Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415152Careful, Dan. I was actually banned for that. It was... Keshu? Some name like that. He said, "I don't consider myself a gamer."

keiro; i remember that thread.  typical rpg.net bullshit thread :rolleyes:

Quote from: Benoist;415239OMG! You're not banned from RPGnet, Frank? I thought you were.

Nah, I banned myself, by leaving.

I'm not banned from EnWorld either, I just don't ever go there.

-Frank

Quote from: FrankTrollman;415261Nah, I banned myself, by leaving.

I'm not banned from EnWorld either, I just don't ever go there.

-Frank

Yeah. I hear you. I show up on EnWorld from time to time, but IDK, the place is not what it was five years ago.

Quote from: Levi Kornelsen;414863A) RPGnet: I'm here to be reasonable, and engage in reasoned stuff.

People keep claiming for me that I'm reasonable and nice, as if I have only one mood.  I think that's complimentary, but it is a pretty one-dimensional slice.  I try to be reasonable while I'm there; that's how the site is oriented.

It doesn't matter how you think a site is oriented - it doesn't hurt to be reasonable or even consistent no matter what forum you post on.

Plenty of people on this forum are 'reasonable' - even when they're using the 'F' word as just another fucking adjective.

Yes, I know I'm responding to a post that 17-odd pages back. I just got home after spending close to 24 hours somewhere else.

- Ed C.

Quote from: RPGPundit;415069Yes, I'd have to write quite a lot of reviews to catch up to your record.

Anyways, why not publish those rpgnet reviews you have left to go on here too? Is there an exclusivity clause or something? Would any publisher seriously say "no" if you said "would you like me to post it at this other forum where another 3300 hardcore gamers hang out and that gets well over 750k hits a month?"

Do the groundwork for a "transition" phase, so that those publishers who send you stuff will get comfortable with the place and knowing it will be a good place for your reviews to be.

RPGPundit

I'm no Pundit or Davenport, but most publishers I review for seem thrilled when they find out that I hit more than just RPG.net with my reviews (and RPG.net's terms don't prevent cross posting unless the place being cross posted to would infringe upon them posting the reviews).

Just my experience.

Quote from: RPGPundit;415041...............  I'm pretty sure whatever kind of roleplaying Curt was doing, his dungeons weren't the same as what most of us would think of...

RPGPundit

This is NOT meant as a defense of Curt in any way - but I do remember from before my banning over there that Curt said he was a a fan of GURPS. I did a friendly posting along the lines of "Hey, good to see another GURPS player on here" Which I think incensed him because I was one of those 'Evil Right-wingers' from his point of view.  (THough I bet he never knew that I'm in favor of gay marriage, yeah that would damage the sterotyped view of me over there)

@ Dan Davenport - nice to see you posting over here. Dude, don't be a stranger...hang out and post frequently.


- Ed C.

Quote from: Imperator;415161So what? That is, at best, an RPG.net problem, worthy of spending an iota of energy here. It's irrelevant.

That may be so. But I was responding to your comment that Levi "just adapts to wherever he is." It's not true. At one place he wants everything stifled and quiet and inoffensive, and does his best to make it so - as a mod at rpg.net. At another place, he tries to stir people up to go make drama he can cackle at - as a poster at storygames trying to stir up shit at therpgsite. He's a chickenhawk.

Quote from: LeviI like what RPGnet is. It's not a universal platform for everything I like to do online, but that doesn't really hit me as a serious complaint. Helping refine it at the things it is good at - holding and containing civil conversation of a long list of types - strikes me as a pure good.

Peace is more than the absence of open conflict. Nor is all conflict unproductive and miserable.

rpg.net is not good at civil conversation, according to the thread you yourself started. It's good at mindless fanboyism, leftist circlejerking (left, good, circlejerking, bad), suppressed but still visible hostility, and harbouring grudges for months or years. That's a direct result of the moderation. And you want more of it.

We have little or no moderation of discussion here, and yet we have productive and interesting discussions. How do we manage it? We're not better people than those at rpg.net, we're all just geeks. Notice the absence of Tangency here, we had one but got rid of it, now we just have Pundit's blog-appendange subforum. We stick to talking about game-related stuff and general geekery.

Free speech about rpgs on an rpg forum. It works.

Quote from: ReckallWhat does this mean, uh? That you can "badmouth" anyone who ISN'T a member of their forums - and thus he/she cannot neither answer nor even know about the accusations?

One day Dubya will join rpg.net and they'll have to ban everyone who's ever posted in Tangency. Of course Dubya's not a gamer, but that's got nothing to do with it

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415353Peace is more than the absence of open conflict. Nor is all conflict unproductive and miserable.

rpg.net is not good at civil conversation, according to the thread you yourself started. It's good at mindless fanboyism, leftist circlejerking (left, good, circlejerking, bad), suppressed but still visible hostility, and harbouring grudges for months or years. That's a direct result of the moderation. And you want more of it.

We have little or no moderation of discussion here, and yet we have productive and interesting discussions. How do we manage it? We're not better people than those at rpg.net, we're all just geeks. Notice the absence of Tangency here, we had one but got rid of it, now we just have Pundit's blog-appendange subforum. We stick to talking about game-related stuff and general geekery.

Very well said; however, I would suggest that RPGnet's approach to moderation could work if it were applied consistently. Again, mandatory civility works quite well in #rpgnet chat. It depends upon the kind of environment you want.

IMHO, the real problem with RPGnet moderation is that they enforce civility selectively.

No matter what you're doing, some one will find a way to take it all way to seriously......

Quote from: Tommy Brownell;415271I'm no Pundit or Davenport, but most publishers I review for seem thrilled when they find out that I hit more than just RPG.net with my reviews (and RPG.net's terms don't prevent cross posting unless the place being cross posted to would infringe upon them posting the reviews).

Just my experience.

Same thing here. I have the same experience: authors and publishers are usually happy to learn I'm posting my reviews on a variety of boards, some of them they wouldn't have even heard of. I think that's because so much in this hobby relies on word-of-mouth. The more ground you can cover via reviews, the better it is for your product. Makes complete sense to me.

Quote from: Dan Davenport;415355Very well said; however, I would suggest that RPGnet's approach to moderation could work if it were applied consistently. Again, mandatory civility works quite well in #rpgnet chat.

Last time I was there, you did not allow political or religious conversation, except in game-related terms. That makes a big difference. Not many people call each-other cunts over whether they like 1st or 4th edition D&D, the aggression comes out with other more weighty issues.

A chat room's also a bit different from a forum, in its immediacy. Conversations going political/religious, or if people want to use profanity, a mere click on a person's name starts a conversation, while still remaining in the room - it's like taking someone aside at a party. A forum is more like having to stand in a circle to have a conversation with everyone listening in. Sure, we have PM and the rest - but it's not as immediate, you have to await a response.

QuoteIMHO, the real problem with RPGnet moderation is that they enforce civility selectively.

Again, I wouldn't call it civility. It's quite possible to be extremely uncivil and unwelcoming without using a single profanity or saying anything which could be construed as an "attack." You know when you're not welcome. Levi acknolwedged that with his thread on "provocation."

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415365Last time I was there, you did not allow political or religious conversation, except in game-related terms. That makes a big difference. Not many people call each-other cunts over whether they like 1st or 4th edition D&D, the aggression comes out with other more weighty issues.

A chat room's also a bit different from a forum, in its immediacy. Conversations going political/religious, or if people want to use profanity, a mere click on a person's name starts a conversation, while still remaining in the room - it's like taking someone aside at a party. A forum is more like having to stand in a circle to have a conversation with everyone listening in. Sure, we have PM and the rest - but it's not as immediate, you have to await a response.

You make some good points there.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415365Again, I wouldn't call it civility. It's quite possible to be extremely uncivil and unwelcoming without using a single profanity or saying anything which could be construed as an "attack." You know when you're not welcome. Levi acknolwedged that with his thread on "provocation."

Also true, but I still think there's a functional setting this side of "anything goes".

Quote from: Dan Davenport;415367Also true, but I still think there's a functional setting this side of "anything goes".

Sure.

And here, the setting is "free speech about rpgs." If someone just goes around abusing everyone, or is obnoxiously racist, etc, they tend not to last. If people come just wanting a fight or to spread some Word, they also tend not to last. It's less bannings, and more just getting discouraged and wandering off, like that Teatine or a hundred other Forgers, or mad racists like Dominus Nox, etc. (Correction, Nox was banned, but there have been others who weren't but just couldn't hack it here.)

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415365Last time I was there, you did not allow political or religious conversation, except in game-related terms. That makes a big difference.

Although, the moderators of #rpgnet will kick you if you talk about gaming too much.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415353Notice the absence of Tangency here, we had one but got rid of it,

Be fair, Kyle. We NEVER had anything even remotely like Tangency.  What we had was an off-topic forum, where there was rampant discussion of weird geek stuff, tv and movies and comics, and lots and lots of political discussions. But for that to have been like Tangency, we'd have to have had thousands of keetoms threads, threads asking for vibes, threads about "alternative sexuality", threads about people complaining or bragging in an utterly self-absorbed fashion about their personal life, and an immense dose of fashionable causes and politically correct college-liberal mentality.  
There are lots of forums with "off-topic" subforums.  There are few that have the particular combination of stupidity and awfulness to be seriously compared to rpgnet's Tangency.

RPGPundit