From this thread here:

http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6856

Quote from: Abyssal MawYou don't have to like anything.
You don't have to buy anything.
You don't even have to say anything.

All you need to do is show some respect to your fellow community members.

And this doesn't even require you to do anything. I.e. you can accomplish this just by avoiding threads that happen to be about games you don't like, don't play, and don't know anything about.

The roleplaying hobby is not about activism.

This is not meant to be a sarcastic post, no hidden meaning, just that I think this is really good advice. Now I disagree  - a lot - with AM, but I think he nailed it right here. What do you folks think?

Regards,
David R

It's nonsense. Of course the roleplaying hobby is about activism! We introduce people to games we love, and we scorn games we hate!

It used to be good advice. I tried to follow it for years. But works only if majority of internet-active gamers respect it as well. That is no no more true! And the line must be drawn somewhere...

I respect those who deserve it instead of respecting every drooling idiot out there.

I have some comments on the original post.

If people follow those suggestions, then making threads about specific games is a good way to avoid problems. Unfortunately that's not always possible or desirable. Personally, in the course of "general discussions", one ought to be able qualify individual threads or comments based on a set of assumptions which might be wider than a single game but narrower than "all roleplaying".

This is part of the reason for the various divisions that have been proposed (GDS, GNS, Adventure/Thematic, etc.) but the terms themselves have often proven contentious in one way or another--and often mean different things even when used by people who claim allegiance to the same "taxonomy". So plain English is often better, and discussion is best served when both speaker & listener avoid arguing over definitions. (E.g., if I say I'm working from a "simulationist" basis and later expand on that, it's counterproductive to argue whether I got "simulationist" right or to take offense at an apparent claim that "non-simulationist" gaming is this or that.)

Also I don't think I should feel obliged to avoid all threads about a game I don't like. Just recently joewolz introduced an "actual play" thread about a game he'd played recently and several of us, but me especially, took that as a cue to start talking about the game in general. This I think was a mistake. On the other hand general critique/commentary threads are fair game; in fact without this assumption you end up with vacuous gushing as the only acceptable form of discussion.

Quote from: David RWhat do you folks think?

I think that it works for me when I do it, and when I don't, I think back that I should have.

No snark intended, but my thoughts are that we don't need a thread about it. Too much meta-discussion and not enough gaming discussion make OHT a dull boy.