A Warm Welcome Back to the Godot Forums, Under New Stewardship!
Hello, i have a question, maybe someone already asked so sorry about this.
What happen to Q&A (https://ask.godotengine.org/)? I was an user there and i liked it.
It says "This site is currently in read-only mode during migration to a new platform".
But where, who, what exactly?
Thanks.
fatalox Yo yo! We are not associated with the official Godot engine website. I am unaware of the timeline of the 'migration'.
Did a quick search around and I don't see anything posted on the social channels either. Hopefully we will see it go live again soon, although I don't have any further knowledge
fatalox
I'm wondering: Why not create a community on Stack Overflow?
I had to check - they call it a collective
MariuszKlimek fatalox
I'm wondering: Why not create a community on Stack Overflow?
Why not just use Unity? Why not trust Google, Microsoft (now including Github), Reddit, and Wikipedia to organize all the world's information? StackOverflow is certainly useful at times, but it's rightfully criticized for monopolizing and gamifying technical discussions.
I dabbled in it when it was new but deleted my account like 10 years ago and I have no interest in going back.
Tomcat KanataEXE Hey, can you delete the thread that started this whole mess?
MikeCL It has been removed.
Nothing on the internet can be deleted definitively "The internet remembers everything"
If this topic is deleted, it gives conspiracy theorists a chance to talk about silencing the problems with Godot.
Indeed, a few of the controversial threads were partially archived on a site that absolutely will not delete them. IMHO those threads should be locked with a note like "locked because it escalated into a flamewar", not removed. There's nothing there that blatantly violated the forum rules, nothing illegal or NSFW. They were frank discussions about forum management which needed to be had.
MikeCL - I'm excited. I think this is the best place for Godot. It's less fragmented than the hand full of various discords we all use. As much as I personally like decentralization, there are certain perks of having a central location for communities to grow. I'm glad this isn't like other social media platforms and I am certain we will all continue to learn and love Godot together.
DaveTheCoder Brainly cats.
I was in process to build godot.forum but since this one is back on, will postpone...
A warm welcome back!
- Edited
Tomcat Which will do far more damage to the community than keeping the entire thread with objections.
It seems like a video has already been made on the topic. I don't think censorship is the best solution. If it's possible, it would be better to restore the thread. Otherwise, this could lead to more videos being created, which could be used as evidence of dissenters being censored within the Godot community. This wouldn't create a positive image of Godot in the public eye.
<video removed due to violating forum rules>
- Edited
Godot haters can work out their hostility here:
https://davethecoder.itch.io/avenger
Xrayez The thread is not coming back, and that's final! The thread turned into
personal dogpiling with misinformation being spread. It
was heading into defamatory territory, which is also against forum rules.
That kind of discussion does not belong here. You are free to discuss those
topics elsewhere.
- Edited
MikeCL You are free to discuss those topics elsewhere.
Interestingly, your decision to redact my previous post by removing the link to the video (which wasn't mine) has had a result quite reminiscent of the Streisand Effect. Recently, your removal has inadvertently amplified attention in the very controversies that were intended to be minimized through the removal of the video. I posted it as evidence of past concerns within this thread, conveying that removing this post might not have been the optimal choice. For instance, an alternative approach could have been to simply lock the topic instead of completely deleting it.
Of course, I won't post this new controversy here, but it's something that you should be aware of... That's exactly what I attempted to deliver in my previous post, but looks like I wasn't clear enough. Removing controversy is similar to trying to hit a mole in the Whac-A-Mole game: when one disappears, another two appear elsewhere.
Nonetheless, do whatever you find necessary to protect Godot's image! I'm just a mere mortal here, and may not understand the bigger picture behind the scenes of Godot. If you think that removing controversy promotes a good image of Godot, please, keep doing so! It is your forums and your rules, so I'm not here to object to your final decision, I have no intention to question your actions, you are the ultimate decision-maker, @MikeCL.
I'm not here to object to your decision, as I mentioned earlier. I've done this numerous times with Godot's toxic leadership, this is futile.
However, I wanted to say that rules can often be adapted to be more tolerable; you have the power to modify them. I'd like to point out that some other communities handle controversies more tolerantly and avoid reacting defensively. My reference isn't limited to the video, but rather to Cybereality's post. The act of labeling something as allegedly defamatory could also be qualified as defamation, as you could be damaging Cybereality's own reputation if what he says is actually true, even in part. It goes both ways. However, the determination of defamation is usually governed by the laws and regulations of specific countries or legal jurisdictions. Until such determination is made, everything should remain open to discussion. Rules that stifle the raising of concerns and the questioning of leadership decisions, which are frequently negative in nature, lead to authoritarian communities. Forums say that spreading so-called negativity is disallowed. The problem is that virtually anything can be labeled as negativity, for example, as insinuations. The reality of life is that we have negativity that we must talk about. Disallowing this aspect proliferates the growth of echo chambers.
Nonetheless, the ultimate decision rests with you. I believe that Godot inherently leans towards an authoritarian stance, making the current rules in alignment with what happens in the Godot community. For instance, I'm uncertain whether initiating a discussion about Godot's censorship practices, supported by facts, would be permissible on this forum. My impression is that the Godot community is unlikely to undergo change. When engaging within the unofficial Godot forums (this community), individuals anticipate more flexible interactions as a means to express any concerns they might have.
If words of dissent have such power, to the point of potentially dismantling the entire project, this inevitably prompts a question about the fundamental worth of Godot. Not only its identity as a community but also its status as an open-source project. It's imperative to delve into whether the project's resilience and legitimacy can withstand the scrutiny of dissent, casting a spotlight on the project's overall robustness and its ability to embrace diverse perspectives while still thriving. Prove that Godot deserves to be adopted by the game development industry by challenging claims made by dissenters, or at least don't make it look like they are right by deleting what they have to say about the project.
I hope you treat the above as a piece of friendly advice since you're the new forum owner, along with your company, and I'd personally like to see a more tolerant community, not only in Godot but elsewhere. The younger generation tends to engage in conversations here, and they may wrongly conclude that it's fine to be silent while witnessing wrongdoings, which is false because not saying what one has to say is equivalent to lying by omission. That's how totalitarianism thrives. This is a fundamental issue. I hope you share democratic values.
No need to reply to this post. Thanks for reading.