Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All

Author Topic: A place for more moderated discussion  (Read 12765 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11145
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
  • Respect: +11802
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #25 on: November 09, 2015, 02:48:44 pm »
+1

As an extreme example, I believe Awaclus is being entirely serious with a lot of his one-liners. Are they not appropriate in a 'serious' discussion? Depends on who you ask.

Well, I would probably just entirely ignore the forum anyway.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The Twitch channel where I stream DominionThe YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's albums for free

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5339
  • Respect: +21665
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #26 on: November 09, 2015, 02:49:17 pm »
+9

- In general splitting communities is bad. It happens anyway, due to wanting to focus on a smaller area, or people having problems with the site owner, or people wanting less moderation. Wanting more moderation, not so common, but here you are. I think I was better off with BGG having all the Dominion traffic, but then there are benefits to having dedicated forums. Currently Dominion is mostly discussed here, then on reddit, then at BGG, then at the German forums. Those pretty much make sense; this site is dedicated, reddit talks about everything, BGG covers all games, and the German forums are in German. It would be better to combine the non-German traffic but there will always be people on BGG who prefer staying there and ditto for reddit.

- It's easy to start your own forums. Zetaboards will give you free ones (with ads) (http://www.zetaboards.com/). You can be up and running so fast. You can make them invite-only if you want just certain people there, or let anyone join. You can moderate however you want and see what happens.

- It's also easy to start a blog. There people can comment on the blog posts. WanderingWinder has a blog with some Dominion articles, probably you've seen it (http://wanderingwindergames.blogspot.com/). Your content could be mostly video-based.

- I think a big thing about the level of moderation is the level of non-post content. If you have tons of non-post content (e.g. front page articles) then people will keep coming to the site for that stuff, despite heavy moderation. When all of the content is posts, they want to say what they want to say.

- If there's a [serious] thread then for sure there will be a parallel "This thread is for replying to Adam's thread without having your post deleted" thread. Really, if you make a separate heavily moderated site that non-members can read, there will be "This thread is for replying to Adam's forums." So I mean, there's something to come to terms with. It seems easy to ignore but it will be there.

- I don't know if you've ever had your posts deleted. It doesn't make people change their wicked ways; it enrages them, and makes them go somewhere else, where their posts won't be deleted. Your rage at posts you didn't want, it's the same for them when they want their post and don't get it. So deleting posts is anti-community, except of course in the case of people trying to provoke the mods, e.g. with shock images. Me personally, I am not interested in having my posts deleted.

- I don't know if f.ds can get ignore lists, but that's a great approach for many people. You hide the Ozles and Witherweavers and never know what you're missing. Except when other people quote them, although their are plug-ins to handle even that. Actually yeah maybe you can do ignore lists with a plug-in if the forum software won't do it. Ignore lists, that is the solution.

- People who make joke posts tend to be popular. It's great to have a WanderingWinder ranking all the cards and writing a paragraph about each; it's also great for a WitherWeaver to crack wise. Even when the hit rate is low. Not that I am praising making tired jokes, man. I might block some of those people, if there were ignore lists. The first three letters are the same, we get it.
Logged

AdamH

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2801
  • Shuffle iT Username: Adam Horton
  • You make your own shuffle luck
  • Respect: +3828
    • View Profile
    • My Dominion Videos
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #27 on: November 09, 2015, 02:49:41 pm »
+1

I don't think my claim is far off the mark, referring back to earlier threads, particularly in his discussion with SCSN. Maybe he never outright stated it, but there were several posts that made this conclusion with textual evidence. Go back and read those; make it a game if you want.

As the person who wrote the posts, and the sole source of all information, intent, and mental and physical work that went into making them, I can say definitively what my intent was and was not. Do you really think you know better than me?

I'd believe you if you showed me some evidence, but seeing as how you just said "go back and pick apart Adam's posts and see if you can find implications that support my point" as your best source of evidence, I'm still not convinced. I still have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Link a specific post, link a thing I said that supports your conclusion and couldn't possibly mean anything else. These would be compelling things, what you said is not compelling.

How many times have I said in this thread that I don't think I'm the best person to be the actual moderator of this? You can't just ignore the parts of what I say that directly contradict your stupid theory about my intentions that you think you know better than me. I honestly don't see how I'm not supposed to take this as a personal attack.

And this is exactly the kind of crap I'd like to not have to deal with when I'm trying to have a productive conversation. His comments are off-topic, non-constructive, and personal in nature. What value does it add to the conversation? You really need to back up what you said or apologize.

I'm not saying I shouldn't be questioned, but I'm not the one who brought up the idea that my opinion shouldn't be questioned. I'm the one who has asked for people to clarify what they mean so it can be talked about, and people like you are the ones who have failed to actually do so.
Logged
I respond to PMs.

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5339
  • Respect: +21665
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #28 on: November 09, 2015, 02:50:03 pm »
+10

People don't like unfree speech.

Speak for yourself.
Make up your mind! Either he gets to speak for himself or he doesn't.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7827
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #29 on: November 09, 2015, 02:57:08 pm »
+3

You hide the Ozles and Witherweavers and never know what you're missing.

You're missing some great god-damned content, let me tell you.
Logged

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1722
  • Respect: +1743
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #30 on: November 09, 2015, 03:03:40 pm »
+2

PPE (because of course): I am just going to post this and not worry about whether other posts conflict with it.

I do think some of the posts that upset Adam in the threads in question were reasonable attempts at constructive conversation that were misinterpreted as trolling. I think the general atmosphere of all the things that were happening contributed to that happening. This is another point that supports the point that this stuff is extremely hard to moderate. I believe it is best to take what Adam has posted here as an accurate representation of what he wants to try to do, and not assume things based on the mud slinging that happened to incite it. If something is started, and on topic disagreement is rejected, I don't think we have to worry about the experiment lasting very long.

I also think there is a very difficult line between disagreeing with someone's position on a topic, and telling them the topic shouldn't be discussed at all. I don't know what point I'm trying to make with that, but I think the second has little value.

I don't have the slightest idea if the thing Adam wants can succeed or not.  It is clear that most of the regulars around here are not bothered by the things he wants to avoid, but perhaps we would perfectly happy to participate in the [serious] threads and have our fun in the other 99% of the forum.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7827
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #31 on: November 09, 2015, 03:08:04 pm »
0

For what it's worth, I think ignore list functionality would be useful.
Logged

XerxesPraelor

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1069
  • Respect: +362
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #32 on: November 09, 2015, 03:12:25 pm »
0

You know, this happens to me in RL all the time.  I'm very serious about something (usually a game, fancy that!) and the people I'm around, family, friends, etc. just aren't that serious.  Therefore, they start poking fun at my seriousness to the point of almost literal ROFL.  Which of course makes me more defensive, which just increases the good joke for everyone else.  My young daughter is starting to exhibit the same traits.

Unfortunately, there is no way to get people like that on board.  The only choices are to flip such a massive gasket that the whole topic shifts to mental stability (but the joke is stopped), or to just let it go.

I think if those people didn't like you, they wouldn't poke fun at your seriousness.  Maybe the other choice is to accept the relationship for what it is.

just let it go == accept the relationship for what it is

(and people doing something because they like you doesn't stop it from being a problem)

Hmm.. not exactly what I meant.  I meant more, like.. what you're getting isn't exactly what you're looking for, but focus on the parts of it that are beneficial and not that are negative.  I mean, it would be far worse if everyone just ignored you entirely.

I have similar experiences with what theright555J was describing.

The literal statement of this is correct. It sounds like it implies something false though.

The thing is, it's not a binary choice overall. For you, you should just put up with it and be grateful you have any family or friends, but the fact that your situation is better than the worst possible situation doesn't mean much, and excusing the people involved in that behavior can lead to all sorts of problems.

If "accept your relationship for what it is" is talking about your attitude, then yeah. You should look on the bright side of life. But framing the problem like that makes it sound like their behavior is actually NBD, when in fact it's a mild to moderate (YMMV) form of emotional abuse.
Quote
I don't have the slightest idea if the thing Adam wants can succeed or not.  It is clear that most of the regulars around here are not bothered by the things he wants to avoid, but perhaps we would perfectly happy to participate in the [serious] threads and have our fun in the other 99% of the forum.
I fully agree.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2015, 03:13:33 pm by XerxesPraelor »
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7827
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #33 on: November 09, 2015, 03:12:57 pm »
+2

I don't think my claim is far off the mark, referring back to earlier threads, particularly in his discussion with SCSN. Maybe he never outright stated it, but there were several posts that made this conclusion with textual evidence. Go back and read those; make it a game if you want.

As the person who wrote the posts, and the sole source of all information, intent, and mental and physical work that went into making them, I can say definitively what my intent was and was not. Do you really think you know better than me?

I'd believe you if you showed me some evidence, but seeing as how you just said "go back and pick apart Adam's posts and see if you can find implications that support my point" as your best source of evidence, I'm still not convinced. I still have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Link a specific post, link a thing I said that supports your conclusion and couldn't possibly mean anything else. These would be compelling things, what you said is not compelling.

How many times have I said in this thread that I don't think I'm the best person to be the actual moderator of this? You can't just ignore the parts of what I say that directly contradict your stupid theory about my intentions that you think you know better than me. I honestly don't see how I'm not supposed to take this as a personal attack.

And this is exactly the kind of crap I'd like to not have to deal with when I'm trying to have a productive conversation. His comments are off-topic, non-constructive, and personal in nature. What value does it add to the conversation? You really need to back up what you said or apologize.

I'm not saying I shouldn't be questioned, but I'm not the one who brought up the idea that my opinion shouldn't be questioned. I'm the one who has asked for people to clarify what they mean so it can be talked about, and people like you are the ones who have failed to actually do so.

I would venture to bet that it's exactly this type of post that gives jsh the impression he got. 
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7827
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #34 on: November 09, 2015, 03:17:10 pm »
+3

...

Man, all I'm really trying to say is that people don't necessarily mean you ill will, even when what you get isn't what you planned to get.  Both in online forums and in real life. 

Okay so I'm making a more relevant point here: it's a forum, people post, free posting is better, you're not always going to like it, and that's all okay.  I hold that the benefit of open posting/discussion outweighs the negatives. 
Logged

AdamH

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2801
  • Shuffle iT Username: Adam Horton
  • You make your own shuffle luck
  • Respect: +3828
    • View Profile
    • My Dominion Videos
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #35 on: November 09, 2015, 03:20:08 pm »
+1

I would venture to bet that it's exactly this type of post that gives jsh the impression he got.

Maybe you can enlighten me as to what is the issue here?
Logged
I respond to PMs.

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8152
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9511
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #36 on: November 09, 2015, 03:21:30 pm »
+1

- In general splitting communities is bad. It happens anyway, due to wanting to focus on a smaller area, or people having problems with the site owner, or people wanting less moderation. Wanting more moderation, not so common, but here you are. I think I was better off with BGG having all the Dominion traffic, but then there are benefits to having dedicated forums. Currently Dominion is mostly discussed here, then on reddit, then at BGG, then at the German forums. Those pretty much make sense; this site is dedicated, reddit talks about everything, BGG covers all games, and the German forums are in German. It would be better to combine the non-German traffic but there will always be people on BGG who prefer staying there and ditto for reddit.

I think this forum is rather unique in that there is a dedicated community of probably the best Dominion players in the world.  All the other places you've mentioned are mainly just randos popping in to ask rules questions.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Chris is me

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2672
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chris is me
  • What do you want me to say?
  • Respect: +3328
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #37 on: November 09, 2015, 03:23:29 pm »
+8

Completely serious suggestion: Could we just get a "Hide Post" button? Don't like the post, just ignore it and move on. Nobody's forcing you to engage them. I realize reading the same shitty post over and over can be quite the mental and emotional drain, so there's value in letting the user hide them. Similar to the collapse post function in Reddit.

All the people that only want serious posts on their threads can just hide the rest from view. Takes no effort, everyone gets what they want.
Logged
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/chrisisme2791

bug me on discord

pm me if you wanna do stuff for the blog

they/them

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7827
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #38 on: November 09, 2015, 04:02:52 pm »
+13

I would venture to bet that it's exactly this type of post that gives jsh the impression he got.

Maybe you can enlighten me as to what is the issue here?

Because it feels like when someone posts a statement about you, what they get in response is a rant.  It looks a lot like you take offense to people disagreeing with you.  Now I hesitate to say that, because I've seen that said before, and it gets a certain type of response:

Quote
As the person who wrote the posts, and the sole source of all information, intent, and mental and physical work that went into making them, I can say definitively what my intent was and was not. Do you really think you know better than me?

I've seen this post (by which, I mean, the same content in almost the same words) maybe about four times.  It's clear that people are misinterpreting you.  But honestly, every time I see this I'm surprised, because when I read the posts that get this response, I read it as someone trying to understand where you're coming from, and you ranting at their audacity to assume they know what you're feeling and thinking.  But really I don't get it.. isn't the point of posting on a forum to share with others what you're feeling or thinking?  They're not telling you what you're feeling: they're telling you what they think you're feeling.  They can be wrong at that, and you can try to clarify.  I don't see  you clarifying much: I see you arguing.

Quote
How many times have I said in this thread that I don't think I'm the best person to be the actual moderator of this? You can't just ignore the parts of what I say that directly contradict your stupid theory about my intentions that you think you know better than me. I honestly don't see how I'm not supposed to take this as a personal attack.

This just strikes me as straight up hypocritical.  Specifically your stupid theory and I honestly don't see how I'm not supposed to take this as a personal attack.

Quote
And this is exactly the kind of crap I'd like to not have to deal with when I'm trying to have a productive conversation. His comments are off-topic, non-constructive, and personal in nature. What value does it add to the conversation? You really need to back up what you said or apologize.

(emphasis mine)

Again, your tone and words are a lot more of an attack than what was originally said, unless I grossly misunderstood.  Moreover, I don't think his comments are off-topic. And this is like.. I mean, this is what does it:

Quote
I'm trying to have a productive conversation

Your conversations are productive, but other peoples' are crap, off-topic, non-productive, stupid, personal attacks.  Is it really that hard to see how someone can read your post and see it as you not wanting different viewpoints?

I just.. if he's wrong, he's wrong, but I don't think he was the one doing attacking.  Every time I read your posts where there's disagreement, you come off (to me) as way more antagonistic than those you're talking with. 
Logged

AdamH

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2801
  • Shuffle iT Username: Adam Horton
  • You make your own shuffle luck
  • Respect: +3828
    • View Profile
    • My Dominion Videos
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #39 on: November 09, 2015, 05:37:32 pm »
0

it feels like when someone posts a statement about you, what they get in response is a rant.  It looks a lot like you take offense to people disagreeing with you.  Now I hesitate to say that, because I've seen that said before, and it gets a certain type of response:

Well I hope I don't make you regret your post. I liked your post because you actually have reasons for what you say and it can actually be talked about.

Quote
As the person who wrote the posts, and the sole source of all information, intent, and mental and physical work that went into making them, I can say definitively what my intent was and was not. Do you really think you know better than me?

I've seen this post (by which, I mean, the same content in almost the same words) maybe about four times.  It's clear that people are misinterpreting you.  But honestly, every time I see this I'm surprised, because when I read the posts that get this response, I read it as someone trying to understand where you're coming from, and you ranting at their audacity to assume they know what you're feeling and thinking.

So it's no secret, I don't like it with people assume things about me, especially when I know that those assumptions are false (I have an unfair advantage, being myself and everything). I read it as someone who has already determined what I'm thinking and feeling and is not open to all of the evidence that already exists to the contrary. I don't think people should assume then know what I'm thinking and feeling when it's not the same thing as what I told them I'm thinking and feeling. When those assumptions question my integrity, I take it personally.

The one in this thread, IMO, fell into that category -- does anyone disagree with this? Let me be clear: jsh's post did not contain any justification for what he said (in fact what he says is directly contradicted by evidence I showed), and its content questions my integrity. No matter how politely he said it, I'm still convinced that it is a personal attack. I gave my reasons and nobody has shown me anything that refutes them. I've asked several times for this, but nothing has come up.

Other ones, well it's possible I may have overreacted to some of them (I even said that in the OP about a particular one), are you saying this about all of them? Like, I can't exactly go review all of my posts and look for things that people could get mad about, it's hard for me to do that because I'm me and I don't know what I'm looking for. If you point to a particular one I can address it. It seems very possible to me that I took something like this as a personal attack for similar reasons, and based on the stuff below, I may have used some words that made it harder for people to understand what I was trying to say.

Quote
How many times have I said in this thread that I don't think I'm the best person to be the actual moderator of this? You can't just ignore the parts of what I say that directly contradict your stupid theory about my intentions that you think you know better than me. I honestly don't see how I'm not supposed to take this as a personal attack.

This just strikes me as straight up hypocritical.  Specifically your stupid theory and I honestly don't see how I'm not supposed to take this as a personal attack.

Quote
And this is exactly the kind of crap I'd like to not have to deal with when I'm trying to have a productive conversation. His comments are off-topic, non-constructive, and personal in nature. What value does it add to the conversation? You really need to back up what you said or apologize.

(emphasis mine)

Again, your tone and words are a lot more of an attack than what was originally said, unless I grossly misunderstood.  Moreover, I don't think his comments are off-topic. And this is like.. I mean, this is what does it:

Quote
I'm trying to have a productive conversation

Your conversations are productive, but other peoples' are crap, off-topic, non-productive, stupid, personal attacks.

So if I don't say crap or stupid, is everything else OK? I'm willing to accept that I should have used better words than those. It also might have had some value in reinforcing the community's view that I should not be the one with the authority over what is considered "off-topic", so "non-productive" may not apply either.

OTOH, I will stand behind that his post was a personal attack. I'll stand behind that it was off-topic. My choice of words doesn't change these facts.

Is it really that hard to see how someone can read your post and see it as you not wanting different viewpoints?

I just.. if he's wrong, he's wrong, but I don't think he was the one doing attacking.  Every time I read your posts where there's disagreement, you come off (to me) as way more antagonistic than those you're talking with.

There are several posts before that where I responded positively to other peoples' ideas -- they were constructive and not all of them jived with my OP. Jsh's post was clearly different to me, so yes it is hard for me to see that. I'll take your word for it that this is where the disconnect is, so thank you for telling me.

I mean, if it's all about two words I used, then people are missing the content of his post and my responses to it. Is that really the cause of this entire misunderstanding? Like, if you told me it was, I'd believe you, but that seems really strange to me.
Logged
I respond to PMs.

pubby

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 279
  • Respect: +448
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #40 on: November 09, 2015, 08:30:19 pm »
0

All this forum needs is another moderator or two. Theory does a good job, but he doesn't catch everything, especially on posts that aren't reported.

The borrow thread is a good example of a thread that needed moderation. The discussion quickly became off topic and vitriolic, and should have been dealt with regardless of whether it had a [serious] tag or not.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7827
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #41 on: November 09, 2015, 08:48:46 pm »
+1

It's just a few words, but rather the overall tone. I don't think jsh was quite correct in what he said, but I do think I see where he comes from.

I will try to type up a more detailed post tomorrow
Logged

tripwire

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 296
  • Respect: +208
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #42 on: November 09, 2015, 09:03:08 pm »
+3

...I'll stand behind that it was off-topic...

I just want to respond to this first because I think this is what worries people about your proposal the most, as evidenced by Withweaver, Deadlock, and jsh's comments. (I'd provide quotes, but I'm bad at posting, which is why I never do it.)

I'm going to try to explain why jsh's comments seem on topic.

If I am understanding correctly, the topic is "A place for more moderated discussion." In each of jsh's posts (disregarding whether he is personally attacking you or not) he gives at least one reason why he thinks a place such as that would be a bad idea in each of his posts. This is on topic.

Maybe you hoped that this paragraph:


Some people think that having moderated discussion is a bad thing, I would say to those people that they are not required to read or participate in moderated discussion. If those people are worried that nobody would participate in moderated discussion, then I would say to those people that silence is preferable to irrelevant noise. If those people choose to disagree with that statement, then I respect their opinion and would like to remind them that they are not required to read or participate in this moderated discussion, and also to please consider that other people out there may have a different opinion and would like to have a place to talk under these guidelines.


says that this is not the thread to discuss whether such a place is a good idea or not. But it doesn't actually say that. Therefore, I do not see why jsh's posts should be considered off-topic.

Finally, you suggest this is just evidence that you shouldn't be the one to moderate these things, but that suggests that another moderator wouldn't remove posts like jsh's. If that's the case, would this hypothetical space on the forum even serve the function that you want it to?

Edit: Since there's no reason for you to have any idea who I am, I just want to also add that I appreciate your presence in this community, Adam, and hope that even if this solution doesn't pan out I hope you can find a way to stick around.  :)
« Last Edit: November 09, 2015, 09:13:54 pm by tripwire »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7054
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9761
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #43 on: November 09, 2015, 09:33:38 pm »
+14

I am firmly for the status quo. I think theory does a fine job of moderating the actual trolls and flamers (who are few and far between). I would strongly prefer that Dominion-related discussion not be split into two subforums. I don't see any need for restrictions on what folks can post where (apart from what's already in place, I mean), and I say that as someone who has been on the receiving end of this sort of off-topic deluge. I once made a thread in the variants forum for a fan card called "Monopoly", and of course the thread was instantly full of Monopoly (the game) related jokes. But here's the thing: the jokers were not to blame for a lack of discussion about my card. If someone wanted to post an opinion, off-topic posts wouldn't stop them. In reality the card idea just didn't merit discussion.

And this is a point that I think bears repeating: we have no evidence that heavier moderation would actually improve the quality of discourse. A [serious] tag may stop someone from posting a joke, but it won't make them post insightful Dominion commentary instead. And someone who was going to post both might instead post neither. Also, just because a topic gets derailed, that doesn't stop people from posting more on-topic discussion afterward. If the thread doesn't get back on topic, it's because nobody has anything they want to contribute at that time, not because of the intervening chaff.
Logged

AdamH

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2801
  • Shuffle iT Username: Adam Horton
  • You make your own shuffle luck
  • Respect: +3828
    • View Profile
    • My Dominion Videos
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #44 on: November 09, 2015, 09:43:23 pm »
0

Maybe it's not clear? I'm talking about the following exchange:

If what you are actually seeking in the depth of your heart (it's not easy to admit) is a place where your own perspective is champion, a blog is a great environment. Just look at ww's. Nothing wrong with it.

I don't know where you got this idea. Did I say something that makes you believe this is the case? If so, please point it out so I can make it clearer. If not, then please don't put words in my mouth (or WW's mouth for that matter).

I don't think my claim is far off the mark, referring back to earlier threads, particularly in his discussion with SCSN. Maybe he never outright stated it, but there were several posts that made this conclusion with textual evidence. Go back and read those; make it a game if you want. Adam is taking the perspective that his conception of how discussion should go is the way it 'should' be, even when he is one of the only people making the argument.

This is what I have an issue with. The rest of his stuff is fine -- I don't really agree with it but I don't have a problem with him saying it. When I'm talking about an inappropriate thing that was said, that's off-topic and offensive and blah blah blah, it's this. I'm not talking about the other stuff he said and I'm not talking about any of the stuff anybody else said. Has this been an area of confusion? If so, I hope it is no longer an area of confusion. Tripwire, I don't believe I actually disagree with any of what you said...


Finally, you suggest this is just evidence that you shouldn't be the one to moderate these things, but that suggests that another moderator wouldn't remove posts like jsh's. If that's the case, would this hypothetical space on the forum even serve the function that you want it to?

I don't know how many times I have to say this -- I'm not looking for a place where I can delete the posts of people who disagree with me. That is not what I want. What I want is not a place where I can delete the posts of people who disagree with me.

I have no idea why people think this is what I want. It's not what I want. In fact, I want quite the opposite. It is Jsh who suggested that this is what I want, and all I have done is deny that and continue to show evidence that this is not what I want. What you have quoted is in fact some of that exact evidence that this is not what I want. You are correct that this is not what I would want! I never wanted that! I have asked for examples of where I have said or implied that this is what I want but none have been provided for me; I suspect this is partially because this is not what I want.

Like, whatever outlets I'm going to have for Dominion are going to happen or not happen regardless of what goes on here (btw, it's a podcast, not a blog, and it's a long way off). The reason I would want to post here is precisely to have people tell me things about Dominion so that I can get better at Dominion. If I just wanted people to agree with me, why would I want that? I would already think I'm the best person in the world at Dominion. I am not. I'm not even close.

To summarize, I'm looking for a place on the forums where discussion about Dominion can take place without the added noise of scout jokes, or other off-topic posts. Disagreement is just fine, in fact it's the whole point. My opinion should not be valued more than the opinions of others unless it turns out that I am demonstrably correct (don't worry, this will never happen).

I am firmly for the status quo.

I am firmly for whatever is best, regardless of whether or not it is what we're currently doing.

we have no evidence that heavier moderation would actually improve the quality of discourse.

This thread. I had high hopes for it and planned to post tons of useful things in there. I no longer even read this thread because I got frustrated with all of the off-topic discussion that happened there. Part of the reason we don't have this evidence is that nobody has gone looking for it. Once there's enough information here to make a decent/relevant poll on the topic, I plan to make such a poll and we will have evidence if that evidence exists.

And I'm even willing to say that if such a poll does not reveal enough people who are interested in this, I'd count that as evidence that this isn't a good idea (even though that's probably not entirely true). If that happens, I will stop pushing for this and I will shut up about it (I probably won't post on F.DS anymore).

If people are so confident that nobody is interested in this and it's a bad idea and it will never work, then this poll should reflect that and those people will have exactly what they want. I'm really not moved by statements that aren't backed up by anything when we can just have these results and know for sure.
Logged
I respond to PMs.

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8152
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9511
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #45 on: November 09, 2015, 09:57:47 pm »
+6

we have no evidence that heavier moderation would actually improve the quality of discourse.

This thread. I had high hopes for it and planned to post tons of useful things in there. I no longer even read this thread because I got frustrated with all of the off-topic discussion that happened there. Part of the reason we don't have this evidence is that nobody has gone looking for it. Once there's enough information here to make a decent/relevant poll on the topic, I plan to make such a poll and we will have evidence if that evidence exists.

Have you looked at that thread lately?  It's been pretty much entirely suggestions about neat card interactions recently.  Jokes come and go, and if people are interested in the topic, they'll post interesting things.  And it didn't even need any moderation to get back on topic. :)
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

tripwire

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 296
  • Respect: +208
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #46 on: November 09, 2015, 10:11:27 pm »
+6


This thread. I had high hopes for it and planned to post tons of useful things in there. I no longer even read this thread because I got frustrated with all of the off-topic discussion that happened there.

That's unfortunate because people continue to post little "combos" in that thread to this day. I actually think that the thread is evidence of some of the things LastFootnote suggests, such as the fact that threads can return to a topic after going off topic for a while.

That being said, the fact that you have stopped posting in there despite feeling like you have more things to post is also evidence that off-topic chatter will prevent some people from making substantive posts.

I look forward to the poll.

PPE: And wero beats me to it. Man lurking's so much easier  :P
« Last Edit: November 09, 2015, 10:15:28 pm by tripwire »
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
  • Respect: +2608
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #47 on: November 09, 2015, 10:18:12 pm »
+3

Everything in moderation, including moderation.

It is the nature of a forum to be public. We cannot choose who responds to our posts and what opinions they have.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9148
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #48 on: November 09, 2015, 10:27:01 pm »
+1

we have no evidence that heavier moderation would actually improve the quality of discourse.

This thread. I had high hopes for it and planned to post tons of useful things in there. I no longer even read this thread because I got frustrated with all of the off-topic discussion that happened there. Part of the reason we don't have this evidence is that nobody has gone looking for it. Once there's enough information here to make a decent/relevant poll on the topic, I plan to make such a poll and we will have evidence if that evidence exists.

I'm not sure if you've forgotten, but you brought up your concerns in that thread and I think your concerns were adequately addressed in the discussion after that.  Stuff that you decided was "off-topic" really didn't seem that way, given the thread title and even some of the examples you posted yourself.  And I thought you eventually understood that the intent of the thread was unclear, even to you:

I'm all for keeping this thread useful, but I am confused as to what is expected of it.

Me too, brah. Me too.  :-\



Re: the proposal in the OP, I'm neutral on the idea but I don't really see the need.  When an OP is sufficiently serious (e.g. a good article) then the discussion tends to remain serious.  Discussion will branch out at times, but that's natural in any productive discussion and longer off-topic discussions can get forked into new threads as long as they get reported.  I think that's really all that's needed.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5339
  • Respect: +21665
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #49 on: November 09, 2015, 11:46:03 pm »
+7

To summarize, I'm looking for a place on the forums where discussion about Dominion can take place without the added noise of scout jokes, or other off-topic posts.
If you don't want to see those off-topic posts, that's fine and reasonable. You could scroll on past them. Maybe you could find ignore list software that works with these forums; a browser plug-in. Ignore lists would be great.

If you don't want me to see those off-topic posts, well, I am so strongly against that. Cover your ears for yourself! It's just so... unfriendly... to want something not to exist that other people are enjoying but which you don't.

BGG is more heavily moderated than here. You could try posting a thread for Dominion discussion there. See what happens. It's easy; I've posted threads there myself. Despite werothedisdainful's dismissal, there are for sure good players on both reddit and BGG. Including some people you know from here.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All
 

Page created in 0.156 seconds with 20 queries.