The Gaming Den

I find it pathetic that such a rule is needed, but at the same time, I'm glad that fbmf spends the time and effort trying to find solutions to keep everyone as happy as can be expected.

Are any of these more or less appropriate ways to ask for a person's non-participation in a discussion?

1) PM?
2) Thread title?
3) Text in the first post?

Thread title is most appropos, I would think. My as well give the poster as much heads up as possible.

Game On,
fbmf

Can we please make it against the rules to disagree with correct maths? Maths is perfectly objective so theres no danger of stifling opinions

I think that sets too much of a precedent in terms of control - way more than desired. Remember: that, if done, won't be just for 1 user being particularly problematic - it'll be a forum rule. Meanwhile, thread titles are editable, right (if you get what I mean)? Also, ignore (the literal use of the term).

Draco_Argentum wrote:Can we please make it against the rules to disagree with correct maths? Maths is perfectly objective so theres no danger of stifling opinions

Correct maths is one thing, relevant maths is another. It's like how people can cite statistical evidence both for and against, say, global warming, and both sets of evidence will be perfectly accurate, but not necessarily both relevant.

Personally I dislike the ignore function more than an extra rules restriction. A lot of good stuff has come from people arguing with someone they don't like. Its not friendly but it does have people refining their positions to be more eloquent. At least until it degenerates into shouting insults.

Incorrect maths OTOH just means there are posts hanging around that are factually wrong and responses explaining simple maths. I don't come here for a maths lesson.

[The Great Fence Builder Speaks]
Irrelevant posts deleted.
[/TGFBS]

I must admit, a rule against arguing against maths might get me banned, as I don't always believe the math being applied is correct.

-Crissa

Thats why I said disagreeing with correct maths. Disagreeing with its relevance is a different matter.

Yeah, but what if I'm wrong?

-Crissa

As much as I think people who cannot perform basic math are not worth reading - I'm against any hard and fast rule about incorrect math. Mistakes happen, but more importantly, ambiguities show up in even simple statements:

Another board I frequent has an annoying meme about what -1² = ??

And the correct answer is -1 because the technically correct order of operations is to interpret that as the negation of one squared, rather than the more commonly assumed squaring of negative one - which should be expressed as (-1)²

......

With common assumptions 2+2 = 4. But those common assumptions are not universal: "I meant the + as string concatenation"; "We're working in trinary here"; and "I was quoting Pazio's design philosophy" are reasonable explanations for why it may not within a given post.

By request...

[TGFBS]
There has been a change in the CoC. The STAY OUT OF THE THREAD IF ASKED rule has been reinstated.
[/TGFBS]

I would like to submit a potential rules change for when Gencon weekend is over and mods are around..

I was wondering if we would institute a hard "No non-gaming discussion" rule?

I know that I am not the first to suggest that, but I feel that this forum is floundering because there's too many low blows, too many personal attacks. I am wondering if a back-to-basics focus on Gaming might do this forum a little bit of good?

I am aware I overshare more than anyone here. I am willing to risk potential warnings and bannings if the board will be improved by that. Thank you.

I approve and endorse this statement.

No, seriously. Arguments with Count aside, it's a good idea.

It would have prevented CeilingCat from leaving, so I can't say it's a bad idea.

I'd like to see the rules cut down on stupid, useless bickering. I have no problem when people fight, but frankly, if this keeps up nobody will be posting here in about a year. Sure, we have the reputation of being "mean", but it started with being mean to other people. And back in the old days, people would agree in one thread, and disagree in another, and things would be fine, and nobody would carry stuff over. Sure, Frank and RC went at it a lot, but there was never any hard feelings.

Now? Now anyone who wants to use the Den for actual gaming stuff can't, because a select few idiots are constantly dragging every topic off-topic for their own personal feud.

Fuck this noise. Start the bannings.

Banning users seems excessive, but a rule banning non-gaming discussion on the gaming boards specifically seems totally reasonable.

Koumei wrote:It would have prevented CeilingCat from leaving, so I can't say it's a bad idea.

Cielingcat left because her crazy turned itself up to 11, not because of anything any particular person said or did.

While she was involved in an off-topic, multi-person flamewar, by the end she had defined anyone and everyone who didn't 100% agree with her subjective feelings and hopes about her personal situation as being "fake allies" who were no better than enemies. Maybe not discussing sexuality and medicine here could have kept her from burning out, but I'm guessing she would have been venting somewhere, and once she pushed her unilateralism that far she was incapable of having a conversation on the internet about anything.

As for taking flame wars from one thread to another, I'm in general against it. And it has gone way overboard. I currently have Zinegata on ignore and he still eats up too much of the threads.

-Username17

FrankTrollman wrote:As for taking flame wars from one thread to another, I'm in general against it. And it has gone way overboard. I currently have Zinegata on ignore and he still eats up too much of the threads.

-Username17

I don't like to start fights but will bring them to bloody total war-ish conclusons .

Zinegata wrote:

FrankTrollman wrote:As for taking flame wars from one thread to another, I'm in general against it. And it has gone way overboard. I currently have Zinegata on ignore and he still eats up too much of the threads.

-Username17

I don't like to start fights but will bring them to bloody total war-ish conclusons .

Yeah, that tends to be a common 'quality' among Gaming Den members.

CatharzGodfoot wrote: Yeah, that tends to be a common 'quality' among Gaming Den members.

True. But I suspect the reason why Frank thinks I post a lot is because I not only fight "total war-ish" arguments, but because I end up fighting multiple ones at the same time.

Or you post a reply to each and every post in a thread, Zin.

-Crissa

Speaking as someone that so far has been uninvolved (and thus can offer a pretty good facsimile of a random visitor's opinion), I'd support a limited form of this. An absolute ban on non-gaming material might be going just a bit too far, but I would like to see a dramatic reduction in off-topic flame wars. Having to sort through them to find meaningful content is boring and it means that I miss any insightful comments made by the people I have ignored.

On-topic flame wars are perfectly fine, though. Those are fun and meaningful.

Also, if implementing a ban on just flame wars is too difficult (as I expect it would be), I'd prefer to err on the side of caution and ban all non-gaming, at least until people stop behaving like peculiarly eloquent /b/tards.

We have a perfectly good off topic board and I think it would be best if the gaming discussion was separated from the non-gaming discussion.