I think we already have a rule about flaming?

The thread you are referring to is really bad, sorry.

maybe it wouldn't be so bad if people didn't make posts contributing nothing but
"you suck OP"
"this thread sucks"
"shinden you suck! stop sucking so much!"
"suck me off!"
"this is gonna suck"
"suck is suck and suck me suck the fuck"

>>2949
>maybe it wouldn't be so bad

No, it probably still would be

I think we should be allowed to say threads are shit when they are and we should be able to try and discourage shitty posting when people post like shit. In moderation, this is fine (ie. no excessive flaming)

It's not discouraging people from "joining in and making good contributions," it's discouraging them from making bad contributions. It's the kind of behavior that taught me to be a less shitty poster.

We're a pretty friendly community, anyway. If you don't want off-topic discussion, stay off of /ot/

I think we should be allowed to have opinions.

>>2961
I think that you're wrong.

>>2961

and I think ur a faget.

But in all seriousness: in most cases, an actual good contribution won't get met with insults and degrading posts. While there may be an occasional good contribution that gets hit with a reddit style 'fuck you and your logic die in flame', those general type topics are already listed and noted and it's 10,000% more likely that the person posting is trolling than actually contributing.

Re-using this thread to comment on >>/ot/39952

I've noticed the pattern of two people engaging in flamewars keeps recurring on /ot/ (in fact the last thread "things that piss you off" thread also got locked because of it). I'm confident the mods have things things under control, but perhaps a rule suggesting that 1:1 flame-warring be moved to /tat/ or something of the like might be useful in gently deterring non-constructive dialogues? Although I guess rule 11 pretty much already covers this by suggesting that users avoid engaging in deliberate 1:1 baiting.

>>6849
Pretty sure in most of these recent engagements, one of the guys involved is always the same one.

>>6849
I feel like changing the rules wouldn't really stop that from happening. When those things get out of hand it tends to end with someone getting banned anyway.