The Obligatory Rules Thread, Take Two

[fbmf]

Why? What were you expecting?

Game On,
fbmf

[Maxus]

Why? What were you expecting?

Game On,
fbmf

Probably that people would be allowed to link/discuss news in the news threads.

I can see a point on both sides. On the one hand, this place needs a cooldown. On the other, it sucks not being able to post some news for fear it'd spark an argument over bullshit.

[Koumei]

It's almost always more arguments and bullshit and less "interesting" or in fact "new"s, anyway.

[Vnonymous]

I am somewhat disappointed because I find the flame war threads tremendously entertaining reading.

I think keeping that sort of slap and tickle fight to a specific thread or even a specific board would be really entertaining, especially if the "no personal attacks outside those boards and threads" was followed, although it can be hard to differentiate between argument over an issue and an "old feud".

Of course I don't run the forum, so.

[fbmf]

[The Great Fence Builder Speaks]

In as much as I got half a dozen or so reported posts about thread spamming, it is obvious there needs to be some sort of anti-thread spamming rule. To that end, how do we want to phrase it?

[*]Something about limiting posts per page by a given user?
[*]Something about posts on the same page within a given time limit?
[*]Other suggestions?

[/TGFBS]

[Zinegata]

Well, the issue is related to the issue of dogpiling. Poster A says something controversial. Poster B, C, D, E, and F respond to Poster A. So Poster A makes 5 posts consecutively.

I think a general "don't post multiple posts consecutively" would resolve most problems that are being raised by innocent bystanders who are getting hit in the crossfire.

Instead "just edit your existing post and put all of the stuff there".

[Maj]

Hey, Zine... Do you just hit the quote button on each post and that's why you have a whole bunch of consecutive posts?

[Kaelik]

1) I think an important consideration regarding any posting limit is the following question:

"How would this have effected making the Tomes, if it had been active at that time."

Every Tome thread started with like 8 posts from Frank in a row in twelve seconds, and letting other people post in the middle, and delaying that would have messed it up.

That said, hypothetical limits should definitely be time based, not number of posts per page based. If a thread drops 20 slots, and only one person consistently brings it back up (for example, play journals) that should be fine.

Also note that some threads always devolve to point counter point between two people. It happens, and should probably be allowed.

Personally, I think the spamming problem is not anything to do with number of posts but instead quality and intent.

I don't even really care if Zinegata posts three times in a row in a politics thread, to address three people with actual arguments. Sure it's annoying that he doesn't have the decency or ability to use Ctrl-C/P or edits. But that's not that big a deal.

But even two in a row is too many (okay, even two times in a thread is too many) when the actual post consists only of:

Something stupid that they didn't actually say

X/10. Some bullshit reason why he thinks he can judge people, without having ever contributed positively to anything ever.

Some comment about how great he is.

So I think that's the actual problem. But meh. It's spamming of the same thing over and over, only slightly reworded. Not any actual change of substance.

[Zinegata]

Hey, Zine... Do you just hit the quote button on each post and that's why you have a whole bunch of consecutive posts?

Pretty much.

I know it's entirely possible to gather up everything in one big post. I've done that when the discussion is actually reasonable.

The problem is that when I lump posts together, people start mixing things up. I might say "Your position is totally wrong" to Kaelik, but because it's lumped in the same posts Midnight might think I said his position is totally wrong.

So when people just launch pointless personal attacks, I just deal with them on an individual basis.

And I think, really, that's Kaelik's issue. He wants to be the only person in the Den who can launch inane personal attacks on others and starts whining when somebody is actually willing to shout back.

[Kaelik]

And I think, really, that's Kaelik's issue. He wants to be the only person in the Den who can launch inane personal attacks on others and starts whining when somebody is actually willing to shout back.

Zine, let me help you out.

Those half dozen reports of you spamming? Zero of them were from me. I don't report posts. Everyone else has a problem with you too.

You aren't shouting back against me, the evil personal attacker. You are the problem.

I pointed out that your statements are shit with an analogy. You then started whining and crying because you can't deal with the big boys, and resorted to self parody when it became obvious that no one was going to take your side.

This didn't start because of personal attacks and you bravely fighting back against the mean establishment. It happened because you think it's an appropriate response to troll horrendously instead of making actual arguments.

[Zinegata]

Zine, let me help you out.

Those half dozen reports of you spamming? Zero of them were from me.

Liar, liar pants on fire.

http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=51823

Sure, you didn't "report" me, but you did in fact post about it in the admins. Why do you think fbmf directed you here to discuss it instead?

So stop the bullshit. You have an issue with me. You don't like me. That's the root of YOUR complaints. Because I reply to your inane shit with equally inane shit.

The valid spam reports - from innocent bystanders like Koumei, Robbypants, and the like - I'm perfectly willing to address and correct. Because they don't deserve getting inane shit.

But you? No. You're just carrying over yet another one of your silly stupid feuds.

So really Kaelik, stop being a fucking crybaby because I think you're full of crap and I'm not afraid to say it.

I will again stop talking to you, and will instead talk shit about you. Because carrying a "conversation" with you, as always, is a complete waste of time.

[Blasted]

There's a scenario with initial posts where you want to reserve a couple of posts for later use. There could be a case for doing that midway through a thread as well, or where you are the only poster in the thread (for instance in the AAR threads).

So the phrasing I'd use would be something along the lines of:
"please refrain from posting consecutive replies; use the edit button"

[Kaelik]

Liar, liar pants on fire.

http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=51823

Sure, you didn't "report" me, but you did in fact post about it in the admins.

So... I'm a liar because I am correct, but you don't like me? Buy a dictionary. I posted a specific way that people can deal with your childish behavior. I don't make threads except in IMOI, so it doesn't apply to me.

So stop the bullshit. You have an issue with me. You don't like me. That's the root of YOUR complaints. Because I reply to your inane shit with equally inane shit.

So really Kaelik, stop being a fucking crybaby because I think you're full of crap and I'm not afraid to say it.

No Zine, you have a problem with me, and have serious issues. That's why you violently flail the very second I post in a thread, no matter what it is about.

You are not replying to my "inane shit" with your inane shit. You are self destructing the second I say anything in any thread.

You posted that Pathfinder has quality because people like it. I used an analogy to demonstrate that argumentum ad populum is a fallacy.

Your very next post was this:

I am too stupid to understand. I am too proud to read.

Hey, look, one of the self-serving idiots who thinks his own stuff is so good and who flies into a rage whenever the real world intrudes into his fantasy.

Again, I don't care what you think is quality, because it's just subjective BS from an asshole.

And then proceed to do the stupid mis attribution to every other person who posts from then on.

Note that I used an analogy with zero personal attacks, and you responded with lying, mis attribution, multiple personal attacks, and never making a constructive post in the thread again, and instead self destructing.

Seriously, projection issues. Go back and read it, and really think about what happened. It's long past the part where I could possibly be mad at you, because it's just so fucking pathetic at this point.

[Zinegata]

So... I'm a liar because I am correct

Witness how Kaelik deliberately distorts the truth just so he has another talking point with which to attack people.

Because in Kaelik's world, he can never be "incorrect". He is always correct, and therefore other people are liars.

For instance...

No Zine, you have a problem with me, and have serious issues. That's why you violently flail the very second I post in a thread, no matter what it is about.

See, here again is Kaelik distorting the truth.

http://www.tgdmb.com/search.php?search_author=Kaelik

Let's take a search of Kaelik's posts. Let's focus on the first page for now, shall we?

The only ones I replied to are:

1) The posts in this thread.

2) The posts in the Pathfinder thread, wherein Kaelik replied to my post first:

http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=176216&highlight=

Hence, when Kaelik says "you violently flail the very second I post in a thread, no matter what it is about", he's lying.

The truth is:

- I reply only to a small fraction of the posts Kaelik makes.

- When I did reply to Kaelik, it was because Kaelik talked shit about me first.

Now, I'm not going into any silly, stupid arguments about "He started it!". But Kaelik claiming that I'm all but stalking him? He's frakking delusional.

Besides, he's not my type.

[Kaelik]

Zinegata, get over yourself. The fact that you explode with stupidity when I post doesn't mean I think you stalk me to threads you otherwise don't read. It means that you self destruct. Seriously, Learn to read.

[Username17]

While in general people posting replies to three or four people in a row instead of multiquoting in a single post is really annoying, it's not the major problem here. The major problem here is that Zinegata is trolling the boards with crap he admits is inane time wasting trolling. How is this not hard to figure out?

-Username17

[Zinegata]

Right, now that Kaelik has proven that he's just a crybaby who's whining about me responding to his inane shit by throwing inane shit right back, and it's completely useless to reason with him because he lives in his own bubble like Glenn Beck, how about we get back to the issue?

Two votes for "No consecutive posts, just edit your existing post!" thus far.

[TavishArtair]

[The Great Fence Builder Speaks]

In as much as I got half a dozen or so reported posts about thread spamming, it is obvious there needs to be some sort of anti-thread spamming rule. To that end, how do we want to phrase it?

[*]Something about limiting posts per page by a given user?
[*]Something about posts on the same page within a given time limit?
[*]Other suggestions?

[/TGFBS]

I do not believe a "hard and fast" rule is possible here. While it is transparently obvious that a given thread poster needs to use some kind of multiquoting, even if they have to hand-copy-and-paste it, if they are posting four times in ten minutes, sometimes a thread will have multiple posts in sequence anyways. They generally shouldn't be that close together though.

If they are constantly repeating the same message with only a few tiny variables changed, over and over, however, it doesn't matter how frequently or infrequently they are posting, it is just white noise even if the posts are months apart.

Spamming is not just repetitive posts. It is junk posts. The same thing over and over again is useless. Non-contributing posts that are the same over and over again are even more useless. And that is what Zinegata has done. He has posted not only an admittedly useless message, but he has constantly repeated it with only tiny variations to suit his sense of "humor" for pages of discussion.

[Starmaker]

Suggestion: ban misquoting, outside of "fixed that for you" obvious light-hearted jokes. People count on quotes being accurate. For any reasonable discussion to take place, people have to know where others stand.

"No consecutive posts" won't stop the flood of shit. The problem is not the number of posts. The problem is *shit*. Following a discussion back and forth through the thread which is being edited Wave-style is inconvenient, and a ruling such as "make a new post for content, edit for shitposting" implies a poster's ability to separate shit from content, in which case the reasonable thing to do is, you know, just not to post shit in the first place.

[Zinegata]

Spamming is not just repetitive posts. It is junk posts. The same thing over and over again is useless. Non-contributing posts that are the same over and over again are even more useless. And that is what Zinegata has done. He has posted not only an admittedly useless message, but he has constantly repeated it with only tiny variations to suit his sense of "humor" for pages of discussion.

Following a discussion back and forth through the thread which is being edited Wave-style is inconvenient, and a ruling such as "make a new post for content, edit for shitposting" implies a poster's ability to separate shit from content, in which case the reasonable thing to do is, you know, just not to post shit in the first place.

Yes I have. Because I said right out that if certain people wanted to continue engaging in inane bashing, I was gonna conduct some inane bashing right back.

Now, if you're saying "Don't respond to shit with shit", then maybe we should go all the way and talk about banning talking shit in the first place.

Misquoting for instance? Sinister and Kaelik both initiated that during the thread, way before I started misquoting anyone.

Junk posting? Let's see... I was saying "Quality is subjective, that's why Pathfinder sells" and Kaelik responds with a Godwin argument that can be summed up as "Stop claiming Pathfinder is good".

Kaelik's argument is seriously not junk despite attacking a point I had not even made, like at all?

So please don't go complain how I post junk posts, yet you're totally fine about other people posting junk too. If you want standards, they have to be consistent standards.

[Kaelik]

I was saying "Quality is subjective, that's why Pathfinder sells" and Kaelik responds with a Godwin argument that can be summed up as "Stop claiming Pathfinder is good".

1) "Godwin" this word does not mean what you think it means.

2) No, it can be summed up as "Stop Claiming that Pathfinder has quality because a large number of people like it." or "Stop invoking the argumentum ad populum."

Why you think that asking someone to stop using a recognized fallacy counts as "junk" is beyond me.

[fbmf]

Suggestion: ban misquoting, outside of "fixed that for you" obvious light-hearted jokes. People count on quotes being accurate. For any reasonable discussion to take place, people have to know where others stand.

I like this, but it would have to have NO exceptions to it. Not even "obvious light-hearted jokes", because sometimes the obvious ain't.

Would that fix the problem?

I don't know that addressing multiple quotes in one post would help because someone would pull out "tl;dr".

Game On,
fbmf

[Zinegata]

I'm good with it.

[RobbyPants]

Suggestion: ban misquoting, outside of "fixed that for you" obvious light-hearted jokes. People count on quotes being accurate. For any reasonable discussion to take place, people have to know where others stand.

I like this, but it would have to have NO exceptions to it. Not even "obvious light-hearted jokes", because sometimes the obvious ain't.

Would that fix the problem?

Even if they immediately follow it with Fixed it for you, or FIFY? What if they use strike-through to show the change so it's obvious. Those can be pretty damn funny and obvious.

I don't know that addressing multiple quotes in one post would help because someone would pull out "tl;dr".

Game On,
fbmf

Maybe, maybe not. When I see a gigantic post, I tend to skim by quote block. If I see my name in one of those (which happens to be bold), I know the next section is relevant to me. I think that's pretty quick to parse. TL;DR usually refers to just gigantic plain text posts, IMO.

[ubernoob]

If we ban misquoting entirely, it would remove a relevant tool for discussion. That tool is used very effectively here. Now, that is a very specific form of argument where you demonstrate that the other person's argument is invalid because it is not specific to the subject at hand, but it is a relevant tool that I'd like to see able to be used.

While in general people posting replies to three or four people in a row instead of multiquoting in a single post is really annoying, it's not the major problem here. The major problem here is that Zinegata is trolling the boards with crap he admits is inane time wasting trolling. How is this not hard to figure out?

-Username17

This is pretty much 100% the issue. In the pathfinder thread it is 100% trolling. There is no content, no humor. Just trolling because Zine is butthurt about something or other. The issue is not the rules, but the fact that we have not banned a troll. Ban the troll and 100% of the problem will be solved.