No room for civility any more?

[faded glory]

Oh notyoueither


Have you forgotten I was flamed first? Or did that fly over your head too?

[Ming]

Originally posted by faded glory
Oh notyoueither
Have you forgotten I was flamed first? Or did that fly over your head too?

Two wrongs don't make a right

So don't start it all over again.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Thick headed?

TDC,

"The Dumbest Clown"

is active again on one of his recent 'thread''s.

Just can't understand, can he? (it?)


AJ

Civility toward the civilized.
Ignorance toward the annoyance?

[Tarquelne]

Originally posted by Ming


Two wrongs don't make a right

So don't start it all over again.

I think it'd be instructive for everyone interested in the "civility" issue to go glance at the "Stalingrad" thread at take a look at the message that provoked Faded Glory, and the posts by FG that preceded it. (There aren't very many, and they tend to be short.... the fact that not an insignificant number of the words in FG's posts are composed primarily of *s - both before and after he was "flamed" - helps keep down the verbage, too.)

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Folks where do I start?

First pronounce me guilty.

Guilty of enjoying seeing a flame war in action. A little chuckle every once in awhile seeing it kinna like you can't help but look at a train wreck. A guilty pleasure.

But, in the same vein I don't think it right to encourage and feed the flames. If I'm not mistaken, flame wars themselves are indeed encouraged by the sense of notoriety it generates.

In order to defuse the anti-CIVil behavior a couple of things have to happen: a) cooler heads have to prevail to prevent rash responses b) The community must have enough resolve not to attempt to encourage the behavior through excess publicity and re-hashment

Folks let it drop.

I'll take the resolution for points a and b.

Og

[Jack_www]

I think that the best thing to do if your are personally attacked is to ignore the person. A lot of people who pick on other people do it because they like the attention it brings and the reactions of the people they pick on. Many times when I see flam wars going on, I wonder why people are fighting other a game for? There are much more important things in life to be worry about then a computer game. Some people hate Civ3, and other people love Civ3, and some just like to some digree. Just like if I like a certain food and someone else hates the certain food I like. I dont argue with that person just because they hate something I like. What will insulting someone else do??? No good comes of it. Why must people continue to such hatered towards one anther, and other the simplists of things? Why cann't people be kind to one anther. If everyone treated everyone else just the same way they wanted to be treated the whole world would be a better place.

[DATarbell]

I attend 'Internet World' every now and then--a computer software industry event composed of tons of seminars/workshops and a host of retailers/service providers. Oftentimes the speakers are industry notables. One such was one of the head honchos from Yahoo (if I remember correctly) and he make the interesting observation that, while the Internet has been ballyhooed as "a place where people can come together", it has really developed into a place where people "form into tighter and tighter niche groups."

In other words, rather than individuals focusing on what they have in common, they focus on the differences between them, and splinter into smaller and smaller groups based on a tighter and tighter set of commonalities (e.g., bass fishermen, afraid of flying, who have 4+ years of post-high school education, hate vegetables, and knit during their spare time). ((Yes, I know its an overstated example. I figure that limits the number of people I'll insult because they belong to that group and feel that I am unfairly picking on them .))

In my mind, 'constructive criticism' is far more difficult than simply 'destructive criticism' or plain, simple 'negativism'. It takes far more effort to state how things could be improved than to simply say that "it sucks."

I think we're fortunate to have a large number of people here that have some very definite, and specific, ideas on how Civ3 could be improved. Together with some who just want an audience while they complain. The trick, I suppose, is to ignore the flames and rants, and try to actively pursue the constructive discussions.

Thanks to all (including, and especially, any Firaxians who are listening) for working to make Civ3 even better than it already is.

[Skanky Burns]

Well said, DATarbell.

[FNBrown]

Just my two cents...

1.) Good post, Vel... you're a gentleman and a scholar, and your efforts are appreciated.

2.) The CivIII Stories forum is a model of civility, if you ask me. I've gotten along blissfully with Civvers from around the world while participating in a succession game there. If you haven't tried it, you should...

- Franklin

[Dienstag]

Another Franklin heard from...

I just found this quote:

"Remember not only to say the right thing in the right place, but far more difficult still, to leave unsaid the wrong thing in the tempting place." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)

[Ethelred]

I have read this post of Faded Glory over twice. Before I posted this I read the rest of the thread unlike my usual method of dealing with posts as I come to them.

I am only posting to clear things up. FG mixed my posts with his and others and did not make it clear who said what. I don't care to have my posts labeled as if they were his and his as if they were mine. So I am going to color code and make a few carefull remarks.


Dark red for my original statements

Dark blue for Faded Glory's

Black for anything new.

FG

------------------------
Then I was savagly attacked bye a lamer.
-----------------------


Funny way that was to show that someone else was being a lamer.

Suggestion FG. Don't tell, show. Thats the difference between the original Robert E. Howard Conan stories and the worst of the pastiches that Lin Carter produced.

Of course there isn't much to show. This next is what FG is claiming as me starting it. As if it hadn't allready started when he tore into the previous person.

Me

----------------------------
Why should he blame the excellent game for your inability to placate your victims. Cities do flip in my games. Mostly to me. Hardly ever the other way. I like that.
----------------------------

If that is what you think of as flames just what is calling me a lamer. This latest 'lamer' remark is now long after you promised to stop.

That was no flame. It was simple reality. When you raze a city you are making victims of the population of the city. Nothing in there was the least insulting as you had allready said you couldn't keep the cities from revolting. All I did was say I could keep the cities without revolts.

FG

------------------------
quote:


Its not the devolopers fault it is a flawed pile of ****! Its yours for reading into the phoney hype!
-------------------------

The next one is mine and I sure don't see anything inflamatory there.

--------------------------------------------------
It is the developers fault that the game works pretty well most of the time. Including culture flipping. Now I don't like the loss of troops. That is really annoying. So I don't leave my troops in. I just wipe out the civ in those rare cases where they have much more culture than I do.
--------------------------------------------------



FG

-----------------------------------------------
quote:


Well...you can go to hell.
----------------------------------------------


Me

----------------------------------
My how illuminating. I can see why you can't use culture flipping to your advantage. Uncultured lout. Much like the Assyrians. Conquered large territories and then culture flipped to be indistinguishable from the conquered.
-----------------------------------


All right, now that is a flame from me. Its in context and the discusion was about culture flipping. His inablitly to hold cities is largely due to not developing his culture. Hence "Uncultured lout".

I really don't see how that is a terrible and uncivil thing to say in the context of that thread.

Him again

-------------------------------------
quote:


Its obvouisly the fault of the devolopers. Oh I refuse to adapt?
Thats a load of bull kiddo
--------------------------------------


Well I didn't say he refused to adapt so who was fertilizing the discusion. I would guess what was in his mind was as mixed up as this latest post was in print.


Now here he quotes me without showing what he said. This remark was funny. He had a rolling eye smiley and I keyed on that. True its a flame but its still funny and hardly in the class of his. Its pretty civil for satire. I am not going to apoligize for being funny.


------------------------------------------
Don't you roll your eyes at me little boy. Now clean up your room and put the toy soldiers away. Your not treating them very well and they may run away to the neighbors little boy. He is much nicer to his toys.
-------------------------------------------


FG - he mixed this up real good.

Faded Glory
-------------------------------
quote:


The fact is the whole war thing is a fuxin mess. Almost all the cities you capture are raised.
--------------------------------



My statement but he ran it right under his l33t speak as if it was his.

------------------------------------
Thats can be very true. The cities in my games were almost all RAISED out of the mud the late unlamented enemy had dragged their unfortunate populace through. In my last game I RAISED Thebes from the Egyptian capitial to become MY capital. Launched the Space Ship from it.
--------------------------------------


I don't see anything wrong there. The only thing he could be annoyed with is my play on his use of the wrong version of RAZE.

Kind of hazardous thing for me do considering how bad my spelling often is. Still it seemed appropriate and I was giving a real example of what FG was claiming can't be done.


FG

------------------------------
Ming I'll chill out. Sorry for the flas. I just had to say that!
------------------------------


This whole post of his shows he has not chilled out.

Me

-------------------------------
Sorry you felt the need to show how poorly you deal with both culture and flames. Do try to get some culture for yourself. Perhaps if I was to point you to some nice Bach or Beethoven recordings or maybe some good musuem sites on the web.
-------------------------------


Again that was thread involving culture flipping.

FG

--------------------------------
Too which Idiot replied, (after being warned bye ming)
--------------------------------


Ming was not at all clear. I and others as well, felt what he wrote was directed at you. I was under the impression that my posts had fit his standards. Sorry that that they didn't but I was not fully aware that he has no humor at all. I had noticed that he sometimes is short on humor but I based my conclusion on how he wrote what he said. I thought that in this case he did manage to see the humor. My mistake.

His mistake was a lack of clarity if he meant to include me. He specificly mentioned you and said nothing that was directed at anyone else in that thread. I was clearly not the only person on that thread that reached the conclusion I did.


Me - here FG again quotes me without quoting what I was replying to. He called me a newbie. Apparently he thinks that my starting to post here only recently means I must have only started playing civ or dealing with the internet recently.

---------------------------------------------
Newbie is youbie. I have been playing computer games since the Apple ][ and cassette tapes. Played Civ since it was an English boardgame. Not even all that new here. Just decided to stop lurking. I figured I would have gotten myself banned if I was dealing with Lib. I wouldn't be able to help myself.
----------------------------------------------


So I said "newbie is youbie". Since when is that some sort of terribly uncivil remark. If FG had not called me a newbie there wouldn't have been the possibilty of my using that particular remark. Frankly that was first flame of mine that actually deserves to be called lame. It was definitly beneath my normal standards. Mea Culpa.

Nothing else there is remotely inflamatory.

FG

----------------------------
quote:
What game are you playing? And why should I have to Raze entire Civ's to the ground? What the hell kinda simulation is that? It makes the game incredibly lame....
-----------------------------


Me

---------------------------------
Civ III 1.17f. The one this part of Apolyton is for. The game you don't know how to play. I have no idea why you have to raze entire civs to the ground. I just take them over. Use their cities for my designs. Its not the game that is lame if I can do it and you can't.
----------------------------------


Again nothing in there is insulting. Well except to me. That first sentence is markedly awkward. I abase myself for it.

FG

--------------------------------
quote:


uh?? Your a moron. Culture plays almost 0 in real conflict. West bank anyone? I dont see Israeli troops defecting or getting kicked out so easily.
---------------------------------


I then made a very reasoned response with no flames at all. Its a bit long to quote yet again and its in his post. I was giving my technique for handling captured cities. Since when is help such a terrible thing it deserves this next remark of his?

FG

----------------------------
quote:


uh.....nice Thanks kiddo. But if you werent such a ****** and actually read my post. I wasnt talking to you.
-----------------------------


My response to that wholly unwarranted remark.

--------------------------------------
If you weren't so terribly, hideously, culturaly deprived you would have noticed that this a largely open forum. Anyone that can keep their temper seems to be welcome.

You will never become a succesfull flame warrior if you can't keep your temper.
---------------------------------------


Again the culture remark is due what we were discussing. Culture flipping. The rest is fairly obvious but he didn't get it anyway. He posted in public. In a place where anyone is free to comment on anything anyone else says. Considering that I was commenting on his unsolicited comment to someone that wasn't talking to him his responce was a bit bizarre.

FG

-------------------------------------
quote:


no need to foam at the mouth jr.
------------------------------------


Nothing was remotely foaming in my post. I am not anyones junior.


Me

--------------------------------------
I take it you are quoting someone in the room with you. Wipe the drool off you chin and no will mistake it for foam.
--------------------------------------


Now that was a bit lame as well. Its hard to work with that sort mindless remark. I should have left it alone. Mea maxima culpa.


---------------------------------
Nice flames. And you accuse me? Iwas over the flames jr. But seeing as how you attacked me like so!? Let the flames (in your case) the Lames! Fly
---------------------------------


Me

---------------------------------
Over the flames? Is that why you are near to taking a trip to Mingapulco?

Flaming is an art form. That means you need some culture to be good at it. You are in danger of culture flipping.
----------------------------------



Yes it was still on the culture flipping thread.

FG

----------------------------------
quote:

Oh your a true warhorse now Bet your daddy is proud! !
----------------------------------


Me

-----------------------------------
He died in 1976. So I suspect that pride is somewhat beyond his present capacity.

Don't bring a knife to a flamethrower fight.

I like culture flipping. I use it. Its good for builders. Its not there for the warmongers.

They really don't need any help anyway. Any competent warmonger should be able to win, corruption and culture or not. A dozen strong producing cities should be enough to take over the world. The rest are there as rest stops on the way to domination.
------------------------------------



I am sorry I was treating FG as an adult able to discuss things and defend himself without his descending to elementery school remarks. It was my mistake to do that. Perhaps I should not be shooting fish in a barrel like that.

If he wasn't mixing things up so much I would have left this alone.

[Alinestra Covelia]

Maybe this particular tuppence is misplaced (and I mean that in its original non-sexual sense) but I think this topic is important and wanted to voice my full agreement - an open, welcoming board is something that everybody ought to support and enjoy.

Right.

However, I have a few theories to proffer. I noticed that the largest influx of new blood into these forums unsurprisingly followed the release of Civ3. It seems to be this particular infusion that has brought the largest attendant number of flame wars, either initiated by or initiated against newcomers.

Is this something that's unique to Civ3? From what I've seen, the game has drawn some criticism for sacrificing complexity and depth for surface gloss. If this is true, then does this have any connection with the differences in poster behavior? The SMAC forums (as Vel pointed out) were a haven for rational and considered posting in their heyday - SMAC being a game that scrimped nothing on the mechanics and was satisfied with a workmanlike graphical interface.

Typically, I don't have any answers - just questions.

Questions like "Where in Beijing can I find a copy of Civ3?" or "Why does every copy of SMAX I have go missing after a month or two?"

[Jethro83]

Its good to see so many people concerned about the rude, abusive and downright offensive individuals on the forums. The problem isn't just here, but in every forum, every IRC network, all through ICQ. Anywhere where direct communication is possible over the Internet has been afflicted. I'm not going to engage in any finger-pointing as it would make me look as bad as these undesirables, but I will say this. There's no need for people to be this way. If they are angry, they should go punch a wall or something. If they feel like just being plain annoying, they should control themselves.

But to all people concerned with this kind of behaviour... Don't let it get to you too much. If they indeed only do it to annoy people, then they've won if you react. If you react, you're giving them what they want. All you need to do is say, 'you have no right to speak to me this way' and just ignore them. Being uncivil to them in response will only sink you to their level. They annoy and offend to make themselves feel bigger. They are the ones who are small and weak. Not you.

We shouldn't be approaching the problem with our flameguns blaring, else we become the problem ourselves. Everyone in the world who wants to be civil and wants to see civilty on the Internet should simply shut the problematic people off. When they realise that their attention seeking insults are reaching deaf ears, they will eventually quit. Banning them isn't entirely the solution, as they will find somewhere else to do what they do, and believe me there are a lot of places where they can be uncivil (battle.net seems to harbour such behaviour, which is a problem as not all of us want to pay to play such games online and have to put up with these undesirables).

Those who are reading what I say and think that those who attack people to make themselves feel bigger are really 'bullies' are absolutely right. These uncivil types we're all concerned about are just bullies. Therefore, what I say can to a limited extent be applicable to other parts of life... work, school, etc. as it is a problem in those places too.

As someone who was constantly harrassed in this way, I can tell you now, they only want to make themselves feel bigger by victimizing people who aren't likely to hit back hard. I may not have any degrees in psychology, but I've had plenty of experience dealing with bullies, and know that they feel that good, honorable, civil types are a threat, as others perceive them as better people. Their solution to this is not to be a good person themself, but to attack the individual in whatever way possible.

I may be wrong in some cases, as the person may not know that what they are saying is offensive. In this case, moderators need to take action against them, to teach them the errors of their ways. Nothing helps them learn what's on and what's not on than to be deprived of basic rights derived from being in these forums with a straight-to-the-point message saying 'you had no right to say that. Goodbye. You're banned'.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't be able to speak their opinions, as that is what makes places like this interesting. What I am saying is that attacking a person or group like we have been seeing is utterly wrong, and there should be a crackdown on such behaviour. And the best way I know is to use the method described in this lengthy post.

Feel free to reply to this using CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. Correct me if I'm wrong, add to what I have said. You're more than welcome to do that. Just be civil when doing so.

[Venger]

For the record Hex, I dunno, maybe I did turn on the game after initially liking it. But that had to be the shortest period that can be defined by quantum mechanics.

I can say the best thing about Civ3, and my utter disappointment in it, is it got me to go buy CTP2, which I find, when modded, quite fun, and I picked up SMAC to boot, which I had poreviously played from a friends CD once and discarded.

Of course, it also got me to buy Empire Earth, a pretty but ridiculous clickfest...

Venger