We want Forum Feedback!

[Renorei]

I think it depends on how the poster handles it. Not too long ago, there was a suggestion to make the cave go back to how it originally was for just one day as a nostalgia thing. I believe people mentioned it would have been a lot of work for very little gain--and that was probably true. Would saying that really have been cause enough for a hand slapping?

In my opinion it should be. Ultimately they're still "speaking for TJ" which in my opinion is rude and should be against the forum rules. He decides what ideas he likes and doesn't like and he decides what ideas are worth his time and which ones aren't. Users should base their support (or lack of support) on whether they like the idea or not, not whether they think it's "too much work" when they can't possibly know how much work would be involved.

 

The idea that you are mentioning probably wouldn't have been that much work anyway, to be honest. It's entirely possible that TJ has code from the original version of dragon cave saved on his computer somewhere. Furthermore, TJ does "a lot of work" for relatively brief holiday events (although admittedly they usually last several days to a week) so there is precedent for him doing "a lot of work" for relatively small gains.

 

Even when people say things like "TJ has already said no to this" they're trying to quell others from speaking and shut down the discussion. TJ isn't a robot. He can change his mind about things, and there are things from the past that he has changed his mind about that he used to be against (i.e. holiday limits). So if a suggestion crops up that TJ has said no to in the past, that doesn't mean he's going to say no this time. If he wants to say no, it should be left up to him to come into the thread and say so. People shouldn't speak for him.

 

Admittedly someone phrasing a statement like this in a polite way is obviously better than phrasing it in a curt way. But they're still speaking for someone else, and in effect, shushing others.

 

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Now I have a suggestion I'd like to make about a different issue.

 

 

 

The trading sub-forum's rules are too strict in my opinion.

 

In the past, I've tried to offer trades in the "Rare Trading Thread" which included one or more eggs/hatchlings that were considered rare according to the rules, but also some uncommons along with them. They weren't being traded individually, but rather all together. Yet a mod will come by and delete the information about the uncommon. I think this practice should stop. If a user is offering multiple eggs/hatchlings together and at least one of them qualifies as rare, their post should be left alone. They are trying to trade the whole bunch together, and the fact that there is at least one rare egg/hatchling in the trade makes the whole trade rare. The additional eggs/hatchlings are there to "sweeten the pot" so to speak, as just a little extra to tempt someone who was on-the-fence about making an offer into biting. Yes, I know they could instead make that trade offer in a different thread. But there are probably a lot of potential trading partners who are only checking The Rare Trading Thread, along with possibly the Metallic Trading Center. By not allowing users to offer rare trades in the Rare Trading Thread which include a few other dragons, you are either restricting the kinds of trades we can offer (if our posts are edited in RTT) or restricting who can see our posts (if we resort to posting them in a different, less high-dollar thread).

 

Also, non-inbred Holly eggs/hatchlings and Val 09 eggs/hatchlings should be allowed to be posted in The Rare Trading thread. After Christmas this year I was trying to trade some Hollies and I wanted to put them in The Rare Trading Thread because nobody was checking the Holiday Trading Thread anymore (which is understandable because most offers in the Holiday Trading Thread at that point where other Holiday dragons). But when I tried to post them there a mod deleted the posts. Had I been able to post them there I might have gotten more/better offers. In the end some of them grew up on my scroll because I was never able to post them somewhere where people who might have been interested would actually see them.

 

Alternatively, allow a new Holiday trading thread specifically for people who are offering Rare Holidays, which would only include non-inbred Hollies, non-inbred Val 09's, 2nd gens from alt Sweetlings, and perhaps 2nd gen Pumpkins.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Renorei

[HeatherMarie]

It sounds like (I'm not assuming this is what you *mean*, but this is what your post *reads* like to me) pretty much every single possible post that isn't agreeing with the OP could fall under trying to "quell others from speaking" or "shut down the discussion".

 

That's sort of what this part of the forum is all about, isn't it? It's unrealistic to think that hundreds of users would see a suggestion about something that is *never* going to happen, for plenty of different reasons, and no one would pop in and say that.

 

I could point out that your post, and my post, could both be considered to be "trying to quell others from speaking and shut down the discussion" simply by virtue of disagreeing and stating reasons.

 

Imo, it's unfair for people to go around saying that a certain "type" of post is trying to silence people, basically just saying "shut up stupid", etc etc, because *no one but the poster* knows how that post was actually meant. No one. Not you, not me, not even the mods. Sometimes posts might be *interpreted* that way, but there's no way to know if it was intended that way.

 

I was one of the users to comment against the "DC nostalgia" idea, and I did mention how much work it would probably be, for a very tiny number of users who would actually welcome it. How can I say that if I'm not a programmer? Simple. I've seen the cave go down for hours because of coding problems or changes. I've seen how much prep-work is done for the special events. I have two friends that have their own websites and I know how difficult it sometimes is for them to change the simplest things. I honestly hadn't even thought of the idea that TJ might have original code stored somewhere, and maybe that's true. We don't know that. If he *doesn't*, it would indeed be a *lot* of recoding, whether or not it would be considered "hard" to do.

 

tl;dr: No one knows a poster's intentions except for the poster, so no one can accurately accuse any "type" of post as being stifling or repressive.

[Renorei]

There are a lot of ways to disagree with an OP that don't include posts that are "speaking for TJ" or posts that quell discussion.

 

For example:

-"I don't like this idea because it will lead to more common eggs on the AP."

-"I don't like this idea because I want to control where all my eggs go."

-"I don't like this idea because I think 2 holiday dragons per breed is enough for each user and I'd rather see them get spread around more."

 

It's obviously open to interpretation, but responses like these don't come across like they're trying to quell discussion. It's a user sharing their opinion about whether they like an idea or not based solely on what they think.

 

People who claim that certain things are too much work for TJ or say that "TJ has already said no to this" may not be intending to quell discussion, but that's how it comes across (to me). They should speak for themselves and what they personally think of the idea, and not worry about how they think TJ will respond, or point out how he's responded in the past, or try to guess how much work it would be for him, or assume they know whether he'd be interested in the idea and willing to do that work. It's not really our prerogative to micro-manage TJ's time for him. If he thinks an idea isn't worth the amount of work it would take, he will say so--he doesn't need the users to speak for him.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

I think at one point the rare trading center did allow such bundle offers--in fact, I'm almost positive of it--but for one reason or another they ended up removing them. I think that's something you'd have to PM whoever manages the rare trading center account about, though, rather than posting just in here.

[Obscure_Trash]

Also, non-inbred Holly eggs/hatchlings and Val 09 eggs/hatchlings should be allowed to be posted in The Rare Trading thread. After Christmas this year I was trying to trade some Hollies and I wanted to put them in The Rare Trading Thread because nobody was checking the Holiday Trading Thread anymore (which is understandable because most offers in the Holiday Trading Thread at that point where other Holiday dragons). But when I tried to post them there a mod deleted the posts. Had I been able to post them there I might have gotten more/better offers. In the end some of them grew up on my scroll because I was never able to post them somewhere where people who might have been interested would actually see them.

 

This one is one you should probably bring up to the thread/project account. Actually, the rare + uncommon thing probably should be discussed with them, too (or if you could get more users who use that thread over here) and then clarified in the thread.

 

Especially for trading threads, mods heavily depend on reports, and a lot of times a designated group of users will help in reporting posts that don't belong in the thread.

 

I don't personally have a problem or major disagreement with anything you suggested, though. :3

[Seika-Seamstress]

I think this forum is rather unfriendly and passive-aggressive towards newcomers. If not for IRC, I wouldn't of thought that people here could be, well nice. Since my first day I have had posts deleted without a clear reason why.. ((I didn't know what Even Gen meant when it got deleted, such terms weren't given to me in my welcome thread)) and of all the forum sections I have visited, none seem more hostile than the Trading Thread.

 

I'm thankful that Z was able to clear things up for me in pm when IRC ((the -ONLY- place I have found helpful nice members and people for DC)) and that another mod stepped up and warned a member when that individual openly mocked me and bullied me on one of my threads. Then in trading, when I don't post in an exact so manner ((usually because of misunderstanding and lack of communication, my post will get deleted without the mod discussing why it was deleted. I've also had an instance of a backseat modder pm me. And from how he handled himself, well this is what I got from him:

 

"You can't post in my thread because you are a newbie and don't have any holiday dragons to breed for other breedable holiday dragons."

 

And I'm thinking to myself...why do moderators allow such threads to exist if new people and older members can't post if they don't at least have 1 breedable pair of holiday dragons? That's segregation and breeds negativity of pettiness immaturity. But we are speaking about a forum that has a high amount of kiddies. Really if not for Z answering some of my questions, I would of been confused and unknowingly breaking forum rules thanks to two different rules clashing together making things confusing.

 

Also Sock was able to talk to me on IRC ((And people if you feel no one is helpful I suggest you go on IRC because it's the only place where you will get help. No help topic will help you like the people of IRC will even though there are some that I would steer clear from.)) and suggested I post here. I did make an effort to email links and what happened to TJ 5-6 days ago, but never got a response back.

 

I suggest that segregating threads in trade like "You no have this dragon so youz not in club" be not allowed and I would appreciate it if people were more friendly and didn't look gift horses in the mouth. Such as: EWWW THATZ TOO COMMON GIMME METALZ! Or those that break the trust of people in the Take an Egg Leave an Egg secion and just take not give. But I know I'm asking too much with this last paragraph but in the same token; people really should be more friendly to each other and more welcoming of new people and not openly chastising/criticising/ignoring them.

[Fuzzbucket]

I'm very sorry you have found this forum so unhelpful. I have to say that I have found IRC to be far more unfriendly. I have to say that MOST trading threads do have clear guidelines at the start, but if someone who was not a mod was like that to you - I would have reported it.

 

Anyway - to the question of post saying too much work for TJ - what about those (which I have myself made at times) saying too much work for too few people wanting it - that nostalgia one was a classic example. The cave has crashed big time twice recently. We have some really good suggestions waiting to be implemented. Why ask TJ to put ANY work in on something for a one day event which actually DOES nothing, when things like that are waiting for his attention ? So in that sense - whatever he may have stored, it's "too much work". It's like my deciding to take up embroidery while the vacuuming hasn't been done for three weeks.

 

Some things have to be a lot more important.

 

As to the ones "TJ has nixed that" - there are posts here from him saying "NEVER". Is it wrong to point that out ?

[Xythus]

(This is a response to "using It's too much work! for shooting down ideas" - subject; too many posts to quote )

 

 

I will admit I am guilty of having done this at least a couple of times, but I am certain that when people use this logic, its usually because its true. I also confess that if I'm the OP, I wouldn't want to have this statement used against my idea. However, we will always see some suggestions that have clearly not been thoroughly thought out and are downright unrealistic, at which point people come in to remind them. Just for sake of example, the "More Raffle Times" thread, which is a suggestion for more raffles (changed from more mini-games/events). I don't need to to be a specialist in anything to realize asking for many more events per year is unreasonable.

 

Suggestions are NOT black and white in terms of just YES! or NO!, which are often how they are treated here. The ideas itself aren't bad, but people forget it often comes with process, multiple people involved, and tons of planning. I can't speak for TJ, or as one of the in-cave artists, but I definitely know the following:

 

~ It takes HOURS/DAYS minimum to sprite and finish something. This includes everything from sketching, resizing, fixing, coloring, re-doing if it doesn't come out right, crits, getting close to perfect as possible, etc.

~ Every event thread always shows the list of art credits, which lets us know who did what, and there's always multiple artists involved. I'm guessing this is because its ethically unfair for one or two people to do most of the work.

~ The above being said, that means all artists have to be contacted and start in advance.

~ No big event is ever planned last minute in real life, so its safe to assume for DC too. While the userbase is relaxing collecting dragons in the summer/fall, TJ and the artists are already getting everything together.

~ Obviously, we all have our own lives and obligations, so sitting in front of the computer for hours won't always be the top of the to-do list.

~ Here artists work for free - and frankly - don't HAVE to be committed. But they do it anyway, and while the whole "we have to respect artists" phrase is overkill in suggestions, it really needs to be remembered that they choose to dedicate their free time to DC.

 

So if we had an event, say, every three months, and that all events are planned in advance, then there is no stop to the planning and working for TJ and artists.

 

TL;DR: Suggestions like these are just not humanly possible due to time restrictions and because DC only has so many artists, which is why many people choose to use "its too much work" as a valid reason.

[cfmtfm]

This one is one you should probably bring up to the thread/project account. Actually, the rare + uncommon thing probably should be discussed with them, too (or if you could get more users who use that thread over here) and then clarified in the thread.

Just popping in with a single cent to say that the "rare + uncommon thing" has been tested out already, but turned out to cause more harm than good. (If anyone's at all interested, there's some stuff on that here.) I feel like that's already clarified in the thread - the first rule is "You may offer only rare dragons ...", which already implies that you cannot offer other non-rares. Of course, the RTC welcomes feedback and suggestions, so I would encourage them to shoot the RTC (either the project account or one of the thread mods) a PM about that! Likewise if anyone has any questions or would like clarification on the rules - we don't bite.

 

Apologies, as I know this isn't entirely forum-feedback-related, but I thought I should let people know about this.

Edited February 8, 2014 by cfmtfm

[whitebaron]

I will admit I am guilty of having done this at least a couple of times, but I am certain that when people use this logic, its usually because its true. I also confess that if I'm the OP, I wouldn't want to have this statement used against my idea. However, we will always see some suggestions that have clearly not been thoroughly thought out and are downright unrealistic, at which point people come in to remind them. Just for sake of example, the "More Raffle Times" thread, which is a suggestion for more raffles (changed from more mini-games/events). I don't need to to be a specialist in anything to realize asking for many more events per year is unreasonable.

Actually, there is two possibilities, if people write that: their estimate is very wrong (usually, when trying to analyze time spent from the outside you have no chance to get it right), or it is rather right. If it's right, they still do not know whether the person who'd have the time to put into, would do so. Example: Spriters for the Xmas and Halloween/V-Day Event. There's no knowing whatsoever IF they could make time as a collective for another 1,2,3 or 15 events.

 

A common example seems to be, for TJ to change something, and people go "that must be hard, screw this". Like bringing back the biomes. For all we know, biomes could be a one-hit-switch that takes him 5 second to take offline and we're at a classic version of the cave. For all we know, biomes could also be totally ingrained in the source code, so that he'd never could remove them from the game anymore.

 

There's bound to be both stuff in his code, seeing as he started early/unexperienced and went on from that. But noone can really tell which stuff is modular, easy to change, or bulky, and almost impossible.

[Sheriziya]

Also, sometimes suggestions are not always made on the assumption it's going to be implemented "right now". I know Naruhina is looking on the long term, as am I and others who are looking for ways for improve the raffle experiences (since you're posting about that particular thread). Since I plan events as a volunteer (including getting people to volunteer for the events) in an organization, I kinda know how much time it can take. I have no illusions about it. That's one of the reasons we're looking for the long term, like it was already stated in one of the threads.

So, yes... maybe it's not something that can implemented "immediatelly/this year", but perhaps it's a suggestion that can be worked out during this year and be implemented next year, or whenever it is possible to implement, IF TJ thinks it's viable.

 

Suggestions like these are just not humanly possible due to time restrictions and because DC only has so many artists, which is why many people choose to use "its too much work" as a valid reason.

And that's EXACTLY why a compromise is being sought in the specific topics. Sometimes suggestions are not made with the intention NOT to change, but with the intention to be a starting point (or in this case a continuing point in a new thread) of a discussion.

And when TJ specifically asks for a subject to be discussed in a separate thread instead of the original combo thread it was in.... it doesn't feel fair/right if it gets shot down with "it's impossible" while noone except TJ, the artists and probably the mods actually know if it's impossible or not.

 

Sorry for the rant... just had to get that off my chest....

[Fiona]

Speaking for TJ and what's possible/too time consuming/whatever, coding wise, yes you have an excellent point. We don't know what's possible or simply not worth his time and effort. So it's very valid to counter a "but it's too much for TJ to code" with "we aren't TJ, so we can't make that call"

 

He himself somewhere suggested that "because TJ said no" is not a valid response to an idea because if we have a strong enough argument in favor of something he could potentially change his stance. So rather than shoot down something because he said it could never be, it's better to say why you yourself don't think it's a good idea.

 

It's also true that people who haven't been involved in organizing events here don't have actual knowledge of what the artists would have time to come up with, but I will say that Xythus hit it on the head with her points about lead time to plan an event and do the artwork. We are able to speak for ourselves though, of course.

[Sheriziya]

Thanks, Fiona It's good to hear from an artist as well!

Edited February 8, 2014 by Sheriziya

[Renorei]

Anyway - to the question of post saying too much work for TJ - what about those (which I have myself made at times) saying too much work for too few people wanting it - that nostalgia one was a classic example. The cave has crashed big time twice recently. We have some really good suggestions waiting to be implemented. Why ask TJ to put ANY work in on something for a one day event which actually DOES nothing, when things like that are waiting for his attention ? So in that sense - whatever he may have stored, it's "too much work". It's like my deciding to take up embroidery while the vacuuming hasn't been done for three weeks.

 

Some things have to be a lot more important.

 

As to the ones "TJ has nixed that" - there are posts here from him saying "NEVER". Is it wrong to point that out ?

If your logic is that it's too much work for too few people wanting it, then you're effectively speaking for other users and TJ. In my opinion that's not something that's needed. All users can speak for themselves based on whether they like an idea and why or why not, based on the idea's merits on its own. And then TJ can choose to allocate his time as he sees fit to whichever changes he also likes and which changes he thinks are most important to make first.

 

It's very "micro-managy" IMO to essentially have the viewpoint that Idea X (which you are indifferent too) is bad because it would take TJ's coding time away from Idea Y (which you really like).

 

If a user doesn't like an idea, they should say so, and say why, and their "why" should be an evaluation of the idea on its own merits. If you are just flat-out unimpressed and disinterested in a certain idea, just say so. TJ and the mods can use their reading comprehension skills to figure out which ideas the users are really jazzed about and which ideas the users dislike or are indifferent to, and then use their knowledge of coding to decide which of the well-liked ideas are actually worth the time, without the users feeling like they need to make that assessment for them.

 

 

 

In regards to whether it's "wrong" to point out that TJ has said no to certain ideas in the past, I would argue that yes, it is wrong. TJ himself has asked users not to do this, and plus, he has changed his mind in the past about things he said he would never do.

[Obscure_Trash]

Thanks for chiming in about the trading threads, cfmtfm.

 

~

 

I think I forgot to say this earlier, but for "this has already been given a no" threads - we're not cleaning out threads closed with a no anymore, so if that really is the case, users should either be providing a link and reporting or just reporting it so a mod can close it as a dupe.

[LibbyLishly]

In regards to whether it's "wrong" to point out that TJ has said no to certain ideas in the past, I would argue that yes, it is wrong. TJ himself has asked users not to do this, and plus, he has changed his mind in the past about things he said he would never do.

I would very much like to see something done about this particular issue, though I don't know if warns are the best idea unless it's a repeat offense.

 

Essentially, if they can pull a direct quote from TJ into their post, I don't care so much. But the sheer amount of "TJ said no to this once" and "TJ said this would happen" that is completely unsubstantiated is, I think, rumor-mongering and damaging to the entire Suggestions section. So often, I see people trying to shoot suggestions down with the "BUT TJ SAID" without ever backing it up.

 

The most frustrating instance of this in my mind is the persistent "TJ said Whites are going to get the Heal BSA" argument, which seeks to render any other White or Heal BSA suggestion invalid. In actuality, I've recently learned, TJ did suggest that he might do something like this before the BSA suggestions section was even created, but the thread has since been deleted and, obviously, Heal in that form has not been implemented in the years since it was suggested - implying that he is most likely not particularly stuck on that idea. It's a pain to have to clarify this every time someone mentions the "Whites are slated to get Heal" rumor, which happens far too frequently. I've actually recently made a suggestion that this be clarified in the OP in the "Will this BSA Work" thread, since it's an official avenue, though it's doubtful that will quell the rumor with any kind of rapidity.

 

tl;dr: At least giving a slap on the wrist to people who persist in spreading the "TJ said XYZ so this suggestion shouldn't exist" mentality could seriously help the Suggestions board.

[cyradis4]

It sounds like (I'm not assuming this is what you *mean*, but this is what your post *reads* like to me) pretty much every single possible post that isn't agreeing with the OP could fall under trying to "quell others from speaking" or "shut down the discussion".

 

That's sort of what this part of the forum is all about, isn't it? It's unrealistic to think that hundreds of users would see a suggestion about something that is *never* going to happen, for plenty of different reasons, and no one would pop in and say that.

 

I could point out that your post, and my post, could both be considered to be "trying to quell others from speaking and shut down the discussion" simply by virtue of disagreeing and stating reasons.

 

Imo, it's unfair for people to go around saying that a certain "type" of post is trying to silence people, basically just saying "shut up stupid", etc etc, because *no one but the poster* knows how that post was actually meant. No one. Not you, not me, not even the mods. Sometimes posts might be *interpreted* that way, but there's no way to know if it was intended that way.

 

I was one of the users to comment against the "DC nostalgia" idea, and I did mention how much work it would probably be, for a very tiny number of users who would actually welcome it. How can I say that if I'm not a programmer? Simple. I've seen the cave go down for hours because of coding problems or changes. I've seen how much prep-work is done for the special events. I have two friends that have their own websites and I know how difficult it sometimes is for them to change the simplest things. I honestly hadn't even thought of the idea that TJ might have original code stored somewhere, and maybe that's true. We don't know that. If he *doesn't*, it would indeed be a *lot* of recoding, whether or not it would be considered "hard" to do.

 

tl;dr: No one knows a poster's intentions except for the poster, so no one can accurately accuse any "type" of post as being stifling or repressive.

While I don't agree with WhiteBaron that its infringing on free speech, I will say that it is a form of bullying and is definitely a problem. I've seen more than one thread shut-down by that. And I've gotten at least one thread going again with the comment "We're not TJ, let TJ decide what TJ can do". And now he posted something like that himself, and we can just link to that post.

 

In fact, I was surprised that the (frequent) statement "TJ is against changing holiday limits!" didn't manage to shut that thread down. Eventually TJ did post, those comments ended, and the discussion did continue, and now? Now we have no holiday limits.

 

I'd say, the Nostalgia thread is a case in point. The "Its so much work!" did shut the idea down. Quickly. When the truth is, no one knows how much work it would have taken. I can think of several ways it could have been easy to do. And twice that many ways it would have been brutal! It all depended on what TJ did and didn't have, what the cave's coding is like. And only he knows that. Mind, I wouldn't have wanted a Nostalgia day. I think the new cave is SUCH an improvement!

 

So while I don't think it needs to be warned, getting the mods to tell the people using those excuses that they aren't valid would be A Very Good Thing. They tend to not listen to everyone else.

 

Cheers!

C4.

[Renorei]

While we're on this topic, I'd love to see a sticky added to S&R with rules specifically for S&R. Amongst those rules, I'd include the two issues we've been discussing. I would also include:

 

-Evaluate each idea on its own merits rather than comparing it to a tapestry of other ideas.

-No slippery-slope arguments.

-When discussing the pros and cons of an idea, only discuss the pros and cons of the idea as stated in the OP, not some variant of it.

 

I'm sure there are plenty more that need to be added but those are the ones that come to mind for me right now.

[DarkEternity]

The nostalgia thread suggested a cosmetic and temporary change for a total of twenty four hours.

 

Not an additional function. Something that could have been already been easily emulated via external addons if not for the stipulations in the TOS.

 

This is what I think people meant by 'too much work for TJ'. And most people, I think, have at least a passing acquaintance with HTML itself (and we're not even discussing the other scripting itself).

 

I'm not even going to mention the copyright issues of the old, old sprites in the first place and other reasons why the changes were made to the cave in the first place, for example biomes, and how it would affect features like Copper Dragon breeding - which, you know, is based on actually having biomes in the first place.

 

 

[Nectaris]

While we're on this topic, I'd love to see a sticky added to S&R with rules specifically for S&R.  Amongst those rules, I'd include the two issues we've been discussing.  I would also include:

 

-Evaluate each idea on its own merits rather than comparing it to a tapestry of other ideas.

-No slippery-slope arguments. 

-When discussing the pros and cons of an idea, only discuss the pros and cons of the idea as stated in the OP, not some variant of it. 

 

I'm sure there are plenty more that need to be added but those are the ones that come to mind for me right now.

I still wouldn't make these warnable offenses, that seems kind of harsh, to be blunt, especially for the slippery slope thing. More of consider them things to be discouraged, rather than rules.

 

On the final one, what if the OP isn't up to date, will we not be allowed to discuss someone else' potential modification to an idea just because it isn't in the OP? We should be allowed to discuss whatever ideas are put forth, even if they are not strictly "in the OP". Sometimes, an OP will propose a change to the idea to see how it is taken before updating, is that somehow off limits too? Worded as it is, that is how people will take it even if that was not your intention.

Edited February 9, 2014 by Nectaris

[DarkEternity]

Evaluate each idea on its own merits rather than comparing it to a tapestry of other ideas.

Comparisons are usually utilised as evidence in an argument. Without comparisons, people would have little to no basis at all for providing evidence for their points. For example, if political leaders are making decisions for their people, they would often refer to examples of events which occurred in the past to backup their judgements.

 

No slippery-slope arguments.

Not every individual is even equipped with equal linguistic ability. For example, we have many different nationalities who frequent Dragon Cave. In addition to the language barrier, would you judge... no warn and punish people based not on their ability to reason and distinguish a non-slippery slope argument from a slippery slope argument when clarity of expression should be the main goal?

 

When discussing the pros and cons of an idea, only discuss the pros and cons of the idea as stated in the OP, not some variant of it.

I strongly disagree. As the argument evolves, the ideas evolve and OPs go inactive.

[cyradis4]

While we're on this topic, I'd love to see a sticky added to S&R with rules specifically for S&R.  Amongst those rules, I'd include the two issues we've been discussing.  I would also include:

 

-Evaluate each idea on its own merits rather than comparing it to a tapestry of other ideas.

-No slippery-slope arguments. 

-When discussing the pros and cons of an idea, only discuss the pros and cons of the idea as stated in the OP, not some variant of it. 

 

I'm sure there are plenty more that need to be added but those are the ones that come to mind for me right now.

I agree with Nectaris, having them strongly discouraged by the mods instead of warnable should take care of the problem. And keep people discussing the ideas even when someone does trot out these arguments.

 

Also I disagree with point 3. I think people can discuss the pros / cons of any modification to the idea, wether or not its in the OP. I've seen some OPs that were just.... really a bad idea, but with some tweaking it became a great idea.

 

Yes, the Nostalgia idea had lots of problems, and wasn't a good idea, but it still shouldn't have been shot down by "its too hard".

 

Cheers!

C4.

Edited February 9, 2014 by cyradis4

[Tawanda001]

-When discussing the pros and cons of an idea, only discuss the pros and cons of the idea as stated in the OP, not some variant of it.

Not too sure about this one, often bouncing around ideas that are variations of the original idea can lead someone to a completely new idea that might be worth considering. Isn't that basically how we finally came to the resolution on lifting holiday limits?

[DarkEternity]

Yes, the Nostalgia idea had lots of problems, and wasn't a good idea, but it still shouldn't have been shot down by "its too hard".

True. I'm not sure if it was because there weren't any other reasons or whether that one was the most expedient and easy to type reason.

[Obscure_Trash]

I personally really don't really want more rules sticky's. For one, there's already plenty of sticky's in this section (as there are in most!). For two, I really don't think a sticky is necessary to say so few things. PLUS that's really already covered by the board rules under the spam/disrespect rules. Just start reporting posts like that to me, guys. Mods will step up in tackling those posts and keeping threads on topic, but it'll be easier to stay on top of if you help by reporting.