# Can I ask why people do this?



## Album Cover X (May 31, 2004)

I've lurked on these boards a while and had a previous ID before that. This place is often a great resource.

But when a thread like this one appears some in the community stop being helpful and start making people feel like an outsider. In the thread I've referred to, a poster asked how you pronounce "Drow". Big deal. So the topic has come up a few times. Personally, I don't care how it's pronounced. But a member of this community felt it necessary to ask and I think he or she is entitled to answers of those who wish to respond.

If a new poster comes here and begins a thread like "Rangers are underpowered" or "The Magic system needs overhauling" they should be allowed to without being made to feel like they've broken some cardinal rule. It might be this person's first post or first time they ever began a thread. And even tho most of us might have participated or viewed a similar discussion 5, 10, or 100 times, don't we owe it to the person who may never have? They could be brand-new to RPGs and somehow located this site and their first real taste of ENWorld is a bunch of people saying "Oh no. not this again."

Before I typed this, there were 67 posts in the aforementioned thread. I count over 10 that basically say "Oh no. not this again." How is that helping anyone except to say, "Hey I've been here longer than you." So big deal - your gold star is in the mail.

Honestly, I'm not trying to start a problem. Just trying to show that we all can be more forgiving of new members. If a post has been done to death and you've said all you wanted to about the subject then don't post to it. Let those who haven't get their chance.

What's that phrase??? "Nothing new under the sun." It could be argued that every thread has been done before or something similiar.

Am I off base in feeling this way???


----------



## Nightfall (May 31, 2004)

Yes but we keep getting the same people that answer it...and THEY get tired of seeing it too. 

I mean how many times can you ask the same question before someone, anyone, just says "ENOUGH!"


----------



## EricNoah (May 31, 2004)

You're right -- in my opinion, the people who have seen a topic before should either point folks to a thread where an enlightening answer can be found, or participate in a positive manner, or else they should just butt out.  "We've seen this before" isn't helpful to anyone.  

If "search" were available to all I think we might be able to reasonably expect folks to do a smidge of research before asking a possibly common question, but since only community supporters have that privelege, it's inevitable that many of the same questions will get repeated over time.  

As you might expect, the subject of "repeated questions" has come up before; check this thread for more thoughts from me (and others):  http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=77764&highlight=question


----------



## Morrus (May 31, 2004)

I agree - it's not a nice way to greet someone new.  Just because someone has seen a similar thread before doesn't mean that everyone has.

A good rule of thumb is this: if you see a thread which covers things you've been through before, and you have no interest in going through it again, then just ignore the thread.  Going out of your way just to post "Oh no, not again" is pretty rude.

There will always be plenty of people who haven't had that particular discussion before, and who may well enjoy having it.  Let them.


----------



## EricNoah (May 31, 2004)

Heh.  And as usual, Russ and I share one brain.  Whee!!


----------



## Morrus (May 31, 2004)

Simultaneous posting of the same stuff - an even more interesting conversation than the one about repeated posting of the same stuff!

Although, technically, I was a few seconds later.


----------



## Hand of Evil (May 31, 2004)

If I was one I apologize.


----------



## EricNoah (May 31, 2004)

I forgot to address the "why" part of the question -- my theory is that some people would rather look "clever" than be "nice"; it's the geek's curse!  Telling the world how worn out a topic is shows the world that the poster has been around a long time, I guess, and that somehow earns him some bragging rights.


----------



## Ashwyn (May 31, 2004)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> As you might expect, the subject of "repeated questions" has come up before; check this thread for more thoughts from me (and others):  http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=77764&highlight=question



Oh god, not this again.


----------



## Crothian (May 31, 2004)

I agree.  It seems pointless and people seem to foget that just becasue I may have seen the thread a hundred times before does not mean that other people have as well.  I see a lot of threads come by again and again.  Sometimes I help when I can but othertime I just ignoire it becasue I do tire of some topics.  

But I always love the Ranger got the Shaft threads!!


----------



## hong (May 31, 2004)

Roll on 4E.


----------



## Teflon Billy (May 31, 2004)

Album Cover X said:
			
		

> If a new poster comes here and begins a thread like "Rangers are underpowered" or "The Magic system needs overhauling" they should be allowed to without being made to feel like they've broken some cardinal rule.




I totally agree with you man.You'll notice I didn't post to that thread because three times is my limit. I figure--unless the topic is near and dear to my heart--After three times I just let the new blood decide for themselves whether a "Paladin can kill a baby orc" or whatever.



> It might be this person's first post or first time they ever began a thread. And even tho most of us might have participated or viewed a similar discussion 5, 10, or 100 times, don't we owe it to the person who may never have?




In my opinion, yes we do.



> They could be brand-new to RPGs and somehow located this site and their first real taste of ENWorld is a bunch of people saying "Oh no. not this again."
> 
> So big deal - your gold star is in the mail.




Whoa! _free gold star_!



> Honestly, I'm not trying to start a problem. Just trying to show that we all can be more forgiving of new members... Am I off base in feeling this way???




Nope, sounds like you have your head screwed on allright to me.


----------



## Album Cover X (May 31, 2004)

Teflon Billy said:
			
		

> Nope, sounds like you have your head screwed on allright to me.




Thanks Billy and everyone else... I figured I wasn't the only one... but this is probably my limit for making sense for awhile...

I've met my quota


----------



## BSF (May 31, 2004)

This is one that bugs me as well. If you are tired of seeing the thread topic, don't read and don't post.  No big deal.  You don't need to try to belittle the person for asking.  

Hey Russ, maybe it would be a good reminder of etiquette in the Rules?


----------



## monkeygrrl (Jun 1, 2004)

Album Cover X said:
			
		

> Am I off base in feeling this way???





nah, you're not off base, and to be honest this kind of 'tude is one of the reasons I mostly lurk around here instead of posting much.


----------



## HellHound (Jun 1, 2004)

Your statement is 100% on-target.

I left an on-line community that was VERY near and dear to me because of rude behaviour being launched towards anyone who dared to ask a simple question that had been asked before.

rec.arts.bodyart became a refuge for old r.a.b.bits and curmudgeons who would rather flame newbies than be helpful.


----------



## Mathew_Freeman (Jun 3, 2004)

I've found that because I'm not interested in going over the same topics again and again, my rate of posting has decreased somewhat. But then, that's to be expected.

As hong says, when 4e gets released (whenever that may be, and I hope it's a good long way away) then we'll all have a new bunch of things to argue over.

I'm glad to see that "Monks are rubbish" threads seemed to have died off somewhat.


----------



## mroberon1972 (Jun 3, 2004)

These points are made especially true since newcommers don't have a search tool for us to direct them to.

How could they even have a chance of knowing?


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jun 3, 2004)

Album Cover X said:
			
		

> In the thread I've referred to, a poster asked how you pronounce "Drow". Big deal. So the topic has come up a few times.




I agree, totally, but in the defense of ENworlders everywhere this type of replies happens very rarely compared to other boards.  Honestly, I’ve been a member on one board where mention certain topics, from a game, where not open for debate and the moderators would close the thread.  

If you want to see how this works I’ll drop a link and the subject line and you can watch the “fun” begin.  

This board is one of the friendliest you will honestly ever find.


----------



## Wrath of the Swarm (Jun 4, 2004)

If a question has been asked and answered many, many times, it's generally possible to learn this through a search.

Obviously this principle doesn't apply as well to EN World, where searches are restricted to members, but on many boards people will show up and ask questions they could easily have answered with a quick scan.  Complaining that the question has shown up before makes the person aware of this and rebukes them for not checking first.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 4, 2004)

Actually, complaining about it doesn't do that.  Politely informing them to use the search would accomplish that.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jun 4, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Actually, complaining about it doesn't do that.  Politely informing them to use the search would accomplish that.




I couldn't agree more, but this isn't about other message boards...  This is about ENworld, one of the nicer and friendlier boards I've ever run across from.  

Being rude isn't tolerated, and I'm quite proud of the fact...  Hey everyone’s quick to say that post count doesn't matter but when I have 4600 plus posts here and like 66 on WoTC forum I think you can see that it indeed does count for something.


----------



## Wrath of the Swarm (Jun 4, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Actually, complaining about it doesn't do that.  Politely informing them to use the search would accomplish that.



  But there's really no way to do that without, in actuality, being insulting.  At best you can hide that consequence deep enough in implication that some people won't notice it.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jun 4, 2004)

Wrath of the Swarm said:
			
		

> But there's really no way to do that without, in actuality, being insulting.




People end wars via the written word I think showing and asking someone to use the search feature isn't nearly as hard.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 4, 2004)

Wrath of the Swarm said:
			
		

> But there's really no way to do that without, in actuality, being insulting.  At best you can hide that consequence deep enough in implication that some people won't notice it.



+

Sure there is.

"This is actually a question that has been brought up a few times before.  If you could please run a search on it (or go to the links I found when I did a search on it listed below) you should have your questions answered.  If, however, your questions are not answered then please ask them after reading the other other threads."


----------



## Bloodstone Press (Jun 4, 2004)

First the why is this: 
Some people have low self-esteem and look for ways to belittle other people as a method propping up their own self-concept. By saying in effect "I'm better than you because I've been here longer/seen that discussion already/already argued that to death." they are making themselves feel good.



> Complaining that the question has shown up before makes the person aware of this and rebukes them for not checking first.




 I don't think anyone should ever be rebuked for asking a question. Even if it has been asked a million times before. Have you ever trained someone to do a difficult task at work? At which point do you start "rebuking" them for asking the same question too many times? 

 Furthermore, it is morally wrong to rebuke someone for not doing something that they are not capable of doing in the first place (searching old threads) 



> But there's really no way to do that without, in actuality, being insulting. At best you can hide that consequence deep enough in implication that some people won't notice it.




 First, I doubt there is anyone on these boards more skilled in handing out verbal beat-downs than myself, and I have to completely disagree with you on this. Being polite is not impossible, it is only more difficult for some of us than others. 

 For example: 
 you might post a thread asking about the prevalence of gamer girls. 

I might say " Hi WotS. Did you know this topic has been discussed before? If you would like to read those discussions, here are the links [insert links found via searching]   "

 I might say " This topic comes up every few months and it usually results in people saying things like [insert various comments I remember from previous threads]  " 

 There is no reason for me to say things that imply I think that I am in some way "better than you" because I simply happen to have seen similar discussions in the past. 

 Really though, the problem is that the impersonality of text communication lends itself to perceived insults and supposed affronts. Therefore, we should always go the extra mile to be as polite as possible. Make generous use of the "  " and don't make accusatory statements. Couch your language with phrases like "I think" and "maybe" and "perhaps." Be careful not to act aloof or superior. Say “we” rather than “you,”  if at all possible. 

 Being condescending, aloof, intimidating, accusatory, presumptive, and belligerent are tactics you use when you are looking for a fight. They shouldn't be used here. 

And, of course, if we don't have anything nice to say, we probably shouldn't say anything at all.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 4, 2004)

and Bloodstone Press makes it to my "likes" list.  Nicely put, very good, Sir, very good.


----------



## Wrath of the Swarm (Jun 4, 2004)

Bloodstone Press said:
			
		

> Furthermore, it is morally wrong to rebuke someone for not doing something that they are not capable of doing in the first place (searching old threads)



  Quite right.  Which is why I said that point doesn't apply to EN World as much as other boards.

In hindsight, perhaps making the search function available only to members wasn't such a hot idea, but them's the breaks.



> I might say " Hi WotS. Did you know this topic has been discussed before? If you would like to read those discussions, here are the links [insert links found via searching]   "
> 
> I might say " This topic comes up every few months and it usually results in people saying things like [insert various comments I remember from previous threads]  "



  Implied subtext:  WotS is unable to perform a simple search and needs this function pointed out to him in extremely basic terms.

The happy faces just make it worse, man.



> And, of course, if we don't have anything nice to say, we probably shouldn't say anything at all.



  Such a strategy, if implemented, would bring the world of discourse crashing to a halt.  I recommend avoiding this at all costs.


----------



## Piratecat (Jun 4, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> and Bloodstone Press makes it to my "likes" list.  Nicely put, very good, Sir, very good.




Mine, too. Well put, especially the last part.

This place is only as friendly as we ourselves make it. If we're rude to someone, they paint the entire site with that same brush. I'd much rather have people feel welcomed.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jun 5, 2004)

Wrath of the Swarm said:
			
		

> Implied subtext:  WotS is unable to perform a simple search and needs this function pointed out to him in extremely basic terms.



If somebody posts something that's been discussed a million times, I think it's fair to assume they either don't know how to perform a search or simply aren't aware that they can. So indeed, pointing it out to them in basic terms is what's required.

There's no insult contained in assuming that someone does not know something, just like there's no shame in not knowing something. If you find it embarassing to have your ignorance pointed out to you, that's your business, I'm afraid. Other people cannot be expected to accomodate that idiosyncrasy.

If the person having search functions pointed out to them KNEW about the functions, then presumably they have some reason for not having used them. They can now refine their comments so that the reason for posting a new thread is clear to all readers. If they merely forgot to consider searching, or didn't know they could, then the appropriate response on their part is, "Thank you."

Nobody's gotten insulted here. I don't see why you would feel insulted in a similar case.


----------



## Wrath of the Swarm (Jun 5, 2004)

Perhaps it's more a matter of vocal inflections and the like that aren't present in messageboard settings.  Clearly, there's a difference between

"Why don't you go look it up?"
and
"Why don't you go look it up?"

that text really doesn't convey.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jun 5, 2004)

Which is why we should always give the benefit of the doubt to other posters and try our best to not be insulted by the presumed inflection of posts, but rather deal with just their content.


----------



## Wolf72 (Jun 5, 2004)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> Heh.  And as usual, Russ and I share one brain.  Whee!!




I knew it!!

I knew it!!

there are way to many spinoff's on that that statement ... fortunately for you it's only 7:30 EST, and I still can't focus my eyes just yet ... let alone think of a snappy comeback.


----------



## Wrath of the Swarm (Jun 5, 2004)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> Which is why we should always give the benefit of the doubt to other posters and try our best to not be insulted by the presumed inflection of posts, but rather deal with just their content.



_Brilliant_ insight, Barsoomcore!  With that depth of understanding, you should seek out a position ending the strife in the Middle East!  Why, I'm sure that you'd have the conflict ended in a day or two with your boundless and profound grasp of interpersonal communication.

(Obviously your suggestion has a few problems.)


----------



## Bloodstone Press (Jun 5, 2004)

> Implied subtext: WotS is unable to perform a simple search and needs this function pointed out to him in extremely basic terms.




 I think the implied subtext is that WotS does not have access to the search function (here on EN World, since that is what we are talking about), and so someone who does have access has gone the extra mile to help him out. 



> The happy faces just make it worse, man.




 Perhaps in isolated cases, especially those where the reader is already on the defensive. I think in general, most people find the happy faces useful in assessing the writer's tone. More often that not the happy face is disarming, not smarmy. 



> Such a strategy, if implemented, would bring the world of discourse crashing to a halt. I recommend avoiding this at all costs.




 This isn't Discourse World, its EN World. 

 Several years ago I used to hang out here under other screen names and I got into plenty of flame wars. I've also had more than my share of flame wars though other avenues not related to this site. 

 I can say with absolute certainty that since Morrus and the mods started cracking down on them, this is a much more pleasant place to hang out. I can remember when nearly every discussion on this site eventually devolved into a flame war. 

 You can disagree with someone without insulting them. People do it all the time here now. 



> Perhaps it's more a matter of vocal inflections and the like that aren't present in messageboard settings. Clearly, there's a difference between
> 
> "Why don't you go look it up?"
> and
> ...




 that's what I was talking about when I said 


> the problem is that the impersonality of text communication lends itself to perceived insults and supposed affronts. Therefore, we should always go the extra mile to be as polite as possible.




 Try this: 
 "Why don't you go look it up?   "
Vs 
"Why don't you go look it up?" 

  Now the ambiguity is reduced. Clearly, the first statement is more friendly and passive than the second. Don't you agree? 

 Of course a better statement would be something like:
"Do you have access to the search function? If not, I can look it up for you.   " 



> Brilliant insight, Barsoomcore! With that depth of understanding, you should seek out a position ending the strife in the Middle East! Why, I'm sure that you'd have the conflict ended in a day or two with your boundless and profound grasp of interpersonal communication.
> 
> (Obviously your suggestion has a few problems.)




 Being smarmy is also a combative tactic, and you don't need the additional phrase in parentheses to make your insult clear. 

 A quick lesson in flaming: 
The more subtle and cerebral your insult, the more it burns. Having to explain your insult only makes you look shallow and petty.


----------



## hong (Jun 5, 2004)

Wrath of the Swarm said:
			
		

> _Brilliant_ insight, Barsoomcore!  With that depth of understanding, you should seek out a position ending the strife in the Middle East!  Why, I'm sure that you'd have the conflict ended in a day or two with your boundless and profound grasp of interpersonal communication.
> 
> (Obviously your suggestion has a few problems.)




Hello, Wrath.

Go away.

ThaADVANCEnks!


----------



## Bloodstone Press (Jun 5, 2004)

crothian said:
			
		

> and Bloodstone Press makes it to my "likes" list. Nicely put, very good, Sir, very good.




 mission accomplished!   



			
				Piratecat said:
			
		

> Well put, especially the last part.




Thanks.   

 After being engaged in countless arguments, I decided to spend some time thinking about why arguments are so prone to this format. When Chuck Rice and I got into it a little last January (in the publisher's form) I started thinking seriously about publishing an essay about the hows and whys of message board arguments. It almost always has to do with perceived insults, often not intended by the originator. 

 I can't take full credit for those observations though. much of it comes from principles of conflict reduction/resolution that I studied in psych classes in college.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Jun 5, 2004)

hong, don't you mean "advTHANKSance"?  

But please be more polite to Wrath, or we'll give him the hong-beating stick.


----------



## Wrath of the Swarm (Jun 5, 2004)

Bloodstone Press said:
			
		

> Several years ago I used to hang out here under other screen names and I got into plenty of flame wars. I've also had more than my share of flame wars though other avenues not related to this site.
> 
> I can say with absolute certainty that since Morrus and the mods started cracking down on them, this is a much more pleasant place to hang out. I can remember when nearly every discussion on this site eventually devolved into a flame war.



  And now they crack down before conflict even begins, acting to pre-empt discussions on topics that _might_ devolve into arguments.



> "Why don't you go look it up?   "
> Vs
> "Why don't you go look it up?"
> 
> Now the ambiguity is reduced. Clearly, the first statement is more friendly and passive than the second. Don't you agree?



  No, the contrast of the grin only heightens the ironic subtext.



> A quick lesson in flaming:
> The more subtle and cerebral your insult, the more it burns. Having to explain your insult only makes you look shallow and petty.



  The more subtle and cerebral the insult, the less likely anyone I feel the need to insult will get it.  People who can't perceive glaring inconsistencies in their positions rarely grasp the nuances of a finely tuned snub or mockery, and people who can aren't the people who need to be scorned in the first place.


----------



## Piratecat (Jun 7, 2004)

Just so folks are clear: subtle nastiness and one-upsmanship isn't any more pleasant than blatant insults. There's an end to our patience, and neither are tolerated when folks should know better.


----------



## Michael Morris (Jun 7, 2004)

This thread reminds me of something.  VBulletin currently has a feature called "Similar Threads" which lists similar threads to the one you're viewing automatically.  Nutkinland has it turned on but it's currently turned off here because it increases query times significantly and would slow the server down.  When the new server is set up though maybe we should look into turning the feature on??


----------



## Morrus (Jun 7, 2004)

When we get the new server, I plan to have pretty much every feature on.


----------



## The Voice of Reason (Jun 7, 2004)

Sheesh.  Am I the only person who watched Pleasantville?
Sometimes occasional unpleasantness is a side effect of a valuable form of conflict, and if you try to eliminate unpleasantness, you end up with a bland and worthless world.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jun 8, 2004)

Wrath of the Swarm said:
			
		

> Obviously your suggestion has a few problems.



Name one.

I assume you're attempting to demonstrate irony, perhaps because you believe that I've said something to the effect that irony is impossible in written communication. I in fact said no such thing. I said that we (that being folks posting on ENWorld) should always give our fellow posters the benefit of the doubt and do our best to avoid being insulted by the presumed tone of their comments.

Your ability to overstate a position so dramatically does not justify claims of insult based on tone, at least not in normal posting conversation. My point is that when we feel that the tone of somebody's post is insulting, we owe it to our fellow posters to reconsider that insult and try to respond to the content of the post, rather than the insult we assume is contained within. Posting is a medium too fraught with inaccuracies to do otherwise.

If we (or at least a majority of us) each follow this practice (as I think most people here do), ENWorld will continue to be a pleasant and useful place to exchange ideas, points of view and resources on d20-related matters. You're free to behave otherwise, of course, within the limits imposed by the mods. And indeed, if you think your method (whatever it may be) is more likely to enhance the pleasantness and usefulness of ENWorld, put it forward and let's examine it.

I'm not saying that insult via tone is impossible. I'm saying that when we feel insulted, it is our obligation as good citizens of ENWorld to consider that perhaps the insult is contained in our interpretation, and not in the actual fact of the post itself.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jun 8, 2004)

The Voice of Reason said:
			
		

> If you try to eliminate unpleasantness, you end up with a bland and worthless world.



And if you fail to control unpleasantness, you end up with a bland and worthless world. The goal is to strike a balance that maximises the exchange of conflicting ideas. That's why we have moderators and Eric's Grandma. Rules of conduct make it possible for groups of people to conflict in useful ways.

Now you might feel that the rules here are weighted too far to one side or another, and that's fair enough. But without some kind of rules, you're back to bland and worthless, right?

If you think particular rules here are limiting usefulness, offer suggestions. I promise you people listen to them. Yes, even to The Voice of Reason.


----------



## Piratecat (Jun 8, 2004)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> Name one.




He can't. He's been banned for a variety of reasons. Voice of Reason can't respond, either; it's the same person trying to sneak back in. You know, when someone asks you to leave a party, it's kind of tacky to try and sneak back through the window.

Sorry to create a one-sided discussion, though.


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 8, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Sorry to create a one-sided discussion, though.




Well, you could look for volunteers to take up his position (or rather, something similar to his apparent position).

(See? Helpful!  )


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

His position was just that he was obviously trying to cause problems.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jun 8, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Sorry to create a one-sided discussion, though.



Oh heck, I don't need an audience. I love the sound of my own voice.


----------



## Michael Morris (Jun 8, 2004)

Dude, sign up for a NKL account.  If P-Kitty has kicked you twice, there's probably a reason.  Meanwhile, over at NKL it's fairly rare to be banned - though getting flamed and derided is a very real possibility if you deserve it >


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

THis guys funny!!  

Okay, so do you actually have a point?  You are spouting off a lot of reteric but no real substance?  Are you just mad at PC because he banned you?


----------



## Dinkeldog (Jun 8, 2004)

BreakAWindow, consider this a cease and desist.  Thank you.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

PC does follow the rules, I've been here a long time and obviously spend some time here, more then most people.  Sure, the place isn't perfect but its so much better then any othe r RPG site I've ever seen it isn't even close.  

And back to the point of the topic, you can critize a persons opinion without critising them.  It's called being adult, many people argue over very heated subjects but still remain friends.  Don't take it personally, this is just a message baord.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

BreakAWindow said:
			
		

> Blah, blah, blah.  _(Paraphrase by Dinkeldog.)_




This is completely untrue.  How do I know?  For a few months I was able to read the private threads of the admins and moderators.  And read them I did.  They go out of their way to try to be fair to people.  I don't know what started this, I don't know what names of yours got banned or what the posts were like.  I do know that PC and the others do not ban people for the reasons you suggest.  

Ultimately, you are a guest here.  THis place belongs solely to Morrus and he can and does enforce his rules the way he wants to.  I don't agree with everything he does or that goes on here, but I can still behave becasue I think it's not worth it in the end.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

And your subject is role playing???  

Sure, the mods can and have the authority to do what they want, guess what all admins have this power.  This is nothing new.  If you don't like it, then leave.  I hate to sound rude byut that is the solution to this problem.  This is EN World, not oxcygen...you can live without it.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

BreakAWindow said:
			
		

> Their ideas of fairness seem to be "warn once, then perhaps twice, and if the person still expresses inconvenient or uncomfortably unpleasant opinions, ban him."
> 
> And quite a few number of people consider this to be "solving a problem".  Mostly because they've been heavily selected for.




How many warnings should a disruptive person get? 



> And no one complains because you want to remain here!  You're not willing to risk access to EN World by stating what they're doing is wrong -- you're not even willing to look for the problems, because that would make it too hard to stay.




Not risk EN World?  Not look at the problems?  There is only one person right not listening to you and trying to figure out what the problems are.  I suggest you show me what the problems are and then maybe we can get somewhere.



> If you invite someone in, violate the terms under which you invited them, what makes you think that you can then complain about their not honoring those terms?




You got an personal invitation here?  Most people like myself just found it by acciendent or happenstance.  Again, what terms specifically are you talking about ans where are they being violated?


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

BreakAWindow said:
			
		

> Blah, blah, blah




Grow some skin.  I'm serious, you should hear some of the things publishers herar about their work.  Books they have slaved over, invested money time, and blood into and then when they finally see their dream a reality some one ios screaming its worthless.  I know becasue I've talked to writers and publishers, and I've also called some ones pride and joy crap as a reviewer.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

BreakAWindow said:
			
		

> Define "disruptive".  Disruptive to what?  To whom?
> 
> They define 'disruptive' as they like, without regard for the standards they imposed.




They define the words.  They are the people in charge, they get to do that.  Sorry, but thats the way it works.  And if many people disagreed with them it would get changed.  But most people do agree with them.



> That's forbidden.  Public complaints aren't permitted, and the people I've contacted have no interest in discussing it either.  I doubt you're honestly concerned, yourself... although I admit I could be wrong.




Many people consider it rude to air private complaints in the public.  And I imagine if your e-mails have been like this, I would be tough to get anywhere becasue you are not listening.  You have a perscribed opinion of how things are but you don't seem to have proof.  



> Anyone arriving here is invited to join the community, as long as they follow the rules.  Unless they follow the rules but the mods feel like doing what they like, of course... then they're subject to editing, deletion or banning.




Inviting and finding this place are two different things.  Even Mr Dictionary says so.  And again you are going on and on and on about the unfairness.  But I still don't see it.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

And since you are continue to post using alt IDs after you have been asked to leave just proves PCs point that banning you was a good thing.  You are acting like a person who deserves to get banned does.

And that's the end of my fun here.  I tried to listen, I was patient.  But no more.


----------



## Piratecat (Jun 8, 2004)

Since it's always fun to put things in perspective, out of 18,757 members we have 32 people on the ban list. Those 32 actually consist of about 25 people due to multiple user names for some folks, and more than half of those are folks who showed up once to post spam. All in all, I think it's fair to say that we only ban as a last resort, when the problem can't be resolved through discussion.

In any case, I'll go on record as saying I'm *very* proud of the folks who post here. Most people are great at self-moderating and keeping their tempers, and it makes our jobs much easier. Thank you for that.


----------



## the Jester (Jun 8, 2004)

I have to admit to once (only once, that I recall) getting out of line and insulting another ENWorlder.  After the fact, I felt bad and apologized, but I still got outta line.  In a thread that ended up closed.  After we'd all been quite clearly warned.

So I apologized, and hey, I'm still here.  I like to think that I learned something from that- but enough about me.  My point is, I think we're all treated fairly and I think it's _easy_ to keep it polite.


----------



## Chacal (Jun 8, 2004)

... Nothing to see here...


Chacal


----------



## Piratecat (Jun 8, 2004)

See what happens when the intervening posts get deleted?


----------



## Chacal (Jun 8, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> See what happens when the intervening posts get deleted?



I have no idea of what you're talking about  
..._whistles_...


Chacal


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jun 8, 2004)

the Jester said:
			
		

> I have to admit to once (only once, that I recall) getting out of line and insulting another ENWorlder.  After the fact, I felt bad and apologized, but I still got outta line.  In a thread that ended up closed.  After we'd all been quite clearly warned.




Wait, that was _you_?

We've been trying to figure out who it was, so we can ban him.  I had my money on Crothian - when in doubt, go with the odds, I figured.

-Hyp.


----------



## Bloodstone Press (Jun 8, 2004)

Hmm. I guess all's well that ends well, eh? 

 Kind of sorry I missed his posts. I almost posted a response a few pages ago, attempting to reason with him, but it just wasn't worth it. 

 however, I'd like to just paraphrase one thing from my non-posted post... : 



> And now they crack down before conflict even begins, acting to pre-empt discussions on topics that might devolve into arguments.




 I disagree. I think the mods do a fine job.



> Just so folks are clear: subtle nastiness and one-upsmanship isn't any more pleasant than blatant insults. There's an end to our patience, and neither are tolerated when folks should know better.




 

 he started it.    

 BTW, if he shows up at NKL someone please let me know. I'll gladly go smack him around.


----------



## johnsemlak (Jun 8, 2004)

I spent some time reading the posts in this thread and getting real confused.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Jun 8, 2004)

First, what Kevin said goes for me, too.  We've got some really great users that "get" the type of community we like here, and all of us appreciate that.

Second, John, it doesn't make much more sense with the posts.


----------



## Crothian (Jun 8, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Wait, that was _you_?
> 
> We've been trying to figure out who it was, so we can ban him.  I had my money on Crothian - when in doubt, go with the odds, I figured.
> 
> -Hyp.




Well, Jester is one of my Alt IDs


----------



## the Jester (Jun 8, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Wait, that was _you_?
> 
> We've been trying to figure out who it was, so we can ban him.  I had my money on Crothian - when in doubt, go with the odds, I figured.
> 
> -Hyp.




Well, Crothian is one of my Alt IDs


----------

