Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Looking at the tournament threads that are front and centre of the forum currently I'd say passive aggressive childish unpleasantness is still very much a dominant personality type!

Wayniac wrote:

Spoiler:

I will say something though, being involved in one way or another in this hobby since 1996 (so 2nd edition 40k).

To use a real-world analogy, I see Warhammer as having 3 "eras":

1) The Golden Age, similar to the height of the Roman Empire before the Dark Ages. This was the 2nd edition days up until probably around 4th edition when they began to ignore criticism, lash out at independent retailers and kill their own games for "competing" with their main 2 games.

2) The Dark Ages: This would be the "Kirby Era" of no communication, treating customers like dirt and coming close to the precipice of going the way of TSR. This also represents the era of "We're a model company, not a game company"
as an excuse despite that being objectively false.

3) The Middle Ages: This would be the current age. GW is active again with the community instead of ignoring it and issuing the word of God from the Ivory Tower, the rules are in an overall good place (certain issues notwithstanding) and in general an infinite improvement over the dark ages.

Now to me, while I 100% agree that the way 40k is now is a lot better than how it was in the decline, it is IMHO a pale imitation of the real golden age. In the golden age, GW had passionate and knowledgeable designers (e.g. Andy Chambers, Alessio Cavatore, Rick Priestly himself). People who genuinely had an interest in making a solid game with great models, rather than pretty models with something resembling a game built around them. They engaged with the community, they supported independent stores more (does anyone remember the Outriders?) and overall things were pretty damn good.

That's how I see it now. This is imitating the glory days, but not actually coming close to them. And IMHO the biggest thing I find lacking is passion. None of the current crop of designers (who, other than Jervis I'm pretty sure all came on board during the Dark Ages) see to be really passionate about the game; sure you sometimes get a well-written codex but a lot of them just feel phoned in and designed by someone (or multiple people) who really can't get "into" the faction enough to really make them play correctly, while in the golden age it felt like all the designers really wanted each army to be as good as it could be.

This is, incidentally, a big reason why the Chaos 3.5 codex was so good and IMHO the single best codex GW ever put out, despite its flaws; it was written by someone who legitimately played Chaos as their primary army and played against Chaos for many years (Pete Hiaines being a friend of Andy Chambers') and really wanted to have them look and work great. For all of is flaws that book showed real passion in designing it that you rarely, if ever, see anymore.

So yes, 40k is better now that it has been the last several years, perhaps even close to the last decade. But for those of us who remember the real glory days, we can see through what they're doing now and see how it's just an attempt to regain the days of old. It's a pale imitation of what the real golden age was. Perhaps unironically exactly like the Imperium itself.

I think the Kirby Era was so dark, that it's probably fairer to call what we're in now, The Renaissance. I'd also rename the Golden Age as The Classical Age. I think a lot of what comes from back then is clouded in a fog of nostalgia. Sure, you're point about passionate designers is entirely agreeable, but if we compare the actual models between then and now, I think the new stuff is magnitudinally © better.

skchsan wrote:Thank the MODs in this forum. They weed out 120% of the unnecessary, childish banters so we can go on and live our lives talking about what matters - RAW vs. RAI.

With all respect to mod's who give their free time, I have to take issue with this. Far too often, I see mod's locking threads that were started with the most well meaning intentions, only because a couple of unruly pests decide to hijack it and start bickering. When my siblings and I used to bicker as children, my mother didn't just lock the living room door and deny the whole family access, she would admonish us and send us to separate rooms, thereby leaving everyone else in peace. I think locking down whole threads instead of dealing directly with culprits is lazy and unfair to the vast majority who play by the rules.

Honestly I'd say if GW keeps going as they are this Renaissance could work itself into a Golden Age (certainly I think GW feels its a golden age with regard to their current profits and market position after a massive turn around and slew of big investments).

Which is another thing; never ever before has any game company pushed out as many models and tomes and material as GW are at their current pace. Granted even they know they can't keep it up like this forever, but even if they burn out and slow down after finishing the AoS battletomes its still a monumental amount of models and sculpts and material they've been pushing forward.



The whole "passionate" thing I think its a rose tinted glasses thing coupled to personal perceptions. I'm sure GW has a lto of very passionate staff with them still; things just get filtered a bit and I think that one also tends to view old s tuff with the nostalgia eyes and can see some of the "management" things that are always there, but which you never "see" when you're young. Then again sometimes people see things that aren't even there - eg they see a story with a central female character and they go all "SJW/Womens rights/political" when it was never intended nor featured in any management plan - ego it was just a story.

The drama has moved to Toxic.

The TFG wasn’t reduced or eliminated. It’s just evolved into the Tournament TFG.

You must have never been laughed at for having your models bad painted, if you think that being toxic is limited to tournament crowed. IMO being an A hole is a cross hobby thing.

As a long time tourney player in a number of games, the toxic players are in general in casual groups, playing casual players.

The process is simple. TFG's want to win. They win best when playing casuals that don't have a ability or desire to know the rules well enough to defeat TFG.

They don't win at Tourneys where if they do win, they do get to a level to where they are playing a real Tourney player, who calls them on any BS, and they lose.

They can't exist long in a Competitive environment.

Yet some how the narrative has been changed by Casuals to make people think the TFG is common in the Tourney scene.

Social interaction required for a Tabletopgame:
Ergo you need, generally people
Ergo you will deal with people
Ergo you will find TFG's.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:
You must have never been laughed at for having your models bad painted, if you think that being toxic is limited to tournament crowed. IMO being an A hole is a cross hobby thing.

wellp. I mean better then unpainted.

Karol wrote:
You must have never been laughed at for having your models bad painted, if you think that being toxic is limited to tournament crowed. IMO being an A hole is a cross hobby thing.

Never seen this. In general, Competitive players care less what your model looks like, they only want it to be clear on what it is, and what it has. Any comments on painting are general encouraging, as even competitive players in general acknowledge that a brilliant looking game is better for the hobby.

Reemule wrote:

Karol wrote:
You must have never been laughed at for having your models bad painted, if you think that being toxic is limited to tournament crowed. IMO being an A hole is a cross hobby thing.

Never seen this. In general, Competitive players care less what your model looks like, they only want it to be clear on what it is, and what it has. Any comments on painting are general encouraging, as even competitive players in general acknowledge that a brilliant looking game is better for the hobby.

Tournament playing generally get upset about non wisywig over maybe anything else short of cheating.
That's probably because it's 1 impossible to follow the 1 plasma gun is a grav and the flamers are plasma and this scout is and intercessor stuff easily and it's easy for you to miss important information about a unit like that.

Most competitive player's just want a good clean game, winning and loosing can get heated, i know I can swear like a trooper at my dice, but that's not the other player's fault it's just sometimes you have those games/days or even events. Also I've found a number of players are always down for a you could have done X or Y or I'm so glad you failed X roll or I was screwed.

The platforms are a bit more varied now than they were then. When I started in 2009, every man and his dog has a blog, not just for Warhammer. Blogging was a very popular craze for a few years and that's somewhat died down now, taking a lot of the hobby bloggers with it.

Reddit is a pretty big platform now for Warhammer and a there's a lot of hate towards Dakka or other similar forums whenever it's mentioned from there. Shame really.

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
The platforms are a bit more varied now than they were then. When I started in 2009, every man and his dog has a blog, not just for Warhammer. Blogging was a very popular craze for a few years and that's somewhat died down now, taking a lot of the hobby bloggers with it.

Reddit is a pretty big platform now for Warhammer and a there's a lot of hate towards Dakka or other similar forums whenever it's mentioned from there. Shame really.

Which is amusing because until very recently the community on Reddit was subject to many years of absolutely insane drama and some of the most shockingly abusive mod behavior I've ever seen, such that the community was rather infamous on Reddit in general and across other GW communities as a result, and fracturing warhammer stuff across half a dozen different subreddits.

Reemule wrote:
As a long time tourney player in a number of games, the toxic players are in general in casual groups, playing casual players.

The process is simple. TFG's want to win. They win best when playing casuals that don't have a ability or desire to know the rules well enough to defeat TFG.

I can certainly attest to this. At my local club we are 80%, I'd guess, casual players with a handful of more competitive but friendly players. We have one guy, who is TFG, that no one wants to play anymore. He cheats and claims that he read his book wrong. It has got to a point where the competitive players now stand around his table waiting for him to pull something so they can stop him. He even emailed me to complain about what they were doing, saying that they should leave him alone and let him play the way he wants to. He wonders why no one will play him anymore!!!

So, weird observations I've witnessed, at my brick and mortar.

1. Players in store - mostly 18-25, somehow wealthy, left leaning politics.
2. Players at the one east coast gaming event ive been to - mostly 21-30s, rich adults with good pay and seemingly a ton of personal time (Programmers/investment bankers?) MAJORITY right wing, like, bad. Lotta MAGA jokes, lotta Trump conversations, a lot of mildly Incel behavior, a lot of weird gross infatuation with extreme right wing German gak. Patches, badges, slogans, insignia. Like, I understand if you like DKoK, but if you have a bunch of WW2 german army gak on you, that isn't 40k.

A lot of chat groups/forums on 40k stuff I've seen online bear some of the same. Has anyone noticed a weird right wing slant to the recent players at events?

Granted - EXTREMELY small sample size on my part, but it really ruined the competitive hobby side for me.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So, weird observations I've witnessed, at my brick and mortar.

1. Players in store - mostly 18-25, somehow wealthy, left leaning politics.
2. Players at the one east coast gaming event ive been to - mostly 21-30s, rich adults with good pay and seemingly a ton of personal time (Programmers/investment bankers?) MAJORITY right wing, like, bad. Lotta MAGA jokes, lotta Trump conversations, a lot of mildly Incel behavior, a lot of weird gross infatuation with extreme right wing German gak. Patches, badges, slogans, insignia. Like, I understand if you like DKoK, but if you have a bunch of WW2 german army gak on you, that isn't 40k.

A lot of chat groups/forums on 40k stuff I've seen online bear some of the same. Has anyone noticed a weird right wing slant to the recent players at events?

Granted - EXTREMELY small sample size on my part, but it really ruined the competitive hobby side for me.

Not sure which "East Coast" you've been to.

Although most of us do enjoy talking about Trump, but not in the way you seem to imply.

And I think you have left and right wings mixed up here.

Reemule wrote:

Karol wrote:
You must have never been laughed at for having your models bad painted, if you think that being toxic is limited to tournament crowed. IMO being an A hole is a cross hobby thing.

Never seen this. In general, Competitive players care less what your model looks like, they only want it to be clear on what it is, and what it has. Any comments on painting are general encouraging, as even competitive players in general acknowledge that a brilliant looking game is better for the hobby.

Then go and write somewhere that you don't want to paint your army, because you don't like to paint and see what happens. There is a litteral paint mafia that claims that playing with an unpainted army is one of the worse things you can do, The tournament players care if your army is legal and if this is an event, if you have the obligatory 5 colours. Plus games vs them are faster, no distracting talking, just rolling and saying what you do.

"There is a litteral paint mafia that claims that playing with an unpainted army is one of the worse things you can do, [...]"
Not even us actual paint mafiosos think *anything* is worse than using literal's synonym-for-figurative meaning. It should be figurative's antonym.

There is nothing worse than that. Not even playing unpainted.

Dai wrote:
Looking at the tournament threads that are front and centre of the forum currently I'd say passive aggressive childish unpleasantness is still very much a dominant personality type!

Agreed. Currently trying to have a civilized discussion about characters in a tournament thread. I've only had one decent response. Everyone else thinks it's pissing and moaning.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/770860.page#10347115

On strange right wing leaning players.

I once met a fellow through X-Wing who turned out to be a real charmer. Put me off of playing Imps for the longest time which was a shame because I turned out to really love that faction later on. Anyways, yeah he was a former CAF officer. Would make all these jokes about killing babies and not so subtle racism. Had killed 11 men in Afghanistan. LOL. But we tolerated him because everyone deserves a chance at first but he just got worse and worse. And he would play the "best" lists and he got to be pretty good so you actually had to work to beat him. Plus he was just such a rules freak, like every round was a rules debate. He just wasn't a very nice guy, even when he was being sociable he'd say some awful crazy thing about homeless people or gays and you'd just cringe. Eventually the owner had a talk with him and he disappeared.

But then this old fart who was a Magic player turned out to be a gold hoarding nuclear war but who thought the world was about to end...

The real answer is casual and competitive both have their share of TFG's, neither is immune. The idea that neither side attracts them is silly. They do attract different kinds of TFG, but they're both TFG.

Tournament TFG will lawyer you to death and attempt to use really sketchy wordings on rules to win. These are the guys who look at something like the admech scryerskull strategem and argued it let them shoot whenever they wanted out of phase, or the guy who says that RAW Take cover and Bullgryns Slab shields don't do anything because there's no such thing as an "armor save". Instances where yes, on a very technical sense they are correct RAW, but RAI is blatantly obvious. These are the ones who may also "forget" certain rules that disadvantage them, but these are hard to prove.

A casual TFG is more likely to make stuff up or deliberately misinterpret rules that are known and accepted. They're much more likely to pick on less knowledgeable players who either won't know or are two nervous to call them on it. These also tend to be the ones picking on players for lower quality paintjobs, choice of army, generic bully behavior, etc.

Neither is mutually exclusive of course, but that's my general experience.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Spoiler:

The real answer is casual and competitive both have their share of TFG's, neither is immune. The idea that neither side attracts them is silly. They do attract different kinds of TFG, but they're both TFG.

Tournament TFG will lawyer you to death and attempt to use really sketchy wordings on rules to win. These are the guys who look at something like the admech scryerskull strategem and argued it let them shoot whenever they wanted out of phase, or the guy who says that RAW Take cover and Bullgryns Slab shields don't do anything because there's no such thing as an "armor save". Instances where yes, on a very technical sense they are correct RAW, but RAI is blatantly obvious. These are the ones who may also "forget" certain rules that disadvantage them, but these are hard to prove.

A casual TFG is more likely to make stuff up or deliberately misinterpret rules that are known and accepted. They're much more likely to pick on less knowledgeable players who either won't know or are two nervous to call them on it. These also tend to be the ones picking on players for lower quality paintjobs, choice of army, generic bully behavior, etc.

Neither is mutually exclusive of course, but that's my general experience.

Yes. I think it's also important to point out that in either case, they are in the vast, vast minority. Disagreeable people appear to us to be more common than they are, only because our brains tend to recall negative emotions and the people associated with them as a sort of defense mechanism against such encounters in future. It also doesn't help that everyone's definition of TFG us different. Some people characterize anyone who brings Castellans & Loyal 32 as TFG even though some of them might be the nicest people one could meet.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
...Has anyone noticed a weird right wing slant to the recent players at events?...

 darkcloak wrote:
On strange right wing leaning players.
...

And everybody clapped. I mean, guys- we just got out of this politics purge, don't drag it back onto the page. There's places to rage about the people that vote the other way. Hell, I'm pretty sure there's places where you can go and rage at them and go back and forth all day about this kinda stuff. But if you can't discuss games- something that should be a shared interest, a thing that can humanize people you disagree with and establish a common ground to work with and bridge the gap between us so we can better understand one another- well, if you can't keep your politics out of it, I genuinely believe you might have an unhealthy obsession, or at least be blinded to a simple fact- every village has an idiot, even the village you belong to.

I don't care how much you hate the President or the people who voted for him, discussing those people that politically align differently from you like they're a toxic element is book definition toxic behavior. You gentlemen are better than this, I know, I've had talks with you both before and you're good guys.

I've had my encounters with obnoxious people of all sides of the spectrum, so don't get yourself thinking this is an exclusively "right-wing" thing. We got the local that went on a tirade about boob armor and had a spectacular meltdown in the shop when the women didn't thank him for insinuating all the guys they play with are rapists or pigs (quite the opposite). And the one that somehow believed that smelling like mildew, feet, and unwashed bootyhole was somehow on par with being black or gay and tried to claim discrimination. We had one guy from some D&D group badmouth our regulars online, and then several of his "Anti-Fascist" friends from out of town were making actual threats of violence- which, of course, had to involve authorities and much laughing because most of our players are vets and about half of them are CHL holders.

And then, above all, worse than any right or left wing drama, we get the little groups of guys that show up- just two or three- and since they're new, try to make them feel at home and feel comfortable. Then more of them show up after a while and it looks good. But they aren't really buying stuff, maybe I should just give it some time.... Aaaaaaaaand the guys are back there beating their chests and gloating because their tournament soup lists just smashed some newbie kid's Space Marine fluffy casual list. So, I get to go find out that these dudes have been banned from the FLGS two counties away and be the one that gets to tell them what our FLGS is like, what kind of community we want, and the first time I get a snarky comment I get to give them explicit directions to the door and the quickest way off the property.

Oh, and of course- I'm the one that has to go online to our store's Social Media page and start cleaning up this mess. Each and every one of those little drama spectacles started some kind of outrage mob action on our page, and overwhelmingly from people that have never even been to our store and most of them live out of state.

The saving grace, of course- tying it back to '40k community drama'- is that online outrage mobs have the memory of a goldfish. They go, they post their little opinions and pretend to be absolutely disgusted about something, pleasure themselves to the number of thumbsy-uppies they get from internet strangers, and once they feel validated, they go back to scrolling through facebook and looking for something else to pretend to be offended by. It's a vicious little cycle and it's a direct side effect of a society that's leaned too hard on social media for socializing and validation, rather than interpersonal relationships with actual human beings.

But, one good thing about drama is it's usually quickly removed if you're willing to be firm.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Spoiler:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
...Has anyone noticed a weird right wing slant to the recent players at events?...

 darkcloak wrote:
On strange right wing leaning players.
...

And everybody clapped. I mean, guys- we just got out of this politics purge, don't drag it back onto the page. There's places to rage about the people that vote the other way. Hell, I'm pretty sure there's places where you can go and rage at them and go back and forth all day about this kinda stuff. But if you can't discuss games- something that should be a shared interest, a thing that can humanize people you disagree with and establish a common ground to work with and bridge the gap between us so we can better understand one another- well, if you can't keep your politics out of it, I genuinely believe you might have an unhealthy obsession, or at least be blinded to a simple fact- every village has an idiot, even the village you belong to.

I don't care how much you hate the President or the people who voted for him, discussing those people that politically align differently from you like they're a toxic element is book definition toxic behavior. You gentlemen are better than this, I know, I've had talks with you both before and you're good guys.

I've had my encounters with obnoxious people of all sides of the spectrum, so don't get yourself thinking this is an exclusively "right-wing" thing. We got the local that went on a tirade about boob armor and had a spectacular meltdown in the shop when the women didn't thank him for insinuating all the guys they play with are rapists or pigs (quite the opposite). And the one that somehow believed that smelling like mildew, feet, and unwashed bootyhole was somehow on par with being black or gay and tried to claim discrimination. We had one guy from some D&D group badmouth our regulars online, and then several of his "Anti-Fascist" friends from out of town were making actual threats of violence- which, of course, had to involve authorities and much laughing because most of our players are vets and about half of them are CHL holders.

And then, above all, worse than any right or left wing drama, we get the little groups of guys that show up- just two or three- and since they're new, try to make them feel at home and feel comfortable. Then more of them show up after a while and it looks good. But they aren't really buying stuff, maybe I should just give it some time.... Aaaaaaaaand the guys are back there beating their chests and gloating because their tournament soup lists just smashed some newbie kid's Space Marine fluffy casual list. So, I get to go find out that these dudes have been banned from the FLGS two counties away and be the one that gets to tell them what our FLGS is like, what kind of community we want, and the first time I get a snarky comment I get to give them explicit directions to the door and the quickest way off the property.

Oh, and of course- I'm the one that has to go online to our store's Social Media page and start cleaning up this mess. Each and every one of those little drama spectacles started some kind of outrage mob action on our page, and overwhelmingly from people that have never even been to our store and most of them live out of state.

The saving grace, of course- tying it back to '40k community drama'- is that online outrage mobs have the memory of a goldfish. They go, they post their little opinions and pretend to be absolutely disgusted about something, pleasure themselves to the number of thumbsy-uppies they get from internet strangers, and once they feel validated, they go back to scrolling through facebook and looking for something else to pretend to be offended by. It's a vicious little cycle and it's a direct side effect of a society that's leaned too hard on social media for socializing and validation, rather than interpersonal relationships with actual human beings.

But, one good thing about drama is it's usually quickly removed if you're willing to be firm.

I've never understood this rule. How come it's acceptable for us to tear the living piss out of each other because of our taste in a particular shape of plastic, or whether a rule is clear or not, but the mere mention of a politician is prohibited? What gives?

 Ginjitzu wrote:


I've never understood this rule. How come it's acceptable for us to tear the living piss out of each other because of our taste in a particular shape of plastic, or whether a rule is clear or not, but the mere mention of a politician is prohibited? What gives?

Because the majority of people calm down when the argument is "marines VS tyrainds" or whatever. Sure people can get a bit heated and excited, but by and large the majority take it casually.
When it comes to politics things get ugly fast. People don't calm down, they get worse. Arguments boil over and go right into personal insults and mud slinging and before you know if you've got a chunk of people hating on each other. It basically results in loads of reports of insults, harassments and sets up long term feuds between people very fast.

Even though the political viewpoints and arguments on Dakka will change nothing in the world we live in people argue as if they will; and because those changes would affect our lives (some in very big ways) people get really passionate about it.


So basically politics can bring out the worst; it can result in bans and suspensions and hurt feelings and contention within a community; esp online. Religion can do the very same and its why many forums have a no politics and no religious debate rule. It's basically shutting down the chance for things to spiral into a nightmare situation which will only sour the community.

Sure this doesn't apply to everyone, but it applies to enough that it creates problems, so shutting it down works. Also even within hobbies there are sometimes banned discussions. Eg in Photography there was a time that nearly every forum had a ban on digital VS film debate. You could talk about both, but you couldn't pit them against each other as it would only lead, again, to fights. Some wargame forums had similar rules when AoS first came out and there was huge backlash and arguments between old fantasy fans and new AoS fans at that time. Rather like the film VS digital arguments, the AoS VS Old World fantasy has settled on its own for the most part.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
I've never understood this rule. How come it's acceptable for us to tear the living piss out of each other because of our taste in a particular shape of plastic, or whether a rule is clear or not, but the mere mention of a politician is prohibited? What gives?

Because insinuating that someone is a terrible human being, a bigot, cancer, Nazi, etc. because of the way they vote- often by misrepresenting their position- is a quick way to make things volatile. It also tends to carry over into other threads, and we get oddly suspicious new people joining just to deliberately stir drama on some of the hot-button topics. Given this day and age where an entire website or group can earn a negative reputation over a few outrage fetishists with blogs disguised as news sites, it's pretty much the safe way to play.

Calling someone subhuman filth because they cheated is wholesome and righteous.

I find a lot of the drama is simply the fact you have a casual and a powergamer trying to play together.

They both play in ways that turns the other off.

Sometiimes you have to accept that not everyone should be playing against everyone.

 darkcloak wrote:
Had killed 11 men in Afghanistan. LOL

100% willing to bet that he’s full of gak.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:
I've never understood this rule. How come it's acceptable for us to tear the living piss out of each other because of our taste in a particular shape of plastic, or whether a rule is clear or not, but the mere mention of a politician is prohibited? What gives?

Because insinuating that someone is a terrible human being, a bigot, cancer, Nazi, etc. because of the way they vote- often by misrepresenting their position- is a quick way to make things volatile. It also tends to carry over into other threads, and we get oddly suspicious new people joining just to deliberately stir drama on some of the hot-button topics. Given this day and age where an entire website or group can earn a negative reputation over a few outrage fetishists with blogs disguised as news sites, it's pretty much the safe way to play.

Calling someone subhuman filth because they cheated is wholesome and righteous.

Bah, had a run in with a pacifist and a commi on the same train and gave me gak for playing a wargame. i just laughed and told them to go look at chess and it's history.

As for the outrage culture, represantitve democracy --> Person not policy matters --> social media age and "hyper awarness of the media = gakshow is basically inevitable.

I think it's very important to keep politics as FAR away from this forum as possible. A lot of people want to get away from politics when they come here, myself included.

Darsath wrote:
I think it's very important to keep politics as FAR away from this forum as possible. A lot of people want to get away from politics when they come here, myself included.

Considering how wh40k started and considering how much satire is in it, did that work out for you?

Edit: to clarify it is an honest question.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Darsath wrote:
I think it's very important to keep politics as FAR away from this forum as possible. A lot of people want to get away from politics when they come here, myself included.

Considering how wh40k started and considering how much satire is in it, did that work out for you?

Edit: to clarify it is an honest question.

It has. Shockingly so. I think it also helps that where I play, everyone kind of agrees to not talk politics. Instead we talk almost exclusively hobby related stuff (or video games and movies if we wanna drift off).