|
similarly if you build a community around mass approval or disapproval determining the visibility of content, you get Reddit
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:44 |
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:That can make the forum very unappealing to new posters though. If I start to throw n-bombs around on RPGnet from now on, and some prospective new member reads that, can we really expect them to sign up for an account and put me on ignore? Or is it more likely they'll just nope the gently caress out and stay away forever? (I'm assuming the prospective poster is a person of good taste. Seeing that kind of poo poo go unmoderated can also quickly attract an entirely different sort of crowd.) While I appreciate what you're saying, there is a vast excluded middle between 'you may not say anything mean ever' and 'drop n-bombs all the time at will.'
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:While I appreciate what you're saying, there is a vast excluded middle between 'you may not say anything mean ever' and 'drop n-bombs all the time at will.' I did say it was an extreme example, and followed it up with a significantly less extreme one - and one which actually happened at that. I think we can all agree here that the n-bomb scenario is unacceptable. Good. But then what is acceptable? That we create an environment with lots of hostility and expect those who are turned off by that to use ignore lists?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:I did say it was an extreme example, and followed it up with a significantly less extreme one - and one which actually happened at that. I think we can all agree here that the n-bomb scenario is unacceptable. Good. But then what is acceptable? That we create an environment with lots of hostility and expect those who are turned off by that to use ignore lists? I would say one in which we can call, say, a person who has lied repeatedly and excessively about Kickstarter fulfillment a liar and a cheat. As I recall, you can still get in trouble for saying Gareth Michael Skarka is either of those.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:Gareth Michael Skarka ... Yeah fair enough.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
I came very close to backing Far West and have been glad I didn't. What is that dude's deal? Does anyone still take him seriously?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
He's just a guy who's really bad at kickstarter, and games in general really. It's really not that interesting so I don't know why this thread commits to 2 pages of discussion whenever he's mentioned.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:I did say it was an extreme example, and followed it up with a significantly less extreme one - and one which actually happened at that. I think we can all agree here that the n-bomb scenario is unacceptable. Good. But then what is acceptable? That we create an environment with lots of hostility and expect those who are turned off by that to use ignore lists? Obviously you'd need a floor of decency, but when you can't say "this rules set is garbage" because a theoretical person will be offended at the harshness of that view, you're better off giving that hypothetical person the ability to ignore your views instead of trying to come up with a set of conditional rules to protect their sensibilities. Like, it doesn't need to be wild west anything goes n-bombs and DIE IN A FIRE posts, but it's impossible to know exactly where to draw the line for everybody - so just do the best you can and let users ignore jerks. Tuxedo Catfish posted:that's not an impossible task, that's literally the definition of moderation lol Policing the tone of a public discussion is impossible and counterproductive because everyone involved has their personal lines and boundaries drawn at different places. I'm not saying hands off everything let the users decide, I'm saying that moderators should focus on tasks they can actually enforce effectively.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
rumble in the bunghole posted:He's just a guy who's really bad at kickstarter, and games in general really. It's really not that interesting so I don't know why this thread commits to 2 pages of discussion whenever he's mentioned. The same thing that happens to the F&F thread or the OPP thread when someone just finds out that BHM was a rapist. It's always news to somebody, and discussing it picks open old scabs. Do not take this as an open season to discuss BHM again I swear to god.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:The same thing that happens to the F&F thread or the OPP thread when someone just finds out that BHM was a rapist. It's always news to somebody, and discussing it picks open old scabs. Well, I mean, there are also a lot of people who just enjoy jumping on a man when he's at the bottom of a very deep self-dug hole. I mean, someone didn't buy isfarwestoutyet.com just for the occasional innocent bystander who wandered in to ask.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
We're addicted to trainwrecks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:Well, I mean, there are also a lot of people who just enjoy jumping on a man when he's at the bottom of a very deep self-dug hole. Problem is there's a bunch of people who believed in him down there with him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Problem is there's a bunch of people who believed in him down there with him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:I would say one in which we can call, say, a person who has lied repeatedly and excessively about Kickstarter fulfillment a liar and a cheat. Kevin Siembieda and Mark MacKinnon also come to mind here as figures who are undeniably untrustworthy jerks, and under a functional set of forum rules people should be allowed to label them as such.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
rumble in the bunghole posted:He's just a guy who's really bad It's this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
Who is BHM?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Who is BHM? Kurieg posted:Do not take this as an open season to discuss BHM again I swear to god.  Black Hat Matt, Matt McFarland's screenname
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 00:08
|
|
|
There is a difference between someone who is merely bad at time management, and someone who declares on a weekly and then monthly and then quarterly basis that he has made progress and is about to release a product on such-and-such a date, and does this for five years straight without releasing the product... all the while publicly and viciously excoriating anyone who criticizes his tardiness. At some point, a person who has a procrastination problem has to admit it to himself and publicly. At some point, attacking your critics for their demonstrably accurate criticism goes beyond being a forgivable foible. At some point, you're no longer a person who is just late on a project you've been paid for: you're just a thief. At some point - say, several years later - you have to admit that you're incapable of completing this project, apologetically refund the money you collected by any means possible, and take up a new line of work better suited to your temperament. Skarka is a lying, angry, vicious, unrepentant thief who happens to have a number of victims who prefer to take his side... perhaps out of a misguided belief that by doing so, they may some day receive the product they paid for, I dunno. Loudly pointing this out over and over serves a dual purpose: it warns newcomers who might not know better to beware a known bad actor, and it warns everyone who could become a similarly bad actor that they won't go unpunished for it. OK there's also a certain visceral satisfaction that comes from calling out bad behavior, I can admit that. It feels good to tell everyone what a lovely person Skarka is. I'm not 100% sure why.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 00:14
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:
I googled for a long time! Thanks, I’ll go away now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
Calling someone a liar, if you have proof of them lying, shouldn't be an offense. It's something that is commendable. Even if someone ended up being merely mistaken or ignorant rather than active lying, they should appreciate being corrected and educated. bewilderment fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Feb 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 01:01
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:Well, I mean, there are also a lot of people who just enjoy jumping on a man when he's at the bottom of a very deep self-dug hole. In fairness, I bought that out of spite. (I let the domain lapse after two years mainly because Garethman stopped giving out deadlines he was going to fly past.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 01:24
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:There is a difference between someone who is merely bad at time management, and someone who declares on a weekly and then monthly and then quarterly basis that he has made progress and is about to release a product on such-and-such a date, and does this for five years straight without releasing the product... all the while publicly and viciously excoriating anyone who criticizes his tardiness. jesus, you weren't kidding
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
Basically, even if you think that calling someone rear end in a top hat is too much, I should be able to say "Futz Gonnagall is a liar. He lied about X, Y, and Z" or "Bugoff Yossarian cheated his artists and writers out of their money, as evidenced by W." If you want to be serious about being a game discussion forum, I should also be able to say "I think Rabbits: The Warrening is horribly designed." Or even shorthand that to "Rabbits: The Warrening is horribly designed," especially if I can back it up by observations about the system. Sure, let the game devs come in and defend themselves. I may be wrong. But if I can't even have that discussion, what are we there for except to fluff the writers' egos? I'll be honest, I don't think SA is, in general, a very well-run forum. But at least we can have honest discussions about the state of the industry here and call out bad actors. You don't have to go full goon to let that happen. There's a middle ground.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 05:02
|
|
|
Serf posted:Allowing game developers to moderate places where their games may be discussed critically is a mistake. Sorry for having talent, Serf!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 09:45
|
|
|
Ettin posted:Sorry for having talent, Serf!!! i've read your games, that's one thing you don't have to apologize for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 12:20
|
|
|
I don't think having game devs be mods is necessarily a terrible decision, and as people have said it's largely unavoidable given how small and incestuous the industry is. But they should be mods because they've demonstrated good judgement, not because they're game devs. It should be an "in spite of" situation. "We know you're a game dev, but we expect you to be impartial, and for god's sake don't mod on threads where you have a clear conflict of interest."
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 17:34
|
|
|
Lol, this "verges on a [group attack]":https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?823131-Infraction-for-memorax300-5)-Seven-Day-Ban posted:anyone here who references the Fatal Rpg as a form of any kind of counterpoint has lost any credibility and respect with me at least. Your not even at zero your at like -1000 with both for even bringing up that terrible rpg. First they came for the people who mentioned FATAL, and I said nothing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
Of course in the context of the post, he was saying that in response to someone going basically "This is real authentic medieval RPGing" is not an automatic selling point for a game, Fatal claims to be real authentic medieval and it's generally a warning sign in my experience" unseenlibrarian fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Feb 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
unseenlibrarian posted:Of course in the context of the post, he was saying that in response to someone going basically True, and it would have been better if the mods had reacted to that aspect of the guy's post rather than condemning the attack on FATAL-mentioners' collective honor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
some loving LIAR posted:True, and it would have been better if the mods had reacted to that aspect of the guy's post rather than condemning the attack on FATAL-mentioners' collective honor. I think that kinda points at the whole problem that the mods in question didn't seem to understand - it sounds like an okay choice (7 day probie) was made for the wrong reasons (because FATAL-defenders are a group lol) but since they arrived at an okay end-point (idiot gets time-out) that means they have an acceptable system and there's no reason to change things ever and how dare you imply that they need to change anything after it turns out they were harboring a sexual assaulter for years (which is just in addition to the incestuous, opaque modding already in place).
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
Darwinism posted:I think that kinda points at the whole problem that the mods in question didn't seem to understand - it sounds like an okay choice (7 day probie) was made for the wrong reasons (because FATAL-defenders are a group lol) but since they arrived at an okay end-point (idiot gets time-out) that means they have an acceptable system and there's no reason to change things ever and how dare you imply that they need to change anything after it turns out they were harboring a sexual assaulter for years (which is just in addition to the incestuous, opaque modding already in place). 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
If you read the whole infraction, it pretty explicitly says that the main reason for the infraction is the personal attack that you didn't quote.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:If you read the whole infraction, it pretty explicitly says that the main reason for the infraction is the personal attack that you didn't quote. Like I said, a decent result but for really stupid reasons. Changing the onus from 'group attack' to 'personal attack' doesn't help when both of those things are really, really stretching the terms to the breaking point in order to justify a probation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
FATAL pushed my Patreon to $600. I don't think it has any other redeeming features though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 05:24
|
|
|
Plutonis posted:It's a reason why I can't make a F&F of Breakfast Cult It's encourage you to do so, if you legitimately have something to say about it. I need to sum up my experiences with it sometime, probably in the FATE thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 13:11
|
|
|
theironjef posted:FATAL pushed my Patreon to $600. I don't think it has any other redeeming features though. I wonder if that's more money than FATAL itself made.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:It's encourage you to do so, if you legitimately have something to say about it. There's three other games I'd rather do F&Fs before... Maybe in march
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
moths posted:Obviously you'd need a floor of decency, but when you can't say "this rules set is garbage" because a theoretical person will be offended at the harshness of that view, you're better off giving that hypothetical person the ability to ignore your views instead of trying to come up with a set of conditional rules to protect their sensibilities. You can say that a rules set is garbage. I've done it myself. You just can't connect it to the person who wrote it and say that they're garbage by the transitive property.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 15:35
|
|
|
Cannibal Smiley posted:You can say that a rules set is garbage. I've done it myself. You just can't connect it to the person who wrote it and say that they're garbage by the transitive property.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:44 |
|
|
And more particularly, what about saying that they are a garbage designer? Being in the position of being able to say that each and every product a person has written is garbage but not being able to arrive at the logical conclusion is cobblers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 18:08
|
|
