Zum Hauptinhalt gehen

Rules for the community – let us know your thoughts

Kommentare

41 Kommentare

  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Hi Jack,

    point 1 to 4 sound very reasonable to me but honestly I consider point 5 and the following paragraph as the attempt of censorship for any kind of critique about the Capture One company and decisions which we users are concerned about, at least those who are affected by such a change.

    point 5:

    No aimless ranting towards Capture One and its business practices.

    This is a user-to-user forum and we want to make it a positive and helpful environment. If you have an issue with Capture One's business practices, e.g. refund policies or license policies, then you are always welcome to contact Support and they will send you in the right direction, or forward your comments to the right people.

    "aimless ranting" sounds reasonable, but my trust in you as a company is damaged, hence my concern.

    You earned a shitstorm full of comments about your license policy changes (and other things) and now you try to find a way to shut us up. That's how i perceive it.

    This itself could be the reason of the next shitstorm.

    You should include a rule which explicitely allows critique of business practices if it complies with 1. to 4..

    Or at least remove point 5.

    Let's keep this a photography community at its core, a positive place to be, and a place to exchange opinions freely even if the company doesn't like them.

    Make this a moderated but not a censored place to be.

    10
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Jack, if you want this to be a community about "photography" and not about photography software then you should consider creating a topic for it with "Photography" in its name. Yes, why not...

    3
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Hi Pip,

    I think you are right, Denmark is democratic with freedom of speech (with restrictions similar to 1. to 4.) being a fundamental right in their constitution.

    2
  • truepictures

    @ BeO to Pip

    The right to freedom of expression does not apply to private companies. Here, so-called house rules apply, which the private company can set up. These may not be immoral or violate human dignity, but they may certainly contain rules, such as a duty of confidentiality. Here, freedom of expression is also severely restricted.
    In other words, Capture One can impose any rules on its private forum that do not violate racism, etc. No one is forced to express themselves there and if they do, they have to accept the rules or not participate. It's like admission to a cinema, for example. The behaviour of visitors is regulated in the house rules. With the purchase of a cinema ticket, these house rules are accepted. Anyone who violates them can be removed from the cinema on the basis of the house rules. Capture One does nothing other than apply its house rules in the forum. This has nothing to do with restricting freedom of expression. Anyone can continue to do so, but not in the forum provided by Capture One. Whether we like it or not, that is how it is regulated by law. Everyone is free to express themselves in a forum that allows (uncensored) criticism of Capture One's business practices.

    To come back to the planned rules: these have been kindly "put up for discussion" by Jack as the mouthpiece of the Capture One decision-makers.

    Point 1. there is no definition of what constitutes hate speech in the Capture One sense, so arbitrary decisions are bound to happen.
    Point 2. as point 1. I would express criticism of Capture One in public, which is excluded according to point 5. A classic circular reference.
    Point 3. this is natural for civilised people.
    Point 4. my statement to point 3 applies.
    Point 5: Like point 1, it is deliberately left open what is meant by this. Almost all of our criticisms of Capture One are by no means aimless, but very targeted and mostly justified - usually with concrete suggestions for improvement.

    The request to contact Capture One support when there are justified points of criticism has, at least in the past, remained unsuccessful in most cases, keyword bug fixes. This builds up a massive potential for frustration on the part of the customer, which has been partially discharged at this point. Based on these experiences, Jack's statement is not very helpful. I myself have already waited several months for an answer to what is actually a banal question.

    Conclusion: these forum rules are justified from a business point of view. Either forum users accept them or decide not to use the forum any more. It is as simple as that.

    3
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Hi truepictures,

    I don't think it is as simple.

    I think you are right in that rules can be defined by the forum owner at his will if it does not violate a law. I did not say or mean that point 5 or even the deliberate and arbitrary removal of posts or forum members from the forum are unlawful.

    However, such kind of censorship (which it would be considered at minimum by the concerned forum member) is not what users typically want to accept. As you pointed out rightfully these forum rules might be justified from a business point of view (who wants public criticism :-) but it would not be wise if they were actually used against company criticism and critics.

    That is because there are other social media channels which could and probably would be utilized to raise such incidents, contributing to the companies image much more negatively than the company might think, at least in the part of the world where freedom of speech is a fundamental right. 

    For the company, I think, it would probably be better to allow critique and remain silent than to remove critical posts or members. Of course it would even be better (for us, but likely also for them) if they worked on the points of the public critique, especially if there are many contributers (and even if they reversed one or the other business decision in question, but for that I am far from confident this company will do).

    Apart from that it is not a good sign if a company is anxious about critique from their customer base.

    The good point is, Jack asks for a discussion.

    Nobody really wants "aimless ranting" but aimed critique should be explicitely allowed - or even encouraged.

     

     

    5
  • Jason Patel

    Personally I feel that, all feedback you get is valuable and actually can help you understand your customer base. The rules by my interpretation is looking to remove this mechanism. The rules should be simply, be civil and when providing critique ensure based on fact.

    I mean your lucky in a way to have continued critique - it shows people actually care about what you do even those who will/have left have done so with regret and their giving you an olive branch for you to get them back.

    3
  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    Jason Patel 

    Personally I feel that, all feedback you get is valuable and actually can help you understand your customer base. The rules by my interpretation is looking to remove this mechanism.

    I think that the point is that this forum is intended mainly for user-to-user interaction. Posting a complaint here, even if it is a very legitimate complaint, is not addressing it to the right audience. I don't work for Capture One, so what help is it to address it to a forum for me to read? There are ways of addressing the company directly, through the support system which targets the intended audience a lot more effectively.

    Ian

    Ian

    2
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Ian Wilson

    So, you agree with them that any company critique should not be discussed between users? Sorry to say that but it sounds as if you were actually working for them Ian.

    I think that the point is that this forum is intended mainly for user-to-user interaction. Posting a complaint here, even if it is a very legitimate complaint, is not addressing it to the right audience.

    Assume you have a regular meeting between users let's say a C1 user group with BBQ once a month where you meet fellow users to eat, dring and talk about photography and C1. A public meeting where everyone can attend. You really think that user to user interaction should only cover feature discussions and not company policy discussions? 

    1
  • Jeffrey Kogler

    My take in this is that it is best for companies such as C1 to allow discussion of potentially contentious items in an environment in which they can respond and manage expectations.  If they restrict that then such items will appear in forums where they have limited presence and input, such as social media, and face negative perspectives flooding that space to the detriment of their reputation.

    2
  • Michael Parker

    As has been said points 1-4 are fair enough. Point 5 causes some consternation.
    I agree aimless ranting is of no real value to users or to C1 as a company, apart from allowing the writer to let off steam.

    However, well argued criticism should be acceptable as a means of feedback and can give C1 an insight into how their paying customers may or may not accept changes to policies introduced by C1.
    I’m sure these forum posts are read by C1 staff or this post wouldn’t have been created.

    Surely any Company would prefer this type of feedback, rather than the passive feedback of their customers voting with their feet and wallets?

    3
  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    BeO

    You really think that user to user interaction should only cover feature discussions and not company policy discussions? 

    No not really, but there's an awful lot of people just ranting abut why they think that Lightroom is better, or it's scandalous that three days after a new camera has been released, Capture One STILL doesn't support it, or that's it, I've had enough, I'm going back to Adobe. Constructive discussion of things that aren't satisfactory, or suggestions for improvements, or whatever, by all means - but there's also a lot of pretty pointless griping that we have to wade through to get to the stuff that we actually come here for.

    Ian

    1
  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    Michael Parker

    I agree aimless ranting is of no real value to users or to C1 as a company, apart from allowing the writer to let off steam.

    However, well argued criticism should be acceptable as a means of feedback...

    Exactly so.

    Ian

    0
  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    Pip

    No, most of the points seem to have been made! I'm not asking for arguments to be elaborated.

    Ian

     

    0
  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    BeO

    Assume you have a regular meeting between users let's say a C1 user group with BBQ once a month where you meet fellow users to eat, drink and talk about photography and C1.

    That sounds very congenial. On the internet, people get rather bad-tempered. Maybe what it lacks is the beer and BBQ!

    Ian

    1
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Hi Ian,

    I understand where you're coming from, and some posts might be purely rants and seem unfair towards the company, but no one is stopping you from jumping in and expressing your view in reply to such posts. And yes some posts might be annoying, but the point is that C1 rule 5 and its given explanation aims at shutting up any critique about the companies business practises or policies which btw. even seem to be unlawful in one case (warranty period needs to be 2 years in the EU for software).

    I am an advocat of freedom of speech (if it doesn't unjustified insult or discredit someone on a personal level) this is important for every free society, and society starts small, at your home, at your job, and in public forums. If we accept restrictions of freedom of speech in such small environments and if we exclude people from public discussions too easily (3 times critique and you're removed from the forum) it is only a matter of time it will be acceptable on a broader scale.

    2
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Yes Ian, cheers! :-)

    0
  • Steve Oakley

    1-4 are reasonable and I think 99% of users try to abide to that. I don't think that anyone has thrown direct personal attacks at employees of C1.

    #5 ? please C1, ask yourself why this is needed. if it has to do with the 800+ and counting comments all negative about changes in C1's business practices, please don't blame the users. the users are not to blame here, C1 is. They aren't aimlessly ranting - most aren't - they are complaining about their unhappiness in being mistreated. there were previous  terms of business that both sides found beneficial, but the terms have been turned to be beneficial to C1 only leaving the users feeling betrayed for their trust. A good deal means both sides feel they got a good deal, fair values exchanged but clearly users no longer feel this way.

    FWIW, Waves - the audio plugins company also a few weeks ago tried to move their users to a subscription only model. after 2 weeks of negative feedback just like C1 got, they realized it wasn't the right thing for their users and went back to their old options. They owned up to their mistake, realized it, and made it right again. BTW the full waves package is $1999 ! single plugins start at $29, and vst for audio consoles can run upwards for $4-6K ! imagine mixing a live show, your lic expired and your mixer's functions quite working.

    If C1 went back to the previous business model, people would be happy, the "aimless ranting" would go away and all would be happish again. eventually C1 would earn back not just user trust, but their hard earned money too for updates when it worked and made sense for the user.

    C1 works for the users, but some how this has gotten confused and turned around and C1 thinks the users are there to service them with payments, just to keep their software running. clearly the users deeply disagree and C1 should listen to its users rather than ignore them. don't blame the user reactions for what isn't their fault. just apologize and walk the bad decision back and then #5 is a moot point for the most part. If  C1 doesn't, well 2-3 years from now this forum may well not be online anymore because C1 went out of business, or is a remnant of its former self just hanging on. As example Bed Bath and Beyond just bit the dust today after years of mismanagement, and at least they were trying to make their customers HAPPY rather than upset. this is the road you are setting for the company by not making users happy and there are plenty of good options to move on to. in which case again, #5 will be a moot point.

     

    4
  • Phrank

    I think better "let of steam" here than out of any contol and moderation from C1 at another forum eg reddit.

    I agree aimless ranting is of no real value to users or to C1 as a company, apart from allowing the writer to let off steam.

    However, well argued criticism should be acceptable as a means of feedback...

    2
  • Jack W
    Admin

    Hi everyone :) thank you for your feedback. I'm so happy to come back to my desk today to find some comments and some food for thought when it comes to community rules.

    I'm also relieved that I took the decision to open a discussion about this, instead of imposing rules that simply come from my own mind. I have a feeling Rule 5 would not have gone down too well... So a particular thank you for the feedback on this one.

    This rule in particular comes from the fact we are a *tiny* team managing the discourse in here. As Ian Wilson points out, this is primarily (and always will be) a user-to-user forum. During many discussions, some of you have pointed out a need for a rule which keeps the discussion on track and makes the forum a positive place to be, specifically pertaining to "moaning" (I concede I could have worded this rule better)

    I am completely in favour of open discussion and actively encourage it. During the period when we were announcing changes to our license policy, I only removed a handful of comments (abusive or spam) out of thousands, which shows me that we certainly have a community of respectable people that for the most part can be trusted.

    I would hate for anybody to think that they are being silenced, but I do feel that there is a need for a rule of this nature.

    I'll give the rules a review today and post an update when I have one. It seems to me that 1-4 are generally agreeable and ones that we can all easily follow.

    Massive thank you again for the feedback. Let's work on this together :)

     

    -1
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Hi Jack-W, you wrote

    This rule in particular comes from the fact we are a *tiny* team managing the discourse in here. As Ian Wilson points out, this is primarily (and always will be) a user-to-user forum. During many discussions, some of you have pointed out a need for a rule which keeps the discussion on track and makes the forum a positive place to be, specifically pertaining to "moaning" (I concede I could have worded this rule better)

    The bold part is a perfect argument for rules 1.-4. which everybody here agrees with. Also for rule no. 5 "No aimless ranting towards Capture One and its business practices." but only as far as "aimless ranting" is concerned.

    However, if you ban all negative comments then it is censorship of the negative kind, and if you are aiming to ban any critique on company business practises and policies then this is censorship as well. None of what you said justifies this.

    There is one elephant in the room and that is the removal of any critique and ban of forum users because hundreds have critizised C1 policy, because they are negatively affected. 

    Which is btw. many more people than you have presumably seen "pointing out a need for a rule which keeps the discussion on track and makes the forum a positive place to be.

    How can you expect your customers  to be purely positive towards the company if you are negatively impacting them?

    As Phrank, me and others have pointed out, if you are sowing wind by shuting off dissent with company practices here you'll likely reap the whirlwind elsewhere, and will loose more clients too. 

    To end with something more positive, you have a talent for positive phrasing even though one could read between the lines that you (or the company) don't intend to follow the argumentation about rule no.5 from most posters here; which makes you a good moderator.

    3
  • Jack W
    Admin

    BeO The "aimless ranting" is for sure the main thing, but I do think I could word it better. The topic of the rant isn't so important, it's more about the atmosphere it creates.

    However, if you ban all negative comments then it is censorship of the negative kind, and if you are aiming to ban any critique on company business practises and policies then this is censorship as well. None of what you said justifies this.

    Completely agree.

    I don't want to stop anybody speaking their mind, or even imply that's the case. But I do care about things staying on topic and people being fair to one another, so I'll keep that as the sole focus.

    Appreciate the positivity and the compliment! :) hopefully I'm also a good listener.

     

     

    1
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    I'm looking forward to sensible forum rules, and their sensitive execution and moderation...

     

    Btw. are you currently deleting posts from here?: 

    https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/articles/7998068628637 

    Yesterday a bit over 1000, now 984?

    0
  • Jack W
    Admin

    Definitely not deleting any comments from that thread. Been a while since I last looked at it...

    Can say with certainty that nobody else is, either.

    0
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Thank Jack.

    Strange, I am having the last page open for a few days and refresh it once in a while in order to see new posts. It happened that I have to go to the "previous" page after a refresh, it was also showing me these numbers (if I recall them correctly). I

    If nobody deletes them maybe people are removing themselves from the forum (those who are finally done with C1 due that new license policy or for whatever reason) and then their posts might vanish too...

    It isn't so important for me, so don't spend any more time with me on this question.

    Thanks.

    0
  • truepictures

    @ BeO
    Yes, I can confirm that yesterday there was still the number 1000 in comments and today 984. I noticed that too - and I was very surprised about it. It would be nice to know what is causing this. Especially because Jack assures us, that it is not caused by Capture One. As a rule, nothing happens without a reason ... like on 14.04, when I could no longer open Capture One. After some thought, I assumed that the server  for activations must be offline. As others had already written: it is an unfortunate policy to permanently monitor lifelong licence holders via activation servers. Instead, I could not do my client work. Every hospital has a back-up generator that immediately and smoothly ensures uninterrupted service in the event of a power failure. The same should be true for companies that install activation servers to monitor their clients. Is this now a damnable, aimless criticism of the Capture One company?

    0
  • Jeffrey Kogler

    I actually get a "page cannot be found" message when I click that link.  Jeff

    OK I worked out why - there is a redundant space at the end of the link,  I see 984 comments as well.

    0
  • Phrank

    @truepictures. Recently I also got locked out of my "licensed" software and was not even able to login under my user account at Capture One homepage. Luckily I got no job todo that day… Is this a taste what will be coming in the future?

    -1
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    Phrank The future should be a little better (even though I still expect overly pronounced protection methods): https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/10532455679773

    truepictures

    Is this now a damnable, aimless criticism of the Capture One company?

    You could not do your client work. In that light your post is even very polite and not damnable at all, if you ask me. Maybe it is partiallly off-topic, but who cares...

     

    0
  • Jack W
    Admin

    I also see 984 comments. Maybe they (Zendesk) round the figure up, or it could be that I have (over time) removed 16 comments out of 1000 and the count simply doesn't load properly.

    I can say with absolute certainty that I haven't looked at that thread in months. 

    0
  • Noob with a Nikon

    Hi Jack-W

    So you want the community to have a discussion concerning the rules of how things are being discussed? And you don't "want to impose them on us". I feel like there is some passive aggressive threat in there somewhere.

    My suggestion would be: how about fixing some of the major bugs or implementing some of the most requested features instead of imposing some friendly authoritarianism on your paying customers?

    -1

Bitte melden Sie sich an, um einen Kommentar zu hinterlassen.