Community Notification Discussion!

[ QUOTE ]
It's about time we have some constructive discussion going without worrying that your thread have its faults pointed out by realistic people who have seen your crappy suggestion a thousand times before, but you didn't bother to read any of the suggestion stickies or use the search function because you just needed to sit at the keyboard, typing about how desperately you wanted AWSUM BEEST MEN PETS FOR MMS.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixed that for ya.

---

[ QUOTE ]
All the Mods are saying,
is give self-moderation a try.

They'll have to split themselves with moderating the Closed Beta Forums and the regular Forums. And to make sure things are ok here in the regular Forums, all they are asking is for us, the community, to keep it civil and to not just go spamming to pad the thread count.

Personally, I'd like to see that the Mods being able help the Devs with getting feedback from the Closed Beta testers, and therefore getting speedier delivery from Closed to Open testing, than to see them being distracted.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know how to solve all their problems with stretching too thin between forums...let people in the beta post on these boards...

Why do we have closed secretive betas of issues anyway ? Well I can understand inviting certain people to assist in the beta even though they probably aren't helping too terribly much aside from bodies in seats as it were.

But yeah no need to hide all the info if nothing else atleast it gives us something to talk about so we don't fight about random other things...

---

*facepalm*

---

I will respond to any post in any way I feel like within the confines of the forum rules. I don't really care if you think that's being rude or not.

---

[ QUOTE ]
I will respond to any post in any way I feel like within the confines of the forum rules. I don't really care if you think that's being rude or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. I dont give crap if I m rude or not.

---

[ QUOTE ]
But therin lies part of the issue. When you provide support, you're providing support for a premise that has been presented. The reasons for the support are already available for scrutiny.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true. "I think this will be good for blasters" gives a reason for support, "/signed" does not. Different people might support a given proposal for different reasons - and in any rational world, those reasons are important for analyzing the strength of the proposal. (Because "this will be good for blasters" can be rebutted, "/signed" cannot.)

[ QUOTE ]
If you're goin to disagree with the premise, you have to provide the reasons because they have not already been presented. Simply posting "No" doesn't do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true. Using your logic "no" expands to "I don't like this idea and don't think it will provide the benefits it presumes to or accomplish its stated goals" as much as "yes" expands to "I do like this idea and think it will be beneficial and accomplish its stated goals". Either both possible responses (in the binary thought experiments were are studying here) expand - or neither does. You can't have it both ways.

---

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

[ QUOTE ]
Asking people to behave themselves is one thing. Telling people they should post a certain way or post a certain minimum required number of words or post a required argument or what have you is just one big slippery slope. If we keep going that way, we may end up with people being prosecuted because they didn't post the correct way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

Case in point: I have a three hundred and seventy-six word response saved to my hard drive, which content-wise is really nothing more than: /no. Wordcount minimums don't work.

---

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So yes, you do advocate an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia directed at one's fellow posters, because you do think one should have to go through any possible quotes with aforementioned fine-toothed comb.

Thank you for confirming that sad fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

The quote feature is just a tool to make responses more clear and concise - it is still as if you have written it. Just like when you quote someone in real life.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nope.

In real life, if I alter what I purport to be quoting, I am in fact guilty of misquoting the person involved. Furthermore, I have had people go absolutely ballistic on me for simple quoting as I have been here - in pieces and chunks. What do you think will happen if I start inserting [omitted] or [censored] in place of questionable terms, words, or even whole phrases?

Flames, is what.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is their problem, then. Just because they broke the rules is no reason for you to.

And as long as you are not doing that style of quoting for multiple people in one post, I have no issues with it. Again, their problem.

---

Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net

Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.

[ QUOTE ]
But yeah no need to hide all the info if nothing else atleast it gives us something to talk about so we don't fight about random other things..

[/ QUOTE ]

Because people would complain (from i9, for example)

"But we did all that hard work to earn more storage space for invention salvage, and now it's useless!"

That would of happened after they changed the original settings to what they are now that disallow SG salvage storage to accept invention storage.

Similar things would/could/probably would happen.

---

Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net

Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.

I disagree very strongly that "/NO" should be treated as forum violation.

If /signed is valid then so is /unsigned or /no

---

This is a song about a super hero named Tony. Its called Tony's theme.
Jagged Reged: 23/01/04

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will respond to any post in any way I feel like within the confines of the forum rules. I don't really care if you think that's being rude or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. I dont give crap if I m rude or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then if you are rude you will not be surprised if you are banned.

---

This is a song about a super hero named Tony. Its called Tony's theme.
Jagged Reged: 23/01/04

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yet if you're not breaking the rules, you've got nothing to worry about

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, tell that to jranger who didn't break any rules.
These new "/jranger is bannable" rules were invented to give them a reason to have him banned.

Search his posts. He doesn't insult, he doesn't flame he simply replies "no" to a lot of bad ideas. There was NOTHING in the rules stateing he couldn't do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he replied "no" to ALL the ideas. I don't see how anyone can argue that he was being anything but a troll.

Seriously, when did half of this forum have lobotomies?

[/ QUOTE ]

After the circumcisions.

---

Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net

Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.

Can we get a badge if we rat out our fellow players?

"Informer" - you no say daddy me snow me Ill go blame,
A licky boom boom down.

---

The Widow's Dark Hand - leader of Faux Pas
Champion Server
Tee Hee!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will respond to any post in any way I feel like within the confines of the forum rules. I don't really care if you think that's being rude or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
Same here. I dont give crap if I m rude or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then if you are rude you will not be surprised if you are banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which brings us back to an old point - there's no rule against rudeness. There are rules against hate, insults and trolling. There is no rule against being rude unless they added it in the last couple of weeks.

Rude is slamming the door in someone's face. Rude is interrupting a person who's speaking. Rude is not minding others' sensitivities. But that, in fact, is just a normal part of human interaction. Unless there is a forum rule that requires me to care about my fellow forum-goers deeply and affectionately, then I will keep not caring one bit about the bulk of them, and I'll be just as rude as I please. As long as I'm not actually OFFENSIVE, then there's really nothing against the rules in that manner of conduct.

To point, if someone takes offence at the fact that I felt it prudent to say I don't like their idea without stating why, then them's tough cookies. There are plenty of very reasonable responses to that that don't include a hissy fit or hurt feelings. And believe me when I tell you, I understand that all too well.

If the rules will require me to not be rude, which they actually don't, then they should require other people to keep a cool head, which they don't, either. Because somehow this is being made out to be a strange case. It's not OK for people to be curt, rude or inconsiderate, but it's somehow OK for the self-proclaimed victims of these actions to be curt, rude and inconsiderate in return.

You know what this reminds me of? A grown man being placed in kindergarten. Then the teacher keeps saying "I know you're right, but you know that'll make them cry, so don't." You can't really ask children to take it like adults, after all. I do not, however, like to think these forums should be handled like kindergarten.

Self-moderation goes both ways. It has to do with what people post and it has to do with how people read those posts. We seem to be persecuting the posters a whole lot, but are we doing much of anything about the people looking for something to be offended about?

---

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Asking people to behave themselves is one thing. Telling people they should post a certain way or post a certain minimum required number of words or post a required argument or what have you is just one big slippery slope. If we keep going that way, we may end up with people being prosecuted because they didn't post the correct way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

Case in point: I have a three hundred and seventy-six word response saved to my hard drive, which content-wise is really nothing more than: /no. Wordcount minimums don't work.

[/ QUOTE ]

You MUST send this to me. YOU MUST.

Also, this new policy makes me afraid to post at all.

---

Testing a response:

[ QUOTE ]
I would normally just type NO as your idea/suggestion/existence is too obviously idiotic/total-fail/proof-there-is-no-god but current board policy states that I must add several words after that to explain what I mean. I'm either sorry or not sorry if this hurts your feelings/ego/digital-genitals but blame god/your-parents/new-policies instead of me.

Thank you.

[/ QUOTE ]

---

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Asking people to behave themselves is one thing. Telling people they should post a certain way or post a certain minimum required number of words or post a required argument or what have you is just one big slippery slope. If we keep going that way, we may end up with people being prosecuted because they didn't post the correct way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

Case in point: I have a three hundred and seventy-six word response saved to my hard drive, which content-wise is really nothing more than: /no. Wordcount minimums don't work.

[/ QUOTE ]

You MUST send this to me. YOU MUST.

Also, this new policy makes me afraid to post at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your request has been evaluated, by myself and several other experts in the fields (such as forensic typology, advanced placement English and long-haired Persian cat waxing) which, taken in total, would construe a solid basis on which to form an opinion and having formed that opinion would feel qualified to express that opinion in a public forum, such as this board, a board similar to this or to a board that is unlike this but has functionality similar enough to this so as to allow posting, editing of posting and review of post that have been posted by persons similar to the one that has posted the post to which I am presently replying to, and having taken into consideration the teleological implications of you suggestion, we must reply in the negative.

By negative, we mean that we have read your post, discussed it amongst ourselves, created a flow chart and made a list of all the things that could be suggestive of a positive outcome to your request, and we made a list of all the things that we viewed, in our considerable opinion, to be negative outcomes from your request. We also consulted a field trained guru, to make sure that our findings were not totally out of line with any metaphysical implications of our findings or the findings that other persons might find if they followed our exact methodology or methodologies similar to our methodologies, or methodologies not similar to our methodologies, but which would generate results in line with the expectations that would be created by our methodologies, and after having completed all those iterations, we finally verified our opinion by consulting the I-Ching, a tarot card spread, and the crazy guy that sleeps under one of our committee members front stairwell, and all of these gave answers that were a variation of “no.”

After conceding the exhaustive review of the matter, we ran one more verification. We constructed a dart board and labeled the left half “yes,” and the right half “no.” We, the five members that had survived this exhaustive review, each cast 100 darts at the board. A total of one hundred and thirty seven darts landed on the left side of the board, two hundred and twenty five landed on the right half, the others missed the board entirely (we were drunk). Given that, two hundred and twenty five is a larger number than one hundred and thirty seven, this final test was also in the negative.

---

That blue thing running around saying "Cookies are sometimes food" is Praetorian Cookie Monster!
Shoot on sight, please.

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree very strongly that "/NO" should be treated as forum violation.

If /signed is valid then so is /unsigned or /no

[/ QUOTE ]

So did you just not read the thread, or did you decide to ignore all the valid reasons why /signed is different then /no?

---

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. --- Thomas Jefferson
Formerly known as YFNDBA

[ QUOTE ]
So did you just not read the thread, or did you decide to ignore all the valid reasons why /signed is different then /no?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just how "valid" those reasons are is up for debate.

---

This guy is not doing too well with the new rules.

---

I tend to agree with those reasons.

If you agree completely.. what more is there to say? You could certainly inflate the post with what is simply a regurgitation of the post you agree with, but that is just silly to require that. All the explanation and points are in the post you are agreeing with. What is the point in repeating them over and over? When disagreeing.. your reasons are not readily present. How is anyone supposed to know what you find wrong with it unless you explain? /no is utterly useless on its own.

By that same token, everything past that first line of my post is useless because it is simply regurgitation of the same points already covered in this very thread. I've wasted your time and my time by doing it. I could have simply stated my agreement and we could all go about our business. A yes requires little explanation. A no.. not so much.

Now, if someone else already covered why you think something is a bad idea you are free to post a short agreement for their reasons for disagreeing. At least I think so. "/no for the reasons already stated" is acceptable to me.

I wonder if the people that find the difference between a yes and no so unfair just enjoy being contrary. Maybe they don't want to have to stop and argue because they can't? Shame shame. Being contrary just to be contrary is naughty.

---

<QR>

I find it depressing and disheartening that there are people that think it's acceptable to be rude as long as there is no rule against it.

---

Kid Lazarus, 50 empath Defender
Freek, 50 mind/psi Dominator
Black Khopesh, 43 db/wp Scrapper
Circuit-Boy, 40 elec Brute
Graf von Eisenfaust, 38 db/wp Brute
Blue Banshee, 35 sonic Blaster
Blood Countess, 33 mind/storm Controller
Dr. Radon, 32 rad Corruptor
Phantom Pirate, 32 db/wp Stalker

ADDITIONAL IDEAS ABOUT TO SPILL.

I have several things whirling in my head so bare with me. I'll try not to mix them up.

My above post is made on the assumption the poster of the original idea made sure to say WHY they think their idea is so grand. If someone says, "lol nerf stalkers they is overpowared!" then a bunch of people simply say, "/yes" then there is indeed a problem. Why do they think this? The line isn't so clear when an agreement is concerned.

Idea: Enable polls in suggestions.. or make is so every thread is created with a yes/no poll by default. That way everyone gets their short responses and anyone that ACTUALLY feels like contributing something of worth can have a say without the clutter.

---

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder if the people that find the difference between a yes and no so unfair just enjoy being contrary. Maybe they don't want to have to stop and argue because they can't?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does everything have to be a point-by-point debate, though? Can't we sometimes just voice our approval or disapproval for something?

Here's an example:

OP: I want the devs to add brightly-colored unicorns to CoH.
Responder 1: /signed
Responder 2: Yes
Responder 3: No

Does Responder 3 really need to go into a detailed explanation of why he or she feels adding brightly-colored unicorns to the game would negatively impact his or her experience? I suppose Responder 3 could have said, "No, because I wouldn't like brightly-colored unicorns in CoH." But isn't that implied by the simple "no"?

Sometimes the things we want to see in the game are just a matter of taste. In some cases, we might have fully reasoned through why we feel a certain way. But in others, we might just simply like or dislike an idea.

---

[ QUOTE ]

I find it depressing and disheartening that there are people that think it's acceptable to be rude as long as there is no rule against it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's moronic to think that a person is required to be polite. What *you* deem rude may very well be a well-deserved thrashing.

What people need to understand is that it doesn't matter how I told you my opinion. Just because I was rude or brusque doesn't make your idea any less crappy.

---