I couldn’t agree more. The amount of “white noise” on BGG is one of the reasons I make BGN my only gaming “must read” on the internet. I only go to BGG now to look at comments on games or player aides and variants.  I’ve stopped reading Geek Lists altogether, as 90% are pointless (but hey, they’re just trying to be funny, right?)

While you’re at it, Aldie, please eliminate the ual inuendos and any other behavior that would be offensive to families and especially women gamers. It’s sad that you now have to play the role of “Kindergarten teacher” on your site, but it was only a matter of time until the juveniles on the ‘net crashed the party.

Yes, I did miss out on the “tempest” last week--frankly, because I just don’t visit BGG much anymore, for these very reasons.

I’d like to echo Jeff’s sentiments as well.  The noise on BGG makes it increasingly unwieldy and has done this for the better part of the last year.  If I want to read interesting commentary on this hobby or specific games, I’m much better served coming here (my first choice) or going to any number of individual blogs.

I realize there are ways to make the sight more personal and ignore the crap, but given the surfeit of good information out there outside of BGG, this becomes a bit of a waste. 

For me, BGG has always been specifically about games - finding rules, looking for player aides, etc.  This kind of information feels like what the site was originally intended for and most importantly, it is what the site seems to do best.  Personally, everything else the site tries to do - whether successfully or not - feels terribly unnecessary.

Aldie and his admins do yeoman’s work keeping the site running, but the site has lost focus.  I have no doubt BGG will survive this tempest and a host of future ones.  BGG can’t be all things to all people though no matter how hard it tries.

BoardGameGeek.com is the best board gaming web site on the Internet.  It has the most extensive database of boardgames available anywhere.  The reviews, gamer aids and other game related files are second to none.  Unfortunately, the community of BGG is not what it once was.  There are those who feel that “free speech” means it’s okay to act like jerks and say outrageous things.  There is another group of “well meaning” individuals who feel they know what’s best for the everyone else.  This group goes around telling contributors why their contributions aren’t “good enough.” Don’t you just love self-appointed monitors? 

BoardGameGeek is still a very good boardgaming site and I still visit BGG everyday.  But BGG has lost something.  Success has had a cost.  BGG is no longer the friendly little boardgame site it once was.  The laissez-faire method of management that once worked so well now needs to be replaced with a more organized form of administration. 

Aldie and the Admins are on the right track.  BoardGameGeek is an important part of the Board Game industry now.  The reputation that BGG has attained should be protected and maintained.  Board gamers everywhere don’t want to see BGG taken down by the anarchists.  It’s time for the “Topic Police” to take a heavier hand.  Keep BGG content on target and topic.  Ask the loud-mouths who have nothing useful to add to go somewhere else.

Oh, and “Common courtesy”?  Obviously, it’s not as common as we’d like to think.

I think there are two separate issues here.  The first one is civility and I agree with all that has been said here and with what Aldie and the admins are trying to do.  It can be a slippery slope trying to figure out what is offensive and what is just edgy, but when lines are crossed, it makes for a much less enjoyable experience for the vast majority of users.  Asking an offended user to take action to stop the culprit is NOT the answer--the onus shouldn’t be on them and it’s much more likely the victim will just stop checking the site out.

However, I don’t really agree about policing non-gaming content.  Like it or not, the Geek has become much more than just a gaming site.  It has spawned a community with strong social functions and activities.  I believe that Derk and Aldie have promoted this through the features they’ve added and are happy with the results.  To require that “only game-related material” be added would hurt much of this atmosphere and remove material which is in no way offensive.  The dilution of the Geek began long ago and is more or less irreversible.  One of the prices of massive success is that many people of all interests and levels of gaming sophistication will flock to a site and while one may yearn for earlier days (I certainly do), it’s wrong to deny them from making the kind of postings they want.  The Geek is what it is.  Like most of you, I find the vast majority of the new material to be of little interest, but I can’t and wouldn’t change it just to satisfy my own desires.  The site remains the premier research source for gaming on the web and that’s more than enough.

Oh, and Jeff, while I sympathize with your desire to turn the Geek into a G rated site, I’m not sure that’s appropriate either.  The great majority of the users are adults and shouldn’t have to couch their language as if a five-year-old was in the room.  If youngsters want to surf the site (which is great), it should be done with adult supervision, just as with any other internet activity by children.  If one’s kids are old enough to surf the site by themselves, they’re old enough not to be corrupted by just about anything currently there.  In this day and age, I don’t think most 12-year-olds would be shocked even by Busen Memo, but if you think they would be, block the site unless you’re around to guide them.

I must admit that I don’t think I’ve ever really used BGG as anything other than a gaming research resource.  When GeekLists started they were pretty much already white noise to me.

As long as diatribes don’t show up in the reviews, rules, or (sometimes) pictures sections I think I’ll be fine.

-----

I have no problems with coming down on people who are creating offensive content.  It it Derk & Aldie’s site and they can do that (and I’m glad as I support that.)

As for trying to keep discussions on-topic, I can’t see that happening.  I’m willing to bet I(a small amount) that I could easily get a decent discussion on Creamed Corn up at the ESPN site.  People who have commonalities love to try to discuss and find more, so tangents happen.  However, I see no need for people to be abusive.

I think early geeklists were essential for helping get the game entries submitted to the early growing BGG database. (For example take Rick Helie’s “History of the take that! cardgame”:  http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/277 ) In such a list the author would group games by a certain criteria and ask other users to add games that were missed.  This in turn would lead to users realizing that the games that they wanted to add were missing from the geek and could be added. (In this case amongst other games someone talks about the 1920’s Lucky Lindy game). IMHO, these association exercises were fun and brought out all sorts of obscure stuff to build the game entries (and association is such a good jogger of memories).

Nowadays so much is a geeklist that could just be a forum post with attached gameids and pictures. Also everything scrolls off so quick that using geeklists as a site building aid doesn’t work anymore. Which is a shame because so much pre-70’s is still missing from the geek (just look at games under the vintage category on Ebay and you’ll find a couple missing entries almost every time)

Am I to understand that the reviews, images, rules, translations, ratings, news, game-specific forums, related links, find-a-gamer functions, rules variants, trading sections, geek buddies, marketplace posts, geek mail, etc. - all offered free of charge - are compromised and sullied by “white noise” geeklists and the non-gaming forum posts?

Oh, please. 

BoardGameGeek is practically without peer on the internet, considering all it offers to its main audience - the board gaming hobby.  Influxes of the public (and wargamers) have strengthened its content.  All that was lost with all these added members was the intimacy of a smaller site. Situations like this usually threaten the “aristocracy” of the smaller site that was, because those people just aren’t that important any more.  Everyone else benefits from the added content and the diversity of opinions.

So disable the GeekList drop-down, stay out of the Non-gaming forums, and take advantage of the 1,000,000 other benefits of the site.

You’ll find the ‘Geek to be better than ever if you do.

P.S.  I like the white noise, BTW, and it certainly hasn’t ever gotten in the way of me finding more information on games than I could ever possibly use.

I hope no one interpreted my comments to mean I thought GeekLists (or whatever) should be eliminated from BGG.  My only point there was that I don’t use them, so they don’t offend me.

I have no problem with policing “meanness”, but policing “off-topic-ness” seems to be next to impossible and really unneeded.

The BGG is quite unique and serves an amazing resource.  Even though I only use about 1/10 or less of the features I would greatly miss it if it were to dramatically change.

The stars align.  Both Scott’s (Alden & Tepper) were right on with their logic.

Thanks for your comments, Larry.  I wasn’t really trying to say that BGG should be G rated.  Allow me clarify.

You wrote: “The great majority of the users are s and shouldn’t have to couch their language as if a five-year-old was in the room”

That’s fine, but I think it would be appropriate to avoid language (especially inuendos) “as if” there is a lady in the room, lest we make gaming into a “good ol’ boys” club.

Besides, it’s just not necessary, and frankly, boring. I’m not THAT old, but that kind of humor is.

I don’t mind the white noise or the innuendos, as I am very much a social gamer.  What I do mind is the nastiness and pettiness and the lack of consideration for other peoples’ feelings that some people seem to find acceptable.  As Kim said, “free speech” is not carte blanche to act like a jerk. 

I know I pissed off several people by referring to the constant comparison of Aldie’s decision to censorship as whining, but I don’t really care.  Some of these people were acting like Aldie and the mods are some kind of internet not-so-secret police force out of 1984 and they’re not.  They’re just normal folks like all of us are, their motivations are quite benign, and most of all they are people with feelings too.