Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
The Purpose of the + in Thread Titles
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Saracenus" data-source="post: 8945000" data-attributes="member: 47839"><p>I am not getting this binary oppositional thing you are trotting out. First off, do you think there is a way to declare a winner on a topic by the number of people that take X side vs. Y side?</p><p></p><p>A +plus thread about Wyrmwood wouldn't be something about unconditionally supporting them and hey, all you haters jump off. It would be a topic about the quality of the product and pluses and minus of it.</p><p></p><p>A + thread does not remove all discussion but it does ask that people who want to come in hard say, "Wormwood is the suckiest of the suckiest companies out there and nothing else." to not come and play in this thread. Does a unbending no that shouts down a topic bring any value to the discussion? I have seen a lot of hot button threads end because a group swoops in and shouts everyone down. I personally don't see any value in it.</p><p></p><p>If you feel that strongly about it, start your own thread where you can go to town on Wormwood. Both threads are going to show up in a search and the rest of us will decide which one we think gives us the best info. You do not get to choose the winner, we do.</p><p></p><p>Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Wyrmwood has done something illegal or unethical. Let's pretend they get caught substituting cheaper wood materials and not the ones advertised. That would be its own thread and you would not dump it in the already existing + Wyrmwood thread. And there is nothing stopping you from doing just that. Where is the crisis?</p><p></p><p>Now if the members of the + Wyrmwood thread decides to take up the allegations on their thread and don't allow counter points you could take that to the Mod staff because their topic is drifting outside there own parameters. Trust me the scandal thread is going to bury the + thread anyway.</p><p></p><p>As for the rest of it, do you really believe the mod staff is not going to come down hard on a thread that is supporting illegal and unethical behavior? Why don't you try this (Actually don't, but this is an example), start a + Thread on NuTSR and the impending litigation with WotC and see what happens. I don't think the topic will last very long or be very popular.</p><p></p><p></p><p>So you are asking for a comprehensive hard line from the mod staff on what is acceptable? You are expecting them to pre-game all types of + threads that are possible? Nobody has time for that and no one would read that beast of a document. The rules for + threads will evolve as the topics put under them grow and evolve. When something crosses a line or abuses the form, the mods can make a ruling and we all learn together. Right now your are buying trouble we do not own.</p><p></p><p>Has anything like this happened yet? I haven't seen one these type of threads. This in my mind a purely hypothetical position, cue the "Think About the Children!" gif from the Simpsons. There is a simple solution since all of these examples pretty much violate EN World Rules you report it to the mods. The mods take a look and if it is violation of the site rules, down it goes.</p><p></p><p>I am not getting the why you need to have a say in a + thread that you don't agree with or don't like. It is not for you. There are tons of threads I don't care about, don't agree with, and a few I have not liked... I didn't not feel diminished when I didn't comment on them; the world kept on spinning and EN World did not implode. A + thread is asking you to respect the OP and those interested in the topic. If you cannot, move along.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Saracenus, post: 8945000, member: 47839"] I am not getting this binary oppositional thing you are trotting out. First off, do you think there is a way to declare a winner on a topic by the number of people that take X side vs. Y side? A +plus thread about Wyrmwood wouldn't be something about unconditionally supporting them and hey, all you haters jump off. It would be a topic about the quality of the product and pluses and minus of it. A + thread does not remove all discussion but it does ask that people who want to come in hard say, "Wormwood is the suckiest of the suckiest companies out there and nothing else." to not come and play in this thread. Does a unbending no that shouts down a topic bring any value to the discussion? I have seen a lot of hot button threads end because a group swoops in and shouts everyone down. I personally don't see any value in it. If you feel that strongly about it, start your own thread where you can go to town on Wormwood. Both threads are going to show up in a search and the rest of us will decide which one we think gives us the best info. You do not get to choose the winner, we do. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Wyrmwood has done something illegal or unethical. Let's pretend they get caught substituting cheaper wood materials and not the ones advertised. That would be its own thread and you would not dump it in the already existing + Wyrmwood thread. And there is nothing stopping you from doing just that. Where is the crisis? Now if the members of the + Wyrmwood thread decides to take up the allegations on their thread and don't allow counter points you could take that to the Mod staff because their topic is drifting outside there own parameters. Trust me the scandal thread is going to bury the + thread anyway. As for the rest of it, do you really believe the mod staff is not going to come down hard on a thread that is supporting illegal and unethical behavior? Why don't you try this (Actually don't, but this is an example), start a + Thread on NuTSR and the impending litigation with WotC and see what happens. I don't think the topic will last very long or be very popular. So you are asking for a comprehensive hard line from the mod staff on what is acceptable? You are expecting them to pre-game all types of + threads that are possible? Nobody has time for that and no one would read that beast of a document. The rules for + threads will evolve as the topics put under them grow and evolve. When something crosses a line or abuses the form, the mods can make a ruling and we all learn together. Right now your are buying trouble we do not own. Has anything like this happened yet? I haven't seen one these type of threads. This in my mind a purely hypothetical position, cue the "Think About the Children!" gif from the Simpsons. There is a simple solution since all of these examples pretty much violate EN World Rules you report it to the mods. The mods take a look and if it is violation of the site rules, down it goes. I am not getting the why you need to have a say in a + thread that you don't agree with or don't like. It is not for you. There are tons of threads I don't care about, don't agree with, and a few I have not liked... I didn't not feel diminished when I didn't comment on them; the world kept on spinning and EN World did not implode. A + thread is asking you to respect the OP and those interested in the topic. If you cannot, move along. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
The Purpose of the + in Thread Titles
Top