"Everyone's so open and friendly" is a lie

[linayar]

I think you're giving them too little credit? Why would you want to return to a thread that in less than 24 hours had almost 11 pages, a lot of which were spent ridiculing the OP for having a different experience or viewpoint? Why would anyone want to return to a thread after being dogpiled on by sarcastic and passive aggressive remarks?
You're implying I shouldn't give OP the benefit of the doubt because they're new to the forums or never came back? Someone always has to be new and I wouldn't blame someone for not coming back.
It could've simply been that they had gotten their issue off their chest because a specific incident or person triggered this feeling, as well.

Again, people were too busy trying to shut OP down or simply tell them they're wrong entirely before even asking them why they even felt that way to begin with.

What are you even talking about? The replies are exactly what the OP is asking for and now you think they'd be afraid or don't want to engage?

Again, the accusation of passive aggressiveness. Maybe I've missed them, but the responses that I've seen are ordinary responses that the OP can engage with. In fact, others are doing it for the OP.

If the OP is asking to be allowed to have "fights and arguments," then they've got them, at least the latter anyway. If they are "absolutely disgusted" when people suddenly refuse to speak, then they shouldn't be silent in their own thread. No one can shut the OP down, only the OP and the GMs.

[Oscura]

What are you even talking about? The replies are exactly what the OP is asking for and now you think they'd be afraid or don't want to engage?

OP wants the ability to openly disagree with someone without feeling like they'll be ostracized or punished for it. The fact that there are replies either saying they're in the wrong element or accusing them of wanting something worse is hardly what I'd call "What they asked for." There's a difference between saying "Actually, my experience hasn't been the same and I've mostly had a good time." Vs "OP, maybe be more mature and not resort to arguments etc," or "Sorry you can't be a jerk in this game OP."

Again, the accusation of passive aggressiveness. Maybe I've missed them, but the responses that I've seen are ordinary responses that the OP can engage with. In fact, others are doing it for the OP.

There are people implying the OP is either childish or immature in multiple posts by insinuating that they cannot solve situations like, "an adult." How is that not passive aggressive? Passive aggressive does not imply nor does it mean that you cannot engage with it. Passive aggression is the act of making a backhanded comment, or talking behind someone's back, or sarcasm in general. You can "engage" with all of that.

If the OP is asking to be allowed to have "fights and arguments," then they've got them, at least the latter anyway. If they are "absolutely disgusted" when people suddenly refuse to speak, then they shouldn't be silent in their own thread. No one can shut the OP down, only the OP and the GMs.

I think people are focusing far too hard on "fights and arguments," and immediately drawing their own conclusions. People in the first few posts even told OP they should try to debate instead. When you debate...you present arguments. Which is why I said I think OP poorly presented their opinion, because they most likely meant, in general, disagree with people, not the act of directly attacking or inciting a verbal beatdown. A lot of people associate "debating," with fighting an arguing with just an extra coat of paint. I think we should focus less on the semantics.

Also, OP said they were disgusted when people would act like they enjoyed one's company or engage with them, only to totally ghost them the next. It's not the same as them ghosting a forum post where they expressed their own concerns.

[Nanchi]

I think people are focusing far too hard on "fights and arguments," and immediately drawing their own conclusions. People in the first few posts even told OP they should try to debate instead. When you debate...you present arguments. Which is why I said I think OP poorly presented their opinion, because they most likely meant, in general, disagree with people, not the act of directly attacking or inciting a verbal beatdown. A lot of people associate "debating," with fighting an arguing with just an extra coat of paint. I think we should focus less on the semantics.

Who in their right mind associates debating with fighting and arguing, that is why we call it debate, because it is none of those things. OP got a healthy amount of differing opinions (some more or less flattering), people who felt the same way as them and people who did not feel the same way. Day in and out you have people with different opinions get ridiculed in these forums, tongue in cheek comments are the standard here. The problem OP presents is something that is wildly accepted as well, just look at the three RMT policy change threads going around. Even if their original meaning was more along the lines of "People are being fake polite and ghosting me in the next second, you cannot have differing opinions in this game." You got plenty of others trying to hyperbole of not being able to "express themselves" in fear of getting a strike. THIS didn't seem like what the OP was talking about. I've said it before and I'll say it again, it does not matter what kind of rules a game enforces, it cannot change peoples behaviors, only stiffle them.
Also I find it ironic how much the thread title echoes in the comments.

[Oscura]

Who in their right mind associates debating with fighting and arguing, that is why we call it debate, because it is none of those things.

Not myself personally, but I've met plenty of people who will assume any sort of attempt to debate with them is an attack on them or their character. I am simply addressing that there are other viewpoints, regardless of how wrong or correct they are.


Make no misunderstanding, I'm not trying to coddle to OP. I just think people are confusing ignorance with malice. Even still, I think it's a bit harsh to assume it's actively a bad thing to show compassion and ask, "Why does this person feel this way in the first place?" I just disliked seeing people insinuate OP was specifically the problem or an instigator when it could merely just be ignorance or frustration.

[linayar]

OP wants the ability to openly disagree with someone without feeling like they'll be ostracized or punished for it. The fact that there are replies either saying they're in the wrong element or accusing them of wanting something worse is hardly what I'd call "What they asked for." There's a difference between saying "Actually, my experience hasn't been the same and I've mostly had a good time." Vs "OP, maybe be more mature and not resort to arguments etc," or "Sorry you can't be a jerk in this game OP."

And when people say something wrong about you, then you correct them like you are trying to do for the OP, not stay silent. And it's not like there aren't posts that do say their experience is different from the OP. The OP doesn't engage with them either.

There are people implying the OP is either childish or immature in multiple posts by insinuating that they cannot solve situations like, "an adult." How is that not passive aggressive? Passive aggressive does not imply nor does it mean that you cannot engage with it. Passive aggression is the act of making a backhanded comment, or talking behind someone's back, or sarcasm in general. You can "engage" with all of that.

The main feature of passive aggressive is refusing to directly communicate, like what the OP is doing now, actually. That's what the "passive" part is about. There is nothing passive about backhanded comments or sarcasm. And in a forum, there is no talking behind someone's back. The OP can read every post in the thread that has not been deleted.

Either way, the OP is simply not engaging with the thread.

I think people are focusing far too hard on "fights and arguments," and immediately drawing their own conclusions. People in the first few posts even told OP they should try to debate instead. When you debate...you present arguments. Which is why I said I think OP poorly presented their opinion, because they most likely meant, in general, disagree with people, not the act of directly attacking or inciting a verbal beatdown. A lot of people associate "debating," with fighting an arguing with just an extra coat of paint. I think we should focus less on the semantics.

On the contrary, it's because people focus less on the semantics, that confusion arise. When people are more careful with the words they say, there will be less confusion, and they can even follow Section 3.3 better.

Also, OP said they were disgusted when people would act like they enjoyed one's company or engage with them, only to totally ghost them the next. It's not the same as them ghosting a forum post where they expressed their own concerns.

Yes, that's the OP's context, but it extends to the context of forum etiquette when you create a certain type of topic that would generate an opinionated discussion and then not follow through with it. You're inviting people to engage and then disengage yourself.

[Oscura]

And it's not like there aren't posts that do say their experience is different from the OP. The OP doesn't engage with them either.

Never insinuated there wasn't, nor was I addressing those people or their comments at any point in my posts. I was implying that those replies should be the norm if we want to promote positivity, not that they were the exception.

On the contrary, it's because people focus less on the semantics, that confusion arise. When people are more careful with the words they say, there will be less confusion, and they can even follow Section 3.3 better.

I don't know what you mean by "section 3.3," but I do agree that people need to be careful with their words. That's why I've said multiple times I think that the OP chose them poorly.

Yes, that's the OP's context, but it extends to the context of forum etiquette when you create a certain type of topic that would generate an opinionated discussion and then not follow through with it. You're inviting people to engage and then disengage yourself.

I think there's a pretty big difference between ghosting something as impersonal as a forum thread or post versus ghosting someone you were directly talking to or in contact with, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

As for the other things I didn't reply to, I'd be arguing for the sake of arguing and there's no point, so just assume I conceded on it.

However, I think calling the thread pointless or implying it was made with ulterior motives because they can express themselves "right now," discounts the fact they were probably ignorant of such and thus expressed their frustrations to begin with. If anything, seeing the replies showed them otherwise, which might be why they decided not to reply. There would be no need at all. Either way it's just assumptions at that point.

[linayar]

I think there's a pretty big difference between ghosting something as impersonal as a forum thread or post versus ghosting someone you were directly talking to or in contact with, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

There are differences, of course, because they are different context. But there is the same expectation that someone you are communicating with might want to respond back.

However, I think calling the thread pointless or implying it was made with ulterior motives because they can express themselves "right now," discounts the fact they were probably ignorant of such and thus expressed their frustrations to begin with. If anything, seeing the replies showed them otherwise, which might be why they decided not to reply. There would be no need at all. Either way it's just assumptions at that point.

That's the problem when the OP is silent. Assumptions are all that can be done. The point of a forum is to make your opinions known and to clarify it when you've been misunderstood.

As much as I applaud you for trying to defend the OP, at the end of the day, you're not the OP, so you cannot authoritatively speak for the OP.

[Oscura]

As much as I applaud you for trying to defend the OP, at the end of the day, you're not the OP, so you cannot authoritatively speak for the OP.

True enough. In the end I ultimately wanted to provide a differing viewpoint as reasonably as possible.