The spread of Toxic Negativity in the B&C community

[Slave to Darkness]

 

 

 

Wouldn’t it just be better if fraters including moderators just kept their negative thoughts to themselves regarding Primaris Marines? I for one would appreciate it.

IMO that's context dependent.

 

Someone who goes out of their way to hate on Primaris at every possible opportunity? - yeah, those kind of opinions would be better not voiced.

 

But someone who is not necessarily hating on Primaris but is upset that their faction is constantly neglected? - telling them to keep their opinions to themselves is akin to telling them you don't care about their hobby as long as yours isn't negatively impacted. It's the exact opposite of a welcoming community and something that I'd rather not see become common in this forum.

 

As I said before, it's all very context dependent. Some people are haters and in those cases it's better to remove the negativity they bring. Other people are "victims" (not an accurate description but I can't think of a better word) of GWs policy and would be better off being supported, rather than suppressed. Differentiating the two can be difficult because they often sound like the same thing, but I'd personally rather deal with a bit of extra negativity than exclude parts of the community from expressing their legitimate opinions.

Silencing people for saying they dont like something is like silencing a political opponent, we life in a society where free speech is important, if we start censoring people here over bloody primaris marines or some such then this place may as well turn into 40k for grownups where you get insta banned for not hating Arch Warhammer...

I mean, there's just a bunch of false equivalencies here, I don't know where to start. The aforementioned poster, in no way, shape or form, implied that negative posts need to be blanket-banned, merely that depending on the context and phrasing, certain measures need to be undertaken. This is *standard practice* in any forum of interaction or debate and literally predates the modern era as a means of facilitating productive interactions. As for equating a mod removing an overtly negative opinion from a thread to silencing a political opponent, just...what? This isn't even a strawman argument, its the whole damn humpball. Posting on a given forum is a privilege, not some basic human right that everyone and their mother is entitled to irrespective of given circumstances - with privileges come demands, in this case rules of behaviour. Removing a post is in no way equivalent or comparable to mobs taking down political entities or a governmental system imposing itself upon an individual.

 

As for Arch, I am not going *anywhere* near defending a man who tolerated and actively encouraged some of the vilest racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia that I have ever seen in the hobby space, and I am quite frankly mortified that this is the wall you've chosen to hide behind.

 

I never said Arch was a good person, just mentioned that the 40k group is toxic when you cant even say his name, in a positive or negative light, I have seen new people get banned just for asking who he even is... I have never defended Arch as a person, and I am hiding behind no wall. I just used him as an example.

 

As for my freedom of speech comment, I meant as long as its not harmful or attacking anybody. This is a Warhammer forum after all. 

Edited December 30, 2021 by Slave to Darkness

[Red_Shift]

I’ve definitely stopped posting on B&C except rarely and I don’t tend to read threads through as much as I used to. That’s due to a combination of negativity in threads and in some sub forums there are very few posters who seem to like each other’s posts and ignore those outside the little group so it is rarely worth joining the discussion. 
 

I’ve  moved mostly over to a couple of Facebook groups which are just much more positive in general - The Last Wall and the IG ones are my most frequented.

 

The news and rumours is the most interesting part for me and I like seeing people’s reactions to the new releases. Positivity is great but sometimes it’s difficult to feel positive about a release so I’ve just decided to say nothing. The new BL character models for example are ok but it’s just so disappointing to see the once a year BL tie in model be another space marine!

 

I think the whole virus situation has just resulted in a lot of people feeling generally frustrated and with little to look forward to as life seems generally on hold. Warhammer is a little escape valve that has been able to keep going even when people are quarantined so disappointment is magnified in a way it wouldn’t be if there were loads of new films at the cinema etc.

[Toxichobbit]

 

Silencing people for saying they dont like something is like silencing a political opponent, we life in a society where free speech is important, if we start censoring people here over bloody primaris marines or some such then this place may as well turn into 40k for grownups where you get insta banned for not hating Arch Warhammer... 

 

 

 

I'm with you on not wanting opinions silenced. I think it's possible to remove excessive negativity without silencing. Usually it's when things turn confrontational between fraters that it escalates and threads get de-railed. There's other ways to deal with it than confrontation. I see no issue with acknowledging a negative opinion, but moving on and not focusing on it. I think those negative opinions should be voiced and heard, but there's a point where the negativity becomes detrimental to a conversation. Steering things away from excessive negativity into more constructive paths is a good way to maintain some semblance of balance. 

 

I think balance really is the key word. Silencing people isn't the answer, but neither is letting negativity run rampant. People do need to be able to express negative opinions. It's cathartic and allows people to feel heard and not ignored. It's also a valuable source of feedback for GW if they want to improve. Just as long as it doesn't become all consuming and the modus operandi for certain topics/forums. I've had my fair share of posts deleted (I'm terrible at staying on-topic) and it does suck, especially if there's no explanation. That said, there are lines that can be crossed and for the good of the community sometimes posts need to be removed, especially if it's to stop things escalating or a topic devolving.

 

It's a delicate balance and we're all just human. We make mistakes and will get it wrong a lot. I think that's fine, as long as we keep trying to make the community a better place.

[Slave to Darkness]

Agreed, were all clearly too invested in this debate and I think we should take a step back and have a breather, even me... We shouldnt be arguing for 5 pages over people arguing in other threads for 5 pages... 

Im gonna go for a walk and sort my head out, Im sorry if my tone here has soured others day but I have a lot of stuff to deal with personally, some 'hobby related' and some very personal (Im not using that as an excuse to be an ass, just explaning why I have not been the easiest Frater to talk too recently) Im sorry if I have pissed anybody off or upset/caused stress. Im finding it hard dealing with certain things at the moment and this thread talking about toxicity is picking at the scab when Im trynna heal (god I sound like a hippy now). Again Im sorry if I have come across as a douche here... Ill see you all later. Have a good day guys and try to go easy on each other... 

and just to reiterate, I aint a fan of Arch, nor will I defend him, I just used him as an excuse when people get nuked and called every ist phobe name under the sun just for askin who he is, thats a toxic community, extreme example yes but still an example.

[Slave to Darkness]

 

. That said, there are lines that can be crossed and for the good of the community sometimes posts need to be removed, especially if it's to stop things escalating or a topic devolving.

It's a delicate balance and we're all just human. We make mistakes and will get it wrong a lot. I think that's fine, as long as we keep trying to make the community a better place.

 

After reading that I understand why one of my comments was removed, whilst still valid in my eyes it may cause more crap in the long run, especially as its regarding a bigger issue than what B&C can deal with. Although one Frater reached out to talk about it and that means a lot, I dont feel like I have to deal with it in my own head... 

 

Im deffo goin for a walk now. Take care ya'll. Instead of arguing go paint heroic rocks. :) 

[phandaal]

I find it as Phandaal said earlier, the harassment and toxicness comes from person 2. Was just in the chaos and Eldar thread and saw this:

 

 

 

When GW say something is gonna be great and worth the wait it never is... I expect little for Chaos or Eldar, not the first time GW have failed to deliver...

Always a ray of sunshine

So person 1 makes a comment about GW, and person 2 makes the comment about person 1 instead about GW. Almost all the negativety I see on the site is from the entitled person 2 who takes criticism about GW personally. I've never understood it.

Noticed this many years ago in a different community for a different product, and since then have come to see it all over.

 

Best guess is some people have mixed up their idea of the company/franchise/hobby/product with their idea of themselves. Maybe everyone does this and some people just take it further than others.

 

So far have not found any reliable way to show Person 2 what they are doing in that moment. If you point it out they will just keep going as if nothing was said.

 

One semi effective method is to ask Person 2 what they like about the topic at hand. They will either start talking about the thing they like and stop talking about other people, or they will dip out of the conversation for a while.

 

Some will just ignore it and keep going with the personal stuff of course.

[Marshal Reinhard]

I dont think I can recall all that many times seeing an overabundance "your faction doesn't deserve a codex" (just once actually, and that unconstructive fellow sits on my ignore list)

 

I do see the same tired view point over and over that Primaris shouldn't have been made. After the bajillionth time im afraid any call for me to emphatize with it falls on deaf ears.

 

The year of chaos and eldar upon us, so uit doesn't feel like anyone besides maybe nids will be in a particularly bad position for long

[jaxom]

On what gets posted and ignoring content:

 

Quotations hidden for space reasons for phone viewers

Hidden Content

the tl;dr version is: a mindlessly positive post, while mindless, is better than a mindlessly negative one, because the first one at least contributes enthusiasm for the hobby. But we should all strive not to create posts that are “mindless” in the sense that they don’t invite actual, mutually enjoyable discussion.

 

 

3/ Be willing to accept responsibility for the power of your words and offer apologies/ explanations or peaceful follow-up de-escalations wherever they may be necessary

 

 

If you think that guy's opinion is stupid, ignore him.  It's an anonymous message board about an overpriced niche hobby.  No one's opinions here matter in your actual real life.  

 

 

There is a frater, whose name I sadly can't recall off the top of my head, who has a tagline that basically says "your opinion matters to other posters, so use it for good" and I think that is the crux of the issue here.

 

*SNIP*

 

For example, if I see minis I don't like previewed (such as, say 75% of the current Space Marine range) and I can't think of anything to write except "they suck/they're not for me", I'll try to think of possibilities for converting them, ideas for alternate miniatures or maybe simply going "well, that's nice for people who like Space Wolves" (or whatever), or at the very least go into why I don't like them in a constructive manner that can actually spark discussion beyond "boo!/yay! those minis and people who like them".
Failing that, I likely just won't post in that particular thread, because my opinion (like anybody else's) really is important and might actually detract from other people's hobby enjoyment in some small but measurable way and while I love the sound of my own voice, telling other people that I don't like what they like is simply not important enough that I want to detract from their enjoyment of the hobby and forum.

 

 

These resonated with me because they reminded me of one of the major principles behind cognitive psychology. To perceive the world is to change one's mind (i.e. the brain is a physical medium and all thoughts and perception have a physical component; changing one changes the other). A feeling or presence cannot be ignored until after it has been perceived and by that point the change has occurred. The next part, the ignoring it part, requires a different set of "mental muscles." It can be difficult, perhaps impossible to know how "sore"  or impaired those muscles are among the people who will interact with the comments one posts.

 

For me, if I've had a long day and I know my "ignore it, it doesn't matter" muscle is sore then I avoid certain topics (in general, not just hobby stuff), even ones I'm excited about. They may not be toxic, but they can take more energy to handle in an emotionally healthy way. On the B&C, some of those topics may be obviously present in a post by its title, sometimes not and I just have to try my best not to fixate.

 

___________

 

On toxic, negative, and detraction

 

Quotations hidden for space reasons for phone viewers

Hidden Content

 

Toxicity comes when people can't be civil and resort to Ad Hominem.

 

*SNIP*

 

There is no place for Toxicity.

There is a place for negativity because negativity isn't a bad thing. it would be like saying that all games are exemplars of their genre, no faults. There are faults, faults exist in all things and it is fine to point them out, discuss them and even have full threads about them. They may not be happy threads but they are needed. If everything was rainbows and daisies it would cease to be pleasant.

 

 

I'm not even sure what Toxic means, from my observation in the context it often translates to something like "this person's behavior is in someway detrimental". 

 

This tread really exploded.

 

My 2 cents is the word "Toxic" has become totally ubiquitous within all or almost forms of communication on the internet over the last few years. I legitimately can't think of any platform I'm apart of or aware of where "Toxicity" isn't used to describe something or someone on a semi regular basis.

 

I'm hoping it's something that will pass. Or at least a new word starts getting used to describe it.

 

I'm not even sure what Toxic means, from my observation in the context it often translates to something like "this person's behavior is in someway detrimental".  

 

People are going to be people wherever and whenever they are. Just try not to think about it.

 

 

 

I did a bit of looking and there's no specific definition for toxic behavior in sociology and psychology literature that I could find, rather its used to refer to socially deviant behaviors like harassment, racism, and sexism. I don't think the B&C is toxic, but I think there could be an improvement in civil discourse.

 

I think part of it establishing the vocabulary for a discussion like this one. For example, a discussion-positive negative post compared to a discussion-negative, or detracting, negative comment (one that detracts from a conversation or leads others to disengage from it). Here's an example of what I think a discussion-positive negative comment looks like:

 

Not surprised to see broken stuff given how terribly balanced 9th Ed codexes have been. Some are just infinitely stronger than others. Like totally different company wrote them. Just surprised that GW said it learned from ranged D weapons and how players hated non interactive stuff like that, and then they did the same thing again.

 

The poster is clearly not a fan, but they are specific with why they are not happy and the design decision that they are criticizing. There's something to agree or disagree with; or prioritize in context (e.g. "It is non-interactive, but I think that is worth it to represent the power of the weapon and I hope it's balanced in some other way"). Here's an example of what I think a discussion-negative or detracting comment looks like:

 

I don't know what kind of crack GW are smoking, but where can I get some? This is beyond bull:cuss OP.

 

Smoking crack is generally perceived as a direct insult due to the crack-junkie stereotype and the  context of the conversion led me to read this along those lines. However, it's not as straightforward as that. In an earlier post, I wrote about feeling attacked when someone attacks an idea that one is emotionally invested in. I like the rule the poster was referring to and think the rule is a clever way of representing something on the table top. The poster was not referring to me, but because I like the rule, I feel like the comment is directed at me and I disengaged until I had the patience to disentangle it in my head. I was one less voice contributing to the conversation (temporarily in this case). I don't think the post was toxic, but I do think it was discussion-negative because there was nothing to engage with other than an insult.

Edited December 30, 2021 by jaxom

[Captain Idaho]

An important amount of information brought up I'll trying a clear up as best as I could.

 

Snip, because it was HUGE!

I'm pretty sure there is something in the works that enables people to make reports using the mobile skin, or at least as an option we can add. Don't hold my feet over the coals for this one as I'm not a Techmarine but I can definitely say we are awaiting improvement options.

 

Another thing you've brought up and something I actually think I can try and talk about and discuss is the question of Mod involvement in a topic. Perhaps this needs to go to a separate discussion but just to reply so you don't think the question is being dodged...

 

Mods are Frater first. Many of us are aware of this as we do say it every now and again but what does this really mean? It doesn't just mean mods are allowed to talk about subjects, it means the rules of the board are the same for them.

 

Black and white rules that are broken, like swearing or off topic posts, will be dealt with quite easily.

 

Posting an opinion that is not what you agree and getting caught into a discussion or debate on the subject? Well if Fraters can do it, as stated by Brother Tyler in this very thread, a Mod can too.

 

But at any time, if a mod breaks rules then they get censured too. Posts removed isn't unheard of just like everyone else. I doubt you will ever see it, but if someone deserves a warning then a report on the discussion would be taken very seriously.

 

The key thing is how we differentiate what you see as a mod to what you see from the same person as a Frater. There are times we post as one but seldom both in the same topic, especially if it's one the mod is debating in.

 

Coloured text like this are favoured by many mods to be a clear as possible, as well as these symbols at the beginning and end of the text of a post: =][= often combined with coloured text.

 

A good example is this very discussion - I've posted as a Frater in it and several people have even tried to call me out as one of the toxic people etc. I have therefore not touched the thread as a mod at all, even using the report function on it once myself.

 

It is a difficult one for some, but if you really have a problem, take the extra time to report something.

[Captain Idaho]

@ jaxom

 

Interesting points there. One thing I noticed in the last one you raised is the perceived negativity is because people often feel like they're being attacked?

 

That is interesting as it puts an interpretation twist on the author that is impossible to determine fully. Another example would be the accusation (using my own examples) that I've been toxic because I used Primaris bolters as an example of bloat, despite the intent having nothing to do with the player base (an example used in this thread actually).

 

So if people feel personally attacked through their own interpretation, what advice can we sincerely give in this case? I guess they can to step back, take 5 minutes, reread the post and consider "what is the statement being made here?"

 

Using your example, it wasn't that you're crazy for liking a busted rule etc, but the rule itself appears so much over the top it appears that the author of said rule was not of sound mind. But reading it in a flash can bring up a less than favourable interpretation.

 

What other solutions can people think of to slow down a topic you might feel upset by?

 

I actually think disengaging with something you didn't find constructive but Re-engage with posts that are, is a fine way to encourage better posting habits (turns out I am a better mod that people might give credit for eh ;) )

[Chapter Master Valrak]

If people ask me for a good site for 40K/Space Marine discussions I always tell them to come here, this is the best run/moderated forum I've seen for Warhammer (also it looks good), yes you had a few bad apples and moaners but that's life, when they step out of line the Moderators do a good job of slapping them back into place.

[Brother Casman]

Well, I have noticed that you, Idaho, have sometimes stated that people replying to your posts have missed your intent with your posts. One thing I think we all need to recognize is that our intent, unless stated clearly, doesn't always come across to people reading the post after. So, it might be useful for us all, as Frater, to think a little longer about what we post and how its worded, before we hit the post button. Easier said than done, I know. ;)

[Captain Idaho]

True, we need to make sure what we say is clear in the sense "can this be mistaken for something else."

 

(Though the examples used here I would challenge are not that contentious. I wouldn't change what I said about Primaris bolters, for example. Sometimes, people just see a personal attack when there isn't one.)

[Rik Lightstar]

Toxicity along with over-zealous positivity or negativity are pretty hard to quantify.

 

From my point of view if you're making the same point for the third time and people aren't agreeing with you, then it's probably time to take a step back. While I've seen more people change their minds here than most other places on the internet, a third attempt isn't likely to be what swings it. My frustration comes especially in the News & Rumours section, where something that is an exciting or interesting prospect for me gets bogged down in multiple pages of back and forth between a small number of participants repeating their position with slightly varied words. It dramatically reduces my chances of finding any actual information in there.

 

A lot of the points people bring up are valid, for example: general business practices, release schedules, faction favouritism, complexity for its own sake, codex creep and lack of "customisation options". They all warrant discussion. What is less valid is finding a tenuous link in another topic and derailing it, it is even less valid when it is done in multiple topics persistently where the same "discussion" keeps moving around and none of the individuals involved are actually changing their position.

 

TLDR: If you feel like starting a post with "Why do I have to keep saying this?", the answer is that you don't, people heard you, just not everyone agreed.

 

Rik

[Brother Casman]

Another thing to keep in mind (even if you'd rather not) is that we're all "psychically wounded" to some degree from the pandemic. We are not living in normal times, we're dealing with lockdowns and restrictions, deaths and illnesses, and the general strain of worry. Be kind to each other, and to yourselves!

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

And the next time before you post something about Primaris please think first if it’s really worth it. Thanks.

[Slave to Darkness]

And the next time before you post something about Primaris please think first if it’s really worth it. Thanks.

Yeah too many primaris posts here ;) 

 

I jest, I totally agree, Im just as guilty. Ill try better. 

[Schlitzaf]

I’ll say this again:

No one in this thread is saying or asking truly for a safe space. Everyone come arguing against the toxicity. Which for of reasonability lets say this again:

Toxicity is an atmosphere or attitude that implicitly or explicitly makes someone feel awful/unwelcomed in an enviroment for essentially disagreeing.

———

 

For example “smoking crack” example given Idaho. Let us say we genuinely disagree. I’ll use latest Hammerhead. If you look at the math, did you realize that essentially depending on what gou are shooting or wounding (depending if we assume 3+ or 4+ base to hit) you are looking at 60-75% kill chance vs 10W T7 unit? If its T8 goes 50-60%. That is actually somewhat unreliable. Meaning looking at 2 Hammerheads for reliability. A Hammerhead likely a standard T7 10-12W 3+ chassis. Meaning most armies can drop one of those a turn easy. So you likely want 3.

 

But I have to be a “crackhead” to think that is reasonable. And let us take the Multiple Bolters, so full disclosure:

 

I stopped engaging anti-Primaris because Ishagu got banned. Often, I felt Ishagu said what I wished to say. But didn’t. Now Ishagu did things, that bothered many many people. But a very clear case modern example of “Bolter Bloat”. A very very good thing js the case of Reivars vs Intercessors. ABR and Carbines started functionally the same. ABR were garbage. For intercessors espaciallg post Discipline. So what did GW do? They gave it an extra attack. Reivars did not need it as kuch as Carbines don’t compete with BoltRifles. And because different unit role classification.

 

Sorry I tangent: I feel those argueing or saying “Not Safe Space” are missing the point. The incredible amount of negativity, and at times True Fans (see converter discussions) is very offputing. And are trying to avoid the bush instead of engaging the bush. My 0.2 cents (maybe final post on this thread)

[Frater Antodeniel]

"Primaris don't exist, Primaris a rescaled Space Marines." Repeat this when painting Space Marines and you will be fine.

 

In the end, the whole thing about Primaris is a bad joke GW played on itself. The division in the community was created by the very bad presentation of the Primaris range when it was implemented. Negativity stems from this initial presentation of the Primaris, and GW negation of the problem.

 

With the expansion of the Primaris range, in the years to come the implementation of the chapter specifics (Death Company, Sanguinary Guard...etc), the whole Primaris thing will solve itself.

 

Also, fluff wise, you are free to either embrace the whole Primaris thing or reject it, in part or entirely. If you like the new style but not the Primaris enhancements, nothing stop you from considering the classic space marines just got new power armour, vehicles and weapons with Roboute Guilliman return.

 

People are sometimes close minded and are often prone to trap themselves in problems of their owns.

 

Open your mind, play the way you like, and enjoy the hobby/game. If you want to build/paint/play an army of Night Lords with AOS Nighthaunt miniatures for example, then do it, don't restrain yourself. That the way it see the hobby on my part.

 

Thought for the Day :

 

In an hour of Darkness a blind man is the best guide. In an age of Insanity look to the madman to show the way.

 

(This citation is so relevant nowdays, after all, we lives in an age of insanity.)

Edited December 30, 2021 by Frater Antodeniel

[Captain Idaho]

And the next time before you post something about Primaris please think first if it’s really worth it. Thanks.

I'm sorry Schlitzaf, but this sort of thing is asking for a safe space. If it's part of the discussion, like what I said about having 6 different bolters being a terrible example of bloat caused by GW, then it's relevant.

 

The alternative is no one can say anything GW does is wrong regarding Primaris less it offends someone, which in turn means no one can say "drop Firstborn" less it offends someone, or more pertinent as many of the people posting here are doing this elsewhere...

 

No one can criticise GW for the new Rail Gun less it offends Tau players.

 

See how clamping down on speech is a problem?

[Schlitzaf]

 

And the next time before you post something about Primaris please think first if it’s really worth it. Thanks.

I'm sorry Schlitzaf, but this sort of thing is asking for a safe space. If it's part of the discussion, like what I said about having 6 different bolters being a terrible example of bloat caused by GW, then it's relevant.

The alternative is no one can say anything GW does is wrong regarding Primaris less it offends someone, which in turn means no one can say "drop Firstborn" less it offends someone, or more pertinent as many of the people posting here are doing this elsewhere...

No one can criticise GW for the new Rail Gun less it offends Tau players.

See how clamping down on speech is a problem?

But it isn’t. It categorically isn’t:

Stalker Bolter Rifles

Bolt Rifles

Auto BoltRifles

Bolt Carbines

Incursor Bolters

Infilitrator Bolters

 

All work different for just cause. And actually expand the game. I provided an example of Bolt Carbines and AutoBoltRifles being categorically different has provided a boon. Additionally more sedentary armies would enjoy a Bolter that plays to that with the Stalker. This isn’t bloat.

 

And you missed whole point with the Hammerhead. Call it overpowered. But once you say “Crack Head” anyone who dares thinks it actually a good design is now on some drug?

[Halandaar]

And the next time before you post something about Primaris please think first if it’s really worth it. Thanks.

Frankly "please think first if it's really worth it" should be a consideration before any post about any topic. Some people have a tendency to make one-liner comments of no value that seem to be purely to inflate their post count.

Edited December 30, 2021 by Halandaar

[RWJP]

This is not your personal safe space or echo chamber. If a post breaks the forums rules, report it. If it doesn't, but you don't like it, ignore it. If it's the same person bothering you over and over, block them. Super simple. Too many people on the internet have this entitlement nowadays.

 

I find it as Phandaal said earlier, the harassment and toxicness comes from person 2. Was just in the chaos and Eldar thread and saw this:

 

 

When GW say something is gonna be great and worth the wait it never is... I expect little for Chaos or Eldar, not the first time GW have failed to deliver...

Always a ray of sunshine

So person 1 makes a comment about GW, and person 2 makes the comment about person 1 instead about GW. Almost all the negativety I see on the site is from the entitled person 2 who takes criticism about GW personally. I've never understood it.

 

Except, Slave to Darkness's post was EXACTLY what Orange Knight is talking about.

 

Now, before I go into this, I will state outright: I believe RedComet's response to Slave to Darkness was absolutely wrong and should not have been posted.

 

Ok, with that out the way, lets get in to it:

 

Slave to Darkness posted in a thread discussing the announcement of the new Eldar vs Chaos box set. Their comment did not add anything to the discussion about the announcement of the new Eldar vs Chaos box set, it was just unnecessary negativity about a tangentially related aspect that was not constructive in any way whatsoever. All it did was add to the "air of negativity" that other users are describing.

 

All Slave to Darkness did was air out a grievance with GW about their way of speaking on social media that didn't need to be aired out. Yes RedComet was in the wrong, but Slave to Darkness was also in the wrong for posting an unnecessary, unconstructive negative comment.

 

This is the issue people are having. There is an air of negativity on this board (and elsewhere) because more and more people seem to feel the need to post negativity even when it isn't helpful or constructive. Is Slave to Darkness right to be of the opinion that GW overhypes things? Absolutely, they're totally welcome to that opinion. Did they need to post it in that thread? No, it wasn't helpful or constructive.

Edited December 30, 2021 by RWJP

[Captain Idaho]

 

 

And the next time before you post something about Primaris please think first if it’s really worth it. Thanks.

I'm sorry Schlitzaf, but this sort of thing is asking for a safe space. If it's part of the discussion, like what I said about having 6 different bolters being a terrible example of bloat caused by GW, then it's relevant.

The alternative is no one can say anything GW does is wrong regarding Primaris less it offends someone, which in turn means no one can say "drop Firstborn" less it offends someone, or more pertinent as many of the people posting here are doing this elsewhere...

No one can criticise GW for the new Rail Gun less it offends Tau players.

See how clamping down on speech is a problem?

But it isn’t. It categorically isn’t:

Stalker Bolter Rifles

Bolt Rifles

Auto BoltRifles

Bolt Carbines

Incursor Bolters

Infilitrator Bolters

 

All work different for just cause. And actually expand the game. I provided an example of Bolt Carbines and AutoBoltRifles being categorically different has provided a boon. Additionally more sedentary armies would enjoy a Bolter that plays to that with the Stalker. This isn’t bloat.

 

And you missed whole point with the Hammerhead. Call it overpowered. But once you say “Crack Head” anyone who dares thinks it actually a good design is now on some drug?

You're proving my point - there is discussion to be had on the issue of different Primaris bolters. You and I don't agree therefore a discussion would be relevant.

 

But you're making an assumption you're correct in this very post I quoted therefore any dissenting opinion is toxic/negative/irrelevant.

 

And no, I didn't miss the point on the Hammerhead. In fact, are you aware who said that? I think you might want to check as it again proves my points in this topic all along...

[phandaal]

I think there are too many different bolters. Justification is just words on paper. On my lists I take as many similar kinds as I can just to reduce the confusion during a game.

 

Everyone has opinions and everyone thinks theirs don't stink. Except for me. I know mine don't stink.