TRT "Free Speech" Club and Discussion

[Ethulai]

Username: Ethulai

Do you agree that the no-reply rule should be removed? (Y/N) Yes :3

Brief description of your stance: (1-2 sentences): I think this might not be brief. Okay, here goes.

As I stated when being quoted on the first post, I do believe there was a great camraderie between users on the TRT before the new rule was implimented. As a personal example, I met the lovely Sugar Snap on there and I used to find myself laughing out loud when reading her posts because she has a quirky, unique way of looking at things.



I miss being able to reply to her. I miss being able to reply to others. I miss giving my sympathy, and being able to have more of a forum/discussion with other users. I feel like this rule has very negatively impacted everyone. You tend to go on the TRT to let off some stream, to vent your frustrations. Before the rule was implemented there was a chance that another user would come along and give you their support or provide a similar example or something along those lines and make you feel better. Suddenly, the trade didn't affect you as negatively, and the weight of anger was lifted from your shoulders. Now...no one can reply to you, and not only are you left with that feeling of anger upon your shoulders but also a sense of sadness that nobody CARES (even though there are probably a number of users reading the post thinking 'oh, I know EXACTLY how you feel...except I better not say anything or I'll get reported/warned').

I also agree with what Patch has said in regards to being able to reply to someone to 'correct' them gently. There are a number of posts I see that cry 'unfair!' when in fact they are not. The ability to reply to a post on a forum ensures that it stays public. PM's are not the preferred way to let someone know that they might be wrong. The other person might feel threatened and even if you are correct feel they are entitled to attack you for invading what is their personal space. Replying on the thread, on the other hand, seems less of a personal critique, especially when written in a matter of fact, no-nonsense way. If another user agrees, or even a few, I don't see it as a 'gang up', rather the affirmation that what the first person to reply said is true and perhaps the original poster needs to rethink how they are trading.

Which brings me to the whole report aspect. There are so many rule breakers on the thread that I believe the rules need to be re-written in a simpler format, or users should be allowed to quote the front page rules. Generally, when a post is reported, the post is removed and that is that. The person who wrote the post may not notice/care that their post has been removed and come online the next day to rant again, breaking the same rule. I believe education is the key here. I would prefer people being 'corrected' for breaking rules rather than everyone attempting to report all rule breakers, unless the rule being broken is very serious - mentioning names, swearing etc.

I will mention here in particular, that people seem to forget that you aren't allowed to rant about open NFT groups, and on the flip-side you aren't allowed to rant about your open NFT groups being offered on. I wonder if there should be a discussion about this rule in particular? Only because I agree with one half of it, but not the other. Ranting about people offering on your open pets seems a little pompous whereas ranting about people's deliberately open "showcase" groups I think is quite valid. Or at least have both those rules under the one rule on the first page. It is a little misleading having one half of the rule under 'no spamming' and the other half being a completely seperate rule.

Also, there needs to be something about demand added into the rules. I believe Topiratti mentioned some people are quite happy to 'boast' about overpay trades. I don't need to see that. I also believe you shouldn't be allowed to rant about overpay trades YOU have sent - it was YOUR personal choice to send it and so what if someone cancelled? Find another trader, move on.

In conclusion, Wikipedia states that an Internet forum is; "is an online discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages." Taking away the ability to discuss a problem with others removes the whole 'community' aspect on the TRT thread. Here are some words people have used that I agree with. The TRT thread at the moment is unapproachable, rendered useless, over abundantly negative and unwelcoming.

My thoughts:
1. Re-write the whole rules, in a simpler format.
2. Add something about demand to the rules.
3. Give users the ability to quote rules to rule breakers. As Beguile said, we learn from our mistakes.
4. Encourage the reporting of bullying, name-mentioning posts.
5. Foster a greater sense of community by ensuring every member follows the rules.

[spencer]

There is no community there anymore.

Yes, this. I liked to discuss trades with other people, talking about bad trades and experiences has always been fun there.

[Kyar]

Hey everyone! :) I really love reading all of your guys' opinions on all of this. :) I'm actually going to be away for the weekend so I likely won't be able to keep up here at all but that doesn't mean the discussion needs to stop. :)

If you have ideas for new rules about replies that could be put into place instead of this one it would be really great to get those figured out too - we're a lot more likely to be able to convince the mods if we have a serious plan to back up what we're trying to do. :) Thank you so much for all your participation - there are so many great thoughts out there that I think we have a good shot at at least convincing the mods to give us a chance! :)

Edit: A quick note in regards to Ethulai's post (which I just had the time to read all the way through) - I agree with you for the most part but I don't think quoting the rules is the best way of doing it. In theory any user reading the thread should already have looked over the rules - and while yes they do need to be cleaned up and more clear - reposting something that they should already have seen just creates a lot of spam. I can't say I personally really like scrolling through a thread and seeing a big:

3. If you see an offer you made being ranted about, don't make a scene or reply.
They have the right to rant and so do you, but we don't need an unnecessary fight breaking out. If they didn't like your trade offer, no big deal, trade with someone different next time. If they're lying about you, report it to staff.

It's just a lot of unnecessary text really and just quoting the first part like so:

3. If you see an offer you made being ranted about, don't make a scene or reply.

works, except it really comes off rather dryly and it seems to me like it would look like more of an attack on the user than saying something more like this:

It's actually against the rules to reply to rants that were made about you.

Something like that anyway. Being gently reminded without necessarily quoting the rules seems to work a little better from what I can tell - because honestly they can check the rules themselves if they made a mistake.

I like what you pointed out about the NFT rants. I know the reason ranting about seeing showcase groups became against the rules was because there was a time where literally 3/10 posts on a page were about it and it got to be really really repetitive. The assumption is that no one likes it and if you're really frustrated with it you should take it to the TTAY (things that annoy you) thread instead. But having those two in separate rules made it difficult for me when I KNEW that both were against the rules to actually find it in the rules section and confirm that before I reported a post.

I also agree on the demand issue. I see it all the time:'
- "I gave in to demand! *link to successful trade where the user intentionally overpaid*"
- "This demand is crazy! *link to great overpay offer user received*"

Those don't really have to do with bad trades and don't belong there - it always comes across as showing off.
However I do believe that posts talking about an overpay offer being rejected are a little more... difficult.
Let's say someone offered a sorbet for another user's BA. If the other user cancels saying it's unfair to them because the BA is worth a non then yeah I think that's a perfectly legitimate rant.
However if the other user cancels saying that they're sorry and they've gotten a better offer or the sorbet just isn't a pet they're interested in I don't feel like that should probably be posted. I offer mid advents for marionettes but if the other user cancels politely saying they just don't think that's what they want to trade it for I don't feel like it's really my right to complain. I'm sure we've all received overpay offers with pets we just didn't really want. That doesn't seem fair to rant about.
It's so difficult to draw the line though. I'm not sure what we could do about that one.

[ProbablySkeletor]

I think we should be allowed to reply to others as long as we have a rant of our own. That way, there won't be tons of spammy responses.

[spencer]

I think we should be allowed to reply to others as long as we have a rant of our own. That way, there won't be tons of spammy responses.

That's a good idea and no such things as "kill it with fire" "OMG MY EYES" because I think this is quite rude to the user who sent the trade, no matter how bad it is. It also sounds a bit... well... "silly" if you know what I mean.

[Patch.]

I think we should be allowed to reply to others as long as we have a rant of our own. That way, there won't be tons of spammy responses.

That's a good idea and no such things as "kill it with fire" "OMG MY EYES" because I think this is quite rude to the user who sent the trade, no matter how bad it is. It also sounds a bit... well... "silly" if you know what I mean.

It sounds immature. I agree. I think the rule should be like on the Good Trade Thread: you can reply as long as you have a rant of your own. I did that for a while and got a warning. I mean...there was a rant in my post. That's when I knew it was completely cut off.
>.<

[Azuri]

Username:
Azuri (Was blizzardclaw awhile back)
Do you agree that the no-reply rule should be removed? (Y/N)
Yes
Brief description of your stance: (1-2 sentences)
I miss the since of community that the TRT used to have, that was where I went to see how some of the people I liked on cs were doing. I feel like I have been closed off from them, doors shut in my face, windows closed, and it isn't by them but by the no reply rule. Frankly if I didn't want to chat or talk to others on CS I would not be as active on the forums as I am.

I guess my real stance is CS is a forum based adoptable site, Players need to be able to communicate, the good and the bad. you take away the users right to talk to others with out PM or knowing them out side of a thread

The TRT is where I met some of the people I trust the most on CS

[Ethulai]

Edit: A quick note in regards to Ethulai's post (which I just had the time to read all the way through) - I agree with you for the most part but I don't think quoting the rules is the best way of doing it. -snip-

It's actually against the rules to reply to rants that were made about you.

Something like that anyway. Being gently reminded without necessarily quoting the rules seems to work a little better from what I can tell - because honestly they can check the rules themselves if they made a mistake.

While I believe you have pointed out a very valid point, the reason I suggested quoting the actual post (and I would prefer to quote the bolded part of the rule as opposed to the whole rule) is that I have tried to PM users before about breaking rules, without quoting them in the first instance. What resulted was they would reply to me, usually quite defensively, and when I went to reply to them again with the quoted rule ready they had already FOE'd me. This way no one can argue that they haven't broken a rule because it is clearly written if you quote it. Saying something afterwards like; 'just a quick reminder this is against the rules, I'm sure no one wants this thread to be closed ' could definitely lessen the blow so to speak. It is just a matter of being as diplomatic as possible.

I like what you pointed out about the NFT rants. I know the reason ranting about seeing showcase groups became against the rules was because there was a time where literally 3/10 posts on a page were about it and it got to be really really repetitive. The assumption is that no one likes it and if you're really frustrated with it you should take it to the TTAY (things that annoy you) thread instead. But having those two in separate rules made it difficult for me when I KNEW that both were against the rules to actually find it in the rules section and confirm that before I reported a post.

My suggestion here is to change the rule from;

6. DO NOT complain about receiving offers on pets that are 'not for trade'.

to

6. DO NOT complain about receiving offers on pets that are 'not for trade' or people having not-for-trade pets in open groups.

I also agree on the demand issue. I see it all the time:'
- "I gave in to demand! *link to successful trade where the user intentionally overpaid*"
- "This demand is crazy! *link to great overpay offer user received*"

Those don't really have to do with bad trades and don't belong there - it always comes across as showing off.
However I do believe that posts talking about an overpay offer being rejected are a little more... difficult.
Let's say someone offered a sorbet for another user's BA. If the other user cancels saying it's unfair to them because the BA is worth a non then yeah I think that's a perfectly legitimate rant.
However if the other user cancels saying that they're sorry and they've gotten a better offer or the sorbet just isn't a pet they're interested in I don't feel like that should probably be posted. I offer mid advents for marionettes but if the other user cancels politely saying they just don't think that's what they want to trade it for I don't feel like it's really my right to complain. I'm sure we've all received overpay offers with pets we just didn't really want. That doesn't seem fair to rant about.
It's so difficult to draw the line though. I'm not sure what we could do about that one.

Here is my personal issue. I believe that the TRT and a select number of users who constantly posted about demand on previous threads are the sole reason that the August PPS lion is going for the ridiculous amount it is. Constantly seeing people post overpay trades for Advents or higher and having their offers rejected on one of the most popular threads on the CS forums allowed for users with August PPS lions to immediately think 'I can get more'. It is now impossible to find a user willing to trade one for a reasonable amount.

So my proposition is that you can rant about demand in general, but it should definitely be against the rules to post real trade examples. I can bemoan that I'll never have a Joker because they are so popular and quite in demand, but I shouldn't post a trade where I offer my Non Tag for one and have it cancelled - like you yourself mentioned, there might be other reasons users reject certain trades, not just because they have better offers on the pet in question.

Finally, looking at the rule we were originally discussing;

1. Do not reply to another person's post in this thread.
That means do not comment on what other people post. Your post must be a rant. Anything else will be considered spam.

How can we change this to a more appropriate rule...

1. If you reply to another person's thread in this thread please ensure you also have a rant of your own to minimise spam.

I'm not sure, maybe other users can give a better example? What I think is important to merge this rule and the third rule together;

3. If you see an offer you made being ranted about, don't make a scene or reply.
They have the right to rant and so do you, but we don't need an unnecessary fight breaking out. If they didn't like your trade offer, no big deal, trade with someone different next time. If they're lying about you, report it to staff.

Again, to avoid confusion like the NFT groups being open rule. I'd love to hear more thoughts about this.

Also, just a quick thank you to Kyar for responding to my post and having such great feedback.

[Duck2900]

Username: Maximumride_123
Do you agree that the no-reply rule should be removed? (Y/N) YES
Brief description of your stance: (1-2 sentences) I myself think that the thread should be back to reply's because I miss giving people sympathy...

[Zelery]

Username: Zelda's Legacy
Do you agree that the no-reply rule should be removed? I strongly agree
Brief description of your stance: I have just recently came back from a hiatus since early February, I come back to find that the TRT no longer is the family the community it once was since my days as COPPA I enjoyed reading the conversations between everyone, it felt like a family. Most everyone I know is from there or the Xat that I had frequently visited I had fun it was enjoyable. I don't know how I can express myself it just was a community a family that I could express my opinions on that I could talk about how I felt, to make other people feel better, to show how I had similar experiences. but now ever since I've come back I haven't gone on TRT. What's the point? Now I feel it's just like a journal, If we can't communicate on it what's the point of having the TRT?