BattleMaster Community
Community => This Forum => Topic started by: Anaris on October 15, 2012, 01:38:22 PM
-
There have now been a few incidents of players declaring that they're leaving a thread (or even the forum) because they're disgusted with it for one reason or another, and either deleting all their posts themselves, or demanding that a mod do so.
I would argue that this should not be something mods should do, unless their posts in the thread are pretty obviously inflammatory (and in that case, they shouldn't be waiting until the person asks!). The sole purpose seems to be along the lines of, "I don't want to talk with you guys anymore, and if I can't defend them, I don't want my posts hanging around to be discussed!" This is an immature attitude, and seems to me to be at odds with the spirit of the forums.
However, I'm not a mod of any sort, so I thought I'd open a discussion on the subject.
-
The mods are not for cleaning up for other people. I think that settles it.
-
I'm fairly certain that a poster can delete their own posts. And if they started the thread, doesn't that delete the whole thread?
-
I'm fairly certain that a poster can delete their own posts. And if they started the thread, doesn't that delete the whole thread?
I think it's a separate thing, but yes, original posters can delete threads that they started.
I know we were talking about the possibility of disabling that, though, due to its having been used in just this sort of manner (deleting an entire thread in a fit of pique when the OP didn't get the validation they wanted, or whatever). Tom, did you determine whether it's possible to remove that permission from the thread starter?
-
The mods are not for cleaning up for other people. I think that settles it.
What if all the posts from a particular person are offtopic, and all the replies to those posts? Can we delete offtopic posts?
-
What if all the posts from a particular person are offtopic, and all the replies to those posts? Can we delete offtopic posts?
Offtopic posts should be split to a separate topic, not deleted, except in unusual circumstances (like a thread Tom starts specifically for one purpose, that people start cluttering up with junk).
-
Offtopic posts should be split to a separate topic, not deleted, except in unusual circumstances (like a thread Tom starts specifically for one purpose, that people start cluttering up with junk).
As long as its not in feature request or development, does it really matter if there are a few off topic posts? I just don't see the importance of keeping all threads on-topic outside of the development and feature request board.
-
As long as its not in feature request or development, does it really matter if there are a few off topic posts? I just don't see the importance of keeping all threads on-topic outside of the development and feature request board.
As mentioned, sometimes a topic has a particular purpose. Like the Sea Travel Feedback topic where I don't want to have discussions so everyone can focus on feedback.
-
As mentioned, sometimes a topic has a particular purpose. Like the Sea Travel Feedback topic where I don't want to have discussions so everyone can focus on feedback.
Which is on the development board. I agree with the need to stay on topic on development and feature request but outside of there what is an example of a topic serving a particular purpose?
-
I agree, I don't see the point in the off-topic snipping. It's a forum, meandering discussion is kind of the point.
Especially when said off-topic pruning is incredibly random and inconsistent to begin with.
-
Which is on the development board. I agree with the need to stay on topic on development and feature request but outside of there what is an example of a topic serving a particular purpose?
The "post facebook news here" stickies in the island sub-forums, for example.
-
The "post facebook news here" stickies in the island sub-forums, for example.
i don't mean to be except this to everything but that's the only thing I can think of. Basically, IMO, you are saying this for specific things but in general off-topic chatter doesn't matter. Also with the Facebook thing, off-topic chatter they should be somewhat lenient as they might be discussing news so it can be accurately described.
-
i don't mean to be except this to everything but that's the only thing I can think of. Basically, IMO, you are saying this for specific things but in general off-topic chatter doesn't matter. Also with the Facebook thing, off-topic chatter they should be somewhat lenient as they might be discussing news so it can be accurately described.
I've seen two types of discussions branch out from the facebook threads, one is clarifying and expressing different point of views of a situation, which I believe is fine. The other basically comes down to arguing with the posted topic and becomes propaganda.
I do welcome both types, I'd just like the different views in the thread and the propaganda happen on facebook itself.
I do think the mods are lenient on those threads, it's a learning experience for all of us and we'll eventually find the happy median.
-
I've seen two types of discussions branch out from the facebook threads, one is clarifying and expressing different point of views of a situation, which I believe is fine. The other basically comes down to arguing with the posted topic and becomes propaganda.
I do welcome both types, I'd just like the different views in the thread and the propaganda happen on facebook itself.
I do think the mods are lenient on those threads, it's a learning experience for all of us and we'll eventually find the happy median.
Really the next step that needs to happen humor-wise is for people to start making FB accounts for realms and "arguing" on the BM status updates.
"Morek Empire and Astrum's long alliance has broken down and war looks likely to ensue!"
---"Morek: OMG! Astrum you're such a bitch!"
---"Astrum: Shut up! You shall be cleansed by the holy fires of Astroism for your heresy!
---"Kabrinskia: LMFAO"
-
Really the next step that needs to happen humor-wise is for people to start making FB accounts for realms and "arguing" on the BM status updates.
"Morek Empire and Astrum's long alliance has broken down and war looks likely to ensue!"
---"Morek: OMG! Astrum you're such a bitch!"
---"Astrum: Shut up! You shall be cleansed by the holy fires of Astroism for your heresy!
---"Kabrinskia: LMFAO"
Not for a realm, but I am so doing this for the Church of Humanity.
https://www.facebook.com/HolyChurchOfHumanity
-
Not for a realm, but I am so doing this for the Church of Humanity.
https://www.facebook.com/HolyChurchOfHumanity
Nice.
-
Hopefully it'll prove easier to update than the wiki. News articles are nice, but keeping the formatting is tiresome.
-
I like the "founded 1006" notice.
But I fear moving stuff away from the wiki will not help improve the wiki.
-
I wish I had time to experiment with the semantic forms... :(
-
I like the "founded 1006" notice.
But I fear moving stuff away from the wiki will not help improve the wiki.
I'll continue to work on the Church wiki pages, but for news, the journal/newspaper format is just an annoying thing to continue working with.
-
Nice, but maybe you should mention that it's a battlemaster religion, and not a real one? ::)
-
Nice, but maybe you should mention that it's a battlemaster religion, and not a real one? ::)
If people want to offer praise and worship, and consider me their Pope, I'm all for it?
Honestly though, if they don't understand from the mention of magic and daimons invading the world, I doubt a "BM Approved" message would make them realize it either. =)
-
There's probably hundreds of websites for in-game guilds and what not, and most of them don't plaster a huge "this is not real life, this is about a computer game" all over it. I know some roleplaying books that have such disclaimers. I like the one best that basically says "if you think anything in this book is real, go see a shrink".
-
I'm glad I wasn't taking a drink when I read that Tom.
-
There's probably hundreds of websites for in-game guilds and what not, and most of them don't plaster a huge "this is not real life, this is about a computer game" all over it. I know some roleplaying books that have such disclaimers. I like the one best that basically says "if you think anything in this book is real, go see a shrink".
You don't think that a link to battlemaster.org and the Church of Humanity wiki page, would be good things to add to the "about" section of the facebook page? It would help with our search rankings, probably.
-
You don't think that a link to battlemaster.org and the Church of Humanity wiki page, would be good things to add to the "about" section of the facebook page? It would help with our search rankings, probably.
No, I'm totally with that, links are cool.
Disclaimers saying "this is not a real-world religion, it's part of a game!" are stupid. The people who need such an explicit notice are too dumb to understand it anyways.
-
You don't think that a link to battlemaster.org and the Church of Humanity wiki page, would be good things to add to the "about" section of the facebook page? It would help with our search rankings, probably.
Which is strange, because I specifically listed those two when I was making the page. Dunno where they were hidden.