What the fuck is going on at RPGdot?

[DarkUnderlord]

My name isn't Exitium anymore. It's Sol Invictus

It is? Are you sure?

 

[Calis]

As for Calis, he's admitted that the only reason he holds a poor opinion of me is because he doesn't want to dispose of my image as an 'internet bad guy' because he's afraid that he 'might actually like me' if he found out what I was really like. If that isn't contrived and childish, I don't know what is.

Oh, that was just a lame joke on IRC.
I'm not going to go through an in-depth analysis of why I don't like you, I just don't. It's actually pretty easy for someone to be my (potential) friend, but I have this personality that isn't easy to swing back into the positive when someone manages to swing my impression of him into the negative. In the past, I've given people who hung out in the same circles I did and got on my bad side a "second chance" after not having spoken to them for a while, rationalizing it and making a real effort to get along with them. That's never worked though; my opinion managed to drop rapidly in all documented cases, and I don't expect it to work with you. I'm not gonna go out of my way to insult you or be an asshole to you or whatever (and could stand to be around you on projects and whatnot - I actually defended/suggested getting you on board when we made the Codex).
I'm not gonna get into this any more. If you want to pretend it's something other than the combination of your personality and mine that causes this, fine. Enjoy your skewed vision of the world.

 

[Tintin]

That post was a joke and meant as nothing more, and I posted it as Sol Invictus. Using that to level some kind of argument as to why I changed my nickname is just false. I changed my nickname a long time before Sept 11, 2005 and it wasn't for any reason you can comprehend, unless you comprehend "bored of old nickname, switched to new one because person thought it was fresher and easier to pronounce".

I hope that insult wasn't directed at me since I never insulted you at all and so would look pretty stupid.

And by the way I think you miixed up your writing because the way you wrote it implies that the reason you changed it was because you were bored of your old nickname. "i don't think you'd understand, unless you understand this reason"

 

[spacemoose]

I don't wonder about such things, Mr. I-Only-Have-12-Posts-But-Act-Like-I-Own-The-Place.

I don't post because I have little time for it. Plus I only post when I have something valid to add, unlike some people with 8000+ posts of worthless shit.

And even though no one here knows me, it appears that the majority agrees with me. How sad.

 

[Sol Invictus]

You're right that it wasn't an insult directed to you.

I was referring to Drak, who made the reference in the first place as if it was some kind of argument against me. It was a joke. It made me laugh. It made other people laugh. Some people thought it was immature, alas. But it certainly isn't representative of my posts nor is it any reason as to why I changed my nickname.

And by the way I think you miixed up your writing because the way you wrote it implies that the reason you changed it was because you were bored of your old nickname. "i don't think you'd understand, unless you understand this reason"

Mea culpa.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I don't post because I have little time for it. Plus I only post when I have something valid to add, unlike some people with 8000+ posts of worthless shit.

Valid like when you made a mock signature to mock me, and several more posts just to insult me? Yes, I suppose that's valid, in the eyes of a twelve year old.

And even though no one here knows me, it appears that the majority agrees with me. How sad.

Or rather, you agree with the majority. The opinion that you hold is hardly your own. You're just another bandwagon hopper who's found himself a clique in which to belong, so don't go around pretending like you came up with the idea that everyone else suddenly agreed with.

 

[Drakron]

You're right that it wasn't an insult directed to you.

I was referring to Drak, who made the reference in the first place as if it was some kind of argument against me.

I made that as a example, the fact you were pissed at it enough to make a reference to me says a lot.

It was a joke. It made me laugh. It made other people laugh. Some people thought it was immature, alas. But it certainly isn't representative of my posts nor is it any reason as to why I changed my nickname.

It made me turn white when all the blood in my vains in sheer terror vaporized in hope to escape and I did not even read the whole thing.

Right now I dont know what more scary, the fact someone create that, the fact you go to places were such examples of literature can be found or the fact you find something like that a joke ...

Of course the reason you decided to be pissed at me is because I picked on you ... I could have pull more serious shit (like the reason why you are not a moderator anymore, the little tartum you pulled in the forums over it, that are better examples of "taking a new nick" reason) but I did not, if that was "little joke" not a example of why censorship looks a neat idea at times then everyone would see it as a joke and would not make such "flaming" connection.

 

[Tintin]

Well Sol Invictus, for all you hate Drakron, at least he's against you with words rather than the signature thing..

 

[Chefe]

I want to jump on this bandwagon!

Can I get my username changed to Exitium?

 

[Sol Invictus]

I made that as a example, the fact you were pissed at it enough to make a reference to me says a lot.

Since when is being pissed a requirement of referring to someone? It takes all of 5 seconds to write a full sentence.

Right now I dont know what more scary, the fact someone create that, the fact you go to places were such examples of literature can be found or the fact you find something like that a joke ...

I didn't look for it. My friend Morgan sent it to me over MSN. Besides, it is a joke. Have you ever read any of Chuck Palahniuk's works? He wrote Fight Club and a lot of other stuff. It's got a similar tone.

Of course the reason you decided to be pissed at me is because I picked on you ...

Again, I don't know where all this is coming from. I merely referred to you because you levelled a poor argument against me and I wished to respond to it. You shouldn't read into things that aren't there.

As for the rest, well, you're right - it wasn't really a flame.

 

[Dhruin]

Edit: Dhruin, in any case my criticism was mostly regarding the review (Sudeki). I am not opposed to forum moderation and most of the threads on the Codex could use a little of that, especially when Roqua decides to unleash his inner child, but threatening someone for use of the term 'graphics whore' is hardly good moderation. VD's comments about the double standards are quite evident in some threads, as well.

Well, I remain a cynic but I'll respond. Sudeki...I can't imagine I would ever post a review of anything with that sort of score but I haven't played it nor discussed it with other staff - the game doesn't interest me. My guess -- just a guess -- is that it was scored against other Xbox RPGs, of which there are very few. No need to jump on me and tell me you still don't think that accounts for a score that high - I get that but I'm not going to comment more specifically on something I haven't played or discussed with the author. Other relevant general comments in a reply to Calis below.

I posted originally just to say to Twinfalls that the site follows the same direction laid down by Rend, with exactly the same mods for years. I don't know why some people want to slam us for having a community site that follows a particular philosphy -- don't like it don't go there, that's why the Codex is here -- but that was Rend's vision and whether people agree or no, it has been very successful and I don't think we'd change it.

Double-standards...I doubt it. Just to be clear, the mod team is completely separate from the content team. I mod a couple of very small forums but that's about it. I know Val quite well and she genuinely tries to moderate the way Rend envisioned it, as far as I'm concerned. For all I know, Val and Jaz were offline when that storm over VD's game came up and by the time they caught up it was all over - or maybe they just see the content of that thread differently. I don't know. I do know one or two posters were purely there to cause trouble, which pisses me off.

@Calis. I agree with nearly all of that. The change in scoring system isn't intended to magically improve the reviews but to at least start from a better base. The old system had categories and weightings that distorted things - now there's no weighting and it's a simple 1 - 10 (no 8.6585, just 8 or 9 or whatever). We have more work to do - getting to this stage involved some debate. People in general simply don't agree what a review is, for starters. I could start a discussuion here and get all sorts of different answers.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Well I know it's not your fault that he gave the game as high a score as he did and I'm definitely not blaming you for that.

As for the way I see review scores, though, it shouldn't be so arbitrary as that. I understand that every review score on every gaming site is purely arbitrary but there's definitely some criteria to follow, so Sudeki's score shouldn't be compared against other X-Box RPGs, since that's a poor yardstick. Even so, didn't RPGDot give KOTOR or KOTOR 2 (which were both X-Box RPGs) a lower score? Now, my argument here isn't based on the opinion that the game doesn't deserve a score that high, but in respect to your position that the game may have been rated upon the merits of other XBox titles, it's hardly right to say that Sudeki is a superior game to the two aforementioned titles.

 

[obediah]

all hail spacemoose. This thread could be completely resolved with a trip to the fellatio barn.

 

[aboyd]

I'm slightly distressed by the fact that you think flaming people for the things they've said, regardless of the fact that they don't even know you (Who are you, again?) is your idea of being mature.

Wait a second. Isn't that exactly the correct way to form an opinion about someone? Aren't people supposed to look past skin color, gender, and so on, and form opinions based upon what a person does, says, and how they conduct themselves?

You're basically saying, "just because I write incredibly stupid things, don't consider me stupid!" In a comment to Dhruin (I think), your point of debate was basically, "yeah, I'm a jerk, but why does that affect your opinion of me?" I mean, it's just bizarre. This approach you're taking doesn't put a positive spin on your image, it only confirms the negative.

And claiming people are drudging up your "old posts" when it turns out you posted them a week ago, well that's just stupid. You have only yourself to blame for the situation you are in.

 

[Calis]

The old system had categories and weightings that distorted things - now there's no weighting and it's a simple 1 - 10 (no 8.6585, just 8 or 9 or whatever).

I'm not a big fan of more significant digits in scores. That just introduces an artificial illusion of precision in there; since stuff like the mood the reviewer is in is always gonna influence scores and will introduce a certain margin of uncertainty, going beyond a simple 1-10 integer scale precision is pointless. So - good job!

Then again, I'm against scores in reviews altogether.

 

[Drakron]

Yes, thats why the Codex have just 3 scores ... it sucks, it rocks and its OK.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

RPGdot rocks!
http://www.rpgdot.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=55478

Quite the bright bunch, eh?

 

[Sol Invictus]

Wait a second. Isn't that exactly the correct way to form an opinion about someone? Aren't people supposed to look past skin color, gender, and so on, and form opinions based upon what a person does, says, and how they conduct themselves?

That's a pretty witty way of telling me to go fuck myself. But you know what, don't expect me to stoop to that sort of low-brow sarcasm just because I've done so in the past. I'm being reasonable and I'd expect people to behave more reasonably to reason without trying constantly and consistently without failure to dredge up drama and bad feelings just because they want to intensify some grudge.

You're basically saying, "just because I write incredibly stupid things, don't consider me stupid!" In a comment to Dhruin (I think), your point of debate was basically, "yeah, I'm a jerk, but why does that affect your opinion of me?" I mean, it's just bizarre.

No, I'm just saying that you shouldn't take my joke post out of context by arguing that it's representative of every single one of my posts and that it's a good reason to be a jerk. There is no good reason to be a jerk and despite being a jerk every now and then I understand it as a bad quality, not something you should flaunt just because there's a whole gaggle of bandwagon jumpers who think it's funny to be a jerk. All I'm saying is that people need to drop the preschooler mentality and get with the topics. It seems that I, and a few other people here (especially TES fans) can't post a single valid, relevent or serious topic without someone being a total ass about it in response.

No, I am not referring to Dhruin, because we got that sorted out.

I'm talking about people who constantly argue and flame for no reason other than to amuse themselves whose entire series of posts consist of nothing more than witticisms and one liners meant to infuriate others. Wouldn't SomethingAwful be a better place for that? It's almost difficult to have a serious discussion over here.

Now look, I have no problem with people calling me or anyone else stupid for the things they say, but only if it is in context to the post itself. Bringing up some nonsense about how I didn't really found CO8 and how I had nothing to do with it (Ave's argument was this) or getting personal with me about whatever, that's completely out of the context of the post is just detrimental to the topic and that's precisely the kind of thing that makes this forum not as civil, or at least sensible as it could be. If you want to argue a point and call your opponent a moron for it, fine - that's what we do here. But don't attack someone out of hand just because you think it'd be funny to elicit a reaction out of them.

 

[Drakron]

For god sake Spacemoose, reduce that signature its fucking up the margins and I have resolution set to 1024x768.

 

[Calis]

Alright, there go my intentions of not replying to this issue any more. Right out the window, kazoom!

But you know what, don't expect me to stoop to that sort of low-brow sarcasm just because I've done so in the past. I'm being reasonable and I'd expect people to behave more reasonably to reason without trying constantly and consistently without failure to dredge up drama and bad feelings just because they want to intensify some grudge.

Why the hell not? I mean, you've basically entered a period where you present your posts as being uber-mature (with the emphasis on "presentation", which has "actual mature analysis" outnumbered, has laid siege to it, and has cut off supplies to starve its inhabitants - yeah, I know, horrible hyperbole) and expect people to adjust attitudes instantly? It doesn't work like that, and acting all indignant when you get the same shit (some of it lame, admittedly) as you got in the past is bordering on hypocrisy.

If you're intending to keep to that moral high ground, you may want to be a little more consistent. Even when you get lame wisecracks designed to evoke further drama thrown your way.

Now look, I have no problem with people calling me or anyone else stupid for the things they say, but only if it is in context to the post itself.

You mean like calling me childish for some lame wisecrack I made on IRC?

 

[syKo]

LOL

 

[Sol Invictus]

I know, horrible hyperbole) and expect people to adjust attitudes instantly?

No, I don't expect it to be instant, but at least I'm making a conscious effort to correct my behaviour without resorting to the kind of childish nonsense that goes on in these parts.

It doesn't work like that, and acting all indignant when you get the same shit (some of it lame, admittedly) as you got in the past is bordering on hypocrisy.

How is it hypocrisy to decide that enough is enough? I can't go through any thread these days without some stranger popping up and posting some inane remark that has nothing whatsoever to do with the thread.

 

[Drakron]

Perhaps you sould post in BioWare forums or Bethsoft forums, they have moderators there that enforce with "Think of the children !" TOS with brutal efficiency (I was going to put Nazi efficiency but then remenber they lost WW II to the commies that lost the Cold War).

Or RPGdot forums ...

 

[Sol Invictus]

How is that a solution? There happen to be a lot of intelligent posts here at the Codex, particularly from Prov, EvoG and Section8 that you wouldn't find elsewhere. That's still no reason for the nonsense replies to persist, however. All they do is detract from the overall content of the thread.

 

[Chefe]

Oh come on guys! Hug and make up! We're all family here.

Woah, Drakron, the ES Forums? Isn't that a little drastic?