With regards to recent complaints.

[buck]

IN reference to recent accusations made within viewtopic.php?f=132&t=136030 that thread of biased modding, we're giveing you a chance to proove it.

The members of the public can bring to us evidance of whatever they feel is wrong, and present it within the open parts of this thread. This evidance should not be made up, and it should not be heresay. You need to proove it on this forum, done on this forum, or you dont proove it at all.

If there is any evidance of wrong doing, then it will be dealt with in the most severe way possible, but if the public cannot find any evidence, Those who made accusations will also be severely dealt with.

Does that sound like a good idea? Yes.

OKAY, So go forth, and attempt to find evidance to back up your claims. You have 7 days. There will be no more argueing, no more fighting, in this thread.

Next sunday, i expect to see inrefuteable evidance of wrongdoing, or a large amount of apoligies.

Buck.

Post all items and articles related to this, in this thread.

[Colton]

Thank you ^^

[RBR]

[Brdavs]

I got warned for the following exchange:

we all know player B is full of it, he's probably scamming or bug abusing to get his naq and using the cover of $$ spending as a smokescreen.

Since he`s TL he must be, eh. Cos god knows that TLE allready cheats if they just catch some1 when his PPT runs out and strangly enough refuse repayment lol...
Bold. Very bold. And rich. Pun intended.

Well Player X is probably a crossdresser and Player Y is his femminin alter ego cover.





But what do they say about assumptions being the mother of all screwups again?

For apparent RL insults.


I`d love to "proove" something, but alas, my post has mysteriously been deleted (lol in itself), I am however quoted on page 811 of the Server War thread, with subsequent aditional "explanation" dashed with a hint of irony.
(Don`t think I`m too presumptous to assume we all know wich topic we`re talking about.)


I`m not even gonna say who is the personally involved mod that warned me, cos by the looks of things, he has enough "troubles" allready, and I`m really not that bothered.






I`d just like to make one ever so humble point/suggestion:

Don`t allow people at war to mod topics about their war.

It`s asking for trouble. It`s unfair to the people he mods, and most of all, to the mod himself. He/She`s only human, it`s natural that given the circumstances things will get a bit gravitating to one side. It`s not a vote of non-confidence in the mods abbility, it`s a fact of life. RL judicial systems have the same issue and they don`t shrug it off, they have means of ensuring a non-involved medi(moder)ator (lol I crack myself up...).

You`ll only get silly arguments over silly warnings about silly things. Things will be arbitrary hammered that otherwise never are, mods wil "hide" behind some abstract rule in a particular case when in 99.9 other cases the word would slide. Things will deliberatly get taken out of the general context and sanctioned.
(I for one think its obvious what that crossdressing remark was trying to point out, given the context, and believe 99,9% of people "got it". Those that choose not to didn`t. It`s like sanctioning some1 that said "it`s wrong to call XYZ a puff" for saying "XYZ is a puff" at one stage).

It`s bound to happen and it happens.

Do yourself a favour and pull all the involved mods off the threads they`ve got a personal stake in. If you cant find any non-involved declare it a FFA zone, it can hardly get much worse as it is lol.

FFS, "idiot" returns you 1602 (now 1603 lol) results ("ffs" now 217 btw) on this forum and we`re bogged down in due process on RL insults by terms "gay" and a clearly caricatured exaggeration to prove a point about unfounded "assumptions"/accusations.
Does that make any sense whatsoever people? In a thread that has so much vile in it it`s vomit inducing just to skimm the pages at times? Where some of the mods are the ones that get most down`n`dirty and sure as heck don`t pull any punches even?

You`avin`a laff? Is he`avin`a laff? Can we get any more hypocritical around here?

If this is not (subconscious?) double standards of the severity and aplication of certain rules (atleast in lithiums case) I can be permbanned on the spot.
But you`ll only be lying to yourselves. You can mince words how something is technically a violation if you streatch it a bit but given the context of the situation/forum/thread its painfully obvious what the name of that particular game is to anyone but those most blinkered.

[Mordack]

In an ideal world I would agree with you, Brdavs. It would be better off all around, and save us a lot of trouble, if people involved in wars didn't moderate the threads connected to those wars.

Unfortunately we simply don't have the manpower. Even now, with the rules in the GC relaxed, the FUALL/TFF thread still requires a great deal of attention. If we were to prevent all affiliated general and global moderators from going near it, then it'd remain unchecked for most of the week round. Your suggestion has a great deal of merit, but is alas unfeasible. The idea of a free-for-all zone won't be accepted by Jason, either, as he aspires to make this a PG friendly atmosphere.

[Noobert]

You were also masking a certain word with a *, which REK in turn quoted. REK got warned for replying to your statement, and then 6 minutes after the issued warning by Robe you edited your post. I didn't want to post here but it is best to include all details when arguing over a warning.

Also your post is not deleted, it was moved to the Dump after being warned over it.
viewtopic.php?f=62&t=135898

I agree with you in the aspect of pulling moderators off the topics, but not every moderator reads threads 24/7. Some general mods won't even touch certain war threads. If we started to pull mods off their own feuds, then modding would be next to non-existent. I just figured I'd post my bit and run before Buck kicks me in the face.

[Brdavs]

At the risk of nitpicking here, the warning issued I`m reffering to was of the subsequently editet version. With the specific reasoning of RL insults subsequently doubly confirmed heh.

But anyways, that hardly matters. I`ve made my humble point, if it`s not feasible then that`s (sadly) that. Perhaps when cases here pile up you can pull off induviduals that pop up in them more ofen then, I don`t know, your problem (glad it`s not mine - past 1 or 2 brainstorming posts hehe).

Here`s a crazy notion: lock the topic(s). Presto, problem solved. It`d probably facilitate and end to the war aswell...

[Jack]

I 'spose you have some sort of evidence to back up your claim? I mean, clearly I am biased and an evil pawn of the DDE empire, so why don't you go get some real proof of it. It must exist somewhere, no?


I'll eagerly await your triumphant return with cold hard proofs.

[Brdavs]

And what evidence would you like? A confession from you? I`m not gonna prove your majesty anything. I`m not gonna start polls about mod actions and if they`re over the line or whatever the public crucifixion/popularity contest/"proof process" normally consists off around here either.
hat`s beneath me and the mod position.

I do however think that given the cases that got/get (and are a tip of the iceberg) presented here (and elsewhere) your peers (and public in general) can make certain deductions themselves.
You have the gaul to look them all in the eye and say with a str8 face that in lithiums case you, what, sanctioned a RL insult completley unbiasedly as you spotted it and the other thousands of comparable/worse "insults" around here get passed by cos you`re only human and you can`t do everything (or whatever)? And just how a caricatured line passes as a RL insult to anyone that has basic reading comprehention?
Show me the decency of not BS-ing me jacko.

If up to anyone its up to them to "prove" weather or not they have a backbone or not by reigning "potentionally curiously over-eager (in some cases)" induviduals in. If not then ok, but let`s atleast be frank about things, eh?

[buck]

Evidence only please.

No argueing in this thread, not until at least the 7 days is up.

[Brdavs]

I`m confused here....

Just what kind of proof do you require? Of what is going on is his head? That`s probatio diabolica and you know it, just lock this thread here then.

Fact is that a guy got slapped for RL insults for saying some1 was "gay" and another one for being too clever for hisown good in his sarcasm & poetic licensing.

Fact is that, by coincindance, the mod that dispensed/es the(se) warnings has a history of dubious and controversial decisions, in a war thread he has a personal stake in, behind him.

Another fact is that this boards are quite the nice nest of various levels of abuse in normal circumstances. Fact is that there is, at this moment, a vibrant debate going on in general weather or not calling someone "scum" is an insult or not.
The prevailing doctrine seems to be that, since nobody likes the guy that got called that, it`s ok. MODs (looks at noobert and does a "lolz") came out and said it was OK or laughed it off. Cos whats a "he`s scum" between friends and agains a scammer right? Plus we`d have to sanction a lot of words then (like "gay" maybe?).

Fact is that under the line everything stated (and much more that happens) spells a certain word beggining with an Arbitra- and ending with -rity.



What more do you want from me? A digitally signed pm stating "Youre banned cos youre TA" lol? To help you work out that 2+2=4? God has given you an intelect and an abillity to evaluate situations and come to deductions and judgments based on those evaluations. I suggest that gift be utilized.



I`m not even asking for a crucifiction of a particular mod due to his bias and reversal of warnings at this stage. Really, I`m not, cos I recognise I got little actual chance in "prooving" it to anyone - in absence of real idiocy on the mods part that will give me a "smoking gun".

I`m asking that you buck, or whoever has authority amongst the mods looks at the objective situation and atleast recognise that there are certain "intriguing points of friction/interest/coincidances" in regards to how many of the mods operate (not just jacko).
Deal with it behind closed doors, have a chat about some base guidelines again, shuffle staff away from topics they have a tendency to generate conflicts in with their modding, whatever.
I`m not pointing fingers at induviduals just at the situation that seems to have become "accepted practice" in the eyes and actions of many.


So ultimatly, all I`m asking via that is a bit more consistency and a bit less of these "curious coincidances" of what gets sanctioned and what not. Scratch that, a bit more coincidances plz, cos atm it`s pritty predictable, in induvidual cases, where the hammer will very likely fall hardest and where it will likely only glance, if even that.
(And the most "disturbing fact" about that is that many thigs other than the violation itslef seemingly come into play when decisions are made. How else does one explain these blatant discrepancies?)

[Borek]

So what you are saying brdavs is that you should not have been warned for calling Rek a crossdresser? Something that has nothing at all to do with roleplaying and is quite clearly defined as a RL insult and subject to action by a mod for being against the rules.

Truth is you are just bitter it was a FUALL mod who warned you, just man up and admit you stepped over the line and deserved a warning, stop trying to make out the mod was Bias, you thoroughly deserved that warning, you knew precisely what you were doing by goading Rek.

[buck]

Fact is noone has yet to present me any evidance, Your stateing things as fact Brdvs, but you need to present me with evidence of these facts to back up your claims. I cant act on suspiscious Minds.

So, For the last time, Evidence is needed to back up any claims, thats the point of this thread, You show me evidence of Misdoings by Mods, if you cant find this evidence, then you apoligise for makeing unfounded claims. So help yourselfs out, Post fact with evidence, or dont post at all, because i cant do NOTHING on claims without evidence. You wouldnt wanna get sent to jail for murdering someone, if there was no evidence of your involvement, would you? No. KEY WORD and Recap, EVIDENCE.

[caesar2]

In an ideal world I would agree with you, Brdavs. It would be better off all around, and save us a lot of trouble, if people involved in wars didn't moderate the threads connected to those wars.

Unfortunately we simply don't have the manpower. Even now, with the rules in the GC relaxed, the FUALL/TFF thread still requires a great deal of attention. If we were to prevent all affiliated general and global moderators from going near it, then it'd remain unchecked for most of the week round. Your suggestion has a great deal of merit, but is alas unfeasible. The idea of a free-for-all zone won't be accepted by Jason, either, as he aspires to make this a PG friendly atmosphere.

well mordack, i fully agree with you. forum needs more mods. i applied and? am not there

well, if nothing else, mod, even if they are moding only market section, should not provoke, offense and insult players on forums. and i can name those i mean: noobert and jack.

noobert is big mouth on GC forum and jack is not acting like mod in PMs. he was answering from MOD position and his answer was not "MODLIKE". your answer, mordack, was almost te same, but full of respect, nice written and reasoning was good. i cant say the same about jack's ghost.

[caesar2]

Fact is noone has yet to present me any evidance, Your stateing things as fact Brdvs, but you need to present me with evidence of these facts to back up your claims. I cant act on suspiscious Minds.

So, For the last time, Evidence is needed to back up any claims, thats the point of this thread, You show me evidence of Misdoings by Mods, if you cant find this evidence, then you apoligise for makeing unfounded claims. So help yourselfs out, Post fact with evidence, or dont post at all, because i cant do NOTHING on claims without evidence. You wouldnt wanna get sent to jail for murdering someone, if there was no evidence of your involvement, would you? No. KEY WORD and Recap, EVIDENCE.

buck, this is poor BS. we all see what happenes. nobody cares about mods, only if they are rude to members. and jack is. laughing in posts, laughing in PMs. if this is the right person to be forum MOD, GM or admin... than your forum is just a poor dump.

This is the only fact i will post here. and you can add noobert too, so we have complete list of mods im complaning.

FOR MORE EVIDENCE READ FORUM DEAR BUCK! im sure if your not blind you will find many of FACTs. (i think each member has a lit of posts, so simple go to nooberts and jacks and you will find evidence.)