• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

Clarification sought on Guidance

Status
Not open for further replies.

SrGrvsaLot

Digital Scribe
Validated User
Recently, I got a bit of moderation in a long-running thread


It's been a bit of a stick in my spokes, to be honest. To be suddenly moderated for something I've been doing for close to 5 years (if you count the VGO thread that was basically the same thing). And to be clear, I'm not complaining. I understand the concern. But I'm not sure what I should do about it.

See, it seems there's been some misunderstanding here. I may not have made my intentions sufficiently clear. The order of causality is the opposite of what this bit of moderation seems to think it is - the blog exist because of the thread, not the thread because of the blog. I.e, I've been writing all of these blog posts specifically to post the links on rpg.net for years. Admittedly, I have occasionally dropped the odd link at other parts of the internet, but the balance is something like 95% rpg.net, 5% all other places combined.

So why bother with the middleman? I don't have a definite answer. It's something that felt like a good idea 5 years ago and that I've mostly been doing from inertia. Though, when I think about it, it does have several advantages that I'd hate to lose - mostly revolving around the fact that with a blog, I effectively have full mod powers over all my own work. (Also, and this wasn't something I consciously realized until I got this sudden bit of unexpected moderation, I've been enjoying the intellectual freedom of not having to answer to anyone but myself)

Still, the obvious solution is to just cut out the middle-man (ie, me) and start posting the whole blog posts directly, but I'll confess, contemplating that has wounded my pride. I've grown accustomed to having a little corner of the internet to call my own. I've put a lot of care into it. And while I recognize that the moderation wasn't directing me to give up my blog, well, 95% of my traffic comes from here. It would be pointless to duplicate my efforts in that way. Yet the blog isn't monetized or otherwise benefiting me in any way. I don't have advertising, crowdfunding, or merchandise (back when I was doing video games, a few people bought me steam games to play, but those were rarely anything I would have bought for myself and new blog has nothing comparable). The only thing I'd be losing is a vanity url.

It's just, now that it comes down to it, it turns out I was vainer than I thought.

What's the compromise, then? How can I bring my link-posts more in line with what rpg.net wants to see in a thread? I suppose I could aim for 1-2 paragraphs of additional thoughts, but hitherto my pattern has been - write post, immediate drop a link in the thread, and the reason the link posts have been so sparse is that after I've spent 3-4 hours writing 1000 words about a book, the last thing I want to do is start recapitulating my previous work. Still, if that's what it takes . . .
 

ANT Pogo

Yuki Approved
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
We don't want you to stop posting your reviews. However, we do want to encourage people to really discuss things on our forum. We want people to post things to talk about, but putting stuff on a blog and simply linking to it tends to discourage discussion a little, because it shifts the focus towards the blog site and away from the fact that this is a discussion forum. If you want to put the full reviews here so people can talk about them, and archive your posts on your blog (with a link to that archive in your sig), that's perfectly fine. We just don't want the forum to be a link repository redirecting users somewhere else, that's all.
 

Atlictoatl

Powered by the Apocryphal
Validated User
🚫 Three Day Ban
FWIW, SrGrvsaLot's posts serve the community in a tangible way, and meet other goals of RPG.net extraordinarily well.
  • They review both video games and RPGs that tend to be held as a high-water standard.
  • They serve as a thoughtful examination of nostalgia within our hobby.
  • They apply modern sensibilities of diversity, inclusion, and equity to the sacred cows of our shared gaming past.
If there's not a lot of commentary about the posts, it's because the author does such a good job of examining the subject matter. In order to comment meaningfully on the work, one would also have to have read the game book fairly recently. Commenting with vague remembrances from the last time the book was encountered is specifically of little value, because one of the main points of the posts is examining them fresh, with modern eyes.

Personally, I find these articles to greatly add to the value of RPG.net, especially from a legacy perspective. These threads deserve to be remembered as one of those things housed on RPG.net that make an impact on our perception of the hobby.

That they are posted in a manner that isn't ideal is more an issue of the limitations of the board software than anything else. There are numerous ways in which a dedicated discussion thread is suboptimal for the project, and a blog post is optimal. If this demand for change were to result in a loss of enthusiasm for the project, or a disappearance of the project from RPG.net, that would be a real loss to the board.

I'm not sure that I understand why this body of work is being targeted at this time, and I'm certain that I don't agree with it. Surely there are other spaces that can be targeted for "encouraging people to really discuss things on our forum". Can't this series be grandfathered in?
 

ANT Pogo

Yuki Approved
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
FWIW, SrGrvsaLot's posts serve the community in a tangible way, and meet other goals of RPG.net extraordinarily well.
  • They review both video games and RPGs that tend to be held as a high-water standard.
  • They serve as a thoughtful examination of nostalgia within our hobby.
  • They apply modern sensibilities of diversity, inclusion, and equity to the sacred cows of our shared gaming past.
If there's not a lot of commentary about the posts, it's because the author does such a good job of examining the subject matter. In order to comment meaningfully on the work, one would also have to have read the game book fairly recently. Commenting with vague remembrances from the last time the book was encountered is specifically of little value, because one of the main points of the posts is examining them fresh, with modern eyes.

Personally, I find these articles to greatly add to the value of RPG.net, especially from a legacy perspective. These threads deserve to be remembered as one of those things housed on RPG.net that make an impact on our perception of the hobby.

That they are posted in a manner that isn't ideal is more an issue of the limitations of the board software than anything else. There are numerous ways in which a dedicated discussion thread is suboptimal for the project, and a blog post is optimal. If this demand for change were to result in a loss of enthusiasm for the project, or a disappearance of the project from RPG.net, that would be a real loss to the board.

I'm not sure that I understand why this body of work is being targeted at this time, and I'm certain that I don't agree with it. Surely there are other spaces that can be targeted for "encouraging people to really discuss things on our forum". Can't this series be grandfathered in?

Moderator Text:

If SirGrvsaLot wants to have a blog, they are welcome to link it in their sig. But posts on RPGNet should be more than simply links to off-site posts. Asked, answered, closed.

Also, Trouble Tickets is not an agora. Not only do we not take appeals on behalf of other users, we don't take demands on behalf of them either. You are banned for three days, and do not do this again.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom