Board Warning wrote:Users given ample warning in thread about flaming. Thread originally contained flame bait, however publisher removed said bait. No reason to post this publically.
viewtopic.php?f=77&t=156520&start=60
Sarajevo wrote:
I never really liked you. Not sure that I ever really agreed with anything you did. In my opinion you're a huge hypocrite and do not deserve the right to remain on these Forums.
So I will repeat the previous sentiments as my farewell you to, Clarkey...
Earendil wrote:
**Filtered** off
Jack wrote:
"**Filtered** off."
Gil-Galad wrote:
**Filtered** off
**Filtered** off
I was issued a board warning for the above post... I maintain that I broke no rules in my post. Moderators in the thread reiterated the need to follow the rules, and I did follow them. I posted, and broke no rule.
Semper wrote:What rules you broke?The Forum Rules wrote:b. Profanity
The use of profanity on the SGW forums is prohibited at all times. This means swearing, cursing and vulgarity. This includes the use of masking. SGW is a family orientated game and as such the language used must be suitable for children.
N.B. As Factorizer signatures often display such content the use of them is forbidden on the SGW forums. However, static versions of the signature, that are clean of prohibited material are still allowed, though users take full responsibility for their content.
Consequence:
The offending user will be given one warning point.
c. Abuse / Racism
Members of the SGW community are required to speak courteously to others. Personal attacks on members are not tolerated. This includes comments about one’s sex, gender, skin colour, religion or cultural heritage. You may not post personal information about another user regardless of how it was obtained. This includes their address, phone numbers, names or any other detail about their real life status that they have not already posted on the SGW forums their selves. For exceptions to this rule please see the role playing section (section 6.)
Consequence:
Minor infringements such as throw away comments, may be ignored or a polite note from a moderator will be issued requesting the user tone it down. More serious cases will result in the issuing of warning points. Very serious comments will be given more warning points. This will be judged with input from the Ombudsperson, Forum Administrators and Moderators.
Firstly you made a personal attack on him by calling him a hypocrite. Which could have been let go with a simple pm...
however... you moved into the double whammy by quoting several lines of swear words and then adding your own at the bottom, filtered out or not.
Mods are to keep things on topic and the verbal warnings issued in that thread were to keep the topic focused on saying farewell to a former forum user in a respectable manner opposed to debating other things which had no place in that topics. These warnings were further issued to avoid people breaking the above two forum rules.
Ample warning was given about this and to keep the topic fairer and more respectful. This was ignored once. The topic was closed for a cool down period. The topic was re-opened with the verbal warnings re-stated. You ignored them.
You're allowed to post your opinions... and believe me you can, somehow for the past four years I have managed it and you know how controversial my opinions can be..but something like this..for a mod doesn't post in such a blatantly policed topic?
Let's take this one at a time now...
Calling someone a "hypocrite" is not a personal attack, I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who believes it is. It could have been in a PM but then what would the purpose of the thread be if I cannot post?Semper wrote:Firstly you made a personal attack on him by calling him a hypocrite. Which could have been let go with a simple pm...
however... you moved into the double whammy by quoting several lines of swear words and then adding your own at the bottom, filtered out or not.
I quoted several lines of filtered profanity, "swear words", but since when is triggering the word filter against the rules? I triggered it, I used a word I knew was filtered and quoted several other filtered words. That is the "profane" portion of my post which simply was not at all, since any possibly profane words I used was filtered which defeats the purpose.
I was very on topic, saying goodbye to Clarkey and telling him what I thought of his experience on the Forums. I debated nothing I didn't mention any specific incident such as the recent incident of him deleting things. I have no obligation to be respectful, I see no reason I can't be rude if I want, I am well within my rights as long as I am not profane and do not break the "Abuse/Racism" rule with some sort of personal attack which I did not.Semper wrote:Mods are to keep things on topic and the verbal warnings issued in that thread were to keep the topic focused on saying farewell to a former forum user in a respectable manner opposed to debating other things which had no place in that topics. These warnings were further issued to avoid people breaking the above two forum rules.
Again, I have no obligation to remain "fairer and more respectful" as long as I break no rules. A Moderator is well within his right to close a thread that is a flame fest, but not to warn people in the thread if did not directly break any rule. I ignored nothing, I took the verbal warnings under consideration and posted accordingly. If they weren't there be assured my post would've been very different.Semper wrote:Ample warning was given about this and to keep the topic fairer and more respectful. This was ignored once. The topic was closed for a cool down period. The topic was re-opened with the verbal warnings re-stated. You ignored them.
My post did not break any rules.
~Empy
[/url]
