A Second Letter to Resettlers; or "But The Future Refused to Change"
- Thread starter Finale Fireworker
- Start date
So far this forum has felt like home in a way I never imagined a forum could. Lets keep the civil family like feeling going... Age has a ton to do with it for me as well. In my 20s I would have been a poster not falling in line with what this place is about, now that I am over 40 I can sit back and appreciate view points from all angles. Much more is gained when everyone respects others within a community even if you disagree to a core.
So great first few weeks ERA... beyond thrilled to be here.. lets keep the bad meltdowns to a min and respect each other with every post. Great OP and love the leadership here so far! Keep up the great work.
So great first few weeks ERA... beyond thrilled to be here.. lets keep the bad meltdowns to a min and respect each other with every post. Great OP and love the leadership here so far! Keep up the great work.
I think the first and easiest step is for members to seriously rethink their thread titles. It's such a small thing that I think can be rectified, at least compared to the other problems.
I know people don't want to have their threads ignored, but "Witcher 3 and BoTW are mediocre shit and here's why" is not how you do it.
It does the entire community more harm than good.
I know people don't want to have their threads ignored, but "Witcher 3 and BoTW are mediocre shit and here's why" is not how you do it.
It does the entire community more harm than good.
THE PLACE THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED WAS TERRIBLE!
The food was awful, too.
*slow clap*Hi everyone. It's me, Finale Fireworker. You may remember me for making threads with long OPs hardly anyone reads. Let's continue that tradition together. Please do not use this thread to air your grievances about the old forum. Such points of contention could not be more against what I am asking for herein.
The inception of this forum was a momentous opportunity to reflect on ourselves as netizens, and as we resolved to preserve the essential qualities of our longstanding community, we also acknowledged our potential to improve. The first few weeks of this forum were defined by our collective interest in being more articulate in our emotions, taking things seriously while also treating them with care, and not falling victim to the habits and pratfalls of our predecessor forum. I think most of us here really cared about creating a community that was more welcoming, less judgmental, and was able to regain our ground as an influential hub of the hobby by releasing our deathgrip on all things negative. After all, we are on this forum and contribute to its existence because we love video games – not because we hate them.
And for the most part, I think we have done well at this. We make positive threads with positive messages. We make threads that cherish the medium that brings us here. And when we’re critical, we attempt to be so thoughtfully. Most of the threads that attempt to spotlight issues within our hobby do so with detailed OPs and provide room for disagreement. I’ve liked that. This is what makes this place feel lighter, brighter, and like home.
But Nothere’s prescient meltdown thread was foreboding to me. I am not averse to a fan frenzy – it’s the nature of any enthusiast forum. A big reveal or a major launch or a significant controversy is always going to dominate discussion. These “meltdowns” cannot be avoided and aren’t inherently bad online events. But I think the danger of these meltdowns is how dramatically they predispose the community to overreaction and hyperbole. It normalizes the stress that these subjects incite. It spills into other threads, endures indefinitely, and then animosity and antagonism become common.
In my first thread on the forum, something I attempted broach to members was mitigating our inclination to exaggerate. When we are on full blast all the time, it affects the way we talk to each other. It makes everything either the best or the worst thing that's ever happened and it disintegrates the possibility for nuance. Members, including myself, mirror and replicate the energy of the threads they participate in. This is how dogpiling happens. This is how circular threads of enormous volume dominate the front page. This predisposes us to more and more meltdowns. This turns the whole forum into a ticking time bomb providing only brief respite between detonations.
Right now, our community is being shaped by the controversy surrounding Battlefront II and EA’s implementation of lootboxes. This was our first meltdown. And, truth be told, it’s not a bad meltdown to have. 2017 is the Year of the Lootbox. It is a time where the industry is experimenting with how far microtransactions and games as a service can go. These experiments are bound to incite consumer response, and that response is important, because it will affect the direction of future games. I don't make light of this at all. What is currently happening is an industrial conversation between creators and consumers and this is inevitable and vital to the survival of any industry.
But it is also a test.
I am not what anyone would call a gentle poster. I am extremely political. My relationship with the games I love are personality defining. Being part of this forum is less of a routine of casual visitation and more an act of lifestyle. I have no right to cast stones at people for being heated because I am a heated poster too. This thread isn’t a reminder for a specific subset of people. This thread isn’t a preachy proclamation about how other people need to behave differently. This thread is for me too. It's for all of us.
Eventually, Battlefront II is going to launch. People are going to buy it, play it, and probably like it. People will want to talk about it and make community threads and not be criticized or lambasted for enjoying it. EA is going to make other video games. Other video games will have microtransactions and lootboxes. What is important is that we move forward without letting our baggage be cumulative. We cannot enter every thread about these subjects or these companies bearing the grudge of every previous slight.
If we are going to survive as a fresh community that does not replicate the mistakes of its forerunner, we have to learn to let go. We have to show some restraint. We have to allow room for nuance.
If we cannot do this, we will have more and more meltdowns. These meltdowns will define us and affect how the industry and other players perceive us. We will be infamous for our inability to handle certain topics, we will be ridiculed for our extremity, and we will lose the plot of why we all came here. I am not recommending that people care less – we are members of this forum because we care about games a lot. But we must reduce the venom in our discourse. We must be conscious of what we contribute to, and how to counteract, one of gaming’s most infamous buzzwords: toxicity.
I ask this community to please be aware of what we’re contributing to. All of our posts are building blocks. They are energy into the zeitgeist of gaming. We shape and morph and reconfigure our forum with tens of thousands of prodding fingers every day. This place is a living and breathing beast that should not contribute to the stereotypes and commonalities that poison our hobby. Do not succumb to the temptations of old habits. Learn to let go, let incidents be isolated, and do not burden yourself or the community with the residue of acrimony.
Post about what you love and treat your fellow member with compassion.
Don’t be a caricature.
Be a Resettler.
Solidarity, 1932 by Kathe Kollwitz. (recolored Purple) Expressionism.
Can someone explain to me what, exactly, constitutes a 'dogpile.'
If an opinion is well articulated it's going to get a response. It's going to get multiple responses. Because other people also have their opinions. If people chose not to respond to dissenting opinions you would instead be castigating the forum for circle jerking and ignoing people who disagree. Are you saying no one should make a response after the first one? What if you disagree with the dissenting opinion, but not for the reason the first response does? What if you can better organize the thoughts and feelings of one of the first responses? Are you just not allowed to talk to people on an open forum now?
This complaint has never made sense to me. If you don't want to debate on multiple fronts, don't. It's that simple. And yes, people are going to call you out if you're clearly cherry picking the easiest posts to rebutt because that's disingenous behavior.
I don't disagree with your OP or this thread as a concept, but what kind of discussion did you hope to begin here? A litany of posts agreeing with you?
Again, not to discredit the idea that we could be better as a community, but that's not really a discussion topic unless you want us to discuss the obstacles holding us back from that goal (complaining about NeoGAF is not one of them). I'm just curious what my contribution should be to this thread other than "yeah me too".
Man, I really enjoy the term Resettler
Also, I'm not sure people who use terms like 'flavor of the month fascist mods' about ex-GAF moderation can ever be part of a respectful, nuanced community.
Moderation through de-escalation can only go so far, and in my opinion being transparent about why people were banned is more important than not banning people.
Also, I'm not sure people who use terms like 'flavor of the month fascist mods' about ex-GAF moderation can ever be part of a respectful, nuanced community.
Moderation through de-escalation can only go so far, and in my opinion being transparent about why people were banned is more important than not banning people.
Amen. I don't see the need to argue here, or make a point. Stick with facts or opinions but respect others.
It seems like we are leaving a lot of ideas behind and taking a positive approach to things (in life in general, I suppose).
You rarely get clean slates in life, and this was very much needed.
Really good post FF. I've mainly been happy over finally being able to interact with the community that I lurked for 4-5 years that I haven't really thought of what I'm adding myself to the community.
Can't imagine that I have added that much so far to the discussions. But after reading this I'll try to step up my game a bit and try to write more thoughtful posts, and hopefully make them more worthwhile to read to fellow era members.
I still enjoy the discussions of the trickier subjects of gaming (including the future and effect of lootboxes in gaming), but I do try and will keep trying to avoid direct personal attacks. I might have done it indirectly by mistake in the past thoo.
In short I'll try to be a better poster than what I am right now.
Can't imagine that I have added that much so far to the discussions. But after reading this I'll try to step up my game a bit and try to write more thoughtful posts, and hopefully make them more worthwhile to read to fellow era members.
I still enjoy the discussions of the trickier subjects of gaming (including the future and effect of lootboxes in gaming), but I do try and will keep trying to avoid direct personal attacks. I might have done it indirectly by mistake in the past thoo.
In short I'll try to be a better poster than what I am right now.
Hear Hear! So far I had a great time here. Although sometimes, as Chindogg already said, some users can be quite agressive in stating their opinions.But I guess nothing is perfect. :)
OP
OP
This is a fair request, because you're right that people tend to gravitate towards these conveniently packaged terms that might mean something different from one member to another.
Dogpiling, to me, means two things:
1. A single brief comment becoming more heavily referenced than the subject of the OP, which occurs in tandem with derailment, and thus changing the tone of the thread because people are going for the "easy win" versus an insightful comment. Not every reply to somebody posting something small and stupid is going to be superfluous. When I discourage dogpiling, what I mean to say is not to single out a particular user who has already been singled-out repeatedly unless you truly have something you think is meaningful to add.
2. Kicking somebody when they're down, which is often directed at companies more than people. It disheartens me to have seen people repeatedly mock Cliff Bleszinski, for example, well after he'd had his piece of humble pie and spoke of needing to turn his game around so his staff can keep their jobs. Reading about the creator of Rime being brought to tears reading people's commentary on his game is also upsetting. This stuff is going to happen - people are going to have negative feelings about people and companies. But there've been times where it gets so extreme and so prevalent that I've just had to look away. There's just no need to be that intensely negative towards people and companies who've already had their share of shock. Far be it from me to determine when enough is enough or when a line is crossed, everyone is going to have their own threshold, so encouraging everyone to keep that in mind will hopefully moderate the amount of flaming figures receive on fan forums.
Last edited:
I'd say 'dogpiling' is when one person or a smaller group of people get multiple aggressive or dismissive objections. I haven't really seen it on here though.
Great OP. But when there are now regular posts whose contents are basically " F___ <*company name*> " or " F___ <*well-known person*> " or "<*name of game*> was trash", or posts where it's obvious the OP was not read - it is clear the honeymoon is over.
That said, I look at each post as I look at an Op-Ed article - there are going to be posts with incorrect facts, posts with wild assertions, and posts with carefully considered arguments that I may fundamentally disagree with. The moderators keep an editorial stance in deciding what gets posted, who can post - and they can comment on any of these posts-as-OpEds at any time. (I do not prefer "mod abuse" as a technical term)
But unlike an Op-Ed, where I have to compete with bots and anarchist posters to try and get a comment visible, I can attempt to carry on a dialogue here. A post may actually change based on a mod's or other user's input. A topic may succeed in me, or other people, having considered another viewpoint.
If a topic can't do that because it is moving way too fast with little new contributions, viewpoints shared, or understanding reached - it has melted down.
That said, I look at each post as I look at an Op-Ed article - there are going to be posts with incorrect facts, posts with wild assertions, and posts with carefully considered arguments that I may fundamentally disagree with. The moderators keep an editorial stance in deciding what gets posted, who can post - and they can comment on any of these posts-as-OpEds at any time. (I do not prefer "mod abuse" as a technical term)
But unlike an Op-Ed, where I have to compete with bots and anarchist posters to try and get a comment visible, I can attempt to carry on a dialogue here. A post may actually change based on a mod's or other user's input. A topic may succeed in me, or other people, having considered another viewpoint.
If a topic can't do that because it is moving way too fast with little new contributions, viewpoints shared, or understanding reached - it has melted down.
I just think it's super important to always be self-aware online. Ideally, online anonymity shouldn't embolden you to be rude and offensive.
All that said, I love this forum. It's a bit scary how well managed and behaved the community is. Even though I wasn't on NG, I see the positives changes this community has made in it's migration to ERA. And while I think discussion about NG and it's past mistakes are very much important, ERA's ability to move on and differentiate itself is a huge testament to the mentality that Finale Fireworker is speaking to. I believe were in good hands.
All that said, I love this forum. It's a bit scary how well managed and behaved the community is. Even though I wasn't on NG, I see the positives changes this community has made in it's migration to ERA. And while I think discussion about NG and it's past mistakes are very much important, ERA's ability to move on and differentiate itself is a huge testament to the mentality that Finale Fireworker is speaking to. I believe were in good hands.
I have been having a couple of issues with ERA
so 1 technical and 2 community is not too bad
- the influx of new users in the free email approval wave and a few bad apples
- The strict moderation on certain topics. Why are some topics banned? why can't we discuss Colin Moriarty?
- Why can't we use Emojis
so 1 technical and 2 community is not too bad
Perfectly fine definitions, both of them. And both having naught to do with what the person I quoted indicated by their description would be dogpiling. Which I know was not your intention (explaining their point of view, I mean). I simply wanted to note that I found your post to:
A.) Be mostly reasonable (I do not believe corporate entities need or deserve protection from harsh words. The people in those coporate entities, sure. But not the companies themselves).
2.) It did not explain the particular kind of 'dogpiling' complaints that I find perplexing.
Makes sense and is more relevant to the post I quoted, yes.
Wait, you mean I could have come in without having to use a specific paid email?
Oh and there's literally nothing to discuss about Colin. If we want to discuss ignorant asshats, we have plenty of Trump threads. We also don't need to discuss JonTron unless he does something newsworthy.
Emojis don't enhance conversation in any way, I'm glad they're not here.
I think everyone is going back to old habits. First week was really pleasant, but now you're already seeing the really snide, abrasive comments. I hope something is done to make sure people stay polite and pleasant to each other. Sometimes it feels like people just come here to vent their daily anger irrationally.
There's a lot of straight up: "No. Your opinion is wrong..."
compared to something more pleasant like: "X had more Y, but I certainly preferred Z because of A."
There's a lot of straight up: "No. Your opinion is wrong..."
compared to something more pleasant like: "X had more Y, but I certainly preferred Z because of A."
Last edited:
User warned: Insulting users - even backhanded insults are insults.
It should go without saying that people should try to have a civil discourse, however, getting on a high-horse and claiming that a community is smarter, more civilized or better than another community has the opposite result.
Not discussing things because it might 'hurt' some delicate feelings is also not a good idea. Some companies and people deserve to be called out for their shit.
ResetEra still consists of mostly the same members as the old place plus some members that were previously banned.
Not every thread / post / member will agree with you or share the same values. There's no point getting worked up over the behavior of others on message boards.
Like, I'm not entirely thrilled how some of the old mods with questionable backgrounds are hanging around here. But I won't go out of my way to insult them or anything.
Not discussing things because it might 'hurt' some delicate feelings is also not a good idea. Some companies and people deserve to be called out for their shit.
ResetEra still consists of mostly the same members as the old place plus some members that were previously banned.
Not every thread / post / member will agree with you or share the same values. There's no point getting worked up over the behavior of others on message boards.
Like, I'm not entirely thrilled how some of the old mods with questionable backgrounds are hanging around here. But I won't go out of my way to insult them or anything.
The forum was great for the first couple of weeks when everyone was desperately trying to tone it down and were in their bestestest behaviour.
It's rapidly becoming that place that no one wants to mention 2.0 , though. Same tone , same love of hyperbole , same desperate attempts at one-upmanship or spamming tired memes/Gifs everywhere. Nice new colour scheme though.
We need to remember how awesome the first couple of weeks were and not just fall into tired old habits.
It's rapidly becoming that place that no one wants to mention 2.0 , though. Same tone , same love of hyperbole , same desperate attempts at one-upmanship or spamming tired memes/Gifs everywhere. Nice new colour scheme though.
We need to remember how awesome the first couple of weeks were and not just fall into tired old habits.
When people target the same posts with one liners, aggressive response, and gifs.
As for the other "players" mentioned in the op...I've seen people on gaming related subreddits are already calling Resetera "newgaf with the same old mods" getting upvoted even though it isn't true
https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/7bnba6/neogaf_users_are_noticing_when_tasted_the/
and we also had people here throwing shade when this board launched, "let's be honest here guys, no one should be surprised this happened. I personally just didn't want to go to gamefaqs for discussion. Glad to be apart of Resetera!"
The mods just gotta step in.
For the most part everyone that registered with a free email has been people that comes from the GAF discord and was verified (remember this forum was created by gaffers). There was a really smart time where a bug happened and people outside that could register with free email but it was a short time.
Point 2 has already been explained in other threads.
The first week is awesome because it is a new thing and we barely got into a routine of being a forum and discussing the everyday things.
This old place meme is tiring. What you describe is nothing exclusive to the old place, it happens literally in every forum, and if you ask me even worse. What you're asking is for something that doesn't exist, and never will.
Last edited:
Considering this place is one of the few that has a zero tolerance policy on some subjects (like bigotry) and actually applies it, it's no wonder that the usual suspects would have a problem with ERA for the very same reason they had a problem with the old place.
If this board becomes uncomfortable to use for the GG types, I'd say it's doing a good thing.
Alright so instead of going out of your way to insult UNNAMED people, you went out of your way to basically insult the entire group by making that comment. How is this helpful in any way? How is this forward thinking? What does it contribute to the sense of togetherness?
- The invite-free part of the free email approval wave lasted 10 minutes and I'm pretty sure only ~1,000 users got in out of 30,000, many of whom were legitimate users that didn't have an invite through the discord groups. I'm certain some gaters got in, but those kinds of people will out themselves eventually. "Bad apples" were inevitable in a forum migration like this, but the fact that migration went mostly smooth when gaters and 4channers were hyping for days about how they were going to destroy the forum the second it opened is pretty damn good, I'd say.
- Cerium has discussed this in the announcements forum, but it comes down to ResetEra being an inclusive place for people of all genders and nationalities. Moriarty is the kind of person who makes sexist jokes, doubles down on them, and then refuses to listen to criticism. I think it's understandable why the moderation team would not want his views on this forum, because he goes against their ideals. Likewise for Denis Dyack, who left after the moderation team made abundantly clear that he couldn't just try to handwave away his previous support of Gamergate with vague non-answers.
- This is probably an issue with XenForo but I have no experience with forum software so idk
Last edited:
To be fair, I did once try to set up a dictatorial nationalist regime dedicated to the extermination of the lesser races. Sorry it reflects poorly on you guys, but I was kinda drunk.
I bet he smells like peaches too!Final Fireworker is like this guy from this portrait:
I wish people would tone down on calling everything "disgusting."
Loot box is not "disgusting" - most don't know the definition of the word apparently. Disgusting is when you're displaced in Syria and have to walk over rotting corpses on your way to collect food/water - that is actually disgusting, the kind of thing that will produce an actual gag/vomit reflex. A lootbox is not "disgusting" it's just anti-consumer.
Loot box is not "disgusting" - most don't know the definition of the word apparently. Disgusting is when you're displaced in Syria and have to walk over rotting corpses on your way to collect food/water - that is actually disgusting, the kind of thing that will produce an actual gag/vomit reflex. A lootbox is not "disgusting" it's just anti-consumer.
I tried to make a similar point in the Michael Pachter thread but you did a much better job. If we are posting about him just to laugh and do the same old meme of "Well, opposite must be true!" why are we even talking about him at all? I think there should be a position of either 1. His articles are worth talking about and some degree of respect should be shown, or 2. If they aren't, and it is just a thread for ridicule, why are we talking about him at all? I am more in favor of 2 unless he currently is or wants to become a member to defend his stance. If I were him I wouldn't want to, but we are just showing ourselves to be awful people if we just bully him. Leave that on the old forum.
Good OP, I think a lot of those points is just practicing good etiquette. I've always followed the "if you won't say it to someone's face in real life, don't say it on the internet" mantra and I think that can still apply to this new community. If you are typing something with the intention of getting a rise out of someone, I think you need to stop and ask yourself what value are you trying to get out of that. If you are entering a conversation or topic from a combative perspective (which often relies on hyperbole or passive aggressive under-the-radar language to avoid a ban) from the start again what value are you trying to extract in the end. It's not hard to practice courtesy and pleasantry since (I hope) most of us already do it in our daily lives.
That was a really well thought out and articulate letter. I agree with everything you've said. That being said, this forum is one the most civil forum I've ever been apart of. No forum will ever be free of disruptive and toxic members, but I think it's fair to say that the majority (civil) will overshadow the few (toxic).
Seems a little odd to call people out on this. You are assigning a very specific set of cases in which a word with a broad definition can be used.
Maybe, I don't really know.
It was more meant as him standing on the edge to a brighter tomorrow, overlooking the steamy/meltdowny landscape and providing us with a clear view of what is important in the future on our path through those picturesque mountains of topics.
But you can interpret a lot into the portrait. Had that as an art test once back in school (analysis, etc.). xD
They banned some folks I liked talking to back in the day and locked me out of a treasure cave of PM's. I've moved on and everyone makes their own decisions but history cannot be erased and we are responsible for our own actions.
I don't have to hold hands with everyone here. It's an internet message board. With every group of people you will like some people more than others.
Very eloquently put, OP. You're definitely right that we shouldn't be as hyperbolic as we were on GAF. It's something that I, personally, especially need to work on.
Of course this forum was going to have a honeymoon period. Everything is shiny and new, people are excited - it's still an internet forum. People are going to disagree. People are going to argue. That's just kinda how it works. Hyperbole will happen, some trolls will manage to get in and will be dealt with when they out themselves - it's not a utopia, and that sort of place doesn't exist. Do we want to get as close to that ideal as possible? Sure, but we understand there is some reality involved there :P
That said, ResetEra is the community. A group of people largely having civil discourse when talking about a variety of topics. We all came from elsewhere and ended up together again, and many of us have been "together" for years now talking about our favorite games, fandoms, or the news-of-the-day.
We have a FAQ, a TOS, etc., to follow. But the tl;dr of all that is basically this:
Rule 1) Don't be a dick.
Rule 2) See Rule 1.
That's it!
That said, ResetEra is the community. A group of people largely having civil discourse when talking about a variety of topics. We all came from elsewhere and ended up together again, and many of us have been "together" for years now talking about our favorite games, fandoms, or the news-of-the-day.
We have a FAQ, a TOS, etc., to follow. But the tl;dr of all that is basically this:
Rule 1) Don't be a dick.
Rule 2) See Rule 1.
That's it!
I'm optimistic, or as optimistic as can be reasonable.
I'm a fan of the moderation system here: It leaves the origninal post in place and allows users to see why and how it was acted on. The accountability is settling, and the clear transparency makes clear exactly what's expected here. I haven't agreed with every individual moderation I've seen (ideally), but I have agreed with the kind of atmosphere I believe the administration is trying to foster through them. An understanding that I believe stems from experience as to how much and in what ways our freedom should be restricted in order to promote the best environment for everyone.
How you say things is important. Hyperbole illicits negative emotional responses from others and isn't useful. If I was your boss and wanted your performance to improve what would you think if I said:
A) Your performance is the worst on the team - it's fucking disgusting. Get your shit together.
B) Hey man I need you to focus on this and that to improve your stats before your review comes up, wanna make sure you come out ahead this year.
A & B are basically same the same thing, except A is going to cause resentment, negativity, and drama for no reason.
That's how people talk towards Pubs/Devs on here (and the internet in general, to be fair.) Instead of saying do this and that so you earn my money, people call them them disgusting, greedy blood-suckers, etc.
It does seem a little extreme, but I do see the point they're making and I'd argue words like "shill," "apologist," and "trash" get similarly flailed around to the point of losing meaning.
Or perhaps the more apt criticism would be to implore people to tone down hyperbole when discussing games. It usually either signals a driveby or a post in a tone too incendiary to actually inspire reasonable discussion. I know what someone's probably going to cut in with, positive hyperbole can be pretty hollow at times as well, but being positive doesn't derail conversation and set off fights.
I've lost count of the forums and online groups I've been part of, and you could not be more wrong. The best forums have active, considerate, and in the single best case, paid moderators who are an active part of the community.
Otherwise you just end up with the usual dicks dominating. Thoughtful contributors leave, and the forum either dies, or splits.
I migrated to this forum with many of OP's concerns as well, and I honestly think the reaction to the Battlefront controversy has been relatively muted, well contained, and proportional to the scale of events, considering the popularity and visibility of the cause. In fact, I don't think it struck me as an unusually big deal among regular grievances with EA until I saw the numbers and attention this incident was pulling on Reddit.
I do think there is a lot to work on here with the disproportionate attention to industry-adjacent drama around marginal figures from YouTube, Twitter, and the enthusiast press. It isn't condoning harassment (for instance) to say that a lot of this junk, troubling or not, does not clear the bar for games-related newsworthiness the way that the EA/Battlefront business does, and we really don't need a thread for every separate claim or allegation as though expressing outrage were a moral duty.
I'm not fond of the way the Denis Dyack situation was handled, to the extent I'm aware of it, but I'm of the admittedly controversial view that past positions in stupidly internecine flame wars like GG aren't a prevailing threat to safety so long as you leave them at the door.
I do think there is a lot to work on here with the disproportionate attention to industry-adjacent drama around marginal figures from YouTube, Twitter, and the enthusiast press. It isn't condoning harassment (for instance) to say that a lot of this junk, troubling or not, does not clear the bar for games-related newsworthiness the way that the EA/Battlefront business does, and we really don't need a thread for every separate claim or allegation as though expressing outrage were a moral duty.
I'm not fond of the way the Denis Dyack situation was handled, to the extent I'm aware of it, but I'm of the admittedly controversial view that past positions in stupidly internecine flame wars like GG aren't a prevailing threat to safety so long as you leave them at the door.
I'm sorry, but I just can't bring myself to endorse anyone who thinks emojis are a good idea.
Last edited:
I've noticed the return to the old ways myself.
But empathy and the gold rule of treating others as you'd want to be treated generally is a good way to think.
For all our virtues, empathy is hard to come by, because it is easy to put a person or a group of posters in a box and then put them on full blast without the consequences of seeing their reaction and how hurtful we can be. This is especially tricky if that person has broken a taboo and spectators feel inclined to have their 2 cents in to signal how good they are. It's not fun being the person on the receiving end.
I am not immune to lashing out, posting without thinking it through, overreacting and generally being a smart ass.
But the BF II scenario has taught me a few things.
1) Empathy towards the actors in a story is important - people involved in the story are real and not an abstract concept. I cannot minimize their suffering.
2) Empathy towards others in the forum - I wanted to post the Jim Sterling review link in a thread trying to positively discuss the game, but Imagined I would be equally annoyed and aggrieved if the tables were turned and I was posting in a positive thread about a disliked game and people shitpost and do drive-bys like that. So I didn't and limited discussion to games I actually wanted to talk about, and not enter threads about games I don't. (this actually will solve a lot of the flaming and console wars behavior)
That is I think the key to it all. It won't stop arguments over console wars stuff and sales predictions. People may still be passive aggressively be trying to prove a point weeks after a disagreement. We can't control other people's behaviors, but we can control our own and I try to be as mindful as possible that it is a conversation.
If there is a disagreement and I am quoted by someone vehemently disagreeing with me, I try to finish the discussion on good terms, not a 'burn it down, I must win' scenario that we often see discussions devolve into. And I also try to thank people for helping me answer a question or say sorry if I have wronged someone in discussion and above all, admit fault.
The admission of fault is the hardest part in a forum. Everyone wants to be right all the time, and I see people say the darndest things one day, and when proven wrong the next, pick up the discussion as if nothing has happened.
But empathy and the gold rule of treating others as you'd want to be treated generally is a good way to think.
For all our virtues, empathy is hard to come by, because it is easy to put a person or a group of posters in a box and then put them on full blast without the consequences of seeing their reaction and how hurtful we can be. This is especially tricky if that person has broken a taboo and spectators feel inclined to have their 2 cents in to signal how good they are. It's not fun being the person on the receiving end.
I am not immune to lashing out, posting without thinking it through, overreacting and generally being a smart ass.
But the BF II scenario has taught me a few things.
1) Empathy towards the actors in a story is important - people involved in the story are real and not an abstract concept. I cannot minimize their suffering.
2) Empathy towards others in the forum - I wanted to post the Jim Sterling review link in a thread trying to positively discuss the game, but Imagined I would be equally annoyed and aggrieved if the tables were turned and I was posting in a positive thread about a disliked game and people shitpost and do drive-bys like that. So I didn't and limited discussion to games I actually wanted to talk about, and not enter threads about games I don't. (this actually will solve a lot of the flaming and console wars behavior)
That is I think the key to it all. It won't stop arguments over console wars stuff and sales predictions. People may still be passive aggressively be trying to prove a point weeks after a disagreement. We can't control other people's behaviors, but we can control our own and I try to be as mindful as possible that it is a conversation.
If there is a disagreement and I am quoted by someone vehemently disagreeing with me, I try to finish the discussion on good terms, not a 'burn it down, I must win' scenario that we often see discussions devolve into. And I also try to thank people for helping me answer a question or say sorry if I have wronged someone in discussion and above all, admit fault.
The admission of fault is the hardest part in a forum. Everyone wants to be right all the time, and I see people say the darndest things one day, and when proven wrong the next, pick up the discussion as if nothing has happened.
Last edited:
I was thinking of this recently. I strongly agree, though I also have a sense of foreboding that as member numbers go up, the early sense of respect and turning over a new leaf will be replaced in part, especially when award and announcement shows start coming up. In particular I'd love to see contentful posts talking about The Game Awards instead of short, cynical comments complaining or picking apart every detail when that show happens. I don't expect that to happen, but if it does that would be amazing.
Speaking generally, I think tribalism is perhaps the biggest harmful thing to discussion and community. I suppose it's baked into human nature. On the most extreme level, you have things like Republican voters defending even the most evil people and actions, willing to pay any price because someone is on their team. On trivial levels, you have things like "people who eat pineapple on their pizza don't deserve respect", or insults suggesting only people who eat a certain candy bar are acceptable, or the classic console wars. Some of these things are intended as jokes, but it becomes widespread and creates the same sort of atmosphere that we briefly avoided.
Here are some examples that may sound trivial and condescending, but I think would actually be beneficial to keep in mind in the coming months:
Speaking generally, I think tribalism is perhaps the biggest harmful thing to discussion and community. I suppose it's baked into human nature. On the most extreme level, you have things like Republican voters defending even the most evil people and actions, willing to pay any price because someone is on their team. On trivial levels, you have things like "people who eat pineapple on their pizza don't deserve respect", or insults suggesting only people who eat a certain candy bar are acceptable, or the classic console wars. Some of these things are intended as jokes, but it becomes widespread and creates the same sort of atmosphere that we briefly avoided.
Here are some examples that may sound trivial and condescending, but I think would actually be beneficial to keep in mind in the coming months:
- Some people may enjoy Battlefront 2. EA can also have anti-consumer business practices. These things are not mutually exclusive, and the people who enjoy the game do not need to be attacked.
- Some people may enjoy [any given high profile game]. Other people may not enjoy the same game. Neither of these groups needs attacked, nor should they need to band together and defend themselves. It is OK for different people to like different things. That makes for a varied community.
- Some people may like certain DC movie(s). Some DC movie(s) may have poor critical and/or audience consensus on average. These things are not mutually exclusive. It is OK to like different things. It is not cool to attack someone and say they should or shouldn't like a movie.
- This applies to movies in general, but it shows up in particular with DC. It is OK to discuss DC movies. It is OK to discuss Marvel movies. It is probably not a good idea to treat any given movie on either side as an argument point for an external DC vs. Marvel competition (or Sony vs. Nintendo, or whatever other competition / tribal thing is in mind). They can exist on their own merits and demerits, and some people may even watch both.
- On the off-topic front, some people may enjoy different pizza toppings, restaurants, food products, cooking styles, or condiments than you. These people should be allowed to live and not judged as somehow doing things wrong because another person's culinary preferences are more correct. It is not a competition.
Fully agreed with this post btw.
And also this.
It's important to remember that a lot (not all, but many) of the problems at the old place are just... normal forum problems. I think some people lose sight of that. We can always strive to do better, of course, but let's not make perfect the enemy of good or set unrealistic goals either.
...Well then.