Conversation started Feb 15, 2011 at 19:38.
Feb 15, 2011 19:38
@TomWij Since I wrote half the FAQ, and I was actually here when the policies where set, I am correcting an assumption your making which is wrong, and which to be honest, 99% of the users in this room knows is wrong about gaming. The FAQ didn't just appear overnight.
Assumption?
So if you don't want to know what actually led to an event, don't use it in an argument. And also don't claim that we are wrong because you read the FAQ. That's offensive to the people that were here when that policy was set.
2
What assumption, I'm not making assumptions...
22
Q: Are video game questions appropriate for superuser?

Or is it time to create another site? questions could be general discussion or tips/tricks

@Diago Respect goes both ways, off-topic commenting and saying something that comes from the FAQ is wrong, isn't...
Feb 15, 2011 19:40
Actually Tom, this statement right here by you is wrong and an assumption:
Good heavens, this is ridiculous.
> And thus Super User prohibits questions for passionate videogamers on all platforms because they can visit Gaming.SE.
Welcome ccomet.
> What kind of questions should I not ask here?
scrolls
I didn't say the FAQ was wrong. I said you drew your support a bit incorrectly, which I don't think is wise considering I'm trying to support the same viewpoint.
> Passionate videogamers on all platforms, ask on Gaming.
Feb 15, 2011 19:41
We DO NOT prohibited questions about games because of gaming SE. It's the other way around. It was created because of us banning games
2
@Diago Does that matter in the Emacs discussion? No! Take it elsewhere...
@TomWij Do you even realise that the FAQ was updated after Gaming was created, and before that, there was nothing.
@TomWij Well you brought it up? Seriously, are you 10? That is your comment I am quoting isn't it?
Yes, it does matter, because you tried to use Gaming to justify existing-site scope discussion.
Which, honestly, doesn't work.
@Diago Where did I bring that up?
Right in the comment that came before mine.
Feb 15, 2011 19:43
@GraceNote As an example.
A bad example
I was suggesting that you use a more applicable example because the one you picked doesn't illustrate what you need it to
@TomWij Right there:
I'm trying to strengthen your argument, not defeat it.
And thus Super User prohibits questions for passionate videogamers on all platforms because they can visit Gaming.SE. I don't see that happen for for a single editor/IDE Emacs, but I would see that happen for a editor/IDE experts site which would solve @ModernHacker's problem... – TomWij 6 hours ago
Also, hex you, Clippy.
2
Feb 15, 2011 19:44
@Diago: @GraceNote: Does Super User prohibit games or not? Answer this and then read my comment before @ccommet's comment again.
Yes, it does, but not for the reason you specified.
@GraceNote Why is the example bad?
Because Gaming doesn't illustrate what you need it to, like I just said.
See how big Editors/IDE are if you combine them all in Super User.
See how big Games where back then if you combined those all back then in Super User.
Wil
Wil
* I WANT A NOTEPAD STACK EXCHANGE SITE!!! *
5
Feb 15, 2011 19:46
Gaming's off-topic on Super User is about as applicable to your argument as is their being off-topic on English.
@GraceNote: No, because Games are Computer Software, while English is a language.
But that has nothing to do with why Gaming is off-topic to Super User.
@GraceNote: Well, it has nothing to do with why Emacs/Editors/IDEs/... are off-topic to Super User either.
See how Gaming is a good example a in comparison with Editors/IDEs?
So you agree that it is a bad example, then.
No, see how similar it is to Editors/IDEs. ;-)
Feb 15, 2011 19:48
No, I don't, because that's not how arguments work.
@GraceNote As for strengening my argument, I don't see how you did that this way...
You can't assert that coins are golden because bananas are yellow.
@GraceNote Metaphors are funny, this one doesn't apply to our discussion though.
How is a coin similar to a banana?
How is golden similar to yellow?
 
Conversation ended Feb 15, 2011 at 19:49.