StarGateWars Forums

Clarkey wrote: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.

Clarkey wrote: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.

Tekki wrote: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.

Clarkey wrote: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.

~FreeSpirit~ wrote: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.

Jason wrote: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...

Clarkey wrote: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...

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

~FreeSpirit~ wrote: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

whereub wrote:

Tekki wrote: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

Tekki wrote: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 wrote: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.