@saosmash said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
I still don't understand what the heck a msbwiki would even be for
To ignore until someone has a hissy fit about something they don't like and reminds everyone that it even exists.
The MUD sub on reddit gets ok traffic but it's not MUSH specific. Other sources are ancient and poorly maintained.
I'm just gonna state this: When I made the ad for Echoes, I felt the need to mentally prepare myself for the critics. I'm a sensitive soul but my desire to help out outweighs my nature. Now, if you think that users need to steel themselves before posting an add, fine. If that's not a problem, make a change.
As for my opinion: Straight up, I really think that if you want to criticize the game being advertised, open up a thread in the Hog Pit and do it there. Hell, link it in the Ad thread, if you want. Leave the Ads for questions from possible players and updates on the game itself. Echoes is soft open so eventually, I will need to add more information. And I play on HorrorMU, which changes its story from month to month and has a set number of slots that need to be reported on from time to time. So locking isn't quite a solution.
And locking also blocks out positive feedback. I know I go on HorrorMU's ad thread to evangelize when there is an update and positivity is NOT a bad thing. It's an awesome thing and we all could use more of it.
Edit: I meant well, but the above is an unfair double standard. I will stand by the need for positivity and the reduction of toxicity but not this way.
Am I the baddie?
Yes. Always yes.
@goldfish said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
As for my opinion: Straight up, I really think that if you want to criticize the game being advertised, open up a thread in the Hog Pit and do it there.
...
And locking also blocks out positive feedback. I know I go on HorrorMU's ad thread to evangelize when there is an update and positivity is NOT a bad thing. It's an awesome thing and we all could use more of it.
Allowing 'positive feedback' in public and walling off criticism behind an opt-in forum that lots of people don't read (because it's mean) or don't know about is bad policy. It defeats half the purpose of the community.
@goldfish said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
I'm just gonna state this: When I made the ad for Echoes, I felt the need to mentally prepare myself for the critics. I'm a sensitive soul but my desire to help out outweighs my nature. Now, if you think that users need to steel themselves before posting an add, fine. If that's not a problem, make a change.
I will second this. I didn't advertise BSGU here for months after the place opened out of fear of getting lambasted by criticism. (It was a player who eventually posted an ad. It didn't go as badly as I'd feared, but nor would I say it was particularly fun either.)
It's all well and good to sit here and say "Well if you can't take criticism, don't make a game."
But here's the other side of it... if you want people making games for you to play on, it helps to treat them and their creations with respect.
This doesn't mean "only say positive things". It means keeping criticism constructive and respectful. (Unless of course they've done something heinous. Then warn away.)
And let's not fool ourselves about the supposed "purpose" of the community being to warn people away from bad apples. Most of the commentary in these ad threads isn't "warning" anyone. It's rants and criticisms and doomsaying about decisions that game-runners have made, and it's freaking demoralizing. Even if it's not your game!
If you think that's beneficial to the community? Well, carry on I guess. It seems to me though that we should be encouraging game-creators, not discouraging them. There are few enough games being made as it is.
Not stomping all over their game advertisement is one way to do this.
@faraday said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
It's all well and good to sit here and say "Well if you can't take criticism, don't make a game."
Or run a forum. 
And let's not fool ourselves about the supposed "purpose" of the community being to warn people away from bad apples. Most of the commentary in these ad threads isn't "warning" anyone. It's rants and criticisms and doomsaying about decisions that game-runners have made, and it's freaking demoralizing. Even if it's not your game!
A lot is. And some is not. I don't know if I'd quantify that kind of thing with any degree of certainty, though.
Another thing to be wary of is just how prone we are as a community in forming bandwagons, so when someone is down others line up to give in that extra kick; one of the contributing reasons some people or games are more frequently blasted is because it's 'safe' to do so as they won't stand up for themselves either because they're not here or because the line will form again like that famous Airplane! scene.
But do I doubt a lot of those "hey, tell us more specifics!" kinds of posts are popcorn bait? No, not for a moment. Do I think some pretty scummy individuals have been exposed here because they can't shut their accusers down? I do think that, too.
We have to take the good with the bad, even if we can also take steps to skewer the ratio of each.
Not stomping all over their game advertisement is one way to do this.
I forked some of the recently active ad threads already (HorrorMU* pending for when Botulism logs on to decide on it). There's a separate discussion thread for each in the Mildly Constructive forum where the existing posts were moved. Unfortunately nodeBB's interface is terrible for this - you can't fork the original post at all, only replies to it, so for example you have to click on 288 separate posts in a long thread instead of 1 if you want to separate them. But that's why I get paid the big bucks.
Anyway, enjoy!
@faraday said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
Not stomping all over their game advertisement is one way to do this.
Is "stomping all over their game advertisement thread" a hundred posts about what character you'd make for a game? Because coming back to the topic title of this thread: Criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive.
I...mostly tried not to be doom-saying. Mostly. I was surprised when anyone said I had succeeded. I had four people independently contact me warning me away from the people running the game for doing what I accused them of doing, so is it hyperbolic reaction or a topical rant?
I'll pull out the tiresome "agree to disagree" on that, because everyone is going to come at the information from their own experience (which is good) or to shut down the complaint (which is not).
No game creators should get a free pass from criticism. No criticism should get a free pass from criticism. The problem with Soapbox is when it becomes unconstructive, and what we consider unconstructive will always waver.
I had a shitty experience on a game. 90% of that was my fault, but the 10% that wasn't was confirmed by others. Should I not say anything, knowing that there's bad actors lurking on a game? (In before people tell me that I should be better at saying so. Thanks, I know that.)
But you're going to disagree. You see the world as being something that can be polite and calm, and I envy you for it. I get angry when people aren't polite and calm, becoming my own worst enemy, but as criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, I'm going to stand my ground on this one.
Either 'ad and updates by the poster only', or make it part of the constructive forums in general.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
@thenomain said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
Either 'ad and updates by the poster only', or make it part of the constructive forums in general.
It's already been done. I prefer the wiki route but it will need to wait until the personnel exists for it.
In the mean time I wanted to publicly praise you for one thing, dude. When you fuck up, you own it, and where you know you're flawed you acknowledge it.
Not everyone here has the self awareness or nerve to do as much.
@thenomain said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
I had four people independently contact me warning me away from the people running the game for doing what I accused them of doing,
Man, theno, you know I like you, but name names or don't bring it up. Don't drop shadow figures of people who 'all agree' about this one thing without giving some concrete names and at least some bit of proof.
There are many people who have contacted me independently calling me a sweet, beautiful forum angel. I'm not gonna name names, but that legit (or well, roughly) happened. Should people put any stock into that? No.
@arkandel said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
Not everyone here has the self awareness or nerve to do as much.
If I had that much self-awareness I wouldn't fail the same way over and over.
Praise to those who don't. Emmahsue. Coin. Chime. Yourself. Usually Ganymede. Many others. So many people here who don't make noise, they are the people who should be catered to, they are the heroes, but we don't give them enough credit or voice because they don't use their voice to make waves.
Those people are who we want. Not me. God no.
--
@meg said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
@thenomain said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
I had four people independently contact me warning me away from the people running the game for doing what I accused them of doing,
Man, theno, you know I like you, but name names or don't bring it up. Don't drop shadow figures of people who 'all agree' about this one thing without giving some concrete names and at least some bit of proof.
Three reasons:
Saying "pics or it didn't happen" doesn't mean it didn't happen. Seriously. Don't fall into the "prove it" defense because it's just as easily used to dismiss criticism. There's a certain point where the evidence has to stack up, but it won't happen unless someone starts it.
You can't have stone soup until someone puts in the stone and invites the town.
So I think you mis-interpreted my motivations, but hopefully that clears it up.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
@thenomain said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
@meg said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
@thenomain said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
I had four people independently contact me warning me away from the people running the game for doing what I accused them of doing,
Man, theno, you know I like you, but name names or don't bring it up. Don't drop shadow figures of people who 'all agree' about this one thing without giving some concrete names and at least some bit of proof.
Three reasons:
It's not my place to out them. Let them out themselves.
not saying to out them. i am saying it is a bad way to argue to name 'all of these people' agree with me without providing some proof that those people exist. i have a lot of people who agree with me about that.
it's just bad form.
It's not my place to out them. You know what happens to players who want to lie low to questionable staff but get outed? It's not pretty. I'm willing--maybe too eager--to be that person but it's not my place.
see above.
The post wasn't about the game, it's about my motivation for using the ad thread as a conversational ground.
and yet, you're the one who started dropping new shit on the people who run the game. own your shit, theno. don't now hide behind 'well this thread isn't about that'. you shot a shot that you didn't need to.
Saying "pics or it didn't happen" doesn't mean it didn't happen. Seriously. Don't fall into the "prove it" defense because it's just as easily used to dismiss criticism. There's a certain point where the evidence has to stack up, but it won't happen unless someone starts it.
i am not falling into that. but you saying there is evidence is what i am calling out. that you were disinvited from a game doesn't amount to 'evidence'.
#FreeFarfalla
@thenomain I really wish you would stop doing this. I have been trying really hard not to get into it with you over it. We have a lot of friends in common that I really don't want to upset by making war about it, especially when I know that it will just upset you and them to no purpose.
But I think you're presenting what happened in a very unfair way because your feelings were hurt and you're disappointed that you won't get to play with your friends on SL, and I sympathize with those things.
So all I'm going to say here is that they're not questionable staff. They're not inexperienced staff. I've been playing and running games with @tat in particular since 2005. And if "four people" are going to anonymously support your position? OK. I guess you were "warned", then.
@meg said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
it's just bad form.
Only if I were saying "all these people hate the game". Tacitly I am, but if you're hand-wringing about four people, then I don't know what to tell you.
Also, the bad form use is when people say "several" or "a lot". Four is a specific number. Sure I could be making it up, but if I'm giving you a number I must have the confidence that they exist.
It's not my place to out them. You know what happens to players who want to lie low to questionable staff but get outed? It's not pretty. I'm willing--maybe too eager--to be that person but it's not my place.
see above.
What? No. Not 'see above'. This is a legitimate concern. There is a reason these people told me in private. I consider this point to be the #1 reason not to name names. I disregard your disregard for their online safety.
I am not falling into that. but you saying there is evidence is what i am calling out.
This is fine. I'm not expecting you to believe me. I'm putting it out there to leave a trail of bread crumbs. Again, I think you're reading more into my purpose than there is. I'm trying to get you centered on it, but if you don't then there's only so much I can do about it.
That you were disinvited from a game doesn't amount to 'evidence'.
And I haven't used that as evidence. I'm sorry; have you not read each and every time I said that I deserved it?
--
@saosmash : I will contact you in PM so you can let me have it in private. As I said, I deserve it.
@arkandel said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
@thenomain said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
Either 'ad and updates by the poster only', or make it part of the constructive forums in general.
It's already been done. I prefer the wiki route but it will need to wait until the personnel exists for it.
...need a week or so still. 
See also: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:UserPageEditProtection <-- handy with a plan to use user pages as the ONLY place for people to voluntarily post their own playlists/data about themselves/etc., and the rest locked down to game ads only.
@thenomain said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
No game creators should get a free pass from criticism. No criticism should get a free pass from criticism. The problem with Soapbox is when it becomes unconstructive, and what we consider unconstructive will always waver.
I had a shitty experience on a game. 90% of that was my fault, but the 10% that wasn't was confirmed by others. Should I not say anything, knowing that there's bad actors lurking on a game? (In before people tell me that I should be better at saying so. Thanks, I know that.)
I think the 10% is extremely generous to yourself, and while it's gracious for people to always say, 'everyone involved could have handled it better', I honestly do not think that is likely the case there. When I heard about a problematic guest on SL and why, like 4 people simultaneously correctly guessed it was you. Yes, you are saying it's mostly your fault, but this is almost uniquely you. This isn't a 'both sides erred' thing, this is you were problematic, and you were asked to go, and they were right to do so because you would have continued to be problematic. The last part is important, because saying you own this is great but if you repeat the behavior over and over what does it change? They have no way of thinking you aren't going to be difficult in the future, and they would be right to part ways with you. I know that's hard to hear but I think it's a lot healthier to reflect on that than start giving yourself a little bit of wiggle room with, "well they could have been nicer."
Sure. They shouldn't be though. They were right to be strict. Being gentle gains them nothing but stress for no advantage whatsoever.
some fucking idiot who people only like because he's good at taking credit for the work of everyone under him, just like every other fucking L&L headwiz.
@apos said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
but if you repeat the behavior over and over what does it change?
It's like you didn't hear me say this a few posts up.
You're always insightful, but it feels like jumping on the bandwagon to me.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
@thenomain No man, I read it, but the problem is you keep giving yourself some wiggle room here with, 'well both sides'. And I think it's very, very, very important you divorce that. I remember that thread with a blow up on a star wars game in CG with Soresu I think it was, it definitely happened on Arx, and it happened here. Don't give yourself mentally an out by saying they were partially at fault.
some fucking idiot who people only like because he's good at taking credit for the work of everyone under him, just like every other fucking L&L headwiz.
And I can give different instances in all three situations where I feel that the staff was acting in an irresponsible, shitty manner.
So...what, that's to be excused?
Going to have to say "no" on that.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
@thenomain If you feel really strongly that there's something to excuse, you can just post up a log of the offending behavior on an appropriate forum post. Presumably it would speak for itself.
@thenomain So say you have a friend that keeps doing yelp reviews about all the bars they get thrown out, and they almost always start with, 'So this is mostly my fault and I got drunk but let me tell you what an asshole the owner and bouncer was'. At some point you get concerned, and I'm having to be That Asshole that is telling you that no man, everyone I know was like, 'oh, it was Theno'.
I really think you should just reflect on that, and I think if you keep going, 'well they had bad behavior so let me talk about that' you are just doing yourself a disservice at this point.
some fucking idiot who people only like because he's good at taking credit for the work of everyone under him, just like every other fucking L&L headwiz.
@saosmash said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:
I still don't understand what the heck a msbwiki would even be for
To ignore until someone has a hissy fit about something they don't like and reminds everyone that it even exists.
