RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Melodia · **05-18-2015, 01:27 PM**

(05-15-2015, 06:45 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote:
(05-15-2015, 01:31 PM)Melodia Wrote: Lots of stuff.

That's my two cents. I enjoy the community and the site.

If I might ask, you say that in the past you have been part of the 'negativity'. Why do you think you took part in such things? Also what caused you to make a conscious decision to stop doing it?

I honestly, looking at my behavior, whether it was complaining, engaging in self-pity, blaming others, etc. it was simply because I was being selfish. I expected one thing and didn't get that. "Oh look, those people talk to each other....why aren't they including me? Aren't I part of this community?" *insert table flip here* That is the kind of behavior that I have knowingly engaged in, and simply because I felt a sense of selfish entitlement. Regardless of how many people told me to work for it, to try my best, I still threw fits and acted the part of a spoiled child. Simply because I didn't get what I wanted. And it took a good level of straight talk from folks here in PMs to get my head on right.

One person who I won't name said it best.... "What kind of example are you setting for your child when you act like this?" It stung but that person was right. And so I have made a conscious effort to improve how I engage with folks here and in game. I actively try to be a positive or at least productive contributer with posts rather than some reactionary flamer.

Kellach Woods · **05-18-2015, 01:41 PM**

(05-18-2015, 01:05 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: I didn't actually ban them, I just asked them to keep out unless they're were planning on following the rules. I can't actually stop them from posting, obviously.

I don't think the thread will explode though, but not because everyone is calm. I just think people are more interested about complaining than changing things. I can't say I'm not guilty of this as well, as you say.

I feel like things /have/ been calmer though in the last week or so. Perhaps people have been making decisions to be more geniuine? Or maybe we just haven't had the proper thread for everyone to explode on.

Hence the quotes - I know you don't have mod powers else your name'd be in light blue. Honestly, I think things have been calmer because less people have been posting. It's just a question of numbers rather than an actual conscious decision to think about what they're saying. Most people are gearing up for Heavensward or other such things, they got other things to do, etc.

I sincerely doubt we've genuinely started giving each poster the credit they deserve - that they're a sentient being worthy of at least a modicum of respect.

Hammersmith · **05-18-2015, 01:44 PM**

Show Content

Alright. Â Where were we?

I'm new here. Â Frighteningly new. Â I am a RPC newb. Realtalk.

With that said: I haven't found this place hostile. Â The mods have been murderously on point and guard about dealing with potential drama.

The threads I've taken part in that could have, and by all internet rules SHOULD have, exploded into flame wars were either cooled off through real talk or by a mod with a fire blanket. Â Compared to a lot of sections of the internet the small minded and often petty ass-hattery seems to not be a focus here.

I'm guessing what the OP alludes to with it's initial prompt is one of those inertial drifts that communities, RP ones especially, accumulate given time.

Speaking from a relative outsider perspective I don't see the place as hostile or out of control in any fashion. Â I've been here for a month or...so? Â It's been calm. Â There's been no flamewar. Â There was rational talk about ERP without resorting to the pit of all too familiar internet slurs associated with the topic.

Gods help us all it's almost like people are capable of acting like rational adults.Â

Yeah. I know. That's weird to me too. Â This is the internet, afterall.

I just hope it continues.

Zyrusticae · **05-18-2015, 03:00 PM**

Quote:I understand all the rules of the legit talk thread, and will obey them. If I am found to have broken any of the rules, I will refrain from posting in the thread for a week. I understand that the purpose of this thread is to try and maintain discussion in good faith

As someone who occasionally goes completely off the rails at times, I just wanted to post about my experience here.

It seems to me like half the time any problems come up because one or both 'sides' in a conversation decide they no longer need to show any due reverence or respect for the other participants or their conflicting views, and phrase their language in such a fashion that makes that extremely obvious. It's one of those things that you can kind of become blind to because you've been engaging in it for so long that you no longer realize when you're doing it. I'm... not even sure how often I've done this, and honestly, I'm afraid to go back and check.

It's a rather fine-grained distinction to make, and I know some folks frown on the idea of 'tone-policing', but it is simply a part of our reality that we must accept - that people are emotional beings and can and will be prone to acting out emotionally given the proper stimulus to do so. As such, it only makes sense to be very careful in how we articulate ourselves in order to prevent that emotional side from overtaking everything. However, in some cases this may not actually be possible, because the subject itself is an emotionally charged one full of people with passionate stakes in the matter. I know exactly what those issues are for me, and I will not hesitate to admit that I should probably refrain from all topics discussing them, simply because I will not be able to behave in a rational manner.

At the same time, I also think it's important for people to understand and be able to recognize when those lines have been crossed. If you see someone acting out about a topic they really believe strongly in, it's important to trust that those feelings are genuine and come from the heart, rather than blowing them off and treating them as non-entities, which ALWAYS exacerbates matters and only makes things worse.

One of the most frustrating things I've dealt with is the one time someone decided to call out my behavior as 'emotional manipulation' (note - I am not interested in discussing that individual here, I am only focusing on the specific behavior). It wasn't until long after the fact that I realized how incredibly disingenuous such an accusation actually is, especially as the only evidence supporting such a thing is the author's own hunch and not a long-term pattern of behavior. To put it short, I was effectively being called a liar, and there are very few ways you can call someone that without making the target look extremely bad and possibly inflaming the situation.

If, on the other hand, the author assumed my behavior to be genuine (which it was) rather than fakery used specifically for emotional manipulation (which it wasn't), things could have gone on much more amiably than they did. Pointing out errors in logic is one thing - that's something I hope to see more of, if done with enough tact - but straight-up questioning the truthfulness of someone's admission of emotional weakness is... hilariously villainous, in hindsight.

Those kinds of behaviors are the sort of thing I want to see a lot less of around these parts. Or around the Internet in general, really. It is possible to have friendly arguments without matters devolving into emotional and verbal abuse and constant bouts of passive-aggressiveness. The problem is keeping things from ever reaching that point in the first place, as often only a small, seemingly insignificant trigger is all that's needed to cross things over from one side to the other. I don't really have a solution for any of this, other than that we, in general, as posters, need to work on our collective conversational skills as well as being able to recognize when our emotional states do not allow for the kind of productive conversations one would hope to have on here.

This is something I'm constantly working on, and honestly, how good I am seems to go up and down in long phases. A lot of it is just how much pressure I'm dealing with in my daily life, and I suspect that goes for a lot of posters on here as well. High stress is most definitely NOT conducive to any kind of conversation. Maybe all that's needed is for folks to go on a voluntary 'time-out' to go cool off sometimes. That's not a long-term solution, but it could help for the odd flare-up here and there.

Heh, but that just sounds like life advice in general. Unfortunately, not everyone is able to just disappear and cool off in their given life circumstances, but, generally speaking, every one of us benefits from being able to just sit back and relax every so often. If you can't get that time off, you may have bigger issues that need your attention than some stranger on the Internet saying things you don't like, you know?

To put it short: be truthful, be genuine, assume others are doing the same, and DON'T be nasty even if you completely disagree, and that would solve like 99% of issues on here that I see. The only hard part is getting everyone to cooperate, which I admit is still most of the challenge. Sorry I can't be of more help on this point.

McBeefâ„¢ · **05-18-2015, 03:26 PM**

So a side question, among the other one.

What do you think the place of image macros, reaction gifs, etc, have in discussions? Do you think they should be banned? Only allowed in certain threads? Allowed in all threads?

I'm personally of the opinion they shouldn't be allowed except in certain types of threads, that they tend to just disrupt a discussion without adding anything of value.

However they are fun, and I like seeing them in lighter hearted threads.

What do you think? Obviously they are frowned upon by the mods and the new updated rules.

ProvaDiServo · **05-18-2015, 03:55 PM**

(05-18-2015, 03:26 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: So a side question, among the other one.

What do you think the place of image macros, reaction gifs, etc, have in discussions? Do you think they should be banned? Only allowed in certain threads? Allowed in all threads?

I'm personally of the opinion they shouldn't be allowed except in certain types of threads, that they tend to just disrupt a discussion without adding anything of value.

However they are fun, and I like seeing them in lighter hearted threads.

What do you think? Obviously they are frowned upon by the mods and the new updated rules.

(By posting in this thread I am aware of whetever rules apply, etc. etc. Kinda a given otherwise why post?)

Honestly reaction gifs are cool. just spoiler them I find them to work in any topic really and it is always nice to have the image coupled with the message for me.

But in terms of overall forum cleanliness and structure Please for the love of god spoiler them so that the page aint stretched. Same for anyone with huge ass signatures expanding beyond 135 pixels in height. I love the creativity and style of fellow graphic bros. but good lord it bothers me when signatures are super huge.

Keep it concealed.

Kellach Woods · **05-18-2015, 03:57 PM**

Image macros are the nuclear option when involving a discussion. In that they serve nothing but to shit up the entire thread for all involved just because you don't personally like it, and it'll take approximately a million or so years before the thread has any sort of relevance again.

In certain threads, where, y'know, it's what the thread's about? Sure. Any other thread and you're essentially saying "this thread is irrelevant to me and thus everyone else (as there's obviously no difference between the two). I'll therefore drop trou and defecate here."

Whether or not I agree with the rules on this is irrelevant - I'm using the forum, I'm expected to follow the rules of the forum. Same goes to you, the mods, etc. If someone breaks them, you report them instead of piling onto the stank already present here.

IMO they're frowned upon because people don't use them to create a lighthearted atmosphere but to add that extra spice of dismissal in their posting. If people were more responsible about the usage of image macros then perhaps that rule wouldn't be.

Hammersmith · **05-18-2015, 04:24 PM**

They don't belong in a discussion topic. Â They're, as already stated, a blatent derail of purpose anywhere except threads where it's acknowledged that the point is to not have a point.

Otherwise it's widescale sad-pepe memes and reaction gifs instead of words with actual meaning as far as the eye can see.

McBeefâ„¢ · **05-18-2015, 06:48 PM**

So then, if as you three say, Image Macros and such add little to nothing to most discussions, but should not be banned.

How should we determine whether or not they're appropriate?

Forums like something awful have thread tags, maybe we could try something like that here? Maybe two sets of rules, one for serious threads and one for light hearted ones?

I still maintain that I could care less about warnings, except for the permaban. I'm totally cool getting one and toning it down for a few weeks. However their permanence almost just tempts me to keep going.

Sort of, "I'll get 10 eventually, so fuck it."

Fox · **05-18-2015, 06:56 PM**

Quote:I understand all the rules of the legit talk thread, and will obey them. If I am found to have broken any of the rules, I will refrain from posting in the thread for a week. I understand that the purpose of this thread is to try and maintain discussion in good faith

(05-18-2015, 03:26 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: So a side question, among the other one.

What do you think the place of image macros, reaction gifs, etc, have in discussions? Do you think they should be banned? Only allowed in certain threads? Allowed in all threads?

I'm personally of the opinion they shouldn't be allowed except in certain types of threads, that they tend to just disrupt a discussion without adding anything of value.

However they are fun, and I like seeing them in lighter hearted threads.

What do you think? Obviously they are frowned upon by the mods and the new updated rules.

This is something I completely agree with Natalie. I think that image macros, reaction gifs, etc should not be allowed (mostly). It's far too easy for them to be dropped into a thread, and have the person run off without actually contributing. Sure, allowing them in certain threads is fine, meme threads, fun-off-topic things stuff like that. But where it comes to RP threads likely not (unless-).

Unless they are there to actually boost the thread or to explain something. Sometimes pictures work better than words. I remember a thread I posted to with 'anchor howl' which most people wouldn't get unless they watched Log Horizon.

The main problem is using them for snappy little comments which I have seen. People quickly oft them to say "Oh I was being funny" but when people post snidey little memes in a way to circumvent is concerning.

So to how to determine whether or not they're appropriate is something I'm uncertain. Because a lot of it is subjective. I think, to solve it; honestly is just to remove them out of all discussion areas, even if they do help 'describe' in the case of anchor howl.

Kellach Woods · **05-18-2015, 08:13 PM**

(05-18-2015, 06:48 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: I still maintain that I could care less about warnings, except for the permaban. I'm totally cool getting one and toning it down for a few weeks. However their permanence almost just tempts me to keep going.

Sort of, "I'll get 10 eventually, so fuck it."

You said this was the real talk thread, so let's talk real.

Why in the grandiose fuck would the rest of us want people around who are not mindful of the rules enough that they areÂ already planning to be banned? (emphasis because come the fuck on)

Is your desire to derail threads and go entirely off-topic and insult users so strong that you must disobey the rules to do so?

You can't say I've been overly nice except in the compliment thread. Hell I'd dare say I've a 50/50 shitposting to relevant post ratio. Yet even with this system I've received zero warnings, none whatsoever. And don't even bring up the future in this because I trust myself to not completely shit on the line of posting decency.

So at this point, I'd ask : Why can't you? Why is it that you're always bringing up the inevitability of your banning?

McBeefâ„¢ · **05-18-2015, 08:53 PM**

(05-18-2015, 08:13 PM)Kellach Woods Wrote:
(05-18-2015, 06:48 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: I still maintain that I could care less about warnings, except for the permaban. I'm totally cool getting one and toning it down for a few weeks. However their permanence almost just tempts me to keep going.

Sort of, "I'll get 10 eventually, so fuck it."

You said this was the real talk thread, so let's talk real.

Why in the grandiose fuck would the rest of us want people around who are not mindful of the rules enough that they areÂ already planning to be banned? (emphasis because come the fuck on)

Is your desire to derail threads and go entirely off-topic and insult users so strong that you must disobey the rules to do so?

You can't say I've been overly nice except in the compliment thread. Hell I'd dare say I've a 50/50 shitposting to relevant post ratio. Yet even with this system I've received zero warnings, none whatsoever. And don't even bring up the future in this because I trust myself to not completely shit on the line of posting decency.

So at this point, I'd ask : Why can't you? Why is it that you're always bringing up the inevitability of your banning?

Well as the ways the rule are written, it can be something as an image macro or a post that isn't quite on topic.

It's sort of a death from a 1000 cuts. Perhaps it will be better once the rules are adjusted. I don't think getting 10 warnings means you are shitting on the line of posting decency. I think currently a user could get 10 warnings, and get permabanned, without being a shitposter.

Hammersmith · **05-18-2015, 09:04 PM**

(05-18-2015, 06:48 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: So then, if as you three say, Image Macros and such add little to nothing to most discussions, but should not be banned.

How should we determine whether or not they're appropriate?

Forums like something awful have thread tags, maybe we could try something like that here? Maybe two sets of rules, one for serious threads and one for light hearted ones?

I still maintain that I could care less about warnings, except for the permaban. I'm totally cool getting one and toning it down for a few weeks. However their permanence almost just tempts me to keep going.

Sort of, "I'll get 10 eventually, so fuck it."

Banned? No. Â Warned? Yes. Â I think the current revamp of the rule is really the best approach to it.

As for the "Well fuck it", that's a non-sequitor example. Â The same sort of logic applies to "I'm going to die anyway, why not murder a baby? Fuck it yolo."

We're dealing within the bounds of reason. Â If we're dealing with crazies, or in this case a terminal troll, they're not going to be bound by what we're discussing in the first place so there's no point in accounting for them other than "They're going to run into an admin, fuck THEM."

I think warnings work. Â We've already seen people check themselves before wrecking themselves, with the one hiccup so far being the one area that had too much non-defined application.

I think warnings work. Â I don't think "Well if crazy people do it why should we have rules at all" is good counter logic against them.

McBeefâ„¢ · **05-19-2015, 11:51 AM**

(05-18-2015, 09:04 PM)Hammersmith Wrote:
(05-18-2015, 06:48 PM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: So then, if as you three say, Image Macros and such add little to nothing to most discussions, but should not be banned.

How should we determine whether or not they're appropriate?

Forums like something awful have thread tags, maybe we could try something like that here? Maybe two sets of rules, one for serious threads and one for light hearted ones?

I still maintain that I could care less about warnings, except for the permaban. I'm totally cool getting one and toning it down for a few weeks. However their permanence almost just tempts me to keep going.

Sort of, "I'll get 10 eventually, so fuck it."

Banned? No. Â Warned? Yes. Â I think the current revamp of the rule is really the best approach to it.

As for the "Well fuck it", that's a non-sequitor example. Â The same sort of logic applies to "I'm going to die anyway, why not murder a baby? Fuck it yolo."

We're dealing within the bounds of reason. Â If we're dealing with crazies, or in this case a terminal troll, they're not going to be bound by what we're discussing in the first place so there's no point in accounting for them other than "They're going to run into an admin, fuck THEM."

I think warnings work. Â We've already seen people check themselves before wrecking themselves, with the one hiccup so far being the one area that had too much non-defined application.

I think warnings work. Â I don't think "Well if crazy people do it why should we have rules at all" is good counter logic against them.

I would agree, if the rules were better defined, and if minor infractions did not inevitably lead to a ban.

Currently though the issue has been any discussion of this topic has been hijacked by people who cry out loudly that dissension and disagreement are wrong, and that you should essentially obey, or get out.

Then it all goes downhill from there, the recent thread 'police state thread' is a decent example.

Reform is not bad, people. And not liking a thing is ok.

Hammersmith · **05-19-2015, 12:06 PM**

(05-19-2015, 11:51 AM)Natalie Mcbeef Wrote: I would agree, if the rules were better defined, and if minor infractions did not inevitably lead to a ban.

Currently though the issue has been any discussion of this topic has been hijacked by people who cry out loudly that dissension and disagreement are wrong, and that you should essentially obey, or get out.

Then it all goes downhill from there, the recent thread 'police state thread' is a decent example.

Reform is not bad, people. And not liking a thing is ok.

That's too black and white for what happened in that thread. Â The thread was a pointed example of "Oh, yeah, ok, we should change things". Â Not "OBEY."

However it was also a good example of why you need the Obey marker on the board, somewhere, clearly spelled out.

Because us nerds are The Wurst when it comes to getting into "White man plays devil's advocate in issue that doesn't affect them in any way shape or form" arguments for the dicking of it.

It's a major note seen over and over again in any RP/Game community. It's why the mods are more than a good idea, they're a requirement. Â It also means some people are going to crybitch about it. Â It is literally a battle you should not be approaching as something you need to "win", like I said.

Consistency mixed with critical acceptance works. Â It's working here, and now, as we speak, with that gif rule re-write.

Edit:

Responded 10 minutes too soon. TIME OUT TIME FOR ME

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Pages (4): « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »

The Talk Thread (Please Read the Rules)

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes