|
If the request is simply for a local ignore (collapse/hide posts from people the reader finds objectionable) then a little Greasemonkey script would probably do the trick.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748/
The structure of the HTML on the threads looks like it would lend itself to this purpose. If people are interested, I might take a crack at writing one to implement this request.
I'd like this! As well as... another Greasemonkey script I had requested on the GM messageboards... that of auto-linking certain strings to certain url's.
For instance, if I am browsing the Paizo boards and come across the word "orc" it'd be super sweet if "orc" transformed into a hyperlink to the orc page on d20pfsrd.com. You could make a variant that linked to the PRD instead/as well for people that prefer the PRD.
Just something on my Christmas wish-list is all :)
I don't see any confrontation...Smurfportant word has been smurfed for emphasis.Very interesting word to hilight, since nobody is requesting anything that affects what other's see at all. If you can't see anything different, how can any confrontation start?
I mean, you're not offended by the fact I MIGHT have GreaseMonkey'd your avatar to appear as George W. Bush in a Thong, are you? After all, you don't see what is on my screen, only what is on yours.
I referred to the fact that you claimed you hadn't 'seen' any complaints about you ignoring them, but of course it'd be hard, wouldn't it, to see anything of an ignored person's?
I referred to the fact that you claimed you hadn't 'seen' any complaints about you ignoring them, but of course it'd be hard, wouldn't it, to see anything of an ignored person's?
When you're not logged into your account, you see every post as you're a 'generic guest', and a decent amount of the time I start browsing the message board without logging in. I also don't really see any posts by posters I *haven't* banned complaining about posters who have banned them.
Anyways, Another_Mage, if you know how to write such a script, that would be SUPER AWESOME!
I referred to the fact that you claimed you hadn't 'seen' any complaints about you ignoring them, but of course it'd be hard, wouldn't it, to see anything of an ignored person's?When you're not logged into your account, you see every post as you're a 'generic guest', and a decent amount of the time I start browsing the message board without logging in. I also don't really see any posts by posters I *haven't* banned complaining about posters who have banned them.
Anyways, Another_Mage, if you know how to write such a script, that would be SUPER AWESOME!
Ah, I get it. You have your site set differently than mine. I usually set sites to automatically logging me in, y'see.
And I still think you're missing the point. Paizo just isn't meant to have an Ignore option, it would ruin everything this place stood for. It would set people against each other, and leave these disputes hanging instead of wrapping them up as is meant to be.
How about a "hide thread" feature....
If you want to get away from a thread you just remove it from your view.....
Yeah, that'd be helpful with FAWTL. :P
However, in other threads I think it'd suffice to simply ignore them, it's not hard. :)
That's your opinion, Smurf Cleaver. You don't speak for everyone.
KenderKin, that's not a bad idea, threads could work the way subforums do.
I think it'd suffice to simply ignore them, it's not hard. :)
It's not hard for whom?
I agree with that. I would also agree that you can ignore some rambling post about smurfs as well....
I guess that a feature or editor (net nanny or surf watch) to block all those posts about smurfs.
Since smurfs are the root of all evil/ills/injustices in the world.....
It is hard for persons wronged by smurfs to ignore those little blue smurfing smurfs.
I think it'd smurfice to simply ignore them, it's not hard. :)It's not hard for whom?
I agree with that. I would also agree that you can ignore some rambling post about smurfs as well....
I guess that a feature or editor (net nanny or surf watch) to block all those posts about smurfs.
Since smurfs are the root of all evil/ills/injustices in the smurfld.....
It is hard for persons wronged by smurfs to ignore those little blue smurfing smurfs.
Smurf hater! You have been smurfed! Pretty smurf-nabbed smurfy, isn't it?
That's your opinion, Smurf Cleaver. You don't speak for everyone.
KenderKin, that's not a bad idea, threads could work the way subforums do.
I think it would be better to ignore thread than to ignore specific people!!!
Other wise you are on to my other idea of everyone gets a troll point that they can assign to individuals....And all the posts show the number of troll points they have, of course you can not see your own number of troll points.....
Mr. Fishy is the "self proclaimed" winner........
That's your opinion, Smurf Cleaver. You don't speak for everyone.
KenderKin, that's not a bad idea, threads could work the way subforums do.
I think it would be better to ignore thread than to ignore specific people!!!
Other wise you are on to my other idea of everyone gets a troll point that they can assign to individuals....And all the posts show the number of troll points they have, of course you can not see your own number of troll points.....
Mr. Fishy is the "self proclaimed" winner........
Kobold Cleaver bows before the smurfy might of Mr. Fishy.
And I would agree with the troll point thing, but I think it needs to be a bit less harsh. Troll points should vanish more quickly, for one thing, and a month of no posting should not be necessary. In addition, people should be able to assign a 'negative troll point' to get rid of one of somebody's troll points, if they do something admirable.
Senior Software Developer
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say, I think that any idea that allows the assignment of points for behavior on our messageboards is a non-starter. Give a bunch of gamers a system they can game? Madness. We'd rather have conversations than competition.
Also, re: the original topic of this thread: We've stated in the past that we don't like the idea of ignore lists because they fragment conversation. I'd prefer that everybody remain civil and open to others' ideas.
I have to say, I think that any idea that allows the assignment of points for behavior on our messageboards is a non-starter. Give a bunch of gamers a system they can game? Madness. We'd rather have conversations than competition.
Also, re: the original topic of this thread: We've stated in the past that we don't like the idea of ignore lists because they fragment conversation. I'd prefer that everybody remain civil and open to others' ideas.
What? I am down now.... :(
First you were the wind beneath my wings the wind blowing in my sails moving me along higher and faster..... :)
Then you let me down there.......
I guess with message boards one way or another it comes down to lots of hot air.........
+4 troll points to me!!! Take that Mr. Fishy
Don't try to send the Smurfmonster on a smurf trip. Teter has no smurf. He is pure smurfil. He is the Anti Smurf. His small conscience is smurfed.
Smurfin' smurf of a smurf! I'll smurf him if it's the smurf thing I smurf! You both smurf, and I hope to Smurf you choke on a smurf!
+4. Kobold Cleaver chooses to give Mr. Fishy his troll points.
|
Hey, Ignore kills trolls and lets be honest, some of us love trolls. The flames keep Mr. Fishy warm and the flesh and hide of trolls feed and cloth Mr. Fishy's guppies. Don't drive the trolls to extintion, trolls have rights too. Just exercise some selfcontrol. Like in Kindergarden, don't hit back.
Is Mr. Fishy a usual suspect? Mr. Fishy hopes so because Mr. Fishy is a shameless attention whore. SHAMELESS!
What's funny is that the allias seems to have taken over its host, because I can't think of a single post I've ever read by corey baired but I've read lots of posts by Mr. Fishy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And I am that dark side. S Pankerton O'Heathy. Validate me.I can only imagine once someone realizes they are being ignored, that they make indirect attacks in reference to the ignoree on various posts, until they bait someone else to respond, that person is added and so on and so on.
Part of the discussion board is the ask questions and be publicly validated, but there is always a dark side to everything.
If you ignored all of heathansson's aliases posts half of this board would disappear overnight. and that's if you didn't even ignore heathansson.
What's funny is that the allias seems to have taken over its host, because I can't think of a single post I've ever read by corey baired but I've read lots of posts by Mr. Fishy.Hey, Ignore kills trolls and lets be honest, some of us love trolls. The flames keep Mr. Fishy warm and the flesh and hide of trolls feed and cloth Mr. Fishy's guppies. Don't drive the trolls to extintion, trolls have rights too. Just exercise some selfcontrol. Like in Kindergarden, don't hit back.
Is Mr. Fishy a usual suspect? Mr. Fishy hopes so because Mr. Fishy is a shameless attention whore. SHAMELESS!
A lot of people make their account their actual name and make their alias their default profile, that's probably what he did.
Smurfin' smurf of a smurf! I'll smurf him if it's the smurf thing I smurf! You both smurf, and I hope to Smurf you choke on a smurf!
Smurf's smurf's a smurf, she's a big fat smurf,
She's the biggest smurf in the whole wide world,She's a stupid smurf, if there ever was a smurf,
She's a smurf to all the boys and girls.
|
I believe that you COULD go hugely too far - for instance, you could fill a post with bigotry, libel, profanity, and illegal material - and the Paizo staff will simply delete your post and put up a warning to cut it out. It won't get you banned. Many times, I've seen a thread go on for PAGES full of flaming and trolling that literally made me physically nauseous before the Paizo staff resorted to stepping in and shutting the thread down.And that's part of what I love about this website. Sorry, DeathQuaker, but I'm firmly in the opposition camp.
If this is what turns you on to posting here, you have just demonstrated why an ignore feature would be useful. No sarcasm meant.
|
|
And in my view, implementing an "Ignore" feature is actually MORE heavy-handed than deleting individual posts on a case-by-case basis. It means that the judgement is taken out of the moderators' hands. And as Kobold Cleaver pointed out, it takes away the power even to apologize.
I am really at a loss as to understand why anyone would object to this. It is an individual preference. Do you feel you have the RIGHT to heard by me? If not, then why do you care if I have the ability to not see your posts. I'm making the decision on who I can see and who I can't and it only effects me. You say if affect the ignored, but it doesn't. They still have the ability to to say what they want and anyone who wants to listen/read can.
I can understand the argument that Paizo might have other thing more important, but not the victim of wrongful ignoring argument. If someone doesn't want to listen to you, then you should talk to other people.
edited for spelling
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And that's part of what I love about this website. Sorry, DeathQuaker, but I'm firmly in the opposition camp.If this is what turns you on to posting here, you have just demonstrated why an ignore feature would be useful. No sarcasm meant.
I suspect it's an old-fogey American thing. We were taught to support the right of people to say things that we don't like. (Not so much, these days, as words like 'outrageous' and 'unconscionable' get thrown around a lot to describe people telling the truth.)
In my view, it's better to be exposed to offensive viewpoints than to pull my head into my shell and pretend that they don't exist, only to be rudely shocked by their influence on the rest of society.
To pull out the 'what's wrong with the world these days' card, we have too many ways to ignore or avoid people whose opinions we don't share these days. Long gone are the days of knowing most of the people on your street, regardless of their politics or religion or philosophy. We clique only with those people whose views are sympatico with our own, and fall into some sort of incestuous self-reinforcing echo chamber, only to meet people at work who say things so hugely outside of our insular little bubbles that they seem *crazy* to us. And then we turn on the TV and find out that 50% of the people in the country share that 'crazy' opinion we found so unsettling and it drives us even further into seeking the comforting 'sanity' of those who agree with us.
The walls go higher and the heads get pushed deeper into the sand, to the benefit of no one.
|
Senior Software Developer
|
Many times, I've seen a thread go on for PAGES full of flaming and trolling that literally made me physically nauseous before the Paizo staff resorted to stepping in and shutting the thread down.
I'm pretty sure most or all of these cases happened before we implemented the flagging system, which we built as an early warning system so we can find out about problem threads before they go completely off the rails.
With 3,000 new posts a day it's otherwise impossible for Paizo staff to find every potential trouble spot (we all have regular jobs), and that's how our boards got into trouble before the flags were introduced.
|
I am really at a loss as to understand why anyone would object to this. It is an individual preference. Do you feel you have the RIGHT to heard by me? If not, then why do you care if I have the ability to not see your posts. I'm making the decision on who I can see and who I can't and it only effects me. You say if affect the ignored, but it doesn't. They still have the ability to to say what they want and anyone who wants to listen/read can.
I can understand the argument that Paizo might have other thing more important, but not the victim of wrongful ignoring argument. If someone doesn't want to listen to you, then you should talk to other people.
edited for spelling
Do you feel you have the right to ignore me? If so, why do you need a forum function to ignore my posts? No one is forcing you to read my posts.
Gary, what about the feature I mentioned in my prior post:
A tag-cloud listing the aliases of everyone who has posted in that thread with the option to show/reveal posts by that alias? This would also be handy for when users want to see all of a Paizo staff member's replies in a given thread without having to scroll thru multiple pages.
The per-alias options I'd forsee would be:
- Show all
- Hide all
- Show only
Heck, it could even be session/cookie-based rather than being stored in our accounts like the other settings.
In this way, you could filter out two otherwise OK users who keep going back-and-forth in a particular thread to see the other on-topic replies without actually permanently ignoring them.
|
Director of Narrative
|
I don't use a bunch of forums, so I really don't know, so I'm hoping some of y'all can help me understand something. When the idea of an ignore function first popped up, I admit I was ignorant of the idea.
The first thing I thought of was threads where someone (let's say party A, B, C) were having a discussion. In that discussion, party D, E, and F joined in. If party B ignored party E, but A, C, D, and F still could see anything, was further conversation within the whole thread compromised because B and E were not seeing the whole picture? Have any of you seen conversation confusion due to "ignoring"?
|
Senior Software Developer
|
Laithoron, the "emphasize posts by particular people" aspect of that suggestion is interesting, but I don't think we have any interest in actually hiding posts. Either a post is visible to all, or it's not. Anything else leads to multiple fragmented simultaneous not-quite-conversations.
I'm imagining a bunch of drunks at a party all talking past each other trying to make their point while ignoring what everybody else is saying. Maybe that's a bad analogy but it's reasonably close to what I think could happen (perhaps without the drunkeness).
|
|
Do you feel you have the right to ignore me? If so, why do you need a forum function to ignore my posts? No one is forcing you to read my posts.I am really at a loss as to understand why anyone would object to this. It is an individual preference. Do you feel you have the RIGHT to heard by me? If not, then why do you care if I have the ability to not see your posts. I'm making the decision on who I can see and who I can't and it only effects me. You say if affect the ignored, but it doesn't. They still have the ability to to say what they want and anyone who wants to listen/read can.
I can understand the argument that Paizo might have other thing more important, but not the victim of wrongful ignoring argument. If someone doesn't want to listen to you, then you should talk to other people.
edited for spelling
I feel I have the right to ignore you, and after this reply, I probably will, but lets make this clear. What you just posted has nothing to do with what I said. I said I do not understand why anyone would object to me having the ability to ignore somoneone. All you did is demonstrate that you can twist some words around, and probably confirmed to some people why it would be nice not to have certain posts cloggin up a thread.
Have any of you seen conversation confusion due to "ignoring"?
I've seen it before, particularly in live chat channels. Hence why I'd prefer a temporary filter mechanism to an ignore feature. (In addition to it's other non-ignore benefits.)
Laithoron, the "emphasize posts by particular people" aspect of that suggestion is interesting, but I don't think we have any interest in actually hiding posts. ... Maybe that's a bad analogy but it's reasonably close to what I think could happen (perhaps without the drunkeness).
Understandable, just figured I'd bring it up. It was something I saw a use for more as a way to search for specific contributions within a thread as a reader than as a participant.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I feel I have the right to ignore you, and after this reply, I probably will, but lets make this clear. What you just posted has nothing to do with what I said. I said I do not understand why anyone would object to me having the ability to ignore somoneone. All you did is demonstrate that you can twist some words around, and probably confirmed to some people why it would be nice not to have certain posts cloggin up a thread.
You might just try ignoring the entire website if TOZ's benign post was enough to put him on your ignore list.
Or thicken your skin a little.
" I have a whole list of sites that he would likely die from reading then. "
Hands Sebastian 2 troll points
|
|
I'm imagining a bunch of drunks at a party all talking past each other trying to make their point while ignoring what everybody else is saying. Maybe that's a bad analogy but it's reasonably close to what I think could happen (perhaps without the drunkeness).
I think this explains what happens now most of the time, when the two loudest people (people who are available to post most often) can easily drown out what everyone else is saying. (fill the thread up with so many useless or reduntant or argumentative posts, that real ideas or valid responses get lost). I cant see how an ignore function would make this any worse. For people like me, who dont respond a lot, but like to sift through the threads for interesting ideas or viewpoints, it will only help weed out the people whoes viewpoint we see over and over and just don't care to see anymore. It isn't that we are trying not to hear joe smith's new game idea. It is more of a case when I see a thrad about fighter abilities, I know that just a page down I'm gonna see jim pint's posts about how fighter stink compared to mages and I dont have the time to sift through 6 pages of that crap to find a few good posts tucked uin there regarding fighter abilities. And that is only if the other people like me sitting on the sideline have the patience to get in there and post, knowing they are gonna have to deal with Jim's agruments telling them thier ideas suck because mages are overpowered.
The ignore feature would make it so I don't see 101 comparing sword damge to spell damaage just to find the one post that has a really cool way of describing a bull rush.
Maybe it may be confusing for someone who is reading the whole thread to suddenly find a post by me that says "Great idea" on page 20 and quotes pages 3, but does that really constitute a good reason to not have it? Especially when the alternative is that the only people who really read that cool idead about bullrush, are the three people arguing about fighter power vs mage power, who don't care about it because it dosen't support thier argument, because everyone else who is not involved in the argument has left the thread on page 2.
wow. Didn't think I felt this strongly about this. Heck if it dosen't happen no big thing but I still dont understand the argument against it.
|
Director of Narrative
|
Have any of you seen conversation confusion due to "ignoring"?I've seen it before, particularly in live chat channels. Hence why I'd prefer a temporary filter mechanism to an ignore feature. (In addition to it's other non-ignore benefits.)
As an installation in a chatroom, I can totally see how that function would have an effect in a live chat situation. I can see folks spending a buncha time on clarification (or developing their own syntax to explain the lapse.)
The closest I've ever gotten to actively ignoring something on the internet other than just not visiting it or using that handy wheel on my mouse was getting rid of all the game statuses on Facebook. (Farmville, Mafia Wars, and other stuff.) While I don't miss that, I can't think of one poster here that I don't want to read. Ever.
|
|
I feel I have the right to ignore you, and after this reply, I probably will, but lets make this clear. What you just posted has nothing to do with what I said. I said I do not understand why anyone would object to me having the ability to ignore somoneone. All you did is demonstrate that you can twist some words around, and probably confirmed to some people why it would be nice not to have certain posts cloggin up a thread.
You might just try ignoring the entire website if TOZ's benign post was enough to put him on your ignore list.
Or thicken your skin a little.
not at all, I just wanted to tick him off a bit, since that was what he was going for. I wouldn't ignore people who try to use my stuff to make meaningless comparisons. The only people that really get me are the ones that care more about the argument then about the thing they are arguing about. Those that have no interest in actually hearing another point of view, and only care about winning the thread. Maybe its my old age, but I just don't have the patience for it (or the time, I only get a few hours a week to relax and check out the boards. It sucks when that is tied up sorting through crap for gems and not even in a Otyugh's lair. Instead I end up moving on and potentially miss some good stuff by other people. That is why it would help me, and not hurt anyone else.
We don't have many like that here but we do have a few..
|
Director of Narrative
|
I think I understand a part of the pro-ignore crew. I was having a hard time sorting it out, but I think, and I may be totally off, but a certain contingent of these message boards use the forums as a resource, and the bickering gets in the way of the real meat.
I knew that contingent was there, but now it makes sense that that group would have a strong desire to sort posts by relevance to the subject. That I almost always viewed these boards as social (despite my first dozen posts here being mechanics-based), certainly colors my opinion about ignoring posters. I can see where folks seeking answers, and not being petty argumentative types, could get annoyed with that kinda behavior when they just want a solid clarification. I wish I could get that kinda service in real life.
|
|
I think I understand a part of the pro-ignore crew. I was having a hard time sorting it out, but I think, and I may be totally off, but a certain contingent of these message boards use the forums as a resource, and the bickering gets in the way of the real meat.
I knew that contingent was there, but now it makes sense that that group would have a strong desire to sort posts by relevance to the subject. That I almost always viewed these boards as social (despite my first dozen posts here being mechanics-based), certainly colors my opinion about ignoring posters. I can see where folks seeking answers, and not being petty argumentative types, could get annoyed with that kinda behavior when they just want a solid clarification. I wish I could get that kinda service in real life.
This is probably it right there Adam and thank you for point out this piece. That is the reason I come here is for a game resource. I have been playing with the same group for years. New ideas don't come from us often. We all know what the others are thinking at most any time. So come here and see how other people are dealing with the cleave / full attack issue is useful to me. However when I go in that thread and find ten pages of (Just using your name boys, I don't mean to imply it is you) Sebastian and TOZ going back and fort about the same thing and trying to score hits on each other, it take the interest right out of the thread. It is no longer useful to me. When I go to three other threads and find Sebastian and TOZ doing the same thing in each one.. well, that is when it would be nice to ignore them. (Not that I ever would. I love poodles and TOZ has such a way with words.) :)
|
|
To pull out the 'what's wrong with the world these days' card, we have too many ways to ignore or avoid people whose opinions we don't share these days. Long gone are the days of knowing most of the people on your street, regardless of their politics or religion or philosophy. We clique only with those people whose views are sympatico with our own, and fall into some sort of incestuous self-reinforcing echo chamber, only to meet people at work who say things so hugely outside of our insular little bubbles that they seem *crazy* to us. And then we turn on the TV and find out that 50% of the people in the country share that 'crazy' opinion we found so unsettling and it drives us even further into seeking the comforting 'sanity' of those who agree with us.The walls go higher and the heads get pushed deeper into the sand, to the benefit of no one.
Sorry Set, missed you in the others. I see your point, but honestly spending my time reading every post on a game board is not going to make me more socially aware. We are talking a game message board, though a pretty good one. Plus I have already explained that I'm not talking about differing viewpoints. I am talking about useless garbage. You know like the Sunday morning evangelists shows. (Oh that might get me ignored)
|
Director of Narrative
|
I can totally understand, as I have used the ignore feature on one of my other forums for a few people, because their posts rarely have anything I wish to read, and some of them can be quite verbose.
Have you ever had a wtf moment when reading those forums where you ignored those folks? Was a conversation or thread ever odd or was the ignoring ever completely seamless?
I'm looking for experience here. I'm just having a hard time seeing how a conversation between 10 people might look where three of those people have no idea what two people each are saying. Does that make sense or am I looking at the tech wrong?
|
|
I can totally understand, as I have used the ignore feature on one of my other forums for a few people, because their posts rarely have anything I wish to read, and some of them can be quite verbose.Have you ever had a wtf moment when reading those forums where you ignored those folks? Was a conversation or thread ever odd or was the ignoring ever completely seamless?
I'm looking for experience here. I'm just having a hard time seeing how a conversation between 10 people might look where three of those people have no idea what two people each are saying. Does that make sense or am I looking at the tech wrong?
I have been on thoes messagboards, and it looks a lot like it does not seriously. People even now, don;t reply to posts that they feel add nothing, unless they like the argument. Since you have been reading this one, imageine if I had not replied to Set. That is pretty much what it would be like. (Again, just using you as an examplet Set, I read your post and thought about it.)
|
|
The nice thing about the feature is that you still have a placeholder where you can click a link to show that individual post. You know they responded, and aren't confused when you see someone quoting their post. The real downside is not knowing which post is being quoted from, so finding it to read the full context is not so convenient.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
~ignores TOZ~ Is someone speaking? All I hear is white noise.
~GRINS~
|
Director of Narrative
|
I have been on those message boards, and it looks a lot like it does not seriously. People even now, don't reply to posts that they feel add nothing, unless they like the argument. Since you have been reading this one, imagine if I had not replied to Set. That is pretty much what it would be like. (Again, just using you as an example Set, I read your post and thought about it.)I can totally understand, as I have used the ignore feature on one of my other forums for a few people, because their posts rarely have anything I wish to read, and some of them can be quite verbose.Have you ever had a wtf moment when reading those forums where you ignored those folks? Was a conversation or thread ever odd or was the ignoring ever completely seamless?
I'm looking for experience here. I'm just having a hard time seeing how a conversation between 10 people might look where three of those people have no idea what two people each are saying. Does that make sense or am I looking at the tech wrong?
Right on. I can see that, however, the part I bolded, is what we do as humans every day. I can't see a society okay with that in one realm of their lives not being able to deal with that in their virtual lives. Actually, I think the real bugger here is getting people to do just that. We can't rely on websites, authorities, and other folks bigger than us to regulate the masses. It is our responsibility as the unwashed masses to make it for ourselves. You want a better social sphere, make it yourself. Be the example and hope it catches on. Make your point. Get listened to. Or not.
But still, I see the point of this request for the archivers, it's just socially awkward.
The nice thing about the feature is that you still have a placeholder where you can click a link to show that individual post. You know they responded, and aren't confused when you see someone quoting their post. The real downside is not knowing which post is being quoted from, so finding it to read the full context is not so convenient.
That's interesting. I like that the option is there in those other forums, but still, to my weird brain, it seems like way too much trouble than it's worth.
Thanks for the reports from places I've not been, folks.
Sure, pick on my race why doncha....
~looks down on you~ Oh. It is a human. No wonder I did not notice that lesser being.
Trollpoints?
Best.
Idea.
Ever.
The Universal Brotherhood of Trolls (Local 2487) demands that I be appointed arbiter of said Trollpoints, and paid a salary commesurate with my status.