Actually it is an alliance vs. horde game, not a f2p vs. p2p game.
The Big Poll
- Thread starter Kincaide
- Start date
- Status
Actually it is an alliance vs. horde game, not a f2p vs. p2p game.
There are F2P and P2P on both Alliance & Horde, who frequently battle one another. So, this statement is a contradiction.
What
i think some options need to be merged. i dont think that many people really mind if guides are separated as long as the discussions are. putting in 2 options with the same discussion separation but different guide separation just splits the numbers in 2.
or there should really be 2 polls. one on how discussion should b separated and one on whether guides should be separated.
or there should really be 2 polls. one on how discussion should b separated and one on whether guides should be separated.
I really wish I could find a way to disable email notifications lol. Looked in settings but didn't see it.
Anyway this is a weak argument and I think you know it. TI is about twinks and therefore BiS gear and enchants. So with that said how different is BiS gearing (which includes enchants) of a Vet 20 from a 29.
I think that this debate, just like the organizational one, is a smokescreen. The real issue IMO based on many posts from the past is that some people (primarily purist/semi purist f2p but also some OG 29s) don't want to mix with the other group(s). But they know how that argument sounds and that it unlikely to buy them much credibility or sway with Shane and the mods.
The game is both. You contradicted yourself.
OP
OP
Hmm, what I meant by that was that the guides would be put in a different part of the forums structure, away from the discussion forums, so that the discussion forums didn't necessarily have to follow the same organizational pattern as the guides. If that was confusing to anyone and would change the way they vote, let me know. I only had so many letters to write the poll options.
Here's what I'm thinking:
On Guides:
The significant differences between the three account types now available in the 20-29 bracket create a demand for guides specific to each account status (Starter/Veteran/Active). In order to keep things organized and easy to navigate, the best solution is to create separate guide sections for each. That way, no group is forced to sift through a guide section in which a significant portion of the posts are irrelevant to them, which is what would happen if Veterans were made to share a guide section with either Starters or 29s. Yes, there are similarities between the groups. However, as we've seen, Vet-specific guides are already being created. Giving them their own guide section would make it easier for Veterans to find the guides relevant to them, and also prevent the Starter- and/or 29-specific guide sections from becoming cluttered with Veteran guides.
On Discussion:
As far as discussion is concerned, I can certainly see the merit in both sides of the argument. On one hand, merging all three groups into a single 20-29 discussion could potentially go a long way towards breaking down the "Us vs. Them" barriers that have been present in this bracket. The current situation, with its segregation of F2P and 20-29, only encourages that mentality. Ongoing discussion between the groups could help chip away at those divides. Or, it could be a total disaster and devolve into argumentative garbage. Hard to say at this point, but I think it's worth trusting people and giving it a shot.
On the other hand, merging all three groups into one discussion would run into the same issue as I mentioned above with the guides - A significant portion of the threads would be applicable to only one or two of the groups, resulting in a discussion forum in which many of the conversations aren't pertinent to a given user. This situation risks becoming inconvenient and annoying, not to mention confusing to newer players.
The Best of Both Worlds:
What I'm suggesting is creating a General Discussion forum for the whole 20-29 Bracket, as well as three sub-forums for discussions specific to Starter, Veteran, or Active/29 topics. If you want to address the bracket in general, say, to organize events or share something with the entire 20-29 community, post it in the general 20-29 forum. If you want to talk about gearing/enchanting options for that rogue on your unlinked starter account, post it in the Starter discussion sub-forum. This way, there is the opportunity for communication between all of our bracket's demographics, while still maintaining a designated area for specific issues that aren't relevant to everyone.
TL; DR: Three separate guide sections. One discussion forum for entire 20-29 bracket, with three sub-forums for topics specific to Starters/Vets/29s.
On Guides:
The significant differences between the three account types now available in the 20-29 bracket create a demand for guides specific to each account status (Starter/Veteran/Active). In order to keep things organized and easy to navigate, the best solution is to create separate guide sections for each. That way, no group is forced to sift through a guide section in which a significant portion of the posts are irrelevant to them, which is what would happen if Veterans were made to share a guide section with either Starters or 29s. Yes, there are similarities between the groups. However, as we've seen, Vet-specific guides are already being created. Giving them their own guide section would make it easier for Veterans to find the guides relevant to them, and also prevent the Starter- and/or 29-specific guide sections from becoming cluttered with Veteran guides.
On Discussion:
As far as discussion is concerned, I can certainly see the merit in both sides of the argument. On one hand, merging all three groups into a single 20-29 discussion could potentially go a long way towards breaking down the "Us vs. Them" barriers that have been present in this bracket. The current situation, with its segregation of F2P and 20-29, only encourages that mentality. Ongoing discussion between the groups could help chip away at those divides. Or, it could be a total disaster and devolve into argumentative garbage. Hard to say at this point, but I think it's worth trusting people and giving it a shot.
On the other hand, merging all three groups into one discussion would run into the same issue as I mentioned above with the guides - A significant portion of the threads would be applicable to only one or two of the groups, resulting in a discussion forum in which many of the conversations aren't pertinent to a given user. This situation risks becoming inconvenient and annoying, not to mention confusing to newer players.
The Best of Both Worlds:
What I'm suggesting is creating a General Discussion forum for the whole 20-29 Bracket, as well as three sub-forums for discussions specific to Starter, Veteran, or Active/29 topics. If you want to address the bracket in general, say, to organize events or share something with the entire 20-29 community, post it in the general 20-29 forum. If you want to talk about gearing/enchanting options for that rogue on your unlinked starter account, post it in the Starter discussion sub-forum. This way, there is the opportunity for communication between all of our bracket's demographics, while still maintaining a designated area for specific issues that aren't relevant to everyone.
TL; DR: Three separate guide sections. One discussion forum for entire 20-29 bracket, with three sub-forums for topics specific to Starters/Vets/29s.
I agree. Lets fight to the death and get it over with.
Incorrect. We all play the same game. There is only 'us.' There is no 'them.' Some people refuse to acknowledge the fact that we all play the same game. They continue to insist they have superior morals or reasons for playing the way they do. This is misguided and a waste of time. You either play the game, or you don't. If you don't like how the game is played by others, you are free to take your ball and go home. No one has to conform to your ideas of what's right.
Grants said:
There's no reason to do it that way. We have these things called thread titles that tell a potential user what a thread is supposed to be about. When you get into the 20-29 thread and you see 'F2P rogue gearing guide,' it's pretty self explanatory that it's a rogue gearing guide for players on trial accounts. The same goes for a guide about gearing P2P resto druid. Please explain to me how giving you guys your own sub forum solves the problem of a fractured community.
Really, it's quite simple. Some of us don't wish to sift through irrelevant information. Time is the most precious resource available.
I think keeping everything in the same section could work, but I think taking some of the functionality of the advanced search, and putting into a very easy to see filter that could sort by "f2p", "vet", "29", or whatever. Just like we have for "US" and "EU", but not so buried in the interface (I didn't even know filter this existed until I looked for it just now).
Last edited by a moderator:
Talk about making things overcomplicated. All that was needed to do was to maybe create a separate guide section in F2P for Veterans.
F2P isn't just about 20s, it's an umbrella term for anything that works without a subscription. Do you honestly expect people to check the 50-59 section for DK stuff? F2P as it stands now encompasses unlinked and linked starters (which differ in more than vanity now), not long ago there were people who could create DKs and those who couldn't, we had some upgrade system abusers, we had high level raids (which pertain to all manner of brackets if level is all that matters), there were some attempts to make level 1 starters a thing and now we have veterans.
Do all these types, shades and flavors warrant separate sections? No, they don't. And all morality/purity bullshit aside the real common denominator here are restrictions and how F2Ps decide to overcome these restrictions. None of which subbed accounts have to deal with. It's not level 20 that makes you F2P.
F2P isn't just about 20s, it's an umbrella term for anything that works without a subscription. Do you honestly expect people to check the 50-59 section for DK stuff? F2P as it stands now encompasses unlinked and linked starters (which differ in more than vanity now), not long ago there were people who could create DKs and those who couldn't, we had some upgrade system abusers, we had high level raids (which pertain to all manner of brackets if level is all that matters), there were some attempts to make level 1 starters a thing and now we have veterans.
Do all these types, shades and flavors warrant separate sections? No, they don't. And all morality/purity bullshit aside the real common denominator here are restrictions and how F2Ps decide to overcome these restrictions. None of which subbed accounts have to deal with. It's not level 20 that makes you F2P.
Then don't? You don't have to use the forums.
There are a lot of people using these forums, this thread being an excellent example, that I do not want to have to encounter anymore than I have to.
These people use logic like a monkey in a zoo uses its own feces. They fling as much of it out there as possible, they have no regard for anyone but themselves, and it makes them feel in a position of dominance when they're done.
If you don't respect or attempt to understand someone's argument, or immediately disregard it, then do not become frustrated when they do the same to you.
There is nothing wrong with the current system on TI - we could simply open up another section for Veteran-specific guides.
I'm going to pick this as an example because it's the most recent post for me and it's an easy example of a failure of logic.
What willix is saying here is that:
IF [MENTION=13519]Activate[/MENTION] does not want irrelevant information
THEN [MENTION=13519]Activate[/MENTION] must not want any information
Anyone with a middle school level of education should be able to point out the obvious flaw in that line of thought.
Let's correct this logic then:
IF [MENTION=13519]Activate[/MENTION] does not want to sort through irrelevant information
AND IF [MENTION=13519]Activate[/MENTION] values time as a resource
THEN make all information relevant and save time.
If we were able to have communities that respected others and constructively argued towards an end without being snarky or insulting, we could merge the forums.
As it is, that is not the case. #Keepthemseparate
These people use logic like a monkey in a zoo uses its own feces. They fling as much of it out there as possible, they have no regard for anyone but themselves, and it makes them feel in a position of dominance when they're done.
If you don't respect or attempt to understand someone's argument, or immediately disregard it, then do not become frustrated when they do the same to you.
There is nothing wrong with the current system on TI - we could simply open up another section for Veteran-specific guides.
I'm going to pick this as an example because it's the most recent post for me and it's an easy example of a failure of logic.
What willix is saying here is that:
IF [MENTION=13519]Activate[/MENTION] does not want irrelevant information
THEN [MENTION=13519]Activate[/MENTION] must not want any information
Anyone with a middle school level of education should be able to point out the obvious flaw in that line of thought.
Let's correct this logic then:
IF [MENTION=13519]Activate[/MENTION] does not want to sort through irrelevant information
AND IF [MENTION=13519]Activate[/MENTION] values time as a resource
THEN make all information relevant and save time.
If we were able to have communities that respected others and constructively argued towards an end without being snarky or insulting, we could merge the forums.
As it is, that is not the case. #Keepthemseparate
Last edited by a moderator:
The better option would be to have multiple choices and you could check in all the boxes you like the best.
And also Kincaie if the forum is based on levels will there be DK discussions in the 50-59 section?
Last edited by a moderator:
It is quite simple. Just put in your guide title what is about as you should be doing now.
"Trial guide to consumables"
"Subsciber's guide to consumables" a complete one would include all levels in the 20-29 bracket.
Are just two examples.
If these title guidelines are not adhered to, the mods should step in and change the title. After all, that is what they are here for, moderation and organization. Most moderators operate behind the scenes. But then again, most moderators don't have to put up with these users.
/cheers
Sweetsidney
"Trial guide to consumables"
"Subsciber's guide to consumables" a complete one would include all levels in the 20-29 bracket.
Are just two examples.
If these title guidelines are not adhered to, the mods should step in and change the title. After all, that is what they are here for, moderation and organization. Most moderators operate behind the scenes. But then again, most moderators don't have to put up with these users.
/cheers
Sweetsidney
After reading all of this I see people stating over and over "I do not want to sift through information that does not pertain to me". Most information on TI does not pertain to anyone. Or you can try the search button. Or the portal option. I do it all the time.
Or I " feel I am being forced to post to threads that have nothing to do with me". If they have nothing to do with you then why even read them, much less post in them? How are you being "forced" to do anything.
/cheers
Sweetsidney
Or I " feel I am being forced to post to threads that have nothing to do with me". If they have nothing to do with you then why even read them, much less post in them? How are you being "forced" to do anything.
/cheers
Sweetsidney
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status