Decline in OT activity

[Narz]

There's so many other things competing for eyeballs these days. Why create an account and participate on a forum just for Civilization when you can go on the Steam forums with your account and talk about Civilization as well as every other game you play. Why participate in CFC OT when you can tailor the content closer to your liking on something like reddit? Specialist forums are no longer a thing that are in the forefront of your mind if you want to discuss something on the internet.

Well one thing I like about CFC is that it's not a "specilized forum", at least OT isn't. Sure most of us played Civ at one point but we don't share political views, dietary preferences, locations or worldviews in general. Thats kept this place interesting, well at least a little interesting, whereas more type-specific places I've posted have fallen by the wayside.

One of the forum's less endearing qualities.


I stopped posting, and mostly stopped reading, after I set up my ignore list.

I populated the ignore list with posters I'd decided it was a waste of time to read or engage. OK ... fine. Now I can just talk to the interesting people, right? Yay.

But what were they doing? They were spending most of their time arguing with people I'd decided were a waste of time.

Such threads stopped being amusing rather quickly.

Almost all the interesting topics, IMO, involve discussions DOMINATED by deeply-uninteresting posters. A relatively few posters - a very few - set the tone and quality of many discussions, and not for the better.

It's not a good dynamic.

There are a number of posters I miss discussing things with. But too much time was spent not talking *with* them, but rather talking *at* other posters while they happened to do the same thing. PM's could be used for a little back-channel discussion, but PMs are hardly a replacement for a threaded forum.

In real life, its chill hanging out with people who share your values & you can feel relaxed/at-ease with but online that type of relationship doesn't generate many printed characters.

Online is just a different world. If you manage to find a forum where people can generate massive amounts of content without fighting do let me know & I'll come check it out, never to return here (except maybe to say hi & lurk once in awhile).

 

[azzaman333]

Well one thing I like about CFC is that it's not a "specilized forum", at least OT isn't. Sure most of us played Civ at one point but we don't share political views, dietary preferences, locations or worldviews in general. Thats kept this place interesting, well at least a little interesting, whereas more type-specific places I've posted have fallen by the wayside.

That keeps people here somewhat, but it doesn't attract new members to the site. People are going to see the name Civ Fanatics and think this site is just Civ and nothing else, why spend the limited time they have on the specialised site versus a Facebook or a Twitter or a reddit.

 

[Narz]

I'm not saying its enough to draw new people, I agree. Its just why I've stayed.

 

[classical_hero]

One thing about the forum I both like a lot and don't like at all is the incredible hypocrisy regarding the official "We're a family forum and stuff guys" stance.

This stance seems to mean that incredibly suggestive sexuality is fine, but nudity, even if it isn't sexual, is right out.

I have no idea what sort of families "The deciders" on this forum have, but they must be pretty messed up to think that the babes thread (for example) is family friendly, while an innocent shot of a nipple is not.

Okay, now that I'm done ripping on "the deciders", let me just say that the other side of this - the "like a lot" part is the babes thread itself. I'm a hypocrite as well, and an honest one, so I have to admit that I look through this thread every once in a while. It's niiiiiice. It tells me that the people who post there have for the most part a very agreeable stance on babes. I can't not praise their efforts.

Anyway, this whole stance on "family friendliness" makes the whole forum appear to be a bit of.. well.. I don't even know how to describe it. A wild west ran by 16 year olds. "SEX IS BAD AND NIPPLES ARE GROSS BUT LOOK AT THAT ARSE"

It comes across as incredibly immature to me. Either do it one way or the other way. This is a weird teenage type of compromise that comes across as very amateurish. Does it attract potential new members or drive them away? I'm not sure.

But hey, I do enjoy the babes.

You can find worse down at the beach that what is found in the Babe thread.

 

[gay_Aleks]

I guess they didn't prepare their beach bodies.

 

[Cutlass]

Yeah, most of us are well aware of the hypocrisy involved in allowing a babe thread while otherwise sticking to a strict intepretation of "family friendliness". The babe thread is something of a holdover from a much earlier time in the forum's history and would probably not be allowed today if they had previously not existed.

FWIW, there's a strong possibility that the babe threads will be going away in the very near future due to a complaint by Google Ads, whose bots recently found one of the old babe threads and tagged it as offensive. Apparently they're doing this throughout the internet and pulling ads from sites that don't meet their content requirements. So our hypocrisy here is likely to be resolved, if only because Google is even stricter than we are.

Been thinking about this a bit. Did you know that a google image search will immediately return images that would be banned by CFC rules? Seems like nothing which is posted in the babe thread now, or the future given the current rules, even approaches what google itself displays.

Try this:

Jessica Alba see through
Anne Hathaway see through
Anne Hathaway nude

and then click the tab for images. The first page is full of images which violate google's terms of service! Topless, see through, nude, real and fake, it's all right there on the first page. And you're worried about what goes on here? I wouldn't be.

Further, I admin a celeb picture forum which in its heyday was as large and active as CFC ever was, both for users and contents. Often with over 1000 users online at a time. I mention the size because with that size comes visibility. And back in the day this was the most visible of all the celeb picture forums on the net. So visible that it attracted a lot of attention. Attention from businesses and lawyers. Not to mention google. So the rules reflect the google hypocrisy against nude pics that they themselves don't follow.

As a result, this is what the rules look like:

2) BANNED CONTENT

No Posting of Nudity or Pictures/Videos from Banned Sources Allowed.

a) You may not post nude pictures or videos or post links to them either in your post or signature. Content with slight see-through and slightly obscured shots are OK. If you are in doubt, please ask a Mod before publicly posting. Censoring or modifying a nude image by blurring it or by adding another object to the image to cover up the area is not acceptable and will be treated the same as an actual nude image. Fully exposed pictures (top or bottom) are not acceptable. This also applies to video posts. This site is designed for people of all ages and many of the picture and video hosts allowed here (such as ImageShack for example) do not allow these types of pictures. Unacceptable content will be removed by the moderators and the poster will be warned.

b) There is to be no posting of any ELLE/FHM/Vanity Fair/Playboy Magazine scans or any other pictures that are owned by ELLE/FHM/Vanity Fair/Playboy (including images or videos from those entities' websites). There is to be no posting of any images from Most Wanted Pictures, Inc, Splash News or MediaVast, Inc. and its affiliated divisions WireImage, FilmMagic, Contour Photos and WireImagesSTOCK. Any banned content also cannot be used in avatars or signature banners.

Full DVD's, movies, full episodes of ongoing TV shows (True Blood, Game Of Thrones, Pretty Little Liars etc), all torrent files and MP3's are also not permitted here due to the obvious copyright issues.

Additionally, there is to be no posting of images from www.BiancaBeauchamp.com, CPI (Creative Photographers Inc) or any of CPI's photographers. See this link for CPI's current list of photographers : http://www.cpi-syndication.com/df/photographers/view . Only their current photographers are banned here.

Also, you may not post pictures by Armando Gallo. Pictures from meinmyplace.com and mimp.findrow.com are not allowed either.

If pictures from any of these sources are found being posted they will be removed without notice and the poster in question will be warned. Continued abuse of this rule will lead to your account being banned.

Note section B. This place is, or was, so visible on the net that specific companies, publications, and photographers routinely have their lawyers contact us to take down content. Certainly that visibility, on a forum which is all about pictures, is far more visible than the babe thread is here.

What's more, that place allows near nudity, such as those see through pics, many of which are barely obscuring the nipples at all. And google isn't saying boo about it.

So I wouldn't think the risk from google of pulling the ads because of the babe thread content is a threat you really have to concern yourself with.

 

[thecrazyscot]

I think it's pretty simple dude, look at unemployment rates at the beginning of your chart and compared to now. Posters got jobs, less time to waste online

My posting dramatically increased after I got my job...I have very little to do here.

There's so many other things competing for eyeballs these days. Why create an account and participate on a forum just for Civilization when you can go on the Steam forums with your account and talk about Civilization as well as every other game you play. Why participate in CFC OT when you can tailor the content closer to your liking on something like reddit? Specialist forums are no longer a thing that are in the forefront of your mind if you want to discuss something on the internet.

Yeah, I think that goes for a lot of people, but some people prefer to have something a bit more...mature and there's more of a community feel than what happens on the Steam forums or other sites.

 

[Leoreth]

I don't see how these things fit together. On the one hand several people have pointed out that CFC's distinguishing factor is the possibility of mature interaction and direct personal connections.

On the other hand there seems to be the idea that we need to attract more people with dick pic and babe threads.

???

 

[Kyriakos]

^Ultimately CFC OT has to compete with fourchan, and not with Wikipedia

 

[thecrazyscot]

I don't want dick pic and babe threads!

I don't understand their appeal anyways - just fire up Google/Bing and you've got all the nipples you could possibly want without the interruption of any commentary.

 

[Kyriakos]

I don't want dick pic and babe threads!

I don't understand their appeal anyways - just fire up Google/Bing and you've got all the nipples you could possibly want without the interruption of any commentary.

Maybe some people here only can get it working if they read commentary on such pics by others!!

 

[thecrazyscot]

How soon before they start adding "developer commentary" tracks to videos on Redtube?

 

[Leoreth]

^Ultimately CFC OT has to compete with fourchan, and not with Wikipedia

I wasn't going to bring that image board up, but in essence this is exactly where that line of thought gets us. And in my opinion if our solution is to become more like fourchan then it's a terrible solution.

 

[Light Cleric]

And not your infamous posting style?

See, this was my knee jerk reaction, too. Then I considered a certain notorious lefty poster who routinely said pretty messed up things about people, sometimes entire populations of countries, had a certain dismissive label for anyone they disagreed with(as in, columnists and journalists, not just CFC posters), and weaseled around by changing the wording of their own arguments when they got called on something. The people I saw who had no problem piling on other people either basically pretended he didn't exist or helped hijack threads to deflect and distract when someone did call them out. It was one of the reasons I realized OT was probably not a place I should frequent often(though I still end up drifting back when I check the Sports threads).

I actually don't think it's ideological bias but rather circling the wagon. Either way, I still saw it happen.

 

[Zack]

See, this was my knee jerk reaction, too. Then I considered a certain notorious lefty poster who routinely said pretty messed up things about people, sometimes entire populations of countries, had a certain dismissive label for anyone they disagreed with(as in, columnists and journalists, not just CFC posters), and weaseled around by changing the wording of their own arguments when they got called on something. The people I saw who had no problem piling on other people either basically pretended he didn't exist or helped hijack threads to deflect and distract when someone did call them out. It was one of the reasons I realized OT was probably not a place I should frequent often(though I still end up drifting back when I check the Sports threads).

I actually don't think it's ideological bias but rather circling the wagon. Either way, I still saw it happen.

As if Form was loved by CFC OT? (I know that's not who you're talking about, but still)

There are conservatives like Farm Boy who get along just fine.

 

[warpus]

Yeah, there are a bunch of people who have somewhat.. immature posting styles, wrapped in a veil of "look at me, I'm so mature and know everything"ness. I see it as a personal defect and not really as an indicator of any sort of negative aspect of the forum culture - there are many people from all sorts of walks of life here, and some of them are just going to have strange viewpoints and strange personality disorders. I think that's just to be expected, as annoying as it seems.

Maybe I just got used to it and moved on *shrug* .. I think what helps me is to not really get emotionally invested in any of the arguments/debates/whatever. It's "just the internet", there's no need to get all worked up over something.

 

[Light Cleric]

As if Form was loved by CFC OT? (I know that's not who you're talking about, but still)

There are conservatives like Farm Boy who get along just fine.

I did say it wasn't ideological.

 

[Zack]

I did say it wasn't ideological.

Fair enough, I didn't catch that last part.

It just bugs me when people say hateful stuff, e.g. gay bashing, and then turn around and whine about being called a bigot. It's disgustingly hypocritical and self-centered.

 

[Borachio]

There are conservatives like Farm Boy who get along just fine.

Wait. Mr Boy is a conservative?

I thought he was a radical Methodist.

But if he's a conservative, what does that make me?

 

[Zack]

What I meant is that people like Farm Boy have expressed more conservative opinions on certain issues and they still get along fine with the community.

But I mean, if you've been starting threads on why gay marriage is an abomination for YEARS... yeah, people are going to call you bigoted. Crying about being oppressed for your "views" is pathetic when those views are bigoted drivel.