It shouldn't matter. As long as he's not cursing us out and violating post rules, he has the right to post whatever he wants.

We certainly have the right to disagree with him as well. Fact is, at one point, he and I were the only guys posting on the other forum at times. I'll part with a secret. I made the 70 card deck thread there to stimulate interest...and it did. Yes, I believe in the right hands a large deck is just as good as the standard, but why would I make a thread knowing most would strongly disagree? To get them back posting. It worked. Mjack knows I did it on purpose because I told him I was going to do it and why.

I'll also state why the forums die off like that. People with differing opinions don't want to post their ideas if they're going to be met with biting sarcasm and abuse. We're not talking simple "disagreement" here, we're talking outright abuse.

It used to make me wonder if there was a sarcasm contest going on somewhere to see who could heap the most out.

Yes, disagree with them if you ...disagree, but be civil about it. That will bring in new blood, which will keep the forum alive. Calling them crazy, or insane or the many words for stupid will only hurt the forum.

As to Mjack, I often disagree and sometimes agree. Isn't that what we're here for? discussions?

On Scenarios 1-3, I agree with you completely.

Scenario 4: Personally, I try to address everything (that I'm going to address anyways) in one post, but I certainly wouldn't be repulsed by the idea of keeping two (or more) different responses to two (or more) different people in separate posts...as long as, you know, they're reasonable posts. Now let's say you address one person in your first post...and then when you go to address the second person it looks something like "@123guy: No, that card is bad."...THAT doesn't need to be a whole separate post.

Now regarding Scenario 5: Yeah, one post is better, but if it happens every now and again, I'll just be bold and speak for everyone here, but I highly doubt you're going to be crucified for it. When it becomes habit though, that's when the problems start.

I pretty much agree with those double-posting versus edit scenarios. Overall, I typically don't care, even if someone gets excited and does an immediate double-post once in a blue moon, that's fine. Even the fourth scenario isn't a big deal, I can appreciate that sometimes it's annoying to craft together a massive reply to many different people in one post.

I think the only real rule is that when every other post is a double-post, that's when it grates on people. Scenario five probably has the most danger of running into this territory, but again, if it's not the norm, it's fine. Sometimes we all get involved in a very active discussion and it's bound to happen, that's fine.

I am going to keep it brief and say that mjack's posting frequency isn't the issue so much as it just feels like he's just posting for the sake of posting. If he had 1000 well thought out and meaningful posts, I'd gladly read them all.

But this isn't the case. We talk about DotP and he talks about Sol Ring. He throws out random info from the MtG Universe about "broken" cards/combos in Vintage/Legacy, when he really knows nothing about them (and they're irrelevant to the discussion at large, anyway). Also, his "know-it-all" attitude and complete unwillingness to listen to helpful advice means that he is a constant source of conflict in the community.

But think about this; dude made 3000 posts in three months over at WotC. In contrast, I made 3500 posts in a year, and I am by far one of the most frequent posters.

tl;dr I come here to discuss DotP with others who share that passion, and I don't want to sift through spam by a "know-it-all" user who doesn't work toward meaningful discussion.

Also, if the mods could check out his interaction with YertletheTurtle in the "Up to Mischief" thread, that would be helpful. I couldn't see mjack's posts, but Yertle quickly went from offering helpful advice to throwing his hands up in the air and walking away from the "discussion".

FWIW, Yertle is one of the best (if not the best) players who post here, so if mjack can't listen to advice from him then something is wrong. But I highly doubt mjack even knows who the "best" posters are around here (in terms of content quality). To him, quantity is everything.

This double-post brought to you by mjack33.

If the original posts are each particularly verbose, (and here I'm thinking a page of text each), then I personally think that multiple posts may be ok if a response is required to multiple sections of each and every post, but would still prefer smaller quote tags for each section of a response if possible, and ideally one post. If the response to a certain verbose section is a smaller reply, ideally use spoiler tags (and perhaps if responding to more than one person with a similar message, putting both quotes in a single spoiler tag). Ideally the visible size of the quote shouldn't excessively exceed the size of the actual response. One thing I find particularly annoying are posts that quote a message and simply say *fixed* but have altered the quote, without entering into debate about said quote.
One post. The only possible exceptions in my opinion would be when the posts are taking place a long time apart; which means they are more likely to be spaced out by other posts anyway.

Whenever I'm about to post something, I usually do the following:
- proofread my post
- think to myself "Is this post contributing something useful to the conversation?"

If the answer is "no" I simply don't post it, even if I spent 10 minutes writing it.
On the other hand, I would rather have a vibrant forum with a lot of active people rather than one where there are few posts and they're all walls of text.

I do the exact same thing. I will often type out a long answer and then just not hit submit, and I'll always check my spelling. If I don't know if I've spelt a word correctly I'll type it into Google and see what it says. I also (usually) check my facts. I don't like to give misinformation, but if I do I will apologise. I like to keep things civil, so I tend not to respond to disruptive posts. If a thread is getting long and argumentative or just going around in circles I'll just leave it alone for a while, check it again in a week or so to see if there has been any new actual discussion, and if not I'll leave it alone for another week.

I can't even begin to count the number of times that I've started typing something, only to reread what I've typed and either started over, or decided not to post it at all.
Or, I've typed something up, clicked submit, found another newer post, which caused me to re-write my original post.

As for the moderation here - I've said it before, I'll say it again, it almost doesn't feel like moderation. It feels like people, who want to keep making this a better place, having a discussion, like the one we have right now.

It's so opposite from what we had with the ORCs that it's almost hard to put into words. I know that I, for one, spend more time on this site than any other right now, with no plans to change.
Fire mentioned it, but, if you've not foraged out to some of the other forums, do yourself a favor and do it.
While I don't normally enjoy seeing things I like have issues (i.e. the WotC forum...) the switch over here has really made me happy. Overall, and in every little way, a better community.

Wait, you've never even played against Yertle...how can you say that?
I'm not saying (not even close) that it's not true...but, I mean, you can say he's a good deckbuilder, since you've seen his decklists...but, having not played against him...personally, I think you need to dump the whole console thing, come back to steam, and really find out!

Actually - the more I think about it, between his run in Neb's tourney, and all of the footage in the top 16 thing...I guess that's enough to come to that conclusion...

Plus, the fact that he keeps beating me to a pulp whenever we play...


edit - the irony of the double post...I forgot which thread I was in...sorry all!

It looks like my personal rules are not so personal after all.

I don't respond to disruptive posts or even posts that I think are not disruptive but written with some kind of anger. I am forbidden by my personal rules to do so. That is not the same as saying that I forgot the matter.
Normally I wait for a cooldown before trying to resume the matter, when I think the civilized discussion returned. Often getting there by circular logic. Sometimes one must think I am too mischievous because of that.

Also I normally don't block any user undefinitively. I give it a month or so blocked, then I unblock him. Only at strike three, it is a definitive block. So far none reached that point.

I've owned him for so long now that I figured Hakeem would have come down with Stockholm Syndrome and shouted me out, but whatever. He knows the deal.

Buuuut, to be fair, Yertle does seem pretty solid in his videos with Legend. Certainly the better of the pair anyways.

Back to the point in question, it sure would be nice if someone, who has to ask if pro-blue creatures can be countered by blue spells, would listen instead of acting like the aforementioned know-it-all. I mean, come on now.

I waited a while in posting to this thread initially because I felt it was cruel and stayed away from it after it was edited because I don't have an opinion on the etiquette of double posts. They don't bother me but I can see why others would find the annoying. Since the conversation has turned back to Jack I decided to give my opinion on the matter.

Me and Jack disagreed on an aspect of the deck we each discussed our points of view and the reasoning behind them and couldn't come to an agreement. I ended the discussion when it became apparent we weren't going to come to an agreement so that other aspects of the deck could be discussed. There is nothing wrong with this from either side.

I consider myself to be good magic player and make an effort to keep current on many of theories and reasoning behind the different decisions involved in both dotp and paper magic but no one has to agree with me. I miss evaluate cards and lines of play just like everyone else. In fact if everyone agreed with me on everything I think I would stop coming here. This community would lose a lot if Jack were to leave. He puts in more effort into this community than most myself included. He was one of the first few to make the transition to nga and took on the task of creating most of the deck threads. He spurs discussion within the community which is especially important when the community involvement begins to lull.

From the looks of it this thread was worse than it is now, I'd just like to ask how some people here handle themselves irl when someone talks stupid or says something you dont want to hear, someone u know or just someone just standing next to you in the mall or whatever? I mean even without an ignore feature no one can force anyone to read your posts, if you feel like someone doesnt contribute to whatever discussion your involved with, there is no rule against skippin a post you dont like and read the next. For me its basic, if I dont like someone I just stop caring, whatever he/she has to say is no longer important for me and does no longer concern me. Thats what good manners is for, I mean bad manners wont put you in jail but it sure wont give you followers on twitter either so to speak...

Yeah, I read his posts, I've read tourney reports, and I've seen footage. Great player.

I don't want mjack to leave, and I never said I did. He just needs to realize that his excessive posting and terrible demeanor need to change.

Again, I never read what he posted in the UtM thread, but I'm sure it didn't begin with, "Yertle, I respectfully disagree" followed by a logical reason why.

You'll get no argument from me...

Back to mjack
I will also agree that he should stay. He has as much right to his opinion as any one of us. While I might not always agree with what he says, there is some that I do agree with. Some of his odd posts have led our community to some interesting discussions. Honestly, it was really mjack and devil who even got the DotP forum here.

I think that, if everyone agrees to either cut one another a bit of slack from time to time, or, just ignore people, we can easily avoid this type of situation in the future.

Edit - I don't like how that sounds - it's not that I agree that he should stay, it's, really, I'd like him to stay. The original wording makes it sound like it's a decision we are making, when it's not - it's his decision.

I don't like that this is a thread. mjack is mjack. There are tools in place to ignore people if you so desire, but calling someone out that does contribute so much content seems self-defeating to me. I'd be sad if he left, and I will defend him. I understand that to some he may come off as abrasive, but that is not something that should bother you to the point this thread was created. People come in all shapes and sizes.

You are allowed to have radically different opinions than others, if everyone thought the same, this wouldn't be a very fun game would it? Just saying!

I really enjoy this forum, especially when compared to the previous alternative. Sounds cliche, but we really should stick together to build a nice user base here. No more public call outs in my humble opinion!

Though the part that I bolded is true, and though I agree with your sentiment on the whole, I feel that this is a special case. I'm not out to attack, but mjack does seem to post more for the sake of posting than to actually contribute something of worth. And typically, *somebody* feels compelled to respond to something he's said, even if only to have a correct answer/more logical point of view sharing prominence. And these discussions tend to go on endlessly, spreading into every thread, until every post is about mjack's crazy views, as opposed to the actual topic at hand. It's exhausting to read, and I know that I've personally stopped visiting as often because I've grown tired of it. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I think we're all intelligent people and we all have interesting things to say about this game. I just wish mjack showed more restraint in sharing his opinions. The thought process posted earlier by others is an excellent starting point, and it's one that I follow as well. I only hit 'submit' when I feel I'm truly contributing something. I would never make a post simply to have my presence acknowledged.

If you feel that a user is posting content that is not on topic, you can report that user's posts. If you think a poster is being disruptive, you can report those posts. In addition, contacting members of the staff to address the problem is encouraged because we didn't know this was a problem until this thread was created and reported. If anybody feels there is a problem, please do not hesitate to talk to somebody about it. We want moderators to be visible and available to help with user's needs and problems.