General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
I am one of those people that doesn't let things drop. I always want to get in the last word, and I always jump into things when i seee things I disagree with.
The funny part I am 100% diffrent in person. I also do better at expressing myself in person. I hate myself on messege boards. Like right now, I tried to start a thread the other day to avoid a fight I saw comeing, and all it did was start another fight. SO then I saw a simalar thread, and tried to go there to talk civil, and now I am in another argument.
So maybe you should ask yourself why you are "100% diffrent in person" than you are on message boards? Which one of these two people is really you? Which would you rather was you?
Just like real life, we're the ones responsible for our messageboard behavior. If that behavior is dysfunctional, we're the ones who should be corrected and leave functional debates, discussions, and yes, arguments, free of our interference.
__________________ Bill D
"There's a fine line between a superpower and a chronic medical condition."
- Doctor Impossible
The funny part I am 100% diffrent in person. I also do better at expressing myself in person. I hate myself on messege boards. Like right now, I tried to start a thread the other day to avoid a fight I saw comeing, and all it did was start another fight. SO then I saw a simalar thread, and tried to go there to talk civil, and now I am in another argument.
Well, here's some advice for you, or for anyone else who finds themselves in a similar position. If you consistently find yourself in argumentative mode, and you are not sure why, how, or how to avoid that fate, the moderation staff is generally quite wiling to help you identify what behaviors or points of style are getting you in trouble.
Gather up a handful of examples where you found yourself in less-pleasant discussion modes, and e-mail a moderator with links to them, and we can probably help you find the roots of your problems. Our addresses are available in a post stickied to the top of the Meta Forum.
I do that all the time too, and not only with posts I think will serve as nothing more than aggravation but also when I just realise my point is not as relevant or the people who will read it are not really going to process it anyways. As for people who have to have the final word . . . there was this one girl on WoW that I ignored. She kept making alts so she could keep pestering me and I had to ignore each one. Then at some point she found my guild's website and started posting there. After banning her from that place as well she started sending e-mails. Seriously.
http://dungeon-crawl.blogspot.com
Tools & tips you can apply immediately to your D&D game! Encounters inspired by the movies, suggestions to speed up your game and reduce bookkeeping, and more!
There's a Monty Python skit about this somewhere. Something about the difference between argument and abuse and the difference between argument and mindless contradiction.
there was this one girl on WoW that I ignored. She kept making alts so she could keep pestering me and I had to ignore each one. Then at some point she found my guild's website and started posting there. After banning her from that place as well she started sending e-mails. Seriously.
I get tired of reading arguments, and I typically don't contribute. I have found myself reading the first page of threads and then not reading the rest. In fact, if a thread is over 3 pages, I basically assume the the comments are 1) mostly repeats or rehashes or 2) arguments that can be attributed to differences in taste. Threads over 5 pages are rarely read at all.
Ironically, I read this thread to the end and posted
If my behavior is representative of anyone else, long threads devolve to mudslinging simply because the neutrals don't want to bother with reading the mud. Or perhaps apathy just kicks in after page 1...
Last edited by Dedekind; 11th May 2009 at 11:28 PM..
Reason: Appropriately, self censoring to avoid being offensive and possible rules violations ;)
I like arguing. I also like quarreling. (Those are different things.) I'm good at both.
But I discovered a few things that changed how I do things on EN World:
(1) Some people simply do not know how to argue. It's not a matter of being right, or being wrong, or the subject in question being a matter of opinion (which, contrary to seemingly popular belief, does not automatically exempt it from argument). It is, instead, a fundamental inability to construct an argument.
(2) Some people are hyper-literal to the point that they're incapable or unwilling to admit to ambiguity in anything.
(3) Some people post as if they're in a perpetual bad mood. Every post is snappish and sarcastic. "Terse" is a good day for these folks.
It used to be that when I ran into these people, I'd shift from "argument mode" to "quarrel mode." Now I don't. I simply add them to my Ignore list. It's against my nature (on- or off-line) to wuss out like this, but I've also discovered that the retaliation gets the whistle on EN World (while the provocation is usually ignored). So the Ignore list is the solution for me.
(Digression: The interesting thing, to me, is that I pay almost no attention to the name attached to a post, even when I'm responding to it. So it takes quite a bit for me to recognize a name to the point that I'll slap it on my Ignore list.
It takes even more for me to recognize names attached to well-presented, well-reasoned, helpful posts, unfortunately. I kinda wish EN World had a "Highlight" list, counterpart to the Ignore list, that would make posts by Highlighted posters more visible. That'd be pretty cool.)
__________________ Jeff Wilder, San Francisco Bay Area If your sig is longer than your posts, your sig is too
long. Nobody reads it, they just get annoyed by it. And if you bore me, you lose your soul to me. - Belly
(Digression: The interesting thing, to me, is that I pay almost no attention to the name attached to a post, even when I'm responding to it. So it takes quite a bit for me to recognize a name to the point that I'll slap it on my Ignore list.
This is an important point, because it is more common than you might imagine.
I've seen a number of complaints of the form, "Person X is stalking me around the boards, coming down on me in seven different threads!" And quite often, person X doesn't know the complainer, and doesn't even realize that they've replied in a nasty manner to the same person a number of times.
So, in addition to the general rule, "Don't make an argument personal" is the corollary, "Don't assume the other person is after you, specifically."
Generally, I was making a habit of ignoring certain kinds of posts. Then I finally figured out how the ignore function works and now my mind is at ease. It creates holes in discussions but I am okay with that. The only issue is I can still read the quoted statements of those I ignore. But I have now developed the habit of glossing over those posts. Does wonders for my blood pressure.
It's a bit strange, when I see a quoted statement from the person on my ignore list (there's only one), I'm fine with reading it. Reading it in the quoted form does nothing to raise my blood pressure. I think perhaps knowing that I have ignored him is enough. I don't feel like I have to respond. I can just read it, think "there he goes again", and laugh.
There's a Monty Python skit about this somewhere. Something about the difference between argument and abuse and the difference between argument and mindless contradiction.
__________________ Founding Father of O.A.F! - Old school Admirers of Fourth edition
Proud Rouseketeers Member-Badge #2!
"I feel books like "A Princess of Mars", "The Swords of Lankhmar" and "The Black Company" are far more important to your gaming experience than whether you choose between OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, or D&D4E." - The Ravyn
I think people sometimes get too fixated about what's "official" to see what they could do with the whole- "David "Zeb" Cook
(1) Some people simply do not know how to argue. It's not a matter of being right, or being wrong, or the subject in question being a matter of opinion (which, contrary to seemingly popular belief, does not automatically exempt it from argument). It is, instead, a fundamental inability to construct an argument.
To me this is the factor of a message boards ability to throw raw numbers of arguments at an issue.
Popular opinion carries in an inherent psychological force of credibility. If 20 people just made threads that says "I hate 4e" with nothing but some mindless blathering, there argument would gain some credibility simply because there aren't an equal number of threads contradicting it. Its the end old "everyone's saying it, so it must be true".
What that means is that a group can "win" arguments simply be repeating the same unstructured argument time and time again.
That said, I think message board arguments can be great, but agree with Jeff that people need to take a bit of time with their arguments. If you are actively countering someone's opinion, the least you can do is check your facts and read your post a few time to ensure clear meaning.
As you can tell from my join date and post count, I don't post much. Mainly I don't have the time but in addition, I don't really like to. I find that if there is a discussion and I decide to join said discussion, someone typically comes along to deconstruct a post line by line (not necessarily mine) which I find somewhat aggravating. There are certain unnamed posters who I describe as "The answer to a question no one asked." type of poster.
Generally I like the EnWorld community and I have never used the ignore feature but there are those who are coming close to being on my list.
__________________ The surest sign that there is intelligent life in the Universe is that none have visited Earth.
Count me in with the people who normally don't pay attention to usernames and avatars. Although there are a few people who stick out when they do post something that makes me look to see who wrote it - both good and bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umbran
Discussion is good. Debate can be good. These are exchange of ideas between people with different opinions.
A rose by any other name. There's a fine line between discussion and argument, often times which one is occurring depends on the observer...
However, if we're going to split hairs, a 'debate' is usually a contest with winners and losers (at the very least, each side is trying to win). I would say that's more detrimental to the tone of the message boards than an argument any day. As others have mentioned, it's the people that try to flood the boards with their opinion so that it looks "right" that are the biggest annoyance.
People can walk away from an argument (rationalizing that the other side is just an idiot), but if they're championing a cause they are too invested to lose (even if the other side IS just an idiot)...
__________________ Visit Dragon Snack Games! The best game store in Mt Morris, NY!
We're not telling anyone what game to play. We are telling the market that we're going to actively encourage our players to stand up and demand that they be listened to, and that they become the center of the gaming industry - rather than the current publisher-centric model. - Ryan Dancey
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
