I mean lol...seriously Crimson Longinus of the internets.
That is your response. Is your friendly (lol?) public service announcement above indicative of a "relevant contribution?"
Here is a public service announcement for you: People see <shrug> emoji and "just sayin' ", and they don't think "definitely not douchey!" So, my advice to you for your contributions to be relevant would be to drop the shrug emojis! Particularly after sarcastic remarks!
Lucky for everyone at ENWorld, you don't get a vote on whose words are relevant and whose are not. I'm quite confident that my contributions over the years meet the standard of "relevant" despite not genuflecting in quite the way you would like me to (for whatever reason)!
And the 80s have a hell of a lot of purchase in all manner of culture, D&D included, in our world thank-you-very-much!
EDIT - And to be clear (because you didn't answer my question). You feel that if I don't genuflect sufficiently to your liking in an acknowledging preamble of some kind, that the ENWorld userbase will consider my contributions irrelevant. Why_is_that? Why is genuflecting to majority share D&D before I talk about my "old-ass 80s D&D" or my "newfangled ivory tower RPGing" the prerequisite for "relevant contributions?" How does that work? Draw me a map.
@Cadence , you xped this so I assume you agree? Could you elaborate on that? Could maybe
@FrogReaver elaborate on that? Why must I submit a sufficiently ackowledging preamble to the hegemony of modern majority share D&D before my contributions should be considered relevant?