I can see it, even logged out.
But just in case, I'll PM you the contents so we can delete it and recreate it to make sure it's there.
The spam filter shouldn't bother you at this point.
Thanks a lot. Go ahead and erase the thing: I'm gonna be busy the whole morning, but later in the afternoon I will repost the topic. Fingers crossed lol
thing, but it came up as if their were no cards in there, did I do something wrong? Also is this in the wrong place?
I responded to your other thread but there were a couple things wrong with the lines in your deck tags. If you look at your other thread, you will see how to get your deck to format correctly.
WizardMN hit it on the head.
I've gone ahead and edited your decktag in your thread so that it appears correctly.
Basically, your two issues were: No [card] tags needed inside of a [deck] tag, and cards should be listed as "1 Cardname" instead of "x1 Cardname"
We're seriously at like half the posts in this thread now deleted.
New idea: Let's use this thread about a magic set, on a magic-specific forum, hosted on a magic-specific web site, filled with magic fans who want to talk about magic... to.. talk.. about.. Magic...
If you want to discuss world politics, gender equality, gender identity, etc, there's plenty of websites and discussion boards for that. This is not one of them. Using Magic as a metaphor for real world discussion doesn't qualify it for being here either.
If I may: why?
I don't actually agree with much of anything being argued re: the detriments of representation in MtG, but I'm not sure it's a topic that's not relevant to the game and a segment of the player base. I think there is an impact on the game, WotC has commented on it in the past IIRC (particularly as they've made a concerted effort to be more inclusive), and I understand if the staff want to argue that there's no point to the discussion (not that I agree with that assessment, but given the number of circular debates I've moderated here a decade ago I completely understand why the staff would view it that way because I'm sure it's a debate with no real end) but I'm not sure a discussion of representation in MtG inherently doesn't belong on an MtG forum (though perhaps not on a Rumor Mill thread).
I can't say I'm overwhelmingly invested (my career is in gender/race/sexual inclusion and the topic is interesting to me on a sociological level, but I'm not really invested in debating it with users here because in my experience that only results in people talking *at* each other), but I have noticed that the subject comes up at pretty much every opportunity so it was worth mentioning to a mod.
The issue is that those conversations almost always turn into heated arguments that delve into real-world politics/views/etc when they continue on. This was one of those cases, where gender/etc in Magic ended up being used - at best - as a metaphor for real world issues, with several posts even skipping the topic of magic altogether to focus solely on those real world aspects.
The topic is very sensitive, and this is especially compounded with the overall real world climate on the subject. Views are polarized, and this generally leads to very passionate posts on the subject, to say the least. Even if we ignore the resulting insults, flaming, and trolling that arises - the topic itself still diverges into a very touchy subject - from both sides. As such, it's a rarity that any such discussion stays tied to Magic.
I know that such discussions often start with good intentions, but... yeah.
I'll note that I didn't warn anyone in the entire discussion until after my second red text post (and then it was for blatantly ignoring a mod request). I don't feel it fair to "punish" people for having strong feelings on real world topics, which is why the topic itself is more of the issue than the people having it.
The issue is that those conversations almost always turn into heated arguments that delve into real-world politics/views/etc when they continue on. This was one of those cases, where gender/etc in Magic ended up being used - at best - as a metaphor for real world issues, with several posts even skipping the topic of magic altogether to focus solely on those real world aspects.
The topic is very sensitive, and this is especially compounded with the overall real world climate on the subject. Views are polarized, and this generally leads to very passionate posts on the subject, to say the least. Even if we ignore the resulting insults, flaming, and trolling that arises - the topic itself still diverges into a very touchy subject - from both sides. As such, it's a rarity that any such discussion stays tied to Magic.
I know that such discussions often start with good intentions, but... yeah.
I'll note that I didn't warn anyone in the entire discussion until after my second red text post (and then it was for blatantly ignoring a mod request). I don't feel it fair to "punish" people for having strong feelings on real world topics, which is why the topic itself is more of the issue than the people having it.
I understand, thank you for the response.
I think, given that this subject comes up quite frequently (I'm not even really a regular forum goer and I've noticed it's come up virtually every rumor season in the past couple years), it might be healthier to find a way to facilitate civil discussion rather than stifle the same subject every month or two. The solution to tribal echo chambers is empathy and education, after all. But, given my history of having a cynical view of MTGS users' capacity to have these discussions, I will concede that it may not be realistic (even if I think breaking down the ignorance, fear, and entitlement around representation is ultimately in the public good of not just this forum, but the world at large).
But just in case, I'll PM you the contents so we can delete it and recreate it to make sure it's there.
The spam filter shouldn't bother you at this point.
No longer staff here.
Also, check out this thread on tags in general:
https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/community-discussion/576824-the-mtg-salvation-tag-explanation-thread
I've gone ahead and edited your decktag in your thread so that it appears correctly.
Basically, your two issues were: No [card] tags needed inside of a [deck] tag, and cards should be listed as "1 Cardname" instead of "x1 Cardname"
No longer staff here.
If I may: why?
I don't actually agree with much of anything being argued re: the detriments of representation in MtG, but I'm not sure it's a topic that's not relevant to the game and a segment of the player base. I think there is an impact on the game, WotC has commented on it in the past IIRC (particularly as they've made a concerted effort to be more inclusive), and I understand if the staff want to argue that there's no point to the discussion (not that I agree with that assessment, but given the number of circular debates I've moderated here a decade ago I completely understand why the staff would view it that way because I'm sure it's a debate with no real end) but I'm not sure a discussion of representation in MtG inherently doesn't belong on an MtG forum (though perhaps not on a Rumor Mill thread).
I can't say I'm overwhelmingly invested (my career is in gender/race/sexual inclusion and the topic is interesting to me on a sociological level, but I'm not really invested in debating it with users here because in my experience that only results in people talking *at* each other), but I have noticed that the subject comes up at pretty much every opportunity so it was worth mentioning to a mod.
Cheers.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
The issue is that those conversations almost always turn into heated arguments that delve into real-world politics/views/etc when they continue on. This was one of those cases, where gender/etc in Magic ended up being used - at best - as a metaphor for real world issues, with several posts even skipping the topic of magic altogether to focus solely on those real world aspects.
The topic is very sensitive, and this is especially compounded with the overall real world climate on the subject. Views are polarized, and this generally leads to very passionate posts on the subject, to say the least. Even if we ignore the resulting insults, flaming, and trolling that arises - the topic itself still diverges into a very touchy subject - from both sides. As such, it's a rarity that any such discussion stays tied to Magic.
I know that such discussions often start with good intentions, but... yeah.
I'll note that I didn't warn anyone in the entire discussion until after my second red text post (and then it was for blatantly ignoring a mod request). I don't feel it fair to "punish" people for having strong feelings on real world topics, which is why the topic itself is more of the issue than the people having it.
No longer staff here.
I understand, thank you for the response.
I think, given that this subject comes up quite frequently (I'm not even really a regular forum goer and I've noticed it's come up virtually every rumor season in the past couple years), it might be healthier to find a way to facilitate civil discussion rather than stifle the same subject every month or two. The solution to tribal echo chambers is empathy and education, after all. But, given my history of having a cynical view of MTGS users' capacity to have these discussions, I will concede that it may not be realistic (even if I think breaking down the ignorance, fear, and entitlement around representation is ultimately in the public good of not just this forum, but the world at large).
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains