[New Users] Please note that all new users need to be approved before posting. This process can take up to 24 hours. Thank you for your patience.
Check out the v.219 Awake: Flicker of Light Patch Notes here!
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the Forums Code of Conduct: https://forums.maplestory.nexon.net/discussion/29556/code-of-conducts

Who must I speak with to have a rule edited?

NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
Reactions: 1,240
Posts: 113
Member
edited April 2017 in Off-Topic Discussion
Mainly I make this request because I have faith in Nexon. For the most part, I merely want a decision maker to see my point of view and then review it. In society, rules (or laws) are challenged and examined on a regular basis in courtrooms. Sometimes no changes are warranted but other times some adjustments are proven to be beneficial or necessary.

Another point of view is that the right thing to do would be to "give up". I have a hard time swallowing this concept because you could say that Nexon and I go way back and that we have history together. (like many players on the forums) Early on, others have stated that "Nexon is no good" but I disagree with that. While its true that I cannot exactly prove it at the moment and almost all signs point to the doubters being correct, I still believe that there is a chance that Nexon could come through.

Current forum politics and drama aside, I have seen Nexon do good and I know that Nexon can be counted on in the right circumstance. If I need to have this discussion about the rule by profile message or private message then I am open to that too. At a minimum I would want to see a trial period (or even a trial thread) without the rule. I do not expect perfection from my game companies and no one should expect perfection when it comes to rules that are made without warning but then can never be questioned.

The alternative is to give up on Nexon and I am not ready to accept that.

Comments

  • UzumeUzume
    Reactions: 2,525
    Posts: 173
    Member
    edited April 2017
    Arwoo. He's the community manager which makes him in charge of the forum rules, for the most part.
  • AKradianAKradian
    Reactions: 39,145
    Posts: 5,951
    Volunteer Forum Moderator, Private Tester
    edited April 2017
    I recommend you wait for OneLetter's promised longer answer regarding rules and transparency and whatever else he promised to have next week as a result of the "current forum politics and drama".
    I'm sure things will become clearer then.
    Stirring the pot right now is not a good idea.

    However, if you want to go by what's been said until now, Arwoo seems to prefer that people Private Message him anything that isn't about the game.
  • NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
    Reactions: 1,240
    Posts: 113
    Member
    edited April 2017
    Uzume wrote: »
    Arwoo. He's the community manager which makes him in charge of the forum rules, for the most part.

    I don't think it is him or her.
  • FennekinFennekin
    Reactions: 2,941
    Posts: 471
    Member, Private Tester
    edited April 2017
    Uzume wrote: »
    Arwoo. He's the community manager which makes him in charge of the forum rules, for the most part.

    I don't think it is him or her.

    Considering KThxBaiNao (former CM) was the one that had the rule instated, I think it would be Arwoo. At least, I think it was KThxBaiNao that made it? Or maybe he just suggested it to OneLetter and he said sure or something. Either way, the CM seems to at least have some control over the rules (*cough* current controversy *cough*)
  • AKradianAKradian
    Reactions: 39,145
    Posts: 5,951
    Volunteer Forum Moderator, Private Tester
    edited April 2017
    Fennekin wrote: »
    Uzume wrote: »
    Arwoo. He's the community manager which makes him in charge of the forum rules, for the most part.

    I don't think it is him or her.

    Considering KThxBaiNao (former CM) was the one that had the rule instated, I think it would be Arwoo. At least, I think it was KThxBaiNao that made it? Or maybe he just suggested it to OneLetter and he said sure or something. Either way, the CM seems to at least have some control over the rules (*cough* current controversy *cough*)

    I think it was Artasi who had the rule instated.
    But anyway, it was the CM at the time. The CM is the admin of the forums and has full control over the forum-specific Code of Conduct. Some sections apply to all Nexon forums for all games, so he can't touch those, but your rule is obviously not one of those.
    Who else did you think it would be, NeoTokyoDude?
  • NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
    Reactions: 1,240
    Posts: 113
    Member
    edited April 2017
    Well I can't say who it could be but I think about the forum management according to reaction time. I can only base this on what I would do and I don't know much about the position of CM.

    If I were in the shoes of a Community manager then here is how I would handle one aspect of the role:

    I would try to read all messages that got sent to me within one or two weeks.
    Then I would try to reply to all messages within about one to three weeks.
    After 3+ weeks, that would probably mean the question was something I was not permitted to discuss or a topic that I would need to ask a higher authority about before giving an answer.
    If it were the former then I would say so right away but if it were the latter then the response could be delayed indefinitely.
  • AKradianAKradian
    Reactions: 39,145
    Posts: 5,951
    Volunteer Forum Moderator, Private Tester
    edited April 2017
    It's so hard to understand what you're trying to say, when you speak in such roundabout ways.

    If you're trying to say, "I PM'ed Arwoo and he hasn't answered," there can be many reasons for that, other than "he's not the person to contact about this."
    Even if the final decision has to be made by some higher authority, the CM is still your point-of-contact for all things forum-related.
  • NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
    Reactions: 1,240
    Posts: 113
    Member
    edited April 2017
    AKradian wrote: »
    It's so hard to understand what you're trying to say, when you speak in such roundabout ways.
    Where was I roundabout?
    If you're trying to say, "I PM'ed Arwoo and he hasn't answered," there can be many reasons for that, other than "he's not the person to contact about this."
    I have only mentioned it in passing to Arwoo and have not sent a specific PM requesting that a rule be changed but I would like to hear some of those other reasons.
    Even if the final decision has to be made by some higher authority, the CM is still your point-of-contact for all things forum-related.
    I would like to believe you on this and leave it at that but if I did, it would just strengthen the argument that "Nexon is no good" which is something I am trying to disprove.
  • AKradianAKradian
    Reactions: 39,145
    Posts: 5,951
    Volunteer Forum Moderator, Private Tester
    edited April 2017
    AKradian wrote: »
    It's so hard to understand what you're trying to say, when you speak in such roundabout ways.
    Where was I roundabout?

    When talking speculatively about how you would act if you were a CM, instead of outright saying what the CM did (or did not do).
    If you're trying to say, "I PM'ed Arwoo and he hasn't answered," there can be many reasons for that, other than "he's not the person to contact about this."
    I have only mentioned it in passing to Arwoo and have not sent a specific PM requesting that a rule be changed but I would like to hear some of those other reasons.

    For example, he needs more time to investigate why that rule was put in place.
    Even if the final decision has to be made by some higher authority, the CM is still your point-of-contact for all things forum-related.
    I would like to believe you on this and leave it at that but if I did, it would just strengthen the argument that "Nexon is no good" which is something I am trying to disprove.

    How would that be "Nexon is no good"?
    Every person has a job and an area of responsibility. The CM is responsible for communication with the community, for all things that aren't customer support. He is the admin of the official forums and he makes the rules (following more general company guidelines for all game forums).
    I honestly don't see anything wrong with that setup (and as you know I'm quick to criticize Nexon for things they do handle incorrectly).
    What kind of forum handling would you expect from a "good" company?
  • CatoooloooCatooolooo
    Reactions: 5,625
    Posts: 1,213
    Member
    edited April 2017
    I would honestly prefer the rule in question to stay as it seems the only threads you want to post on a daily or bi-weekly basis are those banned threads, you even went as far as to continue making threads after the "final thread to end it all" was made in our old forums and after you got an (or multiple) official response(s).

    Even now, you only want to post about the banned topic, but all of that energy is being redirected to posting about the rule that bans that topic. based on what I see (and how frequent/infrequent you have been posting pre and post rule) I can only see you going back to making 5 threads + a week about the same topic but just trying to frame it differently.

    this is going to be my only post in this thread,
  • NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
    Reactions: 1,240
    Posts: 113
    Member
    edited April 2017
    Catooolooo wrote: »
    I would honestly prefer the rule in question to stay as it seems the only threads you want to post on a daily or bi-weekly basis are those banned threads, you even went as far as to continue making threads after the "final thread to end it all" was made in our old forums and after you got an (or multiple) official response(s).

    Even now, you only want to post about the banned topic, but all of that energy is being redirected to posting about the rule that bans that topic. based on what I see (and how frequent/infrequent you have been posting pre and post rule) I can only see you going back to making 5 threads + a week about the same topic but just trying to frame it differently.

    this is going to be my only post in this thread,
    Thank you for posting but this is the sort of comment that I wish would be saved until after my questions about the rules has been settled. Not only is it full of misconceptions but also uses wrong information in many places. If I can ever get the rules sorted out and if you still want to hear my reply then I would be happy to correct this post at that time. But I can't right now because it might derail this thread.
    AKradian wrote: »
    When talking speculatively about how you would act if you were a CM, instead of outright saying what the CM did (or did not do).
    You sound way more roundabout than me. The comparison about "what I would do" is only for a reference to reaction time. As of yet, it is not meant to connect to or indicate anything further.
    For example, he needs more time to investigate why that rule was put in place.
    If I do send such a PM and that wound up being a reason then the CM of the time would need only to say so and to state how much time they would need. Alternatively they could ask the person with the question about it.
    How would that be "Nexon is no good"?
    Every person has a job and an area of responsibility. The CM is responsible for communication with the community, for all things that aren't customer support. He is the admin of the official forums and he makes the rules (following more general company guidelines for all game forums).
    I honestly don't see anything wrong with that setup (and as you know I'm quick to criticize Nexon for things they do handle incorrectly).
    What kind of forum handling would you expect from a "good" company?
    Its not that Nexon would be no good, it is that the argument that "Nexon is no good" would gain strength. My experience with Nexon in the past was largely hit or miss. Sometimes they handled certain things very well but a few times left much to be desired. On some decisions it seemed like a message was being passed on from somewhere else or decisions where being made that were very inconsistent with what was going on at a given time inside of a thread.

    I think Nexon is a "good" company, when it wants to be. I just hope that when a message gets sent, that someone reads it.
  • GirthquakeGirthquake
    Reactions: 350
    Posts: 30
    Member
    edited April 2017
    You can dispense with the act, Neo. We all know what rule you want "edited" and why.

    Would you like yet another display of how you cannot take a hint? I'll give it to you anyway.

    Here we have your post history from the new forums, the outlined threads have nothing to do with legacy servers.
    KzEJk4Y.png
    Nice to see, btw, that in the seven months that have passed since you last created a thread, you still have yet to take a hint.


    And here we have your post history from the old forums, which is what caused that rule to exist in the first place
    cEePGmd.png
    1n7JdEW.png


    So again, you can dispense with the roundabout "no guys I swear I'm not talking about old maple again in what I believe to be a clever subversion of the forum's rules" threads. The only reason you continue this pointless, one-man crusade is because you have never been told flat-out "no". The reason is simple. Professionalism dictates that you respond to impossible requests with "we are not currently considering this", when in actuality, and when you're not blinded by your own desires, it can be easily attributed to "no, it's not happening, it never will happen".
  • NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
    Reactions: 1,240
    Posts: 113
    Member
    edited April 2017
    ^^^

    Great bait mate but I won't be saying anything about that unless the forum staff gives the OK.
    In which case it would bring me much joy to address all the flaws in the above post. Actually except for that subject being off limits I really don't mind talking about it. As you might have noticed, one of my preferred topics in fact.

    Oh wait, come to think of it I take that back. If my preferred topic had its good name cleared and was able to be talked about again, whenever I visited the forums I would make a habit of ensuring that its threads that I saw stayed peaceful. (by filing the appropriate report or reports if warranted) Which means even though I could respond to the above post, I probably wouldn't. Instead what would most likely happen is the maker of a post like that would have to answer to the moderators and might get in trouble for trying to make a topic personal.

    Although if the post was strictly about the topic in question then yes, I would be glad to reply.
  • GirthquakeGirthquake
    Reactions: 350
    Posts: 30
    Member
    edited April 2017
    You actually think you're convincing anyone? You want your nostalgia so bad, go find a private server; there will never be an "official" legacy server in any extent. I don't care if other games have their own official legacy servers, other games are not maple, nor run by nexon. If they haven't said "you know what, we're going to look into doing this and have a legacy server up within a few months" or whatever in the six years you've been at this idiotic one-man crusade, then they're never going to.

    Besides, what rule could you, the guy who never shuts his gob about old maple this and nostalgia that, possibly want edited? It certainly couldn't be the one part of the rules that your actions, your refusal to accept any answer that is not an explicit "yes", caused to come into being.
  • UzumeUzume
    Reactions: 2,525
    Posts: 173
    Member
    edited April 2017
    *ahem* I can only feel things have been derailed a bit. While it may be relevant, why go this far? Let him post whatever he wants to post whether its this rule in a roundabout way or not. It must get tiring calling him out on the same thing, repeating yourself over and over, every single time in the same way.
    Right?
  • NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
    Reactions: 1,240
    Posts: 113
    Member
    edited April 2017
    Girthquake wrote: »
    You actually think you're convincing anyone? You want your nostalgia so bad, go find a private server; there will never be an "official" legacy server in any extent. I don't care if other games have their own official legacy servers, other games are not maple, nor run by nexon. If they haven't said "you know what, we're going to look into doing this and have a legacy server up within a few months" or whatever in the six years you've been at this idiotic one-man crusade, then they're never going to.

    Besides, what rule could you, the guy who never shuts his gob about old maple this and nostalgia that, possibly want edited? It certainly couldn't be the one part of the rules that your actions, your refusal to accept any answer that is not an explicit "yes", caused to come into being.

    Now some folks could get upset at having their point of view challenged but I enjoy educating people and clearing up misunderstandings. If the subject that you mention were not off limits at the moment then this would be a good chance for a lively discussion. Having said that, there are a few parts that I can elaborate on for you.

    For starters this thread is not about bringing back nostalgia but about asking who is in charge of the rules in the first place.
    Once that is established the next course of action would be to make my case about the specific rule that I have in mind.
    With any luck, the information that I pass on would not fall on deaf ears and the forum staff could then consider slightly editing or revising said rule.
    This is the same principle that could be applied to any rule. If you believe something could use a change then it usually does not hurt to ask.

    As to what I want to get out of this, your assumption is partially correct. But that just means that you might have read a few of my past threads on the subject. The goal was never to "push a suggestion through at all costs" the goal for me was only to make a suggestion and give it as much support as possible and lets face it, the one you are talking about needed a lot of help and most everyone knows it. Which is why I think that discussion should keep going, maybe some future player will come up with a solution that the rest us did not think of.

    Try not to get the wrong idea, I don't expect people to agree with every suggestion that appears. The whole purpose of this I believe, is for players to be able to have disagreements, say what they like out in the open without being rude and then whatever happens after that happens.

    Believe what you want.
  • NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
    Reactions: 1,240
    Posts: 113
    Member
    edited April 2017
    You know, I've been thinking and even though I dont much like to see potentially disruptive posts in a thread it does raise a good point. If I cannot reply to the tough questions then is the rule that I ask about worthy of being changed? People who disagree are also members of the forum too so maybe it is appropriate for me to answers some of their concerns. I believe that it is within the code of conduct for me to respond here. If the rule is overturned or changed then I want to be transparent about it.
    Catooolooo wrote: »
    I would honestly prefer the rule in question to stay as it seems the only threads you want to post on a daily or bi-weekly basis are those banned threads, you even went as far as to continue making threads after the "final thread to end it all" was made in our old forums and after you got an (or multiple) official response(s).

    Even now, you only want to post about the banned topic, but all of that energy is being redirected to posting about the rule that bans that topic. based on what I see (and how frequent/infrequent you have been posting pre and post rule) I can only see you going back to making 5 threads + a week about the same topic but just trying to frame it differently.

    this is going to be my only post in this thread,
    If you are going to make accusations then you should at least make sure that the facts are right.
    First this post is referencing a time when making said threads was allowed so there is nothing to complain about there.
    Once the topic was banned, I didnt make any more threads about it, although I did challenge the ban itself and questioned the decision, which is totally permitted.
    The official response was that the subject was undecided. Why do you think people where asking about it and making threads in the first place? It actually still is undecided, please don't spread bogus information like this.
    There is nothing wrong with questioning a rule that you disagree with or think to be unfair, I would encourage everyone to do so. (within reason)
    Girthquake wrote: »
    You can dispense with the act, Neo. We all know what rule you want "edited" and why.

    Would you like yet another display of how you cannot take a hint? I'll give it to you anyway.

    Here we have your post history from the new forums, the outlined threads have nothing to do with legacy servers.
    KzEJk4Y.png
    Nice to see, btw, that in the seven months that have passed since you last created a thread, you still have yet to take a hint.


    And here we have your post history from the old forums, which is what caused that rule to exist in the first place
    cEePGmd.png
    1n7JdEW.png


    So again, you can dispense with the roundabout "no guys I swear I'm not talking about old maple again in what I believe to be a clever subversion of the forum's rules" threads. The only reason you continue this pointless, one-man crusade is because you have never been told flat-out "no". The reason is simple. Professionalism dictates that you respond to impossible requests with "we are not currently considering this", when in actuality, and when you're not blinded by your own desires, it can be easily attributed to "no, it's not happening, it never will happen".
    For starters, there is nothing roundabout about my approach. There is a rule that I disagree with and I have/ am going to do what I can to get it revised. If you want to debate me about the merit of the subject the rule is based on then the least you could do is wait to see if the rule can even be revised. However I see an image of my thread history presented as if it is something dirty and I am glad to say how wrong that charge is. The threads are no longer available but I can summarize what each one was about. (all posted following the rules of their times)

    In order:
    not related to the rule
    self explanatory
    identification
    not related to the rule
    fundraising
    self explanatory
    self explanatory
    proving value
    gathering opinions
    gathering opinions
    not related
    gathering opinions
    self explanatory
    self explanatory
    gathering opinions
    comparison
    not related to the rule
    gathering opinions
    gathering opinions
    not related to the rule
    gathering opinions
    gathering opinions
    nostalgia
    gathering opinions
    not related to the rule
    nostalgia


    As you can see, the lion share of my posts on the previous forum were about collecting opinions and feedback. What I would call a crucial step for any suggestion that wants to be taken seriously. Did it take a while and maybe there are a few too many threads? Maybe but what do you expect with a suggestion as large as it was? When a player makes a suggestion they can either pull stuff out of the air or they can base what they say on real peoples thoughts and real feedback. This is only one of many reasons why I put so much into promoting the suggestion and to get the rule revised. (a rule that was made without prior warning)
  • AKradianAKradian
    Reactions: 39,145
    Posts: 5,951
    Volunteer Forum Moderator, Private Tester
    edited April 2017
    As I recall, the last CM told you to stop talking about Old Maple and also to stop talking about the rule that forbids talking about Old Maple. So now you've taken it one meta step higher?

    You asked a question. You got the best answer we could give you: the CM is in charge of the rules. PM him. Ask him to tell you if you should be talking to someone else. Because the users on the forum certainly don't know and your continued bumping of this thread is not going to do anything but irritate people.
    AlexF
  • NeoTokyoDudeNeoTokyoDude
    Reactions: 1,240
    Posts: 113
    Member
    edited April 2017
    AKradian wrote: »
    As I recall, the last CM told you to stop talking about Old Maple and also to stop talking about the rule that forbids talking about Old Maple. So now you've taken it one meta step higher?
    The previous CM requested that people stop talking about it. No additional rule was added. In some instances, direct questions require direct answers. I did not raise those questions but I did reply to them because they needed to be addressed sooner or later.
    You asked a question. You got the best answer we could give you: the CM is in charge of the rules. PM him. Ask him to tell you if you should be talking to someone else. Because the users on the forum certainly don't know and your continued bumping of this thread is not going to do anything but irritate people.
    I only bump when I feel its important and it was only a single bump.
  • KThxBaiNaoKThxBaiNao
    Reactions: 11,680
    Posts: 300
    Member
    edited April 2017
    The previous CM requested that people stop talking about it. No additional rule was added. In some instances, direct questions require direct answers. I did not raise those questions but I did reply to them because they needed to be addressed sooner or later.


    No, I'm pretty sure AKradian is right.

    I did ask you to stop talking about the rule, and said that I'd lift it once I thought that things had cooled down, and nobody would bug you about posting about it.
    But as you can see, that time is not now.

    Luckily for you, Arwoo is in charge of the forums now. He might lift it, but I would stick to PMing him, otherwise you risk annoying people even more. If you wait for the rule to get lifted, no one can stop you from talking about it, and they shouldn't bug you.