Similarly, I'm hoping something similar happens with the rest of the threads in the General Discussion forum. I don't mind that 4E detractors voice their displeasure about the edition, but if they could at least do it in some constructive fashion, it would be a step forward in getting out of this pointless and silly edition war.
Suggestion #2: Make a new General Discussion forum, but call it something else (maybe just have the community route future General type discussions to the Off Topic Tavern). Leave the old General Discussion as it is, an unofficial "concerns and criticism" board.
Suggestion #3: Make a sticky post with topic guidelines so that topics go in the correct forum, instead of everything ending up in General Discussion.
Suggestion #4: Split up thread-crapped topics. Make a new thread for the edition war topics and move the relevant posts. I'm not sure this is possible within the software, but you might make the thread and refer the offending posts that they need to move the post themselves to the correct thread. Give them one day to do so, then delete the post.
Suggestion #1: Open a forum specifically for such discussions. Call it Concerns and Criticisms, call it Edition Comparisons or Game Design, call it whatever you want, but make a place specifically where posts in the Edition Wars can be moved.
I second that.
Mike, I heard that you and CM are not fond of this idea, and it is an imperfect solution, but it has some advantages. Yes, the former Concerns & Criticism forum was a breeding pool of negativity, but it acted as a lightning rod. When people wanted to *****, there they went. Surely, it would be less work for CM and VCLs than visually combing every forums for trash posts and dumping them manually into the infamous Mega Thread.
Some people want to vent, and that can't be helped. Give them a place to do so, post a warning sign sticky for people this may offend and moderate excesses. This way, people may happily and easily avoid this forum instead of stumbling upon trolls, irrational malcontents and raging June08ers everywhere.
When this new C&C forum dies down on its own, then you can yank it, not before. I think you did it too soon last time.
If CS doesn't care enough to actually enforce even thier own crippled CoC, there's nothing we or the CM/VCL's can do except keep shell gaming the trash threads until the people CS *should* be dealing with get bored and leave.
Making a C&C forum now will do nothing. See, in order for a new C&C forum to work, people would have to follow the rules. And the greifers have already shown that they laugh at the rules and the rules have already shown that they're toothless.
So keep doing what you're doing and hammer harder on Cs's door until they get off thier butts and do thier job.
We already had this thread about C&C.
So obviously the matter is closed?
If CS doesn't care enough to actually enforce even thier own crippled CoC, there's nothing we or the CM/VCL's can do except keep shell gaming the trash threads until the people CS *should* be dealing with get bored and leave.
Making a C&C forum now will do nothing. See, in order for a new C&C forum to work, people would have to follow the rules. And the greifers have already shown that they laugh at the rules and the rules have already shown that they're toothless.
A new C&C would not be about enforcing rules. It would be about advertising a place where what we consider trash (but that other posters consider "important insight") goes. A trap, if you will. It would not work for every troll, but it would work for the ravers and ragers. Right now that magnet is the General forum, for lack of another place.
A new C&C forum would work just like that MegaTrashThread: trash goes there. Same thing, different structure, but with the added benefit that some h4aters & fanbois would actually post there, instead of having to be moved there manually by CM/VCL. They'd still have to do it, but on a smaller scale.
So keep doing what you're doing and hammer harder on Cs's door until they get off thier butts and do thier job.
Re-opening C&C is only part of the improvements that can be done. Giving real power to people who actually give a damn (or making people who don't, well, do), is crucial too. So, with you on this: CS needs to step up or delegate more than titles.
So obviously the matter is closed?
More along the lines that it's been demonstrated not to work.
A new C&C would not be about enforcing rules. It would be about advertising a place where what we consider trash (but that other posters consider "important insight") goes. A trap, if you will. It would not work for every troll, but it would work for the ravers and ragers. Right now that magnet is the General forum, for lack of another place.
A new C&C forum would work just like that MegaTrashThread: trash goes there. Same thing, different structure, but with the added benefit that some h4aters & fanbois would actually post there, instead of having to be moved there manually by CM/VCL. They'd still have to do it, but on a smaller scale.
I think you give maliciousness too little credit. C&C remained contained, I think, because it was the biggest stage for drama. General, as it was in the past, before this edition war, is the big show for drama. I don't think they'll go, especially since we're not even pretending that the point of it is to be anything other than a big, huge trash can anymore.
On top of that, we've already been told they don't intend to make any subforums, no matter how badly they're needed. So talking about it is pretty much a pipedream.
Re-opening C&C is only part of the improvements that can be done. Giving real power to people who actually give a damn (or making people who don't, well, do), is crucial too. So, with you on this: CS needs to step up or delegate more than titles.
I think we should very much discuss this more, hopefully bring this whole thing to CS's attention. CS either needs to give more power to the mods and VCLs, or start having a real presence of their own on this forums.
They also need to start thinking about what's good for the forum instead of their own personal sensibilities (see also, the subforum problem) and fix the CoC (if you go back and read it, it's been crippled in the last two years)
This is an absolutely huge forum and it's incredibly open. They need to recognize that and be available *here* not by filling out some form from a link hidden at the bottom of the page.
It's especially disconcerting that we've complained and called them out for six months and not once have they appeared to clarify anything or defend themselves. The VCL's are trying -- and hell, my hat is off to them for the efforts they've made, and that's a sign that CS should empower them instead of ignoring them as if they were... well, us.
Speaking of which, I worked in CS for a computer firm and let me tell you, there is no group who should be put in charge of giving people pleasant experiences less than CS. By the end of the week, you just want to share the pain. CS should only be used to punish stupid customers for not knowing how to work simple machines.
So it's clearly going to attract the bulk of the detractors.
Since it's an open forum, the detractors are going to post wherever the see a differing opinion and say 'why' they have a differing opinion.
It's against the whole philosophy of an open forum to have threads where these detractions 'may not go'. It's discriminatory. You don't see the people in the Older Editions forums making Community posts about the idiot 4E fans that come in there to make life miserable. One could argue that the maturity level is higher and we know how to use the ignore feature, or one could argue that we enjoy seeing them because it makes us laugh.
To highlight your example of the motivator thread, since I was one of the ones posting motivators in there, what makes yours OK to post and mine not? I have a right to use a motivator thread to motivate people to listen to my views. I used proper posters, and it was fine until people started throwing a hissy fit and arguing things off topic. You got your own thread closed. If you disagreed with something, use the ignore button, or post something (on topic) that counters it. When you start getting violently angry, you've stepped over a line.
More along the lines that it's been demonstrated not to work.
Well, predicting the behavior of a mass of forum members is not an exact science, so demonstrating this would have to involve actually trying it again in this context.
And the context has changed since C&C was closed: following the launch of 4e, we witnessed a massive surge of new forum subscriptors, many (most?) of whom never bothered to lurk for a while (as proper netiquette would have it) before launching into raging diatribes or raving reviews, much to the annoyance of forum regulars.
The majority of these June08ers are not really trolls, nor are they actively trying to circumvent the rules. They're just going over the same things we went through about a year ago, things we thought we were almost done with.
I think you give maliciousness too little credit. C&C remained contained, I think, because it was the biggest stage for drama. General, as it was in the past, before this edition war, is the big show for drama. I don't think they'll go, especially since we're not even pretending that the point of it is to be anything other than a big, huge trash can anymore.
This measure would not specifically target the true trolls. The only way that works with these is banning them one time more than they wish to re-register.
The idea is that it would channel some, a significant part I hope, of the drama. Would it admitedly be a trash-can that no one ever reads? Hell yeah, but a lot of posters would not know that. Would it trap every troll and annoying post? No, but it would contribute to a solution that would have to involve other components, like what you suggest about the broken CoC, and having moderators with teeth.
It's all about providing a clearly identified outlet (people read forum names, at least) for the inevitable naive emotive posters who want to rage or rave. It's good judo: deflect the force, don't try to stop it with equal opposite force.
On top of that, we've already been told they don't intend to make any subforums, no matter how badly they're needed. So talking about it is pretty much a pipedream.
I know, but still, Mike asked.
I think we should very much discuss this more, hopefully bring this whole thing to CS's attention. CS either needs to give more power to the mods and VCLs, or start having a real presence of their own on this forums.
They also need to start thinking about what's good for the forum instead of their own personal sensibilities (see also, the subforum problem) and fix the CoC (if you go back and read it, it's been crippled in the last two years)
...
True on both points.
I may have only suggested one idea but I think there is no magic bullet solution to moderating this monster forum. It has to be a combination of many things that do part of the job.
But it all starts by giving back the power to effect those changes to people who actually give a sh*t. And that's not CS.
Speaking of which, I worked in CS for a computer firm and let me tell you, there is no group who should be put in charge of giving people pleasant experiences less than CS. By the end of the week, you just want to share the pain. CS should only be used to punish stupid customers for not knowing how to work simple machines.
Oh, now I think I understand you better.
Yes, CS must be hell. I know I'd go bonkers after the 91835619836th "important" question about some obscure combo of template/magic item/monk abilities.
To highlight your example of the motivator thread, since I was one of the ones posting motivators in there, what makes yours OK to post and mine not? I have a right to use a motivator thread to motivate people to listen to my views.
The idea of a 4E motivator thread is to motivate people to partake in the experience of 4E. Your so-called motivators had nothing to do with motivating people to get into 4E, and everything to do with snide comments aimed to not only detract from the purpose of the thread but also to condescend WotC. What's more, posting a motivator of Hitler with a one-liner along the lines of "In 4E, he'd be Lawful Good" is not only in incredibly bad taste, but it's also baiting.
In other words, your posts in the motivator threads didn't serve to motivate as much as they did to advance your personal political agenda. That is incredibly off-topic, and disrupts the thread, both of which are violations of the Code of Conduct.
The idea of a 4E motivator thread is to motivate people to partake in the experience of 4E. Your so-called motivators had nothing to do with motivating people to get into 4E, and everything to do with snide comments aimed to not only detract from the purpose of the thread but also to condescend WotC. What's more, posting a motivator of Hitler with a one-liner along the lines of "In 4E, he'd be Lawful Good" is not only in incredibly bad taste, but it's also baiting.
In other words, your posts in the motivator threads didn't serve to motivate as much as they did to advance your personal political agenda. That is incredibly off-topic, and disrupts the thread, both of which are violations of the Code of Conduct.
I disagree that they were off topic, as they were:
A: Motivational Posters, and
B: On the subject of 4E
Certainly they expressed my opinion, but it's patently ridiculous to attribute it to any kind of serious agenda. I expressed my opinion in a manner that was on topic, nothing more. Learn to use the ignore feature if you disagree with me so much, but let others see it if they wish.
The motivator of Hitler was an extreme example, but a potent one, and certainly illustrated my opinion on alignments. Other posters I posted were in a similar vein aimed at other aspects of the game, or at the rampant hypocrisy of the people making the other posters. To say that hypocritical opinions deserve more respect than negative ones is absurd.
What disrupted the thread was not my on topic posts, but people's ignorant reactions to them, and so it was they who violated the Code of Conduct, not I.
It's against the whole philosophy of an open forum to have threads where these detractions 'may not go'. It's discriminatory. You don't see the people in the Older Editions forums making Community posts about the idiot 4E fans that come in there to make life miserable. One could argue that the maturity level is higher and we know how to use the ignore feature, or one could argue that we enjoy seeing them because it makes us laugh.
One could also argue that the Previous Editions General chat isn't overrun with people moaning about how bad previous editions are. I'm sure a few people occasionally come by to proselytize, but the Previous Editions boards are generally left alone by people who don't play those editions. Maybe the idiot 4e fans have reached a higher maturity level and don't feel a need to get in other people's faces about what is or isn't fun.
Certainly they expressed my opinion, but it's patently ridiculous to attribute it to any kind of serious agenda. I expressed my opinion in a manner that was on topic, nothing more. Learn to use the ignore feature if you disagree with me so much, but let others see it if they wish.
The motivator of Hitler was an extreme example, but a potent one, and certainly illustrated my opinion on alignments. Other posters I posted were in a similar vein aimed at other aspects of the game, or at the rampant hypocrisy of the people making the other posters. To say that hypocritical opinions deserve more respect than negative ones is absurd.
What disrupted the thread was not my on topic posts, but people's ignorant reactions to them, and so it was they who violated the Code of Conduct, not I.
Emphasis mine. How you can claim for it to be patently ridiculous to have any kind of serious agenda while at the same time making evident that you're both using extreme examples to advance your opinions while at the same time implying that other posters are hypocritical is, in itself, patently ridiculous. That you seem to be returning with a different forum handle suggests your attempting to resist a ban, and doesn't help your cause either.
Furthermore, that the extreme example of the Hitler poster led to another edition war on the subject of alignment, to which you further contributed, is evidence that your post was baiting others. Or can you honestly state that you had absolutely no idea that such an inflammatory poster would go unnoticed? You should, perhaps, take a good look in the mirror before placing the mantle of hypocrisy on others.
What's more is that you have plenty of ways of voicing your displeasure without using provocative statements and/or images, and you can perhaps even do so in a very constructive fashion. Instead, you choose to rely on inflammatory posts. Why?
Emphasis mine. How you can claim for it to be patently ridiculous to have any kind of serious agenda while at the same time making evident that you're both using extreme examples to advance your opinions while at the same time implying that other posters are hypocritical is, in itself, patently ridiculous.
Furthermore, that the extreme example of the Hitler poster led to another edition war on the subject of alignment, to which you further contributed, is evidence that your post was baiting others. Or can you honestly state that you had absolutely no idea that such an inflammatory poster would go unnoticed? You should, perhaps, take a good look in the mirror before placing the mantle of hypocrisy on others.
What's more is that you have plenty of ways of voicing your displeasure without using provocative statements and/or images, and you can perhaps even do so in a very constructive fashion. Instead, you choose to rely on inflammatory posts. Why?
Hey, the alignment war isn't my fault. I merely placed the poster and would have left it at that. I got flamed for it, and defended my position. I didn't think it would go unnoticed. I expected a rebuttal in the form of another motivator, or none at all. There is an ignore function after all. I haven't changed my stance on anything yet, so I don't think I should bear a mantle of hypocrisy.
"Inflammatory Posts". Well, that distinction between inflammatory and extreme is decided in the eye(s) of the beholder I guess. I feel strongly about the issues and as a result my posts can tend to the caustic. It's a defense reflex when someone attacks elements of a hobby that is a large part of my life. I met my wife playing D&D, I met most of my friends playing D&D, I've helped my children learn to read and do basic math with D&D. In my opinion, Wizards of the Coast has, especially with their couched insults to previous editions of D&D, taken a big dump on my hobby. I tend to the extreme. So do many 4E fans, but they aren't slapped around like the fans of previous editions. That in and of itself is a pile of hypocrisy, but it's understood, business is business after all.
Now you have had a chance to actually talk with and debate me, and you've not been asinine or ignorant. I ask you, am I really that bad?
The general D&D sections are clearly made to discuss THIS edition.
You want to discuss 3,X and older editions? Go to Older Editions sections.
The general D&D sections are clearly made to discuss THIS edition.
We are discussing this edition. Specifically its faults, implied, imagined, perceived or real. You have no right to tell us we cannot make comparisons to older games when we complain about the new edition. This is a textbook example of what I mean when I talk about lack of maturity. Your post comes across as: "I don't like what you say, so don't say it here."
It's ignorant.
We are discussing this edition. Specifically its faults, implied, imagined, perceived or real. You have no right to tell us we cannot make comparisons to older games when we complain about the new edition. This is a textbook example of what I mean when I talk about lack of maturity. Your post comes across as: "I don't like what you say, so don't say it here."
It's ignorant.
Considering that your 'dicussion' consist much of trashing and flamming, well...
Considering that your 'dicussion' consist much of trashing and flamming, well...
Trashing of the system, certainly. I wouldn't begin to deny that. Tashing of people? Only in retaliation.
I challenge you to find one instance of me flaming someone unprovoked.
I.E. A flame that I initiated, not me responding to someone else flaming.
I have never initiated flames. Indeed in many instances where they would have been warranted I did not do so, until they flew at me in an unbridled torrent of pure nerd rage.
When you then continue picking that fight in a separate thread, after most of what you did previously was deleted, (not to mention what is implied by all the extra punctuation and new join date) pattern recognition should kick in.
If you honestly don't believe that what you were doing was inflammatory, allow me to spell it out for you:
It was inflammatory.
Even a ten year old, on the internet for the first time knows you don't use Hitler to prove a point specifically because surprise surprise -- Hitler is inflammatory.
a motivator of Hitler with a one-liner along the lines of "In 4E, he'd be Lawful Good"
Game Junkie Jim, you owe me .99$ for making me ruin my gatorade by laughing too hard.
"Inflammatory Posts". Well, that distinction between inflammatory and extreme is decided in the eye(s) of the beholder I guess.
Be that as it may, you cannot honestly expect anyone to believe that you had no reason to expect such a response to your post. Imagine if you had made some sort of extreme comment that, even in a satyrical way, justified the events that occurred on 9/11 in a forum full of nationalist U.S. citizens. It's irresponsible to act without foresight, much less to act in a provocative fashion fully knowing what consequences your actions could entail.
If, by any chance, you truly didn't know what would happen, then perhaps a formal apology in the General Discussions forum or in the 4E Motivator Thread (now in the Off-Topic Tavern) is in order.
Regardless of your foreknowledge, your actions did precipitate a flame war and you should assume your share of responsibility for it, rather than placing it all on those who took offense to your remarks.
I feel strongly about the issues and as a result my posts can tend to the caustic. It's a defense reflex when someone attacks elements of a hobby that is a large part of my life.
There's nothing wrong with feeling insulted or angry about changes to your hobbies. It's natural for anyone. However, deliberately provoking others is not a reflex. It is a conscious decision you make, and it is in no way conductive to any kind of positive result. All you do is simply attempt to spread the bitterness that you might feel.
So do many 4E fans, but they aren't slapped around like the fans of previous editions. That in and of itself is a pile of hypocrisy, but it's understood, business is business after all.
I agree with you that it is hypocrite. This is why I take the time to report positive first impression threads so that they be moved into the megathread. This still doesn't justify 4E detractors disrupting forum discussions with snide remarks that in no way contribute to the discussion in a constructive or positive fashion.
Now you have had a chance to actually talk with and debate me, and you've not been asinine or ignorant. I ask you, am I really that bad?
IMHO, yes. You really are that bad. It's because you're well aware of the repercussions of your actions and you conveniently cast aside any responsibility you might have in the entire affair. However, I do concur that you're neither asinine nor ignorant. You're angry, feeling self-righteously indignated, and it's understandable. The current edition (4E) D&D forums, however, are not the proper vehicle for casting out your displeasure in this fashion. 4E fans are not closed to the idea of intelligent discussion on what some or many perceive as downsides and any constructive ideas others might have to remedy this. It's no secret that I'm really fond of 4E, but I still took time to voice my displeasure about the classification of rituals as well as a constructive solution to what I perceive to be an issue. I could've just vented my displeasure and say that "rituals are ruined by the dumb classification," but I instead opted for a more reasoned approach.
I would suggest you follow the example of Psychotic_Robot who, for having been an "ardent" opponent of 4E in the C&C forum, is still around and posting in a more constructive fashion, despite still manifesting many signs of displeasure at the new edition.
Seriously, if you post an image using Hitler to prove an utterly false point (and it was), you don't get to call yourself blameless in starting a fight.
It was not utterly false, just a demonstration that 4E's determinations for ethics are flawed.
When you then continue picking that fight in a separate thread, after most of what you did previously was deleted, (not to mention what is implied by all the extra punctuation and new join date) pattern recognition should kick in.
I am at the bias of the WizOs, who's solution to people abusing the report button seems to be to cave in, rather than enforce the CoC/ToU. Nothing in the CoC prevents me from making a new account, however.
If you honestly don't believe that what you were doing was inflammatory, allow me to spell it out for you:
It was inflammatory.
Even a ten year old, on the internet for the first time knows you don't use Hitler to prove a point specifically because surprise surprise -- Hitler is inflammatory.
It's an extreme example, but it speaks more on the ability of the viewer to rationalize than the subject itself. It would be the same if I had used Mussolini, Mehmed Talat, or any other historical figure associated with massive genocide. Hitler happens to be more recognizable. What better way to illustrate evil than someone committing genocide?
But the rest of the post puts us much more on topic.
People want to know what's wrong with the state of the forums? The rules mean precisely JACK. Just as Jim says, "Nothing in the CoC prevents me from making a new account, however."
There is no point in banning people here because banning only means you have to come up with some punctuation on your name to get back in to go right back to what caused you to be banned in the first place with no lesson learned and no resumption of the bad behavior stopped.
If we had incremental bans with some -- ANY -- oversight as to if someone was trying ti circumvent it, people who were making honest mistakes in judgment could learn their lesson and people who were just here to spread grief would go away for good.
What we have now, with all this invisible, back door, ineffective charlatanry and from it, we have people on their fourth or SEVENTH name and as many bannings that may or may not know that they did wrong at all.
And we also have people reveling in the fact that they do wrong and nothing will happen to them in any serious way.
Seriously, at this point, what's to stop people from doing far, far worse (I'm not going to say because they'd do it) then being obnoxious over and over again? Where are the limits? When all possible names are registered and banned?
I've modded for private forums AND public, open forums and NEVER have I seen a forum where the rules themselves favor people who break them.
Anyhoo.
Be that as it may, you cannot honestly expect anyone to believe that you had no reason to expect such a response to your post. Imagine if you had made some sort of extreme comment that, even in a satyrical way, justified the events that occurred on 9/11 in a forum full of nationalist U.S. citizens. It's irresponsible to act without foresight, much less to act in a provocative fashion fully knowing what consequences your actions could entail.
My major mistake is assuming people will act with a modicum of maturity about matters. I keep forgetting that here on the internet, people often do not, and that in any large group the mean intelligence level drops to that of it's lowest member.
If, by any chance, you truly didn't know what would happen, then perhaps a formal apology in the General Discussions forum or in the 4E Motivator Thread (now in the Off-Topic Tavern) is in order.
I will have to think about this. My principles are not so easily swayed, and I feel I was wronged in the whole matter. I think the best you can hope to get from me at the moment is that I've been staying out of the thread. WizOs and CLs have made it abundantly clear that differing viewpoints are not allowed.
Regardless of your foreknowledge, your actions did precipitate a flame war and you should assume your share of responsibility for it, rather than placing it all on those who took offense to your remarks.
My responsibility? I am not in charge of the upbringing, mental state, or maturity of other forum members. I stand by that what I posted was on topic and relevant, and the reaction was completely uncalled for.
There's nothing wrong with feeling insulted or angry about changes to your hobbies. It's natural for anyone. However, deliberately provoking others is not a reflex. It is a conscious decision you make, and it is in no way conductive to any kind of positive result. All you do is simply attempt to spread the bitterness that you might feel.
I'm posting not to spread misery, I'm still playing 2E and I absolutely love every minute of it. My posting is motivated by education. I hope to educate potential new customers about glaring flaws, oversights, and plain out gouging when it comes to DDi.
I agree with you that it is hypocrite. This is why I take the time to report positive first impression threads so that they be moved into the megathread. This still doesn't justify 4E detractors disrupting forum discussions with snide remarks that in no way contribute to the discussion in a constructive or positive fashion.
Certainly not! However, if they post something negative that is totally relevant and substantial, it should stay. What happens is they get flamed, people report the detractor, the detractor gets banned and his post edited and all the flames are edited out to promote the nice and fluffy community feel. The flamers should be banned first and foremost, and the flames removed, and discussion should go on.
IMHO, yes. You really are that bad. It's because you're well aware of the repercussions of your actions and you conveniently cast aside any responsibility you might have in the entire affair. However, I do concur that you're neither asinine nor ignorant. You're angry, feeling self-righteously indignated, and it's understandable. The current edition (4E) D&D forums, however, are not the proper vehicle for casting out your displeasure in this fashion. 4E fans are not closed to the idea of intelligent discussion on what some or many perceive as downsides and any constructive ideas others might have to remedy this. It's no secret that I'm really fond of 4E, but I still took time to voice my displeasure about the classification of rituals as well as a constructive solution to what I perceive to be an issue. I could've just vented my displeasure and say that "rituals are ruined by the dumb classification," but I instead opted for a more reasoned approach.
I would suggest you follow the example of Psychotic_Robot who, for having been an "ardent" opponent of 4E in the C&C forum, is still around and posting in a more constructive fashion, despite still manifesting many signs of displeasure at the new edition.
Fair enough, it's your opinion after all. I disagree that the current forums aren't the place for it though. That's where the relevance lies, problems with 4th Edition. The voice of displeasure can be done in extreme fashion or in mild fashion. Guess which gets more response. It also is more of a service to potential new people to the game. It's better for them to be able to see potential issues with it before they spend their money on a product that they may not like.
I'm not here to be liked, I'm here to voice my opinion. And that's what I do.
I hope the experience didn't scar you too much.
My responsibility? I am not in charge of the upbringing, mental state, or maturity of other forum members. I stand by that what I posted was on topic and relevant, and the reaction was completely uncalled for.
No, you're not in charge of the upbringing, the mental state, or the maturity of other forum members. You are, however, responsible for following the Code of Conduct, to which you agree every time you create an account. You're responsible for making sure your posts aren't disruptive to the forum. You're responsible for making sure your posts don't bait others into an argument that is unwarranted. By posting that extreme Hitler poster, you have evidently disrupted the forum and baited others into an alignment flame war. This is where your responsibility lies, and this much is evident by the fact that the poster was not even folded into the new motivator thread.
My posting is motivated by education. I hope to educate potential new customers about glaring flaws, oversights, and plain out gouging when it comes to DDi.
Then do so in an intelligent and reasoned fashion. Be informative, rather than provocative. If your information is valid to the community, it will become self-evident. It strikes me as obvious that, if you get repeatedly moderated and banned, then the community has issues with either the message or the channel for your communication. If you feel the message is valid, alter the channel.
Certainly not! However, if they post something negative that is totally relevant and substantial, it should stay. What happens is they get flamed, people report the detractor, the detractor gets banned and his post edited and all the flames are edited out to promote the nice and fluffy community feel. The flamers should be banned first and foremost, and the flames removed, and discussion should go on.
Very much agreed.
The voice of displeasure can be done in extreme fashion or in mild fashion. Guess which gets more response.
More response doesn't equate to more worthwhile response. There are many ways I could express my political views. I could organize a debate, distribute flyers, set up a rally. Or I could grab a gun and shoot the head of the opposing party. Obviously murder would grant me far more visibility, but it would not be constructive to my intent and generally reduce my overall credibility.
Rather than simply starting an alignment thread on the subject of deconstructing the 4E alignments and evaluating flaws and potential solutions that, by now, could've possibly gotten quite far, we're in another discussion that has more to do with how we communicate our issues than the issues themselves.
It also is more of a service to potential new people to the game. It's better for them to be able to see potential issues with it before they spend their money on a product that they may not like.
A commendable cause. But how do you plan on giving this service to the people if you keep getting shot down not for your beliefs but for the way you choose to express them? What's more important to you? Is it venting or getting the message across?
You've been banned for *40 whole minutes*? That'll teach ya!
I hope the experience didn't scar you too much.
No, I'm on another account.
No, I'm on another account.
I know.
No, you're not in charge of the upbringing, the mental state, or the maturity of other forum members. You are, however, responsible for following the Code of Conduct, to which you agree every time you create an account. You're responsible for making sure your posts aren't disruptive to the forum. You're responsible for making sure your posts don't bait others into an argument that is unwarranted. By posting that extreme Hitler poster, you have evidently disrupted the forum and baited others into an alignment flame war. This is where your responsibility lies, and this much is evident by the fact that the poster was not even folded into the new motivator thread.
I rather suspect that it was simply political bias due to it being anti-4E.
Then do so in an intelligent and reasoned fashion. Be informative, rather than provocative. If your information is valid to the community, it will become self-evident. It strikes me as obvious that, if you get repeatedly moderated and banned, then the community has issues with either the message or the channel for your communication. If you feel the message is valid, alter the channel.
The community seems to have issues with irrefutable flaws. If they can't debate it, they tend to report the snot out of you so you get banned.
More response doesn't equate to more worthwhile response.
How true! However, often the meat of the issue is usually brought to bear much more quickly.
There are many ways I could express my political views. I could organize a debate, distribute flyers, set up a rally. Or I could grab a gun and shoot the head of the opposing party. Obviously murder would grant me far more visibility, but it would not be constructive to my intent and generally reduce my overall credibility.
Haha! I see I am not the only one to use extreme examples. (However, if you shot the head off the opposing party, those views would effectively be beaten) My credibility is going to be suspect because of my method, but that's to be expected. I suspect EVERYONE'S credibility on the internet. Especially when they're trying to sell me something.
Rather than simply starting an alignment thread on the subject of deconstructing the 4E alignments and evaluating flaws and potential solutions that, by now, could've possibly gotten quite far, we're in another discussion that has more to do with how we communicate our issues than the issues themselves.
This happens. But good conversation evolves in and of itself. And there are no shortage of alignment threads. I post in them. I posted in the motivator thread because they were relevant to the theme of the thread.
A commendable cause. But how do you plan on giving this service to the people if you keep getting shot down not for your beliefs but for the way you choose to express them? What's more important to you? Is it venting or getting the message across?
Quite frankly it's both! It's a bit therapeutic for me, it's educational for new people.
Look, here's the deal: The game is printed. WotC has the market by the short and curlies, and there's not a whole hell of a lot that I can do about it. What I can do, I'm doing.
Finally, reflect on the fact that your main account apprently wasn't permmed when they clearly could have permed you if they were trying to get rid of you the first time.
Jim, if you will indulge me, please just take an hour and think about other possible reasons that you could have been banned. Reflect on the idea that it is possible, however unlikely that you are not the target of a conspiracy.
Finally, reflect on the fact that your main account apprently wasn't permmed when they clearly could have permed you if they were trying to get rid of you the first time.
I never said I was a target of anything!
I just think it's a quick fix and it's overstepping a boundary.
This isn't just about me. It happens to plenty of others, I just happen to be more vocal, and I rarely go anywhere without my laptop.
I rather suspect that it was simply political bias due to it being anti-4E.
Let's not get into a specualtory debate on WizO policy, now. The fact remains that you have been banned, your offensive post deleted, and the issue closed. Obviously, you did something wrong, so it's a good idea to focus on a better strategy.
The community seems to have issues with irrefutable flaws. If they can't debate it, they tend to report the snot out of you so you get banned.
Except that posting what would otherwise be irrefutable flaws (which, incidentally, exclude the Hitler poster) does not constitute a CoC violation, and no amount of reporting such a flaw will get you banned. If they can't debate it reasonably, then you should fairly report these people.
How true! However, often the meat of the issue is usually brought to bear much more quickly.
Do you have any proven examples of this in these forums? I see the new alignment thread in the General Discussion forum being far more constructive than anything you might have hoped to achieve in the motivator thread, and it's mostly due to the surprising lack of inflammatory comments. And it's getting visited by people who are actually interested in the subject of alignment, as opposed to people who enjoy 4E and wanted a laugh about it.
Haha! I see I am not the only one to use extreme examples. (However, if you shot the head off the opposing party, those views would effectively be beaten)
I sometimes jump into hyperbole to demonstrate a point, but never as a point in itself. In this case, the point was that visibility isn't always what most matters, especially when it comes at the expense of the message you're trying to make visible.
This happens. But good conversation evolves in and of itself. And there are no shortage of alignment threads. I post in them. I posted in the motivator thread because they were relevant to the theme of the thread.
I doubt anyone who enjoys 4E will find it in good fun that you spoil a fun thread with an alignment debate. It's sort of like starting a "warforged=robotz" debate in the Eberron motivator thread. There's a time and place for debates, and it's not in motivator threads, and especially not through inflammatory posters.
Quite frankly it's both! It's a bit therapeutic for me, it's educational for new people.
Then I would recommend that you find a different vehicle for your venting, as this one clearly isn't receptive to your methods. As I said, you're neither asinine nor ignorant. You should kindly share your insights with a greater degree of composure.