Site Discussion Thread

[Cedur]

See what for ourselves?

whether there are still concerns about reviving the game?

[Danny]

See what for ourselves?

whether there are still concerns about reviving the game?

I mean, if you're aware of there being concerns or not about reviving the game, you could just say so instead of being vague about it.

[Cedur]

My point is that there are none as of now. People are chill again, and I hope a lesson was learned.

[Zha Hong Lang]

To be honest, the best way to prove that you're ready for the mafia subforum to return is to stop asking for it week after week and just wait until it arrives. Nagging them into adding it back will work against you, since you've already asked them multiple times and they've made their case clear on it. Even if you add something to your argument like "look at the mafia forums, we've improved our behavior", it's not as convincing when first and foremost you're not being patient about it.

Since you do have a dedicated mafia forum, it's not like you're inhibited from playing mafia at all. Just let the issue rest, and then after a few months or so maybe you can bring up the case again if they haven't added the mafia subforum back yet.

[kr4k1n]

My point is that there are none as of now. People are chill again, and I hope a lesson was learned.

Seeing how people still act toxic on other threads, I wouldn't think so

[PersonNamedUser]

My point is that there are none as of now. People are chill again, and I hope a lesson was learned.

Seeing how people still act toxic on other threads, I wouldn't think so

If i may ask practical, what's with your negative attitude lately? I feel that the way you've been replying to stuff lately has sounded a bit snarky,
no offense, it's just that i've noticed that you didn't have this negative attitude when you first joined, so i'm not sure what's annoying you.

Also, i don't see why threads unrelated to mafia are anything to go off of, literally the only real problem that's come up on MosaicMafia is timocosmbx2345
but he's banned from there now, so i don't see what your talking about.

[kr4k1n]

My point is that there are none as of now. People are chill again, and I hope a lesson was learned.

Seeing how people still act toxic on other threads, I wouldn't think so

If i may ask practical, what's with your negative attitude lately? I feel that the way you've been replying to stuff lately has sounded a bit snarky,
no offense, it's just that i've noticed that you didn't have this negative attitude when you first joined, so i'm not sure what's annoying you.

Also, i don't see why threads unrelated to mafia are anything to go off of, literally the only real problem that's come up on MosaicMafia is timocosmbx2345
but he's banned from there now, so i don't see what your talking about.

I'll pm you about it

[Danny]

My point is that there are none as of now. People are chill again, and I hope a lesson was learned.

You still aren't making sense, and you're getting snarky again. There are no concerns as of now about reviving it? That's not entirely true. And what do you mean "I hope a lesson was learned"? What lesson was learned?

[Zha Hong Lang]

And what do you mean "I hope a lesson was learned"? What lesson was learned?

I'd suggest that when you request a detailed explaination, you first carefully explain yourself:

There are no concerns as of now about reviving it? That's not entirely true.

Cedur said there are no concerns, and unless you tell him which ones exist (if there are multiple) then he's not going to know what you're talking about.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to focus this all on you. This entire argument has been unbearably vague. I've hardly seen anyone - from the users who are advocating for mafia, from the users against it, or even from the staff - who has made their case with very specific details of what they're talking about. Perhaps the only exception I've seen to this is Zeldamaster saying that the forum will be brought back when the GMs see fit.


As for the other opinion...

Also, i don't see why threads unrelated to mafia are anything to go off of,

I don't know what practicalshorty is talking about (again, being completely vague and assuming everyone will know exactly what she's referring to), but generally speaking I can say from experience that you're wrong. If someone gets nasty in topic A but doesn't in topic B, that doesn't invalidate the possibility of that person becoming nasty in topic B sometime in the future. There may be a few certain circumstances in which that's unlikely to happen, but unless you be specific then there's no way to truly know if that's the case.

[Danny]

And what do you mean "I hope a lesson was learned"? What lesson was learned?

I'd suggest that when you request a detailed explaination, you first carefully explain yourself:

There are no concerns as of now about reviving it? That's not entirely true.

Cedur said there are no concerns, and unless you tell him which ones exist (if there are multiple) then he's not going to know what you're talking about.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to focus this all on you. This entire argument has been unbearably vague. I've hardly seen anyone - from the users who are advocating for mafia, from the users against it, or even from the staff - who has made their case with very specific details of what they're talking about.

Now, I don't mean to be rude, but I have no idea who you are or where you come from, so I'm not sure you have the full story laid out. To summarize, there is a level of vagueness that may seem confusing and not very narrative to people trying to insert themselves into the argument, but the people who have been part of this argument since its beginning know full well what it means.

Cedur may have said there are no concerns, but he himself has voiced and contributed to the concerns that have piled up. All of the people advocating for and asking "when will Mafia come back?" are the same people actually giving concerns, and the staff has had their fair share of concerns that were already voiced. This is not an issue of things being "too vague", this is an issue with people not listening to the concerns that were raised, while continuing to raise their own concern as well as wanting the game back.

[PixelPest]

Btw Danny I'm pretty sure Jayoshi just changed his username

[Danny]

Btw Danny I'm pretty sure Jayoshi just changed his username

It's real helpful when there's no notification or any indication on who someone is/was when they completely change their profile like that. I think this is actually something that needs to be addressed in a thread like "Username Changes" or something like that. I know there used to be one that existed in the past.

[PixelPest]

Yeah I'd really like that feature too. I know some people put things like that in their sig but a profile option would be very useful, like a past usernames list

[Danny]

Yeah I'd really like that feature too. I know some people put things like that in their sig but a profile option would be very useful, like a past usernames list

Not even past usernames, I mean like a "Username Changes" stickied thread that used to exist in the past.

[Radiance]

Not really. People change their username for a reason.

[Zha Hong Lang]

Now, I don't mean to be rude, but I have no idea who you are or where you come from, so I'm not sure you have the full story laid out.

It's alright, I'm not trying to take sides here anyway. I'm only trying to move the discussion forward.

To summarize, there is a level of vagueness that may seem confusing and not very narrative to people trying to insert themselves into the argument, but the people who have been part of this argument since its beginning know full well what it means.

While this may be true, just because people are familiar with the situation doesn't mean they'll be aware of each thing someone is referring to. Let's say I have a tomato farm, and I have a hired hand tending it. I tell him, "That tomato plant over there looks bad, better weed it out now so it doesn't affect the other plants later". We both know all the tomato plants on the farm. But my hired hand may not know exactly which is the one which I think looks bad. He might have a different idea of what a bad tomato plant looks like. He might think that the tomato plant I'm referring to doesn't look bad (If he even knows what I mean by "over there"... see what I mean?), or he may think that there are multiple ones which look bad, causing him to root up more than what's necessary.

The solution to this, of course, is to give details. I need to tell my hired hand where the problem is, like "That tomato plant by the bush" or "that second tomato plant on the third row" so that he'd know which I'm referring to, and then I need to tell him why it's a problem, like "the leaves are being eaten by bugs" or "the plant is wilting a little too much". He may already know that these are problems for tomato plants, but there's a chance that he wouldn't know what to look for if I don't tell him what issue I think it has.

Going back to the topic at hand...

Cedur may have said there are no concerns, but he himself has voiced and contributed to the concerns that have piled up.

You both agree that there were concerns, but he says they're gone, while you say they aren't. Clearly you two have different ideas about "the concerns". Assuming that you (both of you) know what the other person is talking about will result in a repetitive cycle of "no it isn't!" "yes it is!" "no it isn't!" "yes it is!". How do you know that you're right, and he's wrong? How does he know that you're right, and he's wrong? What if there's the possibility that you might actually be wrong about something, and you don't know about it since it's not being mentioned? You have to tell what it is you think, what details and observations you've made, and why they support your claim. Otherwise you'll just think Cedur's not listening, and he'll just think you're not paying attention. Neither of you will be the wiser about what the other person truly thinks.

It's real helpful when there's no notification or any indication on who someone is/was when they completely change their profile like that. I think this is actually something that needs to be addressed in a thread like "Username Changes" or something like that. I know there used to be one that existed in the past.

I'll admit, it was not a good move on my end to change my username as silently as I did... I'll add something into my profile about it later. Pixelpest's idea sounds pretty neat though, I how like steam has that feature too. Having a topic would be a bit unnecessary unless the feature isn't avaliable for phpbb3.1.

[kr4k1n]

It's real helpful when there's no notification or any indication on who someone is/was when they completely change their profile like that. I think this is actually something that needs to be addressed in a thread like "Username Changes" or something like that. I know there used to be one that existed in the past.

you could've just went to his profile and viewed his posts

[Radiance]

If you have a strong memory, you could do that in the old users, too. Or just check quotes.

[Snessy the duck]

I don't think a username changes thread is that nessecary, considering as practical said, you could just look at their earlier posts. Also, I'm pretty sure most users would probably announce their name change in their sig.

[Oshi]

My point is that there are none as of now. People are chill again, and I hope a lesson was learned.

Seeing how people still act toxic on other threads, I wouldn't think so

Yea, it seems like there's always that one guy who just rants and raves and ruins everyone's fun.

In fact, the internet itself is pretty toxic, literally everywhere you see somebody rambling about how much they hate something or someone and screams insults at another person. It's crazy how far someone will go to just make another feel like human garbage.

But that's why we can't have good things, because there's always a crazy, sadistic troll who tears people apart.

So yea, it's not coming back soon.

---

BTW what happened to the SMBX wiki? Did it die or something?