Oh Gawd!! He mentioned Global Warmming.
 Boring : round 47


- Ed C.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralThere are also few websites who have been around, in one form or another, for as long as RPG.net has.  People have been there for YEARS - so, its only natural they form friendships, relationships, internal reference points and memes.  Its huge because its GROWN to be that.  Over many many years.  

Its still a site about RPGs, primarily.  Tang is huge, yes, but notice they don't have a Tangency Wiki going - or an official Tangency Index - or Tangency Reviews.  Its still focused on RPGs.  Shooting the shit and bitching about politics is a popular pasttime.

Umm, dude?

http://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/Forum_Archive:Main_Page

http://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/Gatherings

http://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/Tangency_Timeline

I'm the one who set up that first one.  

And you didn't address my assertion either.  I'm not talking about people who've been around for a while and know each other.  I'm talking about people who are only there for Tangency, and have no interest in the RPG side of the boards.

OK - what the fuck difference does it make?

Seriously - what difference does it make to the web site?  If someone joined because they like the discussion and community that exists (and don't anyone give me that shit about "its not a community, its a website forum - all groups of people who interact for any length of time form an informal community of some kind.  Its inevitable, and not something you can really stop.  Hell, this place is forming a "community" - even if some people here want to deny it and actively try to argue against it, its happening.  Social interactions form communities - they don't have to be formalized, or anything.  But each group of people who interact over time form their own way of internally communicating, and the group takes on social structures), what difference does it make?

Those people are in the minority, and some of them may find their way to RPGs.

Should we root out the non-rpg-ers, and purge them?  What about people who joined to talk abotu video games, or for Other Media?  

This whole thing is ridiculous.  I agree with some things - the sheer size and volume of Tang does drain system resources, and it impedes Search.  

Getting rid of Tangency is just too extreme a measure.  Cause then you get forum bleed - and discussion of politics and movies and video games creep into other discussions.  If you blow out Tang and start a new "off-topic discussion" section, it'll just happen again.

Geting rid of Tangency - would be a good excuse for a party.

 Or maybe if they did the SJG  way of things and purged/deleted ANY tangency postings and threads that are older than 30 days.

 Maybe then they could use the actual vbulletin search function.
 (which works like its supposed on THIS games forum. Thanks Jeff & Pundy!!)


- Ed C.

QuoteOK - what the fuck difference does it make?

I point it out because it's indicative of the split between the two halves of the site.  The really isn't a unified community on RPGnet.  There's two, with occasional crossover.  There are a lot of posters there who only post to one side or the other, because the built up cliqueishness of both RPG Open and Tangency.

I don't think it's a matter of size, or age.  EvilAvatar is as large and as old as RPGnet, yet no such split occurs on the site at all.  The off-topic area is just another part of the site, and the primary orientation of the site as being about video games and comics remains the driving motive of everyone's presence there.

I didn't post much at all on RPG Open when I was there, because by and large I found it worthless.  I knew a lot of fellow Tangency posters whose posting habits were similar.  

I don't think there really is any easy solution to the subject.  Perhaps some reorientation on the part of the moderatorship to focus more on the importance of RPG discussion over other topics.  Some kind of low tolerance policy towards off-topic flameyness, much like has been demonstrated on this site regarding Dominus Nox perhaps.  I don't know, I have no solution.

I simply think it's silly to deny that the split is there when it's quite apparent to everyone involved.

I don't deny theres a split.  There sure is.  Tang is a really different entity.  I just don't think it makes anywhere near as big a deal as you and JimBob do.

Theres PLENTY of talk about RPGs, and its clear the focus is on that.  The site has grown to include a lot more, though, and I don't see it as a bad thing.  I think altering the structure of Tang, or making some changes that allow the smoother running of the site, are fine.

I just don't see it as a big deal, with how the present moderation is going.  I see few flameouts, few massively huge arguements, and Tang stuff pretty much stays in Tang.

How many people here held Nox's off-topic comments against him in RPG discussions?  It happens - it had an effect on how this site was run for a while.  Its hypocritical to say "Tang arguements bleed over into other sections" when the same thing happens on EVERY forum, and it can happen outside of Tang.  You don't need tang for that - lots of SPECTACULAR flamewars in RP Open, which led to other arguements cross subfora.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralHow many people here held Nox's off-topic comments against him in RPG discussions?  It happens - it had an effect on how this site was run for a while.  Its hypocritical to say "Tang arguements bleed over into other sections" when the same thing happens on EVERY forum, and it can happen outside of Tang.  You don't need tang for that - lots of SPECTACULAR flamewars in RP Open, which led to other arguements cross subfora.

Not exactly. Although there were a few snide comments normally brought on by Nox* himself most folks were more then happy to accept him when it came to RPG talk. Also you got to remember that Nox was not banned from the RPG forums only OT. In fact I would say the informal rule of calling out folks on their bullshit has the effect of cutting down on cross fora or rather cross thread hostility.

Besides the whole "war" what happens in one particular thread normally stays there. The OT forum on this site does not get much traffic ( I think) and when it does and it gets flamey issues remain in that forum. This may be because this is a smaller site.

Most posters at the tBP either don't care about the modding policy or that it works for them. That's the bottom line.

*Take what I say about Nox with a pinch of salt. To my knowledge besides JimBob I was the only other poster calling for his bannation.

Regards,
David R

I never called for a ban of him...but it would not have bothered me if it had happened .
Either way I like this forum better than the Big Purple & pink.

- Ed C.

Quote from: David RIn fact I would say the informal rule of calling out folks on their bullshit has the effect of cutting down on cross fora or rather cross thread hostility.

Besides the whole "war" what happens in one particular thread normally stays there.

There tends to be some overlap between threads, I think - "but you said X in this thread, how can you say Y now?" But it's true that stuff tends to stay in one subforum. The only one really who stands out as not respecting subforum topic divisions is RPGPundit. He sometimes confuses the rpg subforum with his own one. I imagine he just wants to make sure people read his threads. rpg theory stuff will also tend to stay in the rpg forum, rather than zapping off to Game Design like it should.

But most of the other posters respect the topic divisions. And as David R says, it's quite possible for us to call for someone's banning in Off Topic but then happily discuss gaming with them in the rpg section.

OK then - why should RPG.net be any different?  If its possible for you all to get along hunky-dorey with Nox despite your loathing of his politics/views, why should the same not happen at RPG.net?

It does.  In that case, its individual posters who bring beefs with them cross-fora.  I had no problem discussing games with Pseudo - though I never liked his posts on Tang.

So using "flames from Tang spread cross-fora" is kinda false, as far as judging Tang goes.  People who hold beefs from Tang to RPO are the same people who are gonna hold beefs from VGO to RPO - its not a function of the board, its individual posters.

It's the moderation.

Here, people who are offended by someone's comments are expected to deal with it themselves - ignoring, ignore list, argument, abuse, whatever. On rpg.net, people who are offended hit the report button. That actually encourages people to feel offended, because rather than thinking, "how can I deal with this problem?" they think, "does this offend me enough to click that button?" Over time, the threshold for "enough" drops, so that we have people reporting someone for saying their favourite rpg is no good.

I once received a warning for making a joke about d20 players using 1337speak all the time, I forget the details but it was something in the spirit of "they all like ZOMFG k3w1 pw0rz!" This was considered a "group attack against d20 players."

So the moderation encourages posters to take things personally, to have issues.

I do think that while rpg.net suffers from an excess of proscriptive moderation (banning some kinds of talk) and a deficit of prescriptive moderation  (encouraging some kinds of talk), therpgsite suffers from a lack of proscriptive moderation - though it has no corresponding excess of prescriptive. So therpgsite needs to change, be more proscriptive, to be a truly successful site (as successful as it is, it could be more so). But rpg.net needs to change, too.

By "success" I mean, "well-known for interesting and fun talk about rpgs." rpg.net's excessively proscriptive moderation stifles interesting and fun talk, and leads to the "you should use Wushu!" sorts of rubbish. therpgsite's lack of proscription leads to it being thought of as a pit of vipers, and utterly male-dominated (if RPGPundit were a woman, it would probably be female-dominated - this comes from the top).

But whatever the theory, the fact is that at rpg.net, people will put you on their Ignore Lists and lobby to have you banned for your non-rpg posts. So for example Nick the Lemming saw some post of mine and said I was a "right-wing fucktard" (I've rarely been called right-wing before); as a result, he saw none of my rpg posts for the next three years. I'm sure he might have been interested in some of them.

Quote from: JimBobOzThe only one really who stands out as not respecting subforum topic divisions is RPGPundit. He sometimes confuses the rpg subforum with his own one.

You know that just because I have a particular forum of my own, it doesn't mean I can't post to the other forums.  I mean, that would be very clever, to interpret any post I made outside of my forum as being "off topic"; but that's just not the case.  And last I checked, I wasn't posting about politics in the RPG forum, or about RPGs over in Off-topic, so I don't see what the fuck you're talking about.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditAnd last I checked, I wasn't posting about politics in the RPG forum, or about RPGs over in Off-topic, so I don't see what the fuck you're talking about.

No, but you do post about Swine everywhere, which really is about as mainstream an rpg theory as GNS, and so actually belongs in your own subforum. You've also a tendency to take anti-rpg.net rants into the roleplaying subforum, and also some game design theory sort of stuff there.

It's not me who says you shouldn't post at all, you're confusing me with McMurray, jdrakeh, or J_Arcane.

Hmmm, all those Jims are confusing and embarassing to me, I might see if I can get my screen nick changed to Kyle Aaron....

Quote from: JimBobOzIt's not me who says you shouldn't post at all, you're confusing me with McMurray, jdrakeh, or J_Arcane.

I never said that Pundit shouldn't post at all, only that he ought to dial back both the intentional seeding of every forum with anti-swine rhetoric and the accompanying squeal that he not be held to the same standards as those he's attacking because of some imagined moral superiority. Outside of those wailing screeds of madness, Pundit has some good things to say -- lately, though, the wailing screeds account for roughly 95% of his screen time.

Oh okay, I misunderstood. You've a fair point there.

The guy is running five games or something. Surely he has some actual roleplaying material to discuss, instead of this abstract nonsense. RPGPundit, please spend more time demonstrating how awesome your gaming is, rather than simply stating it, or railing at the crapness of someone else's gaming. I mean, I have no doubt that Uncle Ronny, Darren MacLennan and so on have crap gaming, if any. But I'd rather hear about your awesome gaming.

Maybe we should retitle the thread "more rpg.net and more therpgsite frustrations."