The fact that you feel like you'd need tags for this is an implicit acknowledgement of the culture divide people keeping bringing up.
And if you are doing that, what's the point in the merge in the first place?
Even in threads where you might think it won't be needed I think the most likely outcome is simply that it defaults to one style or the other and the people who don't like that style leave. Or at least get very annoyed.
It isn't though? It's a setting of the terms of a thread, no different than an OP but using the shorthand of tags to let people decide if they want to click it.
It is though. Because every time it's brought it, the tags are explained as "this will be the SE++ style one and this will be the D&D style one". This tag thing was just brought up, on this page, explicitly as an answer to cultural differences between the two general chatter forums.
I'm gonna be honest Shryke, I really feel like throughout these threads your actual goal is to poison the well of any conversation that might have an endpoint of change, to the degree where talking with you feels like an energy drain because I may as well debate with a wall
But if I deal with this on its face, bluntly: no, I don't think the tags are attached to the "culture" of each subforum because frankly in the non-political threads the cultures are very similar, and I do not feel identifying the framing of a thread by its on-topic or off-topic nature is any different from literally any OP that has existed on these forums, regardless of subforum origin. It's a setting of terms of discussion, no different than "discuss fashion in here" or "post about technology news". It defines a method of posting but isn't defining an entire forum subculture or else threads like the parenting ones wouldn't be interchangeable.
I guess it's nice of you to explicitly state you are arguing in bad faith and think people don't actually mean what they are saying. Honesty is good I suppose.
And the tags are being explicitly brought up as an answer to the differing posting cultures of the two forums. It's literally how we started talking about
tags last page. I'm not sure what there is to argue when it comes to their intent.
Those are just terms being used for shorthand, there won't be literal tags "D&D style" and "SE++ style"
Yes, that's my point? That regardless of what you call them it's still just recreating the current subforums with tags.
No, I'm indicating your bad faith posting is obvious for anyone trying to read the thread for more than a few pages
Other folks give ideas, or discuss thoughts, and are willing to entertain new concepts, but you only post specifically to drag conversation down
It's patently obvious
I'm just posting my thoughts on the issue. I'm not even posting anything different from what other people are saying. There's multiple people making basically or exactly the same points I am in here. What are you even going on about?
The fact that you can't even imagine that people would actually think that the merging of forums are a bad idea and that D&D and SE++ have distinct cultures that people enjoy and that therefore the only reason people would say that is because they are pulling some long con is a problem with you. How are you going to have an actual discussion about what the new forum's look like structurally if you literally can't imagine that people with different opinions then you mean what they say?
Please scroll up and look at the mod decree before you continue putting words in other peoples' mouths.
0
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered User, Transition Teamregular
We can continue to tread water and recycle the same arguments, but I favor forward momentum with projects like these, so, @The Cheat would you be able to throw together a version of your proposal with brief one-sentence descriptors for each of the sub-forums within your structural proposal? I'll do the same for mine, so we can construct a presentation for a future vote.
I guess I might ask that if there are threads in D&D that aren't strictly on-topic, as a base assumption, why should they continue to be situated in the On-Topic sub-forum?
And, honestly, same question for SE++ with threads that are off-topic.
Because I'm currently reading conflicting messages that an On-Topic tag is tantamount to just issuing a D&D tag onto a thread itself, while also seeing folks mentioning that there are threads within D&D that don't follow the sub-forum's designation?
Other then [chat] there is no thread in D&D that doesn't have some kind of topic. That topic can be broad, like "movies" or "US congress" or "Elon Musk". Or it can be fairly specific, like "US immigration policy" or "Red Dwarf". But there's always something.
If you can believe it, SE++ operates largely in the same exact way!
Outside of the "lol random" threads, the consistent threads that populate SE++ are just as topical.
I never said it didn't. I was just answering your questions about D&D threads.
As I (and others) have said, this isn't about on-topic vs off-topic, and it's not about who is posting where. It's about the culture and expected style of conversation. I don't think it's useful to think of it in any other terms.
NGL, bringing up how much people dislike the Holiday Forum as an argument against consolidation of specific subforums feels like a really flimsy argument against a restructure.
If only because I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting smushing all of the communities into one common space as a long term solution for Coin Return, especially when the Holday Forum has always been couched as a combination of a bit, and (initially, at least) as a bid by Tube to alleviate some of the treehousing that happens in specific subforums.
People are suggesting it as a way to make everyone get along though. And that is, as you note, part of what Tube was saying he wanted to do with it.
It is also, in practice, literally merging the two discussion forums into one space.
It shouldn't be surprising that people are taking it as a potential example of what the results of a D&D/SE++ merger could look like.
Then the question becomes whether people dislike the Holiday Forums because they make it harder to sort topics and put the current discussions on hold (which wouldn't be a problem on CoRe because there will still be categories), or whether they dislike the Holiday Forums because "so-and-so was there". Because most people have been saying the former, and I have a lot more empathy for the former than for the latter.
That's ignoring other potential options. Including "because I don't like the style of posting that takes place in the Holiday forums". And I want to specifically focus on that because, honestly, I think maybe a big part of the problem here is people keep making the assumption that people prefer one subforum over another based on who's posting there. Even as people keep saying it's about the culture and style of discussion. You are making that mistake right here. This is why I've continually pointed out that D&D and SE++ have been different subforums with different cultures for decades at this point. It's got nothing to do with grudges. And we shouldn't keep pretending that's all it is.
I don't know what culture means though. D&D and SE++ don't have different clothes or dialects or musical heritage or observations of the Solstice.
If culture is moderation and rules, we're not doing that: the whole forum is following the same rules.
If culture is posting style, I remain unconvinced that D&D and SE++ actually have different posting styles. The content of the subforums is indistinguishable in most cases.
So that leaves me thinking culture means the specific people in it. I don't know what else it could be.
culture refers to D&D being largely on-topic enforced and SE having no enforcement for staying on topic
it doesn't apply to every thread equally, which is also part of the issue when the lines become unclear, but there being exceptions to the idea doesn't mean the idea doesn't exist
I haven't seen a mod decree about staying on topic in D&D in, like, a year.
... because people immersed in the particulars of the culture are generally pretty good about keeping to the stated topic, returning to it quickly when making brief diversions, and calling on others to start separate threads (GD or otherwise) when one is apparently worthwhile?
That seems like a pretty weak defense.
Man if you think D&D threads mostly stay on topic then we have very, very different experiences. I have learned a lot about the Culture books series for example. There has never been a thread for it, or if there was then I never clicked on it. I sure did learn a ton about the series because I love Star Trek though. The bad news gone right thread also taught my a lot about CVTs. I even reported that ones cause it was over a week as a diversion as memory serves. Shit goes off-topic there all the time.
I think we need to drop the idea of "stay on topic" verse "lol random posting kind of near a topic."
Both forums will diverge on a discussion. That is normal in discussions. The difference is tone, types of post/views on how posts should be structured, and the level or focus of the discussion. Along with at times people being refocused back to a topic.
The split between the two is very much on style, preferred items of discussion, level of discussion (wonk verse personal experience), sourcing at times, and meme verse no meme in specific threads.
I think all of us go to the short hand of "off topic" verse "on topic" but that really undersells how different the cultures of the two forums are around certain threads and posting styles.
And even with that we have tons of overlap in posters. And I would argue some posters go to D&D for the larger wonk/long form discussion and also SE++ on the same topic for the more off the cuff informal style. Both have a place but some people want one or the other. And our goal should keep both. Let them co-exist. And the easiest way is to maintain the structure.
Accepting we have two different cultures of posting with cross pollination I think is an important baseline for how we structure a forum going forward. Because no action should be taken that prefers one over the other otherwise we will bleed a large amount of users.
What prevents this style of conversation from happening by having [chat] in chaos instead of D&D, a dedicated politics sub forum where the terms of discussion can be tagged up front, and a specialized media forum where more formal deep dive threads can be created in parallel with more general threads with less risk of falling off the front page because a catch all general interest forum has too many non-media threads pushing stuff down?
On [chat] I think we beat that dead horse, the topic of [chat] is [chat]. It is going to appear some where but again its culture, posting styles, and personality is more in line with D&D than SE++. There are post in SE++ style which would lead to reports, confusion, and so on.
It isn't an SE++ style. [chat] will probably be [chat] where it is and wasn't part of my discussion anyways.
I think again though whatever you call the SE++ equivalent and the D&D equivalent the biggest thing is you need to make sure there are places for both posting styles. Because when you collapsing them one will be pushed out, we lose people and that shouldn't be our end goal.
At the same time having the tag system seems nice, but it is just putting two forums together and people continue to ignore the other's tags no matter what you call them. Or you just get post like, "Take this to the X thread it doesn't belong here."
Having the forum itself be defined with set rules that do support the culture that exist is important. Also making sure the overall CoC is strictly enforced across all the forums.
In case you're concerned at all - the Zonugal version of the revamp would include a space specifically for [chat] since it really is its own little ecosystem
Oh I missed that part and thought it was just gonna go in chaos in that setup since it’s the more general catch-all for non-media/game/art/politics/etc.
Honestly I don’t think it matters either way, as it IS its own ecosystem and will thrive wherever it is.
I'm guessing this could be discussed but based on previous [chat] discussion, folks seemed happier having it be its own thing
As of right now it had its own lil' subforum so there could be other threads inspired by it, presumably
I guess I might ask that if there are threads in D&D that aren't strictly on-topic, as a base assumption, why should they continue to be situated in the On-Topic sub-forum?
And, honestly, same question for SE++ with threads that are off-topic.
Because I'm currently reading conflicting messages that an On-Topic tag is tantamount to just issuing a D&D tag onto a thread itself, while also seeing folks mentioning that there are threads within D&D that don't follow the sub-forum's designation?
Other then [chat] there is no thread in D&D that doesn't have some kind of topic. That topic can be broad, like "movies" or "US congress" or "Elon Musk". Or it can be fairly specific, like "US immigration policy" or "Red Dwarf". But there's always something.
If you can believe it, SE++ operates largely in the same exact way!
Outside of the "lol random" threads, the consistent threads that populate SE++ are just as topical.
I never said it didn't. I was just answering your questions about D&D threads.
As I (and others) have said, this isn't about on-topic vs off-topic, and it's not about who is posting where. It's about the culture and expected style of conversation. I don't think it's useful to think of it in any other terms.
Outside of the political threads in D&D, I'd argue the regulars of D&D likely engage in topical discussions in the exact same style as folks over in G&T, CF, and SE++.
The way y'all talk about LEGOs or Star Trek really isn't all that different from how G&T users discuss Xbox/Microsoft or how SE++ users discuss workplace issues/challenges.
+6
ToxI kill threadsDilige, et quod vis facRegistered Userregular
My understanding is that under a few different plans there is actually a proposal to cross-link Chat across multiple boards. So it will actually belong to whatever the Private-General board is called, but will show up on and be directly accessible under multiple boards.
Technical indications are that this isn't overly hard, but I don't know how recent/accurate that claim is
maybe the real panopticon was the friends we made along the way
Hell, small thing but it's super weird that SE++ is isolated as the only subcategory of an entire section.
There are technically two subforums there, but one is the old Club PA subforum for if you donated to the original Club PA before nuClubPA was started.
That's probably a holdover from when that forum category was SE++, the Hall of Ghosts, and the Club PA library forum, which was made public eons ago, and nobody ever got around to un-categorizing SE++.
It's also kinda funny because the Ghosts forum basically has nowhere to go in the transition, so it's just gone come May, lol
I guess I might ask that if there are threads in D&D that aren't strictly on-topic, as a base assumption, why should they continue to be situated in the On-Topic sub-forum?
And, honestly, same question for SE++ with threads that are off-topic.
Because I'm currently reading conflicting messages that an On-Topic tag is tantamount to just issuing a D&D tag onto a thread itself, while also seeing folks mentioning that there are threads within D&D that don't follow the sub-forum's designation?
Other then [chat] there is no thread in D&D that doesn't have some kind of topic. That topic can be broad, like "movies" or "US congress" or "Elon Musk". Or it can be fairly specific, like "US immigration policy" or "Red Dwarf". But there's always something.
And you would aver that these threads never go off topic?
I think we need to stop framing this as "some threads in D&D go off-topic, therefore SE and D&D are just the same."
The degree of off-topicness varies by thread, and also the nature of off-topicness varies by thread, and not all threads behave the same, but there are definitely distinct styles pertaining to how the conversation pertains to the stated topic in SE vs D&D. I don't think there's anything to be gained from pretending that there's no difference. If you pop into, say, the SE movies thread and the D&D movies thread and can't see a difference in how the conversation feels, I maintain you're not paying very close attention.
Like seriously, anyone who wants to see the difference, go look at the last couple pages of the SE movie thread and the last couple pages of the D&D movie thread. They are very different in tone and style. It's not necessarily about "off-topicness" or anything, but they are not the same at all. I don't think there's anything wrong with the SE one, but I would much rather be in the D&D one.
Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
DnD threads meander all the time. For days at a time. Or they're so broad in the first place that "on topic" is basically meaningless. There's really no difference in the posting styles. Its 100% just a culture divide.
Hell, small thing but it's super weird that SE++ is isolated as the only subcategory of an entire section.
There are technically two subforums there, but one is the old Club PA subforum for if you donated to the original Club PA before nuClubPA was started.
That's probably a holdover from when that forum category was SE++, the Hall of Ghosts, and the Club PA library forum, which was made public eons ago, and nobody ever got around to un-categorizing SE++.
It's also kinda funny because the Ghosts forum basically has nowhere to go in the transition, so it's just gone come May, lol
This is another Vanilla quirk: If you don't do it this way, you won't be able to move threads into/out of that specific sub-forum because something breaks.
Hahnsoo1 on
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
+2
QuetziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered User, Moderatormod
I guess I might ask that if there are threads in D&D that aren't strictly on-topic, as a base assumption, why should they continue to be situated in the On-Topic sub-forum?
And, honestly, same question for SE++ with threads that are off-topic.
Because I'm currently reading conflicting messages that an On-Topic tag is tantamount to just issuing a D&D tag onto a thread itself, while also seeing folks mentioning that there are threads within D&D that don't follow the sub-forum's designation?
Other then [chat] there is no thread in D&D that doesn't have some kind of topic. That topic can be broad, like "movies" or "US congress" or "Elon Musk". Or it can be fairly specific, like "US immigration policy" or "Red Dwarf". But there's always something.
And you would aver that these threads never go off topic?
I think we need to stop framing this as "some threads in D&D go off-topic, therefore SE and D&D are just the same."
The degree of off-topicness varies by thread, and also the nature of off-topicness varies by thread, and not all threads behave the same, but there are definitely distinct styles pertaining to how the conversation pertains to the stated topic in SE vs D&D. I don't think there's anything to be gained from pretending that there's no difference. If you pop into, say, the SE movies thread and the D&D movies thread and can't see a difference in how the conversation feels, I maintain you're not paying very close attention.
Like seriously, anyone who wants to see the difference, go look at the last couple pages of the SE movie thread and the last couple pages of the D&D movie thread. They are very different in tone and style. It's not necessarily about "off-topicness" or anything, but they are not the same at all. I don't think there's anything wrong with the SE one, but I would much rather be in the D&D one.
The implication that I took from Shryke's post, in the context of what he was replying to, is that the strict on-topic-ness of D&D threads was what made them distinct, and why they should be situated in a specifically on-topic forum. That's why I used that framing in my response.
I guess I might ask that if there are threads in D&D that aren't strictly on-topic, as a base assumption, why should they continue to be situated in the On-Topic sub-forum?
And, honestly, same question for SE++ with threads that are off-topic.
Because I'm currently reading conflicting messages that an On-Topic tag is tantamount to just issuing a D&D tag onto a thread itself, while also seeing folks mentioning that there are threads within D&D that don't follow the sub-forum's designation?
Other then [chat] there is no thread in D&D that doesn't have some kind of topic. That topic can be broad, like "movies" or "US congress" or "Elon Musk". Or it can be fairly specific, like "US immigration policy" or "Red Dwarf". But there's always something.
And you would aver that these threads never go off topic?
I think we need to stop framing this as "some threads in D&D go off-topic, therefore SE and D&D are just the same."
The degree of off-topicness varies by thread, and also the nature of off-topicness varies by thread, and not all threads behave the same, but there are definitely distinct styles pertaining to how the conversation pertains to the stated topic in SE vs D&D. I don't think there's anything to be gained from pretending that there's no difference. If you pop into, say, the SE movies thread and the D&D movies thread and can't see a difference in how the conversation feels, I maintain you're not paying very close attention.
Like seriously, anyone who wants to see the difference, go look at the last couple pages of the SE movie thread and the last couple pages of the D&D movie thread. They are very different in tone and style. It's not necessarily about "off-topicness" or anything, but they are not the same at all. I don't think there's anything wrong with the SE one, but I would much rather be in the D&D one.
One's talking about how good Rat Race is and the other is talking about how to fix Indiana Jones 5 with people randomly chiming in on a movie they watched recently in both.
Hell, small thing but it's super weird that SE++ is isolated as the only subcategory of an entire section.
There are technically two subforums there, but one is the old Club PA subforum for if you donated to the original Club PA before nuClubPA was started.
That's probably a holdover from when that forum category was SE++, the Hall of Ghosts, and the Club PA library forum, which was made public eons ago, and nobody ever got around to un-categorizing SE++.
It's also kinda funny because the Ghosts forum basically has nowhere to go in the transition, so it's just gone come May, lol
This is another Vanilla quirk: If you don't do it this way, you won't be able to move threads into/out of that specific sub-forum because something breaks.
Vanilla, It Just W̵͕̗̹̊̈́͝ö̷̪͖̩̊͠ͅṛ̸̛͈͋͆͑̒̃k̷̟̦̙͙̠̻͈̀̎̿̽̕ş̶̧̳̙͔̺̣̌͑̎̆͝! (tm)
If we aren't defining the threads in D&D and SE by whether they're on or off-topic any more, what is the actual difference beyond the generalized term of "culture"?
I guess I might ask that if there are threads in D&D that aren't strictly on-topic, as a base assumption, why should they continue to be situated in the On-Topic sub-forum?
And, honestly, same question for SE++ with threads that are off-topic.
Because I'm currently reading conflicting messages that an On-Topic tag is tantamount to just issuing a D&D tag onto a thread itself, while also seeing folks mentioning that there are threads within D&D that don't follow the sub-forum's designation?
Other then [chat] there is no thread in D&D that doesn't have some kind of topic. That topic can be broad, like "movies" or "US congress" or "Elon Musk". Or it can be fairly specific, like "US immigration policy" or "Red Dwarf". But there's always something.
If you can believe it, SE++ operates largely in the same exact way!
Outside of the "lol random" threads, the consistent threads that populate SE++ are just as topical.
I never said it didn't. I was just answering your questions about D&D threads.
As I (and others) have said, this isn't about on-topic vs off-topic, and it's not about who is posting where. It's about the culture and expected style of conversation. I don't think it's useful to think of it in any other terms.
Outside of the political threads in D&D, I'd argue the regulars of D&D likely engage in topical discussions in the exact same style as folks over in G&T, CF, and SE++.
The way y'all talk about LEGOs or Star Trek really isn't all that different from how G&T users discuss Xbox/Microsoft or how SE++ users discuss workplace issues/challenges.
I don't think D&D has an active job thread but I do remember at one point expressing interest in getting into government contracting and was met with some pretty "you are the devil if you work for them" type shit and that's not something I'd expect to see in D&D. Chat was a bit more welcoming to me broaching that topic.
I'm sure legos, xboxes, and marvel are probably fine, though.
If we aren't defining the threads in D&D and SE by whether they're on or off-topic any more, what is the actual difference beyond the generalized term of "culture"?
If we aren't defining the threads in D&D and SE by whether they're on or off-topic any more, what is the actual difference beyond the generalized term of "culture"?
Why would there need to be anything else?
Because other posters have identified that there's more to it than on- and off-topic? The last page just indicated that both subforums do both.
If we aren't defining the threads in D&D and SE by whether they're on or off-topic any more, what is the actual difference beyond the generalized term of "culture"?
Why would there need to be anything else?
It invites people to be shitty over people not posting where and how they're perceived as belonging. We already see it constantly. Get rid of the artificial divide, divide based on subject category and not culture.
If we aren't defining the threads in D&D and SE by whether they're on or off-topic any more, what is the actual difference beyond the generalized term of "culture"?
I mean at this point I have written 3 posts on it?
On topicness is a small part. D&D topics refocus hard. If a talk has enough depth it gets spun off.
In reality its tone, depth, style, and assumed focus when posting.
In D&D responding with a meme? Infractionable and just not acceptable. This can happen in SE++ and no one blinks.
D&D is very much focused on something that angers people and that ends to be broad general topics. Folks are wonks. Folks like talking those big trends. And this can frustrate people who are focused on personal experience. Especially around politics and the economy.
And yes the Star Trek thread might have a page where it goes into the Culture or B5 or the Orville (honorary ST show though) and then it goes back. And a lot of the time it is more that people are discussing the other show in relation to something tied to the current discussion around Star Trek.
A lot of the time the OP's in D&D set the tone, the focus of the discussions, and usually resources for people to start at the same baseline of information.
But yes also there are huge differences in culture. And this also is how people view discussions and how those discussion should happen.
And sometimes that will step on people's toes on either side of the fence. It happens.
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community. Its not like DnD is especially scholarly or whatever.
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community. Its not like DnD is especially scholarly or whatever.
Maybe it's the threads I'm in but I genuinely can't remember the last time I saw a meme in SE
Maybe they're all hiding out in the YouTube thread?
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community.
I disagree.
And it is about aesthetics. Its about thoughts on how a discussion should be handled. How people want to interact with a topic and a thread.
Its the same reason we have rules about just posting xitter without context in D&D in threads. Or no nicknames for people we are discussing. For some decorum is grating. For others it produces a discussion we are looking for. And for some it does allow them to walk the line on trolling but not cross it.
But overall it is a different way to discuss things than SE++. And it isn't on topic verse off topic. Its different vibe. And I hate saying that but it is true. And people like the vibes they have! This idea we have squash that and force integration again seems like trying to enforce one's style over another.
And I think we know that sheds people. First we focus on maintaining as much of the community we have now. That should always be our main goal. You shed more by change then maintaining something comfortable.
All this is just over whether/how to restructure/reconcile 20-odd years of forum structural separation that eventually led to a cultural separation for what, a thousand individuals, give or take? Not even generation-spanning, and already there's language like "they're just different, don't ask me how" being used, and an inability to even imagine getting along with "the others", which should sound eerily similar to certain real life scenarios. It's really quite fascinating to see.
Can you imagine the effort it would take to restructure/reconcile the US political-cultural system to something more functional? Any person, or any collective, who is able to do so would truly deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, as that would go such a long way towards "fixing" things.
If we aren't defining the threads in D&D and SE by whether they're on or off-topic any more, what is the actual difference beyond the generalized term of "culture"?
Why would there need to be anything else?
It invites people to be shitty over people not posting where and how they're perceived as belonging. We already see it constantly. Get rid of the artificial divide, divide based on subject category and not culture.
That's assuming the divide is artificial. It's not.
Different cultures between the two forums is more then enough for what people are talking about.
If we aren't defining the threads in D&D and SE by whether they're on or off-topic any more, what is the actual difference beyond the generalized term of "culture"?
Why would there need to be anything else?
Because other posters have identified that there's more to it than on- and off-topic? The last page just indicated that both subforums do both.
Yes, and those differences are, basically, culture. That's the point. That's the answer. There doesn't need to be more.
I guess I might ask that if there are threads in D&D that aren't strictly on-topic, as a base assumption, why should they continue to be situated in the On-Topic sub-forum?
And, honestly, same question for SE++ with threads that are off-topic.
Because I'm currently reading conflicting messages that an On-Topic tag is tantamount to just issuing a D&D tag onto a thread itself, while also seeing folks mentioning that there are threads within D&D that don't follow the sub-forum's designation?
Other then [chat] there is no thread in D&D that doesn't have some kind of topic. That topic can be broad, like "movies" or "US congress" or "Elon Musk". Or it can be fairly specific, like "US immigration policy" or "Red Dwarf". But there's always something.
And you would aver that these threads never go off topic?
I think we need to stop framing this as "some threads in D&D go off-topic, therefore SE and D&D are just the same."
The degree of off-topicness varies by thread, and also the nature of off-topicness varies by thread, and not all threads behave the same, but there are definitely distinct styles pertaining to how the conversation pertains to the stated topic in SE vs D&D. I don't think there's anything to be gained from pretending that there's no difference. If you pop into, say, the SE movies thread and the D&D movies thread and can't see a difference in how the conversation feels, I maintain you're not paying very close attention.
Like seriously, anyone who wants to see the difference, go look at the last couple pages of the SE movie thread and the last couple pages of the D&D movie thread. They are very different in tone and style. It's not necessarily about "off-topicness" or anything, but they are not the same at all. I don't think there's anything wrong with the SE one, but I would much rather be in the D&D one.
This is why a media sub forum could have threads like [now showing] and [film criticism] and have room for both, with specific purposes, and less risk of getting pushed off the main page by the far more broad topics on SE and D&D that make the mega threads the most viable way to talk.
There doesn’t just have to be The Movies Megathread.
In D&D, there were lots of different ways of discussing movies over the years, and having a single "movies" thread along with separate threads for individual movies that generated a lot of chatter was worked best for how the people there like talking about movies.
The problem with something like separate "analysis" and "now-showing" threads is that it doesn't match up with how the people like to have conversations. A conversation will go like "I saw a movie yesterday, here's a lengthy review on it" and then some people will talk about their own analyses for a bit and then someone will be like, "This movie was just a bad imitation of <obscure French movie from 1963> and the some people will talk about how it was robbed of the Palme D'Or and now we're talking about Truffaut's oeuvre for a while before someone makes an Indy fridge joke and now we're talking about how the recent Indy game was actually the third best Indy film. And none of that really functions the same unless the topic is just "movies". And honestly, none of that functions the same if you have the topic of "movies" but in SE, because that's generally not the sort of vibe you get in there.
Which I know, because every time the question of SE and D&D being different comes up, I double check by looking at the SE and D&D movie threads to make sure I'm not crazy, and they always look very different. To the point that it's now my Subforum Difference Reference Thread.
Edit: To be clear, I am well-versed in how movie discussions go, because Tube hated megathreads and I constantly had to fight to keep it because he was like, "just make separate threads for each movie, what's the big deal." Like, imagine if you're chatting with a friend about movie stuff and someone keeps popping in to say, "Hey, you were talking about Bullitt, stop trying to talk about Ronin now just because they both have excellent car chases. You have to go to a different room to talk about Ronin."
ElJeffe on
Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
If we aren't defining the threads in D&D and SE by whether they're on or off-topic any more, what is the actual difference beyond the generalized term of "culture"?
I mean at this point I have written 3 posts on it?
On topicness is a small part. D&D topics refocus hard. If a talk has enough depth it gets spun off.
In reality its tone, depth, style, and assumed focus when posting.
In D&D responding with a meme? Infractionable and just not acceptable. This can happen in SE++ and no one blinks.
D&D is very much focused on something that angers people and that ends to be broad general topics. Folks are wonks. Folks like talking those big trends. And this can frustrate people who are focused on personal experience. Especially around politics and the economy.
And yes the Star Trek thread might have a page where it goes into the Culture or B5 or the Orville (honorary ST show though) and then it goes back. And a lot of the time it is more that people are discussing the other show in relation to something tied to the current discussion around Star Trek.
A lot of the time the OP's in D&D set the tone, the focus of the discussions, and usually resources for people to start at the same baseline of information.
But yes also there are huge differences in culture. And this also is how people view discussions and how those discussion should happen.
And sometimes that will step on people's toes on either side of the fence. It happens.
At some point it feels like maybe people need to just accept people are saying what they actually mean on this subject. That the cultural difference is something they feel and see and notice. And that it shouldn't just be dismissed.
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community.
I disagree.
And it is about aesthetics. Its about thoughts on how a discussion should be handled. How people want to interact with a topic and a thread.
Its the same reason we have rules about just posting xitter without context in D&D in threads. Or no nicknames for people we are discussing. For some decorum is grating. For others it produces a discussion we are looking for. And for some it does allow them to walk the line on trolling but not cross it.
But overall it is a different way to discuss things than SE++. And it isn't on topic verse off topic. Its different vibe. And I hate saying that but it is true. And people like the vibes they have! This idea we have squash that and force integration again seems like trying to enforce one's style over another.
And I think we know that sheds people. First we focus on maintaining as much of the community we have now. That should always be our main goal. You shed more by change then maintaining something comfortable.
Speaking of "don't use nicknames"... for the longest time I was confused why the banned forumer TNC was being referenced by a ton of people in D&D until someone finally posted a link to something Ta-Nehisi Coates was talking about.
twitter/meme/picture dumps are one of the biggest cultural differences
Politics threads in D&D that's a hard no, but I've seen them show up in "politics" threads in SE++ time and again. They're incredibly hard to parse and follow (especially since I don't want to read twitter for obvious reasons). Even the non politics threads this is exhausting.
I assume XF will allow me to disable hotlinking of things like youtubes or twitters so I don't have to be assaulted with 18 physical pages and my vscroll being assaulted for this.
All this is just over whether/how to restructure/reconcile 20-odd years of forum structural separation that eventually led to a cultural separation for what, a thousand individuals, give or take? Not even generation-spanning, and already there's language like "they're just different, don't ask me how" being used, and an inability to even imagine getting along with "the others", which should sound eerily similar to certain real life scenarios. It's really quite fascinating to see.
Can you imagine the effort it would take to restructure/reconcile the US political-cultural system to something more functional? Any person, or any collective, who is able to do so would truly deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, as that would go such a long way towards "fixing" things.
I've seen this stuff happen within the span of a single summer camp, so... yeah.
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community.
I disagree.
And it is about aesthetics. Its about thoughts on how a discussion should be handled. How people want to interact with a topic and a thread.
Its the same reason we have rules about just posting xitter without context in D&D in threads. Or no nicknames for people we are discussing. For some decorum is grating. For others it produces a discussion we are looking for. And for some it does allow them to walk the line on trolling but not cross it.
But overall it is a different way to discuss things than SE++. And it isn't on topic verse off topic. Its different vibe. And I hate saying that but it is true. And people like the vibes they have! This idea we have squash that and force integration again seems like trying to enforce one's style over another.
And I think we know that sheds people. First we focus on maintaining as much of the community we have now. That should always be our main goal. You shed more by change then maintaining something comfortable.
Now that's a different issue. What you are saying is "if there's a merge, the entire forum will become SE++ and filled with low-quality posting". I do think that SE++ has changed somewhat and can hold a serious conversation, and I don't see why rules like "don't post Twitter posts without fully quoting and adding something"* and "don't use nicknames for public figures since it makes conversation hard to parse" can't be forum-wide.
*Also could encourage less "Twitter hot takes" posting.
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community.
I disagree.
And it is about aesthetics. Its about thoughts on how a discussion should be handled. How people want to interact with a topic and a thread.
Its the same reason we have rules about just posting xitter without context in D&D in threads. Or no nicknames for people we are discussing. For some decorum is grating. For others it produces a discussion we are looking for. And for some it does allow them to walk the line on trolling but not cross it.
But overall it is a different way to discuss things than SE++. And it isn't on topic verse off topic. Its different vibe. And I hate saying that but it is true. And people like the vibes they have! This idea we have squash that and force integration again seems like trying to enforce one's style over another.
And I think we know that sheds people. First we focus on maintaining as much of the community we have now. That should always be our main goal. You shed more by change then maintaining something comfortable.
These are community standards that can be managed and largely agreed on and smoothed out without a forum divide. "No nicknames for political figures" isn't going to cause some mass exodus for SE++ regulars.
The community you have now is shedding people, and pretty regularly they're clear this is because of the way the forum is built and/or ran. Train is already moving
A lot of the time the OP's in D&D set the tone, the focus of the discussions, and usually resources for people to start at the same baseline of information.
X to doubt, here. Sometimes this is the case? Maybe? But there's probably like 5-10 media threads in DnD right now with a single paragraph/YouTube link for an OP. I went and looked and I think one of them had someone's bitmoji in it (Snapchat avatar) which is um, basically a meme
NGL, bringing up how much people dislike the Holiday Forum as an argument against consolidation of specific subforums feels like a really flimsy argument against a restructure.
If only because I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting smushing all of the communities into one common space as a long term solution for Coin Return, especially when the Holday Forum has always been couched as a combination of a bit, and (initially, at least) as a bid by Tube to alleviate some of the treehousing that happens in specific subforums.
People are suggesting it as a way to make everyone get along though. And that is, as you note, part of what Tube was saying he wanted to do with it.
It is also, in practice, literally merging the two discussion forums into one space.
It shouldn't be surprising that people are taking it as a potential example of what the results of a D&D/SE++ merger could look like.
Then the question becomes whether people dislike the Holiday Forums because they make it harder to sort topics and put the current discussions on hold (which wouldn't be a problem on CoRe because there will still be categories), or whether they dislike the Holiday Forums because "so-and-so was there". Because most people have been saying the former, and I have a lot more empathy for the former than for the latter.
That's ignoring other potential options. Including "because I don't like the style of posting that takes place in the Holiday forums". And I want to specifically focus on that because, honestly, I think maybe a big part of the problem here is people keep making the assumption that people prefer one subforum over another based on who's posting there. Even as people keep saying it's about the culture and style of discussion. You are making that mistake right here. This is why I've continually pointed out that D&D and SE++ have been different subforums with different cultures for decades at this point. It's got nothing to do with grudges. And we shouldn't keep pretending that's all it is.
I don't know what culture means though. D&D and SE++ don't have different clothes or dialects or musical heritage or observations of the Solstice.
If culture is moderation and rules, we're not doing that: the whole forum is following the same rules.
If culture is posting style, I remain unconvinced that D&D and SE++ actually have different posting styles. The content of the subforums is indistinguishable in most cases.
So that leaves me thinking culture means the specific people in it. I don't know what else it could be.
culture refers to D&D being largely on-topic enforced and SE having no enforcement for staying on topic
it doesn't apply to every thread equally, which is also part of the issue when the lines become unclear, but there being exceptions to the idea doesn't mean the idea doesn't exist
I haven't seen a mod decree about staying on topic in D&D in, like, a year.
... because people immersed in the particulars of the culture are generally pretty good about keeping to the stated topic, returning to it quickly when making brief diversions, and calling on others to start separate threads (GD or otherwise) when one is apparently worthwhile?
That seems like a pretty weak defense.
Man if you think D&D threads mostly stay on topic then we have very, very different experiences. I have learned a lot about the Culture books series for example. There has never been a thread for it, or if there was then I never clicked on it. I sure did learn a ton about the series because I love Star Trek though. The bad news gone right thread also taught my a lot about CVTs. I even reported that ones cause it was over a week as a diversion as memory serves. Shit goes off-topic there all the time.
I think we need to drop the idea of "stay on topic" verse "lol random posting kind of near a topic."
Both forums will diverge on a discussion. That is normal in discussions. The difference is tone, types of post/views on how posts should be structured, and the level or focus of the discussion. Along with at times people being refocused back to a topic.
The split between the two is very much on style, preferred items of discussion, level of discussion (wonk verse personal experience), sourcing at times, and meme verse no meme in specific threads.
I think all of us go to the short hand of "off topic" verse "on topic" but that really undersells how different the cultures of the two forums are around certain threads and posting styles.
And even with that we have tons of overlap in posters. And I would argue some posters go to D&D for the larger wonk/long form discussion and also SE++ on the same topic for the more off the cuff informal style. Both have a place but some people want one or the other. And our goal should keep both. Let them co-exist. And the easiest way is to maintain the structure.
Accepting we have two different cultures of posting with cross pollination I think is an important baseline for how we structure a forum going forward. Because no action should be taken that prefers one over the other otherwise we will bleed a large amount of users.
What prevents this style of conversation from happening by having [chat] in chaos instead of D&D, a dedicated politics sub forum where the terms of discussion can be tagged up front, and a specialized media forum where more formal deep dive threads can be created in parallel with more general threads with less risk of falling off the front page because a catch all general interest forum has too many non-media threads pushing stuff down?
On [chat] I think we beat that dead horse, the topic of [chat] is [chat]. It is going to appear some where but again its culture, posting styles, and personality is more in line with D&D than SE++. There are post in SE++ style which would lead to reports, confusion, and so on.
It isn't an SE++ style. [chat] will probably be [chat] where it is and wasn't part of my discussion anyways.
I think again though whatever you call the SE++ equivalent and the D&D equivalent the biggest thing is you need to make sure there are places for both posting styles. Because when you collapsing them one will be pushed out, we lose people and that shouldn't be our end goal.
At the same time having the tag system seems nice, but it is just putting two forums together and people continue to ignore the other's tags no matter what you call them. Or you just get post like, "Take this to the X thread it doesn't belong here."
Having the forum itself be defined with set rules that do support the culture that exist is important. Also making sure the overall CoC is strictly enforced across all the forums.
In case you're concerned at all - the Zonugal version of the revamp would include a space specifically for [chat] since it really is its own little ecosystem
Oh I missed that part and thought it was just gonna go in chaos in that setup since it’s the more general catch-all for non-media/game/art/politics/etc.
Honestly I don’t think it matters either way, as it IS its own ecosystem and will thrive wherever it is.
I'm guessing this could be discussed but based on previous [chat] discussion, folks seemed happier having it be its own thing
As of right now it had its own lil' subforum so there could be other threads inspired by it, presumably
Right now the Coin Return beta site has a (non-public) 'The Treehouse' subforum that is for chat.
While there will probably be a chat thread that the D&D [chat] regulars set up shop in, I didn't get the feeling that was exclusively intended to be a home for D&D chat - there could certainly be a 'What are you playing right now' chat for just kinda bullshitting about video games or like a 'SE Chat' that is basically the current Twitter thread and has a different set of occupants, etc.
Also we can say "but SE++" posts memes or whatever but damn if I haven't seen "the cruelty is the point" posted in response to every evil thing a republican does ever since Serwer wrote that.
I feel like we've heard enough voices from "SE++ people" and "D&D people" that the question if "is there a significant culture difference between the two" is answered? With an affirmative yes.
There certainly appear to be enough voices on both sides that have expressed this recently and throughout the life of the thread that I don't feel comfortable dismissing them. SE++ posters that feel D&D posters abuse the letter of the law -- that they avoid personal insults but act shitty in other ways to bait people into getting banned/infracted. D&D posters that have had negative experiences in SE++ where they feel like they've been "shouted out of threads" in ways they don't experience in D&D and that no one will entertain the idea of listening to them if they go against the group consensus. Note that neither of these have anything to do with "on topic" or "off topic".
It appears that the SE++ posters that were most vocal with their discomfort last time around are mostly just not here posting anymore, more than it seems like they've totally changed their minds? I know there was a lot of talk of people leaving SE++ entirely because of changes made related to the transition -- is it just that they left?
I guess I'm trying to understand what's changed to lead it to be "Now mostly only D&D leaning people acknowledge there are cultural differences"? Because I really came out of the last discussion thinking we had broad consensus that there were cultural differences that could not be summed up as "on topic" or "off topic" (with the hope of being able to solve them with good moderation!), and now the focus of discussion if is whether that's a thing or not at all.
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community.
I disagree.
And it is about aesthetics. Its about thoughts on how a discussion should be handled. How people want to interact with a topic and a thread.
Its the same reason we have rules about just posting xitter without context in D&D in threads. Or no nicknames for people we are discussing. For some decorum is grating. For others it produces a discussion we are looking for. And for some it does allow them to walk the line on trolling but not cross it.
But overall it is a different way to discuss things than SE++. And it isn't on topic verse off topic. Its different vibe. And I hate saying that but it is true. And people like the vibes they have! This idea we have squash that and force integration again seems like trying to enforce one's style over another.
And I think we know that sheds people. First we focus on maintaining as much of the community we have now. That should always be our main goal. You shed more by change then maintaining something comfortable.
These are community standards that can be managed and largely agreed on and smoothed out without a forum divide. "No nicknames for political figures" isn't going to cause some mass exodus for SE++ regulars.
The community you have now is shedding people, and pretty regularly they're clear this is because of the way the forum is built and/or ran. Train is already moving
Realistically "add context to your links" and "don't use nicknames for figures" is something i don't think you'd see any argument from SE folks about
Maybe a little much for like, a Vtuber thread? But otherwise adding a sentence on a tweet from some random isn't an onerous ask.
I guess I might ask that if there are threads in D&D that aren't strictly on-topic, as a base assumption, why should they continue to be situated in the On-Topic sub-forum?
And, honestly, same question for SE++ with threads that are off-topic.
Because I'm currently reading conflicting messages that an On-Topic tag is tantamount to just issuing a D&D tag onto a thread itself, while also seeing folks mentioning that there are threads within D&D that don't follow the sub-forum's designation?
Other then [chat] there is no thread in D&D that doesn't have some kind of topic. That topic can be broad, like "movies" or "US congress" or "Elon Musk". Or it can be fairly specific, like "US immigration policy" or "Red Dwarf". But there's always something.
And you would aver that these threads never go off topic?
I think we need to stop framing this as "some threads in D&D go off-topic, therefore SE and D&D are just the same."
The degree of off-topicness varies by thread, and also the nature of off-topicness varies by thread, and not all threads behave the same, but there are definitely distinct styles pertaining to how the conversation pertains to the stated topic in SE vs D&D. I don't think there's anything to be gained from pretending that there's no difference. If you pop into, say, the SE movies thread and the D&D movies thread and can't see a difference in how the conversation feels, I maintain you're not paying very close attention.
Like seriously, anyone who wants to see the difference, go look at the last couple pages of the SE movie thread and the last couple pages of the D&D movie thread. They are very different in tone and style. It's not necessarily about "off-topicness" or anything, but they are not the same at all. I don't think there's anything wrong with the SE one, but I would much rather be in the D&D one.
This is why a media sub forum could have threads like [now showing] and [film criticism] and have room for both, with specific purposes, and less risk of getting pushed off the main page by the far more broad topics on SE and D&D that make the mega threads the most viable way to talk.
There doesn’t just have to be The Movies Megathread.
In D&D, there were lots of different ways of discussing movies over the years, and having a single "movies" thread along with separate threads for individual movies that generated a lot of chatter was worked best for how the people there like talking about movies.
The problem with something like separate "analysis" and "now-showing" threads is that it doesn't match up with how the people like to have conversations. A conversation will go like "I saw a movie yesterday, here's a lengthy review on it" and then some people will talk about their own analyses for a bit and then someone will be like, "This movie was just a bad imitation of <obscure French movie from 1963> and the some people will talk about how it was robbed of the Palme D'Or and now we're talking about Truffaut's oeuvre for a while before someone makes an Indy fridge joke and now we're talking about how the recent Indy game was actually the third best Indy film. And none of that really functions the same unless the topic is just "movies". And honestly, none of that functions the same if you have the topic of "movies" but in SE, because that's generally not the sort of vibe you get in there.
Which I know, because every time the question of SE and D&D being different comes up, I double check by looking at the SE and D&D movie threads to make sure I'm not crazy, and they always look very different. To the point that it's now my Subforum Difference Reference Thread.
Edit: To be clear, I am well-versed in how movie discussions go, because Tube hated megathreads and I constantly had to fight to keep it because he was like, "just make separate threads for each movie, what's the big deal." Like, imagine if you're chatting with a friend about movie stuff and someone keeps popping in to say, "Hey, you were talking about Bullitt, stop trying to talk about Ronin now just because they both have excellent car chases. You have to go to a different room to talk about Ronin."
See this seems weird to me because this sounds exactly like what I would expect out of the SE movie thread
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community. Its not like DnD is especially scholarly or whatever.
Maybe it's the threads I'm in but I genuinely can't remember the last time I saw a meme in SE
Maybe they're all hiding out in the YouTube thread?
Go look at the last two pages of the movie thread to see two examples of someone responding with memes.
Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
I don't really think that characterization is accurate. 95% of threads on either side is people just saying stuff. Rules like the "no memes" thing mostly just comes down to visual aesthetics and its a poor basis for dividing a community.
I disagree.
And it is about aesthetics. Its about thoughts on how a discussion should be handled. How people want to interact with a topic and a thread.
Its the same reason we have rules about just posting xitter without context in D&D in threads. Or no nicknames for people we are discussing. For some decorum is grating. For others it produces a discussion we are looking for. And for some it does allow them to walk the line on trolling but not cross it.
But overall it is a different way to discuss things than SE++. And it isn't on topic verse off topic. Its different vibe. And I hate saying that but it is true. And people like the vibes they have! This idea we have squash that and force integration again seems like trying to enforce one's style over another.
And I think we know that sheds people. First we focus on maintaining as much of the community we have now. That should always be our main goal. You shed more by change then maintaining something comfortable.
These are community standards that can be managed and largely agreed on and smoothed out without a forum divide. "No nicknames for political figures" isn't going to cause some mass exodus for SE++ regulars.
The community you have now is shedding people, and pretty regularly they're clear this is because of the way the forum is built and/or ran. Train is already moving
Realistically "add context to your links" and "don't use nicknames for figures" is something i don't think you'd see any argument from SE folks about
Maybe a little much for like, a Vtuber thread? But otherwise adding a sentence on a tweet from some random isn't an onerous ask.
Yeah you could pretty easily run a community where memes and citation expectations are contextual. Post a funny star trek meme in the star trek thread. Add context for links about Gaza. Whatever, its not hard, and functionally its the way a lot of the forum works now.
Posts
Please scroll up and look at the mod decree before you continue putting words in other peoples' mouths.
I never said it didn't. I was just answering your questions about D&D threads.
As I (and others) have said, this isn't about on-topic vs off-topic, and it's not about who is posting where. It's about the culture and expected style of conversation. I don't think it's useful to think of it in any other terms.
I'm guessing this could be discussed but based on previous [chat] discussion, folks seemed happier having it be its own thing
As of right now it had its own lil' subforum so there could be other threads inspired by it, presumably
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
Outside of the political threads in D&D, I'd argue the regulars of D&D likely engage in topical discussions in the exact same style as folks over in G&T, CF, and SE++.
The way y'all talk about LEGOs or Star Trek really isn't all that different from how G&T users discuss Xbox/Microsoft or how SE++ users discuss workplace issues/challenges.
Technical indications are that this isn't overly hard, but I don't know how recent/accurate that claim is
There are technically two subforums there, but one is the old Club PA subforum for if you donated to the original Club PA before nuClubPA was started.
That's probably a holdover from when that forum category was SE++, the Hall of Ghosts, and the Club PA library forum, which was made public eons ago, and nobody ever got around to un-categorizing SE++.
It's also kinda funny because the Ghosts forum basically has nowhere to go in the transition, so it's just gone come May, lol
I think we need to stop framing this as "some threads in D&D go off-topic, therefore SE and D&D are just the same."
The degree of off-topicness varies by thread, and also the nature of off-topicness varies by thread, and not all threads behave the same, but there are definitely distinct styles pertaining to how the conversation pertains to the stated topic in SE vs D&D. I don't think there's anything to be gained from pretending that there's no difference. If you pop into, say, the SE movies thread and the D&D movies thread and can't see a difference in how the conversation feels, I maintain you're not paying very close attention.
Like seriously, anyone who wants to see the difference, go look at the last couple pages of the SE movie thread and the last couple pages of the D&D movie thread. They are very different in tone and style. It's not necessarily about "off-topicness" or anything, but they are not the same at all. I don't think there's anything wrong with the SE one, but I would much rather be in the D&D one.
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
This is another Vanilla quirk: If you don't do it this way, you won't be able to move threads into/out of that specific sub-forum because something breaks.
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
The implication that I took from Shryke's post, in the context of what he was replying to, is that the strict on-topic-ness of D&D threads was what made them distinct, and why they should be situated in a specifically on-topic forum. That's why I used that framing in my response.
One's talking about how good Rat Race is and the other is talking about how to fix Indiana Jones 5 with people randomly chiming in on a movie they watched recently in both.
{Bluesky Account }{Writing and Story Blog}
Vanilla, It Just W̵͕̗̹̊̈́͝ö̷̪͖̩̊͠ͅṛ̸̛͈͋͆͑̒̃k̷̟̦̙͙̠̻͈̀̎̿̽̕ş̶̧̳̙͔̺̣̌͑̎̆͝! (tm)
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
I don't think D&D has an active job thread but I do remember at one point expressing interest in getting into government contracting and was met with some pretty "you are the devil if you work for them" type shit and that's not something I'd expect to see in D&D. Chat was a bit more welcoming to me broaching that topic.
I'm sure legos, xboxes, and marvel are probably fine, though.
Why would there need to be anything else?
Because other posters have identified that there's more to it than on- and off-topic? The last page just indicated that both subforums do both.
I'm done engaging with you, thanks.
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
It invites people to be shitty over people not posting where and how they're perceived as belonging. We already see it constantly. Get rid of the artificial divide, divide based on subject category and not culture.
I mean at this point I have written 3 posts on it?
On topicness is a small part. D&D topics refocus hard. If a talk has enough depth it gets spun off.
In reality its tone, depth, style, and assumed focus when posting.
In D&D responding with a meme? Infractionable and just not acceptable. This can happen in SE++ and no one blinks.
D&D is very much focused on something that angers people and that ends to be broad general topics. Folks are wonks. Folks like talking those big trends. And this can frustrate people who are focused on personal experience. Especially around politics and the economy.
And yes the Star Trek thread might have a page where it goes into the Culture or B5 or the Orville (honorary ST show though) and then it goes back. And a lot of the time it is more that people are discussing the other show in relation to something tied to the current discussion around Star Trek.
A lot of the time the OP's in D&D set the tone, the focus of the discussions, and usually resources for people to start at the same baseline of information.
But yes also there are huge differences in culture. And this also is how people view discussions and how those discussion should happen.
And sometimes that will step on people's toes on either side of the fence. It happens.
Maybe it's the threads I'm in but I genuinely can't remember the last time I saw a meme in SE
Maybe they're all hiding out in the YouTube thread?
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
I disagree.
And it is about aesthetics. Its about thoughts on how a discussion should be handled. How people want to interact with a topic and a thread.
Its the same reason we have rules about just posting xitter without context in D&D in threads. Or no nicknames for people we are discussing. For some decorum is grating. For others it produces a discussion we are looking for. And for some it does allow them to walk the line on trolling but not cross it.
But overall it is a different way to discuss things than SE++. And it isn't on topic verse off topic. Its different vibe. And I hate saying that but it is true. And people like the vibes they have! This idea we have squash that and force integration again seems like trying to enforce one's style over another.
And I think we know that sheds people. First we focus on maintaining as much of the community we have now. That should always be our main goal. You shed more by change then maintaining something comfortable.
All this is just over whether/how to restructure/reconcile 20-odd years of forum structural separation that eventually led to a cultural separation for what, a thousand individuals, give or take? Not even generation-spanning, and already there's language like "they're just different, don't ask me how" being used, and an inability to even imagine getting along with "the others", which should sound eerily similar to certain real life scenarios. It's really quite fascinating to see.
Can you imagine the effort it would take to restructure/reconcile the US political-cultural system to something more functional? Any person, or any collective, who is able to do so would truly deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, as that would go such a long way towards "fixing" things.
That's assuming the divide is artificial. It's not.
Different cultures between the two forums is more then enough for what people are talking about.
Yes, and those differences are, basically, culture. That's the point. That's the answer. There doesn't need to be more.
In D&D, there were lots of different ways of discussing movies over the years, and having a single "movies" thread along with separate threads for individual movies that generated a lot of chatter was worked best for how the people there like talking about movies.
The problem with something like separate "analysis" and "now-showing" threads is that it doesn't match up with how the people like to have conversations. A conversation will go like "I saw a movie yesterday, here's a lengthy review on it" and then some people will talk about their own analyses for a bit and then someone will be like, "This movie was just a bad imitation of <obscure French movie from 1963> and the some people will talk about how it was robbed of the Palme D'Or and now we're talking about Truffaut's oeuvre for a while before someone makes an Indy fridge joke and now we're talking about how the recent Indy game was actually the third best Indy film. And none of that really functions the same unless the topic is just "movies". And honestly, none of that functions the same if you have the topic of "movies" but in SE, because that's generally not the sort of vibe you get in there.
Which I know, because every time the question of SE and D&D being different comes up, I double check by looking at the SE and D&D movie threads to make sure I'm not crazy, and they always look very different. To the point that it's now my Subforum Difference Reference Thread.
Edit: To be clear, I am well-versed in how movie discussions go, because Tube hated megathreads and I constantly had to fight to keep it because he was like, "just make separate threads for each movie, what's the big deal." Like, imagine if you're chatting with a friend about movie stuff and someone keeps popping in to say, "Hey, you were talking about Bullitt, stop trying to talk about Ronin now just because they both have excellent car chases. You have to go to a different room to talk about Ronin."
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
At some point it feels like maybe people need to just accept people are saying what they actually mean on this subject. That the cultural difference is something they feel and see and notice. And that it shouldn't just be dismissed.
Speaking of "don't use nicknames"... for the longest time I was confused why the banned forumer TNC was being referenced by a ton of people in D&D until someone finally posted a link to something Ta-Nehisi Coates was talking about.
twitter/meme/picture dumps are one of the biggest cultural differences
Politics threads in D&D that's a hard no, but I've seen them show up in "politics" threads in SE++ time and again. They're incredibly hard to parse and follow (especially since I don't want to read twitter for obvious reasons). Even the non politics threads this is exhausting.
I assume XF will allow me to disable hotlinking of things like youtubes or twitters so I don't have to be assaulted with 18 physical pages and my vscroll being assaulted for this.
I've seen this stuff happen within the span of a single summer camp, so... yeah.
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
Now that's a different issue. What you are saying is "if there's a merge, the entire forum will become SE++ and filled with low-quality posting". I do think that SE++ has changed somewhat and can hold a serious conversation, and I don't see why rules like "don't post Twitter posts without fully quoting and adding something"* and "don't use nicknames for public figures since it makes conversation hard to parse" can't be forum-wide.
*Also could encourage less "Twitter hot takes" posting.
These are community standards that can be managed and largely agreed on and smoothed out without a forum divide. "No nicknames for political figures" isn't going to cause some mass exodus for SE++ regulars.
The community you have now is shedding people, and pretty regularly they're clear this is because of the way the forum is built and/or ran. Train is already moving
X to doubt, here. Sometimes this is the case? Maybe? But there's probably like 5-10 media threads in DnD right now with a single paragraph/YouTube link for an OP. I went and looked and I think one of them had someone's bitmoji in it (Snapchat avatar) which is um, basically a meme
Right now the Coin Return beta site has a (non-public) 'The Treehouse' subforum that is for chat.
While there will probably be a chat thread that the D&D [chat] regulars set up shop in, I didn't get the feeling that was exclusively intended to be a home for D&D chat - there could certainly be a 'What are you playing right now' chat for just kinda bullshitting about video games or like a 'SE Chat' that is basically the current Twitter thread and has a different set of occupants, etc.
There certainly appear to be enough voices on both sides that have expressed this recently and throughout the life of the thread that I don't feel comfortable dismissing them. SE++ posters that feel D&D posters abuse the letter of the law -- that they avoid personal insults but act shitty in other ways to bait people into getting banned/infracted. D&D posters that have had negative experiences in SE++ where they feel like they've been "shouted out of threads" in ways they don't experience in D&D and that no one will entertain the idea of listening to them if they go against the group consensus. Note that neither of these have anything to do with "on topic" or "off topic".
It appears that the SE++ posters that were most vocal with their discomfort last time around are mostly just not here posting anymore, more than it seems like they've totally changed their minds? I know there was a lot of talk of people leaving SE++ entirely because of changes made related to the transition -- is it just that they left?
I guess I'm trying to understand what's changed to lead it to be "Now mostly only D&D leaning people acknowledge there are cultural differences"? Because I really came out of the last discussion thinking we had broad consensus that there were cultural differences that could not be summed up as "on topic" or "off topic" (with the hope of being able to solve them with good moderation!), and now the focus of discussion if is whether that's a thing or not at all.
Realistically "add context to your links" and "don't use nicknames for figures" is something i don't think you'd see any argument from SE folks about
Maybe a little much for like, a Vtuber thread? But otherwise adding a sentence on a tweet from some random isn't an onerous ask.
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
See this seems weird to me because this sounds exactly like what I would expect out of the SE movie thread
Go look at the last two pages of the movie thread to see two examples of someone responding with memes.
Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
Yeah you could pretty easily run a community where memes and citation expectations are contextual. Post a funny star trek meme in the star trek thread. Add context for links about Gaza. Whatever, its not hard, and functionally its the way a lot of the forum works now.