StarGateWars Forums

Regarding War Surrenders and the War thread - specifically FUALL versus TTF

In the current war there are two surrender thread which are being... somewhat kept clean. However, there is an issue of what to do when an individuals surrender is not accepted by one side.

Now, GunZ posted in the Surrender to TTF thread stating that he did not accept some of the surrenders, and this post was removed. He then started several threads rejecting other surrenders.

These were merged into one thread. Fair enough.

That one thread was merged into the war thread - where it would NEVER been seen.

It's a case of consistency here because there doesn't seem to be any.

What i would like to bring to the Ombudsman's attention so that he can raise it to the Mods/Admin of the board is that the thread is not being modded or controlled, or it's only being done in an ad hoc basis.

Can we get an ACTIVE mod on this thing and some CLEAR rules about what should be posted where, so that these things don't get merged, split and generally ignored or done on the whim of each particular mod or admin.

Tekki wrote:Regarding War Surrenders and the War thread - specifically FUALL versus TTF

In the current war there are two surrender thread which are being... somewhat kept clean. However, there is an issue of what to do when an individuals surrender is not accepted by one side.

Now, GunZ posted in the Surrender to TTF thread stating that he did not accept some of the surrenders, and this post was removed. He then started several threads rejecting other surrenders.

These were merged into one thread. Fair enough.

That one thread was merged into the war thread - where it would NEVER been seen.

It's a case of consistency here because there doesn't seem to be any.

What i would like to bring to the Ombudsman's attention so that he can raise it to the Mods/Admin of the board is that the thread is not being modded or controlled, or it's only being done in an ad hoc basis.

Can we get an ACTIVE mod on this thing and some CLEAR rules about what should be posted where, so that these things don't get merged, split and generally ignored or done on the whim of each particular mod or admin.

It is only FAIR to tell a person that has decided to run we do not accept. I am not insensitive to real life issues, but I know some people that have quit simply want to stat build and we will not abide by that.

If you folks recall. even ROBE agreed with me in my ORIGINAL rejection of a runner on September 6th.I rejected DHM'S ''surrender'' ...TTF were apparently outraged at my post. But before the ''official position was changed you agreed with me and you posted this....

Robe wrote:You are right Gunz, the posts were relevant.
DHM stated that he was leaving the War in regards to the Task Force, which is simple enough and would have gone unchallenged. However, he also said that he had permission from his Alliance Leader to leave Alpha.

When you posted that you had not accepted his resignation and subsequently over ruled the Leader of Alpha (with the sanction of ETL), the ensuing flurry of posts by members of the Omegan Empire seemed to be internal alliance debates.

Having watched the discussion develop over a few days, I decided to leave the posts because I agree with you that they were relevant (based on the first post by DHM). However, I also support Mordack in his capacity as a mod trying to respect the authors request in the first post.

SVaRuN wrote:Message to MODS the author of this thread would request that any post any kind of post which is not in the ways of = I am leaving the war and have paid the tribute...to be deleted...far too many ppl on either side so to make it completely VISABLE and clean!
Blue

[b][color=#FFBF00]

The only fair way to keep this forum clean is for both sides to have the opportunity to reply to a quitter...otherwise that individual has no clue he is not free of this thing.


You rejected the simplest, most logical route . I pushed the issue with individual threads, and as I predicted I get a warning from the MOD Gods.

You left me no options..either I accept the surrender accepting your silly ''no response because it is spam '' rule or I accept your solution of burying it in a spam fest thread is not acceptable to me. PERIOD.

So...warning or not...I will reply to any unacceptable surrender with a rejection thread.



I reject the warning. I have played this game longer than most and I have a healthy understanding of the difference between spam and a reasonable reply to an unacceptable request.

Frankly I am a bit tired of this. The only war TTF is capable of winning is the forum wars, because you delete, move, or warn any post you think does not serve your purpose.

I will make a deal with TTF. Let's all agree to actually fight in the game .

For goodness sake, I understand modding and keeping a thread clear of tripe, but for goodnees sake , should we not allow alliance leaders to accept or deny surrenders on the thread they they are made in ?

That is just common sense guys.

By all means lets review this in a logical manner.
Consistency is important.

I look forward to the Ombudsmans report and draw his attention to the fact that FUALL set the precedent by being the the first to request that no spamming occur in their surrender thread.
They were also the first to ask mods to split their post so any comments complaining about their surrender not being accepted were moved by Deni to the General Discussion topic.

viewtopic.php?f=68&t=124484&start=150

deni wrote:discussions about individual surrenders split and moved to the general dicsussion thread

From a mod perspective Four Threads are enough.
Some mods have expressed this is too much already.

There is a general thread that Buck started in frustration to the multiple threads being opened.

There is the Epic War Thread (Part one, two and three).

There are two surrender threads; One for players wanting to surrender to FUALL and one for players wanting to surrender to the Task Force.

PM from Robe wrote:Gunz and Tekki

The mods have been asked to maintain a strict protocol on both surrender threads involved in the FUALL TF War (at the request of both authors).

Only actual surrenders and Offiical acceptances by the appropriate HC (not opposition) are allowed to remain in the thread in question viewtopic.php?f=68&t=119535

If you would like to discuss the implications of surrenders then there is a war discussion thread.

Thank you for understanding that we must manage these threads in accordance with with the authors requests on both sides of the war.

If you have any further questions please contact me on msn.

Best regards

Robe

Current posts in the Surrender to TTF thread NOT removed by Admin.

Centauri Prime wrote:Great fight this war FAHQKD and best of luck in the future

caesar2 wrote:Good luck FAHQ, well fought!

Robe wrote:FAHQKD fought long and hard and showed great sportsmanship.

Live Long and Prosper

Those above posts are NOT acceptance of surrenders, but are discussion of surrenders.

Robe wrote:Consistency is important.

Only sometimes.

Robe...I take strong exception to your assertion that I , as a leader of Omega Empire am guilty of ''spamming '' when I attempt to accept or deny the surrender of friend or foe, yet clearly the same standard is not applied to members of TTF.


Spam is a useless injection of opinion or comment into a topic one has no standing in...surely we can all recognize the difference.

I submit there is a strong bias in this forum....and I will not just let it go .

While the warning is a part of this issue, the issue also contains the lack of modding of the war thread and the selective modding of the surrender threads.

Various posts have been left, deliberately overlooked, while others were removed and a 'cease and desist PM' sent.

Now either all posts not either a surrender or the acceptance are removed, or none are. You can't have it half way.

Please refer to my second post in this thread for post examples.

And it's not like they could have been 'overlooked' as they were reported as being off-topic for that thread.

Tekki wrote:While the warning is a part of this issue, the issue also contains the lack of modding of the war thread and the selective modding of the surrender threads.

Various posts have been left, deliberately overlooked, while others were removed.

But that isn't an issue for the ombudsman...However, I will give you my opinion.


Overmodding of the surrender threads to not allow comments and/or opinions....isn't right.
Neither side "owns" the forum...Nor should they. This ceases being a community when power is used in this manner.


If the war thread is heavily spammed...lock it.

If someone wishes to comment about a surrender rejection in the thread where it wasn't accepted...that is only right.

The forum should be the same on all ends, not catering to a given sides whim. Which i have seen in regards to the surrender threads.

The war threads for instance, are so full of needless spam anymore...that i'm surprised they are allowed at all. There was a time where people knew better.
More warnings and more time outs would be my recommendation.

Bill

Once again, not my area though.

So let me get this straight.

Comments by FUALL in the surrender to TTF thread will always be removed.

Comments by TTF members aren't removed because apparently 'they are on that side'.

Right... that's ... consistent.