Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Conan makes a whoopsie
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6217494" data-attributes="member: 177"><p>Sorry, I don't think I sufficiently connected the dots. </p><p></p><p>Could they, in theory, avoid the unfairness on you? Yes. But, as a practical matter, attempting to do so may not be in their best interests. If there are enough jerks, or the jerks are really bad, then taking the time to determine each and every case becomes a losing proposition. Then, it is not irrational or impractical to expect folks to have to demonstrate a certain level of goodwill before cutting them slack.</p><p></p><p>Basically, jerks in the world have taught people to be pretty wary. If, in practice, 90% (or some high percentage) of the time people who start out like jerks turn out to actually be jerks, they'll have learned to not bother with the 10%. They are unlikely to change just because you feel it is unfair. </p><p></p><p>And to be honest, we get new users all the time who have no problem quickly coming to terms with how EN World works. You guys are kind of an anomaly in that regard, and I suspect your unity of identity as OTTers actually worked against you in this.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, here we get to a pertinent point - how much do they care what you think? See above - yes, they may be branding a decent person as a jerk. But, if the odds are against that, then they won't be too worried about it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If you really are all about fairness - If how you behave doesn't say what they think it does, it probably follows that how they behave doesn't necessarily say what you think it does, either. Two way street, and all that.</p><p></p><p>You tell us what it doesn't say, to you. You don't tell us what it does say, to you. That's leaving things open to interpretation, you know. Given the context, is that what you really want to do?</p><p></p><p>I posit that what it really says is that they've been burned too often and too badly before to make being open to such initial salvos seem reasonable, to them. That's not inconsistent with being about civility, it simply means they have a higher burden-of-proof threshold than you'd like.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Dude, do note we have *thousands* of users. How many have actually done this? Are you sure you're not painting with too broad a brush.</p><p></p><p>In addition, while you may not like it, there's nothing uncivil about choosing who you want to talk to, based on your own reasons. If they find your style unpleasant, for whatever reason, they don't owe it to you to talk with you.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 6217494, member: 177"] Sorry, I don't think I sufficiently connected the dots. Could they, in theory, avoid the unfairness on you? Yes. But, as a practical matter, attempting to do so may not be in their best interests. If there are enough jerks, or the jerks are really bad, then taking the time to determine each and every case becomes a losing proposition. Then, it is not irrational or impractical to expect folks to have to demonstrate a certain level of goodwill before cutting them slack. Basically, jerks in the world have taught people to be pretty wary. If, in practice, 90% (or some high percentage) of the time people who start out like jerks turn out to actually be jerks, they'll have learned to not bother with the 10%. They are unlikely to change just because you feel it is unfair. And to be honest, we get new users all the time who have no problem quickly coming to terms with how EN World works. You guys are kind of an anomaly in that regard, and I suspect your unity of identity as OTTers actually worked against you in this. Well, here we get to a pertinent point - how much do they care what you think? See above - yes, they may be branding a decent person as a jerk. But, if the odds are against that, then they won't be too worried about it. If you really are all about fairness - If how you behave doesn't say what they think it does, it probably follows that how they behave doesn't necessarily say what you think it does, either. Two way street, and all that. You tell us what it doesn't say, to you. You don't tell us what it does say, to you. That's leaving things open to interpretation, you know. Given the context, is that what you really want to do? I posit that what it really says is that they've been burned too often and too badly before to make being open to such initial salvos seem reasonable, to them. That's not inconsistent with being about civility, it simply means they have a higher burden-of-proof threshold than you'd like. Dude, do note we have *thousands* of users. How many have actually done this? Are you sure you're not painting with too broad a brush. In addition, while you may not like it, there's nothing uncivil about choosing who you want to talk to, based on your own reasons. If they find your style unpleasant, for whatever reason, they don't owe it to you to talk with you. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Conan makes a whoopsie
Top