Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Authors of reviews/editorials are not credited properly

Goral

Arcane
Patron
The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
3,403
Location
Poland
I would like to point out that reviews, editorials, interviews and other articles do not give proper credit to its authors. Instead first thing we see is:

"Review/article/interview - posted by (((Infinitron)))" or "Review/article/interview - posted by (((Crooked Bee)))" suggesting it's their work. Technically it is correct that they were the ones who posted it to the public but that information shouldn't be that exposed IMO and the roles should be swapped (so written/interviewed by Ludo Lense/Darth Roxor/Bubbles, and maybe at the end "posted by CB/Tron") or the author should be in the title (like in DR's editorial). I wanted to skim through some articles of certain authors for certain reasons but because author's name is always in different places and there are often more bolded words it's not as convenient as it could be (and yes, I know CTRL+F and google). What's funny is that often users will write:

Infinitron said:
Shadow Tactics is great
instead of
Ludo Lense said:
Shadow Tactics is great
because they're either too stupid or too lazy.

I'm not sure if authors even care about it (although seeing how Ludo Lense reacted I think some do at least) but it is Site feedback after all.
 

Ed123

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
15,162
Location
banal
Serpent in the Staglands Wasteland 2
YpQyFuS.jpg

o7xRY.png
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
92,333
RPG Wokedex Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
This is why we add [Review by X] at the beginning of the article. Not much else we can do other than encourage you to brofist the author when he shows up in the thread.
 

Cadmus

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
4,218
The format of the newsposts containing reviews is fucked. Shitty blurp followed by text followed by a link to the actual article, making the article unclickable straight away. There should be the review article on the front page instead of an announcement of review that you have to read though and click through.
 

Ed123

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
15,162
Location
banal
Serpent in the Staglands Wasteland 2
Ratings should also be disabled for news posts.

Why? Ratings are a reminder of just how seriously we should take content produced by the sort of individual who posts on RPGCodex.
 

Severian Silk

Guest
Ratings should also be disabled for news posts.

Why? Ratings are a reminder of just how seriously we should take content produced by the sort of individual who posts on RPGCodex.
Which brings us right back around to the OP again. What content is produced? And by whom?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Valky

Arcane
Manlet
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
2,418
Location
Trapped in a bioform

Goral

Arcane
Patron
The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
3,403
Location
Poland
It was brave Gamasutra warrior Felipepepe who volunteered to review this worthy title
There is no such information there, check the link. If that doesn't bother you that's your prerogative but it's funny to me and IMO it discourages others from posting articles on the Codex. BTW, for some time now you've been posting more on Gamasutra and not RPG Codex, why is that?
 
Unwanted

Charles Eli Cheese

Neckbeard Shitlord
Edgy Shitposter
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
1,864,979
Location
Jewed by inanatron the crybaby faggot
If (((Einstein))) can take credit for a formula he found in the patent office working as a clerk and become the most famous man in the world then you will be waiting a long time before the (((establishment))) corrects this situation.
 
Unwanted

Charles Eli Cheese

Neckbeard Shitlord
Edgy Shitposter
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
1,864,979
Location
Jewed by inanatron the crybaby faggot
1879 -1955), Time Magazine's "Person of the Century", wrote a long treatise on special relativity theory (it was actually called "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies", 1905a), without listing any references. Many of the key ideas it presented were known to Lorentz (for example, the Lorentz transformation) and Poincaré before Einstein wrote the famous 1905 paper.

As was typical of Einstein, he did not discover theories; he merely commandeered them. He took an existing body of knowledge, picked and chose the ideas he liked, then wove them into a tale about his contribution to special relativity. This was done with the full knowledge and consent of many of his peers, such as the editors at Annalen der Physik.

The most recognizable equation of all time is E = mc2

It is attributed by convention to be the sole province of Albert Einstein (1905).



However, the conversion of matter into energy and energy into matter was known to Sir Isaac Newton ("Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another...", 1704). The equation can be attributed to S. Tolver Preston (1875), to Jules Henri Poincaré (1900; according to Brown, 1967) and to Olinto De Pretto (1904) before Einstein. Since Einstein never correctly derived E = mc2 (Ives, 1952), there appears nothing to connect the equation with anything original by Einstein.

Arthur Eddington's selective presentation of data from the 1919 Eclipse so that it supposedly supported "Einstein's" general relativity theory is surely one of the biggest scientific hoaxes of the 20th century. His lavish support of Einstein corrupted the course of history. Eddington was less interested in testing a theory than he was in crowning Einstein the king of science.

The physics community, unwittingly perhaps, has engaged in a kind of fraud and silent conspiracy; this is the byproduct of simply being bystanders as the hyperinflation of Einstein's record and reputation took place.


This silence benefited anyone supporting Einstein.

Einstein processed a patent by Olinto De Pretto that used "his" famous equation.

:philosoraptor:
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Top Bottom