Though there is to some extent a... Let's call it "Negativity bias" for a lack of a better term, I'm sure there is one. In online forums, people tend to be more driven towards voicing their opinions if it's of a "negative" nature- Actually let's call it criticism, that's often what the intent is. I don't actually want to throw shade on any group of people here, rather share an experience.
It's more likely for someone to find the motivation and interest in navigating to an online forum... The point I'm ultimately trying to make is, online forums has the odds stacked against it of often being dominated by variants of criticism or "negativity", often because it's the most passionate fans that in their own way just want something they love to be even more loveable, somewhere deep down, even though others may perceive them as haters.
From personal experience with customer and inter-office responses there definitely is a negative spin to most responses. Response bias is mostly impossible to avoid, unless there are metrics available that are free of bias. It happens in online forums and a lot of other spaces, the main difference for online forums is that we are all veiled behind our profile pictures and usernames. (There is a lean towards distrust, even when forum members agree. Just as how drivers want to immediately assume the other drivers are the issue, because all they see is a car, not the human being. It's hard for users to read this in my voice or to humanize my posts.)
Originally Posted by The Composer
I want to focus on Larian forums specifically, to "win an argument" here, in the only way that matters in the end of the day imo, is to influence the developers. Most people get stuck in interpersonal squabble instead of focusing on what matters... So I believe it should be narrated in 2nd person present-tense, so that the player has a stronger sense of driving the story and making the choices as they go themselves." - No squabble, no frustrated rants about how they're bad developers or ruin D&D or how everyone that disagrees with me is ignorant, or get stuck on calling them out for ad hominems, strawmans, or any other non-sense. Just keeping the eye on the ball, and presenting a rational argument.
I will try but writing in the second person has never been my strength xD I'd like to think I've avoided ad hominems or strawmen for the most part. But that can get challenging if there ever is a prolonged back-and-forth. As you write in the next quote, it's easiest if the discussion stays focused on the topic or the critique itself.
Originally Posted by The Composer
Now I'm doubtful that my particular message was in any means impactful... but I believe level-headed discussion that focuses on the merit of the criticism, rather than other participants of the debate, goes a long way. In fact, I believe that undermines the criticism more than anything, and I dare say most people share their criticism because they hope to see it make a difference. That's what I'm trying to say I suppose, that I want criticism and calls for action to actually inspire action, rather than to undermine itself by falling victim to typical weaknesses of the human psyche
It'd be great if discussions stayed on the discussion at hand.
