last day (15 days later) » 

2:58 AM
A: “Is something wrong?” Yes: Too much moderation

Please Delete Metl;dr* When I talk about waiting I simply mean, give the community some time to see if the obviously broken answer is not actually broken at all. The Preface I never intended to post here: I am fairly certain that I voted for the current mods whenever the previous election was. If someone ...

I know on meta dv's are different, but in light of the fact that I was asked to post and update based on critique, any reason for the dv?
I didn't vote, but I can point out that neither top example answer qualifies as NAA by the text or by our moderation practices, nor does the bottom one. A mod warning that an answer might attract downvotes is orthogonal to whether a mod judges it NAA, for instance—that's just giving editing advice and trying to help improve the post.
@SevenSidedDie State of mind your honor. Otherwise, I'll simply agree to disagree. What I find most ironic is that the example clearly shows his defense of RAW, which indicates to me that is simply paranoid and the straw that seems to have broken the camel is, in fact, weightless.
I'm not sure what you're talking about regarding RAW. To be clear, I mean this example, of which you say “Given the comments, it seems fair to say that this was a case where the mod felt that NAA might apply”. I just want to clarify: that post does not qualify as NAA, and the mod's comments on it aren't suggesting it might. It's not an example that supports the statements it's being used here to illustrate. This one also doesn't qualify as NAA. If either got NAA flags, those flags'd be dismissed.
@SevenSidedDie clearly I have failed to both communicate and understand. RAW refers to the crazy discussion over at I do not know for certain, since I wasn't here, but that appears to be what sparked a chunk of this meta discussion. But I do still think that those comments point to state of mind, and given waxeagle's and your own comments around Aggressive policing and what is on topic for RAW/edition specific requests I am worried that posts like those will no longer be welcome.
2:58 AM
No worries, they're totally still not NAA and wouldn't have been made so. The proposed “aggressive policing” would have been a temporary measure, and specific to the Q&A using that tag; put another way, that aggressiveness would have been the exception that proves the normal rule that such answers are normally OK. (Elsewhere I have noted that I wasn't keen on the proposal anyway, since aggressive policing is a pain and a lot of work even for a small set of questions. Trying it on the whole site would be madness, and madness-inducing! I don't even want to imagine it.)
Also your example if asked today would be closed in about 10 seconds by the community
@waxeagle I hope you don't find that a good thing.
@joshua I do because that's how the community has chosen to govern the site and protect quality. I'll refer further discussion on this to the C.SE meta.
Balancing the unique RPG.SE needs with overall SE best practices is, indeed, one of the more thought-provoking parts of being a mod. "either-or", as your answer seems to present it, isn't an option.
Furthermore, as part of this discussion we've been encouraged for the mods to speak their own minds instead of coming to agreement amongst ourselves first, as something that helped this kind of trust issue on Puzzling. Your request to "get our story straight" instead is instructive in how different people react to different kinds of communication; I've added a sidebar in my answer to explore it.
@mxyzplk I think it's good to have each moderators very own opinion. Just keep in mind that it's hard to argue over facts instead of feelings when you have three sets of facts (for example "I would flag it", "I would not", "It depends"). It's not bad, it's just hard to find a good starting point for getting away from blanket statements and into real facts.
2:58 AM
@JoshuaDrake I've been advised by both mods and a number of high rep users that answering poor/bad questions (and I do it too) is enabling the kind of behavior we'd rather not encourage. I use we in the collective sense, since good/better questions do lead to good/better answers. I am trying to do a better job of commenting in questions to get them to improve. As I went over your example questions, the tremorsense one in particular, it was another case of querent never came back to refine the question. Your answer was good for the edition you cited -- querent never cited one. (Arrgh)
@KorvinStarmast so what if they never cited an edition? We're not launching space shuttles or saving babies. Worse case we answer with the current/prevailing version and future answers may include the next edition, as the sometimes do on SO. Sigh, I am getting the sense that this is not the community I joined. C'est la vie...
@JoshuaDrake I am not trying to dis your reply (which I liked) nor your sincere desire to help that querent. (For all I know, he was asking 3.5e). It's just that since I have begun participating here, which is chronogically some time after the 5e starter set came out it is because rules vary between editions on so many things that this kind of specificity isn't too much trouble to include when someone asks for that in a comment. Not your fault, certainly. You were trying to answer the question thoroughly, and did.
@JoshuaDrake Unlike programming language editions, game editions are often in effect entirely different games. It's not like the difference between JRE6 and JRE7, where if they just say “Java” it's pretty safe to answer without getting a version number first. It's more like if someone asked a question and it looks like code from some C-like language, but they didn't indicate whether it's C, C++, C#, Objective C, Lua embeds, or whatever. D&D is like that: you can't assume which game they actually mean, and need them to say which one explicitly.
@SevenSidedDie I was think more about Windows editions, and if you've ever been on SuperUser you know how that can go. But given that the VB.NET vs C# question I was reading on SO the other day had an answer updated 6 months after, I still disagree with you. It is especially sad that we seem unable to use common sense and tell everyone to TAG it. Recently I was talking to someone who wanted to play Pathfinder. He has an early D&D box set, is an avid board gamer, and video gamer, but he did not realize that there are different editions. I can apparently no longer recommend to him. :(
@KorvinStarmast you misunderstand me. No dis was read. Rules vary, sure, but as a community refusing to help because someone forgot to indicate/was not even aware of/or reasonably assumed the latest version of the game in question (reminding you all again that it is a GAME) is the same childish petulance of the edition and play style wars wankery gamers are associated with.
@PleaseDeleteMe Actually, I think that a link to the outstanding question/answer that lists the editions of D&D might be a good tag or auto tool, like the help center or the tour, for such an inquiry or comment. That way, What's known becomes part of getting the frame of the question right. If there's a 2e question, there's only a little I can answer. If there's a 1e question, or OD&D, I have a lot more to offer. I won't wast someone's time on a Pathfinder question. The tag, o a statement in the question on which edition, helps anyone not offer an unhelpful answer.
2:58 AM
@Joshua, it's not a real problem in practice. People use [dungeons-and-dragons] thinking there's only one, they get asked to clarify, the clarification gets made, and the question gets answered—properly, without guessing what they're talking about. The only time it doesn't work is when they never come back to check for answers anyway, and so never see the request for clarification.
(Incidentally, if you really want your account deleted you are going to have much quicker service by reading the help for how to accomplish it. Renaming one's account is an ineffective method, and is easily mistaken for a flounce.)
3:25 AM
@JoshuaDrake "I can apparently no longer recommend to him." Sure you can. I started on OD&D in 1975, and it was not hard to see from a bit of reading before I ever asked a question (an old habit I learned in the days of BBS ...) to see how the land lay. It still took a bit of work to get used to the flow and tone, as I'd become used to forum interactions. It's not, as you pointed out, rocket science.
@waxeagle I get a feeling that I may get smacked a bit at for calling out a troll ... or what looked like one. Probably gonna sit back and not participate for a bit there. Seen some very interesting stuff there.
4:17 AM
@KorvinStarmast lots of interesting stuff, and after the cowboy first days settled down it's become a very useful site that's found it's niche
@JoshuaDrake most of the time, we can help you figure out what you're talking about. It's not like we're telling people "don't ask if you don't know" it's more about "hey, can we make sure we're on the same page so we give you advice that actually works for your game?"
giving people 4e advice for their 3.5 game is just going to confuse the tar out of them. That's the whole point of edition tagging.
@KorvinStarmast Funny how I figured that out from your 1e comment.
@waxeagle that is not at all the tone the majority of the community has been communicating.
@JoshuaDrake That's very much the intent we're talking about it from a different perspective, but if you're looking at the purpose it's serving and the intent of policy rather than the practice of policy POV, you'll see that it's designed to help the user
@SevenSidedDie I'm glad it is not a problem for you and your friends, enjoy your community.
meta is very much about discussing the practice of policy because the intent is implied.
@waxeagle I was the user, and you have demonstrated repeatedly how little you care.
4:27 AM
You're not a new user, you're not going to make the mistake of not tagging an edition...
@waxeagle Dear goodness, how tone deaf are you? No on should have to tag an edition.
@JoshuaDrake I'm really confused, are we talking about the same site? unless the question is sys-agnostic, I'm expecting to find out what game the person is playing from the tags...
@waxeagle Seriously. You, like me, are a single user. It is fine that you enjoy having all the little buckets to put things in, good for you. When the OP cares about them, I like them too. But guess what, not everyone cares. Some of them have never even played an RPG before. To your question, no we are not talking about the same site, which is why I have chosen to no longer participate in it.
@SevenSidedDie Except for the ones that get closed.
@JoshuaDrake yes. We close questions where the game that is being played is ambiguous....That's again, by design so that the person can get help that actually helps them. Giving people random answers for a game they aren't playing isn't helpful
@waxeagle Really... <pounds head on table/>
@SevenSidedDie That part was done after the name change. Sorry that I still remember the bug where info would leak without it.
4:39 AM
@JoshuaDrake I realize that you're concerned about people who don't play RPGs...that's not exactly our intended audience here...
And even for those few that are, the normal iteration of asking for clarification (so that answers can actually be helpful), fixing the question, then answering it works. Yes, some get closed—if they could clarify but never care enough about their own question to bother responding, then we've saved users from wasting their time answering a dead question. That's good! The ones that never get fixed stay closed, and the ones that get fixed get reopened. This is how all SEs are supposed to work.
@waxeagle Look, it is obvious from the meta discussion that I, a regular RPG player, with experience going back over 25 year, with a minimum of 4 different RPGs on the shelf in my bedroom, and at least 3 different versions of D&D have tried to tell you that the community this discussion has outlined is one I don't want to participate in.
@SevenSidedDie Oh no, someone wasted time on the interwebs!
@JoshuaDrake Should I take that as a signal you're unfamiliar with the philosophy behind SE having a close function?
@SevenSidedDie Yes, I've only been on SE for 7 years, please explain me like I'm five.
@SevenSidedDie Look, we can't even agree on when to use NAA. And that is based on links from the original Meta.
@JoshuaDrake You're saying things that are directly contradictory of it, so I'm confused. I'm trying to figure out what you're talking about.
@JoshuaDrake No, we actually agree. What you've described for what NAA should be used for is how it's used here. I really don't know why that disconnect is continuing, but rest assured that we use it how you've expressed your desire that we use it.
What I'm seeing is a user who is clearly upset, and who is objecting to things that are either not happening, or are contradicting other things the user says they understand. I would like to help.
4:49 AM
@SevenSidedDie Funny, did you even read my whole answer on the Meta, and see @waxeagle say "Ha, ha it doesn't work that way in real life!"
@JoshuaDrake Hold on a sec while I go review that? My memory isn't gibing with that description, so I should go refresh it.
@SevenSidedDie @waxeagle actually, you guys have spent enough time on me. I'm sure we'd all hit the bar/pub and laugh about it in a few weeks if we were physically co-located. But clearly either we are simply too different, have too different of a vision, or as is more likely the case English has failed to translate between two human skulls.
@JoshuaDrake I'm not finding something that looks like that. Can you link to it?
@JoshuaDrake I think it must be a misunderstanding. You have too much familiarity with the SE model to be saying what it sounds like to us what you're saying, so there has to be a failure either on sending or receiving.
@SevenSidedDie The comment got moved to chat, so it is not handy at the moment. "@nvoigt if that actually worked, I'd be OK with that. But it really doesn't in practice."
aye, I said that. And there's context too! (I'll provide it, since I'm still awake...). This is specifically referring to the community deleting posts that I'd regard as NAA (yes, I operate with a slightly broader definition of NAA than some other people, generally don't have to break it out here much, because people are good here), but anyways, if we acknowledge that certain answers that are *off topic* to the question necessitate deletion (something we probably quibble on), then there are two options, community deletion or moderator deletion. If the community lacks sufficient will (or rea
5:00 AM
@JoshuaDrake I don't see that on your answer's deleted comments. Do you remember which post it was on?
@SevenSidedDie twas on my aggressive deletion answer
Okay, got it:
in Discussion on answer by wax eagle: “Is something wrong?” Yes: Too much moderation, yesterday, by wax eagle
@nvoigt if that actually worked, I'd be OK with that. But it really doesn't in practice.
@JoshuaDrake Is that the core item for this issue?
@SevenSidedDie That in the context of the 5.0 question, 3.5 answer, etc. I'd say about 1/2 of it.
@JoshuaDrake Okay. There's some context that I think is missing. Can I lay some of that out?
@SevenSidedDie The other 1/2 being the "version or we close it!" probably.
5:07 AM
@JoshuaDrake Well, that's an objection I don't quite understand yet, but one knot at a time I figure.
@SevenSidedDie Aside from some typos and hyperbole I don't think I have any regrets. :)
So can I lay out some context for wax eagle's response to nvoigt there?
Here? or there? I'm fine.
The response there, which has context I'd like to lay out here, yeah. Ok, bear with me a bit then.
Wax's post was regarding a proposal to collect some data about how the tag gets used by question-askers. As part of that, we were proposing handling the answers in a certain way that would smoke out askers who were using the tag wrong. This mirrors how we used to delete answers that didn't follow the old game recommendation rules.
(We don't do that anymore, because the rules didn't work and the deletions didn't help that.)
@SevenSidedDie on a personal note I'd burninate the RAW tag to the ground, but that is a side issue.
5:12 AM
@JoshuaDrake Yeah, a side issue and I think it would make it worse in the long run. But a side issue.
Nvoigt was very unhappy with how their answers would get reminded to stay or be edited to be on-topic in game recommendation questions. When game recs were made off-topic again (they're off topic by default) because the rules we laid out to allow them to be on-topic weren't working, nvoigt was rather unhappy. This has lasted.
@SevenSidedDie Yeah, I almost posted my meta answer on book list request back to that insanity.
So already there is some hard feelings surrounding any deletion of answers, when nvoigt is commenting on wax's post mentioning answer deletion.
The crucial thing that I think was lost in translation and lack of context: wax's post about aggressively policing anything was specifically about how we might have chosen to handle an aspect of data collection on the RAW tag.
So when nvoigt objects that the downvotes should be allowed to do that job, and wax responds that letting the community handle answers where there are special rules for off-topic answers does't work, it was very much in context of needing to do riduculous policing stuff on answers that were supposed to be following special rules.
@SevenSidedDie But see, I didn't agree with this part of the post either "Normally, this is pretty cut and dried, you answer a 4e question with a 3.5 or 5e answer, that's not an answer, delete. You answer a FATE question with GURPs, not an answer, delete."
5:16 AM
So those comments aren't about the general handling of answers, or what NAA means.
@JoshuaDrake Yeah, and I can see how you might object to that. It's an oversimplification, and I think you're seeing the good thrown out with the bad, when I'm nearly certain the kind of answers wax has in mind in that sentence are not what you're picturing.
@SevenSidedDie Yeah, I'm envisioning a pretty simplistic scenario there where there's a clear desire for a specific ruleset. So let me grab one of my questions a minute
@SevenSidedDie I am glad that you know him so well, but that post clearly states something that I (and I assumed nvoigt at least) disagreed with.
Q: Does Cleave trigger an adjacent enemy's mark?

wax eagleI am playing a level 5 great weapon fighter and had a question that hasn't come up yet, but I wanted clarification in case it did. One of my at-will powers is Cleave. My question is if I am marked and use Cleave on someone other than the marker while the marker is adjacent to me: Will this tr...

so this is my first RPG.SE question I ever asked. It's about 4e's cleave power and how it interacts with an arcane bit of hte fighter's class. If someone answers that with a response about 3.5's cleave power, or a similar power in 5e, neither of those answers are at all relevant to the arcane workings of 4e's power system and this particularly narrow mechanical interaction.
@JoshuaDrake I don't know what you disagree with there, because it's an oversimplification. I know, from experience, what kinds of answers wax is talking about there. What I'm not sure of is if you're on the same page and objecting to it, or on a different page and objecting to something unrelated.
@SevenSidedDie how can I know what he's objecting to? The answers are already gone!
@SevenSidedDie if they were down in the -3 range at least I'd see them.
5:21 AM
(those are hypothetical, they didn't come, the only deleted answer there is an asinine cleavage joke)
@JoshuaDrake If I implied you should know, I'm sorry and I didn't mean to. I'm trying to excavate what your objection is.
@JoshuaDrake my argument though is that they aren't actually answers, they aren't just wrong, they are actively not answering the question because they failed to grasp the context
@waxeagle Great and that worked for you as a good interaction, and certainly anyone else who picks up 4e in a year and doesn't know how cleave works.
they don't help anyone, they aren't providing anyone useful context, they are pointless
@waxeagle Can you tell me how that stands the test of time? You got one man's opinion.
@waxeagle You missed the point. They didn't answer the question for you.
5:25 AM
@JoshuaDrake Wait right there.
Can you explain, for a moment, how an answer about Cleave in D&D 3.5e works would have been answering that question?
@waxeagle (Not the cleavage joke) but maybe someone would have liked to know how they evolved from 3.5. Maybe the 3.5 rule explicitly said: "marks trigger when..."
@JoshuaDrake does 3.5 even have a concept of marking?
@JoshuaDrake There aren't any fighter marks in 3.5, that's part of the point. An answer that just talks about 3.5 doesn't even… make sense.
Guys, it was an example.
@JoshuaDrake Yeah, and we're trying to use it to understand the crux of your objection.
5:28 AM
@JoshuaDrake and one that proves the point we're trying ot make, 3.5 and 4e are completely different games
so an answer that gives 3.5 rulest on a 4e question makes 0 sense
Honestly this is becoming comical.
@JoshuaDrake Can you answer a couple hypothetical questions, then?
And none of the stuff I had in AD&D 2nd Edition is relevant to 5e
And nothing I read in Dungeon World will ever help me play D&D
@JoshuaDrake No, that's not true. This is where I mean you're looking at an oversimplification.
@JoshuaDrake Ditto, not true.
and heaven forbid I read Burning Wheel
Oh wait, someone here found that a useful answer.
Forgot about that.
A: How do I implement Social Combat into a D&D/D20/Pathfinder game?

Please Delete Me In 4.0 you could run a skills challenge. (@okeefe I was too slow looking up a link. :( ) In 3.5 you could use the given social skills like bluff, diplomacy, sense motive, etc. to create opposed rolls between characters. You could house rule your own system like Burning Wheel's Duel of Wits

Oh yeah. Funny that one.
5:30 AM
see that's a completely different type of question...
Someone asked about their D&D game
@JoshuaDrake When I say you're objecting to something that's not happening, this is what I'm talking about. There is nothing wrong with that answer to that question.
and this is where we're talking past each other
Specifically they asked about D20
And I answered with 4.0, 3.5 and Burning Wheel
@JoshuaDrake If it's not obvious, we're agreeing with you. That answer is fine. It doesn't count as NAA.
5:32 AM
Dear goodness the hodgepodge
But your meta does NOT say that it is fine.
yeah, we're talking about two completely different styles of questions
and you're missing that
@JoshuaDrake So what's happening here is that we're saying “snakes are going to be deleted” and you're objecting “but slothss shouldn't be deleted!” And then we get confused why you're saying that.
Whatever guys, as I said, tone deaf.
Here I thought we'd be parting on better terms.
@JoshuaDrake Yeah, that line you're objecting to is an oversimplification, and is specifically about one context where there would be special rules for deletion. Which don't apply, and will never, to any of the answers you're wanting us to not delete. We agree with you.
goodnight y'all I've gottta get to bed before I turn into a pumpkin. @JoshuaDrake it's been a pleasure.
5:37 AM
At least to this college educated (cog sci, BTW Philosophy, Linguistics, Psychology and Comp Sci), native English speaker who manages to hold down a job despite arguing the philosophy of a chat site for the grown up version of cops and robber after midnight, you can't imagine how anyone could ever hear you differently than you sound in your own heads.
It's your prerogative to leave the site for whatever reasons you like, but it seems unfortunate to me that you would leave over the chance we might do something that we've sworn up and down that we won't do.
Oh, a fellow cogsci grad. :)
Please tell me you didn't go to UR
@JoshuaDrake I'm not saying that someone might read that answer the way you did.
@JoshuaDrake No, SFU.
5:39 AM
@SevenSidedDie Name a dinning hall and I'll believe you.
What I'm saying is an attempt to explain with more nuance what our actual position is, so as to wipe away the misunderstanding caused by that post.
@SevenSidedDie can you not see the problem that it has been like a day and a half and numerous posts and followups and I'm not 100% convinced, now imagine what some who didn't soldier through all this must think.
@JoshuaDrake Does SFU have dining halls in residence? Outside residence at least, there was only the caf between the econ and phil towers, and little nooks scattered around the rest of the place.
@JoshuaDrake So is your objection that the post needs correction?
@SevenSidedDie lol I thought that you meant: (S)hut the (F)... (U)p. as you were a UR grad too.
@JoshuaDrake Oh, sorry! No, that makes much more sense. When you asked me about dining halls I started wondering what UR was at SFU. Simon Fraser University. Local here.
5:44 AM
Ahh, University of Rochester, NY.
@JoshuaDrake A whole continent away then. :)
So: is the objection that wax's description of how answers are handled is misstated (and as stated reads like a terribad idea) or is the objection that our actual real handling of answers is bad?
Yeah, funny I figured at least one of you might be British.
My objection was to the policy as outlined in that post.
@JoshuaDrake Being Canadian is kind of like bring half British, in some ways. Definitely in my spelling.
@JoshuaDrake Yeah, that's a reasonable thing to object to.
Gary != Grey when sting matching, pro developer tip!
@SevenSidedDie the whole meta storm (aside form that paranoid rant) reads like a police state.
@JoshuaDrake Yeah, gotta regex that…
5:47 AM
"now they have two problems..."
Also, Cali native so I maybe a bit too free spirit for SE in general.
@JoshuaDrake There's going to be some of that when high-rep users participate and have major beefs. We can't blow over in a stiff wind that's wrong about relevant facts, so we do end up looking like walls. It's really unfortunate. :/
But it is not just the mods.
After looking at the vote tallies.
@JoshuaDrake How so?
The majority of votes are clearly in favor of the moderation as it. It certainly looks like the majority of the community wants something closer akin to what wax actually wrote.
Note the downvotes on my own half-assed attempt.
And I don't feel "picked on" or even anything like that in spite of my smart mouthed comments a few times (okay probably more than a few).
@JoshuaDrake Like we've been saying though, current moderation is actually pretty relaxed regarding answers. If it looks like the votes are for the status quo, it's pretty much in line with what you've been asking for.
5:54 AM
That maybe, but it feels more significant than that.
@JoshuaDrake The votes on the “aggressively police” post by wax—what I think you mean by “what wax actually wrote”—are actually pretty poor. It's not being endorsed:
A: “Is something wrong?” Yes: Too much moderation

wax eagleI'll probably post another more general answer here. But I really want to address something very specific for the moment. The line that seems to have struck a nerve in my RAW data collection post: Aggressively Police Answers All that was meant by that statement was that I was (and still am)...

Well, that one struck a nerve with more people probably, but it still has +5/-2 and at least one of those is me. :)
@JoshuaDrake Maybe it's just from where I'm sitting, but 3 (5/-2) is a really weak showing on meta.
lol, I'm just used to having fewer comments on mine in general. ;)
As someone who just hit up during lunch, a few days back and stumbled into this meta thing... having no actual complaints, I get the impression that the community has shifted from when I first joined up 4 years back.
@JoshuaDrake Yeah… you kinda waded into a major storm. Fortunately, the central issue causing it seems to be almost calm:
Q: A low-intervention approach [rules-as-written]: back to tagging basics

SevenSidedDieSometime during the weeks of wrangling over the rules-as-written tag it occurred to me that, I am pretty sure, we've fallen into a fundamental error that may be the cause of all the problems: Tags aren't for sending encoded signals to answer-writers That's the job of the question body itself, o...

@JoshuaDrake It has definitely shifted, that's true. I'm not sure that it's shifted in the ways you're concerned about, but it has definitely shifted in some notable ways.
6:02 AM
:27823496I liked for that one.
@SevenSidedDie I'm certain I've shifted too. Some for the worse (not participating nearly as much), some for the better (at least I didn't rage quit like I did the DBA stack probably 4 years back.)
@JoshuaDrake Oh, yeah, that proposal is great. It would be my ideal… if we were going to forge forward with data collection. For complicated reasons involving 1) being pretty sure that no amount of data will be accepted by those I'm most eager to bring to the table and 2) having a solution that I think is supportable without months of data collection, we're not likely to implement it. But doppel deserves kudos for writing a good idea.
Tell wax thanks. Hope you all don't feel like you wasted your time.
I'll probably still crack a grin when I see your avatar, I should probably have that looked at...
@JoshuaDrake I do hope it was helpful! That's the best measure of whether it was worthwhile, regardless of your decision regarding membership.
Well at least I think we understand each other better. On the internet that may be worth a whole lot.
I'm glad. :) I feel like sometimes I'm a cranky curmudgeonly crankasaur, so someone reminding me that I don't come off that way lifts me up.
@JoshuaDrake It… yeah. It really is. It's rare enough to value when it happens.
6:10 AM
I still think the meta needs toned down, but I only ever got the impression that @mxyzplk was cranky ;-) .
Know this, at least one person with a different view on how to run things, thinks that the community as a majority is happy with the site as is and the moderation thereof. And if I'm right, then you all are doing exactly what you should be.
@JoshuaDrake Yeah, meta is at a steady simmer these days. It'll calm down at some point I'm sure. Sorting out misunderstandings like this, one at a time, seems to be an important part of getting meta on a more even keel, actually!
@JoshuaDrake There's always an element of “can't please everyone” that we struggle with. Struggle, because we don't actually want to needlessly displease anyone. So asking ourselves “what's the right thing to do? what are we originally supposed to do?” is our constant companion.
6:26 AM
@JoshuaDrake I'm going to sign out shortly since it's bedtime soon. I just want to thank you before I go for being so receptive to my attempts to re-engage and sort out what was wrong. It gives me hope. :) I hope you have a good impending day/night period as relevant for your location!
7 hours later…
1:10 PM
@JoshuaDrake Well now I'm sad. Had I not poured fuel on the flame strikes that came off of KRyan's reaction to the r-a-w tag dialogue, you'd not have gotten alienated/upset with the community to the point that we may lose your input. From where I sit, all that amounts to is a pile of suck. I'll ask you to stick around and participate in the future since you ability to explain stuff in an RPG is solid.
3 hours later…
4:01 PM
@KorvinStarmast Don't be sad.
@KorvinStarmast Hopefully, as the throw back Thursday appropriate song says: "no one is to blame."

last day (15 days later) »