Absolutely. This thread is giving me a headache.

not really
and you didnt respond to me buying final fantasy ! ;p

I've never played a FF game. I have nothing to offer that comment. :P

you and your glib logic ;p

i bought FF 3 5 and 6

now all we need is 1 2 and 9 and the first 9 are all on steam
and i really need to finish 4

Let's be real here. This is not about accepting them anymore. And they have no power to get you to give them anything anyway.

Heck, I don't "accept" them in some sense of that word. They are likely a jerk, at least as far as enjoying the fact that a certain Supreme Court justice recently died. And a clueless or disingenuous jerk... can't really make my mind which is more likely tbh...

But you are going into actively rejecting them and trying to push them out of here. So yeah, sometimes jerks can be victims...

I think you need to reflect what exactly you are trying to achieve in relation to greene. And when you know what you want from them, of them, maybe you still should think a bit why you want that.

I'm not trying to get anyone to be friends here. F&^% that kindergarden shit. I just don't understand what is so serious and bad about what they're doing that it can't be tolerated.

And again, because the joker troll was right on the nose: if you think tolerance equals support, you are into SJW territory and have become the monster.

Now can we please stop talking about greene? Why not make this meta level again folks? It would freaking help me get the pronouns straightened out at least...

sure fine with me

And why is that I wonder? :)



Please no talk about gaming. In this context it's a transparent attempt to derail and dismiss the serious conversation that is required and some want to have.

Can you respect that?

okay fine ill bow out unless somebody summons me

Appears I didn't see this thread yesterday....

To avoid interminable arguments, I think there needs to be agreement between the people engaging to drop a point when its dead, or acknowledge a point as countered when it is. But the problem comes when people can't agree on the point of invalidity of an argument or just refuse to accept it, or simply don't believe in fact based argumentation at all.

From what I gather, its easier to acknowledge that a point raised on a forum isn't important, leave the discussion and come back later still using the same points without addressing criticism of those points. I support the freedom to do that, but I agree it doesn't advance the discussion. A possible solution if we want a create a topic where the posters have to agree to adhere to those rules in that topic only, but that depends entirely on people using those repetitive arguments not posting there and other people discussing not replying to posts that violate the rules.

Avoiding using an argument will depend on how strongly a person believes in that argument, and on what basis that belief is held. If it is held as valid on very strong grounds by that person, it will probably not be possible for them to not use it. And considering how closely someone believes an invalid argument, it might not be possible for them to be convinced off of believing it on a forum on the internet. The only solution to that is to ignore those arguments and focus on others.

As to newbies, I think the reason they don't get treated as well is because people suspect alts, and given the history of those on these forums and those that still use them today, I wouldn't blame them. I wouldn't want GOG to limit accounts by IP, but alts are a problem, at least how I feel. The reason I don't reply to many noobs is because I think their alts.
As to solving that problem, I heard totalbiscuit once say putting a one week limit between registration on a forum and posting help a lot. Logic being the people cool down and don't post stuff in the hear of the moment, also makes making alt accounts a longer process and worth less effort. But we have forum specific quirks, like this one's lack of moderation (which I still think is a plus more than disadvantage).

As to controlling emotions and tone, its is completely reasonable to say and easy to do, but it really can't be enforced and everyone has a breaking point after which they lose patience and scream and shout at everyone. Same with having a welcoming community. No one is obligated to be nice to anyone else on the internet, and no one is obligated to use proper pronouns or whatever.

TL;DR, it will improve the quality of discussions we can have here to control emotions and not bring up dead arguments, but it really depends on how willing people are to follow those principles. Given every debate on the internet is low risk and low reward, I don't think we can enforce it unless we have a topic with those principles as rules and voluntary posting.

Good points. Thanks for the effort.

Re: "I think there needs to be agreement between the people engaging to drop a point when its dead"

I think it takes only one to stop an argument - no mutual agreement required usually. Stepping aways does not mean you lost the argument, and there's nothing more comic than somone screaming at the air when their adversary is long gone to do something else. Basically sometimes moving on is the way to "win". This is I think the truth behind the expression Only way to win is not to play.

Then on the forum specifics, that's definitively getting into object level discussion. I have some thoughts on that but will keep them to myself for now.

Another point, on your conclusion about no one being obligated to be nice, and everyone having a breaking point. I think the best way to address that is for your friends to be such that they pull you back, rather than egg you on. Obviously when you go over the line the ones that made you go over the line (intentionaly or not) are the least likely to be able to deescalate you. What can be tragic though, is when people have blind loyalty, and will support their family and friends regardless of actions. My buddy threw the first punch, but instead of holding him and gettign him out of the brawl, I'll jump right in and punch his victim's buddy. Yay to me, I'm such a good friend. Or maybe I'm just reinforcing destructive behaviors and the right thing to do would be more counterintuitive? But I know it's hard to be a true friend, when the person you are helping does not see it as being helpful, rather the opposite. Tragic really.

I have a nice anecdote about a baby bird and a cowturd making that same point. Not sure you'll want to hear such folksy wisdom though. :D

Final comment. More a question really. What you said about net debates being low risk and low reward surprised me a bit. I hope you can ellaborate, because I actually see the net as high reward. Maybe it's because I am old enough to remember the days before you had the world at your fingertips, but I always felt this shit can be magic. I mean, here I am talking to someone from India, after having had a chat with someone from the Netherlands, all people with wonderfully different approaches to life, from whom I can learn something and if not change my mind, at least get to know them / the world's variety better? That's without considering how easy it is to find people with similar interests as me - in GOG for example I know I can discuss old games and DRM free philosophies whenever I want. I think those are all valuable things, and I get them at a very low cost. You see what I mean?

Is the OP running for president, or what?

Would you vote for me?

People have told me I should go into politics. Goes to show how little they truly know me... I'm no Cincinnatus.

I don't vote in general, I don't believe in majority rule or any of that crap. Well, I vote for games to be on GOG. :P
But theoretically, if I was to cast a vote, no I wouldn't vote for you. You talk way too much!

cant be worse then trump