Cleaning out my closet

MWChapel wrote:

... doesn't mean you need to pout about it and delete all your stuff.

Why the hell do you care? Is the decision somehow affecting you?

It's a game site.

That hellhole stopped being a site about games a long time ago. Now, BGG is strictly a site about BGG.

MWChapel wrote:

So your humor went over like a fart in church. WAH! get over it. Just because you got reemed on a chit chat thread, doesn't mean you need to pout about it and delete all your stuff. So they made you sad and now you aren't a boardgamer? Funny how you state you are all about so called "conflict" games, but at the first sign of conflict you run away. Wipe off the black lipstick and grow some stones.

I've had my share of beat downs in chit chat,but what do I care? It's a game site. I'm still a boardgamer.

It's just that I got too involved in BGG and then I started taking things personal. I know of three users who deleted me as their geekbuddy, which I guess was done for no other reason than my forum postings. That's what I want to avoid. I'm going to reduce my activity on BGG to discussion about games and just to be consistent I'm going to delete a good amount of irrelevant posts I made. By the way I don't undergo this deletion process in vain, because I also revisit some really interesting discussions I almost forgot about. Most importantly all this doesn't have anything to do with quitting board gaming, I just think that when you spend too much time on BGG, this becomes a hobby on itself, one I'm not overly proud of.

billyz wrote:
"Keeerrrriisst Chappy... what the fuck do you care what Schweig does? I don't know you from Adam..."
When you see the couple together, Adam is politer and the one wearing the 'I'm with stupid' t-shirt!

TheDukester wrote:

That hellhole stopped being a site about games a long time ago. Now, BGG is strictly a site about BGG.[/quote]

So I guess the "HUNDREDS" of Session Reports, Game Reviews, Strategy guides, Game articles, Game photo's; Yes, hundreds, maybe thousands, and yes, that was just last week; doesn't constitute a site "about" games?

Not sure what website you are talking about then.

MWChapel wrote:

So I guess the "HUNDREDS" of Session Reports, Game Reviews, Strategy guides, Game articles, Game photo's; Yes, hundreds, maybe thousands, and yes, that was just last week; doesn't constitute a site "about" games?

Wow, sounds like I touched a nerve.

Relax, bro. If you get too worked up, you won't be able to participate in all the bacon threads over there.

TheDukester wrote:

MWChapel wrote:

So I guess the "HUNDREDS" of Session Reports, Game Reviews, Strategy guides, Game articles, Game photo's; Yes, hundreds, maybe thousands, and yes, that was just last week; doesn't constitute a site "about" games?

Wow, sounds like I touched a nerve.

Relax, bro. If you get too worked up, you won't be able to participate in all the bacon threads over there.

I apologize, I didn't know we were only telling dumb ass remarks here today. That I can do, bro.

I'm with Chapel on this one. BGG is sometimes annoyingly meta, but there's no question it's still a boardgame site. Just that most of those contributions are about shit I don't care about. You decide your own level of involvement with the other bullshit like pissing matches about mechanics and how elegant shit is.

The only real problem is that the bullshit and anal retentive characters occasionally bleed into substantive posts, derailing everything. But it'd be an exaggeration to call that most of the time.

The other problem is the illusion that stupid shit dominates BGG. Contentwise it probably doesn't. It's just that all the stupid and annoying content gets a ton of thumbs so you always see it on the front page. Things like http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/380811 picture live in infamy for weeks garnering tons of thumbs while other pictures of games quickly fall off the map.

MWChapel wrote:

That I can do, bro.

Well, you do have a lot of practice ...

Gary Sax wrote:

The other problem is the illusion that stupid shit dominates BGG. Contentwise it probably doesn't. It's just that all the stupid and annoying content gets a ton of thumbs so you always see it on the front page. Things like http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/380811 picture live in infamy for weeks garnering tons of thumbs while other pictures of games quickly fall off the map.

That's a pretty cool picture though.

mikoyan wrote:

Gary Sax wrote:

The other problem is the illusion that stupid shit dominates BGG. Contentwise it probably doesn't. It's just that all the stupid and annoying content gets a ton of thumbs so you always see it on the front page. Things like http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/380811 picture live in infamy for weeks garnering tons of thumbs while other pictures of games quickly fall off the map.

That's a pretty cool picture though.

By the way gamephotos was dipdragon ( http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/162667 )
and G M K was gollum ( http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/30252 ).

Ah shit. WTF happened? I just saw this thread. Fuck 'em man. Stop deleting your posts. If people don't like them they can go to hell.

Schweig! wrote:

mikoyan wrote:

Gary Sax wrote:

The other problem is the illusion that stupid shit dominates BGG. Contentwise it probably doesn't. It's just that all the stupid and annoying content gets a ton of thumbs so you always see it on the front page. Things like http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/380811 picture live in infamy for weeks garnering tons of thumbs while other pictures of games quickly fall off the map.

That's a pretty cool picture though.

By the way gamephotos was dipdragon ( http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/162667 )
and G M K was gollum ( http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/30252 ).

Not talking about the deletion of stuff (which I understand, because you are using your real name as username; I deleted my name quite a while ago and am happy that I chose a 'pseudonym' back then (albeit not a very 'cool' one:))).

But this thing about dipdragon=gamephotos and gollum=G M K was an eye-opener. It makes just so much sense, if you compare the users and their contributions. Is this common knowledge on TOS, is there a thread on this? Makes you wonder who else is wandering around there. Pat Hirtle? Fawkes?! Aleister Finchley?!? Ted Torgerson?!?!

Schlupp wrote:
"Makes you wonder who else is wandering around there. Pat Hirtle? Fawkes?! Aleister Finchley?!? Ted Torgerson?!?! "
Rumour has it that Tom Vasel is actually Lord Lucan (or was it Red Rum? I can never remember.)