The Cesspool

[Davion]

While I do not concider myself a community member of the RPGWatch, and therefor probably shouldn't comment on this matter, but I find that this thread feels too detached from the general "vibe" of these forums.

I might not read the Codex, but I'm convinced that both it and the Watch have their cons and pro's. This stupid senseless hairpulling about who's the best is ridiculous.

Could this pointless shoutfight be closed, please?

I am a motherfucking biotic god.
Fear me.

I raise you with an Asari Merc Leader.

 

[Maylander]

I am a motherfucking biotic god.
Fear me.

*Thud*
I'm... tired..

 

[txa1265]

Fear me.

I thout the correct expression was PH34R ME!!!!!11111111one

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Not that I care but that this isn't correct. Perhaps most of them start off as a thread about our content or something

I think that's generally the case with it being mostly in response to content. I can't find it, but there was one where you guys picked something as game of the year or something and pretty much everyone slagged you off for it . Considering we do that about every other site that posts shitty content we disagree with, I don't see that as necessarily being out of the ordinary.

Mind you I don't think anyone's too seriously against each other's sites here.

And now I'm also starting to wonder how you all found this thread.

http://www.rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=41125

So saying that your off topic forum is more interesting than ours if you ignore our interesting off-topic forum is slightly off.

I wasn't going for the "more interesting" angle. I was going more for the "old threads that have been posted to over a long time and the pages have grown that way" angle.

If you take the Politics forum on the Watch, it starts:
- 15 page thread about TARP; created in 2008.
- 2010 is a bad year thread; 6 pages; created Jan 7, 2010
- Future of Obama; 9 pages; Jan 14, 2010
- Afghanistan; 11 pages; March 09
- Republicans; 11 pages; Jan 6 2010;
- Totally non US; 5 pages; Jan 22 2010;

Compared to the Codex multi-pagers:
- Hinduism; 5 pages; Created Feb 16, 2010
- WW1; 4 pages; Feb 19
- Anti-Irish; 6 pages; Feb 12;
- Codex is a Cesspool; 8 pages; Feb 18
- BLACK GUY GETS HIS ASS WHOOPED; 10 pages; Feb 17
- Lil' Kim; 4 pages; Feb 16

Some of those virtually popped up over-night and all of them were created within the last week, compared to the Watchs' multi-page threads which weren't even created this month. The point was really more about the Codex' higher posting rates resulting in a faster thread turn-over.

Case in point, one of the tranny threads that sits in Retardo Land hit 44 pages (approx 1,100 replies) in 12 days. It was created Aug 06, 2009 and the last post was Aug 18, 2009. Now there might be some really intelligent, well thought-through post in there that's recommended reading but if you weren't quick enough, it would've been buried under the deluge of "WHAT IN THE HELL…".

Cue discussion about quantity vs quality.

Could this pointless shoutfight be closed, please?

People never ask for stuff like this at the Codex. Though we do get "Retardo plz".

I agree though, the 'debate' is pointless. Though I don't think anyone is really trying to prove any points here about who is better.

RPGWatch has better news (if you consider SPAM EVERYTHING as having better news) and they're good at that. The Codex was more about FUCK YOU INTERPLAY, OBLIVION SUCKS and being free to say that without some ass coming along and posting "zomg my frail sensibilities are offended by this heated discussion, can some fair moderator lock this thread please and FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN".

To that end, I think both sites serve the audiences they were built for.

This is just an internet discussion on an internet discussion forum. Mainly designed to pass the time. In a thread basically created by a butthurt Codex outcast.

 

[Terror From The Deep]

People never ask for stuff like this at the Codex. Though we do get "Retardo plz".

It would make a very fine subject of study; why people get this unreasonable urge to have certain discussions, that do not conform to their particular viewpoints and beliefs, barred for everyone else while they themselves are perfectly capable of ignoring it for good for their own fragile and insecure selves.

I think it may have something to do with the clash of reality between the intellectual ideals and aspirations that people are taught, or rather brainwashed, to adopt but are not taught nor even given a modicum as to how. I say brainwashed because, regardless of any hypothetically inherent value, anything that is simply taught with no regard to how, simply is brainwashing as most would agree, I imagine.

I've observed through out years that most people, even the ones blinded by certain ideologies to the extreme ends, tend to desperately want to have these qualities but rather want to use these as means to justfiy their own preformed ends and therefore any attempt at gaining knowledge and reach at "a conclusion" rather than "the conclusion" they already have, is in vain because the procedure is a corrupted one before it can even begin. In the end, they are perfectly incapable of modifying these prejudices.

What I wonder is how much of this reality is a product of inherent intelligence and how much is of upbringing. There are examples in both fronts to speak against the other but then again, since most men are incapable of using the tools at their disposal without corrupting them towards a certain end, can any environment be truly different than another?

And how does all this play into this inherent desire of oppression? It's been at least partially proven through several social experiments that oppression, as primitive as it is, is an inherent motivation found in most people, regardless of their social environment and admitted levels of intelligence. For references; I particularly remember the experiment at Boston University, conducted sometime between 60-80s -forgive my memory. Nonetheless, Google is your friend.

So we can only confirm that men do want to oppress whenever their points of views and values are contested, as demonstrated by the few in this thread. But just why? What I think makes this question extra-special is the circumstances of internet: the complete, uncontested and unintervened control over your access to content, where vast worlds practically exist or cease to exist merely by your own choice and your own will to ignore. Yet, most men are incapable of that just the same and force themselves to have a reason to oppress.

Could this be a manifestation of the acknowledgement of the lack of intellectual sufficiency, where the subject is, on an unconscious level, completely aware that he lacks to ability to provide cohesion through knowledge and objectivity but this conflicts with the ideals imposed on him so he's merely trying to achieve unity and harmony through oppression to soothe the emotional pain and receive social confirmation that the ideals he's been brainwashed to practice and achieve, has been reached, nonetheless with poor methods?

You will notice that the reasons most often given to justify oppression are easily invalidated by examples where oppression, as enforced by those with some form of authority, has been avoided. Take what DarkUnderlord said as an example: Where many a thread of a certain kind gets locked in most forums with enforcement, such threads lead to nowhere and die out soon enough naturally without enforcement. People practicing their free will and power to ignore.

This also brings the spoilt brat analogy to mind, where overprotection of children often leads to underdeveloped spoiled character as opposed to children using the best tools of human nature, adaptation, to further build their character and have a say on who they are going to be.

 

[beans]

That post only took me about 30 - 40 mins to put together while I was uploading some stuff.


Actually that was more a comment that the multi-page threads in Off-Topic on the Watch are fairly typical of those you find on every other internet forum ("What are you listening to / reading right now?" etc…) in that they've been around for a while (possibly years) as many members reply to them, but that they're not so much typical of the Codex, where our multi-page threads are… different and pop-up over night.

Incidentally, not the same beans as this are you?

Nope but i am the same beans from ITS

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

Is it a cesspool? Hell yeah. But while largely an indigestible mess, and an agglomeration of the most annoying internet personalities and internet memes (how often can you say multiheaded d*** before it gets old? Apparently veeeeery long) that I have encountered, that place has been a fertile breeding ground for ideas on RPGs that despite everything have had quite some reach, I believe. And don't forget, projects like those of iron tower studios, of which AoD has just been voted most anticipated on this very site, have their roots in the Codex.
I rarely go to there anymore, but: long live the codex!

 

[Maylander]

If you take the Politics forum on the Watch, it starts:
- 15 page thread about TARP; created in 2008.
- 2010 is a bad year thread; 6 pages; created Jan 7, 2010
- Future of Obama; 9 pages; Jan 14, 2010
- Afghanistan; 11 pages; March 09
- Republicans; 11 pages; Jan 6 2010;
- Totally non US; 5 pages; Jan 22 2010;

Compared to the Codex multi-pagers:
- Hinduism; 5 pages; Created Feb 16, 2010
- WW1; 4 pages; Feb 19
- Anti-Irish; 6 pages; Feb 12;
- Codex is a Cesspool; 8 pages; Feb 18
- BLACK GUY GETS HIS ASS WHOOPED; 10 pages; Feb 17
- Lil' Kim; 4 pages; Feb 16

Some of those virtually popped up over-night and all of them were created within the last week, compared to the Watchs' multi-page threads which weren't even created this month. The point was really more about the Codex' higher posting rates resulting in a faster thread turn-over.

True, but a single post in the Watch threads is often bigger than an entire thread on the Codex. The usual content is "haha suck on it" or "rofl eat shit", which is hardly a discussion or a sign of activity. It took you 30-40 min to write one post, which you obviously put some thought into - it would take you 10 to write every single post in the majority of those threads.

The interest value in such threads borderlines zero. It's not even a matter of expressing an opinion - it's just plain trolling. You can find similar posts on most World of Warcraft related forums.

Heck, if you just program a bot to write single-line posts containing words like "cocktopussy", "rofl", "homosexual" or "trans", you could reproduce the majority of the posts at the Codex within a few seconds.

Here's a usual Codex thread:
1. Excellent post. Well written, and often just plain brilliant. Hilarious stuff.
2-8. Rubbish. Not worth reading.
9. Great post.
10-14. Rubbish again.
Etc.

When the Codex shines, it outshines pretty much every other forum out there. However, I see little point in anyone defending the one-line rubbish posts containing absoluttely nothing but a few sexually related words as "expressing an opinion" or "freedom of speech". It's rubbish. No more, no less. Thread-filler crap not worth mentioning.

The posts that contain some actual information or opinions on the other hand, are often worth reading. Like someone already said in this thread: The codex is liberal enough to allow certain people to reach high points they can't do elsewhere. Doesn't change the fact that the one-liners are useless.

 

[Arhu]

Truth be told, I find this thread rather refreshing and I haven't seen anything yet that would warrant locking it. The P&R forum, now that's more volatile at times, but Corwin seems to be doing a good job over there. We have a fairly lax attitude towards moderation, theads getting locked is almost the hardest punishment we give out, maybe a warning to direct personal attackers. We do, however, have a very low tolerance for spam and spammers, who find themselves banned rather easily, even though, interestingly, spam posts tend to spawn discussions of their own.

Personally I'm glad cuss words aren't the norm here on the Watch, because I find them unnecessary in normal discourse and difficult to filter through while reading.

 

[dteowner]

It's about time to clear up a popular misconception. I've been a moderator here for over 2 years now. In that time, outside of obvious spam, I've moderated exactly one post. One. I've locked exactly zero threads. Zero. As the resident friendly neighborhood fascist, it's safe to say my low counts aren't atypical, either. I have no doubt the highest number of moderator actions have been in the P&R forum, but even on potentially inflamatory topics like that you've got single digits of locked threads in a couple years worth of posts. So all this whining about "frail sensitivities" and "locked threads" is a smokescreen. Iz bullshit, boys. Come up with a better insult.

 

[magerette]

@Dark Underlord: On the threads you refer to in P&R—we recycle topics and deliberately avoid creating multiple threads—mainly because we've found that they all go off-topic fairly fast into certain well-defined arenas of discussion. Thus, we have only one thread a year for right-centric discussions, one for general politics, one for non-US politics, one for the lefties, one for the righties to bitch about the lefties, etc. So, while I don't understand how a thread that's three days old is automatically better than a thread that's three weeks old, or three years old with new posts, I thought I'd just clue you in to how our extended discussion system among people who know each other works.

Obviously, you have a more spontaneous board with a shorter attention span. We have a community that knows what someone's going to say before they start typing, and chooses to discuss anyway because it enjoys the dispute (at a milder level most of the time.) It's kind of the difference between a flipped-out fraternity party and a classroom discussion, and I'm sure members of both sites wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[JemyM]

Come up with a better insult.

How appropriate, you fight like a cow.

 

[Jaz]

interestingly, spam posts tend to spawn discussions of their own

...and funny discussions at that .

 

[dteowner]

How appropriate, you fight like a cow.

Not a bad insult. Covers fat, dumb, misdirected gender, and lack of suitability for purpose. All in a very short burst. Not a bad insult at all.

 

[JemyM]

Not a bad insult. Covers fat, dumb, misdirected gender, and lack of suitability for purpose. All in a very short burst. Not a bad insult at all.

And approx 1 520 000 hits on google.

 

[DeepO]

And approx 1 520 000 hits on google.

I'm shaking, I'm shaking!

 

[JemyM]

I'm shaking, I'm shaking!

You are rubber, I am glue.

 

[Maylander]

Heheh, nothing beats good ol'Monkey Island insult fighting.

 

[Squeek]

The way I see it, Web forums are a bit like parties in that they're hosted and encourage guests to mingle and enjoy themselves. Some parties fail, obviously. But even when they don't, not every party is for everyone.

The question is then, how do you rate and compare parties? Some posters here would suggest it's just a question of how well guests get along (or how hosts deal with confrontations). While I can certainly see their point, I would suggest good parties are interesting and fun.

IMO, the bar for parties can and really should be set higher, like trying to attract interesting guests who will relax and drop their pretenses. Myself, I’m willing to put up with some adolescent humor in order to enjoy something interesting. Boring doesn’t cut it for me, even when it’s well behaved.

 

[elkston]

*¹Although strangely enough, elkston does have an account on the Codex which he registered a full 2 years before he came here, so maybe he's a Codexer trolling you gaiz or somethin'.

Naaah. Like many here, I am a former RPGDOT-er. I found out about the 'codex during my 'DOT days and decided to have a look, that is all.

There are many valuable posters on the CODEX with encyclopedic knowledge of CRPGs. I appreciate that as my experience goes back to the mid 80s. I like being part of that club that knows what "Sister Theodesia turns Ace into a blood sausage" means! But if it involves laughing with the boys while racial slurs are thrown around, then count me out.

I can't just shrug off the "N-word" because it feels like a betrayal to me. It's like saying you can't be part of our club because you are black. Hey, I've continued to play computer games (specifically CRPGs) into my adult years, accepting all the social stigma attached to this. I don't need to be shoved out from the group for something out of my control.

Signed,
Elkston (the butthurt)