Drawing attention to a specific user and their detrimental behaviour

[Niverio]

@Dandelo: Thank you for shedding some light and insight onto the first creation of the portal. I didn't know that the site's intention was not to publish puzzles in the web originally. I also respect the decisions taken throughout the years about how the evolution came to be.

[Joe Average]

Indeed. As has been explained, a lot of new people came here and enjoyed making use of a free service, but then after a short while, some of them started to complain and ask for the site's services to be altered to better fit their own needs. And even when someone took the time to explain some problematic issues with those required changes, they still demanded for some rash action to be taken. It's rather annoying.

To anyone who fits that description: We're not your parents, we're not your baby sitters, we're not here to fix your mess, we're not here to care for your drama, and we have no interest to resolve whatever feuds and rivalries that you may carry over from some other website.

------------------

@Niverio,
what I meant by "imaginary moral high ground" is that, despite participating in the discussion about ratings for four pages, you suddenly claimed that the only point of your concern was the supposed cheating, which contradicts your opening statement. After being presented with an large number of factual arguments against your position, you tried to change the narrative by over-simplifying the entire matter as:
1) cheating is bad
2) this person cheats
3) veteran site members are defending the cheater = supporting bad actions

The point is that with that post, (either on a conscious or subconscious level) you tried to apply emotional pressure by painting a picture with you on the morally "right" side and the veteran site members actively supporting morally wrong actions. As one of LMD's current board members, such a mis-characterization of this community is where I draw the line.

That said, your complaint has been noticed, and we are generally aware of the flaws of the rating system and have been thinking about possible means to fix them, but it's not an easy task. Banning one user ID is not a solution, especially when their behaviour - though irritating and annoying - would still be within the current guidelines.  

BTW, I never asked you to leave. You are still welcome here to use the puzzle portal, but at the same time you are also free to start your own puzzle website that you can run any way you deem fit. If you know so much better, then just show us how it's done properly. 

[Dandelo]

If this is not clear to everyone: LM is a club with members from all around Germany, and some other countries. Since we only meet twice a year at the championships (and even there only a part of the members) the Rätselportal used to be the backbone of LM. The changes in the last years more or less have removed this backbone.

[Hausigel]

I do not think "removed" is a good term. It has been one the declared goals of this community to popularise puzzles and to welcome new puzzle friends, hence it would be out of place to pretend this is suddenly no longer the case. On the other hand, we should stand our ground when it comes to general guidelines and netiquette. There should certainly be a way to get the best of both worlds.

[Dandelo]

But the communication with the other LM members, which was usually in the comment sections, is gone. I don't see the Rätselportal as a medium for the club life anymore. And I believe that many members stopped using the portal. Or at least use it less frequently.

[Dandelo]

Kaum sag ich's, ist der Server down...

[Samish]

It's been said that people using the full scale of rates are using it "the right way" compared to people giving mostly good rates, well the immense majority of puzzles I solve over here are excellent. I wouldn't rate them lower than "very nice" or rate a good puzzle "not very nice" just to use the full scale, and I don't see how that could be a misuse of the rating system. I would be happy to use a larger part of the scale if there were more levels refering to excellent puzzles.

It's also what bothers people about the user we were talking about, the systematic use of pejorative rates isn't only a different use of the scale, it's a negative message purposefully transmitted to the setters.

I'm happy to learn more about the history of this site and feel sorry to understand that there have been tensions and issues due to the recent skyrocketing success of the site. I love this place of the internet and am grateful to the people who created it, moderate it and keep it up. The puzzle community is very lucky to have LMD, but what makes it so awesome to me is also having many of the best setters in the world publishing their creations here daily, making this place the worldwide center of exploration, invention, combination of variants. I wish it made up for the negative aspects the new community has brought.

[uvo]

what makes it so awesome to me is also having many of the best setters in the world publishing their creations here daily, making this place the worldwide center of exploration, invention, combination of variants.

Maybe this is true for Sudoku, I can't judge that. For puzzles that are not Sudoku, your statement is painfully wrong.

[polar]

I'm happy to learn more about the history of this site and feel sorry to understand that there have been tensions and issues due to the recent skyrocketing success of the site...

... what makes it so awesome to me is also having many of the best setters in the world publishing their creations here daily

 
What is a success to one person is a downfall to others. I cannot recommend highly enough taking a look at the older puzzles here. For me personally, many of them are in a class of their own. It is quite saddening to see that the slowing frequency of such puzzles being posted has coincided directly with the 'success' of the site. Perhaps it's a little hypocritical of me to say that, since I doubt I would have ended up here without its recent popularity, but even as a newer user the changes are hugely apparent if one spends some time in the LMD archives.

[DiMono]

I'm sorry to resurrect an old thread, but as a professional web developer, I have some thoughts.

What I've gathered from catching up on this thread is that LMD began as a way for friends to share puzzles with each other, and then CTC caused an unexpected surge in traffic and sudoku content because they were saying in their videos that this was where they were getting their puzzles from. Many sudoku setters then began posting their puzzles here hoping CTC would notice them (including me). As a result of this, high quality sudoku puzzles surged, other puzzles almost entirely stopped, and a lot of the original users either left the website or significantly reduced their activity on it. I also gather there is a lot of resentment among some of the earlier users for this happening.

I think "This isn't what we created it for, and we don't like it, but we put up with it" is not the right way to view this. Regardless of how it happened, LMD has become one of the premier places on the internet for high quality sudoku. It's lightning in a bottle. For better or for worse, the website has changed into what it is now, and it's never going back to what it was without making it private.

So why not fully embrace it? Since most users now speak English, have all pages available in both languages. In addition to putting news on the frontpage, have a "Sudoku of the Week" that highlights one/some of the best puzzles posted in the last seven days. When someone new comes along and their first few puzzles are excellent, give them a spot on the homepage as a "rising star" to encourage them to keep going, and to encourage people to solve their puzzles.

Since there are many more users now, you could put the top 10 setters and solvers of the month and all-time on the homepage, to incentivize people to make higher quality puzzles and to solve more puzzles, so they can achieve accolades (but have the top 10 setters also relate to puzzle beauty, not just number of puzzles - Will Power posts almost every other day, but Phistomefel has higher rated puzzles, and should be higher in the list).

Then you could go further by offering "premium puzzles" and other additional features to paying members, to help support hosting costs and future development. CTC provides a sudoku hunt each month to their Patreon members - there's no reason you can't do the same here for paying members. Build up LMD as the place to go for high quality sudoku, and then incentivize people to join and become paying members. And for the original users, you can have a special private area where the spirit of the original website remains.

When things change, you can either change with them and grow, or resist the change and shrink. Regardless of how it started, this website's purpose has changed over the last few years, and so far you've been dragged along with it. There is so much potential here for the site to be much more than it currently is. All you have to do is decide to lead those changes instead of being led by them.

And yes, I do recognize that some of what I've suggested above would actually reward the person this thread is about for their behaviour. However, regardless of how much I disagree with that behaviour, since the LMD staff don't view it as a problem, I see no reason to have it influence my ideas.