uPlay is a good example of how not to listen to user reports

Discussion in 'Internet and Technology' started by cheat_master30, Nov 10, 2016.

  1. cheat_master30

    cheat_master30 Moderator

    3,805
    1,052
    +1,079
    Why?

    Because they literally banned someone's avatar because it was a picture of Donald Trump. You know, that controversial guy who just became the US president yesterday.



    Via:



    Now admittedly, that might be fine on a smaller forum. Like say, a very specialist one where avatars have to be all professional looking pictures of the users, or politics isn't tolerated at all for whatever reason.

    But this is basically an equivalent to Steam. It's like if YouTube removed someone's avatar because it had Barack Obama as the picture. It just sounds ridiculous.

    However, that's still not the biggest kicker here. Oh no, just read through this discussion and tell me what sounds insane here:

    It's unbelievable isn't it? It's basically saying 'if enough people flag something, we'll remove it regardless of whether it's against the rules'. Actual judgement or moderation? Who needs that eh? We'll just delete whatever people report as offensive too many times!

    Really though, if you're running a community or service, do not do this. Reports are there to be looked and evaluated, not as an automated content removal system.

    what do you think of this insanity?
     
    • Informative! Informative! x 1
    • List
  2. pierce

    pierce Habitué

    1,169
    262
    +719
    The Donald approves this message
     
  3. Alex.

    Alex. The Ancient Dragon

    11,576
    1,322
    +1,197
    President Elect*

    I don't agree with this, but a company has to weigh their options. Upsetting one individual is less costly than a hoard of them. Likewise, people can say they won't support xyz company for their political moves but fail to realize how entrenched the product or products are in their life.

    I recall people getting angry when a piece of legislation was a hot topic years ago and they'd say "We're not going to buy so and so's products because we don't agree with their message!"

    The problem was that the products in question belonged to a global conglomerate. By extension, they realized they'd be missing out on a lot of every day essentials. They could buy store brand, but those stores also supported those measures. In addition, they found that they just couldn't live without Microsoft, OpenOffice, Adobe, Google/YouTube/Android, Apple, etcetra.
     
  4. cheat_master30

    cheat_master30 Moderator

    3,805
    1,052
    +1,079
    It's a good point, though a tad less relevant in this case. uPlay are popular, but they're still a fairly small competitor in a large and difficult market.

    Given the company who owns it (Ubisoft)'s games are also on Steam, this could be a very bad idea for them. As far as I know, Steam tends to have a better reputation about this stuff.

    So while I see your point, it's a bit more like if say, a smaller company did a bad business move while still offering the same products on platforms free of their bull****.
     
  5. TrixieTang

    TrixieTang Politically Incorrect

    8,509
    1,522
    +2,806
    They're basically saying that their site can be abused by report-spamming. Honestly, they're kinda inviting it.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.