StarGateWars Forums

To be fair, if we were to go ver batum on the rules, the rules as stated may support Haz's argument. He did deviate from the normal methods of moderation.

Digression != discretion (a rule revision may be necessary here)

However, I agree with Empy on this. While the intent was good, and the suggestion was made by users within the thread, according to the rules it was not an act currently allowed on this forum. Precedent notwithstanding, given the fact that people in the past were sure to have made mistakes at one time or another.

The rules referring to discretion may have intended to mean that which of the listed options used was up to the Mod handling the issue, not that they could create a separate way of dealing with it. Users can suggest many things in regards to a thread, like locking or dumping a topic, but unless it adheres to the forum rules, like having the OP give the go-ahead for such an action, the Mod has the responsibility to inform the user(s) such an act is not possible and find an alternative solution within the rules.

Does this mean Haz is biased and is purposely acting against ROB3RT? Certainly not.

Psyko wrote:To be fair, if we were to go ver batum on the rules, the rules as stated may support Haz's argument. He did deviate from the normal methods of moderation.

Digression != discretion (a rule revision may be necessary here)

However, I agree with Empy on this. While the intent was good, and the suggestion was made by users within the thread, according to the rules it was not an act currently allowed on this forum. Precedent notwithstanding, given the fact that people in the past were sure to have made mistakes at one time or another.

The rules referring to discretion may have intended to mean that which of the listed options used was up to the Mod handling the issue, not that they could create a separate way of dealing with it.

Maybe, maybe not. It could also mean that any option thought of that could help in the current circumstances, could be used. Just because an option doesnt appear within the rules, it does not mean that it is not a good idea, nor does it mean it is against the rules, instead that it could be working with the rules.

Psyko wrote:Users can suggest many things in regards to a thread, like locking or dumping a topic, but unless it adheres to the forum rules, like having the OP give the go-ahead for such an action, the Mod has the responsibility to inform the user(s) such an act is not possible and find an alternative solution within the rules.

The OP does not need to give the go-ahead. It was all still within the rules.

iv) A topic shows a tendency to be locked or needs constant moderating due to those posting in it continually not complying to the rules of the forums.

Consequence:
The topic will be locked for a cool-down period to allow posters to step away and gain composure, if serious enough then the topic will be locked permanently or for longer periods of time.

In each case of locking or moving a topic, it is up to the Moderators digression as to what to do. Once a topic is created, it belongs to the forum and the original author loses all rights of control over it.

Psyko wrote:Does this mean Haz is biased and is purposely acting against ROB3RT? Certainly not.

Thank you I probably should have said it sooner, but I thought it was obvious lol.

Consequence:
The topic will be locked for a cool-down period to allow posters to step away and gain composure, if serious enough then the topic will be locked permanently or for longer periods of time.

In each case of locking or moving a topic, it is up to the Moderators digression as to what to do. Once a topic is created, it belongs to the forum and the original author loses all rights of control over it.

I thought it was obvious that the discretion part refers to the above part about locking for a period of time. Whether or not it needs a cool-down lock, and how long said lock will be if required is the discretionary part, and also whether or not it will be locked permanently. As I said, nowhere does it say new threads can be created.

Empy wrote:

Consequence:
The topic will be locked for a cool-down period to allow posters to step away and gain composure, if serious enough then the topic will be locked permanently or for longer periods of time.

In each case of locking or moving a topic, it is up to the Moderators digression as to what to do. Once a topic is created, it belongs to the forum and the original author loses all rights of control over it.

I thought it was obvious that the discretion part refers to the above part about locking for a period of time. Whether or not it needs a cool-down lock, and how long said lock will be if required is the discretionary part, and also whether or not it will be locked permanently. As I said, nowhere does it say new threads can be created.

As mentioned before, it could be that, or it could be that in each instance of locking a topic, it is up to the moderator to decide where to go from there. Do they keep it locked? Do they clean it out and reopen it? I took a different approach, as I didn't exactly want to go through 131 pages searching for spam/insults. I locked the thread and started a new one, one that clean of spam and insults, and much easier to moderate, should it be needed. I fail to see what is so wrong with that?

Haz wrote:

Psyko wrote:To be fair, if we were to go ver batum on the rules, the rules as stated may support Haz's argument. He did deviate from the normal methods of moderation.

Digression != discretion (a rule revision may be necessary here)

However, I agree with Empy on this. While the intent was good, and the suggestion was made by users within the thread, according to the rules it was not an act currently allowed on this forum. Precedent notwithstanding, given the fact that people in the past were sure to have made mistakes at one time or another.

The rules referring to discretion may have intended to mean that which of the listed options used was up to the Mod handling the issue, not that they could create a separate way of dealing with it.

Maybe, maybe not. It could also mean that any option thought of that could help in the current circumstances, could be used. Just because an option doesnt appear within the rules, it does not mean that it is not a good idea, nor does it mean it is against the rules, instead that it could be working with the rules.

Psyko wrote:Users can suggest many things in regards to a thread, like locking or dumping a topic, but unless it adheres to the forum rules, like having the OP give the go-ahead for such an action, the Mod has the responsibility to inform the user(s) such an act is not possible and find an alternative solution within the rules.

The OP does not need to give the go-ahead. It was all still within the rules.

iv) A topic shows a tendency to be locked or needs constant moderating due to those posting in it continually not complying to the rules of the forums.

Consequence:
The topic will be locked for a cool-down period to allow posters to step away and gain composure, if serious enough then the topic will be locked permanently or for longer periods of time.

In each case of locking or moving a topic, it is up to the Moderators digression as to what to do. Once a topic is created, it belongs to the forum and the original author loses all rights of control over it.

Psyko wrote:Does this mean Haz is biased and is purposely acting against ROB3RT? Certainly not.

Thank you I probably should have said it sooner, but I thought it was obvious lol.

I got my forums confused. The other forum I mod requires OP consent.

As I stated, the rules may, or may not support your actions on the part of discretion.

As I said, it says nowhere in the guidelines that Mods can re-create threads.

The discretion part refers to whether or not to lock a thread and for how long. It couldn't possibly refer to creating a new thread when that is not mentioned anywhere.

Empy wrote:As I said, it says nowhere in the guidelines that Mods can re-create threads.

It doesn't say anywhere that they can't recreate the threads either.

Empy wrote:The discretion part refers to whether or not to lock a thread and for how long. It couldn't possibly refer to creating a new thread when that is not mentioned anywhere.

That is your interpretation, not mine. It does not specifically say that a new thread could be created, but that it is up to the mods discretion as to where to go from there.

this is **Filtered**.... for JT and ETL to be banned from the forum is just crazy

THEY make the forum so we can fight... they are our leaders and I think they both act like leaders

if you do not like the heat LEAVE THE WAR simple... or my bud Ro3ert calls the shots simple enough

akbar wrote:this is **Filtered**.... for JT and ETL to be banned from the forum is just crazy

THEY make the forum so we can fight... they are our leaders and I think they both act like leaders

if you do not like the heat LEAVE THE WAR simple... or my bud Ro3ert calls the shots simple enough

JT is on a voluntary ban for 2 months (the minimum for a voluntary ban).
ETL isn't banned.

Haz,
this forum is dead... thanks to YOU anyways... ban me big deal

akbar wrote:Haz,
this forum is dead... thanks to YOU anyways... ban me big deal

Who mentioned banning? All I did was give you a verbal for spam. You then responded saying it wasn't. I asked what it was. Then you posted this without responding... you could have just responded to my PM telling me what it was.

a moderator without rules with a button = dead forum
why player not use your topic ? close it and shut up

R0B3RT wrote:a moderator without rules with a button = dead forum
why player not use your topic ? close it and shut up

Without rules? No, I abide by the rules. As for the dead forum, let's agree to disagree.

As for why players don't use the topic I created, I don't know. It seems semi-active to me. I honestly don't care if it is used or not. All I was trying to achieve was a clean slate away from the spam and insults, to give you all a chance to stay on topic.

you broke the rules... OE is our war not yours... consider me with Ro3ert ingame bro...

Haz wrote:

R0B3RT wrote:a moderator without rules with a button = dead forum
why player not use your topic ? close it and shut up

Without rules? No, I abide by the rules. As for the dead forum, let's agree to disagree.

As for why players don't use the topic I created, I don't know. It seems semi-active to me. I honestly don't care if it is used or not. All I was trying to achieve was a clean slate away from the spam and insults, to give you all a chance to stay on topic.

you have personality problem i can.t help you
the problem is nobody control moderator operate here