Return of the Edition War

[Morrus]

I suppose there's also the risk of some people ascribing slants in moderation due to the financial support of WotC's advertising dollars.

Well, other than tell people they're wrong, not much I can do about unsubstantiated accusations of dishonesty. There will always be a percentage people who attribute their being moderated to any motive other than the likely real cause - that, at the time, they were being an ass.

Sure, nobody's perfect, and we might slip up from time to time, but accusations of systemic and organized dishonesty are completely false.

 

[Mark]

Well, other than tell people they're wrong, not much I can do about unsubstantiated accusations of dishonesty. There will always be a percentage people who attribute their being moderated to any motive other than the likely real cause - that, at the time, they were being an ass.

Sure, nobody's perfect, and we might slip up from time to time, but accusations of systemic and organized dishonesty are completely false.

Just as you wish your slip ups to be charitably framed, you might want to consider that people are less likely to believe in "systemic and organized dishonesty" as they are that the same results can come from a subconcious bias to remain relevant to the largest segment of a downwardly trending demographic. It's only natural that those with a vested interest in the success of the site would lean toward a pro-WotC bias without ever having to do so purposefully. Also, people should be careful not to fall into the trap of believing that most critical opinion is negative by nature when in fact it is more often meant to bring about positive change. Beware the extremists on both sides but be sure not to ignore that pseudo-positive extremists damage the dialogue by stifling the critical discussion that can otherwise improve all manner of things worthy of close imspection and analysis. Just some cautionary thoughts.

 

[Rolflyn]

I've noticed the resurgence of the Edition War as well. Or maybe I've slipped into more problematic threads of late.

I've always found ENWorld pro-4E. It seems every thread has an anti-3E backhanded comment such as "Before 4E came along and saved me from 3E,..." This used to really bother me, but now I laugh. Still, it gets tiring to see the same names making the same references. I generally stay to threads I feel aren't going to go that direction, but sometimes curiosity gets the better me.

As a result, I spend much more time at Paizo. Yes, there is an edition war there too but it leans more my direction.

 

[ExploderWizard]

There are differences between Fourth Edition and earlier editions.

Why must every comment that mentions a difference be labeled WAR?

There are differences between every edition published. If that were not the case then there would only be one edition.

There are people who take the "game remains the same" advertising way too literally. The various editions all have different flavors and are written with separate sets of assumptions about playing style. Everyone will gravitate to the game or games that provide what they are looking for.

There is nothing inherently bad or ill meaning in recognizing these differences and embracing the ones that we find most appealing. Ignoring that major changes in style and theme have taken place through the editions is sometimes as annoying as climbing on a soapbox about it.

Such opinions do not need to be accompanied by comments that all alternate styles suck and shouldn't exist.

I'm sure someone, somewhere will see this as an attack.

 

[Lanefan]

I'm sure someone, somewhere will see this as an attack.

So quit wasting time and roll your to-hit die, dammit!

Lanefan

 

[stonegod]

I don't frequent the non-PbP parts as often, and then its mostly General and a little bit of 4E. But, just to counter "biases", the PbP-side is still heavily 3.5 with some healthy 4E interest. Not as much Pathfinder, but (1) its not out officially and (2) they tend to stay over an paizo it seems.

The Playing the Game board had in the last day:
- 30 3.5E games updated
- 10 4E games updated
- 3 Pathfinder games updated
- 2 Star Wars games updated
- And one each of World of Darkness, BCMI, Dark*Matter, Call of Cthulu, and Babylon 5

I'm excluding the 3 living forums as they are editions specific (one 3, one 4, and one transition to 4).

Just an FYI.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I've noticed the resurgence of the Edition War as well. Or maybe I've slipped into more problematic threads of late.

I've always found ENWorld pro-4E. It seems every thread has an anti-3E backhanded comment such as "Before 4E came along and saved me from 3E,..." This used to really bother me, but now I laugh. Still, it gets tiring to see the same names making the same references. I generally stay to threads I feel aren't going to go that direction, but sometimes curiosity gets the better me.

As a result, I spend much more time at Paizo. Yes, there is an edition war there too but it leans more my direction.

I gotta disagree there, man. While many of the posters here love 4e, that doesn't mean the forums themselves are skewed a different way. Yeah, those names - and I bet I could guess a few ;p - get rather tiresome, but it's just people making noise. And keep in mind, I'm willing to bet those same people glare at their own list of names or people who always talk about ho much better 3.5 is over 4e. I'm probably on one or two...er...or several...lists.

What makes a board skew in one direction over the other is in cases like RPG.net, where the moderators enforce an edition war by openly backing one of the editions, or when a website is closely tied with one of the editions and has an actual stake in it. I don't think EN World has a stake in any of the editions - it's a D&D website first, specific edtion website second.

 

[ST]

Just as you wish your slip ups to be charitably framed, you might want to consider that people are less likely to believe in "systemic and organized dishonesty" as they are that the same results can come from a subconcious bias to remain relevant to the largest segment of a downwardly trending demographic. It's only natural that those with a vested interest in the success of the site would lean toward a pro-WotC bias without ever having to do so purposefully.

I don't believe that. It's very cleverly worded, but it's just not plausible to me. Morrus is talking about people accusing the mods of being in bad faith, and you're basically saying "well, maybe they're not intentionally acting in bad faith, they're just subconsciously influenced", and I don't buy it. No offense intended, but no, the mods really are getting attacked just for doing their jobs.

The mods probably have a lot less emotionally invested in this than some of the posters. IMO the mods are the healthy ones, emotionally, for this. That's my only dog in this fight, speaking up for the mods since I think they've had to handle a Gordian knot.

It's especially strange to see the comparison with Paizo -- I like those guys, but, hey, there is clearly a financial interest in one edition over another, so it kind of squicks me when they actively support anti-4e posters. But I guess it's only fair, a company isn't bound to encourage people who use competitor's products to post on their forums.

 

[Morrus]

I think it's fair to say that delivery is more important than the message with this issue. Nobody should hold it against you for having an opinion or a preference; and they're welcome to have a contrary opinion or preference. It's how those are presented where problems arise.

 

[Mark]

Morrus is talking about people accusing the mods of being in bad faith, and you're basically saying "well, maybe they're not intentionally acting in bad faith, they're just subconsciously influenced", and I don't buy it.

There's nothing to buy. No one can act completely without bias. Those behind the scenes are the only ones with all of the information, so they will have to take a hard look at things on their own and make whatever adjustments they need to make based on their info. If this were some crackpot acting as a lone voice in the wilderness, certainly it could be easily dismissed but obviously there are enough members speaking up that this could use a closer look. Part of the secret of success for EN World has always been to listen to its members and make adjustments based on feedback. We can trust them to do the right thing.