We Need a Board Detente

[Thunderous Mojo]

I’ve been avoiding the Playground, as any conversation that references Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything or the future of D&D gets derailed, and shutdown.

I don’t know if we need a pronouncement from the beleaguered Moderators giving more firm guidelines on what are conversational redlines, or if we the Playground community can come up with an equitable solution……
……all I know and feel is something has to change in the current social dynamics of this board.

Be Well, Good Luck, and Good Gaming all!

[Peelee]

The Mod on the Silver Mountain: Moved to more appropriate Forum

[Segev]

I’ve been avoiding the Playground, as any conversation that references Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything or the future of D&D gets derailed, and shutdown.

I don’t know if we need a pronouncement from the beleaguered Moderators giving more firm guidelines on what are conversational redlines, or if we the Playground community can come up with an equitable solution……
……all I know and feel is something has to change in the current social dynamics of this board.

Be Well, Good Luck, and Good Gaming all!

My advice would be just to avoid those threads. Not every thread references TCE/the future of D&D as a broad subject. And there're plenty of threads that touch on TCE stuff without touching on the hotbutton part of it. Even the hotbutton part is oft mentioned and then moved on from; it's only when the thread topic is on the changes being a good idea or how they move forward that threads get...contentious. Most such threads have something along those lines as their explicit topic, though obviously thread drift can lead to some threads being derailed if they push the hotbutton in the wrong way. I think avoiding the first category should be pretty easy - just don't click on them - while the second, if you're in one when it goes off the rails, just post some content that is ON topic to try to rerail it. Or report it; I know when it reaches "report it," it's hit that point you're already trying to avoid, but an early report can get moderator action that scrubs an offending post or two before the thread needs to be locked for review.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I've noticed a change in tone as 5e has evolved. Maybe its me but at first there were more rule and strategy based threads. Now I see anyway a lot of vagueness about alignment and "are all orcs or drow evil" or whatever.

[Psyren]

I'd say it's coming up a lot simply because it's news. A lot of WotC's recent books, blog posts, errata etc have focused on this topic. Eventually they'll get the language/design more or less where they want it, move on to other products/releases, and we'll move on with them.

...Then they'll release 5.5 with this design philosophy baked into core and we'll start all over again

[loki_ragnarock]

... if this is in regard to the thread that just closed, I think it's pretty clear that people were crossing some lines toward the end that are self apparent or even explicitly stated. As an outside observer, of course. I'm sure in the heat of the moment that alternative Star Trek proposal sounded like something other than totally awful and tone deaf, but there it was.

Best thing, maybe, is to not get so heated to begin with; it's a forum, not a chat room, and there's room to slow down a bit. But, you know, people get passionate when they talk about their enthusiast hobbies. I actually take heart that it's a well moderated community where there are people willing to step between and tell folks to cool off and talk about something else for a minute when things start becoming excessively cringy.

[Dr.Samurai]

I think I agree with the above. However, I think Tasha's could justify some clarification or something because a lot of the discussions tend to gravitate toward off-limit conversations. I don't think that's anyone's fault in the abstract (it would be difficult to talk about why you support or do not support certain changes without discussing why WotC made those changes), but ultimately it is their fault when they choose to continue the conversation in that direction. And I say that as someone that has received some very annoying warnings for comments that couldn't harm a fly and were on-topic but are, at the end of all things, not really allowed.

But it may be useful to have a no-Tasha's rule or something, where conversation about the rules changes in Tasha's is not allowed, because it will inevitably go there.

[Burley]

I think the issue is more far reaching than certain books or new errata. I feel like people lately are just itchy to argue. In the last few months, I've been argued with, like, three times when I and my "opponent" are saying the same thing. Or, the "opponent" does that thing where they take my post sentence-by-sentence and tell me every little thing that earns me coal in my stockings.

Maybe I'm the problem and I'm saying inflammatory things without realizing? Maybe arguing about dumb stuff that doesn't matter is the latest cultural touchstone of Western culture? I dunno. Maybe both or neither.

All I know is: I used to love to read and give my opinion on the forum. (It's actually the only forum I'm still active on.) But, now, I feel like I'm reading to see if my opinions are going to line up with the posts in the thread, because I'll get told immediately when they don't. So, the boards feel less about gaming and more about... anxiety, maybe? I'm not gonna have a panic attack because some .jpeg is mad at me, but I don't like having to mentally juggle whether it's even worth typing something if it's going to be thrown in my face.

But it may be useful to have a no-Tasha's rule or something, where conversation about the rules changes in Tasha's is not allowed, because it will inevitably go there.

That's censorship, which I don't think is the goal here. You shouldn't ban something because some people are irresponsible in their usage of it. You continue to monitor when people are being irresponsible and deal with the specific incidents by, oh say... locking a thread or suspending the offender.

[137beth]

I think the issue is more far reaching than certain books or new errata. I feel like people lately are just itchy to argue. In the last few months, I've been argued with, like, three times when I and my "opponent" are saying the same thing.

That's been common on this forum for over a decade. In fact, I have a quote in my extended sig about it:

There is nothing more emblematic of this forum than three or four pages of debate between people who, as it turns out, pretty much agree with each other.

That was from 2014.

[Psyren]

I think I agree with the above. However, I think Tasha's could justify some clarification or something because a lot of the discussions tend to gravitate toward off-limit conversations. I don't think that's anyone's fault in the abstract (it would be difficult to talk about why you support or do not support certain changes without discussing why WotC made those changes), but ultimately it is their fault when they choose to continue the conversation in that direction. And I say that as someone that has received some very annoying warnings for comments that couldn't harm a fly and were on-topic but are, at the end of all things, not really allowed.

But it may be useful to have a no-Tasha's rule or something, where conversation about the rules changes in Tasha's is not allowed, because it will inevitably go there.

The "controversial" part of Tasha's is one page in the whole book. One!

Ban the book and now we can't discuss a number of safe topics - the artificer, the subclasses, OCFs, spells, retraining, NPC classes, magical locations, items, running puzzles etc.

I personally feel the existing forum rules cover what we can talk about and what we can't just fine.

[dafrca]

I'd say it's coming up a lot simply because it's news. A lot of WotC's recent books, blog posts, errata etc have focused on this topic. Eventually they'll get the language/design more or less where they want it, move on to other products/releases, and we'll move on with them.

...Then they'll release 5.5 with this design philosophy baked into core and we'll start all over again

Bold added by me....


This gave me a great laugh, thank you so much!

[Dr.Samurai]

That's censorship, which I don't think is the goal here. You shouldn't ban something because some people are irresponsible in their usage of it. You continue to monitor when people are being irresponsible and deal with the specific incidents by, oh say... locking a thread or suspending the offender.

You are free to call it that, but the fact remains that there are topics here which cannot be talked about. I see no reason why one more topic would suddenly be "censorship" whereas it wasn't before.

The "controversial" part of Tasha's is one page in the whole book. One!

Ban the book and now we can't discuss a number of safe topics - the artificer, the subclasses, OCFs, spells, retraining, NPC classes, magical locations, items, running puzzles etc.

I haven't seen those Tasha's threads...

I personally feel the existing forum rules cover what we can talk about and what we can't just fine.

You're probably right and I'm probably just salty lol...

[DarknessEternal]

Scrubbed post

[Thunderous Mojo]

... I actually take heart that it's a well moderated community where there are people willing to step between and tell folks to cool off and talk about something else for a minute when things start becoming excessively cringy.

I feel this way as well. The Mods in Playground are great, and extremely helpful.

What I have found, personally, disapointing is the lack of restraint.

As you adroity stated this is a Forum, not a private server.

[Trafalgar]

On one hand, I feel like this forum is better moderated than most. I recently asked for workout advice on a fitness forum. Most of the responses were either from personal trainers who said they would help me if I paid them or people saying my workouts were lame and weak and how dare I ask my noob fitness question to workout gods like themselves. I haven't gone back to that site since.

On the other hand, {Scrubbed}

[Gtdead]

I'm actually surprised that people feel that the arguing has sucked the fun out of the forum. I mean, sure, I have felt it too once, because I entered a discussion about alignment during my first month in this forum, but seriously, no hard feelings as long as the discussion is contained in the respective thread and not affect relationships in a detrimental fashion, which I personally haven't felt/seen happen. Personally I hope that I haven't offended anyone, I apologize to anyone that may have felt that way from my posts and it's my belief that most people here would do the same if they had an inkling that they offended someone. I have no problem with adversity, I've been participating in forums since I was 9 years old and I feel that the discussions in this one are very safe, even when going overboard, thanks to a great community and moderation efforts.

As for the matter at hand, I think we need to accept that anything which may raise moral issues, is prone to controversy. Some people are more trigger happy than others although every single one of us can be sucked into these discussions.

I have no problem admitting that I know when I'm breaking the rules and I know that this admission is double breaking the rules, so I'm trying to be as polite as possible, while rationalizing my behavior like a grade schooler would do: "Someone else started it". I'm ready to suffer my warnings/infractions due to this and hopefully I haven't offended enough to catch the banhammer.

As long as people are diligent enough to keep these discussions from bleeding into other threads, don't hold grudges and stop when the mods ask them to stop, I think everything will be fine. And perhaps sometimes things may get a bit unfair with warnings/infractions, but I'm certain that just like me, everyone knows when he is breaking the rules and we are all prone to biting more than we can chew.

Going to stop now cause I'm getting emotional.

[Rockphed]

On the other hand, I feel that there is inconsistency in how different moderators handle things. Some moderators seem to really like sniping posts; there are threads where 3 or 4 posts in a row have been redacted. Some moderators just post that everyone needs to cool it and I think this is often the right response. But some moderators preemptively lock a thread if it looks like it might break a rule in the future and I think that's wrong.

Whether they do the one or the other depends, in large part, on exactly how much attention they want to pay to exactly what is going on. I suspect they say "everybody cool it" when they are tired or busy and see a report that a thread is starting to get toxic but don't want to actually read through the thread to see if there are infractions. If they are tired or busy and find a thread that has metastatized into grey goo they lock and post "closed for review". Sometimes they even get around to reviewing said thread and unlock it. I wouldn't hold my breath though. If there is a single post that crosses a line they censor it and anything that quoted it. I think I have seen all the mods use most of these methods.

Speaking of which, if something is drifting toward the line I am almost certain the mods would rather you report it before it becomes a problem than waiting until somebody has crossed all the lines and is starting to make a throne of skulls while wearing the blood of their enemies as war paint. If you have seen a line of conversation go toxic several times before and see it starting, the mods have probably seen it too or are willing to believe you when you say that it is tending toxic.

[Psyren]

Could definitely use some moderators to point out that certain people are not god-emperor of how D&D should be enjoyed and played.

If you feel someone has crossed a line then report that individual, and explain the issue as clearly as you can in the report field. Honestly though I find the best approach is to just not engage with every single thing I find disagreeable. In a community this size we're going to see some opinions and playstyles that just don't fit with our own worldview, and that's totally okay. I'm not always the best at avoiding getting heated either but I do try, and I enjoy many of the debates and discussions on the game that we have here. Let whoever it is dig themselves into a deeper hole.

As one of my favorite YouTubers (Treantmonk) ends most of his videos with: "I'm going to sit back, relax, and have some fun; D&D is for everyone!"

On one hand, I feel like this forum is better moderated than most. I recently asked for workout advice on a fitness forum. Most of the responses were either from personal trainers who said they would help me if I paid them or people saying my workouts were lame and weak and how dare I ask my noob fitness question to workout gods like themselves. I haven't gone back to that site since.

On the other hand, I feel that there is inconsistency in how different moderators handle things. Some moderators seem to really like sniping posts; there are threads where 3 or 4 posts in a row have been redacted. Some moderators just post that everyone needs to cool it and I think this is often the right response. But some moderators preemptively lock a thread if it looks like it might break a rule in the future and I think that's wrong.

If you have an issue with a specific moderator(s) and don't feel comfortable contacting them directly, the protocol is to reach out via PM to site administrator Roland St. Jude.

[Batcathat]

To me, saying that arguing takes the fun out of the forum is like saying sugar takes the taste out of candy, disagreeing with people and having them disagree with me is like 83 percent of my reasons for being here (the rest is mostly games and making bad jokes). I don't think the problem is arguing or even arguing about specific topics, but that people sometimes (here and everywhere) get too emotional and personal about it.

That said, I can't say I have any good solution to that problem, so while I don't agree with banning certain topics from discussion, I can understand the reasoning behind it.

[Phhase]

I don't think anyone has any problem with a civil debate, I think the malaise come from the fact that such debate gets derailed or acrimonious with irritating frequency (although this is admittedly a highly subjective take not all will agree with).

[Roland St. Jude]

The Mod on the Silver Mountain: Moved to more appropriate Forum

Sheriff: I will get you back for this.

On a more serious note:
1. No rule change on this is forthcoming. Please feel free to report any violation of the Forum Rules that you see. If a thread seems problematic or headed in a problematic direction, feel free to report that. When you do report, just do your best to explain what the problem is and we'll take a look.
2. Concerns about specific acts of moderation should be sent to me via Private Message.
3. Whether the Playgrounders, as a group, agree to a detente is really up to you, collectively and individually.

I have often counseled posters: 1) when in doubt, just don't post it and 2) there is no rule that requires you to engage in every thread or with every post, so take a pass on those that particularly upset or bother you--there are plenty of other things going on here.