criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong

[Arkandel]

@faraday said:

b) Perhaps (probably) I'm jaded, but it seems like a moderation nightmare waiting to happen. Especially given how prior attempts at MU game/people wikis have turned out.

It's not my place to judge anyone else's jaded status (I have my own cynisisms reserved) but I don't believe in extrapolating from past failures to pre-emptively discount fresh attempts. Especially before the actual design of how the wiki will work or who will be able to edit what has been completed yet.

And I don't think you can argue it would give us options in terms of seeking out games - which is what ads are about - we don't currently have. If you're a random player coming over to MSB to look for a certain kind of game you might be interested in looking at different things, and no matter what forums aren't meant to provide that. This would be a new feature for us.

So that is not the change I want to see in the world. The change I want to see is a clear, enforced policy on what goes where here.

That's not mutually exclusive to having a wiki. I don't care to keep policies which aren't working out or which don't accomplish what they were created to do in the first place.

[Tinuviel]

@arkandel said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:

If you're a random player coming over to MSB

Well that's their first mistake.

[mietze]

I don't think random players come to MSB to look for advertisements for a new game.

[Flitcraft]

I can't say I see the point of a wiki, here. It'd just add another layer of complication and maintenance and make it a little harder to see when a new game opens.

That said, anything beats a policy of "advertisements and testimonials on the public forum, warnings and criticism get shuffled to the Hog Pit."

[faraday]

@arkandel said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:

Especially before the actual design of how the wiki will work or who will be able to edit what has been completed yet.

Fair enough. I'm coming at it from more of the philosophical meaning of "wiki", which is community-edited, moderator-curated. You can certainly use wiki software as more of a locked-down CMS if you do enough gymnastics with permissions.

And I don't think you can argue it would give us options in terms of seeking out games - which is what ads are about - we don't currently have.

But, um... I can and do argue that. I think that an "Ads" section, which was locked-down to JUST ads and updates (and not 27 pages about why people don't like a skill system, had bad experiences, think the forum policies need work, or heaven-knows-what other tangents) is perfectly useful.

Just look at the Playlist threads. They're fine. The owner puts all the relevant info in the first post and 'bumps' the thread when they update it. Occasionally there's some "I knew you when" chatter, but it's pretty limited and tame.

A wiki could organize the info better, sure, but it's a lot more overhead and yet another place to check for information that I think could be addressed perfectly well right here.

ETA: Oh, and if the ads thread were JUST ads, there's no reason not to delete them when a game closes. Thus reducing clutter and helping people find games more easily.

[Sunny]

I agree 100% with @faraday . Adding more things to manage when the rules we have aren't even being enforced, I have no faith that the rules on a wiki would be enforced any better than those on the forum, and a wiki is super bad potential for badness. I am of the opinion that you should wait until you have what you are doing currently working right before you add more to it.

[Prototart]

if a game is a toilet people deserve to be able to find out before they get shit on themselves without, like, say, having to go to the length of making an account and clicking to view one particular sub forum where it's ok to say "hi this place is run by someone gross"

is my unpopular opinion

but then i p much came here to say that, so

[Paris]

@mietze said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:

I don't think random players come to MSB to look for advertisements for a new game.

They do, though. There are many many lurkers who use MSB to stay current on new games.

[Tinuviel]

This place can't seriously be the only source for information on new and upcoming games...

[Insomnia]

When I first started coming to WORA way back in the day it was to know about the bad and skeevy shit that was happening on games so I could avoid them. Having to dig through posts to find the magical shifter breasts, or toe-rings of doom to find out about a place just means I pretty much skim over everything except what interests me, and generally ignore the ads because I know only good things said about place doesn't mean everything is all good.

I'm old now and have been doing this for way too long, I don't have the time to get invested in a place, only to be broadsided by the things I would have avoid the place for had I known.

[Paris]

@tinuviel It is a major one, there aren't that many hobby-wide forum sites about MUSHing.

[faraday]

@tinuviel said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:

This place can't seriously be the only source for information on new and upcoming games...

Do you know of another one? If so please share! TMC is the only other one I know of, and I don't think a lot of MUSHes bother to list themselves there.

[Flitcraft]

@prototart said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:

if a game is a toilet people deserve to be able to find out before they get shit on themselves without, like, say, having to go to the length of making an account and clicking to view one particular sub forum where it's ok to say "hi this place is run by someone gross"

is my unpopular opinion

but then i p much came here to say that, so

++++++

[faraday]

@prototart said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:

say, having to go to the length of making an account and clicking to view one particular sub forum where it's ok to say "hi this place is run by someone gross"

I will just point out that this is not necessary even if the current rules were enforced. You can a) Link to a game discussion thread from the ad thread as an alert and b) Post criticism about a game in the publicly-viewable Mildly Constructive area as long as you don't turn it into a complete dumpster fire.

[Tinuviel]

@faraday said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:

Do you know of another one? If so please share!

I usually check out places based on word of mouth recommendations or bbposts on other games.

[saosmash]

I still don't understand what the heck a msbwiki would even be for

[Cupcake]

@saosmash A place to slag on other players and insult them in perpetuity, basically.

WORA had a wiki just like it!

[mietze]

Yeah that's what I'm worried about really.

[Tinuviel]

I suppose what this "wiki or not" discussion comes down to is... What are we trying to build MSB into?

Are we a community hub and resource? Are we a bitching forum with some occasionally constructive bits? Are we a cult?

[Prototart]

@tinuviel said in criticism not allowed in ad threads is only enforcing a false positive, prove me wrong:

I suppose what this "wiki or not" discussion comes down to is... What are we trying to build MSB into?

Are we a community hub and resource? Are we a bitching forum with some occasionally constructive bits? Are we a cult?

tbh i think the noblest thing msb can be/is is, like, pre-rapey-Russian-propaganda-outlet wikileaks for mu*ing, bc other than word of mouth there's like no other way or place to out bad actors and bad behavior no matter how badly they need to be outed and nowhere else to like chronicle that shit and compile it, esp considering that when one person talks about it almost always ten other people they prob don't even know show up w the same story of creepiness

like, that's not all it is and its def not infallible or anything, there are ppl loved here but viewed that way by huge swaths of like everywhere else and im sure vice versa, but that's the reason i came here

also sure it doesn't ~have~ to get shuffled off to hogpit but i know ppl who don't post stuff about games bc they assume it'll have to be put there or will be put there and just like don't want to deal with hogpit, that's the assumption ppl make, that - esp for still-running games - if you have critical stuff to say you have to go to hogpit