The politics of games.

[Kekvit Irae]

You propose dropping the moderation of this one onto the backroom team?

No, I propose the creation of a new sub-forum inside the Arena for such discussion, as noted in the very first line of my first post.

Games Workshop? Nothing to do with the arena, even with a speculative backroom. Child slavery isn't our territory, and that would be the real subject. Games would only be a sideline.

First, it is my understanding that Games Workshop is Arena material.

The Arena
A place to discuss any games not from the Total War series; also for game reviews, consoles and console games, etc.

Bolded the good parts. Unless the description suddenly changed to PC and console games only, traditional games are allowed.
Second, the child slavery part was a joke, to place emphasis on the "OMG, _____ is an evil overlord!" syndrome currently residing in the Arena now. I would have put in EA instead of GW, but I'm getting tired of all the EA bashing going on lately.

[Martok]

For what it's worth -- and speaking only for myself -- I started those two topics (the Amazon protest and the Gamers Bill of Rights) in the Arena simply because it seemed the most appropriate place. These are issues that affect gamers, after all, so where else to better discuss them? Granted, there's a bit of overlap with the Backroom when they have threads discussing the RIAA and whatnot, but that's more the exception rather than the rule.

Not that I want the Arena to be forever dominated by such discussions, of course -- I agree its primary purpose is still to discuss actual games. That's how it should be. Still, I don't see the harm in actually discussing issues that matter to gamers from time to time. (It's not like the Frontroom is all sunshine and lollipops, just for another example.) Besides which, I concur with froggy that these are simply hot topics at the moment, and will eventually fade in time.

[The_Doctor]

Maybe you should give it a week or two, and then see if the problem is still there and if it is then work something out.

You propose dropping the moderation of this one onto the backroom team? Otherwise it will be the same two victims volunteers reading the posts. We'd just have to do more clicking.

child slavery

[Veho Nex]

Yeah I'd say wait for a while before adding it. From what I've seen the arena only has its politcal moments once in a while. Other than that there are plenty of true arena threads. But adding a prefix to the name might be an easier fix. Like in the backroom or tw sections.

[Ferret]

The Arena isn't exactly one of the most active forums anyway, if you removed all the threads about DRM and other things that would go into the backroom of it, the Arena would become even more desolate. There are little enough threads with new posts being added to keep up with the ones you want to read and ignore the ones you don't want, the titles are apt enough to help you decide whether you want to read it.

So, in short, I agree with Mouza.

[frogbeastegg]

No, I propose the creation of a new sub-forum inside the Arena for such discussion, as noted in the very first line of my first post.

You've also said you are sick of seeing these posts. My point is, either you'll be reading them because they are in the arena, or you won't because they aren't. Creating a backroom does not alter this.

I wrote the arena's description years ago, same as I wrote the welcome topic and rules. The arena is - and always has been - for computer games, or, as they've been called by society and the internet at large for most of my life, games. Hence the way everything talks about demos, platforms, consoles, handhelds, PCs ... Conversely, board games are still called board games, card games are called card games, and war games war games. If I'd meant to refer to them then I'd have done so. On the very rare occasions someone has posted a topic on a traditional game I've tended let it pass because there is no correct forum for those topics. They show up in the front room too, and fit there equally well. If people want to talk about painting warhammer miniatures then it's mostly off-topic. If they want to talk about the evil ethics behind them then it's totally off-topic. EA's ethics still have some relation to games.

Agreed on wanting the patrons' views. It's why I posted the link; it would have been sad if people missed this topic and didn't get chance to have their say. I'm not the only one who doesn't get out and about much. If anything gets changed (or not) as many people as possible should be content with the decision.

Well, from a legal perspective I don't think that's quite right.

From a legal perspective we can discuss whatever we like, provided we're not giving out links to cracks or telling people how to pirate games. From a working perspective, we've had upset messages about certain topics discussing things like secuROM.

Anyone guess why I hold the Arena dear?

Is it because you can play with our friendly lions and build sandcastles on the fighting ground?




How do people feel about a light compromise? Keep the games threads targeted more towards games, and keep the bulk of the DRM and similar discussion in a seperate topic in the same forum? Not a total seperation, just an attempt to reduce the way some games threads end up being more about the copy protection than the playing experience. Not heavy mod action, just a post nudging the discussion back towards the game and highlighting the other thread.

Yes, in the end it comes down to mod discretion. However it's usually easy to see when a thread is running too far off topic, and it's usually very simple to solve with a single post.

I stress that this wouldn't remove all DRM discussion from the game topic. The idea is to divert the flow if and when it threatens to drown.




And for everyone saying the arena is quiet, it wouldn't be if people spent more time talking about games and less time playing them!

[Mouzafphaerre]

.

How do people feel about a light compromise? Keep the games threads targeted more towards games, and keep the bulk of the DRM and similar discussion in a separate topic in the same forum?

No. It's little different from splitting the forum. The games exist with everything related to them. We can't and should not separate issues like DRM, system incompatibilities, breaking bugs etc. from the in-game stuff. It was the whole point of my post. (That aside, self censorship is hardly the right way to go. )
.

[Kekvit Irae]

We could always implement a word filter system. Simply filter every third word in the Arena to 'StarDock'. Everyone loves StarDock, so using this method everyone in the Arena would be happy.

Let's take (with apologies) Mouza's post above as an example:

It's little StarDock from splitting StarDock forum. The StarDock exist with StarDock related to StarDock. We can't StarDock should not StarDock issues like StarDock, system incompatibilities, StarDock bugs etc. StarDock the in-game StarDock. It was StarDock whole point StarDock my post. (StarDock aside, self StarDock is hardly StarDock right way to StarDock.

[Mouzafphaerre]

We could always implement a word filter system. Simply filter every third word in the Arena to 'StarDock'. Everyone loves StarDock, so using this method everyone in the Arena would be happy.

Let's take (with apologies) Mouza's post above as an example:

.
Apologies?! You've just made me laugh out my guts!
.

[Husar]

I take offense by the statement that everybody loves StarDock as I do not have a single game of theirs.
I demand an apology, a foot massage and the replacement of seven "StarDock"s by "Valve" in the offending piece of quote...

On the actual issue, I think mentioning the bad copy protection used in the game in a thread about the game is pretty fine but when the whole thread fills up with "I won't StarDock it because of the Valve used!!!1111 " and then a lengthy repost of the same old "The StarDocks will Valve it anyway because this Valve never works, give them 3 StarDocks and it's Valve by the StarDocks and this is screwing with their StarDock Valve anyway and I'm so angry etc. blaValve" then you end up with the same posts in every second thread which makes me think that one topic to cover all sorts of copy protection makes more sense while the game threads can mention it once or twice for those who may not know the game is protected by copy protection x or y and do not want to read the endless ramblings in the copy protection thread. That way everybody gets the vital info and them freedom-loving capitalists can get their thread to be annoyed about copy protections.

[pevergreen]

freedom-loving capitalists.

I love those guys!

Also, possibly the best "post" ever by Kek.

[Martok]

How do people feel about a light compromise? Keep the games threads targeted more towards games, and keep the bulk of the DRM and similar discussion in a seperate topic in the same forum? Not a total seperation, just an attempt to reduce the way some games threads end up being more about the copy protection than the playing experience. Not heavy mod action, just a post nudging the discussion back towards the game and highlighting the other thread.

That would be fine with me, at least in theory. I'm a little concerned, however, that it could adversely affect threads about games inextricably linked to DRM (such as Bioshock, Mass Effect, and the now-infamous Spore) -- if invasive and/or inconvenient copy protection software is a major issue with a PC title, then I don't feel it should be shunted off to a general discussion thread about DRM.

Or are we actually mostly in agreement on this, and I'm just rambling on for no good reason?

And for everyone saying the arena is quiet, it wouldn't be if people spent more time talking about games and less time playing them!

Hey, now! I'll have you know that some of us do our part, thank you very much. I spend way too much time talking about games and not enough time playing them (heck, it's pretty much my MO at this point).