Greedy Goblin

Monday, April 5, 2010

Infraction for Nagast

Another wonderful post from my favorite fun forum. It actually doubly wonderful. At first because it's a perfect example of the social "warfare" that works only other socials, and not on people like EJ moderators:

"The other information that is not "anecdotal" in these convoluted threads can be obtained from other reputable sources. I will therefore obtain my information elsewhere." It is a full sentence version of the legendary comment "/unsubscribe" that I have to delete in dozens. It assumes that the writer somehow wants to be popular and liked by others (which is considered obvious by socials) so simply mentioning that you don't like them and don't silently read them will hurt them. Actually intelligent people don't care more than they have to (delete the trash comment). The intelligent opinion about /unsubscribe was perfectly summarized by Rohan: "Oh noes. Whatever will I do? My dreams of wealth and power, cruelly dashed by the loss of a anonymous reader."

The point is that the anonymous reader contributed nothing to the site, so his loss is nothing. Even if you assume that the writer wanted to spread some idea, the reader already made the decision of not believing it, so the damage is done, it no longer matters if he stays or don't.

"I will no longer promote your site to my friends online. If asked I will direct them to other sites and tell them about how rudely I was treated by the Elitest Jerks team. ... I will post a negative review of your site online. ... Perhaps you will consider changing your attitude so that people will maintain a positive view of your site." This is the HC version of the above. If the author is hurt by the loss of a reader, he will be hurt more by the prospective loss of even more! I can hit them hard by directing my friends elsewhere and making negative rumors! This is completely logical as n*harm > 1*harm if n > 1. That's why socials fear the bad rumor like the bubonic plague. However, as the harm of his leaving is 0, the harm of the leaving of his friends is n*0.

The second thing to notice is a common social excuse: "others do it too, so I'm entitled to do it". Our specimen said: "This anecdotal story about me and my spec that you refer to is not unlike 80% of the other posts in this thread ... There is growing consensus among WoW players that it is not worth their time scrolling through hundreds of posts to find information that they need".

The moderator masterfully replied: "Hey guys I was just telling an anecdotal story like everyone else, but clearly the information is out there so I shouldn't have to back it up or anything important like that. But your site really is hard to read because of all the posts like mine." If something is harmful on its own, you shall not do it, regardless how many others do it. On the other hand if it's not harmful, you are free to do it, regardless how many others do it. Or simpler: don't give a damn how many sheep do something!


wickEdgirl said...

This kind of feeling of entitlement stems from a simple socio-political fact: an overall bullshit myth of "egalitarization" of all aspects of life, which is starting to include private property/private organizations.

They should get it in their heads: if I 100% own something (and I do not get any money from public funds for it) I can exclude you from it on *any* basis I want. Even if I am 100% "wrong" and "rude" and "a jerk" by your values.

Best thing I can read from these kinds of posts is their unaware-awareness that the free-market will work in their favor and that someone, somewhere will make an option that will accept them with open arms.

Kaaterina said...

Anyone else notice the irony of an user 'leaving' because of the epic variation of "QQ YOU'RE ALL ELITIST JERKS". While the forum is called elitist jerks?

How can someone keep a straight face when telling his friends "Don't go to Elitist Jerks, there's no freindly helpfull ppl there!" ?

I mean, even the most ironclad social would have trouble at not flinching at the obvious irony.

Christian said...

Weird then, that those vaunted nonsocials from EJ have a forum dedicated to shaming the people that they ban.
It can't possibly have anything to do with trying to assertain superiority by showing the masses how much better they are.

Regardless, it's quite entertaining to read.

Entrak said...

You forgot to mention the best part of it.

"Best wishes!"

A.k.a. "You fucked up bad, but I will forgive if you crawl in the mud to get me back"


Darbaris said...

I always knew there was a banhammer page on EJ, but never went in to see. This is hilarious.

Anonymous said...

The threat of "taking my business elsewhere" is not a social threat. Its business pure and simple and when it comes to business, financial transactions, word of mouth can and will aid your success or ruin any chance of it, depending on whether its positive or negative. Even large established companies can be bankrupt through bad reviews. It is illogical to deal with a business that performs badly, a waste of time and money. Even so-called "socials" understand that most of the time.

Some people mistakenly believe that the same rule applies to blogs and forums, but what they fail to understand is that it will only work if target blog or forum is in it for financial gain.

duncan said...

though this isn't actually my view, you could argue that it would be a good thing that socials leave your site and spread bad rumours... assuming you're only interested in intelligent debate. Socials would be more likely to befriend socials and antisocials would be less likely to listen to bs rumours.

Shannon said...

I'm curious what you think of Tun's ragequit/ban from EJ last year. He was banned for giving anecdata with nothing to back it up, and afterward made a nice long butthurt post on the Ensidia website about how wronged he was.

The sad thing about it is his anecdotes, while they disagreed with the spreadsheets at the time, turned out to be right. The thing is he had no data to prove himself, only his superior attitude, and refused to believe he was bound by the rules that the rest of us are. Because rules are for scrubs or something.

Anonymous said...

I personally think that losing "business" even on EJ would be bad. Lets say hypothetically they lost everyone except the people from EJ itself. Who's going to make all the handy spreadsheets?

Tonus said...

I love forums where the moderation is strict but clear-- where you know what is expected of you, and also where you stand. If you have any intelligence at all, and a tiny bit of patience, you will quickly learn if it is the forum you want to be a part of.

That's the thing about the EJ forums. They tell you (more than once) what they expect from each and every person that wants to post. They tell you exactly what they are, what they discuss, and what they DON'T discuss, as well as what they do not want to see at all.

Read the rules, then browse the banhammer thread for (let's be generous) 30 minutes. That is just ~35 minutes of reading and you will know all you need to know about what they expect and what they will (and will not) tolerate. You will also understand that they are not interested in sparing your feelings when you screw up- they will be blunt and insulting and short on patience. Don't like it? They do not care, because they do not want your kind of person there.

So it's not really socials that get slapped around hardest, it is pure morons and slackers. Some are socials, some are hardcore, all are remarkably stupid and feel as if the forum belongs to them, and that the rules should be set aside so that they can flood the threads with their idiocy. It's funny to read through the complaints from people who didn't bother to do a little reading and understand what they were getting into. They wind up getting that sense of entitlement shoved right up their asses, and it's funny as hell.

Bristal said...

You simply cannot ever own anything 100%. In any social structure, there must be provisions for monitoring and restricting the rights of individuals for the good of all.

You may be able to exclude me and most people from your possessions for whatever reason, but there are always officials who can restrict your most basic rights to own things for a variety of good, and not so good reasons.

Eminent domain. Economic interest of property owners. Developmental interests of a community.

As well there are many many laws that restrict your ability to "exclude" others from access to things that you own. Doesn't matter that you don't receive public funds.

Own a business legally with a business license? You MUST allow & furnish access to wheelchairs. Certainly you can exclude whomever you want from your house, right? How about the police? The fire department if your house is burning and could threaten others' homes? What if someone comes to your house begging for help, you ignore them and they die? Threaten the power company meter reader?

A black or white sense of ownership just does not exist. Ownership is GRANTED by others within a social structure, or by virture of your power to hold property. It is not some God-given or inalienable right of existence.

Anti said...

having a quick read of the EJ ban hammer forum i'm thinking it might be an interesting exercise to see how many infringments could be fit in one post.

Kaaterina said...

@last Anonymous

People don't go to EJ for the stimulating social conversation. They go there for discussion.

Basically, not 'everyone' would leave since most of that 'everyone' actually understands and agrees with their policy, seeking refuge from the droves of drooling retards that flood the official forums (which, not surprisingly are under Blizzards 'everyone is a special flower' policy, and 'you must be nice to everyone else, no mater if he's a window-licking lunatic').

Jeanie said...

"Weird then, that those vaunted nonsocials from EJ have a forum dedicated to shaming the people that they ban.
It can't possibly have anything to do with trying to assertain superiority by showing the masses how much better they are."

It's just the normal trash/ban forum that alot of other forums would have. And it has todo more with technical aspect of the forum rather than their needs to show superiority.
Out of curiousity, do you actually spend time periodically reading the banhammer forum, Gevlon ? Cause that would be ... unproductive, and weird.

Anonymous said...

[Assuming no significant advertising revenue of course.]

I can't see why the anonymous readers think them unsubscribing would matter much.

On the other hand, bloggers are doing it voluntarily. Would anyone blog if they had zero readers? if not, then it is not fair to say they have zero value to the blogger. small perhaps. but not 0

nachobel said...

Ej really are some nice people once you get to know them. But they are absolutely elitist, and complete jerks. All the time. Even to their friends. The entire community can basically be summarized as that group of frat guys at that one house that would always get drunk and then throw beer bottles at you as you walked by, but then would also be upset if you came into their house and didn't take your shoes off.

chase said...

The EJ forum doesn't exist to make you feel warm and fuzzy about yourself. It is where you go to get information and share information with others. Not feeling, cold hard data.

If you want an idea of just how bad a forum can get when you don't regulate things, take a look at the blizzards damage dealing forum. There is absolutely nothing that can be gained from that cesspool.

Chev said...

I'm glad you posted the link to the EJ banhammer forum. I'd never seen it before, and it just confirmed that I never want to visit their site again. And I'm not a 'social'. I value rational, logical debate and opinion backed up by facts.

But the 'price' of admission to the rambling, pointless, self-referential mess that is the EJ forums is simply not worth the occasional nuggets of gold that lie in there, buried somewhere on page 294 of a given class thread.

Forget it, get your valuable information from a place that is a little more respectful of your fellow man/woman. Would you deal with people like that in real life? No way. I realise that this comment won't be a popular one on the GG site, but I'm not dropping my standards of human politeness and decency for some nerdy tin-star sheriffs over at EJ. Life is too short.

Cirian said...


You will consistently exclude yourself from valuable situations in life if you always go about things with an attitude like that.

Most intelligent people would realize that a valuable repository of information is just that. You do not have to post on the elitist jerks forums to benefit from them, and therefore you do not need to be personally subjected to their personality foibles. If you are just not going to read the forums merely because you do not agree with the way they treat other people, well that is pretty well the definition of M.

If I needed a reference book, I can go to the library and get one. I do not need to chat with the other people at the library, and I would not care at all if the librarian strangled kittens in their spare time. It just would not be relevant to me, nor would I accomplish anything by making a hypothetical stand and not using the library.

Above and beyond that, there are many people who value competence over friendliness. In almost any circumstance, if I had to do perform any bit of work (in this case number crunching to determine the ideal rotations/gear/spec in WoW) I would rather do it with someone who is good at the job, rather than someone who can make friendly banter while contributing nothing to the task at hand.

Anonymous said...

You're right. We all know people like you and the contributors of EJ couldn't care less about the loss of a subscriber. You spew hot air simply to warm the space around you. You relish the view of your own words and the sound of your own voice. You wouldn't care if only one person ever saw your posts, that person being yourself, since you believe you live in a vacuum and only you matter.