MCM is hardly a market anymore

[Scroll32]

I thought I would respond to some of the comments on here, just because I think there are some misconceptions about the moderation of the site and the rules.

Firstly, when it comes to the site punishing users and moderating the content, we have rules and we stick to them, we can't just go "oh well, it's just arguing in chat" or "oh, maybe this time we will let it go." we follow an escalation process.

If you think that people are punished too easily, could you explain why? Do you believe that the rules are unclear? Do you think that people should be allowed to do certain things that we disallow? I would be interested to hear the opinions. I would suggest creating a suggestion thread if you believe something should be changed none the less.

In regards to this comment;


It might seem little but following an escalation process is important, if you do things and still can't improve from previous warnings then the punishment must increase and that's the same for any of the shoutbox rules, it's not just that arguing will cause this punishment. I won't comment on individual users but the general point being that a process is followed and that's how the site is moderated.

I'm not sure what you mean by over-moderated? The site has rules and that's what determines what's moderated and what's not, if the rules are violated the appropriate action is taken against the user in correspondence with the rules and the warnings stated here;
https://www.mc-market.org/wiki/warnings/

Furthermore, if the moderation could be improved, do you have any examples of what you mean? Do you mean changing the rules and/or process to better suit the community? If so I would suggest creating a thread in our suggestion forum here;
https://www.mc-market.org/suggestions/

In regards to the thread;

I must agree with Geek, I'm not sure how removing a few sections or editing the forbidden products list really affects the whole marketplace, yes it may harm a few select individuals who are looking to offer or request that specific service, but the wider forum still has a lot of services that can be offered.

I think the words, "hardly a marketplace anymore" are a little dramatic.

I look forward to the responses.

I agree with you that banning things from the forum and rule enforcement are separate topics, but the issue is the same, a dying site. Can you guys at least admit that the site is indeed seeing a decrease in activity? Can you also admit that as you have been banning more sections and punish popular members (outside of scamming) recently? I get the logic in why people who break the rules need to be punished (I don't get staff's logic in banning things that are legal and not banning everything that breaks a tos, but this is besides the point). Bottom line is that you(staff) are continuing to go down this road and you are seeing a decrease in activity, so we are just pointing our the correlation in hopes that you actually find a solution. I get you guys just keep saying the new update to the site will solve all your problems, but that might be too little too late.

 

[Magnusdk123]

I agree with you that banning things from the forum and rule enforcement are separate topics, but the issue is the same, a dying site. Can you guys at least admit that the site is indeed seeing a decrease in activity? Can you also admit that as you have been banning more sections and punish popular members (outside of scamming) recently? I get the logic in why people who break the rules need to be punished (I don't get staff's logic in banning things that are legal and not banning everything that breaks a tos, but this is besides the point). Bottom line is that you(staff) are continuing to go down this road and you are seeing a decrease in activity, so we are just pointing our the correlation in hopes that you actually find a solution. I get you guys just keep saying the new update to the site will solve all your problems, but that might be too little too late.

I mean the site is mostly stable in terms of visits per month if you look at the general statistics for the last half a year. It has been ranging consistently around half a million visits each month, so I don't really get what you mean that it might be too late. I might be wrong though who knows, but I prefer to look at the numbers.

 

[Wezel]

gang gang gang

 

[Scroll32]

I mean the site is mostly stable in terms of visits per month if you look at the general statistics for the last half a year. It has been ranging consistently around half a million visits each month, so I don't really get what you mean that it might be too late. I might be wrong though who knows, but I prefer to look at the numbers.

I saw mick mention that he has even seen less activity compared to what it used to be. I also see less new posts and less sb messages that I have in a while, which is where I got my metrics from. Also, I'm not suggesting that now it is too late, I'm just worried about the future if this inactivity that I am seeing continues to increase.

 

[Magnusdk123]

where did you find these statistics sir

SimilarWebs, Google analytics and other sources.

 

[Siliz Arts]

I've noticed the inactivity as well due to the number of people in chatbox alone. I disappeared for around a month to deal with some medical issues and upon coming back to look for commissions, suddenly I no longer see more than 2-4 people in chatbox at a time.

 

[Dann]

I mean the site is mostly stable in terms of visits per month if you look at the general statistics for the last half a year.

I saw mick mention that he has even seen less activity compared to what it used to be.

I had mentioned the fact that statistically from our banner ad, the side was getting less visitors than in 2019... pre COVID. Yikes.
(During a discussion regarding ad pricing)

I'm also doubting that the site is even growing at this point - our top banner ad has seen worse performance in terms of views meaning that the overall site is smaller than in 2019.
We're seeing ~6% less views per day on the top banner ad (Jan 2019 -> May 2019 vs Oct 2020 -> June 2021)

The top banner ad used to cost $415.40 back then, It's now $711.45... You've put your prices up by ~71% yet the site has shrunk by ~6%. Nice.

I do think that whilst the site basically had its hand forced in removing Minecraft accounts, they're not really doing a whole lot in terms of trying to reformat & push the site into an EULA/TOS compliant market place bringing in new users at a fast enough pace to outweigh users leaving, as per the rest of the gaming industry MC-Market should have had a influx of new users from COVID, yet clearly this is missing - or they're outnumbered by the masses of people leaving.

 

[Jasmine]

I eventually do want to elaborate my point further I just want to say this thread has been 10x more active than chatbox has been for the past month or so with consistent posts and people coming together to express their opinion on this topic. Wow.

 

[Lotus]

I'm not sure what you mean by over-moderated? The site has rules and that's what determines what's moderated and what's not, if the rules are violated the appropriate action is taken against the user in correspondence with the rules and the warnings stated here;
https://www.mc-market.org/wiki/warnings/

I feel this might be an example of how users feel a bit more 'violated' when warned. Did this really really need points? Or could you have swiped this under the rug with a verbal warning?

yeah me lol
View attachment 461481
View attachment 461482
it was 3 warning points but, it ruined my day

I always believed that if it is something that was not intentionally malicious (i.e. if you were intentionally disrespectful or harassing someone), then the first time it happens could be forgiven without points and just a reminder that the next time won't be so lenient - recurring offences should be warned. Exceptions apply for things like premium plugin violations etc, but I'm talking about insignificant rules like this.

But I know every moderator has a different view on this topic slightly and I know it's hard to keep things consistent between everyone. One thing I didn't like was that new users would get fucked with warning points because they make simple accidental mistakes out of not knowing the rules, and that would leave a terrible first impression of the site (and probably never return again). At least I've felt this idea of leniency hasn't been taught properly internally and it's just easier to teach new mods "user break rule? warn".

The issue is that warning points (even something as small as 3 points) are perceived to be really really bad in comparison to a verbal warning, and so as root said, it ruined his day even though it really wasn't a big deal. Both the points and the warning topic itself.

I do think that whilst the site basically had its hand forced in removing Minecraft accounts, they're not really doing a whole lot in terms of trying to reformat & push the site into an EULA/TOS compliant market place

This. I've always been on the side of removing accounts, being TOS compliant, etc, from the start (sorry not sorry), but it's been a half-assed commitment at times unless something is forced. That half-assed commitment scares away sellers who are looking for a "not shady marketplace" and pisses off the existing users who really want accounts etc.

Yeah sure, the complaint of this thread is that the removal of accounts and other shady stuff is what's killing the site, but the reality is that accounts are never coming back and the site has to pivot to a brand that is more accessible to everyone.

I've also always thought the site is sort of inaccessible to newbies who have no experience with forums and the onboarding process could be worked on. That is a big part that should be addressed to improve the growth of this site - although I do think the XF2 release would be helpful for that. It should still be a topic discussed and brainstormed to improve on.

 

[Andrew]

I feel this might be an example of how users feel a bit more 'violated' when warned. Did this really really need points? Or could you have swiped this under the rug with a verbal warning?

I can understand that. I do also however understand that all of our rules, policies and warning structure is public and can be easily accessed, users should not just get away with breaking the rules the first time because they could not be bothered to read them. They are here to protect the community at the end of the day and it's the job of the staff team to best enforce them, we're not here to be mean, I don't enjoy issuing punishments I much greater enjoy the support side of the site in helping others.

I am all for the idea about further explaining the escalation process or the moderation process through some form of wiki, as 120275 suggested, however that does always open up the possibility of people finding loopholes or abusing the knowledge to work around the staff team. It's something that I'm more than happy to suggest tho, if the community feel it's something they could benefit from moving forward.

 

[BrettPlays]

At least, if we're not going to be welcome in the future version of the site, we can leave, today.

This.

 

[Ted]

I'm not saying it's not a market. I'm saying it's not the same. Also, for many years selling and buying minecraft accounts was prohibited but did that stop any site for real? From selling optifine cape or minecon cape accounts? You can't even ask how much certain named/rank accounts are worth even if you have no plan to sell.

And not to mention how many times I see people still selling nitro but yet when I ask around I get a warning.

I've been here for more than 6 years.. it hasn't been the same since I joined. Sometimes people believe the site changes, but it's really people's opinion who changes. People who no longer need mc-market because they realize how unimportant the website is to their daily lives. Sellers who were once here expanded their communities away from being governed under rules and another owner. Maybe their services no longer agreed with what mc-market respected? What's the real reason that people stay here? Is it to continue selling products and squeeze authenticity out of a community that is mostly created with more sellers over buyers?

If you want to offer such services, you're forced to separate your business from this website. By doing this, people soon realize that this place is no longer as useful as they thought. I'm 21 now, far older than I was when I registered. I'd be more interested in creating my branding here rather than actually selling products. However, many people have different reasons for being here, that's just mine. There are users here who make lots of money, but I can guarantee you most of their income isn't from this site.

Edit: In reality, Mc-Market is like the chatroom that our older generations created when the internet first started.

 

[Lotus]

They are here to protect the community at the end of the day and it's the job of the staff team to best enforce them, we're not here to be mean, I don't enjoy issuing punishments I much greater enjoy the support side of the site in helping others.

Blame the user, not the policies is what you're doing. Reality isn't going to change, so adapt and compromise - why do you punish accidents if they cause no harm to another individual? (e.g. root's case). Why return innocent mistakes with something as offensive as warning points when it could've been resolved amicably by both parties? I have a firsthand experience where I've seen users respond so kindly with a verbal warning due to their lack of understanding of the rules and they never break it again, but very hurt when you just slap them on the wrist with points - and I know that staff members are divided with how they approach these sorts of cases.

Are you here to help users as a supporter or play the stone-faced police enforcer role? You're leaning more to the latter than former despite what you're saying - and quite frankly being an MCM mod should be viewed as primarily a customer support job than anything else.

As I said, obvious violations that make sense wherever you go on Earth (e.g. disrespecting people, illegal content, etc.), go for it and warn the shit out of them. But for rules that are site-specific and not common sense, you can't hold the expectation that new users will know it.

TLDR; Review how you handle accidental violations and ones out of ignorance of the rules that do no harm to another user. And maybe this time, actually get the agreement out of the whole staff team and update the documents and staff policies accordingly. Else things will start splintering as different staff members will handle things differently as they do now.

 

[Andrew]

Blame the user, not the policies is what you're doing. Reality isn't going to change, so adapt and compromise - why do you punish accidents if they cause no harm to another individual? (e.g. root's case). Why return innocent mistakes with something as offensive as warning points when it could've been resolved amicably by both parties? I have a firsthand experience where I've seen users respond so kindly with a verbal warning due to their lack of understanding of the rules and they never break it again, but very hurt when you just slap them on the wrist with points - and I know that staff members are divided with how they approach these sorts of cases.

Are you here to help users as a supporter or play the stone-faced police enforcer role? You're leaning more to the latter than former despite what you're saying - and quite frankly being an MCM mod should be viewed as primarily a customer support job than anything else.

As I said, obvious violations that make sense wherever you go on Earth (e.g. disrespecting people, illegal content, etc.), go for it and warn the shit out of them. But for rules that are site-specific and not common sense, you can't hold the expectation that new users will know it.

TLDR; Review how you handle accidental violations and ones out of ignorance of the rules that do no harm to another user. And maybe this time, actually get the agreement out of the whole staff team and update the documents and staff policies accordingly. Else things will start splintering as different staff members will handle things differently as they do now.

I understand what you're saying, I would not saying it's blaming the user and not the policy however. That's like saying because I did not know the law I should be exempt from it. The same form comes across here, just to less serious degree. We have rules and policies in place to protect the community but also to protect the site itself. It's the responsibility of each individual user to read the rules, if they choose not to, in my opinion they loose the right to be annoyed at being punished. They chose to not to read the rules.

In another example, if we were in a school and you mess around in class, you cause a disruption, you get sent to a form of isolation, or at least that was how it was where I went to school. The difference with this example, which correlates with you is that teachers usually gave you a warning before they sent you out of class. That here would be acting as our verbal warning.

I'm all for verbalising more warnings for less serious rules and punishments, when I verbally users they receive a conversation from me explaining the warning, what rule they have broken and what they did that violated that rule, I give everyone the chance to open a ticket if they need further clarification. I think it's important to verbalise certain aspects, but I also see the importance of discipline in the warning system.

You're right, some people may not repeat the offence again if they receive a verbal warning but equally the same affect should occur with warning points, at the end of the day, warning points are warnings the real punishment is a ban from the site, we're very generous and allow people 75 warning points before being banned, that's a lot of chances, assuming you're not violating more serious rules more often, which you've already stated, should remain warning points.

I will mention to Kram when I speak to him that in some cases maybe an internal discussion about the rules and what could be treated lighter, should be, I agree that we're here to support the community and site members while also providing a balance to ensure that the site is moderated properly. So, I'm all for being lighter on less serious offences.

You mention that we're here to play a police enforcer role, I think that's a little dramatic. We're here to enforce rules, yes but that's the same anywhere you go, there will be rules and people that enforce them. It's a learning curve to life as-well. We are also here to support the members of the community and that is what I spend a good portion of my time on the site doing and I'm sure is the same for the other staff as-well.

I will also bring up accidental violations, I will remind you though that it is hard to determine if something is accidental in quite a lot of cases and that could pose a problem especially with people starting to claim that their violations of the rules are accidental in order to get a "free pass" however i do agree in certain cases there is certainly more scope to be more discretionary and am happy to bring it up for discussion.

 

[Jasmine]

I understand what you're saying, I would not saying it's blaming the user and not the policy however. That's like saying because I did not know the law I should be exempt from it. The same form comes across here, just to less serious degree. We have rules and policies in place to protect the community but also to protect the site itself. It's the responsibility of each individual user to read the rules, if they choose not to, in my opinion they loose the right to be annoyed at being punished. They chose to not to read the rules.

In another example, if we were in a school and you mess around in class, you cause a disruption, you get sent to a form of isolation, or at least that was how it was where I went to school. The difference with this example, which correlates with you is that teachers usually gave you a warning before they sent you out of class. That here would be acting as our verbal warning.

I'm all for verbalising more warnings for less serious rules and punishments, when I verbally users they receive a conversation from me explaining the warning, what rule they have broken and what they did that violated that rule, I give everyone the chance to open a ticket if they need further clarification. I think it's important to verbalise certain aspects, but I also see the importance of discipline in the warning system.

You're right, some people may not repeat the offence again if they receive a verbal warning but equally the same affect should occur with warning points, at the end of the day, warning points are warnings the real punishment is a ban from the site, we're very generous and allow people 75 warning points before being banned, that's a lot of chances, assuming you're not violating more serious rules more often, which you've already stated, should remain warning points.

I will mention to Kram when I speak to him that in some cases maybe an internal discussion about the rules and what could be treated lighter, should be, I agree that we're here to support the community and site members while also providing a balance to ensure that the site is moderated properly. So, I'm all for being lighter on less serious offences.

You mention that we're here to play a police enforcer role, I think that's a little dramatic. We're here to enforce rules, yes but that's the same anywhere you go, there will be rules and people that enforce them. It's a learning curve to life as-well. We are also here to support the members of the community and that is what I spend a good portion of my time on the site doing and I'm sure is the same for the other staff as-well.

I will also bring up accidental violations, I will remind you though that it is hard to determine if something is accidental in quite a lot of cases and that could pose a problem especially with people starting to claim that their violations of the rules are accidental in order to get a "free pass" however i do agree in certain cases there is certainly more scope to be more discretionary and am happy to bring it up for discussion.

I just find it personally bizarre that knowing and memorizing all of MC-Market's rules is a standard. From the time we were young we were taught by our guardians the school rules and how to stay out of trouble. We were not taught the MC-Market rules. You cannot apply the exact 1:1 comparison because they're completely different.

I do like your stance on loosening up and giving more verbal warning but 75 is not a very generous number considering you can be hit with ~25 warning points in certain cases and usually 10 warning points that stuck with you and put on your record for YEARS and MONTHS. MC-Market (chatbox specifically) is on a very steep decline and it is held against them for 6 months minimum or years at a time. I fully understand your escalation policy and that's fine but the thing is, it never really does go down for not the best users. In my personal opinion I have learned the rules for not creating another account and to not let someone log into my account by letting this never happen again but yet it takes 2 & half years for this to expire and not be on my record. Most users on MC-Market won't even see that happen before they quit or move on with their busy life.

So is 75 points lenient? Yeah, but you don't factor in that it takes half a year for MC-Market to forgive you for accidentally posting "First" on an announcement thread or accidentally putting your thread in the wrong category.

I have read all the rules and I do understand them because I genuinely care about the site and my account, but how about the people just stopping by? This kind of moderation doesn't help as activity is punished since you're more likely to get warned (and thus suspended) for being active if you don't know the rules 1:1

 

[Andrew]

I just find it personally bizarre that knowing and memorizing all of MC-Market's rules is a standard. From the time we were young we were taught by our guardians the school rules and how to stay out of trouble. We were not taught the MC-Market rules. You cannot apply the exact 1:1 comparison because they're completely different.

I do like your stance on loosening up and giving more verbal warning but 75 is not a very generous number considering you can be hit with ~25 warning points in certain cases and usually 10 warning points that stuck with you and put on your record for YEARS and MONTHS. MC-Market (chatbox specifically) is on a very steep decline and it is held against them for 6 months minimum or years at a time. I fully understand your escalation policy and that's fine but the thing is, it never really does go down for not the best users. In my personal opinion I have learned the rules for not creating another account and to not let someone log into my account by letting this never happen again but yet it takes 2 & half years for this to expire and not be on my record. Most users on MC-Market won't even see that happen before they quit or move on with their busy life.

So is 75 points lenient? Yeah, but you don't factor in that it takes half a year for MC-Market to forgive you for accidentally posting "First" on an announcement thread or accidentally putting your thread in the wrong category.

I have read all the rules and I do understand them because I genuinely care about the site and my account, but how about the people just stopping by? This kind of moderation doesn't help as activity is punished since you're more likely to get warned (and thus suspended) for being active if you don't know the rules 1:1

I actually do see where you're coming from and I am willing to take this all for internal discussion and I have taken notes as I do believe that the opinion of the community is important. I do agree that some of the expiry times for warning points are a little excessive and could be re-evaluated, however for some serious offences I do think that a lengthy expiry is important.

When it comes to the amount of points given per offence of the rules, I actually think it's very well balanced, would you disagree?

I see what you mean in regards to my comparison, I don't think that it takes that long to read over the rules and pick up a general understanding even if it's not perfect, I don't expect anyone to not make mistakes, no one is perfect and that's why we have a warning system and don't just issue bans.

I will take the points further as I can see where the community is coming from in regards to moderation, but I did want to provide the other side of the coin as I think it's important to also recognise.

In conclusion to what I'm picking up from the current general consensus is that the community would prefer if we provided a more verbalised warning system for lesser first offences and reduce the expiry time on some of the offences. Obviously, I can't guarantee any of these changes but I'm happy to put them up for discussion internally as I can see where the community is coming from but it most certainly would need some serious dicussion and thought put into it.