mathlord banned

[Noobert]

IF there was an issue about my ruling in that thread then the correct process is for the issue to be handled via the Ombudsman. The correct process is NOT to ignore and undermine my ruling and continue until further action (whether right or wrong) is taken.

No-one took the ruling to the Ombudsman, therefore no-one took the right process.

NOW it gets brought to the Ombudsman because further action WAS taken.

There was no set rule in place that involved non-involved parties not being able to post in war threads. This new rule was implimented by yourself after a while in that thread.

Hence Clarkey, while you can advise, you cannot actually rule that non involved parties may not post without consent of the Admins which you did not receive.

Though I was specifically invited by Semper on page 1 and Buck later to post in the thread as an honorary member of Nemesis Sector. Hence I was not attempting to undermine Clarkey's authority, I was posting as invited to and thus was not a 'non-involved' party as referred to in your post. Because I was invited to post, I had no reason to refer this to the ombudsman before this time. And even now, it's coming up because of a related case which involves Mathlord, FreeSpirit, and myself.

[semper]

IF there was an issue about my ruling in that thread then the correct process is for the issue to be handled via the Ombudsman. The correct process is NOT to ignore and undermine my ruling and continue until further action (whether right or wrong) is taken.

No-one took the ruling to the Ombudsman, therefore no-one took the right process.

NOW it gets brought to the Ombudsman because further action WAS taken.

you did not enforce your ruling in that thread. In a normal situation perhaps a warning would suffice, but just take a look at who was present in the thread.... this is one situation where the fear of force, rather than the use of it was never going to work.

I can say personally I don't care what the mods say to me.. I will do as I dam well please and if I get a warning for it, I will just make your life hell in ways that don't stop the rules because I can do that, most cannot. So how do you handle someone like me? Ban me? Probably never a good idea..

Don't let yourself get offended by all this clarkey, you slipped up for once thinking our common sense and respect would get the better of us, a reasonable assumption to make. It happens to the best of us, and it will only further your tacit knowledge for the future.

[whereub]

It seems to me that we have a misunderstanding about who was involved in the war, as it involved/s parties who are not in the alliances.

As Semper has stated both Mathlord and Noobert, neither of whom are in Nemesis Sect or TA Massers, were both invited into the war by Nemesis Sect.

Now we have Noobert, who has had his mod powers revoked for two weeks for posting attempting to undermine another mod. However, the charge is that he was attempting to undermine another mod by continuing to post, but he was invited to post by the war participants. I know the ombudsman/men can do nothing about the mod powers but I bring this up for comparison.

Similarly Mathlord has been banned for posting while not involved in the war, but he too was invited to participate.

Lithium was not invited and was posting regardless of the warnings and advice given by the Mod Clarkey.

However, the case does beg the issue of how much can non involved but interested parties post in a GC thread because unless I'm mistaken there is no formal ruling that they may not post, it's merely done on the request of participants and in this case, they invited outside parties.

well this does differ ... mathlord was actually involved in the war ... noobert was not .... he was only invited to post in the forum and afterwards mods told anyone not in the war to stop posting ....so there for math was fighting and should have been allowed to post -noobert was not fighting and should have stopped his posting after warnings were given in the thread

[FreeSpirit]

IF there was an issue about my ruling in that thread then the correct process is for the issue to be handled via the Ombudsman. The correct process is NOT to ignore and undermine my ruling and continue until further action (whether right or wrong) is taken.

No-one took the ruling to the Ombudsman, therefore no-one took the right process.

NOW it gets brought to the Ombudsman because further action WAS taken.

Technicly no rules were broken as ur rule wasnt a rule. The subject was still also being discussed in the mod forum. I know i should acctually discuss this with the admins but aslong as none of em reply to my pm's i will just do my wording here. Also i dont have trust in the ruling of admins due to the server war and Robe's obsession for FUALL members or her being unable to keep game and work seperated.

As i explained in the pm to the admins the actions taken were harsh due to the fact that more mod "orders" get disregarded in public by other mods. Cruise the forum and ull see em ramping towards eachother. Yet for these mods no actions were taken. If u want to have a system for punishment make sure its not a double mesure but balanced.

Also i hear that the ombudsman has no part in issues between a mod and admins? Why is there an ombudsman in the first place then? Werent Jason's words this: The ombudsman is the mediator between users, mods and admins? I believe it was but just to make sure ill ask him tommorow.

[Juliette]

Also i hear that the ombudsman has no part in issues between a mod and admins? Why is there an ombudsman in the first place then? Werent Jason's words this: The ombudsman is the mediator between users, mods and admins? I believe it was but just to make sure ill ask him tommorow.

viewtopic.php?p=1076195#p1076195

there will be 1 'ombudsman' -- basicly a role that interacts between the forum staff, and the forum users...they are a 'player representative' and are tasking with bringing any and all concerns about the forum, staff, etc to the forum staff. they will act as a collective player voice, giving it more weight/importance and focus. they will have access to everything that a forum mod would...100% visibility...

Between "staff" and "users". A "collective player voice" has no place in mod-admin problems. Seems clear enough to me?

True, ever since the first ombudsman they have taken more and more roles, rights and duties on their shoulders. That does not mean they are supposed to, or that their successors can do so freely. Seems clear enough.. ombudsman, stay out of mod-mod and mod-admin affairs?

[zeekomkommer]

I do not like people blatantly ignoring my warnings and I do not like people telling me how to do my job. Only those that should tell me how to do my job (or atleast advise me) are the Admins and my Group Leader which is Mordack. And yes you did tell me how to do my job...

Clarkey can demand and demand, but these posts are relevant to the topic at hand.

viewtopic.php?f=67&t=138180

there is a difference in posting in a thread against the rules, but that is openly defying a moderator, you lost you moderator powers becausse of you posting that

The mods can request all they want. Im here under the right of freedom of speech

viewtopic.php?f=68&t=138015&p=1695807#p1695807

there is a difference in posting in a thread against the rules, but that is openly defying a moderator, , you lost you moderator powers becausse of you posting that


this issue can not be solved by the ombudsmen, this is the juristiction of the forum admins. so i don't want any more talk about that case since it's not for the ombudsman


jack it is true, post can be given multiple warnings for 1 offence. why was this needed for lithiums post ? ( i only want a reply from jack about that)


mathlords case is not about his moderator powers, it's about him being warned and banned for posting in a topic wich was off limits for players that were not in the alliances involved in war. mathlord was invited by TA massers in the thread becausse he was warring nemesis sector ingame. jack already stated that is why he got warned and banned. and also stated that he didn't know they were a part of it and was doing his dutys as a mod in cleaning it out.

jack made a mistake, that's only human and we are here to undo mistakes

zeekomkommer

[Tekki]

It seems to me that we have a misunderstanding about who was involved in the war, as it involved/s parties who are not in the alliances.

As Semper has stated both Mathlord and Noobert, neither of whom are in Nemesis Sect or TA Massers, were both invited into the war by Nemesis Sect.

Now we have Noobert, who has had his mod powers revoked for two weeks for posting attempting to undermine another mod. However, the charge is that he was attempting to undermine another mod by continuing to post, but he was invited to post by the war participants. I know the ombudsman/men can do nothing about the mod powers but I bring this up for comparison.

Similarly Mathlord has been banned for posting while not involved in the war, but he too was invited to participate.

Lithium was not invited and was posting regardless of the warnings and advice given by the Mod Clarkey.

However, the case does beg the issue of how much can non involved but interested parties post in a GC thread because unless I'm mistaken there is no formal ruling that they may not post, it's merely done on the request of participants and in this case, they invited outside parties.

well this does differ ... mathlord was actually involved in the war ... noobert was not .... he was only invited to post in the forum and afterwards mods told anyone not in the war to stop posting ....so there for math was fighting and should have been allowed to post -noobert was not fighting and should have stopped his posting after warnings were given in the thread

What this shows Whereub is that if one person can be invited into the war and therefore allowed to post, so can others.

And others were posting due to the invite, not due to any desire to undermine any moderators advice.

[whereub]

mathlord was in the war fighting
noobert was not

going off the mods post math could post
noobert could not

[Tekki]

Mathlord was invited into the war by Nemesis Sect.

Noobert was invited to post by Nemesis Sect.

Since the post by Clarkey is not to my knowledge an actual forum rule but advice from a moderator, where is the difference been 'invites'?

[semper]

Mathlord was invited into the war by Nemesis Sect.

Noobert was invited to post by Nemesis Sect.

Since the post by Clarkey is not to my knowledge an actual forum rule but advice from a moderator, where is the difference been 'invites'?

Noobert is not on their side..

[Clarkey]

Hence Clarkey, while you can advise, you cannot actually rule that non involved parties may not post without consent of the Admins which you did not receive.

I am not the only one that has placed a ruling like this in a war thread, yet your complaints are only aimed at me.

[Manetheren]

This is a thread about mathlord and his warning that got him banned. Not a thread about lithium or noobert. Both the mod that posted the order and the leader of the opposing alliance have stated mathlord was in the war and thus is allowed to post in that thread.

The warning will be removed and the ban undone.

If you want to discuss the other issues raised in this thread then take it to the right place and through the proper channels.
I would appreciate it if everyone followed the rules outlined here viewtopic.php?f=132&t=117479

Locked