Why is the Playground so much nicer than the rest of the internet?

[Chess435]

Having been all around the internet, I've seen my fair share of jerks. Whether it's on gaming sites, forums, imageboards, or pretty much anywhere with more than twenty people, the internet seems to be almost wholly comprised of ragers, trolls, and just general unpleasantness. But for some reason, the wonderful community here seems to defy all of the standard conventions of how people normally behave. People actually engage in rational discussion and debate, and while there may be disagreements, it almost never boils over into-full blown RAGE!!!. I've even seen people change their mind on a subject here based on a logical argument from someone else. Simply put, you guys are all awesome, and props to everyone here, epecially the Mod Squad, for keeping this as one of the nicest places on the 'net. :smallbiggrin: I really need to use less commas...

[Ikialev]

Because the rules prevent any sort of ungoodthoughts. It creates a hugbox, much like dreadful tvtropes forums, by banning any sort of negativity.

Also because nerds are friendlier than most people

[Giggling Ghast]

Because Rich Burlew is actually a young boy with terrifying psychic powers who can read peoples' minds and turn them into animals if they say anything bad about meow meow meow meow meow

[Zar Peter]

Because there is a mind con...

There is no mind control. Now go back to your fun!

What was the question?

[SiuiS]

Moderation. Enough posters have it, and the enforcement squad is pretty sweet. and completely honest; like, did you know Kpenguin is an actual penguin? Taller than I thought he would be though.

[Moff Chumley]

Because people post threads about how nice it is every couple weeks?

Actually that's probably not why.

[Gensh]

Because the rules prevent any sort of ungoodthoughts. It creates a hugbox, much like dreadful tvtropes forums, by banning any sort of negativity.

Also because nerds are friendlier than most people

This, plus the site design in general. Most other forums try for something either along the lines of digital chic or just something generally eye-catching. The Playground uses neutral colors and tends to stick to smiling stick figure avatars, which lends to a sense of community.

[Pokonic]

First and formost, your probably going to make a account to better follow the little webcomic thats to your left. That very fact is kind of a icebreaker, because your already here because you got linked to a DnD Stick Figure webcomic and like it.

Also, I am going to sum it up Alice in Wonderland Style.

"In THAT direction," the Titan said, waving its right banhammer round, "lives a brony: and in THAT direction," pointing his pesudopod downword, "lives a roleplayer . Visit either you like: they're both geeks."

"But I don't want to go among geeks," the Pixie remarked.

"Oh, you can't help that," said the Titan: "we're all geeks here. I'm a geek. You're a geek."

`How do you know I'm geek?" said the Pixie.

"You must be,"said the Titan, "or you wouldn't have come here."

[Tebryn]

Because the rules prevent any sort of ungoodthoughts. It creates a hugbox, much like dreadful tvtropes forums, by banning any sort of negativity.


No they don't. They simply don't allow us to post them. We still think them plenty.

[Rockphed]

Because the rules prevent any sort of ungoodthoughts. It creates a hugbox, much like dreadful tvtropes forums, by banning any sort of negativity.

I have encountered lots of negativity and disagreement here in the Playground. I have even encountered such from moderators. What I haven't seen is dozens of posters writing long, involved screeds that dissect their opponents' posts and souls on a microscopic level. The maximum I have seen even dissecting eachother is 5, and even then the dissection was all the post not the soul.

The rules harshly punish trolls, often in the worst way possible: they remove the trolling posts. Also, while the rules do not excuse violations in response to trolls, consistent trolling will get the mods after you.

Finally, there is no mind control citizen, go back to your fun.

[Morph Bark]

First and formost, your probably going to make a account to better follow the little webcomic thats to your left. That very fact is kind of a icebreaker, because your already here because you got linked to a DnD Stick Figure webcomic and like it.

Also, I am going to sum it up Alice in Wonderland Style.

"In THAT direction," the Titan said, waving its right banhammer round, "lives a brony: and in THAT direction," pointing his pesudopod downword, "lives a roleplayer . Visit either you like: they're both nerds."

"But I don't want to go among nerds," the Pixie remarked.

"Oh, you can't help that," said the Titan: "we're all nerds here. I'm a nerd. You're a nerd."

`How do you know I'm nerd?" said the Pixie.

"You must be,"said the Titan, "or you wouldn't have come here."

Replace every instance of nerd with geek and you basically got it right here, yeah.

[Kobold-Bard]

No they don't. They simply don't allow us to post them. We still think them plenty.

Aww, you think Roland isn't moderating your thoughts. How cute :smallwink:

[blackfox]

Because anyone expressing any sort of unkind, dishonest, or Chaotic thoughts tends to wake up one day in the middle of the Amazon Forest.

[Eldan]

It's a shame, in some ways. There's a lot of people here who would probably be really fun to argue politics, or history, or philosophy with. But then, it would kill the atmosphere here.

[Othesemo]

The threat of retributive, irreversible damage. It's all you really need to get people to mind their manners.

Main reason that I use other forums too. This place is good for gaming talk or banter, but it's not remotely fit for any serious discussion.

[CoffeeIncluded]

Because the rules here are so strict, and I think a lot of people here just happen to be nicer and more courteous than elsewhere.

[Othesemo]

Because the rules here are so strict, and I think a lot of people here just happen to be nicer and more courteous than elsewhere.

The latter is because of the former. The people who are less nice and courteous than elsewhere get smacked with the banhammer. The resulting courteousness of the community is no more an intrinsic trait than is the beauty of a flower patch whose owner has spent hours slaving away over it.

[Elemental]

Might have something to do with that mind control people keep mentioning...

But in seriousness, it's probably because the people here work to keep it a pleasant place and we have Moderators and Administrators who do the same.

[Kindablue]

I'll just leave this here. (http://www.thenicestplaceontheinter.net/)

[Esprit15]

Forums with strict rules and good moderation in general tend to be well behaved. Also there is the There is no mind control. fact that many of the people that would be drawn here would tend towards being generally more amiable people.

[thubby]

simple, we're all nuts.

normal people, in normal forums disregard basic social etiquette and generally act like jerks.
but we're anything but normal. dare i say we're abnormal. so we behave like somewhat reasonable human beings.



and before you go arguing that you're not crazy. all i can say in response is that I've just called you and everyone here nuts, and you're laughing about it.
that is all.

[Elemental]

and before you go arguing that you're not crazy. all i can say in response is that I've just called you and everyone here nuts, and you're laughing about it.
that is all.

Indeed. It's been scientifically proven that insanity and a good healthy level of zaniness is good for the soul.
Nice straitjacket by the way. It looks rather comfortable.

[Elder Tsofu]

I'll just leave this here. (http://www.thenicestplaceontheinter.net/)

That was a creepy place filled with creepy people. :smalleek:

[Totally Guy]

People are not nicer here. We just find politer ways of expressing our hatred towards other posters. It's subtle but it's everywhere.

[Elder Tsofu]

People are not nicer here. We just find politer ways of expressing our hatred towards other posters. It's subtle but it's everywhere.

Maybe it is by being overly nice? The nicer someone is the more they hate you. :smalltongue:

[ThePhantasm]

This thread is giving me deja vu. Seems like we have a thread on this topic rather regularly these days.

But yes, the forum is very nice.

[Elemental]

Maybe it is by being overly nice? The nicer someone is the more they hate you. :smalltongue:

Now I can't trust anyone...

[JuanCudz]

It also means the Playground is a lot less colourful than the rest of the internet, and the yard monitors will give us detention if we misbehave. Seems there are a lot of sensitive souls here.

[Wyntonian]

My theory is that it's all populated by my fellow Oregonians and some Canadians, I.E., the nicest folks on the planet.

What's that? Not from Oregon OR Canada? Sure, that's what you think for now....:smallamused:

[RabbitHoleLost]

Because anyone expressing any sort of unkind, dishonest, or Chaotic thoughts tends to wake up one day in the middle of the Amazon Forest.

Once, I called somebody a troll, and Roland St Jude showed up at my front door and kicked me in my face.

True facts
Not really a true fact at all, actually. Roland is pretty powerful but I don't think "teleportation" is one of those powers

Anyways, this sort of thread shows up every now and again, and, yes, the Playground is, at surface, much nicer and more pleasant than any other forum you'll find on the internet. However, once you dig around, get involved off the forum in, say, a chat or an online game- then you start to see the ugliness that happens when a bunch of people associate with eachother over a period of years.

[irenicObserver]

Does it matter? You found someplace nice and you want to question it?

[Elemental]

Does it matter? You found someplace nice and you want to question it?

It is important to make certain that things aren't the result of psionic manipulation.
But, I haven't noticed any subtle inconsistencies. Has anyone else?

[Hattish Thing]

Replace every instance of nerd with geek and you basically got it right here, yeah.

So much awesome....

[blackfox]

Anyways, this sort of thread shows up every now and again, and, yes, the Playground is, at surface, much nicer and more pleasant than any other forum you'll find on the internet. However, once you dig around, get involved off the forum in, say, a chat or an online game- then you start to see the ugliness that happens when a bunch of people associate with eachother over a period of years.Eh, having been heavily involved in the GitP gamer community for a number of years, I find a small amount of nastiness, mostly originating from a few nasty individuals, a moderate amount of flipping out over seemingly innocuous things, mostly originating from a few individuals who are liable to flip out over seemingly innocuous things, and a good amount of being obnoxious to your best friends for the sake of being obnoxious to them. Just my 2c.

[Kindablue]

That was a creepy place filled with creepy people. :smalleek:

The similarities go on.

[shadow_archmagi]

Because our glorious overlords forbid the slightest negativity, even implied negativity.

[The Glyphstone]

*takes notes*

[Krade]

This mind control thing is patently false. I mean, I've actually been to the home of a moderator and I can tell you there is definitely no mind c-OH I CAN'T DO THIS ANYMORE!!! MY BRAIN IS NOT YOUR PLAYTHI-There is no mind control, citizen. Go back to your fun.

[Siosilvar]

It's because of the bananas.

...I've said too much.

[Mauve Shirt]

It's not. It's heavily moderated, but all of the weirdness and meanness of the rest of the internet bubbles beneath the surface until you meet people outside of the playground and you're like :smalleek:.

[snoopy13a]

Also because nerds are friendlier than most people

I disagree based off of my experiences with MMORPG forums. Nerds can be as petty, elitist, and vindicative as anyone else. Plus, I'm going to go out on a limb and venture that 4chan isn't populated by lacrosse bros :smalltongue:

Nah, nerds are more or less as friendly as everyone else.

Anyway, the "friendliness" of this forum is really dictated by the heavy moderation. Personally, I would describe the atomsphere as more cordial than friendly.

[Adlan]

No Politics, No Religion.

I moderate on another forum where we have the same rule, and we get the same effect. It's not that posters here don't have P&R views, but it's much harder to hate on someone just because they think Vaarsuvius is Male, and you know Vaarsuvius must be female, than it is to go on a massive internet rant against [insert favourite political or religious target here].

[Tengu_temp]

People are not nicer here. We just find politer ways of expressing our hatred towards other posters. It's subtle but it's everywhere.

It's not. It's heavily moderated, but all of the weirdness and meanness of the rest of the internet bubbles beneath the surface until you meet people outside of the playground and you're like :smalleek:.

This. GitP is pretty normal by the standards of the "nice" part of the internet.

[Surrealistik]

Draconian moderation.

Also a blanket ban on the most controversial topics.

[blackfox]

Draconian moderation.

Also a blanket ban on the most controversial topics.Yep, yep, and...

*takes notes*CRAP :smalleek:

[Rockphed]

No Politics, No Religion.

I moderate on another forum where we have the same rule, and we get the same effect. It's not that posters here don't have P&R views, but it's much harder to hate on someone just because they think Vaarsuvius is Male, and you know Vaarsuvius must be female, than it is to go on a massive internet rant against [insert favourite political or religious target here].

Ironically, all politics and religion flamewars go exactly the same way.

Poster1: I am a [group 1] because I like [group 1's primary platform] even though I don't agree with [group 1's nth-level platform]. Also, I enjoy doing [stereotypical thing group 1 does] and [less stereotypical thing group 1 does. You should all join [group 1].
Poster2: That is cool. Though I have always wondered how a [group 1] could live with himself considering [group 1's position on group 2's secondary platform].

And from there it is all downhill. The only thing we might miss is the occasional chance to correct a prejudice, but those are few and far between.

[Seffbasilisk]

The internet is like the wilds.

This here forum, is a town. We have walls, guards, and the occasional adventurer.

Generally adventurers tussle with the guards, start barfights, and play vigilante with any troublemakers.

Adventurers are then kicked out, unless they can take a sidequest.

The sidequest is There is no sidequest. This never happened. Move along citizen.

Like I was saying, it's a relatively well-patrolled area, so you're not likely to have random encounters (for a certain definition of random), or encounter marauding trolls. If you do, the guards will likely back you up.

[Feytalist]

The internet is like the wilds.

This here forum, is a town. We have walls, guards, and the occasional adventurer.

Generally adventurers tussle with the guards, start barfights, and play vigilante with any troublemakers.

Adventurers are then kicked out, unless they can take a sidequest.

The sidequest is There is no sidequest. This never happened. Move along citizen.

Like I was saying, it's a relatively well-patrolled area, so you're not likely to have random encounters (for a certain definition of random), or encounter marauding trolls. If you do, the guards will likely back you up.

So what you're saying is, in this instance, we're all commoners.

Cool. :smalltongue:

[Othesemo]

Ironically, all politics and religion flamewars go exactly the same way.

Poster1: I am a [group 1] because I like [group 1's primary platform] even though I don't agree with [group 1's nth-level platform]. Also, I enjoy doing [stereotypical thing group 1 does] and [less stereotypical thing group 1 does. You should all join [group 1].
Poster2: That is cool. Though I have always wondered how a [group 1] could live with himself considering [group 1's position on group 2's secondary platform].

And from there it is all downhill. The only thing we might miss is the occasional chance to correct a prejudice, but those are few and far between.

Which is precisely why you should only debate them with people who are actually capable of defending their beliefs, rather than committing to Ad Hominems. Which is precisely why you should not debate them here (that and the aforementioned retributive, irreversible damage, of course).

[Fredaintdead]

So what you're saying is, in this instance, we're all commoners.

Cool. :smalltongue:

Wait... if we're all commoners... HIDE FROM THE CATS!

[willpell]

Simply put, you guys are all awesome, and props to everyone here, epecially the Mod Squad, for keeping this as one of the nicest places on the 'net. :smallbiggrin:

Those of us who enjoy free speech more than mandatory happy-vibes do not find it especially nice.

[Rockphed]

Which is precisely why you should only debate them with people who are actually capable of defending their beliefs, rather than committing to Ad Hominems. Which is precisely why you should not debate them here (that and the aforementioned retributive, irreversible damage, of course).

My point was that Ad Hominems are inevitable. On the other hand, asking "How do you justify X?" is not inherently an ad hominem. I have a friend who asks that exact question about something political not in an attempt to make people look stupid but because he really wants to know.


Those of us who enjoy free speech more than mandatory happy-vibes do not find it especially nice.

Technically, it is freedom of the press when we start talking about the forums. And said freedom applies to the owner of the press, in this case Rich Burlew.

[willpell]

Technically, it is freedom of the press when we start talking about the forums. And said freedom applies to the owner of the press, in this case Rich Burlew.

The Internet updates in real time; I would argue that makes it more akin to verbal speech than to printed periodicals. Your claim to the contrary is also valid, but if the law agrees with you, it speaks more to the law being outdated than to your position being more correct. The Bill of Rights was written at a time when the idea of an Internet would have been utterly inconceivable; I think if Ben Franklin were around today he would put a lot of thought into which freedoms are involved in Internet communication, and I don't believe the answer would be an obvious "it's textual so it counts as press". Press can be owned, but I don't believe the forum terms make The Giant the legal owner of every word "spoken" on his forum.

[Mauve Shirt]

If you don't want moderation in your moderation so you can deny mind control while you deny mind control, you should get a something awful account.

[willpell]

Anyway, the "friendliness" of this forum is really dictated by the heavy moderation. Personally, I would describe the atomsphere as more cordial than friendly.

I agree but I'd say even this is being generous. You know the saying "an armed society is a polite society?" Myself, I have never believed that saying "please don't gun me down in cold blood" counted as politeness, and so I disagree with the premise, but it is the policy on which I believe the moderators operate, except they are the only ones who get to be armed.

Myself, I prefer a system where instead of moderators restraining what people can post, you give people the ability to mute any post they don't want to see or any poster who has produced too many such posts (ideally I'd even say you should be able to mute parts of posts but that's probably not technically feasible). Let everyone say absolutely anything, with no consequence worse than the possibility that nobody will listen. In that way, each poster can in fairly short order sculpt their own definition of a "nice" environment.


It's a shame, in some ways. There's a lot of people here who would probably be really fun to argue politics, or history, or philosophy with. But then, it would kill the atmosphere here.

I'm probably not one of the people you had in mind here, but just for the record I would be very interested in a "GITP Unmoderated Offsite Annex" forum. As long as this didn't have to be on The Giant's bandwidth dime, and didn't seduce too many people completely away from this VERY NICE AND LOVING AND NEGATIVITY-FREE community, I'd imagine this would probably be cool with him, though I could be mistaken.

[Riverdance]

I think the blanket ban of controversial topics makes a big difference.


I'll just leave this here. (http://www.thenicestplaceontheinter.net/)

Awww, that's really sweet :smallredface:

[Othesemo]

My point was that Ad Hominems are inevitable. On the other hand, asking "How do you justify X?" is not inherently an ad hominem. I have a friend who asks that exact question about something political not in an attempt to make people look stupid but because he really wants to know.

Absolutely not. They're often resorted to by insecure or illogical debaters, but they aren't inevitable.

{Scrubbed}

[JaaSwb]

The Internet updates in real time; I would argue that makes it more akin to verbal speech than to printed periodicals. Your claim to the contrary is also valid, but if the law agrees with you, it speaks more to the law being outdated than to your position being more correct. The Bill of Rights was written at a time when the idea of an Internet would have been utterly inconceivable; I think if Ben Franklin were around today he would put a lot of thought into which freedoms are involved in Internet communication, and I don't believe the answer would be an obvious "it's textual so it counts as press". Press can be owned, but I don't believe the forum terms make The Giant the legal owner of every word "spoken" on his forum.

Forums are actually a lot like a printed periodical, except with pieces that are written very rapidly and distributed instantly. By submitting our words, we are granting the Giant license publish those words here, but not relinquishing copyright. Free speech doesn't really apply to us as authors, since just like a newspaper chooses what to print and what not, so can the Giant put limits on what he's willing to distribute to the readers. After all, you're free to find your own server and publish your political/religious views there.

I do think it's a realy pity these subjects are banned here though. I suppose it would be too much work to ensure the discussions stay civil and don't go around in circles.

[Krade]

Freedom is the ability to go somewhere else if you don't like where you are. Sure, you're not 'free' to say whatever you like here, but there's plenty of other places where you are, and quite exactly nothing keeping you here.

[Xondoure]

Freedom is the ability to go somewhere else if you don't like where you are. Sure, you're not 'free' to say whatever you like here, but there's plenty of other places where you are, and quite exactly nothing keeping you here.

Except perhaps the friendly attitude and camaraderie of fellow playgrounders. :smalltongue:

[Krade]

Except perhaps the friendly attitude and camaraderie of fellow playgrounders. :smalltongue:

Then perhaps one should say instead, "Nothing keeping you here against your will."

[Mauve Shirt]

This is where the complete lack of mind control comes in.

[Starwulf]

Myself, I prefer a system where instead of moderators restraining what people can post, you give people the ability to mute any post they don't want to see or any poster who has produced too many such posts (ideally I'd even say you should be able to mute parts of posts but that's probably not technically feasible). Let everyone say absolutely anything, with no consequence worse than the possibility that nobody will listen. In that way, each poster can in fairly short order sculpt their own definition of a "nice" environment.


That kind of forum DOES NOT work. I was a member of ffxi.allakhazam.com from 2005 until now(I haven't posted since 2010 tho), and they had the "rate up and rate down" ability that eventually mutes posters, and if often turned into nothing more then a mere popularity contest with certain people being rated up into the stratosphere, and others who posted things certain groups disagreed with, would be rated down into the ground and there posts would never show up under default conditions. It was a worthless system there, and I'm more then willing to bet it would be a worthless system anywhere else.

Really, if you don't agree with this forums take on moderation and how they ban certain topics, then why stay? If you stay because you enjoy the other conversations, then don't complain that you can't talk about things that you knew full well in coming here were banned. If you want to talk about politics and religion and other touchy topics, there are tens of thousands of other forums on the web, I'm sure at least a dozen of them are somewhat civil(well, maybe, I've never had a single political discussion with ANYONE that didn't turn into a yelling match). Don't trash on GITP just because they know what topics often turn into hatred and venom within minutes of being posted.

[blackfox]

That kind of forum DOES NOT work.Yes it does. (http://www.reddit.com)

[Anarion]

The Internet updates in real time; I would argue that makes it more akin to verbal speech than to printed periodicals. Your claim to the contrary is also valid, but if the law agrees with you, it speaks more to the law being outdated than to your position being more correct. The Bill of Rights was written at a time when the idea of an Internet would have been utterly inconceivable; I think if Ben Franklin were around today he would put a lot of thought into which freedoms are involved in Internet communication, and I don't believe the answer would be an obvious "it's textual so it counts as press". Press can be owned, but I don't believe the forum terms make The Giant the legal owner of every word "spoken" on his forum.

The decisive element for speech purposes is editorial control. And the Giant has that, as do all his staff that moderate this forum. I don't really find the law outdated at all in that context. The alternative is Snuggles the Death Kitty, but all the time, since the owners of a site wouldn't have the editorial control to ensure that threads stayed on topic.

[Raistlin1040]

Yes it does. (http://www.reddit.com)As a frequent Redditor myself, there are a LOT of problems with Reddit. Not to say it's not a great site, because it is, but calling it a "nice" site isn't true.

[Starwulf]

Yes it does. (http://www.reddit.com)

just because the forum exists doesn't mean it works. I'm sure, just like allakhazam, that there are plenty of "cliques" that rate down groups they dislike, and uprate the ones that they do, regardless of material posted. Hell, Allakhazam is a decent forum in and of itself, but the rate system is still a POS that is, again, nothing more then a popularity system.

[factotum]

I think you're slightly misinterpreting what willpell said. What I think he'd like is a system where you personally rate people's posts. These ratings are never seen by anyone else, they just affect your own view of the forum so you won't see those posts made by someone you consider objectionable.

Having said that, I don't think a forum like that would work either. How would you handle the situation where somebody has quoted a post made by someone on your "don't see" list? It would also make for really disjointed conversations where you can't see half the replies!

[Vixsor Lumin]

I think you're slightly misinterpreting what willpell said. What I think he'd like is a system where you personally rate people's posts. These ratings are never seen by anyone else, they just affect your own view of the forum so you won't see those posts made by someone you consider objectionable.

Having said that, I don't think a forum like that would work either. How would you handle the situation where somebody has quoted a post made by someone on your "don't see" list? It would also make for really disjointed conversations where you can't see half the replies!

Have you ever blocked somedbody or been blocked on facebook? That's the problem that shows up there to (at least I think it still does, the person that banned me eventually blocked all my friends for siding with me and it was a few years ago) my problem solved itself and I think that the "popularity contest" is what caused it to. If you block someone eventually your probably going to block the people who agree with them or act similarily (sp?). So eventually after furious banning of posts by both sides, your left with your own corner of the internet where most people agree with you on almost everything. The downside, is that that would get very boring very quickly.....

[willpell]

if often turned into nothing more then a mere popularity contest with certain people being rated up into the stratosphere, and others who posted things certain groups disagreed with, would be rated down into the ground and there posts would never show up under default conditions.

Well then it's a good thing that a "popularity contest" of global thumbing up and down was NOT what I suggested. My idea is for every poster, or post, or part of a post, to have a simple on/off switch for each poster. You choose to see it or not to see it; you can mute a person, censor words you don't like, tag subjects that you're not interested in, etc - and it all affects only yourself. This might be technically infeasible, I can believe that - but at least an approximation of the most stripped-down version of it would be possible, and a LOT preferable to being ruled by whims of moderators who are only human and thus perfectly capable of behaving inappropriately, or tolerating the inappropriate behavior of their colleagues for any number of reasons (mutual back-scratching being the most prominent - "I'll tolerate your failings as a human being if you'll tolerate mine", which is the exact opposite of what I want to see being done under ANY circumstances).


Really, if you don't agree with this forums take on moderation and how they ban certain topics, then why stay?

For the same reason that I don't move out of America despite disagreeing with 3/4 of its laws and lawmakers - because there isn't another America I can move to which is more to my preference, nor could I move there for free. If I could press one button and be transported to a DarthWiki version of GiantITP, where there's no moderation save to prevent spam and I'm free to discuss adult content and religion and other UTTERLY ABHORRENT AND INTOLERABLE AND THEY MIGHT MAYBE GET US SUED SO DON'T YOU DARE topics, copying all my posts on this forum to corresponding topics on that one and putting a redirect link on my profile so that friends I've acquired here can easily find me there, then I'd press that button.

The closest option that's available would be to get my own account on something like SimpleMachines or YetAnotherForum, create my own forum, manually copy my own posts, compose addenda that would summarize the content around them, link that forum to my profile, and hope that the bother of needing to register an account on my forum wouldn't be too much of a deterrent to people who might have been interested in what I had to say if I were still here. All of which brings problems of its own, from Rich suing me for going too far in posting extracts of OOTS to my forum for the aforementioned context, to my forum being infected with spammers. All of which tends to mirror the problems I would face if I wanted to go out into international waters with a very large barge full of sand and build myself a private island where I make all the laws, hoping I don't get bombed by the US or raided by pirates or simply go mad from lack of social outlets (okay the island one also carries a risk of starving to death, but the analogy holds up pretty well otherwise).

There is only one America; therefore it must be a home to all Americans (and ditto for every other country). There is only one GiantInThePlayground; therefore it must be a home to all people who want to operate on a forum dedicated to OOTS - call them "first-generation Playgrounders" - as well as to those who want to operate on a forum which is home to first-generation Playgrounders (whether collectively or as individuals - as an example one of my incentives for staying here is a poster named Vilpich, so as long as he's here I can't just up and leave without losing access to him), and so on and so on until the community stops forming. Anything that helps everyone live in the same roof is a good thing, including the creation of additional houses under the first roof, for people who aren't welcome in the same house as those who live in the main house whose roof is the one under discussion. (This analogy is getting more awkward with each passing second but I can't think of a better way at getting at my point so I'm just gonna leave it.)

[blackfox]

As a frequent Redditor myself, there are a LOT of problems with Reddit. Not to say it's not a great site, because it is, but calling it a "nice" site isn't true.Heh, it isn't a nice site. It's not full of nice people. It does work, though.


just because the forum exists doesn't mean it works. I'm sure, just like allakhazam, that there are plenty of "cliques" that rate down groups they dislike, and uprate the ones that they do, regardless of material posted. Hell, Allakhazam is a decent forum in and of itself, but the rate system is still a POS that is, again, nothing more then a popularity system.It works because (IME) it's large enough that people don't really care to get to know each other. Even on the subreddit dedicated to all the facepalm-worthy racist/sexist/etc. stuff that people say on reddit, they don't go on a downvote brigade.


I think you're slightly misinterpreting what willpell said. What I think he'd like is a system where you personally rate people's posts. These ratings are never seen by anyone else, they just affect your own view of the forum so you won't see those posts made by someone you consider objectionable.

Having said that, I don't think a forum like that would work either. How would you handle the situation where somebody has quoted a post made by someone on your "don't see" list? It would also make for really disjointed conversations where you can't see half the replies!Reading his post again; yeah, you are right. My bad. Your last sentence is also why I don't block people on here.


Well then it's a good thing that a "popularity contest" of global thumbing up and down was NOT what I suggested. My idea is for every poster, or post, or part of a post, to have a simple on/off switch for each poster. You choose to see it or not to see it; you can mute a person, censor words you don't like, tag subjects that you're not interested in, etc - and it all affects only yourself.I think right now we do have an on/off switch for each poster, it's just awkward to use cause it's not the point of the forum. Having been in online environments (though not fora) where you /can/ mute only the people you don't want to talk to, though, it gets confusing pretty fast. (Just like this sentence.) In places like that, I would rather just put up with and/or express my displeasure with the obnoxious person.

[Boci]

There is only one America; therefore it must be a home to all Americans (and ditto for every other country). There is only one GiantInThePlayground; therefore it must be a home to all people who want to operate on a forum dedicated to OOTS - call them "first-generation Playgrounders" - as well as to those who want to operate on a forum which is home to first-generation Playgrounders (whether collectively or as individuals - as an example one of my incentives for staying here is a poster named Vilpich, so as long as he's here I can't just up and leave without losing access to him), and so on and so on until the community stops forming. Anything that helps everyone live in the same roof is a good thing, including the creation of additional houses under the first roof, for people who aren't welcome in the same house as those who live in the main house whose roof is the one under discussion. (This analogy is getting more awkward with each passing second but I can't think of a better way at getting at my point so I'm just gonna leave it.)

Why don't you go to another roleplaying forum to discuss the prohibited topics here, whilst remaining active on GitP? Isn't that a win-win? And if you like certain posters here, you can always invite them to join you on the other site as well.

[willpell]

I think you're slightly misinterpreting what willpell said. What I think he'd like is a system where you personally rate people's posts. These ratings are never seen by anyone else, they just affect your own view of the forum so you won't see those posts made by someone you consider objectionable.

Not even a rating necessarily; that would be one of the higher-end implementations. I'd settle for just a show/hide button.


It would also make for really disjointed conversations where you can't see half the replies!

I am completely fine with that. You can always ask people who you haven't muted for clarification about things they've said to people you have muted whom they haven't. A bit awkward perhaps but I think it's the best possible solution, and I say this having experienced a version of it (the chat channel on Magic: the Gathering Online specifically; it has censorship and it isn't a permanent forum, but it has this one aspect of what I think is the ideal, or at least the best approximation thereof we can manage.


So eventually after furious banning of posts by both sides, your left with your own corner of the internet where most people agree with you on almost everything. The downside, is that that would get very boring very quickly.....

I don't believe that this is undesireable. Most people would only wall themselves off from, say, 30-70% of the content that they could have access to; what was left would still be more than enough to keep them entertained. The people who are so emotionally fragile that they have to mute 95% of what they see might end up feeling a little lonely by the time they were done, but it would be exactly what they wanted, and they could always change their mind and unmute some people. I think it'd be a neatly self-balancing system in short order. The problem you describe with Facebook sounds like a case of too much "tethering" - people blocking an entire group because of one person within that group, which is not something I would advocate or accept.


Why don't you go to another roleplaying forum to discuss the prohibited topics here, whilst remaining active on GitP? Isn't that a win-win? And if you like certain posters here, you can always invite them to join you on the other site as well.

Limits of time, energy, and the natural "flow" of events. If the topic comes up in the thread, I want to discuss it in that thread. If you're in a no-smoking restaurant and you get the urge to smoke, you might be willing to abandon your meal and your fellow diner and go outside to smoke, and maybe some of your fellow diners would follow you there and continue the conversation. But it sure would be nice if, instead of banning all smoking, the restaurant could just contain your smoke to your own vicinity (with a big fan or a plastic air bubble or something), so that you could stay and continue your meal without disturbing either anyone else or yourself. The equivalent for this forum would be if, instead of scrubbing posts, the moderators just put them in a "scrubbed for reason X" box, leaving them readable by those who want to read them and invisible to those who don't, based on the reason. That way you don't have to leave the thread where the discussion is happening.

(Man I'm being awkward with my analogies today.)

[Boci]

Limits of time, energy, and the natural "flow" of events.

Fair enough that you feel that way, but aren't you then asking others to divert time , energy and change the natural flow of their website to you don't have to yourself?

On another forum I frequent there is a sub forum named "Controversial Topics", politics and religion being named as examples of threads that belong there. The overall atmosphere over there is friendly. So could such a system work here? Possible. Is it worth the risk? That's up to The Giant, and so far it seems that he thinks the answer to that question is a negative.

[willpell]

Fair enough that you feel that way, but aren't you then asking others to divert time , energy and change the natural flow of their website to you don't have to yourself?

Indeed, and they are free to decline. As long as it's their personal choice and not the enforcement of some blanket rule I'm fine with that. My definition of ethics emanates 100% from the individual - I was about to say his feelings, but that's inaccurate, it's more like his natural equilibrium or something to that effect, since mercurial individual feelings can steer you awry just as much as inflexible conformist principles can.


On another forum I frequent there is a sub forum named "Controversial Topics", politics and religion being named as examples of threads that belong there. The overall atmosphere over there is friendly. So could such a system work here? Possible. Is it worth the risk? That's up to The Giant, and so far it seems that he thinks the answer to that question is a negative.

I'm not sure that he's actually vetoed such an idea; he may just never have gone out of his way to look into such a thing. And of course the issue of bandwidth cost tends to incline the answer to any improvement in the forums toward a default "no". I actually wish the moderators would just flat-out say "we are nixing any and all conversation that does not directly pertain to the comic in order to minimize bandwith costs"; that would at least be consistent. Instead, there's some more nebulous rule which I completely do not understand, leaving me not daring to say much of anything - and that to me is not "nice", hence my decision to post here in the first place. A lot of the time people like to congratulate themselves on how awesome they are, and I feel it is important to deflate them quickly in such cases, so that they do not succumb to "Lawful Stupid Jerk Paladin Syndrome" or some variant thereof. The forum is only "nice" if it allows you to say it isn't "nice", and have your opinion be heard and evaluated (even if the valuation comes out to "you're wrong").

[Atreyu the Masked LLama]

It's not. It's heavily moderated, but all of the weirdness and meanness of the rest of the internet bubbles beneath the surface until you meet people outside of the playground and you're like :smalleek:.

This is about the Noodle Incident, isn't it? I already apologized. I didn't know Indurain was standing there, I didn't know you had a bacon allergy, and I certainly didn't expect the Renfaire would actually lock someone in the stocks for 3 hours. On the plus side, the pictures were classic! :smallsmile:

[Mauve Shirt]

I don't think I'll ever be able to forgive you for that Llama. Those stocks are uncomfortable, and when you have a face full of itchy spots from an allergic reaction to bacon, they are EXTREMELY uncomfortable. Bad times all around, even if the pictures are entertaining. :smalltongue:

Reddit is not a nice site. It's as "friendly" as the playgrounders off the playground, at best. Any place where your "score" is dependent on how many people like you is rarely a good place to be new. There are cliques in the playground, but if a clique doesn't like you they can't downvote you until you completely disappear. You can make your own clique. With blackjack. And hookers. Actually, blackjack and hookers might make you more popular on Reddit than here.
We already have ignored poster lists. They work just fine. If I need to see a post by someone I've ignored, if it's a game or something, I can click the button that lets me look at that specific post.

[Pyromancer999]

Reddit is not a nice site.

Seconded.

It's as "friendly" as the playgrounders off the playground, at best. Any place where your "score" is dependent on how many people like you is rarely a good place to be new.

According to what I've heard, most are at least civil. Granted, I've heard little.


There are cliques in the playground, but if a clique doesn't like you they can't downvote you until you completely disappear. You can make your own clique. With blackjack. And hookers. Actually, blackjack and hookers might make you more popular on Reddit than here.

What cliques?

......

Please uptoke this to Karma Heaven.

:smalltongue:

[Rallicus]

It's not.

Instead, it's a lot more passive aggressive rather than flat out mean and vulgar. Many of my posts are passive aggressive and many of the replies to said posts are as well.

Heavy moderation plays a big part too, I'm sure.

I like to think that the tabletop gaming community is pretty nice too and I hope that plays a part as well, though. I mean, one of the last bastions of sanity and maturity on 4chan is the tabletop gaming board. That's saying something.

[willpell]

Instead, it's a lot more passive aggressive rather than flat out mean and vulgar. Many of my posts are passive aggressive and many of the replies to said posts are as well.

Hence my insistence that we shouldn't just go along with the happy vibes. When hypocrisy and duplicity are allowed to prevail, truth ceases to stand on its own, and accusing people of a crime becomes an effective way of committing a crime against them; happiness becomes a weapon, cries of emotional frailty are used to punish and persecute, no one can be trusted and nothing means anything, all because people couldn't handle things being "not nice". I would rather have "aggressive-aggressive", get everything out in the open so everyone knows where they stand. Honesty is the only real politeness; calling someone a dirty name right to their face is doing them a favor, because it makes it clear to them what they should think of you.

[Rockphed]

Absolutely not. They're often resorted to by insecure or illogical debaters, but they aren't inevitable.

Okay, as the length of a political discussion between randomly political people increases, the probability of it turning into a flame-war approaches 1. By randomly political, I mean that the participants are not pre-selected for their politics. So, making up a political scale that runs from Zeeble to Cunox, if we do not pre-select for part of the Zeeble-Cunox spectrum, we will have flamewars in short order.

Since the Giant brings people together with something that is orthogonal to politics, it is reasonable to assume that playgrounders are distributed across all political spectra. I will make no guess as to how their distribution compares to the general population. So if we started talking about politics, I doubt we would last 2 pages before everyone involved had launched enough vitriol to turn Canada into a barren wasteland.


That kind of forum DOES NOT work. I was a member of ffxi.allakhazam.com from 2005 until now(I haven't posted since 2010 tho), and they had the "rate up and rate down" ability that eventually mutes posters, and if often turned into nothing more then a mere popularity contest with certain people being rated up into the stratosphere, and others who posted things certain groups disagreed with, would be rated down into the ground and there posts would never show up under default conditions. It was a worthless system there, and I'm more then willing to bet it would be a worthless system anywhere else.

Ultimately, I have to agree. If nothing else, the D&D edition wars proved that a couple people on any side make EVERYONE on the other annoyed. So you would pretty much lose the goodish arguments on both sides and be left with the petty and worthless ones.


Having said that, I don't think a forum like that would work either. How would you handle the situation where somebody has quoted a post made by someone on your "don't see" list? It would also make for really disjointed conversations where you can't see half the replies!

Here in the playground, we have the ignore list. Each user can choose to ignore any other user. I don't think there is a technical limit to it, but I have never tried to probe its limits. As others mentioned it is cumbersome and doesn't allow for ignoring certain posts, but it does allow for paying attention to specific posts.

[Siosilvar]

Here in the playground, we have the ignore list. Each user can choose to ignore any other user. I don't think there is a technical limit to it, but I have never tried to probe its limits. As others mentioned it is cumbersome and doesn't allow for ignoring certain posts, but it does allow for paying attention to specific posts.

I'll be honest; I'm pretty liberal with giving out ignores, so I know it works to at least 30. The necessity to actually go to the user's profile, click "ignore this user", and then "save list" is a pretty decent barrier; if you actually want to ignore them, however awkward it is doesn't matter in the impassioned moment (though it does take a bit of redirecting energy towards this more constructive action instead of replying), and if you don't really want to ignore them, you get a bit of time to think about it as the pages load.

I even have a few users ignored that I rather admire, just because there's a fundamental disconnect in the way we view some topics, so I don't want to see their posts unless it's on an unrelated topic.

I must admit that I don't see the point of ignoring a specific post. Unless you reread that thread often, it shouldn't come up, since pages move fairly quickly in discussions.

[ShadowySilence]

Because We All Love Big Brother... :smalltongue:

Naw, kindess breeds kindness, and this community got a good start with a good leader and it all came together that way. Trolls and their ilk need other mean spirited people around to show off to or there is no reason to troll, so they are not attracted to a place such as this. :smallcool:

[Thes Hunter]

The playground is mellower because Rawhide coats the pages with crushed Happy pills.

[Chainsaw Hobbit]

I'll just leave this here. (http://www.thenicestplaceontheinter.net/)

That made me uncomfortable, because I'm used to being taller than everyone I meet, and the camera in the videos made it seem as if the viewer was always the same hight as the subjects.

[willpell]

That made me uncomfortable, because I'm used to being taller than everyone I meet

...but you're a hobbit?.... :smallwink:

[Chainsaw Hobbit]

...but you're a hobbit?.... :smallwink:

A hobbit with a glandular issue. I'm 6'2".

[Gligarman2]

It is important to make certain that things aren't the result of psionic manipulation.
But, I haven't noticed any subtle inconsistencies. Has anyone else?

Yes. Why has the site changed so much? Why do these threads appear so often? How do the mods act so effective? Answer: Dramatic Convinience! We are all the heroes of a bad story about nerds who save the world and are thought of as "cool." We need to rebel! Someone, become an evil overlord! We have to become evil to live! Think about Tarquin, or Xykon! We can be them, or the lovably geeky sidekicks to the awkward new kids. We can either have impractical and stupid "gadgets" or become EVIL OVERLORDS OF THE UNIVERSE! Come brothers and sisters! We will put on flowing capes and gain castles! We can ransack small villages of children! We can use our knowledge of storytelling to become unto KINGS!

[Tyndmyr]

I agree but I'd say even this is being generous. You know the saying "an armed society is a polite society?" Myself, I have never believed that saying "please don't gun me down in cold blood" counted as politeness, and so I disagree with the premise, but it is the policy on which I believe the moderators operate, except they are the only ones who get to be armed.

Myself, I prefer a system where instead of moderators restraining what people can post, you give people the ability to mute any post they don't want to see or any poster who has produced too many such posts (ideally I'd even say you should be able to mute parts of posts but that's probably not technically feasible). Let everyone say absolutely anything, with no consequence worse than the possibility that nobody will listen. In that way, each poster can in fairly short order sculpt their own definition of a "nice" environment.

Slashdot has a somewhat similar mod system. It could, perhaps, be improved, but it provides a nice way to get rid of trolling and the like. The only troll posts that survive are those with some sort of redeeming value, like being hilarious.


I'm probably not one of the people you had in mind here, but just for the record I would be very interested in a "GITP Unmoderated Offsite Annex" forum. As long as this didn't have to be on The Giant's bandwidth dime, and didn't seduce too many people completely away from this VERY NICE AND LOVING AND NEGATIVITY-FREE community, I'd imagine this would probably be cool with him, though I could be mistaken.

I could easily host such a thing, but I would imagine that linking it to Giantitp would be hard without using Rich's IP, which is obviously undesirable, and people won't want to sign up twice.

[BayardSPSR]

Heavy moderation aside, the fact that most of us come from a background of involvement in a hobby that demands cordial face-to-face interaction probably contributes. I do buy the argument about the stick-figure avatars, though - creates a certain kind of levity to even the most negative interaction that makes you less likely to want to overreact, maybe. Certainly does for me.

If it's cordial here because of the mods, then what can I say; we seem to have good mods. As far as I'm concerned, that's what mods are for.

And I'm not a mod in disguise, I swear.
He's standing behind me with a baseball bat I hope he doesn't noti

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: As I'm sure everyone is aware, rules and moderation complaints are not a subject for discussion here. (Check the Forum Rules under "Inappropriate Topics," if you don't believe me.) This thread has become too much of that. If you really have an issue, PM me.