A more serious SYM thread (no spam)

[TonyMontana1638]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiona @ Tony. I think there is some exclusiveness in the SS, not because anybody want it to be cliquey but just because if people get to "know" each other over time there are inevitably references to shared experience, in jokes and all that kind of thing. That makes it hard for new comers, maybe. Or maybe not. I do remember how hard it was to post when I first came here because everybody seemed to be such friends ( I didn't know they all hated each other then )

I agree with you completely: of course there's some exclusivity but what can you do about it? I'd again like to urge people not to be intimidated by this and try posting there. I know there's a certain hump to be overcome, but once you get used to the place you'll realize it isn't done intentionally. You can go back and look at some of my comments posted ages ago about how it's hard to get into SYM at first, but I give you my complete comfortability with the place now as proof that there is a place for everyone here. I was more annoyed at having the clique-ish comment thrown our way by a member who's been here for ages: I believe there to be some clique-ish behavior on the part of those SYM 'oldies' who know everything that's ever gone on here and can all wax poetic about the 'good ol' days' but I know it isn't their fault and don't complain anymore. It isn't their fault: same with the SS. I'd have taken that from someone who's new, but not a vet.

@ BS: I swear I didn't type this after seeing your post, but we're obviously thinking along the same wavelengths at least. I'm not so arrogant as to say I've never been a hypocrite before . You guys had that thrown in your face back then, so is it so terrible to hope you'd know what it feels like and wouldn't feel the need to return the favor? We're all hypocrites here.

[Fiona]

Oh I don't know, Tony. I am no historian. But perhaps you get established threads and then new people feel left out and start a new one from time to time? How did the HC start? Maybe it was like the SF?

[Hill-Shatar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiona Oh I don't know, Tony. I am no historian. But perhaps you get established threads and then new people feel left out and start a new one from time to time? How did the HC start? Maybe it was like the SF?

Random act of Luis Antonio to combat the gods, Aegis and Fable, at the time, and was then bumped and continually posted in for the past two years. The SF was brewed out of an argument and the SS out of worry for the SF. Short history session complete.

[TonyMontana1638]

No, you're right Fiona that is exactly how at least the SF got started but I can personally swear to everyone here that, on my word and position as owning the second post ever in the SS (which has to stand for something ... right? ) that there is a place for everyone there. It may very well be clique-ish in reality, I never said it wasn't just that I didn't see that much evidence of it, buteverybody is welcome.

[Fiona]

@ Hill. That seems to mean it was a similar process for the HC and the SF, right?

[Bloodstalker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyMontana1638 @ BS: I swear I didn't type this after seeing your post, but we're obviously thinking along the same wavelengths at least. I'm not so arrogant as to say I've never been a hypocrite before . You guys had that thrown in your face back then, so is it so terrible to hope you'd know what it feels like and wouldn't feel the need to return the favor? We're all hypocrites here.

Yes, it is so terrible. Mostly because I had envisioned at least a twelve post argument, and you're trying to cheat me out of it.

also, do to my nature, I am not sympathetic to anything, On the contrary, I'm quite vindictive. It's part of the gifted thing I was talking about with my last post.

[Fiona]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bloodstalker also, do to my nature, I am not sympathetic to anything, On the contrary, I'm quite vindictive. It's part of the gifted thing I was talking about with my last post.

Well make your mind up Is it due to your nature; your post count; or is it a gift? I ask because I wish to set my aspirations in accordance with my possibilities

[Bloodstalker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiona Well make your mind up Is it due to your nature; your post count; or is it a gift? I ask because I wish to set my aspirations in accordance with my possibilities

You don't aim high, do you?

[Fiona]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bloodstalker You don't aim high, do you?

It is quite a leap from where I am to vindictiveness. Hardly a modest journey, sir

[Lestat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bloodstalker You don't aim high, do you?

Aim high, the arrow lowers while flying.

[Fiona]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lestat Aim high, the arrow lowers while flying.

Um, I just noticed this thread says no spam

[dragon wench]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiona Um, I just noticed this thread says no spam

Tsk tsk... shame on you

[Ravager]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill-Shatar The SF was brewed out of an argument and the SS out of worry for the SF.

The SF was formed due to the diasagreement over how spam should be...whether it should be allowed for two people to spam several pages or for them to stop so people can look back to their posts and 'fairly' respond.
(Link to the disagreement is a few pages back)
The SS was formed thanks to Chu's desire to get the SF shut down as it was and I quote 'no longer welcome'.

And my view on this is pretty much the same as it was before.

If there are cliques developing, then it's probably unavoidable, we do what we can to make people welcome all the same. And I personally don't see such a clique anyway.

[Maharlika]

... I agree when others say that there is NO DELIBERATE INTENTION for the members to be cliquish/clannish.

It all boils down to PERSONAL PREFERENCE/INTEREST.

Generally, SYMians are noted to be very accommodating.

I may not post as often as I did back in those Tavern Days and the "War of the Cults" (Spammers, COMM, DF's, RT, etc), but that doesn't mean I feel that I have been left out and isolated. It's the member's prerogative which threads he wants to participate in or what kind of threads he wants to make.

As for SPAM, I would generally have the Forum Rules as the basis on just how far it is to be tolerated. I think there are different kinds of Spam: some are very much tolerated and acceptable (the "social spam"), others are downright "incomprehensibly unnecessary".

[Vicsun]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon wench I think this thread deserves a bump. Why? Because I'm deliberately reopening a can of worms of I raised in the Heathen Citadel the other night. I commented that a large number of people who frequent the Succeeder Stronghold rarely post elsewhere. They almost never venture their opinions on more serious life issues or topics outside of the Stronghold's cozy confines. And... they rarely (if ever) begin their own threads. It's not as though SYM is a place where really hostile flaming is condoned. It's not as though most of the inhabitants of the SS are new anymore. Thus the insecurity and clannish behaviour make little sense. I personally think spam threads that go on in perpetuity are rude, encourage cliquish behaviour and stifle SYM as a whole. Further, I would dearly love to see the old thread length limits that SYM used to have restored. *dons asbestos flak jacket*

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but would like to know if you see the spam threads in which you didn't participate like The Heathen Citadel in a different light than spam threads you participated heavily in like The Flop House or your own Sanctuary of the Depraved. Has your view on them changed, and if so what promted the change?