31/10/2014 at 10:14 #11646
People have opinions and they like to express them.
On forums people will often be more vocal about something than were they face to face.
Some people are like this, some are not.
Some people will argue for the sake of it.
Others shy away from posting for fear of confrontation.
There are people that will not post because they grow weary of their comments being met with the same criticism time after time rather than other likeminded people sharing their viewpoint.
One person in a room full of people in agreement who shouts you are all wrong, will ruin it for the others.
So I had an idea…
Could be impractical but is it worth a go?
Some people want genuine discussion and will welcome counter arguments and other points of view.
Some people just want to talk about something with others who are in agreement, without hearing another point of view.
The former is how forums pretty much work, the latter is rarely how forums work as someone will always exercise their forum right to disagree even when expressly asked not to do so.
So, is it worth creating a rule where if the poster of the topic has stated they only want agreeing replies, any replies that are not in agreement are deleted?
I am not sure many will want this but for those that do, it may allow conversation without the fear of their topic being derailed by trolls and people who just want to be that guy (or girl) that shouts you are all wrong?31/10/2014 at 10:59 #11652Derek HParticipant
Is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?31/10/2014 at 11:12 #11654Derek HParticipant
Seriously, what is the point of that anyway? If I want 100% agreement with everything I say I can talk to my cat. But even he disagrees on occasion.
I think Newbury Fast Play Napoleonics are the the best set of Napoleonics rules ever! No disagreement please.31/10/2014 at 11:15 #11655Alvin MolethrottlerParticipant
I’m not sure it’s a workable idea. However, if an OP puts (reasonable) stipulations to participation in his or her thread then I would be prepared to respect those conditions. It all depends on what the thread is about really, I mean IF a thread popped up with the title “Hitler was a great bloke” and the OP wanted the agree only rule applied I would see no reason to be respectful of that.31/10/2014 at 11:25 #11657EartherParticipant
Trying to pre-empt or control potential arguments seems a fruitless exercise to me. By all means, the OP can stipulate some parameters (which generally happens anyway on forums), but enforcing them is difficult. I think a lot of forum users would cry ‘unfair’ if a mod ‘sided’ with the OP.
It would lead to a lot of the ‘editorial’ issues seen ‘elsewhere’. And that, kids, is not cool.31/10/2014 at 11:43 #11660JoeParticipant
I have no objection to it and would respect the rule.
I don’t see a siatuation where I would ever us it myself though.31/10/2014 at 12:03 #11663sebigboss79Participant
Not needed and counterproductive imho.
If someone is not mature enough to witness other opinions then they fail at life. The “agree with me or be gone” rule is against the idea of a forum.
To me in a forum people come together and exchange opinion. It is not for some of them to get a pat on the shoulder for “how good they are”. Just my opinion though.
My blog: http://rolandsminireviews.wordpress.com/31/10/2014 at 12:42 #11664ShahbahrazParticipant
Newbury Fast Play ? Bah. much too simplistic. Where are the rules that are a good enough simulation to take into account different Bricoles? Unless it takes into account how many rounds were distributed from that wagon, it just isn’t realistic. I’m writing my own set including the special Hemorrhoid rules for Napoleon, and until then none of you will have ever played a REALISTIC set of Napoleonic rules. It includes requirements for veteran French players to dice for which extremities have been removed by frostbite (bolt-cutters included in the deluxe set), and I am currently working on the British Cavalry ‘stupid’ rules – not sure yet whether I will do the special ‘beagle’ rules or just require all players to be related to the Duke of Dorsetshire.
--An occasional wargames blog: http://aleadodyssey.blogspot.co.uk/ --31/10/2014 at 12:47 #11665
War is the last argument of Kings.
So as war-gamers where does that put us?31/10/2014 at 13:00 #11666EartherParticipant
Wargames – the continuing argument of numpties?31/10/2014 at 13:20 #11669James EwinsParticipant
If you only want to be agreed with, the internet is possibly not for you. Unless you have some way of removing all voices of dissent from your view and pretending everyone agrees. But that doesn’t just border mental illness, it shares a party wall and a driveway.
Chief Sarcaster at http://www.exmouthwargames.org.uk/
Assistant Dogsbody at http://legionaryshow.co.uk/
/31/10/2014 at 13:24 #11671
“Earther wrote” Wargames – the continuing argument of numpties?
That made me laugh so much I have just spilt my cover over myself.
Cheers.31/10/2014 at 13:42 #11672RosebudParticipant
William Harley, No it didn’t and no you haven’t.31/10/2014 at 13:48 #11674CameronianParticipant
Have an iggy button fitted in all threads, same as the reply/quote option.
'The time has come" The walrus said. "To talk of many things: Of shoes--and ships--and sealing-wax--Of cabbages--and kings--And why the sea is boiling hot--And whether pigs have wings."31/10/2014 at 14:25 #116751 yorksParticipant
No leave it as it is. Would be helpful in there were links to top of page or back to main forum index at the bottom of each page, as I use this mainly on my phone and my finger sometimes gets friction burns from all the scrolling31/10/2014 at 14:34 #11678
The problem isn’t the arguing. It’s the same old people with the same old arguments.
It got old years ago, and now it’s washed up at TWW and started all over again.
Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.31/10/2014 at 15:52 #11687A Lot of GaulParticipant
In terms of moderation, I strongly prefer as light a hand as possible. If people want to argue, then let them argue – provided that they don’t violate the forum rules of decorum while doing so, of course. Attempting to prevent them from doing so can potentially cause far more problems than it could solve. In my experience, even mildly controversial wargaming topics often tend to be ‘hijacked’ within a few posts, in any case.
When I find a forum topic uninteresting or the posts tedious, I simply ignore them and focus on the ones that I do enjoy. Personally, I much prefer having the freedom to make my own choices about what I want to read, rather than for a moderator or someone else attempt to protect my ‘delicate sensibilities’ from arguments or other controversies.
Just my two pence worth. Naturally, YMMV.
"Ventosa viri restabit." ~ Harry Field31/10/2014 at 16:19 #11689McLaddieParticipant
I agree that differing points of view are a basic attraction of forums, and it would be very difficult to moderate the ‘shouters’ in any case. However, the negative posters generally show their colors–often by resorting personal attacks rather than actual discussions. The real conflagrations are often around specific topics, and always have been. The nice thing about posting is that ‘shouters’ are no ‘louder’ than anyone else. They can be left unread.31/10/2014 at 16:22 #11690McLaddieParticipant
Is it shouting if the same post is duplicated….31/10/2014 at 16:40 #11694sebigboss79Participant
Personal attacks of course are not “sporty” and should be moderated. I was asuming that two people are capable of exchanging viewpoints and making their own one clear to the other party in a civilised way.
Yes I do know I have high hopes for some forums but hopefully it will eb the norm here rather than the exception. Not that I have doubts but….
My blog: http://rolandsminireviews.wordpress.com/31/10/2014 at 16:41 #11695
“Rosebud wrote” William Harley, No it didn’t and no you haven’t.
So it’s the full £5 argument then.31/10/2014 at 16:53 #11696Guy FarrishParticipant
I was dead against this for five minutes and then I had a proper think about it.
I’d give it a go.
I suspect that not many would use it because it risks being a one post thread and/or a very boring discussion.
On the other hand you wouldn’t want it to be a trend.
So try it and see.
It has the merit of being self selecting and not imposed by you and I suspect most people want a bit of animated discussion although not the hostility some jump to, so it won’t be used much.
I really can’t see the ‘Weren’t the (insert mass murderers of choice) great’ type post getting much traction here given Michaels common sense whether it has a ‘do not disagree’ tag or not.
Worth an experiment to see how much it would get used.
Definitely review for a month and don’t be afraid to cull it if required.31/10/2014 at 17:47 #11700Steve JohnsonParticipant
By and large I think things are ok as they are. Sadly there will always be a few members who seem to take pleasure in disagreeing with anything that anyone says. Constructive critiscism is welcomed; moaning for the sake of it is not.31/10/2014 at 18:09 #117011 yorksParticipant
Is it possible to ignore threads. I find this forum quite difficult to find things other than the most posted thread. Take the “do rules have historical movement rates” thread every time I clicked the latest post in horse and musket it seemed to be this one, after about the first 50 posts I found it a bit repetitive. there is no indication of what other replies have been posted on other threads in the horse and musket fourm without opening every one up.31/10/2014 at 18:29 #11703
Is it possible to ignore threads.
Not currently anyway.
Well not in the TMP sense of the word no.31/10/2014 at 18:30 #11704kyoteblueParticipant
Who knows ,It could work.31/10/2014 at 18:34 #11706
there is no indication of what other replies have been posted on other threads in the horse and musket fourm without opening every one up.
Not sure I understand what you are asking for.
There is the overview that shows each topic within a forum: (I used this one as an example)
And how many replies it has had and when the last reply was.
If there is something else you mean please drop me an e-mail or maybe start a topic about that, trying to keep this one about the question in the first post you see.
🙂31/10/2014 at 18:37 #11707
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>1 yorks wrote:</div>
Is it possible to ignore threads.
No. Not currently anyway. Well not in the TMP sense of the word no.
Most fora have an ignore function. It makes for a happier place, and shifts some of the hassle of moderation to individual members.
If I can ignore a PITA I’m not going to be grizzling to you about the puerile, self-righteous, nauseating, immature, simplistic posts of the PITA am I?
Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.31/10/2014 at 19:05 #11710
It’s just struck me instead of having arguments why don’t we have war-games against each other and the winner wins the argument.31/10/2014 at 20:04 #11713
Most fora have an ignore function. It makes for a happier place, and shifts some of the hassle of moderation to individual members.
Therein lies the problem.
Most fora, LAF, WD3, etc use phpBB software, they are without doubt the bees knees in forums.
However they don’t have the other functionality needed for TWW.
Such as a home page with news articles, membership systems that grant access to various areas of the site.
Automatic payments and header and side banner advert facilities etc.
Short of spending a lot of cash on getting a bespoke site made the only option was an off the shelf bit of kit.
TWW is wordpress with a BBpress forum plugin.
The other things are plugins too, such as the membership system, the calendar, forms, private messaging, etc.
It was tough choice but in order to make it have all the things that were needed it ended up being WordPress based.
This does mean the forum is not as swanky as a phpBB forum but it is I think the most functional out of TMP, TGN and TWW.
I have looked for ignore plugins that will work with BBpress but have not found any readily available.
All in all it does not have all the functions people want, but then you can’t please everyone.
Saying that TWW has:
Topics/threads you can subscribe to
Boards/forums you can subscribe to
Gaming related only topics, no politics
List of new topics
List of latest posts
No deletion or censoring of posts that adhere to forum rules
Forum rules apply to everyone
Forum search function that is quick and easy to use
News search function that is quick and easy to use
Links to gaming related topics on other sites are allowed
E-mails to TWW staff normally answered within 24 hours
News from manufacturers
An interactive Event Calendar
Private messages that show the whole conversation
Users online feature
Traders that send in news will also have their news posted to Twitter, Google+ and Facebook
Traders will also receive an e-mail to notify them that their news is published
No down time31/10/2014 at 20:20 #11715shelldrakeParticipant
I am more interested in weeding out the thread hijacks to keep topics, well… on topic.31/10/2014 at 20:22 #11716
I am more interested in weeding out the thread hijacks to keep topics, well… on topic.
I think the thing to do there is ignore any tangents and do what Luke did it in the trench run.01/11/2014 at 01:51 #11744CatullusParticipant
Mike, you already have a sensible set of general rules and you don’t need more detail. TMP has a large body of rules and they have never stopped all the in-fighting on that forum. You will never get every single member of any large group of people to get along.
You’ll twist yourself into knots trying to apply a rule like this. It is no substitute for hands-on moderation and dealing with problems on a case-by-case basis.
If people aren’t prepared to be met with criticism, a blog might be a better platform for their posts.01/11/2014 at 03:23 #11746grizzlymcParticipant
It’s just struck me instead of having arguments why don’t we have war-games against each other and the winner wins the argument.
Because your rules are rubbish and mine are perfect!
Honestly, arguing about rules for resolving disputes does seem to be the purpose of a wargames frorum.01/11/2014 at 03:48 #11749repiqueoneParticipant
Mike, I think this is real easy. Have two forum topic areas: Game design for published designers discussion. Game design for unpublished designers. Get the parties not to post on a forum they do not belong on, and it would end all heated discussion. Published would be simply defined as having published a rule set for commercial sale and is currently available for purchase, and played anywhere else but in their own basement.
You might attract a number of people who would be willing to share their experience and insights, both pragmatic and theoretical, in putting forth publicly available works. I think you will find this group highly supportive of each other’s creative efforts, even if they disagree on the methods and implementation. People might find that interesting.
The other forum would still give Bandit and McLaddie a chance to speculate on how to write rules and share their theories on how they will do that, when they get to it.
Seems like a reasonable compromise. 😉01/11/2014 at 04:23 #11758kyoteblueParticipant
Hey that could work !!!01/11/2014 at 06:00 #11764Jonathan GingerichParticipant
The moment someone starts an irksome enough thread, another thread will spring up. Since they can’t reply directly, posts will be LOUD and SNARKY. But hey! at least everyone will agree within the thread!01/11/2014 at 07:37 #11766
Hey that could work !!!
What odds are you offering against?
Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.01/11/2014 at 08:07 #11767
Game design for unpublished designers. Get the parties not to post on a forum they do not belong on, and it would end all heated discussion.
Maybe, one initial problem I see is when an unpublished rules writer asks for advice from a published on.
They would not be allowed to give advice as they would be posting on a topic they are not allowed too, even when asked to..
I can see where you are coming from but it sounds just a bit elitist and would set a precedent for more forums that are professional vs amateur.
Painting forums split between people that get paid to do it and those that don’t.
Competition/tournament gamers vs regular gamers.
I see also one group making remarks about the other group knowing the people from the other group are forbidden from replying directly.
ah well, seems most people are against.
Just a thought!
🙂01/11/2014 at 09:11 #11769WhirlwindParticipant
I can see where you are coming from but it sounds just a bit elitist and would set a precedent for more forums that are professional vs amateur. Painting forums split between people that get paid to do it and those that don’t. Competition/tournament gamers vs regular gamers. I see also one group making remarks about the other group knowing the people from the other group are forbidden from replying directly.
You could try it and see how/if it worked out, but maybe just have a board which is invitation only for published games designers that everyone can read, but posting privileges are restricted? And there will still be the normal games design boards that everyone else (myself included) can still ask for questions/advice etc. And nothing to stop published games designers from frequenting that board too.
And if there is demand from the pro painters and the competition players for a place which is a little bit exclusive because they want to discuss issues in that way, I can’t see the problem with that either. Us non-pro painters and tournament players can still benefit from their wisdom. I’ve never played a tournament, but if I was a tournament player and wanted to discuss tournament issues but I was constantly getting posts saying variants of “why play this way? what is fun about this?” then I might appreciate a dedicated space (I have absolutely no idea if this happens by the way, I was just imagining).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.