Talk:/tg/

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

Category[edit]

Hmm.. What the hell kind of a category would this page go in? --Myomoto 23:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Shitstorm? --Anonymous 23:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
RAGE? --Rodwell 06:35, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Stop shitting over this. --Rodwell 06:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

How about it's own one? --User:Zombiecreeper

Mods = Fags talk[edit]

The editor in me wants to wipe out the bitching added in this update, because it's destructive criticism... but I know it isn't just one butthurt voice in the wilderness, there's plenty of people who've been shut out of /tg/ for mentioning 4e in a 4e thread, or getting their threads about Pathfinder deleted with no explanation.

/tg/ really HAS gone down the shitter these days, it used to be one of the most fun and popular boards, but now it's a borderline ghost town run like a police state with a strict No Fun Allowed policy, a reason why most of the old populants of /tg/ have fled to other boards, namely /co/, /v/. Dayum Shame.... -Mr. Spooky Jun 12, 2:24 PM 2011

If you think /tg/ has decreased in quality, fine, but don't deface the /tg/ page to say so. Saying that arguments get you banned is obviously wrong. Saying that POSTING (!!!!!!) gets you banned is obviously wrong. Saying the drawfags are gone is obviously wrong. Whine and gnash and scream crap all you like in the talk page, don't do it on the main page. Someone else. 15:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes because 1d4chan is all about srs buisness and no fun allowed. Grow a sense of humor, were all about glorification and exageration, if you can't take a hint then that's your own damn fault. -Mr. Spooky 21 June 2011

Oh, I know about exaggeration. That doesn't mean I agree with what you wrote. Someone else. 17:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I think a more balanced perspective would help. Critiicism, o.k. But the stuff on the page could easily be considered flaming -no account.

Cut that shit out. This is not a blog[edit]

In the discussion section of this very page, there is a brief conversation that sums up current era /tg/ very succinctly:

"The editor in me wants to wipe out the bitching... because it's destructive criticism, but I know it isn't just one butthurt voice in the wilderness, there's plenty of people who've been shut out of /tg/ for mentioning 4e in a 4e thread, or getting their threads about Pathfinder deleted with no explanation.

/tg/ really HAS gone down the shitter these days, it used to be one of the most fun and popular boards, but now it's a borderline ghost town run like a police state with a strict No Fun Allowed policy, a reason why most of the old populants of /tg/ have fled to other boards, namely /co/ and /v/. Dayum Shame..." -Nostalgiafag

"If you think /tg/ has decreased in quality, fine, but don't deface the /tg/ page to say so. Saying that arguments get you banned is obviously wrong. Saying that POSTING (!!!!!!) gets you banned is obviously wrong. Saying the drawfags are gone is obviously wrong. Whine and gnash and scream crap all you like in the talk page, don't do it on the main page." -Pedanticfag

"Yes because 1d4chan is all about srs business and no fun allowed. Grow a sense of humor, we're all about glorification and exaggeration, and if you can't take a hint then that's your own damn fault." -Nostalgiafag

"Oh, I know about exaggeration. That doesn't mean I agree with what you wrote." -Pedanticfag

While these two gentlemen probably never expected this exchange to be transferred over to the main page, it does actually present a very clear picture of what /tg/ is like now. On the one hand, you've got the oldfags who used to post on /tg/ prior to November, 2009, who miss what it was like when the board, honest to god, contained just about every interest you could have. He misses the fascinating topics of yore and the freedom.

The second individual is akin to the neckbeards remaining on /tg/ who actually like the way it is now. They never cared about the unique content posted on /tg/. In fact, guys like this welcomed the mods and during their inception insisted that /tg/ needed to be cut down. They'll argue that you can still post fun things on /tg/, but will neglect the fact that you can only post certain kinds of fun things that meet a very strict moderation standard.

The difference between these two individuals is not a matter of right and wrong. This is a subjective argument. It boils down to personality. The old fag full of nostalgia wants to do things right, but isn't sure he should take things seriously. In his mind, /tg/ and 1d4chan should be funny, irreverent, and not fully accurate sources of information. If someone can't handle that traditional games and the board related are all for fun, then that's their problem.

On the other hand, you've got the pedantic fag who probably has a sense of humor, but not anything of the kind required to write silly stories about serious settings. Reason being because this anon sees the world more through a lens of black and white. He doesn't think hyperbole is funny - he wants the wiki entries to be factual and he wants them to agree with his personal views. This is the guy who, when you make a joke about 40k, butts in to tell you that obviously you didn't read the fluff like he did because the setting is nothing like how you're making it out to be. Also note that he gets the final word in, but his final word contributes nothing to the conversation. Everyone on /tg/ knows a dork like this.

Both of these people are huge neckbeards. Otherwise they wouldn't be fighting about this. In the glory days of /tg/, the board was populated and run by the nostalgia fag, who thought everything should be funny, creative, and who respected a certain amount of chaos. Current /tg/ is more heavily populated by the pedantic fag, who has no problem with aggressive moderation and doesn't really want to talk about anything too outlandish anyway. It's the guy who plays for fluff versus the guy who plays for crunch. One guy wants the board to be fun and have personality, and the other wants the board to be clean, where more focus will be given to his otherwise less tantalizing army lists or character stats.

/tg/ is a little sterile now, but you will still find the occasional good thread, and the pedantic fags are all cheers and smiles.

Hi, I'm the pedanticfag. I write screwy, wacky shit all the damn time. I love when topics get hilariously derailed. I like porn and and I like when trolls get trolled. I do NOT like it when people with rosy goggles try to impose their subjective views as fact. I don't give a shit about crunch and never have. I write fluff for a fucking LIVING. Check my user page if you need examples.
I guess what I'm saying is shut the fuck up. Never assume that a single argument encapsulates the viewpoints of entire groups of people, then extrapolate entire strawman arguments from it. I see mod behavior I loathe, and having met the nazi janitor online and spoken to him for months, I know exactly why he did what he did. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. You, on the other hand, feel free to make broadbased assumptions about both my motivations and preferences without having the slightest fucking idea who I actually am.
Do not post this garbage on the /tg/ page again. Someone else. 01:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
I'd love to hear the motivation/reasons the janitor gave. --Zecro 06:12, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Dude, you're a phenomenally huge fag. Get over yourself. I can't picture someone like you doing anything that isn't self-promoting or at the least about promoting your own prattling, half-wit views. I'll chime in with the last guy who you tried to dominate: if you can't grow a sense of humor, learn to shut the fuck up and deal with it. For that matter, if you don't want people to know what kind of ass you are, don't post on public websites to display. -- 11:23, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
And if you had balls enough to stand by your claims, you wouldn't be posting anonymously. You had your argument resoundingly refuted, so you call back to insults? I'm not surprised. This site is not your blog. There's no call for personal perspectives on pages. Live with it.
Zecro: the reason it happened was threefold: one, a recent overhaul of the mod and janitor staff left a mod who was rarely present during US peak hours in charge. Two, moot is an appeaser and fundamentally lazy, and the janitor didn't want what happened to /x/ because of moot's laxity to happen to /tg/. Three, the nazi mod had a phenomenally short temper, which eventually drove him out of the channel we used to hang out in, and resulted in his QQing from the 4chan staff when moot questioned his poor decisions. Someone else. 06:28, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I can back up Someone Else regarding the janitor. --Ahriman's Aide 06:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I accused you of being a motherfucking pedant, and then you act like a pedant. Nobody has been refuted, genius. And I'm not sure if you realized, but 1d4chan is full of personal perspectives and hyperbolic generalizations. It's kind of how a person writes comedy or makes the writing interesting. If we just write facts, omitting any information or opinions that you don't approve of, there's really nothing interesting to read.
I'd persist with restoring the addition I made, but I can see that you're the kind of insecure individual who would never let this thing go without a massive tantrum that requires everyone to look at you and pay attention to you. And it's cute you think you're a writer. It really is. I see you wrote a sequel or something to HS40k, with HS40k originating all the way back in 2008. Good for you! And you write about the Tarrasque. Also good for you! I'm so proud. It must take a lot of creativity to write about somebody else's ideas. You're such a benefit to this wiki. Thank god we have you here so that we don't clutter up the pages with non-factual information and the like.
But you know what you should do that I think would really help? Maybe you should make a post to the page explaining to everyone how you aren't pedantic and how important it is that everyone recognize exactly what kind of person you are. As a writer you understand that telling is more important than showing, so when you just tell them you're an awesome guy and not a pedant they'll clearly see that and fall in love with you. Obviously we all really care about you and who you are, and your name is a badge of courage that all the wiki users respect.
Either that, or you can come to terms with the fact that you're a complete nobody who's going around shitting on things you merely don't agree with, and you don't shit on them in a way that's even remotely funny. You just edit the opinions you don't like away. There's nothing fun about it, and there's nothing fun about you. Fuck you, asshole. You're a waste and an obstacle. -- 10:16, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Look who's talking- at least Ahriman's Aide and the others WRITE things instead of wasting time bitching about the mods like every other reject from /b/. In fact, by your definition you would easily qualify as both a nostalgiafag AND a pedanticfag from all the whining you do. Just fuck off already- the spambots manage to be funnier than you, for fuck's sake.--Newerfag 20:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
"While these two gentlemen probably never expected this exchange to be transferred over to the main page" should have been your first clue that your impending contribution was probably not a good idea. Different people have different opinions about what /tg/ "ought" to be like, including opinions on whether or not the mods are good or bad, and the article would be incomplete if it did not at least mention this division, but it already does so, and in any case, personal attacks and straw men are not helpful -- frankly, they only make you look bad -- and dragging arguments (an argument that has been settled, or at least dormant, for over a year) into the main page and waging edit wars there are particularly problematic.
I'm not an expert on the history of /tg/, and I've never interacted with the mods in any capacity; don't confuse my actions here as taking a side for or against them. I am giving 74.222.219.51 a one-week block for his conduct only. --AssistantWikifag 20:30, 27 November 2012 (UTC)