Page 1 of 1

So let me see if I have this straight...

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:20 am
by Just Some Guy
You guys are allowed to call people names like "4rries" because they dare to play a game y'all don't like. You post incorrect things about 4e to "back" your points. Then when some people come along and point out your mistakes, or try to defend themselves from the immature name-calling, that's "trolling" and they get banned?

Isn't that rather pathetic? Are you guys really that thin-skinned you can't deal with people disagreeing with you, or treating you the way you treat them?

Re: So let me see if I have this straight...

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:35 am
by Kaelik
Just Some Guy wrote:You guys are allowed to call people names like "4rries" because they dare to play a game y'all don't like.
Anyone is allowed to call anyone any names here, as long as there is a point to the names, and their posts serve a purpose other than incitement.
Just Some Guy wrote:You post incorrect things about 4e to "back" your points.
I know you are one of these "banned" posters, so you aren't objective, but you could at least pretend to be serious. The vast majority of claims made against 4e were not incorrect. They were objective statements, reflecting a set of values. Oh well. So is "murder is bad" but you probably don't complain when people say that.
Just Some Guy wrote:Then when some people come along and point out your mistakes, or try to defend themselves from the immature name-calling, that's "trolling" and they get banned?
Very few people even made an attempt at dealing with arguments. To whit, Darwinism, ie, probably you, just spouted random assertions that had nothing to do with the actual conversation. Some people did present arguments that had already been countered several hundred times earlier in the thread they didn't read, but where still posting in.

There was a lot of trolling going on.
Just Some Guy wrote:Isn't that rather pathetic? Are you guys really that thin-skinned you can't deal with people disagreeing with you, or treating you the way you treat them?
You are not the owner of this forum. I am not the owner of this forum. Frank Trollman is not the owner of this forum. If you were banned, and you might have just bee put on time out, it was because you were being a nuisance to the owner of this forum.

If you get kicked out of a restaurant for pissing on the tables, that's not my fault either. This forum has arguments all the time. People very rarely are ever banned, or even put on time out. You did something beyond disagree with people, you wasted everyone's time not making arguments, and not addressing the arguments presented.

I am not banned, but I have personally called out at one time or another every single person in that thread who has more than 100 posts. It's not thin skin preventing us from dealing with you, it's you not dealing with anything. Pity party time is now over, either go post something constructive somewhere, or go post somewhere else.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:43 am
by fectin
I was a bit confused about it too. I'm pretty sure it's because enough people started saying unkind things about another forum, because that does end in thread-lock.

Separately, and purely from my perspective, that episode started with assinine comments from Darwinism (whether or not he was connected with everyone else, the timing made it look like he was), and was exacerbated by his refusal to read any arguements or counterexamples. Seriously, I can not come up with anything he would have done differently if he were deliberately trolling.

Everyone else came in very shortly afterwards and basically introduced themselves as deliberate trolls. (Example: Red Mage, top of this:http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=49 ... &start=775 )

So, what exactly do you think should have happened differently?

Re: So let me see if I have this straight...

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:36 am
by Books
Just Some Guy wrote:You guys are allowed to call people names like "4rries" because they dare to play a game y'all don't like.them?
It would actually be pretty funny if there were a lot of variation, apparent effort, or semblance of anything but circle jerking. I like "3cidivists" and "Pathologies" myself, although the latter is admittedly pretty clumsy.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:50 am
by Data Vampire
90% of everything is crap. That include both complaints and defenses of 4E. However, whatever the topic people tend not to see or give a pass to crap that is on the side that they agree with.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:22 am
by Josh_Kablack
As one of the old-skool regular posters on this board I have 2 things to say

1. I like 4e.
Joined: 27 Feb 2011
Posts: 1
2. I don't need to read any further to add you to my ignore list. Nobody else here should either.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 6:55 am
by Prak
I tend to merely use descriptive names, like Paizoans instead of the seemingly preferred Paizils (a clumsy portmanteau of Paizo and Fail), just like I call us Denizens. Or I call people dicks, or idiots. That kind of thing. 4ries is an insult to furries, I feel, so I don't particularly like it, though it is likely the reason others do. 4ons and such are just as clumsy and dumb, in my opinion, as Paizoans, so I don't use them.

But yes, we call people mean names here. I haven't the patience to actually give 4e much of a look, so I cannot argue mechanics or anything of that sort (though I will argue point. I hold there was only a financial point to printing 4e, and that it was primarily the fault of Hasbro). But seriously, even I could tell that you were all just wasting time, space and electricity with that shit.

And that is why people were banned. They wasted the mod's time and tested his patience, and the long running posters here were not doing anything for which he's inclined to ban someone. The 4e inciters from SA, however, were.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:07 am
by Draco_Argentum
Josh_Kablack wrote:As one of the old-skool regular posters on this board I have 2 things to say

1. I like 4e.
We'll convince you that you hate every second of it one day. :P

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:13 am
by Prak
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Josh_Kablack wrote:As one of the old-skool regular posters on this board I have 2 things to say

1. I like 4e.
We'll convince you that you hate every second of it one day. :P
Actually, this is one of the big things I've really learned since discovering the Den. People here attack a lot of games on the basis of mechanics, but seem to forget, most of the time, that as gaming is really a social event, the people you share that experience with can make a game not terrible, even if the mechanics suck. I mean, my three longest running and most enjoyable games that I've played in are Werewolf, Rifts and Runequest. Did the rules suck? Fuck and Yes. But the groups were bearable-good, and the actual play was, at least overall, fun. And I generally didn't have anything better to do.

Hell, I know at least one other person here who actually likes Rifts, as far as I know, and people should keep in mind how much we bitch about 3e. Mechanical unsoundness really isn't much of a reason to not play something, unless it's so mechanically unsound that it actually can't be played.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:32 am
by Maxus
Of course. I have to describe the divide as "Analysis Alex" and "Normal Alex' to friends when they encounter it.

Analysis Alex will pick apart inconsistencies and show that, yeah, that's just not good. Normal Alex will still play with you because you're a friend and hanging with you would be fun.

Hypothetically, with good enough company, you can enjoy having your balls (or boobs, as gender-appropriate) pounded flat with a wooden hammer. This speaks to the quality of your company, not for the inherent fun in the activity. People SHOULD play games and have fun and all.

But when you're trying to say a system/rule is superior when you're promoting THAC0 or, I dunno, saying it's understandable to use a logarithm-based armor calculation or that it's incredibly easy to make a character who will die within three rolls because there's so many options that -look- awesome but aren't really...Then you can't say it's a great system.

That's a divide from fun. Or, rather, bad mechanics inhibit fun (unless that's what you're expecting, I suppose). Time spent figuring out how a rule works at the table is time spent not playing, so it behooves the rules to be clear and understandable and, if edge cases come up, to have some way to get a reasonable idea out of what happens. and it'd be nice if every gets to cut a slice out of the fun pie by giving them the means to make a character which is both 1) Engaging to them 2) As awesome as his abilities would indicate he is.

Re: So let me see if I have this straight...

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:20 pm
by Kaelik
Books wrote:
Just Some Guy wrote:You guys are allowed to call people names like "4rries" because they dare to play a game y'all don't like.them?
It would actually be pretty funny if there were a lot of variation, apparent effort, or semblance of anything but circle jerking. I like "3cidivists" and "Pathologies" myself, although the latter is admittedly pretty clumsy.
See "Some Guy" aka Darwinism. A lot of people on your team weren't banned, because they weren't giant trolls, merely acceptable level trolls (showing up to pick a fight is fine, as long as you actually argue with the people you are picking a fight with).

It was just you, and a few other trolls that got banned.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:46 pm
by Zinegata
Prak_Anima wrote:
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Josh_Kablack wrote:As one of the old-skool regular posters on this board I have 2 things to say

1. I like 4e.
We'll convince you that you hate every second of it one day. :P
Actually, this is one of the big things I've really learned since discovering the Den. People here attack a lot of games on the basis of mechanics, but seem to forget, most of the time, that as gaming is really a social event, the people you share that experience with can make a game not terrible, even if the mechanics suck. I mean, my three longest running and most enjoyable games that I've played in are Werewolf, Rifts and Runequest. Did the rules suck? Fuck and Yes. But the groups were bearable-good, and the actual play was, at least overall, fun. And I generally didn't have anything better to do.

Hell, I know at least one other person here who actually likes Rifts, as far as I know, and people should keep in mind how much we bitch about 3e. Mechanical unsoundness really isn't much of a reason to not play something, unless it's so mechanically unsound that it actually can't be played.
Yeah. One would get the impression that Denners are trying to design the next competitive strategy game like Chess. But this is primarily an RPG board for crying out loud.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 2:40 pm
by Josh_Kablack
After a night's sleep, I've actually come to the conclusion that I was too lenient on the OP in my prior post so lemme rephrase in a way that's a little more clear:



This is your first post - REALLY?!?!

Well then, what sort of brain-damaged anti-social dimwitted fucktarded idiot of a mouthbreather registers an account on a forum solely to complain about the moderation that occurred before he/she/it joined said forum?

What the fucking hell is wrong with you people and why can't you leave our shit alone?


And please, don't bother to answer that, it's strictly rhetorical - as you folks already have provided a disturbingly complete answer and I'm ignoring you along with every single person who registered this month anyways.

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 2:55 pm
by Zherog
Josh_Kablack wrote:...what sort of brain-damaged anti-social dimwitted fucktarded idiot of a mouthbreather ...
You forgot "window-licker" and "knuckle-dragger." Just sayin'... Although you do score style points for "fucktarded."