If I started a thread about how to disagree politely in the PFS forum, would it get moved?


Website Feedback

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hey Chris and other Friendly Forum Staff --

The PFS forums can get really grumpy at times*. I'd like to start a thread with suggestions about productive and friendly ways to disagree. I want to write it for the PFS forum, about the PFS forum, without naming names or pointing fingers. I'm a fairly tactful poster, and I think that I could manage this balancing act, but I'm worried about two things.

THING ONE: Would a thread of friendly suggestions be considered over stepping into moderator territory?

THING TWO: Would it be considered off-topic? I'm afraid that it would immediately get moved to website feedback or gamer talk. If I started such a thread, and it stayed polite, would it be possible for it to stay in the PFS forum for a bit?

Hmm

___
* The most recent flamewar was especially toxic. It made me feel horrid, and caused at least a few of the other women posters I know to wonder if they even want to be in PFS.

Community Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What would make your thread unique enough about Pathfinder Society to have it in that forum, rather than in Gamer Talk? The problem with creating these kinds of threads in Pathfinder RPG General Discussion, PFS General Discussion, or elsewhere, is that they are not problems unique to Pathfinder or Pathfinder Society—they are endemic to gaming as a whole. From the way you're describing the thread you want to write, I would move it to Gamer Talk, as there's nothing specifically about Pathfinder Society about it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One suggestion is to make a sticky post in the other threads that would be a link to the one suggested above, or one that covers the same topic. This way, the link will be more likely to be seen, but the forum category rules will not be broken. I know that this suggestion is realizes on a technicality, but I feel as though it needs to be done.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Liz Courts wrote:
What would make your thread unique enough about Pathfinder Society to have it in that forum, rather than in Gamer Talk? The problem with creating these kinds of threads in Pathfinder RPG General Discussion, PFS General Discussion, or elsewhere, is that they are not problems unique to Pathfinder or Pathfinder Society—they are endemic to gaming as a whole. From the way you're describing the thread you want to write, I would move it to Gamer Talk, as there's nothing specifically about Pathfinder Society about it.

Liz, I've thought about this.

There is something very specific to PFS about it. The audience. PFS is different than the general gaming community because so many of the people who are regulars in that forum actually meet to game together in organized play at cons. We connect. We interact. The PFS forums have a very specific community of people who come to know each other.

Toxicity in the PFS forum carries over, unfortunately, to real world interactions. I have two friends, both active on the PFS forums who have had so many unpleasant disagreements there that they couldn't interact politely with each other at Paizocon. The thing is, both these guys have far more in common than they know. Had they met at a gaming table, they both would have been fine. But their toxic interactions carry over.

Specifically I want it in the PFS forum because I want the PFS community to see it. We're not just anonymous faces on the internet. Heck, I've been stripped of my anonymity since becoming a VA. We're a community.

The way we interact is IMPORTANT. We need to take the heat out of our conversations so that we can actually solve our problems without causing rifts that follow us in our realworld actions and without turning newcomers away from Organized Play.

I recognize that one thread won't change an entire grumpy culture. But if I can slide it a bit towards more civility, I think we'd all feel better about each other, and the community of volunteers that make up PFS would be a happier one for all of us.

Does this make sense?

Hmm

Community & Digital Content Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps it's a lofty goal, but we need everyone in all subforums on paizo.com on the same page in terms of treating each other civilly. We acknowledge that PFS is it's own animal in terms of the outreach into "real-life" tables and interpersonal interactions, but that subforum is still part of a larger community. And parts of that larger community also have "real-life" components, though they are in reference to home games and not the larger organized play circuit (and there are circles of gamers on our site who do not touch PFS who are just as interconnected).

The best way to really see change in my view is to lead by example. My team is certainly open to hearing any and all suggestions that any individual on our site has to offer, and we do take them into account when handling our policies and determining moderation practices. My team also makes ourselves available as a sounding board to folks here that need a "sanity check" when posting to our forums, or if they're struggling with an individual or subject on our site.

We're not comfortable directing users at an unofficial thread for guidance on how to compose themselves in a specific forum, as it can very easily put the responsibility on the original poster to manage the responses to it (which they do not have the ability to do). The internet is also a difficult platform for determining intent/tone, and the nature of communicating via screen (no matter what site it occurs on) is going to cause some difficulty. I don't think that struggle is at all unique to the PFS subforum or the PFS community, and such a thread would certainly be moved (as that subforum is dedicated to specifically PFS content).


I have an idea, perhaps, if you are so inclined, Hmm, you could go ahead and create your thread. The purpose would then become an aid for the creation of an official thread covering the same thing. I believe that such a thread would be good idea. Since Chris Lambertz and her crew are no doubt quiet busy, and since they do not feel comfortable directing people to a thread created by a non official, this would be a way to help the crew while allowing them to have an official thread.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yep, Liz. I hear where you're coming from. I do try to lead by example. I believe that I have been a consistently positive and tactful voice on these fora.

However, it's hard to create a positive forum culture, when you're one voice amongst many. It's also hard to learn communication techniques just by watching. If you're never shown the tools, how can you know how to use them?

I don't want to be the author of an 'official' guide so much as the person who starts the conversation and keeps it going. I suppose starting a group guide could be a start, but if we're doing this with the goal of helping Paizo create its own official thread, I worry that I would be perceived by Paizo employees as that bossy person who's criticizing what they do and trying to make more work for them. Instead, what I want to be is a cheerleader for you guys, and maybe to help others become cheerleaders too.

Maybe it is in the end a pipe dream. Unfortunately, I think my proposed discussion would get lost in Gamer Talk, particularly since I spend no time on that sub-forum. An outsider would have less credibility there.

:(

I will drop this project for now, but thank you for taking time to consider my proposal, even though we disagree.

Hmm

___

EDITED to remove references to my previous experience, as here I plan to just be an enthusiastic amateur.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't spend a lot of time there, so this comment may well be a fair way off-base:

It seems to me that one distinguishing feature of PFS over Pathfinder more generally that may (or should?) spill over into messageboard etiquette is that there is a codified 'chain of increasing authority'. GM-VC-Tonya (presumably I've missed some granularity there).

As such, whereas in the rest of the forums there isn't really a 'correct' answer and we can all just bang away on the keyboard trying to get the last word - there will be times in a contentious PFS thread where the matter is settled (whether any given poster is satisfied with the settlement or not) and pushing on publicly trying to establish what "should" have happened might confuse the outcome for casual readers. It could also muddy the waters as to when there has been an 'official' answer versus a bunch of gamers stating their opinions as fact - a la the rest of the messageboards... :)

As I said - I don't spend much time there (and no very little about PFS) so perhaps that isn't particularly relevant. However, it does strike me as being a significant difference between PFS discussion vs discussion elsewhere.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:


___
* The most recent flamewar was especially toxic. It made me feel horrid, and caused at least a few of the other women posters I know to wonder if they even want to be in PFS.

Yeah, the way some posts have gone in the latest flamewar, and in previous others, I, and I'm sure other people and groups have gotten feelings to that effect.

Grand Lodge

Hmm wrote:
The most recent flamewar was especially toxic. It made me feel horrid, and caused at least a few of the other women posters I know to wonder if they even want to be in PFS.

I do think it's important to remember that what you see on the boards here is only a small portion of the overall PFS community. Overall, in my experience, the community as a whole tends to be far more agreeable and pleasant.

Also it helps to keep in mind that people are often far more wretched on the Internet than in person due to the lack of social repurcussions.

That said, I do think that a thread on proper discussion/debate etiquette could help some people. However, I also think that the worst offenders simply wouldn't care.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:
Yep, Liz. I hear where you're coming from. I do try to lead by example. I believe that I have been a consistently positive and tactful voice on these fora.

I believe that you have. :)

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:

I don't spend a lot of time there, so this comment may well be a fair way off-base:

It seems to me that one distinguishing feature of PFS over Pathfinder more generally that may (or should?) spill over into messageboard etiquette is that there is a codified 'chain of increasing authority'. GM-VC-Tonya (presumably I've missed some granularity there).

As such, whereas in the rest of the forums there isn't really a 'correct' answer and we can all just bang away on the keyboard trying to get the last word - there will be times in a contentious PFS thread where the matter is settled (whether any given poster is satisfied with the settlement or not) and pushing on publicly trying to establish what "should" have happened might confuse the outcome for casual readers. It could also muddy the waters as to when there has been an 'official' answer versus a bunch of gamers stating their opinions as fact - a la the rest of the messageboards... :)

As I said - I don't spend much time there (and know very little about PFS) so perhaps that isn't particularly relevant. However, it does strike me as being a significant difference between PFS discussion vs discussion elsewhere.

You would think that the recognized chain of leadership would prevent a lot of tooth and claw style posts.

It doesn't.

Even when someone's question is answered in the third post!

Also, leadership doesn't come in and post all that much. Wait, I shouldn't say that, because Tonya Woldridge and John Compton do post in the threads. But we really don't want them to have to post because by the time the conversation has gotten to the bottom of the hill most posters are not going to like what John or Tonya have to say about a contentious issue.

VCs and the newly created RVCs are regular posters. Problem is no one will accept what we have to say regarding an issue because we aren't "Campaign Leadership." It is a vicious circle that can produce the examples HMM has highlighted.

I'm just happy HMM is one of ours. :)

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh, and this is something I can totes recommend. If you have concerns about any thread or post or poster, the fine folks at community@paizo.com will answer your questions and/or discuss an issue with you. I know. I have sent Liz and Chris several emails in the past and have always received a response.

It is a resource we have and should use. Though, I am not positive the Community Team looks forward to answering more emails from us.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:

Hey Chris and other Friendly Forum Staff --

The PFS forums can get really grumpy at times*. I'd like to start a thread with suggestions about productive and friendly ways to disagree. I want to write it for the PFS forum, about the PFS forum, without naming names or pointing fingers. I'm a fairly tactful poster, and I think that I could manage this balancing act, but I'm worried about two things.

THING ONE: Would a thread of friendly suggestions be considered over stepping into moderator territory?

THING TWO: Would it be considered off-topic? I'm afraid that it would immediately get moved to website feedback or gamer talk. If I started such a thread, and it stayed polite, would it be possible for it to stay in the PFS forum for a bit?

Hmm

___
* The most recent flamewar was especially toxic. It made me feel horrid, and caused at least a few of the other women posters I know to wonder if they even want to be in PFS.

You could always go ahead and write it, let it be in Gamer Talk, and continually link to it whenever it's relevant to an active PFS thread. It's not like you need to meet a minimum Gamer Talk activity quota before you can engage in a major conversation there. ;) As more people read and like it, there will also be more people who link it and encourage others to read it.

I've seen a similar phenomenon take place elsewhere on the boards. For example, there used to be an astute poster named Grick who frequented the Rules forum and wrote an excellent guide to how the Magus' Spellstrike and Spell Combat class features work (because lots of people don't get it at first). That existed over in the Rules forum, but the people who saw it there would save the post (whether as a "favorite" or with the "list" feature) and then link it whenever the topic came up in any other forum: Advice, Houserules, General Discussion, wherever. I've seen it with other posts as well.

Just because it's in Gamer Talk doesn't mean only "the Gamer Talk posters" will see it. Some of them will also be PFS forum posters, and they (along with you) will link it in relevant PFS threads. Then some of the PFS posters will get to see it even if they never otherwise go to Gamer Talk, and they too will save a link. If people like it, its presence will snowball, possibly to the point of it not even mattering which forum it's in at all, as everybody reaches it through links or the "recent threads" sidebar.

Even though I've personally given up on PFS, I'm still totally in favor of those who can still wring some good out of it fighting to protect it. Best of luck to you. :)


Leg o' Lamb wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

I don't spend a lot of time there, so this comment may well be a fair way off-base:

It seems to me that one distinguishing feature of PFS over Pathfinder more generally that may (or should?) spill over into messageboard etiquette is that there is a codified 'chain of increasing authority'. GM-VC-Tonya (presumably I've missed some granularity there).

As such, whereas in the rest of the forums there isn't really a 'correct' answer and we can all just bang away on the keyboard trying to get the last word - there will be times in a contentious PFS thread where the matter is settled (whether any given poster is satisfied with the settlement or not) and pushing on publicly trying to establish what "should" have happened might confuse the outcome for casual readers. It could also muddy the waters as to when there has been an 'official' answer versus a bunch of gamers stating their opinions as fact - a la the rest of the messageboards... :)

As I said - I don't spend much time there (and know very little about PFS) so perhaps that isn't particularly relevant. However, it does strike me as being a significant difference between PFS discussion vs discussion elsewhere.

You would think that the recognized chain of leadership would prevent a lot of tooth and claw style posts.

It doesn't.

Even when someone's question is answered in the third post!

Also, leadership doesn't come in and post all that much. Wait, I shouldn't say that, because Tonya Woldridge and John Compton do post in the threads. But we really don't want them to have to post because by the time the conversation has gotten to the bottom of the hill most posters are not going to like what John or Tonya have to say about a contentious issue.

VCs and the newly created RVCs are regular posters. Problem is no one will accept what we have to say regarding an issue because we aren't "Campaign Leadership." It is a vicious circle that can produce the examples HMM has highlighted.

I'm just happy HMM is one of...

I guess that's kind of what I meant and thought perhaps a sticky or PFS specific thread might address.

It seems to me that PFS is, by nature, more structured and more hierarchical than the rest of the boards. The admirable refrain of "there's lots of ways to play the game" is kind of less true in PFS. It's more regulated and there is a more formal dispute resolution system than elsewhere in the community - every member of the PFS community is important, but that doesn't mean their opinions on "how things should be" have equal weight when it comes time to settle a contentious issue.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Alright. Let me think about this...

I've been asked to work on some other writing projects for my local lodge which will have to take precedence, but I'll have to think about doing this project as well. While the worst offenders may not be willing to change, they are a small minority and can probably be handled by the flagging system and our excellent mods. I do think that a forum culture shift can happen if enough people want it. So let's see what happens if we give them the tools to change.

And Jiggy, your point about how gamer talk can be seen by other posters is a good one. I did a search and found at least 10 Hmm posts in Gamer Talk -- probably all from PFS threads that got moved, or me following a link from elsewhere. So I've been in that forum without even realizing it!

I'm sorry you gave up on PFS. I enjoyed playing with you! But I'm glad you're still part of the PFS boards.

Hmm

PS Dehning I'm glad to be part of the Minnesota Lodge too.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:
And Jiggy, your point about how gamer talk can be seen by other posters is a good one. I did a search and found at least 10 Hmm posts in Gamer Talk -- probably all from PFS threads that got moved, or me following a link from elsewhere. So I've been in that forum without even realizing it!

Yep, the internet may have its flaws, but it also has assets; interconnectivity is one of them. :)

Quote:
I'm sorry you gave up on PFS. I enjoyed playing with you!

And I you! Sadly, you (and those like you) were outnumbered.

Quote:
But I'm glad you're still part of the PFS boards.

Huh?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am at a con and have been GMing almost non-stop. I am still glad that you are on the Paizo boards. I like your voice!

Hmm

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Hmm wrote:
I am at a con and have been GMing almost non-stop.

*gets out the pom-poms*

One of my best PFS experiences was at a con. Knock 'em dead!

Dark Archive

Jiggy wrote:
Hmm wrote:
I am at a con and have been GMing almost non-stop.

*gets out the pom-poms*

One of my best PFS experiences was at a con. Knock 'em dead!

If you are at CONvergence, stop by the 22nd floor and say hello.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wish there was a fix for the toxicity, I personally know people turned away by it.

I believe the root cause is some posters believe the rules are written like computer code with only one way to interpret them and they know the correct way. This is compounded by the forum mantra of "all posts are unofficial".

I honestly don't know how to fix that, so I often try to get people to accept that the rules can have different interpretations. Something that often proves unpopular to the "computer code - only one way" fans.

When we had forum posts as official answers, I couldn't count the number of times a forum post by SKR, Jason, and James Jacobs would gain them pages of personal attacks. I don't know how they handle that with the grace they often showed.

To make matters worse, each time there is a FAQ or Errata on a contentious subject there is a chance of rage against the answer.

Is there really no fix for this?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Part of the toxicity might be caused by people who only play PFS because it is very hard to cast them out. Do not get me wrong, the openness is ultimately a good thing. It is just very unfortunate that the toxic ones are the most vocal.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:

I wish there was a fix for the toxicity, I personally know people turned away by it.

I believe the root cause is some posters believe the rules are written like computer code with only one way to interpret them and they know the correct way.

Well, that's one of the causes.

I've also encountered the following:


  • GMs declaring "That rule/FAQ is clearly cheese, despite being official; sometimes Paizo is wrong. I won't be allowing it at my table," with no repercussions from leadership, and heaps of verbal abuse to anyone who points out that that's not allowed.
  • Folks sending PMs or personal emails for no other purpose than to cuss people out for things like having pointed out their circular logic in the rules forum.
  • Folks who respond to rules that explicitly contradict their view by saying "Well, it's ambiguous, and as GM I have the right to adjudicate gray areas" and cite rules that are silent on a given topic as "supporting" their views that were already disproven elsewhere.
  • VOs who cry wolf "cry rules lawyer" against differing opinions, even when the differing opinion is a plain-english reading of the rule and their own "interpretation" is a tortured twisting of the language.
  • Leadership figures (VOs/multi-star GMs) who respond to requests to cease their verbal abuse by stating that the fact they haven't been stripped of their titles/removed from PFS proves they're not doing anything wrong.
  • Plenty of other stories I could tell.

But, yes, there is also some toxicity from folks who behave as you described. They're in there too. But you have to be wearing some pretty big blinders to pin that little subgroup as the categorical "root cause" of the PFS forums' toxicity. Correspondingly, whatever solution one might try to implement will need to cover a lot more bases than the single one you identified.


When 2 posters denounce each others opinions as not fact, I usually counter "It is my opinion that both of you are giving opinions.".

Now if the devs or mods(developers or moderators) like that, they can add it to a pinned topic.

Sometimes I say during a flame war,"I find flame wars so boring" or "If you are trying to get me to hide this topic, it's working". Sometimes I suggest a compromise, then bemoan how both sides usually turn on me.

Some things, such as Mirror Image, just don't make sense to me, but I acknowledge that I would have to deal with the RAW if I ever play PFS.

Recently, some posters have said things are illegal because they are not core. Playing core is a game table choice. I find it much more diplomatic to say,"I don't have that book yet." Core means only using the Core rulebook and maybe the first Bestiary.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I really hate it when we get into circular arguments about the one true way to read the rules that turn into shouting matches. And yes, Jiggy, I've also seen some of the behavior that your were pointing to. It depresses me a lot, but I do have hope.

Take a look at Proposal to Unchain Phantom Phenomena and Silverhex from their Pregens. There was disagreement aplenty. Many of the GMs posting thought it was a great idea. Others thought it was horrible. But there was little to no toxicity. The discussion stayed civil throughout.

Now part of it may be that I thanked those who provided thoughtful dissenting views and provided clear summations to make sure that everyone knew their voices and viewpoints were heard. (And part of it may be that no one really wanted to yell at me or Drogan... I can't rule out the personalities of the two main people who participated in keeping the discussion going here.)

Still, for me, the thought was that where polite disagreement happened once, it could possibly happen again. There are techniques that can be both learned. Maybe if more people tried, we could find a path to communication where more of our discourse was civil disagreement.

Hmm

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Sounds great! If your own pleasant manner manages to get absorbed into the PFS leadership culture in place of what's currently considered acceptable, then I'd call that a win. :)

Silver Crusade Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Even I've gotten dragged into toxic and offensive behavior lately. It hurts, to know that I can't remain civil, and for everyone to see it... to break my promise and ruin my reputation. I might not be around much longer as a result.

Good luck, Hmm. I hope you succeed where I failed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:

Even I've gotten dragged into toxic and offensive behavior lately. It hurts, to know that I can't remain civil, and for everyone to see it... to break my promise and ruin my reputation. I might not be around much longer as a result.

Good luck, Hmm. I hope you succeed where I failed.

It can be all too easy to slip into the group behavior. To my regret, I've done so myself. Now when I notice my emotions rising I take a break from the site until it fades. Sometimes it's just a day or two, but sometimes it's a week or more. You might find an approach like that helpful. I hope that you don't leave permanently though. You are one of my favorite people here, and I've really learned a lot from your contributions both about the game and about posting on these boards.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've grown as a writer because of Kalindara, it truly would be a shame. :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

100% agree.

Plus (fwiw) I didn't think your tone was that bad. Don't be too hard on yourself!

Liberty's Edge

I admit to being guilty of being more negative than positive on the boards. I'm not proud of it. Yet prefer to be honest. If I don't like something in the books or errata. I will mention it. To me the worst offenders are those who post to ask a opinion on a subject. Have already made up their mind about it. Then get mad when posters usually don't agree with them. Expecting less of wanting to hear feedback and more validation.

The Exchange

A video about Trolling that I think might give some invites... Maybe

The Psychology of Trolling

At least it helped me some...

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:

Even I've gotten dragged into toxic and offensive behavior lately. It hurts, to know that I can't remain civil, and for everyone to see it... to break my promise and ruin my reputation. I might not be around much longer as a result.

Good luck, Hmm. I hope you succeed where I failed.

You've gotta do what's best for you, whether that's to stay involved and vigilantly police your own behavior, or withdraw (to whatever degree).

I tried soldiering on for quite a while, hoping that maybe I could help put things right from time to time. However, it eventually became clear that the stress and anger building up from the unchecked abuse running rampant (not just in the forums, but through private channels and in person as well) were getting to the point of affecting my overall quality of life. I had to get out, and since doing so, I've become a substantially happier and kinder person.

But maybe you can achieve a different result; best of luck to you. :)

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
I've grown as a writer because of Kalindara, it truly would be a shame. :-)

Is there a writing forum on here that I missed?

BTW, Kalindara, I'm so happy you're back!

Hmm

Community / Forums / Paizo / Website Feedback / If I started a thread about how to disagree politely in the PFS forum, would it get moved? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Website Feedback