# ENWorld Edition Bias



## Rolflyn

To tell the truth, I almost quit ENWorld because it seemed so pro-4e that it was difficult to stay.  Then, I discovered that there were only a few people that were causing this impression, and so I stayed and even started posting.  As time goes by, my opinion has changed.  What do others think?  What is your impression of the prevailing attitude of ENWorld.

And please, don't start and edition war over this.  I'm interested in how people perceive ENWorld and not the merits of one edition over another.


----------



## Ydars

It depends on which area of the site you most frequent. It has also changed over time.

It was certainly very pro-4E a while back in this area, but now I think the anti-camp is much more vocal, and it is not just a few individuals either.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Strange. I voted and landed here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-3rd-edition-house-rules/5457-2nd-level-mage-armor.html 



A thread with a post by angelsboi...  Wow, that is a long time ago... 



I voted "fair and balanced", but that's actually not the best description for it. In those "real" edition war threads, I am not sure it can be called fair or balanced. 

But elsewhere there is a lot of opportunity to discuss things from both sides. There might be only an edition bias if we are actually discussing only one edition, but that would be to be expected, right?

Edit: On second thought, maybe the fact that 4E is discussed more then 3E might be a point that there is a bias towards 4E? Hmmm...


----------



## Ydars

How weird; the same page translocation, to a thread from ages ago, happened to me when I voted.


----------



## Kzach

I want a "Meh" option or at least a lemon-flavoured one.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Like the OP, I perceived a very strong pro-4E bias up until a couple of months ago.  I find things much more balanced now.

BTW, you'd gain more useful information if you had choices in the poll like:

* Pro-4E, and I'm pro-4E
* Pro-4E, and I'm not pro-4E
* Pro-3E, and I'm pro-3E
* Pro-3E, and I'm not pro-3E

... and so on.

It might be worth scrapping this poll and starting a new one, in fact, especially give the weird thread-transfer effect on voting, which got me, too.

BTW, this is my 2,000th post.  Yay me.


----------



## silver_wizard

I too perceived a strong pro-4E aura here. It was so unbearable that it actually drove me away ("plenty of other forums, no need to waste time" and so on). I have recently started to check the posts here a bit more seriously (as opposed to the "oh, let's just check enworld for a few seconds, on the off chance that something useful and interesting might be found" mentality I had adopted during this time), and things have started to even up a bit. Let's see...


----------



## DandD

Many anti-4th edition statements from very few members, countered by some pro-4th edition jubilation from other slightly more members equals the ENWorld boards a little bit. 

Even if there's still some threadcrapping and thinly disquised edition war going on, with always the same people in it.


----------



## Ashrum the Black

I had the strange thread warp happen when I voted as well.

I voted for fair and balanced. I've seen both pro and anti sides seeming to take over the boards with their threads. Both seem to be able to comment without any undue censorship, as long as both sides remain civil.

I will say that there seems to be more in the way of 4e threads right now, but I place the blame for that on the fact that it is the new and shiny at the moment, and it is the system getting all the new relases. I figure the 3e threads will see an up tick about the time that paizo lets their finalized pathfinder rules out into the wild. Especially if they get some buy in by some of the 3pp. We'll see how things fall. 

-Ashrum


----------



## FireLance

Fair and balanced, in pretty much the same way that a volcanic eruption in an arctic blizzard is fair and balanced.


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd

I'd say still slightly anti-4E, solely based on posters, not ENWorld "management". While I have seen 1, maybe 2, "ZOMG! 4E roxxor!" threads, I have seen many more threads started just to tell us all that some guy on the interweb doesn't like 4E. There are of course those that react in the opposite way in such threads, I'm basing my vote on threads started.

Edit: And of course now I see the new big 4E love thread. :doh:


----------



## Charwoman Gene

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> I'd say still slightly anti-4E, solely based on posters, not ENWorld "management". While I have seen 1, maybe 2, "ZOMG! 4E roxxor!" threads, I have seen many more threads started just to tell us all that some guy on the interweb doesn't like 4E.




That just shows that 4e-haters are vain.


----------



## Shadeydm

To me there is a strong pro 4E bias on the site and has been for some time now. This is most clearly reflected in how the boards are moderated.
Someone who does not like some aspect of 4E and posts this opinion in a pro 4E thread is banned from the thread but the thread continues. While someone who is pro 4E can thread crap in a discussion about a shortcoming of 4E and the thread gets locked instead, a win-win for the pro 4E crowd.
Similarly someone who is pro 4E makes personal attacks against someone who is critical of 4E and they simply get a reprimand. Meanwhile when someone who is foolish enough to do the same to the pro 4E crowd, they not only get a thread ban or site ban but the offensive post actually gets deleted.
Even now there is lengthy thread which basically says that if you don’t switch to 4E then the problem is with you not with 4E somehow I can’t imagine the reverse sticking around long.
Point in case not that long ago there was a lengthy thread discussing the flaws of 3E this thread grew long and stayed civil yet at the same time several threads were started to try and have a similarly calm discussion about 4E’s flaws and those were consistently thread crapped by the pro 4E crowd and locked down by the mods. If this isn’t bias then I don’t know what is.


----------



## Psion

I'd have to say it's slightly pro-4e. It was worse, but never as bad as RPG.net's D20 forum is.


----------



## Crothian

It is biased both ways it seems.  There are too many people here that feel strongly one way or another to say the board as a whole is.


----------



## Charwoman Gene

It's the mod's fault that the 4e crowd is full of whiners and thread-crappers?  and that the anti-4e crowd tends to insulting vbannable offenses?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Charwoman Gene said:


> It's the mod's fault that the 4e crowd is full of whiners and thread-crappers?  and that the anti-4e crowd tends to insulting vbannable offenses?




Note that the poll is not about the moderation - though one could probably distinguish between "moderation policy" and "member demographics" or something.


----------



## Shadeydm

Charwoman Gene said:


> It's the mod's fault that the 4e crowd is full of whiners and thread-crappers?  and that the anti-4e crowd tends to insulting vbannable offenses?




When the same behavior by both factions is not moderated the same way and in this case moderated in a way which favors pro 4E discussion and discourages the opposite, yes this is a function of site moderation.


----------



## DaveMage

I voted slightly 4E based on the users, not the board ownership/moderators.

I think Morrus has been very fair to all constituencies.


----------



## La Bete

Shadeydm said:


> When the same behavior by both factions is not moderated the same way and in this case moderated in a way which favors pro 4E discussion and discourages the opposite, yes this is a function of site moderation.




I think the non-infrequent bannings of pro-4e regulars (Wis, I'm looking at you! ) disagrees with you.


----------



## Obryn

I think it's paranoid in the extreme to think ENWorld's moderators have any horse in the race other than smooth board operation.  Seriously, name *one* that you'd call an unabashed 4e "fanboy" to the extent that they'd moderate threads based on the poster's edition of choice.

People love to be the underdogs.  If you're a 3e fan, you probably think the site is biased towards 4e.  If you're a 4e fan, you probably think the site is biased towards 3e.

-O


----------



## Mallus

If I had to call it, I'd say there are slightly more 3e fans that are active posters, which isn't surprising given that ENWorld started as a 3e rumorsite/fansite. 

For the record, I'm a fan of the game the rules help produce, I'm not a rule set partisan.


----------



## diaglo

Obryn said:


> If you're a 3e fan, you probably think the site is biased towards 4e.  If you're a 4e fan, you probably think the site is biased towards 3e.




i'm a fan of neither. i think it is only very slightly 4E biased.


----------



## Fifth Element

Obryn said:


> I think it's paranoid in the extreme to think ENWorld's moderators have any horse in the race other than smooth board operation.  Seriously, name *one* that you'd call an unabashed 4e "fanboy" to the extent that they'd moderate threads based on the poster's edition of choice.



Very much agreed. There's always stuff on both "sides" that gets through, and stuff on both "sides" that gets punished. The mods have been really good in difficult circumstances, I think.

As for the site as a whole, I'd say there are a few more 4E hatebois than 4E fanbois, but overall it's pretty unbiased. Just ignore those few posters who try to stir up trouble.


----------



## Obryn

diaglo said:


> i'm a fan of neither. i think it is only very slightly 4E biased.



Oh, come on!  You know you d02 is the one true game! 

Anyway, is that because of the posters, or because of the moderators?

There are more 4e products being released nowadays than OGL products, so I'm not really surprised to see more 4e _discussion_, overall.  But I don't know if I'd call a _site _biased without, basically, action or purposeful inaction from above.

-O


----------



## diaglo

Obryn said:


> Anyway, is that because of the posters, or because of the moderators?




mostly posters.

squeeky wheels get the ban.


edit: the previous edition fans can be more abrasive and thus get banned more. that's why i am saying only very slightly 4E biased. both sides are still feeding the trolls.


----------



## Pbartender

FireLance said:


> Fair and balanced, in pretty much the same way that a volcanic eruption in an arctic blizzard is fair and balanced.




Yeah...  That's about how I see it.

If by fair and balanced, you mean "equal numbers of equally vociferous extremists from both sides of the conflict", then yes, EN World is fair and balanced.


----------



## Vorput

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Strange. I voted and landed here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-3rd-edition-house-rules/5457-2nd-level-mage-armor.html
> 
> 
> 
> A thread with a post by angelsboi...  Wow, that is a long time ago...




Same happened to me.  I smell a conspiracy!  Voting in this thread led to the 3rd edition house rules forum...


----------



## Alzrius

Hm, there's nothing I can say here that hasn't been said already. I voted, and got threadwarped.

I do think that there's some slight bias in favor of 4E, though nowhere near as bad as it was a few months ago. It mostly seems to be a small handful of members who take any statement against 4E personally, and have no compunction about being very vocal and rude about it. I also think those people haven't been moderated as much as they should be - things seem better now because those people have largely begun to shut up (which may be due to some moderator action?), so things seem better.


----------



## Shadeydm

La Bete said:


> I think the non-infrequent bannings of pro-4e regulars (Wis, I'm looking at you! ) disagrees with you.




Funny you should mention that poster since when I look at his or her handy work in the thread titled poll of polls post #40 I see very personal attack (in response to humor and a critique of the actual poll) and in response this post was not deleted, nor was the poster banned. I guess this pokes a pretty big hole in your theory


----------



## La Bete

Shadeydm said:


> Funny you should mention that poster since when I look at his or her handy work in the thread titled poll of polls post #40 I see very personal attack (in response to humor and a critique of the actual poll) and in response this post was not deleted, nor was the poster banned. I guess this pokes a pretty big hole in your theory




Not really. I've seen him get sanctions ranging from warnings, to mod edits to bannings (on more than one occasion).

Admittedly the bannings are normally in response to BryonD.


----------



## Fifth Element

Shadeydm said:


> Funny you should mention that poster since when I look at his or her handy work in the thread titled poll of polls post #40 I see very personal attack (in response to humor and a critique of the actual poll) and in response this post was not deleted, nor was the poster banned. I guess this pokes a pretty big hole in your theory



Don't count on it. A lot of moderator activity takes place privately, behind the scenes. I've discussed this with the mods before - not all warnings and bans are revealed in-thread. Often the offending poster is dealt with directly, with no publicity, so to speak.


----------



## diaglo

Shadeydm said:


> Funny you should mention that poster since when I look at his or her handy work in the thread titled poll of polls post #40 I see very personal attack (in response to humor and a critique of the actual poll) and in response this post was not deleted, nor was the poster banned. I guess this pokes a pretty big hole in your theory




but he was warned: http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/248080-poll-polls-3.html#post4613350


----------



## Shadeydm

diaglo said:


> but he was warned: http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/248080-poll-polls-3.html#post4613350




Indeed however when things get personal such posts are normally deleted and such posters are at least banned from the thread. In this instance not only was the offending post allowed to stand but I suspect there would likely have been no moderation at all if I didn't offer the Mods the alternate choice of responding to the post myself.


----------



## the Jester

There are asshats on all sides.

Overall it's fair and balanced.


----------



## diaglo

Shadeydm said:


> Indeed however when things get personal such posts are normally deleted and such posters are at least banned from the thread. In this instance not only was the offending post allowed to stand but there would likely have been no moderation at all if I didn't offer the Mods the alternate choice of responding to the post myself.




huh?
the post was reported. by me i know for sure.

normally when things get personal the poster gets warned or banned.
the deletion thing must be new.


----------



## mmu1

For the longest time, I really felt outnumbered (and somewhat harassed) as a 3E fan, to the point where I largely gave up on ENWorld - I think Edena's recent poll helped me (and, judging by the threads popping up, a lot of other 3E folks) realize that we're actually still a majority here, despite how vocal a lot of the 4E proponents have been.

Or perhaps it's just a manifestation of a larger trend I can't see since, as I said, I've stopped reading ENWorld for a while.

On the management side... I have to say that, given the fact people running ENWorld have a financial stake in the success of 4E (I distinctly recall Morrus complaining about how badly they were doing on 3E merchandise after the announcement of 4E) I think it'd be hard for _some_ kind of bias - or something that might as well be a bias, in terms of how it looks to us posters - to creep in. Though I don't really think it extended to matters like modertion policy, even if some of the heavy-handed measures taken to prevent "edition wars" (I marveled at things that were construed as inappropriate, during that period) could at times make it seem like it.

For example, the way early Pathfinder threads got moved out of General RPG Discussion and into one of the sub-forums definitely _felt_ like they were being swept under the rug...


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Shadeydm said:


> Funny you should mention that poster since when I look at his or her handy work in the thread titled poll of polls post #40 I see very personal attack (in response to humor and a critique of the actual poll) and in response this post was not deleted, nor was the poster banned. I guess this pokes a pretty big hole in your theory




The gap you perceive is the gap between how the individual mods handle a case they get tasked to handle. At least that's part of it.


----------



## Shadeydm

diaglo said:


> huh?
> the post was reported. by me i know for sure.
> 
> normally when things get personal the poster gets warned or banned.
> the deletion thing must be new.




Just look at how the thread titled Why do you keep playing 4E was moderated if you can't see any difference in how things were handled then I respectfully withdraw from having this discussion with you sir.


----------



## diaglo

Shadeydm said:


> Just look at how the thread titled Why do you keep playing 4E was moderated if you can't see any difference in how things were handled then I respectfully withdraw from having this discussion with you sir.




that's a mod difference.
edit: also respectfully withdrawing


----------



## Charwoman Gene

Shadeydm said:


> Just look at how the thread titled Why do you keep playing 4E was moderated if you can't see any difference in how things were handled then I respectfully withdraw from having this discussion with you sir.




Are you saying there is a secret conspiracy of 4e love?  Rediculous.


----------



## Shadeydm

diaglo said:


> that's a mod difference.
> edit: also respectfully withdrawing




Very well however I expect if that thread had been critical of 4E instead of thread crapping being deleted it would simply have been locked and gone bye bye.


----------



## Creeping Death

the Jester said:


> ... asshats ...




That is like one of my favorite internet words.  It even sounds funny.


----------



## diaglo

Shadeydm said:


> Very well however I expect if that thread had been critical of 4E instead of thread crapping being deleted it would simply have been locked and gone bye bye.




Plane Sailing has admitted to a 4Elovefest. read the Understanding change thread by Truename.


----------



## Echohawk

Shadeydm said:


> Very well however I expect if that thread had been critical of 4E instead of thread crapping being deleted it would simply have been locked and gone bye bye.



I'm reasonably sure that it is against the forum rules to discuss moderation decisions in the manner that is occurring here. I respectfully suggest that if you have an issue with the moderation of a particular thread, that you take it up privately with the moderators involved.


----------



## Shadeydm

Charwoman Gene said:


> Are you saying there is a secret conspiracy of 4e love?  Rediculous.




No I am saying that pro 4E and anti 4E commentary are moderated differently. I would love to see stats on the subject like pro 4E threads locked vs edited and anti 4E threads locked vs edited but thats not going to happen and isn't likely to change anything regardless of the results.

Anyways I have nothing further to say on the subject. I certainly don't envy the Mods given the climate around here and the obvious need for the site to hitch its wagon to 4E a tough tightrope to walk to say the least.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Im in the camp that thinks that the site focus is slighly for 4e focused now, but I can undertsand thats because that is where most of the new stuff is comming from. I also think that the members here are still slightly more pro-3E than pro-4E. 

I also have issues with the poll choices since being pro-3E doesn't neccesarily make someone anti-4E (not that it excludes it either). Better choices would have phased the poll from Pro-4E to Pro-3E instead of Pro-4E to Anti-4E.


----------



## Shadeydm

Echohawk said:


> I'm reasonably sure that it is against the forum rules to discuss moderation decisions in the manner that is occurring here. I respectfully suggest that if you have an issue with the moderation of a particular thread, that you take it up privately with the moderators involved.




My apologies if this detracted from your enjoyment of the thread. I was merely responding to the OP originally and then subsequently to some follow-ups. I can see how this might be viewed as something of a derailment and as such will refrain from further commentary on the subject.

Sorry.


----------



## Obryn

mmu1 said:


> On the management side... I have to say that, given the fact people running ENWorld have a financial stake in the success of 4E (I distinctly recall Morrus complaining about how badly they were doing on 3E merchandise after the announcement of 4E) I think it'd be hard for _some_ kind of bias - or something that might as well be a bias, in terms of how it looks to us posters - to creep in.



Well, the moderators - AFAIK - have absolutely zero financial stake in ENWorld.  It's not a paid job.  Really, the only person who does that I know of is Morrus.  Frankly, Russ is about the last person I could see encouraging moderators to moderate differently based on (of all things) edition preference.

It's a conspiracy theory that doesn't pass the laugh test, as far as I'm concerned.

-O


----------



## Haffrung Helleyes

*I voted fair and equal*

I think the moderation is fair here.  I am pretty pro-3E these days, but have never been moderated.  

What I have noticed is the absence of a few pro-4E posters who used to post 10 or more times a day, always promoting 4E and never discussing anything else.  I seriously wondered at the time whether they were merely doing their job!  

Now that they are all gone, I think the climate is much better here, and I am enjoying EnWorld much more.

Ken


----------



## Obryn

Shadeydm said:


> Very well however I expect if that thread had been critical of 4E instead of thread crapping being deleted it would simply have been locked and gone bye bye.



Welcome to the wonderful world of Confirmation Bias.

-O


----------



## catsclaw227

Or quite possibly, a forum specific version of Hostile media effect.


----------



## Echohawk

Shadeydm said:


> My apologies if this detracted from your enjoyment of the thread.



No worries, it didn't detract from my enjoyment of the thread. I was merely pointing out that these forums do have a rule against challenging a moderator in public, and it is probably wise to bear that in mind for this thread.


----------



## Oni

Given that this is basically a dnd forum and not dedicated to one particular edition it wouldn't be surprising that there would be a slight bias toward the shiny new in print edition of the game.


----------



## Rel

Echohawk said:


> I'm reasonably sure that it is against the forum rules to discuss moderation decisions in the manner that is occurring here. I respectfully suggest that if you have an issue with the moderation of a particular thread, that you take it up privately with the moderators involved.




Indeed that is a rule and if Shadeydm had a problem with how it was handled then he is more than welcome to e-mail me about it.

However, what I find particularly amusing about this case, is that Wisdom Penalty WAS BANNED.  No, I didn't say, "That's it, jerk.  You're banned for three days." right there in the thread.  But the comment was uncalled for, way out of line, and he deserved the banning he got.

If you find it a useful data point for this thread, I am moderately pro-4e.


----------



## garyh

It seems slightly anti-4e to me.  The reason being I frequent 4e threads and see lots of anti-4e posts from anti-4e posters, and I no longer frequent 3e threads, so I don't know if pro-4e folks are doing the same there.


----------



## MoogleEmpMog

Slightly anti-4e, although that's almost certainly a "squeaky wheel" issue rather than a reflection of the actual demographics.


----------



## Herschel

Rolflyn said:


> To tell the truth, I almost quit ENWorld because it seemed so pro-4e that it was difficult to stay. Then, I discovered that there were only a few people that were causing this impression, and so I stayed and even started posting. As time goes by, my opinion has changed. What do others think? What is your impression of the prevailing attitude of ENWorld.




I'd say perception does not equal reality. In many of the threads I read, I notice all the "3E whiner victims trying to claim everyone is trying to tell them how to play their game." In the same vein, a lot of the writing styles are similar to those "RPG-only whiners" who were typographically screaming on the minis boards about how miniatures needs to cater more (*or only) to them. 

In reality, the more you look, the more you find it's a pretty diverse crowd, you just notice things more based on personal bias/preference until you look longer and deeper than you may want, or quite frankly, have time for. But it's there and well represented.


----------



## Eridanis

Moving thread to Meta.
Since Rel has commented, I'll chime in, as well.



Obryn said:


> I think it's paranoid in the extreme to think ENWorld's moderators have any horse in the race other than smooth board operation.




Exactly so.



Fifth Element said:


> Don't count on it. A lot of moderator activity takes place privately, behind the scenes. I've discussed this with the mods before - not all warnings and bans are revealed in-thread. Often the offending poster is dealt with directly, with no publicity, so to speak.




Correct, as well. That's how we've handled things for years, and we continue to do so when we can. In many cases, though, a post is so egregious that we need to take steps to edit it before it causes a larger flamewar. In a perfect world, we'd be able to wait for someone to email us back when we ask a question about what they mean, and so forth. But the fact is, we have a lot of posts, and a lot of posters, and moderating is what we do when we're (ahem) doing our real jobs. We can't spend all day by the phone, so to speak. 



Shadeydm said:


> Very well however I expect if that thread had been critical of 4E instead of thread crapping being deleted it would simply have been locked and gone bye bye.




In practice, it's quite rare for an entire thread to be locked. We prefer to have free discussion, and usually banning a problem poster will allow a discussion to get back on track. Sometimes we have to, of course, but it tends to be a last resort used if multiple people ignore warnings to back off. We don't care if a thread's pro- or anti- anything. We want people to have civil discourse.



Obryn said:


> Well, the moderators - AFAIK - have absolutely zero financial stake in ENWorld.  It's not a paid job.  Really, the only person who does that I know of is Morrus.  Frankly, Russ is about the last person I could see encouraging moderators to moderate differently based on (of all things) edition preference.




I've been a moderator for nearly six years, and not once in all that time has Morrus asked us moderators, either in the mod forum or by email, to weigh financial considerations or edition preference when we moderate. (Frankly, if he ever said such  thing, we'd be on the first plane to the UK to see where the pod people had taken the real Russ to.*) We're here to make sure ENworld is a fun and useful place for people to talk about their favorite game. That's our goal, and none of us have an axe to grind one way or another. Also, the full extent of my "pay" was a few pdfs a few years back. We don't do this for pay. We do it because we want to. And for the pun wars in the mod forum. 

As for bias? I'm not a rabid fan of 4E, but I'm not anti-4E. I look forward to trying it myself one of these days, when I find enough people willing to play it. A game is a game is an excuse for friends to get together. Whatever facilitates that is cool by me - and by all my fellow mods and admins, I feel safe to say.

* Hmm.. sounds like a good Gameday one-shot. Hmm...


----------



## nimisgod

Definitely slightly more anti-4E to me. I used to go to the General RPG discussion forum "alls the times." But nowadays, certain threads drive me to seclusion in the 4E rules forum/cave more often than not.


----------



## mmu1

Eridanis said:


> I've been a moderator for nearly six years, and not once in all that time has Morrus asked us moderators, either in the mod forum or by email, to weigh financial considerations or edition preference when we moderate. (Frankly, if he ever said such  thing, we'd be on the first plane to the UK to see where the pod people had taken the real Russ to.*) We're here to make sure ENworld is a fun and useful place for people to talk about their favorite game. That's our goal, and none of us have an axe to grind one way or another. Also, the full extent of my "pay" was a few pdfs a few years back. We don't do this for pay. We do it because we want to. And for the pun wars in the mod forum.




I never said he did. In fact, I specifically said I _didn't_ think it affected moderation.

However, I think it's impossible NOT to favor a new edition when you run a website such as this, and paying for it all is an issue.


----------



## LightPhoenix

mmu1 said:


> However, I think it's impossible NOT to favor a new edition when you run a website such as this, and paying for it all is an issue.




Paying for the site has, to my recollection, always been an issue irregardless of edition.


----------



## Negflar2099

I didn't vote because I have no idea what you mean by biased. This isn't a news program, it's a message board. It doesn't have to present both sides or give equal weight to every opinion. It's just a place for people to express their own feelings about role-playing games. If you're saying that do I feel a majority of the posters favor 4e or not well that's a different question. If you're saying do I feel the people who run the board favor one side or the other well that's a different question too. 

Frankly like many people this Edition Wars thing frustrates me. I can't believe this stuff is still going on six months later. I bought 4e and I enjoy it. I don't see why that has to upset anyone or why that steps on anybody's toes. I come to these boards so I can answer specific questions about the rules or see what other people have come up with for their game. Instead I get Edition Wars crap. 

I don't go into the 3e boards and bad mouth the players there but I see that all the time in the 4e boards. For those who hate 4e I'm sorry but don't try to ruin my experience just because you don't like 4e. If that's what you mean by bias than I guess the boards are biased.


----------



## Plane Sailing

diaglo said:


> Plane Sailing has admitted to a 4Elovefest. read the Understanding change thread by Truename.




I think you are drawing more from my comments in that thread than are warranted! I am an early adopter by nature, that is true - and I was very keen for 4e to arrive. However, after playing it for 6-7 months I'm finding less and less I like about 4e, from fundamental design philosophy upwards.

Less a 4Elovefest and more a 4Eblinddatewhichdidntworkout, if you know what I mean.

Apart from that, it's as Eridanis said.

Cheers


----------



## noretoc

silver_wizard said:


> I too perceived a strong pro-4E aura here. It was so unbearable that it actually drove me away ("plenty of other forums, no need to waste time" and so on). I have recently started to check the posts here a bit more seriously (as opposed to the "oh, let's just check enworld for a few seconds, on the off chance that something useful and interesting might be found" mentality I had adopted during this time), and things have started to even up a bit. Let's see...




This is exactly what I did.  Today is my first real visit back.  I was surprised to see I was not the only one.


----------



## diaglo

Plane Sailing said:


> Less a 4Elovefest and more a 4Eblinddatewhichdidntworkout, if you know what I mean.




you could always go back to OD&D(1974)


----------



## Plane Sailing

diaglo said:


> you could always go back to OD&D(1974)




Nah, my go-to game from the 1970's is Runequest2!


----------



## Arnwyn

Negflar2099 said:


> I don't go into the 3e boards and bad mouth the players there but I see that all the time in the 4e boards.



Yeah, that would suck if wankers showed up on the "D&D 4th Edition Rules" forum and thread-crapped.


----------



## hewligan

I voted pro-4e, anti-3e. I agree that this was much worse a few months ago, to the point where I almost took my PbP game to another set of forums. It was not that the anti-3e sentiment that I felt a few months ago ever infect my game thread, it was just that I never found myself coming to the site except for my game post so the logical idea was that I should move to a forum that I frequented for other purposes.

I do, however, think things have calmed down quite a bit on here over the last few months. I even read the main forum again, which I avoided for a long time. There are still 4e vs 3e threads, but less of them (there was a stage where that was all you could find), and some reasoned discussion has returned.

I think the main page is still quite pro 4e, but it is Morrus's labour of love, and he is a 4e fan and he has the right to focus on whatever he wants.

I still like this site. I went through a period of hating it a bit, but I feel the love returning a little.


----------



## Morrus

hewligan said:


> I think the main page is still quite pro 4e, but it is Morrus's labour of love, and he is a 4e fan and he has the right to focus on whatever he wants.




Not at all.  I post what news is sent to me.

Unfortunately, it's pretty much impossible to post about new 3E products from WotC, unless I invent fake news.  The news is what it is - it's about what IS happening, not what we WANT to happen.  And, unfortunately for all the 3E fans out there, there IS more 4E news than there is 3E.  

I include _Pathfinder_ news when there is any; I include any 3E news sent to me by 3rd-party publishers.  I include EN Publishing's own news, which is all 3E (_War of the Burning Sky_ is for 3.5).  

But no, I don't _create_ the news; I just report it.


----------



## Morrus

Shadeydm said:


> No I am saying that pro 4E and anti 4E commentary are moderated differently. I would love to see stats on the subject like pro 4E threads locked vs edited and anti 4E threads locked vs edited




You are absolutely correct.

Now think about _why_ that might be.

Anti-4E threads tend to get moderated more often than pro-4E threads.  This is because Anti-ANYTHING threads tend to get moderated more than Pro-anything threads.  

The reason for that is very, very simple.  An anti-anything thread is far mroe likely to have arguments in it than a pro-anything thread.  

Negative threads get moderated more because they tend to contain more examples of rule-breaking.  

Nobody is ever going to get moderated for saying "I love 3E".


----------



## hewligan

Morrus said:


> Not at all.  I post what news is sent to me.
> 
> Unfortunately, it's pretty much impossible to post about new 3E products from WotC, unless I invent fake news.  The news is what it is - it's about what IS happening, not what we WANT to happen.  And, unfortunately for all the 3E fans out there, there IS more 4E news than there is 3E.
> 
> I include _Pathfinder_ news when there is any; I include any 3E news sent to me by 3rd-party publishers.  I include EN Publishing's own news, which is all 3E (_War of the Burning Sky_ is for 3.5).
> 
> But no, I don't _create_ the news; I just report it.




Well if that is the cast then the impetus is on people like me to send you through more links when we hear of news on Pathfinder, KoboldQ, OpenDesign,  RPGSuperstar, etc.


----------



## diaglo

Morrus said:


> Nobody is ever going to get moderated for saying "I love 3E".




i love OD&D(1974)


----------



## Morrus

hewligan said:


> Well if that is the cast then the impetus is on people like me to send you through more links when we hear of news on Pathfinder, KoboldQ, OpenDesign, RPGSuperstar, etc.




I'm fairly sure I have't missed anything (except for over Xmas) on any of those four tihngs in particular.


----------



## Kzach

Morrus said:


> But no, I don't _create_ the news; I just report it.




Well if you want to be commercially viable, you should really take a few cues from Fox News and start getting creative


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

The switch from the "Search cloud" to the "Tag cloud" knocked Pathfinder down a peg or two.

I can't decide if that's a pro-4e bias or an anti SSOASS bias. 

I miss seeing SSOASS over on the right. I used to whisper it to myself every time I got agitated. "This thread is SSOASS."


----------



## Quartz

To me, the board seems to be pro 4e and pro 3e, and negative comments attract the attention of mods. That seems to throw a lot of people.


----------



## Morrus

Wulf Ratbane said:


> The switch from the "Search cloud" to the "Tag cloud" knocked Pathfinder down a peg or two.




Te dfference is that the "Tag Search Cloud" showed which tags in the cloud were being clicked on - so an established tag was only ever going to grow larger.  Pretty pointless.

The Tag Cloud shows which tags are being _used_.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

Morrus said:


> The Tag Cloud shows which tags are being _used_.




Gotcha.

Ergo ENworld is biased first and foremost to D&D, with a tie for 2nd place between 4e and House Rules...?


----------



## love.christine

I play D&D (well, GM mostly).

Doesn't matter which edition it is.


----------



## Nifft

diaglo said:


> i love OD&D(1974)



 Reported.


----------



## Dinkeldog

No, I didn't read all 5 pages, but while this looks like a near normal distribution, I should point out that this is an internet poll which is self-selecting and therefore can't be used for research purposes.  (Hey, I'm starting a business statistics analysis class tomorrow and I've got to get the wording down pat.)


----------



## frankthedm

Enworld is a polite board, but 4E deserves impolite criticism. Thus giving 4E it's due respect runs afoul of the board.


----------



## Rel

frankthedm said:


> Enworld is a polite board, but 4E deserves impolite criticism. Thus giving 4E it's due respect runs afoul of the board.




I guess it's best then for you to observe the "If you can't say something nice then don't say anything at all" rule.


----------



## Umbran

frankthedm said:


> Enworld is a polite board, but 4E deserves impolite criticism.




4e is a game, dude.  You can't be polite or impolite to a game.  

The people don't deserve impoliteness, no matter what edition they play.


----------



## Dinkeldog

Something to keep in mind here:

While the distribution is looking fairly normal, the poll as a whole doesn't mean anything because it's self-selecting.  It's useful for entertainment value, but is neither predictive nor does it prove any hypothesis.


----------



## DaveMage

Dinkeldog said:


> Something to keep in mind here:
> 
> While the distribution is looking fairly normal, the poll as a whole doesn't mean anything because it's self-selecting.  It's useful for entertainment value, but is neither predictive nor does it prove any hypothesis.




Are you TRYING to cast "Summon Treebore" or what?


----------



## Duskblade

All 3E all the time.


----------



## Roman

There was a very strong pro 4E/anti 3.xE bias on ENWorld some months back and I felt the moderation was also biased. It got so bad, I was essentially driven away from the site coming back only occassionally and not posting anything. Moderation improved dramatically pretty fast though and pretty quickly ceased being biased at all (at least in my eyes). The site was still hostile to 3E/3.5E due to some vocal posters, but this tendency tended to diminish over time and things are much, much better now - hence I visit the site more often again, though not as much as prior to the edition schism. 

(Note: I did not vote on the poll, because it is closed.)


----------



## Dinkeldog

Roman said:


> There was a very strong pro 4E/anti 3.xE bias on ENWorld some months back and I felt the moderation was also biased. It got so bad, I was essentially driven away from the site coming back only occassionally and not posting anything. Moderation improved dramatically pretty fast though and pretty quickly ceased being biased at all (at least in my eyes). The site was still hostile to 3E/3.5E due to some vocal posters, but this tendency tended to diminish over time and things are much, much better now - hence I visit the site more often again, though not as much as prior to the edition schism.
> 
> (Note: I did not vote on the poll, because it is closed.)




The funny thing there is that the mods aren't all pro-4E or anti-4E.  What I think is really going on is that those that are most adamant about their edition choice are also least willing to accept that someone else might prefer something else.  That's human nature.


----------



## Morrus

Roman said:


> There was a very strong pro 4E/anti 3.xE bias on ENWorld some months back and I felt the moderation was also biased. It got so bad, I was essentially driven away from the site coming back only occassionally and not posting anything. Moderation improved dramatically pretty fast though and pretty quickly ceased being biased at all (at least in my eyes).




Moderation hasn't changed one iota.  What _has_ changed is the nature of the threads.  There are less arguments about it.


----------



## Roman

Dinkeldog said:


> The funny thing there is that the mods aren't all pro-4E or anti-4E.  What I think is really going on is that those that are most adamant about their edition choice are also least willing to accept that someone else might prefer something else.  That's human nature.




They are no longer pro or anti 4E that is true. But in the immediate aftermath of 4E's release (or perhaps it was just before 4E's release - I no longer remember) I do recall a bias. I was reading several nasty threads and it was generally the pro-3E people that got banned/reprimanded/whatever even when their behavior was not as bad as that of the pro-4E people who got off scott free in the same threads. Luckily, that situation with moderation didn't last long, but the bad atmosphere on the boards lasted much longer and to some extent still exists, but it has diminished substantially. 



Morrus said:


> Moderation hasn't changed one iota.  What _has_ changed is the nature of the threads.  There are less arguments about it.




You are Morrus, the owner of the site, and furthermore I like you, so I am not going to argue with you on this matter, but I remember what I remember... In any case, I don't want to dredge the topic of this brief period of what I think was bad moderation up any further - it only brings back bad memories (even though I wasn't directly affected) and in general (excluding this brief period) the moderation on ENWorld has been excellent, so this is my last post on the topic. 

But yes, the number of arguments has thankfully greatly diminished as has the vehemence. It was so bad with the vicious arguments that at one point, even though I have been a gamer for most of my life, I was considering leaving not just the boards but also what had previously been a relatively friendly hobby if I ever had to move far away and thus lose my gaming groups (the atmosphere at my groups was luckily not affected by the edition wars). Luckily, this is no longer an issue, as the heat has gone down to an acceptable level now. I feel it is still more hostile than it used to be before the edition schism, but nowhere near as bad as in its immediate aftermath.


----------



## Plane Sailing

Roman said:


> the pro-3E people that got banned/reprimanded/whatever even when their behavior was not as bad as that of the pro-4E people




Just wanted to say that it was unlikely that any pro-3E or pro-4e people got banned or reprimanded.

That tended to be reserved for the anti-3E or anti-4E people...

Cheers


----------



## Mark

Roman said:
			
		

> (. . .)





Welcome back!


----------



## Ginnel

I hid in the Hive its so comfy there, well I didn't hide exactly my enthusiasm for reading the general boards drifted 

Things seemed to have died down a bit now but people are still being asshats as demonstrated in this and other threads, the site itself is not pro or anti anything, a logical unbiased look at the site can show that.

Chill out, enjoy the discussions and stop being an asshat about things


----------



## Morrus

Plane Sailing said:


> Just wanted to say that it was unlikely that any pro-3E or pro-4e people got banned or reprimanded.
> 
> That tended to be reserved for the anti-3E or anti-4E people...
> 
> Cheers




That's a fairly succinct summary.  Anti-people usually end up on thw wrong end of moderation; pro-people do not.


----------



## pawsplay

I think because many 3e people were unhappy about the change-over, criticizing 4e was a real dry thatch plus match issue. So I will put forward that I feel, for a time, pro-3e, critical of 4e people had to endure a certain level of stifling. When I say stifling, I mean only that certain lines of conversation were not as free, not that I think any person was ill-treated. I remember the moderation being fair, even patient. It is unfortunate that 3e fans were not able to be as vocal as they might like, but I do not think that was caused by the moderators or even necessarily by anti-3e posters. Rather, I think it was a function of the context (edition changeover), the politeness level this board calibrates for, and the topic flammability.

While it is not possible to be rude to a game, frank discussion is more likely to cross the lines of politeness, as experienced by any given person. So I can see what frankthedm is saying, to an extent. But I think 4e can be criticized strongly but in a fashion that is respectful to other posters, and I have faith in the moderation team to respond fairly to people posting in good faith. 

I am pleasantly surprised at how quickly the boards have returned to normalcy.


----------



## JoeGKushner

Roman said:


> There was a very strong pro 4E/anti 3.xE bias on ENWorld some months back and I felt the moderation was also biased. It got so bad, I was essentially driven away from the site coming back only occassionally and not posting anything. Moderation improved dramatically pretty fast though and pretty quickly ceased being biased at all (at least in my eyes). The site was still hostile to 3E/3.5E due to some vocal posters, but this tendency tended to diminish over time and things are much, much better now - hence I visit the site more often again, though not as much as prior to the edition schism.
> 
> (Note: I did not vote on the poll, because it is closed.)




I'll have to go the 180 route and say that I was reminded (wisely) by moderators severlal times on the anti-4e crowds that if I didn't want to be involved in the wars to just not read those threads so I'm going to completely disagree with you.


----------



## Lanefan

3e?  Bah!
4e?  Bah!

The poll has no option for "too pro-3e *and* too pro-4e".  It needs one; not that it matters, seeing as it's closed now anyway....

But where's the love for 1e, other than right here? 

Lanefan


----------



## Rel

Lanefan said:


> But where's the love for 1e, other than right here?
> 
> Lanefan




Dragonsfoot?


----------



## diaglo

Rel said:


> Dragonsfoot?




nah. Grognards


----------



## Relique du Madde

I noticed the expired poll has no option for Mutants and Masterminds. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  I feel unloved.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Rel said:


> Dragonsfoot?




I think diaglo stole all the love and kept it for himself.  



> I noticed the expired poll has no option for Mutants and Masterminds.  I feel unloved.



Don't worry, it's just because you _are_.  


Spoiler



Just a fellow Hivers pick...[


----------



## Lanefan

diaglo said:


> nah. Grognards



Checked it out - signed up - doesn't seem all that active...

Thanks for the tip, though.

Lanefan


----------

