Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 9614922" data-attributes="member: 177">So, there's an interesting subtlety in this.&nbsp; If we are given that, at least short term, a game is what it is, then there are a few different useful goals* in discourse:1) Informing those who are not yet engaged with the game about the game, Siskel and Ebert style.&nbsp; 2) Venting.&nbsp; I get it, but it really helps if folks are up front that this is what they are doing.3) Finding solutions - as you mention, above.4) Building other solutions, collaborating with other players to figure out fixes.&nbsp; Only the first of which is really what we would properly call &quot;critique&quot; or &quot;criticism&quot;.&nbsp; The others call for different modes of interaction than criticism provides.And knowing the audience matters.&nbsp; F'rex: walking into a messageboard that is dedicated to 5e to critique 5e tends to be teaching your grandmother to suck eggs.&nbsp; You aren't generally addressing people who have not engaged with the game, so it is the wrong place for critique, honestly.And that failure in understanding may lead to some of what EzekielRaiden described, above.&nbsp; Nobody on the 5e boards is the seasoned critic speaking to an uneducated audience.&nbsp; Approaching discussion there like you were is going to fall flat. *There are engagements in discourse that I do not list, because they are not terribly useful.&nbsp; For example, some folks like to stroke their own egos by sounding cool and sophisticated via not liking popular things.&nbsp; That's not of much value to anyone.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 9614922, member: 177"] So, there's an interesting subtlety in this. If we are given that, at least short term, a game is what it is, then there are a few different useful goals* in discourse: 1) Informing those who are not yet engaged with the game about the game, Siskel and Ebert style. 2) Venting. I get it, but it really helps if folks are up front that this is what they are doing. 3) Finding solutions - as you mention, above. 4) [I]Building[/I] other solutions, collaborating with other players to figure out fixes. Only the first of which is really what we would properly call "critique" or "criticism". The others call for different modes of interaction than criticism provides. And knowing the audience matters. F'rex: walking into a messageboard that is dedicated to 5e to critique 5e tends to be teaching your grandmother to suck eggs. You aren't generally addressing people who have not engaged with the game, so it is the wrong place for critique, honestly. And that failure in understanding may lead to some of what EzekielRaiden described, above. Nobody on the 5e boards is the seasoned critic speaking to an uneducated audience. Approaching discussion there like you were is going to fall flat. *There are engagements in discourse that I do not list, because they are not terribly useful. For example, some folks like to stroke their own egos by sounding cool and sophisticated via not liking popular things. That's not of much value to anyone. [/QUOTE]

Verification