RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Fortress of Awesome Chat forum killers

i agree with SoM. forums are dinasaurs, with Twitter and Facebook and such people dont really do the forum thing anymore and when they do theyre pecking order fests, remember when we went to that forum MOTA posts at it wasnt just trolling that was banned, they would boot people for disagreeing with the moderator

MisterJLA talkative Moderator Conqueror
15000+ posts 44 seconds ago Reading a post
Forum: Pro & Jake's Fortress of Awesome Chat
Thread: forum killers

-Sincerely
Post 2005 MisterJLA

then, there were a buncha alts that were creativity-bereft. they required no thinking. they were bad. like mopius. online obsessor. post-2005 mister jla.

well, let's see.

i think that alts have been a large responsibility in making stuff pooish. not all alts. used t'be, back in my day (*sips iced tea*) alts were created to be another persona. there was a lil napoleon. a zod. even an urg, god bless him. they were characters suited to their role. i liked those. they were fun and inventive and stuck to character and, oddly, contributed to the appropriate threads in a logical fashion.

then, there were a buncha alts that were creativity-bereft. they required no thinking. they were bad. like mopius. online obsessor. post-2005 mister jla. mimic. "the." etc. posting to threads with no value, in a fashion i'd argue vastly different (and far more damning) than the traditional art of spamming, frantaing and/or basasmsing. the new era of alts seem to have a topic-ending impact to an impressive degree. they are fucking clown shoes.

i do not think politics is that large of a factor, if at all. whether you hate g-man, whomod, wondy, mem, or any of the other deemed extreme fans, i don't think causing anger and friction is something that stifles conversation, but rather something that inspires it. if g-man is pissing off the opposing team (not straight people or young people in this instance, but liberals) in more cases than not, that creates new posts. someone will want to get all riled up and retaliate.

however, there appears to be limits as to what can qualify as conversation sparking in the political realm. g-man linking the super bowl commercial thread in the media forum to ... i dunno. left wing agenda? that's likely a case of "too far". or, for another example, anything captain sammitch posts. i think posts that are laden with icons, or those that are simply anticipating someone you're goading has been goaded, devalue not only the discussion, but your argument in it.

one of the larger turn-offs to me, unlike slow walks on the beach, is the idea of "cheap heat". one of my absolute favorite things to do on the forum years back was getting into word fights and debates with other posters. the insults would fly back and forth, but with typical levels of creativity added in. it wasn't just a "you are a homosexual, and rex has sexual relations with socks" discussion. there were mini-stories created and images photoshopped and all sortsa inventive ways to specifically not say the same thing over and over (even though you were). ironically (or, perhaps, ingeniously-creative) i often find cheap heat comments much more insulting than the clever ones. not in the "my feelings!!" sorta way, but in the notion that i no longer have a desire to respond or contribute to the thread in any fashion, because the cheap heatior has lamed it (verb form) beyond repair.

Beardguy is Pro's alt.