# UPDATE: Politics/Religion no longer permitted again!



## Morrus

*UPDATE -- the below experiment has ended, and politics/religion is no longer allowed here again.  Back to business as usual!*


---------------
This is an experiment. It may or may not last.

You may now discuss political and religious topics* in this forum only* and *only in threads marked with the new politics and religion tags*.  However, and this is important - you are still not allowed to be jerks to each other. If doing the former means you can't restrain yourself from the latter, then refrain from the former.  We - as in the moderators - are assuming you are adults and if you choose to participate in a political or religious thread, you acknowledge that you possess the self-restraint needed to avoid being rude to those with whom you disagree.  And make no mistake, on this board of 160K members from across the world, who grew up in very different environments to you, and share none of your daily cultural touchstones,  people will disagree with you in ways you find alien and incomprehensible.  It is YOUR responsibility to handle that situation, not theirs, or to avoid it, but you don't get to be rude.

Topics should be *marked with the new politics and religion tags*.  Avoid these threads if you cannot control yourself. Use the report post button rather than respond in anger. If you respond in anger, you'll be at fault, even if you're right.

We will not accept "but I was right" as an excuse for rudeness. The words "right" and "rude" are two different words.   We _will_ ask you to leave if you're rude. Yes, we know there's a close to 100% chance you'll go around telling everyone it was because you were right, not because you were rude.  It wasn't, but if that makes it easier for you to accept, or to deal with internally, we're used to that.

Nationalism is utterly unacceptable.

If this experiment doesn't work out, and you're the cause of it, you probably won't work out either.  Don't be the reason this doesn't work.  Don't make CHA your dump stat. Please, think and be nice. If you're on a track to trying to "win" something you're (a) not going to win anything; and (b) on a track to be asked to leave. Victory is not a goal.

One tool we might use is to simply ask you not to post in this forum (Media Lounge). That would be a shame, because you wouldn't be able to participate in the awesome science and movie threads.

This is very much an experiment.  There is a good chance it won't work out, and we're perfectly ready to accept that, in which case we'll disallow politics and religion again.  We'll review in a few weeks!


----------



## Umbran

I will add, in really big letters so people don't miss it:

DON'T MAKE IT PERSONAL

If you start making statements about an author personally, rather than about his or her logical support as presented, that's a red flag for us that you're not working out.


----------



## Janx

just a side challenge, is it possible to talk about american politics without referring to political party or "liberal" or "conservative"?  Because I don't think those words mean what people think it means.  Maybe by handicapping the standbys of language which mostly ends up being namecalling, they could just talk about issues and ideas for solutions.


----------



## Morrus

Janx said:


> just a side challenge, is it possible to talk about american politics without referring to political party or "liberal" or "conservative"?  Because I don't think those words mean what people think it means.  Maybe by handicapping the standbys of language which mostly ends up being namecalling, they could just talk about issues and ideas for solutions.




They also mean different things in different countries (and more used in some than others).  But terms like that are very ingrained in discussion of US politics as far as I can tell, so that may be a tall ask.


----------



## Kramodlog

The nationalism clause needs some clarification. What constitute nationalism and why is it unacceptable?

I ask because if you say Québec needs to be independent from Canada, you are considered to be a nationalist here, which I guess makes it a "no no" subject if I understand the limit correctly. But I'm not sure why it is more contentious than abortion or the Pope saying global warming is bad, which I assume are ok to discuss. All sort of nations want independence or have independentist movements with in them, and it is no more or less emotional than say abortion.


----------



## delericho

goldomark said:


> The nationalism clause needs some clarification. What constitute nationalism and why is it unacceptable?
> 
> I ask because if you say Québec needs to be independent from Canada, you are considered to be a nationalist here, which I guess makes it a "no no" subject if I understand the limit correctly.




Ditto Scotland.

Then again, given what Scotland went through in September of last year, and the stuff that's _still_ ongoing, I was actually rather glad of a few places where it wasn't constantly being discussed.


----------



## sabrinathecat

Oh, I sooooo want to say something...

Maybe I'll find an actual thread where it will be appropriate.


----------



## Jhaelen

Oh dear...


----------



## delericho

sabrinathecat said:


> Oh, I sooooo want to say something...
> 
> Maybe I'll find an actual thread where it will be appropriate.




Or maybe start one?


----------



## Morrus

Remember, only threads tagged with one of the new tags. That way it's very easy for people to avoid politics.

By nationalism, I mean derogatory comments based on nationality. It may be the wrong word; I wanted a word which treats nationality as an -ism like sexism, racism, and so on.


----------



## Kramodlog

I'd say racism would cut it.


----------



## Janx

Morrus said:


> Remember, only threads tagged with one of the new tags. That way it's very easy for people to avoid politics.
> 
> By nationalism, I mean derogatory comments based on nationality. It may be the wrong word; I wanted a word which treats nationality as an -ism like sexism, racism, and so on.




so badism is bad.


----------



## Umbran

Janx said:


> just a side challenge, is it possible to talk about american politics without referring to political party or "liberal" or "conservative"?  Because I don't think those words mean what people think it means.




Oh, they mean what people think they mean - because they mean at least two things.

They have a technical, theoretical and historical meaning.  They also have a meaning that equates to "closer to and/or more likely to agree with current Democrat or Republican parties".


----------



## Umbran

Janx said:


> so badism is bad.




Yah.  Saying, "All you people who are X are bad," is bad.  X being a race, a religion, a sexual orientation, nationality, member of political party, and so on.  

In general, if you paint negatively with a broad brush, you are apt to create issues, and thus apt to run into issues with moderation.


----------



## Kramodlog

It is difficult to not use the "S" word when talking about anti-vaxxers and those who believe Reptilians control everything.


----------



## Morrus

goldomark said:


> It is difficult to not use the "S" word when talking about anti-vaxxers and those who believe Reptilians control everything.




By that do you mean "stupid"?  Or something else.  You're gonna have to try, I'm afraid!  Debunk the argument, and don't attack the person - the usual rules, really.


----------



## Janx

Morrus said:


> By that do you mean "stupid"?  Or something else.  You're gonna have to try, I'm afraid!  Debunk the argument, and don't attack the person - the usual rules, really.




it would seem like all you'd have to do is state pure facts like Polio incidents were stopped because polio vaccines were widely used.

If somebody responds with, "no, that was a coincidence!  My left nipple Herberous Crax traveled back in time to eradicate Polio with his lactic powers" then you've avoided calling anybody stupid.


----------



## trappedslider

Janx said:


> "no, that was a coincidence!  My left nipple Herberous Crax traveled back in time to eradicate Polio with his lactic powers".




Citation please


----------



## Janx

you know the nice thing is, now that the floodgates on religion and politics have been opened...

nobody's arguing about religion or politics.

My faith in ENworld is renewed


----------



## Dioltach

Janx said:


> My left nipple Herberous Crax traveled back in time to eradicate Polio with his lactic powers" then you've avoided calling anybody stupid.




My left nipple is mainly for picking up shortwave radio.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

I don't have left or right nipples- both of mine are centrists.


----------



## Scott DeWar

I do have left and right nipples, just no belly button. I was hatched.


----------



## Kramodlog

Platypus-Man?


----------



## Scott DeWar

world of gliq-'Ahch-atain - the female palces the egg in the male like the Terran sea horse.


----------



## Janx

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I don't have left or right nipples- both of mine are centrists.




so they run vertically, like shirt buttons?


----------



## Scott DeWar

or like a mammalian 4 legged creature, just one row.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Janx said:


> so they run vertically, like shirt buttons?




Exactly like shirt buttons.


----------



## delericho

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Exactly like shirt buttons.




Are you sure those aren't your shirt buttons?


----------



## Janx

delericho said:


> Are you sure those aren't your shirt buttons?




No, he's just happy to see you.


----------



## Alzrius

Morrus said:


> By nationalism, I mean derogatory comments based on nationality. It may be the wrong word; I wanted a word which treats nationality as an -ism like sexism, racism, and so on.




So basically, we shouldn't talk about how the only good things ever to come out of England were America and the Beatles?


----------



## Scott DeWar

Alzrius said:


> So basically, we shouldn't talk about how the only good things ever to come out of England were America and the Beatles?




And Canada.


----------



## Morrus

Scott DeWar said:


> And Canada.




And English. And gravity.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> And gravity.




With respect - gravity comes from the mass of the Earth altogether, not just England.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> With respect - gravity comes from the mass of the Earth altogether, not just England.




Nah. We invented it. Before Newton, everybody just kinda floated about.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> Nah. We invented it. Before Newton, everybody just kinda floated about.




So, it is your guys' fault we can't all fly?


----------



## Dioltach

Dieting is our fault too.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> So, it is your guys' fault we can't all fly?




Well, it was floating at best.


----------



## Scott DeWar

Blast you English That is why I can't fly?!?! I spit in your general direction! Your momma dresses you funny and she smells of elderberry wine!


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> Well, it was floating at best.




Yes, but if I float, that means I can *swim*.  Flying is swimming in air!  Darn English anti-flyers!


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> Yes, but if I float, that means I can *swim*.  Flying is swimming in air!  Darn English anti-flyers!




Drifting, perhaps?


----------



## Scott DeWar

Well, isn't flying actually falling and missing the ground by being distracted at just the right moment?


----------



## Bullgrit

For all the years I've been writing a blog, (8 years, now), I have intentionally avoided touching on any controversial subjects. But at the beginning of this year I decided to publish my thoughts on some such issues. I'm just stating this because I have now started a couple of controversial topic discussions here in Miscellaneous. I'm not starting these topics to test Morrus' allowance for politics and religion. It's just that, coincidental with his test, I happen to have some controversial topics "in the cylinder", so to speak, already written. I will avoid posting more than one a week, and even then, I am completely willing to stop, and completely understanding if things go in a bad way and they need to be taken down.

For the record, I'm not posting anything controversial to raise a ruckus or start arguments. I'm just interested in discussion among friendly, intelligent people with a wide variety of experiences and thoughts.

Bullgrit


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Well, while this seems to be working out OK so far, I have to say I hope the politics/religion discussion test doesn't continue. I like EN World specifically because it doesn't (well, didn't) have those discussions (and if you want them, there's always Circvs Maximvs). EN World to me is a refuge from all of that stuff.

I appreciate that I can just not click into one of those threads, so thanks for providing a very visible tag.  If I could hide all of the threads with a given tag from myself, I would. Or put it in a sub-forum or something.


----------



## Morrus

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> I appreciate that I can just not click into one of those threads, so thanks for providing a very visible tag.  If I could hide all of the threads with a given tag from myself, I would. Or put it in a sub-forum or something.




Something I'm working on!  No promises, but I'm trying to implement that.


----------



## Bullgrit

> there's always Circvs Maximvs



The few times I've looked in over at CM, it was not a place for friendly, intelligent discussion. If it comes to using CM or just having no discussions, I'll go with no discussions.

Bullgrit


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Bullgrit said:


> The few times I've looked in over at CM, it was not a place for friendly, intelligent discussion. If it comes to using CM or just having no discussions, I'll go with no discussions.
> 
> Bullgrit




Ditto that.  I saw more gossipy, catty, backstabbing behavior than real meaningful discussion.  I'd rather hold my tongue than participate there.


----------



## Bullgrit

> though it would be a topic for another thread



I'm I imagining, or does it seem that every politics/religion thread has gone far off the original topic and on to other controversial topics?

Bullgrit


----------



## Morrus

Bullgrit said:


> I'm I imagining, or does it seem that every politics/religion thread has gone far off the original topic and on to other controversial topics?




What's even more interesting to me is that politics is now the most used thread tag in this forum.


----------



## Scott DeWar

Only because it is new and previously forbidden. Once the rush is over, It will probably change.


----------



## Henry

Janx said:


> If somebody responds with, "no, that was a coincidence!  My left nipple Herberous Crax traveled back in time to eradicate Polio with his lactic powers" then you've avoided calling anybody stupid.




On the other hand, SyFy channel needs a new series pitch...

...and _Time Crax_ (subtitle: _Areolar Police_) is somewhat more believable than Sharknado, so I'm in.


----------



## Remus Lupin

I'll be honest, I hope that the politics and religion experiment comes to an end as well. I talk about those things in LOTS of contexts (being a guy whose field is politics and religion), and I always appreciated the fact that I could leave all that behind at ENWorld.


----------



## Umbran

So, honest question:

The threads in question are clearly marked.  You never have to enter into one.  The mere presence of them is an issue, even if you never have to take part?


----------



## Scott DeWar

Umbran said:


> So, honest question:
> 
> The threads in question are clearly marked.  You never have to enter into one.  The mere presence of them is an issue, even if you never have to take part?




Honest answer: Not for me. I choose in a cognoscente level.


----------



## Remus Lupin

Yeah. Speaking only on the basis of my own reaction, it changes the tone of the forum, and my fear is that politics discussions may begin to dominate the first page of the forum, so that to find topics I might actually be interested in discussing here, I'll have to click a few pages back. When I got back into gaming after a long hiatus, I made a promise to myself I would keep politics and religion out of it, and just concentrate on the gaming fun. For the most part, I've managed to keep to that, and I always liked that ENWorld was a politics/religion free zone. Obviously, others may feel differently, but I do admit to a bit of disappointment to all of a sudden coming here to find a number of politics threads. Not the end of the world by any means, but disappointment nonetheless.


----------



## Morrus

Well, like I said (was it in this thread or elsewhere?) I'm working on an easy solution to that so you can just ignore 'em all in one fell sweep.


----------



## Scott DeWar

Morrus said:


> Well, like I said (was it in this thread or elsewhere?) I'm working on an easy solution to that so you can just ignore 'em all in one fell sweep.




I remember you saying something about a sub-forum for politics and religion. is that what you referred to?


----------



## Janx

I reckon we done better with the topics at hand that has happened in the past.

At there's only like 3-4 active politics threads right now.


----------



## Kramodlog

This ain't the place to ask, but I'll ask anyway. Could be possible to unsticky some threads in this section? It is starting to be crowded at the top and they aren't all active. Maybe one thread could be made about the rules of the Misc. section?


----------



## trappedslider

So,it's been a few months and I feel that we should go back to not having politics or religion discussed because it basically goes back to being an echo chamber in the threads being that "Conservatives or Republicans are bad" and some posters are basically rubbing against the line as it  were when it comes to posting in such topics.


----------



## Ovinomancer

trappedslider said:


> So,it's been a few months and I feel that we should go back to not having politics or religion discussed because it basically goes back to being an echo chamber in the threads being that "Conservatives or Republicans are bad" and some posters are basically rubbing against the line as it  were when it comes to posting in such topics.




Yeah, it's subtle, but there's definitely a hostility towards the right (at least the US right).  I think that it would be mostly invisible if you weren't of the right, but it's there.  And I say this as someone that is used to that kinds of hostility and engages it often -- I like to argue politics on the internet.  I know, that makes me a bad person, but I'm okay with that.

Also, since mods that are participating in the threads and seem generally left leaning, I think a lot of the low grade insults and sweeping generalizations are just not even registering with them.  I suppose that answer to that is to report them, but it's less of a 'this post is clearly over the line' as it is a pattern across many posts.  Makes it difficult to determine if/when to report.


----------



## Umbran

Ovinomancer said:


> I think that it would be mostly invisible if you weren't of the right, but it's there.




You vastly underestimate the perceptiveness of others.  



> Also, since mods that are participating in the threads and seem generally left leaning, I think a lot of the low grade insults and sweeping generalizations are just not even registering with them.  I suppose that answer to that is to report them




Yes it is.  If you don't report it, we don't get to know what you find bothersome, and what you don't.  That being said, I have already had some conversations about things that I have seen going askew, so it isn't like we are proceeding blithely along ignoring things.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Umbran said:


> You vastly underestimate the perceptiveness of others.



You seem to be taking my statement personally.  If so, sorry, no offense was intended.  I had thought it a fairly innocuous statement, but I'm prepared to be wrong.



> Yes it is.  If you don't report it, we don't get to know what you find bothersome, and what you don't.  That being said, I have already had some conversations about things that I have seen going askew, so it isn't like we are proceeding blithely along ignoring things.



You snipped the last half of that where I explained why reporting was tough.  I understand that's how it's supposed to work, but I also said that it's more of a pattern than any specific post violating the rules.  I'd hate to drop a bunch of reports that say "this slightly bothers me if you pair it up with the post four behind it and six behind that" reports as that's seems likely to get me into trouble for over reporting.  It seems damned if you do, damned if you don't.  Guidance there, instead of 'report problems, citizen!' would be most appreciated.


----------



## Umbran

Ovinomancer said:


> You seem to be taking my statement personally.




Not in the least.  

There are areas (racism and sexism being major examples) where a person can have unconscious biases, or in which folks can say things they don't realize will be taken negatively.  That's not going on here - the folks who are hostile (and, it is clear that there are folks on both sides who are hostile) know they are hostile.  Their expressions of that hostility are fairly obvious.  

The experiment is based on the idea that, while people can be hostile, they can still remain civil, that EN Worlders can say they don't like a policy, or a group that enacts a policy, without being jerks.  We don't imagine that we can eradicate hostility, or make it invisible.  The question is whether we can keep it down at a level where constructive conversation can still be had.



> You snipped the last half of that where I explained why reporting was tough.  I understand that's how it's supposed to work, but I also said that it's more of a pattern than any specific post violating the rules.




This is not a new concept to us.  We've banned people for it before.

The overall measure is whether or not a person ever flagrantly violates the rules, does their style collectively make them more harmful to discussion than helpful?  Are they a net major negative?  

If people don't report things you find problematic, then you depend on the moderators' collective judgement on the matter.


----------



## Scott DeWar

Hey [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION], empty your private message folder. trying to send you something.


----------



## Umbran

Scott DeWar said:


> Hey [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION], empty your private message folder. trying to send you something.




Huh.  That snuck up on me.  I've gotten rid of a bunch of old stuff, so I should be able to receive again.


----------



## Scott DeWar

Umbran said:


> Huh.  That snuck up on me.



just like old age


> I've gotten rid of a bunch of old stuff, so I should be able to receive again.




sent. Thank you.


----------



## TerraDave

The word you may have been looking for is *jingoism*


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Did anyone else hear "My Prescioussssss!" in their head when they saw that picture?


----------



## Morrus

So as an update. I'm thinking about ending this experiment. I don't feel it has added anything pleasant to the board.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Not surprised.  I've heard grumbling about people comparing the added political element to the atmosphere at Circvs Maximvs.


----------



## Remus Lupin

I would not object in the slightest, and would probably visit more.


----------



## Cor Azer

No worries.

I'm glad you tried the experiment, but ultimately, it's a side-feature (so-to-speak) of the boards that doesn't add enough to warrant further resources.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Morrus said:


> So as an update. I'm thinking about ending this experiment. I don't feel it has added anything pleasant to the board.



I'm Ovinomancer, and I approve this message.



Dannyalcatraz said:


> Not surprised.  I've heard grumbling about people comparing the added political element to the atmosphere at Circvs Maximvs.



Not even close.


----------



## Kramodlog

Politics and religion bring diverse and adult conversations to EW. Geek stuff is interesting, but so is politics and religion and they make for refreshing subjects. How many Star Wars thread can there be? Politics and religion are part of the human experience. People can avoid the political and religious threads if they do not want to read about it on EW.

I do not want to antagonize, but why are they so hard to avoid if people do not want to read them? The tags are pretty clear.


----------



## Dog Moon

goldomark said:


> Politics and religion bring diverse and adult conversations to EW. Geek stuff is interesting, but so is politics and religion and they make for refreshing subjects. How many Star Wars thread can there be? Politics and religion are part of the human experience. People can avoid the political and religious threads if they do not want to read about it on EW.
> 
> I do not want to antagonize, but why are they so hard to avoid if people do not want to read them? The tags are pretty clear.




I agree.  There are so many Star Wars threads and if I can avoid them then people can avoid the like what three or four political/religious threads?  Maybe they aren't adding a whole lot to EnWorld, but I definitely don't think they're subtracting from it.

Unless I'm missing something and somehow those discussions are spilling over into other threads that I'm not aware of...

But I personally have liked the couple of discussions that have arisen and appreciate that people seem to be able to discuss things with a minimal of attitude.  So if I could choose I would choose to keep them.


----------



## Morrus

The threads may be only a handful at a time, but they are very busy threads and tend to overwhelm the various feeds with political content. That makes them nigh impossible to avoid if you use a mobile device or the What's New? feed. I can't imagine what first time visitors think when the first thing they see on the site is some of the less pleasant viewpoints frequently expressed in those threads.

Nah, I think it was a worthy experiment, but it failed.


----------



## Kramodlog

Morrus said:


> The threads may be only a handful at a time, but they are very busy threads and tend to overwhelm the various feeds with political content. That makes them nigh impossible to avoid if you use a mobile device or the What's New? feed. I can't imagine what first time visitors think when the first thing they see on the site is some of the less pleasant viewpoints frequently expressed in those threads.
> 
> Nah, I think it was a worthy experiment, but it failed.




So what is the status of the current conversations and future conversations?


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> So as an update. I'm thinking about ending this experiment. I don't feel it has added anything pleasant to the board.




Okey-doke.  When do you want to sunset these discussions?


----------



## dd.stevenson

Umbran said:


> So, honest question:
> 
> The threads in question are clearly marked.  You never have to enter into one.  The mere presence of them is an issue, even if you never have to take part?




I realize this train has already sailed, but to me the outrage inducing clickbaity thread titles are an issue, in that they make this forum less pleasant to browse.


----------



## Umbran

dd.stevenson said:


> I realize this train has already sailed, but to me the outrage inducing clickbaity thread titles are an issue, in that they make this forum less pleasant to browse.




Sailed, and returned to port!  To be honest, the thread titles are a minor issue, compared to some of the content we've seen lately.


----------



## Morrus

OK, we've discussed it in the mod forum, and we've decided to give folks until the end of the week to finish up any discussions. Its sad, because I hoped it would work out better, but some of the content we've seen posted (as Umbran alluded to above) is pretty unpleasant and very much not in line with the site's goal of being welcoming and inclusive to all.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Morrus said:


> OK, we've discussed it in the mod forum, and we've decided to give folks until the end of the week to finish up any discussions. Its sad, because I hoped it would work out better, but some of the content we've seen posted (as Umbran alluded to above) is pretty unpleasant and very much not in line with the site's goal of being welcoming and inclusive to all.




I do hope that some of that content was the gleeful and repeated naming Republicans as racists.  Probably not, though.  Didn't seem to be an issue before now.


----------



## Kramodlog

Probably has to do with all the people who keep talking like they are wearing pillowcases on their heads.


----------



## Umbran

It looks like we will be closing down politics and religion discussion on Friday.


----------



## Kramodlog

Umbran said:


> It looks like we will be closing down politics and religion discussion on Friday.




I have a modest resquest. Can we keep the thread about Trump that Danny started open? 

Trump is a once in a life time sort of phenomenon. Especially with the primaries starting soon. Ok, the thread as died a bit, but there are two scenarios that could happen and one of them could change the traffic in that thread. 

The first scenario is that he loses the Iowah and New hampshire primaries and we stop talking about him in less than a month. I look stupid for asking for the reprieve and politics is completely out of EW and the mod's hair. The second scenario is the he wins and keeps on winning. That becomes something that a lot of people will want to discuss. Instead of being able to discuss any politics, we just discuss one subjet matter that is rather unique. Seems like something that could be manegable and that could actually add to the community.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Honestly, I don't think much good will come of allowing the exception.  

I mean, you're right about it, but considering the way Trump's rhetoric is veering, that campaign will either burn out or be a constant source of inflammatory dialog.  The only other thing going on in there is the death-watch for the other GOP candidates.  

Best, I think, to kill it along with the others.


----------



## Ovinomancer

goldomark said:


> I have a modest resquest. Can we keep the thread about Trump that Danny started open?
> 
> Trump is a once in a life time sort of phenomenon. Especially with the primaries starting soon. Ok, the thread as died a bit, but there are two scenarios that could happen and one of them could change the traffic in that thread.
> 
> The first scenario is that he loses the Iowah and New hampshire primaries and we stop talking about him in less than a month. I look stupid for asking for the reprieve and politics is completely out of EW and the mod's hair. The second scenario is the he wins and keeps on winning. That becomes something that a lot of people will want to discuss. Instead of being able to discuss any politics, we just discuss one subjet matter that is rather unique. Seems like something that could be manegable and that could actually add to the community.




This is a great idea!  I mean, there's no one that supports Trump that comes here, right?  Even if they do, they'll probably find the gleeful insulting of Trump in that thread as funny as the rest of us, no?  And if they don't, it's not like they're real people or people we should respect anyway.

/snark


----------



## Kramodlog

Ovinomancer said:


> This is a great idea!  I mean, there's no one that supports Trump that comes here, right?  Even if they do, they'll probably find the gleeful insulting of Trump in that thread as funny as the rest of us, no?  And if they don't, it's not like they're real people or people we should respect anyway.
> 
> /snark




So, you're making an argument for a safe zone where people can avoid being offended?


----------



## Ovinomancer

goldomark said:


> So, you're making an argument for a safe zone where people can avoid being offended?




Here, at ENW, where that's a general paraphrase of the rules?  Yup.  Morrus has already decided that the politics experiment is a failure because it creates to much of a bad atmosphere.  You advocating for keeping your pet thread where you gleefully offend people that don't agree with you isn't exactly within the spirit of what Morrus' decision is about, is it?


----------



## Kramodlog

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Honestly, I don't think much good will come of allowing the exception.
> 
> I mean, you're right about it, but considering the way Trump's rhetoric is veering, that campaign will either burn out or be a constant source of inflammatory dialog.  The only other thing going on in there is the death-watch for the other GOP candidates.
> 
> Best, I think, to kill it along with the others.




It is true, there is a good chance that racism is much discussed in that thread. And I say why not? Trump is something that some members of the community will want to discuss, it will be contained in one place, andI know it isn't EW's mission, but racism needs to be adressed. Of course, if people can behave the axe can always fall on it like the rest. 

Anyway, I said what I wanted to say. This is out of my hands.


----------



## Kramodlog

Ovinomancer said:


> Here, at ENW, where that's a general paraphrase of the rules?  Yup.  Morrus has already decided that the politics experiment is a failure because it creates to much of a bad atmosphere.  You advocating for keeping your pet thread where you gleefully offend people that don't agree with you isn't exactly within the spirit of what Morrus' decision is about, is it?




You're confused. There are people who are offended because I do not share there opinion. That isn't the same.


----------



## Ovinomancer

goldomark said:


> You're confused. There are people who are offended because I do not share there opinion. That isn't the same.



lol.  Sure, man, you go on with your bad self here at ENW, where you're sheltered from being offended by other peoples opinions.


----------



## Kramodlog

Ovinomancer said:


> lol.  Sure, man, you go on with your bad self here at ENW, where you're sheltered from being offended by other peoples opinions.




I'm not the one who complained about other people's opinions offending me.


----------



## Ovinomancer

goldomark said:


> I'm not the one who complained about other people's opinions offending me.




I didn't complain I was offended.  I don't much like Trump to begin with, and your puerile banter about him didn't rise to the level of anything I much cared for.  However, I'm more than capable of recognizing that it would be insulting to others that didn't have my internet thick skin and/or actually liked Trump.  Just, as it appears, you're capable of recognizing the same.


----------



## Remus Lupin

Hey guys, thanks for demonstrating why these threads need to end.


----------



## Umbran

Gentlemen,

Your are herein clearly demonstrating one of the reasons why we didn't allow such discussion before, and why it is probably wise that we shut it down again.  

If you want, we can shut things down that much earlier, and maybe give you both vacations for your troubles.   

Enough with the axe grinding.  Let it go.


----------



## Ryujin

It was a worthy experiment. Pity it ended this way.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Umbran said:


> To be honest, the thread titles are a minor issue, compared to some of the content we've seen lately.




I have no doubt.


----------



## Morrus

As a note, you can always go to Circvs Maximvs if you need to continue the political debate.  It's much closer to the tone of the political conversations that took place here, and you'll find some of the same people on both sites.

http://www.circvsmaximvs.com/forum/forum.php


----------



## Bedrockgames

I think it was an interesting experiment but not getting into politics is probably best for the forum. Sometimes it is hard to resist posting on political threads, but I never feel like I am able to clearly convey my views in a format like this, and I think it is just better on gaming forums to focus on all things geek.


----------



## Jhaelen

I don't think I've ever participated in a discussion about politics or religion in real life that ended calmly - much less so on the internet. Good riddance, I say!


----------



## Ovinomancer

Jhaelen said:


> I don't think I've ever participated in a discussion about politics or religion in real life that ended calmly - much less so on the internet. Good riddance, I say!




Heh.  Most of my conversations about politics in real life end pretty calmly.  Much less so on the internet.  I think it's less likely  to hurl baseless epitaphs at people IRL than with the comfortable anonymity of the net.   Also, granted, I don't engage people in discussion that I know are rabid about the topic, and I'm rarely rabid about the topic (free speech being a noted exception), so perhaps that's it.  It's not my choice of discussion partners, though, as I most often discuss politics with people that don't hold my views.  I tend to find it very tedious to discuss subjects where everyone agrees already.

Religion, on the other hand, I just avoid, period.


----------



## Morrus

Reminder - tomorrow's the day we close the threads.  I don't know at what time - whenever we get a spare moment, I expect. So you should look at finishing up your conversations today.


----------



## Mishihari Lord

Morrus said:


> The threads may be only a handful at a time, but they are very busy threads and tend to overwhelm the various feeds with political content. That makes them nigh impossible to avoid if you use a mobile device or the What's New? feed. I can't imagine what first time visitors think when the first thing they see on the site is some of the less pleasant viewpoints frequently expressed in those threads.
> 
> Nah, I think it was a worthy experiment, but it failed.




To be fair, political discussion worked much better here than other places I've seen on the internet, meaning that there was some actual discussion going on rather than just people CAPS screaming at each other.

Still, I'm glad you're ending it.  For me, it was a real turn-off from the site.  I've been participating here since before 3E's release and one of the big reasons I'm still here is that there are people here I chat with that I rather like.  Well, with the politics experiment, I've seen that some of them are actually fairly dreadful people with really dreadful views on the world.  With the political threads frequently on the top of the "all threads" view I've found myself less and less interested in coming here even to check out the RPG conversations.


----------



## tomBitonti

Morrus said:


> Nah, I think it was a worthy experiment, but it failed.




No experiment fails if it provides useful data.  I think the experiment was worthy, and you are correct to collect the results and act on them.

I agree that the forums should stop allowing politics/religion.  It was initially interesting, but of late the conversations seem to degenerate very quickly.  And they do seem to fill up the first page of the forum, making them hard to avoid.

Can you update this thread title?  A person not reading the thread would not notice the immanent shutdown.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Istbor

While I am new here, and rather just enjoy reading threads more than participating most of the time. The section in question is a mixed bag to say the least. While sometimes interesting and thought-provoking, it can also be very disheartening and distasteful. 

I can get behind the decision to turn off the switch before things get worse.


----------



## Umbran

tomBitonti said:


> Can you update this thread title?  A person not reading the thread would not notice the immanent shutdown.




Well, I was expecting to un-sticky the thread, so it'll rapidly fall out of view.  But, it isn't a bad idea, and I'll make sure it gets updated when the discussion is officially closed.


----------



## Staffan

A small suggestion:

Could you please make a new thread announcing the end of the politics experiment? I wasn't following this thread, and had no idea it was ending until someone hinted at it in another thread. It seems like the kind of thing that could use its own announcement, instead of being on page 7 or whatever of a half-year-old thread.

It probably doesn't need another thread's worth of discussion though - any discussion could be directed here, or at least have potential debaters pointed this way so they can see what's already been said.


----------



## Umbran

Staffan said:


> Could you please make a new thread announcing the end of the politics experiment? I wasn't following this thread, and had no idea it was ending until someone hinted at it in another thread. It seems like the kind of thing that could use its own announcement, instead of being on page 7 or whatever of a half-year-old thread.




Easy enough.  Again, when the discussions close, I'll make sure there is an announcement-sticky-thread at the top of the forum for... a few days, at least.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Umbran said:


> Easy enough.  Again, when the discussions close, I'll make sure there is an announcement-sticky-thread at the top of the forum for... a few days, at least.




He was asking for a notification that the threads would be closed BEFORE the threads close.  I think it's a fair ask, not that you're bound by such things.


----------



## Umbran

It isn't like anyone's going to be hung from the yardarm for missing the discussion, folks.  Chill out, already.


----------



## Sacrosanct

Ah well, back to the discussions about how 5e sucks because there's no warlord and the ranger is horrible, how 4e sucks because it's too WoW like, how 3e sucks because it's for no one but min/maxers, and how AD&D sucks because THAC0.


----------



## Janx

Mishihari Lord said:


> To be fair, political discussion worked much better here than other places I've seen on the internet, meaning that there was some actual discussion going on rather than just people CAPS screaming at each other.
> 
> Still, I'm glad you're ending it.  For me, it was a real turn-off from the site.  I've been participating here since before 3E's release and one of the big reasons I'm still here is that there are people here I chat with that I rather like.  Well, with the politics experiment, I've seen that some of them are actually fairly dreadful people with really dreadful views on the world.  With the political threads frequently on the top of the "all threads" view I've found myself less and less interested in coming here even to check out the RPG conversations.




That's true, and unfortunate.

I reckon it might even color how we view other topics we're discussing.  So if PersonX hates TopicY that I like, is that why he's disagreeing with me on TopicZ.  As well as now I really don't care for PersonX at all.

maybe just sticking to the topics (and related topics) that ENWorld is best.

And I am sorry that I have whatever bad views and ideas that I should not have.  I will try to correct that.


----------



## Umbran

Janx said:


> That's true, and unfortunate.
> 
> I reckon it might even color how we view other topics we're discussing.  So if PersonX hates TopicY that I like, is that why he's disagreeing with me on TopicZ.  As well as now I really don't care for PersonX at all.




Interestingly, I've noted an opposite effect.  There is at least one person in the political discussions with whom I strongly disagreed... who has repeatedly been giving me XP in gaming discussions while we were disagreeing on politics.  I found that a bit refreshing.


----------



## Janx

Umbran said:


> Interestingly, I've noted an opposite effect.  There is at least one person in the political discussions with whom I strongly disagreed... who has repeatedly been giving me XP in gaming discussions while we were disagreeing on politics.  I found that a bit refreshing.




I think that's great.  I'd rather see people be able to discuss other topics and not carry grudges.


----------



## amerigoV

This is all I got to say about this


----------



## Kaodi

Regardless of the fact that I have posted in such discussions, I, for one, welcome our old politics and religion censoring overlords.


----------



## MechaPilot

Sacrosanct said:


> Ah well, back to the discussions about how 5e sucks because there's no warlord and the ranger is horrible, how 4e sucks because it's too WoW like, how 3e sucks because it's for no one but min/maxers, and how AD&D sucks because THAC0.




I know you were just joking, but I do have to say that I didn't like THAC0.  I thought it made teaching the combat part of the game to new players more difficult than needs be because of how counter-intuitive it was.  That said, I wouldn't say that THAC0 made 2e suck.  Once players adapted to THAC0, which took some players longer than others, it became a virtual non-issue.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Janx said:


> I think that's great.  I'd rather see people be able to discuss other topics and not carry grudges.




I never carry grudges about politics.  Why would you?  You find common ground where you find common ground, and you argue or don't talk where you don't.  Pretty simple.


----------



## Morrus

And it's done. Politics threads are now all closed.


----------



## Remus Lupin

Thanks Morrus.


----------



## Istbor

I was hoping for at least one halfhearted Vader "NOOOOoooooooo".


----------



## Umbran

Istbor said:


> I was hoping for at least one halfhearted Vader "NOOOOoooooooo".




Someone called the decision to stop politics discussion, "asinine."  I figure that counts.


----------



## Janx

Umbran said:


> Someone called the decision to stop politics discussion, "asinine."  I figure that counts.




I don't think that's an appropriate response.

It was an interesting experiment.  But there are other venues like Circus Maximus or other sites for those topics.


----------



## Morlock

I'm confused. What was that 15 page thread that just got closed, if not a thread about politics? I don't want to violate the rules here. If politics is a forbidden topic, I won't discuss politics here. But if lefties are going to discuss politics here, then so am I.

And if Nationalism is going to be banned regardless, you should just ban political discussion altogether. I don't even know what kind of mentality it takes to allow discussion of a topic, but forbid people with a certain opinion of that topic from expressing their POV. Soviet, maybe? I doubt even the Soviets were that obvious about it, but maybe I have the wrong impression.

ETA: never mind, I skimmed the recent pages of this thread and I get the gist. I initially saw how old this thread is and couldn't figure out what was going on. It's the usual story; leftists "get offended" and shut down free speech. No big.


----------



## Morrus

Morlock said:


> I'm confused. What was that 15 page thread that just got closed, if not a thread about politics? I don't want to violate the rules here. If politics is a forbidden topic, I won't discuss politics here. But if lefties are going to discuss politics here, then so am I.
> 
> And if Nationalism is going to be banned regardless, you should just ban political discussion altogether. I don't even know what kind of mentality it takes to allow discussion of a topic, but forbid people with a certain opinion of that topic from expressing their POV. Soviet, maybe? I doubt even the Soviets were that obvious about it, but maybe I have the wrong impression.
> 
> ETA: never mind, I skimmed the recent pages of this thread and I get the gist. I initially saw how old this thread is and couldn't figure out what was going on. It's the usual story; leftists "get offended" and shut down free speech. No big.




Politics are now not permitted there.  That does _not_ mean "start insulting people of a different political leaning to you in the announcement thread." Please refrain from political jibes.  Thank you.


----------



## Kramodlog

In the spirit of things, I must say I'm offended by the number of stickied threads in this section. Do you guys think it is possible to reduce that number? It would reduce the scrolling needed to see threads.


----------



## dd.stevenson

The forum description still needs to be updated.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> So as an update. I'm thinking about ending this experiment. I don't feel it has added anything pleasant to the board.




Why is pleasant more important than engaging, interesting, thought provoking, etc? 

This is a weak decision.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Umbran said:


> Someone called the decision to stop politics discussion, "asinine."  I figure that counts.




I was being nice, because I like you folks.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Why is pleasant more important than engaging, interesting, thought provoking, etc?
> 
> This is a weak decision.




Nevertheless, we expect you to abide by it, please.


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> Why is pleasant more important than engaging, interesting, thought provoking, etc?




Well, it seems that, on the whole for the community, it wasn't actually all that engaging, interesting, or thought provoking.  The politics and religion threads generated a large number of posts from a very small number of posters; generally the same small list of users in all the relevant threads.  The community, overall, didn't engage with these topics.

Then, if these threads produced even a small negative influence from them being unpleasant, the presence of these topics can very quickly become an overall negative influence on the boards.  The politics and religion discussions, honestly, weren't adding enough value to the boards to justify their presence.

Ultimately, the mission of these boards is *gaming* discussion.  Other topics are nice if they at least are not a detriment to that mission, but should (and as you see, will) be jettisoned if they significantly detract from the core experience for more users.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> Nevertheless, we expect you to abide by it, please.




Dude, MOrrus, don't even respond if all you're going to say amounts to, "Shut up, I'm the authority figure here. Do as I say." 

The pre-emptive "don't break the rules" statement is not only implicit in the existence of the rule, but has been re-iterated with the announcement itself. 

"Follow the rules whether you like them or not" isn't a relevant response to a statement of disagreement with the rules. It's also a very disrespectful one, especially from someone who so strongly dislikes being spoken to disrespectfully. 



Umbran said:


> Well, it seems that, on the whole for the  community, it wasn't actually all that engaging, interesting, or thought  provoking.  The politics and religion threads generated a large number  of posts from a very small number of posters; generally the same small  list of users in all the relevant threads.  The community, overall,  didn't engage with these topics.
> 
> Then, if these threads produced even a small negative influence from  them being unpleasant, the presence of these topics can very quickly  become an overall negative influence on the boards.  The politics and  religion discussions, honestly, weren't adding enough value to the  boards to justify their presence.
> 
> Ultimately, the mission of these boards is *gaming* discussion.  Other  topics are nice if they at least are not a detriment to that mission,  but should (and as you see, will) be jettisoned if they significantly  detract from the core experience for more users.




Thanks. I really appreciate the well thought out response. I still disagree with the decision. Did I miss some indication you and the other mods/Morrus could see that the discussions were leaking into threads where they didn't belong, or dragging in people who didn't want to be a part of them? Were you guys having to spend too much time moderating those threads? 
If not, I guess it just doesn't make any sense to me, and seems like a weak cop out, to just ban those discussion outright. If a few posters were having those discussions, but weren't dragging others in, taking the discussions to threads where they don't belong, or otherwise breaking any rules, how was it different from threads about obscure gaming things that only a few people on the forums care about or want to talk about? I mean, the thread titles warned away anyone who didn't want to participate, right?


----------



## Kramodlog

doctorbadwolf said:


> I mean, the thread titles warned away anyone who didn't want to participate, right?




I must say this is one of the things I find puzzling. Why can't people avoid a thread on subjects they do not like? It is as puzzling as people feeling "forced" to buy all D&D books WotC publishes. Why must they buy them all? 

I'm also puzzled at people having their feelings hurt because someone has a different opinion, so they want that person to be censored.

Anyway, the boat as sailed. I agree with you, but you're just gonna antagonize Morrus and the mods.


----------



## Ovinomancer

doctorbadwolf said:


> Dude, MOrrus, don't even respond if all you're going to say amounts to, "Shut up, I'm the authority figure here. Do as I say."
> 
> The pre-emptive "don't break the rules" statement is not only implicit in the existence of the rule, but has been re-iterated with the announcement itself.
> 
> "Follow the rules whether you like them or not" isn't a relevant response to a statement of disagreement with the rules. It's also a very disrespectful one, especially from someone who so strongly dislikes being spoken to disrespectfully.




Just to step in for a minute here as someone that usually also doesn't appreciate Morrus' communication style, but:  he owes you exactly zero justification for his choices on how to run his board.


----------



## Umbran

Ovinomancer said:


> Just to step in for a minute here as someone that usually also doesn't appreciate Morrus' communication style, but:  he owes you exactly zero justification for his choices on how to run his board.




And... Ovinomancer and I agree on something!  Now, if that isn't an indication, I don't know what is 

Morrus provides a place for people to chat about gaming, free of charge.  For a while, he decided to see if it would also work as a place to discuss other topics, free of charge.  He figures that didn't work out, so we are back to how it was before.  Still, free of charge.  And, he still offers you Circvs Maximvs, a place where you can still continue to discuss these topics.  And, you know what?  That's free of charge, too.

Seems to me, doctorbadwolf, that you're still ahead of the game.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Umbran said:


> And... Ovinomancer and I agree on something!  Now, if that isn't an indication, I don't know what is



You also don't appreciate Morrus' communication style?!


----------



## doctorbadwolf

goldomark said:


> I must say this is one of the things I find  puzzling. Why can't people avoid a thread on subjects they do not like?  It is as puzzling as people feeling "forced" to buy all D&D books  WotC publishes. Why must they buy them all?
> 
> I'm also puzzled at people having their feelings hurt because someone  has a different opinion, so they want that person to be censored.
> 
> Anyway, the boat as sailed. I agree with you, but you're just gonna antagonize Morrus and the mods.




Well, Morrus and I already butt heads, but yeah I could be less antagonistic about it. That's fair. 



Ovinomancer said:


> Just to step in for a minute here as someone  that usually also doesn't appreciate Morrus' communication style, but:   he owes you exactly zero justification for his choices on how to run his  board.




Fundamental philosophical differences aside (because I think  you're completely wrong about that), I never asked for any. I just  called out what I think is a crappy response to a criticism. 

Not  owing someone anything doesn't preclude getting criticism, nor does it  make it a good thing when you react to criticism in a less than  impressive manner. 



Umbran said:


> And... Ovinomancer and I agree on something!  Now, if that isn't an indication, I don't know what is
> 
> Morrus provides a place for people to chat about gaming, free of charge.   For a while, he decided to see if it would also work as a place to  discuss other topics, free of charge.  He figures that didn't work out,  so we are back to how it was before.  Still, free of charge.  And, he  still offers you Circvs Maximvs, a place where you can still continue to  discuss these topics.  And, you know what?  That's free of charge, too.
> 
> Seems to me, doctorbadwolf, that you're still ahead of the game.




I get where you're coming from, I really do. 

However, a  service being free of charge doesn't magically invalidate criticism of  that service, or how it's run, or a given decision related to same. It  being free is mostly irrelevant, here. It doesn't make any decision he  makes automatically the right choice.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Well, Morrus and I already butt heads




We do?

Also, guys, I'm _right here._


----------



## Kramodlog

You're here in the internet!? Are you like Tron? Cause I'm a total fan.


----------



## Ovinomancer

doctorbadwolf said:


> Well, Morrus and I already butt heads, but yeah I could be less antagonistic about it. That's fair.
> 
> 
> 
> Fundamental philosophical differences aside (because I think  you're completely wrong about that), I never asked for any. I just  called out what I think is a crappy response to a criticism.
> 
> Not  owing someone anything doesn't preclude getting criticism, nor does it  make it a good thing when you react to criticism in a less than  impressive manner.
> 
> 
> 
> I get where you're coming from, I really do.
> 
> However, a  service being free of charge doesn't magically invalidate criticism of  that service, or how it's run, or a given decision related to same. It  being free is mostly irrelevant, here. It doesn't make any decision he  makes automatically the right choice.




You really think Morrus owes you a response to your criticism?  I didn't say anything about your ability to criticize, although that's also up to Morrus' whims, I was talking about your unreasonable expectations that he should respond to your criticism in the way you wish him to.  He doesn't owe you anything.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Morrus said:


> We do?
> 
> Also, guys, I'm _right here._



Dude, it's a pretty bad bet to expect that you're paying attention to any given thread, even if you've previous posted.


----------



## Umbran

Ovinomancer said:


> You also don't appreciate Morrus' communication style?!




Morrus' communications could sometimes use a bit of extra wordsmithing.  He is sometimes a bit overly optimistic about how well people will get where he's coming from.

What I do appreciate, however, is the amount of work he puts into the site.  Lack of wordsmithing is a small flaw, by comparison.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Ovinomancer said:


> You really think Morrus owes you a response to your criticism?  I didn't say anything about your ability to criticize, although that's also up to Morrus' whims, I was talking about your unreasonable expectations that he should respond to your criticism in the way you wish him to.  He doesn't owe you anything.



Again not what I said. Stop trying to extrapolate meaning that isn't there.  Had he not responded at all, that would have been fine. 
Not going to get into a whole thing tho. Last I will say is that I find the mindset that ppl don't owe each other anything to be unrealistic at best, and reprehensible at worst, especially when talking about anyone in a position of even minor or situational authority of any kind, and/or public/leadership figures.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> We do?
> 
> Also, guys, I'm _right here._






We don't? 

Srsly tho, I just mean that we have argued more than once this week, and probably will again. 
On the whole, though, I like you. You're doing a better job here than wotc did on their forums.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Again not what I said. Stop trying to extrapolate meaning that isn't there.  Had he not responded at all, that would have been fine.
> Not going to get into a whole thing tho. Last I will say is that I find the mindset that ppl don't owe each other anything to be unrealistic at best, and reprehensible at worst, especially when talking about anyone in a position of even minor or situational authority of any kind, and/or public/leadership figures.




I have no position of authority or leadership. I'm just the host here, in a little gaming website. I have my place, and guests are welcome as long as they behave nicely, and they're asked to leave if they act like an ass. Just like most other social situations. 

My 'authority' is exactly the same as yours - in your house, I'm sure you have acceptable and non-acceptable behaviour, too. That's not authority. That's just being the host.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> I have no position of authority or leadership. I'm just the host here, in a little gaming website. I have my place, and guests are welcome as long as they behave nicely, and they're asked to leave if they act like an ass. Just like most other social situations.
> 
> My 'authority' is exactly the same as yours - in your house, I'm sure you have acceptable and non-acceptable behaviour, too. That's not authority. That's just being the host.



That's...an odd position, imo.  That is authority. Not only as a host, either. 
Even the mods have authority, and thus different and additional responsibilities. As the person who runs a popular website with a distinct community, you have authority within the site and it's community. 
Also, when I have guests, the idea that I owe them nothing is complete and utter nonsense, and someon saying that to me would actually offend me pretty strongly. 

Also also, "little gaming website"? Facetious much?


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> That's...an odd position, imo.  That is authority. Not only as a host, either.
> Even the mods have authority, and thus different and additional responsibilities. As the person who runs a popular website with a distinct community, you have authority within the site and it's community.
> Also, when I have guests, the idea that I owe them nothing is complete and utter nonsense, and someon saying that to me would actually offend me pretty strongly.
> 
> Also also, "little gaming website"? Facetious much?




That's all you. None of that is me. And yeah. Little. This place is pretty tiny.  

Look, dude, before this thread I was barely aware of you. Now I just think you're a jerk who has invited himself  into my house and is going out of his way to annoy me. Please stop that. If you don't like me, or if you don't like my house, or the expected behaviour  here, that's fine - go somewhere else. I don't mind, I promise.


----------



## trappedslider

I think your house needs a fridge with snacks


----------



## Kaodi

If "journalism" and drugs are considered politics, we might have picked a bad time to close up shop. Oh well,  . (But seriously, might we get a ruling on this?)


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> That's all you. None of that is me. And yeah. Little. This place is pretty tiny.
> 
> Look, dude, before this thread I was barely aware of you. Now I just think you're a jerk who has invited himself  into my house and is going out of his way to annoy me. Please stop that. If you don't like me, or if you don't like my house, or the expected behaviour  here, that's fine - go somewhere else. I don't mind, I promise.




Wow. Guess the ennie awards aren't a thing that's hugely important to the ttrpg world, helping shape how games are percieved by the gaming community as a whole, with a live awards thing at gen con? We have very different definitions of little. 
and how does one invite oneself into a public forum that literally invited everyone from the wotc forums to come here, not to mention the general standing up invitation of an open forum with an active and inviting community? 

Anyway, I've already pointed out that I like this site and how it's run, and respect the job you're doing. Apparently you think that should entirely preclude any criticism. That is preposterous, imo, but ok. 

Look, I'm sorry. I didn't intend to create a gorram moop fest.


----------



## fba827

As someone (albeit a quiet someone these days) who has been using these boards since they started under different leadership ( back when 3e was still getting scoops and previews), one of the things I always appreciated was the no politics or religion rule.  I'd go in to specific reasons on my I like that rule but the short of it is my reasons are my reasons and won't change anyone else's opinion.  So I'll just leave it at this :  I appreciate the attempt to test their inclusion, but more so I appreciate the pulling of the plug on the test and putting the no politics no religion rule back in place.  So thank you.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel

So I noticed that when starting a new thread, the religion and politics prefixes are still available. Are those staying on there, or will they eventually be removed?


----------



## MechaPilot

doctorbadwolf said:


> Wow. Guess the ennie awards aren't a thing that's hugely important to the ttrpg world. . .




They're not to me.  No award is.  I could give a rat's wiggling bum if a film is declared best picture, or if an rpg wins an ennie, or who gets inducted into the rock n roll hall of fame, etc.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MechaPilot said:


> They're not to me.  No award is.  I could give a rat's wiggling bum if a film is declared best picture, or if an rpg wins an ennie, or who gets inducted into the rock n roll hall of fame, etc.




Sure, but they are a big deal, whether you or I pay attention to them or not. They impact the industry.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel

What's an ennie?


----------



## Ovinomancer

doctorbadwolf said:


> Wow. Guess the ennie awards aren't a thing that's hugely important to the ttrpg world, helping shape how games are percieved by the gaming community as a whole, with a live awards thing at gen con? We have very different definitions of little.
> and how does one invite oneself into a public forum that literally invited everyone from the wotc forums to come here, not to mention the general standing up invitation of an open forum with an active and inviting community?



The Ennies aren't run by Morrus, aren't hosted on this site, and aren't paid for out of his pocket.  They may have started here, and this may be where there's a lot of discussion, but they're independant now.

And no one's said you can't criticize, so that's a red herring, what's been said is that no one owes you any explanations due to your criticism.


----------



## DarkMum

No Politics? No Religion?  Great, I could use a break from all that, where do I sign? More seriously, I'm not kidding. I've had it up to here with gender war politics on the internet, and if this place is free of that crap, I'm very happy to hear it.


----------



## billd91

DarkMum said:


> No Politics? No Religion?  Great, I could use a break from all that, where do I sign? More seriously, I'm not kidding. I've had it up to here with gender war politics on the internet, and if this place is free of that crap, I'm very happy to hear it.




Depends on what aspect of it you think is crap. The mods around here take a dim view of sexism and bigotry in general and there's a lively discussion going on right now about women being sexually harassed in game stores and at cons.


----------



## Ovinomancer

billd91 said:


> Depends on what aspect of it you think is crap. The mods around here take a dim view of sexism and bigotry in general and there's a lively discussion going on right now about women being sexually harassed in game stores and at cons.



I wish it were just a dim view.   Instead there's a preferred ideology.  Adhere to it, and you can dance across r he lines of acceptable behavior against those that don't.  Not saying the mods allow this intentionally, they're just far more blind to poor behavior that aligns to their ideology.

But, there aren't many posts like that, so it doesn't often surface.


----------



## Remus Lupin

I'm not sure why anyone should be surprised or even irritated that there is a preferred ideology around here. As Morrus has said, it's his house. In my house, if you were to repeatedly say things that I found offensive, I'd step in, in a way I wouldn't in a genuinely public forum or in someone else's house. That said, I'm dubious that the mods are significantly more likely to crack down on bad behavior by those who are their ideological "side" than those who are not. I've been cautioned once or twice, and my general attitude is "OK, I probably needed to take a step back there, thanks mod, for giving me the opportunity to see that" even if I believe I'm on the "right" side of an issue. And even if I didn't think I crossed any line, again, it's not my house.


----------



## Umbran

Ovinomancer said:


> Not saying the mods allow this intentionally, they're just far more blind to poor behavior that aligns to their ideology.




We get told that every so often.  Usually from both sides of a conflict.

Interestingly, the only bit of moderation that's happened in the current Harrassment thread was me booting someone you'd think I generally *agreed* with out of the thread for poor behavior.

So, there you are.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Dude, I blatantly called Morrus out for what I felt was crappy behavior, and criticized how he runs the site, and I didn't get modded. Multiple mods responded in disagreement to my comments, but that was it. 

Say what you will about Morrus, the site, and the mods...they simply aren't trigger happy with ppl they disagree with or lenient with ppl they agree with. They are more fair than the mods at most sites I've frequented. 

As for ideology...I wish. Imo, one legit criticism of this place one could make is that it isn't strongly or blatantly enough against the rules to say sexist or otherwise bigoted things.


----------



## DarkMum

billd91 said:


> Depends on what aspect of it you think is crap. The mods around here take a dim view of sexism and bigotry in general and there's a lively discussion going on right now about women being sexually harassed in game stores and at cons.




    As it was exactly that sort of discussion I lost my temper in elsewhere, at the same old mindless repetition of the pattern of discussion about the subject on the internet, that would be the particular crap aspect of it I'm trying to avoid.     

It's bad enough I have to live with it in a world I've been fighting to change IRL, so the internet version has been annoying me to the point of plainly speaking (Typing? Whatever...) my mind in response.     It's not the fight to end these problems that annoys me, it's the way that discussion of said cause has such an inevitable pattern to it that I don't think I can stand to see it any further without a great deal of unhealthy teeth grinding episodes of my own in the process.


----------



## Umbran

Well, we do try to make sure that discussion stays limited to threads specific to the topic.  And, those threads are not common - they come up occasionally, and then die away for some months.  I hope you'll find it easy enough to avoid such topics.


----------



## Sadras

What is strange is that CM which has the freedom to bring up almost any topic and is non-moderated (if that is the right word) is pretty chilled, I would say more so than Enworld. I guess it is the limited traffic that keeps it that way. I find myself wanting to click _Laugh_ for every other post.

I find the comments on Enworld, with its limited topics, give rise to much more snarkiness amongst posters.


----------



## Kramodlog

With Trump being the Republican nominee, I regret that we cannot discuss this once in a life time phenomenon.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Agreed! 

But, on the iher hand...im glad to not know who supports trump.


----------



## Umbran

With Trump being the nominee, I am rather grateful I don't have to police the resulting discussion.


----------



## Ovinomancer

How is this not talking about politics?


----------



## Remus Lupin

We're not talking about politics. We're talking about talking about politics. It's very meta. And now that I'm talking about talking about taking about politics, it's meta-meta. There may be no end to this!


----------



## Brandegoris

But~ But ~ But Trump????
No? No talkie?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Nope.


----------

