What kind of political topics -INVOLVING GAMES- can be discussed in game foruns

[dnf]

As we already know, the game topics do not take kindly to thread derail(no matter how irrelevant), and topics involving politics and general discussion. Fair enough i guess, but what's the course of action when these politics and gd topics gets involved with games?

In my personal observation, topics involving involving general feminism gets the GD treatment in a matter of hours(exceptions may occur if you just post these topics in BTE). The last topic that comes to mind regarding this issue was made by Infinitron, regarding the movie-documentary "tits or GTFO" begging money on kickstarter(wich makes me wonder if it woudn't be better to move the topic to Codex Lilbrary).

OTOH, there exist a topic on General gaming regarding taxation of violent games that didn't get the GD treatment(probably because it didn't gather a bigger crowd i guess) : http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/biden-wants-to-tax-violent-video-games.83167/
Other example, probably involves Anthony daves thread about his time at Obsidian that probably involves a lot of General Discussion topics.

So, my question is: Why didn't this recent topics involving ex-Obsidian dev and game tax get the GD and politiks treatment? Sure, these topics seems fairly shitstorm free(and thus boring to a point) and no big deal, but why be afraid of consistency? Why not just go all the way if you feel this manner of moderation is the best one?

Sugestion: make BTE your only choice of posting about politics+games issues in gaming forums(or make a original thread in politics,GD or Library).

 

[Sceptic]

So, my question is: Why didn't this recent topics involving ex-Obsidian dev and game tax get the GD and politiks treatment? Sure, these topics seems fairly shitstorm free and no big deal

I don't understand the purpose of this thread, since you seem to have answered the question yourself.

 

[dnf]

So, my question is: Why didn't this recent topics involving ex-Obsidian dev and game tax get the GD and politiks treatment? Sure, these topics seems fairly shitstorm free and no big deal

I don't understand the purpose of this thread, since you seem to have answered the question yourself.

Whats exactly is the answer? That codex members can't handle a little shitstorm from time to time? If the topic don't derail its fair im my book(though some derailments make a thread better). If i could choose, i would choose less thread moving, but since the moderation don't agree with my views, why not improve in the consistency meter?

 

[Monty]

The Anthony Davies thread has some really interesting gaming-related insights and certainly doesn't deserve to get dumped into GD.

 

[evdk]

I don't understand the purpose of this thread, since you seem to have answered the question yourself.

The purpose of this thread is spillover butthurt from the "Let's demote some mods" thread a.k.a. "Waaah, Jaesun's mean to me"

 

[DragoFireheart]

The Anthony Davies thread has some really interesting gaming-related insights and certainly doesn't deserve to get dumped into GD.

If anywhere it should have gone to Politics forum.

 

[dnf]

The Anthony Davies thread has some really interesting gaming-related insights and certainly doesn't deserve to get dumped into GD.

There is also non-gaming related discussion in that thread,so how about moving half of the discussion to GD? Oh wait, he is a dev star so rules don't apply to him. Keep sucking that cock bros.

I don't understand the purpose of this thread, since you seem to have answered the question yourself.

The purpose of this thread is spillover butthurt from the "Let's demote some mods" thread a.k.a. "Waaah, Jaesun's mean to me"

Retards already chiming in. If you get butthurt over your own rules(that gets conveniently glanced over), then your rules are not good in the first place and needs change or clarification.

 

[Commissar Draco]

Someone still thinks Codex as hole is not sewer... How Charming.

 

[evdk]

Retards already chiming in. If you get butthurt over your own rules(that gets conveniently glanced over), then your rules are not good in the first place and needs change or clarification.

Because the purpose of this thread is to fulfill your genuine desire to clarify the finer points of forum rules and definitely not being butthurt over being called a shitposting retard over in the other thread.

 

[dnf]

Retards already chiming in. If you get butthurt over your own rules(that gets conveniently glanced over), then your rules are not good in the first place and needs change or clarification.

That's all i can see in your response. How about you clarify one of my questions in the OP? If you think im a shitposter or butthurt or both, then fine, i can live with it, but let us gloss over personal grudges in this thread alone shall we?

 

[Marquess Cornwallis]

dnf: The boringly obvious answer, without meaning any disrespect to you or your writing style which does leave quite a bit up to the reader's imagination, is that you seem to misunderstand the purpose of forum rules. They're not intended as set-in-stone commandments but rather guidelines for people who don't feel entirely secure in their own judgement of (in this particular case) what topic/amount of derailment is appropriate for which particular forum section. It's ultimately the mods' call whether they move a thread or not -- and this case-by-case context-sensitive evaluation is one of the reason why you have any mods at all; if you were after "consistency with rules", you could instead make do with a bot that would move threads based on appearance of certain keywords. Hence, if you don't like your threads moved to GD, don't post in them as if they were already there.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

The boringly obvious answer, without meaning any disrespect to you or your writing style which does leave quite a bit up to the reader's imagination, is that you seem to misunderstand the purpose of forum rules. They're not intended as set-in-stone commandments

I seem to find it's always the hard-core religious right conservatives who have the biggest problems with rules. I theorise that it's either because they spend their whole lives trying to overlook inconsistencies in the bible; or they're so used to arguing with LIBRULS about what rules are in versus what rules are out, that it's their default position whenever that encounter any situation they disagree with. "I'll show those LIBRULS, watch me argue over their inconsistent rules!".

As we already know, the game topics do not take kindly to thread derail (no matter how irrelevant), and topics involving politics and general discussion.

I think you mean "no matter how relevant". Because irrelevant conversation is likely to get split, regardless of the thread, and yes - especially in the game forums.

Fair enough i guess, but what's the course of action when these politics and gd topics gets involved with games?

You mean if someone starts a thread in politics and it degenerates into a discussion about Bethesda's latest release?

I'm yet to see it happen.

In my personal observation, topics involving general feminism gets the GD treatment in a matter of hours(exceptions may occur if you just post these topics in BTE).

I'm not surprised.

OTOH, there exist a topic on General gaming regarding taxation of violent games that didn't get the GD treatment(probably because it didn't gather a bigger crowd i guess) : http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/biden-wants-to-tax-violent-video-games.83167/
Other example, probably involves Anthony daves thread about his time at Obsidian that probably involves a lot of General Discussion topics.

Conversation is related to tax on games, not tax in general - therefore it would seem more appropriate to stay in "General Gaming" as it's a "General Gaming" issue.

So, my question is: Why didn't this recent topics involving ex-Obsidian dev and game tax get the GD and politiks treatment? Sure, these topics seems fairly shitstorm free(and thus boring to a point) and no big deal, but why be afraid of consistency? Why not just go all the way if you feel this manner of moderation is the best one?

Probably nobody cares enough to move the thread around. If anything, you could argue it should be in General Gaming. But like, we have this report feature if it bothers you.

 

[dnf]

DarkUnderlord

"I'll show those UNDOMESTICATED SNOWMENS, watch me argue over their inconsistent rules!".

Nice strawman here bro.

I think you mean "no matter how relevant". Because irrelevant conversation is likely to get split, regardless of the thread, and yes - especially in the game forums.

No, i mean irrelevant really. If i make an unfunny joke regarding a thread, its most likely to be removed because of fear of derail or something.

You mean if someone starts a thread in politics and it degenerates into a discussion about Bethesda's latest release?

I'm yet to see it happen.

No, i mean discussions that blurs the line between games, politics and general discussion. Things like violence, feminism, general retardation, australian politics, etc.

In my personal observation, topics involving general feminism gets the GD treatment in a matter of hours(exceptions may occur if you just post these topics in BTE).

I'm not surprised.​

​

​

General feminism and social justice in games of course. Other foruns are not so bothered by it, like RPS wich has a 30 page discussion involving games and feminism in their PC games section. Of course people there are a bunch of PC pussies.​

Conversation is related to tax on games, not tax in general - therefore it would seem more appropriate to stay in "General Gaming" as it's a "General Gaming" issue.

Point taken.

Probably nobody cares enough to move the thread around. If anything, you could argue it should be in General Gaming. But like, we have this report feature if it bothers you.

If it bothered me, it should be in popamole rpgs, since its Obsidian we are talking about and they are yet to release a proper CRPG game. If anything, it should bothers mods, not me.

Bonus question: What if i make a NSFW thread about general games porn, kinda like sgc meltdown in BTE? What would be the mods instance?

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

darkunderlord is right even when he's wrong, duh.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

"I'll show those UNDOMESTICATED SNOWMENS, watch me argue over their inconsistent rules!".

Nice strawman here bro.

It's just a statement as to what you're doing.

Bonus question: What if i make a NSFW thread about general games porn, kinda like sgc meltdown in BTE? What would be the mods instance?

Keep fighting those LIBERALS! With a hypothetical wanking exercise designed to... do what, exactly? Waste my time? Give you a "point" you can use to score against the moderators later? "My bullshit trolling post was split to Retardo Land despite being some-what relevant! That's against the rules! I'm going to cry about it!"

I think you mean "no matter how relevant". Because irrelevant conversation is likely to get split, regardless of the thread, and yes - especially in the game forums.

No, i mean irrelevant really. If i make an unfunny joke regarding a thread, its most likely to be removed because of fear of derail or something.

In the context of your statement "the game topics do not take kindly to thread derail (no matter how irrelevant)", that makes no sense. Irrelevant - as in "not relevant" stuff - is, by its very nature, highly likely to get "moderated out". Especially if it's like, completely irrelevant to the thread.

Have I told you about sharks? Sharks are pretty awesome. Let's now go off on a tangent about sharks...

See how that's irrelevant? And understand how likely that is to get split off into its own topic elsewhere?

You mean if someone starts a thread in politics and it degenerates into a discussion about Bethesda's latest release?
I'm yet to see it happen.

No, i mean discussions that blurs the line between games, politics and general discussion. Things like violence, feminism, general retardation, australian politics, etc.

I'm yet to find a game about Australian politics being discussed on the Codex. And I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up in the political forum. Especially if the discussion became less about the game and more about the politics.

General feminism and social justice in games of course. Other foruns are not so bothered by it, like RPS wich has a 30 page discussion involving games and feminism in their PC games section. Of course people there are a bunch of PC pussies.

Yeah, they don't have a politics forum.

Probably nobody cares enough to move the thread around. If anything, you could argue it should be in General Gaming. But like, we have this report feature if it bothers you.

If it bothered me, it should be in popamole rpgs, since its Obsidian we are talking about and they are yet to release a proper CRPG game. If anything, it should bothers mods, not me.

Is there a reason why it should bother the mods? Is it off-topic to the forum? Is it a thread about politics? Should it be retardo'd? From looking at it, looks like it's a no to all the above. It's just a dev answering questions.

Now if you're really struggling with the rules, Tommy Wiseau is right. This is the rule you need to know: I make them, you don't. This is a private forum that by my good grace I've allowed you to register and post in. I reserve the right to kick you out, ask you to leave, or split your shit off to anywhere I want, at any time I feel so inclined - for whatever reason I deem valid. I delegate those same powers to the administrators and moderators that have been appointed here. While I will, as seen recently, demote them if I believe they're not adhering to the instructions I give them, for the most part they do a good job and I see no reason to add any additional guidelines / rules or further instruction for them.

Creating hypothetical exercises that are yet to occur won't change that. And even if there is a clear answer from me here, there's no guarantee that it will last. I reserve the right to change that answer on a whim, because I felt like it. The Codex is not a state and you are not a citizen of it. There is no constitution here to which we are all upheld. There is no bill of rights granting you certain freedoms. I am the Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary.

I am the law.

 

[mondblut]

OTOH, there exist a topic on General gaming regarding taxation of violent games that didn't get the GD treatment(probably because it didn't gather a bigger crowd i guess) : http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/biden-wants-to-tax-violent-video-games.83167/
Other example, probably involves Anthony daves thread about his time at Obsidian that probably involves a lot of General Discussion topics.

The "General Discussion topics", as stated in the official GD description, are:

Talk about whatever you like that isn't gaming related.

Taxation of games is, quite obviously, gaming related.

Also, my Codexian lore got rusty - what's a "BTE"?

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

I don't know why, but I may be starting to like DarkUnderlord. That's not against parliament, is it?

 

[dnf]

It's just a statement as to what you're doing.

I fail to see this as a conservatard thing, since many liberals showed complaints at one point.

Keep fighting those undomesticated snowmanS! With a hypothetical wanking exercise designed to... do what, exactly? Waste my time? Give you a "point" you can use to score against the moderators later? "My bullshit trolling post was split to Retardo Land despite being some-what relevant! That's against the rules! I'm going to cry about it!"

I guess it would be retardo then, ok. Dirty topics stay in the locked foruns, i get it now.

In the context of your statement "the game topics do not take kindly to thread derail (no matter how irrelevant)", that makes no sense. Irrelevant - as in "not relevant" stuff - is, by its very nature, highly likely to get "moderated out". Especially if it's like, completely irrelevant to the thread.

Yeah, irrelevant and no threatening by nature, but, like i said, i have no problem with it.

I'm yet to find a game about Australian politics being discussed on the Codex. And I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up in the political forum. Especially if the discussion became less about the game and more about the politics.

I was thinking about Cleve huge derail into Australian politics into the "sir-tech goes bankrupt" thread. Now that i woudn't have a problem splitting.

Yeah, they(RPS) don't have a politics forum.

They have a general discussion forum.

Is there a reason why the Anthony Daves Thread should bother the mods?

Off-topic talk maybe.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

dnf meltdown imminent.

 

[evdk]

Also, my Codexian lore got rusty - what's a "BTE"?

The (Second) Best Thread Ever, Part 3

 

[mondblut]

Also, my Codexian lore got rusty - what's a "BTE"?

The (Second) Best Thread Ever, Part 3

Oh. Never read it.

 

[Mangoose]

Oh, come on, it's quite obvious where to draw the line. Even if both gameplay and politics are mentioned in the same post, there is still just one subject that the main idea of the post is trying to support via the use of the other object.

 

[Mangoose]

Sure, these topics seems fairly shitstorm free(and thus boring to a point) and no big deal, but why be afraid of consistency? Why not just go all the way if you feel this manner of moderation is the best one?

Because you don't go all the way with general, blanket rules. If you want a fair, consistent legal system, then feel free to write the 500-page book that allows the system to cover any and all exceptions.

And the general discussion talk in Anthony Davis's thread did not derail the thread. Some topics, you know, are simply baiting because of their nature. And other topics aren't. You can't rely purely on rules here unless, again, you have a 500-page legal code.

 

[Gakkone]

Just stay in GD.

 

[Sceptic]

dnf meltdown imminent.

If by "imminent" you mean "a thread ago"....