D&D 3E/3.5 A message to the 3.5ers

[EricNoah]

I think we can all agree that threadcrapping is bad / unpleasant / rude. What varies from person to person is how much negativity they percieve to be the measure of threadcrapping. I have often had the urge to tell a few of my fellow 3.x holdouts "could you just not be a jerk about it, please?" But I figure that won't help -- people who are reacting with perpetual negativity on a habitual basis (on this or any topic) aren't going to change just because of little ol' me. Ignore list is my only recourse in the face of that.

 

[DaveMage]

But I figure that won't help -- people who are reacting with perpetual negativity on a habitual basis (on this or any topic) aren't going to change just because of little ol' me.

If you believe the above to be true then I think you underestimate the respect people have for you around here.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Yeah, I have to agree with Eric here. If there is one thing that 4E definitely is to blame for, it is me suddenly starting to use my Ignore list, and adding people to it on a weekly base, from all sides of the fence. And from what it looks like, it won't get much better before the first Core books are actually out. :\

 

[Odhanan]

And from what it looks like, it won't get much better before the first Core books are actually out. :\

I wish the core books were out already. Precisely for this reason.

 

[Mistwell]

Enough with the Yellow Brick Road argument.

Real simple. People who are not switching to 4e have been asked not to post in this forum. This is the only forum where 4e posts are allowed. Therefore, yes, indeed, it has been said that if you aren't posting positive, you shouldn't post it, if you are not switching to 4e.

There was more context than the sentence you are citing. More than one person has mentioned that greater context.

This "nobody said" stuff is just feigned politeness. It's pretty obvious that there is a lot of hostility.

Indeed.

In the OP, the term "grognardry" was used, identifying fans of the old edition with curmudgeonry. The request was made for non-converts not to post here, on behalf of everyone who is converting.

Converts and non-converts? That's a misrepresentation. But, it's the same one you keep making, so I guess me repeating again isn't going to help.

So the OP basically contains two salient positions:
- People who are not switching to 4e should not express their opinions of 4e on ENWorld

People who already firmly decided they will not play it should have a voluntary moratorium on the subject. Further, the thread's theme is more "please stop repeating the same negativity in all the threads".

- People who are considering 4e but have not definitely decided do not exist, or at least are not a significant audience for the 4e debate

False. Numerous people said so in this thread that people not decided SHOULD post their opinion. I think this is really the crux of the issue for me right now - somehow, we are mis communicating on this point.

So it seems to me that the OP effectively posits that the purpose of this forum is to discuss 4e with the aim of fostering enthusiasm.

I don't get that, nor do many others. Repeatedly people have said that constructive criticism from those who are considering 4e is encouraged.

 

[pawsplay]

Mistwell, I am not talking about "people," I am returning to the original post.

As you are not the original poster, I think you might want to refrain from reporting what is true/false about the OP, to say nothing of the other posters in this thead whom you have decided to speak for.

I'm not even sure what you're disagreement with me, apart from you covering the same ground defensively, whereas I purposefully laid bare the propositions being put forth. It amounts to the same thing; some opinions are considered unwelcome, some people are being camped who have not voluntarily chosen a side.

I think a really good example is the way you addressed my post as though I were aligned with other posters in the thread, against "your" side however you conceive it.

I am for open dialog and if you are also for that, then we do not disagree philosophically.

I'm not sure what "constructive criticism" means in this context, since we are not addressing the 4e designers, not very directly. I think just "criticism" encompasses what we do here. Discuss, consider, challenge, analyze.

 

[Piratecat]

Actually, all things must come to an end. This thread has served a purpose, and has survived without major implosion. Good job, gang - and thanks to everyone who worked to communicate without arguing.

Klunk.