TWG: A discussion

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

looks to me like you did

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

sorry is this bothering you because whether or not it bothers you isn't the point

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

in fact it doesn't really matter

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

In the end you're advocating for the ability to post 30-40 times in a row, without me saying "No don't do that." because it would be host interference.

No.

I'm okay with poor posting, and I'm okay with multi-posting. I have problems when they're combined. There is a hardline between what is constructive/destructive to the game and what is just postcount++

You don't need rules when the players themselves can demand things like that to stop. Two things could happen: you interfere and you basically suggest that whatever a player is doing isn't part of some meta strategy OR you let the players incorporate what they may find to be annoying and unhelpful and unproductive and let them take control of the situation. I think the former is better. The former lets every single decision each player makes in the game, whether it annoys you or not, Manti, to have value of its own. 40 posts could result in annoying a group that might kill that player for it. Maybe even ignore his posts. That's all PART OF THE GAME.

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

the decision to NOT do that shouldn't come from the host - it should organically become a thing people care about. That's what TWG is.

[Xiz]

Re: TWG: A discussion

The fact that you're triple/quadruple posting here to try and get your point across isn't actually helping your argument. Sure, this isn't English class, but god damn two posts could've contained those thoughts. Not 7.

in TWG, its good to triple post. Its very common.

[Krauthammer]

Re: TWG: A discussion

If a player has the need to post eight times in a row with very few worthwhile content in them and calls it a strategy, then it is not a good player.

As well if one's strategy relies on annoying everybody else.

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

oh, ok. ignoring the fact that that isn't true, you're suggesting we censor players based on their skill level?

Like I said, you can't ever expect people to play like you want them to. Especially if you define their skill level by what you consider to be a 'good.' 'Good player qualities' don't include 'not posting 9 times in a row'

[DarkManticoreX2]

Re: TWG: A discussion

in TWG, its good to triple post. Its very common.

Let me set this straight. In TWG, Triple+ posting is allowed. It isn't good or bad, it's simply permitted because of two reasons.

1). It's sometimes very difficult to raise several different points in one post. If a post gets too long points get missed or people skim over them. Also sometimes reads change just after you find something out and you need to let the thread know.

2). The Edit button is disabled because the what you post in the thread is supposed to be conversation you want everyone to hear. The thread is your legacy that other people will remember about you for the game. In essence you can't change their memory, or edit past events to make you look better.

You don't need rules when the players themselves can demand things like that to stop. Two things could happen: you interfere and you basically suggest that whatever a player is doing isn't part of some meta strategy OR you let the players incorporate what they may find to be annoying and unhelpful and unproductive and let them take control of the situation. I think the former is better. The former lets every single decision each player makes in the game, whether it annoys you or not, Manti, to have value of its own. 40 posts could result in annoying a group that might kill that player for it. Maybe even ignore his posts. That's all PART OF THE GAME.

So you're advocating for anarchy? No rules, let the players handle every issue? I understand where you're coming from but there's a limit to what is acceptable forum behavior even in TWG.

I won't tolerate people intentionally insulting other players past a game standpoint.
I won't tolerate porn in the thread just because it'll make people not want to view a page (and is a forum rule).
I won't tolerate a billion posts in a row when one or two could have gotten a point across.

The question is acceptable forum behavior and none of those things are acceptable.

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

I'm saying this happens because players let it happen not because you don't stop it from happening. If it should stop it should be done in the game because the game is independent from the forums. Even insulting is a fine line because we know how easy it is to get under people's skins (you know, this happens in TWG).

You can't police the game and say 'hey you could've said that in fewer posts' because the way people communicate is just as important as what they're communicating. Even if it's nothing.

Acceptable forum behavior is kind of a cheap card to pull and interferes with what TWG is about.

TWG is basically as separate from the forums as TGB is. The only difference is that we don't have a panel. If we keep this up not only will this place be micromanaged.. it'll be micromanaged with .... forum rules instead of letting the community organically develop itself. This is more important.

What happens in game stays in game. That's how it's always been. What happened to post-game ice cream?

The game thread is and should be and should remain a world of its own.

[Krauthammer]

Re: TWG: A discussion

A player telling another player to stop isn't very effective. It doesn't guarantee to stop.

However, if the host asks something to stop, it can help as the host has better ways to enforce it.

Also, if the place will develop in a place where shitposting is encouraged and aloud (leading to things like what Dance did), then it will be disorganized and bad. A forum game needs regulations that goes beyond the game's rules. It needs something to keep it in order, to not to let it go too far.

And most of a forum's rules (in this case, FFR) fit nicely, and help to keep things in order while keeping a healthy dose of enjoyment.

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

There shouldn't be a guarantee.... Because it's supposed to be part of the game.

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

Limiting social discourse like you guys want limits the game and only enables a repetitive cycle of pseudo intellectual masturbation where everyone posts but nobody talks or becomes emotionally involved

[thesunfan]

Re: TWG: A discussion

wtf is with you and the phrase pseudo intellectual masturbation. I've known you for less than a week and you've used that phrase at least 5 times.

[FictionJunction]

Re: TWG: A discussion

masturbation is a great word