Thread-ban instead of thread-lock?

[pharma]

You need to go back to the point where a mod got involved in the "discussion" to understand what @trinibwoy is talking about.
It's unfortunate but maybe they should have self-moderated instead of attempting to have the last word on the topic.

 

[trinibwoy]

they deemed that the discussion was done because no new information was being added.

It seems to me they deemed the discussion over because they disagreed with the poster who presumably didn’t sufficiently acknowledge the shortfalls of HWRT to their liking. There was no violation of forum rules and the discussion was 110% on topic.

Being a mod is surely a thankless job but in this case they should’ve kept the keyboard holstered. There was no harm being done. Mod power shouldn’t be used as an “I win” button in a debate.

 

[SlmDnk]

@BRiT

For your reconsideration...

Or could you at least give some input to the topic at hand?

 

[digitalwanderer]

It seems to me they deemed the discussion over

Fixed it for you.

could you at least give some input to the topic at hand?

From my discussions with the mods basically begging for a thread to discuss the 4060ti/7600 launch and burn and it ain't gonna happen. Until we can behave ourselves they will not budge.

Notice I said "we", and I can't blame them for their position. The nVidia and AMD "show signs in 2023" threads are already being used to discuss it and I'm one of the worst offenders in there on it. I'm gonna try and stop. I was hoping we could maybe all agree to open up a "Low End Launch Card Drama" thread in general just where we could all discuss this, but I had it explained to me in a fashion I just can't argue with that we're not ready for it yet.

I'm gonna try and be less combative/confrontational on my analysis/opinions. Not sure if I can pull it off, but I'm gonna try really hard and hope it can help.

 

[SlmDnk]

Until we can behave ourselves they will not budge.

If that's really the case then the moderators are as immature as the ones whom can't behave themselves.

Thread-ban the misbehavers and re-open the thread. Job well done. It's as simple as that.

 

[digitalwanderer]

If that's really the case then the moderators are as immature as the ones whom can't behave themselves.

Thread-ban the misbehavers and re-open the thread. Job well done. It's as simple as that.

I don't mean to insult you but I'm pretty sure that kind of attitude is why it ain't gonna open any time soon. The mods are right and we're wrong, even if we're right.

That's just what the rules are and how they work, and until we respect that we'll continue to be denied posting privileges.

 

[nutball]

This is a private space, ergo 1A "rights" don't apply here.

Domain names and hosting are cheap, and there is free software available that will allow you to run your own forum as you see fit.

Everybody here clicked the "I Accept" button when signing up. So you accepted.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

If that's really the case then the moderators are as immature as the ones whom can't behave themselves.

I'd recommend spending a year in a mod's shoes. I've done it, and would not again. When things spiral, it feels like you now have two jobs, one of which you don't get paid for and is tantamount to cleaning up shit.

I don't always agree with the mod decisions, but I get it and I know that I'm often seeing a fraction of the nonsense they do.

 

[trinibwoy]

I don't mean to insult you but I'm pretty sure that kind of attitude is why it ain't gonna open any time soon. The mods are right and we're wrong, even if we're right.

That's just what the rules are and how they work, and until we respect that we'll continue to be denied posting privileges.

Mods are just people on the internet. I sincerely hope they’re not the type of people who let “being a mod” get to their heads. It would be a weird flex.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I disagree. How is a debate of SWRT and HWRT trade offs derailing a thread named “Unreal Engine 5” when UE5 is the reigning poster child for exactly that discussion?

It's not. The issue was the argument against SWRT that wasn't being progressed and just reiterated Epic should be doing things differently, every single time SWRT came up. It was an intellectual dead-end that just added noise over the top of every game and demo conversation. As spelled out, if there's new contributions to the be made to the debate, they should be made. Until then, to preserve the flow of the conversation without the same dead-end head-banging.

AFAICS that thread is running very well and producing ongoing healthy discussion. We just no longer have "why aren't Epic using the triangle RT hardware??" come up every other week.

You need to go back to the point where a mod got involved in the "discussion" to understand what @trinibwoy is talking about.
It's unfortunate but maybe they should have self-moderated instead of attempting to have the last word on the topic.

I'm confused. Are you talking about Andrew Lauritzen? As one of the guys working on UE5, you don't want him contributing to the UE5 thread?

 

[pharma]

I'm confused. Are you talking about Andrew Lauritzen? As one of the guys working on UE5, you don't want him contributing to the UE5 thread?

Yes, I am talking about Andrew and all his posts that were deleted in his back and forth with OlegSH that depicted the nature of the discussion. It's pretty obvious not everyone will be in agreement and being able to accept criticism, different perspectives and knowing when to "agree to disagree" will be important instead of just following the party line.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm not sure what posts you are referring. Could well be Andrew messed up a bit, balancing moderation with personal perspective with professional occupation. Or someone stepped in overtly-strong. From my mod perspective though, in this case I'm saying any damage is less than the benefit in an imperfect world.

Also there's nothing stopping a discussion being moved to another thread if people want to start a thread, "why doesn't UE5 uses RT HW?" or somesuch. A new thread can see participants walk away if they feel the discussion is cyclic, keeping a more general thread from getting bogged down. Sometimes it's not realistic or manageable to spawn a thread from existing content, so just make a new one. This only is a Bad Idea if a thread has been locked and the discussion is attempted again. If in doubt, ask the mods if a new thread can be started on a taboo topic in an existing thread.

eg: Me locking down PS4 talk from current-gen thread, and a new thread opening...

Current Generation Games Analysis Technical Discussion [2023] [XBSX|S, PS5, PC]

Oh, really? I didn't notice. Seriously, the PS4 advantage over One wasn't all that great in terms of geometry or texture assets superiority, however, PS4 did occasionally enjoy higher framerates or at the vey least, stuck closer to 1080p. It was 50% more powerful on the GPU side only, 18 CU...

forum.beyond3d.com

Current Generation Games Analysis Technical Discussion [2023] [XBSX|S, PS5, PC]

Ok, found info that there is 64. Then there is wrong info in wikipedia. Are you sure.... 20% (it's actually 18%) is nothing these days, it's also the difference on paper and nothing ever scales 100% linear. So that 18% performance advantage on paper might only result in a 0-18% increase in...

forum.beyond3d.com

Liandry then started a new thread:

Some Xbox 360 and PS3 questions

I would like to start a new thread about Xbox 360 and PS3. There is still some moments I didn't understood yet. I will try to ask questions by one and maybe someone can explan. Also would be interesting if some discusion starts here. So question. Maybe someone haven't red this...

forum.beyond3d.com

 

[trinibwoy]

It's not. The issue was the argument against SWRT that wasn't being progressed and just reiterated Epic should be doing things differently, every single time SWRT came up. It was an intellectual dead-end that just added noise over the top of every game and demo conversation. As spelled out, if there's new contributions to the be made to the debate, they should be made. Until then, to preserve the flow of the conversation without the same dead-end head-banging.

AFAICS that thread is running very well and producing ongoing healthy discussion. We just no longer have "why aren't Epic using the triangle RT hardware??" come up every other week.

UE5 supports both HWRT and SWRT and Epic is using the triangle RT hardware so that’s not the issue. Maybe rename the UE5 thread to UE5 games and demos and create a new one for UE5 technology?

Shutting down debate on the trade offs between Lumen’s SDF and triangle tracing modes is certainly not the answer. Epic themselves are leaning into the comparison in their technical documentation and presentations. Not sure why it should be disallowed here.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Shutting down debate on the trade offs between Lumen’s SDF and triangle tracing modes is certainly not the answer. Epic themselves are leaning into the comparison in their technical documentation and presentations. Not sure why it should be disallowed here.

Start a new thread about that specifically? Then it won't be derailing the other thread and everyone who wants to can discuss it there..

 

[pharma]

UE5 supports both HWRT and SWRT and Epic is using the triangle RT hardware so that’s not the issue. Maybe rename the UE5 thread to UE5 games and demos and create a new one for UE5 technology?

Shutting down debate on the trade offs between Lumen’s SDF and triangle tracing modes is certainly not the answer. Epic themselves are leaning into the comparison in their technical documentation and presentations. Not sure why it should be disallowed here.

Good idea. Renaming the thread to something other than UE5 technology is appropriate since it fails in that respect and currently is more of a gaming oriented threads. It would allow Epic to maintain their "rose bush" appearance and avoid triggering moderation to topics counter to Epic's marketing/political pitch.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Shutting down debate on the trade offs between Lumen’s SDF and triangle tracing modes is certainly not the answer. Epic themselves are leaning into the comparison in their technical documentation and presentations. Not sure why it should be disallowed here.

The debate wasn't shut off. The constant complaining about not-using-HW-RT-even-when-it-was-explained-multiple-times was.
The software-versus-hardware conversation was not disallowed - it was explicitly stated when there's something new to add and we're not treading old ground, it can be discussed.

Unreal Engine 5, [UE5 Developer Availability 2022-04-05]

except for corner cases such as kitbashing, laziness or lack of expertise, or just the fact that SW RT is used by default I don't think your characterization of the many, very legitimate cases in which HW RT is not currently an appropriate solution is fair here. I don't know if you're being...

forum.beyond3d.com

We're clearly at the point where no new information is being brought up, so the "discussion" was done a while ago, whether you believe it a success or failure. At the very least move it to a new thread please until there's actual new information, preferably related to Unreal or an Unreal game.

You and Pharma were invited to start a new thread about SW Lumen versus HW, just not in that thread.

At that point, Andrew didn't engage full on moderator protocols which is fitting as he's in the middle of the discussion, so I did. And we explained why. And invited people to change the discussion to keep things healthy. no-one could be bothered to start a new thread as suggested, instead just grumbling about the mods getting in the way.

All the push back has been a few posters who want to post what they want where they want, ignoring the requests of the mods to structure the forum to maintain healthy discussions.

 

[pharma]

If the debate wasn't shut off where are the deleted posts between Andrew and OlegSH that occurred prior to your mod involvement and inflammatory statement?
It was hard not to notice the posts when reading the thread at that time.

The nature of the thread changed around here and push back by Andrew on certain discussions.

 

[trinibwoy]

Good idea. Renaming the thread to something other than UE5 technology is appropriate since it fails in that respect and currently is more of a gaming oriented threads. It would allow Epic to maintain their "rose bush" appearance and avoid triggering moderation to topics counter to Epic's marketing/political pitch.

Yeah I’m not following the logic here. It’s a thread in the “Gaming Technology” section. There is already a different “Games” section for discussing games and demos. Yet somehow the technical discussion is considered off topic because it’s disrupting discussion of games and demos? Doesn’t make sense to me.

@Shifty Geezer sorry but it’s a little silly to complain about arguments being rehashed given how quiet this forum is. Without rehashed arguments there would be near zero activity here.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If the debate wasn't shut off where are the deleted posts between Andrew and OlegSH that occurred prior to your mod involvement and inflammatory statement?
It was hard not to notice the posts when reading the thread at that time.

The nature of the thread changed around here and push back by Andrew on certain discussions.

I don't know. I can't see any redacted conversation. Regardless what happened before, the way going forwards was spelled out fairly IMO.

Yeah I’m not following the logic here. It’s a thread in the “Gaming Technology” section. There is already a different “Games” section for discussing games and demos. Yet somehow the technical discussion is considered off topic because it’s disrupting discussion of games and demos? Doesn’t make sense to me.

What? That thread is talking about the UE5 features and showcases and how it works. Such as muscle deformer, and TSR. The games (gameplay, story, etc) aren't being discussed in any capacity; they are just showing UE5 in operation.

@Shifty Geezer sorry but it’s a little silly to complain about arguments being rehashed given how quiet this forum is. Without rehashed arguments there would be near zero activity here.

1) Think of it from Andrew's perspective. He pretty much only contributes to one thread for obvious reasons, and he doesn't want to get stuck in a loop. Hence the request to move discussion out of 'his' thread.
2) Have you really got nothing better to do with your life than repeat the same ideas ad nauseum on an internet forum? You're actually request the opportunity to say the same things over and over, not changing anything, not convincing anyone, not learning anything new, in a thread where that behavoiur disrupts those wanting to talk about new stuff even if not as frequently as you'd like??

Seriously, what is you guy's problem with starting a new thread on UE5's HW vs SW RT?? In the amount of time you've spent arguing, you could have easily solved the problem yourself with your own moderator-sanctioned agency!!

 

[trinibwoy]

What? That thread is talking about the UE5 features and showcases and how it works. Such as muscle deformer, and TSR. The games (gameplay, story, etc) aren't being discussed in any capacity; they are just showing UE5 in operation.

You literally just said it was disruptive to discussion of games and demos. Which clearly doesn't make sense since it's not a games and demos thread.

"It was an intellectual dead-end that just added noise over the top of every game and demo conversation."

1) Think of it from Andrew's perspective. He pretty much only contributes to one thread for obvious reasons, and he doesn't want to get stuck in a loop. Hence the request to move discussion out of 'his' thread.

Oh, didn't realize it was Andrew's thread. Based on everything you've said here that thread is really poorly named

2) Have you really got nothing better to do with your life than repeat the same ideas ad nauseum on an internet forum? You're actually request the opportunity to say the same things over and over, not changing anything, not convincing anyone, not learning anything new, in a thread where that behavoiur disrupts those wanting to talk about new stuff even if not as frequently as you'd like??

Seriously, what is you guy's problem with starting a new thread on UE5's HW vs SW RT?? In the amount of time you've spent arguing, you could have easily solved the problem yourself with your own moderator-sanctioned agency!!

So now there's a problem with providing site feedback in the site feedback forum? Sheesh.

This isn't about me. The UE5 SWRT debate was between Oleg, Andrew and other folks. I'm commenting here in "site feedback" because I felt compelled to provide feedback on questionable moderation. I guess that's also not allowed here.