At least, strict *and FAIR* modding.
The place became so hostile to pros, who are also fans and want to discuss in peace without fire coming at them.
This is a horrible idea. Certain moderation is good, but not some forum-exile for everyone who doesn't conform to a particular positive viewpoint. The Ask the Author threads should have nerd-rage moderated. Telling forum users, many of whom have invested a great deal of themselves in the realms, to get lost and complain somewhere else is misguided. Maybe it just because of where I am, but I'm not a fan of institutionalised segregation.
It's not forum exile. It's giving those who hate the new realms a place specifically for them. No one is saying they don't have a right to vent their frustration. We already have a two subsections for the Realms because the moderators felt that there where different but important aspects of the Realms discussion. All I'm saying is that the topic is important enough to others that they feel the need to interject their opinions on EVERY post, so if it's THAT important to them why not give them their own forum? As I said they did it when they where releasing 4e Core and I think it worked out, why not here. That way if people want to hear what the haters have to say they can go to that sub-section, but if want to discuss the current Realms in a constructive way then they should also have a venue for that without having to shift through all the hate/hysteria/personal attacks.
Move threads with negative titles?
Move or delete posts that expressed negative views?
Remove the posters themselves?
Where would "the line" between constructive criticism and your "hate/hysteria/personal attacks" be?
Not least because if you did this you would get duplication of almost every topic. The one in The Pit and the one filled with Happiness and Light. I am not dismissing the idea, I just wonder how it would actually work. Really work.
Not least because if you did this you would get duplication of almost every topic. The one in The Pit and the one filled with Happiness and Light. I am not dismissing the idea, I just wonder how it would actually work. Really work.
That's the only reason I haven't already suggested this: it's impractical.
It's not forum exile. It's giving those who hate the new realms a place specifically for them. No one is saying they don't have a right to vent their frustration. We already have a two subsections for the Realms because the moderators felt that there where different but important aspects of the Realms discussion. All I'm saying is that the topic is important enough to others that they feel the need to interject their opinions on EVERY post, so if it's THAT important to them why not give them their own forum? As I said they did it when they where releasing 4e Core and I think it worked out, why not here. That way if people want to hear what the haters have to say they can go to that sub-section, but if want to discuss the current Realms in a constructive way then they should also have a venue for that without having to shift through all the hate/hysteria/personal attacks.
The problem with this is it would feel like an exile to those people who this is aimed at.
"Don't like the new realms? Well, leave the forums you've been frequenting and take the whining over here!!!" Even if thats not the intent, it would be read as such. It would just create more resentment.
The problem to me is that the bias actualy may leans to the *negative* side. I see not much done to stop CoC breaking.
The place became so hostile to pros, who are also fans and want to discuss in peace without fire coming at them.
This is unfortunate, sure. But the thing is that these are Realms forums, not 4e Realms forums (unless I am mistaken). I do not see any real flaming of pro's here tbh. A lot of negativity to the new ed, but I myself haven't seen any CoC violation come from this (other than the off-topic accusations of Rich in the Ask thread, which are tiresome). Up in the 4e forums, there is this sense of entitlement with pro 4e gamers due to it being "their forum", as in, for the discussion of people who like 4e. People can't come here with the same sentiment. These are forums for the setting in general, not simply for the 4e incarnation of it. Sure negativity can be tiresome if you are on the other side, but it is not specifically disallowed or out of line.
And to be honest, I don't see anyone threadcapping postive discussions about the new incarnation of the setting. There just hasn't been an opportunity for such threads, since very few people have the new setting yet.
Pretty much as it is supposed to be, but enforced actualy.
The problem to me is that the bias actualy may leans to the *negative* side. I see not much done to stop CoC breaking.
Looks that way to me. Maybe the some antis - it would only take one - are just more prone to reporting people for trolling. Though I've made a conscious decision to be more active about reporting things.
18DELTA ;)
The problem with this is it would feel like an exile to those people who this is aimed at.
"Don't like the new realms? Well, leave the forums you've been frequenting and take the whining over here!!!" Even if thats not the intent, it would be read as such. It would just create more resentment.
"You like the new realms? Well, this is commercial crud! Join us in wagging war on it or leave with your fanboyism!"
It feels like exile for peoples. You know, I have seen in PM and in posts 'pros' stating that they just don't care coming frequently or at all, 'pushed away' ('why should I post?'). Can you see the resentment from this frustrated side?
People with complaints are just as right to ask for all fans of 4e to get a subforum to talk in, but I hard;y think that's solve any problems.
Even IF they implemented this, there would still be breachs on both parts. Whether it be the "Haters" coming to complain here, or "fanbois" dropping by to ***** and mock there, the crossfire would happen.
In the months to come, this will die down. Until then, we all will live with each other.
-RW
In the months to come, this will die down. Until then, we all will live with each other.
-RW
-
18DELTA ;)
Freedom of speech prohibits this. We have the right to say what we want, where we want, within the guidelines of the COC.
People with complaints are just as right to ask for all fans of 4e to get a subforum to talk in, but I hard;y think that's solve any problems.
Even IF they implemented this, there would still be breachs on both parts. Whether it be the "Haters" coming to complain here, or "fanbois" dropping by to ***** and mock there, the crossfire would happen.
In the months to come, this will die down. Until then, we all will live with each other.
-RW
Let me make this clear, as the original poster: I AM NOT ADVOCATING CURTAILING FREEDOM OF SPEECH OR SAYING PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO COMPLAIN. WotC has already used the Complaint/Concern forum idea with success in the past. That is all I'm asking for. Just organize the Realms forum into similar topics. We already do this across the board (different topic+different sub-forum. If you post in the wrong forum, the moderators MAY move you to a more appropriate one. To me, complaints, personal attacks on game designers other people who like the new Realms is fundamentally different for talking about the new Realms and how to game/have fun in it. Because it's different IMHO then complaining, I feel it should warrant it's own sub-forum.
So, when we had a 4e Complaints and Concerns sub-forum did you all think that was violating your freedom of speech rights? The notion of a sub-forum for complaints is nothing new for this board...
And it could easily be done the other way, make a new forum for people who want to positively discuss having fun in the new Realms. I just suggested the Complaints way cause they've done it in the past.
We don't like this. get over it
When people complain, they complain about something they read. They complain to get a response, or to be dubbed correct. They want to start a debate, and some even want to be proved wrong.
So tell me how the heck that could be done in a separate forum. Would you like us to see something that is frustrating, or incorrect, and then copy paste it elsewhere, and complain about it to no one. Maybe we can argue with the people that agree with us.
You just want to make your life easier, at the expense of the people who aren't happy with being told to bugger off after dedicating years and money to a dead setting.
Like I said, clearly once more, Leave it alone. It will resolve itself in time. Alternatively, go make a separate forum on another site, and complain there, then come back and let us know how the suggestion worked out.
-RW
You just want to make your life easier, at the expense of the people who aren't happy with being told to bugger off after dedicating years and money to a dead setting. (...)
You sir, get a cookie.
And this idea won't work - they try to keep the 4e fans seperate from the 3e fans over at Paizo, and you get a lot of cross-edition posting going on anyway, which just makes matters worse when someone says 'go home to your own forum'.
Although I would have to say the atmosphere is way more polite there, its probably because the 4e fans are so heavily outnumbered.
I think both sides make valid points, and sometimes I think I might be the only person who sees both ponts of view, and think both are correct,
They DID ruin the old Realms - period.
However, the new Realms afford us a Golden opportunity (at least for the gaming fans of the setting).
I like to hear about lore, new and old, and all opinions are welcome as far as I'm concerned. You just got to remember that what you think isn't what everyone else... or anyone else... thinks.
You can enjoy any edition you want (and the 2e players are laughing there arses off at us), but don't put someone else down just because they prefer something different.
You can enjoy any edition you want (and the 2e players are laughing there arses off at us), but don't put someone else down just because they prefer something different.
oh. darn it
If we had to avoid making snide comments, I'd have to retro-actively delete about 9000 of my posts. :P
And this idea won't work - they try to keep the 4e fans seperate from the 3e fans over at Paizo, and you get a lot of cross-edition posting going on anyway, which just makes matters worse when someone says 'go home to your own forum'.
Although I would have to say the atmosphere is way more polite there, its probably because the 4e fans are so heavily outnumbered.
I think both sides make valid points, and sometimes I think I might be the only person who sees both ponts of view, and think both are correct,
The DID ruin the old Realms - period.
However, the new Realms afford us a Golden opportunity (at least for the gaming fans of the setting).
I like to hear about lore, new and old, and all opinions are welcome as far as I'm concerned. You just got to remember that what you think isn't what everyone else... or anyone else... thinks.
You can enjoy any edition you want (and the 2e players are laughing there arses off at us), but don't put someone else down just because they prefer something different.
I'm with you on this. I didn't want to pick sides, but I'll argue from the side I believe is correct, or at least more correct. Here I don't disagree with the problem, only the solution.
-RW
oh. darn it
I know... I know... that statement takes most of the fun out of being human.
Also 'disarms' just about every comedian on the planet. :P
I'm with you on this. I didn't want to pick sides, but I'll argue from the side I believe is correct, or at least more correct. Here I don't disagree with the problem, only the solution.
Very true...
Segragation is never the way to handle a disagreement - it always inevitably makes matters worse.
Finding a common ground is the key to acceptance, and we all love the Realms, right? ;)
I'm with you on this. I didn't want to pick sides, but I'll argue from the side I believe is correct, or at least more correct. Here I don't disagree with the problem, only the solution.
-RW
There is no problem. People are allowed to be angry about the changes. WoTC had to atleast know most of use would be ticked even if they don't care if we are. They knew this was coming.
There is nothing wrong with people speaking out against something they don't like, whether its to vent, effect change, or just provoke interesting debate
So, again, I see no problem
If we had to avoid making snide comments, I'd have to retro-actively delete about 9000 of my posts.
And this idea won't work - they try to keep the 4e fans seperate from the 3e fans over at Paizo, and you get a lot of cross-edition posting going on anyway, which just makes matters worse when someone says 'go home to your own forum'.
Although I would have to say the atmosphere is way more polite there, its probably because the 4e fans are so heavily outnumbered.
I think both sides make valid points, and sometimes I think I might be the only person who sees both ponts of view, and think both are correct,
They DID ruin the old Realms - period.
However, the new Realms afford us a Golden opportunity (at least for the gaming fans of the setting).
I like to hear about lore, new and old, and all opinions are welcome as far as I'm concerned. You just got to remember that what you think isn't what everyone else... or anyone else... thinks.
You can enjoy any edition you want (and the 2e players are laughing there arses off at us), but don't put someone else down just because they prefer something different.
You're not the only one who sees things this way. That more or less mirrors my thoughts as well. I don't really like what they did with the Realms, but I also see it as an opportunity. I think some changes were needed - there were things that needed to be fixed - but the way they went about them was all wrong, right from the start.
I guess I fall somewhere in the middle. Does this mean my nerdrage is not up to par with everyone else? :P
There is nothing wrong with people speaking out against something they don't like, whether its to vent, effect change, or just provoke interesting debate
The only problem I have here is with people who have absolutely nothing good to say, no positive thoughts, and the only posts they make are to attack others and / or spread around their negativity. The former is worse, actually, in my opinion because I feel that it drags the overall mood of the boards down.
I do, however, love debate and interesting conversation.
If we harrass both sides enough, they'll be forced to team-up and destroy us...
All part of our evil little plan.
Yes these are free boards and whining is allowed, but really why do people need to say the same crap on every thread? Do you wish to split the forums that badly? The only reason we got a forum split in the first place was due to the negthreads. Speaking your peace is cool as hell. Whining about the same old you know what is just childish folks.
Voice of Reason leaves the room
Logic! Reason! Reality!
When our powers combine....
WE ARE CAPTAIN... Anti-Nerdrage? :P
MarkusTay63-
Logic! Reason! Reality!
When our powers combine....
WE ARE CAPTAIN... Anti-Nerdrage? :P
Resistance is futile... No force in the universe can nullify nerd-rage (well maybe naked breasts :D )
Please do not use this thread to debate where people should post.
WizO_Unicorn
-I am going to have this thread closed.
The only problem I have here is with people who have absolutely nothing good to say, no positive thoughts, and the only posts they make are to attack others and / or spread around their negativity. The former is worse, actually, in my opinion because I feel that it drags the overall mood of the boards down.
I do, however, love debate and interesting conversation.
The moment someone actually attacks another person, it should be reported.
That said, some people (and I don't mean you, I just mean generally) have a difficult time separating themselves as people from their feelings for the game. So when the nay-sayers offer a (negative) opinion on the latest "reveal", some people take it as a personal offense rather than understanding that the negativity is really aimed at the designers' revision.
Given that such a large number of posts fall into the negative category, I do think it says something important about the new Realms. The designers essentially made these revisions for the company and for themselves as authors, with little to no thought toward what the majority of current fans actually wanted. Yes, there were things that needed "fixing", but almost none of those issues were addressed. Or, when they were, the "fix" ends up being worse and requires some sort of retcon leading to continuity problems.
Perhaps it really is the case that "too many cooks" (i.e. too many designers) had their hand in the revision process. It certainly feels as though certain author-favored bits and pieces made their way in, and the most massive RSE ever to hit the Realms was little more than a sloppy, global "explanation" for everything they wanted to inject. Other authors, some who had -very- popular novel lines, seem to have not only gotten the chop, but much of their work functionally destroyed or made meaningless.
Freedom of speech prohibits this. We have the right to say what we want, where we want, within the guidelines of the COC.
Just wanted to comment that Freedom of Speech has nothing to do with this. Freedom of Speech doesn't mean you get to say whatever you want on private property, which is what these boards are. The fact that it's restricted by the guidelines of the CoC should be a clear indicator that Freedom of Speech doesn't really apply on this or any other message board, nor can any message board owner curtail those rights, as only the government can do that.
Seriously this is just a request that we all know will not happen but the OP is just "throwing it out there" so he can voice his opinion. Closing this thread will be a very telling thing about the FL of these boards in my opinion.
P.S Way to go US at smashing the "other guys".
Closing this thread will be a very telling thing about the FL of these boards in my opinion.
[SBLOCK=
Disclaimer. User was angry at time of posting. Is less so now, though the point remains]-I know, right? Closing a thread dealing with an off-topic issue that has been dealt with and resolved numerous times is really telling...
[/SBLOCK]Freedom of speech prohibits this. We have the right to say what we want, where we want, within the guidelines of the COC.
No, freedom of speech expressly does not prohibit this.
We're on a privately owned forum. We agreed to abide by WotC’s rules when we all joined up.
Regardless, it's one thing to recognize one can say pretty much what one wants whenever they want (we can all do that). It's another thing to think before speaking.
To consider the long-term effect of one's words....you know, over time.
The quote in my sig by GamerZero pretty much sums it up:
[sblock]
We want everyone to feel free to post what they think. In fact, we want to encourage everyone to do that, regardess of what their stance is on one of our products.
However, we also need everyone to feel free to have forum discussions without disruption. This means that not every thread is the place for people to say how much they love or hate a product.
--emphasis mine.
Now in real life, it's awfully easy to smack someone down and tell them they can either stop ruining the mood and quality of a discussion or qualify for a tried and true ass-kicking to make them shut up.
On the forums, the CoC prevents this. So we're stuck with people who don't technically violate the CoC, but don't actually contribute anything beyond thoughtless, reactive negativism.
Yes, people like this (of which this forum has its fair share) should be relegated to their own forum. And no, they're not that hard to find at all.
The ones that post smart, thoughtful criticism grounded in reality (or at least post things like, "I don' like X, W or Z" withouth delving into hyperbole), though, should stay here. We need you.
Bel
Take Markus' and Therise' statements, which are clearly not facts but are written as though they are:
They DID ruin the old Realms - period.
The designers essentially made these revisions for the company and for themselves as authors, with little to no thought toward what the majority of current fans actually wanted.
Both of these statements are off topic, are argumentative (because they're either highly opinionated (Markus) and/or factually incorrect/un-provable (Therise)).
These kinds of statements have their place, in the right thread, but as often as not they show up everywhere.
This, people, is why I’d gladly donate lottery winnings (should I ever win it) to WotC so they can budget a full time moderator to the FR Forums. When people can’t self-police themselves, and especially when statements like the ones I quoted are made in defense of posting negatively, only constant moderation can correct them.
Since we know this won’t happen, the next best thing is to hope for a sub-forum.
In all honesty, I'd post a lot less on the WotC boards if it were not for the fact that I regularly view them to discuss and read about updates to FR and what not. Plus, compared to Candlekeep the WotC boards is a shining beacon of love, happiness, and positive thinking.
Granted, I have mostly always lurked, but there is such bitterness and outright rage that is really hard to understand.
I stated awhile ago, that I was concerned that the Realms might have changed so much it couldn't really be considered the Realms any longer. I thought long and hard on it, but reading Lost Empires of Faerun really convinced me this wasn't the case.
I'm now looking forward to seeing the new lore. True, it's not the old Realms that I fell in love with, but I'm willing to roll with the new Realms and at least give it a chance.
Of course, if the campaign setting is terrible, I'll take this all back. :P
I also have to say that while I can't say for sure how many here dislike the direction they have taken the realms, the ones who are the loudest and rudest are seem to be the same few people instigating things.
Really, I'm not against having a crybabies only forum but it won't help anything IMO. This place needs at least semi-competent moderators and right now we don't have that. If they are too busy then they need to start interviewing for more mods out of the member pool.
Until that happens all we can do is be patient and wait until this all dies down.
Really, I'm not against having a crybabies only forum but it won't help anything IMO. This place needs at least semi-competent moderators and right now we don't have that. If they are too busy then they need to start interviewing for more mods out of the member pool.
So if its not positive it must be moderated? I'm generally critical of WotC, but in this instance I have to say that accusing the mods of incompetence is uncalled for. Any CoC violations that I see here get moderated. As for anything else, its just not the mod's job to deal with. Negativity is not against the CoC. And negative discussion is still discussion.
And, really, if you want to accomplish positive change on the forum, why are you using such gosh darn emotive language? "Crybabies"? If anything needs to be modded, its that kind of baiting. Incompetant moderators? Bah! Look in the mirror before you start the self-righteous proclamations of what is good forum behaviour.
Notice how 'pros' here admitted not caring or daring move around (and at Candlekep) so much anymore.
The 'antis' should stop also taking things so personaly and feeling as if they where attacked.
So if its not positive it must be moderated?
That's definitely the agenda of some, to silence anything they personally disagree with: or in other words, enforced Pollyannaism.
That's definitely the agenda of some, to silence anything they personally disagree with: or in other words, enforced Pollyannaism.
That work both ways of the debates.
Kinda proved my point.
That work both ways of the debates.
Kinda proved my point.
Nope, I have never -ever- suggested driving pro-4ERealms people away, nor that they be shunted into their own separate threads. Nor have I ever suggested special moderation for heavily positive fans. They are entitled to their opinions of the material, so long as they abide by the CoC. I've never sought to deprive someone of their ability to post their opinion. I've argued against some of the opinions for their facts or unsupported beliefs, yes, but never against their right to express said opinions.
Nope, I have never -ever- suggested driving pro-4ERealms people away, nor that they be shunted into their own separate threads. Nor have I ever suggested special moderation for heavily positive fans. They are entitled to their opinions of the material, so long as they abide by the CoC.
This is why this proposal is silly. People complain about the negativity, yes, but its not aimed at anyone in particular, and its not like there are pro 4-Gotten Realms threads that are being threadcapped. There just isn't that much positive discussion that can be done before the FRCS has circulated. This is not something to blame on other forum members.
You can enjoy any edition you want (and the 2e players are laughing there arses off at us), but don't put someone else down just because they prefer something different.
I wonder how many people are going to be playing/running both Living Forgotten Realms AND Pathfinder Society?
Gomez,
#1 on that list :D
This is why this proposal is silly. People complain about the negativity, yes, but its not aimed at anyone in particular, and its not like there are pro 4-Gotten Realms threads that are being threadcapped. There just isn't that much positive discussion that can be done before the FRCS has circulated. This is not something to blame on other forum members.
Exactly. In life, and not just forum boards, we must always expect to come up against opinions that we may not like. That's just life, and dealing with other people. Those who want to control content - well, that's just a power trip to appease their own tender sensibilities.
The real value of these Forums comes from sharing ideas about the Realms.
The real value comes from the feeling that's generated by people showing through their posting habits that they place more value in generating a positive and supportive Realms-themed atmosphere than they do in "allowing" others to express repetitive negativity.
The right to an opinion does not automatically confer the right to express it whenever and wherever one wants, regardless of what's in the CoC.
This is because the CoC isn't written to govern toddler-level basics of human interaction.
That's not a personal opinion either, Therise. That's a fact of life.
I think the point several of us are getting at, Therise, is that abiding by the CoC isn't enough.
The real value of these Forums comes from sharing ideas about the Realms.
The real value comes from the feeling that's generated by people showing through their posting habits that they place more value in generating a positive and supportive Realms-themed atmosphere than they do in "allowing" others to express repetitive negativity.
This cannot start happening until the FRCS has reached more than just the folks in Canada.
This is because the CoC isn't written to govern toddler-level basics of human interaction.
Really, your point fails because you felt the need to imply that certain members of this board do not possess toddler-level social skills. You claim the high ground, but you are the one doing the baiting and making the snarky comments.
Basically, if you want to post about your complaints about the game or some aspect, you put a "-" in the thread title. That way everyone knows that this is a thread that will contain criticism, and should be avoided by people who don't care to hear complaints or who will start arguing with those who complain. Conversely, a "+" thread means that this person only wants people to speak positively or neutrally about the thread topic, and so it can be avoided by everyone who doesn't want to. Of course, if you read one of these threads and find it disagreeable, you can start one of your own. This way you can have a thread about a topic and not have to worry about it getting mired in pro/anti debate.
You can also not label a thread either way if you welcome that debate. The vast majority of threads on that board are unlabeled.
This way, people get the chance to rant or gush without worrying about others miring down the thread, while also still being able to create threads that contain those debates if they wish. It also means that no one feels like they are shuffled to some other board.
And I will say that looking over this board, people HAVE been extremely hostile, on both sides of the issue. I have also seen this hostility bring down other threads, and I personally have been very reticent to post my opinions on threads because of the environment and the fear of being flamed, and it seems others on this thread have mentioned similar feelings. And this goes for both people in favor and against the changes.
Anyways, + and - threads. Something to consider.
That's not taking the moral high ground. That's just stating a fact.
Yet we have several people, many of them (presumably) grown adults, arguing vigorously for a different way of doing things.....one that involves allowing anyone and everyone to say anything they want, whenever they want, so long as the CoC isn't violated.
Our Forum Lead pushes this idea. Others as well.
All I'm doing is pointing out two simple facts:
1) The CoC doesn't cover the basics of human interaction (it assumes users already have that figured out).
2) It's never OK to say what you want, whenever you want.
EDIT: Just read gersovir's post. I think that's a good idea, actaully.
(Do not) Troll or bait the community in general with inflammatory statements, such as ones designed to elicit a negative response from the community
and
Do not disrupt chat, forums, blog comments or other communication channels. For example:
Spam through repeated posts, or off-topic content by word or intent to forums or comments (scrolling, flooding, polling, or by "bumping" a post more than once in 48 hours)
Frankly, there are whole threads here which appear to me to breach the first of these and I fail to see how repeatedly turning every thread on 4e FR into a hate-fest doesn't breach the second.
I think the point several of us are getting at, Therise, is that abiding by the CoC isn't enough. (...)
The right to an opinion does not automatically confer the right to express it whenever and wherever one wants, regardless of what's in the CoC.
"Did you ever hear anyone say, "That work had better be banned because I might read it and it might be very damaging to me?"
- Joseph Henry Jackson
"Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too."
- Voltaire
"Free speech is intended to protect the controversial and even outrageous word; and not just comforting platitudes too mundane to need protection."
- Colin Powell
"Those who would deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves."
- Abraham Lincoln
Here's a couple to add to the quote list:
Think before you speak.
Consider what you say (in this case, write) before you say it.
Ask yourself why you're writing something, before you write it.
:::::::::
Really, it's not that bloody hard.
All those qoutes are really appealling....all that freedom talk makes me shed a tear.
And utterly irrelevant. No social group really allows free, unfettered, unregulated speech. Social interaction requires that we consider the effects of what we say in the context we say it in.
All the proposed technical solutions are insufficient, because this is a social problem: basically this is a social grouping with no way to signal that contributions are negative and undesirable. Moderation is an awfully blunt tool, so you end up relying on people acting in a mature fashion with little in the way of sanctions to encourage them. Not much to be done but to sic the moderators on the worst instances and try to bring the consequences of their actions to the attention of the offenders.
The advanage I'd say of having specific + or - threads is that they do provide that context to signal others what contributions are negative or undesireable. A - thread tells everyone that talking about how, actually, the change are great, is not why the thread exists and is not what the OP wants to discuss, while a + thread shows that talking about how, actually, the changes are terrible is not what that OP wants. And if someone reads the thread and strongly disagrees with what is said, they can create a non-labeled thread to have that back and forth discussion.
A better rule of thumb might be that complaining how terrible the changes are in a thread that is explicitly about using the 4e realms is off-topic and disruptive. So complaining in threads that are explicitly about the changes is one thing but complaining in a thread that takes 4e as given is unacceptable.
Then let people introduce themselves if they wish.
It sounds corny, but efforts at community building are actually pretty effective in defusing some of the worst side-effects of Internet discussions.
At least all of it could be clumped into one thread where people could go to vent their anger. It could be very theraputic.
Complaints are fine but when they spill into every other thread it gets annoying. Some lurkers even said how they did not want to post due to the negativity. That cannot be good for building a community or getting new gamers and fans into the FR.
Outline what is an isn't responsible behaviour as a forum-goer. This is the internet. As Mr Misc points out, kids learn when and when not to speak not by shouting into a vaccum (which the forums are technically) but through people in positions of authority saying "This is not acceptable".
Make it clear to people that "I love this" or "I hate this" or "'s mother was a badger" aren't acceptable... and then enforce it.
Thread cr@ping annoys me too, even when it is done by people I agree with on a topic I find abhorrent... and as such I have tried to be more reasoned in my posts since I realised that. So why not help other people realise that saying both:
"I hate this, all devs are poop-heads!"
or
"I love this, all devs rox my sox box!"
Contribute almost nothing to the flow of a discussion.
Get the community involved if you want to have a community. Not just people saying "All pro/anti people should be hung up by the... town hall", but get people discussing a code of behaviour for this place.
Then draw up a community covenant with the help of the mods.
Outline what is an isn't responsible behaviour as a forum-goer. This is the internet. As Mr Misc points out, kids learn when and when not to speak not by shouting into a vaccum (which the forums are technically) but through people in positions of authority saying "This is not acceptable".
Make it clear to people that "I love this" or "I hate this" or "'s mother was a badger" aren't acceptable... and then enforce it.
Thread cr@ping annoys me too, even when it is done by people I agree with on a topic I find abhorrent... and as such I have tried to be more reasoned in my posts since I realised that. So why not help other people realise that saying both:
"I hate this, all devs are poop-heads!"
or
"I love this, all devs rox my sox box!"
Contribute almost nothing to the flow of a discussion.
Get the community involved if you want to have a community. Not just people saying "All pro/anti people should be hung up by the... town hall", but get people discussing a code of behaviour for this place.
This is a really good idea, in practice. Though I don't see how we could accomplish this without trampling on people's idea that what opinions they say (no matter how irrevelant to the topic) can/should be heard. I, to a degree, believe this but there comes a time when people's opinion (including mine) on certain topics gets said over and over and over and over again to whre the point is moot. By now, most people on the boards know each others opinion on the various FR related topics and to reiterate those opinions for no other reason than to express that opinion is lunacy.
Better to keep silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
Silence is golden.
Do unto others as you would have done to yourself.
It is one thing to give valid criticism of the subject of a thread, positive or negative. Simply making a negative statement because you are miffed because the direction that the designers went is not to your liking is not productive, and limits actual discussion of the topic at hand, since it simply starts the same back and forth that we find in too many threads.
We get it, 4ed FR is not to your liking, continue playing in 3.5, or play pathfinder, or whatever you want to play. Just try to take into consideration the feelings of those who come here looking for discussion of lore and rules, but who play a different version than yourself, and refrain from negative statements just because you are allowed to by CoC.
There is no problem. People are allowed to be angry about the changes. WoTC had to atleast know most of use would be ticked even if they don't care if we are. They knew this was coming.
There is nothing wrong with people speaking out against something they don't like, whether its to vent, effect change, or just provoke interesting debate
So, again, I see no problem
Don't worry, I wasn't implying that was the problem. However I can see where the opposing complaints arise in regards to a constant berrage on angry remarks. I am not saying they are undeserved, I just think WoTC has forced us to direct them at the wrong audience. So rather than having a community friendly and unified, a lolthian union has occured, where for the time we're pitted against one another, as the culprit stands on laughing.
4E fans need to understand what has been lost, and the frustrations many feel at this seemingly unwarrented change. In return, many remarks need to be more constructive than "I hate this" or "That is just $%^&ing stupid". That only serves to inflare tempers of one another, and doesn't work towards any end that might diffuse the complaints.
-RW
-RW
There is a strong difference between negativity designed to bring the community (and everyone in it) down, and criticism of something you dislike.
It's the difference between: "The 4th Edition Realms sucks and I hope it fails." vs "I dislike what they've done to Silverymoon. It makes no sense, and here is why..."
Another example: "4th Edition FR is only designed to appeal to those who've always hated FR." vs "I dislike 4th Edition Forgotten Realms because they've killed off too many of my favorite NPC's and deities."
Is it clear, now? One is designed just to spread around negativity and the others are designed to give an opinion and provoke discussion. The latter contributes nothing but negativity and the former provokes debate and discussion.
It comes down to how you express your opinions to others. It is not what you believe that matters, but how you express your opinion - to either contribute to the community as a whole or bring it down.
...Speaking your peace is cool as hell. Whining about the same old you know what is just childish folks.
Voice of Reason leaves the room
You act like the issue is one sided. The frustration stems from in many ways being told we're not wanted, or having valid opinions ignored or discredited without cause. That is how arguments degenerate into negative comments.
The holdovers may in your opinion whine to much, but the replacement crew likes to stick their fingers in their ears and yell "I'm not listening, mines better than yours, na na na". So which then in your opinion is more immature? I think there is a fair running for both.
-RW
Mr. Miscellany- We don't need the forums to become the Stepford wives. And despite your arguments, I think you fail to realise you're acting as biased and offtopic as the rest. In context things you've quoted do pertain to the thread, and for their individual posters, stand to illustrate WHY they disagree with aspects of the OP's choice of words.
It really doesn't matter what Gamer zero said to be honest. And freedom of speech means just that. You are allowed to say what is on your mind in any forum you wish. whether or not is is well accepted or appropriate is for others to decide for themselves.
You take that right away, and you deny free speech in all regards. Those who detest 4e do not wish to hear the mindless droneing dribble of the 4e masses. So, by your own argument no post has a place in any thread so long as the community is split as it is. That's kind of a silly position don't you think?
Please remember your opinion is just that. One that you post at the leisure of this community, and the community expects the same courtesy from you.
-RW
Here's an idea. You want to have postive discussion of the new realms?
Well, go have some positive discussion already!! No? Then you are just "whining" as well.
I think this just derives from frustration that the FR board is edition neutral, and that the pro "side" isn't the one that is officially endorced, as it is in the boards above. I can think of several posters who would love nothing more than to have this board become 4e specific, so that they can starting 4venging everyone else out of here.
Somewhat ironically I am rather moderate on the issue, but the "pro propoganda" gets under my skin. Especially when nothing is being done to stop positive discussion.
Again, you want some positive discussion? Have it. No one is stopping you.
[edit: props to Red Wizard for his post)
And freedom of speech means just that. You are allowed to say what is on your mind in any forum you wish.
Free Speech does not mean you get to express yourself in any forum you wish. It doesn't mean you get to violate the property rights of others. I'm no more entitled to walk into your home to protest Smurf atrocities against Gargamel any more then you're entitled to post on a privately-owned forum content which the forum owner deems unnaccepable.
You take that right away, and you deny free speech in all regards.
Only the government can deny the right to Free Speech, through legal action, the incurring of fines, or imprisonment. Board moderation does not constitute a violation of the Right to Free Speech as forum moderators don't have any power to curtail your rights to express yourself. You still have plenty of avenues through which to express yourself. You can post on a forum where what you have to say is allowable, or create your own. You can create a blog or website. You can hand out fliers or stand on a street corner waving a sign.
The fact that forum moderation is not only allowable, but acceptable, should put to bed this notion that people can say whatever they like on a message board they don't own. For example, pornography is protected by Freedom of Speech. However, we're not allowed to post pornography here. Are my rights to Free Speech violated if I can't post pornographic images here? No, because this is a private space and the owners can decide what can and can't be placed here.
The use of swear words are protected by Freedom of Speech. And yet whenever I try to say ****, ****, *******, ****, *****, or any other swear word, the swear filter prevents that. So is my right to Free Speech violated because those words are censored out? No, because this is a private space and the owners can decide what can and can't be placed here. People are no more entitled to say what they want on a message board owned by someone else then they are to spray paint graffiti on the side of someone elses building.
Sorry for the rant, but this really gets my goat, as this argument is a false one, and it's always made at the expense of the owners of a message board. The ones who actually pay the bills to run them, and who're entitled to run it in any way they see fit. Would it suck if the board owners didn't allow criticism on the forums? Yes. But this isn't a Free Speech issue.
I really think some people here are missing the point entirely.
There is a strong difference between negativity designed to bring the community (and everyone in it) down, and criticism of something you dislike.
It's the difference between: "The 4th Edition Realms sucks and I hope it fails." vs "I dislike what they've done to Silverymoon. It makes no sense, and here is why..."
Another example: "4th Edition FR is only designed to appeal to those who've always hated FR." vs "I dislike 4th Edition Forgotten Realms because they've killed off too many of my favorite NPC's and deities."
Is it clear, now? One is designed just to spread around negativity and the others are designed to give an opinion and provoke discussion. The latter contributes nothing but negativity and the former provokes debate and discussion.
It comes down to how you express your opinions to others. It is not what you believe that matters, but how you express your opinion - to either contribute to the community as a whole or bring it down.
very well put....
All I'm looking for is a forum to discuss in a positive manner how to play in the Realms as the currently are. The Realms have changes, the timeline has advanced 100 years and that where many will be playing. At the same time I recognize the fact that people who dislike the direction the Realms went have a right to voice their concerns/issues/complaints. To me though these are two different topics entirely. Because of their fundamental difference IMHO, they should each have their own dedicated section. This is an extreme example and used only as an exaggeration but you wouldn't post on an Eberron board about something that is happening in the Realms. Both fall under the umbrella of D&D but they are separate sections with separate topics. To me this is the same general issue here, the Umbrella is the Forgotten Realms and the sub sections are "Complaints/Concerns" and "Gaming in the New Realms".
On top of that I'm puzzled but the moderators response of threatening to close this thread or saying that in violates the CoC. This is not a new idea I am proposing. It was not by WotC when 4e was coming out and stuck around for a while. IMHO is was very successful and not one did I ever read a post by people who felt they where being segregated of the freedom of speak was being curtailed. There where still spirited discussions both positive and negative toward the new edition but if you went to that section you knew what was going to be happening. If you wanted to discuss other aspects of playing 4e, there where specific sections for that, and on those sections I never once read a post by someone offended that their freedom of speech was being curtailed by having a forum dedicated to say, 4e Classes for an example. Why is it such an issue here. Why do the naysayers feel that it's their right to try an hijack a post that is having a honest discussion about a topic with an inflammatory remark toward the people posting or WotC designers/employees.
Okay, that's pretty long winded, but let me try to sum up (which I have not been able to do so in the past to date), my issue is not to try and curtail freedom of speech or to stifle arguments/discussions about the merits of the new Realms. My point is that I feel that discussion of how to enhance gaming fun (that why we do this right?) and how to run a game/PC in the new Realms is COMPLETELY a different topic than discussions about the merits of the changes made to the Realms and as such both deserve their own sections.
My point is that I feel that discussion of how to enhance gaming fun (that why we do this right?) and how to run a game/PC in the new Realms is COMPLETELY a different topic than discussions about the merits of the changes made to the Realms and as such both deserve their own sections.
(emphasis mine)
Oh. You want the Running the Realmssection.
An important thing to remember is that nothing is actually stopping positive threads here. There have been a few threads that I have seen that were specifically outlined by their OPs as postive only. Were they shot down by raging negativity? Not to my knowledge. No, folks said some postive things, got bored, and left. There simply hasn't been opportunity for pro discussion since the book hasn't finished doing the rounds. There is nothing to complain about!
Here's an idea. You want to have postive discussion of the new realms?
Well, go have some positive discussion already!! No? Then you are just "whining" as well.
I think this just derives from frustration that the FR board is edition neutral, and that the pro "side" isn't the one that is officially endorced, as it is in the boards above. I can think of several posters who would love nothing more than to have this board become 4e specific, so that they can starting 4venging everyone else out of here.
Somewhat ironically I am rather moderate on the issue, but the "pro propoganda" gets under my skin. Especially when nothing is being done to stop positive discussion.
Again, you want some positive discussion? Have it. No one is stopping you.
[edit: props to Red Wizard for his post)
No, no, no, no... You are missing my point. I'm NOT saying that this board should go away, or that having all the negativity is wrong for here (or any section dedicated to criticing (sp?) the new edition, be it either positive or negative.) All I'm saying is that that type of stuff is fundamentally different from a section which is dedicated to playing in the Realms as they are now (that being 100 years in the future) and that is completely different from a discussion on what the designers did "right" or "wrong" in peoples opinions with the new Realms.
Sigh....
(emphasis mine)
Oh. You want the Running the Realmssection.
I thought so originally but I was told by the moderators/VLC that the Running the Realms was for discussing game mechanics and not fluff. A notion backed up by the description of that sections:
The Forgotten Realms have many unique races, classes, spells, and powers, all of which have been integrated and implemented in the setting. Discuss these mechanical aspects of Dungeons & Dragons here, with other fans of Ed Greenwood's panoramic campaign setting.
No, no, no, no... You are missing my point. I'm NOT saying that this board should go away, or that having all the negativity is wrong for here (or any section dedicated to criticing (sp?) the new edition, be it either positive or negative.) All I'm saying is that that type of stuff is fundamentally different from a section which is dedicated to playing in the Realms as they are now (that being 100 years in the future) and that is completely different from a discussion on what the designers did "right" or "wrong" in peoples opinions with the new Realms.
Sigh....
Oh that wasn't aimed at you. That was mostly in reponse to some of the guys who picked up your banner and used it as a beating stick to bash some "whiners". My bad for lack of clarification. Rant posts tend to be unfocused.
Oh that wasn't aimed at you. That was mostly in reponse to some of the guys who picked up your banner and used it as a beating stick to bash some "whiners".
Sorry, my bad...
I thought so originally but I was told by the moderators/VLC that the Running the Realms was for discussing game mechanics and not fluff. A notion backed up by the description of that sections:
The Forgotten Realms have many unique races, classes, spells, and powers, all of which have been integrated and implemented in the setting. Discuss these mechanical aspects of Dungeons & Dragons here, with other fans of Ed Greenwood's panoramic campaign setting.
Heh, I was under the impression that adventure design, and practicalities of game running went there too. Having it as mechanics only is a bit weird I think. How much FR specific mechanics discussion can there really be? I would go to character building for that. Oh well. Maybe LK can come by and explain.
All I'm saying is that that type of stuff is fundamentally different from a section which is dedicated to playing in the Realms as they are now (that being 100 years in the future) and that is completely different from a discussion on what the designers did "right" or "wrong" in peoples opinions with the new Realms.
This section of the forums is for all aspects of discussing Realmslore. In any edition, even 1st or 2nd. Surely on that basis what your suggesting is a difference between discussing the a) use of 4th Ed Lore and the b) analysis of 4th Ed Lore (with possible reference to past editions).
Aren't those two different Threads, not two different Forums?
This section of the forums is for all aspects of discussing Realmslore. In any edition, even 1st or 2nd. Surely on that basis what your suggesting is a difference between discussing the a) use of 4th Ed Lore and the b) analysis of 4th Ed Lore (with possible reference to past editions).
Aren't those two different Threads, not two different Forums?
Not for me IMHO but I can see your point. My problem arises when we have a good discussion going on and someone interjects the typical (awe this is crap, what where the designers thinking) and the rest the the thread goes to heck in a hand basket from that point on. To me the issue is that there is a difference between discussing the merits of a change (or non change for that matter) and discussing how to play in the setting as it is. One is like a movie review so to speak and other is more akin to a discussion about writing the sequel. Did that make sense? It did to me but I've been finding it kind of difficult to explain my point on this..
Not for me IMHO but I can see your point. My problem arises when we have a good discussion going on and someone interjects the typical (awe this is crap, what where the designers thinking) and the rest the the thread goes to heck in a hand basket from that point on.
But surely this is covered under either the "Thread Cr@ping" or "Off-topic" sections of the CoC quoted earlier in this thread... and is therefore reportable and modable? I am not sure whether you would want to start involving the mod team in this but it seems like you could.
To me the issue is that there is a difference between discussing the merits of a change (or non change for that matter) and discussing how to play in the setting as it is. One is like a movie review so to speak and other is more akin to a discussion about writing the sequel. Did that make sense? It did to me but I've been finding it kind of difficult to explain my point on this..
I think I do. The problem is that you are indeed talking about the movie. Now if you wanted to subdivide by episode (as per Starwars) or whatever is a question all to itself. But this particular forum is avowed as being Edition Neutral which means that the only way to manage what you are saying with a forum-split would be to sub-divide into "Current Edition" and "Past Editions". Is that what you are suggesting?
But surely this is covered under either the "Thread Cr@ping" or "Off-topic" sections of the CoC quoted earlier in this thread... and is therefore reportable and modable? I am not sure whether you would want to start involving the mod team in this but it seems like you could.
I think I do. The problem is that you are indeed talking about the movie. Now if you wanted to subdivide by episode (as per Starwars) or whatever is a question all to itself. But this particular forum is avowed as being Edition Neutral which means that the only way to manage what you are saying with a forum-split would be to sub-divide into "Current Edition" and "Past Editions". Is that what you are suggesting?
Not really but it would help some I think. While I realize that this section is edition neutral, I don't think that is the issue. It's more about what the discussion is not what it is about. So that is to say, a section for complains/concerns/reviews could also be edition neutral, while a section on how to incorporate the current fluff into your gaming session (that's just one aspect) would really be something different in my eyes. To use your StarWars analogy, a discussion about the films and books and their quality/direction would be good in one type of section, while discussion on where we go if we where running a SWSE game (both game mechanics and story wise) after those produced movies/books would be a different discussion. To bring it back to the Realms, let's say a discussion surrounding the notion of "boy that was dumb to nerf the Harpers, what where the designers thinking, they've ruined everything" is different then a topic of "okay, so the Harpers has disbanded and now somewhat reformed. Where do they go from here?" type of thing.
Free Speech does not mean you get to express yourself in any forum you wish. It doesn't mean you get to violate the property rights of others. I'm no more entitled to walk into your home to protest Smurf atrocities against Gargamel any more then you're entitled to post on a privately-owned forum content which the forum owner deems unnaccepable.
Freedom of Speech
Learn it please.
I don't really care if it gets your goat or not, that it none of my concern. This remains a case of freedom of speech. The freedoms in one area, are only trumped when they trample on the freedoms taking precedense in another.
You're missing the fact that as a company, WoTCare legally obligated to make this a safe enviropment for their members. This not necessarily out of some warped notion of caring, but as a legal safety net against would be naysayers, wishing to make a dollar off of their poor child being exposed to negative vibes. This means that censoring of vulgar language for youth, and those sensative to it trumps your freedom of speech.
Just because the right to safety trumps the right to speek out, does not make this less of a Freedom of speech issue. You are free to protest the government, until you show agression to any other person. Then you are taking away the freedoms of another, and THAT is what is not allowed.
You are endorsing removing the freedoms of some, to sate the minor inconvinience of another. I am sorry, that is not how the system works. Granted there is no absolute perfect forum in which all opinions and ideas can be shared in any manner or tone wanted, but that doesn't mean Freedom of speech is absent. It simply means that basic human rights trump individual opinion.
-RW
Freedom of Speech
Learn it please.
In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to "limitations".
Such limitations include not violating the property rights of others.
I don't really care if it gets your goat or not, that it none of my concern. This remains a case of freedom of speech. The freedoms in one area, are only trumped when they trample on the freedoms taking precedense in another.
Exactly. And being the private property of someone else, the owners of a message board are entitled to run it as they see fit. Just as you're not entitled to protest in someones home or place of business, neither are you entitled to use someone elses message board to say whatever you like to say.
You're missing the fact that as a company, WoTCare legally obligated to make this a safe enviropment for their members. This not necessarily out of some warped notion of caring, but as a legal safety net against would be naysayers, wishing to make a dollar off of their poor child being exposed to negative vibes. This means that censoring of vulgar language for youth, and those sensative to it trumps your freedom of speech.
As a company, they can also decide what sort of content is placed on their own personal forums. If they want to decide that discussion can solely revolve around what your favorite Pokemon is, and ban anyone who speaks about Digimon, then that's their right, because this is their own private property and they can dictate the terms as to what does and doesn't occur on their own private property.
Just because the right to safety trumps the right to speek out, does not make this less of a Freedom of speech issue. You are free to protest the government, until you show agression to any other person. Then you are taking away the freedoms of another, and THAT is what is not allowed
Neither are you allowed to step onto someone else's property and protest there. You can protest a chain store all you like, but you're not allowed to protest it from within the store. You can protest public politicians. That doesn't mean you're allowed to step into their living rooms and protest there. You can protest a corporation and their policies, but you can't go into their board rooms and protest there. Likewise, if a moderation team decides they don't want certain discussion, then they can disallow it, because the board is their own private property.
For instance, many message boards ban discussion of politics and religion. What's the safety issue there? There is none. And yet that isn't a problem, because message boards are privately owned and the owners can dictate the terms as to what discussions are and aren't permissible. There are no howls about those board owners violating both the right to Free Speech and Freedom of Religion because message boards are private properties and the owners have the right to dictate what goes on on their private property.
You are endorsing removing the freedoms of some, to sate the minor inconvinience of another. I am sorry, that is not how the system works. Granted there is no absolute perfect forum in which all opinions and ideas can be shared in any manner or tone wanted, but that doesn't mean Freedom of speech is absent. It simply means that basic human rights trump individual opinion.
I'm not endorsing anything of the sort, because no one's rights are being stepped on (Note: I'm not commenting on the topic title, period. I'm talking about Freedom of Speech and message boards in general, and how Freedom of Speech does not apply to message boards). If WotC bans me tomorrow, my rights haven't been violated in the slightest, because Freedom of Speech doesn't entitle me to say whatever I want to say on someone else's property. If I'm banned, then my Freedom of Speech isn't curtailed, because I still have plenty of avenues to pursue to get what I want to say out which don't involve me abusing the private property of somebody else. So no, I'm not endorsing the removal of the freedoms of some.
However, you are endorsing the violation of property rights. You're denying others the right to use their own property as they see fit. That is a clear cut case of violating the freedoms of others, and that's what you're advocating.
If they truely hated everything about the Realms in 4E they would just go to a forum that was Pre-4E and leave it all alone.
Is there something you've supported passionately for 10 or more years? Local sports team, RPG setting, novel series? If that went off in a direction that you personally found extremely disappointing, would you be able to simply ignore years of emotional investment and completely stop keeping track of what was happening as soon as you ran into something troublesome? If I could do that, I'd probably have avoided quite a bit of annoyance; as it is, I've kept watching shows even after quality declined in the hopes of improvement until I finally reached the point where I just didn't care anymore. But that can take time. And so I'm still reading about 4E Realms even though I don't plan to use them, because I've invested years and I don't know how much money in the setting. I greatly dislike just about everything I've heard, but I will keep on reading, at least for a while. And I think (hope) that decision should be understandable to those who've ever been devoted to a hobby and then seen it become something no longer enjoyable.
But based on the arguments I've encountered in the past, there's no right choice; if I gave up without reading all about 4E FR, I'd be blamed for making judgments without having all the information; if I stick around despite not liking what I hear, I'm ruining it for the rest.
And as has been pointed out, I don't think it says anywhere that the Realmslore section is only for people playing 4E FR.
Complaints are fine but when they spill into every other thread it gets annoying. Some lurkers even said how they did not want to post due to the negativity. That cannot be good for building a community or getting new gamers and fans into the FR.
Enforced positivity can be a detriment, too, if people are afraid to criticise something in fear of being bashed for their lack of taste and intelligence (as an example, apparently I'm a tool who needs her geek card revoked for only liking The Dark Knight instead of ~adoring~ it as the best crime film since The Godfather).
If the changes are as good and necessary as some people say, they should work and bring enough new fans to FR to offset the people who quit the setting. If they don't, maybe the designers should have paid more attention to things the old fans liked about the setting instead of removing them to appease the preconceptions of people who had not supported FR products in the past.
And if it's not toddler-like interaction to show up in threads to gloat over the destruction of aspects of the Realms and respond to members unhappy with the removal of things they liked by saying that their liking of those realms/gods/NPCs was what ruined the setting, well...
Here's an idea. You want to have postive discussion of the new realms?
Well, go have some positive discussion already!! No? Then you are just "whining" as well.
Oh, shush. Only people who dislike 4E FR are guilty of whining and unconstructive repetitive arguments.
....However, you are endorsing the violation of property rights. You're denying others the right to use their own property as they see fit. That is a clear cut case of violating the freedoms of others, and that's what you're advocating.
Since this seems to be the crux of your argument, I`ll address it fully.
These boards, are for all intents an purposes public space, created for the sole purpose of discussing, debating, disputing and disregarding material as each individual member sees fit.
The members with qualms regarding the edition change are in no way denying others here to use or enjoy the 4th edition. They are not attacking the members physically, nor are they destorying tangible property of either WoTC or their consumers. They are stating an opinion, in a venue designed for the sharing and distribution of opinions.
Nowhere in the guidelines, or the COC does it stipulate the degree to which said opinion need be articulated, and so long as it does not in ANY way impede the freedoms of another, it is a viable means by which to vent frustration.
You seem to believe that this in some way goes against the property rights of either WoTC or its consumers. This venue in no way blongs to the members, thus they have the freedom to choose where to or not to partake in any and all threads transpiring within this forum. When they sign up, and post in any thread, they are accepting the responsibility for that which is seen within. WoTC will monitor the forums for harassment, and use of language, that the right of safety stipulates each member deserves
As this forum was create by wizards, for the exact purpose it is used for, Feedback, any feedback, viewed within this board in no way inhibits that which was intended with its creation.
Noone here is holding a gun to anyone else head and telling them not to buy the books. Noone is forcing you to read the posts that have a negative context. Thus no rights are being undermined or attacked here, save the attempt on the freedom of speech. I am sorry if you can not see this.
-RW
Since this seems to be the crux of your argument, I`ll address it fully.
Read my post, again. At no point, ever, did I address the OP. In fact I specifically stated that I'm not referencing that at all. I'm not making any comments, pro or con, regarding the idea about directing negative posts being directed elsewhere. The one and only thing I'm talking about is the idea that somehow moderation on a message board constitutes violating Freedom of Speech, because it doesn't. A board administrator can come up with whatever crazy rule he wants to, and he's fully entitled to do so, because it's his own private property, and he can dictate the terms.
Let’s say I own a message board. In the Terms of Service I state that discussion of Hockey is off limits. I can’t stand Hockey, so I don’t even want to hear about it, and I inform any and all new posters that the discussion of Hockey is a bannable offense. Then you come along and discuss Hockey, and I ban you. You really think your Freedom of Speech just got violated, there? It didn’t, because as a message board administrator, I don’t have the power to violate your Freedom of Speech. You weren’t jailed for expressing your love of Hockey. You’re not prevented from discussing Hockey at other venues. You’re just not allowed to discuss Hockey on my message board, because it’s mine. I pay for it’s running and upkeep, and what goes on in that message board is absolutely my choice, and your rights don’t extend to the point that you can dictate to me what I do with my own personal property. You want to take me to court for violating your Free Speech? Go right ahead. Let’s see how long it takes before you’re laughed out of court and you’re forced to pay my lawyers fees and for wasting the courts time.
That's the point I'm making. That on a message board, no, you don't have the absolute right to Freedom of Speech, because your rights aren't unlimited. They don't extend to the point that you can violate the rights of another, in this case property rights. That's my entire problem with your argument. You don't think negative posts should be put into another forum? Great, although I don't particularly care, and I'm not even weighing in on the subject one way or the other. But what I take issue with is your making it a Freedom of Speech issue, when it isn't in the slightest.
Read my post, again. At no point, ever, did I address the OP. In fact I specifically stated that I'm not referencing that at all. I'm not making any comments, pro or con, regarding the idea about directing negative posts being directed elsewhere. The one and only thing I'm talking about is the idea that somehow moderation on a message board constitutes violating Freedom of Speech, because it doesn't. A board administrator can come up with whatever crazy rule he wants to, and he's fully entitled to do so, because it's his own private property, and he can dictate the terms.
Let’s say I own a message board. In the Terms of Service I state that discussion of Hockey is off limits. I can’t stand Hockey, so I don’t even want to hear about it, and I inform any and all new posters that the discussion of Hockey is a bannable offense. Then you come along and discuss Hockey, and I ban you. You really think your Freedom of Speech just got violated, there? It didn’t, because as a message board administrator, I don’t have the power to violate your Freedom of Speech. You weren’t jailed for expressing your love of Hockey. You’re not prevented from discussing Hockey at other venues. You’re just not allowed to discuss Hockey on my message board, because it’s mine. I pay for it’s running and upkeep, and what goes on in that message board is absolutely my choice, and your rights don’t extend to the point that you can dictate to me what I do with my own personal property. You want to take me to court for violating your Free Speech? Go right ahead. Let’s see how long it takes before you’re laughed out of court and you’re forced to pay my lawyers fees and for wasting the courts time.
That's the point I'm making. That on a message board, no, you don't have the absolute right to Freedom of Speech, because your rights don't aren't unlimited. They don't extend to the point that you can violate the rights of another, in this case property rights. That's my entire problem with your argument. You don't think negative posts should be put into another forum? Great, although I don't particular care, and I'm not even weighing in on the subject one way or the other. But what I take issue with is your making it a Freedom of Speech issue, when it isn't in the slightest.
Freedmon of speech rofl, I been in Jail 3 times. Freedom is just a word now. Cops can do whatever they please. Freedom use to mean something back then.
... But what I take issue with is your making it a Freedom of Speech issue, when it isn't in the slightest.
I`m not going to argue this all day. We disagree, and that`s fine. One of us is missing something very important, or we`re both misunderstanding the other. Regardless, it`s irrelevant. Ths OP isn`t getting his wish.
-RW
I was trying to disarm this rather obvious 'forum bomb' by turning to humour, but this topic is way too touchy, I guess.
Misc - You're right - I didn't even think I was being negative there - 'ruin' is opinionated - I apologize.
'Destruction' probably would have been more accurate and unbiased. I know a few anti-FR gamers that are positively dancing for joy right now over the old Realms destruction, so to them, it's anything but 'ruined'.
I don't think 'destruction is an opinon, since the Realms that existed in 1e, 2e, and 3e no longer exists, and a second world has been super-imposed over it, a Spellplague wiped much out, borders and geography has changed quite a bit, and nearly all the NPCs are dead along with plenty of gods, and the nature of magic (the Weave - an INTRINSIC part of the setting) has completely changed. I'm NOT offering an opinion weather ANY of that is good or bad, but those are facts, and the world we once new is gone.
Is that better? ;)
Resistance is futile... No force in the universe can nullify nerd-rage (well maybe naked breasts :D )
Is Nerd-Rage a tappable Power-source in 4e?
Like your sig. :D
Yeah man, like your quotes. :D
My one and only beef is the notion that a board owner disallowing certain discussion is somehow a violation of Freedom of Speech, because that's a crock. For instance, my Hockey example? I post at a board where that's an actual rule. The board owner will literally ban you if you bring up Hockey. And no one cries about that being a violation of their Freedom of Speech, because it's his place, not ours. He sets the rules, and he can decide what goes on and what doesn't. Likewise, WotC can decide what they want to do here.
If they decide to banish all negative discussion? They're entitled to that. Would it be a boneheaded decision? More then likely. Would it be contrary to the whole point of creating these message boards in the first place? Definitely. But saying that their doing so is a violation of Freedom of Speech? Come on...
You know, after I noticed you quoted me, I couldn't even find the thread I said that in. :embarrass
Get it right! :P
To clarify: I'm not discussing the topic at all. I'm not commenting on the OP's thread in any way. I don't give a damn about what WotC does in regards to whatever the OP's talking about. All my posts are entirely off-topic, and likely violate the TOS in that regard. I wouldn't be surprised if a mod comes along and deletes my posts for being off-topic. And you know what? If that happens I'm not gonna start screaming "FREEDOM OF SPEECH! FREEDOM OF SPEECH!", because they make the rules and it's their choice what does and doesn't get posted. And if they choose that people should stay on-topic, and posts which go off-topic (as I frequently do) are to be deleted, then that's their choice, because this is their place, not mine. Which is fair, because in my place, I do things my way.
My one and only beef is the notion that a board owner disallowing certain discussion is somehow a violation of Freedom of Speech, because that's a crock. For instance, my Hockey example? I post at a board where that's an actual rule. The board owner will literally ban you if you bring up Hockey. And no one cries about that being a violation of their Freedom of Speech, because it's his place, not ours. He sets the rules, and he can decide what goes on and what doesn't. Likewise, WotC can decide what they want to do here.
If they decide to banish all negative discussion? They're entitled to that. Would it be a boneheaded decision? More then likely. Would it be contrary to the whole point of creating these message boards in the first place? Definitely. But saying that their doing so is a violation of Freedom of Speech? Come on...
I`m not saying that they can`t do it. Never implied (or meant to) that they couldn`t. The point remains it would be a quelling of a simple freedom. And given the design of the board, it seems a freedom they wholey endorse. The implication was never meant to suggest such freedoms are never overlooked, simply calling it what it is.
-RW
The point remains it would be a quelling of a simple freedom.
And my point is that it wouldn't affect your freedoms in the slightest, because your freedoms don't extend to the point that you can step onto someone else's property and say what you like. Nor does getting booted off a message board mean that your rights to free speech have been eliminated or harmed in the slightest. Do you really think your freedoms are quelled when a mod comes along and deletes your post? For God's sake, if that were the case, then msatran is the most oppressed person on the planet!
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Like your sig. :D
I was trying to disarm this rather obvious 'forum bomb' by turning to humour, but this topic is way too touchy, I guess.
Misc - You're right - I didn't even think I was being negative there - 'ruin' is opinionated - I apologize.
'Destruction' probably would have been more accurate and unbiased. I know a few anti-FR gamers that are positively dancing for joy right now over the old Realms destruction, so to them, it's anything but 'ruined'.
I don't think 'destruction is an opinon, since the Realms that existed in 1e, 2e, and 3e no longer exists, and a second world has been super-imposed over it, a Spellplague wiped much out, borders and geography has changed quite a bit, and nearly all the NPCs are dead along with plenty of gods, and the nature of magic (the Weave - an INTRINSIC part of the setting) has completely changed. I'm NOT offering an opinion weather ANY of that is good or bad, but those are facts, and the world we once new is gone.
Is that better? ;)
Not really.
Change…even massive change…is not necessarily the same as destruction. Is the caterpillar "destroyed" inside the chrysalis? Is Kilauea "destroying" Hawaii? Was America "destroyed" because the founding fathers are now gone? Was the world "destroyed" as the Egyptian, Greek/Roman, Slavic, Nordic, Anglo-Saxon and Celtic gods have been supplanted by the Judeo/Christian/Islamic myth?
The word "destruction" arises out of your overwhelming desire to attach a decidedly negative and absolutist connotation to what is merely change.
IMO.
Last edited by WizO_KiRin : Today at 02:26 PM. Reason: Reference to delted post
Case in point!
Damn, when I asked for a mod to come along I was just kidding. :PAnd my point is that it wouldn't affect your freedoms in the slightest, because your freedoms don't extend to the point that you can step onto someone else's property and say what you like. Nor does getting booted off a message board mean that your rights to free speech have been eliminated or harmed in the slightest. Do you really think your freedoms are quelled when a mod comes along and deletes your post? For God's sake, if that were the case, then msatran is the most oppressed person on the planet!
They do when I am invited onto said property, and told to discuss their product. I don`t see how you think they are not being quelled here. Just because there are more restrictions in place, does not mean certain freedoms are checked at the door. Otherwise your argument would mean you can legally murder someone who steps on your property. And unless you in some of the more backwards states, I doubt that is the case.
So unless what is said is in direct conflict with other basic rights, the boards will observe them. The primary reason I`d imagine more of a fuss is not raised over banning, is no measure is taken to prevent a return under another name.
I think you`re deluding yourself here as to what freedom of speech really is. As I said, it can be cut off in certain venues, for varied reasons, but that does not mean it doesn`t extend to every facet of society as we know it.
-RW
They do when I am invited onto said property, and told to discuss their product.
No, because the property owner can rescind that invitation at any time. Otherwise he wouldn't be the property owner, now would he? For instance, say I throw a party at my house. You're telling me that, just because I threw a party at my house and invited a bunch of people, that I can't then turn around and kick out any number of those people? Being invited onto a property doesn't give you use of that persons property in perpetuity.
I think you`re deluding yourself here as to what freedom of speech really is.
Funny, as I was about to say the same to you, seeing as how you have this funny notion that says that your rights automatically supercede the rights of others. That Freedom of Speech somehow entitles you to violate the property rights of others. Rights stop at the exact point at which they tread on the rights of others.
1) Realms scholars, they collect the Realms like one would collect Edgar Allen Poe or Arthur Conan Doyle. Some have specialties, like Elves, some don’t.
2) DMs, unlike the above, they don’t feel the need to know every bit of Realmslore, just the parts that affect their game. This may include many different areas, though.
3) Players, depending on their DMs, their knowledge may only be what their character has experienced or a good working knowledge of their region or even more than the DM.
The opinions of these posters are myriad and can vary in depth of conviction, but, we all have to realize that there are different opinions out there, ones that disagree with our own. Yes, I know it's crazy, but it happens. It also happens that a few of these posters feel the need to inject rampant partiality into whatever they post. This helps no-one, and usually rouses posters of the opposing viewpoint to do battle. We understand your point, but we’re don’t agree and repeating it isn’t going to change our minds, it’s like an annoying TV commercial, it gets ignored.
We also need to realize that it's not always about us, WotC does not do anything just to **** you off, they try to make informed decisions based on feedback from many sources. If your favorite realmsian thing gets axed, maybe there weren’t enough people with your opinion on it or there were other reasons, just not obvious ones.
Now I’m not making excuses for WotC, they have come up with some really off the wall reasons for some of the things that have happened and ain’t nobody buying some of it. They have also responded to public outcry on some issues and we have effected change. Usually if presented in a rational manner.
Bel
No, because the property owner can rescind that invitation at any time. Otherwise he wouldn't be the property owner, now would he? For instance, say I throw a party at my house. You're telling me that, just because I threw a party at my house and invited a bunch of people, that I can't then turn around and kick out any number of those people? Being invited onto a property doesn't give you use of that persons property in perpetuity.
If you have a party at your house, and have invited people in, what transpires within, you are then held accountable for. You are the primary candidate for responcibility, and any qualms down the line are settle on your own. That does not mean you can not remove the problem from the property, but so long as they are there with your permission, you are accountable.
If a person comes to you party, and damages the wall, YOU and not them will have to pay for the repairs. If the police are called for noise, it is the owner who will be punished. That is not to say that you can not then persue them for compensation, but initial blame is shifted to you.
It is no different than if you let an unlicensed person get behind the wheel. You are to blame for any faults that arise.
Funny, as I was about to say the same to you, seeing as how you have this funny notion that says that your rights automatically supercede the rights of others. That Freedom of Speech somehow entitles you to violate the property rights of others. Rights stop at the exact point at which they tread on the rights of others.
lmao. This isn't against my arguement, I have said this time and again. The rights of speech stop when they overlap the rights of the human being. But my freedom of speech, and that of the others here in no way impedes the rights of the individual. When they do, the COC steps in and resolves it. Otherwise, speech has free reign.
It's a simple concept really. I think you're hitting on it, and then doing an about face and marching off again. The rights of personal safety trump the right to freedom of speech. However neither safety --mental or physical-- are being attacked here, nor are these alleged property rights. The latter is something you are avidly dancing around for some reason. I will point out you can not assign property rights to the members, so kindly cease that arguement.
Until they recind the invitation to all, or modify the purpose, the rights and freedoms afforded us remain. However if they set a precidence that no negative can come of their work, they not only lose the chance to grow, but also run the risk of recieving no positive feedback either.
-RW
MarkusTay63-
You're not the only one who sees things this way. That more or less mirrors my thoughts as well. I don't really like what they did with the Realms, but I also see it as an opportunity. I think some changes were needed - there were things that needed to be fixed - but the way they went about them was all wrong, right from the start.
I guess I fall somewhere in the middle. Does this mean my nerdrage is not up to par with everyone else? :P
I too agree with you that some things were needed to change (less Shar, Cyric and Shade, more of other evil groups, less Mystra and more about Tyr, Lathander and other good groups). The return of Tchazzar in Chesentea was a very good bit of fresh air to the setting, and it didn't destroyed anything, it added to it.
The 4ed realms are the perfect example of how not make changes.
Do unto others as you would have done to yourself.
We are those who are returning all the negativity about the True Realms back to it's source, therefore we aren't gulty of starting the negativity, only of returning it.
If you have a party at your house...
I'm not talking about damages or fault. I'm talking about simply deciding who you want or don't want on your public property. For instance, say someone, in very polite terms, states that the Miami Dolphins aren't very good at the game of football. Was that a terrible thing? No. But if I choose to kick them out because they insulted the Dolphins, then that's my choice. When it comes to my property, and what people say or do on it, I'm perfectly entitled to say who comes and goes. I'm not talking about fault. I'm not talking about damages. I'm just talking about simply deciding what does and doesn't go on on your own property. If I invite people into my home to play Scrabble, and they decide to play Clue, instead, and I don't want them to play Clue, then I'm entitled to boot them out. If I invite them in to play Clue, and we start playing Clue, I'm still entitled to kick them out.
It's a simple concept really. I think you're hitting on it, and then doing an about face and marching off again. The rights of personal safety trump the right to freedom of speech. However neither safety --mental or physical-- are being attacked here, nor are these alleged property rights. The latter is something you are avidly dancing around for some reason. I will point out you can not assign property rights to the members, so kindly cease that arguement.
The only one dancing around it is you, because for some reason, you have it in your head that I'm agreeing with the OP. That I'm saying that the posters should decide what other posters should be saying. That I'm having a specific discussion about this thread, when I have said, repeatedly, that I'm not talking about this thead title at all. I'm not talking about forum posters deciding what other forum posters can and cannot say. I'm talking about forum posters and FORUM OWNERS. I'm talking about messages boards in general, and whether onerous moderation rules on them constitute a violation of Freedom of Speech. What I'm not doing is talking about the specific policies of this board.
You've got it in your head that I'm arguing for the OP's idea of a Realms Concerns & Criticisms board when I have stated, repeatedly, that I'm not arguing for such a thing at all. The only thing I'm arguing against is the idea that getting your posts moved, edited, or deleted on a message board somehow constitutes a violation of Freedom of Speech. That's it.
My argument is that the rights of the property owner, in this case WotC, trump the rights of the posters. If WotC wants to make all discussion about fluffy kittens, and bans anyone discussing fluffy bunnies, then that's their right.
However if they set a precidence that no negative can come of their work, they not only lose the chance to grow, but also run the risk of recieving no positive feedback either.
Agreed, but such a change does not violate your Freedom of Speech. And if such a change occurs, and you feel it does somehow violate your civil rights, well, feel free to file a class action lawsuit, and we'll see how far you get.
Were someone to be banned from the bored indefinately for holding an opinion the designers did not like, they could with all validity hire a lawyer and sue. That is not to say it would be given the time of day, but that does not mean it wasn't a blatant disregard of that basic human freedom.
I think you are missing that severity doesn't equate to validity here. If they summarily banned all naysayers, they could very easily end up with a class action suit on their hands.
-RW
P.S. My point regarding you home was to illustrate that personal freedoms don't get checked at the gate. The severity was ramped up to show it, and the punishment was meant to illustrate the ramifications of taking away such freedoms.
I'm sorry this didn't come across.
P.P.S. I am in no way tieing you in to the OP, however your argument stemmed from my counter to the OP. Any refernce made in that regard is in context to that statement. My defense of this is as broad as your own, I just think you're missing how freedom of speech works.
We are those who are returning all the negativity about the True Realms back to it's source, therefore we aren't gulty of starting the negativity, only of returning it.
So, you are implying that pro 4ed people have been posting attacks and propaganda in 3.5 threads? Or did they come to your house and start to preach to you about how horrible the older versions are, and that they need to change.
People have had issues with every edition that has come out, otherwise we would all be playing 1st edition and loving it. Complaining about a specific rule or bit of lore is far different than saying that the whole setting is broken, before even having seen the entirety of it. Your sig makes it clear that you have no interest in this new edition, and that you have no desire to participate in a rational debate about the changes, but rather will decry them out of hand, since the whole setting is lost to you. I would add you to my ignore list, but that would keep me from perhaps seeing some bit of info you give on non 4th edition material that would aid my game. So the best I can do is to hope you choose to limit your comments to an appropriate time and place, and that your arguments are more than just knee-jerk reactions to changes you didn't have a hand in making.
In a public venue, people have the same rights they do in a private one. Those rights include freedom of speech.
And those rights don't cease to exist because they get ejected from certain venues.
That is not to say it would be given the time of day, but that does not mean it wasn't a blatant disregard of that basic human freedom.
...uh huh. I got banned off a board under the name Human Microbe. Then I got banned under the name Humanis Microbus. Then I got banned under the name Microbe Incognito. Was I banned for a crappy reason (namely politely criticizing a tv show on the official message boards)? Yes. But were my human freedoms stepped on? No, because I still had those freedoms. I was still free to share my opinion with anyone I liked at other venues. However, forcing the board owner to let me stay, despite him not wanting me there, would've been a violation of HIS rights. He paid for the board, so it's his right to decide what goes on there. Was he an inveterate ass? Yes. But as he was the owner, he had the right to be.
Another board I frequented, when the negativity got so bad, outright closed their forums down. That sucked, but that's their right. They pay for those forums, and they can stop paying for them. Your Freedom of Speech doesn't mean you're entitled to have someone spread whatever it is you want to say on their dime.
I think you are missing that severity doesn't equate to validity here. If they summarily banned all naysayers, they could very easily end up with a class action suit on their hands.
And they'd get absolutely nowhere, because their is no violation of Freedom of Speech. Would all those people still not be able to express themselves on other boards, like Candlekeep or Paizo? Do they still not have internet access, which they can use to post up blogs where they can express those opinions? Are they not capable of making their own message boards where they can state their opinions?
As I pointed out, before, other message boards bar the discussion of religion or politics. There's no personal safety issues, there. So are those message boards, like ENWorld, infringing on the rights of their posters? Let me answer that. Nope, because it's their place, and they set the rules. And you know what the posters who wanted to discuss those topics did? They made their own forum just for that purpose.
A real violation of Freedom of Speech is taking someone who's exercising that right without harming others, and imprisoning them or fining them. THAT is a violation of Freedom of Speech. But taking someone who's intruding on your own private property and ejecting them? That's not a violation of Freedom of Speech. Getting banned off of a message board? That is most definitely not a violation of Freedom of Speech. It's a jerk move when you're not really doing anything, but it's not a violation of Freedom of Speech.
If that arguement were to hold true, then one could feasibly extend it to things of other natures. The defense of racial or sexist remarks. As a buisness owner, I could refuse to hire a person of african decent, and using your defense, no rights would be lost as he could always find work elsewhere.
I'm sorry, but the disregard of human rights even on a small scale is still not an acceptable practise. And regardless of whether or not any court would take the complaint seriously does not change that simple principal.
-RW
P.S. I'll continue responding as long as you continue to argue, but as I have said all ready it is irrelavant. I will not budge on this, as is evident neither will you. We're only wasting space continueing this, but if you insist so be it.
And -that- is extremely disrespectful of other posters, and ultimately, it's little more than baiting. Disagree with my opinion, fine. But seek to deny a group of people the rights to express their opinions on a forum board that allows expression of opinion, not fine.
I keep reading this post waiting for Markus to throw up his Braveheart photo/post. :D
Seriously... where's Markus? Bring us Braveheart! :D
Taking away a freedom anywhere, is taking it away period. You can't make a valid arguemnt that no freedoms are lost, solely on the basis that you can take you opinions elsewhere.
Yes one can, because you're not actually losing a freedom. Once again, what exactly about Freedom of Speech indicates that you're entitled to have others spend money so that you can be heard? Freedom of Speech doesn't mean others have to give you a forum to voice your opinion. It gives you the right to speak. It doesn't give you the right to be heard.
If that arguement were to hold true, then one could feasibly extend it to things of other natures. The defense of racial or sexist remarks. As a buisness owner, I could refuse to hire a person of african decent, and using your defense, no rights would be lost as he could always find work elsewhere.
Talk about your grossly overexaggerated arguments. There's a big difference between not allowing certain behavior on your property and discrimination.
I'm sorry, but the disregard of human rights even on a small scale is still not an acceptable practise. And regardless of whether or not any court would take the complaint seriously does not change that simple principal.
And you don't think what you're advocating isn't a disregard of human rights? That one shouldn't be able to tell others to leave their property if one so chooses? To make as grossly exaggerated an argument as the one you just made, above, what you're advocating is the abolition of property rights. Where does it end? Can protesters set themselves up in my home because to say they can't would be an infringement on their Freedom of Speech?
P.S. I'll continue responding as long as you continue to argue, but as I have said all ready it is irrelavant. I will not budge on this, as is evident neither will you. We're only wasting space continueing this, but if you insist so be it.
By all means, I've got all day.
This thread needs a reality check. No one is claiming that the forum owners, or even their official moderators, are denying people the freedom to express their opinions. It's other posters who are complaining that some people need to be shut down, segregated into separate threads, or removed - all because they want the CoC changed to reflect their personal wishes. The argument, GreenKnight, since you seem to have missed it entirely, is that the forum owners have not seen fit to change their CoC based on the wishes of a few irritated fans. Yet it's those same posters who agreed to the CoC as written, which allows for everyone to express their opinions pretty openly... but now the CoC is "not enough" (in their opinion) for them and they're the ones who are campaigning to censor (i.e. deny the ability to express opinions they don't personally like) other posters.
I'm not discussing that at all. I'm just discussing Red Wizard's claim that there's a Freedom of Speech issue, when there's no such thing. By all means, feel free to ignore my posts. As I've mentioned repeatedly, I'm wholly off-topic, here.
So, you are implying that pro 4ed people have been posting attacks and propaganda in 3.5 threads? Or did they come to your house and start to preach to you about how horrible the older versions are, and that they need to change.
People have had issues with every edition that has come out, otherwise we would all be playing 1st edition and loving it. Complaining about a specific rule or bit of lore is far different than saying that the whole setting is broken, before even having seen the entirety of it. Your sig makes it clear that you have no interest in this new edition, and that you have no desire to participate in a rational debate about the changes, but rather will decry them out of hand, since the whole setting is lost to you. I would add you to my ignore list, but that would keep me from perhaps seeing some bit of info you give on non 4th edition material that would aid my game. So the best I can do is to hope you choose to limit your comments to an appropriate time and place, and that your arguments are more than just knee-jerk reactions to changes you didn't have a hand in making.
Many of those who are pro 4ed have been making the same negative posts about 3rd edition, that's why I made that comment, and the reason those who fall under this group can't say that the negativity should be killed without being hypocrites.
Yes one can, because you're not actually losing a freedom. Once again, what exactly about Freedom of Speech indicates that you're entitled to have others spend money so that you can be heard? Freedom of Speech doesn't mean others have to give you a forum to voice your opinion. It gives you the right to speak. It doesn't give you the right to be heard.
They pay for the forum to be a place of discussion on the Realms. They have given permission for this to transpire, and it is heralded as such. However it would go against a persons freedoms to ban or block them based solely on an opinion they may have. If there is no other grounds for said action, then yes it is an action taking against your right to speek. It doesn't matter the scale.
The forum may restrict the topics of which can be discussed, as that is their right to do so. You would be treading on their rights to disobey, as it is a privately owned area. However the pretense under which we have been invited in, does not allow for banning on the opinions to which they ask.
Talk about your grossly overexaggerated arguments. There's a big difference between not allowing certain behavior on your property and discrimination. Besides, that sort of thing already goes on. Seen any small breasted women or men at Hooters, lately?
You can't make the arguement both ways. Rights are equal across the bored, or they simply don't exist. The argument is valid, no matter how rediculous you may percieve it to be.
And I never said human rights worked. Hell I don't even agree with them. But as it stands, I can argue them as nonsensical as they seem. That doesn't mean they actually exist. I'll be the first person to point out all the inconsistencies of the farce that is freedom.
And you don't think what you're advocating isn't a disregard of human rights? That one shouldn't be able to tell others to leave their property if one so chooses? To make as grossly exaggerated an argument as the one you just made, above, what you're advocating is the abolition of property rights. Where does it end? Can protesters set themselves up in my home because to say they can't would be an infringement on their Freedom of Speech?
Not at all. Now you are being ludicrous in your comparrisons. Freedom of speech is one of the lowest freedoms afforded to us. I am in no way suggesting that someone could enter your home and berrate you over the way tou look act or dress. You would be well within you rights to remove them if that was the case.
However, were you to say "Come into my house and tell me what you think about how I look and act", you would then be inviting comment on those things. To then try to remove someone from your property for saying something you didn't like, would trample upon their freedoms. Now a court might find this silly, but it is a fact.
If you can't figure out the correct sequence here, I don't know what to tell you. I do know the repetition of my posts is getting tiresome. I'm saying the same thing, and you're running in circles on this.
By all means, I've got all day.
Have at it then. I'm not going anywhere. It's only a waste of time, but if you're happy with that, who am I to stop you from doing so.
-RW
I'm not discussing that at all. I'm just discussing Red Wizard's claim that there's a Freedom of Speech issue, when there's no such thing. By all means, feel free to ignore my posts. As I've mentioned repeatedly, I'm wholly off-topic, here.
Well, just because you refuse to open your eyes and see it doesn't mean that it isn't there. Bottom line: some posters here are arguing that another group of posters should be censored. And that impinges upon people's freedom of speech, given that the CoC allows for free expression of opinion (within the limits of the CoC).
I'm ready to goatse this thread at any minute.
How mature.
Many of those who are pro 4ed have been making the same negative posts about 3rd edition, that's why I made that comment, and the reason those who fall under this group can't say that the negativity should be killed without being hypocrites.
True that, in every way.
While you do have a Freedom of Speech granted you by the constitution (NOT our CoC), you are only allowed to employ ANY of your constitutional freedoms in a manner that does NOT infringe upon another's Freedoms.
One of the most basic freedoms is the 'Pursuit of Happiness', and if constant complaining is curtailing another's 'pursuit of happiness' - in this case, thier enjoyment of 4e - then we are being selfish by putting OUR Freedoms ahead of theirs.
So, there is a gray area here wherein we need to try to dial-back some of the more vitriolic opinions so that others may enjoy what THEY LIKE.
I will NOT stop complaining about things that bother me... but there is a correct way (and threads) to do so.
I personally have been giving my opinion of each new piece of information we get, but then I try to avoid mentioning that particular thing again. I found I was saying pretty-much the same thing in every thread, to the point I was irritating myself. Way too often us '4e FR naysayers' keep repeating the same exact things, and we should at least try to find new things to complain about. ;)
And besides, its not ALL bad - there are a couple of nuggets of goodness buried in the new setting - you just have to dig a little deeper these days.
I'm ready to goatse this thread at any minute.
What does that mean?
And besides, its not ALL bad - there are a couple of nuggets of goodness buried in the new setting - you just have to dig a little deeper these days.
Why am I now tempted to post a picture of someone taking a mining pick to a copy of the 4E FRCG? :P
They pay for the forum to be a place of discussion on the Realms. They have given permission for this to transpire, and it is heralded as such. However it would go against a persons freedoms to ban or block them based solely on an opinion they may have. If there is no other grounds for said action, then yes it is an action taking against your right to speek. It doesn't matter the scale.
It's their property. Whatever they allow people to do on their property can be revoked at any moment. That's the benefits of being a property owner. Deciding what to do with your own property whenever you want to.
However, were you to say "Come into my house and tell me what you think about how I look and act", you would then be inviting comment on those things. To then try to remove someone from your property for saying something you didn't like, would trample upon their freedoms. Now a court might find this silly, but it is a fact.
Fact? Hardly. Once again, as a property owner, I'm perfectly entitled to boot them from my home. That's not trampling their freedoms, because they're freedoms don't give them the right to trample on mine. And simply put: As a property owner, I have the right to decide when I get to eject people from my own private space. What, is there a grace period when my property rights are negated before they kick back in? Of course not. That person is in my home at my sufferance. Anytime I want them out, they're gone. Booting them from my home, for whatever reason, does not constitute a violation of their rights. However, forcing me to keep them there, when I don't want them there, does constitute a violation of my rights.
If you can't figure out the correct sequence here, I don't know what to tell you. I don know the repetition of my posts is getting tiresome. I'm saying the same thing, and you're running in circles on this.
And round and round we go...
Why am I now tempted to post a picture of someone taking a mining pick to a copy of the 4E FRCG? :P
Dude - you should do that! :D
Create one of those 'motivational posters' that are all the rage, with the title "diging deep for 4e goodness' or some-such.
So in regards to that pursuit, the manner in which it is viewed makes for a difficult call on our level. Higher up however I'm sure pro4e wins. *Shrugs*
As I said though, I was never defending fairness, or implying it exists. ;)
-RW
They pay for the forum to be a place of discussion on the Realms. They have given permission for this to transpire, and it is heralded as such. However it would go against a persons freedoms to ban or block them based solely on an opinion they may have. If there is no other grounds for said action, then yes it is an action taking against your right to speek. It doesn't matter the scale.
-RW
This has always been an argument on any message board of a company - especially in MMO's where people's opinions there make these seem like babytalk. And it has been researched and pointed out many times that message boards set up by a company are not a valid platform for free speech. It is their company's property and they can decide what is posted and what isn't. They could ban anyone who posts the word "orange" if they so chose.
This would be no different than if I came over to your house and began spewing forth anti-semetic comments. I may have every right to say what I want, but you have every right to tell me to shut up or get out of your house. The same applies here. Just because anyone can access these boards does not make it as public as a street corner.
Well, just because you refuse to open your eyes and see it doesn't mean that it isn't there. Bottom line: some posters here are arguing that another group of posters should be censored. And that impinges upon people's freedom of speech, given that the CoC allows for free expression of opinion (within the limits of the CoC).
No, that's not an infringement on Freedom of Speech, either. It may surprise you to know this, but people DO have the right to tell each other to shut up. And if you don't like that, then you're free to tell them to shut up, or look up the CoC, or whatever. Either way, I'm not even talking about the OP, so I really don't care about that particular discussion.
How mature.
It was a joke. :P
It's their property. Whatever they allow people to do on their property can be revoked at any moment. That's the benefits of being a property owner. Deciding what to do with your own property whenever you want to.
Fact? Hardly. Once again, as a property owner, I'm perfectly entitled to boot them from my home. That's not trampling their freedoms, because they're freedoms don't give them the right to trample on mine. And simply put: As a property owner, I have the right to decide when I get to eject people from my own private space. What, is there a grace period when my property rights are negated before they kick back in? Of course not. That person is in my home at my sufferance. Anytime I want them out, they're gone. Booting them from my home, for whatever reason, does not constitute a violation of their rights. However, forcing me to keep them there, when I don't want them there, does constitute a violation of my rights.
You invite them in, and ask of them their opinion. You are extending the olive branch for them to accept. Just because you may not like that which you hear, does not mean suddenly their rights are lost again. They remain, and take precedence over your rights, so long as it does not threaten you. when their piece has been said, by all means remove them politely. Then in the future, modify the terms under which you bring another in.
But once you have set down the rules, you don't get to change them without reprocussions simply because it suits your needs. That is going against anothers rights.
And round and round we go...
You expected more?
-RW
Many of those who are pro 4ed have been making the same negative posts about 3rd edition, that's why I made that comment, and the reason those who fall under this group can't say that the negativity should be killed without being hypocrites.
Ah, but who is hypocrite? Why the antis 4ed and 4th version of FR can emit criticisms but not the pros? Why couldn't pros of 4ed be critical of the past edition(s)?
Of course, the antis are so righteous and the pros fanboys.
Just looking at your sig - I say, 'down with the FR ayatolhas!'.
Ah, but who is hypocrite? Why the antis 4ed and 4th version of FR can emit criticisms but not the pros? Why couldn't pros of 4ed be critical of the past edition(s)?
Of course, the antis are so righteous and the pros fanboys.
You didn't got it, again.
What I said was that a 4ed fanboy that bashed 3ed has no right to cry when 4ed get attacked.
You didn't got it, again.
What I said was that a 4ed fanboy that bashed 3ed has no right to cry when 4ed get attacked.
What I see here is that a 3ed/Paizo/blabla fanboy who complain about the current and future offering have no right to cry when his favorite stuff get 'attacked' (aka criticized).
No, that's not an infringement on Freedom of Speech, either. It may surprise you to know this, but people DO have the right to tell each other to shut up. And if you don't like that, then you're free to tell them to shut up, or look up the CoC, or whatever. Either way, I'm not even talking about the OP, so I really don't care about that particular discussion.
The whole argument began because of this, so you might consider it just a tad.
This was never meant to be drawn out in some gradiose inspection of the freedom of speech concept. I honestly don't care who has the right to say what, or who's rights trump whos. In my book, mine beat everyone elses regardless of the situation, so it doesn't matter at the end of the day if I'm right or wrong here :P.
-RW
What I see here is that a 3ed/Paizo/blabla fanboy who complain about the current and future offering have no right to cry when his favorite stuff get 'attacked' (aka criticized).
3rd time, I hope you get it.
You complain about X, you loose the right to cry when somebody complains about Y.
3rd time, I hope you get it.
You complain about X, you loose the right to cry when somebody complains about Y.
That apply to you too, mister Defender of 'your' Realms.
That apply to you too, mister Defender of 'your' Realms.
I never cryed when somebody attacked the realms, I showed them a different point of view, for those who could be reasoned with (minority), or simply ignored, for those who couldn't (majority). But it seems that those who bashed 3rd edition are expecting that we don't return the courtesy, to which I'm going to anwser: you insulted what I like, don't expect me to be polite with what you like.
I never cryed when somebody attacked the realms, I showed them a different point of view, for those who could be reasoned with (minority), or simply ignored, for those who couldn't (majority). But it seems that those who bashed 3rd edition are expecting that we don't return the courtesy, to which I'm going to anwser: you insulted what I like, don't expect me to be polite with what you like.
Never cried? Perhaps, but I see anger from you frequently, and a condescendance. It's hard to have a discusion when someone claim the moral superiority.