Originally Posted by suomynona
In my opinion, Off Topic should be a fun and relaxed board; but this is very different than a meme driven meme board that no one without two dozen years of extensive Toribash-meme-metaknowledge could hope to participate in. Thus, Wibbles is still not a good idea.
That's your reasoning for not allowing Wibbles? It's too insular for people to participate in? It was the most popular and active board - participation was very high.
So that's your reason for not allowing it? Skul's reason is just 'NOOOOOPE, shit up clan boards instead' which is just as wrong as saying 'shit up IRC instead'. Clans and IRC aren't public community-wide spaces that everybody can participate in.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying turn OT into Wibbles. Proceed with the suggested adjustments to make OT less shit and grey. What I'm saying right now is that if that's your justification for keeping Wibbles extinct, then that's no real justification at all.
Why are the higher staff so viscerally against the idea of Wibbles coming back, really? These forums could do with being a little less stuffy and from what I've seen the people want it too.
Last edited by Ele; Sep 10, 2016 at 10:33 AM.
Originally Posted by suomynona
In my opinion, Off Topic should be a fun and relaxed board; but this is very different than a meme driven meme board that no one without two dozen years of extensive Toribash-meme-metaknowledge could hope to participate in. Thus, Wibbles is still not a good idea.
I think that situation is neither inherent nor unique to Wibbles.
Originally Posted by suomynona
In my opinion: A useless post is one that doesn't meaningfully affect what the thread knows, or doesn't positively contribute to what the thread is doing. For example, posting "The Uke position is much better than the Tori position in spiritwrestlingrigged.tbm" in the thread "Use of trains for transportation rising in 4th world countries!" would definitely be useless. "Yes", without context, is also generally useless, especially if you get ninja'd by someone else asking a different (but still yes or no) question.
IMO the first isn't useless, it's off topic. The second isn't useless, it's just not as useful as possible, as I said elsewhere, someone can just ask "can you elaborate?"
Originally Posted by suomynona
Because if every thread is the same, we arrive at the same issue we are currently at, just with a different selection of threads. Also, believe it or not, some threads are incredibly predictable, and it takes miraculous luck to save some of them.
I'm not sure I agree, allowing people to post what they want means that if someone wants to post something else, they are free to. This is the opposite to the current situation, where few people are posting because they aren't allowed to post the way they want to.
Originally Posted by suomynona
I'd agree that it should be limited to the lowest of the low quality. If we get a page of threads that are all the same and have all the same responses though, we are probably going to ban that thread type, at least temporarily.
I would put this in the "deal with it if it ever happens", because it sounds absurd. And if it did happen, then again I don't see the problem. It doesn't actually inhibit people from posting in other threads that they are interested in.
Originally Posted by suomynona
Thread: "Boats!"
Example 1: "Hey, I like boats."
Example 2: "Oh, do you own any?"
Example 1: "Oh sure, I own three yachts."
Example 2: "Oh neat can we get pics?"
Example 1: [INSERT NICE YACHT HERE]
^ this would be fine.
Thread: "Boats!"
Example 1: "Hey, can I buy a demon head texture?"
Example 2: "Oh sure, what specifically do you want?"
Example 1: "Like fangs and blood and gore and edge and shit!"
Example 2: "Okay, sure, I can do that. How about 5k for it?"
Example 1: "But I'm poor how about 3k?"
^ this would not be fine. Take it to PMs.
Sure, but that's a problem because it is off topic, not because it is conversational.
Originally Posted by suomynona
The forums aren't here to do your homework. If you can disguise your survey as something clever like "Boats!" and someone just happens to admit to owning 3 yachts, that's probably fine. However, "Can you please fill out this oddly invasive Google Form for the hope of receiving 10TC?" is not.
So make the rule "no homework" not "no surveys"?
But even so, what does it matter if someone asks toribash for help on their survey? You are free to not answer, so I don't see why it's a problem. I'm always happy to help with that kind of thing if I'm not put out, actually someone was doing interviews not that long ago for their schoolwork, it was no big deal so again I see no problem.
Originally Posted by suomynona
No.
fake edit:
Okay, seriously, one word answers are the epitome of not even trying. Writing even just two words, even if one of them is "fuck" is supporting your answer. If you can't even justify why you're giving a one word answer, I'm not entirely convinced you can justify why it should be allowed as a post. Or, in other words, it's hard to imagine a world where a one word answer (which takes zero effort to post) is a better use of your time than a five word answer or a one word answer that's secretly a link to an FAQ page or something of the sort (which takes a grand total of one effort to post, which isn't much if we're honest), when the latter inherently supports itself much more strongly and takes a grand total of 1 second longer to write on your part.
If you have any reason to expect that someone might reply "why?", which you SHOULD expect in Off Topic, then you should already be answering that question, or you're just actively wasting their time.
The forum is not an instant messaging platform. You have the opportunity to convey your ideas more fully than on, for example, Skype. Please use this opportunity, even if only slightly.
Again, why is it a problem?
Your reasoning if I'm not mistaken relies on the assertions that "not trying" is bad, "time efficiency" is a factor at all, and that peoples time spent reading the offtopic section of an indie fighting game has value that needs to be respected.
I disagree on all 3 of those counts. I don't think it's possible to police effort, so banning things that you perceive as low effort won't actually fix the problem, and I don't see a problem with not putting effort in to posts in the first place.
I don't think time efficiency is something that most people posting in the offtopic section of an indie fighting game really care about. If they did value their time then I doubt they would be on this forum at all. Again, the point of offtopic is fun, so if people don't find a certain thread to be fun or find they are wasting their time reading 1 word posts, then they are welcome not to do that.
Originally Posted by suomynona
We usually argue against necroposting because the original thread context has decayed into nothingness by then, and a lot of the time starting a new thread is better. If your necropost seamlessly and meaningful integrates into the thread despite the difference in time, then it's obviously fine. In something like Technical Support, this is close to impossible, since most issues are fundamentally different, and it messes up our ability to track what issues are or aren't solved if there's a ton of different issues getting shoved into one thread.
Off Topic's a bit of a different situation though, and it should definitely be possible to make decent necroposts. At the same time, there's still some big merits to starting a new thread entirely.
Again I think this is more to do with off topic posting rather than a problem inherent in necroposting.
Originally Posted by suomynona
In general, I'd say that we should just hold a discussion on it and see what we come up with. Having two way communication between everyone on these things helps a lot, but at the moment that'll basically require that we actually decide on what we want Off Topic to be.
Well can we cut to the chase then? IMO off topic should return to its original purpose of being the home for anything that doesn't go anywhere else, especially threads that exist solely for fun.
Originally Posted by suomynona
I don't want OT to turn into a non-srs-bsns board, but I do agree that you shouldn't be held to extremely rigorous standards before posting threads here.
We have discussion for serious/semi-serious threads, questions can go in RT. OT should only be for fun, really.
Otherwise what is the point of the sub?
Originally Posted by suomynona
Fun discussion can be serious discussion. I don't want people to forget that. Too often people seem to get caught up in some kind of "Discussion means I must defend my points to the death however I can!" mentality.
I'd disagree with that sort of thing though. To me, a serious discussion is a discussion that produces insight of some sort. Even if the discussion is "What would change if cats had laser eyes that could melt through steel?", that can be simultaneously fun, ridiculous, but also serious if anyone bothers to reply with anything like "Cat food probably becomes government subsidized" or what have you.
kek that's true, but we have an entire sub with the caption "Serious talk goes here." If that is not telling you where to put your serious threads, then I don't know what more we can do.
Serious discussions, fun or otherwise, go in discussion. Any argument to the contrary is advocating the merger of discussion/OT to some extent.
Originally Posted by Ele
Why are the higher staff so viscerally against the idea of Wibbles coming back, really?
The argument I've heard spouted before is that a board with few rules inherently subverts authority - staff need to be constantly exerting their power by deleting posts, closing threads, infracting posts, in order to maintain their worth. You can't do that if there are no rules to use as an excuse.
Last edited by wibblefox; Sep 10, 2016 at 12:25 PM.
If you have minions in your avy or sig DO NOT REPLY TO MY POSTS
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaIn my opinion, Off Topic should be a fun and relaxed board; but this is very different than a meme driven meme board that no one without two dozen years of extensive Toribash-meme-metaknowledge could hope to participate in. Thus, Wibbles is still not a good idea.
I think that situation is neither inherent nor unique to Wibbles.
There are also sections of the community that would prefer not to have such things, but if we both agree that OT doesn't need to turn into Wibbles, then this is a less relevant discussion. I'm just against turning OT into Wibbles.
As far as bringing Wibbles back goes, I will say that I'm not opposed to it, but I'm also not in favor of it happening at the moment. I believe that it is possible to sort OT out first, and that that would be a better use of time at the moment; as opposed to arguing about whether or not Wibbles is a truly awful idea (there are reasons to argue that, but it's neither here nor there).
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaIn my opinion: A useless post is one that doesn't meaningfully affect what the thread knows, or doesn't positively contribute to what the thread is doing. For example, posting "The Uke position is much better than the Tori position in spiritwrestlingrigged.tbm" in the thread "Use of trains for transportation rising in 4th world countries!" would definitely be useless. "Yes", without context, is also generally useless, especially if you get ninja'd by someone else asking a different (but still yes or no) question.
IMO the first isn't useless, it's off topic. The second isn't useless, it's just not as useful as possible, as I said elsewhere, someone can just ask "can you elaborate?"
Off topic posts are generally treated as useless posts. Maybe the solution is to get rid of that infraction entirely and replace it with a handful of more descriptive ones? But that's a different thing as well, and if people want the infraction system overhauled for whatever reason, please start a different thread on that in S&I or OT or Discussion or (oddly enough) TP so that we can actually discuss it.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaBecause if every thread is the same, we arrive at the same issue we are currently at, just with a different selection of threads. Also, believe it or not, some threads are incredibly predictable, and it takes miraculous luck to save some of them.
I'm not sure I agree, allowing people to post what they want means that if someone wants to post something else, they are free to. This is the opposite to the current situation, where few people are posting because they aren't allowed to post the way they want to.
Eh, we can try without, but I'm pretty sure we'll be adding it back if we do. Those threads don't usually add much to the board as a whole, and if they start preventing people from finding threads they'd be interested in, they're a problem.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaI'd agree that it should be limited to the lowest of the low quality. If we get a page of threads that are all the same and have all the same responses though, we are probably going to ban that thread type, at least temporarily.
I would put this in the "deal with it if it ever happens", because it sounds absurd. And if it did happen, then again I don't see the problem. It doesn't actually inhibit people from posting in other threads that they are interested in.
It does if they can't find them as a result.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaThread: "Boats!"
Example 1: "Hey, I like boats."
Example 2: "Oh, do you own any?"
Example 1: "Oh sure, I own three yachts."
Example 2: "Oh neat can we get pics?"
Example 1: [INSERT NICE YACHT HERE]
^ this would be fine.
Thread: "Boats!"
Example 1: "Hey, can I buy a demon head texture?"
Example 2: "Oh sure, what specifically do you want?"
Example 1: "Like fangs and blood and gore and edge and shit!"
Example 2: "Okay, sure, I can do that. How about 5k for it?"
Example 1: "But I'm poor how about 3k?"
^ this would not be fine. Take it to PMs.
Sure, but that's a problem because it is off topic, not because it is conversational.
Yes. And most conversationalist things involving only two people are going to be off topic. Otherwise there wouldn't just be two people, ideally.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaThe forums aren't here to do your homework. If you can disguise your survey as something clever like "Boats!" and someone just happens to admit to owning 3 yachts, that's probably fine. However, "Can you please fill out this oddly invasive Google Form for the hope of receiving 10TC?" is not.
So make the rule "no homework" not "no surveys"?
But even so, what does it matter if someone asks toribash for help on their survey? You are free to not answer, so I don't see why it's a problem. I'm always happy to help with that kind of thing if I'm not put out, actually someone was doing interviews not that long ago for their schoolwork, it was no big deal so again I see no problem.
Same reason we ban referral links (in short, it's more often than not going to be someone just looking for free money on the internet). On top of that, random surveys are occasionally really disturbing from a privacy standpoint.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaNo.
fake edit:
Okay, seriously, one word answers are the epitome of not even trying. Writing even just two words, even if one of them is "fuck" is supporting your answer. If you can't even justify why you're giving a one word answer, I'm not entirely convinced you can justify why it should be allowed as a post. Or, in other words, it's hard to imagine a world where a one word answer (which takes zero effort to post) is a better use of your time than a five word answer or a one word answer that's secretly a link to an FAQ page or something of the sort (which takes a grand total of one effort to post, which isn't much if we're honest), when the latter inherently supports itself much more strongly and takes a grand total of 1 second longer to write on your part.
If you have any reason to expect that someone might reply "why?", which you SHOULD expect in Off Topic, then you should already be answering that question, or you're just actively wasting their time.
The forum is not an instant messaging platform. You have the opportunity to convey your ideas more fully than on, for example, Skype. Please use this opportunity, even if only slightly.
Again, why is it a problem?
Your reasoning if I'm not mistaken relies on the assertions that "not trying" is bad, "time efficiency" is a factor at all, and that peoples time spent reading the offtopic section of an indie fighting game has value that needs to be respected.
I disagree on all 3 of those counts. I don't think it's possible to police effort, so banning things that you perceive as low effort won't actually fix the problem, and I don't see a problem with not putting effort in to posts in the first place.
I don't think time efficiency is something that most people posting in the offtopic section of an indie fighting game really care about. If they did value their time then I doubt they would be on this forum at all. Again, the point of offtopic is fun, so if people don't find a certain thread to be fun or find they are wasting their time reading 1 word posts, then they are welcome not to do that.
I would disagree that Off Topic is truly a purely fun board. There should be opportunities to have fun, but it's not meant to be Wibbles either. It was fairly explicitly made as a "not Wibbles".
The thing is that these standards I'm
People's time should have value, otherwise you're just disrespecting them. If they wish for it to have less value, they are free to spend their time elsewhere, but I would like Off Topic to have the potential to have interesting things where they would otherwise be inane.
I really don't see any value that could be added by allowing one word posts, and I don't see any meaningful value that is detracted by disallowing one word posts. I do see an advantage to requesting that posts be at least two words, and I don't see any disadvantage to requesting that posts be at least two words considering that one of the words could be "Fuck" and still get a better point across.
tl;dr: One word posts: "Fuck no."
Still standing by that description, since it's a rule you could literally bypass, meaningfully and within its spirit, by adding "fuck" to every one word post you would otherwise make. Is it family friendly? No, whatever, that's a different rule anyways.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaWe usually argue against necroposting because the original thread context has decayed into nothingness by then, and a lot of the time starting a new thread is better. If your necropost seamlessly and meaningful integrates into the thread despite the difference in time, then it's obviously fine. In something like Technical Support, this is close to impossible, since most issues are fundamentally different, and it messes up our ability to track what issues are or aren't solved if there's a ton of different issues getting shoved into one thread.
Off Topic's a bit of a different situation though, and it should definitely be possible to make decent necroposts. At the same time, there's still some big merits to starting a new thread entirely.
Again I think this is more to do with off topic posting rather than a problem inherent in necroposting.
Fair.
A point of note, this train of thought was more sparked by the suggestion that you shouldn't post a new thread if there existed an old thread in some period of time, not the opposite. Honestly, for OT making no necroposting a rule doesn't really make much sense, so I'd probably say we won't.
The more important point is "When's the earliest you should repost a thread?" I think a month is fair for that, but I think six months is way too long.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaIn general, I'd say that we should just hold a discussion on it and see what we come up with. Having two way communication between everyone on these things helps a lot, but at the moment that'll basically require that we actually decide on what we want Off Topic to be.
Well can we cut to the chase then? IMO off topic should return to its original purpose of being the home for anything that doesn't go anywhere else, especially threads that exist solely for fun.
To me, Off Topic feels like it should more be about anything people want to discuss without the pretense of importance or relevance. This isn't to say that every post has to be structured like a discussion, but I do believe that every decent thread in Off Topic implies a similar format as a discussion. Even the acronym thread could be summarized as "Here's a neat trick, do you like it?" combined with "Are your fellow posters clever or just awful?"
I'll apologize in advance for using terminology that's not precise and I usually tend to mean something unusually abstract when I say something like "threads should be discussions". Sorry about that.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaI don't want OT to turn into a non-srs-bsns board, but I do agree that you shouldn't be held to extremely rigorous standards before posting threads here.
We have discussion for serious/semi-serious threads, questions can go in RT. OT should only be for fun, really.
Otherwise what is the point of the sub?
OT should be a ride. I'd kinda like to see Off Topic as a sort of "I want something I didn't expect", and I'd like there to be opportunities for that. I'm not sure I want Off Topic to be "I'm bored, let's shitpost until not bored". There are other places on the internet for that.
In short, I believe almost any thread should be allowed in OT. If it turns into a really serious debate, it can be moved to Discussion later. If it's a really straightforward question, it can be moved to Rapid Threads. Moving threads is an option, but I feel that Off Topic is a home for any and all kinds of threads (so long as some threads meet some exceedingly minimal quality standards, such as not being the infamous "s" thread that got HoS'd from Wibbles and everyone who posted in it got banned. In Wibbles.).
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by suomynonaFun discussion can be serious discussion. I don't want people to forget that. Too often people seem to get caught up in some kind of "Discussion means I must defend my points to the death however I can!" mentality.
I'd disagree with that sort of thing though. To me, a serious discussion is a discussion that produces insight of some sort. Even if the discussion is "What would change if cats had laser eyes that could melt through steel?", that can be simultaneously fun, ridiculous, but also serious if anyone bothers to reply with anything like "Cat food probably becomes government subsidized" or what have you.
kek that's true, but we have an entire sub with the caption "Serious talk goes here." If that is not telling you where to put your serious threads, then I don't know what more we can do.
Serious discussions, fun or otherwise, go in discussion. Any argument to the contrary is advocating the merger of discussion/OT to some extent.
Our ruse is discovered![/sarcasm]
I don't know if that'd actually be a bad thing. I don't feel like that's a reason to exclude this thread type from Off Topic. I don't see a reason to exclude a thread type that's allowed anywhere else on the forum from being posted in Off Topic. If a thread thrives in Off Topic, leave it there. If it doesn't, move it to somewhere it might fair better.
A replay thread in OT is an obvious move. A discussion thread is less clear cut, in my opinion.
Originally Posted by wibblefox
Originally Posted by EleWhy are the higher staff so viscerally against the idea of Wibbles coming back, really?
The argument I've heard spouted before is that a board with few rules inherently subverts authority - staff need to be constantly exerting their power by deleting posts, closing threads, infracting posts, in order to maintain their worth. You can't do that if there are no rules to use as an excuse.
I'd disagree with that myself. OT would probably do fine if we never deleted, closed, or infracted anything but the most egregious content, let's be honest. However, I feel that we should be somewhat more structured in any modifications of OT than that, since this is an opportunity to make it better, not just "Hey, guys, it lives if we turn the life support machine off".
Which it would, no doubt. In that metaphor, I feel we'd get much better results by considering what, in addition, we can do to help OT be better.
----
@Ele: In regards to your post specifically, I haven't formulated a concrete argument against having Wibbles. It was removed at the time due to some significant and at that time relevant pressures from the administrative side of things. I do not believe it is !!!LITERAL WORK OF SATAN!!! or anything like that. I do not feel at the moment that it would be helpful to bring it back at the moment. I'd believe but I am not entirely sure that the people who would participate in that directly are a mostly closed group though. I'd have to go run some stats on the old Wibbles board to back that up, which would be a significant undertaking.
Last edited by suomynona; Sep 11, 2016 at 08:45 AM.
Squad Squad Squad lead?
The standardization of Toribash Squad roles may have gone too far!
The standardization of Toribash Squad roles may have gone too far!
Originally Posted by suomynona
There are also sections of the community that would prefer not to have such things
Well I'm just saying that just because it's wibbles doesn't mean it will be 100% in jokes, and just because it isn't doesn't mean it will be 100% free of in jokes. It's not something that you can control, and certainly not something unique to wibbles.
Originally Posted by suomynona
Off topic posts are generally treated as useless posts. Maybe the solution is to get rid of that infraction entirely and replace it with a handful of more descriptive ones?
Regardless of how they are treated, if we can show that all "useless" posts are either fine, or actually covered by another rule, then we can happily remove the "no useless posts" rule which was never fully understood by the community or staff anyway.
Originally Posted by suomynona
if they start preventing people from finding threads they'd be interested in, they're a problem.
Again I think this is an unlikely situation, to have an entire page of for example active birthday threads. Then again, if there is an entire page of active threads, does it really matter if you've "seen em before"? A thread can't be active if people aren't posting in it after all.
I think this would be another case of disparity between staff and users.
Originally Posted by suomynona
It does if they can't find them as a result.
At the point where they can't find the thread they want at all (how many pages of threads would you consider that to be? 10 pages? more?) then maybe it's time to accept that the majority of players aren't interested in that thread, and of course a user who can't find such a thread is free to make a new one...
Originally Posted by suomynona
Yes. And most conversationalist things involving only two people are going to be off topic. Otherwise there wouldn't just be two people, ideally.
I somewhat disagree but if the problem is that it's off topic, then it should be covered in the off topic rule. If two people are discussing something on topic, then as per your example it's fine.
To repeat myself:If we can show that all "conversationalist" posts are either fine, or actually covered by another rule, then we can happily remove the "no conversationalist posts" rule.
Originally Posted by suomynona
Same reason we ban referral links (in short, it's more often than not going to be someone just looking for free money on the internet). On top of that, random surveys are occasionally really disturbing from a privacy standpoint.
Not clicking referral links and not contributing to surveys should be a personal choice. If someone makes a survey about favourite toribash colour, why should that be banned? If someone makes a thread for chaos nest type shenanigans, why should that be banned?
Again I think it's a case of lazy moderators making a blanket rule when really they have specific concerns - in this case privacy.
Originally Posted by suomynona
I would disagree that Off Topic is truly a purely fun board. There should be opportunities to have fun, but it's not meant to be Wibbles either. It was fairly explicitly made as a "not Wibbles".
The thing is that these standards I'mtalkingpreaching (more or less) about are such a bare minimum request for anyone on a forum.
People's time should have value, otherwise you're just disrespecting them. If they wish for it to have less value, they are free to spend their time elsewhere, but I would like Off Topic to have the potential to have interesting things where they would otherwise be inane.
I really don't see any value that could be added by allowing one word posts, and I don't see any meaningful value that is detracted by disallowing one word posts. I do see an advantage to requesting that posts be at least two words, and I don't see any disadvantage to requesting that posts be at least two words considering that one of the words could be "Fuck" and still get a better point across.
tl;dr: One word posts: "Fuck no."
Still standing by that description, since it's a rule you could literally bypass, meaningfully and within its spirit, by adding "fuck" to every one word post you would otherwise make. Is it family friendly? No, whatever, that's a different rule anyways.
Well to be fair, any post under 1 sentence is likely to be infracted as being "useless" anyway. Definitely a post that just says "fuck no" would be infracted for being useless... So yes you could bypass that rule, but there are bigger blanket rules anyway.
There are circumstances when 1 word posts are fine, and so they should be allowed by default. In the rare case that they are not ok, they should be met with appropriate action (from a sliding scale of "please explain" up to "infraction", rather than the current system of "delete" to "infract").
Originally Posted by suomynona
A point of note, this train of thought was more sparked by the suggestion that you shouldn't post a new thread if there existed an old thread in some period of time, not the opposite.
Tbh both stances are equally silly, each thread is case by case. Does it make sense to revive the old 3-word-story thread? No. Does it make sense to revive the acronym thread? Yes.
On the flip side: If someone revived the old 3-word-story thread does it really matter? No. If someone makes a new acronym thread does it matter? No...
So really, why does this rule exist? Over generalisation and lazy moderation. People can make their own choices, and if they choose wrong then who cares, maybe someone will say "we already have this thread" and link, maybe they won't and people will start a new thread, it literally does not matter.
Originally Posted by suomynona
To me, Off Topic feels like it should more be about anything people want to discuss without the pretense of importance or relevance. This isn't to say that every post has to be structured like a discussion, but I do believe that every decent thread in Off Topic implies a similar format as a discussion. Even the acronym thread could be summarized as "Here's a neat trick, do you like it?" combined with "Are your fellow posters clever or just awful?"
IMO any 1 persons opinion is less important than the sum of the community, therefore with relaxed rules people can post whatever they want, and if 1 style of posts gets buried, then it's because it's less popular. When not allow the community to build the community they want, rather than dictate it to them.
Originally Posted by suomynona
I'll apologize in advance for using terminology that's not precise and I usually tend to mean something unusually abstract when I say something like "threads should be discussions". Sorry about that.
I have talked to you many times and I understand that lol.
Originally Posted by suomynona
OT should be a ride. I'd kinda like to see Off Topic as a sort of "I want something I didn't expect", and I'd like there to be opportunities for that. I'm not sure I want Off Topic to be "I'm bored, let's shitpost until not bored". There are other places on the internet for that.
In short, I believe almost any thread should be allowed in OT. If it turns into a really serious debate, it can be moved to Discussion later. If it's a really straightforward question, it can be moved to Rapid Threads. Moving threads is an option, but I feel that Off Topic is a home for any and all kinds of threads (so long as some threads meet some exceedingly minimal quality standards, such as not being the infamous "s" thread that got HoS'd from Wibbles and everyone who posted in it got banned. In Wibbles.).
You can't spell "infamous" without "famous". People posted there because they wanted to, ultimately the community decided to shit post for fun, what's wrong with that.
Originally Posted by suomynona
If a thread thrives in Off Topic, leave it there. If it doesn't, move it to somewhere it might fair better.
Yup, I agree.
You are welcome to post serious discussion in OT, just be aware that it may not thrive. They are after all free to post in the correct place, or ask a staff to move their thread. There is no need to make OT accommodating of serious threads when we have an entire dedicated subforum for them.
Originally Posted by suomynona
I'd disagree with that myself. OT would probably do fine if we never deleted, closed, or infracted anything but the most egregious content, let's be honest. However, I feel that we should be somewhat more structured in any modifications of OT than that, since this is an opportunity to make it better, not just "Hey, guys, it lives if we turn the life support machine off".
Which it would, no doubt. In that metaphor, I feel we'd get much better results by considering what, in addition, we can do to help OT be better."
s/life support machine/death machine/
Best not to forget that the sub is near death right now, it's not like it is healthy and thriving and we are discussing the rules. This is the only active thread on the sub in 2 days.
About wibbles, I should think the actual reason for removal is because hamster retired right? Without him the board had no leader nor advocate among the staff. No one was keen to take over, so the board was closed.
If you have minions in your avy or sig DO NOT REPLY TO MY POSTS
Originally Posted by suomynona
@Ele: In regards to your post specifically, I haven't formulated a concrete argument against having Wibbles. It was removed at the time due to some significant and at that time relevant pressures from the administrative side of things. I do not believe it is !!!LITERAL WORK OF SATAN!!! or anything like that. I do not feel at the moment that it would be helpful to bring it back at the moment. I'd believe but I am not entirely sure that the people who would participate in that directly are a mostly closed group though. I'd have to go run some stats on the old Wibbles board to back that up, which would be a significant undertaking.
I'd like it if you and whoever else necessary to bringing wibbles back could discuss it coming back, since there is a demand. If you find there's no significant reasons not to bring it back, then I think it'd be really great if we could have wibbles back. I think that's reasonable.
Last edited by Ele; Sep 11, 2016 at 10:32 AM.