Photonrider described the problem, I have the solution

[jimipitbull]

If it was a false accusation you are perfectly free to report it.

I have offered a much simpler solution to Johnny. It's his problem, not mine.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Same applied to Mr. Johnny.

Ambiguity is a reminder to think.

"The first step is admitting you have a problem" means that the hard part is over. We've recognised the issue, and now we can take steps to resolve it.

Thankfully, school is in session and Mr. Johnny has the answers.
With his help, we can finally kick the habit.

Or perhaps just cause the community to become even more fractious, as per @mister dog 's warning.

Same what applied to Mister Johnny

 

[Griffith500]

Same what applied to Mister Johnny

Report.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Report.

Report what? I never said anything about reporting anyone in particular

 

[Griffith500]

Report what? I never said anything about reporting anyone in particular

I never said you did! Was I replying to you?

My advice is universal, though: think.

 

[McClarenDesign]

@photonrider posted a thread describing his disappointment in the direction he feels the GT forums are heading HERE. In his opinion it's devolved into a battle of those that love and those that hate the franchise and every thread ends up in a battle of wills between the two sides and it makes every thread repetitive and ugly. I understand his disappointment and as a fellow Canuck I'm here to tell him and you, there is a solution to this and it's within your control. So everyone please listen up, school is in session, Mr. Johnny is here.

The solution to this "trolling" dilemma as described in the in @photonrider's OP is quite simple. A well worded, well thought out, tightly defined original post, followed by an OP that maintains control of the thread through active participation. If you want relatively troll free threads, you need to define the conversation first and foremost, and this will also gives others that are interested in maintaining a neat, tidy and positive discussion the tools to do the job.

Now before you jump up and down yelling, "Johnny is nuts, that won't work", yes it will. I don't start a lot of threads around here, but when I do, I often keep a tight reign on the discussion and it starts with a narrowly defined OP. Ever been into one of my Undocumented Changes threads? Read the OP. It spells out exactly what I want in that discussion and what I don't want. Then watch my posts throughout the thread. When someone drags it off topic, I gently push them back. The responses aren't always pleasant from the participants, I think "dictator" has been hinted at a few times, but I don't care. It's my thread, I posted the OP as to what I want to discuss, and I'll report anyone that tries to derail my thread after being warned first. Doesn't win you a lot of fans, but it sure makes for a nice, neat, tidy discussion.

So if you want a discussion where you can control the trolls, you must take charge of the thread, starting with a well worded OP and followed up with actively cajoling people back into line and as a final resort, reporting those that don't heed your warnings. These are the tools the @Jordan has given us and the mods allow us to use and they work well and most importantly, you will get the active support of moderators to allow you to do this. That's what they are here for, to ensure that you get to have the types of discussions that you want to have. When you entitle a thread, "Hey look, a new VGT", YOU left the door wide open to any response, and it's your own fault if the discussion devolves into a trail of posts criticizing Kaz, GT, the VGT Project etc., because YOU didn't define the discussion and you're well aware of how things are around here these days. If I were starting a VGT thread and wanted to control the off topic nonsense, this is something I might do:

First, assume that many posters will read the title, not read the OP and just start to post. So your title has to help define what you want, like this:

The Ford VGT Positive Discussion Thread
​

Catchy eh? But it tells you it's about the Ford VGT and it's positive and that's what counts.

Now to the OP. I'd do something like this.

The new Ford VGT is upon is..pics below...blah blah blah. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the pros and cons of this particular car and to celebrate it's imminent release. Everyone is entitled to express their like or dislike for this car, suggest improvements, wishes for performance, compare it to other VGT's etc. etc.

What this thread is not about is bashing the VGT Project, the GT series, the lack of real car DLC, Kazunori Yamauchi or any aspect of Gran Turismo. You are still free to do that in the appropriate thread which I have linked HERE. Please limit your discussion to the new Ford VGT

That's all you have to do. You've narrowly defined the discussion and given yourself the tools to reign in anyone that posts off YOUR topic in YOUR thread. The worst thing that might be acceptable would be something like, "That's the ugliest car I've ever seen" or, "it's boring and uncreative" etc. etc. Anyone expressing dislike for the car should be ok and you as the OP have to ensure that those that like the car don't try to actively target someone who says they don't like the car. If you as the OP decided that dislike of the car is acceptable in your thread, you have to manage that as well.

When the inevitable joker pops in with (paraphrasing), "GT sucks, VGT sucks, Kaz sucks, lolwut" etc. my first move would be to quote the portion of the OP that tells them that's unacceptable to them, suggest they stay on topic, and if they continue, then you report them. Just make sure you aren't reporting posts because you don't like them, even if they fit within your OP. You will get mod support if you have tightly defined the conversation and the violation you are reporting is clear and precise. If you report everyone that makes posts you don't like, but are actually within the spirit of your OP, expect to get ignored.

The power is within you, to create the kind of that you want. This is your Expecting random chance to make it work the way you'd like it to work doesn't work. Expecting the mods to babysit this place and read your mind as to what you want doesn't work either. Take charge, take the bull by the horns, make the you want it to be, or to put it bluntly, stop whining and complaining, about whining and complaining, because if you don't want to be part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

Do something about it.



Now having said all this, if the mods think I'm way off base here and overstepping my authority, feel free to close this thread

Worked for me.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

My view on stuff like this is, discussion forums become way, way less interesting where you're discussing how people are discussing, rather than discussing, err, stuff. It sucks all the fun out of it, and that's a large part of why we're here right, to have a bit of fun, or get something out of being here in some form or another. And for me it's important to remember you just can't get that if you're wary of how people might respond to your posts, or indeed you're the one looking to make others wary. Not fun.

Of course there's plenty of methods and strategies to maximise fun/interest - which Johnny excellently details above - but to me the most important thing is to always be thinking about the attitude you are conveying in your posts, and to approach the forum (especially one as large and diverse as GTPlanet) as relaxed as you can - if relaxed is the right word (there's probably a better one, hopefully you know what I mean).

I haven't posted a great deal and I've been lucky enough not to have had many people having a go at me, or people being, err, 'eager' to tell me I'm Wrong - but when it does happen, trying to avoid fighting back, or going into debate battlestation mode, means I can still feel this place is fun. Which, as simplistic as it sounds, is all I really want as long as I'm here posting.

And lastly, for the people who really do cross the line and break rules, I've always trusted the moderation staff here to deal with that appropriately and consistently - it's worth saying that GTPlanet's moderation team is by far and away the best set of mods I've seen or dealt with on any forum I've been on, I couldn't stress that enough personally.

 

[Griffith500]

My view on stuff like this is, discussion forums become way, way less interesting where you're discussing how people are discussing, rather than discussing, err, stuff. It sucks all the fun out of it, and that's a large part of why we're here right, to have a bit of fun, or get something out of being here in some form or another. And for me it's important to remember you just can't get that if you're wary of how people might respond to your posts, or indeed you're the one looking to make others wary. Not fun.

Of course there's plenty of methods and strategies to maximise fun/interest - which Johnny excellently details above - but to me the most important thing is to always be thinking about the attitude you are conveying in your posts, and to approach the forum (especially one as large and diverse as GTPlanet) as relaxed as you can - if relaxed is the right word (there's probably a better one, hopefully you know what I mean).

I haven't posted a great deal and I've been lucky enough not to have had many people having a go at me, or people being, err, 'eager' to tell me I'm Wrong - but when it does happen, trying to avoid fighting back, or going into debate battlestation mode, means I can still feel this place is fun. Which, as simplistic as it sounds, is all I really want as long as I'm here posting.

And lastly, for the people who really do cross the line and break rules, I've always trusted the moderation staff here to deal with that appropriately and consistently - it's worth saying that GTPlanet's moderation team is by far and away the best set of mods I've seen or dealt with on any forum I've been on, I couldn't stress that enough personally.

There is value in discussing the nature of discussion, partly because these little micro communities work just like real communities, and useful insights to real communitues can be gained in such a sandbox.

Some people like to use that sandbox for other purposes. Like practising stepping up and being a leader, or practising being a master debater, or practising devil's advocate.

None of that is inherently bad, it is entirely to do with intent. Which is a societal issue, and thus everyone's problem.

I believe the word you are looking for is "detached". That's easy for some people, but really very hard for others. Which is why there is no one rule to rule them all.

The success of the moderation here is, I think, due to the way they self-moderate, which prevents cultural islands from forming, at least in their "official" activities (which is all that matters).

Can we expect the same of those brave few who step up to lead threads? Not always, I'd wager. Thus, rules upon rules creates divides and legitimises them vs. us, creating cultural islands, instead of a cultural sea.

EDIT: from @McClarenDesign 's thread
"In short, don't be a dick."

 

[Johnnypenso]

There is value in discussing the nature of discussion, partly because these little micro communities work just like real communities, and useful insights to real communitues can be gained in such a sandbox.

Some people like to use that sandbox for other purposes. Like practising stepping up and being a leader, or practising being a master debater, or practising devil's advocate.

None of that is inherently bad, it is entirely to do with intent. Which is a societal issue, and thus everyone's problem.

I believe the word you are looking for is "detached". That's easy for some people, but really very hard for others. Which is why there is no one rule to rule them all.

The success of the moderation here is, I think, due to the way they self-moderate, which prevents cultural islands from forming, at least in their "official" activities (which is all that matters).

Can we expect the same of those brave few who step up to lead threads? Not always, I'd wager. Thus, rules upon rules creates divides and legitimises them vs. us, creating cultural islands, instead of a cultural sea.

EDIT: from @McClarenDesign 's thread
"In short, don't be a dick."

I could be wrong but I don't think this idea would devolve into cultural islands. I believe the missing link here is that some people don't want every thread turned into a debate and let's face it that's generally what happens most of the time and I'm often right in the middle of it At the same time I can understand how annoying it is for someone who just wants some light hearted conversation about something he loves and appreciates and so I don't think there's anything problematic with creating an "appreciation" type thread that bars off topic nonsense. The other forums are loaded with these types of threads and they are extremely busy and prolific. And the other thing is, by creating an "appreciation thread" it doesn't limit someone else from creating a general discussion thread on the subject at the same time, nor does it limit those that like and participate in the appreciation thread, from participating in the full discussion thread and duking out their opinions there.

I see this as more of an additional positive contribution to the GT forums that in no way limits full discussion in the appropriate threads if so inclined.

 

[JKgo]

............I most of the time agree with Johnnypenso, so no surprise here, having a better defined OP could cut down...un-wanted (not warranted?) posts/comments. I've seen some cool threads over by the suggestions forum getting derailed over folks sharpening/baring their knives so whatever method is applied to cool the madness, hell I'm all up for it.

 

[TokoTurismo]

Oh yeah, and another thing. I'm not sure if this is the right thread for it, but here goes. There are some people who take criticism to a hole new level by wanting him or her to even leave and never come back to GTP, all because you've criticized, or even expressed your feelings about their *insert favorite game here*.

I refuse to call out their names because I feel it's wrong and makes said people feel victimized (if that's the right word). So I won't mention them, but I will say there are some people who call others who criticize something they love "haters" (even though these "haters" posts are very logical and aren't just mindless whiners), whine about them and also hope to see those people disappear from the site. Some people need to understand that those "h-word" are hardcore fans who love the GT franchise, hoping for it to improve on its issues that were kept for the longest time. Due to no improvements, issues corrected etc in both GT titles (GT5 and GT6), many has given on it, but haven't left it (like myself) and stay on GTPlanet because it's that great of a site with lot's of diversity. One will be crazy to leave this awesome site for another, created by one of the biggest GT fans himself, @Jordan, who too adores the GT franchise as well.

I and many others who are critics to GT nowadays, highly respect those who still love GT6, and doesn't let the flaws ruin their experience with it. 👍 However, they need to let others who want to express their feelings and share their opinions about said current GT title (they don't have to agree with those people either, but respect them too), not just shut them up. You know, some of us critics are trying to inform said developer (who doesn't seem to listen, like, at all) on his mistakes and help correct said mistakes for the future.

I feel GTP has completely divided into two groups who're not only against each other, but don't seem to work together at all in trying to gain the developer's attention. This could be the very possible reason why Kaz hardly listens, or because his fame has taken over him...

 

[Griffith500]

I could be wrong but I don't think this idea would devolve into cultural islands. I believe the missing link here is that some people don't want every thread turned into a debate and let's face it that's generally what happens most of the time and I'm often right in the middle of it At the same time I can understand how annoying it is for someone who just wants some light hearted conversation about something he loves and appreciates and so I don't think there's anything problematic with creating an "appreciation" type thread that bars off topic nonsense. The other forums are loaded with these types of threads and they are extremely busy and prolific. And the other thing is, by creating an "appreciation thread" it doesn't limit someone else from creating a general discussion thread on the subject at the same time, nor does it limit those that like and participate in the appreciation thread, from participating in the full discussion thread and duking out their opinions there.

I see this as more of an additional positive contribution to the GT forums that in no way limits full discussion in the appropriate threads if so inclined.

Your advice is useful, don't get me wrong. If you want a thread to provide a specific "service", it helps to keep a tight rein on things.

But if the same discussion ends up taking place across three different threads, to avoid mixing the opinions of different members, that is insular.

Additionally, in the case of more exploratory threads, like most in whichever is the "next GT game" section, for instance, it is not acceptable to block new avenues of discussion. Nor is it feasible to constantly rejig the "rules".

In those cases, and moreover just generally, tolerance, detachment, benefits of doubt, gentle reminders, even light hearted digs etc. etc. are worth more than cracking the whip, as though you (as in "one") were on some kind of Moral Majority mission.

Basically everyone just chill out and don't take it so damned seriously, then things like trolling would be more obvious. A bit like it is in the infield, and also in many of the less polar parts of the forum. Part of this is an aspect of humility, in the sense of knowing the limits of your own ignorance.

Honesty, also, is important - that's the honesty to admit to yourself when you're trying to use rhetoric to turn an opinion into a matter of fact. Or simply the honesty to admit when you're wrong, or, more sinisterly, when you decry extreme arguments for the "opposing" opinion, but tolerate them when they line up with your own. That comes with practice, and can be infectious.

The problem isn't one of individuals, or of the odd thread, it's a general conduct issue.

It's like you said, we should lead by example.
Although it's perhaps best not to follow mine so much...

 

[Johnnypenso]

Your advice is useful, don't get me wrong. If you want a thread to provide a specific "service", it helps to keep a tight rein on things.

But if the same discussion ends up taking place across three different threads, to avoid mixing the opinions of different members, that is insular.

Additionally, in the case of more exploratory threads, like most in whichever is the "next GT game" section, for instance, it is not acceptable to block new avenues of discussion. Nor is it feasible to constantly rejig the "rules".

In those cases, and moreover just generally, tolerance, detachment, benefits of doubt, gentle reminders, even light hearted digs etc. etc. are worth more than cracking the whip, as though you (as in "one") were on some kind of Moral Majority mission.

Basically everyone just chill out and don't take it so damned seriously, then things like trolling would be more obvious. A bit like it is in the infield, and also in many of the less polar parts of the forum. Part of this is an aspect of humility, in the sense of knowing the limits of your own ignorance.

Honesty, also, is important - that's the honesty to admit to yourself when you're trying to use rhetoric to turn an opinion into a matter of fact. Or simply the honesty to admit when you're wrong, or, more sinisterly, when you decry extreme arguments for the "opposing" opinion, but tolerate them when they line up with your own. That comes with practice, and can be infectious.

The problem isn't one of individuals, or of the odd thread, it's a general conduct issue.

It's like you said, we should lead by example.
Although it's perhaps best not to follow mine so much...

In an ideal world this will work, not so much when you mix together hundreds of personalities at various stages of maturity. So you really only have two choices. You take the bull by the horns and institute change on your own and the community structure certainly supports that or you just continue on, business as usual and nothing changes.

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

Ah yes, here comes Johnny to save the site. Maybe use all your energy and self proclaimed knowledge to save the world instead of just one little virtual website. 💡 Johnny Superman.

 

[doblocruiser]

You read it all? Thanks man:tup:

It was worth it, just like @photonrider 's post 👍

 

[Johnnypenso]

Ah yes, here comes Johnny to save the site. Maybe use all your energy and self proclaimed knowledge to save the world instead of just one little virtual website. 💡 Johnny Superman.

One planet at a time buddy, one planet at a time.

See what I did there?

 

[Stephanos82]

Good read! Thank you Johnnypenso!

 

[Griffith500]

In an ideal world this will work, not so much when you mix together hundreds of personalities at various stages of maturity. So you really only have two choices. You take the bull by the horns and institute change on your own and the community structure certainly supports that or you just continue on, business as usual and nothing changes.

I don't think it's two choices; it's one (i.e. none). You simply set an example; but exactly what example do you set?
There, the choices are endless.

You've chosen exclusion as "the solution".


The immature are, by definition, young and impressionable enough to be moulded into almost anything (much to their credit), and you've chosen to show them that the best way to deal with people who are different from you is to keep them separate from you - break the cycle.

There is a difference between strictly separating threads based on specific technicalities (like the way update threads are separated), and doing the same based on "polarity" of opinion - which is what you get if you say "no bashing", and then a special bashing thread is set up in response. I never did like the "EPIC" complaining and praise threads, they were symptomatic long ago of a problem of segregation.

It was discussed in photonrider's thread that gently pressing for more info will both uncover trolls (for the mods to deal with) and allow the erstwhile-basher the chance to reword his thoughts in a way that may actually be discussed; perhaps eloquence is simply not his strong suit. Excluding him deprives him of that opportunity, or perhaps motivates him such that he doesn't care to be constructive in YOUR thread in the first place.

When new people come to this site, immature or otherwise, they look to experienced members' behaviour to see what is expected of them. Now it seems you're going to ask them to pick a team, too. That makes it much harder for those people to transition out of the [current / next GT game] section and into the other parts, where segregation is less of an issue; where teams don't exist: how does one be a "basher" in the relationships thread?


What better place to "train" the next generation in the art of mixing in a vast sea of cultural differences than a forum dedicated to light-hearted entertainment ("it's just a game") frequented by people from a vast sea of cultural differences? History has shown that people can effectively train themselves, with the appropriate grounding influences - the kind you can only get from a broad and even horizon.

You see, I'm more of an inclusive kinda guy.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I don't think it's two choices; it's one (i.e. none). You simply set an example; but exactly what example do you set?
There, the choices are endless.

You've chosen exclusion as "the solution".


The immature are, by definition, young and impressionable enough to be moulded into almost anything (much to their credit), and you've chosen to show them that the best way to deal with people who are different from you is to keep them separate from you - break the cycle.

There is a difference between strictly separating threads based on specific technicalities (like the way update threads are separated), and doing the same based on "polarity" of opinion - which is what you get if you say "no bashing", and then a special bashing thread is set up in response. I never did like the "EPIC" complaining and praise threads, they were symptomatic long ago of a problem of segregation.

It was discussed in photonrider's thread that gently pressing for more info will both uncover trolls (for the mods to deal with) and allow the erstwhile-basher the chance to reword his thoughts in a way that may actually be discussed; perhaps eloquence is simply not his strong suit. Excluding him deprives him of that opportunity, or perhaps motivates him such that he doesn't care to be constructive in YOUR thread in the first place.

When new people come to this site, immature or otherwise, they look to experienced members' behaviour to see what is expected of them. Now it seems you're going to ask them to pick a team, too. That makes it much harder for those people to transition out of the [current / next GT game] section and into the other parts, where segregation is less of an issue; where teams don't exist: how does one be a "basher" in the relationships thread?


What better place to "train" the next generation in the art of mixing in a vast sea of cultural differences than a forum dedicated to light-hearted entertainment ("it's just a game") frequented by people from a vast sea of cultural differences? History has shown that people can effectively train themselves, with the appropriate grounding influences - the kind you can only get from a broad and even horizon.

You see, I'm more of an inclusive kinda guy.

I think you're seeing the world with rose coloured glasses. Everything you say makes sense of course, the problem here is, I don't think it's trolling specifically that's the problem, which is why I referred to it as "trolling" and not trolling. IMO I think the gist of @photonrider's post was that he wants to avoid this, which isn't technically trolling:

The Newest VGT Thread:

OP - Here's the new VGT, ain't she purty, PD is so great for giving us free stuff.

Post 1 to 11 - Yeah, looks great, so wonderful, never seen a car look better, not a fan of those headlights, how come the door handle is purple, the driver has a moustache...etc.

Post 12 - This car is ugly, why is Kaz wasting time modeling fake spaceships and not real cars, this franchise sucks .

Post 13 to 656 - Back and forth about Kaz, PD, VGT's, spaceships, physics, racing tires, Assetto Corsa, Project Cars, consoles, PC's, memes, etc. etc. etc.

Point being, post 13 to 656 isn't off topic or reportable because the OP in no way put a limit on the discussion and it isn't really trolling because there is no limit to the discussion and therefore just about anything is fair game. And so every thread from post 13 to 656 (exaggeration for dramatic purposes) turns into the same thread, and there's little real discussion of anything new or different.

I'm not saying that my suggestion is the best way to do things, nor the ideal solution in a perfect world. I'm just saying that if there is a group of people that are bothered about the way things are going, then they can make a change if they have the stamina and perseverence to do so. Yeah the community will be slightly fractured, but it would be more peaceful and the discussion can still go on as usual because the same people in the "nice" thread will still have to wander into the not-so-nice thread to put in their 2 cents.

At least that's my theory.

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

One planet at a time buddy, one planet at a time.

See what I did there?

Just like I knew you would. You are entirely too predictable, but then again, all people with your personality traits are. Nice conversing with you Johnny.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Just like I knew you would. You are entirely too predictable, but then again, all people with your personality traits are. Nice conversing with you Johnny.

I can only imagine you must be referring to my predictably rapier wit, and consistently magnanimous personality. I thank you for the compliment sir 👍👍

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem.

Be brave Johnny, you can kick the habit.

To be fair to Johnny, he's posted just about as much positive stuff as he has criticism. Just look at his content feed.

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

I can only imagine you must be referring to my predictably rapier wit, and consistently magnanimous personality. I thank you for the compliment sir 👍👍

Actually no, that's not what I was referring to at all. I'm sure some keen member will pick up on it though and see what I just did here. Anyways, I'll stop now and let you get back to what it is you do. Thanks for playing.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Actually no, that's not what I was referring to at all. I'm sure some keen member will pick up on it though and see what I just did here. Anyways, I'll stop now and let you get back to what it is you do. Thanks for playing.

Well then go ahead and say what you mean. If you meant something different just say it, don't be afraid . Tell me of these personality traits that all people like me have, I'm curious to know what you think

 

[Griffith500]

I think you're seeing the world with rose coloured glasses. Everything you say makes sense of course, the problem here is, I don't think it's trolling specifically that's the problem, which is why I referred to it as "trolling" and not trolling. IMO I think the gist of @photonrider's post was that he wants to avoid this, which isn't technically trolling:

The Newest VGT Thread:

OP - Here's the new VGT, ain't she purty, PD is so great for giving us free stuff.

Post 1 to 11 - Yeah, looks great, so wonderful, never seen a car look better, not a fan of those headlights, how come the door handle is purple, the driver has a moustache...etc.

Post 12 - This car is ugly, why is Kaz wasting time modeling fake spaceships and not real cars, this franchise sucks .

Post 13 to 656 - Back and forth about Kaz, PD, VGT's, spaceships, physics, racing tires, Assetto Corsa, Project Cars, consoles, PC's, memes, etc. etc. etc.

Point being, post 13 to 656 isn't off topic or reportable because the OP in no way put a limit on the discussion and it isn't really trolling because there is no limit to the discussion and therefore just about anything is fair game. And so every thread from post 13 to 656 (exaggeration for dramatic purposes) turns into the same thread, and there's little real discussion of anything new or different.

I'm not saying that my suggestion is the best way to do things, nor the ideal solution in a perfect world. I'm just saying that if there is a group of people that are bothered about the way things are going, then they can make a change if they have the stamina and perseverence to do so. Yeah the community will be slightly fractured, but it would be more peaceful and the discussion can still go on as usual because the same people in the "nice" thread will still have to wander into the not-so-nice thread to put in their 2 cents.

At least that's my theory.

There's no denying you have a point. I shall have to be more observant of exactly how these bouts break out.

I still think gentle "What makes you say that?" prods work well (i.e. starting with post #13). Usually, you get some kind of "well, it's just the way I see it" - and nobody feels the need to argue any further with that. Sometimes you get qualifiers, and the discussion unfurls along that route; e.g. comparing previous VGTs to the new one and why they are valuably distinct, perhaps. Sometimes you get stubborn re-statements, inflammatory language etc. - but you've already narrowed the incidence down somewhat. Sometimes you get a language pedant (like me) get the bull by the nose and not let go...

I guess I object partially to splitting across threads because I have difficulty maintaining context (in my head) even when it's all contained within just the one thread (I get into trouble with the more meticulous debators on that front). I don't like the idea of trying to account for opinions on both sides of the tracks from separate literal threads, although I might well end up an unwitting cross-pollinator...

 

[Johnnypenso]

There's no denying you have a point. I shall have to be more observant of exactly how these bouts break out.

I still think gentle "What makes you say that?" prods work well (i.e. starting with post #13). Usually, you get some kind of "well, it's just the way I see it" - and nobody feels the need to argue any further with that. Sometimes you get qualifiers, and the discussion unfurls along that route; e.g. comparing previous VGTs to the new one and why they are valuably distinct, perhaps. Sometimes you get stubborn re-statements, inflammatory language etc. - but you've already narrowed the incidence down somewhat. Sometimes you get a language pedant (like me) get the bull by the nose and not let go...

I guess I object partially to splitting across threads because I have difficulty maintaining context (in my head) even when it's all contained within just the one thread (I get into trouble with the more meticulous debators on that front). I don't like the idea of trying to account for opinions on both sides of the tracks from separate literal threads, although I might well end up an unwitting cross-pollinator...

I tried a variation of, "what makes you say that?" with @GTP_CargoRatt above, let's see if it works

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

Well then go ahead and say what you mean. If you meant something different just say it, don't be afraid . Tell me of these personality traits that all people like me have, I'm curious to know what you think

Well, its just the way I see it. Nice chatting with you Johnny.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Well, its just the way I see it. Nice chatting with you Johnny.

So does that mean you don't want to tell me what those personality traits are that you alluded to? It was important enough for you to mention them to begin with, are you afraid to follow through?

 

[TurismoBad]

So there's a desire to discourage thread derailment and/or 🤬 posting - I don't think any pledges for good behavior can have long lasting effect. The only way to achieve this is by stricter moderation.

Honestly though - I can't see much of that stuff lately here. Shortly after launch, sure - and rightly so. Now not so much, so I'm surprised at the timing of all this.

The peak of poop has been reached a long time ago (I know you thought of Jurassic Park too ). After abandoning Q&A I believe many just let PD go on their errands to see if they can redeem themselves with GT7, switched to other games or simply can't give a damn - just like PD.

 

[Stephanos82]

One planet at a time buddy, one planet at a time.

See what I did there?

Muahahaha too funny, sorry t'was too funny