# So how much worse have arguements gotten on Enworld?



## Storyteller01 (Sep 28, 2006)

Not out to point fingers, and I'm far from an innocent party. I noticed a post concerning the developement. 


So,umm... how bad has it gotten? How can we fix it?


_EDIT: ...if there's anything to fix..._


----------



## Iku Rex (Sep 28, 2006)

Maybe I haven't read enough threads lately, but I don't think it's gotten "worse" at all. In my experience this "everything was so much better in the good ol' days" idea pops up with some regularity, and the way to "fix it" is to realize that it wasn't broken in the first place.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 28, 2006)

While I've been spending less time on the boards of late, I admit that I haven't noticed things being any more cranky than usual.  There's been some nice healthy disagreements over this or that, but, nothing terribly nasty.  At least on General where I usually hang out.  Looking at the board, I don't see any locked topics, and haven't in a while.


----------



## EricNoah (Sep 28, 2006)

It goes in cycles, but generally things seem to be on a pretty even keel right now.  All I have to do is visit other forums and compare the level of participation and discussion -- it's amazing how upbeat, friendly and focused EN World is by comparison.  

That said, EN World does have somewhat of a reputation for having a rude Rules forum.  Posters showing off their "rules skills" but failing to use their "people skills" -- posters not only interested in being right but making sure others have been verbally shredded along the way.  I personally avoid the Rules forum.  Granted, I haven't been in there in a long time and maybe the situation has resolved itself.  

There will be times when EN World as a whole seems to get cranky -- it's when hot-button issues come up and people feel the need to takes sides, "win" arguments through underhanded tactics, equate gaming preference with morality or intellectual capacity, and just generally inflate little things into big things.  Underlying these swells of discontent, I believe, is the spectre of the future -- a new edition that eventually forces EN World to decide which way it will go, and who will be left behind.


----------



## Nifft (Sep 28, 2006)

The only thing that's gotten worse is the spam, and that's not even particularly bad.

 -- N


----------



## Cor Azer (Sep 28, 2006)

It's likely my fault... I leave the boards for a year, and when I come back, all heck breaks loose...

Even though nobody missed me...

Or even realized I was gone...


----------



## Henry (Sep 28, 2006)

It's gotten far, far, far worse. In 2002, when Book of Vile Darkness was still due in a month or so, discussion of that book caused (I seem to recall) something like SIX threads, all about the speculated content of the book, to be closed due to arguments.

I think Book of Erotic Fantasy caused a similar reaction, though not as severe. There have been others, no doubt, but that one sticks out to me because it was VERY heated, and because it was Dinkeldog's and my first week on the job as mods.


----------



## Henry (Sep 28, 2006)

Cor Azer said:
			
		

> It's likely my fault... I leave the boards for a year, and when I come back, all heck breaks loose...
> 
> Even though nobody missed me...
> 
> Or even realized I was gone...




Realized you were gone? Heck, I've used your name for a psychotic Warforged BBEG in my Eberron Campaign! Of course I noticed! Welcome back! 

I didn't notice you were back until just now, though...


----------



## Berandor (Sep 28, 2006)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> Underlying these swells of discontent, I believe, is the spectre of the future -- a new edition that eventually forces EN World to decide which way it will go, and who will be left behind.



That's a good guess.

(I will probably be left behind, btw)


----------



## diaglo (Sep 28, 2006)

regular cycle.

diaglo "watched this trend since 1edADnD was released" Ooi


----------



## Odhanan (Sep 28, 2006)

> I personally avoid the Rules forum. Granted, I haven't been in there in a long time and maybe the situation has resolved itself.



I've seen this happen on several boards. I usually do not like Rules forums for this very reason. 

I don't think things have gotten any worse of late. I don't spend as much time as others on the boards, but I don't think there's too much ill intent here.


----------



## mhensley (Sep 28, 2006)

I must be missing something.  Somebody point me to the locked threads.  Those are the most fun to read.


----------



## Arashi Ravenblade (Sep 28, 2006)

Well i cant really say. I usually look at the first post in a htread and if i have an opinion i post it. I dont usually check back to see if people responded to what i have said, so i cant really say how much i have contributed to arguments.  I say my peace and im done.


----------



## shilsen (Sep 28, 2006)

I don't think it's gotten any worse than normal, and I think it's generally fine most of the time.

If you do think it's bad, fixing it is really simple. Just remind yourself regularly that getting the least bit upset about an opinion expressed by a random stranger on the internet is a serious waste of time and energy. Especially when the opinion is, in all likelihood, about your particular approach to playing a game. I've been on the boards since Eric started them, and I've never got in a serious argument, because I remember the above.


----------



## Stalker0 (Sep 28, 2006)

Also have to agree that its business as usual. Other than the occasional heated argument, most things are handled pretty smoothly.


----------



## Driddle (Sep 28, 2006)

Storyteller01 said:
			
		

> How bad has it gotten? How can we fix it?




Sheeesh. What a question. You obviously have no institutional memory yet.
... It's positively vanilla here. Stop fretting.


----------



## Eridanis (Sep 28, 2006)

Scooting over to Meta...


----------



## DanMcS (Sep 28, 2006)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> That said, EN World does have somewhat of a reputation for having a rude Rules forum.  Posters showing off their "rules skills" but failing to use their "people skills" -- posters not only interested in being right but making sure others have been verbally shredded along the way.  I personally avoid the Rules forum.  Granted, I haven't been in there in a long time and maybe the situation has resolved itself.




Nope.


----------



## DungeonmasterCal (Sep 28, 2006)

*I think there might be a "mini-trend" over the last three or four months where a lot of discussions about the balance of new classes have really riled folks up (Tome of Battle comes to mind). Whenever someone poses the question of "Is X Broken?", that's just opening the door for some folks to start stuff.

JMHO.*


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 28, 2006)

> Whenever someone poses the question of "Is X Broken?", that's just opening the door for some folks to start




People forget that If you ask for a opinion then you will get responses that validate your point of view and you will get responses that run counter to that point of view.

People forget that opinions are not facts.  They are just that... opinions.


Confilct occurs when that happens.  As long as posters remember that not everyone is going to agree with their point of view and that opinions are just that .... opinions, then one can safely navigate the sometimes stormy seas that message boards can become.


----------



## billd91 (Sep 28, 2006)

Arguments themselves aren't bad as long as people are being reasonable and presenting decent arguments. It's when people are being jerks that there's a problem. Sometimes it's pretty clear (and the mods come in with a 3-day ban) but sometimes it just comes from people getting further and further retrenched into their positions and repeating it a few too many times or too stridently to really be polite.
But as long as everyone posts like they aren't taking offense or trying to provoke it, it's usually OK.

I can easily see how a perception that things are more argumentative lately can come up. ENworld is getting pretty big and that means we bring in more people with strong opinions who end up making something of a splash.


----------



## Cheiromancer (Sep 28, 2006)

Does someone keep track of how many bannings/warnings/thread closures occur over time?  

I know that I might have the subjective impression that things are going well, and it's just because I haven't come across threads that are problematic.  Alternatively I might think the civility of the boards are decreasing, based on running across two such threads in a row.  But this is just random noise; like a fair die rolling well for a while, or poorly.  Some objective statistics would help.

Personally I think the "Can monks take INA" threads are the source of all evil; they make people grumpy, and this extends to other threads.  We should extend the no politics/no religion rule to monks taking INA, and everything would be fine.


----------



## Crothian (Sep 28, 2006)

There are always a few trouble makers in the works and as we get more people we get more trouble makers.


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 28, 2006)

I think Mousferatu (Ari had posted the statement that the OP is referring to) might have just been having a bad, sick day. From my perspective we aren't going through a tough period right now. Things have been pretty calm.


----------



## diaglo (Sep 28, 2006)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> I think Mousferatu (Ari had posted the statement that the OP is referring to) might have just been having a bad, sick day. From my perspective we aren't going through a tough period right now. Things have been pretty calm.





great. now i've got the line "eye of the hurricane" from "it's the end of the world as we know it" running thru my head as a theme song.


----------



## Cor Azer (Sep 28, 2006)

Henry said:
			
		

> Realized you were gone? Heck, I've used your name for a psychotic Warforged BBEG in my Eberron Campaign! Of course I noticed! Welcome back!
> 
> I didn't notice you were back until just now, though...




A BBEG? But... I'm such a nice, kind fellow. ~I just might have to start an argument over that 

And to be fair, I've only been back a week or so - I wanted to lurk for a while to get caught up on the latest "in" topics


----------



## Mouseferatu (Sep 28, 2006)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> I think Mousferatu (Ari had posted the statement that the OP is referring to) might have just been having a bad, sick day. From my perspective we aren't going through a tough period right now. Things have been pretty calm.




Yep. Pretty nasty day yesterday. Ari gets irritable when he doesn't feel well.   

I'll admit, I _do_ have the impression that we've been in an "argument-heavy" period for a little while, and have since before I got sick yesterday. But I'm prepared to acknowledge that it may just be a combination of bad luck and perception on my part, with the whole "sick thing" pushing it over the top.


----------



## Michael Morris (Sep 28, 2006)

Nifft said:
			
		

> The only thing that's gotten worse is the spam, and that's not even particularly bad.
> 
> -- N



 You haven't seen the spambot lately have you.  Man but it's getting to be one fat turkey.


----------



## Storyteller01 (Sep 28, 2006)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> I think Mousferatu (Ari had posted the statement that the OP is referring to) might have just been having a bad, sick day. From my perspective we aren't going through a tough period right now. Things have been pretty calm.





It was actually a comment made by a moderator (in response to mouseF) that prompted the thread. I can see us users having a bad day, but when mods notice an increase...


----------



## Joshua Randall (Sep 28, 2006)

I heard about this great feature whereby you simply don't read the threads that annoy you. I think it was called "willpower", or something like that.


----------



## BlackMoria (Sep 28, 2006)

> I heard about this great feature whereby you simply don't read the threads that annoy you. I think it was called "willpower", or something like that.




Well, rancor threads are like car wrecks.  One just can't resist gawking at the carnage.


----------



## diaglo (Sep 28, 2006)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> Well, rancor threads...





bah, rancor is one of those optional class abilities that seldom gets approved by newer DMs. iirc it was from Foe Hunter PrC in Masters of the Wild


----------



## Piratecat (Sep 28, 2006)




----------



## Rystil Arden (Sep 28, 2006)

Piratecat said:
			
		

>



 Huh--didn't realise Greenberg was a Jedi name.


----------



## EricNoah (Sep 29, 2006)

Joshua Randall said:
			
		

> I heard about this great feature whereby you simply don't read the threads that annoy you. I think it was called "willpower", or something like that.




If someone can invent a way for me to not read a thread BEFORE it annoys me, I'd buy that for a dollar!


----------



## hafrogman (Sep 29, 2006)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> If someone can invent a way for me to not read a thread BEFORE it annoys me, I'd buy that for a dollar!




Didn't you just say you don't read the rules forum?  Sounds like you owe yourself a dollar.


----------



## EricNoah (Sep 29, 2006)

But who knows what wondrous discussions I'm missing just because I suspect it's nasty in there?  Alas, woe is me.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Sep 29, 2006)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> If someone can invent a way for me to not read a thread BEFORE it annoys me, I'd buy that for a dollar!




Only reading threads in Rules which are one page or less long would probably be a good litmus test


----------



## diaglo (Sep 29, 2006)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> Only reading threads in Rules which are one page or less long would probably be a good litmus test




i'd narrow that down to 7 replies or less.


----------



## Blood Jester (Oct 1, 2006)

diaglo said:
			
		

> i'd narrow that down to 7 replies or less.




Why do I feel like playing "Name That Tune" now?...


----------



## LightPhoenix (Oct 2, 2006)

Because you can name that rule in only four posts?


----------



## diaglo (Oct 2, 2006)

LightPhoenix said:
			
		

> Because you can name that rule in only four posts?




well mostly b/c you get the original question.

the answer from the SRD or core rules.

a little clarification.

and then some kind of house rule to make it fit the specific campaign.

after that... it is all an argument


----------



## Joshua Randall (Oct 2, 2006)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> If someone can invent a way for me to not read a thread BEFORE it annoys me, I'd buy that for a dollar!



Step 1: do not read any thread the day it is posted.
Step 2: check back in a few days. If the thread has more than 2 pages, do not read it, because pages 3+ will be either (a) repetitive or (b) argumentative.
Step 3: if someone does slip through Steps 1 and 2 and manage to annoy you, make liberal use of the ignore list.*
Step 4: send me money.

* Although this post is tongue in cheek, I seriously think that life would be better if more people used the ignore feature. It's not like anything on ENW is some crucial matter of policy that affects the lives of aware, involved citizens in a democratic society -- we're discussing a game. So ignoring people who annoy you is a Good Thing (tm).


----------



## Plane Sailing (Oct 2, 2006)

I REALLY wish that more people realised that they didn't have to try to 'win' an argument.


----------



## diaglo (Oct 2, 2006)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> I REALLY wish that more people realised that they didn't have to try to 'win' an argument.




that's why we have moderators.


----------



## Iku Rex (Oct 2, 2006)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> I REALLY wish that more people realised that they didn't have to try to 'win' an argument.



What do you mean by "winning" an argument?


----------



## BOZ (Oct 2, 2006)

exactly.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Oct 3, 2006)

diaglo said:
			
		

> well mostly b/c you get the original question.
> 
> the answer from the SRD or core rules.
> 
> ...




Er... diaglo, I thought for all your old-schoolness, you at least would have seen Name That Tune.

Or, I'm a failure at making references.

Ah well.


----------



## diaglo (Oct 3, 2006)

LightPhoenix said:
			
		

> Er... diaglo, I thought for all your old-schoolness, you at least would have seen Name That Tune.
> 
> Or, I'm a failure at making references.
> 
> Ah well.




i was in Engerland at the time.    they've got like 3 channels max.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Oct 3, 2006)

I think it's always pretty bad on ENWorld, compared to other (more openly contentious) communities:

I think what passes for peaceful here is actually pretty passive-aggressive. There are some long-term posters here who absolutely game the system to a fine degree, adhering to the letter of the law while managing to be consistently insulting and snide to anyone who doesn't agree with them. And then, when they get the response they want, they hammer on the Report Bad Post button and the folks violating the letter of the law get slapped down.

The moderators are too overwhelmed to catch most of this -- it's a BIG site -- and the really adept system-gamers have been around long enough to know exactly what'll keep them from getting in trouble.


----------



## BOZ (Oct 3, 2006)

and those folks often get called-out on sites where the moderation works differently.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Oct 3, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> and those folks often get called-out on sites where the moderation works differently.



Heck, on some of the sites I can think of, those folks just get suspended or banned entirely. (I go to some really draconian sites.)


----------



## Piratecat (Oct 4, 2006)

It's interesting; some people are what I call "prickly" posters, and just attract more arguments or worsen ones around them. It has a lot to do with how they phrase things in posts. One of my really good buddies is like this -- totally relaxed in person, but he comes off as very brusque and confrontative here even when he isn't trying to be.


----------



## Blood Jester (Oct 4, 2006)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> It's interesting; some people are what I call "prickly" posters, and just attract more arguments or worsen ones around them. It has a lot to do with how they phrase things in posts. One of my really good buddies is like this -- totally relaxed in person, but he comes off as very brusque and confrontative here even when he isn't trying to be.




Hey Bite ME!

I am like, sooo tense in person too!


----------



## Piratecat (Oct 4, 2006)

*snort* Sorry, man, not talking about you.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Oct 4, 2006)

Way to go, Piratecat.  Destroy the man's dreams.


----------



## Abraxas (Oct 4, 2006)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> It's interesting; some people are what I call "prickly" posters, and just attract more arguments or worsen ones around them.



I agree with PC that there are "prickly" posters. I also believe that there are a few posters who use a tactic of being deliberately obtuse to frustrate others. In fact there are a number of threads going on right now that I believe have this happening.

Overall I have found the boards to be particularly quarrelsome and that posters who I used to enjoy reading have taken up posting styles that I find . . . down right rude and unhelpful in a backhanded way since late July/early August.


----------



## Nyaricus (Oct 4, 2006)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> What do you mean by "winning" an argument?



I personally don't thinkyou have to win an argument. So there.

Seriously though, I hope that the jerks on EN World just go in my Meta Troll thread and squeeze out all their PA-baggage there


----------



## diaglo (Oct 4, 2006)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> It's interesting; some people are what I call "prickly" posters, and just attract more arguments or worsen ones around them. It has a lot to do with how they phrase things in posts. One of my really good buddies is like this -- totally relaxed in person, but he comes off as very brusque and confrontative here even when he isn't trying to be.





Ah, breaker one-nine, this heres the rubber duck. you gotta copy on me, pig pen, cmon? ah, yeah, 10-4, pig pen, fer shure, fer shure. by golly, its clean clear to flag town, cmon. yeah, that
Big 10-4 there, pig pen, yeah, we definitely got the front door, *good buddy*. mercy sakes alive, looks like we got us a convoy...

diaglo "stuck singing Convoy now for the rest of the day" Ooi


----------



## Plane Sailing (Oct 4, 2006)

diaglo said:
			
		

> i was in Engerland at the time.    they've got like 3 channels max.




So you were here in the 70's? That was when we had 'Name that tune' on TV!


----------



## diaglo (Oct 4, 2006)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> So you were here in the 70's? That was when we had 'Name that tune' on TV!




yup. 1970 to jan 1974.

i go back about every 3 years to visit my relatives.


----------



## Deset Gled (Oct 4, 2006)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> What do you mean by "winning" an argument?




I get the impression that some people think that "winning" means always having the last word in a discussion.


----------



## Piratecat (Oct 4, 2006)

Which is why I always make a comment before locking threads.


----------



## BOZ (Oct 4, 2006)

or even after someone else locks them!


----------



## LightPhoenix (Oct 4, 2006)

Man, that's weak.  Everyone knows that when a mod locks your pissing contest, you go start _another_ thread to get the last word in.  Really.   

[edit]

Or, the better way is to thread-crap in every thread your nemesis starts or posts in.  That way, you've got lots of last words.  Victory by attrition!


----------



## IcyCool (Oct 6, 2006)

It certainly seems cyclical here.  Maybe we are at the beginnings of another rise.  Things are generally nice around here though, barring a few hotbutton topics.  And the rules forum has always been the least friendly forum (I'm sure I've contributed to that in the past).  That really toned down with the moderator post telling everyone to be civil.


----------



## Felix (Oct 10, 2006)

You know, since I read Eric's post about avoiding the Rules forum (which along with Story Hour, General and Art & Miniatures where I hang out) I've been thinking that the Rules board has gotten much, _much_ more civil in the past 6 months.

Maybe it's the sticky thread of Pielorinho's that's there as a reminder, but the other day even a small discussion of the lance's Power Attack bonus didn't get heated. Granted, I wouldn't start a thread singing the praises of the FAQ, nor did I read the "Monk and Improved Natural Attack" threads, but on the whole I think that forum is on the mend.


----------



## BOZ (Oct 10, 2006)

it does have a bad reputation though.


----------



## EricNoah (Oct 10, 2006)

Felix said:
			
		

> I've been thinking that the Rules board has gotten much, _much_ more civil in the past 6 months.




That's good to hear.  

There's probably a very different feel in a forum where an answer can indeed be "right" or "wrong" vs. a forum like General where you're just sharing your opinions or ideas.


----------

