Bethsoft vs Community Sites

I've had a few emails on this subject wanting this issue on the front page. I'm working this weekend, am hosting a series of meetings from Monday and have a conference the week after, so I don't have the time to absorb the details or work up the outrage.

So, you tell me. Is this an outrageous abuse that gamers should fight against, a sad state of affairs but nothing that concerning or just a beat up by interested parties.

It's about the way Bethsoft treated a Star Trek fans site (Bethsoft recently published a ST strategy game to poor reviews) and obviously spills over into Elder Scrolls, Fallout 3, whether NMA was "blackbanned" and so on.

Interviews at MA with the trekkies:

http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34700

I've put this in General RPG, because any discussion will ultimately head towards Oblivion and the recent Fallout fan community articles at NMA.

Thoughts?

It's a pretty disturbing situation IMO. The STG site looks credible to me, certainly it shows a lot of hits and fan presence. It looks like one of those situations, though, where you would have to delve deep into the actual posts which prompted the blacklisting--if the criticism became too heated and offensive, Bethsoft has a right to regulate their forums just like any other site.

If the blacklisting is an attempt to censor the honest opinions of a large number of the game's fan base as STG maintains, however, it is a shortsighted and counterproductive effort on Beth's part, and they will deserve all the bad press and bad blood coming down the information superhighway in their direction.

Note: I had no idea Interplay did the first Star Trek game. What a company that was!

At the time of the blackbarring, STG was home to such comments as:

Originally Posted by DrPhoton
The cow that calls herself marketing artist is a third-rate, asinine fellatist of male donkeys that couldn't find her own mutney with a mirror.

A forum moderator was conducting an organised campaign of harassment against said donkey fellatist:

Originally Posted by Acidrain
Anyone that is disgruntled by the antics of the Alexander, Cow, Rouge Vulcan of Legacy forums please send you emails to the marketing Artist at Bethsoft and Lead Admin of the forums to:

Lindsay Muller
lmuller@bethsoft.com

And also this thread. STG is populated and staffed by some seriously low-wattage, unhinged individuals. Bethesda responded to their antics as any rational business would. There's no story here, and this non-story has nothing to do with RPGs. It's pretty funny, though, so go ahead and post it.

Edit: Forgot to mention Victor1st's alleged rivalry with MadDoc employee ChessMess ("SIEG! HEIL!"), the Führer of the 3rd Reich of Star Trek gaming. Yes, that part is true. No, I didn't know they had one either.

Thank you, abbaon, for presenting the other side of the conflict.
The truth is that some of the STG members were becoming rather offensive in the comments, however, for my part, I do not believe a total blacklisting of their site was in order. I mean, it wasn't just removed as a link to a fan-site, but also from every thread citing it and personal signatures.
Also, you have to credit the STG folk with a certain degree of justification. If you have played Star Trek: Legacy, the game that caused most of this furor, you know how unbelievably wretched it is. More than a disgrace to the Star Trek franchise, it is a disgrace to space combat sims and videogames. Everything from the mindless combat, brain-dead AI, non-responsive and awkward controls, to the very scale of items and "realistic" physics is a testament to the shoddy work put into this title, ultimately amounting to but one more attempt to shake down a certain demographic for their cash.

Doesn't really surprise that benthesa can't handle critic.. Despite those bad behaving individuals banning whole site is just weird. It doesn't put benthesa in good light no matter what the situation was. Besides this ain't the first time when they blacklisted some site or topic from discusion.

And benthesa has a questionable reputation in terms of how they do pr-work. False promises, not responding to bug-threads… And the whole radiant AI thing was a joke.

Bethesda has the right to cooperate with whomever they want - or not. And the Star Trek website can pretty much write about Bethesda's game whatever they want. That's just how journalism works - also outside of the internet.
Usually it's not really an advantage if a company does not cooperate with the press, normally it causes a dispute, people begin to ask questions, etc. Still, every company or individual has the right to do it (ever heard of an exclusive interview?). Now, if it is really true that the community of that Star Trek website used the forum to personally attack members of Bethesda then I can understand Bethesda quite well.
Now, I understand Bethesda… that doesn't mean I would act like these guys. As you can see their behavior just causes trouble and they will just lose reputation. It's a vivid sign that whoever is responsible for their pr has no idea of his/her job.

I'm having a hard time with this one as well - but that doesn't mean that they're wrong.

The problem is that I have hit a certain age and professional standing where someone coming at me with a 'logical argument' full or profanity, hyperbole and vitriol shuts off my brain pretty darn fast.

Sure we all let loose once in a while, and not all criticism is (or should be) constructive. And perhaps I just couldn't stand to sift through all of the infantile ranting and 'me too' posts to find the constructive stuff alluded to multiple times.

I remember what I said the time someone (a recent college graduate looking for a job as an engineer on my team) dropped the f-bomb twice in an interview - If you want to be taken seriously, behave seriously. Act like a 13-year old in a chat-room, and that is how you'll be treated.

I know, I know … ZOMG F U n00b!

Originally Posted by abbaon
*snip*

So how does that coincide with Bethesda ordering STG to remove comments from their podcast?

Or consider that they blacklisted the RPGCodex for reasons that had always been present (site content, image links, whatever), but this blacklisting just happened to be right after VDweller's review of Oblivion?

I'm not saying that according to their own rules Bethesda is wrong. If Bethesda's rule is to moderate comments made on another site by enforcing a policy on their own forum…well, that's their own choice. It's bad pr, but it's their good right.

That does not vaguely explain the happy coincidence of STG and the RPGCodex being banned *right* after making an expansive, public criticism of two Bethesda-published games. You can stand on your head playing the cymbals for all I care, but question is; are you going to defend this coincidence as just that…coincidence?

Originally Posted by txa1265

The problem is that I have hit a certain age and professional standing where someone coming at me with a 'logical argument' full or profanity, hyperbole and vitriol shuts off my brain pretty darn fast.
.
.. Act like a 13-year old in a chat-room, and that is how you'll be treated.

I know, I know … ZOMG F U n00b!

Couldn't agree with you more. The freedom of opinion voiced on the internet is an excellent--and sometimes hilarious--thing, but people only undermine their own credibility by frothing at the mouth and indulging in egregious (if creative) diatribes of highly colored profanity and personal insult. You can enjoy these types of posts as entertainment or deplore them as excess, but either way it's hard to take them very seriously.

I'm bothered a little bit more by STG's contention that Beth pimped their Star trek game on the site pre-release, granting interviews left and right, then suddenly closed the door.

If this did indeed happen before any major off the wall flaming began, and only because the site was not gung-ho on the title and saying so (thier review gave the title 71%, tho not in a very friendly way ) then the unpleasant dungball of this issue is rolled into the Beth camp.

Of course, this is the impression STG would like us to have, but I really don't care enough to unpeel the onion --by delving into the whole sad morass of outrage/personality conflicts/hate blogs etc- and find out. If someone has the proof to back this up, they can probably rest at least some of thier case.

Whichever way it really happened, the end result does neither the site, the game nor Bethesda any good.

@Kharn-your NMA sig is a classic

The Codex blackbanning also coincided with its members spamming the forum with links to their lawl mudcrabs photoshops, after the moderators closed the first thread. The STG blackballing coincided with its members flaming staff and developers on the ESF forums, the STG forums, and via the personal email addresses and IM accounts which were posted on the STG boards -- which is quite disturbing, actually. These facts are sufficient to explain the moderators' actions. They don't have infinite time to deal with your adopted idiot children, so they discouraged further tantrums by withholding their attention. It worked.

Would the ESF moderators blackborscht a site whose users criticised Bethsoft games, but otherwise acted like adults? It's an interesting question, but neither of these cases answers it.

Originally Posted by abbaon
Would the ESF moderators blackborscht a site whose users criticised Bethsoft games, but otherwise acted like adults? It's an interesting question, but neither of these cases answers it.

The moderators don't decide blacklisting, as far as I know. Also, are you saying sites should be held responsible for not having control over actions of their own posters on other forums? If they bothered the ESF, why didn't the moderators just ban those users?

That said, how about the coincidence that at the same time as the Codex' image-spam, ESF posters were acting in ways and linking to sites, the reason of which has been cited as reason to blacklist the Codex.

Look, it's not an either-or here. I don't deny "just cause", I deny "just motive". You think that unrealistic?

I think that when I have a phenomenon to explain, conspiracy theories are my last recourse, not my first. Neither of us can read men's souls. If you want to attribute sinister motives to Bethsoft's employees, then your journalistic integrity must surely compel you to first search for more compelling evidence than these coincidences, since you have a perfectly valid and above-board explanation staring you in the face.

Originally Posted by abbaon
I think that when I have a phenomenon to explain, conspiracy theories are my last recourse, not my first. Neither of us can read men's souls. If you want to attribute sinister motives to Bethsoft's employees, then your journalistic integrity must surely compel you to first search for more compelling evidence than these coincidences, since you have a perfectly valid and above-board explanation staring you in the face.

The question shouldn't first be "is it above-board or not" or "is it official or not", the fact that the explanation comes from Bethesda makes it as reliable as any explanation from RPGCodex and STG.

If I apply Occam's Razor, the most direct, straightforward conclusion to explain several coincidences, including the timing, which sites they banned, the inconsistency of how they act towards the targets and the lack of using alternatives by Bethesda…Occam's Razor directs me towards concluding Bethesda has every reason to blacklist STG/RPGCodex, and amongst those reasons are a wish to silence and stiffle criticism. That is a natural and obvious conclusion, it's hardly a conspiracy theory to think it's true.

PS: though if you want to write a piece "In defense of Bethesda", I'd be fine with publishing that, too

You've alleged that Beth employees and volunteers conspired to silence their critics and lie about their motives, and you've supported it with nothing more substantial than your highly biased interpretation of some coincidences. There's no other term for that than conspiracy theory. Naturally, you can apply any criteria you like when forming your personal opinions; I never contested that. I said that this isn't a news story, and it's not. It's a baseless and malicious rumor. It would be unethical for anyone calling himself a news provider to help you disseminate it.

And unfortunately, Dhruin probably cares about that stuff. I implore him to set aside his standards and post this newsbit. Funny is funny.

Sorry to do a flyby posting and run off but my time is limited. Kharn, when I read the interview, all I saw is several questions that indicate Bethsoft screwed up this game (fine - but I can list dozens of games that do that), a story of a ST site that is at war with another (and I don't know which is in the "right" -- what would the other site say?) and a bunch of vitriolic rubbish at the ST site that probably explained the "blackban" quite well.

Should Bethsoft cut off sites they don't like? Probably not -- but that's their call. With the apparent criticism is accompanied by over-the-top vitriol, malicious email campaigns, image campaigns and forum trolling, I'd probably blackban them as well.

I just don't see a story. What I do see, is you guys being anxious to add this to your list of Bethsoft grievances - which is also your right - but you can can conduct that on your own sites.

You asked if you should be responsible for the actions of your users. The answer is no - BUT, if you don't moderate the behaviour at the extremes (and again, that's your right to do as you please), surely you have to accept if someone can't take it.

On the ST guy being told what to do with his podcast…doesn't he simply tell them "sorry, my bandwidth - get stuffed"? Where's the story in that?

Originally Posted by abbaon
You've alleged that Beth employees and volunteers conspired to silence their critics and lie about their motives, and you've supported it with nothing more substantial than your highly biased interpretation of some coincidences.

You're right that on the surface it's a cum hoc ergo propter hoc to say that all these coincidences share the common factor of blacklisting following criticism and thus it is a form of cencorship of criticism.

However, it's equally cum hoc ergo propter hoc to imply that the common factor of the sites being populated by assholes (and many sites of ESF visitors are that) is the reason for blacklisting.

Since both arguments are fallacious, you could argue that picking either one implies bias.

That said, with another coincidence of Bethesda disallowing a critical piece (note the given reason: "Biggest load of BS I've ever had the pleasure of half reading. Therefore it was deleted." It is untrue and therefore must be removed? False arguments aren't allowed on the ES forums?) pops up, there is bound to be a breaking point where correlation really DOES imply causation. I think that breaking point has been crossed (bias?), you don't, maybe you'll never think that breaking point will be crossed.

Also, you have an interesting perception of journalistic standards. You do realise I have worked professionally in the industry, right? If so, do you realise it is more "unethical" for every media to deny STG's Victor the chance to let himself be heard, and there is nothing "unethical" about conducting an interview with him to let him say what he wants. It's a news story (for NMA, not necessarily for this placE) because both the RPGCodex and the STG site think it's a big deal and have the full right to express said opinion.

Dhruin: I'm not sure what VDweller pm'd you, but remember my pm specifically noted "Probably not your topic." I only sent it to you after Blue's News posted it, since I figured "hey, if Blue thinks it's newsworthy, maybe Dhruin will too".

It is slightly weird that you think there's no story whatsoever in a company trying to dicate a fansite's actions.

If I was the owner/CEO of Bethsoft and I saw even one of those posts previously cited I would cease all involvement with the previously mentioned site. When you are a company as large as Bethsoft you just can't afford to even allow the slightest association with anything that could bring bad press. Even though they don't have shareholders(share price) to worry about, it's still something someone who is wearing a business hat and not a software developers one would do.

Originally Posted by Kharn
That said, with another coincidence of Bethesda disallowing a critical piece (note the given reason: "Biggest load of BS I've ever had the pleasure of half reading. Therefore it was deleted." It is untrue and therefore must be removed? False arguments aren't allowed on the ES forums?) pops up, there is bound to be a breaking point where correlation really DOES imply causation. I think that breaking point has been crossed (bias?), you don't, maybe you'll never think that breaking point will be crossed.

I won't impugn the motives of another without just cause. That's the standard I apply to this situation. Bethsoft will have demonstrated its sinister motives to my satisfaction, and will have crossed that line, when it blackbans a site without that site's users first conducting coordinated campaigns of misbehaviour on the ESF boards.

That's when this will become news. You can copy and paste 7,000 word hit pieces onto the ESF until Doomsday and they won't add up to a case of blackbanning a site for criticism. They don't let you use the ESF as a vehicle for criticism of their company -- that's not news. They ban links to sites that criticise the company -- that's a news story, but only if it's true. This will be scandal rag sensationalism and nothing more until we have an unambiguous case of this behaviour, or internal communication which supports the claim, or something besides more circumstance.

This is not news for the the front page of this site, that seemed clear to me, that's why I didn't called your attention. And I'm not convinced that this is a policy of Bethesda, it might be simply their lack of know how regarding fansites with critical views, but still I wouldn't dismiss any of this as simple conspiracy theories, but issues that require further analysis, at a deeper level.

I don't have a crystal ball to tell me the future, so I like to gather all the info I can get to have a better understanding of what is at stake, so I follow these issues in that sense.

Originally Posted by abbaon
I won't impugn the motives of another without just cause. That's the standard I apply to this situation. Bethsoft will have demonstrated its sinister motives to my satisfaction, and will have crossed that line, when it blackbans a site without that site's users first conducting coordinated campaigns of misbehaviour on the ESF boards.

Fair enough. Your choice.

Originally Posted by abbaon
You can copy and paste 7,000 word hit pieces onto the ESF until Doomsday and they won't add up to a case of blackbanning a site for criticism.

"wont add up to a case of blackbanning a site for criticism, in my perspective." You mean. Because I'm not the only one with a different perspective, and while I won't cite the Codex or ESF as unbiased places (heh), there are people who read this with interest and gather food for thought out of it without being rabidly anti-Bethesda.

Your contention is a bit skewed. You're saying this isn't newsworthy enough for RPGWatch (though it is for Blue's News), based on some skewed journalistic standard which states that people's opinions should not be heard. I agree in the case of RPGWatch, because this just isn't the kind of stuff RPGWatch covers (as I said in my pm to Dhruin), but you're going to have to substantiate the contention that publishing or posting news about an interview is "unethical" if you want to uphold it.