| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Learned Scribe
Acolyte
35 Posts |
 Posted - 23 Jul 2013 : 23:41:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tasker Daze
No one is forcing you to be here, if you have so many problems with the site.
No one is forcing Bradley to be here, with the heavy aegis of the sites anti-4e reputation hanging about his shoulders... But not only is he here, but he started/stickied/and bumped to the top a scroll about it.
|
 |
|
|
Tasker Daze
Seeker
84 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2013 : 23:46:42
|
I assume you're talking about Sage, who was talking abuot the reputation of this site. That's not the same as you creating an account just to bitch about things. You;'re the one complaining about this site, it's moderation, and the other members.
If you hate eveyrthing Candlekeep, then don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. It's your choice to be here. |
. |
|
|
|
Learned Scribe
Acolyte
35 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2013 : 23:55:07
|
But listen Sage, let me tell you what you can do to lift that burden:
When a new poster come in and says something like,
"Hi everyone, I like the Forgotten Realms, too! What do you feel are some of the worst ret-cons from the 3e-4e transition? I'd like to work on some articles that reconcile these points, and place them during the time jump."
Scribe 1: "What, Sell-plague?! No, the Sell-plague was the DEATH of my Realms, and the Sell-Plague sucks!!"
Scribe 2: "The Shattered Realms, no thanks! We DO NOT talk about the Shattered Realms here at Candlekeep. So just take your 4e garbage and leave!"
Scribe 3: "The designers who were in charge of the complete destruction of the Realms did it for reasons (A-B-C-D...) and those reasons are offensive to me! The designers said in an interview that all the things that I love about the Realms were crap! So to Hells with the designers, and their crappy Realms!"
Scribe 4: "The 4e Realms are NOT the Realms at all! The 4e Realms are a completely different world! A real fan of the Realms does not like the 4e Realms, because the 4e Realms is a completely different campaign setting!"
Scribe 5: "We have all decided that we hate the 4e Realms, which are not the Realms. So if you want to discuss the Shattered/Sell-plagued Realms here, you must be a troll... because we don't like this topic, and topics we don't like are started by trolls. You are a troll, troll, so go back to the bridge where you and your 4e "Realms" belong. Preferably in the midden!"
The WRONG thing to do is say to yourself, "Oh, gee-jim-jiminy. All the scribes are in a tizzy because this new guy doesn't know that we all hate the 4e Realms. Probably should ban the new guy so he doesn't agitate the scribes."
The correct response would be:
Sage: "Scribes, everyone at Candlekeep is entitled to their opinions. If you don't want to discuss things regarding the 4e Realms, you need not respond. However, it is important that we do not label people 'troll' just because they want to reconcile the prior and current lore. Please refrain from attacking others scribes, or your account with be temporarily suspended."
|
Edited by - Learned Scribe on 24 Jul 2013 00:00:32 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2013 : 00:12:49
|
How about a quote where someone is called a troll for nothing more than saying they like the 4E Realms, or where they were told to leave for no reason other than liking the 4E Realms?
How about backing up your accusations?
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2013 : 03:28:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I guess Candlekeep is getting blamed for 'nuking' 4e in someone's eyes. The sad part is, we are a teeny, tiny community - not even a speck of dust on the thing that is the internet.
I believe I posted more objections about 4th edition on the WotC forum then I ever did here. I certainly have issues with design and classes, however also have issues with some aspects of 3rd Edition.
Strangely enough, I've known some long time folk who have left these halls, firstly around 2003-2004, and then again in 2008, because they perceived Candlekeep as a bastion for positively promoting ONLY either the 3.5e Realms, or, later, the 4e Realms. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
ksu_bond
Learned Scribe
New Zealand
214 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2013 : 21:50:02
|
| Strangely enough, I would be one of those who left around 2008...but I'm glad to be back :) |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jul 2013 : 20:15:08
|
| Interestingly enough, calling attention to the disdain of 4e with this thread only helps to bolster that impression. Fictional campaigns, worlds, and events are entirely too subjective for anyone to be right or wrong. I stopped posting substantially because I felt the need to defend everything I posted because it was in relation to 4e. It's just not productive. |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4685 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jul 2013 : 21:19:22
|
Matt, not sure what I can say about that. I did not follow 3rd well because I did not like some of the things done there, some of the things about 4th insulted me so I made no effort at all to follow. I did see a few things discussed that might be considered an improvement. I can not judge that in context.
That said I have respect for you in your work and your service.
|
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Ze
Learned Scribe
Italy
147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jul 2013 : 21:29:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Interestingly enough, calling attention to the disdain of 4e with this thread only helps to bolster that impression.
Quite the opposite, I'd say.
|
|
|
|
ksu_bond
Learned Scribe
New Zealand
214 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jul 2013 : 22:29:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Interestingly enough, calling attention to the disdain of 4e with this thread only helps to bolster that impression. Fictional campaigns, worlds, and events are entirely too subjective for anyone to be right or wrong. I stopped posting substantially because I felt the need to defend everything I posted because it was in relation to 4e. It's just not productive.
This is ultimately the reason why I left the Wizards FR boards (where I was fairly active along Kuje and several others) and then Candlekeep...only for me it was because I was staying behind in 3/3.5 and I "was" having to defend everything I posted because it was "not" in relation to 4e. Any efforts that I made to ask questions of why this was done or how to incorporate some of the changes into my 3/3.5 game were met with "that's what the people wanted" and "you should just move your game to 4e". Including by more than one WotC staff members.
So yes, my view of 4e became negative fairly quickly...and after receiving more than one warning about being negative towards 4e, nevermind the negativity directed towards those of us who wanted to play in an earlier edition, I just stopped participating (hence the low post count in relation to how long I've been a member).
I have only decided to return now after buying Elminster's Guide (my first post 3.5 WotC purchase btw, novels included) and seeing the mood surrounding the soon to be released 5e. |
|
|
|
BlackAce
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
358 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2013 : 15:47:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Interestingly enough, calling attention to the disdain of 4e with this thread only helps to bolster that impression. Fictional campaigns, worlds, and events are entirely too subjective for anyone to be right or wrong. I stopped posting substantially because I felt the need to defend everything I posted because it was in relation to 4e. It's just not productive.
As I said earlier and as Learned Scribe has so kindly proved, that difficulty cuts both ways. You simply cannot have a constructive conversation about 4th, one way or the other. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2013 : 15:54:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Interestingly enough, calling attention to the disdain of 4e with this thread only helps to bolster that impression.
Hmmm.
How would you have recommended I handle this issue then? |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2013 : 16:59:16
|
But, 'the war is over'.
The only people picking at the scabs of the 'cease fire' are the folks who seemed to have enjoyed the 'edition wars'. Although everyone here has their own opinions - that sway from one end of the spectrum to the other - we have all pretty-much just accepted things the way they are and are eagerly awaiting to see what they do with 5eFR.
Now that I am going back through a lot of what was considered '4e material', I can tell you I find it very good and very useful. I am talking about the later stuff here, which appears to have started going 'back to basics' (using the lore to give us great stories).
What happened was that 4e was a smack in the face (for many of us), and is was specifically tailored to appeal to non-fans... which was a ludicrous thing to shoot for, in hindsight (the whole 'New Coke' argument). It wasn't the rules that was so off-putting, it was what they did to FR. The Eberron fans didn't mind it, and the Darksun fans even rejoiced at getting some much-needed love. In not-so-many-words, they admitted to dumbing-down the setting to remove all the 'feelings of entitlement' (which DID exist, mind you).
The Forgotten Realms was not only intimidating for new fans, but it was also intimidating to write for. They wanted a setting that everyone could approach on even-footing (they even said precisely that in some podcast). Unfortunately, that was a really bad idea - FR's strength was the sheer plethora of back-lore, and they nuked that. You had to 'buy all new stuff' to play in the (4e) Realms again.
As for the rules, they really weren't all that bad. They got a bad rap both because of what happened to FR, and also the poer-gamer crowd couldn't do their broken 3e builds anymore. I think the 4e rules were a good set of 'beginner RPG' rules, because balance is important to people new to a game. The existing 3e rules were a nightmare at that point. What I think is that they had a lot of very good ideas, and then took them all too far. They developed (and over-thought) everything, until everything was so perfectly balanced at every level that it felt as if much flavor was sucked-out.
What a lot of people don't realize is that 'in the beginning', DMs had to provide almost all of that 'flavor'. D&D started out as just a set of rules for encounters - DMs had to provide the rest. Its called Rolepay. 4e took us back to that, and most old fans rejected it - they had become spoiled with the crunch providing the fluff as well. A good DM can run anything with any set of rules - its about telling a story, and letting your players be a part of it. The 4e rules worked fine for that.
As for 4eFR, it got better, toward the end. The problem is, most of us had already walked away from it. Our opinions of 4e are all based on the initial release, which was basically a book telling us what we didn't have anymore! Picture making a list of all your favorite things in the world, and then someone coming along and telling you - one by one - that all of that doesn't exist anymore. Geeee.. I wonder why we were all so pissed. It didn't matter what they produced later, we were already mad as hell.
That is why I think a lot of the 4e designers get so insulted here on this site - they are thinking about the stuff they did, which came LATER. When WE - THE FANS - are talking about 4eFR, we are talking about the first couple of books, and most importantly, the FRCG (which was the emotional equivalent of water-boarding for many of us).
So 4e fans, cheer up. 1e/2e fans... what can I say? Get over it already. 3e fans, we are getting more of what we wanted, and more of what they already started to produce. Designers and/or authors, ignore the BS and grow thicker skins; you were just victims of the backlash, and shouldn't take it personally. Lets move on into this new edition with a clean slate - we need to build this community TOGETHER. All fighting does is take our little hobby further down a path to destruction. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2013 : 22:20:30
|
Markus pretty much nailed it. That part about people griping over the 4E FRCG as though it were the whole of 4E Realms content is spot on.
I'll just add that while there are fans of specific editions of the Realms, there are a lot of us, like myself, who enjoy the Realms in its entirety and are just sick and tired of seeing one or two scribes--to this day--trying to trash whole editions of the Realms, in ways big and small, for no good reason.
Candlekeep exist so that we can all enjoy the Realms, however we care to enjoy it. Video games, novels, sourcebooks, comic books, online articles, magazine articles, etc., all of it can be discussed and enjoyed here.
Since we're on the internet, there's an infinite amount of room within these halls for us to do our thing without stepping on each other's toes.
But occasionally that still happens, either accidentally or deliberately. Not as much as before, thanks to attrition owing to the passage of time, but also because of the efforts of the moderators.
When it happens deliberately—that is, when someone decides to get in the way of someone else’s enjoyment of the Realms—the moderators need to take action immediately and publicly to stop such behavior.
It does not matter that people who are suspended or banned can make new accounts or borrow a friend’s account, because deliberately getting in the way of another person’s enjoyment, or potential enjoyment, of the Realms is wrong. It’s attacking the foundation of what Candlekeep stands for.
Consistently addressing such behavior, publicly and directly, is how you send the message—and more importantly, build a reputation—that Candlekeep is edition neutral.
There is no one single right way to enjoy the Realms. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 28 Jul 2013 23:14:07 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2013 : 22:31:58
|
Didn't help any that the initial books, the ones you grab off the shelves, the ones you turn to when building a new character, focused a lot on what changed from the previous version of the setting (mind you now a century later and several catastrophes removed from the present game date) than what the setting was about. It was more about being Not-Old-Realms than its own setting.
Eberron 4E was Eberron, Dark Sun 4E actually presented the original Dark Sun setting in 4E form. Those setting books presented the core of the setting. Despite trying to get away from the baggage of Old Realms, I'm afraid 4E Realms bore that baggage with it into the current edition, now even intensified from all the changes.
The way 4E released material might have also hobbled the level of discussion on the 4E Realms. There were few traditional print books to acquire. These used to stir conversation on the setting in the 3E era. Now everything is on DDI. Those who don't subscribe simply have little to add to the discussion. For whatever reason, there aren't enough forum-active 4E Realms fans talking about the setting to build a critical mass of discussion.
From personal experience, I tried to engage with the community post-Spellplague/4E on building connections between the editions, updating groups and organizations who might have lasted through the century, now affected by Spellscars or such. The efforts were short lived and did not sustain itself. Certainly nothing close to the extent of the old discussions we had on the WotC boards (ex: the Elven Netbook, the Kara-Tur thread, the Utter East project).
It's an issue of the signal being weak (few present 4E fans + few interested neutral 1E/2E/3E fans) enough to allow the noise (enough anti-4E Realms folk) to drown out the useful discussion, whatever amount there was. I think the environment being anti-4E is just a minor problem, there's not enough 4E material of discussable quality (at least none within casual reach of people) to charge up the fanbase.
I've seen the Anti-4E accusation leveled against other establishments, such as Kobold Quarterly magazine. Interestingly the magazine editor and staff went out of their way to ask for 4E articles. They couldn't publish any if none were submitted. In the end, 4E articles continued to trickle down, almost becoming a non-participant by the magazine's closing. In fact, towards the end, we started seeing an equal number of AGE system articles mixed with a few for 13th Age and Castles & Crusades.
Entitlement and back-lore had zip to do with any of this. People still play in comparable settings without the same 'intimidation' (Star Wars, Star Trek, Middle-Earth, Marvelverse, DC-verse). By now Eberron has about as much attention as FR did during Mid-2E, Pathfinder's Golarion has about as much as FR's 2E era (maybe excluding novels, which might be the problem right there). If anyone thinks playing in FR is like treading on a razor, you're yet to play with some Nihonophile fans of L5R.
Sure elements of such exists for each setting, but I think the level of entitlement is steady for every setting (thus overblown for the Realms). People deal with it all the time. It doesn't appear in every game like the Anti-Realms zeitgeist claims. More importantly, it's up to the designers to provide suitable entry points for games in these settings. FR has no excuse compared to any other setting. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2013 : 03:23:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
It does not matter that people who are suspended or banned can make new accounts or borrow a friend’s account, because deliberately getting in the way of another person’s enjoyment, or potential enjoyment, of the Realms is wrong. It’s attacking the foundation of what Candlekeep stands for.
While I wholeheartedly agree with this, I'm a little confused about why it supposedly doesn't matter. This very fact is at the heart of the problem of why Candlekeep suffers from repeat offenders of the Code of Conduct. And it's reflective of the fact, also, that we are all ultimately limited to how we respond to them. If these agitators repeatedly create new accounts just to start their own brand of trouble in these halls again and again, then it becomes an increasingly difficult situation to negotiate -- and not only for the Mod/Admin staff, but for the regular contributors who frequent this site.
These agitators have little interest in what Candlekeep stands for. Or, rather, perhaps they do have an interest, but it's an interest generated in how best to exploit the apparent weaknesses of the CoC and carry forward with their own disruptive agenda.
quote:
Consistently addressing such behavior, publicly and directly, is how you send the message—and more importantly, build a reputation—that Candlekeep is edition neutral.
But isn't that what we of the Admin/Mod staff have been doing all along? |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1266 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2013 : 03:32:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Markus pretty much nailed it. That part about people griping over the 4E FRCG as though it were the whole of 4E Realms content is spot on.
So because I referenced the FOURTH Edition FORGOTTEN REALMS Campaign SETTING to a poster asking what people did/didn't like about the 4th Edition Forgotten Realms I'm somehow in the wrong???? You're way off base, and you don't make any sense in doing that, Jeremy. The Fourth Edition Campaign Setting introduced the Fourth Edition to the world.
I never EVER said that the 4th Edition FRCS was the whole of what was published, and I think Elminster's Forgotten Realms (4th edition content) and what I have heard of the Neverwinter 4th edition guide are good books.
But that particular thread was started by someone asking what was so disliked about 4th edition. I gave my opinion and linked to a neutral NON CANDLEKEEP website where the paying D&D fans gave their opinions, good and bad, on the 4th Edition Campaign Setting book-- which was/IS the introduction to the 4th edition Forgotten Realms. It was a perfectly valid thing to do. What other material would you have us reference to answer their question??? Lord.
Your attacking my post because it disagrees with your rhetoric is really off-putting. Just ignore my posts forever and please don't reference them to make your weak arse points.
|
|
|
|
Learned Scribe
Acolyte
35 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2013 : 00:20:19
|
Candlekeep suffers from few, if any, "repeat offenders" of the CoC. Candlekeep does, however, suffer from Mod staff that consistently interprets the CoC to promote their own anti-full-continuum of the Realms agenda. Which is fine... if your goal is to consistently denigrate the work of those designers currently working on the Realms.
Unlike this sites many anti-Realms Mods and Scribes, there are some of us who actually love the entire Realms continuity.
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
It does not matter that people who are suspended or banned can make new accounts or borrow a friend’s account, because deliberately getting in the way of another person’s enjoyment, or potential enjoyment, of the Realms is wrong. It’s attacking the foundation of what Candlekeep stands for.
While I wholeheartedly agree with this, I'm a little confused about why it supposedly doesn't matter. This very fact is at the heart of the problem of why Candlekeep suffers from repeat offenders of the Code of Conduct. And it's reflective of the fact, also, that we are all ultimately limited to how we respond to them. If these agitators repeatedly create new accounts just to start their own brand of trouble in these halls again and again, then it becomes an increasingly difficult situation to negotiate -- and not only for the Mod/Admin staff, but for the regular contributors who frequent this site.
These agitators have little interest in what Candlekeep stands for. Or, rather, perhaps they do have an interest, but it's an interest generated in how best to exploit the apparent weaknesses of the CoC and carry forward with their own disruptive agenda.
quote:
Consistently addressing such behavior, publicly and directly, is how you send the message—and more importantly, build a reputation—that Candlekeep is edition neutral.
But isn't that what we of the Admin/Mod staff have been doing all along?
|
Edited by - Learned Scribe on 30 Jul 2013 00:31:09 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2013 : 00:29:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Learned Scribe
Candlekeep suffers from few, if any, "repeat offenders" of the CoC. Candlekeep does, however, suffer from Mod staff that consistently interprets the CoC to promote their own anti-full-continuum of the Realms agenda. Which is fine... if your goal is consistently denigrate the work of those designers currently working on the Realms.
Unlike this sites many anti-Realms Mods and Scribes, there are some of us who actually love the entire Realms continuity.
I'm beginning to wonder if you've confused us with some other website, because your comments certainly don't reflect the reality of this one. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
silverwolfer
Senior Scribe
789 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2013 : 05:58:34
|
The fact you only have 7 post LC, tells me your nothing but a coward or someone who got banned in the past. Post under your real name, or just accept that you got banned and leave already .
What I learned today is exactly that. |
|
|
|
Tasker Daze
Seeker
84 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2013 : 06:50:03
|
| if the mods are so bad, why havent they banned the Learned Scribe yet? |
. |
|
|
|
silverwolfer
Senior Scribe
789 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2013 : 08:05:49
|
| would create a paradox... |
|
|
|
Thieran
Learned Scribe
Germany
293 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2013 : 12:04:47
|
| It is my personal opinion that Wooly and the Sage are *not at all* like the Learned Scribe describes them. Quite the contrary. |
|
|
|
Learned Scribe
Acolyte
35 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2013 : 03:09:08
|
A better question... Why haven't the Mods taken direct action to correct the error of their ways by appointing additional Mods who:
1.) Actually play D&D
2.) Actually review the current material
3.) Review current material prior to assessing it...
Classic Candlekeep:
Scribe: I absolutely hate Realms Product X-Y-Z...
I haven't actually read Product X-Y-Z...but I heard someone on Candlekeep talk trash about it, so you know... it's trash. |
Edited by - Learned Scribe on 01 Aug 2013 03:38:24 |
|
|
|
D-brane
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
140 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2013 : 03:47:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Learned Scribe
A better question... Why haven't the Mods taken direct action to correct the error of their ways by appointing additional Mods who:
1.) Actually play D&D
2.) Actually review the current material
3.) Review current material prior to assessing it...
Okay, now I'm definitely know for sure that you're talking out of your a*se.
1.) I don't know about Wooly, but I know The Sage plays D&D - - in all its varied forms - - because he sometimes talks about his games here.
2.) I know both Wooly Rupert and The Sage have reviewed various D&D products and novels from time to time. The Sage even has some reviews for Forgotten Realms books posted on Amazon.com. because I've read them.
3.) Again, I don't know about Wooly Rupert, but I know The Sage reads and sometimes reviews current articles released online by Wizards.
Classic Saer Hidden Scribe:
Saer Hidden Scribe: I absolutely hate the Mods at Candlekeep because they disagree with my disruptive behaviour...
I haven't actually read what these Mods say... but I know how I should feel about them because of what they've tried to do to me, so you know... they're trash. |
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." |
Edited by - D-brane on 01 Aug 2013 03:49:29 |
|
|
|
Learned Scribe
Acolyte
35 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2013 : 03:55:23
|
Indeed, D-Brane,The Sage does often review products before denouncing them.
The 'Rupe? Not so much.
Play D&D?
The Sage? Yeah
The 'Rupe? Not Since 1994...
Would the site benefit from a Mod who is actually active in the current decade of RPG develeopment?
I think so.
You may not.
Saer Hidden Brace cannot be stopped from posting on Candlekeep regardless of the mods efforts...
yep. |
Edited by - Learned Scribe on 01 Aug 2013 03:58:10 |
|
|
|
D-brane
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
140 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2013 : 04:07:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Learned Scribe
Indeed, D-Brane,The Sage does often review products before denouncing them.
Provide me with proof of where The Sage has denounced a particular D&D product in his review?
quote:
Would the site benefit from a Mod who is actually active in the current decade of RPG develeopment?
I think so.
You may not.
You just acknowledged above that The Sage reviews current D&D products. So he is, thus, active in the current decade of RPG development.
So, again, less talking out of your a*se please. Because now you're skipping over your own points when it's convenient.
quote:
Saer Hidden Brace cannot be stopped from posting on Candlekeep regardless of the mods efforts...
yep.
No one is trying to stop you from posting. What the Mods are trying to do, is help you to realise that your behaviour is disruptive. Look at the examples in this thread? Have you even talked about anything here at Candlekeep besides this imagined "poor treatment" by the Mods?
Nope. |
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." |
|
|
|
Learned Scribe
Acolyte
35 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2013 : 04:19:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by D-brane
Provide me with proof of where The Sage has denounced a particular D&D product in his review?
I choose to find no proof. Does The Sage represent the entire Mod staff?
No.
quote:
You just acknowledged above that The Sage reviews current D&D products. So he is, thus, active in the current decade of RPG development.
So, again, less talking out of your a*se please. Because now you're skipping over your own points when it's convenient.
Does The Sage represent the entire Mod staff?
No.
quote:
No one is trying to stop you from posting. What the Mods are trying to do, is help you to realise that your behaviour is disruptive. Look at the examples in this thread? Have you even talked about anything here at Candlekeep besides this imagined "poor treatment" by the Mods?
Nope.
My commentary is timely, poignant, and on-the-mark.
Disruptive to the Mod staff's anti-full-continuum-of-the-Realms-agenda... yes.
Thank you.
Perhaps the Mod staff will choose to elect additional Mod staff which will more appropriately represent the fan-base...
but NO...
they will not, so that they can continue their anti-full-Realms-continuum agenda. |
Edited by - Learned Scribe on 01 Aug 2013 04:21:49 |
|
|
|
Learned Scribe
Acolyte
35 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2013 : 04:25:49
|
And remember, Matt James said it best:
quote:
...this site is decidedly anti-4e. It's best to decide if you want to pick up some of the content, read it for yourself, and figure out if you like it or not.
|
Edited by - Learned Scribe on 01 Aug 2013 04:26:19 |
|
|
|
D-brane
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
140 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2013 : 04:36:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Learned Scribe
quote:
Originally posted by D-brane
Provide me with proof of where The Sage has denounced a particular D&D product in his review?
I choose to find no proof. Does The Sage represent the entire Mod staff?
No.
No, he's one third of the Mod Staff. But you're still failing to back your claim with proof. Which only weakens your the point you're trying to make.
quote:
quote:
You just acknowledged above that The Sage reviews current D&D products. So he is, thus, active in the current decade of RPG development.
So, again, less talking out of your a*se please. Because now you're skipping over your own points when it's convenient.
Does The Sage represent the entire Mod staff?
No.
Again, he's one-third of the Mod Staff. So, again, you're failing to make your point here as well.
quote:
quote:
No one is trying to stop you from posting. What the Mods are trying to do, is help you to realise that your behaviour is disruptive. Look at the examples in this thread? Have you even talked about anything here at Candlekeep besides this imagined "poor treatment" by the Mods?
Nope.
My commentary is timely, poignant, and on-the-mark.
It certainly is. In order to be as disruptive as you've been in the past, you have to be timely, poignant, and on-the-mark.
quote:
Disruptive to the Mod staff's anti-full-continuum-of-the-Realms-agenda... yes.
The fact that you've failed, repeatedly, to prove this agenda you claim, again, speaks volumes about your real intent here at Candlekeep.
quote:
Perhaps the Mod staff will choose to elect additional Mod staff which will more appropriately represent the fan-base...
The community isn't big enough to warrant additional Mods. I know Alaundo has said that in the past. It's a decision that has nothing to do with either Wooly Rupert or The Sage. So unless you're also claiming that Alaundo is anti-4e, you really need to, again, stop talking out of your a*se.
quote:
but NO...
they will not, so that they can continue their anti-full-Realms-continuum agenda.
Until you provide proof for this so-called anti-full-Realms-continuum agenda by ALL members of the Mod Staff, your points are an inaccurate representation of the true state of affairs here at Candlekeep. |
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
A State of Affairs for discussing the 4e Realms...
