iphdrunk wrote:Have you ever considered that most of the "have you ever" questions may be of little to no interest to the original poster? [...] have you ever considered answering to these posts in a less condescending way?
hear, hear.
Little theory here:
Somebody leaves Ryzom, posts that Ryzom is a bad game, and all the community feels the need to answer him, some to convicne him it's not bad, others to convince him he didn't understand the game. These threads are recurrent.
They always move on the same mechanism:
X leaves
X doesn't only leave but posts that Ryzom is bad.
(A, B, C...N) all play and enjoy Ryzom.
If Ryzom is really bad (A, B, C, ... N) are enjoying a bad game, therefore X is cleverer than them. And that's what his posting implies.
If Ryzom is proven good then X didn't understand the game, or didn't take enough effort to understand and then (A, B,C, ... N) are cleverer than him.
Naturally (A, B,C,... N) feel hurt by the first hypothesis and try to prove it wrong.
But if first hypothesis is wrong then the second one is true which makes (A, B, C...N) be in a superior position.
Leaving is neutral.
Posting "Ryzom is bad. I leave" is a condescendent attitude.
Answers are just symetrical condescendent reaction
Detail 1. Posting "Ryzom is bad. I leave" disregards entirely the feelings of the forums community, has a more or less constient will to hurt.
Detail 2. The more the answer is kind, the more denotes self confidence, the more the answer is aggressive denotes need to convince the author himself of his truth.
Don't worry, Anissa, most people who answered affirmed mostly their devotion to our world rather than their condescendence to X.