In your completely unbiased opinion correct? I often ask myself why you even post. Do you just enjoy conflict? Because I don't think I've ever seen you in a thread that wasn't how should I say a war zone. Yes I think that's an apt description. So much flame being used it requires its on warning sign.
The point of no return? No. I've seen threads getting back on the rails, after asides and smaller discussions, and then they get shut down. The point of return was already in motion, and heading back. There was no passing of the Event Horizon with everyone's eyes bleeding and the thread ship totally lost.Productive? The very common situation is one side carrying an argument, setting their positions, making points, then someone gets offended and then it all gets locked. Locking isn't productive at all.
A thread I am posting in that is not a war zone.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pue4&page=2?1-players-girlfriend-or-friend -that-just#61
Another one
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pud4?Something-to-make-you-laugh#3
In a world
Where threads are locked
One man stands aloneMainly because he is shaking his head slowly
At terrible threadsLamontius: The Lamontening
Coming
Summer 2013
Ha ha ha ha!
Nice one.
I think locking threads when people are trying to post is jerk behaviour. In that it inconveniences and shuts down debates.
Heh - so they can lock threads nobody wants to post in? Gracious of you. :p
Your basic position then being that moderating the site is inherently jerkish? (Deleting posts is also inconvenient, no doubt?)
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Holy sheets of white satin, Mikaze got worked up. MIKAZE. Raise the force fields! Hide the sheep! The fury of thousand Good Orcs mounted on cephalopod agathions is bearing down on us and let me tell you, there will be no prisoners taken this time. They'll tolerate and redeem the living crap out of anybody who stands in their way.
But yeah, M is pretty much spot on.
I actually like Mikaze, made some good posts out there, but I don't think it is mutual.
My trespasses in criticising the mods is too far, there must be a retribution. A loyalist can always recognise another loyalist.
Till later champs.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I actually like Mikaze, made some good posts out there, but I don't think it is mutual.
Mikaze is consistently the most funny, interesting and informative ( if you like playing good guys ) member of this community. He's literally worth about five of myself.
As for locked threads, they often prove to be the most interesting ones to read, for the sheer trainwreck value. ;)
To reiterate the statements by Gary and Vic, the reasons that threads are locked are generally because it's gotten to the point of no return, or it violates forum rules. There is a point at which some conversations are no longer productive, but instead become aggressive. Moderation is an addendum to some staff members jobs and it is impossible to make all parties happy all of the time. There is no malice, personal vendetta or trickery behind moderator decisions, and if you feel that there is an egregious issue, we will explain or answer questions via this forum or email.
It strikes me as somewhat disingenuous to imply that human beings are always utterly bereft of personal motivation in situations such as this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't call it conscientiously disingenuous.
People have their biases. Sometimes their position requires them disagreeing with a very vocal minority.
This is why I asked His Tyrannasaur-ness about how to dollar-vote against the Super-Sanitation to Preserve Delicate Sensibilities.
If I started a thread kvetching about turning 'brothel' into 'dance hall', I'm pretty sure my tendency towards strident diatribe would get the thread insta-locked, because I feel very strongly about this particular subset of subject matter. I also am fairly certain who would do the locking, and I am fairly certain that the reason would be justified inasmuch as the boards are supposed to be kept to a certain range of ratings corresponding to the movie code. I could rail against the system and reiterate the tradition of ale and wenching, someone would likely ask if it is as integral to my game as it sounds, then issue the standard 'houserule it', and then it would go into circles of prurience versus prudity, and things would proceed to hit a lock faster than a crowbar swung by a desperate junkie.
I know I can vote with my dollars, which is why I try to promote and purchase the things that push the envelope. I also know that some people play Pathfinder with their kids, and it's not like there's going to be separate books for the gamers who go up to R and beyond. It's the same ruleset, and euphemisms will have to carry the day, for sake of inclusiveness.
I don't feel it disingenuous if the person that normally locks me doesn't see why this is such a big deal to me. It's quite probably nothing personal, no matter how much I may joke to the contrary.
It's just as probable that I have a blind spot for that sort of thing, 'cause I don't see Mikaze making good guys of EVERYTHING, just orcs. Cause, let's face it, sometimes you gotta have noble savages, and a Certain Company made them work very well on that front.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Huh.
Not only am I constantly amazed at what I can get away with on these boards, sometimes I am amazed that they haven't booted me out entirely.
But maybe that's because you guys keep 'em so busy they never get down to my beloved OTD.
Thanks, 3.5 Loyalist and Co.!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds hawt.
I have to agree with TOZ. I've been a moderator (and administrator) on gaming forums before. A good lot of the conversation that goes unchecked on Paizo would have been instantly or rapidly closed on any other forum I've spent any appreciable amount of time on.
I'm still not sure how I feel about it. On the one hand, I think the quick lockings did good to dissuade certain kinds of conversations from ever happening (*cough*politics*cough*). On the other, just when you think there's only downhill to go, you'll stumble across a thread where people are being surprisingly civil, and you're thankful for the extremely lenient stance on moderation Paizo has.
So yeah, I don't see this whole Paizo strict-moderation conspiracy plot. Everything here's a lot more tolerant of these sorts of discussions than anywhere else I've ever been, for the good and ill of those discussions both.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
doodlebug you are mistaking the full body massage of tyranny with the crushing grip of tyranny
it happens
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All action is good action when you're polymorphously perverse.
In a world
Where threads are locked
One man stands aloneMainly because he is shaking his head slowly
At terrible threadsLamontius: The Lamontening
Coming
Summer 2013
I'd buy it and a trilogy
I love the way this page has gone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All action is good action when you're polymorphously perverse.
translation:
It doesn't matter when it's Arcturian, baby
The best 6 minutes in all of filmdom.
[Six and a half minutes later]
Huh. I thought that was one of Hudson's lines, but I guess not.
Also, N f@!&in' SFW
I wouldn't call it conscientiously disingenuous.
People have their biases. Sometimes their position requires them disagreeing with a very vocal minority.
This is why I asked His Tyrannasaur-ness about how to dollar-vote against the Super-Sanitation to Preserve Delicate Sensibilities.
If I started a thread kvetching about turning 'brothel' into 'dance hall', I'm pretty sure my tendency towards strident diatribe would get the thread insta-locked, because I feel very strongly about this particular subset of subject matter. I also am fairly certain who would do the locking, and I am fairly certain that the reason would be justified inasmuch as the boards are supposed to be kept to a certain range of ratings corresponding to the movie code. I could rail against the system and reiterate the tradition of ale and wenching, someone would likely ask if it is as integral to my game as it sounds, then issue the standard 'houserule it', and then it would go into circles of prurience versus prudity, and things would proceed to hit a lock faster than a crowbar swung by a desperate junkie.
I know I can vote with my dollars, which is why I try to promote and purchase the things that push the envelope. I also know that some people play Pathfinder with their kids, and it's not like there's going to be separate books for the gamers who go up to R and beyond. It's the same ruleset, and euphemisms will have to carry the day, for sake of inclusiveness.
I don't feel it disingenuous if the person that normally locks me doesn't see why this is such a big deal to me. It's quite probably nothing personal, no matter how much I may joke to the contrary.
It's just as probable that I have a blind spot for that sort of thing, 'cause I don't see Mikaze making good guys of EVERYTHING, just orcs. Cause, let's face it, sometimes you gotta have noble savages, and a Certain Company made them work very well on that front.
You talk funny. :P (Truth be told, while I think I'm perhaps on the complete opposite side of the bell curve as you are when it comes to the whole "prurience versus prudity" stance, I still kinda super-adore the way you write about it.)
As someone who was on the locking end of a recent thread, I have to say I was a teensy bit upset at the time (right when it was being locked, I was actually smack in the middle of writing a devastating post-- fraught with mordant wisdom and unassailable logic-- that would have proven my internet foes wrong for all time, and established my place as sovereign of all I surveyed. *wink*)
After a few seconds' reflection, though, I realized my post wouldn't have done anything but aggravate an already hopeless situation, and the locking actually kept me from wasting another minute on an ill-advised attempt to change someone's opinion. So, I guess I'm actually grateful for it.
But yeah, I may not always see the logic or reason for locking a thread, but I figure, as long as I'm a guest, I'll try to respect the rules of wherever I'm visiting. I don't want to be an "Amanda", after all.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd buy it and a trilogyIn a world
Where threads are locked
One man stands aloneMainly because he is shaking his head slowly
At terrible threadsLamontius: The Lamontening
Coming
Summer 2013
the second one will end on a complete cliffhanger
the third one will just be absolutely terriblethen years later I will come out of retirement to make a fourth which will destroy any remaining sense of nostalgia you had for the first one
after that I will basically just fly around in my diamond-encrusted golden time machine that runs on burning one-hundred dollar bills and the tears of those I have utterly disappointed
You talk funny. :P
That I do. What's worse is that people who have spoken to em in person? Know that I am even more egregiously loquacious in a face to face environment.
(Truth be told, while I think I'm perhaps on the complete opposite side of the bell curve as you are when it comes to the whole "prurience versus prudity" stance, I still kinda super-adore the way you write about it.)
Even when my tastes in subject matter cleave closer to tasteless, I try to make the conversation flavorful. :D It's what I do. And while I'm saying as much, I'd like to note there's nothing wrong with 'cleaner' games (in contrast to people seeing me rollin', and hatin', patrollin' and tryin' ta catch me gamin' dirty), so long as one takes into account that there's different audiences for everything and everyone, and the Princess Bride might suit some just fine, while others want Lord of the Rings, and others are chomping at the bit for some Record of Lodoss War (and some of us meanwhile are off in the realm of Words Worth, but I digress).
As someone who was on the locking end of a recent thread, I have to say I was a teensy bit upset at the time (right when it was being locked, I was actually smack in the middle of writing a devastating post-- fraught with mordant wisdom and unassailable logic-- that would have proven my internet foes wrong for all time, and established my place as sovereign of all I surveyed. *wink*)
See, those moments are not the one that make me flip tables and take a turn for the vitriolic - those tend to be more 'shoulda/coulda/woulda' moments as once the lock's in place, there's a rapid loss of interest and the fires of passion are directed at another topic. If I feel strongly enough about a subject that I have to be 'right', then usually I get it out of my system early in the thread, and then hang out for the inevitable disappointment as no one agrees with me. :D
After a few seconds' reflection, though, I realized my post wouldn't have done anything but aggravate an already hopeless situation, and the locking actually kept me from wasting another minute on an ill-advised attempt to change someone's opinion. So, I guess I'm actually grateful for it.
But yeah, I may not always see the logic or reason for locking a thread, but I figure, as long as I'm a guest, I'll try to respect the rules of wherever I'm visiting. I don't want to be an "Amanda", after all.
I don't like being the Choad Warrior at all (yay Chez Geek reference!), and I try to contribute where I can, when I can. The problem tends to be that what I bring at the adult party favors that are not always appropriate, and there's not a 'dance hall' built into the Paizo boards, and I don't have the resource points, free time, or the territory to build one of my own and establish trade with the kingdom of Paizo, even though I would welcome many individuals to such a place.
Having once been a mod in a chat of such subject matters, I know how difficult it can be. And frankly, I tend to find my own form of full frontal nerdity goes in directions weird even by the standards of those of agree with me, or at least commiserate about how certain topics are taboo or seen as distasteful.
And of course, sometimes that leads to crickets and a slow and embarrassing thread-death. Like in that one about dwarven versus gnomis strip clubs.
Though perhaps the less said there, the better.
(and some of us meanwhile are off in the realm of Words Worth, but I digress).
I know this reference and I am ashamed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
Dear sir and/or madam: I am a teacher of college-level composition; I find your vocabulary unduly overwrought. "FYI," as the kids say.
I wouldn't call it conscientiously disingenuous.
People have their biases. Sometimes their position requires them disagreeing with a very vocal minority.
This is why I asked His Tyrannasaur-ness about how to dollar-vote against the Super-Sanitation to Preserve Delicate Sensibilities.
If I started a thread kvetching about turning 'brothel' into 'dance hall', I'm pretty sure my tendency towards strident diatribe would get the thread insta-locked, because I feel very strongly about this particular subset of subject matter. I also am fairly certain who would do the locking, and I am fairly certain that the reason would be justified inasmuch as the boards are supposed to be kept to a certain range of ratings corresponding to the movie code. I could rail against the system and reiterate the tradition of ale and wenching, someone would likely ask if it is as integral to my game as it sounds, then issue the standard 'houserule it', and then it would go into circles of prurience versus prudity, and things would proceed to hit a lock faster than a crowbar swung by a desperate junkie.
I know I can vote with my dollars, which is why I try to promote and purchase the things that push the envelope. I also know that some people play Pathfinder with their kids, and it's not like there's going to be separate books for the gamers who go up to R and beyond. It's the same ruleset, and euphemisms will have to carry the day, for sake of inclusiveness.
I don't feel it disingenuous if the person that normally locks me doesn't see why this is such a big deal to me. It's quite probably nothing personal, no matter how much I may joke to the contrary.
It's just as probable that I have a blind spot for that sort of thing, 'cause I don't see Mikaze making good guys of EVERYTHING, just orcs. Cause, let's face it, sometimes you gotta have noble savages, and a Certain Company made them work very well on that front.
I concur with your overall assertion that we shouldn't censor adult concepts. I wish Paizo would do a "Black Dog"-style imprint. I also contend that this is separate from the issue at hand.
In essence, Paizo wishes to portray its forums being subject to utterly impersonal moderation. I feel the need to occasionally step in and point out that human beings are, on the whole, not quite so detached from their own opinions, best interests notwithstanding.
Good ideas.
Off topic, but I'm pretty certain they didn't intend "dance hall" as a euphemism for "brothel." Dance halls are/were their own real things, pretty much exactly as described in the book. The contemporary equivalent would be a nightclub, more or less. Which can have lascivious things happen at, but are most definitely not brothels.
Brothels would more or less use the same stats as a tenement. Maybe some would have a common room and bar added. Add a team of laborers for the prostitutes; the last part the book itself suggests, which indicates they are not afraid to discuss prostitution by its name.
@DeathQuaker: Here
|
|
James Jacobs did explain that the whole dance hall kerrufle is because the hardcover RPG line has far greater circulation than softcovers and chances of any religious loony going crazy about brothels in kid's game book are far higher than with softcover lines, which have more wiggle room for Things That Make Americans Flip Out. There is a precedent with protests about "Sacred Prostitute" trait in APG (whoring made saintly? who cares if that was a historical fact, that ain't happenin' in Gods Amurica!) as opposed to all three Book of the Damned softcovers raising no concern whatsoever.
Of course one can ask why images of guts being spilled never raise any concern but hey, it's Americans and their dumb "BLOOD = FINE, NIPPLES = BAD" thing.
Of course one can ask why images of guts being spilled never raise any concern but hey, it's Americans and their dumb "BLOOD = FINE, NIPPLES = BAD" thing.
I'd be good for having less of both personally. I'm both prudish and easily queasy.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Of course one can ask why images of guts being spilled never raise any concern but hey, it's Americans and their dumb "BLOOD = FINE, NIPPLES = BAD" thing.I'd be good for having less of both personally. I'm both prudish and easily queasy.
No no, you can't. You're either a godless European and you want more boobies and less gore, or you're a prude Amurican and you want more blood and less sodomy. It's a binary choice.
No no, you can't. You're either a godless European and you want more boobies and less gore, or you're a prude Amurican and you want more blood and less sodomy. It's a binary choice.Of course one can ask why images of guts being spilled never raise any concern but hey, it's Americans and their dumb "BLOOD = FINE, NIPPLES = BAD" thing.I'd be good for having less of both personally. I'm both prudish and easily queasy.
I'd be happy to have everyone completely clothing-covered, but blood - even fake blood, in excess - and gore make me nauseous. I can't win here.
I'm so glad you exist, Gorbacz.
PostMonster General
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In essence, Paizo wishes to portray its forums being subject to utterly impersonal moderation.
I'm not sure where you're getting this from. I think we've been pretty consistent in stating that our moderators are human and every moderation decision is a judgment call.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James Jacobs did explain that the whole dance hall kerrufle is because the hardcover RPG line has far greater circulation than softcovers and chances of any religious loony...
Meh.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
In essence, Paizo wishes to portray its forums being subject to utterly impersonal moderation. I feel the need to occasionally step in and point out that human beings are, on the whole, not quite so detached from their own opinions, best interests notwithstanding.
The quoted text seems to suggest that moderators will generally fall on one side of an argument or another.
Frankly, for many of the threads that have forced me to step in with my moderator hat, I genuinely don't fall in on *any* side. In most of them, a small number of people are arguing that X must be true and anybody who thinks Y is an idiot, and a small number of people are arguing that Y must be true and anybody who thinks X is an idiot, and my own opinion is that the world would be a better place if people who believe in X would just go ahead and do X and let the people who believe Y do Y, and vice versa.
In short, my own personal opinion on most of the threads I moderate can be summed up with the phrase "don't be a jerk."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In essence, Paizo wishes to portray its forums being subject to utterly impersonal moderation. I feel the need to occasionally step in and point out that human beings are, on the whole, not quite so detached from their own opinions, best interests notwithstanding.The quoted text seems to suggest that moderators will generally fall on one side of an argument or another.
Frankly, for many of the threads that have forced me to step in with my moderator hat, I genuinely don't fall in on *any* side. In most of them, a small number of people are arguing that X must be true and anybody who thinks Y is an idiot, and a small number of people are arguing that Y must be true and anybody who thinks X is an idiot, and my own opinion is that the world would be a better place if people who believe in X would just go ahead and do X and let the people who believe Y do Y, and vice versa.
In short, my own personal opinion on most of the threads I moderate can be summed up with the phrase "don't be a jerk."
If I am very unhappy with one aspect of how the moderating team is doing their job, then it is that you guys have a tendency to remove a bunch of angry posts ( which is totally okay, people, like myself, have a temper and things get heated ), but to leave the ( often blatant flamebaiting ) offensive post in place which started those angry retorts.
There are certain individuals ...actually one individual mostly... who seem(s) to have mastered the ability to run under your radar with the flamebaiting and uses this blind spot extensively.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@DeathQuaker: Here
Stop disillusioning me. I was happy thinking Paizo had done something right.
Anyway, it's not the impression I got from the book itself. So there.
In essence, Paizo wishes to portray its forums being subject to utterly impersonal moderation.I'm not sure where you're getting this from.
To reiterate the statements by Gary and Vic, the reasons that threads are locked are generally because it's gotten to the point of no return, or it violates forum rules. There is a point at which some conversations are no longer productive, but instead become aggressive. Moderation is an addendum to some staff members jobs and it is impossible to make all parties happy all of the time. There is no malice, personal vendetta or trickery behind moderator decisions, and if you feel that there is an egregious issue, we will explain or answer questions via this forum or email.
Found another one:
On a real problem in gaming and an issue across gaming groups, shut down before the second page finished:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pupl&page=1?Power-gamer-protected-species
Some people got angry and defensive (I think the main poster was mostly right, but could have been more coherent) over Conundrum's posts, and it was locked fast. Now this locked thread can never get into the power gamer issue further, it has to continue somewhere else.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In essence, Paizo wishes to portray its forums being subject to utterly impersonal moderation. I feel the need to occasionally step in and point out that human beings are, on the whole, not quite so detached from their own opinions, best interests notwithstanding.The quoted text seems to suggest that moderators will generally fall on one side of an argument or another.
Frankly, for many of the threads that have forced me to step in with my moderator hat, I genuinely don't fall in on *any* side. In most of them, a small number of people are arguing that X must be true and anybody who thinks Y is an idiot, and a small number of people are arguing that Y must be true and anybody who thinks X is an idiot, and my own opinion is that the world would be a better place if people who believe in X would just go ahead and do X and let the people who believe Y do Y, and vice versa.
In short, my own personal opinion on most of the threads I moderate can be summed up with the phrase "don't be a jerk."
Actually, I hadn't considered that you guys would have an axe to grind re: the debate itself. I would assume that in any situation where you had an actual opinion on whatever was being debated, you would tell us, so we could know.
But we do build up personas here on these boards, and as we read and as people post, we learn who we like and who we don't, who we agree with and who we don't, and how those separate spectrums correlate. There are people who say things that make me roll my eyes and click away even if I think they meant well, and there are people who make me smirk and await responses even if I know they didn't. And vice versa. We all have opinions of each other. There would be no sense of community, or at least continuity, if we didn't. And I can't imagine that moderation from Paizo staff members somehow exists in a vacuum, completely disregarding the personas of the posters in any given thread.
That doesn't mean you guys have targets and you look for opportunities to snipe at them. But it does mean that the identities (as it were) of the people involved will play a part in your decision. It would be weird if they didn't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In essence, Paizo wishes to portray its forums being subject to utterly impersonal moderation. I feel the need to occasionally step in and point out that human beings are, on the whole, not quite so detached from their own opinions, best interests notwithstanding.The quoted text seems to suggest that moderators will generally fall on one side of an argument or another.
Frankly, for many of the threads that have forced me to step in with my moderator hat, I genuinely don't fall in on *any* side. In most of them, a small number of people are arguing that X must be true and anybody who thinks Y is an idiot, and a small number of people are arguing that Y must be true and anybody who thinks X is an idiot, and my own opinion is that the world would be a better place if people who believe in X would just go ahead and do X and let the people who believe Y do Y, and vice versa.
In short, my own personal opinion on most of the threads I moderate can be summed up with the phrase "don't be a jerk."
In essence, Paizo wishes to portray its forums being subject to utterly impersonal moderation.I'm not sure where you're getting this from.To reiterate the statements by Gary and Vic, the reasons that threads are locked are generally because it's gotten to the point of no return, or it violates forum rules. There is a point at which some conversations are no longer productive, but instead become aggressive. Moderation is an addendum to some staff members jobs and it is impossible to make all parties happy all of the time. There is no malice, personal vendetta or trickery behind moderator decisions, and if you feel that there is an egregious issue, we will explain or answer questions via this forum or email.
You forget that Chris is Definitely Not a Robot™
To be real though, at no point in your quotation does might be a robot Chris claim that moderation is done with cold hands; instead, she points out that they are done "without malice", which means they aren't taking anyone's side when they delete posts or lock threads.
Or, you know, what Vic just said.
The team sounds pretty consistent to me in their posts here.
Actually, if only once side is complaining and flagging, then a moderator that locks a thread is taking the side of those that complain (and not those that aren't complaining).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Found another one:
On a real problem in gaming and an issue across gaming groups, shut down before the second page finished:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pupl&page=1?Power-gamer-protected-species
Some people got angry and defensive (I think the main poster was mostly right, but could have been more coherent) over Conundrum's posts, and it was locked fast. Now this locked thread can never get into the power gamer issue further, it has to continue somewhere else.
That thread was indefensible flamebait just waiting for a lock from the getgo and you know it.
When the first post in the thread starts with calling people who disagree with you "idiots", there's nowhere to go but downhill. Don't even try to defend that.
Frankly, I'm going to call a spade a spade. The only purpose for this thread is for you to make a stink any time a moderator does anything on the forum that you don't like. You dismiss any argument that doesn't fit into your narrative with an offhanded, careless comment and mockery. Frankly, I have better things to do with my time, and I imagine so does the staff. Good *#&$ing riddance.
Found another one:
On a real problem in gaming and an issue across gaming groups, shut down before the second page finished:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pupl&page=1?Power-gamer-protected-species
Some people got angry and defensive (I think the main poster was mostly right, but could have been more coherent) over Conundrum's posts, and it was locked fast. Now this locked thread can never get into the power gamer issue further, it has to continue somewhere else.
Don't really see that being an issue, considering the vast, vast number of threads on the issue already extant.
Emotive words you use there, but they aren't truly that persuasive.
This guy was agitated with the number of powergamers he has come across, and identified that they were being protected from criticism by moderators. He had some ideas why they came about, which was disagreed with, there was argument. Then the thread got locked.
Proving he was on to something. If only he was less emotional and angry, there would have been no reasons, at all, to lock the thread.
"there's nowhere to go but downhill. Don't even try to defend that."
This point on inevitability has already been addressed. Some threads are recovering when they are killed off.
You didn't actually check the link properly did you?
On the second page, the bile is exhausted, it calms right down, and they are moving on. The main poster acknowledges some fault and contribution to the "aforementioned combative posts" and says: "too bad we couldn't skip the 50 or so combative posts and boiled it down to the more reasonable stuff."
Then it was locked. The thread had already turned around. It is this type of thing that really gets my goat, I've seen it far too many times, and that is why I started this thread. Which like Conundrum's thread, has gotten a lot of hostility towards the topic.
Don't really see that being an issue, considering the vast, vast number of threads on the issue already extant.Found another one:
On a real problem in gaming and an issue across gaming groups, shut down before the second page finished:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pupl&page=1?Power-gamer-protected-species
Some people got angry and defensive (I think the main poster was mostly right, but could have been more coherent) over Conundrum's posts, and it was locked fast. Now this locked thread can never get into the power gamer issue further, it has to continue somewhere else.
Yep. Paizo's mods lock what people are determined to talk about. When people care this much, they should just back off and let the posts come, pro and anti power gamer.