D&D 4E Why is this board so down on 4E critics?

[jdrakeh]

Actually, the only difference is how precise the language used to express the poster's sentiments was.

No, no, it isn't. Those are two entirely different sentences. The former is politely phrased, the latter example is not. It has nothing to do with precision and everything to do with basic manners. It's about expressing an unpopular opinion without resorting to the use of perjoratives or hyperbole. It's not about being precise. It's about showing some respect for other posters.

So this basically amounts to a penalty on those without the wherewithal to express themselves precisely.

No, it doesn't. It amounts to a penalty for being deliberately offensive and contributing nothing topical to a thread. Saying that you a belive a thread has no merit is (so far as I can tell) absolutely allowed here. Jumping into a thread to post a string of profanity, perjoratives, and hyperbole with the intent to offend is, OTOH, frowned upon -- rightly, I might add.

 

[moritheil]

No, no, it isn't. Those are two entirely different sentences. The former is politely phrased, the latter example is not. It has nothing to do with precision and everything to do with basic manners. It's about expressing an unpopular opinion without resorting to the use of perjoratives or hyperbole. It's not about being precise. It's about showing some respect for other posters.

No, it doesn't. It amounts to a penalty for being deliberately offensive and contributing nothing topical to a thread. Saying that you a belive a thread has no merit is (so far as I can tell) absolutely allowed here. Jumping into a thread to post a string of profanity, perjoratives, and hyperbole with the intent to offend is, OTOH, frowned upon -- rightly, I might add.

You do not believe that the same sentiment can be behind both responses, and that one of those responses is refined so as to be socially acceptable?

If I might get gameist for a moment, someone with low charisma doesn't necessarily mean to offend; they just wind up being blatantly offensive because they don't know how to express themselves any better. There is a certain quote about not assuming malice when incompetence explains things that comes to mind.

 

[Umbran]

So this basically amounts to a penalty on those without the wherewithal to express themselves precisely.

No. It amounts on a penalty against anyone who does not express themselves in what we've defined as a civil manner, for whatever reason. Those who lack the wherewithal are not in any way specially targeted in that regard, as they are vastly outnumbered by those who have the ability, but choose not to use it.

 

[jdrakeh]

You do not believe that the same sentiment can be behind both responses and that one of those responses is refined so as to be socially acceptable?

I believe that the same senitment can be behind both responses and I believe that it's possible to be polite, yes. Now, both of those questions having been answered, this does not make "You suck!" the same sentence as "I do not believe this thread has merit." which was your earlier, patently false, assertion. Though both of these experessions may convey similar or same sentiments, one of them does so in a wholly, obviously, inappropriate manner, using completely different words -- eprjoratives that were originally coined to be offensive. I submit that people do not routinely mistake "You suck!" as being a polite or productive phrase.

If I might get gameist for a moment, someone with low charisma doesn't necessarily mean to offend; they just wind up being blatantly offensive because they don't know how to express themselves any better. There is a certain quote about not assuming malice when incompetence explains things that comes to mind.

A person has time to think about what they post before they type it -- days, if need be. Charisma doesn't really enter into it. When somebody posts a deliberately offensive thing, I submit that it's far more likely they don't care about what they're posting than it is likely they don't know what they're posting. Suggesting that acting like an ass is excuseable due to ignorance of acceptable social behavior is just that -- an excuse. Ignorance is not a disease -- it is a matter of choice. If you choose to be offensive, you choose to live with the consequences.

 

[Elephant]

Guild, I'm going to recommend that you read my post #39 above and apply those methods to your future posts. Your future posts will not of course be in this thread because you are no longer allowed to post in this thread. Thank you.

Whoa - you can selectively ban users from threads that way? I didn't know the board had such fine-grained options!

...and in an effort to actually contribute something to the topic at hand, I feel like the board is full of pro-4e buzz. Being highly skeptical of the 4e changes I've read about, I feel a bit out of place. Then again, I haven't been spending much time reading the 4e threads, so I have to admit I don't have much data for my conclusions/bias.

 

[moritheil]

On a practical level, will agree that Umbran's assertion is quite understandable. That said, I do feel obliged to respond to a post that has not gotten the details of my earlier statements correct.

I believe that the same senitment can be behind both responses and I believe that it's possible to be polite, yes. Now, both of those questions having been answered, this does not make "You suck!" the same sentence as "I do not believe this thread has merit." which was your earlier, patently false, assertion.

Not quite. My assertion was that both result from the same sentiment, expressed in different cultural contexts and with different (perhaps radically different, in your example) degrees of social skill. Read Penny Arcade and you will see how casual trading of insults is normative in some gamer sub-cultures.

Suggesting that acting like an ass is excuseable due to ignorance of acceptable social behavior is just that -- an excuse. Ignorance is not a disease -- it is a matter of choice. If you choose to be offensive, you choose to live with the consequences.

My post was about incompetence, not ignorance. You are ascribing to me things that I am not suggesting. From the start my purpose has never been to question cases where people could help themselves, only cases where people could not help themselves - whether because they failed to realize that certain extreme behaviors are not equally acceptable in all places, or because they lack the ability to express themselves in a cleaner fashion.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Yeah, didn't Eric himself say "crap on a stick" sometimes?

And "crap weasels".

 

[Morrus]

You do not believe that the same sentiment can be behind both responses, and that one of those responses is refined so as to be socially acceptable?

If I might get gameist for a moment, someone with low charisma doesn't necessarily mean to offend; they just wind up being blatantly offensive because they don't know how to express themselves any better. There is a certain quote about not assuming malice when incompetence explains things that comes to mind.

While you are correct, there's a second facet that I don't think you're considering: we [the mods] are not here to educate, counsel or offer therapy; there are far better venues in life for that sort of tihng. We're here to do one thing: keep the peace.

So, to a large extent, there's no practical difference between someone being unable and someone being unwilling to be civil; I have every sympathy for the former, and I hope that somehow they are able to find a way to address this in their lives, but I'm neither qualified or inclined to be the person who provides that.

People usually get a second, even a third chance. We try to give them the opportunity to fit in, but there's only so much we can do: and if someone is persistently causing flame wars, we're left with little choice, harsh as that may sound.

Our usual anaology is that of a casual gathering in somebody's house. The person who starts wrecking the furniture and attacking the other guests may well have very sound psychological reasons for his unpleasant behaviour, but he can't be allowed to continue it at others' expense. He'll be asked to leave; from his POV, maybe he doesn't, or is unable, to understand why he's been asked to leave, but the safety and comfort of the other guests is the primary consideration.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Whoa - you can selectively ban users from threads that way? I didn't know the board had such fine-grained options!

...and in an effort to actually contribute something to the topic at hand, I feel like the board is full of pro-4e buzz. Being highly skeptical of the 4e changes I've read about, I feel a bit out of place. Then again, I haven't been spending much time reading the 4e threads, so I have to admit I don't have much data for my conclusions/bias.

The hardcore optimists tend to think the place is full of anti-4E buzz. The hardcore pessimists tend to think the place is full of pro-4E buzz.

My general recommendation is if you're really positively anticipating 4E, try to look at the thread titles and maybe even see the first few posts in a thread and if it's quite negative, then maybe hitting the back button will give you a brighter, sunnier day. Similarly, that back button works if you're really leery of what 4E will do and a thread seems like, "Oh, wowsers, this is awesome!"

Try to make the place work for you--but if working for you means getting into people's faces, brawling, or leaving a big old turd in someone's cheerios, then ENWorld may turn out to not be the best place for you. We'll do our best (but no promises or guarantees--the rules are posted and if you're not sure what they are, then hit that announcement at the top of every forum--ignorance is no defense for not following the law) to warn and try to steer people back to the straight and narrow.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Whoa - you can selectively ban users from threads that way? I didn't know the board had such fine-grained options!

I don't know whether that is just jesting, but in the spirit of explanation - there are no mechanics for selectively banning someone from a thread. However, we are using this at the moment as a step less than an outright suspension. If someone has been told not to post in a thread again and they do so, they can expect a suspension.

Cheers