Return of the Edition War

[Samuel Leming]

Having read the post before you edited it, I have to agree and know that particular poster gets reported regularly with no apparent action taken (none in the threads where I personally know he gets reported and he's still here, so obviously not banned). I've got to ask, is the poster in question actually posting within the limits of what is acceptable behavior?

Samuel Leming, OTOH, has been here for years without any infractions of which I am aware and this poster has him so up in arms he actually risks breaking the rules. That's gotta tell you something.

Thanks for the support. I really need it right now.

There really doesn't appear to be a rule against acting like a jerk here as long as you don't step over the line and break an actual rule. That's why some people on other boards say we have a reputation for being passive-aggressive.

I think I see the moderator's reasons for this though. Jerklike behavior is subjective. You know it when you see it, but not everyone agrees on what makes a jerk. The moderators need to be objective. When taking an action they need to be able to point to a specific infraction. Otherwise a moderator can be more easily accused of letting personal issues influence his rulings.

 

[S'mon]

I was in a really foul mood this last weekend. Normally when that happens I recuse myself form moderating for a while; I didn't recognize it at the time, though. I think it's worth me apologizing for the overly stringent result, because I largely things worse instead of better. Sorry about that.

Now that things have calmed down again I'd just like to say here that I think you've behaved like a gentleman in apologising PC, and have minimised any lasting damage.

 

[S'mon]

I
I decided to take his advice after that and actually started to use the "Ignore" function for a couple of members.

I have a bit of a problem with the ENW Ignore function because when an Ignored poster starts a thread, it preserves the thread as visible, but without their initial post. This makes for confusing reading! Invisibling the entire thread might be better.

 

[Mark]

Another problem with the ignore function becomes apparent when someone who is prolific and prone to derailing threads gets off on a tangent. It is mostly useful, though.


Also, I agree that PC is most definitely a gentleman.

 

[Arnwyn]

I have a bit of a problem with the ENW Ignore function because when an Ignored poster starts a thread, it preserves the thread as visible, but without their initial post. This makes for confusing reading! Invisibling the entire thread might be better.

Indeed. AFAIC, ENWorld's Ignore function is broken and essentially non-functional. For me, if an Ignore function doesn't entirely scrub the existence of a poster from ENWorld when I'm browsing, it's pretty much valueless.

(And while this is completely wishful thinking, I'd still love the ability to add myself to others' ignore lists... some people shouldn't ever respond to me! )

 

[Morrus]

Indeed. AFAIC, ENWorld's Ignore function is broken and essentially non-functional. For me, if an Ignore function doesn't entirely scrub the existence of a poster from ENWorld when I'm browsing, it's pretty much valueless.

And yet, when I set it to do that a while back, people complained that they'd prefer to see the threads so they could change their mind on a case-by-case basis about viewing them.

Can't win, really.

FWIW, I personally prefer it the way you do.

 

[Arnwyn]

And yet, when I set it to do that a while back, people complained that they'd prefer to see the threads so they could change their mind on a case-by-case basis about viewing them.

Can't win, really.

Heh!

That complaint doesn't make much sense to me... if one is going to go so far as to use the Ignore function, then there really shouldn't be any "case-by-case basis"... Crazy illogical people!

And sadly that still doesn't fix the 'see the offending poster in quotes' problem.

 

[LightPhoenix]

I think the reason for it was two-fold. First, just because someone ignored starts a thread, doesn't mean that the non-ignored replies in the thread have no value. Second, I think perhaps that people wanted a way to "cheat" the ignore option - ignored people can still be detected, if not always read.

 

[Mark]

Do I sense the beginning of an Ignore List Settings War?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Reading the Pathfinder thread on changes to the Allip, I think we are mislabeling the whole thing.

It's not an edition war.

It's a playstyle war.

Samuel Lemings example is great for that, too. It's not about the individual edition, but the playstyle it supported or suggested, and how people like or dislike that playstyle.