Timeline for Are questions specifically about the computer version of a game on topic?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
28 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:38 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/ with https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 8, 2016 at 17:07 | comment | added | Cascabel | @freekvd If I had to decide, I'd say it was fine to ask in the first place - the OP didn't know whether it was a bug or a rules misunderstanding, just as you might not know whether a weird card in a game is a typo or a rules misunderstanding. Sure, since it turns out to be a bug, we can't fix it for the OP (and maybe they should report it), but the OP isn't asking us to fix it, they're trying to understand the game. | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 8:15 | comment | added | freekvd | Since this got upped... what about this question: Why did I win "Asia Passport" achievement early? | |
| Apr 6, 2016 at 1:57 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 53 characters in body
|
| Apr 5, 2016 at 16:47 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 154 characters in body
|
| Apr 5, 2016 at 0:19 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 128 characters in body
|
| Apr 5, 2016 at 0:14 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 128 characters in body
|
| Apr 5, 2016 at 0:05 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 212 characters in body
|
| Apr 4, 2016 at 23:59 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 212 characters in body
|
| Apr 4, 2016 at 23:37 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 214 characters in body
|
| Apr 4, 2016 at 22:34 | vote | accept | Cascabel | ||
| Sep 16, 2014 at 17:03 | comment | added | Cascabel | Let us continue this discussion in chat. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 17:02 | comment | added | Cascabel | @Rainbolt Thank you for trying to support your position. I still disagree: Arqade does exist for electronic board games, but we exist for board games (regardless of platform). Both sites are fair places for these questions. We do not need to revise our policy to get rid of them; they get good answers where. And it's not at all confusing to take only computerized board game questions here (and not computer games in general) - I don't think anyone's going to think "oh, they take questions about MTGO? I can ask about Call of Duty." | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 17:00 | comment | added | Rainbolt | @Jefromi Do feel free to address the latter half of my comment, where I ventured beyond common sense. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 16:59 | comment | added | Cascabel | @Rainbolt You've said that common sense needs to be applied, and that the conclusion is your policy, which conflicts with the site's policy - pretty clearly implying that you think the site's policy is wrong. If you want to discuss this, fine. But please try to avoid petty arguments. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 16:50 | comment | added | Rainbolt | @Jefromi I didn't say that it's common sense that you are wrong. I said common sense needs to be used when applying the policy. If you decided that common sense dictates that you are wrong, then obviously you have some internal conflict that you need to sort out. As for supporting my own case, fine. Arqade exists for electronic games, therefore they are better equipped to handle such questions. It's more confusing to allow some electronic only questions here and not allow others. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 16:05 | comment | added | Rainbolt | @Jefromi Sorry, I deleted my comment at the same time you responded. I'm currently revising it. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 15:59 | comment | added | Cascabel | @Rainbolt Yes, we all understand your proposed policy. But why is it a good idea? And what is wrong with the current policy? Yes, the current policy does create a little more overlap than your proposed policy. But at least a couple of us think that's a good thing, and are explaining why. You're just telling us it's common sense that we're wrong, and that it shouldn't even be debatable. It's not very convincing. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 15:16 | comment | added | Rainbolt | @PatLudwig Is the policy you wrote immune to community interpretation? | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 14:49 | comment | added | Cascabel | @Rainbolt I think I've given a couple great reasons to keep them: it's less confusing to users, and they'll get good answers here, in some cases likely better than on Arqade. If you disagree, please try to make a better argument than "it's common sense that I'm right." | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 14:21 | comment | added | Pat Ludwig Mod | @Rainbolt - Thank you, I really appreciate your assistance in interpreting the policy page I wrote. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 13:15 | comment | added | Rainbolt | @PatLudwig The overlap exists because some questions are applicable to both the physical and the electronic game. There is simply no reason to keep questions that are exclusive to the electronic game. Arqade exists for that. Please apply some common sense when reading policy. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 5:30 | comment | added | Pat Ludwig Mod | Great answer! The only thing I'd add is that there is no expectation that each question is on topic on only one StackExchange site. Many sites overlap coverage areas. We respect the questioner's choice of site to ask their questions and are unlikely to migrate on-topic questions. | |
| Sep 16, 2014 at 0:30 | comment | added | Cascabel | @Rainbolt Yes, that one's easy. Not everything is that simple. | |
| Sep 15, 2014 at 23:37 | comment | added | Rainbolt | The MTGO "bug" question was obviously on topic because, in order to determine if it was a bug in the first place, one must first understand the rules. The rules are clearly applicable to both the paper and electronic versions of the game. | |
| Sep 15, 2014 at 23:29 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 131 characters in body
|
| Sep 15, 2014 at 23:18 | history | edited | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 435 characters in body
|
| Sep 15, 2014 at 23:11 | history | answered | Cascabel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |