If I don’t want to mingle with you, it doesn’t mean there are no people I want to mingle with.
Well, I don’t think you are a sheep for having an opinion similar to that of someone in a video that you linked. Its very possible that people can have similar opinions as streamers or youtubers (hard concept for some I know). I would just ignore that part though if thats what was really bothering you.
Ignore those who jump to a comment like that. Devolving into the profile bit is a bit “toxic” so to speak though and why I am primarily giving flak. I will admit though, I dislike forum alts a lot but if its 120 or 60 for Classic I won’t bat an eye. Although if their point is more than just inflammatory I try to take it at face value.
Then I suggest you accustom yourself to how open discussion forums work.
This isn’t a Facebook club. You don’t get to pick and choose who can participate in discussions here.
4 Likes
Tell me how this will go with blizzard killing their game by catering to that 1%… because thats the majority of who will be able to speak in the forums. Fun Detected, Fun must be neutralized, all for the 1% who see this as a job / sport instead of a game for fun
2 Likes
…what?
1 Like
Everyone will be able to create forum topics though. So everyone’s voice will be heard.
I know people might crapola all over this post, but there might be something here. 
1 Like
You seem upset that nobody is buying into your hackneyed definition of pay-to-win.
If you are unhappy with the quality of responses you’re getting, maybe improve the quality of your own posts.
3 Likes
eh not as bad as i first thought but still bad. We just need thread spams to go away and be allowed to only make so many “i want attention answer my thread plz” forums in a week. That might help.
No.
/10chars
Heck yes this would be a great idea
Prevents people from talking about “I can’t” on some things
And why stop there, classic people stay on classic forums and retail stay on retail forms
1 Like
Why do you think so? People that agree rarely respond. Also, I don’t care. It’s just my opinion and it never changed. Especially it has little chance to be changed by people that don’t even play the game. My definition of pay to win is correct and it is correct for me for sure. I am not upset.
I’m 472, and I can tell you plainly. I am too much friction for most. The controversial, the blunt, the Shadina. We about to make fire up in here with how much friction there is.
Edit: Jokes aside - no. People of all item levels can be heard. If they do not have the experience to justify their opinion, they can be told that in a pleasant manner, and then given information. If they choose to hear it, wonderful. If not? Meh.
2 Likes
There’s a difference between someone saying “BfA sucks” with little to no progress on 8.3 content vs the one who says “BfA sucks” when he did it all
I’d trust the guy who did 8.3 content about his pros and cons
1 Like
Sure. That’s my point. It’d be like someone talking about 5 mask visions without ever having actually done a 5 mask vision, or saying something is easy without ever having participated in the content. It’s one of those situations. And, like I said, one can inform someone pleasantly that, until they perform in said content, they can’t really say something about it. Don’t knock it till you try it sorta thing.
That doesn’t mean we should have a filter and banish all the people who aren’t 450+.
2 Likes
This guy isn’t saying any of that, though?
He literally just wants to create an echochamber with a gatekeeping mechanic based on gear, of all things.
You know, the thing that gets replaced not only every patch, but every expansion?
3 Likes
Why not? I personally don’t want to hear anything from people that don’t play the game. Really I don’t.
Also, everyone can create their topics so everyone will be heard by devs (if they ever check forums).
He literally just wants to create an echochamber with a gatekeeping mechanic based on gear, of all things.
What?
I’ll raise you. I think we should have an option to make topics viewable only for players who have over 500 battle pets and 300 mounts. Or better yet, you also must be fabulous.
Unfortunately you are not fabulous and your collections are extremely underwhelming. So you really don’t play the game as much as you think you do. Therefore, you are the weakest link. Good bye.
People are entitled to opinions, sure. But when their opinion is inherently flawed because they’d rather just post spam about what a certain streamer thinks. Instead of actually discussing it themselves, and then get defensive when people call it spam and disagree? Nah, trusting someone like that is the last thing I’d ever do.
These are the WoW forums. The only barrier to entry is having a subscription. Its worked for over a decade. It’ll continue working just fine. Without ludicrous hurdles for those deemed as “lesser than thou”.
9 Likes
I’ll raise you. I think we should have an option to make topics viewable only for players who have over 500 battle pets and 300 mounts. Or better yet, you also must be fabulous.
Unfortunately you are not fabulous and your collections are extremely underwhelming. So you really don’t play the game as much as you think you do. Therefore, you are the weakest link. Good bye.
LOL That would be a blessing to me to never see these posts. I don’t mind this option. Maybe pet collectors have some hardcore topics that they want to discuss with people that have clue about pets.
The item level is questionable i suppose but I do agree on his stance of “don’t talk about X and Y when you don’t have any proof You’re doing said content”
It’s like the other day some druid was preaching how his Cataclysm retail experience before he quit = BfA experience now, when he never even attempted BfA