Return of the Edition War

[jaerdaph]

Topic bans, ala RPG.net.

"Hi (Poster X), we understand you're a big fan of (subject Y), but we've noticed you've been posting some inflammatory stuff about (subject Z). For the next (day/week/month), please do not post about (subject Z).

Thanks!"

That's great, and I agree with Mark and others that probably the disciplinary action should get a little tougher around here like it is at RPGNet, but I would caution that RPGNet tends to go too far. They have this forum there called Trouble Tickets, where the name of a permanently or temporarily banned user is posted, and anyone is allowed to post in that forum, frequently mocking the person being disciplined. The mods have even taken to writing cute little announcements and thread titles of late as part of that process as well. It all seems very hypocritical to me, especially if the individual was removed for personal attacks on other users. And I'd truly hate to see a similar pillory or whipping post at EN World.

Another aspect is that the most vitrilic threads tend to be "about the industry" you could shift them to a subforum (but I don't think that is the best plan) - perhaps you could topic-ban some posters from the industry threads?

It would be nice to see threads about WotC (and other companies) policy, legal issues, business practices, piracy etc. stay out of general so folks who just want to play the game and could care less could easily ignore them.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Topic bans, ala RPG.net.

"Hi (Poster X), we understand you're a big fan of (subject Y), but we've noticed you've been posting some inflammatory stuff about (subject Z). For the next (day/week/month), please do not post about (subject Z).

Thanks!"

Another aspect is that the most vitrilic threads tend to be "about the industry" you could shift them to a subforum (but I don't think that is the best plan) - perhaps you could topic-ban some posters from the industry threads?

I would hesitate greatly before taking RPG.net's advice regarding anything that involves the edition war, seeing as how horribly scewed the moderation is there. The problem with topic bans is the old "Who decides who gets to post where?" I'm not saying this to claim anything bad about EN Worlds moderators, mind you ;p, but RPG.net's moderators are very definately scewed regarding the edition war, and the end result has been "anyone is allowed to insult Pathfinder and 3.5 as much as they want, but a ban on anyone who speaks ill of 4e."

 

[Piratecat]

I assume you mean skewed and not screwed.

While people don't always perceive it that way, the mods here are as big fans of 3e and Pathfinder as of 4e (in fact, probably half the mods aren't playing 4e as far as I know.) We specifically pick people to mod who are edition neutral; I'll be buying Pathfinder when it comes out, and I'm loving Sagiro's 3.5 game. I think the perception comes that for a while, certain folks got shut down when they were particularly vitriolic about 4e. We're just against anyone being fervently unreasonable and insulting.

Same goes for OSRIC. While I don't personally think much of how Joe went about trying to force the issue, I'm all for the game.

 

[Morrus]

A big problem - and perception - with such threads (which leads to supporters of either "side" feeling they are picked on and those on the other side are given carte blanche) is that people focus on the topic of the thread rather than the nature of the thread.

If it's a negatve thread, it's far more likely to be one those which erupt into argument. An "I love X" thread is almost always OK, but an "I hate X" thread is more likely to go downhill.

And of course, with a new game on the block, your'e gonna get a lot of "I love the new game" and "I hate the new game". Unsurpisingly, the former tend to be peaceful, and the latter tend to be acrimonious; and therefore they attract moderator attention. Conversely, you get few"I hate the old game" threads, and so less moderation on that side of the coin.

Then of course, you get folks saying "the mods moderate those who don't like X, but not those who like it", which is blatantly untrue (we truly couldn't give a flying crap which version of the game you like); the truth is that the mods moderate those who act in an antisocial manner, and the "I hate X" threads tend to attract such posts.

So the issue isn't of a difference of opinion in edition preference; it's of the delivery of that opiion. It's the difference between "I hate 4E and people who play it are idiots..." and "I love 3.5, and here's why..." (exagerated generlized examples, obviously, but they serve to illustrate the point).

In short, just being polite and friendly, whetever you point or opinion, will pretty much guarantee you're OK.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Again, I'm not trying to claim that ENWorld moderators lean any which way, merely that topic bans are something that seems way too much, and could way too easily fly out of control. Also, please don't take advice from RPG.net D:

Also...eh...I'm not an ENGLISH professor ;p

 

[Eridanis]

You can still use your old dice, but you have to install them as Administrator, and in a folder other than Programs...

"Are you sure you want to roll those dice? Please enter your password to roll 1d20..."

Another suggestion may be some sort of internal "warning points" system. For example, every time a post gets moderated (ie, a mod needs to edit) they get a point, so you can tell who the problem users are more easily. This might be a little more work though.

This is actually something we're discussing right now in the mod's forum. Really, none of us can be everywhere, and while we're very good at communicating, i's true that a particular nitwit might be disciplined seperately by three different mods without the others knowing. A tallied infraction system might let us track these things quantitatively, rather than qualitatively.

While people don't always perceive it that way, the mods here are as big fans of 3e and Pathfinder as of 4e (in fact, probably half the mods aren't playing 4e as far as I know.) We specifically pick people to mod who are edition neutral; I'll be buying Pathfinder when it comes out, and I'm loving Sagiro's 3.5 game. I think the perception comes that for a while, certain folks got shut down when they were particularly vitriolic about 4e. We're just against anyone being fervently unreasonable and insulting.

Indeed. Point is, we seek out the kind of people to moderate who are very good at keeping thier personal feelings seperate from the need to keep the peace. Whatever game we play, we're all on the same page when it comes to wanting fair, respectful, and lively discussions.

 

[Dyson Logos]

Personally, as someone who is pretty system-neutral overall (although I admit to not having tried to run 4e yet, just played it twice) I've found the moderation to be excellent here. Not the clumsy moderation I've seen on many other forums.

 

[LightPhoenix]

What I appreciate is the speed of the moderation. Case in point: I stupidly posted in the newest veiled edition war thread (Goodman v. Dancey) and within the maybe six hours before I checked the thread again, someone who flamed my post had already been moderated. I didn't even get the chance to read the flame. I learned my lesson and am not even reading those threads anymore.

This goes to two points. First, the mods are doing an excellent job staying on top of things. Second, the community is doing a good job reporting those things. So perhaps this is a bit self-congratulatory, but yay for us!

 

[Shemeska]

Then of course, you get folks saying "the mods moderate those who don't like X, but not those who like it", which is blatantly untrue (we truly couldn't give a flying crap which version of the game you like); the truth is that the mods moderate those who act in an antisocial manner, and the "I hate X" threads tend to attract such posts.

I suppose there's also the risk of some people ascribing slants in moderation due to the financial support of WotC's advertising dollars. Mind you, I think the mods have done a pretty good job around here, and I have no complaints about what does or doesn't get nuked when there are rude or warring posts. But it's a tricky situation that risks a presumption whenever anything anti-whoever is paying for advertising gets moderated.

Of course I also haven't seen any major WotC ads online for the past month, so their ad blitz might be slowing down, or I'm not noticing it here, or rpg.net, or slashdot, etc.

 

[Lanefan]

Eh, I don't think the sides are neccisarily 3e vs 4e, or even other editions vs 4e, though.

Quite right. In some cases it's old-school vs. 3e *and* 4e, and I'll gladly throw down in that arena if anyone will ever let me.

In case it matters, I'd rather see the General forum stay as inclusive as possible, if only because anything put anywhere else tends to get lost.

Lanefan