Indeed. Your help in making these, to say nothing of what you've done for the forum have really been a solid support for us all. We'll miss seeing you in the mod cave.
I'm glad your last mod piece made it to publication though, and that you got to talk about Ephara.
- bobthefunny
- Staff
-
Member for 13 years and 2 days
Last active Sat, Feb, 24 2024 23:38:40
- 17 Followers
- 10,970 Total Posts
- 686 Thanks
-
Jan 11, 2015bobthefunny posted a message on Word of Command #4 - Engines of CommandPosted in: Articles
-
Dec 3, 2014bobthefunny posted a message on Word of Command #3 - Welcoming New CommandersYour method of letting players tumble out into their own camps can be a good one when you have enough room to do it. People will naturally gravitate into the games that fit their decks' schedules.Posted in: Articles
In smaller environments where you may only have one or two pods going though, it can be a bit more difficult. Also, you then get problematic players like me who like to play across the entire spectrum.
I also believe that casual environments can provide excellent learning areas, but you have to be careful of it as well. One trap that my own group has been running into now is being too lenient on take-backs. Originally implemented to allow the newer players some freedom of thought and to help them work through what courses of actions to take. It can start to be abused into not fully thinking through a situation. An example being that one player cast Council's Judgment to remove my Commander. The second player voted for another permanent in order to set up a double exile option for player C, and player C then mistakenly selected a third permanent for more exily goodness, at which point I selected one of the other targets for my vote in order to save my Commander. Player C hadn't really thought things through (and I'd also quickly jumped the gun on my own vote, I'll admit), but we ended up rewinding that play so he could properly select his vote.
I find it helps best to properly (and as honestly as possible) represent the board state for newer players. For example, with cards with the Will of The Council, such as Council's Judgment, I find that it helps to explain to newer players what the consequence of their vote will do to the options the next player in line will be able to make. After a while, you can scale back the aid you give to after the play or game is over, that way they can learn from their own choices, but still have the benefit of a different viewpoint.
In one game, my brother should have had lethal on me since he had a pro-black creature, and he was paranoid about a Duplicant in my Chainer deck's graveyard... except that he misplayed having forgotten that Chainer would reanimate it as a black creature and opted to spread his equipments out instead. Since my brother should have known better, that was an observation I made at the end of the game (a few turns later). He has never forgotten it again.
These kinds of interactions though can really help all players improve their own levels of play. -
Nov 8, 2014bobthefunny posted a message on Word of Command #3 - Welcoming New CommandersAbsolutely! The greatest way to truly learn anything is to teach it. It really makes you get an in-depth understanding of the subject.Posted in: Articles
I'm glad you enjoyed the article. -
Sep 28, 2014bobthefunny posted a message on Word of Command #2 - KHAAAAANS!Should have been Corpsejack Menace, I guess.Posted in: Articles
Indeed, much thanks to the entire editorial staff, this wouldn't be possible without them. -
Mar 29, 2012bobthefunny posted a message on Tibor & LumiaSol Grail, while getting points for being oldschool, has never impressed me in EDH. Here are a few alternatives (some less budget than others):Posted in: Deck Compilation
Coalition Relic - the most expensive of them, but far more useful.
Phyrexian Lens - a bit painful, but may be worth the added color utility
Star Compass - the best budget alternate. Taps for either color we have; CiPT, but costs 1 less, so same net mana gain when played.
Also, do not overlook Fire diamond and Sky diamond
Also, for storm count, do you have a Frantic Search? -
Aug 22, 2011bobthefunny posted a message on Being a substitute teacher is no substitute to teachingTeachers have been cut, this means there are less teachers that are teaching to get sick; this also means there are more teachers now looking for work, and thereby more substitutes looking for work.Posted in: Stoogeslap Blog
A full time teacher's resume will look better when a school is looking for a sub, so they'll be called in first. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Feyd is a technical admin and mod here, and is also the primary tech and administrator of MTGNexus. The two sites are separate, and have differing policies, though our policies and approaches do overlap in some ways. We have a few members who moderate both forums.
The recent thread involved a user who had been banned from Nexus, who tried to open discussion here with several members who are moderators on both sites. We have instructed that person that the proper way for them to discuss his position with Nexus, is through Nexus' own channels for that - and not here. Or at least - not publicly.
Let's get this thread back to discussing the actual card in question.
I have played Alurenin Commander in a 1-drop tribal Karador deck. In the general scheme of things though, its uses do tend to lean more towards the combo side of things. Even that Karador deck was upgraded to include a combo that uses Aluren, though that was a response to another combo player joining the group.
Kraum gives you some good draw to balance out Kodama's hand emptying ability. While Teferi's Veil won't work the way you want, it's still a great card to protect you from wrath effects and sorcery speed removal, though it will turn off Kodama on opponents' turns if you phase her out. To play with these kinds of combat tricks, you could look at blink shenanigans instead, such as ghostly flicker. A blink style deck would be very potent with Kodama at the helm.
You would get potentially infinite triggers.
When you put in something from Kodama's ability, it was not Sakashima's ability, so Saka will trigger. When you put something in from Saka's trigger, it was not Kodama's ability, so Kodama will trigger. Repeat until hand empty.
With the multitude of mass card draw creatures (Zegana, Keruga, the Macrosage), green etb draw effects (Elemental Bond), and clones, people have already brewed instant wins off of it where you can draw and play your entire deck in one turn.
Several players in my playgroup are working with a much more limited budget, so I hope to point out more of such things for them as time goes on. It also helps me to be a bit more mindful of my own budget - I feel that some players get discouraged when they get beaten by a card, and then they look it up and realize it's out of their budget, and thus may think they can't compete - when there are actually a lot of alternatives and strategies at lower budgets.
I think the RC made the right call. It's not their job to police Wizards' sales, nor to discourage players from purchasing something they enjoy, nor to punish legitimate fans of the franchise.
The fault here lies with Wizards, not the RC.
I don't think this is the right move either. It shouldn't fall on punishing players who have picked up something they love or are excited about. The anger should be directed at Wizards. Not the players.
Here's a few ideas that jump immediately to mind, I'll try and keep them by color, with red first.
Token Makers
Big Scary Creatures
Potential Commanders
H3RAC71TU5, I would say that the biggest things to address would be why we should have a debate forum here, rather than a site better suited and dedicated to it; how to maintain a debate forum in a family and work friendly environment; and how to respond to bad actors and trolls, without expressing a personal bias, or implicating personal policy as site policy.
We have no plans to reopen Debate, and are not working towards any plans to reopen Debate. It was closed for many reasons, and as far as we can see, those reasons remain valid.
There are plenty of other sites specifically tailored to hosting those types of debates. I am not personally familiar with them, however a quick google search resulted in this Quora question, which has several answers. Might be a place to start. I have also found the various stack exchanges to be nice areas for discussion of a multitude of topics, they have a politics one, though I haven't frequented that one myself.
Now, this does not mean that we cannot one day reopen debate here on Salvation, however it would take a lot of work and dedication.
Now, there currently are no moderators willing to take up the mantle of a Debate forum, however there are plenty of moderator openings where someone could join the staff and get a feel of the process and experience, and then move on to other improvements. We are always looking for talented, calm, and rational individuals, especially those that have ideas and visions for improving the site.
===
This would be the same for any other off topic forum (and even on-topic, though showing the common interest on those is easier). For example, if someone wanted to make a Yu-Gi-Oh forum, or an Anime forum, it would be the same idea.
That said, this thread got very personal very quickly, so I'm putting a brief pause on things. I'm also going to ask that personal attacks on other users not take place here (or anywhere else on the site).
I think we have seen very clearly here how a conversation can easily derail, and change the flow of topic to something other than what it was intended to be.
I would also like to take a brief moment to apologize for my earlier post. My exasperation, frustration, and loss of patience very clearly came through in my tone, and that was unacceptable. I deeply apologize for my lack of calm.
Your analogy to the NFL situation is... apt, and thought provoking. Thank you for that.
I do consider there to be a difference however, in reach, scope, timing, and purpose.
The NFL protests were about dedicated and heroic players using their influence and position to reach out (even at personal risk) to bring awareness to a wider audience that was not informed.
Posting on these forums does not involve a user's influence in reaching out and raising awareness to a larger audience. An anonymous user has negligible influence, the reach of the site is very closed to a specific facet and small. In short, I disagree that the context is in any way similar.
We do realize that there will never be a clean differentiation. This is brought up in the "Inclusion in the MTG Salvation Community" announcement that was made, but I will rephrase it here. When Wizards releases statements that inherently have a political judgment - such as removing ties with an artist, or removing existing art from the game, we understand that discussions on those topics will contain some inherent politics.
So long as the intersection of the two remain Magic focused (and not inflammatory/racist/prejudiced) the discussion remains on-topic. The problem occurs when the discussion moves outside of being magic related, or when racist or other prejudicial comments start being made.
Let me rephrase - Yes, we have areas dedicated to allowing the community to bond over things which are outside the realm of Magic. Those topics are perfectly fine in their designated areas - however, if someone were to bring those topics into the Magic related section of the forums, they would no longer be acceptable in the context of their environment.
My quote above refers in particular to the Magic forums, and in concept of the Site as a whole (If people have come to this site, it is likely that they did so in the main focus of discussing Magic. While it is theoretically possible that we may have Mafia players who have somehow arrived here and joined who have no interest in Magic, I believe that overlap would be small).
I answered this above, hopefully well enough, but I shall restate: There will never be a perfect division when it comes to inherently political statements made by Wizards. These clearly will want discussion by the Community, and our goal as staff is to try and make sure these discussions remain on topic.
This site will always stand by the side of inclusion. Any comments stating that such inclusion is unnecessary, unhelpful, or morally incorrect will not be tolerated.
So here's the thing:
Every spoiler season this year, at least one thread, if not multiple, have gone off the rails. The 15 seconds is exaggerated, however I stand by the concept that the Rumor Mill is not the place to have these discussions. I also stand by the statement that this site is not the appropriate place to host a forum dedicated to that. I most assuredly stand by the fact that hosting such a forum would be a nightmare, and would be an unmitigated disaster given the site's current resources.
This is simply not the place for this.
The extreme I was referencing here was the action of forcefully advocating a position by moderating against anyone of a differing opinion.
I do not personally believe that BLM is an extreme position, nor do I believe that it (should) be inherently political. Somehow it has become so, but I will fight and die on the hill that it is not.
Likewise, while I will not personally advocate for bluelives, I will advocate for the people that use it in a manner to support police against violence, and against calls to violence against police. To this end, it has become the Site's current stance that moderating against BlueLives in signatures would be that line of overmoderation that you mentioned. I can only emphasize, again, that this currently appears consistent with literally every other business. I have not found a single one that approaches this differently.
The context was not clear - in part Hate Groups in general have no place here. The KKK, All Lives Matters, and White Lives Matters are not allowed. Thus, I am now confused as to your original post. Your point was "3. A balance which is inclusive to hate groups is toxic to the cohesion of the forum community". If you're talking about Hate Groups in general, this point is invalid, as we do not allow them. The only context that made sense is the current discussion of whether #BlueLivesMatters should be allowed on the site.
If this association was in error on my part, I apologize.
This... feels like it's getting into semantics. While I can see what you are arguing, I doubt that you do not see the point I was trying to make.
Yes, every community, every nation, every group of people will have laws and rules based on the morals it wishes to emphasize. However, there are some topics that are disagreed upon, ambiguous, or otherwise in contention. While each of us on the staff, and the owners, may have our personal opinions on these topics, the Site itself is not here to pass judgement on those. The site is not here as a platform to advocate for a cause in contention. Each of us that wishes to do so, does it on our own time, in our own locations.
There is also the issue that the quote of mine you placed is in reference you your point 3: "3. A balance which is inclusive to hate groups is toxic to the cohesion of the forum community". Given the context of the preceding posts about the validity of BlueLives, and that Hate Groups in general are not allowed here, the association was the inference that your point was associating BlueLives as a Hate Group. Thus, the context of MY quote about passing moral judgement is that it is not this Site's duty or prerogative to make the judgement about whether or not a group qualifies as a Hate Group. We'll leave that to those better suited for it.
Intervening in off-topic discussions is literally our job. If every thread were to turn into a thread about gardening, this would be a terrible Magic site. Replace "gardening" with any single other topic that is not Magic, and that statement remains true. Even Politics.
Now, perhaps there is some remote set that will come out that provides an overlap between gardening and Magic. Then, gardening might find itself on topic... if it remains related to Magic. Replace "gardening" with any single other topic that is not Magic, and that statement remains true. Even Politics.
This past year has proven otherwise. Politics has repeatedly come up, and been disruptive every single time. Every time, people report the opposition, and people not involved in the discussion report it and request that it please just stop.
I agree that people are primarily interested in discussing Magic. That's why discussing politics here is disruptive. That's why discussing politics here is not appropriate.
Depicting a black person in art is not Magic being expressly political. In fact, there is literally nothing political about depicting a black person in art. The only thing political, would be the person making a political statement because a black person was depicted in art. The art is not political, Magic is not being political, the person is.
Humanity is universal. I will stand by that, and the site will stand by that.
Yes, I am human and can be frustrated. I also do have my own personal opinions, though as I am in a position of some sort of authority here, I do my best to refrain from exercising them too strongly, lest people inadvertently believe those statements to be on behalf of the site, rather than myself. (The site has had issues with some moderator opinions and pieces being mistaken as site policy rather than personal in the past). I also do wish to avoid potential optics of bias.
While everyone will have their personal biases, I can do my best to try and keep it in check and moderate as objectively as possible.
Perhaps it is a bit of a strawman, but that was also a bit of the intention. There are topics that have been derailed to extreme political discussion, which goes beyond what you discuss.
This does make me sad. You have been an excellent influence on the forums, and a very long time standing member and accomplished moderator and admin of the site through trying times. Your departure does deeply distress me, as it clearly shows a dissonance in what the site is and should be.
The debate forum was well intentioned, and started off well and well moderated. But it quickly went down a black hole. Towards the end of its existence, debates were not held in good faith, and there was a tendency to argue and make contrarian points just for shock and attention. There ended up being multiple "debates" which were nothing more than outright trolling, as well as rife trolling throughout what might be considered legitimate debates.
And this doesn't even touch on the topics found in the NSFW Debate subforum (which I am personally confused why was ever a thing here).
Looking at the retired forum, there are 11 threads that needed to be deleted in the first page alone, and another 9 on the second page. That's not healthy. There are also a significant amount of red text, and banned members in the responses.
I am well aware that there were several mods that held the forum in fond memory, however there was solid reason to shut it down at the time. Perhaps it could return one day, but today is definitely not the time.
===
A reminder: This thread is not to replace the debate forum. It is to discuss site policy, or to bring matters and concerns to the attention of the staff and owners. It is not the place for philosophical, theoretical, or political debate.
It IS the place for discussion about the Regulations of the site.
For those wondering about direct contact with the owners of the site: I will discuss with them if there is a way to make this feasible, but my guess is that it less likely. MagicFind operates a large number of sites, and part of the purpose of the staff is to be the intermediary to the Owners, so as to limit being swamped. The owners are aware of this thread, but unlike all of us, I doubt that most visit the site on a frequent basis, let alone daily. That's what the staff is for.
I will happily forward relevant concerns, and if any of those concerns involve staff (or even myself), forward and alert them to those, while limiting my personal involvement to the best of my ability and ethics.
1. This seems to me to be a fallacy. If a policy against political posts is itself political, then the option is either to allow politics, or still be political? Everything is political? I find it irresponsible to believe that mature individuals are entirely incapable of having a conversation of Magic, or anything else, without bringing up politics every 15 seconds. Somehow, I manage to hold many such conversations each day.
2. So the options again are either to enforce bias, or to be biased anyways? Again, I disagree. Censoring to one extreme or another can only be harmful to all involved. This is a site that exists to discuss Magic. This should be feasible without overcomplication.
3. The site is not here to pass moral judgment. You know what else would be detrimental to a community? Excising anyone with a differing viewpoint than your own.
While you may be judging the entire group to be a hate group, the rest of the collective US community, the commercial interest, and the internet do not currently agree with your assessment. If a change occurs, we will adapt to it. Until then, every other commercial venture is willing to accept it, so will we.
4. And what overzealous and authoritarian approach are you referring to here?
5. You know what else would affect revenue? Becoming a Magic site that doesn't discuss Magic.
If a person arrives at this site from google, wanting to look up an interaction, or discuss some new cards - but instead they see a bunch of people yelling at each other about entirely unrelated things? Well suddenly that makes this seem like a terrible site to come to for the answers to Magic related questions.
===
I joined this site to discuss Magic. I joined it to discuss Commander. I joined the moderator team to help improve the goals of facilitating that kind of discussion. For the last THREE MONTHS, 95% of my interaction and duties on this site have been entirely non-magic related. I'm frankly getting sick and tired of this. Everywhere else, I seem to be able to find people who are able to hold a conversation on a topic without needing to proselytize. Conversations in which if a person says "Hey, I don't want to hold this discussion here, can we let it drop," the other person respects it. Or even following simple rules and requests for use of a facility or services. When the people who collect the garbage in my neighborhood arrive in the early morning with their trucks, no one seems to need to quiz them about their political allegiance.
Everyone saying that we need to discuss non-magic things here... No. We. Don't. There are plenty of places where you can share your political views. There are plenty of places where it's appropriate to do so. Want to share them? Write an opinion piece to your local paper. Write to your congressman. Go to a protest. Go to a townhall. GO. VOTE. Arguing with random people on the internet, on a site which has nothing to do about it is a waste of everyone's time.
I'm willing to bet that you don't go to a Walmart, or a Target, or even a McDonald's to shout at people about your views on this. There is nothing that makes this place any more appropriate than those, expect that on here you can do so from the comfort of your own home and you don't have to actually look anyone in the eyes when you do it. Don't do it. We don't want it here. Grow up. Take it to where it matters.
This site is about Magic. If you want to talk about something Not Magic - you've come to the wrong place.