On Removing Clutter

[Arylett Charnoa]

it's directed at people like Cirrus and Arylett Dawnsborough and co. who don't understand Eevee's point about quality

Umm... I didn't even post in this thread (until now), how do you know my opinion on things? But I digress, it's not that "people like Cirrus and Arylett Dawnsborough" don't UNDERSTAND Eevee's point, it's simply that we disagree with it. Related...

Zim, EeveeSkitty, this is why. I am going to repost this post over and over until you actually bother to get your head out of your ass and read what probably the most intelligent member on the board has to say. This post, his previous post, it sums it all up.

I have read his post, many times as a matter of fact. And it still has not convinced me. In fact, repeating it over and over is quite unlikely to convince anyone. It feels downright degrading, like you're insulting our intelligence. It would be like if I quoted Zim over and over, would that make you any more likely to agree? No.

Your wall of text translates to:



We're not telling you to leave. We're telling you to start posting better quality stuff because the current crap is absolute garbage.

FYI Topics made in the name of Lulz, when done properly, are actually full of lulz. Hence the name, Lulz.

I personally find the Lulz to be quite a unfunny topic and did not find it entertaining whatsoever. But that's my opinion. And isn't that your opinion too? That the Lulz is, quote, "full of lulz"? Why should your opinion decide what is entertaining and what's not for the whole forums? You wish to get rid of Forum Games... because in your opinion it is "crap" and "absolute garbage". You know, I don't really like the Lulz. What if I asked for it to be deleted? What if I asked for all threads I found to be "worthless crap" to be deleted? The point is, your opinion does not necessarily apply to others.

Also I don't believe you're interpreting Zim's point correctly. His point is not "Angst angst angst You're oppressing me swear swear swear Why do I have to change putz putz putz". It was just like I said, you shouldn't really think that your opinions apply to the whole forums.

So how about instead of arguing with us in a futile effort to get us to change our minds you could be making that forum games social group like someone suggested and /do/ something about it.

Who are you guys to have any authority what happens to the forums? As you said, these forums are not a democracy. If Butterfree wants the games gone, she will get rid of them. But I do believe she has expressed the fact that she won't. So really, why are you arguing with us? She said they were staying. It's a huge part of the forums, wouldn't moving it to usergroups still cause lag anyway? I know nothing much of this sort of thing, but what exempts usergroups from taking up space on the forum servers? It's really the same thing.

I understand why you view it as spam, there are generally no real discussions in Forum Games. However Forum Games are probably not spam. They have entertainment value to what seems to be a lot of people in the forums (like Zim said, why else would they have so many posts). And really, they're not hurting you at all. In fact, they're not hurting anyone. And you will next refer me to the US vs. World, which lagged the forums. I personally agree with its deletion (in fact, I don't really mind the fact that it was deleted. It was lagging the forums, why not?), as well with the idea of deleting inactive forum games that nobody posts in anymore. As long as one prevents threads from getting as large as the US vs. World, why can't we keep Forum Games? I I know what you're going to say next: "They take up the servers, waste of space! That's harming the forums themselves!" These forums serve only one purpose, and that is to entertain people. Why else do people come here? Perhaps to have a discussion, but people come here to have fun. In their free time. And Forum Games is just the forums serving their purpose, providing entertainment to the people that like them. Just as the Insanity forums provide entertainment to people that like them, just as the Miscellaneous and so on and so forth. And to get rid of them simply because they don't entertain you or a few other people, simply based in your opinion (that they are "worthless crap") when others do enjoy them, is really not a plausible enough reason to get rid of them.

 

[Tarvos]

Quality control is a good enough reason to get rid of anything. We don't use NES anymore, we have the Wii now? Why are you advocating being stuck in a silly repetetive cycle?

Umm... I didn't even post in this thread (until now), how do you know my opinion on things? But I digress, it's not that "people like Cirrus and Arylett Dawnsborough" don't UNDERSTAND Eevee's point, it's simply that we disagree with it. Related...

I have yet to see a single dissection of Eevee's post by someone that was sound. Plus, your opinion isn't hard to fathom. You disagree? On what grounds? By spouting the same bs all over again that we've already debunked? I don't think you've actually properly understood it. I want you to read the posts he made, make the logical connections in your mind, and maybe you can fathom why we're saying what we're saying

I have read his post, many times as a matter of fact. And it still has not convinced me. In fact, repeating it over and over is quite unlikely to convince anyone. It feels downright degrading, like you're insulting our intelligence. It would be like if I quoted Zim over and over, would that make you any more likely to agree? No.

I'm not insulting your intelligence. I'm not sure, quite simply, whether people bother to read. Apparently you read but just try to cop-out. From the posts you people have been making you have been unable to make any argument than "BUT IT HAS ENTERTAINMENT VALUE" which is of course complete bollocks. Pissing you people off who think everybody should live in cotton candy land has entertainment value to me, seeing you get bent all in a knot because your precious game is taken away (and it isn't because you can still play it anywhere else and you only need one post as Eevee said). We're trying to promote some quality posting here and when someone tells you that you ought to comply with a bit of a standard, you get all defensive about freedom and act like a precocious two year old crying out for Mummy.

This is the blatant bollocks that I am pissed off with. It's no wonder I don't take much of the forum seriously.

 

[Music Dragon]

Quality control is a good enough reason to get rid of anything. We don't use NES anymore, we have the Wii now? Why are you advocating being stuck in a silly repetetive cycle?

Of course, this only works if we assume that everyone enjoys the Wii more than the NES.

 

[Tarvos]

Of course, this only works if we assume that everyone enjoys the Wii more than the NES.

I am pretty sure you can name any modern day gaming console and people will tell you that it is objectively better than the NES, saleswise, performancewise, technically, consumer opinionwise, etc. I doubt that would be hard to figure out.

 

[Music Dragon]

I am pretty sure you can name any modern day gaming console and people will tell you that it is objectively better than the NES, saleswise, performancewise, technically, consumer opinionwise, etc. I doubt that would be hard to figure out.

Sure, sure! But there's always the odd person who prefers the old and outdated over the new and advanced, even if it is of lower quality. After all, the purpose of high quality is to satisfy the user! People don't always enjoy what they're supposed to enjoy.

 

[Tarvos]

yeah but there's a place and time for everything and this forum needs a bit less place and time for counting threads

 

[Music Dragon]

yeah but there's a place and time for everything and this forum needs a bit less place and time for counting threads

I could go ahead and bring up the whole "people are enjoying themselves and it's not doing any harm if you quarantine the crap in a single forum where nobody'll ever have to worry about it again" thing, but then you'd go DAMP on me and point me to Eevee's post. I assure you, though, I did read it.

Still, improving the "quality" of the forums equates to improving the degree to which its members are pleased with it; obviously people are pretty divided on what is satisfactory. True "quality" is necessarily subjective; there is no absolute rule that says "this is worthless garbage, while this is useful and should be kept". It all depends on what you want out of the forums, and what you personally find enjoyable. Obviously a lot of people here seem to find Forum Games terribly amusing - and would, most likely, consider the quality of the forums significantly improved if certain "snarky" veteran members disappeared.

TCoD isn't a democracy. TCoD isn't a geniocracy, either. TCoD is a benevolent dictatorship. I'm aware that plenty of members - me included - find Forum Games utterly pointless and would rather see some posts worth reading. But then again, plenty of members enjoy spouting garbage, too. Much as I hate to say this - because it makes me sound like some disgusting diplomat toady - Butterfree owns these forums, and her opinion is the only one that actually matters. She decides what the purpose of these forums is.

Don't get me wrong here! I'm not particularly appreciative of all that spam, either. But I'm also painfully aware of the fact that my opinion isn't more important than anyone else's around here.

 

[Tarvos]

I'm very aware of it. I just don't really post much anywhere thanks to it except where I deem it proper to post.

 

[Valor]

I personally find the Lulz to be quite a unfunny topic and did not find it entertaining whatsoever. But that's my opinion. And isn't that your opinion too? That the Lulz is, quote, "full of lulz"? Why should your opinion decide what is entertaining and what's not for the whole forums? You wish to get rid of Forum Games... because in your opinion it is "crap" and "absolute garbage". You know, I don't really like the Lulz. What if I asked for it to be deleted? What if I asked for all threads I found to be "worthless crap" to be deleted? The point is, your opinion does not necessarily apply to others.

Exceeeeept I actually note what is spam and not worthy of being read by the average human. You see, it doesn't matter if there IS discussion going on when a huge majority of it is just pointless blather or requires very little thought.

On particular note, look at the first page of Forum Games. There are six topics right now that have over 1000 posts. That means those topics have over 50 pages. You following me? Now, let's take a look at the "Never-ending D/P Cheat" topic.

...accidentally farts while doing this, and the ice beam turns into fire. But then the ice beam-gone-fire-fart-powered suddenly...

Hmm, yes, lots of thought put into this topic. Just post some random directions. The only post that requires any thought is the first one, where the glitch starts. Rather than actually looking at the game and using game situations to help explain the cheat, all it does is list these "lol so random" moments followed by an ellipse. Doesn't even need the poster to look at the last post.

Oh, but wait, you say. That's only ONE topic. Well, surely you have me there! Curses, I shouldn't be telling people to start posting better if I only have one topic. Surely the most popular topic, "You're Banned", is a redeeming factor!

You're banned because i'm scared of that happening now. I was a fucking butterfree!

Hm, nope. Guess not.

Also I don't believe you're interpreting Zim's point correctly. His point is not "Angst angst angst You're oppressing me swear swear swear Why do I have to change putz putz putz". It was just like I said, you shouldn't really think that your opinions apply to the whole forums.

Actually, it was rather accurate. Probably saved some people quite some time by condensing his entire post without losing context. A little angst here, a little HARDCORE SWEARING there, and lots of whining.

Oh, speaking of Zim:

Also, please don't condescend me by saying my posts are simply that. If I said what I thought a lot of your side's posts essentially are, I'm sure you'd get angry and I might get in trouble, so don't do it to me.

No, I'd laugh at you for trying to mock me when all you did was just flatter me. No points for you for saying you would do that, either.

Also, for us, Forum Games can be full of lulz.

You obviously have no clue what the Lulz are and all you're doing is making yourself look bad by trying to look like you know what they are. Please bow your head in shame and make an exit on the left or right side of the room.

 

[Ruby]

If we all agree that spam has to be deleted, as I think we do, the only thing left to be settled is what to count as spam. The various other tiffs - about democracy and whether Forum Games is fun, what caused the server crashes, and so on - are not relevant or needed. If you are going to speak in this thread at all, answer the one question that's worth answering: What is spam and does it include Forum Games?

 

[Lucas₇₅₅]

How is it that these "non-quality pieces of garbage" affect anything but the forum games themselves? I see no reason why the forum games should be deleted, other than lag. Which, in fact, could be managed, by wiping the threads every so often (By a hack or otherwise). Does this "garbage" affect anyone? Are you even forced acknowledge it? The thought that goes into the posts is irrelevant. The thought that goes into other posts is not. So if someone posts in the forum games with no thought in their posts, comes out, and posts other things with the same amount of thought as they used in posts before they went in, what harm does it do to anything? Does it do any at all?

 

[Valor]

We shouldn't have to wipe the Forum Games every so often. That will just keep it as a repeating problem.

What sense would that make.

 

[Ruby]

Lucas, do you agree that all spam has to be deleted?

 

[Lucas₇₅₅]

I do; But I also think that the definition and guidelines of what spam is varies by person, so it's pretty hard to do anything with it without upsetting someone.

 

[Ruby]

What I am saying is that if something is spam it doesn't matter how many people are affected by it, or how many people like it, or how many people acknowledge it. What matters is that it is spam, and that is all.

 

[surskitty]

You are also spamming if you make a post or thread that is directed personally at only a very few people and has nothing of interest for anybody else. Instead of actually posting that, you might as well simply send the person or people a PM instead of clogging up the forums with it.

Most of forum games fits this. None of it is interesting to read; any given post is of interest to the one person it's directed at.

 

[spaekle]

I do; But I also think that the definition and guidelines of what spam is varies by person, so it's pretty hard to do anything with it without upsetting someone.

Eh... well, I can understand forum games being entertaining to some extent, but this I'm gonna have to disagree with. There needs to be some sort of standard on post quality, or there'd hardly be a point at all to calling this a 'discussion forum'.

and, well, going by what the rules officially say about spam:

Edit: actually surskitty brought this up while I was typing this post but what the hey.

Rule #7: Don't spam.
A post is spam if it is of no real value to the thread. [...]

Well, I guess posts in forum games have value to the thread as long as they're posted to contribute to the game, but I think this is more of a matter of whether the thread is spam in the first place.

You are also spamming if you make a post or thread that is directed personally at only a very few people and has nothing of interest for anybody else. Instead of actually posting that, you might as well simply send the person or people a PM instead of clogging up the forums with it.

^ This paragraph almost sounds like it's echoing a lot of this thread. :V

Any thread that has no real topic of discussion for other members is also spam. For example, if you made a thread that contained only the words "BLUEBERRY PIE!", no sensible discussion will ever arise from it; we don't want the forums cluttered up with such stupidity.

Another interesting point I bolded there!

I'm still in favor of the social group thing, by the way.

 

[Lucas₇₅₅]

But still, about it saying "PM the people involved" and "little value to other people," there may not be a whole lot of people who post in the forum games, but there are a lot, I believe. Is there any way to see how many individual people have posted there?

 

[Zuu]

It doesn't matter how many are posting. What matters is how many posts are made and what value they have.

 

[surskitty]

Forum games as a whole I can understand keeping. I would, however, like most of the ones that have no value to anyone other than the one or three people it's directed at to be nixed. Most posts in You're Banned are not particularly witty or interesting and quite probably are repeated; all of the rating threads are of interest only to the person being rated at the time and are frequently simply circlejerks; the never-ending stories rarely make sense as a comprehensive whole and so could be viewed as a failure....

I'm not saying KILL ALL FORUM GAMES. It could be interesting and relevant to someone other than the one person any given post is directed at! But it never is.