Hey Ron,

I know this has been discussed (and shot down) before, but since it's reared its head again I'll mention it again (out of sight out of mind and all that).

The Forge is a fantastic resourc for gamers to get together and discuss games in development, ongoing campaigns, indie games in general, etc. However, roleplaying (as you yourself like to point out on occasion) is a social activity and I would certainly like to think that I have made good friends at my time here on The Forge.

All of us being such good friends, I kind of wish there was a place where we were allowed to discuss things not necessarily strongly gaming related, such as Blakes post, without being "told off" for it.

So, once again I am going to renew the call for an "off topic" forum where the rules are relaxed somwhat. After all, look how successful the Forge Birthday forum was for the 4 days of its existence. Yes, you could argue (and probably will) that there are other chatrooms and personal email and PM etc for that kind of thing, but it's not as "community building" if it has to be done at another venue, it wouldn't feel like it was still, at the core, a group of Forgeites.

Just my 2c, my friend.

Brian.

I agree - one of the problems I think the forge has, is that people aren't always sure where to post what. A general communoity forum solves this by providing an "if in doubt" forum.

Of course discussion in the community forum would still have to be strongly gaming-related (unlike RPg.net's tangency, or even the birthday forum), but I think a forum where people can just throw out ideas or opine about games would be a good idea, whilst leaving the Creation and Theory forums free for the focussed posts.

I'm a hard sell on this one. Brian actually did the best job yet convincing me (and I'm only the minor monster; wait 'till you have to fight the dread level 10 Ron), and it still doesn't sound like a great idea to me.

Thomas mentioned, "I think a forum where people can just throw out ideas or opine about games would be a good idea." I think that sort of behavior is exactly why you don't see a lot of good discussion in Indie Game Design any more. When it became the place for everyone to say, "Hey, I had an idea for a game last night, and I haven't put any thought into it, but here's the paragraph and a half that I wrote up," a lot of the good discussion, about game design no less, moved to RPG Theory.

I'm not saying a community forum will never, ever happen (although I am saying it's unlikely.) As always, the "if in doubt" problem is easily solved - e-mail someone, or send them a private message. While we are a tight-knit community, which is one of my favorite things about this place, we're a working community, not a lifestyle community.

Ron once commented on Game Design Journals, pointing out that every word written in a journal, is a word not being written for the game itself.

My feelings on a community forum are somewhat similiar. Every word spent in casual conversation is a word not be written on an actual game design or advancing our understanding of the hobby.

I'm not against the idea of a Community Forum per se, but I'm not sure...short of a draconian handed moderator, how to keep it from becoming a "chat room". If there ever were to be such a forum, I think it would need a moderator (who wasn't the already overworked Ron or Clinton) who was willing to put the kybosh on anything that strays even remotely into Tangency territory (after all there's already a perfectly good forum for that elsewhere).

What makes it especially hard is the introduction of new members into the Forge Community. I think the presence of a community forum would actually make that more difficult. One of the hardest adjustments to make to "life on the Forge" is that these aren't typical chat forums where people socialize and say whatever is on their mind. Currently, new members are "broken in" to that in a manner similiar to learning to swim by being thrown in the deep end. With a Community Forum, where the standards of on topic posting are relaxed, even a little bit I think that transition would become *harder* because it would be easier to bring into the Forge, habits developed elsewhere.

Just writing to back up Brian. I almost posted to that thread myself, but decided to let it cool off a day or two first.

Edit: To elaborate a bit, mostly aimed at Ralph. The Forge does not, and never will, need a "Social Forum." It does not need a chat room. It does not need a Tangency forum.

Incidentally, Clinton is wrong in his statement that socializing can be done through private chat and email. Such socialization is a group activity, and requires a group forum. Witness what went on in the Forge Birthday forum. You can't have that in private exchanges.

This is not a problem, however. Group socialization is not a requirement for the discussion of RPGs. The Forge has need of a place for discussion of gaming things that do not fit into the existing forums.

Ron said that the fact that Blake had trouble finding a place for his post should have clued him in. No. The fact that Blake had trouble finding a place for his post should clue Ron in that we have a lack. The fact that the issue keeps coming up should also do so.

As a side note, I don't think people come to the Forge to socialize. I think that the people who are asking for a "social forum" aren't really asking for a frighteningly chatty forum like Tangency or a yahoo-group style chat club.

I think that sort of behavior is exactly why you don't see a lot of good discussion in Indie Game Design any more. When it became the place for everyone to say, "Hey, I had an idea for a game last night, and I haven't put any thought into it, but here's the paragraph and a half that I wrote up," a lot of the good discussion, about game design no less, moved to RPG Theory.

Hi,

I'm not a heavy poster here, but I spent a lot of time browsing the board.

IMHO, the problem that reside with a off-topic forum is that it would be directly against the proclamed goal of the Forge : to promote and help small press rpgs.

See, nothing gets accomplished along those goals with such a forum.

Maybe someone could create another board, linked to this one, specially designed to allow social exchange between forgites ?
Actually, I would really be interested in posting more off topic, and exchanging tidbits with other members of these fora, but not on this particular board. The only net result would be, again IMO, an increase in noise and a loss in quality of the discussion.
For ex, look on how little was posted elswhere during the forge birthday.

Again, I'm all with you about wanting to "exchange" more, but not on the Forge proper.


Take care,

Fabrice.

The Forge Birthday Forum was a lot of fun.

Not a whole lot else went on at the Forge while it was an open forum, though...


Stuart

At the risk of being branded for heresy, let me observe that there already exist forums elsewhere for the sort of gamer interaction that is desired.

Nearly everything that happens here, plus everything that people seem to be seeking that is not here, used to be over at Gaming Outpost. There were reasons why Gaming Outpost was felt to be inadequate particularly for game design--some were problems with the server, some were matters of focus (GO provides forums for a lot of major games and fewer indie games, with only one game design forum), some were personality conflicts.

But I know quite a few people who are on these boards who still pop into Gaming Outpost forums once in a while; and Gaming Outpost does have a forum that is specifically off-topic; and it is a lot looser on what people can post where.

Aaron and Jacob are nearing completion of an improvement to the system and the restoration of the stored thread database. I don't know whether they can rebuild that site (certainly it will never be what it was to game design, as much of what it was in that area has been replaced by this site), but at least it's a casual place where people can chat about such things.

I'm there every day. It's not lonely--there are several people there every day, and more who drop by periodically. Ed Healy was just telling me he still lurks those boards when he has time.

So if you're looking for a place to talk about such things in a less focused and less rarified atmosphere, where you can ask stuff like "what do people play" and "has anyone tried this game" and that kind of thing, http://www.gamingoutpost.com/ is still there, and the forums are all free.

So stop nagging Ron and Clinton to create what already exists within reach.

--M. J. Young

Just to cast against a social forum (though not necessarily against a general gaming forum). I think the impersonal nature of the Forge is a good thing. Personal bias about other posters obviously creeps into the discussion sometimes, but I think a social forum would exacerbate the problem severely.

szilard wrote: The Forge Birthday Forum was a lot of fun. Not a whole lot else went on at the Forge while it was an open forum, though...

Erk. Wire-crossing is going on here . . . people are talking about two different things.

I don't believe anyone wants a purely off topic socializing forum a la Tangency. If you do want a completely off topic social forum, another thread should be started to discuss it. I don't think it needs to happen. I'm pretty sure it never will.

What I want is a place to have ON TOPIC discussions material that isn't explicitly covered by the existing forums, like:

For example, links to game design articles posted by designers in the field (Greg Costikyan, for example). Links to other gaming discussions that you'd like Forge-ite input on. General interest questions about game design that don't necessarily focus on a specific game like: Where do you get your ideas? What font should I use? How does a game designer defeat writer's block? What common typos should you avoid from other indie-game texts?

If people continue to post and read at the Forge, they *will* have similar issues that they want to discuss as a group. Having a snap moderator crackdown on every thread that doesn't fit into the existing forums is a Very Bad Thing (TM). It not only makes Ron look like a tyrant (which he is not!), but it makes the poster with a perfectly reasonable motive look stupid in an "Idiot! You should know better!" sort of way. It's insulting, even if it's not intended as such.

I'm not saying we need a Forge birthday forum year round, or a place to post IRAQI WAR threads. Help! I'm saying we need more room than we have to post about issues at the hands of gamers.

Obviously, I'm only one opinion among many, but there seem to be enough like-minded posters to bear my saying it again.

Hey Pags,

Don't we already have these:

Paganini wrote: For example:

• Links to game design articles posted by designers in the field (Greg Costikyan, for example)
• Links to other gaming discussions that you'd like Forge-ite input on
• Where do you get your ideas?
• What font should I use?
• How does a game designer defeat writer's block?
• What common typos should you avoid from other indie-game texts?

Fang--This whole idea was initiated by someone posting the question of how to deal with writers block on one forum, and being told not that it was the wrong forum but that there was no right forum for that topic.

That's your example.

Now, maybe that's been resolved to, "Yes, maybe there is a forum for that" (although I can't recall what forum that would be); but it still stands as evidence that such topics will arise periodically.

I'm fine with the idea that there are some topics of interest to indie game designers that don't have a place here. After all, this isn't the "Independent Game Designer Coffeehouse and Kibbutz", it's
The Internet Home for Independent Role-Playing Games
as the sign says--the place to design and discover games, not to meet and chat with designers. As far as I'm concerned, The Forge has defined itself, and chooses not to stretch that definition too far; so Forgites (which seems the best spelling for the accepted designation) who want to kibbutz should find a place elsewhere to do so.

I don't think (I could be wrong) that Ron and Clinton established this site for the specific purpose of replacing Gaming Outpost or RPGnet. I believe they built these forums for the specific purpose of focusing on independent game design and publishing in a way which those sites were unable or unwilling to support. Those of you who wish to discuss game design issues in a less formal atmosphere are certainly all welcome to come back to Gaming Outpost and chat there. I promise to read every thread on the major forums, and I know that there are a few people there (Time, Tadeusz, and others) who also read those forums and respond. Sure, it's gotten quiet over there--but if some of you came back and posted your somewhat less focused or slightly off-topic game thoughts there, it would get noisy again pretty quickly.

And the signal-to-noise ratio at GO was never terrible, even in the high-volume days. Not so good, perhaps, as here, but good enough that people commented on it then.

--M. J. Young

Hey Fang,

I chose my examples very specifically. They aren't hypothetical. The examples are either exactly what you call for - real posts, made by real people, that were really moderated - or have been mentioned by posters who didn't feel comfortable posting them because they weren't sure where to put them.

Obviously a few things need to be clarified about my post.

M. J.,

The original post was five sentences long. One vaguely spoke of some game (you had to gather was called EU States - no further information - based on the thread title). Two said what the author wouldn't do. And the other two were basically "Wah, I have writers block." All of which was posted to a Forum for concrete game design.

We can't make anything of the negations. The vague one was contrary to that Forum's aim at concreteness. That left the two whining threads as 'the meat' of the article.

That does not, in my mind, resolve to a Forum that belongs on the Forge. To me, dissected as such, this example is exactly what we don't want. I am requesting an example of something we do.

Paganini,

Those were anything if specific. A and B are about as vague as vague can be; what articles, what discussions? (And if you mean the FATAL thread, Ron's right; it already has discussion space for it, if you want Forge-ite response, PM to have it posted there.) D and F are perfectly legitimate questions for the Publishing Forum (and are no more specifc than anything else you've listed), I haven't seen anything like that moderated out. C is just too plain vague; I agree with Ron, threads that poll the rabble do not create any lasting value. Only through dialogue, conversations interacting, is new value created; a list of "I did this" is a poor cross section of anything and doesn't teach anything.

As for E, in addition to what I explained to M. J. above, I have to point out the alternative (of the original post) Ron received was miles better.

Ron's PM contact wrote: I have a game I'm working on - called EU States - and I've managed to flesh out the background and setting well. (include major bits of setting here). However, I find that when it comes to making my mechanics, I draw a blank and nothing seems to fit. Has anyone else had this happen with a game, and what did you do to move past it?

I think Fabrice said it best:

IMHO, the problem that reside with a off-topic forum is that it would be directly against the proclamed goal of the Forge : to promote and help small press rpgs.

See, nothing gets accomplished along those goals with such a forum.

Hello,

I agree with each and every one of Fang's points he's presented, and Nathan, in particular, should consider them carefully.

Clinton and I did some talking about this over the weekend, and here's the scoop.

1. There will be no Social or General or Other Topics forum at the Forge.

2. Every forum needs to have its clear purpose posted as a sticky at the top.

For instance, Nathan's suggested post with links regarding game design principles would go directly into RPG Theory, no questions or ambiguities. I don't see that as challenging item at all.

3. Anyone is free to utilize forum software to set up a Social or General or Other Topics forum at another website, which people can use as a venue for whatever sort of interaction they'd like to get in such a place. Feel free to put the link in your signature line here, for instance. It wouldn't have "the Forge" on it and it would sure's hell not be moderated by me or Clinton.

This strikes me as a win-win option.

Best,
Ron

Cool Ron.

I think, way back when, when I first mentioned the idea of a new forum, one of the other options I mentioned was to clearly define what was appropriate for each forum.

Ron wrote: I agree with each and every one of Fang's points he's presented, and Nathan, in particular, should consider them carefully.

Le Joueur wrote: To me, dissected as such, this example is exactly what we don't want. I am requesting an example of something we do.

[Edited in preview: this was cross-written with the previous three posts. I'm posting it anyway because it makes a slightly different point, similar to Jack's.]

I think I stepped partway into this debate when I posted a thread about word usage in the Publishing forum. Though no one to my knowledge actually complained about the thread's existence, at least one poster speculated that the moderators would close it, and it's been brought up as an example of a marginal topic since then. That is to say, a topic that would have been more appropriate in the proposed related-topics forum.

This is interesting, because it's a case where fitting into the forum focuses actually did strongly influence what I posted, I believe for the better. I had to figure out whether and why my concern about certain spelling and usage errors would be of interest to anyone else. The answer was that the people making these mistakes were publishing games, and it was specifically the mistakes that wouldn't be caught by a spell check program that were bothering me -- IOW, the likelihood of the same errors ending up in indie published products and harming their perceived quality. That's a concern that others here would likely share. Ergo, a topic for Publishing, but only with a focus on the specific kind of spell-checker-proof errors that might matter to a publisher.

I may have been right, I may have been wrong, but in any case the forum guidelines had an effect. The guidelines force topics to focus on the specific aspects of a topic that are relevant to people making indie games. A link to the FATAL review, offered in the context of making a point or raising an issue about the difficulties of handling of controversial content in a role playing game or about dealing with negative reviews -- some point or issue, that is, relevant to indie games -- would not (I believe) have been "moderated." And if no such point or issue has been identified, then why should it be posted at the Forge?

Here's the thing: making indie games is a really really broad subject! In a sense there are no "game-related topics inappropriate for any of the existing forums." Only game-related topics whose authors have not bothered to think about or to explain in the post why the topic is of interest to people making indie games. Once you do that, it becomes pretty clear which forum to post in. That is to say, it's not the subject matter that's "appropriate" or "inappropriate," but whether the actual point you wish to discuss is or is not relevant to indie games.

The D20 system is not an "inappropriate topic," but whether or not people think D20 sucks is an issue of no relevance. (That one's obvious; no one's suggested otherwise.) A review of FATAL is not an "inappropriate topic" but people's general reaction to it is an issue of no relevance. Writer's block is not an "inappropriate topic" but "tell me what to write because I can't decide due to writer's block" is of no interest or benefit to anyone, not even the poster. (Explaining to the poster why not might be relevant, but if one must shift the topic that much to be relevant then that's not a good sign for the thread.) On the other hand, the restated question quoted in Fang's post is clearly relevant.

All of Paganini's examples are of topics whose general subject matter is perfectly acceptable, provided the poster focuses on an issue relevant to indie RPG design. Making the poster do so is, I belive, the whole point of the policy and is of great benefit to everyone.

- Walt

Ron Edwards wrote: 3. Anyone is free to utilize forum software to set up a Social or General or Other Topics forum at another website, which people can use as a venue for whatever sort of interaction they'd like to get in such a place. Feel free to put the link in your signature line here, for instance. It wouldn't have "the Forge" on it and it would sure's hell not be moderated by me or Clinton.

Walt is my hero!

Was that on topic?

Mike

I'll quickly add my two cents in, since the FATAL thread I started has apparently catalyzed this discussion.

In retrospect, it would have been easy enough to embed the FATAL link in some kind of Forge-safe topic statement that passed a de minimis relevancy threshold (e.g., in RPG Theory on appropriate Simulation limits, or in Publishing on marketing and target audience, purpose of reviews, etc.), but my only motivation was to share notice of a potentially interesting or entertaining game-related feature located elsewhere, not to start a discussion on it. I could have PM'd a boatload of people, but that seemed more trouble than it was worth. In the end, I probably should have strangled the impulse to post in the first place, but I have to admit that I consider the Forge to be - at least in part - a social community, and a number of fellow members here my friends, despite never having met any of you outside of naked text. The FATAL review was a cool (I thought), game related -- even indie game related, given FATAL's status -- thing I wanted to share with the Forge. A simple enough sentiment, but not kosher in the context of the forums here.

I join my voice to those opposed to a generally social or off-topic forum. However, I'd also like to pose the question as to whether a channel for sharing links with the Forge community is desirable. I'm of mixed mind on it, personally. The potential for off-topic tangency is there, but so too is an opportunity to making relevant resources, reviews, or links available without requiring discussion on same.

Thoughts? Is there a narrow solution here, or is it a non-issue in the first place?

Best,

Blake