I'm going crazy trying to understand what you just said.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

No offense taken. Just wanted to provide a bit of perspective, that's all. :)

And yeah, I think it's pretty awesome, too. I've got all these fantasy scenarios in my head of the world's poor rising up and taking over the world with Linux. Weed may be at least partly to blame for that.

EDIT: Oh for fuck's sakes, why do I always have the luck of my tl;dr posts ending up at the bottom of comment pages. Everyone go back and look and stuff! Or don't. :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments

@tuubi:

Sorry to have to nit-pick about one point, but I gotta inform you, not everyone who uses Linux does so by choice. Many people in first world nations, yes, but certainly not everyone.

First of all, Windows isn't even translated into languages spoken in countries that would be too poor for Microsoft to bother selling software to. Charities make use of Linux a lot as well. I've heard of some educational charities in Africa who make heavy use of Linux because that donor money is better spent on things like books and clothing and medicine, as opposed to proprietary O/S licences and subscriptions to tech support lines. I wish I could remember the name of the organization that did this... if someone else remembers, I'd appreciate being reminded.

Furthermore, lots of people still get their computers second-hand or even out of the trash, including my best friend, who is homeless. They need to install Linux on these machines to get around the passworded logins, viruses and other crap that often come with Windows machines that were formerly used by random strangers.

Finally, I got my computer from System76, so I've had Linux FORCED on me by my OEM, the bastards!!! </sarcasm> Sure, I made the choice to switch to Arch (literally the day I unboxed it, heheheh), but technically Linux (as in the kernel itself) was always a part of my computer since day one.

@Hwkiller:

I get what global moderation is like, too. Not quite on the scale of something as huge as Steam, mind you, but I did it for a few years on a rather well-populated fan site. I consulted with my colleagues on staff-only boards, helped form and shape policy, banned a few morons, got a feeling for what the politics can be like. Totally been there, man, and my hat goes off to you for having the patience for doing this on Steam, of all places! Whatever you're taking for stress, I want some of it, too. :)

That being said, please try to think of things from a normal user's perspective, which I'm sure we both can agree is a less informed perspective than a moderator's perspective. It's cool to know that you and your fellow staff are aware of Meraco, and I very much appreciate you disclosing that much to us, but if anyone is getting the assumption that you're doing nothing, it doesn't come from absolutely nowhere. Where it comes from is by just observing Meraco traipsing around every game's forum scot-free, with no big red menacing (Banned) tag next to his name, while the bans keep rolling in for other people who have been much less inciteful to others by comparison.

Sure, normal users don't see what you're doing, fair enough, but at least give them some credit in that they can deduce what you're not doing through their own experiences in the community and the inconsistencies they observe in moderation. People have a perfectly psychologically explainable reason for jumping to conclusions, here. Meraco doesn't even have a hint of a wet noodle ever having been lashed across his back, while those who challenge his opinion get banned for technicalities and harmless criticism.

Also, that rule you mentioned? That one where moderation can't be questioned? Come, now. I'm sure that rule was meant to be applied with a very heavy understanding of discretion. Speaking from experience here, I highly recommend you check with your higher-ups on exactly what is meant by that rule, for context and clarity, because that rule is very vaguely and broadly written, and therefore by its very nature makes it easily abusable by anyone who would want to take advantage of those obvious flaws in its wording.

Let's recap what happened. The author of this post was literally banned for merely stating that they were "unhappy" with how the moderation is going. It was ONE LINE of opinion that's harmless to all but the thinnest of skinned, used as a closing thought at the end of a frustrated but still respectfully-worded rant about the unfairness of being discriminated against for the crime of contributing to science. If you're a fellow Linux user, I insist that you re-read that post in full instead of skipping right to the end where the infraction was made, because I guarantee you'll be downright touched by the passion that went into it.

As I've stated earlier, I have my doubts that this rule was intended to be applied so broadly and with such a "letter of the law" attitude behind it. However, if I am wrong, and that is the way it goes, then it is simply a bad rule. Period. I know I'm possibly risking my own neck by saying this to you personally, Hwkiller, but for a global moderator on a network as large as Steam, I was kind of hoping you would appreciate that there are many bigger fish for you guys to be frying than people who respectfully state they're unhappy with your colleagues.

I know your job is a pain in the ass, trust me, I really do, but the moment you start thinking everyone you're moderating is just there to piss you off, you gotta take a break and think about things for a moment, stop going on automatic for a bit, you know what I'm saying? These are normal human beings you're dealing with. Given the circumstances and the poor quality of communication they're faced with, plus considering the fact that a very large number of people on Steam live in democratized countries, it's only natural that people are going to question and criticize leaders when they believe them to be doing a poor job. We live in a world where some people aren't afraid to get their asses kicked by the police or even the military for voicing an opinion. Given that perspective, it would probably be wiser not to expect people on the Internet to somehow fall into line more easily, given that all they're risking by comparison is having their talking privileges taken away from them on 0.00000000000000000000000000000000001% of the entire Internet.

Before anyone corrects me, I know it wasn't a global who did this ban, I'm just a bit... unhappy... that these bans are being defended by one, rather than seeing an attempt being made at grasping both the context and the complete lack of severity present in this particular situation. Trust me, there are much worse ways people can voice their opinions on Steam, some of my own shitposting being great examples.

ohgodispentwaytoomuchtimeonthisplzhelpsendcookies

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I would recommend putting the rules in /etc/udev/rules.d instead.

udev, like a lot of other Linux software, store their configuration in several different places. Technically, you certainly can make that rules file in /lib rather than /etc and yes, it would work as it's expected to, but there's a logic and an order of precedence to each configuration location that should be conformed to, so as to avoid any potential behavioural issues in the future.

/lib/udev/rules.d = Location for default udev rules. This includes rules that came with udev itself, as well as rules that came with your distribution and other software installed through your package manager. If you create rules in this directory, they will work, but you risk them being clobbered (overwritten) by software and distribution upgrades, resulting in a "where the hell did my configuration go?!" scenario. Not good.

/usr/lib/udev/rules.d = Some distros use this instead of the above directory. In other distros it might even be a symlink to the directory above. In any case, same description as above.

/etc/udev/rules.d = Location for udev rules created by your local sysadmin. This is probably you. Anyway, you are the BOSS of this directory. Other packages shouldn't be installing rules in this directory, so if you haven't touched it before, it's probably empty. The point is, this is where you should be putting any rules you have to make for your system that aren't in /lib already. In the event that there's a rules file in multiple configuration locations with identical names (say, /lib/udev/rules.d/99-custom.rules and /etc/udev/rules.d/99-custom.rules, for example,) rules in this directory take precedence over rules in other locations.

When your distro includes the necessary changes to its Steam repo package's udev rules, it will likely put that file in the first or second location in /lib or /usr/lib. Keep a close eye on your updates for the next while, once it's integrated you can probably get away with deleting the file you created in /etc. This fix will eventually be automatically integrated into every distro's Steam repo packages, but for now this fix is very useful while we wait for our respective distros to catch up.

Hope this helps everyone out. Glad to finally be here, by the way. :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments