ENWorld = whiners arguing ?

[Xombie Master]

You take the good,
You take the bad,
You say I whine,
I say I'm mad.
The facts of life!
They don't join in,
They say we're lame,
but I still hate,
them all the same.
The facts of life!

There's a thin line between whining and anger. I express anger pretty much all the time, as it's the purest of emotions. The thing is, when people agree with your point, they say you're right to be "angry". When they're wrong, and you're right, they say your just "whining".
A whiner won't admit they are wrong. An angry person can resist being a whiner by giving in when they make a mistake.

 

[Jdvn1]

How's this a drawback? Heck, I'm younger than you(from what I remember, at least) and I don't have a problem at all. Remember, us younger ones will rule the board when all of the Old Ones finally die.

... I never thought about that. I wonder how long EN World will last, and how long the oldest member will have been registered.

... Although if Apocalyptic Kitty's account keeps getting passed on, he might have no competition.

 

[EricNoah]

There are certainly many posters who can't seem to understand that preferences vary from person to person.

No!! There's only one universal truth, and if others are too stupid or weak to see it, then they must be driven away!!

 

[Acquana]

Now hold on ...

There's a thin line between whining and anger. I express anger pretty much all the time, as it's the purest of emotions. The thing is, when people agree with your point, they say you're right to be "angry". When they're wrong, and you're right, they say your just "whining".
A whiner won't admit they are wrong. An angry person can resist being a whiner by giving in when they make a mistake.

I disagree. I can deconstruct just about everything you've put down, but that would be hijacking the thread a tad too much.

Instead I'll say that expressing anger a tremendous deal on a forum only proves the point that those who stay away would want to make. A forum shouldn't be for either "anger" or "whining" to begin with. After all, the term itself referrs more to debate than any emotional state. Debate has almost nothing to do with emotion when done properly, even if you happen to disagree with whoever you're debating with. Arguing on a venue such as this is worthless, considering that few people honestly, deeply care about what someone they've never met thinks enough to take anything they say into real consideration.

So ultimately, I appreciate that I can debate a good deal more than argue on EN World, but it's not without people who take things personally and make a discussion an argument. Going back to my previous post, that's just what happens with anonymity.

 

[Shemeska]

Like what? Just curious, no judgments here. I learned not to judge people back when I turned 83 back in the 70's ...

I've found that there's a slightly different approach taken to the game between myself and a lot of folks who started the game in earlier editions. I didn't start till 3e was out, and so I have that forming my initial exposure to the game, plus subsequent adoration of some of the best material from 2e. In my experience, I've found that I tend to not always see eye to eye with those who started out in 1e, and especially those who started in 1e and had a seriously negative reaction to 2e.

That isn't bad or wrong, we're just on totally different sides of the stage on some topics very often it seems.

I can give some generalizations about that different approach I see if you want.

 

[Henry]

No!! There's only one universal truth, and if others are too stupid or weak to see it, then they must be driven away!!

Frell You! Buzz off, Noah!

Someone, hold me.

 

[reveal]

Frell You! Buzz off, Noah!

Someone, hold me.

 

[Bastoche]

I disagree. I can deconstruct just about everything you've put down, but that would be hijacking the thread a tad too much.

Instead I'll say that expressing anger a tremendous deal on a forum only proves the point that those who stay away would want to make. A forum shouldn't be for either "anger" or "whining" to begin with. After all, the term itself referrs more to debate than any emotional state. Debate has almost nothing to do with emotion when done properly, even if you happen to disagree with whoever you're debating with. Arguing on a venue such as this is worthless, considering that few people honestly, deeply care about what someone they've never met thinks enough to take anything they say into real consideration.

So ultimately, I appreciate that I can debate a good deal more than argue on EN World, but it's not without people who take things personally and make a discussion an argument. Going back to my previous post, that's just what happens with anonymity.

Debating about trivial manners is what I would define as "whinning". For example, having a newbie post his 1000th level character and yet having an 8 pages long "debate". That's whiners arguing IMO.

I do not go on many RPG related forums. I could count 3 of them, 2 of which I barely participate in. The other forums I go to are about other subjects. Among all the forums I go to, ENworld is by far the "whiniest"

 

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

I've found that there's a slightly different approach taken to the game between myself and a lot of folks who started the game in earlier editions. I didn't start till 3e was out, and so I have that forming my initial exposure to the game, plus subsequent adoration of some of the best material from 2e. In my experience, I've found that I tend to not always see eye to eye with those who started out in 1e, and especially those who started in 1e and had a seriously negative reaction to 2e.

That isn't bad or wrong, we're just on totally different sides of the stage on some topics very often it seems.

I can give some generalizations about that different approach I see if you want.

You mean the "Diaglo Syndrome"? I think I know what you mean, but I'd bet the people with striking differences other then just nostalgic memories are in the minority.

 

[andargor]

Second is pretty much the entirety of the Rules forum. While occassionally a useful place to stop by, it's generally ... whizzing contests between wanna-be pundits, to be honest. Simple rules questions turn into proclamations issued from on high by volatile personalities and 8+ page arguments about the most minute trivialities. If MY first encounter with ENWorld had been on the Rules forum, I'd probably have never come back, based just on the vitriol.

I find this thread interesting, especially the opinions about the Rules forum. That's where I hang 95% of the time. And 4.5% of the time in the Software & Computers forum.

I actually enjoy the Rules forum. Even as a (very) long time gamer, I like to discover new things about the game. I'm still learning now. And I take my role as our group's rule lawyer very seriously. Yes, some people take that as a negative.

But my experience, at least, has been that it frees our DM from the nitty-gritty that can slow down the game so he can concentrate on the story. I don't argue with him, I just tell him what are his options and what is the most correct interpretation according to the posters here. And he makes up his mind, if necessary implementing a house rule on the spot if it makes sense to him and his campaign. I'm an objective resource he can count on, and in turn EN World is my inspiration.

I don't therefore mind the occasional heated debates, which are for the most part civil. It shows that the rules aren't fixed and in many cases not very clear. The "Smackdown" threads are actually very useful, so that "legal" combinations that can ruin a campaign are house ruled out early on.

So debates on the "most minute trivialities" have actually helped us have more fun games.

There are different forums for different people, and we are all looking for different things here. Some people like Rules, some House Rules, some SH, some General, etc. I find that we each have our personal tastes with respect to the game.

Andargor