Posts made by Arkandel

@jibberthehut Wtf was their excuse for locking a dog that wasn't theirs in their garage in the first place?

Another interesting read.

https://www.polygon.com/2018/7/25/17593516/video-game-culture-toxic-men-explained

@tinuviel Those kids would have loved MSB.

@thenomain Also if you are making any kind of profit from Blizzard's copyrights, you are not likely to have a very good time in the near future.

@thenomain I feel kinda bad doing that to non-major chains. Like there is prooobably a Canada's Computers on my way to work and a couple of smaller holes in the wall I could do that with, but then they lose money on me if I don't find anything I like.

With BB I have no reservations. Fuck'em.

@thenomain said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

@arkandel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

Just go your local Best Buy

Why do you hate @Packrat?

See what I like about Best Buy is how convenient it is to return things when you're testing something. I buy 99% of my shit from Amazon just because it has variety (which big box stores simply do not, they give you like... three options for anything), but for example when I wanted to check some ethernet-over-power adapters I could just go to the local BB, grab a box, try it out and if it didn't work to my satisfaction after a couple of days I could switch it for another pair.

With Amazon I need to find boxes, print out a label, etc.

@thenomain said in Mudkraft:

What is this?

I can't but echo the sentiment. Wtf is this?

@packrat It sounds like it's your network card (which is among the cheapest and easiest things to fix, too). Just go your local Best Buy, grab a new card and it should be fine, other than the inconvenience.

@shincashay I'm inclined to agree. I hoped for something useful to get input from, but any signal is completely lost to the noise.

Locking it, with apologies to those of you who I know tried to contribute in good faith.

@kanye-qwest I haven't watched it, is it just the trailer or the actual show too? I don't know if it is or when it's coming out either.

@friendlybee @surreality could you please take this feud to personal messages or other threads?

@faraday said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

This is why I don't like the whole "attack the idea not the person" strategy.

In a forum that's largely about presenting ideas for others to comment in it would be counter-productive to discourage the concept of 'attacking' them. That's what peer reviews are about, after all; you invite conversation, others try to point flaws out, and in the end - hopefully - the original concept is fortified, stronger for having been doubted.

We can't not have that. 'Criticism' is still part of 'constructive criticism'.

Is there a gray line folks on forums are happy to strand or just plain cross? Sure, but again we need to make sure we can have some conversation without stepping on seashells around each other.

Do I wish we were all more civil in general? Damn right I do, but we are still human. I've put ideas out there that got shot down hard - some harder than others - but a thick skin is necessary on the interwebs, which isn't news to anyone reading this.

Can we please guide this back away from RL politics and into forum ones or something?

@lisse24 said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

That being said, dogpiling does happen on this forum, a lot.

It does. And I want to come up with a way to address it that's not worse than the original problem.

@deadculture said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

How proactive should MSB's moderation style be?

I think that's not the issue here. It's more of an open floor debate on what the limits should be than how they will be enforced.

Having said that common courtesy feels like it's pretty uncommon sometimes. For example I use "bitch" as a verb in my daily life but I don't see how it's a big deal to stop using it in the context of a single conversation if someone goes out of their way to ask; sure, I'd be free to roll my eyes or whatever if the context wasn't misogynistic at all, but why not just do it?

On the other hand if that same someone made a point of demanding or ordering me to use whatever terms they wanted to substitute overall I might take it the wrong way. If I was a poster on a forum and the admin went and said "hey, we don't condone the terms 'BC' and 'AD' in reference to time periods here" I would just stop logging on there because fuck that.

@faraday said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

@arkandel said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

What I don't want is to make this forum unwelcoming to anyone who doesn't share my personal views.

But by allowing trolls to troll with thinly-veiled cracks, you're essentially making the forum unwelcoming to anyone who wants to have a non-troll-bombed conversation. That's where we are right now. The mods have to decide if that's where you want the place to remain. We can have another 20-page long thread about moderation but it really feels like we're just arguing in circles every time this comes up.

I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, but it's hard to tell if having complaints both about silencing people by catering to SJWs and - at the same time - not moderating enough to push contentious behavior out is a sign we're doing something very wrong or very right.

It's kind of funny, just difficult to draw conclusions from.

@faraday said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

Haven't we proven time and time again that the community doesn't regulate itself?

I don't know that we have. I hope not.

Freedom of speech means you can stand on the street corner shouting horrible stuff; it doesn't mean you can do so in my living room. The person in charge (whether that's the home owner, business owner or forum owner/s) has to decide what level of discourse they find acceptable, which in turn decides what kind of environment they're going to foster.

I have no issues enforcing any rules or being yelled at by internet people. What I don't want is to make this forum unwelcoming to anyone who doesn't share my personal views. That's the reason the bar is set pretty damn low ("don't be a racist") and why I want the content here to be a reflection of our community, not its administrators.

I realize this is perhaps counter-intuitive in some ways as, for instance, as a game runner I would absolutely need to enforce my vision for the world, but as @Auspice pointed out earlier... MSB isn't a game.

@lisse24 said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

No matter how idiotic the idea, I think everyone benefits from having it aired.

I'd rephrase that this way: Blocking an idiotic idea from being aired does more harm than it would.

@deadculture said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

In fact, they can subpoena MSB to break my anonymity, get my email

Just for the record I'll delete the VM, all backups and shut the forum down before we are forced to hand out personal information. Although I'm not sure how well that'd fly in Canada anyway.

@deadculture said in MSB, SJW, and other acronyms:

I believe that speech should always be unmoderated and that social admonishment will take care of course correction, if necessary.

That's my expectation. However it comes with a caveat; if a person is attacked in the process of applying the admonishment they won't get 'bailed out' by the administrators, especially in the Hog Pit.

So if General You gets triggered by a word and decides to correct the poster but they push back we won't jump to your rescue - at least not from a moderation point of view - since it's not against the rules per se.

It's up to the community to regulate itself, which I'm hoping we can do, but which also puts everyone at the relative mercy of cliques. I might agree with General You and I can even post to that effect, but I won't save you from the people grouping up.