Web Escalate threads again

Quetzi said:

Using a 'closed' tag has been considered in the past but I personally think that a negative tag like that would only serve to dissuade suggestions in the first place, something we don't want to do. Escalated is a tag the moderation put on a thread to signal that they've highlighted the thread to management (we read the suggestion board daily anyway). It does just mean that a moderator thinks the idea is good. Giving closure to threads is something we can't really do for a variety of reasons, it might be that we're actually working on an idea but don't know if it will make it onto the server, or when (as an example a much requested feature was in development for over 9 months, during which time there was a lot of anger about why it hadn't been added... Some things just take longer than expected)

Click to expand...

So technically, if there aren’t any ‘Escalated’ tags, either the suggestions aren’t good enough for the server OR the moderators are less active?

Also, if you do read the suggestion board daily, make it clear, because sometimes it feels like threads are getting looked over. I myself had this problem with a recent thread (https://www.cubecraft.net/threads/lucky-ideas-loot-kits-achievements-and-more.217361/). I put hours of work in it, tagged Camezonda after a few days because people were mentioning the “lack of staff response”. I understood that he can be busy so I gave it a few more days. Someone else in tagged Camezonda again, but to this day, I still didn’t get a reply.

Last up, I can see why some parts of an idea take up a lot of time. But the management likes to keep their content hidden until it’s actually released (which is normal in the gaming business) but it feels like the threads are getting ignored. And no-one likes to be ignored.

Thanks for your reply to this thread, I appreciate it.

Quetzi said:

I understand and I do reply to threads where it makes sense to. As I've said in the past, sometimes a thread is best left to develop on its own, particularly if there is already a healthy discussion going on. The last thing I'd want to do is to polarise the discussion based on my own comments, unless it makes sense to do so ofc.

Click to expand...

I admit that I’ve read that before, but sometimes, there is no real discussion or people all agree on the idea. In that case, it’s quite hard to keep a thread alive.
That’s the part where the “bump” rule comes in, but doesn’t always work out. I feel like when a thread hit this stage, you’re allowed to reply to it.

Quetzi said:

I will say that I personally pay a lot less attention to the big detailed threads about specific game modes, mainly because there are others in a much better position to accurately judge what's needed for individual games (I really don't do PvP based games). This doesn't mean that those threads are bad, just it's quite difficult to put any kind of reply that doesn't look like a commitment to implement something when there are a lot of suggestions in one place.

Click to expand...

Talking about my specific Lucky Islands thread, that’s why Camezonda was tagged, because I have a feeling that he manages those kind of threads.
I see why a “non-related” answer from management isn’t always helpful so it doesn’t get replied to. But still, a reply can change a lot of stuff.