Forked thread: Meta portion of the "Class Acts" bard thread

[MrMyth]

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.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

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?

 

[Eridanis]

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.

 

[Piratecat]

I kind of like the announcements, personally, because (as someone said) they act as the default location for that topic's discussion. Handy.

 

[doctorhook]

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 don't understand the hostility...

 

[Glyfair]

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.

 

[Asmor]

I just want to apologize if I came off as rude. It was not my intent.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

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

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.

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.

Maybe something like:
Dragon [insert number] - [insert article name].

I am not sure what to do about free articles. In Theory, they are not Dragon or Dungeon articles, so WotC - [insert article name] might suffice.

 

[Thanee]

I don't understand the hostility...

What hostility exactly?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Morrus]

He may have made it rudely but he has a point.

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.