TheRPGSite

http://forum.rpg.net/ (http://forum.rpg.net/) as of 12:20 CST on 2/1/07

QuoteOur forums have gotten too big! We're doing some repair work to resolve this, but because of the aforementioned size of the forums, it may take all day.

Here's a thought:   NUKE TANGENCY FROM ORBIT.

make those retards go use Something Awful, like the rest of the uh retards.

Quote from: kregmosierhttp://forum.rpg.net/ (http://forum.rpg.net/) as of 12:20 CST on 2/1/07



Here's a thought:   NUKE TANGENCY FROM ORBIT.

make those retards go use Something Awful, like the rest of the uh retards.

Thats the first thing I thought of, its an RPG site, and the Tangency portion is double or triple the size... Keep other media, keep other games, becasue they are at least somewhat related to the site... pictures of your pets is not

Yep, my first thought was that Tangency is the culprit too. Pruning the gorram thing down would be the sensible option, but from the breif announce in Trouble Tickets earlier today, it looks like they're trying a fix/hack to get it going.
I guess there's something to be said for the accusations that RPGNet is being run by Tangencites if the site admins dare not nuke the off-topic forum.

The trouble is, despite the name, it is not primarily an rpg site.  It's a Tangency site with a very active rpg forum attached.

But yeah, it's obvious that Tangency is the problem.  Personally I think they should split it into tangency.net and rpg.net.  Give the Tangency guys a home, collect their membership fees, but make it a separate site not dedicated to gaming.  You could have a link one to the other on the homepage of each.

Nytflyr, have you ever considered publishing Dirty 30's?  It really is tremendous.

Quote from: BalbinusNytflyr, have you ever considered publishing Dirty 30's?  It really is tremendous.

I put it down on paper and it was a whopping 30 some odd pages, so not really enough for anything published (except pdf which is being considered.... once Im done finding things to add... like  1935 - Beer in a can!!!)

Quote from: Balbinus...  Personally I think they should split it into tangency.net and rpg.net.  Give the Tangency guys a home, collect their membership fees, but make it a separate site not dedicated to gaming.  You could have a link one to the other on the homepage of each.

This would be a very good idea.  I hardly ever go to Tangency, but whenever I do, I don't recognise 90 percent of the names there.  It really is a separate community from the RPG board.

Quote from: NYTFLYRI put it down on paper and it was a whopping 30 some odd pages, so not really enough for anything published (except pdf which is being considered.... once Im done finding things to add... like  1935 - Beer in a can!!!)

Under resources, you should consider adding the excellent Astounding Tales! by Howard Whitehouse, which is available for sale but I can't remember where.  It's a fairly rules light but very good pulp miniatures ruleset, although really it's an rpg aimed at those who don't think they play rpgs.  

Similarly, To be Continued by G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. is another pulp minis game, a bit like .45 in terms of genre.  Astounding Tales! IMO is entirely playable as an rpg, so probably could be To Be Continued and .45 but AT! very much so.

Quote from: BalbinusUnder resources, you should consider adding the excellent Astounding Tales! by Howard Whitehouse, which is available for sale but I can't remember where.  It's a fairly rules light but very good pulp miniatures ruleset, although really it's an rpg aimed at those who don't think they play rpgs.  

Similarly, To be Continued by G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. is another pulp minis game, a bit like .45 in terms of genre.  Astounding Tales! IMO is entirely playable as an rpg, so probably could be To Be Continued and .45 but AT! very much so.

excellent, I will add those in the next day or so.

Quote from: AkrasiaThis would be a very good idea.  I hardly ever go to Tangency, but whenever I do, I don't recognise 90 percent of the names there.

Well part of the problem might stem from the fact certain users, whose names I don't recognize, have post counts higher than mine.  IOW: People keep changing their handles!

Quote from: AkrasiaIt really is a separate community from the RPG board.

Not really.  It's just the off-topic forum that's, uhm, sort of like, well, this forum!  :p

Yeah, nuking the cesspool that is tangency would solve the problem but, as Balbinus said, the official position of the administration and moderators over there is that they are not a roleplaying community.

I cannot see a day where they will separate the two communities. I think they like the pathetic outlook of users telling each others what they had for dinner and exchanging secret geek handshakes like it's actually something you should be proud of, while that Curt continues to mis-moderate the place like it's a freaky gay advocacy forum.

On another note, when the forums crashed there was a note over in Trouble Tickets saying Jared Sorensen was "gone for good". I assume this means permabanned. I wonder what that clown did this time.

Damn, wouldn't it be funny if the truth was a banned user came back and hacked that rotten tree down?

I kinda hope that's what happened, it might take the echogods there down a peg or two.

So that's what's happening to the place, eh? Just yesterday I went there to hunt up an old Roleplaying Open thread of mine, and saw that the oldest post there was December 12th, 2006. They did a clipping? I thought, but of course as a banned user can't enquire.

As well as having more posts in Tangency Open than the rest of the forums combined, Tangency Open takes up a lot of bandwidth because it's where most of the images get posted. All those h4wt chixxorz threads. Sure, the images aren't hosted on the rpg.net server, but the remote linking sucks up processing power - more than just text. And of course paid-up members can attach images to their posts directly, which many of them do.

The real test will be if they also clipped all the Tangency Open posts from before December 12th, 2006. That'll show what they think is important :p

Quote from: Consonant Dudethe official position of the administration and moderators over there is that they are not a roleplaying community.

so what doest the RPG in RPG.net stand for?

Quote from: NYTFLYRso what doest the RPG in RPG.net stand for?

At this point?

Domain squatting, basically, without intent to sell.

Quote from: JimBobOzThe real test will be if they also clipped all the Tangency Open posts from before December 12th, 2006. That'll show what they think is important :p

Was that your offical Drop Dead Date?

Out of curiosity, how many people over here were permabanned over there?

Quote from: Christmas ApeAt this point?

Domain squatting, basically, without intent to sell.

And the furry little albino gets it in one. :(

!i!

Quote from: Consonant DudeYeah, nuking the cesspool that is tangency would solve the problem but, as Balbinus said, the official position of the administration and moderators over there is that they are not a roleplaying community.

That's not my impression, at least - pretty much every post I've read by Cessna adressing the issue stressed that it was a forum for discussing rpgs.

Quote from: Consonant DudeOn another note, when the forums crashed there was a note over in Trouble Tickets saying Jared Sorensen was "gone for good". I assume this means permabanned. I wonder what that clown did this time.

Once the forums come back, check that "Nazis Are Munchkins" thread at RP Open. Sorensen suddenly started claiming that the jokes in the thread are against the guidelines of the forum, and when the mods wanted to know exactly what the problem was, he began quoting the rules along with comments like "consider this your warning" and "my mod voice is black".

Quote from: Christmas ApeAt this point?

Domain squatting, basically, without intent to sell.

Well, they added a gaming index a few months ago, which has been expanded since then. That doesn't really fit with the idea of domain squatting - if that was the case, they wouldn't need to add anything new.

(They're still getting reviews for the archive on a weekly basis, too. And while Tangency is taking the lion's share of the traffic, the gaming related forums still see a good amount of it).

Quote from: AegyptoThat's not my impression, at least - pretty much every post I've read by Cessna adressing the issue stressed that it was a forum for discussing rpgs.

It's not a matter of impressions. It's the official position. Stressed several times in Trouble Tickets in clear, unambiguous writing.

Every administrative decision and moderation policy is made with that in mind. They call it a "general interest" website. Which basically means a geek cesspool with some RPG concerns tacked on.

The fact RPGs still have room over there is due to that being of interest to many geeks and a corollary of the domain RPG.net, which is valuable to them. They're still benefiting from when that website had a constructive vocation and a direction that actually made some sense.

There's more to rpg.net than the forums, and there's more to the forums than Tangency.

Just not much.

The administration also adamantly refuses to prioritize roleplaying over any other interest, aside from giving it a separate forum (which makes it no different than "Other Media Open", honestly).

Therein lies the problem.

Of course, I avoid Tangency Open and have for years.  It's not like Tabletop Gaming Open is the greatest rpg discussion board ever, but it occasionally holds something of interest.

Quote from: GrimGentOnce the forums come back, check that "Nazis Are Munchkins" thread at RP Open. Sorensen suddenly started claiming that the jokes in the thread are against the guidelines of the forum, and when the mods wanted to know exactly what the problem was, he began quoting the rules along with comments like "consider this your warning" and "my mod voice is black".

I noticed that as well. I couldn't tell if he was telling a subtle joke no one was getting or if he was on some brain altering chemicals that ruined his ability to communicate coherently.  Of course, I didn't see any red posts prior to abandoning the entire thread, so it seems I missed the showdown. He did say his mod voice was black before they warned him...

Eh. If I see one or two threads that intrest me for five minutes it was a 'productive' visit for me.   For a long time I'd see references to Tangency, and I just assumed it was an entirely different site. Imagine my shock to learn it was part of the forum. :keke:

Quote from: Kester PelagiusNot really.  [Tangency is] just the off-topic forum that's, uhm, sort of like, well, this forum!  :p

No. On Tangency are people who never post about roleplaying, and who in fact don't game, never have and don't want to. Whereas we're all gamers here, and people who post only on Off-Topic and not about roleplaying are openly derided, with moderator encouragement.

This is primarily a roleplaying site; rpg.net is now a general interest site. This mission statement of this place is to talk about rpgs; the mission statement of rpg.net is "to be as welcoming to as wide a range of users as possible." In fact, when I was banned, one of the reasons cited was that I openly wondered why people would come to rpg.net if they weren't interested in rpgs.

So the two ain't the same thing.

Quote from: WerekoalaWas that [Dec 12th, 2006; where rpg.net Roleplaying Open seem to have stopped] your offical Drop Dead Date?

I don't think so, I think that was earlier. November?

Meh.  Let them turn it into Tangency.net.  It isn't like they weren't already openly condoning the derailment of any RPG related thread anyway.

Maybe it will be down long enough that some of the better posters will come over here and settle in.  I miss reading some of them.

Quote from: RedFoxOf course, I avoid Tangency Open and have for years.  It's not like Tabletop Gaming Open is the greatest rpg discussion board ever, but it occasionally holds something of interest.

Now that I think of it, my visiting habits to big purple over the last few weeks have been primarily to check on the PbP game I'm in. I've gone days without even going into the Tabletop or Video Games forums - not being into Exalted or WoW I don't see much to interest me there these days.

Quote from: AegyptoWell, they added a gaming index a few months ago, which has been expanded since then.

Is that in addition to the wiki?

Quote from: Aegypto(They're still getting reviews for the archive on a weekly basis, too. And while Tangency is taking the lion's share of the traffic, the gaming related forums still see a good amount of it).

One of my reviews (first in a long while over there) just went live.  Actually if you like game reviews may I suggest popping over to Hinterwelt dot com?  I hear they have some excellent reviews there.  :D

Quote from: JimBobOzNo. On Tangency are people who never post about roleplaying, and who in fact don't game, never have and don't want to.

Actually, of late, Tangency seems to be the place where folks burned out on gaming in general come to vent.  Didn't used to always be that way.

Quote from: JimBobOzWhereas we're all gamers here, and people who post only on Off-Topic and not about roleplaying are openly derided, with moderator encouragement.

Speaking of encouragement I could use some.  What would you like to see in a space-opera supplement dealing with the hive of scum and villainy otherwise known as "frontier"?

Quote from: JimBobOzThis is primarily a roleplaying site; rpg.net is now a general interest site. This mission statement of this place is to talk about rpgs; the mission statement of rpg.net is "to be as welcoming to as wide a range of users as possible." In fact, when I was banned, one of the reasons cited was that I openly wondered why people would come to rpg.net if they weren't interested in rpgs.

You were banned?  I did not know that.  Then again it's hard to keep track of. . .  :rolleyes:

Duuuude.  :rolleyes:

This forum rocks!  :rolleyes:

(Sorry, they banned that smiley at RPGnet awhile ago.)

Quote from: Kester PelagiusSpeaking of encouragement I could use some.  What would you like to see in a space-opera supplement dealing with the hive of scum and villainy otherwise known as "frontier"?

I'm not sure. I'm just starting to think about this sort of thing myself, and so I've a zillion different thoughts about it. It might be worth discussing in my Cheap warp drives (http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4198) thread.

Quote from: Kester PelagiusThis forum rocks!  :rolleyes:

(Sorry, they banned that smiley at RPGnet awhile ago.)

Of course. It offended someone in Tangency, so they had to take it out.

h4wt chixxor pics? talk of anal sex techniques? no worries! But the roll-eyes smilie could seriously disturb someone! They might...
:combust:

Quote from: JimBobOzOf course. It offended someone in Tangency, so they had to take it out.

What non-clique member used it and against what clique member?

Quote from: GabrielWhat non-clique member used it and against what clique member?

I dunno, I stopped keeping track of all the Tangency cliques well over a year before I was bannzorzed. But that was the tone of it when it was announced, that the roll-eyes smilie was inherently offensive. And it hardly ever appeared in Roleplaying Open. TTRO was all :p and :D, not so much of that other shit.

Plus nine-tenths of the other rules of rpg.net ("no personal attacks, no group attacks, no panhandling except in the Ads/Open Promo forum, no suicide threads," etc, as opposed to what? "no piracy" for other subforums) evolved out of Tangency dramas, why wouldn't that one.

Quote from: Kester Pelagius... Not really.  It's just the off-topic forum that's, uhm, sort of like, well, this forum!  :p

I politely disagree.  :)

Tangency at RPG.net is full of people who never post in the main RPG fora.  I post in the main RPG fora on a regular basis -- I know those people (even the bloody Exalted fans).  Tangency has different people.

Sorry, but that's a fact. :raise:

Quote from: AkrasiaI politely disagree.  :)

Tangency at RPG.net is full of people who never post in the main RPG fora.  I post in the main RPG fora on a regular basis -- I know those people (even the bloody Exalted fans).  Tangency has different people.

Sorry, but that's a fact. :raise:

Here I would politely concur. :)

What I find so interesting about all this is the sheer number of people on this board that dislike other boards but continue read them. Why do people do that? I figure that if you hate them and they've banned you, why bother?

Quote from: James McMurrayWhat I find so interesting about all this is the sheer number of people on this board that dislike other boards but continue read them. Why do people do that? I figure that if you hate them and they've banned you, why bother?

I haven't been banned by RPG.net.  :pundit:

Yet! :p

And, in fact, I like the place.  The RPG section, that is (I have no comment on 'Tangency').

I've had many good conversations about C&C, AD&D, True 20, Buffy, Angel, Rolemaster, old OOP games, etc. there.

The RPG section of RPG.net is totally golden for me.  :cool:

Quote from: James McMurrayWhat I find so interesting about all this is the sheer number of people on this board that dislike other boards but continue read them. Why do people do that? I figure that if you hate them and they've banned you, why bother?

I certainly don't hate 'em.  The moderation policy is naff, and it's often hard to separate the wheat from the mountains of chaff, but it's still the biggest place to talk about RPGs shy of ENWorld.  And it's less D&D-specific than ENWorld.

And I also haven't been banned yet.

My only beef with RPGnet is that they ban people without question and without recourse.

Quote from: Zachary The FirstHere I would politely concur. :)

And, just to make a point of distinction, I politely concur, asshole! :mad:

!i!

Quote from: AkrasiaI haven't been banned by RPG.net.  :pundit:

Yet! :p

And, in fact, I like the place.  The RPG section, that is (I have no comment on 'Tangency').

Like all things Tangency can be a fun diversion every now and again.  But too much Tangency, that can cause stomache upset and forum rage.

Quote from: AkrasiaI've had many good conversations about C&C, AD&D, True 20, Buffy, Angel, Rolemaster, old OOP games, etc. there.

The RPG section of RPG.net is totally golden for me.  :cool:

You mean when y'all aren't posting threads complaining about Exalted/Palladium/the high price of game books/how D20 is going to implode the gaming industry?  :teehee:

Quote from: Kester PelagiusActually, of late, Tangency seems to be the place where folks burned out on gaming in general come to vent.  Didn't used to always be that way.




Speaking of encouragement I could use some.  What would you like to see in a space-opera supplement dealing with the hive of scum and villainy otherwise known as "frontier"?



You were banned?  I did not know that.  Then again it's hard to keep track of. . .  :rolleyes:

Duuuude.  :rolleyes:

This forum rocks!  :rolleyes:

(Sorry, they banned that smiley at RPGnet awhile ago.)

THEY BANNED A SMILEY?!?!?!?!

Could you provide more details, please?

Quote from: ZalmoxisMy only beef with RPGnet is that they ban people without question and without recourse.

Actually on rpg.net they at least have to give a reason, AIR.

Now on SJG bans have no reasons given with them, but the common denominator seems to be if andy hackard likes you or not.

Quote from: Kester Pelagius... You mean when y'all aren't posting threads complaining about Exalted/Palladium/the high price of game books/how D20 is going to implode the gaming industry?  :teehee:

:confused:

Not my threads, mate....

I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about, and frankly, I don't give a shit.

Quote from: Akrasia:confused:

Not my threads, mate....

I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about, and frankly, I don't give a shit.

But I'm going to reply to it in emphasis and with bold.

Frankly, after a while I stopped paying much attention to RP Open.  It was what drew me to the site, but after a while itceased to be what kept me there.

There just ceased to be all that much in the way of threads that interested me, just tons of spectacularly idiotic and petty flamewars, and my own attempts at discussing things that would interest me tended to be universally ignored.  Thing was too, that while I like RPGs, and enjoy them a lot, they're only one aspect of my interests, and when presented with an open forum with which to discuss all of them, the RPGs are likely to wind up being less than a majority percentage.  

I've posted to and read more RPG-related posts on this site than I think I had in the last two or three years or more on RP Open at RPGnet.  

And there were enough other folks who wound up engaging in similar migration, that it sort of led to the odd split that's continued to this day.  

There are indeed a number of non-gamers who post in Tangency.  A lot of them came by way of friends or family who were gamers and long time RPGnet posters, but there were also some who just seemed to wander in from nowhere in particular and nest.  A lot of those didn't really last, with the exception of a rare one or two like bulletproof.  Most of the regular Tangency-exclusive posters are gamers, they just didn't really spend much time talking about them.

Point being that contrary to the popular opinions of a lot of folks in this thread, the non-gamers remained an exception rather than a rule.

The moderators have stated that the direction they'd intended for the site was more as a general geek hangout, than a specifically focused RPG-only site.  That's just the way it is, and it seems spectacularly unlikely to change anytime soon.  

I never quite understood why this pisses so many people off.  "How dare people talk about things you don't want to talk about!  They should only be allowed to talk about what I want to talk about!  But the mods are bad fascist censors!"

Quote from: Dominus NoxTHEY BANNED A SMILEY?!?!?!?!

Could you provide more details, please?

I logged in one day and the :rolleyes: was just that.  Text.  I believe there was an initial announcement about the smiley being removed and a warning not to circumvent it's removal, or that may have been in a totally seperate thread.  Long story short the :rolleyes: was removed because it was considered disruptive, which I took to mean people complained about it.

As I'd just logged in after a long absence I couldn't even tell you what led to this.  In the end the ruling was the :rolleyes: smiley was technically not "banned" just no longer "desired".  Or some thing along those lines.

Quote from: Akrasia:confused:

Not my threads, mate....

I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about, and frankly, I don't give a shit.

Enhance your calm citizen.

I've been on the boards a while.  From the sound of it perhaps a wee bit longer than you.  So I may be referencing things that happened before you joined the forums.

Long story short: There've been periods of time when RP Open was full of threads about Exalted.  So many threads about Exalted that TT actually had threads complaing about the threads in RP Open!  Before that there were a number of threads about how D20 was going to doom the industy ("my hat of D02 know no limit" ring any bells?), and lots and lots of other silliness.

Nothing to worry about.  It's all water under the bridge.

Quote from: J ArcaneI never quite understood why this pisses so many people off.  "How dare people talk about things you don't want to talk about!  They should only be allowed to talk about what I want to talk about!  But the mods are bad fascist censors!"

There are a few reasons.

The first is that it's just plain confusing. We sign up to rpg.net expecting to talk about rpgs. You wouldn't sign on to dog.net expecting to talk about giraffes and rhinos, nor would you sign on to medical.net expecting to talk about modern literature. So if a forum stops being mainly about its title topic, well that's just confusing. It's the same reason people get annoyed when threads are derailed - you go into it expecting to talk about one thing, and there they are blabbing about another. It puts people off, and eventually people stop going to that forum at all.

The second is that in the case of rpg.net, the heavy-handed moderation came about as a result of Tangency Open. Without the dramas of that forum, there'd be not one-tenth the moderation. They wouldn't be doing shit like banning the roll-eyes smilie for the sake of someone posting about Exalted, but when it's about someone's day at work or gay rights, well then everyone gets sensitive, and out come the rules and heavy moderation.

The third is that you end up with threadcraps, like old Kiero saying, "what's d20?" in the middle of some Roleplaying Open thread. The people with no interest in the forum and those with some overlap a bit; in the case of rpg.net or The Forge, those people are the Bitter Non-Gamers, like Kiero, and they're a pain in the arse and we'd rather not have them; without subforums which encourage them (like Tangency Open, or RPG Theory), they go away. With them, they hang around being cocksmocks.

In short, there's nothing wrong with off-topic discussion in its own forum.

However, if your site is called "rpg.net," I think it should maybe probably maybe be primarily about roleplaying games.

Quote from: Kester PelagiusI logged in one day and the :rolleyes: was just that.  Text.  I believe there was an initial announcement about the smiley being removed and a warning not to circumvent it's removal, or that may have been in a totally seperate thread.  Long story short the :rolleyes: was removed because it was considered disruptive, which I took to mean people complained about it.

As I'd just logged in after a long absence I couldn't even tell you what led to this.  In the end the ruling was the :rolleyes: smiley was technically not "banned" just no longer "desired".  Or some thing along those lines.

So now the mods control even the smilies on rpg.net. Jesus tap dancing christ, what the fuck next?

Has anyone openly just left rpg.net after saying something to the effect of "It's just fucking impossible to have a conversation around here anymore without getting threatened or banned." or "I just can't stand the pompous asses running this place anymore."?

I've contributed to lots of conversations on RPGnet without the worry about bannage or using the wrong smiley. All you have to do is not be an asshole. It's pretty easy. And smileys are fascile anyway.

Oh and PS - Akrasia is one of the best posters over there. Maybe it's cuz he like the old-school stuff like I do.

I left without getting banned, I've gone back maybe three times to read specific threads Jim Bob sent me links to, and that's it. I'm much happier now that I'm no longer associated with the site, though I do miss the PbP forums there.

Here's the latest:

QuoteWe've figured out how to "fix" the board, but in the process the last 500,000 posts got eaten. We're thus shutting down the board again, to see if a restore will fix things. This will probably be another day, folks.

I hadn't noticed.

QuoteWe've figured out how to "fix" the board, but in the process the last 500,000 posts got eaten. We're thus shutting down the board again, to see if a restore will fix things. This will probably be another day, folks.

My God.

That means 499,900 Exalted threads were snuffed out in an instant.

Quote from: J ArcaneFrankly, after a while I stopped paying much attention to RP Open.  It was what drew me to the site, but after a while itceased to be what kept me there.

There just ceased to be all that much in the way of threads that interested me, just tons of spectacularly idiotic and petty flamewars, and my own attempts at discussing things that would interest me tended to be universally ignored.  Thing was too, that while I like RPGs, and enjoy them a lot, they're only one aspect of my interests, and when presented with an open forum with which to discuss all of them, the RPGs are likely to wind up being less than a majority percentage.  

I've posted to and read more RPG-related posts on this site than I think I had in the last two or three years or more on RP Open at RPGnet.  

And there were enough other folks who wound up engaging in similar migration, that it sort of led to the odd split that's continued to this day.  

There are indeed a number of non-gamers who post in Tangency.  A lot of them came by way of friends or family who were gamers and long time RPGnet posters, but there were also some who just seemed to wander in from nowhere in particular and nest.  A lot of those didn't really last, with the exception of a rare one or two like bulletproof.  Most of the regular Tangency-exclusive posters are gamers, they just didn't really spend much time talking about them.

Point being that contrary to the popular opinions of a lot of folks in this thread, the non-gamers remained an exception rather than a rule.

The moderators have stated that the direction they'd intended for the site was more as a general geek hangout, than a specifically focused RPG-only site.  That's just the way it is, and it seems spectacularly unlikely to change anytime soon.  

I never quite understood why this pisses so many people off.  "How dare people talk about things you don't want to talk about!  They should only be allowed to talk about what I want to talk about!  But the mods are bad fascist censors!"

QFT.  In the end, who cares and what does it matter?  If you were given the business end of the modhammer, then get on with your life.  For gods sake, its just a friggin website.  You've found another one to do what you wanted to do in, what difference does it make if RPG.net dropped all reference to role playing games, and is now called "The Curt and Cessna Dick Swinging and Dancing To Techno Metallica Power Hour Live Cam"?

Quote from: Dominus NoxSo now the mods control even the smilies on rpg.net. Jesus tap dancing christ, what the fuck next?

Has anyone openly just left rpg.net after saying something to the effect of "It's just fucking impossible to have a conversation around here anymore without getting threatened or banned." or "I just can't stand the pompous asses running this place anymore."?

No.  Because, of course, it is perfectly possible to carry on conversation without getting warned or banned.  Its not, however, possible to carry on a conversation being a cockmunch and not get threatened or banned.  Theres a difference.

Well, I still like to post there, my concern is that Tangency (which incidentally also has a lot of good about it) has resulted in far more aggressive moderation of Open than I think is healthy for debate there, I think Tangency is linked to the problems with using the historically very valuable Search function which is now near useless and I think Tangency is plainly the cause of the bandwidth issues.

Simple as that, Tangency has directly reduced the site's utility to me as an rpg forum.  That's my beef with it, and in the process the Tangency driven moderation has led to a ton of posters I found interesting being banned.

Personally I always liked the Exalted threads, I don't play the game but I do like people posting with real love and enthusiasm about an rpg they love, to me that's what the site should be about.

Anyway, the difference is that I've lost much of the utility of a site that I sunk a lot of time into and that still has a lot of great people on it, that's why I care about it.

As for Tangency posters, perhaps I'm wrong, my impression was that a significant number of the more vocal and frequent posters were not actually gamers.  I've seen a few post about how they find gaming a bit odd.

Again, I would prefer to see it split into Tangency.net and rpg.net, with cross links one to the other on their main pages.  That would mean the tangency guys could still get on with the unique thing they've created but the rpg fora could maybe be moderated a bit less heavily and have fewer bandwidth problems.

Oh, one last thing, for the moment I'm a paying member.  I'm unhappy that my membership fees are going increasingly to supporting a general geek chatsite, that's not what I paid for.  I don't see myself renewing my membership on current trends.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralNo.  Because, of course, it is perfectly possible to carry on conversation without getting warned or banned.  Its not, however, possible to carry on a conversation being a cockmunch and not get threatened or banned.  Theres a difference.

Certainly I manage, although I do think that some conversations are hampered and I think there is sometimes a vague air of simmering resentment as instead of being able to say to people "fuck you, you retarded lawncrapper, your flabby body is only held together by the accumulated dirt of years of living in your parents' basement without washing and it doesn't surprise me your game has problems, your players are probably retching from the site of you" we have to say something more like "I'm not sure I'm entirely with you on that point".

I think sometimes it's best just to let these things out...

The thing is, certainly one can still converse, however I do genuinely think that under the current climate the quality of conversation has declined in part because of a concern about getting banned if one ends up in an argument.  Sometimes arguments are good things, I learn more from being corrected than I ever do from people agreeing with me.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralNo.  Because, of course, it is perfectly possible to carry on conversation without getting warned or banned.  Its not, however, possible to carry on a conversation being a cockmunch and not get threatened or banned.  Theres a difference.

What he just said. I've never received a single warning, I think, and I've posted in whenever thread I felt like to. And Balbinus also makes good points, as usual.

I've always been surprised by all the people who spend time proclaiming how shitty, irrelevant, awful or whatever is RPG.net, or any other forum, but spent time browsing them, looking for things to be aggravated at. If I don't like a site, I stop visiting it. :raise:

I'm a recent poster but long time lurker - very long time. Never had any problems with the mods, but then again I've never mixed it up with anyone. I'm not even a face in the crowds. The whole moderation spill over from Tang is one of the reasons I don't post as often as I do here. I don't like the feeling of having to watch what I say, not because I want to piss on anyones parade but rather because it's a game forum and I don't see the need for such tight moderation which sometimes strays into censorship territory with I despise.

Now, I'm very well aware that RPG Open has got hell of a lot of posters and without some kind of moderation, the whole place could blow up -it will be interesting to see the situation here when this site gets as much traffic as tBP - but I do think one of the reasons threads seem to degenerate into minutiae and passive/aggresive BS is because the conversation stopper, Fuck You has been taken away.

Also, I get the feeling that most folks on RPG Open are more interested in talking about games than actually playing them. This really does not have anything to do with Tang, just my thoughts about tBP in general...

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Zachary The FirstMy God.

That means 499,900 Exalted threads were snuffed out in an instant.

The thing that bothers me is how this will affect the Play-by-Post forum. Losing four months worth of gaming posts is no fun.

Quote from: Zachary The FirstMy God.

That means 499,900 Exalted threads were snuffed out in an instant.

"I feel a great disturbance in the Force. As if 499,900 Exalted threads suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced."


TGA

Quote from: AegyptoThe thing that bothers me is how this will affect the Play-by-Post forum. Losing four months worth of gaming posts is no fun.

Seriously, that is sad.  I hope they're able to back up a fair amount of it.  That and the AP forums would be devastated (if they didn't keep backup txt copies themselves) if they couldn't.

One thing about tangency is if you dont go with the group think that goes on over there you get dogpiled, and eventually banned. They are tollerant only as long as you agree with them. That kind of behavior has no place on an RPG site, its about games, not about global warming, Bush's latest mistake, Ketooms, or anything of the like. when tangency outgrew the gaminging portion it should have been reevaluated.

when you have gamers talking off topic, it doesnt take over a board, its when the non gaming friends show up to be part of a clique is when it starts to overflow.

And for the life of me I dont know why they wont trim off old posts, its not like you can find any if you wanted to anyway

There are some really good, thoughtful threads on Tagency. Then you get the waste of bandwidth that are the 'I've got a new pen!' or 'Post boosting' threads. Wierd.

Quote from: James McMurrayWhat I find so interesting about all this is the sheer number of people on this board that dislike other boards but continue read them. Why do people do that? I figure that if you hate them and they've banned you, why bother?

There were several questions along the same lines so I chose yours.

First of all, I don't think it has to be absolute love or hate. I should also get out of the way that I have never been warned, suspended or banned on RPG.net. I also haven't left with the notion that I will never come back.

I still perceive good things at RPG.net. For instance it's a pretty good place to get information and news. The userbase is huge and reports all sorts of things from all corners of the world.

The huge userbase also means that there is a variety of games being discussed. I feel the variety is not what it used to be but still, it's damn impressive.

There are also some great users over there. Fortunately, you can find many of those here. Personally, I became more comfortable leaving when I saw that guys like Balbinus were also members of other forums.

Things such as trolling, xenophobia, homophobia are quickly dealt with, which is great. This comes with a trap I feel moderation has fallen for, unfortunately.


On the not-so-positive side, the moderation team is hellbent on being "accepting" to the greatest number of people. This leads to ridiculous accusations of "group attacks on X" which are sometimes laughable.

There's also the fact, as JimBob pointed out, that Tangency is responsible greatly for the moderation over there. Simply put, you want moderation to be appropriate for the environment. Moderation on a porn website is different than on a "First Time Mom" website. Same thing here. Moderation on a general interest website is different than on a roleplaying website.

One byproduct of this "accepting policy" is the useless  need to constantly be "positive". By that I mean that over there, there's this extremely artificial vibe that you need to talk of how great things are. Pointing out negative facts is sometimes seen as "trolling" or "threadcrapping" no matter how true they are. What you end up with most of the time is empty, senseless lovefest like the "awesome SteveD phenomenon" that JimBob sometimes refer to. You know, where all you have to say is how your games are awesome, and your players are awesome and everything is "awesomified", without ever having any fucking substance to your arguments.  

But probably the worse aspect of RPG.net currently is the rampant elitism and clique-ish nature of the place. Over there, a large number of users judge your posts and opinions by the number of posts you have and how popular you are. This leads other users into pretending they like popular things so they can gain acceptance. I know for a fact some posters over there are pimping games they have never read and never played as if they were the best thing since sliced bread. This is rather depressing and is not conducive to sincere discussions.

This leads to a forum where interaction is based on popularity. And it makes RPG.net constantly behind the curve in what's happening. When the Forge was all new and shiny, people at the Big Purple derided that place unnecessarily and didn't understand half of what is going on. Now that it's mostly irrelevant but popular, people are hyping the place while still not understanding half of what's going on over there.

All I can say is that I've been a regular on RPGnet since...oh, about two incarnations ago.  I've never received a warning or had the slightest problem with the mods.  The RP forum is more active than just about any other RPG site on the web, which along with the Gaming Index and the bi-weekly reviews more than justifies the domain.  Yes, there are cycles of certain types of issues (waves of posts following new releases of certain games, indie-RPG darlings of the moment, the ever-returning "price of RPGs" debates, etc.)  Oddly enough I've never had a problem ignoring topics that didn't interest me, though.

It's interesting how Tangency has grown pretty much into its own entity, though, even while the rest of the board remains active and interesting.

I've kept an eye open for years, looking for other sites that were as useful and interesting, and they've been hard to come by.  (As a tangent, can anyone recommend some other good RPG sites?  (apart from this one, that is).)

Ah, I just knew I would find a discussion about this subject at TheRPGSite. :haw: Great minds also seem to think alike, since my first response was also "so why not ditch Tangency and refocus on real gaming?" Not that it would happen with the current administration.

On to specifics:

Quote from: Consonant DudeI cannot see a day where they will separate the two communities. I think they like the pathetic outlook of users telling each others what they had for dinner and exchanging secret geek handshakes like it's actually something you should be proud of, while that Curt continues to mis-moderate the place like it's a freaky gay advocacy forum.

Yeah. What galls me is how RPG.NET used to be the coolest general gaming site you could visit about two or three years ago, and it has since been turned into a grownup version of Livejournal. A place where genuine debate about gaming is no longer tolerated, but look, you can join in on the fun of talking about keetoms, your headache in the morning, and your favourite gay/transfolk-friendly colours!

While we are at it, Curt, you useless nitwit, get off your fucking gay cross already. The rest of the world doesn't give a fuck about your Holy Martyrdom, and even less about hiding the sausage. It is 2007, dude, and just because some random loser uses gay as a general pejorative doesn't mean you have received Divine Dispensation to right their wrongs by banning them. I don't think I have seen too many worse moderators than you, and I have seen an awful lot of bad ones.

QuoteOn another note, when the forums crashed there was a note over in Trouble Tickets saying Jared Sorensen was "gone for good". I assume this means permabanned. I wonder what that clown did this time.

Quote from: GrimgentOnce the forums come back, check that "Nazis Are Munchkins" thread at RP Open. Sorensen suddenly started claiming that the jokes in the thread are against the guidelines of the forum, and when the mods wanted to know exactly what the problem was, he began quoting the rules along with comments like "consider this your warning" and "my mod voice is black".

Now this - although it regrettably cost Jared his posting privileges at The Big Purple - is funny as hell. I don't know Jared, don't remember his posts either, but that could be exactly the right way of going out in a blaze of glory. To tell the truth, I was occasionally getting the urge to do something just like he did (only with a stronger "Kiero sucks!" message), before my sanity returned. Shitty moderation does that to you.

Quote from: J ArcaneI never quite understood why this pisses so many people off. "How dare people talk about things you don't want to talk about! They should only be allowed to talk about what I want to talk about! But the mods are bad fascist censors!"

Quote from: hackmastergeneralNo. Because, of course, it is perfectly possible to carry on conversation without getting warned or banned. Its not, however, possible to carry on a conversation being a cockmunch and not get threatened or banned. Theres a difference.

My problem is that the whole corpus of rules were changed over our heads without there being a need for it (I am only talking about Open; Tangency and its requirements are completely inconsequential to me, because Tangency should be an appendix to the main site, and not its main driving force). For example, about two or three years ago, RPG.NET not only allowed heated discussion about gaming subjects, but was actually infamous for it.

There was even a (generally Tangency) clique which noisily left because they were thinking RPGNet was unfriendly to various groups (minorities were cited, but I think the general message was against "non-niceness" in general). While their requests were openly ridiculed back then - including by people who were, or still are active moderators, like Kuma and (IIRC) Darren. Today, it is as if the same group of thin-skinned attention whores had taken over the place, and set their agenda as the rules. When the boards come back, look for the letter of "the Undersigned", and compare them - especially in the context of the responses - with the current guidelines and their enforcement.

Second, I believe the current strategy of moderation/site administration is a poor one. I am no enemy of moderation; being a moderator myself on a subforum of RPG.HU, I readily deal with people who break the spirit of the rules (I don't moderate just by the letter of them, if possible). However, the particular way RPG.NET does it is, I believe, harmful for open discussion. In debate, there are always disagreements that result in hurt feelings, anger or general resentment; there is no avoiding it. People, even otherwise relaxed people, need an opportunity to kick back, or occasionally to vent steam. By over-moderating, the possibility is removed (since the consequences of going off are severe and administered without an understanding of or consideration for context), yet hostilities do not disappear. Instead, they collect under the surface, increasing pressure and resulting in either passive-agressive behaviour (that is, within-the-rules weaselly behaviour, the kind of underhanded insults you would choke someone for if you could) or people snapping and getting banned like Jared and many, many others.

Right now, RPG.NET is this place: it has a constraining and poisonous atmosphere, frustrated moderators and rules designed for the most delicate little flowers in the fucking garden. That's not to say I consider every opinion worthy of inclusion. Some users just can't get along and need to be removed for the good of others (Mark "kamikaze" Hughes comes to my mind, but - with all due respect otherwise - a good argument could also be made for nisarg/RPGPundit, whose getting an own site to administer seems to have done him a lot of good). But that's no longer the case. Now, the mods are banning good people who have been a positive influence on the site and who made it a fun place, just because they no longer fit the changed policies and because they aren't the precious little flowers in need of protection (who, if I might remind anyone, are generally non-contributors on the gaming side). That sucks. That's betraying the trust of those who invested their opinions and work in the forums, and made them successful.

Also, I would have been permabanned for this message on The Big Purple. Think about it a little.

And finally, a friendly message to all those who would disagree with me:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v198/Melan/rolleyesbarf13.gif)

Quote from: Consonant DudeThis leads to ridiculous accusations of "group attacks on X" which are sometimes laughable.

I still think the "Misspelling The as Teh is a group attack on dyslexics" was about the funniest thing I've ever seen on big purple :D

Quote from: Tom B(As a tangent, can anyone recommend some other good RPG sites?  (apart from this one, that is).)

Story-games is kind of an opposite to this one (rpgsite). Where this one focuses too much on traditional games, Story-games focuses too much on new-shiny-weird. If the qualitiesof both could be put together and the faults of both could be ditched, you'd have a hell of a website.

Then there's Levi's gamecraft, which is unfortunately totally useless despite having some nice ideas to it.

There's isn't yet a balanced, all-around gaming website to take RPG.net's place.

Quote from: Consonant DudeI should also get out of the way that I have never been warned, suspended or banned on RPG.net. I also haven't left with the notion that I will never come back.

For the record, neither have I - on RPG.NET or elsewhere, except for a small, small number of deleted posts. Also, I post in the worthwhile threads, of which there is still a fair number of. I don't "hate" RPGNet; if that were the truth, I'd just have found a discussion forum elsewhere. I like it too much not to care.

[edit]In all fairness, it comes to my mind I was recently warned for posting links to covers of a Hungarian science fiction magazine that had tits on 'em. I included a warning, and my post was perfectly on topic (discussion about sword&sorcery), but it got edited and I got a note to cease. I did.[/edit]

Quote from: Consonant DudeStory-games is kind of an opposite to this one (rpgsite). Where this one focuses too much on traditional games, Story-games focuses too much on new-shiny-weird. If the qualitiesof both could be put together and the faults of both could be ditched, you'd have a hell of a website.

Then there's Levi's gamecraft, which is unfortunately totally useless despite having some nice ideas to it.

There's isn't yet a balanced, all-around gaming website to take RPG.net's place.

I think Storygames does what it does pretty well, I don't post there anymore but that's mostly as I didn't feel especially part of the group and didn't feel I had much to contribute to their interests, I don't rule out posting there again at some point in future though I doubt I will.

Personally I rather like the split between Storygame and the RPGsite, it's like we have a thematic gaming forum and an adventure gaming forum almost :D

Of course, looking at the top ten rpg thread in the top forum here I notice, probably to the great surprise of many Storygame posters, that indie/thematic type games actually have quite a solid following here.  They crop up in an awful lot of top tens, including top tens from people who are plainly mostly playing adventure games.

Oh, for the record, generally I like Kiero and find his posts interesting.

Quote from: BalbinusOf course, looking at the top ten rpg thread in the top forum here I notice, probably to the great surprise of many Storygame posters, that indie/thematic type games actually have quite a solid following here.  They crop up in an awful lot of top tens, including top tens from people who are plainly mostly playing adventure games.

Yup! What's interesting is that I think you'd see a similar breakdown over there. You probably have the hardcore "story game afficionado" and then you have people who like all sorts of games.

I don't post there (due to a couple of reasons) so I might be wrong but a few threads I read led me to the impression that gamers are more alike than they think.

It's too bad we have to have this "war" :rolleyes: ;)

Quote from: Consonant DudeIt's too bad we have to have this "war" :rolleyes: ;)

At least it's civil.

Quote from: Dominus NoxHas anyone openly just left rpg.net after saying something to the effect of "It's just fucking impossible to have a conversation around here anymore without getting threatened or banned." or "I just can't stand the pompous asses running this place anymore."?

I'm not big on making dramatic exits, but I'm not shy on admitting that I left RPGnet because the moderation seemed oppressive.  And I wasn't a troublemaker (you know, like JimBob ;) ).  I just felt like I couldn't express myself freely in such a heavy-handed environment.

The RPG sections still have a lot of good material.  I occasionally drop by the review section.  But the forums no longer feel like fun to me.

And this:

Quote from: MelanAnd finally, a friendly message to all those who would disagree with me:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v198/Melan/rolleyesbarf13.gif)

That's going in as an official smiley selection ASAP.

I've lurked and posted on RPG.net since about '97/'98.  When I first started posting I got flamed out immediatley - for being new.  But I loved that.  That's what I love about this place - it's vibrant and passionate and it doesn't take prisoners.  RPG.net started to lose it after the infestation by the "Winna pack".  Now at least two of them are mods and it shows.

RPG.net, due to its Winna'd (no offence to the girl personally, but she seemed to accrue this cult of popularity made up by 'better than thou' drama queens, posting little of import but ruling the place like the popular kids of filmic high schools) atmosphere is like that town from the twilight zone where the little boy with power over reality wants everyone to be happy - or else.

But I don't care.  Cause I'm here.  And so are most of the people I liked reading there, with more and more coming over everyday.
Now if only I get a few more choice posters I'll be really happy.

Quote from: StumpydaveRPG.net, due to its Winna'd (no offence to the girl personally, but she seemed to accrue this cult of popularity made up by 'better than thou' drama queens, posting little of import but ruling the place like the popular kids of filmic high schools) atmosphere is like that town from the twilight zone where the little boy with power over reality wants everyone to be happy - or else.

Funny you should mention her... that was the clique that set the tone for RPG.net and now most of that clique isnt even there anymore!

Quote from: jrientsThat's going in as an official smiley selection ASAP.

Done!

Try :rollbarf: and see what happens.

Great googly-moogly it's like someone set off a thermonuclear device causing exponential growth of this heated topic, or something.  Where to start.

Quote from: Tom B(As a tangent, can anyone recommend some other good RPG sites? (apart from this one, that is).)

If you mean general RPG sites they're few an far between.  But here's a couple I know of, just be aware I've not actually clicked many of these links in ages so some of the boards may have gone AWOL.

GameCraft (http://gamecraft.7.forumer.com/index.php?sid=0252d14b28368c0e7acf36aefd50c18a)

The Hinterwelt Forums (http://www.hinterwelt.com/HWEForum/)

Dragonsfoot (http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/)

EnWorld (http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/index.php?) (A D20 forum, I think.)

Palladium Forums (http://forums.palladium-megaverse.com/)

Mortality Net (http://www.mortality.net/board/index.php)

International Game Desingers Association Forums (http://www.igda.org/Forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=61) (Don't remember if this is RPG or MUD related.)

That's about it for my bookmarks.  Anyone else have any RPG forum links they'd like to share?

RE: The whole "Tangency is the Devil" thing because it's "not RPG related" I find that arguement a bit odd, especially considering the number of other fora that exist that are NOT RPG related.  What about Other Media Open?  Not exactly game related that.

I don't think anyone is arguing that Tangency is the Devil because it's not RPG related.  I think people are suggesting that Tangency is the Devil and it is not RPG related.

Other Media Open doesn't influence site policy... as far as I know, anyway... and neither does Play by Post.

Quote from: Kester PelagiusRE: The whole "Tangency is the Devil" thing because it's "not RPG related" I find that arguement a bit odd, especially considering the number of other fora that exist that are NOT RPG related.  What about Other Media Open?  Not exactly game related that.

Its not the Devil becasue its not RPG related, its the devil becasue it overpowers the RPG related boards, as for other media, its at least a little related... Firefly movie/game. Star Wars movie/game. Star Trek movie/game. Dune movie/novel/game. Comic Books Champions/DC Hero/Marvel Supers Heros/Heroes Unlimited/Nessesary Evil. Music inspires games etc etc etc...

Quote from: jrientsI don't think anyone is arguing that Tangency is the Devil because it's not RPG related.  I think people are suggesting that Tangency is the Devil and it is not RPG related.

Oh, well, in that case. . .

Here's a few more forums from my bookmarks:

Pen & Paper RPG Forums (http://www.pen-paper.net/forum/) (Was removed but apparently is back.)

JAGS BBS (http://www.jagsrpg.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=PNphpBB2&file=index)  (Forum for the JAGS RPG.)


Yahoo Groups

Gamma World (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/gammaworld/)

RPG Create (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rpg-create/)

The OD&D Guild (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theoddguild/)

PA Forge (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/paforge/)

I'm in withdrawal.

Also, what's the deal with Sorensen? Such a cliffhanger.

Ok, those "name levels" suck hard.

Quote from: NYTFLYRFunny you should mention her... that was the clique that set the tone for RPG.net and now most of that clique isnt even there anymore!

I find the irony of that development to be hilarious.

Quote from: BalbinusBut yeah, it's obvious that Tangency is the problem.  Personally I think they should split it into tangency.net and rpg.net.

That's a good suggestion, but I know that Skotos devotes a bar minimum of their resources to keeping RPGnet running (i.e., the cheaper and quicker that they can fix problems with RPGnet, the better). The old search function issue was a great example -- rather than work out the bugs or upgrade the server (neither of which would have been too cost or time intensive), they just dropped the function entirely.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityOk, those "name levels" suck hard.

Glad to know I'm not the only one who hates them...

Quote from: jdrakehThat's a good suggestion, but I know that Skotos devotes a bar minimum of their resources to keeping RPGnet running (i.e., the cheaper and quicker that they can fix problems with RPGnet, the better). The old search function issue was a great example -- rather than work out the bugs or upgrade the server (neither of which would have been too cost or time intensive), they just dropped the function entirely.

Good example.  Another would be the fact, if you try to go to RPGnet now, it returns either a "page can not be found" or "server can not be found" error page.  Whereas the Skotos main site, and it's forums, are perfectly accessible.  Yet, if memory serves, and this could have changed since then, it's been stated both sites are run off the same server.

So how is it one site is down but the other is not?

Simple enough.  One is a member "pay" site and one is not.

Quote from: NYTFLYRIts not the Devil becasue its not RPG related, its the devil becasue it overpowers the RPG related boards, as for other media, its at least a little related... Firefly movie/game. Star Wars movie/game. Star Trek movie/game. Dune movie/novel/game. Comic Books Champions/DC Hero/Marvel Supers Heros/Heroes Unlimited/Nessesary Evil. Music inspires games etc etc etc...

C'mon!  It's not that bad.  And all this talk of Tangency being a community unto itself is utter nonsense!  Seriously it's not as if it has it's own livejornal (http://community.livejournal.com/rpgnettangency/) blog or anything.  There is no secret community of Tangency!  ;)

Quote from: Kester PelagiusGood example.  Another would be the fact, if you try to go to RPGnet now, it returns either a "page can not be found" or "server can not be found" error page.  Whereas the Skotos main site, and it's forums, are perfectly accessible.  Yet, if memory serves, and this could have changed since then, it's been stated both sites are run off the same server.

Actually, I believe that RPGnet is on its own server (acquired from Sandy Antunes, IIRC). This maybe incorrect, though. My memory is a bit fuzzy. That said, either way, I'm 100% positive about the policy regarding its maintenance.

Quote from: GrimGentOnce the forums come back, check that "Nazis Are Munchkins" thread at RP Open. Sorensen suddenly started claiming that the jokes in the thread are against the guidelines of the forum, and when the mods wanted to know exactly what the problem was, he began quoting the rules along with comments like "consider this your warning" and "my mod voice is black".

Cool. Maybe he'll come here. Maybe even manage to drag John Wick back with him, kicking and screaming if necessary.

RPGPundit

Quote from: GabrielMeh.  Let them turn it into Tangency.net.  It isn't like they weren't already openly condoning the derailment of any RPG related thread anyway.

Maybe it will be down long enough that some of the better posters will come over here and settle in.  I miss reading some of them.

Well, this place feels more and more to me like the OLD RPG.net felt way back when. Of course, the mods here are saner than theirs ever were, which is what bodes well for this place's future.

RPGPundit

BTW, right now, while RPG.net is down, might be a very good time for ANY of you with a blog to advertise these forums on your blog.  Lots of people who otherwise might never have come here may give it a try just because they're suffering RPG.net withdrawl.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Consonant DudeStory-games is kind of an opposite to this one (rpgsite). Where this one focuses too much on traditional games, Story-games focuses too much on new-shiny-weird. If the qualitiesof both could be put together and the faults of both could be ditched, you'd have a hell of a website.

Then there's Levi's gamecraft, which is unfortunately totally useless despite having some nice ideas to it.

There's isn't yet a balanced, all-around gaming website to take RPG.net's place.

I think this place is it. Any other place, where you try to mix RPGs and Storygames and give them and their fanatics equal time, will end up getting caught up in a mire of either flamewars or mod repression.  The two hobbies are not compatible online.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Kester PelagiusGood example.  Another would be the fact, if you try to go to RPGnet now, it returns either a "page can not be found" or "server can not be found" error page.  Whereas the Skotos main site, and it's forums, are perfectly accessible.  Yet, if memory serves, and this could have changed since then, it's been stated both sites are run off the same server.

So how is it one site is down but the other is not?

Simple enough.  One is a member "pay" site and one is not.

Umm, well the rpg.net problem is currently a forum database error.  So if Skotos has a separate forum with its own database...

Quote from: RPGPunditI think this place is it.

It isn't balanced nor all-around, because of what follows what you just said:

Quote from: RPGPunditAny other place, where you try to mix RPGs and Storygames and give them and their fanatics equal time, will end up getting caught up in a mire of either flamewars or mod repression.  The two hobbies are not compatible online.

Simply put, a lot of people don't draw clear lines between RPGs and "story games" the way others (like yourself) do. We can argue all day long about where the lines are, how clear the boundaries and the overlaps. And what each of the two extreme camps think and say about the "enemy".

But it really doesn't matter to some of us. We're quite happy with the diversity offered by roleplaying. And sooner or later I would hope a forum that is welcoming to all sorts of roleplaying games without going overboard in one direction or another will see the light of day. But until then, there is no such forum. RPG.net might be the closest to that but it is hampered by other problems.

That being said, RPGsite has a lot going for it. I quite like this place and the way it's run so far.

Quote from: Consonant DudeIt isn't balanced nor all-around, because of what follows what you just said:



Simply put, a lot of people don't draw clear lines between RPGs and "story games" the way others (like yourself) do. We can argue all day long about where the lines are, how clear the boundaries and the overlaps. And what each of the two extreme camps think and say about the "enemy".

But it really doesn't matter to some of us. We're quite happy with the diversity offered by roleplaying. And sooner or later I would hope a forum that is welcoming to all sorts of roleplaying games without going overboard in one direction or another will see the light of day. But until then, there is no such forum. RPG.net might be the closest to that but it is hampered by other problems.

That being said, RPGsite has a lot going for it. I quite like this place and the way it's run so far.

Y'know, ideological debates aside, I believe that you can discuss any RPG you want here.  Pundit has a hate-on for Nobilis, but if you started a thread actually discussing something concrete about Nobilis, whether it be your own game, some rules questions, or even a debate over the setting, I don't think you'd get rpg.net levels of thread-crapping here.

I don't see people on therpgsite deliberately pissing in each others' cheerios like I do at TBPS, which is the main thing it has going for it over TBPS at this point, IMO.

Quote from: Kester PelagiusC'mon!  It's not that bad.  And all this talk of Tangency being a community unto itself is utter nonsense!  Seriously it's not as if it has it's own livejornal (http://community.livejournal.com/rpgnettangency/) blog or anything.  There is no secret community of Tangency!  ;)

No! You've doomed us all!

:D

Quote from: RedFoxY'know, ideological debates aside, I believe that you can discuss any RPG you want here.  Pundit has a hate-on for Nobilis, but if you started a thread actually discussing something concrete about Nobilis, whether it be your own game, some rules questions, or even a debate over the setting, I don't think you'd get rpg.net levels of thread-crapping here.

I don't see people on therpgsite deliberately pissing in each others' cheerios like I do at TBPS, which is the main thing it has going for it over TBPS at this point, IMO.

Shit, on RPG.net I made a point of not posting (as a rule) on threads that were clearly marked for "game x" if "game x" was a game I disliked or had nothing to do with.

If you talk about Nobilis as part of some other thread subject, or try to talk about nobilis on the Amber forum, or whatever, then you'll probably have a big fight on your hand.

If you start a thread about Nobilis saying how great Nobilis is, depending on how you phrase it, you might see me coming in there to tell you why it isn't.

But if you start a thread because you have a question regarding some rules element of Nobilis, or some setting element, or want to discuss something within the game, not only would I not ban you or stop the thread, I probably wouldn't comment at all.

Ditto for any other RPG I dislike. As long as its in the right forum, and serves some purpose other than singing the praises of or spreading ideological claptrap, I think its fine to post about it here.

You just won't see it specially protected by moderation the way certain pet games are over at RPG.net (while you're allowed to generally piss all over other games).

RPGPundit

Yeah, but what I mean to get at here is that it's not just you.  I think everyone here has, so far, respected that kind of boundary.  At TBPS it's par for the course to start sideline thread-crap arguments.  It's a forum in-joke to say, "Why don't you use Exalted?" because people really say shit like that all the time.

Serious discussion is often derailed by shit like that, and it's the A #1 reason I find this place better for discussing RPGs in earnest.

Yeah, no argument from me. This place lets people talk.

However, there's a certain polarization toward certain games and styles. Just like story-games tends to. There are strong assumptions and inclinations due to the very way these communities grew to be.

Quote from: Consonant DudeYeah, no argument from me. This place lets people talk.

However, there's a certain polarization toward certain games and styles. Just like story-games tends to. There are strong assumptions and inclinations due to the very way these communities grew to be.

Yeah.  You can talk about any RPG you like here, but you're going to get a better calibre of conversation about some games than others.  If for some reason I really needed some Exalted or Nobilis info then I'd probably be better served by heading over to RPGnet.

Quote from: NYTFLYROne thing about tangency is if you dont go with the group think that goes on over there you get dogpiled, and eventually banned. They are tollerant only as long as you agree with them. That kind of behavior has no place on an RPG site, its about games, not about global warming, Bush's latest mistake, Ketooms, or anything of the like. when tangency outgrew the gaminging portion it should have been reevaluated.

when you have gamers talking off topic, it doesnt take over a board, its when the non gaming friends show up to be part of a clique is when it starts to overflow.

And for the life of me I dont know why they wont trim off old posts, its not like you can find any if you wanted to anyway

umm...no?

if you don't go with the group think and act like a cockmunch, you get dogpiled and banned.

Again, you can disagree, butthe only people who get banned are people who just can't stop acting like cockmunches.  People who disagree, but don't act like a cockmunch, get along just fine.

Quote from: jrientsYeah.  You can talk about any RPG you like here, but you're going to get a better calibre of conversation about some games than others.  If for some reason I really needed some Exalted or Nobilis info then I'd probably be better served by heading over to RPGnet.

And I'd be better served by talking about Star Wars D6 over at The Rancor Pit.  But that's really about selecting a forum that has a hardliner fan-base surrounding one or two games than talking about some sort of game "type" split.  This is still a better caliber general discussion RPG board than any other I've seen.

I've never had a problem discussing games on RPG.net, except all the White Wolf threads Pundit used to jump into, with his "WW is teh EEEVIL!"  ;)

D&D has a large userbase on Big Purple, the main problem I have with D&D isn't non D&Ders shitting on it, its OLD D&Ders shitting on it and trumpeting RC every freakin thread.And refusing to admit that D&D now means "3.5 D&D", just like old WoD is now oWoD, not WoD any more...

One thing I have seen lately I didn't see when i was there before is this sudden urge some members have to police things that might be offensive...to someone, anyone at all... and then crow about it.

Maybe I just don't remember seeing it before, but if I had a mind to declare a swine war and set up a rogues gallery I could pop over to RPG.net now (or whenever..) and pick up two or three names of posters I've never exchanged words with just for their tendency to say

"I saw this post and I totally think it would offend someone. I'm not sure who, but I reported it. Why haven't the mods banned this guy yet?"

Its frankly odd. Their comment suggests that they didn't personally find it offensive, but they reported it anyway. They don't respond to posters that irk them, they report them. They don't wait to be offended, they report everything...

Disturbing, and a good reason to stay out of trouble tickets so as to not loose what little faith in humanity I still have. :rolleyes:

Quote from: HackmastergeneralAnd refusing to admit that D&D now means "3.5 D&D"

I don't know what that's supposed to mean.  I'm running my second 3.5 campaign right now and playing in someone else's 3.5 game.  But I'm also running '81 Basic/Expert D&D at a con next weekend.  (aside - Crap!  I gotta write some adventures!)  Both are D&D.  I don't see how the existence of a new edition of D&D makes an older version somehow less dungeony and dragony.

Quote from: jrientsI don't know what that's supposed to mean.  I'm running my second 3.5 campaign right now and playing in someone else's 3.5 game.  But I'm also running '81 Basic/Expert D&D at a con next weekend.  (aside - Crap!  I gotta write some adventures!)  Both are D&D.  I don't see how the existence of a new edition of D&D makes an older version somehow less dungeony and dragony.

I think he means for reference purposes.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralI've never had a problem discussing games on RPG.net, except all the White Wolf threads Pundit used to jump into, with his "WW is teh EEEVIL!"  ;)

a) Pundit spells it "teh"??

b) Pundit, what was your handle over at RPGnet?

nisarg

Quote from: GoldenApeI think he means for reference purposes.

Ah, gotcha!  If I ask a question about 3.5, I don't want to hear AD&D answer or vice versa.

el diablo robotico: Pundit was Nisarg.  And I went by American Badass.

Quote from: jrientsAh, gotcha!  If I ask a question about 3.5, I don't want to hear AD&D answer or vice versa.

el diablo robotico: Pundit was Nisarg.  And I went by American Badass.

You gotta be fucking kidding.

Quote from: ImperatorYou gotta be fucking kidding.

Yeah, I was just messing with you.  Pundit really was Nisarg, but I went by jrients over there.

Quote from: jrientsYeah, I was just messing with you.  Pundit really was Nisarg, but I went by jrients over there.

I thought your name looked familiar.

Quote from: jrientsYeah, I was just messing with you.  Pundit really was Nisarg, but I went by jrients over there.

Oh, I knew you as jrients over there :) It's just that, if you had been also American Badass, I would have to built you a cathedral or something. You know, to worship you.

Quote from: GoldenApeI thought your name looked familiar.

Yeah, I go by jrients or Jeff Rients pretty much everywhere I hang out on the internet.  It helps me behave myself to use my real name.

BTW, I love your pink robotar.

Edit to add:  Imperator, I can't keep up that sort of pretense.  I just don't have the willpower to be someone else for such a sustained period.  Yet I play roleplaying games.  Odd.

Quote from: jrientsAnd I went by American Badass.

American Badass was one of rpg.net's most distinguished posters. To usurp his mantle even in jest is to sully his legacy.

However.

If you supply proof positive that you were indeed American Badass, then I should like to worship you, clean up after your cat and do your kids' homework.

PS: Aha.

Quote from: jrientsI don't know what that's supposed to mean.  I'm running my second 3.5 campaign right now and playing in someone else's 3.5 game.  But I'm also running '81 Basic/Expert D&D at a con next weekend.  (aside - Crap!  I gotta write some adventures!)  Both are D&D.  I don't see how the existence of a new edition of D&D makes an older version somehow less dungeony and dragony.

I think what he's referring to is the tendency of a lot of the uber-grognards to deliberately pretend you're talking about OD&D when you refer to the term.  

They refuse to acknowledge that 3.0/3.5 are ALSO D&D.  

It's one of those idiotic little conversation ploys that they think is so clever, but is mostly over used and stupid.

And I must also concur on the RC twaddle.  RC got to be as bad as Exalted after a while there, and I was very sad and frustrated when it seemed for a short bit there that some of that constant crap was bleeding over into the forums here, though thankfully it seems to have subsided.

Quote from: jrientsYeah, I go by jrients or Jeff Rients pretty much everywhere I hang out on the internet.  It helps me behave myself to use my real name.

BTW, I love your pink robotar.

Thanks. :D Pink's my favourite colour, and robots just kick ass all around.

American Badass told me I rocked. Obviously the fellow was slightly insane, but it's a nice thought.

Quote from: J ArcaneI think what he's referring to is the tendency of a lot of the uber-grognards to deliberately pretend you're talking about OD&D when you refer to the term.  

They refuse to acknowledge that 3.0/3.5 are ALSO D&D.  

It's one of those idiotic little conversation ploys that they think is so clever, but is mostly over used and stupid.

And I must also concur on the RC twaddle.  RC got to be as bad as Exalted after a while there, and I was very sad and frustrated when it seemed for a short bit there that some of that constant crap was bleeding over into the forums here, though thankfully it seems to have subsided.

Y'know, I went out and bought a copy of the RC on ebay because of that twaddle (thankfully for cheap) and...  I don't see what's so great about it.

A friend's copy of Castles & Crusades looked worlds better.

Quote from: RedFoxY'know, I went out and bought a copy of the RC on ebay because of that twaddle (thankfully for cheap) and...  I don't see what's so great about it.

A friend's copy of Castles & Crusades looked worlds better.

Frankly I'm not interested in C&C either.

It frankly didn't look like anything I wanted to spend money on.  The atrocious layout and editing alone scared me off, and the focus of the game is towards an audience that is not me.

I'm what I suppose you could call a "new school" D&D player.  I think 3.0 was the epitome of the series.

Quote from: J ArcaneFrankly I'm not interested in C&C either.

It frankly didn't look like anything I wanted to spend money on.  The atrocious layout and editing alone scared me off, and the focus of the game is towards an audience that is not me.

I'm what I suppose you could call a "new school" D&D player.  I think 3.0 was the epitome of the series.

My head gets spinny with all the feats and options and whatnot, but I think D20's a solid system.

I couldn't even say what the difference is between 3.0 and 3.5.  I think 3.5 has easier notation for facing/reach, or sommat?

I just use the SRD for all my needs, honestly.  It's free.

There's tons of differences between 3.0 and 3.5, but most are easily missed and won't cause you much trouble if they're not used.

Quote from: RedFoxMy head gets spinny with all the feats and options and whatnot, but I think D20's a solid system.

I couldn't even say what the difference is between 3.0 and 3.5.  I think 3.5 has easier notation for facing/reach, or sommat?

I just use the SRD for all my needs, honestly.  It's free.

3.5 is like moving to a new group, and they've already got a bunch of wierd random house rules in place that've built up over several years.  

It's a lot of little changes, some good, some bad, but none terribly obvious, which can really throw you off.

Personally, I would've been happy to stick with 3.0, but I use d20SRD.org a lot, as well as e-Tools, and that sort of led to a grudging migration and acceptance of the new version simply because it was what I had rules for.

Sort of like upgrading a Microsoft OS.  You really don't want to, but eventually you have no choice.

Quote from: Hackmastergeneralumm...no?

if you don't go with the group think and act like a cockmunch, you get dogpiled and banned.

Again, you can disagree, butthe only people who get banned are people who just can't stop acting like cockmunches.  People who disagree, but don't act like a cockmunch, get along just fine.

You're in such a state of denial it's not even funny.

You really don't need to be a cockmunch to get dogpiled. All you need to do is state something unpopular. That's all. The groupthink effect over there can be quite strong.

Wake the fuck up and stop lying to yourself. Or shut the fuck up and stop lying to everybody else.

Quote from: Consonant DudeWake the fuck up and stop lying to yourself. Or shut the fuck up and stop lying to everybody else.

I just wanted to quote that for no other reason than it is a cool quote. Carry on.

Quote from: jrientsI don't know what that's supposed to mean.  I'm running my second 3.5 campaign right now and playing in someone else's 3.5 game.  But I'm also running '81 Basic/Expert D&D at a con next weekend.  (aside - Crap!  I gotta write some adventures!)  Both are D&D.  I don't see how the existence of a new edition of D&D makes an older version somehow less dungeony and dragony.

I think that he might be referring to the recent spate of threads at ENWorld and RPGnet wherein self-professed "old-school gamers" refused to acknowledge that D&D 3x was D&D. This is something that I discuss on my blog with great frequency and is, possibly, my largest hobby-related pet peeve. . . the "If it's new, it's crap!" battle cry isn't only bitter, it's rooted in extremely irrational fear.

Quote from: droogAmerican Badass told me I rocked. Obviously the fellow was slightly insane, but it's a nice thought.

Was it American Badass who once said:

"Games should be played like pussy eaten"

Regards,
David R

Quote from: RedFoxA friend's copy of Castles & Crusades looked worlds better.

That wouldn't be mrlost's copy would it? Cuz if so then that would've actually been *my* copy, cuz he was borrowing it from me for a while (unless he went out and bought it afterwards). Just mentioning that cuz it's a funny coincidence.

And thanks to everyone for pointing out that pundit = nisarg. Nice to have the frame of reference.

Quote from: Consonant DudeYou really don't need to be a cockmunch to get dogpiled. All you need to do is state something unpopular. That's all. The groupthink effect over there can be quite strong.

True to the dogpiling. But not true to the banning, unless you subsequently become a cockmunch as a result of the dogpiling (which isn't hard to do if you get pissed off enough at the dogpilers).

Quote from: el diablo robotico. . . unless you subsequently become a cockmunch as a result of the dogpiling (which isn't hard to do if you get pissed off enough at the dogpilers).

Honestly, that's how most (but not all) of the bans I've seen go down over there happen.

Anyways, to me its obvious that both RC D&D and D&D 3.x are D&D.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Consonant DudeOver there, a large number of users judge your posts and opinions by the number of posts you have and how popular you are. This leads other users into pretending they like popular things so they can gain acceptance. I know for a fact some posters over there are pimping games they have never read and never played as if they were the best thing since sliced bread. This is rather depressing and is not conducive to sincere discussions.

I once asked for my postcount to be zeroed. I figured they change usernames, why not postcounts? We know the software allows it, since for a while Cessna was zeroing his postcount each time he banned a user.

They reacted with incomprehension. Why would anyone want such a thing?

I explained that with a postcount in the thousands, some people were thinking well of me and what I said simply because of my postcount. I wanted the worth of what I had to say to be judged simply by what I said, not the postcount next to the post.

Now they reacted with hostility and indignation. I was told that I was wrong, postcounts didn't matter at all. I said, if they don't matter, why not zero mine? I was given a warning and told not to bring it up again.

I said a long time before that that in reality, forums have only one rule: don't fuck with the mods. If the mods like you, you can do whatever you want - see for example a (twice) permabanned poster who moved in with a mod and an admin into a share flat, and then became a mod himself (Curt). If the mods don't like you, then eventually you'll be banned, whatever you've done or not done - see for example, me. "You didn't break any rules but we feel you're generally bad for the site." "Bad for the site" means, "we mods don't like you." One of the causes of the dislike was my generally casual and sometimes brusque posting style; but the real kicker was that I fucked with the mods. I questioned the culture of the site. Questioning Tangency or postcount values is the same as going to a nightclub and questioning it being a pickup joint, or going to church and arguing with the priest about the existence of god.

Don't fuck with the mods. That's the only real rule any forum has.

Melan's post about moderation (http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=70509&postcount=69) was very interesting, and I thank him for it. I find it particularly relevant since he's a moderator of an rpg site with twice as many members as rpg.net.

Quote from: Kester PelagiusRE: The whole "Tangency is the Devil" thing because it's "not RPG related" I find that arguement a bit odd, especially considering the number of other fora that exist that are NOT RPG related. What about Other Media Open? Not exactly game related that.

Tangency is not the devil, it's simply off-topic. You know how when you've got a thread about topic X, someone comes in and blabs about topic Y, and we call it a "threadcrap", and don't like it? Why don't we like it? Because we're having a nice happy discussion about something we're interested in, and this other fucking bullshit is dragged in, shit we're not interested in. Well, it's time to make up a new word: forumcrap. What a threadcrap is to a thread, a forumcrap is to a forum. Tangency is one big forumcrap on rpg.net.

The other thing is as we've said, moderation policies are drive by shit that's happened on Tangency. The moderation on a site about topic X is being driven by stuff which has nothing to do with X. Which is fucked.

Other Media is a different thing, it's actually related to rpgs. I mean, if people are discussing Conan the Barbarian or Thomas Covenant or Star Trek, that's very easy to relate to rpgs. "So, my day at work sucked," or "Marines kill 24 in Haditha" bears absolutely no relation to rpgs.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralAgain, you can disagree, but the only people who get banned are people who just can't stop acting like cockmunches. People who disagree, but don't act like a cockmunch, get along just fine.

ZOMFG u r makin a personla attack on t3h me!

u shud be t3h bannzorzed!

But here, you won't be. An innocent bit of discussion won't lead to surprise warnings or bannings. Just normal geeks talking shit between each-other won't have someone wander in and start editing their posts or hassling them.

Quote from: el diablo roboticoTrue to the dogpiling. But not true to the banning, unless you subsequently become a cockmunch as a result of the dogpiling (which isn't hard to do if you get pissed off enough at the dogpilers).

Well... I got dogpiled a shitload of times, and on each occasion remained cheerful and matter-of-fact. It really drove the fuckers crazy. If you're kicking a guy when he's down, you really hate it when he keeps smiling. But I still got bannzorzed, so there you go.

rpg.net remains a good site, because of its posters, and despite, not because of, the moderation. There are a lot of interesting discussions there - a lot of stuff which doesn't interest me, but would interest others, and a lot of stuff that is pretty stupid, but stupidity is often fun, too. The only reason I don't read it more often is that as an unregistered poster, I can only get 10 posts/page, which makes the big threads too slow to read through.

In answer to those saying, "why rag on the site, just don't read it," again we've got the good old bit of stupidity that's so common online - "the fallacy of the excluded middle." It's not, "either it's a wonderful perfect site and I read every thread, or it's utter shit and I can't bear a word." There are other possibilities, for example, "it has some good stuff, and is good despite, not because of the moderation; with better moderation, this good site could be a great site." Some of us talk about it because we regret the place, we're nostalgic for what could be.

It's like, at the end of my street are two vacant lots, used to be service stations. Now there's an empty building with broken windows, and a patch of rough grass and broken bricks. It's been like that for five years now. Every day when I pass on the way to work or the shops, I feel some regret. Those two lots could be four houses, or twelve units, or twenty apartments, or a small park, or a community garden, or a big shop. "Well if you don't like the vacant lots, just don't look at them! What do you care?" I care because it's sad - it's a waste of potential.

Now, rpg.net isn't a vacant lot. It's more like a somewhat rundown building still being used, but sadly run-down and scrappy-looking. And I feel regret, because it's a waste of potential. They've got 30,000 members, at least a thousand of whom post at least once a week. They could be any kind of site they wanted to. With that number of members, whatever their moderation policy or site focus they'd keep a good level of conversation going. They could have been anything. They chose to be less than they could be.

And why? Because people with no interest in discussing rpgs were instead discussing Dubya and gay marriage and abortion and what they did at work today and their new pen and h4wt cosplay chixxorz, and someone wanted "an emotionally-safe environment." Cessna mocked that phrase once. Now it's in the site's mission statement, in altered form - "as welcoming to as wide a range of users as possible."

Such a waste.

I got tired of standing up for people whose threads were closed or who were banned for reasons I considered unjust, only to have moderators refuse my attempts at making sense.

That, and I felt like I didn't belong anymore.

Great big bags of cheetos!

I guess the best place to begin is with the main topic. . .

RE: Tangency.  Is it off-topic?  Yes, but that's it's entire point and purpose.  Does it sometimes seem like the posts are totally absurd?  That depends on your point of view.

Current events and news threads don't appeal to all adults, but they do to some, and in any forum you're going to have certain current events that just come up.  Having Tangency is at least a pressure valve for people to have a place to post that sort of non-RPG related subject matter.

RE:

QuoteOther Media is a different thing, it's actually related to rpgs. I mean, if people are discussing Conan the Barbarian or Thomas Covenant or Star Trek, that's very easy to relate to rpgs. "So, my day at work sucked," or "Marines kill 24 in Haditha" bears absolutely no relation to rpgs.

I'd say that depends on your RPG.  If I'm running an modern day espionage game current world events may have a very real bearing on my game world or even give me ideas.  As for talking about your day at work, again that depends on the context.  OTOH it's Tangency, the forum to vent and rant and whatever.

RE:

Quoterpg.net remains a good site, because of its posters, and despite, not because of, the moderation. There are a lot of interesting discussions there - a lot of stuff which doesn't interest me, but would interest others, and a lot of stuff that is pretty stupid, but stupidity is often fun, too. The only reason I don't read it more often is that as an unregistered poster, I can only get 10 posts/page, which makes the big threads too slow to read through.

But just think the upside to that is unregistered users don't see Tangency, so you at least don't have to see all the off-topic posts.  OPAH!

BTW: There's a new message up now.  Looks like the upgrade is moving along apace and RPGnet should be back up and running soon.  Maybe.

Quote from: David RWas it American Badass who once said:

"Games should be played like pussy eaten"

Regards,
David R

Brohammer, only he gets to say that, and live.

...And they are back, at least for the moment being.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityBrohammer, only he gets to say that, and live.

I always thought that would make a good tagline for a game company.

"Games for folks who like to..."

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Spike"I saw this post and I totally think it would offend someone. I'm not sure who, but I reported it. Why haven't the mods banned this guy yet?"

Its frankly odd. Their comment suggests that they didn't personally find it offensive, but they reported it anyway. They don't respond to posters that irk them, they report them. They don't wait to be offended, they report everything...

I bet they were the lonely kid that all the other kids hated, who ran to the teacher every time someone did something that might get them in trouble because they liked watching other kids get in trouble.  Yeah, that takes a special kind of personality, that enjoys watching people get in trouble more than having friends.

Quote from: Hackmastergeneralumm...no?

if you don't go with the group think and act like a cockmunch, you get dogpiled and banned.

Again, you can disagree, butthe only people who get banned are people who just can't stop acting like cockmunches.  People who disagree, but don't act like a cockmunch, get along just fine.

The problem comes though, in that what defines "being a cockmunch" has a lot to do with "holding positions I don't agree with".  

This can be a perfectly acceptable way to decide such thing.  I doubt you or I would object to defining racist views like Nox's as "being a cockmunch".

But then you get instances like myself, where simply loudly disagreeing with the direction of the moderation suddenly means you're "a cock munch".  Or disagreeing on the quality of the latest RPGnet darling.

Amado G ultimately got banned because he found one of the Exalted books repugnant, and held no punches about saying so.

Never mind that the word "cock munch" itself would likely be declared a group attack on gays or something given the state of things there.

And further, there's plenty of cockmunches on that site that get away just fine with being banned.  You just have to be a passive-aggressive cockmunch, or a mod, like Maclennan.  You can be a raging troll who starts nothing but arguments with your every post, and still skate by free and clear, like Geza Echs and the rest of the Devil's Advocacy Squad.  

Ultimately the thing that ended up frustrating the shit out of me with RPGnet was inconsistency.  There's not really any rhyme or reason to it beyond "What the mods like/dislike" and "what generates the most whining in the form of reports".  They seem to have a direction in mind, but no real consistent way of applying it.

After my departure, I wandered off to other sites with far less heavy-handed moderation, and frankly I prefer it entirely.

Quote from: J ArcaneThe problem comes though, in that what defines "being a cockmunch" has a lot to do with "holding positions I don't agree with".  

This can be a perfectly acceptable way to decide such thing.  I doubt you or I would object to defining racist views like Nox's as "being a cockmunch".

But then you get instances like myself, where simply loudly disagreeing with the direction of the moderation suddenly means you're "a cock munch".  Or disagreeing on the quality of the latest RPGnet darling.

Amado G ultimately got banned because he found one of the Exalted books repugnant, and held no punches about saying so.

Never mind that the word "cock munch" itself would likely be declared a group attack on gays or something given the state of things there.

And further, there's plenty of cockmunches on that site that get away just fine with being banned.  You just have to be a passive-aggressive cockmunch, or a mod, like Maclennan.  You can be a raging troll who starts nothing but arguments with your every post, and still skate by free and clear, like Geza Echs and the rest of the Devil's Advocacy Squad.  

Ultimately the thing that ended up frustrating the shit out of me with RPGnet was inconsistency.  There's not really any rhyme or reason to it beyond "What the mods like/dislike" and "what generates the most whining in the form of reports".  They seem to have a direction in mind, but no real consistent way of applying it.

After my departure, I wandered off to other sites with far less h

Yo, arcane, how about trying to make like one post without making me the "negative example" for a change? It gets a little fucking old after a while.

Oh, btw, what you said about being a cockmunch equalling "holding views unlike mine" also applies to being a racist.

Quote from: J ArcaneUltimately the thing that ended up frustrating the shit out of me with RPGnet was inconsistency.  There's not really any rhyme or reason to it beyond "What the mods like/dislike" and "what generates the most whining in the form of reports".

I was banned from RPGnet, but this particular issue had been a source of frustration for me going on four years at the time of my banning. There is no point in having rules if they're applied willy-nilly. In order to work as intended, rules have to be applied consistently across the board.

Or as my good friend Thomas liked to say "What's good for one must be good for all, if rules are to create order rather than chaos."

What made this entirely frustrating is there are (or were) several RPGnet mods who should have, by all means, have understood this (i.e., mods with a history of military service and/or employment as aw enforcement officers). This drove me absolutely nuts.

The only real (i.e., inviolate) rule at RPGnet is "Do not question the mods" -- all of the others seem to blink in and out of existence as the mods see fit (especially when other mods happen to be breaking them).

RPGnet is back up, btw...

Quote from: Dominus NoxAmado G ultimately got banned because he found one of the Exalted books repugnant, and held no punches about saying so.

Well, no, actually.  Amado got banned because he was unable to stop doing things so blatant that the mods couldn't avoid banning him without looking like total and irrefutable hypocrites. That's why they banned him with a heavy heart.  He was one of their own, part of the clique, but his personal issues made it necessary to sacrifice him for the sake of maintaining their thin veneer of credibility (more like suspension of disbelief) with the "proles".

RPGPundit

Quote from: el diablo roboticoThat wouldn't be mrlost's copy would it? Cuz if so then that would've actually been *my* copy, cuz he was borrowing it from me for a while (unless he went out and bought it afterwards). Just mentioning that cuz it's a funny coincidence.

Yup, it was probably yours then. I don't think he actually bought C&C, just borrowed yours.

Quote from: Tom BRPGnet is back up, btw...

And the last round of the PbP I was in has vanished into the process.
Still, at least we've got Tangency Pr0n Monday.... :rolleyes:

American Badass was one of the greatest posters who ever lived, we should at some point have a balls to the wall wake for him, in which we toast his memory with cans of beer held high.

I loved his stuff.

As for banning, I have seen people get banned where they really weren't being dicks, it's easier than it looks.

Otherwise though, I'm glad it's back up.  Having it there is no loss to anyone who doesn't post there and is good for those who do, so hurrah.

Quote from: Kester PelagiusEnhance your calm citizen.

I've been on the boards a while.  From the sound of it perhaps a wee bit longer than you.  So I may be referencing things that happened before you joined the forums.
...

Sorry for my overreaction to your earlier post.  I'm aware of some of the things you alluded to, but resented the implication that I was in any way involved with them.  Anyway, I was in a foul mood.  My apologies.

Quote from: el diablo robotico... Oh and PS - Akrasia is one of the best posters over there. Maybe it's cuz he like the old-school stuff like I do.

Thanks! :cheers:

One of the things I like about RPGnet is that there are so many people there who dig 'old school' stuff.  It's rather reassuring to see that many other gamers today also dig the Rules Cyclopedia version of D&D (pity that that fact irritates J Arcane and Hackmastergeneral so much).

Calithena, Melan, Fiendish Doc Samsara, grubman, Melan, Araquel, and many others, generally have cool stuff to say about RPGs (whether about 'older' D&D, JG, Rolemaster, or whatever).

Quote from: BalbinusOh, for the record, generally I like Kiero and find his posts interesting.

I never paid attention to his Wushu threads (since I never had an interest in that), but what he's had to say about C&C has been rather interesting.  It's not my style, but I've enjoyed reading his posts on it.

Quote from: el diablo roboticoTrue to the dogpiling. But not true to the banning, unless you subsequently become a cockmunch as a result of the dogpiling (which isn't hard to do if you get pissed off enough at the dogpilers).

That's more or less part of the plan.  I've seen many threads at RPGnet where a group of posters gang up on one and start insulting him.  Usually the mods get involved, often Topher (in his "non-mod" guise) or Darren, and help fling the poo.  Then, when the poster gets fed up and starts saying the same kinds of things that his attackers are, Cessna or Curt sweep in and swing the banstick.  Every once in a while one of the baiters will use the banstick, but usually Cessna or Curt does it to keep up the illusion of "fairness."

They've been doing the bait-and-ban for years now, and have become very predictable about it.

Quote from: AkrasiaCalithena, Melan, Fiendish Doc Samsara, grubman, Melan, Araquel, and many others, generally have cool stuff to say about RPGs (whether about 'older' D&D, JG, Rolemaster, or whatever).

Double the contribution, double the pleasure! :D

Quote from: GabrielThat's more or less part of the plan.  I've seen many threads at RPGnet where a group of posters gang up on one and start insulting him.  Usually the mods get involved, often Topher (in his "non-mod" guise) or Darren, and help fling the poo.  Then, when the poster gets fed up and starts saying the same kinds of things that his attackers are, Cessna or Curt sweep in and swing the banstick.  Every once in a while one of the baiters will use the banstick, but usually Cessna or Curt does it to keep up the illusion of "fairness."

They've been doing the bait-and-ban for years now, and have become very predictable about it.

It's not as systematic as you make it sound.

I really believe they aren't doing it on purpose. At least, most times. But yeah, the end result that you described tends to happen once in a while. In any event, whether they do it on purpose or not, it still sucks when it happens.

Someday someone these mods fuck over on a board is going to be strutting around at a con and someone he fucked over will walk up to him and spit in his face, or at least call him an asshole to his face.

I really look forward to that. Hell, I'd do it if I ever caught a certain mod at a con.

I'm amazed it hasn't happened yet

Quote from: Dominus NoxI'm amazed it hasn't happened yet

That would be because most people are more rational than you are.

Quote from: Consonant DudeThat would be because most people are more rational than you are.

Not to mention it's a lot easier to be a fucktard on the internet than it is in real life.

Quote from: AkrasiaSorry for my overreaction to your earlier post.  I'm aware of some of the things you alluded to, but resented the implication that I was in any way involved with them.  Anyway, I was in a foul mood.  My apologies.

Never meant to imply anything of the sort.

On an unrelated note, just to show there's no hard feelings, you'll know when I decide to take the dive into the deep-end of hell bent for leather as I'll come flying off the ropes with blood soaked sweat flying in all directions shouting imbecilic tirades with face all afluster while calling you something like a scum sucking knuckles dragging on the bottom of the sea squidbilly with delusions of being a three-penny whore, or something really over-the-top silly, all the while denouncing your name with strategic precision as the Exorcist you hired flees into that special place where his mind used to be as you marvel at the inanity of the run-on-sentence and. . .  Well.  It'll probably be without bothering to use punctuation.  Or a spell checker.  :p  :D

If someone didn't get a chuckle out of that then that was the better part of three minutes wasted.

Quote from: MelanDouble the contribution, double the pleasure! :D

No, no ... I was also referring to the other Melan ... :DRUNKANI:

Quote from: Tom BRPGnet is back up, btw...

Did they end up recovering all/most of the posts that might have been lost?

I looked briefly, but didn't see anything to indicate either way.

Edit:  Ok, looks like some posts were lost... not sure about any details, though, anybody else got some info?

Jared Sorensen is a funny cunt! I'm going to buy him a beer if I ever meet him.

Quote from: JimBobOzAnd I feel regret, because it's a waste of potential. They've got 30,000 members, at least a thousand of whom post at least once a week. They could be any kind of site they wanted to. With that number of members, whatever their moderation policy or site focus they'd keep a good level of conversation going. They could have been anything. They chose to be less than they could be.

I don't disagree with your general sentiment - too often in life we are faced with the waste of potential that frustrates.

But I'm curious if they would have 30,000 if they were as, well, focused, as you imply in other posts.  In other words, if they were to hold to a more "we're here to talk about RPG's" approach, would they keep those 30,000 members or get a post a week from 1,000 or more?  I'm not asking in the rhetorical "I don't think so" sense - honestly curious.

And the other thing that strikes me is the last line here.  I'm not sure they didn't choose to be exactly what they wanted to be.  That fact that you or I or anyone else might think that's less than they could be, they might honestly think they are headed for a place better than they were.

It's especially true if it's a business venture as organizations will often build a focused clientele and then attempt to use that as a springboard into a broader customer base. That often leads to the kind of disagreements and consequences you see in this case - the old users feel a sense of remorse and longing for the way things were; the new users don't understand what the problem is with their approach; and the people trying to implement the change are either jerks, or labeled as such.

Such is the way of the world...

Well, they built themselves up on the strength of rpg stuff. People signed up just to comment, "wow" on the Creepy Gamer thread in Roleplaying Open; no-one signed up to comment "wow" on the h4wt chixxorz cosplay thread on Tangency Open. Certainly some people signed up to join cliques on Tangency, and those people post a lot; but they post non-gaming stuff.

There's also the question of quality and quantity. You've ultimately got to ask yourself, "what's this place for?" Is it just a place to get a zillion posts about nothing in particular? They used that approach, and as a result this week their whole forum crashed. Or is it a place to get a thousand posts about some particular topic?

If I want to read about topic X, which is better - 1,000 random books from the bookstore, or 4 carefully selected books?  Of course, that assumes I'm interested in topic X.

You also have to ask yourself, "what are the people joining expecting?" Given that the poll I posted, "are your games any fun?" revealed that 93% of respondents were playing in an rpg group, and 5 or 6% of the remaining 7% wanted to (1 or 2% didn't want to), I'd say, "the people joining rpg.net are expecting to talk about rpgs."

I've no doubt that rpg.net - or, the mods and the most influential posters - chose for it to be a general discussion site. I don't think they drifted there by accident, it was entirely their choice. But so what? You could get a genius mathematician choose to be a janitor - but it's still a waste of potential.

I'm speaking in extremes here of quality and quantity, and of course reality isn't that clear and simple, or extreme; I'm just expressing it that way for clarity. I mean, however you moderate an rpg site you're not going to find that every post is as good and interesting as (say) Robin's Laws of Good Gamemastering. But it could be a bit closer to that than "daily drivel and whinging." There's a lot of room on that scale.

I'm currently getting a database error notice from RPG.net. Anybody else?

Quote from: droogI'm currently getting a database error notice from RPG.net. Anybody else?

Likewise.

Quote from: JimBobOzPeople signed up just to comment, "wow" on the Creepy Gamer thread in Roleplaying Open; no-one signed up to comment "wow" on the h4wt chixxorz cosplay thread on Tangency Open.

Also, do not underestimate the appeal of the Motivational Posters.

Quote from: JimBobOzYou also have to ask yourself, "what are the people joining expecting?" Given that the poll I posted, "are your games any fun?" revealed that 93% of respondents were playing in an rpg group, and 5 or 6% of the remaining 7% wanted to (1 or 2% didn't want to), I'd say, "the people joining rpg.net are expecting to talk about rpgs."

But not only that. I know I recall joining just to participate in some Raymond E Feist thread. Though it might have been gaming related. And maybe I'm an odd poster, but I didn't become a regular to just talking about roleplaying, it was primarily to talk about all the various things connected to gaming with fellow gamers.

Quote from: droogI'm currently getting a database error notice from RPG.net. Anybody else?

Yep.  Maybe the upgrade issues aren't resolved yet after all?

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!I got tired of standing up for people whose threads were closed or who were banned for reasons I considered unjust, only to have moderators refuse my attempts at making sense.

That, and I felt like I didn't belong anymore.

That's pretty much why I don't post there anymore either.

The last straw was when Darren started harassing me (with Cessna's knowledge and complicity) for reporting a post of his.

So I just quit posting.

Ehh...the fuck...?

Yeah...I don't miss the place.

Quote from: PhishStyxThat's pretty much why I don't post there anymore either.

The last straw was when Darren started harassing me (with Cessna's knowledge and complicity) for reporting a post of his.

So I just quit posting.

Reporting a Darren post wherein he was abusive to me was what earned me my permaban, actually. Well, there was a lot more to it, but that was the last straw, so to speak.

The man (or boy or whatever he is) is one of the most vile people I've seen online, just for overall bad attitude and sheer power-mad ego-spurting all over the place.

For me, the beginning of the end was when I started calling bullshit on Cessna for snarky thread-crapping then pulling out his mod-dick when people would respond to his provocation.  I figured someone needed to show that the rank and file could stand up to the mods and admins as long as they were sure to do it within the guidelines and didn't break any rules in doing so.  So, yeah, I brought it upon myself.

Not long thereafter, Eric Brennan, with whom I'd never had a problem before, started going to great lengths to mis-interpret anything I posted as a jab and a bait at him.  From there it was all down hill.  Darren and Curt would make pointed comments about my posts, and it became obvious that I had become a "Backstage" problem, a liability for RPG.net.  Never mind that I wasn't doing anything wrong.

Enh.  I devoted myself to the notion that I wasn't going to let myself get chased off, but once I started to find other avenues for online expression, I just drifted away out of apathy.

!i!

(P.S. It also didn't help much when I started reporting mod posts when I felt that they had broken the site guidelines.  I figured, if they were going to immediately shut down any public complaint by closing threads, that was the only recourse.  From what I hear now, it appears they've begun to issue mod warnings for that sort of thing.)

Quote from: Consonant DudeYou're in such a state of denial it's not even funny.

You really don't need to be a cockmunch to get dogpiled. All you need to do is state something unpopular. That's all. The groupthink effect over there can be quite strong.

Wake the fuck up and stop lying to yourself. Or shut the fuck up and stop lying to everybody else.

What the fuck ever dude.  I'm not the one wasting time and breath whining and pissing and moaning about a place I can't even post to any more.

If you don't like the place, then just shut the fuck up about it.  Christ.

Oh, but I'm lying, because my experiences with the place are 100% contrary to yours?  What the fuck ever.  You can keep holding on to your precious delusions, or just, you know GET ON WITH YOUR FUCKING LIFE.

Its your choice.

Quote from: jrientsI don't know what that's supposed to mean.  I'm running my second 3.5 campaign right now and playing in someone else's 3.5 game.  But I'm also running '81 Basic/Expert D&D at a con next weekend.  (aside - Crap!  I gotta write some adventures!)  Both are D&D.  I don't see how the existence of a new edition of D&D makes an older version somehow less dungeony and dragony.

It makes it hard to carry on conversations.  One is out of print, one is the current incarnation that is in print.  The other one is OLD D&D.  Its like talking about how a sports team is doing well this season, and someone keeps jumping in and touting how the 61 edition was utter crap, or the best ever.  Lets deal with the current team, and leave the classics to seperate threads.

Its not a huge thing, but the constant RCing of clear 3.5 threads bugs me.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralWhat the fuck ever dude.  I'm not the one wasting time and breath whining and pissing and moaning about a place I can't even post to any more.

I'm not the one either. You'd know that if you were grounded into reality.

Hey, buckle in and hold tight while I sing another of the praises of this site over RPG.net.

There are a lot of people here whom I recognise from over there, many of whom I had thought were total dicks, and for whom I had no sympathy when they were banned.  Then, A) the tables were turned and I fell afoul of the mod-machine, and B) I came here and saw these same people interacting in a different environment.  What I came to realise was that RPG.net was, and remains, an incredibly antagonistic environment for right-of-the-middle politics and "traditional" RPGs.  People who fall into these categories, or are simply identified with them, are routinely baited and persecuted.  It's kind of chicken-or-the-egg, but it seemingly brought out the worst in people whom I am coming to appreciate and even respect here.

Yes, brothers and sisters, it's group hug time.
:grouphug:

!i!

So a user (who I don't know) named Dave Turner called Darren out about the Sorensen thing.

He used the intriguing term "revenge-banning." I find that term fitting for what seems to happen most commonly at rpg.net.

So after an administrator and 2 moderators respond insultingly to Dave, Eric Brennan ends the thread with "That goes for everybody -- we don't mind criticism." Apparently, that only applies to the kind that doesn't actually criticize them.

Eric Brennan -- the former admin who still gets to enjoy all of the powers of being an admin/mod, yet none of the responsibilities.  I think that goes a long way toward justifying the whole "mod-clique" accusation.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaEric Brennan -- the former admin who still gets to enjoy all of the powers of being an admin/mod, yet none of the responsibilities.  I think that goes a long way toward justifying the whole "mod-clique" accusation.

!i!

Oh he isn't "former" anymore. He's back on the administration staff officially.

You guys just don't know how to play strategically. Or is it tactically? I always get those mixed up.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaWhat I came to realise was that RPG.net was, and remains, an incredibly antagonistic environment for right-of-the-middle politics and "traditional" RPGs.

RPGnet has never been a friendly place for right-of-the-middle politics (sometimes even right-of-Noam-Chomsky politics) but it was possible to say right-of-the-middle things without getting banned if one could keep their cool and not flame back.  I wasn't banned despite being involved in the gay marriage and gay adoption threads that got Curt banned in 2004 -- now curiously deleted when I went looking for it.  I'm not sure if I could say the things now that I could say then without getting banned, though.

Quote from: PhishStyxSo a user (who I don't know) named Dave Turner called Darren out about the Sorensen thing.

He used the intriguing term "revenge-banning." I find that term fitting for what seems to happen most commonly at rpg.net.

So after an administrator and 2 moderators respond insultingly to Dave, Eric Brennan ends the thread with "That goes for everybody -- we don't mind criticism." Apparently, that only applies to the kind that doesn't actually criticize them.

Let's be fair. Dave Turner acted like an idiot. You don't start a discussion with someone by insulting them. That's even more true when they happen to be moderators.

They've also had a number of threads regarding Sorensen due to the irrational mancrush many users have for the dude. And to top it off, they claim they will give Turner a shot at opening yet another thread on the subject tomorrow.

I'm not even sure Turner got a formal warning.  I would have banned his ass right there. Proof that a lot of moderation is subjective.

As much as I question certain moderation policies over at RPG.net, retards getting outraged over nothing and barging on Trouble Tickets absolutely does not help matters. It makes legitimate issues less likely to be heard with the appropriate seriousness.

I have to say I've never received a warning, and minimal dogpiling.  Of course, I tend to avoid political threads, but my comments have tended to be more right-wing than left.  (I have a strong devil's advocate response that I try to keep reined in...)

Most of the banning seems to occur when someone snaps and starts striking back personally.

For those who cannot otherwise see it, here is Turner's post copied in it's entirety.

QuoteI've heard that Sorensen was banned for imitating a mod:

QuoteOriginally Posted by Darren MacLennan
Imitating a mod, or even pretending to, and then sassing back when you've been asked to explain your baffling actions, is a sign that you've simply gone around the deep end

I guess this was because Jared was saying "My mod voice is black" in his posts? In the context of how mods are identified at RPG.net (unique avatar style, formal title in their subject line), how can anyone seriously claim that there was a genuine worry that Jared was imitating a mod? Since the thread has been removed, I can only wonder if he actually wrote things that could be interpreted as mod commands? Did he try to use his "authority" to tell others to stop posting? Did he threaten to ban someone that wasn't a mod?

QuoteOriginally Posted by Darren
(And it wouldn't have been long until somebody reported one of his posts and said "Wait, is Sorenson a mod?" We just added two; it wouldn't be hard to get confused.)
And it would have killed you to reply that all RPG.net mods have unique avatars and signatures that properly identify them? Apparently, that would be too much trouble.

At least pick a remotely plausible reason for your revenge-banning. Pathetic.

Which part was the insult aside from the clear demonstration that MacLennan is ignoring Sorensen's sardonicism for the sake of an excuse to get rid of him?

Is it the term "revenge-banning?" Cause that's my favorite of the entire post.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaFor me, the beginning of the end was when I started calling bullshit on Cessna for snarky thread-crapping then pulling out his mod-dick when people would respond to his provocation.

That was exactly what sparked the incident that resulted in my banning (that's not what ended it, but that it where it started). The really odd thing was that, my the last PM I received before my banning (which was actually undertaken by Curt) came from Cessna. . .

He informed me that he lives an hour North of me (which I knew) and that if I'd been a bit more cordial (read "if I'd let him crap on my thread and not called him on it"), I might have been invited to game with him. . . but that I blew my chance.

Why would somebody even send out a PM like that? Was he expecting me to break down in tears or something? It sounded as if he thought that one should view the opportunity to game with a RPGnet mod (or, possibly, just him) as being akin to winning the lottery.

This was easily the most bizarre online behavior I had witnessed for a long time -- not infuriating, mind you, simply puzzling.

Quote from: jdrakehThat was exactly what sparked the incident that resulted in my banning (that's not what ended it, but that it where it started). The really odd thing was that, my the last PM I received before my banning (which was actually undertaken by Curt) came from Cessna. . .

He informed me that he lives an hour North of me (which I knew) and that if I'd been a bit more cordial (read "if I'd let him crap on my thread and not called him on it"), I might have been invited to game with him. . . but that I blew my chance.

Why would somebody even send out a PM like that? Was he expecting me to break down in tears or something? It sounded as if he thought that one should view the opportunity to game with a RPGnet mod (or, possibly, just him) as being akin to winning the lottery.

This was easily the most bizarre online behavior I had witnessed for a long time -- not infuriating, mind you, simply puzzling.

Dude, if you live within an hour of cessna, for god's sake please take the opprotunity to go down to where he lives and call him a pompous asshole right to his face, preferably in front of his game group.

If the price of gas is an issue, I'll personally take up a collection on this forum to raise money to send you to pay for the gas, round trip.

Quote from: jdrakehHe informed me that he lives an hour North of me (which I knew) and that if I'd been a bit more cordial (read "if I'd let him crap on my thread and not called him on it"), I might have been invited to game with him. . . but that I blew my chance.

Why would your behaviour in an online forum affect whether he wanted to game with you? You can be fun in a game group and a cocksmock in a forum, and vice versa.

I mean, if you consistently insult someone over years, or if you talk about all this game stuff which is just utterly out of their kind of thing, fair enough they wouldn't want to game with you. But if you just break some forum rules... Who cares?

Strange shit. Forums are not the same as sitting there around a game table.

Quote from: JimBobOzWhy would your behaviour in an online forum affect whether he wanted to game with you? You can be fun in a game group and a cocksmock in a forum, and vice versa.

I mean, if you consistently insult someone over years, or if you talk about all this game stuff which is just utterly out of their kind of thing, fair enough they wouldn't want to game with you. But if you just break some forum rules... Who cares?

Strange shit. Forums are not the same as sitting there around a game table.

Perhaps but it would make an impact on me and whether I'd want to play with a given person. After all that's potentially my first impression of the person.

Cessna sounds like he'd be a pretty boring guy to know.

Quote from: JimBobOzWho cares?

Well, him obviously.

I think what intrigues me most about it is that a couple years ago when Cessna started getting into that "cranky mode" for a while, I tried to have a conversation with him about what was going on (as did a number of others).

One of his big points was that rpg.net is not a community of any kind and never genuinely was; RPG.net is a business run by Skotos and administered by him. As a result, he intends to do whatever he damn well pleases, which all means that I and everyone else should shut the hell up and leave him and the other admins/moderators alone.

To me, that opinion as well as Darren's
"I don't think that your grip on the English language is the best.* I think that you should leave the moderation of the forum - and decisions about the behaviors of the moderators - to us.  Sound good? Good."

looks like a statement of
"Hey, no fair! Quit criticizing us, 'cause we can't handle it. We get to shit on YOU, not the other way around!"

*NOTE: I double majored in English and philosophy, so I'm fairly certain that my grasp of English is considerably better than Darren MacLennan's.

Quote from: Dominus NoxDude, if you live within an hour of cessna, for god's sake please take the opprotunity to go down to where he lives and call him a pompous asshole right to his face, preferably in front of his game group.

Honestly, it's not worth my time. I've got far more productive things to do with my days than harass Cessna.

Quote from: droogCessna sounds like he'd be a pretty boring guy to know.

Well, who knows. He consciously blands himself out these days, it's that, "I must be a Distant and Impartial Leader!" thing. I just get tired of the self-pity of many of the mods and admins. "We do this for free, and it's so haaaaaard." "Well then, stop!"

Quote from: PhishStyxOne of his big points was that rpg.net is not a community of any kind and never genuinely was; RPG.net is a business run by Skotos and administered by him. As a result, he intends to do whatever he damn well pleases, which all means that I and everyone else should shut the hell up and leave him and the other admins/moderators alone.

That's what I mean. Self-pity and a sense of entitlement. It's like when geeks start yabbering about how some game designer didn't answer their question about whether they could stack feat #1,348 with feat #2,082 or not. "ZOMFG how dare you! I deserve better!"

A moderator deserves a degree of gratitude for their efforts which help a forum work well - if it's working well. They deserve respect as any human being (yes, there are human beings at the other end of this text! Amazing, eh?). But, you know, that's all. They don't deserve unquestioning obedience or anything - it's just a fucking geek discussion site. If you put yourself out there online, expect to get the occasional kick.

I mean, I post a lot. I get to have a few people online recognise my name and say, "oh, you wrote up so-and-so." The good side of that is occasional admiration and an ice-breaker for people to start talking to me, and some interesting conversations. The bad side is that some people will choose me as a target, insult me for years on end and from forum to forum. But you know, if it's too much for me - I can just stop posting stuff.

So if it's all too hard for Cessna and his mates, they can just quit. When a guy steps in the shit, splashes it around on himself, I'll offer him a hand up and out - but if he keeps splashing and saying how everyone should feel sorry for him and ladle great gobs of respect on him for his wading through shit, well, no.

So I just imagine Cessna being a guy who runs his game group, never lets anyone else GM but always complains about how thankless a task GMing is! ;) That's the impression I get but I don't know. You really have to be some kind of drongo to judge people by a few internet posts, who knows what they're like in real life? That applies as much for Cessna telling jdrakeh he won't game with him because of his posts, and jdrakeh saying, "I don't care, I wouldn't want to game with you anyway!" Get some perspective, lads.

Quote from: PhishStyxOh he isn't "former" anymore. He's back on the administration staff officially.

I think it's now Nina who's occupying the "Former admin but still sticks her oar in a lot" position.
They've also recruited a couple more Moderators to swell the ranks since JonA and Levi quit.

The thing that bothers me about RPG.net's moderation is this:

Tim and I are about to release a controversial book.  Among other things, it includes a discussion of sexual relationships in apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic environments (both gay and straight) and how to handle rape in your games.  I don't want to derail the thread so check my blog if you want to know more

It is not misogynistic (though I will accept accusations of misanthropy), but it's easy to characterise that way.  I can easily see someone writing a review describing it as FATAL d20 and posting it on TBP.  We'll be obliged to respond

Tim, bless his artificial limb joints, has a posting style that could be described as a little bit abrasive (in the same way that Ebola is a little bit contagious) and is the only person who I've seen use the word "cunt" as a noun, verb, adjective, adverb and conjunction.  If I wanted a nuclear fall-out shelter designing or a hostage rescue mission planning and executing he would be the person I would go to.  If I wanted a delicate PR exercise carried out ... he would not

So it will fall to me to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous dogpiling while avoiding the Scylla and Charybdis of RPG.net's moderation policy.  I'm not looking forward to it

Quote from: JimBobOzWhy would your behaviour in an online forum affect whether he wanted to game with you? You can be fun in a game group and a cocksmock in a forum, and vice versa.

Not to take Cessna's defense, because I would most certainly like to game with James but online behavior does affect me. Heck, that's why I think I'd like to game with James in the first place!

There are only two differences in communication that I see between face to face and forums:

1-You have to type and cannot see or hear your interlocutor. This makes it a little more complicated to figure out tone, emotions, etc...

2-There's very little to no accountability in the conversations.

Now, #1 is legitimate. You're likely to have misunderstandings when you communicate with someone. Heck, it's likely to happen face to face with close friends so it's going to happen on forums with people you know less. But there's a difference between an argument, or misunderstanding and seeing you are really incompatible with a person. Polite, mature individuals will come to an understanding despite the limitations of the medium.

As for #2 there's no excuse for it. I think a lot of folks are likely very nice in persons and hide behind the written medium when they are online but I consider those folks fucking cowards. I think they reveal more about their true selves online than they do offline and I absolutely don't want anything to do with them.

In short, it doesn't matter where and how you said something. If I really don't get along with someone online, I wouldn't want to meet them.

Quote from: PhishStyxWhich part was the insult aside from the clear demonstration that MacLennan is ignoring Sorensen's sardonicism for the sake of an excuse to get rid of him?

Is it the term "revenge-banning?" Cause that's my favorite of the entire post.

Well, it might be your favorite part of the post but it's pretty insulting. The overall tone of his post is cranky and he ends it with "pathetic".

Not exactly how you start a productive conversation.

Quote from: JimBobOzI just get tired of the self-pity of many of the mods and admins. "We do this for free, and it's so haaaaaard." "Well then, stop!"

I think that's actually what started me out on taking Cessna to task.  As just a plain ol' poster, I thought he seemed like a decent enough fellow with whom I shared a few gaming interests.  As a simple mod, I think it may have been a year or more before I even noticed his promotion.  But as an admin, I just started to look at what this crappy, thankless, volunteer job was doing to him and said, "Dude.  You have a wife and a kid now, for which you should be happy.  You have a shitty job, about which you should be doing something.  What the fuck are you doing here making yourself even more unhappy?  Just enjoying the opportunity to take it out on others?  Do something good for yourself and get yourself the fuck out of this job."

!i!

Quote from: Consonant DudeWell, it might be your favorite part of the post but it's pretty insulting. The overall tone of his post is cranky and he ends it with "pathetic".

Not exactly how you start a productive conversation.

I don't ever recall a conversation with rpg.net's revenge banning staff BEING productive.

Usually, it goes one of two ways, either "Shut up or get banned," unless it's Darren ('cause he's such a literate guy) then it's "SHUT YOUR FUCKING MOUTH."

Which of those is supposed to be the productive model?

Quote from: PhishStyxI don't ever recall a conversation with rpg.net's revenge banning staff BEING productive.

We'll file that behavior under "deliberately obtsuse", then. I can't say the process is perfect, but TT does clarify a lot of things and many questions users ask are answered in a satisfactory fashion.

So, there are problems but the fact you think it's acceptable to barge in there and inappropriately address the staff tells me a lot more about your own issues and what the moderators have to deal with than any faults they may have.

Quote from: PhishStyxUsually, it goes one of two ways, either "Shut up or get banned," unless it's Darren ('cause he's such a literate guy) then it's "SHUT YOUR FUCKING MOUTH."

Yeah, Darren is definitly one of the weakest moderators at RPG.net.

But anyway, your question is answered. You showed a post dripping with snark, outrage and written in an insulting tone and asked what was bad about it. The stuff has been pointed out to you.

Quote from: Consonant DudeWe'll file that behavior under "deliberately obtsuse", then.

An interesting characterization of the rpg.net staff you have there, bud.

QuoteSo, there are problems but the fact you think it's acceptable to barge in there

Barge? It's a forum. He's a member. What barging was involved?

Quoteand inappropriately address the staff

He asked questions.

Oh.

Right.

I can definitely see how THAT would be a problem.

Quotetells me a lot more about your own issues and what the moderators have to deal with than any faults they may have.

I certainly don't think he needs to invite "The Fuck? Moderator" over for tea & crumpets before he posts a criticism of what's happening there.

QuoteYeah, Darren is definitly one of the weakest moderators at RPG.net.

QuoteBut anyway, your question is answered. You showed a post dripping with questions, criticism and written in the same tone used by the alleged moderators when doing their job and asked what was bad about it. The stuff has been pointed out to you.

Well, you got me there, didn't ya. Excuse me, while I golf clap for your amazing win of the internet.

Quote from: PhishStyxAn interesting characterization of the rpg.net staff you have there, bud.

No. Deliberately obtuse. We're talking about you here.

Quote from: PhishStyxBarge? It's a forum. He's a member. What barging was involved?



He asked questions.

Oh.

Right.

I can definitely see how THAT would be a problem.

Deliberately obtuse, again. No, he didn't just ask a question. As anyone can clearly see, he was not asking in a way conducive to dialogue. He was rambling. He was rude. He was insulting.

Quote from: PhishStyxI certainly don't think he needs to invite "The Fuck? Moderator" over for tea & crumpets before he posts a criticism of what's happening there.

He could have asked for more reasons politely, or expressed his disagreement, without insults and with a cool head.

Quote from: PhishStyxWell, you got me there, didn't ya. Excuse me, while I golf clap for your amazing win of the internet.

I don't need "the win". The way you twist every word and ignore the facts, I think you need the win a lot more than anyone else.

Quote from: Consonant DudeNot exactly how you start a productive conversation.

Well, Cessna has pretty openly stated that he views everyone as the enemy, and anyone who has any disgreement with the modstaff is nothing more than a troublemaker, so it's pretty difficult to have an environment of constructive commentary.

I'll tell this tale again, because it really illustrates the RPGnet modstaff line of thought.  A long time ago, there was a forum (I think it was called The Cesspool).  This forum's purpose on RPGnet was as a place posters could go and air their grievances about moderators "without fear of reprisal" because the moderators were not allowed to look at this section, only administrators were.  I think "without fear of reprisal" pretty much demonstrates the atmosphere at RPGnet before I even get to the rest of the story.

Well, the forum inevitably became primarily about Darren's modding, because up until Curt's appointment, he had always been the most capricious of the mods.  Well, instead of doing anything about recurring complaints, Cessna eventually commented something about closing down the forum because too many people were complaining.  But that's nothing new in itself, RPGnet has always tried to hide the complaints rather than deal with them.

Anyway, somehow the subject of the security of the forum and the comments came up.  As we all know, sockpuppet accounts are encouraged on RPGnet.  And several moderators have commented they have multiple accounts.  I merely commented that it would be no problem for a moderator to log on in his non-moderator handle and then view the "confidential" information in the Cesspool.  So, the section wasn't really secure or confidential in the first place.

Of course, Cessna had a minor blow up at this observation.  How dare I characterize the moderators in that manner!  They were all fair, objective people whose integrity was unquestionable.  

Later, the Cesspool was closed.  The cited reason was that too many users used it to stir up shit on the otherwise peaceful forum.  I can only assume that since the moderators were all flawless individuals of sterling character that it was realized there was no reason for the forum section.

As far as I've observed, it's not really possible to have a discussion with several of the RPGnet mods/admins, because they are right and everyone else is wrong, and the wrong-thinkers are quickly silenced.  Not a particularly good environment.

A lot of you guys on this thread were/are long time posters (some of who, I'm surprised got banned) on tBP, so my question is, why is it with such fucked up mod practises, the majority of posters continue to frequent the site?

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RA lot of you guys on this thread were/are long time posters (some of who, I'm surprised got banned) on tBP, so my question is, why is it with such fucked up mod practices, the majority of posters continue to frequent the site?

The traffic flow is second only to the big RPG company sites, like the D&D forums at WOTC's site.  Traffic flow, and thus the turnaround time on threads, is a big component in attracting and retaining users; RPG Net has the largest flow of all the independent tabletop RPG sites, with only EN World as its rival.  Add those whose interest is primarily or solely Tangency--the Bulletproofs, Himes, Shimadas and the like--and you have your answer.  (Tangency is not only the largest single forum at RPG Net, it also either #1 or #2 in posting traffic, making it very active as well.)  Fast-paced, highly-trafficked forums make for large user bases despite moderation policies (sometimes, because of them; notice the change in the character of the user base over time, as it conforms to the standards that the moderation policy encourages).

Quote from: David RA lot of you guys on this thread were/are long time posters (some of who, I'm surprised got banned) on tBP, so my question is, why is it with such fucked up mod practises, the majority of posters continue to frequent the site?

Regards,
David R

The content, the variety. It's vast and it has something for everyone.

That's where a lot of "stories" break. So it's a huge, centralized source of discussions. Even if a person does not like biases or mods or whatever, there's probably interesting info there.

Like when there's problem with a GURPS' book spine, or a controversial entry on Dancey's blog. Recently, Wick's new fantasy game using FATE caught my interest. Also, a few months ago only a RPG.net user contacted me and asked me if I was interested in the Spherewalker Sourcebook. It's an extremely rare OOP product for my favorite game, Everway. We ended up doing a trade that pleased us both. Amazing stuff!

The sheer volume of posters is unbeatable. I mean, you could have the smartest, most dedicated userbase of 500 but you would never cover all the angles the way RPG.net does. Most people know this and that's also why they break the stories there.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker(... notice the change in the character of the user base over time, as it conforms to the standards that the moderation policy encourages).

This I find pretty interesting. What exactly do you mean by change in character ? Are you talking about RPG Open or Tangency Open or both?

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Consonant DudeThe sheer volume of posters is unbeatable. I mean, you could have the smartest, most dedicated userbase of 500 but you would never cover all the angles the way RPG.net does. Most people know this and that's also why they break the stories there.

Yeah, this is the main (only?) reason why a couple of gamer friends of mine post/lurk exclusively over there.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RThis I find pretty interesting. What exactly do you mean by change in character ? Are you talking about RPG Open or Tangency Open or both?

Regards,
David R

Can't speak for Bradford but I've noticed a change in character as well. More docile userbase. A lot of blatantly fake positivism as well.

On average (there are exceptions) this makes for the mass of users being easier to moderate as they are striving for acceptance by sucking virtual dicks. I think there are currently three active threads in trouble tickets basically worshiping moderation and administration.

This makes for a lot of activity and is basically sort of like advertising. Industry guys love it because people are encouraged to praise products instead of speaking with objectivity, users love it because the vibe is that everything is great, moderators love it because they don't have to intervene. Yay!

Quote from: David RWhat exactly do you mean by change in character ? Are you talking about RPG Open or Tangency Open or both?

CD cites "fake positivism', with which I have to concur.  However, I'd characterise it more like this.  There is an increasingly greater body of active posters there who openly and vociferously express their general misery and unhappiness in life.  These same people have staked their claim on RPG.net, and Tangency in particular, as their ground for commiseration, and yet they simultaneously demand that people act happy and friendly in order to create a "positive and open environment" that they can enjoy without feeling judged.

In other words, losers.  Pathological losers who have cultivated an environment to affirm that no one is any better off than they are, and that they can go on ad nauseum about their issues and never be confronted on them.

There.  I said it.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaThere.  I said it.

Honestly Ian, I think you and CD might be on to something. I heard this before, from long time lurkers turned recent posters. I just wanted to hear it from folks who have a posting history with the site.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Consonant DudeNo. Deliberately obtuse. We're talking about you here.

No, we were talking about Darren MacLennan and his amazing grasp of English vocabulary. The man who brought us, "The Fuck?" As best I can tell, he epitomizes deliberately obtuse.

As to me, trust me when I tell you that I'm being the model of restraint here.

QuoteDeliberately obtuse, again. No, he didn't just ask a question. As anyone can clearly see, he was not asking in a way conducive to dialogue. He was rambling. He was rude. He was insulting.

He asked questions, he posted examples, he made a clear point.  At the end of his post, he gave a conclusionary opinion about the activity. Definitely not insulting, probably rude, but that's a judgement call and doesn't rise to the level of being threatened by an administrator.

QuoteHe could have asked for more reasons politely, or expressed his disagreement, without insults and with a cool head.

Darren and the other revenge banning staff could have been polite, too. They could avoid being dismissive to other's opinions. They COULD actually do their jobs. But instead, they choose the route of revenge bannings.

QuoteI don't need "the win". The way you twist every word and ignore the facts, I think you need the win a lot more than anyone else.

Thanks for making up a bunch of "facts" to go along with your opinions. You win AGAIN. Congratulations, 1 MILLIONTH used.

I have been looking for a place to get this off my chest, and it looks like I found it!

I joined this site mainly because of the shitty moderation on "big purple". Its nice to see some old posters from there posting here. Particularly on this subject. It would be impossible to have this discussion over there.

The mods at rpg.net just seem like a bunch of hypocrites everytime they ban someone and close a thread. You can make all the attacks or snarky comments you want as a mod. I appreciate that they are only human and everyone has a bad day, but then they like to whine about what a hard job they have moderating and no one appreciates it. If you try to bring it up in trouble tickets, they give you shit and you might as well consider yourself "on notice". Who moderates the moderators? Is there a grown up in charge? (I agree with the poster that said Curt needs to come down off the cross, you're here, you're queer, we're used to it...) The mods routinely speak to the board users in a condescending and often insulting tone, daring you to invoke the "modhammer". That passive aggressiveness has all the stink of the bullied finally getting to be the bully. They need some moderators with thicker skin, to say the least.

For the record, I'm not banned over there, I have never even been warned. I'm a pretty easy going guy. But so often I will be reading a thread and then "Jesus" comes in with the new-testament-red letters and warns someone over something petty because they have been looking for an excuse to ban someone over something they said in tangency or whatever. I'm closer to 40 than 30 now, so I really have little use for an internet forum where the boundries of discussion are drawn by adolescents with a grudge and a sense of persecution, although I do enjoy the creepy gamer thread...

Anyway, it's nice to be on the "Ship of the Banned" with yall!

Quote from: Consonant DudeNot to take Cessna's defense, because I would most certainly like to game with James but online behavior does affect me. Heck, that's why I think I'd like to game with James in the first place!

Thanks! FWIW, I'm certain that I'd like to game with you, as well. That said. . .

My point wasn't that online behavior doesn't impact perceptions, but that sending out a PM (a message that nobody else can read and, thus, isn't effected by) that basically says "You could have had the privelage of gaming with a god like myself, but you screwed up!" is bizarre in that that aside from serving as a poorly executed attempt* to kick somebody while they're down, I don't see that it serves any purpose.

I was an administrator over on the RPGHost forums and I've never felt the need to engage in that kind of weirdness -- and, I call it "weirdness"  because I can't see how sending out PMs like that has anything to do with one's duties as an administrator or benefits the site in any way. It seems like extraordinarily petty behavior that somebody who is ostensibly meant to serve as an example of appropriate conduct shoud do their best to avoid.

Now, that said, I thik one could successfully argue that leading by example isn't happening too frequently at the Other Place -- but still, it could. And that, I think, is the real shame. By engaging in thread crapping, personal attacks, and the other behavior that they're supposed to be quelling, I think that the current mods and admins of RPGnet actively create most of their own woes by inviting the genral populace to follow suit.

Quote from: Consonant DudeI'm not the one either. You'd know that if you were grounded into reality.

So, what, I'm supposed to keep a documented curriculum vitae of your posting history?  Some guy I barely know, and could care less about?

You aren't one of the frothing, banned hordes on here bitching and moaning because they acted like a jackass and got called for it?  Fine.  

You still have your head up your ass.  But you don't like the place.  Cool.  I don't really care.  But it is totally possible to post there, and post about unpopular topics, and not get friggin banned over it.  You might not be popular, but not banned.

So what topics have gotten people banned from rpg.net in the past? I'm specifically looking for things that were not phrased as "this is my stance, and you're an idiot if you disagree."

Quote from: Consonant DudePolite, mature individuals will come to an understanding despite the limitations of the medium.

Sure. But in face-to-face life, impolite, immature people also come to understandings. It's because they have to, there's no Ignore List in real life. Being forced to get along with someone is not always a bad thing - it can, in fact, be a maturing experience in itself.

For example, on the Army Recruit Course if two blokes hated each-other, or if one was the useless one in the platoon and the other his worst critic, we'd put them together, and tell them if they didn't get along there'd be harsh punishment coming up. Certainly it was rare that they went on to become good buddies (whatever the movies tell you), but they did learn to get along and respect one another.

Now, Army Recruit Course has coercive power, and no-one in civilian life would get away with forcing two people who hated each-other to get along. Still, we can supply the force for ourselves. And it is, as I said, a maturing experience.

Quote from: Consonant DudeI think a lot of folks are likely very nice in persons and hide behind the written medium when they are online but I consider those folks fucking cowards. I think they reveal more about their true selves online than they do offline and I absolutely don't want anything to do with them.

That's one way to look at it - that people have an inner evil they conceal face-to-face but show online. The other way to look at it is that a person is like, say, a six-sided die - they can only show you at most one-half of their different faces at once. They can choose to show you all, or only show you a part of themselves. I think more often than not, online people only show you part of themselves.

You're seeing it as, they're revealing a hidden part; I see it as, often they're hiding most of themselves. So for example old Gareth-Michael Skarka, well-known for being an abrasive poster, loudly declaring that due to the latest argument he'd had he was "quitting the industry", calling people cunts and so on. Well, apparently this guy has got a wife and kid or two. So with at least a couple of people, he's pleasant and kind enough to have them spend their lives with him. So I don't think it's simply the case that GMS hides his nasty side with his wife and kids, and shows it online; it's more like he's hiding his nice side online, and shows it with his wife and kids. He's both nasty, and nice - two sides to him. But he conceals the nice side online.

Sure, we're not responsible for what people show us and won't show us. If I post like a cocksmock, I can't really complain when people think I'm a cocksmock. But still, I think it pays to remember that even if the person's a manic poster doing fifty a day, still they won't be able to show you all of themselves.

Usually people won't be open and revealing, won't be at all humble online. If I post, "this is the way it is, and anyone who thinks differently is a fuckwit," I'll get a lot of responses. If I post, "I think it could be this way, but I'm not sure, what do you guys think?" I get a few responses, but not many. If I post, "I just don't know," then I'll get no responses at all. Likewise, as we saw with the threads about my game with the difficult player, when I posted how annoyed I was, I got lots of responses; when I posted that I had fucked up and was sorry, the responses quickly dwindled away to nothing.

So we choose what we're going to reveal about ourselves, what sides we'll show, and the medium of a forum encourages us to reveal the angry, arrogant, know-it-all side, because people will respond, we'll know they're reading. If we reveal the calm, humble, apologetic and doubtful side, we'll get no responses, no-one will talk to us.

The medium shapes the message. Combine this with the natural human tendency to reveal some things about ourselves but not others, and you get places like internet forums.

I may be Jewish, but old Jesus did say one good thing, "judge not, that ye be judged" - that is, careful how you judge people, in case you'll be judged by the same standards. Obviously I don't believe in not judging people at all, but the standards I choose are those I'm happy to be judged by myself. So I'll judge negatively someone who expresses violent bigotry about some particular group, or someone who is deliberately obscure in their talk and calls it being smart. I'm happy to be judged by those standards.

Quote from: Consonant DudeIn short, it doesn't matter where and how you said something. If I really don't get along with someone online, I wouldn't want to meet them.

There's the other aspect, too - whether they post at all. I've a few good friends in the roleplaying hobby, and they don't post at all. So I don't get along with them online - they're unknown to me, if I judged them by their lack of posts, I'd think they were boring and not worth talking to. Yet in person they're nice.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralYou still have your head up your ass.  But you don't like the place.  Cool.  I don't really care.  But it is totally possible to post there, and post about unpopular topics, and not get friggin banned over it.  You might not be popular, but not banned.

Possible? Yes.

Totally possible? No.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralSo, what, I'm supposed to keep a documented curriculum vitae of your posting history?  Some guy I barely know, and could care less about?

Not at all (although just for the record, I said in this very thread that I have never been warned, suspended or banned). But if you don't know my posting history, don't go saying things that turn out not to be true.

Although, thinking about it further, maybe it's best that way. Shows you are very consistent in ignoring facts and making shit up.

And the red mod voice comes to gamecraft, too (http://gamecraft.7.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=336).

(Scroll down, I had to link the thread, that forum doesn't seem to allow linking to individual posts.)

Sad.

Whenever mods pull the "mod voice," I always imagine...

Quote from: Consonant DudeNot at all (although just for the record, I said in this very thread that I have never been warned, suspended or banned). But if you don't know my posting history, don't go saying things that turn out not to be true.

Although, thinking about it further, maybe it's best that way. Shows you are very consistent in ignoring facts and making shit up.

Oh climb down off your cross.

I missed one friggin post in a very long thread when I came late to the party.  It happens.

The "facts" you are saying I am ignoring are, in fact, simply your opinions.  

For some reason, you and others have a bug up your ass about RPG.net.  Thats fine.  I have been posting there for years and have never ONCE seen anyone banned who didn't deserve it.

But you know what?  You've found another place to post.  A place you feel more comfortable with.  Thats great, and thats whats important.  Why invest so much of your time and energy on a place that you  don't like?

Its called a life.  I suggest you get one.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralI have been posting there for years and have never ONCE seen anyone banned deserve it.

Not even spammers?

QuoteWhenever mods pull the "mod voice," I always imagine...

I imagine something more like goatse.

Quote from: JongWKPossible? Yes.

Totally possible? No.

It certainly is.  I've posted plenty of times, disagreeing with "indy" and "forge" games on RPG.net.  I've mentioned frequently my dislike for communal storytelling that tries to masquerade as an RPG, and diceless games, and most of the Forge mechanics I've seen.

But, you see, I do it without coming off like a jackass, insulting people, and backsassing the mods when I get called on it.

I actually once got into a heated discussion with a mod over the whole deal, and guess what?  Didn't get warned once.  Cause I didn't act like a jackass.

I'm FAR from the most popular poster there, although I get along with lots of folk there, simply because I enjoy the personalities there (A2K is an awesome person, and the Brits are a hysterical bunch), and I don't act like a jackass.  But I don't kiss ass and suck up either.

Give this place a few more years.  There'll be in-memes, and "cliques" and "packs" - this is a social place, eventually all social organizations develop their own internal dialogue patterns and social mores.  They may not be overt like Tangency, but when a large group of people interact socially, a social order will eventually occur.  People will develop friendships, and maybe relationships from here, and there will be fallings out of friends, and gaming gatehrings and the like.  Its inevitable.

Quote from: JimBobOzNot even spammers?

Whoops, who DIDN'T deserve it.  Mind fart.  :deflated:

Quote from: HackmastergeneralWhy invest so much of your time and energy on a place that you  don't like?

Welcome to the internet! :keke:

Go start a thread about any given television show or roleplaying game.  Usually within less than 10 posts you'll get someone telling you why it's so horrible and why nobody smart would be watching/playing it...and will be willing to argue with you about why you shouldn't like it for the next 200 posts.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralWhoops, who DIDN'T deserve it.  Mind fart.  :deflated:

Oh. Well, you're talking bollocks, then. Heaps of people got banned who didn't deserve it, if only because people with a far more negative contribution to the place stuck around and were praised.

To say that someone deserves to be banned is to say that they are, overall, a negative contributor to a place. That is, their contributions are less than nothing. If you think the contributions of people banned from rpg.net are worth less than nothing, I have to wonder what you're doing here talking to people like me, who were banned from the site. Why are you talking to people when you think what they have to say is worth less than nothing?

Quote from: JimBobOzWhenever mods pull the "mod voice," I always imagine...

(http://www.bytesend-inc.com/sgate/goauld/apophis_small.jpg)

Coooool! :D

Quote from: JimBobOzOh. Well, you're talking bollocks, then. Heaps of people got banned who didn't deserve it, if only because people with a far more negative contribution to the place stuck around and were praised.

To say that someone deserves to be banned is to say that they are, overall, a negative contributor to a place. That is, their contributions are less than nothing. If you think the contributions of people banned from rpg.net are worth less than nothing, I have to wonder what you're doing here talking to people like me, who were banned from the site. Why are you talking to people when you think what they have to say is worth less than nothing?

I've known plenty of people, who in one context or another, I didn't like talking to, but in another context, I didn't mind it.

This forum is not entirely populated by people who were banned there.  And just because someone flamed out and got banned in one place doesn't mean they will in all.

Most of what I remember of your postings on .net were good.  

Plus, I'm just like talking about rpgs.  Its good to have a backup place - ENworld is TOO D20 focused.

I think I'm just going to bow out of this, and all future, threads about RPG.net.  I'm still on the place, I don't need to talk about it over here too, and I wouldn't want to get in the way of everyone's righteous indignation over being banned from an imaginary place.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralMost of what I remember of your postings on .net were good.

So I made an overall positive contribution to rpg.net?

So they banned a poster who made an overall positive contribution to rpg.net?

But I thought you said they only banned people who "really deserved it"? Are you saying that people who make overall positive contributions to a website really deserve to be banned?

Or is it possible that not everyone banned "really deserved it"?

Quote from: HackmastergeneralI think I'm just going to bow out of this, and all future, threads about RPG.net.  I'm still on the place, I don't need to talk about it over here too, and I wouldn't want to get in the way of everyone's righteous indignation over being banned from an imaginary place.

That's probably a good idea; if you don't like that a subject of conversation is coming up on here, the best thing you can do is not to contribute to it.  There's lots of other good stuff to contribute to instead anyways.

RPGPundit

Pundy,

just ouf of curiousity, how long do you think it'll be before the godclique at rpg.net makes it a bannable offense to post over here?

I can see someo of them looking thru this forum, and if thye see a poster here who identifies himself as a poster on rpg.net, they ban him.

I just wonder when cesspool's going to do that....:confused:

Quote from: Dominus NoxI can see someo of them looking thru this forum, and if thye see a poster here who identifies himself as a poster on rpg.net, they ban him.

I just wonder when cesspool's going to do that....:confused:

Are you kidding, Nox?  I have on good authority that they're going to start reinstating banned accounts of people here, just so they can ban them again.  Starting with you! :eek:

!i!

I don't know how it's panned out this way, but I've noticed a lot of folks I really enjoyed reading on RPGnet, from Bill to Clash to jgants, jrients (well, I've been an avid reader of his blog), JimBob, TonyLB, Rotwang, Balb, JArcane, and others have made their way over here.  They all tend to post things I find relevant, useful, and/or funny, entertaining, and interesting.  That exodus or visitation of so many of those who I really found to be good, worthwhile posters at RPGnet has really been a huge part of making this site attractive to me.

Well, I came over here because I am always happy to help make active and successful any project which is positive about gaming in general. I am here quite a lot because I got bannzorzed from rpg.net, and because I work from home and need something to do while the pot is boiling for the next corporate office dinner!

Like Zachary, I noticed that some people I enjoyed reading were posting here. I just wouldn't have joined otherwise. I still have a wishlist of maybe a dozen people I'd like to see here, to make this busier and even more interesting.

And it's really too bad that Wick and Grubman were scared away so soon.

I just had an idea. I'm gonna start a thread!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaAre you kidding, Nox?  I have on good authority that they're going to start reinstating banned accounts of people here, just so they can ban them again.  Starting with you! :eek:

!i!

I know that was another pathetic, annoying slam on me, or meant to be, but the thing is, I could honeslty see them doing something like that.

I suspect so many people migrated over here, and are vocal about their distaste for 'big purple' 'cause they can't talk about it over there. If they could, the site probably wouldn't be in such a damn mess. (imo, of course) The silence is kind of damning, there, in more ways then one.

The other thing that's really noticable is how many posters here are permenantly banned over there. The fact that they're almost always productive posters and not rampant ass-clowns here is because even when people do something really dumb one day doesn't mean they'll do it every day. There's a plethora of gamers here that could and did post over there, and that kind of represents a gaming brain-drain.

Not that there arn't pleanty of fantastic posters there, but every one that makes their home here and can't (or won't) go back is another brick out of Big Purps wall. Plus, it's kind of proof that many who've been permabanned there really didn't need to be. I suspect that kind of pisses some over there off a bit, because it's kind of an indication that the mods were wrong the whole time about a bunch of things and that it's really not a fluke.

This site just keeps getting bigger. I read both, but I know which one I post on more.

You getting this, Cessna?

I think the mods on rpg.net would take great pleasure in seeing a thread bitching about them here, as it would help confirm them in their view that the only people who post here are obsessed with them and have no life so post about them still.

Which ain't true.

We have better things to talk about IMO than another site's errors, writ large as they undoubtedly are.

Quote from: BalbinusI think the mods on rpg.net would take great pleasure in seeing a thread bitching about them here...

You know, it's even crossed my mind that they may actually be counting on sites like theRPGsite to handle the overflow of people marginalised by the non-RPG-ing character of the contemporary RPG.net.  Not to venture too deeply into Nox-conspiracy territory.

QuoteWe have better things to talk about IMO than another site's errors, writ large as they undoubtedly are.

I think there's also a very real need to vent a little about it.  While many of our more illustrious members were punted from the site, probably more of us here were elbowed rudely out of the way from a site we never intended to leave.  That said, upwards of 20 pages probably more than addresses this need.

!i!

I think these threads will occur once in a while. It's pretty tough for a website such as this not to have discussions about "big things". RPG.net, ENworld, D&D, WotC... that kind of stuff gets a lot of attention.

The one thing I really like about these discussions is that they do reflect what each user wants (or doesn't want) to happen here. Now, not everybody agrees about what's right or wrong over there but I find that it helps to know what users think.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaThere.  I said it.

Agreed.  Increasingly, I get the "Please victimize me!  I am weak and pathetic!" vibe.

Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerIncreasingly, I get the "Please victimize me!  I am weak and pathetic!" vibe.

I think it's more akin to the "Little Dog" effect, really.  They snarl and yap viciously as long as they're safely under someone else's protection, then go back to shivering nervously.

I'm sorry.  That was cruel.

Okay, I'm not that sorry.  It's cruel, but true.

!i!

I'm still curious about the "talking about X gets you banned" phenomenon. Can someone give me a short list of topics (beyond racist rants and whatnot) that have gotten people banned? I'd like to perform an experiment.

Don´t call Borgstrom a would be c-grade novelist.

I'd like to avoid actual insults, since that's the experiment. :)

Quote from: SettembriniDon´t call Borgstrom a would be c-grade novelist.

Or Pundit "a raving madman" (http://forum.rpg.net/showpost.php?p=6887322&postcount=52)...

There's no list of banned topics, as far as I can remember, with the possible exception of Fred Phelps. Pimp: the Backhanding used to be under a topic ban, but that was lifted some time ago.

Not banned topics, topics that get people banned. People in this thread and others have said that certain topics will get you banned. Others have replied that no, talking about those topics like an ass gets you banned. I want to take a list of those topics and discuss them politely and pleasantly and see if I get banned.

To be honest, if something is explicitly a banned topic and someone posts about it, well what does one expect?

Banned topics are usually listed in the rules I think at the top of the page, the Phelps family are still a banned topic I think.

But clearly banned topics aren't the problem, it's the increasinbly broad interpretation of things like the personal and group attack rules and the somewhat gung ho attitude of some of the mods.  There was a chap the other day who complained on trouble tickets, his thread was closed but three different mods posted to it hammering him, and of course the thread being closed he couldn't reply as only the mods had the power to open it to make a post and then close it again.

That's the issue.  Guys like Mr A getting tempbanned for saying that reading Dr'lizzt novels or however you spell it is a waste of your life.  That got him banned for a bit for a group attack on readers of those novels.

Quote from: James McMurrayPeople in this thread and others have said that certain topics will get you banned. Others have replied that no, talking about those topics like an ass gets you banned.

Ah. Well, I'd say that it's the latter. Group attacks are by far the most commonly cited reason for bans.

Quote from: Consonant DudeI just had an idea. I'm gonna start a thread!

And a very good thread it was.

RPGPundit

Quote from: James McMurrayNot banned topics, topics that get people banned. People in this thread and others have said that certain topics will get you banned. Others have replied that no, talking about those topics like an ass gets you banned. I want to take a list of those topics and discuss them politely and pleasantly and see if I get banned.

Try discussing at length how your religion forbids homosexuality and/or gay marriage.  

You'll be gone in a week.

Quote from: J ArcaneTry discussing at length how your religion forbids homosexuality and/or gay marriage.  

You'll be gone in a week.

Anything actually RPG related?

Brain Damage.  Actually daring to talk about Edward's Brain Damage comment is the RPG equivalent of the gays-religion topic.

RPGPundit

Quote from: James McMurrayAnything actually RPG related?

To be honest, while the name on the forum has the letters 'R', 'P', and even 'G' the proper sequence on it, it's maybe half about them anymore. The other half is completely generic, idle chitchat.

Quote from: BalbinusThat's the issue.  Guys like Mr A getting tempbanned for saying that reading Dr'lizzt novels or however you spell it is a waste of your life.  That got him banned for a bit for a group attack on readers of those novels.

Or the fellow whose thread was locked by Darren because he accused people who illegally downloaded copyrighted material of being thieves and called them "scumbags".  Darren actually had the temerity to defend his decision as a group attack against thieves.  Of course, in reality, he just didn't like the combative tone the fellow was using, but he fell back on "group attack against thieves" for justification.

!i!

Cool, I'd prefer to actually test the waters on RPg stuff if possible. Tangency doesn't really do it for me, I'd rather run the risk of accidentally learning something from my fellow posters about games. :)

Without tangency an entire generation of self-aggrandizing shutins would be unable to talk about what they had for breakfast!  There would be no way for frustrated geeks to set up experimental gay sex in the bathrooms at GenCon!

It would be tragedy of the highest order.

Next GenCon, I am now officially holding it until I get home.

Quote from: Zachary The FirstNext GenCon, I am now officially holding it until I get home.

:haw:

Your jizz?  Good idea in general.  Not your other effluences, though.  Just choose your restrooms carefully, and watch your step. :)

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaYour jizz?  Good idea in general.  Not your other effluences, though.  Just choose your restrooms carefully, and watch your step. :)

!i!

Sound advice, sir, sound advice indeed.

EDIT:  Fonkaygary, I hope that wasn't inspired by an actual RPGnet thread. :eek:

Quote from: JamesVTo be honest, while the name on the forum has the letters 'R', 'P', and even 'G' the proper sequence on it, it's maybe half about them anymore. The other half is completely generic, idle chitchat.

True...but that half is still very substantial and still out-traffics most pure RPG websites.

Quote from: Zachary The FirstFonkaygary, I hope that wasn't inspired by an actual RPGnet thread. :eek:

Not a big purple thread, no.

Since someone was looking for an example of how someone got banned for little more than expressing an unpopular opinion (probably with the wrong people present), this thread (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=238027) might be worth a look.

I skimmed the thread looking for red text, but I assume I missed a banning for disagreement with a popular opinion.

'cause that Zoran dude apparently felt that if he explained the benefits patronizingly enough the mods would let him piss all over their shoes. There's "disagreement" and there's "blaze of ego". I'm not gonna even pretend to be a fan of their moderation, and maybe the initial warning was shitty - I'm more than willing to believe it when those two get involved - but everything after that was antagonistic. It may be bad policy to ban for antagonism, but it's not unexpected that bad mods would do so when blatantly antagonized, ya know?

Quote from: Elliot WilenSince someone was looking for an example of how someone got banned for little more than expressing an unpopular opinion (probably with the wrong people present), this thread (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=238027) might be worth a look.

Z.B.* is one weird cat.  Maybe his problem is similar in some way to Brian Gleichman's issues with internet communication.  I'm not saying the ban was justified, but at the same time I'm not surprised he quickly alienated folks.

*I'm not gonna type his name because I know he searches for his own name to join in conversations about himself.**  This happened on my blog a while back.

**I do that too, BTW.

Are you talking about the Zoran banning on the last page? It looks to me like he engaged in belittling a mod, was warned, and then banned when he didn't stop. Perhaps his intended tone when worrying if there were too many "big words" for others to comprehend wasn't meant to be denigrating, but that's when you should explain yourself instead of calling people liars, uncivil, and full of crap.

C'mon folks! Surely with a demon as evil as the RPG.net mods and so many claims of topics that get you banned somebody should be able to give me at least one to try on for size. :)

It's pretty dodgy when the mods come into a thread, throw some snark at the about to be banned poster (not in red type off course) and a little later another mod comes along all in red type and bans said poster. And I could do without the so-called wit (from some mods) that comes with the banning.

Regards,
David R

It's definitely not my cup of administrative tea, but if they get you to commit bannable offenses, it's not being banned for a topic, just for being gullible. I'd ideally prefer a topic that does not involve anything illegal or not work safe (gaming preferably), and that people believe others have been banned for in the past. Then I can go in, weather the group attack or mod sniping and see what happens.

OK.  For your amusement, here is where I got thread banned and possibly topic banned.  I didn't get banned from the site, but I feel it definitely fit in with a pattern of arbitrary harrassment I had been undergoing at the time.  It was the final straw which convinced me to leave.

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=265074 (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=265074)

The relevant posts are:

1 = Obviously setting the tone of the thread fairly broad.

13 = My first post and obviously unnecessarily flippant.  However, this post was not what I was given my thread/topic ban for.   And, incidentally, at least two other posters picked up on what I meant and agreed with the sentiment.

28 = This is where someone else pops up with a flippant remark intended as a dismissal of me.  But, it wasn't without justification.  His post reminded me that my original flippant remark needed qualification, so I added it.

32 = Is interesting for what Jack sees the thread as.  

36 = This is the post I got banned for.  I think I explain my point well, and I think it relates very directly to the subject as presented by the original poster.  I throw in a little snark against Jack, but that snark was not what I got the thread/topic ban for.  Considering how the thread had been going, I really have to wonder who would have reported the post as a violation, if it was reported at all.

45 = And here's Curt with red text telling me that I'm not civil and that I'm threadcrapping.  He supports his point with an out of context quote from post 36.  In context, the quote is clear that I did care and thus the attitude.

Now, I obeyed Curt's ruling.  Respect the position even if you don't respect the person in it.  However, I did appeal that ruling.  I followed the procedures for such an activity and kept it through e-mail and private instead of making it a public spectacle.  I asked what exactly my "threadcrap" was and generally sought enlightenment.

I was stonewalled for 2 weeks or so.  I never got an answer as to how I had crapped the thread.  After all that time my only answer from Cessna was a very terse "The ban stands."  When I sent another e-mail, I was told I was being a "rules lawyer" and "the topic ban (implying all Eden threads) stands".  So, in the end, I didn't know if I was going to get smacked for commenting in future threads or not.

It should also be noted that I never posted much to Eden or P&P CoH threads.  I think this was only my first post to such a thread in several months.  As far as I'm concerned, there was no kind of pattern of threadcrapping that I was following.

Quote from: David RIt's pretty dodgy when the mods come into a thread, throw some snark at the about to be banned poster (not in red type off course) and a little later another mod comes along all in red type and bans said poster.

That was my thought exactly.  ZB starts to get himself into shit, then along come Darren and Cessna to join with Eric in playing cat & mouse while waiting for the hammer to drop, occasionally dropping not-so-veiled comments to the forums at large to watch their step when dealing with a mod or admin.  Yes, ZB was gunning hard for a confrontation, but the arrogance of the mods in this situation was typically antagonistic and provocative.  Would ZB have gone off like he did had he been treated sternly but more professionally?

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaWould ZB have gone off like he did had he been treated sternly but more professionally?

!i!

Maybe, maybe not. He was definitely spoiling for a fight, but maybe he'd have backed off if treated more civilly. I'm not sure that matters though. The RPG.net setup is most definitely one of "don't screw with the mods" so when you intentionally screw with mods, especially after a warning, you know what is going to happen.

I'd be interested to know how many of the bans happen because somebody implodes under the weight of the modding policies and lashes out at someone despite the warning because they're mad as hell and not going to take it any more.

I think ZB is one of the internet's more special little flowers, and not perhaps the best example.

If I recall correctly, he went out of his way to stalk Bruce Baugh, and I mean stalked here in a pretty literal way, albeit online.

Quote from: BalbinusIf I recall correctly, he went out of his way to stalk Bruce Baugh, and I mean stalked here in a pretty literal way, albeit online.

I thought that was Pundit.  No, seriously.  I guess Bruce is a popular fella. :deflated:

!i!

QuoteIs interesting for what Jack sees the thread as.

Jack is one of the biggest goddamn assholes on that site.

But he's a well connected asshole, and his girlfriend/wife/whatever is a damn moderator.

So basically you probably got banned for daring to talk back to Jack.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaI thought that was Pundit.  No, seriously.  I guess Bruce is a popular fella. :deflated:

!i!

Possibly both, I didn't know Pundit had but I saw ZB doing it.  To be honest, I find Pundit a hell of a lot easier to converse with than I ever found Nisarg, I think he's a lot more tolerant of differences of opinion than he used to be.

Quote from: J ArcaneJack is one of the biggest goddamn assholes on that site.

But he's a well connected asshole, and his girlfriend/wife/whatever is a damn moderator.

So basically you probably got banned for daring to talk back to Jack.

Are we talking about Jack Spencer Jr by any chance or another Jack?

Edit:  It seems not, who the hell is Jack?  He has 17,000 plus posts and I don't know him, is he a Tangencyite by any chance?

Quote from: BalbinusTo be honest, I find Pundit a hell of a lot easier to converse with than I ever found Nisarg, I think he's a lot more tolerant of differences of opinion than he used to be.

You know, that's completely in line with my observation in this thread from a day or two ago.  There are a number of people here whom I recognise from RPG.net whom I thought were complete asses over there, but in a less provocative environment I'm finding that I can appreciate them, and in some cases even enjoy them.

!i!

Quote from: BalbinusAre we talking about Jack Spencer Jr by any chance or another Jack?

Edit:  It seems not, who the hell is Jack?  He has 17,000 plus posts and I don't know him, is he a Tangencyite by any chance?

Jack mostly posts about on Other Media, where he's basically the resident bully.  He considers himself far too superior to everyone else to post very often to any of the other major forums.

I am not sure that this discussion of the problems with RPG.net (and in my opinion there are many) is particularly constructive.  I mean, I enjoyed that forum over the years but, as many others here, didn't like the direction that the moderation was going.  Fortunately, we have a place here where the moderation style is very different and more in line of what I consider appropriate, so it is a win for me.  Going on about RPG.net just makes us look like dorks.  I'd rather see this forum (and what it represents) become successful and never look back to TBP...

BTW, for what it is worth, I have only had one experience in dealing with the RPG.net moderation staff.  Some time ago I thought a particular banning was uncalled for and I sent a polite email to the admins explaining why I thought so.  I got a very polite email from Cessna in response in which he admitted a mistake and he reversed his decision and reinstated the user in question.  I suspect that mine was not the only complaint, but I was pleased with the way the staff handled it.  Does this mean that I agree with their moderation philosophy?  Not at all, which is why I am spending the vast majority of my lurking time here now...:p

Just wanted to put that out there.


TGA

RPG.net is an oxbow lake, lets move on.

Zoran was/is a dodgy character no doubt about it, but like I said, the mods (some of them) behaviour are pretty unprofessional...or rather, malicious. Having said that, I understand that there is no real use in discussing tBP over here, but I do realize that threads like these are the only way some folks can vent their frustrations over their banning/issues with tBP. I mean, they can't do it over there.

But at the end of the day, it's their house so their rules. The majority for whatever reasons are happy with the situation. There is a lot of good stuff over there. When I go there I make sure to play extra nice. Sometimes doing this gets in the way of a real conversation. It becomes a tactical game of finding ways to say things that won't get you in trouble.

Just my last words on this thread :D

Regards,
David R

QuoteIt becomes a tactical game of finding ways to say things that won't get you in trouble.

Like in the GDR.

Quote from: SettembriniLike in the GDR.

Well, save for the slight difference that they don't imprison you or shoot you or anything, yeah, exactly like that.

I think a degree of perspective may be in order, unlike the GDR one may leave whenever one wishes if one disagrees with how things are managed.  Also, there's that whole being banned from a forum isn't quite as bad as being imprisoned or executed bit.

No, but unlike Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany, the GDR of the eighties was a rather "pleasant", albeit dull and caged place.
And a whole culture grew out of "submarine criticism". That is a very pronounced element of contemporary german cultural debate. And the structures in RPG.net seem to breed a similar culture.

Really, I live 500m from the Stasi Headquarteres, don´t educate me on GDR history. Ron Edwards did that, and he got the biggest
:rolleyes:
you could ever imagine from the participants of the "Spione" promo-event.
Trust me insofar, as that my remark would have been totally on-target for a german audience.

Quote from: SettembriniNo, but unlike Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany, the GDR of the eighties was a rather "pleasant", albeit dull and caged place.
And a whole culture grew out of "submarine criticism". That is a very pronounced element of contemporary german cultural debate. And the structures in RPG.net seem to breed a similar culture.

Really, I live 500m from the Stasi Headquarteres, don´t educate me on GDR history. Ron Edwards did that, and he got the biggest
:rolleyes:
you could ever imagine from the participants of the "Spione" promo-event.
Trust me insofar, as that my remark would have been totally on-target for a german audience.

I have no doubt you know more about that history than I do, it's more that I think the impact on people's lives must be a touch greater in the case of the GDR than in the case of rpg.net.

I appreciate that in one sense it is only a question of degree, but I think that's an important question, else it becomes a bit like a reductio ad absurdum (an exempli ad absurdum?  I don't have the latin to coin the phrase).

However, I'm not German and it's not my history, so of course there may be nuances I'm missing.

To be more precise:

The skills you need to communicate are akin to the skills many people developed into an art form in the GDR in anticipation of the possibility of somebody reporting. Or the witful and clever avoidance of banned terms and the recoining of "acceptable" terms to still utter criticism. Truth to be told, in the GDR that was aimed mostly at the party. But the need for veiled communication was generated by the fear of a shamus being around.
So yes, of course are internet forae completely voluntary and irrelevant. When granting leeway and freedom to others doesn´t cost nothing, and the persons in control still refrain from doing so, I am very sceptical of their aims.

You know, if it´s all irrelevant, than you need no mind control.

But, I shall better not beat the dead horse RPG.Net anymore. I bored myself. I shall get over it.

Quote from: SettembriniTrust me insofar, as that my remark would have been totally on-target for a german audience.

Maybe for a German audience but otherwise that comparison is pretty ridiculous. I could say a lot of things about tBP's policy (to be clear, I think only some folks feel like the way how some here feel about tBP), that folks around my part of the world could relate to, but even they would say - WTF , you are comparing something that goes on in a hobby forum, to the shit we went thorugh..idiot.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaI think it's more akin to the "Little Dog" effect, really.  They snarl and yap viciously as long as they're safely under someone else's protection, then go back to shivering nervously.

I'm sorry.  That was cruel.

Okay, I'm not that sorry.  It's cruel, but true.

And the teapot tempests that erupt when it collapses, because it really is that fragile, remind me on a regular basis that being nice and being good are not the same thing.  It happened again today, in the merged thread about that Smith chick.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralOh climb down off your cross.

I missed one friggin post in a very long thread when I came late to the party.  It happens.

The "facts" you are saying I am ignoring are, in fact, simply your opinions.  

For some reason, you and others have a bug up your ass about RPG.net.  Thats fine.  I have been posting there for years and have never ONCE seen anyone banned who didn't deserve it.

But you know what?  You've found another place to post.  A place you feel more comfortable with.  Thats great, and thats whats important.  Why invest so much of your time and energy on a place that you  don't like?

Its called a life.  I suggest you get one.

I like how you suggest I get a life, when you're the one wasting time announcing Anna Nicole Smith's death on RPG.net like anyone actually care and getting bitchslapped repeatedly like a little girl (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=310590&page=13#130) by MacLennan and Curt for your trouble. That after defending that place vehemently here.

Quote from: Tom BTrue...but that half is still very substantial and still out-traffics most pure RPG websites.

Spot on.

Edit: I'm German, it's my history, and Settembrini is so out to lunch it's not funny anymore.