One could say that venting is useful to the one venting....mentally it helps clear the air so to speak. So one could say it might not be useful in some sense but not all.

As for trolling I thought you were accusing OP of trolling on purpose, or starting this thread to troll people. I'm sorry if I was mistaken.

You can never make that accusation with any certainty. In this case I personally think it's more poor judgment than trolling, but the OP could also be a troll. It's really hard sometimes to identify the difference between a troll and a fanbois. And then there are the folks around here that just get cranky from time to time.

In this case it was mostly an observation about the quality of the thread, if I was really convinced that this was a troll topic, I really shouldn't be posting here feeding the troll anyways.

OTOH, I can think of several forum members that might as well be trolls as they're about as useful to the forum as a troll.
My favorite troll around here is a certain Canadian that asks for help then trolls his own thread when he doesn't like the help given. So full of lulzy goodnes. Plus, he's Canadian so it's even more of a freakshow.

True. As Vestin (I think it was him) said in "yet another D3 thread" - if you happen to dislike something about a company that is beloved by many, you'd better get pretty damn convincing arguments because their fanboys would not let it be. (Sadly, that doesn't help much, because often you can't reason with such people. )

And then one of said fanboys gets annoyed because almost every thread concerning Blizzard's products or politics (many of which started by himself) ends in the same way and starts this thread. I bet that if people praised Blizzard instead of disliking, he would be happy.

Indeed. I find the irony of the situation quite amusing.

I'm a GOG fanboy, a muffin fanboy, a beer fanboy and a metal fanboy.

Come at me bro.

The main problem of this forum are the blalant double standards employed by many in the community.

GOG selling Wasteland 2. --> Awesome!

Origin selling Wasteland 2. OMG, always online DRM, end of the world, Brian Fargo sold out.

GOG refusing to stock a game because of quality/pricing --> Good decision

Steam refusing to stock a game because of quality/pricing --> OMG Steam is using market dominance to control gaming. The end is near.

GOG has multiplayer CD-Keys ---> DRM free

Other game has multiplayer CD_Keys ---> I don't buy that fscking game with some shitty DRM. Gaming is over.

This goes on and on and on.

The problem with this is, that it kills any proper discussion about the drawbacks of eg Steam. If you bring up false statements like "Steam will take my games away whenever they want" you can't really discuss the more relevant stuff.

There is nothing wrong with being a fanboy, I'm a very vocal GOG fanboy (*only in the old game department, though) but that doesn't stop me using my brain every now and then.

What, Canadian trolls are like twice as amusing as regular trolls.

Sir, you forgot to take your pills today.
You sumed it up perfectly.

Not to mention that GOG selling RCT3 for 20 dollars is fine, a great deal, but Steam selling it for the same price "THEYRE RIPPING US OFF, DAMN VALVE GREEDY BASTARDS".

Oh no, we've even been tricked into trolling each other!
Now hold the phone, I thought we all agreed to be pissed about RCT3 being $20! Fsck that!

Can I be your fanboi?

I already am!

First of all - it was actually in the "Anyone else boycotting Diablo III for even single player being online required?" thread; secondly - that's not what I said. After Fred_DM found your usage of the term "Blizzard apologists" (sic !) unusual, I extended the mockery of gaming hipsterdom by saying "Woah, man - he has a point. If you're going to claim that the most successful gaming company, with legions of fans (of various dedication), is actually NOT supposed to be scorned, you need to come up with some pretty convincing arguments. I mean - if something is insanely popular, it has to be evil, right ? Common sense ;)..."
It made a lot more sense in context but "apologists", in my eyes, were the straw that broke the camel's back; using such a term in a matter-of-fact way implies that everyone participating in the discussion already assumes that Blizzard is "evil", some merely try to excuse them. That's the sort of audacity I... dislike.

I also find the term "fanboy" useless in discussions - at worst it's an insult meant to exploit the "person X belongs to group Y, therefore what he says is not true" fallacy. At best it's an insult, period.

I got the impression of his later messages that he was pissed off of anti-DRM messages in this board overall, not just that one thread.

About the "can't they read?" part:

http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/italian_anarchists_shoot_nuclear_executive_in_the_knee_and_threaten_more_violence/page1

If XmXFLUXmx had stated in the first message that he doesn't want any comments about the evils of conservatives, but the discussion is only about the evil actions of green hippies, should his wish be abided?


Anyway, I agree that in that particular case (the Diablo 3 thread) mentioning the DRM can probably be considered trolling, message #21 in particular, and overall it would have been better not to post it.

But the way I see it, it is a bit similar case as if this was a cat discussion forum, but discussion about dogs would be tolerated too. Someone starts a discussion about "So which dog breed do you like the most?", and some new (to the forum) cat-lover came to that discussion trolling "None. Dogs suck, cats are much nicer, and quieter too (after operation)."

Would that comment be constructive in a dog discussion? No. But should the OP be overly surprised that such a comment was posted in a cat forum, even if he said in the first message that he doesn't want any comparisons to cats in the discussion? Not really.


GOG is quite a tolerant forum, even in that it quietly allows discussions or even promotion of its competitors, and discussion of games that are directly the opposite of the DRM-free stance of GOG. In exchange for this tolerance, I feel the people who like to discuss about dogs in a cat forum would just realize the anti-dog sentiments in the forum, and try to cope with it.

So tolerance is a bargaining chip now?

You can't have the cake and eat it too. If you feel a cat forum should be tolerant in e.g. allowing discussion about dogs too, you shouldn't be surprised if there are opposing views every now and then.

That doesn't mean those clashes should be actively triggered, from either side. But if someone really feels certain hot topics should be curbed, then maybe sometimes the best way to avoid them is to curb other controversial topics that usually seem to trigger them?

This isn't a specifically focused forum though. It's GENERAL DISCUSSION. Yes, threads have focused topics sometimes but it's not a clear cut "posting dogs on a cat forum(or vice versa)" situation here imo.