What about the criticism "But what about servers!?" Minecraft, along with most other games, are balanced around singleplayer and/or small groups of friends playing together at the same time. Balancing around servers is pretty difficult if not impossible, since many have plugins and players have different skill levels and different playtime and equipment on the server. So often I see people say "No Support" to a suggestion because "then advanced players can slaughter the newbs with it!" Really though, is that a valid criticism? Servers may be big and popular, but they're not the main game, despite what many people seem to think.
"then advanced players can slaughter the noobs with it" is rarely a valid criticism because that's how the game has always worked. Some people are overpowered, others are brand new. Nothing you can do about it. The notion that the game should be balanced around both singeplayer and multiplayer together is still valid though. That is how the game has always been designed. There are very few major differences in balancing. The only thing that people would really try to block because of multiplayer balance is something that can only be obtained by a set number of players. And I think it's perfectly valid to want some kind of way for everyone to have access to that feature.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Gamelord. Pixelmon Server Owner. Server IP: pixelmonprisma.mc-server.net | Server Discord:https://discord.gg/HkK855b
I'm of the mindset that servers should keep and protect themselves. They should act within the scope of their power to provide to their server as they see fit. Having a question "what about servers" isn't a valid criticism because that would be policing.
New section time! This one is about the tried and true criticism that yoshi9048 definitely can't touch! "People could use this for griefing!"
Or... maybe, just maybe... I might have something to say about it. STOP IT! Now brah, I know what you're thinking; but hear me out! Put your ear to your monitor and hear the words on this screen! Alright, now that everyone near you thinks you're crazy; I'm going to say "stop using it". It's copy pasta. It's basically the can of soup argument all over again. You easily can apply this criticism to a can of soup and be correct!
In fact, "it can be used for griefing" is so ubiquitous that I wouldn't be surprised if it outweighed Herobrine on the suggestions forum. Why do I say that? I can think of any item or feature already in Minecraft and state with full certainty and without batting an eye; it can be used to grief. Name anything, and I can create a paranoid system where it can be abused to devastating effect by anyone with an inclination to use it in such a way.
Which is to say, the suggestion is being denied by something outside of the scope of the suggestion; the malicious intent of another individual. This is the suggestions forum, not the server-nanny forum. With that being said; if you have a solid and plausible case where the idea can be easily exploited or abused unwittingly; then feel free to post your argument; but be very careful to keep your "it can be used to grief" to cases where a lot of detrimental harm can come from a suggestion with few positive elements.
ooh ooh ooh how about flowerpots? Or farmland, tilled soil?
I love it when people actually find ways, like you said, to explain how every item and or feature can be used to do this or that, so I wanna see a bit in action. I honestly can't think of a single way that flowerpot could be used to grief... I mean, I suppose you could fill a houses floor with them, but that doesn't seem like much of a griefing...
Enlighten me! I wanna hear this process, please!
Also love the title. Good Grief indeed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Wyrm Watches. The Wyrm knows. The Wyrm reads. The Wyrm Animates too! Check me out at the WyrmWorks Channel on Youtube!
You should join Brazil on the Total War Minecraft server - 167.114.100.168:43841! Includes many Minecraft Forum members including myself, Selene011, Genius_idiot, Gamelord, and more!
You go back to your base after 30 minutes of mining; and you see your entire house filled to the brim with alternating stacks of flowerpots and farmland. You bring out your shovel to take care of the dirt blocks but now have to also cycle out to remove the flowerpots, flower pots, dirt, flower pots, dirt... The guy really got you good, haha. In the corner, you see one exposed dirt block hidden behind a wall. You clear it out and see a flower pot beneath, but you also see the 5 stacks of sand fall onto the pot, breaking them. Only moments later, you see the stream of lava pour in and your house start to catch fire.
EDIT
edited replacing dirt (which isn't affected by gravity) with sand (which is); and using the behavior of the flower pot to break gravity blocks falling on it.
Flower pots are not affected by gravity; but I think they do need to be placed on full blocks.
That was impressive, though I was expecting just flowerpots Don't flowerpots break instantly though, and drop when the block they are placed on breaks?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Wyrm Watches. The Wyrm knows. The Wyrm reads. The Wyrm Animates too! Check me out at the WyrmWorks Channel on Youtube!
You should join Brazil on the Total War Minecraft server - 167.114.100.168:43841! Includes many Minecraft Forum members including myself, Selene011, Genius_idiot, Gamelord, and more!
That was impressive, though I was expecting just flowerpots Don't flowerpots break instantly though, and drop when the block they are placed on breaks?
If you don't get on-topic I'll test it on you. >:)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Gamelord. Pixelmon Server Owner. Server IP: pixelmonprisma.mc-server.net | Server Discord:https://discord.gg/HkK855b
Hmm, so, this annoyed me. It annoyed me enough to make a post about it here. This will likely make FTC OP. I'm not one to air dirty laundry, so I'll go and create an example of something similar to what I saw that sparked this section.
Creepers don't actually explode, you obviously don't know anything about Minecraft.
The above has just the right amount of feel to it to be a close analog of what I saw on the forum.
I bet you can digest the problems on sight. If not; let me break it down.
The entire post could've been better served had the second phrase never existed. What's the point? What do you plan to add with that? The only thing that can come from that is disparaging or self-sabotage as you're drawn under fire for saying something so trite. Not only that, but the "correction", for lack of a better term; was based off of a misinformed justification as creepers do explode.
The only plausible explanation for above that would lend any credence to the poster is he is intentionally trolling. If he's not intentionally trolling; then I struggle to find actual meaning in what the critic meant to gain off the post.
The point is; if it adds NOTHING to the discussion; don't add it.
Hmm, so, this annoyed me. It annoyed me enough to make a post about it here. This will likely make FTC OP. I'm not one to air dirty laundry, so I'll go and create an example of something similar to what I saw that sparked this section.
The above has just the right amount of feel to it to be a close analog of what I saw on the forum.
I bet you can digest the problems on sight. If not; let me break it down.
The entire post could've been better served had the second phrase never existed. What's the point? What do you plan to add with that? The only thing that can come from that is disparaging or self-sabotage as you're drawn under fire for saying something so trite. Not only that, but the "correction", for lack of a better term; was based off of a misinformed justification as creepers do explode.
The only plausible explanation for above that would lend any credence to the poster is he is intentionally trolling. If he's not intentionally trolling; then I struggle to find actual meaning in what the critic meant to gain off the post.
The point is; if it adds NOTHING to the discussion; don't add it.
I don't get the point. Doesn't the guide reiterate this point anyway? Be constructive, right?
The point is that abject negativity does nothing to a criticism except weaken your position. That's not to say that attempting to be humorous or coy about something is a bad thing; but that blatant slams against someone (especially when they're not wrong) is a no-go.
Something I just noticed is that the "Easy as a TV dinner!" section is called "BLISTERPACK" in the link in the table of contents. Is that a reference to something?
Also, would the "We don't need this" criticism fall under that section? I believe it would, but I couldn't find mentioned in the guide.
EDIT: actually, I noticed that there are actually quite a few references in the hyperlinks in the table of contents.
I am going to be a critic of the critics on the mine craft forum for a minute (Please bear with me) This is a message I want to get across its not to provoke any one its to give people a chance to see something from some one else's point of view.
I honestly don't think the forums need critics at all. Exactly why do people think they have the right to go around door to door stomping on peoples ideas?
I hear so many people say to not only to my own ideas but to other peoples ideas "NO SUPPORT" In big black letters like they are yelling it at the end of their lecture about why this won't work and your stupid for even suggesting it.
Exactly who decided that these people were given the right to judge our idea? Why isn't there a down vote button and if they don't like the idea they could just down vote it and not give a huge lecture that makes us not even want to use these forums at all. They literally pick our words apart and quote them like a politic battle between former candidate Hillary Clinton and President Elect Donald Trump.
They say "NO SUPPORT" as if they are a judge sitting in a court room hitting his or her mallet on the desk telling every one the verdict.
I feel like this isn't a place where people should act like that. This is a place where every one comes to share their ideas not to get criticized to the point where they use another alternative forum.
Oh yeah, yeah I understand its your god given right you can hurt little kids feelings and stomp all over their dreams. Just cause your the big bad critic with the big mouth. After your done making them feel like they are stupid and they don't ever want to play mine craft or use the forums again because of you, you can just say your criticism was constructive. Maybe to driving them away.
I notice there are 6 primary types of critics on these forums and 5 of them should be outlawed.
type #1 "Already been put in the game your stupid for asking and here is why then NO SUPPORT"
type #2 "OP! OP! OP! OP! NO SUPPORT! OP! heres why"
type #3 " Yew haven't explained anything about this how exactly would this work NO SUPPORT (to a little kid) come back when you have read our complicated suggestion rules guide"
Type #4 You just have bad luck, mine craft doesn't need to fix this because I don't seem to have this problem NO SUPPORT!
Type #Why do we need more of _______ its just more ____ we don't need. NO SUPPORT
Type #6 constructive critic - I thought you had an interesting Idea but I feel like It would make the game too easy or would be too overpowering.
Notible mentions
"This would cause people in real life to do something because they saw it in a video game NO SUPPORT!"
"I am going to respond to your comment and aggressively destroy you mentally while following all the rules and guidelines so that I cant get in trouble"
"the kind of person who would respond to this comment negatively telling me its off topic when this is a response to a guide for critics"
"The guy or girl who doesn't actually read all the way through your idea and starts telling you that its a dumb idea criticizing you and telling you off with out even reading everything said
I don't know about you but I think every one should be the constructive critic and not trample upon the dreams of kids and adults.
I think there should be something different. Something needs to change.
Well, that's the whole purpose of this guide: to encourage others to give helpful constructive criticism rather than just give pointless opinions. Problem is, people aren't obligated to read this, and even those who do don't always listen to it.
I honestly don't think the forums need critics at all. Exactly why do people think they have the right to go around door to door stomping on peoples ideas?
Yeah, let's just have threads auto-lock the very second someone posts a suggestion because all critics are hitler. Let's cut the crap, you're just sore your suggestions got debunked and this is a revenge rant. Have you never been to a public forum before?
Oh yeah, yeah I understand its your god given right you can hurt little kids feelings and stomp all over their dreams. Just cause your the big bad critic with the big mouth.
*rests head in hands* You get to choose what you post. You don't get to choose the reception. Stop talking about "crushing little kids' dreams". Goofy suggestions on a forum are not dreams. If critics are bullies to you, then you're not ready for the internet. If only there was a guide people could read before people make sugge- oh wait there is!
Please get some perspective, and stop acting like a sore pseudo-bully victim. Where's Cerroz when you need him?
This is a message I want to get across its not to provoke any one its to give people a chance to see something from some one else's point of view.
Yes, I'm well aware of what a discussion is. This is a discussion forum.
I honestly don't think the forums need critics at all. Exactly why do people think they have the right to go around door to door stomping on peoples ideas?
Which is why we have discussions. You have a definition of critic that is not in-line with what's defined in the script.
FTC and myself go out of our ways to create clear definitions of the words used. In this case:
critic (n) - any poster that is not the original suggester.
I defined it above. If you are not the suggestion originator; you are a critic. Whether your criticism is blind praise or scoffing and bafflingly humbling hate; it is still a criticism.
Exactly who decided that these people were given the right to judge our idea?
Years of experience reading and proofreading other similar related threads; understanding of current ingame mechanics and how innocent-appearing changes can cause dramatic reverberations across the game medium. Perhaps they are modders with a clear idea of precisely how some suggestions work and their shortcomings.
In short, sometimes people can speak with a level of authority because of experience, sound logical reasoning, or practical application.
Who decided these people were given the right to judge? The Minecraft forum community. We're all welcome to have a voice. This means we are all welcome to judge an idea.
Why isn't there a down vote button and if they don't like the idea they could just down vote it
Because spite is a real thing. People would dislike a poster (like myself) and just down vote a post (regardless of actual suggestion quality) as a form of "internet justice". It's petty, is disappointing, it's a real phenomenon.
They literally pick our words apart and quote them like a politic battle
You literally have an unlimited amount of time to choose your words. You are unbound and unrestricted on word use; if you don't want others to pick your words apart; choose different words.
Something I just noticed is that the "Easy as a TV dinner!" section is called "BLISTERPACK" in the link in the table of contents. Is that a reference to something?
Also, would the "We don't need this" criticism fall under that section? I believe it would, but I couldn't find mentioned in the guide.
EDIT: actually, I noticed that there are actually quite a few references in the hyperlinks in the table of contents.
I have a few easter eggs in FTC; the TOC is one big hiding spot; but there's one or two more hidden in plain text.
I'll look through this guide about polarity, if I can't find a section; I'll make a section.
Below was written 3 years ago; and it's more a PRT guide than it is a FTC guide.
I'll rewrite it below the quote to reflect my current view and rationale.
PARSUP!
I tend to not be too terribly concerned with this one as people generally give, at the very least, the facsimile of a cover sheet of a reason for partial support. In fact, this one is usually to blame with the original poster not selling his idea properly.
A properly sold suggestion (I'll define this later) will polarize your audience. You want your posters to either LOVE it or HATE it. You do NOT want partial support. Partial supporters do not champion. Partial supporters bloat their own post count, probably give you a +1, and leave, never to return. Full supporters adopt the suggestion. It is their suggestion as much as it is yours. They will fight against the haters and help make the thread better. If you get meh or partial support, it's because the audience isn't enthralled enough to like it or dislike it. Not only that, but members that aren't captured probably won't post at all. You get more coverage and better polarization when you properly sell your idea than if people are disinterested enough to press back or simply state "meh" or "partial support". They're officially in limbo.
Now, I can't exclusively paint this problem on the OP. Not everyone has the linguistic prowess of a god, and if everyone did, then we wouldn't have a need for communication, now would we?
If you say "partial support", you haven't done your job as a critic. Why are you casting only partial support? What objections are keeping you from partial support. Now, I know the OP hasn't exactly sold you for/against the idea, but what begrudging is keeping you from enjoying the idea? How can OP improve his idea so it attains the polarizing qualities you're after?
Stating "partial support" may as well be "no support" without a reason for all the good it does. I've already been over "supporting details". They are the dividing line between "post-troll" and "critic".
While partial support is not a bad thing, unless you give supporting details, you're better off not saying anything at all. I'd personally rather not see partial support as it goes back to the all-or-nothing attitude. If you're going to bother supporting something, support it all of the way, or refuse to support it all-together. Nothing sucks worse than having your idea thrown into purgatory and trying to fight for its rightful place; even worse is dying in purgatory. It's better to know if an idea sucks or if it's worth keeping around.
SELLING YOUR IDEA:
An idea is an intellectual commodity. In this case, you're selling your idea for support and time. Those who want your idea will pay you in those currencies. Those that dislike your idea will not. It's that simple.
But, if you don't know how to properly sell your idea, or you don't care who reads/dislikes/likes your idea, then you won't get any biters. Selling your idea isn't just the enthusiasm behind the idea (wouldn't that be nice); selling your idea is actually using targeted marketing techniques to grab the desired audience to the idea.
Marketing isn't a bad thing. It's what allows the companies you love to remain the companies you love. This is what keeps Coke in business, Mojang in business, etc. If it wasn't for marketing, we'd all live in a communist trade-restricted society where the yoke of the government controlled our very actions. For those that already live under those terms, I doubt you're reading this as "internet service" would likely be deemed an unnecessary luxury, if it was allowed, it'd likely be filtered to the point of oblivion; if you are reading it and living under those conditions then I doubt that this would be all-too-radical of a change for you; but for most of the world, it would mean a major structural change to the way EVERYTHING is run.
With that said, selling your idea is a targeted attack. If you want to shoot elephants, you're not going to have much luck in South America, is what I'm saying. You have to choose your target demographic and sell the idea to them.
If your idea is purely aesthetic, say so in the tag; grab the attention of those that want aesthetic items; explain how your idea would make the world better simply by existing or through a process of creation.
Selling an idea is an important part of your suggestion, without it, your idea will be in limbo. Selling an idea is usually a simple affair too, ask a question of the audience. Create a need. Tell your audience how your suggestion will fill the need. Close. Failure to do this is a failure to get thread recognition. Have fun in limbo!
PARSUP AND OTHER ROOT VEGETABLES
I totally understand the want/need/desire to have your voice heard and to give the OP as much credit as possible. Even if you don't totally buy the idea he is selling; you can at the very least say support some aspect of it, right?
Well... You can; but it's actually better to pick a stance. Partial Support (which I derogate as parsup) doesn't really help OP. It's a very flimsy and wishwashy stance; and an argument of minimum sufficient strength of a passing breeze is usually enough to send the stance into a support or no support.
Instead of being flippant and thin skinned about your opinion; choose a side. Either you LIKE the suggestion enough to adopt it; or you don't like it. Yes or no.
If you say that you do support; continue to guide the suggestion with possible uses; reasons for inclusion, etc. to help OP out.
If you do not support, state what you'd like OP to do to correct suggestion to where you would support. Or if you simply do not agree with the suggestion; perhaps things that others that do like the suggestion would want to see changed.
If you want to give partial support; you'll do a lot more justice just by saying "no support, but willing to change position should [conditions] be met."
"then advanced players can slaughter the noobs with it" is rarely a valid criticism because that's how the game has always worked. Some people are overpowered, others are brand new. Nothing you can do about it. The notion that the game should be balanced around both singeplayer and multiplayer together is still valid though. That is how the game has always been designed. There are very few major differences in balancing. The only thing that people would really try to block because of multiplayer balance is something that can only be obtained by a set number of players. And I think it's perfectly valid to want some kind of way for everyone to have access to that feature.
I'm of the mindset that servers should keep and protect themselves. They should act within the scope of their power to provide to their server as they see fit. Having a question "what about servers" isn't a valid criticism because that would be policing.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
GOOD GRIEF
New section time! This one is about the tried and true criticism that yoshi9048 definitely can't touch! "People could use this for griefing!"
Or... maybe, just maybe... I might have something to say about it. STOP IT! Now brah, I know what you're thinking; but hear me out! Put your ear to your monitor and hear the words on this screen! Alright, now that everyone near you thinks you're crazy; I'm going to say "stop using it". It's copy pasta. It's basically the can of soup argument all over again. You easily can apply this criticism to a can of soup and be correct!
In fact, "it can be used for griefing" is so ubiquitous that I wouldn't be surprised if it outweighed Herobrine on the suggestions forum. Why do I say that? I can think of any item or feature already in Minecraft and state with full certainty and without batting an eye; it can be used to grief. Name anything, and I can create a paranoid system where it can be abused to devastating effect by anyone with an inclination to use it in such a way.
Which is to say, the suggestion is being denied by something outside of the scope of the suggestion; the malicious intent of another individual. This is the suggestions forum, not the server-nanny forum. With that being said; if you have a solid and plausible case where the idea can be easily exploited or abused unwittingly; then feel free to post your argument; but be very careful to keep your "it can be used to grief" to cases where a lot of detrimental harm can come from a suggestion with few positive elements.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
ooh ooh ooh how about flowerpots? Or farmland, tilled soil?
I love it when people actually find ways, like you said, to explain how every item and or feature can be used to do this or that, so I wanna see a bit in action. I honestly can't think of a single way that flowerpot could be used to grief... I mean, I suppose you could fill a houses floor with them, but that doesn't seem like much of a griefing...
Enlighten me! I wanna hear this process, please!
Also love the title. Good Grief indeed.
The Wyrm Watches. The Wyrm knows. The Wyrm reads. The Wyrm Animates too! Check me out at the WyrmWorks Channel on Youtube!
You should join Brazil on the Total War Minecraft server - 167.114.100.168:43841! Includes many Minecraft Forum members including myself, Selene011, Genius_idiot, Gamelord, and more!
You go back to your base after 30 minutes of mining; and you see your entire house filled to the brim with alternating stacks of flowerpots and farmland. You bring out your shovel to take care of the dirt blocks but now have to also cycle out to remove the flowerpots, flower pots, dirt, flower pots, dirt... The guy really got you good, haha. In the corner, you see one exposed dirt block hidden behind a wall. You clear it out and see a flower pot beneath, but you also see the 5 stacks of sand fall onto the pot, breaking them. Only moments later, you see the stream of lava pour in and your house start to catch fire.
EDIT
edited replacing dirt (which isn't affected by gravity) with sand (which is); and using the behavior of the flower pot to break gravity blocks falling on it.
Flower pots are not affected by gravity; but I think they do need to be placed on full blocks.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
Yoshi knows from experience.
That was impressive, though I was expecting just flowerpots Don't flowerpots break instantly though, and drop when the block they are placed on breaks?
The Wyrm Watches. The Wyrm knows. The Wyrm reads. The Wyrm Animates too! Check me out at the WyrmWorks Channel on Youtube!
You should join Brazil on the Total War Minecraft server - 167.114.100.168:43841! Includes many Minecraft Forum members including myself, Selene011, Genius_idiot, Gamelord, and more!
If you don't get on-topic I'll test it on you. >:)
OPINIONATED FACT
Hmm, so, this annoyed me. It annoyed me enough to make a post about it here. This will likely make FTC OP. I'm not one to air dirty laundry, so I'll go and create an example of something similar to what I saw that sparked this section.
The above has just the right amount of feel to it to be a close analog of what I saw on the forum.
I bet you can digest the problems on sight. If not; let me break it down.
The entire post could've been better served had the second phrase never existed. What's the point? What do you plan to add with that? The only thing that can come from that is disparaging or self-sabotage as you're drawn under fire for saying something so trite. Not only that, but the "correction", for lack of a better term; was based off of a misinformed justification as creepers do explode.
The only plausible explanation for above that would lend any credence to the poster is he is intentionally trolling. If he's not intentionally trolling; then I struggle to find actual meaning in what the critic meant to gain off the post.
The point is; if it adds NOTHING to the discussion; don't add it.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
I don't get the point. Doesn't the guide reiterate this point anyway? Be constructive, right?
The point is that abject negativity does nothing to a criticism except weaken your position. That's not to say that attempting to be humorous or coy about something is a bad thing; but that blatant slams against someone (especially when they're not wrong) is a no-go.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
Something I just noticed is that the "Easy as a TV dinner!" section is called "BLISTERPACK" in the link in the table of contents. Is that a reference to something?
Also, would the "We don't need this" criticism fall under that section? I believe it would, but I couldn't find mentioned in the guide.
EDIT: actually, I noticed that there are actually quite a few references in the hyperlinks in the table of contents.
Want to see my suggestions? Here they are!
I am also known as GameWyrm or GameWyrm97. You can also find me at snapshotmc.com
I am going to be a critic of the critics on the mine craft forum for a minute (Please bear with me) This is a message I want to get across its not to provoke any one its to give people a chance to see something from some one else's point of view.
I honestly don't think the forums need critics at all. Exactly why do people think they have the right to go around door to door stomping on peoples ideas?
I hear so many people say to not only to my own ideas but to other peoples ideas "NO SUPPORT" In big black letters like they are yelling it at the end of their lecture about why this won't work and your stupid for even suggesting it.
Exactly who decided that these people were given the right to judge our idea? Why isn't there a down vote button and if they don't like the idea they could just down vote it and not give a huge lecture that makes us not even want to use these forums at all. They literally pick our words apart and quote them like a politic battle between former candidate Hillary Clinton and President Elect Donald Trump.
They say "NO SUPPORT" as if they are a judge sitting in a court room hitting his or her mallet on the desk telling every one the verdict.
I feel like this isn't a place where people should act like that. This is a place where every one comes to share their ideas not to get criticized to the point where they use another alternative forum.
Oh yeah, yeah I understand its your god given right you can hurt little kids feelings and stomp all over their dreams. Just cause your the big bad critic with the big mouth. After your done making them feel like they are stupid and they don't ever want to play mine craft or use the forums again because of you, you can just say your criticism was constructive. Maybe to driving them away.
I notice there are 6 primary types of critics on these forums and 5 of them should be outlawed.
type #1 "Already been put in the game your stupid for asking and here is why then NO SUPPORT"
type #2 "OP! OP! OP! OP! NO SUPPORT! OP! heres why"
type #3 " Yew haven't explained anything about this how exactly would this work NO SUPPORT (to a little kid) come back when you have read our complicated suggestion rules guide"
Type #4 You just have bad luck, mine craft doesn't need to fix this because I don't seem to have this problem NO SUPPORT!
Type #Why do we need more of _______ its just more ____ we don't need. NO SUPPORT
Type #6 constructive critic - I thought you had an interesting Idea but I feel like It would make the game too easy or would be too overpowering.
Notible mentions
"This would cause people in real life to do something because they saw it in a video game NO SUPPORT!"
"I am going to respond to your comment and aggressively destroy you mentally while following all the rules and guidelines so that I cant get in trouble"
"the kind of person who would respond to this comment negatively telling me its off topic when this is a response to a guide for critics"
"The guy or girl who doesn't actually read all the way through your idea and starts telling you that its a dumb idea criticizing you and telling you off with out even reading everything said
I don't know about you but I think every one should be the constructive critic and not trample upon the dreams of kids and adults.
I think there should be something different. Something needs to change.
Well, that's the whole purpose of this guide: to encourage others to give helpful constructive criticism rather than just give pointless opinions. Problem is, people aren't obligated to read this, and even those who do don't always listen to it.
Want to see my suggestions? Here they are!
I am also known as GameWyrm or GameWyrm97. You can also find me at snapshotmc.com
This was horrendously one-sided. Maybe you just have trouble dealing with negative posts?
The Unofficial Suggestion Guide - Everything you need to know to not make goofy mistakes in a suggestion! Honestly though, you should really go there.
Yeah, let's just have threads auto-lock the very second someone posts a suggestion because all critics are hitler. Let's cut the crap, you're just sore your suggestions got debunked and this is a revenge rant. Have you never been to a public forum before?
*rests head in hands* You get to choose what you post. You don't get to choose the reception. Stop talking about "crushing little kids' dreams". Goofy suggestions on a forum are not dreams. If critics are bullies to you, then you're not ready for the internet. If only there was a guide people could read before people make sugge- oh wait there is!
Please get some perspective, and stop acting like a sore pseudo-bully victim. Where's Cerroz when you need him?
Yes, I'm well aware of what a discussion is. This is a discussion forum.
Which is why we have discussions. You have a definition of critic that is not in-line with what's defined in the script.
FTC and myself go out of our ways to create clear definitions of the words used. In this case:
critic (n) - any poster that is not the original suggester.
I defined it above. If you are not the suggestion originator; you are a critic. Whether your criticism is blind praise or scoffing and bafflingly humbling hate; it is still a criticism.
Years of experience reading and proofreading other similar related threads; understanding of current ingame mechanics and how innocent-appearing changes can cause dramatic reverberations across the game medium. Perhaps they are modders with a clear idea of precisely how some suggestions work and their shortcomings.
In short, sometimes people can speak with a level of authority because of experience, sound logical reasoning, or practical application.
Who decided these people were given the right to judge? The Minecraft forum community. We're all welcome to have a voice. This means we are all welcome to judge an idea.
Because spite is a real thing. People would dislike a poster (like myself) and just down vote a post (regardless of actual suggestion quality) as a form of "internet justice". It's petty, is disappointing, it's a real phenomenon.
You literally have an unlimited amount of time to choose your words. You are unbound and unrestricted on word use; if you don't want others to pick your words apart; choose different words.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
I have a few easter eggs in FTC; the TOC is one big hiding spot; but there's one or two more hidden in plain text.
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
UPDATED FTC
Added Post: Griefer's guide to the universe
Added a link to the negativity guide.
I'll look through this guide about polarity, if I can't find a section; I'll make a section.Below was written 3 years ago; and it's more a PRT guide than it is a FTC guide.
I'll rewrite it below the quote to reflect my current view and rationale.
PARSUP AND OTHER ROOT VEGETABLES
I totally understand the want/need/desire to have your voice heard and to give the OP as much credit as possible. Even if you don't totally buy the idea he is selling; you can at the very least say support some aspect of it, right?
Well... You can; but it's actually better to pick a stance. Partial Support (which I derogate as parsup) doesn't really help OP. It's a very flimsy and wishwashy stance; and an argument of minimum sufficient strength of a passing breeze is usually enough to send the stance into a support or no support.
Instead of being flippant and thin skinned about your opinion; choose a side. Either you LIKE the suggestion enough to adopt it; or you don't like it. Yes or no.
If you say that you do support; continue to guide the suggestion with possible uses; reasons for inclusion, etc. to help OP out.
If you do not support, state what you'd like OP to do to correct suggestion to where you would support. Or if you simply do not agree with the suggestion; perhaps things that others that do like the suggestion would want to see changed.
If you want to give partial support; you'll do a lot more justice just by saying "no support, but willing to change position should [conditions] be met."
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)
While FTC may be unpinned, I'll be maintaining the negativity guide by-and-large here.
You can find it http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/44180?comment=843
Simply add something you'd like to see me discuss or something you'd like to see added to become part of the discussion. Thanks!
OFFICIAL POSTING/REPLYING GUIDELINES
UNOFFICIAL POSTING GUIDE (PRT)
UNOFFICIAL REPLYING GUIDE (FTC)