Quote from: JimBobOzSerious Paul and AnimalballBrasky signed up just to attack RPGPundit and stir up shit;

No, no you're confused. We're not attacking Pundit. We're attacking the rest of you in that thread. We're calling you, the membership, fanboys who seem idolize Pundit for no particularly good reason.

As far as I can tell that's on topic for that forum since it is called "Pundit's own forum."

(If you're going to hate me, fine. But hate me for the appropriate reasons.)

Quotetheir posts since then have largely had nothing to do with rpgs.

I'm sorry is there some sort of requirement that I post X number of RPG posts for every Off topic post I make? is it some sort of unwritten rule I am unaware of? Or are you just electing yourself moderator of what is on topic and what isn't?

(I am flattered you're following my posting so closely.)

There is an Off Topic forum. I post to it. Why is that so bad? Should I attempt to post drivel to the RPG forums and clog them, when I have nothing to say?

And what if I enjoy reading the RPG threads? Even if I don't comment, I can't read? Is every lurker here going to be required to post Jimbo?

I suggest you take the stick out of your ass, climb down off your soap box and worry about making your own posts constructive, there by letting your reputation be built by what you do. (I'm pretty fine with mine, I'm not looking for your help. As well meaning as it.)

Quote from: JimBobOzThey're here to stir shit, not to talk rpgs. It's not theshitstirringsite, it's therpgsite.

I think you under estimate both us. I can only speak for myself, but as I've already said I've limited my fun to one thread. I've tried to maintain a creative and constructive input in other areas.

I guess that rubs you wrong. Luckily, I don't care. You seem, from your posts, to be a greatly sensitive tit who needs a hug. when you're ready, I have one for you.

Also Jimbo I'd like an apology for every Off topic reply you've ever made, since according to you it's all dead weight. So I expect we can see all of your Off topic forum posts deleted shortly? And you will of course never post there again, right?

Since anyone who isn't here to specifically discuss RPG's isn't welcome right? And you do speak for everyone, right?

Okay, I still don't care about Lev...  but can we ban Serious Paul?  

Quote from: Serious PaulNo, no you're confused. We're not attacking Pundit. We're attacking the rest of you in that thread. We're calling you, the membership, fanboys who seem idolize Pundit for no particularly good reason.

Yippee for you.

Quote from: Serious Paul(If you're going to hate me, fine. But hate me for the appropriate reasons.)

I don't hate you. You're just irrelevant, and at least trying to be destructive, to therpgsite.

Quote from: Serious aulI'm sorry is there some sort of requirement that I post X number of RPG posts for every Off topic post I make? is it some sort of unwritten rule I am unaware of? Or are you just electing yourself moderator of what is on topic and what isn't?

It's not "electing myself moderator." I'm a member of the forum. This particular thread has a moderator of this forum asking us about moderation of it. We've been asked for our opinions, so I'm giving mine.

As to posts about rpgs vs posts not about rpgs, there are two things here.

First is "does the guy add anything to the place in terms of rpg talk? Does this person subtract anything?" I would say, if you only post about non-rpg stuff, then I wonder what the fuck you're doing here, but you're harmless, so I'd say, "leave the guy alone." You'd be a net zero, neither adding to the rpg talk, nor subtracting from it.

If you only post about non-rpg stuff and run around insulting the other members, then you're a net negative and should probably be banned.

It's a balance thing, no hard and fast rules, you just gotta judge each case on its merits. Like RPGPundit was asking us to do here with lev_lafayette.

The second point is, well, quality vs quantity. Let's suppose joewolz went crazy and started flaming everyone. He doesn't post about rpgs much, but when he does, it's interesting stuff. Whereas for example JongWK posts a lot, but it's not always that interesting to everyone. So overall they both contribute a lot to the rpg talk here.  

Quote from: Serious Paul(I am flattered you're following my posting so closely.)

Not really. I just read and post on the main roleplaying subforum, and the off topic subforum, and I notice you're strongly present on one but not the other. You make yourself noticed, so you're noticeable by your absence.

Quote from: Serious PaulShould I attempt to post drivel to the RPG forums and clog them, when I have nothing to say?

If you've nothing to say about rpgs, then I wonder why you're here. On, you know, therpgsite.

Quote from: Serious PaulAnd what if I enjoy reading the RPG threads? Even if I don't comment, I can't read? Is every lurker here going to be required to post Jimbo?

I don't see why not. A policy of expelling lurkers would do no harm at all. But even without that - if someone just lurks, fine, so what, like I said, they're a net zero to the place, neither adding to nor subtracting from it. So who cares, they're harmless.

But if they say nothing about the main topic of the forum, and at the same time insult other posters, and yabber along in the off-topic subforums, well, fuck 'em. Let them go crap on someone else's lawn.

Quote from: Serious PaulI suggest you take the stick out of your ass, climb down off your soap box and worry about making your own posts constructive, there by letting your reputation be built by what you do. (I'm pretty fine with mine, I'm not looking for your help. As well meaning as it.)

The constructiveness of my posts is not for me to judge, nor is my "reptutation" (whatever that means on a little message board). It's for others to judge. As to your reputation, I am indifferent to it. I just want you to at least occasionally talk about rpgs, or shut up, or fuck off to some other board whose focus is on the things you do like to talk about.

Each person should talk about whatever interests them. But forums have to have a focus, a main topic of discussion. If the topic doesn't bring the people together, then what will? Just their individual likes and dislikes for each-other. In other words, they form a clique. Which is pretty sad, and goes against the stated purpose of this place.

I don't have to apologise for off-topic posts, anymore than my players have to apologise for saying "hey did you see that football game?" There'll always be talk outside the main toic, that's fine. But if there's only that off-topic talk from a person, you've got to wonder why they're there. If some player in my group never roleplays, just talks shit, then I'll wonder why they're there. If they add insults to other people in the group, then I'll toss 'em out. But if they roleplay, and talk shit, and occasionally insult others, then I'll balance up how good their roleplaying is before deciding whether to toss 'em out. It's a balance thing.

Talk about rpgs, or shut up about everything, or go to some site whose topics match your interests. But don't crap on our lawn.

You do a great job of making yourself look like a jerk, which means I don't have to. Let me know how that banning lurkers thing goes!

Dude, you can't possibly win with a "he posts off topic stuff in the off topic forum, let's ban him" platform.

Serious Paul makes a very fine point:

The concepts of "contributing" and "useful posts" are just guises of the chimera of "common good".
Once somebody can establish authority over what is to be acknowledged as "common good", all nasty things can be done in that name.

Look at RPG.Net. All Moderation there is done for the "common good"...

Quote from: SettembriniSerious Paul makes a very fine point:

The concepts of "contributing" and "useful posts" are just guises of the chimera of "common good".
Once somebody can establish authority over what is to be acknowledged as "common good", all nasty things can be done in that name.

Look at RPG.Net. All Moderation there is done for the "common good"...

I'm fine with the concept of community standards.  RPG.net does not, as a general rule, consult the userbase on their opinion before making decisions.  One could argue it's because the userbase is too unwieldy to do so.

As a small messageboard with a small userbase where everyone knows each other, this kind of thing works and it works well.  Ain't nothing wrong with asking everyone here, "Hey, is that guy who wandered in and started pissing on the carpet annoying ya'll?  You want to kick him out?"

There are 1600 plus members here. Less than 600 are active. That means 1 in 3 people.

Some of post, but only post when we feel we add something to the discussion.

Much of the time, for ex, I have something I could say but because it doesn't add much, I don't take the time. For me, it's kind of a time-effort-value equation.

Here, I think there's no value in banning Lev. I think it'd be a bad idea. Going from RPGPundit's stated rational for banning you, Serious Paul and Brasky, tread really close to the line, though I wouldn't ban you because you're not disruptive enough to the site and occasionally post something of value.

For this site, now, banning people is almost always going to be worse then the problems they cause.

Holy fucksticks! And people reckon there's navel-gazing at the Forge! Settembrini, I agree.

I am against banning Lev. More on that soon, as I read the thread

EDIT: I've read it. Long story short.

I disagree in that the solely goal of Lev is to attack you, Pundit, unless you define that as "defending my opinions against the shit and insults that you fling in my direction."

Also, he doesn't attack the mission statement in any way, unless you define that as disagreeing with you on that D&D is the best thing ever. Lev is a guy that carries an RQ book and uses it to teach kids what is roleplaying. Unless RQ is now a Swine game and I haven't received notice, I don't see him as promoting any agenda other than defending himself and stating his opinions.

If Lev is banned, most of us should be banned.

Settembrini, no one is more aware of the slippery slope of administerial power than I am, nor of the risk of corruption for those in power.

Faced with the likes of Lev, blakkie, TonyLB, etc (blatant Swine) on the one side, people like Paul and Bill Brasky (drunken fratboys out to make trouble) on another side, and people like Dominus Nox (retards) in the third; I think the fact that I haven't banned a single person in all this time speaks volumes, and is a victory for the site, and puts the lie to ANY argument that "heavy moderation" is needed to "control" roleplayers and make it possible to have a productive environment.  RPG.net's modclique are liars, we've proven it.

So I think on the other hand, I could be granted a bit of trust that if someone comes along who is attacking the board, I could ban him without suddenly throwing all of that away and becoming a totalitarian nutjob.
Again, if that's NOT so, then I shouldn't be banning spambots either by your logic.  There is NO effective difference between a spambot and a guy who would come in here just to attack the site.

RPGPundit

QuoteSettembrini, no one is more aware of the slippery slope of administerial power than I am, nor of the risk of corruption for those in power.

That´s great, and all that matters.

See, I can see that you are torn between your alpha male persona ("punish them pigfuckers!") and your classic liberal intellect ("let the dogs bark").
It´s good that intellect wins.
And being a human that can be angered is understandable. Overcoming the animal is civilization.

But to give in to those feelings leads to, how cheesy, the dark side.

@people who think I´m nuts for bringing this up in a totally irrelevant RPGForum:
It´s important because this site is irrelevant on a larger scale. If you can´t grant others freedom when it doesn´t hurt, doesn´t cost you anything, if the discussions are basically irrelevant and not about, say, the death penalty, then you can never grant freedom in truly important manners.