MetaPost comments and questions about the messageboards and other parts of EN World. If you have a problem, this is where to go. Moderator email addresses are posted here.
Well, a few folks that week in and week out tend to almost be in a race to start a thread for each and every single article on the DDI with nothing more than a post of "It's up!" and a link to WotC's paysite, well it borders on the obnoxious.
I'd be in favor of a single thread for each issue of the e-zine as was done for the print magazines or a subforum for DDI non-free articles.
As a counter-point, I'd say I vastly prefer having the ability to discuss each article and its topic independantly, rather than cramming them into a single thread. I can't imagine how you find the posting of the thread obnoxious - if it isn't a topic of interest to you, there is no need to read the thread!
But since many people clearly do want to discuss these topics, I don't think its fair to state they should go away because you prefer otherwise.
I'd be in favor of a single thread for each issue of the e-zine as was done for the print magazines or a subforum for DDI non-free articles.
Since you aren't at all interested in the game or in the subscription, why is it any more obnoxious than any other thread you're not interested in checking out based on the title - and why do you imagine your personal preferences have any effect on the matter?
__________________ Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
Religion must remain an outlet for people who say to themselves, "I am not the kind of person I want to be." It must never sink into an assemblage of the self-satisfied.
Shemeska - no need to comment on how others post. If you have a question, please contact the moderators.
mhacdebhandia - no need to be rude to others. Please feel free to report a post that you think needs moderating.
guivre - welcome to a three-day ban for questioning moderation in thread, rather than privately. And to answer your implied question, it's never been moderated because no one's ever reported a post for that before. Hard to believe, but we can't be everywhere.
The moral of the story? If you have a problem, please report a post or contact the mods.
__________________ What family doesn't have its up and downs?
I kind of like the announcements, personally, because (as someone said) they act as the default location for that topic's discussion. Handy.
__________________ - Piratecat, EN World Admin
Currently editing the 4e War of the Burning Sky adventure path. Support EN Publishing, get excellent modules!
Yikes. A guy creates a thread to discuss a new article, and people jump all over him for it. What gives? It's better to have a thread to discuss the article than to try to do it all in a single thread, especially considering the volume of D&DI subscribers who post here.
I kind of like the announcements, personally, because (as someone said) they act as the default location for that topic's discussion. Handy.
I do. However, I do prefer when whoever posts actually comments on the article. It shows they bothered to do the work, rather than rush for the link
On the other hand, a designated "post the article" person isn't a bad idea. I know I have been caught in commenting on a cool article, only to find that 3 other people posted with the exact same time stamp. Having an "official thread starter" for the new articles will cut down some of the disjointed discussions that happen when a couple of threads get combined that cover the same article.
__________________ David A. Blizzard
"The only constant I am sure of is this accelerating rate of change" - Downside Up by Peter Gabriel
I kind of like the announcements, personally, because (as someone said) they act as the default location for that topic's discussion. Handy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glyfair
I do. However, I do prefer when whoever posts actually comments on the article. It shows they bothered to do the work, rather than rush for the link
That pretty much covers it for me. I want a forum entry discussing each article and not have multiple articles discussed in one thread. I preferred if even the first poster makes a quick summary or comment on the contents.
Quote:
On the other hand, a designated "post the article" person isn't a bad idea. I know I have been caught in commenting on a cool article, only to find that 3 other people posted with the exact same time stamp. Having an "official thread starter" for the new articles will cut down some of the disjointed discussions that happen when a couple of threads get combined that cover the same article.
That sounds like a fine house rule.
I am not sure if we can "burden" someone with the task and expect him to always do it.
What I'd like was a "standardized" format for the thread title, so it's easier to find and search, and it also helps people avoiding double posting the threat.
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
The OP doesn't bring anything to the thread either if you're being honest. If it's that important to post "It's up" for every DDI article that comes out a very small shell script hooked to the RSS feed.
There's a large difference between commenting on an article and just posting to say it's up. I'm surprised that thread starts like that aren't banned with as heavy handed as the moderation is around here.
Well, posting something some others don't find interesting is not a problem. You're allowed to post something that "doesn't bring anything to the thread". It's posting something rude that's the problem. "It's up" is not rude to anyone, regardless of how interesting or useful some folks might find it.
Well, a few folks that week in and week out tend to almost be in a race to start a thread for each and every single article on the DDI with nothing more than a post of "It's up!" and a link to WotC's paysite, well it borders on the obnoxious.
It's a handful of posts amongst hundreds, none of which you have to click on. How can that possibly be "obnoxious"?
As an internet phenomenon, "FIRST!" posts are very common... and kinda annoying, honestly.
If you are only interested in being first, then posting merely that the content is up makes sense, but then it's just a "FIRST!". There's nothing actually wrong with doing this. It hurts nobody. But as a practical matter it reminds many of fairly juvenile, one-upsmanship posting patterns they see elsewhere.
It should not be worth announcing if the content is not worth discussing. If you are interested in discussing the content, there is no reason why you can't take the time to post, "It is up, and I thought it was cool because..."
I, for one, would take it as a courtesy if people put at least a little commentary in such posts.
I agree with the thought that it's nice to have a single thread to discuss the article. However, I also agree with the sentiment that the posts should have some substance to them, and shouldn't just be "first" or "up". If this means there may be a couple of threads on the topic... well, that's why mods can merge threads.
I, for one, would take it as a courtesy if people put at least a little commentary in such posts.
I agree whole-heartedly with this.
I don't find the posts annoying, but I would appreciate it if people were to add just a little commentary to them when they start them.
__________________ DM of Adventure Path Story Hour (now in Thunderspire Labyrinth!): Ryam Plays Dice - updated 8th June 09 (campaign on indefinite hiatus).
Player in Swordlands Story Hour: Interview with a Fey - updated 15th June 09. News just in - this campaign may be restarting in the near future! Watch this space!
I also have the singular honour of being Rouseketeer #20.
I kind of like the announcements, personally, because (as someone said) they act as the default location for that topic's discussion. Handy.
Exactly, I much prefer to have a specific thread for discussion of each article. Furthermore, I spend very little time browsing WotC site, so for me this threads are useful reminders of when new articles are available. I think that by now, it's very clear that the initial post in those this threads links to pay per view content and they are very easy to ignore... there are countless threads here that hold no interest to me and I just don't open them.
Edit: that said, I agree with those who think that some initial discussion would make those posts much more useful.
__________________ 'Can a magician kill a man by magic?' Lord Wellington asked Strange. Strange frowned. He seemed to dislike the question. 'I suppose a magician might,' he admitted, 'but a gentleman never could.'
The thread seems fine to me. It generated some relevant discussion about the article. As well, the original poster contributes thoughts himself a few posts down. Anyway, I prefer individual article discussion. I'll just skip the ones that don't interest me.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
