安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题
I have the exact opposite opinion: small communities are much more toxic because they can be extremely elitist. Their forums may seem cleaner, but only because they kick out anyone who doesn't conform to the general opinion or is simply unpopular. So the entire community consists of the admin's circle of close friends.
Unless the owners are truly toxic, I am fine with groups “curating” who can be a part of it. It prevents the group from losing its identity and feel. And likewise, big groups are not immune to toxicity- for instance OT. OT is huge, and drives out most of the kind users because this space is relatively hostile. Thus, given the quality if users, it’s the reason I have no interest offering spaces that said users would not improve with their presence.