Three more days

[Wormwood]

I believe the ban should remain in effect, if only because I find the current crop of Edition Cold Warriors much more creative and amusing than the self-immolating commandos of the previous war.

 

[Corjay]

That's not to say I wouldn't mind rational discussion on the different editions, calm statements regarding your favorite edition backed by experience or fact as opposed to knee-jerk reaction and opinion.

Such discussion is impossible from two entrenched camps. If you want such discussion you will only find it from people who like both editions.

For instance, I hate 3e and will therefore only have bad things to say about it. The same goes for anyone who hates 4e. Only those who like both will be able to have an objective discussion about the differences.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think the ban on edition wars is a good idea. I don't see this one resolving itself like it did when 3rd edition was released.

4E has been out for about 10 minutes. The 2E/3E stuff hadn't settled down by this point.

 

[Vanuslux]

Amen.

I think it's a matter of approach. Just as you point out, the one says "I like this because it does such and such". That's focused and is not launching ammunition against an opponent. Thus is no part of any war. But saying "you must be a moron for liking that version" is a clear attack. So a thread that says "I like this version, who else does?" is not an edition war thread. But a thread that says "Why on earth would you want to play that version?" is clearly an edition war thread.

Aye, the main problem is that regardless of which kind a thread starts as, it's inevitable that both sorts of posters will end up posting in it.

 

[Umbran]

Just three more days until the edition wars can resume.

No.

For one thing, we are considering extending the ban.

For another, even if we don't extend it, we are going to be pretty ruthless about policing. If we have to use the banhammer more than a couple of times, you can expect that the topic will be restricted again.

 

[pawsplay]

Well, I would expect policing to be stringent. Feelings are strong, and ENWorld has, in my entire recollection, been a place where civility has been enforced. That said:

If we have to use the banhammer more than a couple of times, you can expect that the topic will be restricted again.

This just sounds like an invitation for people to "act up." As others have suggested, I think the important thing is for people to receive the usual warnings, early and consistenty, for uncivil behavior. I think punishing the topic itself is counterproductive to the idea of a forum.

While I can see an argument for extending the ban another month, I have a hard time imagining it going longer than that. There is only much you can say without broaching the forbidden subject: some people prefer one edition over another, for reasons intellectual, social, and emotional. It is relevant not only to discussions about differences between editions, but a variety of other topics where these differences are relevant.

"You are stupid for liking X" is already against the rules, with or without a ban. Because it's already against the rules to say someone is stupid. But I don't think someone would be moderated for saying 3e multiclassing works better than AD&D's multiclassing, and so I wonder what purpose is served by forbidding someone from making an evaluative comparison between 3e and 4e's mutliclassing systems. At least, as I understand the ban, that would be forbidden because it would inspire someone to defend one game and criticize the other. But it's a worthy topic.

 

[Campbell]

If that's all you want we have a whole different forum for that sort of thing

http://www.circvsmaximvs.com/

The Circvs is not really the forum for that sort of thing. It might be light on moderation, but pointless ranting is not looked at too kindly by its denizens.

 

[Crothian]

The Circvs is not really the forum for that sort of thing. It might be light on moderation, but pointless ranting is not looked at too kindly by its denizens.

I'm not sure there is a place that looks kindly on pointless ranting. But my point its you won't get banned there for doing it. And it's not here which is also important.

 

[Mark]

I would prefer to see the edition wars remain on the back burner. I almost stopped visiting ENWorld due to the edition wars.

That's not to say I wouldn't mind rational discussion on the different editions, calm statements regarding your favorite edition backed by experience or fact as opposed to knee-jerk reaction and opinion.

However, these are the internets and such a wish is merely a pipe dream.

Not if mods use the tools at their disposal. Mods can split edition wars conversation out of threads that it inappropriately infects and then combine the split-off thread into a huge ongoing depository thread for edition wars chatter (and temp ban anyone who repeatedly causes that to need to happen in threads where it is inappropriate). Once people realize that trying to shut down conversation by jumping in with edition wars talk or accusations, I think that ploy will become less attractive.

I agree EN World needs to be a place where discussion of editions can happen. Stifling genuine discussion on edition comparisons is probably not a good thing for EN World in the long run

 

[hong]

I believe the ban should remain in effect, if only because I find the current crop of Edition Cold Warriors much more creative and amusing than the self-immolating commandos of the previous war.

Do you have a problem with going commando?