Suggestion : Summary / Conclusion within first 3 post of FFF discussion

[Tairon96]

TL;DR

• First post in FFF discussion like it is now
• Second post reserved, edited and maintained by any forum mod to summarize the discussion
• Third post in FFF discussion reserved and edited after discussion is ended to describe any possible conclusion

______

What ?

In the obvious case a FFF will lead to a controversial discussion it might be very helpful to reserve the first three post for the Wube staff

If from time to time the second post is updated with some kind of summary from the ongoing discussion ... and after the discussion is called to an end the third post contains a conclusion ... this would be very, very helpful.

______

Why ?

I have read the "complete" thread about the "Bots vs Belts" discussion ... but only part 2 . It was very interesting at first. But the last 10-15 pages of this 51 pages thread was only tedious, tiresome and exhausting. The same topics, suggestions, objections and comments ... over and over again. The worst thing was, the amplitude of opinions was raising more and more ( The discussion on part 1 I have skipped fearing for the worsen ). If you want to keep a discussion like a constructive feedback / criticism / brainstorm, it is necessary everyone knows what is already said. But most forum users are not disciplined enough for reading every thing and you can't ask everyone to keep up with a fast developing discussion, either.

On page 19 of 51 the user Shados tried to summarize the thread so far ( first half of his post )

Shados' summary on 'Bots vs Belts'( click )

I don't expect to see such a high quality summary every FFF discussion. But it is my strong belief, in the second post even a quick and dirty updated summary from time to time would help to keep the flames low. Most people fear their opinion might not be heard. You can see this very clearly in the thread. But if they read in the summary someone else has already mentioned the same thought, they don't feel lost and unheard ("Hey, there is someone thinking the same way"). They don't need to repeat the opinion over and over again, since it is already noted. They can concentrate on adding new ideas. The last 5 pages of the thread a few people tried to keep it to the facts by doing some research. Besides that, the thread was already going downhill. There were next to nil new thoughts brought up. It felt like an echo thrown back and forth increasing in volume and disharmony. A constructive feedback was out of reach... (A newbie offered a view from the outside, but the heated "experts" didn't not see this opportunity)

______


The third post could be used for a conclusion to allow everyone to read what might be the result of this discussion. In Shados' post ( Kudos ! ) he gave also a very good example how this could look like ( second half of his post ). Again, I don't expect such a high quality conclusion at every FFF. But it would also help to keep the flames in the future at a low level : Devs' thoughts about the pros and cons on the most reasonable suggestions / comments / objections / feedback show the community, "Hey, although they might not have the same opinion like me. But at least they have taken notice of my objections."

______


Additionally, please, repeat from time to time, since some people forget one or two points :

• Devs do what they can do best : Developing the game.
• Mods do what they can do best : Listen to the community and summing the input for the Devs
• Listening is not taking orders. Neither for Mods nor for the Devs
• Factorio is in early access, meaning it is still object of countless changes.
• "You have not bought the game. You have bought a license to play the game."

______


Just my humble opinion. The rest is up to you.

[DaveMcW]

The result of discussions is posted in the Releases forum.

[Tairon96]

The result of discussions is posted in the Releases forum.

¿ ?

I am sorry, but in the release forum, there are "only" the results of the development posted.

Development is not public discussion. It's not even close the same.

______


The "result" of the "Bots vs Belts" discussion of FFF-224 and FFF-225 was posted at the end of FFF-226 ( click )

Bots conclusion (for now)
Over the last 2 weeks we have had an absolutely huge response to the topic of 'Belts vs Bots', and the amount of feedback we have received is simply incredible. It really does feel great to have a community that is so passionate about our game, and willing to share their thoughts with us. Though with great discussion, come great disagreements, and this conversation has definitely sparked some debates in the community. We hope we can join together once again, not as 'bot lovers' or 'bot haters', but just as players that enjoy the game.

After extensive discussions in the office and internal testing, we have come to the conclusion that we need more time. This is a delicate topic, and the solution has to be one that walks a fine line within the design of the game. We are moving to work on other features and improvements, some of which are related to the balance of power between belts and robots, but for now it is highly unlikely there will be any changes in 0.16. When the time comes around to look at this topic again, we will keep you informed of any progress.

Due to the split into blog and forum, the result is not searchable within the forum. In this case it doesn't matter

[...] we need more time [...]

[...] for now it is highly unlikely there will be any changes in 0.16 [...]

[...] we will keep you informed of any progress [...]

And again : Due to the split, the further progress is not searchable within the forum. I don't know, if the topic came up again and if there was another discussion and a more detailed conclusion / result ( "I have come late to the party" ) ... since the results are "locked away" in the blog.

Additionally we were not informed about the pros and cons discussed on the suggestions the community has made. So we are kept in the dark about the reasons.

Without any more detailed feedback about the suggestions made in the public discussion, the community will not be able to fine tune suggestions in a future discussion.

[Koub]

Your suggestion does make sense. However, I see three issues with it :

1) What you ask for represents a tremendous work. Not the 3 post reserving at the beginning of each FFF thread, but the second post summary and the third post conclusion would represent a time involvement no moderator has, no community member has (on the time scale the game took to be developped), and the devs can always be accused to be partial - and should focus on the game first in my opinion.

2) Some discussions never truly finish. There are still now people posting revolutionary ideas (and by revolutionary, I mean people who didn't read the over 100 pages of discussion on the subject that took place early 2018) on how to fix balance between bots and belts. And the bots vs belts is just one of many examples.

3) Most people don't bother even reading the second post. Some do of course, but from what I can see, the majority just posts their opinion as a reaction just when they see something to react to. Therefore, such work would only be of use for a small part of the commmunity.

[Jap2.0]

So are you offering to write these for them? I don't see anyone who has the time. Koub has said the mods don't. Wube is trying to make a game here, and has to be careful to make sure that they aren't overly biased and don't reveal anything that is not meant to be public or is a surprise for another FFF.
When are you posting these? Are you just declaring the discussion "done" at some point, or are you continuously editing them for days, weeks, or even months straight?

[Tairon96]

@ Koub

Your suggestion does make sense. However, I see three issues with it :

1) What you ask for represents a tremendous work. Not the 3 post reserving at the beginning of each FFF thread, but the second post summary and the third post conclusion would represent a time involvement no moderator has, no community member has (on the time scale the game took to be developped), and the devs can always be accused to be partial - and should focus on the game first in my opinion.

2) Some discussions never truly finish. There are still now people posting revolutionary ideas (and by revolutionary, I mean people who didn't read the over 100 pages of discussion on the subject that took place early 2018) on how to fix balance between bots and belts. And the bots vs belts is just one of many examples.

3) Most people don't bother even reading the second post. Some do of course, but from what I can see, the majority just posts their opinion as a reaction just when they see something to react to. Therefore, such work would only be of use for a small part of the commmunity.

Thanks Koub for your answer. I thought someone in the Wube team would copy and paste the suggestions made in a FFF discussion for the other team members for some kind of brainstorm meeting. My fault.

Yeah, a good example for people that fit into the category of (3) seems to be ...

[Tairon96]

@ Jap2.0

Hmmm, don't know, if I should reply to Jap2.0. I will try it ...

______

Maybe my English is not well enough to make my point clear in the opening post. Maybe my English is not well enough to understand what Jap's point is. For me it sounds like I have somehow offended him and his answer is like (*Grrr*NAY*Stomp*Never!!1Elven!!*Grrr*).

[...]

his complete post

So are you offering to write these for them?  I don't see anyone who has the time.  Koub has said the mods don't. Wube is trying to make a game here, and has to be careful to make sure that they aren't overly biased and don't reveal anything that is not meant to be public or is a surprise for another FFF.
When are you posting these?  Are you just declaring the discussion "done" at some point, or are you continuously editing them for days, weeks, or even months straight?

______

First of all: I like criticism. Yes I really love it! But I prefer constructive criticism. And I dislike destructive criticism. Now guess, in what category your post is sorted into?

Do you have read and have tried to understand my post? Do you have read and tried to understand Koub's post?

I don't think so.

______

I have never suggested the community should participate less in the development of Factorio. I have never suggested Wube should reveal secrets or give away the opportunity to surprise us with new features. Where have you read this ?

My suggestion was to summarize the discussion thread in the rare situation of a predicted controversial discussion will follow the FFF.

I wanted Wube to direct our ideas in a way Wube will find our suggestions more useful by preventing to discuss ideas Wube has already discarded (e.g. can't be implemented / doesn't fit into their vision of the game / ... )

______

Furthermore I wanted to remove the likelihood of repetitive arguments. And what are you doing ? Repeating Koub's arguments and adding ... nothing but verbal attacks. Please be so kind and take a look at Koub's post and try to adjust your tune to a more polite manner. If you do so and add something new, your opinion will be heard.

______

Although Koub has mentioned this argument, too, I want to go into more detail:  ...

Your logic is flawed: On one hand you say "Are you just declaring the discussion 'done' at some point, [...]" and on the other hand you say "[...] or are you continuously editing them for days, weeks, or even months straight?".

If a discussion goes on for months like the bots/belts controversy the workload of editing the summary is spread over the time span, too. And the mods are already combining similar threads in the "ideas and suggestions forum". A copy and paste of a *new* thought into the summary would have been only very little additional work. The only problem would have been the first few days. But this has already been mentioned before by Koub. By the way : If you had read the bots/belt FFFs more carefully, you would have noticed, it has been declared done by Klonan in the next FFF a week after the part 2. But this I have already mentioned in my reply to DaveMcW.

______

If you don't like my suggestion, it is okay for me. But ...

Neither it was not meant to be a poll (this would have been in the responsibility of Wube). Nor it was meant to be an invitation card for creatures living below bridges and being in a constant bad mood.

[Jap2.0]

Maybe my English is not well enough to make my point clear in the opening post. Maybe my English is not well enough to understand what Jap's point is. For me it sounds like I have somehow offended him and his answer is like (*Grrr*NAY*Stomp*Never!!1Elven!!*Grrr*).

First of all: I like criticism. Yes I really love it! But I prefer constructive criticism. And I dislike destructive criticism. Now guess, in what category your post is sorted into?

Do you have read and have tried to understand my post? Do you have read and tried to understand Koub's post?

I don't think so.

I'm sorry if I came across that way. I was hoping for some clarification on a few points (I was more asking for clarification on those points and if they would be valid criticisms than pointedly making them), and I must admit it came across as a worse tone than I meant. My apologies.
As for your question, yes, I have read and done my best to understand your post.

I have never suggested the community should participate less in the development of Factorio.

I don't recall doing it myself either (I may be wrong, if can give me a quote with a bit of context I could do my best to explain).

I have never suggested Wube should reveal secrets or give away the opportunity to surprise us with new features. Where have you read this ?

Accurately concluding a discussion can be difficult when oftentimes the conclusion is simply the next FFF, they haven't decided what to do yet themselves, or there is really no conclusion to be made (although these cases are generally not contentious, so the summary wouldn't be necessary), whether it's because the FFF contained next to nothing debatable, because only a tiny minority disagreed with the changes, or because the devs have their heart set on the change being made as they described it.

Of course, if by concluding a discussion you mean addressing every idea from the summary, that would take a lot of work, most likely be even more contentious if it was written by someone who makes the game, and the response to most ideas would probably be no, but some people would probably try to use that in a way to stop all discussion of that topic (which I doubt would be their goal). All of this would get significantly harder the more contentious the debate. Shados' list has 35 ideas (and this was only half way through the discussion!) and took him many hours to write. Certainly, the devs' posts don't need to be this through, but it sounds like you want them to address every idea. It would be no small task.

My suggestion was to summarize the discussion thread in the rare situation of a predicted controversial discussion will follow the FFF.

Ah, sorry.

I wanted Wube to direct our ideas in a way Wube will find our suggestions more useful by preventing to discuss ideas Wube has already discarded (e.g. can't be implemented / doesn't fit into their vision of the game / ... )

I don't think that's a good idea. This forum is largely here for us to give Wube feedback on their game - if you limit that discussion to ideas they've already decided to do (or are expecting them to actively discard some), then I don't think that's going to happen. For reference, see this post with the following quote:

• We're not immune to making the wrong decision,
  So I don't think its productive to close all the discussion, akin to saying: "We are right you are wrong now shut up",
  Over time and through player testing, people may come with fresh and new perspectives for us to consider,
  And we may very well have a reason to amend some of the changes we have made

as well as this

• Shutting down an idea, or confirming an idea, without any actual substance to it, is never going to help,
  In the years since it was suggested, it could start to make more sense, or it could start to make less sense,
  Putting some developer mark on an idea that it's either approved or disapproved, will cause only misinformation in the long run
  
  I like to let threads and ideas play themselves out amongst the community,
  If I say something or interfere, I could change the natural outcome of the discussion

Furthermore I wanted to remove the likelihood of repetitive arguments. And what are you doing ? Repeating Koub's arguments and adding ... nothing but verbal attacks. Please be so kind and take a look at Koub's post and try to adjust your tune to a more polite manner. If you do so and add something new, your opinion will be heard.

Cool, cool, only bringing up personal attacks for the fifth time. (Despite that I don't see anything especially personal, other than a few requests for clarification. And I probably shouldn't have written those last two sentences.)

Although Koub has mentioned this argument, too, I want to go into more detail:  ...

Your logic is flawed: On one hand you say "Are you just declaring the discussion 'done' at some point, [...]" and on the other hand you say "[...] or are you continuously editing them for days, weeks, or even months straight?".

If a discussion goes on for months like the bots/belts controversy the workload of editing the summary is spread over the time span, too. And the mods are already combining similar threads in the "ideas and suggestions forum". A copy and paste of a *new* thought into the summary would have been only very little additional work. The only problem would have been the first few days. But this has already been mentioned before by Koub. By the way : If you had read the bots/belt FFFs more carefully, you would have noticed, it has been declared done by Klonan in the next FFF a week after the part 2. But this I have already mentioned in my reply to DaveMcW.

So the answer is that you're continuously editing them for days, weeks, or months straight. With contentious issues, you'll have to be continuously editing several summaries at once.
I'd also say that simply copying and pasting an idea is an under representation of how difficult it would be. Sure, some posts have a clear idea, but some have multiple, some are hard to understand, and some have convoluted changes that are difficult to summarize. Analyzing the ideas on top of that would make it even harder.

If you don't like my suggestion, it is okay for me. But ...

I like the suggestion, I just don't find it feasible. (Of course, it might help if you focused on my words rather than my tone )

Neither it was not meant to be a poll (this would have been in the responsibility of Wube). Nor it was meant to be an invitation card for creatures living below bridges and being in a constant bad mood.

Okay, okay, I get it .



One last thing I'd like to bring up: with your suggestion of having a limit of one single post for an idea, there is no real way for people to show support for an idea. Voting has been suggested on several occasions, but ultimately it has never happened (beyond the polls that kind of work sometimes). Additionally, many ideas are slight variations of an idea, which causes a whole additional level of deciding whether to put it in the summary, whether to allow it, where to draw the line between the same post and a variation, etc.