something like a "You have 24 hours to fix your card before this thread gets locked because it's broken/bad design blah blah blah", people who post the card just post it, leave it, and then never come back to it. That doesn't fix anything, and they are completely oblivious to learn and develop as a card maker.

[Sora1499]

[quote name="Devil's Advocate" post="6142111" timestamp="1360635823"]Sora,   1. Black doesn't have to prove anything to you because he's Black.[/quote] I'm not seeing the logic there. [quote name="Devil's Advocate" post="6142111" timestamp="1360635823"] 2.Irrelevant because you and I are the only ones who post in CC.[/quote] Kyng, Toyo, Axi, Sleepy, Neo, Zazu, Chance, Spike, John, and Striker. :T And Kvn and DA used to post back in the day.

[Blake]

Stop spamming. That does not help anyone.

Stop minimodding. That does not help anyone.
 

OT: I suggest making it so that after the first person has posted under Advanced Clause, the rest of us do not have to post 45 words provided that we are making fixes and suggestions, excluding OCG fixes. This way, we are not just paraphrasing what has been mentioned above to pump out words and actually bring out genuine suggestions. Sometimes there isn't all that much that a person notices wrong with a card and they just have one or two things to point out. Also, this way the person doesn't just go tl;dr as some go (yeah, I sort of realize you're a bad person if you do that, but still).

lolno. The current AC is already quantity over quantity, so why would we want to throw quantity out as well? Though, you do make a good point of how the current Advanced Clause does nothing but promote filler.
 

Kyng, Toyo, Axi, Sleepy, Neo, Zazu, Chance, Spike, John, and Striker. :T And Kvn and DA used to post back in the day.

0-2 people there count as decent.

[Aix]

The current AC is already quantity over quantity, so why would we want to throw quantity out as well? Though, you do make a good point of how the current Advanced Clause does nothing but promote filler.

Huh, fixes and suggestions are not quality? If they are not quality, at least, the person who is posting is trying to help, trying to bring quality. There is no way for pure quality, but paraphrasing other people's words is not appealing and I often become too lazy to do so, after all, this is a recreational site built merely for enjoyment. We are not here to improve our essay writing and rewording skills (I paraphrased paraphrase), we are just here just cuz it's fun and many people enjoy helping others, but they are lazy. They are coming here during their leisure time, they do not want to work here. While some would look down upon others for their unability to word things eloquently, here is not the place for it. Quick concise fixes can be better and saves time so that we have more leisure time on this leisure site.

 

 

Stop minimodding. That does not help anyone.

 

Dante really wasn't helping at all there. I was pointing that out.

 

 

About the no chance for fixes thing, even if we were to put something like a "You have 24 hours to fix your card before this thread gets locked because it's broken/bad design blah blah blah", people who post the card just post it, leave it, and then never come back to it. That doesn't fix anything, and they are completely oblivious to learn and develop as a card maker.

That is actually an idea, that way, us reviewers have 24 hours to help this poor guy, figure out if he really doesn't know how to play or really doesn't care. If he refuses our help, or does not make any mention of it, then, he prolly gave up and we should give up on him as well. Next time he posts crap, go ahead and lock him, but mention how he ignored the last warning.

[Blake]

Huh, fixes and suggestions are not quality? If they are not quality, at least, the person who is posting is trying to help, trying to bring quality. There is no way for pure quality, but paraphrasing other people's words is not appealing and I often become too lazy to do so, after all, this is a recreational site built merely for enjoyment. We are not here to improve our essay writing and rewording skills (I paraphrased paraphrase), we are just here just cuz it's fun and many people enjoy helping others, but they are lazy. They are coming here during their leisure time, they do not want to work here. While some would look down upon others for their unability to word things eloquently, here is not the place for it. Quick concise fixes can be better and saves time so that we have more leisure time on this leisure site.

Sure there is. The old AC supported thinking deeply about how a card interacts with the game, what practical uses there are, and so on, and required said thought.

We're not requiring eloquence, because eloquent emptiness is worse than nothing at all. The original idea of the advanced clause was to push members to become better at yugioh AND card making at the same time, not to just fill a post up as much as you can. THAT is what I meant by quality over quantity.

And honestly, bad advice is worse than no advice, as well. Why would we want bad activity?
 

Dante really wasn't helping at all there. I was pointing that out.

Minimodding is still minimodding.

That is actually an idea, that way, us reviewers have 24 hours to help this poor guy, figure out if he really doesn't know how to play or really doesn't care. If he refuses our help, or does not make any mention of it, then, he prolly gave up and we should give up on him as well. Next time he posts crap, go ahead and lock him, but mention how he ignored the last warning.

Tried sometghing similar to this before with the old Advanced Clause when it required a small explanation of the intent of your card.

Spoiler: didn't work.