Let's talk about the level of discourse on Gaming Side. AKA ban 3 word posts.

[Fredrik]

It can be annoying, yes, especially if you're the one starting the thread and you just get short dismissive replies that don't take the discussion an inch further. It quickly takes out the fun in starting new threads.

But I don't think bans are a good solution. People just learn how to tackle the stricter moderation and starts watching their tongue and become fake instead just to avoid bans.

We need more honest people here, and as in real life it's perfectly okay to not be perfectly aligned in every possible subject with everyone you meet, the person you almost start hating when talking about one subject might be the one who's the best person to talk to in another subject.

We're all different and comes from all over the world from different cultures and social classes. We really just need to learn how to talk in a civil way.

Also, with harsh moderation it needs to be the same for every poster so we don't get the scenario at the old place where old prominent posters could get away with everything while less popular posters got banned for barely anything. It rarely work. Random guy 345 will always get banned before Mr.popular who makes the best OTs and starts the best news threads.

Personally I think people just need to act their age and start talking online as if they would talk to a stranger face-to-face on the street. We're all adults

 

[Papercuts]

I don't think word/character limits would really accomplish much. The GotY thread is a good example of it--awhile ago people could just post lists, and that got changed to mandate atleast one comment so it had some substance in it. I don't think this really improved much, as most of the ballets just put a completely throwaway line in their list and the people who actually put effort into their writeups continued to do so. Realistically, nothing really changed.

There definitely is a problem with people wanting to rush into something with a hot take, but I'm not sure what the solution to that is.

 

[construct]

yeah. i understand and agree with raising the level of discourse on this side but more words doesn't mean more thoughtful content

sometimes you see someone write a multi paragraph screed of pure nonsense and there is nothing more to do than hit them with a lmao

Click to shrink...

hey wait a second

 

[newmoneytrash]

hey wait a second

Click to shrink...

but sometimes it's just to show that something is actually funny!

 

[Iztok]

Word count has no bearing on the quality of a contributing post.
Definitely not to a point of being ban worthy.
Not against implementing a minimum required before posting, but I don't think it'll have the desired effect.

 

[Instro]

I feel like the level of toxicity is directly correlated to the decrease in reaction gifs. Too many actually want to post a couple sentences shitting on someone or something that could be summed up in a gif that actually introduces some levity.

 

[Nuclear Detergent]

I do wish people would come together. I get the reasons for some of the polarization (for instance, those who want Trump out of office vs. those who are not comfortable voting for Biden)...I honestly do, and so does the rest of staff.

Click to shrink...

Can we please have a new American president, that all Americans can agree on, so the zeitgeist of American society, and more importantly Resetera, can heal ;)

I actually think you're right on the money. People have become extremely standoffish, but my experience is that it's mostly on topics with a focus on things around games (i.e. the people who make them, their beliefs and deeds).

 

[PhantomFFR]

While we generally discourage things like thread-shitting (for lack of a better term), tbh there are times where it just happens and makes sense. If weekend-era makes a thread about their specific shitting style, I don't think I could bring myself to ban someone who simply responds with "lmao."

Click to shrink...

In some ways the question should maybe not just pertain to replies, but also OPs. Are low-effort OPs (especially about serious topics) that due to their low-effort nature invite similar low-effort replies, really needed? Especially so, if that aforementioned low-effort-effect results in the ban of the people who reply but no sanctions against the OP, that more or less caused this?

And by sanctions I don't necessarily think about banning people, but by maybe locking such threads quickly or taking away thread creation from people who mostly create low effort OPs. And while I understand that "low effort" is not necessarily an objective metric, I don't think it's subjective to such a degree that it couldn't be somewhat clearly moderated.

And the same goes for replies as well. But there has to be some sort of divide between what some users (like me and presumably the OP of this thread and several that replied in kind) want this forum (or rather the discussion on this forum) to be, to what others (as evidenced in this thread as well) want it to be.
In some ways I feel that "my" side is part of that one panel "What if we create a better world for nothing?"-cartoon. But then again, for me "better" means higher quality of discussion, which for me means reading posts that make me think, that offer me new points of view. And I try to do the same when I write. Hence why this "be the change you want others to be"-argument falls somewhat flat. I believe I am, I think most people who have the same opinion about the quality of discourse are as well, hence why they take offence to how some threads devolve into either ban-fests or a barrage of hot takes and quick replies lacking the effort required by the topic at hand.

So in conclusion: I think I want this place to be something different than the people running it want it to be, I'm slighlty more annoyed by browsing through the contents of threads, I'm less likely to participate actively, and I don't feel much of a sense of belonging.

 

[T0kenAussie]

Seems there is just a lot of bad faith posters dragging things down for mine.

It seems counter intuitive to do but allowing people to fork by platform and then more strictly moderate the forks to root out concern trolls and FUD but probably will divide era more

There's no easy answer tbh once a site moves from niche to popular sub niche and gets references in news sites and podcasts it's going to attract the Facebook level commenters. I've seen similar things happen to enthusiast subreddits for rugby league and other sports

 

[Khanimus]

And if the honest reaction is three words or less? Or reaction gifs? Hell, any live-reaction threads are basically gonna be cut down by 80%.

 

[PhantomFFR]

And if the honest reaction is three words or less? Or reaction gifs? Hell, any live-reaction threads are basically gonna be cut down by 80%.

Click to shrink...

But is this a bad thing? Why would it be? Why would it be worse to have 50 "likes" noted at the bottom of a post rather than 50 replies with variations of "Great!" as the sole content? I don't quite follow your line of thinking, but would like to know what you get from reactions threads in general, but also specifically from them being typed out instead of a like-button.

 

[Khanimus]

But is this a bad thing? Why would it be? Why would it be worse to have 50 "likes" noted at the bottom of a post rather than 50 replies with variations of "Great!" as the sole content? I don't quite follow your line of thinking, but would like to know what you get from reactions threads in general, but also specifically from them being typed out instead of a like-button.

Click to shrink...

Because a massive percentage of posters aren't reading every post, nor would be looking for 'like' counts. Part of a reply system is that it increases the chance for visibility for what is presumably an effective post and can better guage the nature and trajectory of discourse in a thread. I'm not always looking for every theadmark in a thread unless the title highlights hints towards it. Not every threadmark-worthy post gets flagged as such. The very structure of forum design is meant to let ideas reverberate, and if that does so with a simple "+1", sometimes that's probably enough.

 

[XR.]

But is this a bad thing? Why would it be? Why would it be worse to have 50 "likes" noted at the bottom of a post rather than 50 replies with variations of "Great!" as the sole content? I don't quite follow your line of thinking, but would like to know what you get from reactions threads in general, but also specifically from them being typed out instead of a like-button.

Click to shrink...

You can't replace comments, as simple as they may be, with a like-button. Come on now.

 

[PhantomFFR]

Because a massive percentage of posters aren't reading every post, nor would be looking for 'like' counts. Part of a reply system is that it increases the chance for visibility for what is presumably an effective post and can better guage the nature and trajectory of discourse in a thread. I'm not always looking for every theadmark in a thread unless the title highlights hints towards it. Not every threadmark-worthy post gets flagged as such. The very structure of forum design is meant to let ideas reverberate, and if that does so with a simple "+1", sometimes that's probably enough.

Click to shrink...

I'm afraid I don't follow. Wouldn't the ideal situation be that every post is worthwhile enough to be read (or at least skimmed over)? What does a reverb add?

Is the use of reverb just to allow threads to stay longer at the top of the thread listing? With fewer posts altogether, wouldn't that happen as well? If there was a reaction counter, why shouldn't people look at it, if it was the best way to gauge how a thread/post is taken? It also doesn't have to be right next to the post, it could also be somewhere else more visible in the thread (perhaps a "most reacted to posts" list near to the reply box?) Wouldn't that too solve the problem? Though I still don't really see the apparent core issue (reverb) as a problem.

You can't replace comments, as simple as they may be, with a like-button. Come on now.

Click to shrink...

Please explain. I, as mentioned above, completely fail to see the distinction between "Hey, that's great" and pressing a like button.

 

[Jonnax]

There are people who put significant effort into making a thread, only have some arsehole write some "witty" or dismissive response that derail the whole thing.

The problem is that people want that "one and done" feeling.

But in actuality it's just shitposting.

Am I guilty of it? Yes.
But I think that it should be moderated with warnings at least.

 

[BobbeMalle]

- Question

First post: "No"
All other posts "Woo first post nails it, moving on"

I loathe this kind of responses with all my body and spirit

 

[ActWan]

First make sure you actually permaban racists, and not just for 1-3 weeks. (random example, and there are much more).
Then make sure that when you do actually permaban racists (like Hindle), to not give them a mod sanctioned alt account.
(and generally, stop being too easy on racists just because they post frequently on the forum)
Also, when you permaban trolls and console warriors (after giving them far too many long bans and chances), to not let them come back from their permaban (like Braaier). (and don't secretly remove some bans earlier than the ban removal date because they begged)
I'm certain discussion will get better then. Place just needs to be more strict.
(and yes, I'm aware of my own past posts and bans)

 

[Khanimus]

I'm afraid I don't follow. Wouldn't the ideal situation be that every post is worthwhile enough to be read (or at least skimmed over)? What does a reverb add?

Is the use of reverb just to allow threads to stay longer at the top of the thread listing? With fewer posts altogether, wouldn't that happen as well? If there was a reaction counter, why shouldn't people look at it, if it was the best way to gauge how a thread/post is taken? It also doesn't have to be right next to the post, it could also be somewhere else more visible in the thread (perhaps a "most reacted to posts" list near to the reply box?) Wouldn't that too solve the problem? Though I still don't really see the apparent core issue (reverb) as a problem.

Click to shrink...

This implies posters are going to look through threads for reaction counters. That's not how people engage when scrolling through feeds - people connect with the content of the post (even when that content is just quoted text). I'm not looking through Twitter replies by like-counts.

You're still assuming posters are going to read through every page for every post, and that's simply not what people do. Most will read the first couple pages, flip to the last couple, and anything in-between is introduced to them specifically by quoted text. So yes, that visibility matters.

 

[EggmaniMN]

I'd like to call out people just leaving youtube videos as responses as well. At least have some wording of your own, some explanation, point to a time stamp that illustrates what you're getting at. It happens every now and then and it's just frustrating to see. Threads made with just a youtube video and "I'll add info later" shouldn't happen either. It isn't a race to be first with whatever video. If you don't have the time to actually say anything, don't post.

 

[PhantomFFR]

This implies posters are going to look through threads for reaction counters. That's not how people engage when scrolling through feeds - people connect with the content of the post (even when that content is just quoted text). I'm not looking through Twitter replies by like-counts.

You're still assuming posters are going to read through every page for every post, and that's simply not what people do. Most will read the first couple pages, flip to the last couple, and anything in-between is introduced to them specifically by quoted text. So yes, that visibility matters.

Click to shrink...

I think you partially misunderstood me, My line of thinking is: With higher quality posts (as I tried to define before), there will be fewer posts, thus less to read when engaging in a thread thus it will be much easier/less time consuming and at the same time way more rewarding to read all the posts in a thread. Hence in a hypothetical ideal, you wouldn't have users skipping to the last page and missing worthwhile posts.

That being said, as well as in terms of reaction-counters (which could also be visibly easily distinguished, so you could even by just scrolling by see what post generated a lot of reaction). It might require relearning how to use a forum, but again... and this is possibly a hypothetical question, what's bad about this? Are you really happy with the current state of affairs as you laid them out? To me that seems, much as I believe it to be true, a sad state, but not an unchangeable fact of life.

 

[XR.]

Please explain. I, as mentioned above, completely fail to see the distinction between "Hey, that's great" and pressing a like button.

Click to shrink...

I mean, I'm not sure how often people actually tend to respond with a mere "Hey, that's great", but if we assume people do, I still think that adds more than a thumbs up. A like/thumbs up has no nuance - it lacks the ability to convey anything at all, e.g. what part of my post they agree with, if they just appreciate my post or found it funny.

Outside of that it also tends to encourage like-bait posts, which isn't great for discussion.

A discussion forum should be just that, a place for discussion, and not a place to hunt for points and likes. The short replies are very easy to ignore or just skip past, so unless they're intentionally dishonest or disruptive, I don't see much of a problem.

 

[Rygar 8Bit]

If it keeps a cool thread on the front page for more people to get eyes on it, I'm ok with it. More people seeing the thread then more people who can engage with it.

 

[construct]

Then make sure that when you do actually permaban racists (like Hindle), to not give them a mod sanctioned alt account.
(and generally, stop being too easy on racists just because they post frequently on the forum)

Click to shrink...

???

 

[Khanimus]

I think you partially misunderstood me, My line of thinking is: With higher quality posts (as I tried to define before), there will be fewer posts, thus less to read when engaging in a thread thus it will be much easier/less time consuming and at the same time way more rewarding to read all the posts in a thread. Hence in a hypothetical ideal, you wouldn't have users skipping to the last page and missing worthwhile posts.

That being said, as well as in terms of reaction-counters (which could also be visibly easily distinguished, so you could even by just scrolling by see what post generated a lot of reaction). It might require relearning how to use a forum, but again... and this is possibly a hypothetical question, what's bad about this? Are you really happy with the current state of affairs as you laid them out? To me that seems, much as I believe it to be true, a sad state, but not an unchangeable fact of life.

Click to shrink...

An extended word count doesn't make a post higher quality, nor guarantee an increase in positive engagement. Nor is that any more likely to motivate people to read through a thread in its entirety, or to keep it front-facing in the thread feed.

And again, like counters don't actually motivate investigation. A high frowny-face count doesn't challenge a shitty post. A thumbs up doesn't set a real tone. You're just asking posters to engage even less. Something as specific as a single "No." says more than an emoji.

 

[Lelouch0612]

I had in mind a similar topic OP. More than the short posts, my two big issues are the following:

- people not reading the OP
- the widespread utilization of words like "trash" or "garbage". It only aggravates the discourse and adds nothing insightful.

Also, I feel like more and more, it becomes difficult to discuss most of the games releasing. You'll always have people coming in the thread to tell you that the game sucks for X or Y reason.

 

[Plinkerton]

My view is that it's not really about positivity vs negativity or even about word count, but more about the posts where the user is clearly trying to say the most inflammatory thing they can think up because they know it'll get a reaction.

You could go into almost any thread about a popular game and you're guaranteed that one of the first five or so posts will be something like "too bad the game sucks" or something, regardless of the context of the thread itself.

I'm not at all implying that everyone should have the same opinion on a game or trying to stifle criticism, but it's so clear when a post like that is made solely because the poster knows that more people will respond to negativity than positivity and they're just baiting people. And at worst it results in a total derailment from the original post.

It's got to a point where I usually don't even bother opening threads about some of my favourite games because I know there'll be these sorts of posts derailing any sort of meaningful discussion. I'm not against criticism of things I like but seeing someone post offhand, drive-by inflammatory stuff about those things is just not worth my time.

This isn't something that's exclusive to this forum; it's just where discourse on the internet is in 2020. It's become a race to have the hottest take to get the most reactions, basically led by Twitter and Reddit. But it's something that I wish was pushed back on more here.

 

[Jonathan Lanza]

This has been the case on most every online forum and it's the symptom of several things...

1. People like to be responded to. There's nothing worse than having 100+ posts in a forum and only .2% of them have been quoted or responded to in anyway. One word inflammatory responses may not be informative or good in any way but they are no doubt what people respond to the most so if you're looking to be heard then it's a good way to go about it.

2. In direct relation to that a lot of people treat any sort of online media as sorta junk food. Nothing to really get invested or put too much mental energy in so they find the easiest to respond to thing and just respond to it. Now I'm not saying anyone needs to treat this as like a job or serious business or anything but it's important to realize that this is ultimately the enemy of any sort of productive discussion about anything.

overall I think it's important to remember that sometimes you don't have to say anything and you may even end up taking some time to read something if you don't try too hard at getting that response in real fast like.


Also PLEASE read the last post of the last page. There's nothing worse than being the last post on a page and realizing that literally nobody is going to back to read what you said.

 

[Lelouch0612]

My view is that it's not really about positivity vs negativity or even about word count, but more about the posts where the user is clearly trying to say the most inflammatory thing they can think up because they know it'll get a reaction.

You could go into almost any thread about a popular game and you're guaranteed that one of the first five or so posts will be something like "too bad the game sucks" or something, regardless of the context of the thread itself.

I'm not at all implying that everyone should have the same opinion on a game or trying to stifle criticism, but it's so clear when a post like that is made solely because the poster knows that more people will respond to negativity than positivity and they're just baiting people. And at worst it results in a total derailment from the original post.

It's got to a point where I usually don't even bother opening threads about some of my favourite games because I know there'll be these sorts of posts derailing any sort of meaningful discussion. I'm not against criticism of things I like but seeing someone post offhand, drive-by inflammatory stuff about those things is just not worth my time.

This isn't something that's exclusive to this forum; it's just where discourse on the internet is in 2020. It's become a race to have the hottest take to get the most reactions, basically led by Twitter and Reddit. But it's something that I wish was pushed back on more here.

Click to shrink...

Yep this.

 

[Rogue Kiwi]

I would like to see a rule regarding open hostility. Yes some people post some awful things on here. Report them and move on, trust the mods to do their job and take the high road. Like discussed in the linked thread the amount of "get fucked" posts I see here on an almost daily basis keeps me from being more active in this community. It feels like in every negative story you have to be as quick as you can to aggressively verbally attack the accused, and anyone who disagrees in the threads.

 

[daninthemix]

I do think part of this might be because Gaming is just one big forum. Which means there are Nintendo fanboys, PC fanboys, Sony fanboys, Xbox fanboys, moderates, people with all systems, and people who are indifferent.

 

[Duffking]

It's not the length of the posts that a problem, it's largely just the attitude of the community. Era pretty much just lives of hyperbole, nobody ever has any kind of middle ground opinion, all games are either the GOAT or Trash, and nobody here ever really wants to read a thread or read replies. They want to hop in, leave their take and then they come back if they a notification bell.

There's also a rather pervasive thing on this forum where people who like a thing seemingly take it very personally if someone else doesn't like that thing. I can't remember the last time I saw two people on this forum actually behave like adults when they had different opinions on a major release.

Neither of these things are exclusive to this forum though, they apply pretty much on every large community.

 

[Lelouch0612]

I do think part of this might be because Gaming is just one big forum. Which means there are Nintendo fanboys, PC fanboys, Sony fanboys, Xbox fanboys, moderates, people with all systems, and people who are indifferent.

Click to shrink...

The internet doesn't need another echo chamber imo. Everyone can get along just fine.

 

[daninthemix]

The internet doesn't need another echo chamber imo. Everyone can get along just fine.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I agree that the forum is mainly fine and good. I'm just suggesting that fanboyism is the primary antagonist.

 

[basic_text]

I'd rather ban sods that post images without a name or context!

 

[Roshin]

Am I the only one or... Sorry. :D

Thinking back (I've been on the internet a long time), I've seen this topic pop up on various forums all the way back to Usenet. There always seems to be a group of people who wants to ruin things for everyone else (for teh lulz, I guess) and the only way to combat it seems to be strict rules and moderation.

 

[PhantomFFR]

An extended word count doesn't make a post higher quality, nor guarantee an increase in positive engagement. Nor is that any more likely to motivate people to read through a thread in its entirety, or to keep it front-facing in the thread feed.

Click to shrink...

I know why we are kind of stuck on the word count, but to me that's a shorthand for "quality of post", which again pertains to a well formulated (different) point of view, that makes me think about it or verbalizes my thoughts. So while I agree with the first statement, it's not really all that I'm trying to talk about.

And again, like counters don't actually motivate investigation. A high frowny-face count doesn't challenge a shitty post. A thumbs up doesn't set a real tone. You're just asking posters to engage even less. Something as specific as a single "No." says more than an emoji.

Click to shrink...

I mean, I'm not sure how often people actually tend to respond with a mere "Hey, that's great", but if we assume people do, I still think that adds more than a thumbs up. A like/thumbs up has no nuance - it lacks the ability to convey anything at all, e.g. what part of my post they agree with, if they just appreciate my post or found it funny.
[...]
A discussion forum should be just that, a place for discussion, and not a place to hunt for points and likes. The short replies are very easy to ignore or just skip past, so unless they're intentionally dishonest or disruptive, I don't see much of a problem.

Click to shrink...

While there might be a bit more tone, I don't think there's usually a more granular depiction of what aspect of a post people reply to, if they don't specifically quote, which they (in the posts I'd be thinking about) don't. I also don't know if it's that valuable in terms of opportunity cost. Obviously my premise is: More "bad" (not necessarily meaning short posts, but those that don't offer a new aspect/point of view/thought) posts prevent "good" posts. Hence less "bad" posts means more "good" posts. Thus if you follow my line of thinking, you'd want to reduce the amount of "bad" posts.

Now for me personally I'd actually be way more likely to give a "like", "dislike", "agree", "disagree", whatever reaction button-reaction than post "Hey I agree with you!". So for me as an active participant in a discussion, actual reaction-buttons would engage me more and give the writer more feedback. And as said, as a reader I too think it's more hassle to scroll past replies, that just confirm something multiple times, without adding new aspects to the discussion, than just seeing a reaction-counter. The result in both cases (though with replies a bit less than by a counter due to the obviousness of a number in a counter) I then might be curious about why people react in great amounts in a similar way. But again, that would be virtually the same, no matter how that information is conveyed to me.

Outside of that it also tends to encourage like-bait posts, which isn't great for discussion.

Click to shrink...

But as it is now, it encourages quick-bait reaction posts. Aside from that, if it's just visible within a thread and not counted publicly on a per user basis I really don't think that's what's happening. I can only compare with skyscrapercity.com, when it still had publicly visible likes next to the avatar in every post, but I don't think I encountered one post in 7+ years there, where I thought this was just to bait a like. And what for? And ultimately even if it did happen, that would be up to moderation to curb. I don't think that's much of an issue at all.

 

[Bold One]

Welcome to Hot Take culture,

Its all about get in your zingers and receiving e-high fives from strangers for sick first post.

 

[Gloam]

The level of discussion will not change as long as the main talking points are industry buzzwords. It's the same old "AAA" this, "new IP: that, who cares about stock keeping units? The co-opting of marketing speak by people is depressing to see.

 

[HellofaMouse]

i dont think the problem is 3 word, low effort posts (though they are not great). i think the real problem is the general reluctance to argue in good faith. people get hostile and confrontational way too easily on this site. nobody wants to disagree politely, and have a productive conversation.

 

[Deleted member 29682]

The whole "\thread" mentality really highlights when someone doesn't want a discussion, they just want everyone to know what they think.

 

[Maturin]

I comment less and less due to so many posts in the gaming side being just snark and playing the man/woman rather than the ball. And the console/franchise wars - so utterly tiresome at my age.

 

[DynamicSushy]

I've increasingly been using the site just for news anyway.

Read the OP and back out right away. No time for all the shit takes anymore.

Click to shrink...

Yep. I pretty much read the shit takes if I've got nothing better to do and wanna be entertained.

Sometimes a topic isn't even worth the discussion yet 500 people find a way to say the same general thing, but in a different way. Then you get that one person who put in a little too much effort in their essay and they end up grossing everyone out and getting banned.

 

[Carlius]

i dont know man i believe its not just on the gaming side, but on the entire forum. People here are aggressive, they dont respect others opinion, they bash threads with comments like "do we really need a thread for this?" making an OP feel like he/she has no space to express his or her ideas. It is a forum after all, all kinds of discussions (moderated of course) should be discussable.

A lot of us here just cant seem to be able to ignore threads. I for one feel that on the gaming side, theres just too much of an n4g feel, toxicity and fanboyism going on and while i understand this forum is quite liberal in its views, bashing others for having a different opinion is just getting annoying.

 

[regenhuber]

It's not the length of the posts that a problem, it's largely just the attitude of the community. Era pretty much just lives of hyperbole, nobody ever has any kind of middle ground opinion, all games are either the GOAT or Trash, and nobody here ever really wants to read a thread or read replies. They want to hop in, leave their take and then they come back if they a notification bell.

Click to shrink...

Yup that's the main problem. Whether a thread is a "win" largely depends on the # of replies for many people.

Let's say I have a problem with a certain aspect of a game:

a) "LTTP: Game X has the worst [aspect of a game] in the history of gaming"
b) "I would enjoy Game X a lot more if [aspect of a game] was changed to this...."

Thread title b) wouldn't piss as many people off .
Discussion would be more constructive but after a few hours the thread would slowly vanish from the front page.
Thread title a) would attract ton of people that either want to tell you how wrong you are or agree with you.

Same can be said for replies in threads.
I hate how many exchanges go like this:
User A "Game X looks wonderful."
User B "No it doesn''t."

Many people here talk about subjective opinions like they are facts.
Totally agree that the length of posts is not the main issue here bc context matters.
It's the matter-of-fact attitude so many posters here have. The aggressive YAYs and NAYs drown out all the sensible discussion.

No coincidence that the only places I normally post in are the OTs where this attention-whoring is less common.

 

[Prototype Viktor]

This post still applies today.

Be the change you want to be. All of you, not just "the others".

Click to shrink...

I am the change I want others to be if only I could get HGH gains on shitting on Ubisoft heh

Maybe I'm not paying attention enough or my ignore list is working well but I don't see a abnormal about of weird things on gaming side anymore

 

[ColdSun]

First, I wanted to take a moment and thank a lot of you for the constructive feedback and as well responses to fellow users regarding that feedback.
Some of these ideas are things I've pondered on in the past while others are definitely worth considering as well.

Going forward, we will take this thread into account as we continue to refine our moderation policies.