The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Why did x megathread get locked?

12467

Posts

  • WybornWyborn GET EQUIPPED Registered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    Jars wrote: »
    ceres wrote: »
    I just want to say here that I think people have the idea that a successful thread has to make it to 100 pages because that's the round arbitrary number that has been picked to lock them at no matter what. I've made a thread here or there in SE, and I think maybe one ever has hit ten pages. I don't think that makes them failures.

    This may be partly the fact that I spend all my time in a part of the forum where multi-page threads are the exception and not the rule, but at a certain point it might be worthwhile to review and adjust the criteria for what makes a thread successful.

    I think a better question than "how long did the thread last?" is "did you get to have the conversation you wanted to have?"

    I feel like I keep reading things like "when I posted about this game in the [X] thread the conversation went on for a whole page but when I went and made a thread about the same game it died after a page." The functional difference between those two statements is nil; the conversation lasted a page. With or without Giant Thread X it would have lasted a page, just outside of that thread people who might not keep up with the big thread but are still interested in the game will see it. Post count is not a good metric to determine this.

    Neither is how long a thread stays on the first page. SE can move pretty fast, and it's entirely possible to post in a thread at 7am and have it fall off of page two by 4pm, even if it gets posted in every day. That's okay. I have a thread going right now that is essentially a two-project knitting circle (though not closed, anyone could come try the project with us). There are maybe five people who actively use it, and sometimes I have to dig around page four or five for it when I want it to post or for reference, but the people who use it do that when we have updates. Although the sensible ones probably bookmark it. But you get the idea.

    Not every thread is going to live to see 100, but that doesn't mean the ones that don't are without value, or that making them is a pointless endeavor. And just because a thread does reach a hundred pages doesn't mean it needs to be a thread all the time. There's a balance to be struck between "conversation about X should really take place in the X thread instead of following the tangent in the Y thread" and having every thread turn into a chat about one's day, just with different groups of people who spend most of their time under thread titles with letters arranged this way instead of this way. Part of finding that balance is locking even good threads at a certain point and giving them a rest. This is especially true of the kind of topic that tends to involve personal stories and anecdotes. Those things can get stale or run dry after a while.

    If what you really want is to create an inclusive conversation, that's a great reason to make a thread. If you want to make a thread that will go to page 100 and be immediately recycled, that is a very different kind of goal.

    But again.

    There are people who will click on a specific thread about x and there are people who won't but if they run into topic x in a less focused thread they may become interested and engaged by it and join the conversation.

    why?

    if you want to talk about something then go post in the thread about it. it's really that simple

    talking to the wall is no fun, even if I paint a box on my wall saying "this is a topic about stuff".

    but there are people that clearly do want to talk about it because apparently conversations about these games pop up all the time, but only in megathreads.

    what makes going into a thread about it that much more difficult. this seems to me like a self inflicted thing. people want to talk about a topic but they aren't willing to do so.

    In fairness, Blueblue made a good point about this - one reply to a given post about La Mulana in the LM thread, but somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 in a very short amount of time for the same post in the Steam thread

    That doesn't speak to reasons, I guess, but it does speak to the phenomenon

    dN0T6ur.png
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    Wyborn wrote: »
    I remember that the Giant Bomb thread went quietly into the night (mostly) after you gave the people in it warning that the whole thing was being shuttered for a while

    If this comes up again - like hypothetically if we have a megathread and it's allowed to stand until you say "No that's enough of that" - do you think that getting a little more of a heads up is going to be the norm? Or does that usually cause more drama than it prevents?

    I think we should generally give at least one thread cycle as warning, and explain why we're doing it.
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Dedwrekka wrote: »
    Do the problems associated with the SE Superhero thread existing outside of GV also apply to the Agents of Shield, Daredevil, Ant-Man, Marvel, and DC threads in G&T?
    One is ostensibly a comic thread that often talks about movies, and the others are ostensibly movie/show threads that often talk about comics.

    Sorry, do you mean D&D? If G&T has threads about tv shows and movies something is very seriously amiss.

    Yeah, my bad. I meant D&D.

    Ok so the answer: possibly with the larger Marvel and DC threads. I don't actually know what their remit would be, given we have a whole forum for on topic superhero talk. For individual tv show/film threads, probably not. There's a clear crossover there.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    Jars wrote: »
    ceres wrote: »
    I just want to say here that I think people have the idea that a successful thread has to make it to 100 pages because that's the round arbitrary number that has been picked to lock them at no matter what. I've made a thread here or there in SE, and I think maybe one ever has hit ten pages. I don't think that makes them failures.

    This may be partly the fact that I spend all my time in a part of the forum where multi-page threads are the exception and not the rule, but at a certain point it might be worthwhile to review and adjust the criteria for what makes a thread successful.

    I think a better question than "how long did the thread last?" is "did you get to have the conversation you wanted to have?"

    I feel like I keep reading things like "when I posted about this game in the [X] thread the conversation went on for a whole page but when I went and made a thread about the same game it died after a page." The functional difference between those two statements is nil; the conversation lasted a page. With or without Giant Thread X it would have lasted a page, just outside of that thread people who might not keep up with the big thread but are still interested in the game will see it. Post count is not a good metric to determine this.

    Neither is how long a thread stays on the first page. SE can move pretty fast, and it's entirely possible to post in a thread at 7am and have it fall off of page two by 4pm, even if it gets posted in every day. That's okay. I have a thread going right now that is essentially a two-project knitting circle (though not closed, anyone could come try the project with us). There are maybe five people who actively use it, and sometimes I have to dig around page four or five for it when I want it to post or for reference, but the people who use it do that when we have updates. Although the sensible ones probably bookmark it. But you get the idea.

    Not every thread is going to live to see 100, but that doesn't mean the ones that don't are without value, or that making them is a pointless endeavor. And just because a thread does reach a hundred pages doesn't mean it needs to be a thread all the time. There's a balance to be struck between "conversation about X should really take place in the X thread instead of following the tangent in the Y thread" and having every thread turn into a chat about one's day, just with different groups of people who spend most of their time under thread titles with letters arranged this way instead of this way. Part of finding that balance is locking even good threads at a certain point and giving them a rest. This is especially true of the kind of topic that tends to involve personal stories and anecdotes. Those things can get stale or run dry after a while.

    If what you really want is to create an inclusive conversation, that's a great reason to make a thread. If you want to make a thread that will go to page 100 and be immediately recycled, that is a very different kind of goal.

    But again.

    There are people who will click on a specific thread about x and there are people who won't but if they run into topic x in a less focused thread they may become interested and engaged by it and join the conversation.

    why?

    if you want to talk about something then go post in the thread about it. it's really that simple

    talking to the wall is no fun, even if I paint a box on my wall saying "this is a topic about stuff".

    but there are people that clearly do want to talk about it because apparently conversations about these games pop up all the time, but only in megathreads.

    what makes going into a thread about it that much more difficult. this seems to me like a self inflicted thing. people want to talk about a topic but they aren't willing to do so.

    some posts require effort or research, and it's hard to care if nobody's going to read it. There are other, more dedicated forums. I'd only post about it here if I want to talk about it with a given group of regulars in a thread

    but for G&T in particular, there can be other additional expectations for thread creation - a somewhat detailed/authoritative OP, in-game guild leadership, etc. that's a lot of commitment for something that might not actually get any interest. and if one were so motivated as to seek out a game-specific thread regardless, well, the era of bbcode fanforums for everything is fading but nowadays Reddit is but a click away

    aRkpc.gif
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    sounds like people just go to the steam thread they already view/bookmark it and ignore the others. that's... quite relevant to the topic isn't it

  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka Metal Hell adjacentRegistered User regular
    edited August 2015
    Rainfall wrote: »
    Tox wrote: »
    Honestly I have no problem trying to break down the superhero thread because if I don't spend multiple hours in that thread over the course of the day it ends up too long and I just end up skimming several pages to make sure I didn't miss anything major. So making it to where I can come back a day later and oh I've only missed a couple of pages, and maybe a good joke or two, that's fine with me.

    I think that spinoff threads for new movie releases would solve the core of this problem, when a new MCU film comes out it wipes out discussion of anything else for 20+ pages.

    I agree, as long as it's handled well. The D&D threads tend to homogenize over time as the release gets further in the past and the threads devolve into general discussion, or turn into discussions meant for one thing but oh I clicked on the wrong thread because there's five of them on the front page about related properties. But the other question is, why not just make the Superhero thread spinoffs in GV?

    Dedwrekka on
  • ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    edited August 2015
    Straightzi wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    I'm not going to be drawn into giving precise definitions of subjective judgments.

    I get that

    but it does mean theres a specter of possible closure over any thread that contains multiple topics, which is why I was just trying to get a general idea

    point taken

    Why is this such a worry for you?

    You make a thread and you see what happens

    It's a roll of the dice every time you make any thread

    Sometimes those dice will come up with a lock symbol, and sometimes they'll come up with so few posts the thread vanishes into obscurity

    That's just the way it goes

    because its really not fun to have a fun discussion going and then have the thread locked

    edit: again, not complaining, just answering why its a concern for me in particular

    Chincymcchilla on
    I have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • ceresceres When the last moon is cast over the last star of morning And the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
    ceres wrote: »
    I just want to say here that I think people have the idea that a successful thread has to make it to 100 pages because that's the round arbitrary number that has been picked to lock them at no matter what. I've made a thread here or there in SE, and I think maybe one ever has hit ten pages. I don't think that makes them failures.

    This may be partly the fact that I spend all my time in a part of the forum where multi-page threads are the exception and not the rule, but at a certain point it might be worthwhile to review and adjust the criteria for what makes a thread successful.

    I think a better question than "how long did the thread last?" is "did you get to have the conversation you wanted to have?"

    I feel like I keep reading things like "when I posted about this game in the [X] thread the conversation went on for a whole page but when I went and made a thread about the same game it died after a page." The functional difference between those two statements is nil; the conversation lasted a page. With or without Giant Thread X it would have lasted a page, just outside of that thread people who might not keep up with the big thread but are still interested in the game will see it. Post count is not a good metric to determine this.

    Neither is how long a thread stays on the first page. SE can move pretty fast, and it's entirely possible to post in a thread at 7am and have it fall off of page two by 4pm, even if it gets posted in every day. That's okay. I have a thread going right now that is essentially a two-project knitting circle (though not closed, anyone could come try the project with us). There are maybe five people who actively use it, and sometimes I have to dig around page four or five for it when I want it to post or for reference, but the people who use it do that when we have updates. Although the sensible ones probably bookmark it. But you get the idea.

    Not every thread is going to live to see 100, but that doesn't mean the ones that don't are without value, or that making them is a pointless endeavor. And just because a thread does reach a hundred pages doesn't mean it needs to be a thread all the time. There's a balance to be struck between "conversation about X should really take place in the X thread instead of following the tangent in the Y thread" and having every thread turn into a chat about one's day, just with different groups of people who spend most of their time under thread titles with letters arranged this way instead of this way. Part of finding that balance is locking even good threads at a certain point and giving them a rest. This is especially true of the kind of topic that tends to involve personal stories and anecdotes. Those things can get stale or run dry after a while.

    If what you really want is to create an inclusive conversation, that's a great reason to make a thread. If you want to make a thread that will go to page 100 and be immediately recycled, that is a very different kind of goal.

    But again.

    There are people who will click on a specific thread about x and there are people who won't but if they run into topic x in a less focused thread they may become interested and engaged by it and join the conversation.

    Yeah I mean, I guess my post wasn't really meant to address what you're saying, and I'm not sure what about its content gave the impression that it was aimed at people who only want to do their chatting in huge pre-made threads. It was actually meant to address the anxiety or perception of futility people are talking about surrounding creating their own threads, and to give my perspective on the discussion occurring in this thread, having had literally nothing to do with the decision or the execution of it. It was not intended to be a comprehensive explanation or solution.

    And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    ronya wrote: »
    but for G&T in particular, there can be other additional expectations for thread creation - a somewhat detailed/authoritative OP, in-game guild leadership, etc. that's a lot of commitment for something that might not actually get any interest. and if one were so motivated as to seek out a game-specific thread regardless, well, the era of bbcode fanforums for everything is fading but nowadays Reddit is but a click away

    I hate those expectations. No one reads those OPs, certainly not more than once. There's an element of preening and status seeking about it, especially when people complain (and they sometimes do!) that they would 'make a better OP' and 'keep it updated'. If I make a thread about a game I almost always use the format "(x) is a pretty fun game" and then write a couple of sentences about why I like it.

  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    I mean I made a thread about SMAC that was just "this game is 12 quarters on gog go buy it" and then the body was fuck miriam over and over and people posted in it

    because holy shit fuck miriam

  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Cybertronian Paranormal Eliminator Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    but for G&T in particular, there can be other additional expectations for thread creation - a somewhat detailed/authoritative OP, in-game guild leadership, etc. that's a lot of commitment for something that might not actually get any interest. and if one were so motivated as to seek out a game-specific thread regardless, well, the era of bbcode fanforums for everything is fading but nowadays Reddit is but a click away

    I hate those expectations. No one reads those OPs, certainly not more than once. There's an element of preening and status seeking about it, especially when people complain (and they sometimes do!) that they would 'make a better OP' and 'keep it updated'. If I make a thread about a game I almost always use the format "(x) is a pretty fun game" and then write a couple of sentences about why I like it.

    I've done some OPs in my time. One day I had to look up a question to something, and then later I came back to update the OP and realized I already answered the question there ages ago.

    Even the people who make the OPs don't read the OPs.

  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    Straightzi wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    I'm not going to be drawn into giving precise definitions of subjective judgments.

    I get that

    but it does mean theres a specter of possible closure over any thread that contains multiple topics, which is why I was just trying to get a general idea

    point taken

    Why is this such a worry for you?

    You make a thread and you see what happens

    It's a roll of the dice every time you make any thread

    Sometimes those dice will come up with a lock symbol, and sometimes they'll come up with so few posts the thread vanishes into obscurity

    That's just the way it goes

    It may just be a bad comparison, but I don't think mod actions should ever really be analogous to dice rolls. There should at least be reasons given to those who ask for them.

  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited August 2015
    Jars wrote: »
    sounds like people just go to the steam thread they already view/bookmark it and ignore the others. that's... quite relevant to the topic isn't it

    Steam games are a weird sort because there are a few that can sustain a thread on their own, like Evolve, Crusader kings, Civilization, etc., and a lot, lot more that cannot and their only exposure will be a few pages here and there in one of the Steam threads.

    DoctorArch on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
  • turtleantturtleant Gunpla Dad is the best.Registered User regular
    Big threads are really nice when I'm just getting around to playing a game for the first time that has been out for a while.

    It's just how it works. If I'm playing some game that's already come and gone for most people and their isn't a big thread that is related to it, I'm either going to have to necropost an old thread about it or make a new thread about it. Both of which will get 1 or 2 responses and then disappear off of the first page, and the saying "out of sight, out of mind" very much applies to small threads.

    Where as, if I post in a big thread, I'll probably get at least a few people discussing the game for a while, and that discussion might spin off to other similar games, and it's just a much better experience.

    Big, more general threads also tend to be much better about spoilers too, in my experience. Like, I just started playing Bloodborne last week, but I don't really want to go into the BB thread because it's full of people discussing end game bosses and weapons and such.

    X22wmuF.jpg
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Cybertronian Paranormal Eliminator Registered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    I mean I made a thread about SMAC that was just "this game is 12 quarters on gog go buy it" and then the body was fuck miriam over and over and people posted in it

    because holy shit fuck miriam

    To be fair, that's a pretty informative OP.

  • RainfallRainfall Registered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    I mean I made a thread about SMAC that was just "this game is 12 quarters on gog go buy it" and then the body was fuck miriam over and over and people posted in it

    because holy shit fuck miriam

    Fuck Deirdre :winky:

    But no seriously god dammit miriam whyy

  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    I mean I made a thread about SMAC that was just "this game is 12 quarters on gog go buy it" and then the body was fuck miriam over and over and people posted in it

    because holy shit fuck miriam

    To be fair, that's a pretty informative OP.

    I agree. It absolutely got right to the important stuff!

    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
  • Mr. GMr. G Registered User regular
    The Xbox OP I made was literally copied and pasted from the Wikipedia articles for the Xbox One and the Xbox

    Though that was deliberate for a gag

    6F32U1X.png
  • BlankZoeBlankZoe Registered User regular
    I'm kinda curious about the eventual fate of the superhero thread

    Like it absolutely has problematic elements in it and has some real bad dog piling tendencies, but there tends to be a lot more discussion about a lot more topics in there than GV and in the past when it has either gone away for a while or there has been a push to get people to go to GV they've never really worked? Like, I would really like it if GV became really active and fun and lively but even Geebs' super creative contests and polls couldn't breath life back into it.

    I would be pretty bummed out if the thread outright disappeared because it is a subject I, shockingly, like to discuss frequently and GV moves at a far more glacial pace and is way less spontaneous and fun in its flow of discussion. If we had a solution that fixed this issue then I would be happy but I'm skeptical since it didn't work the last two times it was attempted.

    CYpGAPn.png
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    In G&T it's pretty rare that I even open the first page of a thread. If I want to read about Batman or whatever I start from the last page and go back if I seem to have missed something.

  • LockedOnTargetLockedOnTarget Registered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    Jars wrote: »
    ceres wrote: »
    I just want to say here that I think people have the idea that a successful thread has to make it to 100 pages because that's the round arbitrary number that has been picked to lock them at no matter what. I've made a thread here or there in SE, and I think maybe one ever has hit ten pages. I don't think that makes them failures.

    This may be partly the fact that I spend all my time in a part of the forum where multi-page threads are the exception and not the rule, but at a certain point it might be worthwhile to review and adjust the criteria for what makes a thread successful.

    I think a better question than "how long did the thread last?" is "did you get to have the conversation you wanted to have?"

    I feel like I keep reading things like "when I posted about this game in the [X] thread the conversation went on for a whole page but when I went and made a thread about the same game it died after a page." The functional difference between those two statements is nil; the conversation lasted a page. With or without Giant Thread X it would have lasted a page, just outside of that thread people who might not keep up with the big thread but are still interested in the game will see it. Post count is not a good metric to determine this.

    Neither is how long a thread stays on the first page. SE can move pretty fast, and it's entirely possible to post in a thread at 7am and have it fall off of page two by 4pm, even if it gets posted in every day. That's okay. I have a thread going right now that is essentially a two-project knitting circle (though not closed, anyone could come try the project with us). There are maybe five people who actively use it, and sometimes I have to dig around page four or five for it when I want it to post or for reference, but the people who use it do that when we have updates. Although the sensible ones probably bookmark it. But you get the idea.

    Not every thread is going to live to see 100, but that doesn't mean the ones that don't are without value, or that making them is a pointless endeavor. And just because a thread does reach a hundred pages doesn't mean it needs to be a thread all the time. There's a balance to be struck between "conversation about X should really take place in the X thread instead of following the tangent in the Y thread" and having every thread turn into a chat about one's day, just with different groups of people who spend most of their time under thread titles with letters arranged this way instead of this way. Part of finding that balance is locking even good threads at a certain point and giving them a rest. This is especially true of the kind of topic that tends to involve personal stories and anecdotes. Those things can get stale or run dry after a while.

    If what you really want is to create an inclusive conversation, that's a great reason to make a thread. If you want to make a thread that will go to page 100 and be immediately recycled, that is a very different kind of goal.

    But again.

    There are people who will click on a specific thread about x and there are people who won't but if they run into topic x in a less focused thread they may become interested and engaged by it and join the conversation.

    why?

    if you want to talk about something then go post in the thread about it. it's really that simple

    talking to the wall is no fun, even if I paint a box on my wall saying "this is a topic about stuff".

    but there are people that clearly do want to talk about it because apparently conversations about these games pop up all the time, but only in megathreads.

    what makes going into a thread about it that much more difficult. this seems to me like a self inflicted thing. people want to talk about a topic but they aren't willing to do so.

    Again: this only works for people who are ALREADY interested in thing. Megathreads allow for new interest in thing to form and expand.

    There are a bunch of games and comics from this year that I never would have looked at if I didn't stumble upon conversation about them in a megathread.

    I knew I loved the Arkham series, so I will easily go into an Arkham Knight thread. But I never would have given a Galak-Z thread a look at all. But thanks to things like the PlayStation or podcast threads, I ended up checking out this neat little game. Now I might participate in a thread for it, but it took megathreads to catch my initial interest.

    Monster Hunter is a series I had written off. Tried already, even. Yet the enthusiasm from people in the Nintendo thread convinced me to try the new one anyway. And I ended up really liking it. The MH thread alone would have never done this for me, because I never would have gone in there because I had previously written it off.

    The nice thing about megathreads is you might go in there to talk about x but you can get pulled into talking about y or z without ever planning on it. And that's extremely valuable to me and a big part of what makes this place my forum of choice.

  • WybornWyborn GET EQUIPPED Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    Jars wrote: »
    sounds like people just go to the steam thread they already view/bookmark it and ignore the others. that's... quite relevant to the topic isn't it

    Steam games are a weird sort because there are a few that can sustain a thread on their own, like Evolve, Crusader kings, Civilization, etc., and a lot, lot more that cannot and their only exposure will be a few pages here and there in one of the Steam threads.

    I was going to say this applies to a lot of Wii U and 3DS games in the Nintendo thread, as well

    But I think a lot of them are covered by the indie games thread nowadays

    dN0T6ur.png
  • FAQFAQ Registered User regular
    Little question

    do you guys reckon the movie thread fall into bullet point 3? It's definitely gotten busier but I do think when there isn't one movie talk dies a bit.

  • AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist The Skies of HiigaraRegistered User regular
    Straightzi wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    I'm not going to be drawn into giving precise definitions of subjective judgments.

    I get that

    but it does mean theres a specter of possible closure over any thread that contains multiple topics, which is why I was just trying to get a general idea

    point taken

    Why is this such a worry for you?

    You make a thread and you see what happens

    It's a roll of the dice every time you make any thread

    Sometimes those dice will come up with a lock symbol, and sometimes they'll come up with so few posts the thread vanishes into obscurity

    That's just the way it goes

    because its really not fun to have a fun discussion going and then have the thread locked

    edit: again, not complaining, just answering why its a concern for me in particular

    I've never seen a thread locked completely out of the blue until the megathreads were closed yesterday. Admittedly I might be missing them, but in cases where threads are closed it is usually because:

    A. the posters have gone so wildly off topic that there is no hope of getting back in place

    B. The posters are combative in some way, or the argument has become cyclical and personal

    C. It's a spambot or breaks the official forum rules.

    D. The thread hits 100 pages (whether or not it needs a cooling off period is another discussion).


    I don't think I've ever seen a "fun" thread closed, but I'm not omniscient. And I wouldn't take it personally if one is, as many factors outside of the OP's control can dictate that. But that's easier said than done.


    Really, Chincy, I can't think of any reason why you are worried about your place around here.

    He/Him | "We who believe in freedom cannot rest." - Dr. Johnetta Cole, 7/22/2024
  • StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    Javen wrote: »
    It may just be a bad comparison, but I don't think mod actions should ever really be analogous to dice rolls. There should at least be reasons given to those who ask for them.
    They're not dice rolls. This isn't a science: there is no Law of Megathreads with precise definitions. There are a variety of criteria one takes when determining if something is A) a megathread and B.) a megathread worth keeping around. Trying to give precise rules on what defines a megathread just leads to rules lawyering.

    YL9WnCY.png
  • EtchwartsEtchwarts Eyes Up Registered User regular
    The OPs in G&T are good if it's like, an online game I haven't played and I need some guides on how the stuff works

  • Mr. GMr. G Registered User regular
    FAQ wrote: »
    Little question

    do you guys reckon the movie thread fall into bullet point 3? It's definitely gotten busier but I do think when there isn't one movie talk dies a bit.

    I think the movie thread is essential to have somewhere to talk about older, smaller movies

    Like if someone just got around to watching Boyhood and wants to talk about it, they can go to the movie thread

    6F32U1X.png
  • DJ EebsDJ Eebs Moderator, Administrator admin
    We've had discussions about GV a few times. Generally speaking, I don't think barring the superhero thread is going to have any significant impact on GV's traffic, but the question of whether or not the superhero thread needs to go anywhere is kind of out of my jurisdiction. I think Graphic Violence can and probably should pivot to more in-depth and on-topic discussions than we can really get away with in here. It's very easy to lose track of a discussion you're having about, say, the Fantastic Four in the SE superhero thread, because the thread is going to very quickly move past the discussion, because superheroes is a very broad topic these days.

    Honestly, that's kind of the catch-22 of a megathread: it's easy to start a conversation about anything in that given topic, but it's also difficult to sustain that conversation outside of the short-term.

  • AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist The Skies of HiigaraRegistered User regular
    Actually, my favorite part of the movie threads here and in D&D is seeing people talk about smaller, obscure movies from the past. It's almost like a book club vibe.

    He/Him | "We who believe in freedom cannot rest." - Dr. Johnetta Cole, 7/22/2024
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    FAQ wrote: »
    Little question

    do you guys reckon the movie thread fall into bullet point 3? It's definitely gotten busier but I do think when there isn't one movie talk dies a bit.

    I think it falls into it hard, but I've lost that argument over and over again with the other moderators. And also yeah, people sometimes want to just talk about the dumb movie their dumb self just dumb saw.

  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Cybertronian Paranormal Eliminator Registered User regular
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    I'm kinda curious about the eventual fate of the superhero thread

    Like it absolutely has problematic elements in it and has some real bad dog piling tendencies, but there tends to be a lot more discussion about a lot more topics in there than GV and in the past when it has either gone away for a while or there has been a push to get people to go to GV they've never really worked? Like, I would really like it if GV became really active and fun and lively but even Geebs' super creative contests and polls couldn't breath life back into it.

    I would be pretty bummed out if the thread outright disappeared because it is a subject I, shockingly, like to discuss frequently and GV moves at a far more glacial pace and is way less spontaneous and fun in its flow of discussion. If we had a solution that fixed this issue then I would be happy but I'm skeptical since it didn't work the last two times it was attempted.

    I think if all the regulars made the effort to move over to GV over time, rather than all at once, and sort of guide the way for the non-regulars/lurkers then we might be able to pull off getting a decent level of posting going on over there.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    but for G&T in particular, there can be other additional expectations for thread creation - a somewhat detailed/authoritative OP, in-game guild leadership, etc. that's a lot of commitment for something that might not actually get any interest. and if one were so motivated as to seek out a game-specific thread regardless, well, the era of bbcode fanforums for everything is fading but nowadays Reddit is but a click away

    I hate those expectations. No one reads those OPs, certainly not more than once. There's an element of preening and status seeking about it, especially when people complain (and they sometimes do!) that they would 'make a better OP' and 'keep it updated'. If I make a thread about a game I almost always use the format "(x) is a pretty fun game" and then write a couple of sentences about why I like it.

    it was probably more meaningful in the era before Wikia and Reddit, to be sure. I curated the Diablo II thread OP for a while.

    nowadays, well... I suppose it depends on the game? A lot of the value-added in a thread is still dependent on having regulars contribute content, because they care about the community of fellow regulars here rather than elsewhere. A thread where nine other forumers show up to say "oh, this is interesting" before they, too, click away to Reddit to look for dedicated fans to talk to about the game doesn't give the thread any attractive activity.

    aRkpc.gif
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User, Transition Team regular
    Tube wrote: »
    In G&T it's pretty rare that I even open the first page of a thread. If I want to read about Batman or whatever I start from the last page and go back if I seem to have missed something.

    The frustrating thing about that is when the thread title will mention some info I really want to read about, but there's no link in the OP to that discussion, and it seems to be pages and pages ago...

    No idea how to solve that except better curated OPs, but that's a LOT of dedication to keeping a topic monitored and offering easy connection points for new participants.

  • DJ EebsDJ Eebs Moderator, Administrator admin
    We'll be doing a Best of 2015 style thing in GV that's going to be similar to those GV10 polls, by the way.

  • GnizmoGnizmo Registered User regular
    Ok question that isn't designed to corner you on hard definitions but more guidelines despite how it may sound. Take threads like the Nintendo or Steam thread that often have viable topics worth creating their own thread and are pretty close to, if not megathreads. If the population actively spawns threads for games that are too dominant (say Mario Kart or Civilization) while focusing more on small topics that won't get attention do they get more leeway in closure considerations? Obviously it is all case by case, but I guess the question is does good behavior help? The Nintendo thread I know pushes topics out somewhat regularly to keep a focus on lower profile games. I am just hoping that model is sustainable as it seems pretty healthy to me.

  • Donovan PuppyfuckerDonovan Puppyfucker A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
    Athenor wrote: »
    Actually, my favorite part of the movie threads here and in D&D is seeing people talk about smaller, obscure movies from the past. It's almost like a book club vibe.

    I fucking love it when somebody else talks about how they feel a certain fondness for a lesser-known movie that was actually pretty great, but few people have seen. Like Copland. It's really pretty fucking good, but very few people seem to have seen it. But then, everybody I ever talk to that HAS seen it always has the same opinion of it - "you know, it's actually pretty fucking good!

  • -Tal-Tal Registered User regular
    A problem I have is discussions of the same thing happening in multiple threads and I'm not sure where to talk about it

    PNk1Ml4.png
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    Gnizmo wrote: »
    Ok question that isn't designed to corner you on hard definitions but more guidelines despite how it may sound. Take threads like the Nintendo or Steam thread that often have viable topics worth creating their own thread and are pretty close to, if not megathreads. If the population actively spawns threads for games that are too dominant (say Mario Kart or Civilization) while focusing more on small topics that won't get attention do they get more leeway in closure considerations? Obviously it is all case by case, but I guess the question is does good behavior help? The Nintendo thread I know pushes topics out somewhat regularly to keep a focus on lower profile games. I am just hoping that model is sustainable as it seems pretty healthy to me.

    The Nintendo thread has a stronger case to stay alive because most people don't care about Nintendo any more so individual threads about Splatoon or whatever are unlikely to have traction. For X Box and PS4 a million games come out every month. For Wii U it's like 3 a year.

  • FAQFAQ Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    FAQ wrote: »
    Little question

    do you guys reckon the movie thread fall into bullet point 3? It's definitely gotten busier but I do think when there isn't one movie talk dies a bit.

    I think it falls into it hard, but I've lost that argument over and over again with the other moderators. And also yeah, people sometimes want to just talk about the dumb movie their dumb self just dumb saw.

    cool, thanks for answering

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    but for G&T in particular, there can be other additional expectations for thread creation - a somewhat detailed/authoritative OP, in-game guild leadership, etc. that's a lot of commitment for something that might not actually get any interest. and if one were so motivated as to seek out a game-specific thread regardless, well, the era of bbcode fanforums for everything is fading but nowadays Reddit is but a click away

    I hate those expectations. No one reads those OPs, certainly not more than once. There's an element of preening and status seeking about it, especially when people complain (and they sometimes do!) that they would 'make a better OP' and 'keep it updated'. If I make a thread about a game I almost always use the format "(x) is a pretty fun game" and then write a couple of sentences about why I like it.

    For a post about a videogame yeah. But there are a lot of topics which can result in either a great thread or a horrible crappy one. And a really big factor in how they go is the OP. It's not the only factor but look at threads like the SE++ trans thread or Atomika's thread about the GOP debate or the thread about the US Government Shutdown. Obviously lots of work went into those OPs and I think it really helped set the tone in the first page or so which in turn nudged (if not shoved) the thread towards going well.

    I'd contrast that with the rash of "Goddamn separate threads" that Eljeffe started. When a thread starts already fighty and hostile to the subject matter with an OP that is at best exasperated that it even exists it will continue in that vein.

    Attacked by tweeeeeeees!
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    -Tal wrote: »
    A problem I have is discussions of the same thing happening in multiple threads and I'm not sure where to talk about it

    I have that problem too. Sometimes I can't even remember which thread I was already talking about it in.

Sign In or Register to comment.