The truth is the truth, and a big difference between "being helpfully realistic" and "being discouraging" is the sensitivity and maturity of the person hearing said truth.

I'm all for tactful, positive communication, but I agree with Spiro here: coddling those with a blatant lack of talent (like is often seen in the hobbyist art communities) just wastes people's time. Don't tell the chef he's got promise as a game designer when his napkin sketches already tell you he can't design his way out of a paper bag. Tell him his designs are horrible*, so he either takes a long hard look at what's bad about them, and learns, or discovers his culinary passions while he was off being discouraged from game-making.

*The one big caveat to all this: you need to have an explanation for your criticisms. "It sucks" is just mean. "It sucks because there's no flow to the level layout and all the weapons you designed are effectively different colored copies of eachother" is more at the heart of what constructive criticism means.

@L.Spiro - There's a difference between: "Hey. Did you just sh*t on this napkin?" and "Your design/mockup is not clear at all." Some people aim for the former. Which, IMO, is not helpful to the listener/reader. If they are not good, then they are not good. You don't have to coddle them. But dropping a nuke on them is unnecessary also.

There are certain plateaus few will reach because of natural, God-given talent. But to say that practice doesn't make perfect is blatantly false. It may take someone twice or thrice as much time to draw or program at a level someone else does. But what they lack in natural talent, they make up in perseverance and practice. Granted, I sucked as a programmer when I first started. But I am surely far better than I was before because I stuck to it. However, I will admit, I'll never be a Donald Knuth.

There are certain plateaus few will reach because of natural, God-given talent. But to say that practice doesn't make perfect is blatantly false. It may take someone twice or thrice as much time to draw or program at a level someone else does. But what they lack in natural talent, they make up in perseverance and practice. Granted, I sucked as a programmer when I first started. But I am surely far better than I was before because I stuck to it. However, I will admit, I'll never be a Donald Knuth.

I don't think its so much about talent as it is about attitude and expectations, There is a not insignificant number of people coming to these forums with the expectation that all they have to do is bring a vague idea and other people will make the game for them and make tons of money, They are very different from the people who come here to learn. (Anyone who comes here to learn has a good shot at getting somewhere)

I wouldn’t say it is my reputation, but it is not really uncommon for me to post a reply in the “Breaking into the Industry” section that is extremely discouraging.

That's odd, I find some of your posts to be too encouraging in that forum, especially around the 'how can I work in other countries?' questions.

coddling those with a blatant lack of talent (like is often seen in the hobbyist art communities) just wastes people's time.

Enh. Many of my favorite web cartoons started off looking like ass. Hell, the first 1-2 revisions of the Simpsons and Family Guy look kinda dodgey.

And as a programmer, I know my first... I dunno decade? of code might be confused with line noise.

People get better. Coddling is rarely the answer, but so is dismissing someone outright because they're ignorant or unskilled. Educating them, and otherwise helping them get better faster is way better. IMO, many times that means disuading people quickly and unequivocably from a path that will cause them to learn very slowly.

I think it's completely wrong to approach this issue presumptiously, for anyone doing that. As human beings we spend our lives judging eachother all the time, even judging whether or not other people are judging people. I don't know about y'all, but I've experienced many times that people who argue about me or others being particularly bad, sometimes end up being the ones playing world police and poisoning the air. They end up being on that judgemental power trip.

I would advice everyone on this forum the following:

If there is any ambiguity in whether someone is truly being "heartbroken" or not, assume that he or she isn't. It's very nice to be defended by other people, but it can be extremely patronizing sometimes when you catch people trying to defend a position that you do not share. As they "defend" you, they make you seem stupid, childish and overly sensitive. I personally find that 10 times worse than anyone speaking down on me. That said though, I am 31 years old and have had my share life experience. Other, younger members, may not be so lucky and, in their naivety, take unnecessary offence of someone's words. Now, I think most people on these forums are old enough to stand on their own two feet, and anyone younger or otherwise more sensitive will most often (if not always) react quite badly to such aggression - meaning that it's clear when it happens and people can comment on it either way.

However, that's not to say that the problem is to be ignored either. But usually, things that needs to be resolved will get resolved, albeit with a little downhill trip before the next peak. But if the end is good, everything is good IMO. Provided of course, that the end is indeed good.

There's also the problem of culture crash:

On the internet, we constantly have to deal with people from all across the globe and we all have different ways to communicate. Especially considering that 90% of us likely has english as a secondary language. That means that people WILL get misunderstood, so why not stay on the safe side and just assume that ALL negativity boils down to misunderstandings?

The two-fold battle against bullying:

In order to prevent and reduce bullying, there's been proven to be two things that must be done in conjunction:

First, one needs to do the obvious and discourage any form of unwarranted critique. Critique should always be relevant and neutral in that it simply states a truth or clearly defined personal opinion. But even that can be misunderstood as bullying, so it's important to have some clear rules on critique and make sure that newcomers understand the criteriae for reporting people (and encourage them to do so when those are indeed met).

But secondly, discouragement must also be coupled with a lesson in growing a spine as well. There's any number of situations that people could've easily just walked away from if they just let it go. I'm actually astonished by the vast number of crystalline personalities that roam the internet. I'm not even sure if they truly are this sensitive, or if they're merely playing the "sympathy card" as a well-known divide-and-conquer tactic. Too many people are so fixed on "winning a debate" (and I'm sorry to say I've had my own rounds with that myself - hence my current stance), that they forget the most important part - it's just words on a forum. My point here is that "bullying" is a fickle expression, highly dependent on whom you're asking.

There are things that people can say to me, that other people will break up in tears for having listened to. People are different, and we all got our reasons. And I got some chips on my shoulders that some others would just frown upon as well. It's life, we live it and deal with things in the way we've been brought up to do. But respecting some people without stomping over others, is harder that it looks. As such, the neutral stance should always be encouraged - but an active neutrality (stating your opinions on any matter), NOT a passivity to what is happening.

Ultimately, I think it's all a balance issue, but I also think we need to take a pause and figure out what exactly we're trying to debug. Because the way I see it, it's more often than not a "problem" that doesn't require fixing. In fact, it's a problem that we need in society, because downfalls are exactly what grows us our spines in life.

====================

So, after that lengthy comment, I'll revert to simplicity and say this: If there's something I feel is bad, I comment on it. I try to be constructive and concise, but if I end up becoming all emotional only to later shut my mouth when a moderator reminds me - is the situation really that bad?

Just some random, variably coherent thoughts from me. Cheers.

Some more thoughts:

I think it's easy to think that others are being overly encouraging, if you yourself are being overly pessimistic - and vice versa. I have had an overwhelming learning curve in knowing what the human brain can actually do or not, and I think it's kinda underestimating of nature herself to assume that you need to moderate your encouragements in any way. If things are unrealistic and people are genuinely seeking truth, then it's shown to them constantly anyways. But if people are NOT genuinely seeking truth, then no amount of realism or encouragement will ever save them from oblivion. THEY are the only ones themselves, who can do that.

If I have to choose between two things - I'd rather be overly encouraging than opposite. Too many dreams are extinguished too early, when we clearly are not in the position of a teacher. Let THEM handle the discouragement, because at least they have official papers saying that they know what the heck they're talking about.

I don't know about you guys, but I sure as heck don't know what I'm talking about, 70% of the time. And that's ok, because at least I'm not trapped by the Dunning-Kruger effect like most people are.

There's a fine line one must not cross when giving advice. Although I will say that these boards have NOTHING I say NOTHING to complain about. Go have a look in the C++ irc channel, every question you ask you get trolled by a C++ veteran for being "foolish", "arrogant" or "clueless". Most questions will also spur a rather aggressive debate on the optimal solution.