OK, we're gettng a little annoyed here!

[billd91]

See, I find the above much more insulting than someone insulting my game of choice, but apparently it's okay to suggest I'd never have any kind of a forum worth a crap. But god forbid I criticize some fanboys idol's golden shower feat.

It's not a question of criticizing the feat. It's the way you do it. Don't be a jerk when you do it. Don't question the designer's intelligence or suggest ulterior motives. Don't insult the people who like the feat. Don't engage in hyperbolic hysterics.

 

[Kesh]

This thread is really padding out my Ignore List. I find that depressing.

 

[rounser]

This thread is really padding out my Ignore List. I find that depressing.

You've got the right to ignore whoever you want, but I find this a bit of a headscratcher. This thread seems very civil and constructive. But you'll probably never read this if you've ignored me.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

I am not sure what you're directly referencing about August but I would offer a word of caution. Post count is a double edged sword.

Me.

I've gone from lurking to posting over 4e. I have a low-post count and came back just for 4e.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Me.

I've gone from lurking to posting over 4e. I have a low-post count and came back just for 4e.

Speaking of which - Charwoman, I remember when you first appeared on ENworld, and I'm sure it was after someone found that a spell checker (or something similar?) suggested 'Charwoman Gene' for some other phrase. Soon after that you registererd, but for the last six months I've been racking my brain to try and remember what that original phrase was.

Do you remember?

 

[Terramotus]

Ok, I'm mostly a lurker who occasionally finds useful things to post about or who has the occasional question to ask. I've been coming to these boards for the same thing I came to Eric Noah's for when 3E was coming out: people dissecting and disseminating information about the new edition, and extrapolating from there what we might see.

But there's too much bile being spread for me to effectively find that, and I've found myself compelled to post more often in the last month or so because of it than in a long long time.

It seems to me that what I'm seeking should be the default aim of a 4E forum on a D&D news site. Am I wrong?

I come to this forum for information, not to listen to people who presume to tell other people how they must run their game. And, to me, that's all the anti-4E stuff is - telling me that I shouldn't be running my game a certain way. I also think it's uncalled for, especially since I haven't seen people verbally defecating all over older editions these past years. I'm like Tommy Lee Jones from The Fugitive at the dam scene. "I'm not buying Fourth Edition!" "I don't care!"

And honestly, I do think the "anti-4E" sentiment is responsible for the civility problem. Because it's easy to ignore someone who's slightly more enthusiastic than you are, but it's hard to ignore someone who thinks that what you're interested in is a lump of garbage.

That sentiment isn't going to go away, though. Not anytime soon. I think the only solution is one posted earlier in the thread: separate the 4E forum into a Discussion and Opinion forums. That way, at least, people who are looking for information can stick only to the Discussion forums and not have to deal with the people who want to duel online over which play style is superior.

 

[Wolfspider]

How can you discuss something without having an opinion though?

 

[Terramotus]

How can you discuss something without having an opinion though?

For example, discussion would be taking the information about Dragonborn and speculating about how they are created from the information leaked and whether they fill the niche of the strong PC race instead of Half-Orcs in the new edition.

Opinion would be whether or not you like Dragonborn over the Half-Orcs and whether or not you will allow them in your game.

 

[JayBrickwall]

How can you discuss something without having an opinion though?

Have you ever watched CSPAN?

But seriously, EN has entered the agree to disagree phase of 4e speculation. Posts that denounce the whole edition because of one leaked "still-being-worked-on" rule tidbit, or one name that might sound foolish seem to serve no purpose other than to add that poster's name to the "stand-up-and-be-counted" list.
Conversely, posters who fawn over every announced change (and even some that aren't), rationalize every pantheon or campaign setting redux and who already have pages of expository backstory for their first 4e homebrew seem like the extreme other end of the bell curve.

Not that either of them are in the wrong, far from it, they are opinionated and enthusiastic... they just make it harder for the big mass of us in the middle to parse and assimilate in shades of gray.

Much like the other posters who have mentioned coming here for 3e news and leaks; I am one of you, and it just seems... harder this time around to get information and discussion that is HELPING me to make up my mind, as opposed to making me recoil from the threads. Doesn't mean I will stop reading, though!

Moderation is a tough job, but somebody's got to do it, and someone ELSE isn't going to be happy when its all said and done.

 

[Piratecat]

See, I find the above much more insulting than someone insulting my game of choice, but apparently it's okay to suggest I'd never have any kind of a forum worth a crap. But god forbid I criticize some fanboys idol's golden shower feat.

In what possible way do you consider this argument to be okay?

JRR, stay out of the thread, please. If you can't post without sniping at one another, don't post.