on issue of server war threads in general

[Casshern]

sorry to say this but i believe certain mods are being to extreme.

such as

What part, exactly, Of no more Fuall Or server war threads, wasnt understood?

That, Is your thread. viewtopic.php?f=101&t=124143

Everyone who has posted in this thread, will be dealt with when i get home from work.

the thread that this was taken from is a proposal by a player to mediate an end or at least a method of trying to find an end to war. thus i believe it is quite ok for someone to post this thread in relation to the matter and to be replied to. also if this was put in the one thread with all the rest of the posts it would just get lost.

disagree with me or not but your jobs as mods as i see it, is to keep spam to where it should be and stop people breaking the rules of forum. NOT to stop free speech in a free online game forum.
sgtdiesalot


ps sorry if i posted this in the wrong place but it seem the correct area to me

[Clarkey]

No-one is stopping any one from free speech. However, there is a dedicated thread for discussion for everything related to the War.

[Casshern]

yes ye will be, having one thread will just cause other areas that people want to discuss be lost. By not letting us as a community post what we want in threads where apriopate and in rules (neglecting spam insults etc) you will be stopping the communties free speech


look at

Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak freely without censorship or limitation. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes used to denote not only freedom of verbal speech but any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression is closely related to, yet distinct from, the concept of freedom of conscience and freedom of thought.

i do agree some limitations are needed,(we don't want insults or racism on forum)but such limitations as in use now as extreme



another point to why its extreme is that some of the issues that are being raised are in relation to the war, but not specifically about the war and can/should be applied to the rest of the server in which others can freely sound off about.

[Zeratul]

it was decided on the top of the forum chain of command to make it this way... you can survive with only one thread for that discussion...

[Mordack]

sorry to say this but i believe certain mods are being to extreme.

such as

What part, exactly, Of no more Fuall Or server war threads, wasnt understood?

That, Is your thread. viewtopic.php?f=101&t=124143

Everyone who has posted in this thread, will be dealt with when i get home from work.

the thread that this was taken from is a proposal by a player to mediate an end or at least a method of trying to find an end to war. thus i believe it is quite ok for someone to post this thread in relation to the matter and to be replied to. also if this was put in the one thread with all the rest of the posts it would just get lost.

disagree with me or not but your jobs as mods as i see it, is to keep spam to where it should be and stop people breaking the rules of forum. NOT to stop free speech in a free online game forum.
sgtdiesalot


ps sorry if i posted this in the wrong place but it seem the correct area to me

First of all, this isn't a case of "certain mods" being anything. The decision to take a tough stance on FUALL/TJP threads was made as a collective, and with input from all three admin. Please don't lynch individual moderators for only doing what they've been told to.

Secondly, I think the topic of a possible end to the war, or a mediation process, falls somewhat squarely under the header of "general war discussion." I don't see how anybody can argue otherwise. Any of the posts made in the closed thread would have been welcome in the official one, thereby negating your point about deliberate censorship.

[Casshern]

First of all, this isn't a case of "certain mods" being anything. The decision to take a tough stance on FUALL/TJP threads was made as a collective, and with input from all three admin. Please don't lynch individual moderators for only doing what they've been told to.

Secondly, I think the topic of a possible end to the war, or a mediation process, falls somewhat squarely under the header of "general war discussion." I don't see how anybody can argue otherwise. Any of the posts made in the closed thread would have been welcome in the official one, thereby negating your point about deliberate censorship.

Sorry but I did not single out any mods (i did say certain as that all I see posting) can u show me any name of any mod I singled out. Now secondly I am not privy to the private workings of the mod team so if u took the decision as a whole then the mod team of the forum are being to extreme.

Now also I only posted my opinion so that this issue could be discussed, if any mod is taking it personally, it was not the intention and I would prefer you to take the insinuation that I did back.

On the fact that the peace thing could be discussed in one thread, yes, it might be able to but personally, I think that if everything was in one thread that it would cause confusion. (You do not see everyone who wants to sell ats posting in one thread if they did it would be a very confusing system).

again I iterate that I did not mean to single out mods if u think I did (I didn't) and even if I did what is the purpose of the feedback forum if I could not discuss the actions they carry out. I did not get personal in anyway, remember the community is not here to serve ye but ye to serve the community. In general, I think the forum team do a good job but I still think that on this occasion the MOD TEAM is using overkill.

sgtdiesalot

[Mordack]

First of all, this isn't a case of "certain mods" being anything. The decision to take a tough stance on FUALL/TJP threads was made as a collective, and with input from all three admin. Please don't lynch individual moderators for only doing what they've been told to.

Secondly, I think the topic of a possible end to the war, or a mediation process, falls somewhat squarely under the header of "general war discussion." I don't see how anybody can argue otherwise. Any of the posts made in the closed thread would have been welcome in the official one, thereby negating your point about deliberate censorship.

Sorry but I did not single out any mods (i did say certain as that all I see posting) can u show me any name of any mod I singled out. Now secondly I am not privy to the private workings of the mod team so if u took the decision as a whole then the mod team of the forum are being to extreme.

Now also I only posted my opinion so that this issue could be discussed, if any mod is taking it personally, it was not the intention and I would prefer you to take the insinuation that I did back.

On the fact that the peace thing could be discussed in one thread, yes, it might be able to but personally, I think that if everything was in one thread that it would cause confusion. (You do not see everyone who wants to sell ats posting in one thread if they did it would be a very confusing system).

again I iterate that I did not mean to single out mods if u think I did (I didn't) and even if I did what is the purpose of the feedback forum if I could not discuss the actions they carry out. I did not get personal in anyway, remember the community is not here to serve ye but ye to serve the community. In general, I think the forum team do a good job but I still think that on this occasion the MOD TEAM is using overkill.

sgtdiesalot

You didn't single anybody out, no, but the implication of the phrase "certain mods" is fairly opaque. I wasn't attacking you, or having a go about it, I just wanted to make it clear that the decisions in question were taken by the mod team as a whole, and not individual mods going vigilante. I wanted to make that clarification to everybody and anybody reading, not just you.

The system we have in place is a little less than perfect, admittedly, and I will concede to your point about it being potentially confusing. However, in addition to the four usual general moderators, each thread has been assigned someone specific to watch over it in a hawklike fashion. Hopefully this will be enough to keep them orderly.

[thaltek]

it was decided on the top of the forum chain of command to make it this way... you can survive with only one thread for that discussion...

a suprisingly hard to read color on acidtech.......

[Zeratul]

sorry about that, pressed the wrong color button on the side when coloring post...

[Mr Nice Guy]

I do understand the reason Mods closed the thread, but... wouldnt it be better to let it be... it would be the posibility to the end of the war and the biggest head acke of u guys in a long time... dont u agree ?

[Lore]

I do understand the reason Mods closed the thread, but... wouldnt it be better to let it be... it would be the posibility to the end of the war and the biggest head acke of u guys in a long time... dont u agree ?

So you necro a 3 month old thread for this?

1 thread, if you can't use it then PM it. Not that hard.

[Mr Nice Guy]

was expecting u to close it mostly... ha ha ha...

[Lore]

:lol: was expecting u to close it mostly... ha ha ha...

I can warn you if thats what your after


You are verbally warned for spaming and necroing threads, do so again and it will be an official warning

You have a valid complaint then make your own thread.

[weilandsmith]

The moderators are not here to entertain you. We're here to make sure that forum rules are implemented. And yes, we serve the community by trying to keep this forum from collapsing. We're not here to cater to your whims though.

There are rules about the FUALL TTF war and limitations placed on the number of threads that FUALL and TTF, as a whole, can have for the duration of the war. This rule was agreed upon by all three forum administrators and the moderator community.

Is it too much? Perhaps...

Will we give you what you want? No.
The rules have been made; and but for the sake of consistency if nothing else, the rules stay that way unless the three forum administrators decide to overturn the rule.

edit:lock