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="jgsugden" data-source="post: 8945993" data-attributes="member: 2629"><p>That is a fairly standard practice. People talk about the number of followers they get on Tik Tok, for example. They look at supporting numbers. ....</p><p>I used examples that were intentionally not 100% black and white. It is the topics that are shades of grey and require counterpoints to create clear perceptions. </p><p></p><p>I answered this multiple times. I do not have a clear answer - just concerns.</p><p>As I said, I have concerns and these threads make me nervous because they can be manipulated. I provided examples where we would be concerned. Do you suggest that we should not worry about a problem until harm is clearly caused?I have concerns that harm could be created through misuse of a tool with a noble cause that is capable of creating misperceptions. I don't think telling people to just step aside and let potential harms be allowed to unfold is a good path.</p><p></p><p>To me, my concern aligns with behaviors we see in the industry. As an example, there is a company called Blacklist Games. They had a series of Kickstarters that were well intentioned (I believe) but during which they lied to their backers. In the end, they asked for / extorted more money from their backers. If you go to their social media accounts you see no reference to these problems - because they delete anything contrary to a positive image for them and leave only the few posts where people appreciate the quality of the materials in the end (which are, in fact, nice looking minis). People that look up this company on social media get no clue that the company has a major history of problematic behavior because all that is allowed is positive statements about them on those sites.</p><p></p><p>Just to spell it out: I am pretty sure I could put together threads (+) that would make the mods uncomfortable and unsure whether they should step in. I WILL NOT, but I could. Others that have more manipulative goals may, and that concerns me. It isn't the easily identifable bad faith threads that bother me - it would be the ones that straddle the line and hav both a valid reason, and the potential to create significant misrepresentations of public opinion.</p><p></p><p>One suggestion I made was to allow a 'down vote' mechanic to be applies to the thread to express discomfort with the idea without trolling the discussion. That seems reasonable, if feasible, and provides some ways to address concerns I raised (although not a perfect answer for several reasons). </p><p></p><p>I'd also love to see a FAQ with the official rules for + threads to provide clarity on the rules for them - potentially including limitations on the use. That may not be something the mods are interested in providing - which is perfectly fine - but I would think it could be useful and helpful to the community.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jgsugden, post: 8945993, member: 2629"] That is a fairly standard practice. People talk about the number of followers they get on Tik Tok, for example. They look at supporting numbers. .... I used examples that were intentionally not 100% black and white. It is the topics that are shades of grey and require counterpoints to create clear perceptions. I answered this multiple times. I do not have a clear answer - just concerns. As I said, I have concerns and these threads make me nervous because they can be manipulated. I provided examples where we would be concerned. Do you suggest that we should not worry about a problem until harm is clearly caused?I have concerns that harm could be created through misuse of a tool with a noble cause that is capable of creating misperceptions. I don't think telling people to just step aside and let potential harms be allowed to unfold is a good path. To me, my concern aligns with behaviors we see in the industry. As an example, there is a company called Blacklist Games. They had a series of Kickstarters that were well intentioned (I believe) but during which they lied to their backers. In the end, they asked for / extorted more money from their backers. If you go to their social media accounts you see no reference to these problems - because they delete anything contrary to a positive image for them and leave only the few posts where people appreciate the quality of the materials in the end (which are, in fact, nice looking minis). People that look up this company on social media get no clue that the company has a major history of problematic behavior because all that is allowed is positive statements about them on those sites. Just to spell it out: I am pretty sure I could put together threads (+) that would make the mods uncomfortable and unsure whether they should step in. I WILL NOT, but I could. Others that have more manipulative goals may, and that concerns me. It isn't the easily identifable bad faith threads that bother me - it would be the ones that straddle the line and hav both a valid reason, and the potential to create significant misrepresentations of public opinion. One suggestion I made was to allow a 'down vote' mechanic to be applies to the thread to express discomfort with the idea without trolling the discussion. That seems reasonable, if feasible, and provides some ways to address concerns I raised (although not a perfect answer for several reasons). I'd also love to see a FAQ with the official rules for + threads to provide clarity on the rules for them - potentially including limitations on the use. That may not be something the mods are interested in providing - which is perfectly fine - but I would think it could be useful and helpful to the community. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
The Purpose of the + in Thread Titles
Top