StarGateWars Forums

Am I wrong or should Mods (no matter who they are) be told when they are dismissed?

Should the Mod Admin not tell Semper that they fired him? And that they replaced him as Misc Leader with Solus?

We all know why Semper was banned, we all know about the locking and unlocking of his thread. A thread that he claimed he was going to announce the target in 24hrs...... which funnily enough sounds very familiar too..... erm, let's say......

viewtopic.php?f=124&t=158366


So why was Semper not informed of his removal? Why has the Mod Admin not informed him?
Was Sempers "act" so bad that he had to be removed as a Mod?

Why is Korruption's thread left unlocked when he says:

Korruption wrote:target to be announced in 12 to 24hrs (once first hits are made)

But Semper was not allowed to have his left open when he was going to announce his target in 24hrs?

Simple questions should get simple answers.

Semper got banned because he accumulated 3 warnings within a period of 6 months just as every other forum user would have been.

Korruption's thread will stay unlocked as long as it does not detoriate into a purely spam thread. There is a war declaration (intention to mass a target once a ppt expires) in the opening post, so the purpose of the thread is clear.

This was not the case with Semper's thread as the opening post just said "Because I can ... no need to say more" (or something along those lines) followed by 2 pages of spam. As the author voiced his intention to declare war (on an unknown target at that time), the thread was left in the vendetta corner and locked to prevent further spam. Else it would have been moved to the Public Dump or the Temple.

deni wrote:Semper got banned because he accumulated 3 warnings within a period of 6 months just as every other forum user would have been.

Korruption's thread will stay unlocked as long as it does not detoriate into a purely spam thread. There is a war declaration (intention to mass a target once a ppt expires) in the opening post, so the purpose of the thread is clear.

This was not the case with Semper's thread as the opening post just said "Because I can ... no need to say more" (or something along those lines) followed by 2 pages of spam. As the author voiced his intention to declare war (on an unknown target at that time), the thread was left in the vendetta corner and locked to prevent further spam. Else it would have been moved to the Public Dump or the Temple.

Thank you for the explanation on that front, however the situation with Korruption's thread and Sempers thread are exactly the same, even if one wasn't written like the other. Both people posted that they were starting a war, both people had not announced their target, both people claimed that they would be announcing their target in 24hrs, only 1 person got their thread locked........ unfair and wrong.

The main point for this thread though falls on his uninformed removal.

Dean Winchester wrote:

deni wrote:Semper got banned because he accumulated 3 warnings within a period of 6 months just as every other forum user would have been.

Korruption's thread will stay unlocked as long as it does not detoriate into a purely spam thread. There is a war declaration (intention to mass a target once a ppt expires) in the opening post, so the purpose of the thread is clear.

This was not the case with Semper's thread as the opening post just said "Because I can ... no need to say more" (or something along those lines) followed by 2 pages of spam. As the author voiced his intention to declare war (on an unknown target at that time), the thread was left in the vendetta corner and locked to prevent further spam. Else it would have been moved to the Public Dump or the Temple.

Thank you for the explanation on that front, however the situation with Korruption's thread and Sempers thread are exactly the same, even if one wasn't written like the other. Both people posted that they were starting a war, both people had not announced their target, both people claimed that they would be announcing their target in 24hrs, only 1 person got their thread locked........ unfair and wrong.

The main point for this thread though falls on his uninformed removal.

Your argument is based on the assumption that Semper's thread was locked because of him declaring war on an yet unknown target.

This assumption is wrong though. The thread was locked due to spam and not declaring war at all.

Further I do not see how "Because I can ... no need to say more" could be interpreted as a war declaration.

deni wrote:

Dean Winchester wrote:

deni wrote:Semper got banned because he accumulated 3 warnings within a period of 6 months just as every other forum user would have been.

Korruption's thread will stay unlocked as long as it does not detoriate into a purely spam thread. There is a war declaration (intention to mass a target once a ppt expires) in the opening post, so the purpose of the thread is clear.

This was not the case with Semper's thread as the opening post just said "Because I can ... no need to say more" (or something along those lines) followed by 2 pages of spam. As the author voiced his intention to declare war (on an unknown target at that time), the thread was left in the vendetta corner and locked to prevent further spam. Else it would have been moved to the Public Dump or the Temple.

Thank you for the explanation on that front, however the situation with Korruption's thread and Sempers thread are exactly the same, even if one wasn't written like the other. Both people posted that they were starting a war, both people had not announced their target, both people claimed that they would be announcing their target in 24hrs, only 1 person got their thread locked........ unfair and wrong.

The main point for this thread though falls on his uninformed removal.

Your argument is based on the assumption that Semper's thread was locked because of him declaring war on an yet unknown target.

This assumption is wrong though. The thread was locked due to spam and not declaring war at all.

Further I do not see how "Because I can ... no need to say more" could be interpreted as a war declaration.

In relation to the spam issue the thread should have been cleaned of spam.

Who are we to dictate how someone else declares a war. I believe the thread was meant to pursue a course of mystery. If the thread became spammed then a mod should clean it just like Korruptions thread was cleaned of spam.

Dean Winchester wrote:

deni wrote:

Dean Winchester wrote:

deni wrote:Semper got banned because he accumulated 3 warnings within a period of 6 months just as every other forum user would have been.

Korruption's thread will stay unlocked as long as it does not detoriate into a purely spam thread. There is a war declaration (intention to mass a target once a ppt expires) in the opening post, so the purpose of the thread is clear.

This was not the case with Semper's thread as the opening post just said "Because I can ... no need to say more" (or something along those lines) followed by 2 pages of spam. As the author voiced his intention to declare war (on an unknown target at that time), the thread was left in the vendetta corner and locked to prevent further spam. Else it would have been moved to the Public Dump or the Temple.

Thank you for the explanation on that front, however the situation with Korruption's thread and Sempers thread are exactly the same, even if one wasn't written like the other. Both people posted that they were starting a war, both people had not announced their target, both people claimed that they would be announcing their target in 24hrs, only 1 person got their thread locked........ unfair and wrong.

The main point for this thread though falls on his uninformed removal.

Your argument is based on the assumption that Semper's thread was locked because of him declaring war on an yet unknown target.

This assumption is wrong though. The thread was locked due to spam and not declaring war at all.

Further I do not see how "Because I can ... no need to say more" could be interpreted as a war declaration.

In relation to the spam issue the thread should have been cleaned of spam.

Who are we to dictate how someone else declares a war. I believe the thread was meant to pursue a course of mystery. If the thread became spammed then a mod should clean it just like Korruptions thread was cleaned of spam.

Do not base your arguments solely on assumptions, Clarkey. You do assume that the thread was not cleaned, yet it was.


You do fail to tell me though, how "Because I can ... no need to say more" can be interpreted as a war declaration.

We did remove spam from that thread..
It just kept on growing. Besides, it wasn't even an actual war thread. Just a declaration of ability, and not even specifying which particular ability it concerned.

deni wrote:You do fail to tell me though, how "Because I can ... no need to say more" can be interpreted as a war declaration.

Well it was posted in the GC after all. However, Semper I believe (and please continue to correct me where I am wrong as i'm obviously not the one that was involved) had told you that he would be posting the target in 24hrs, which would I presume imply that it was a war declaration, even if the opening post did not make it clear?

And I'd like to point out before this thread becomes soley about his warnings/bannings, that this thread is also about his uninformed removal as mod.

Dean Winchester wrote:

deni wrote:You do fail to tell me though, how "Because I can ... no need to say more" can be interpreted as a war declaration.

Well it was posted in the GC after all. However, Semper I believe (and please continue to correct me where I am wrong as i'm obviously not the one that was involved) had told you that he would be posting the target in 24hrs, which would I presume imply that it was a war declaration, even if the opening post did not make it clear?

And I'd like to point out before this thread becomes soley about his warnings/bannings, that this thread is also about his uninformed removal as mod.

By your logic every thread posted in the GC is a war declaration. No matter its content. This is definitely not the case.


After being asked to post the targets, the reply was "However.. I shall post some stats and a name in good time."

That was the reason for the thread to REMAIN in the GC and not to be dumped.

Earendil wrote:And i fail to see how any of this has anything to do with you Clarkey

Since when has it not been appropriate for anyone to bring issues up on behalf of those that are banned?

I don't recall any Admins saying to anyone else that it has nothing to do with them when they are bringing forward issues.

And your way to handle it was to send Semper a PM during his ban which he would not be able to read for 6 to 5 days and leaving it for him to find out via 3rd parties that he had been fired. i fail to see the professionality in that. plus the fact that Semper claims you were online last night and that you knew he was online as well but you made no effort to speak to him about it.

Earendil wrote:lmao @ bumping the topic first.

I fail to see the humour. i edited my post to add extra information, and we all know that the thread does not indicate when a post has been updated. Therefore if you had already read the thread then I edited afterwards you would not see until a new post is made. Therefore i bumped it in order to make it clear it had been edited. I'm sure you'd rather that than me double post???

Earendil wrote:And if he found out that way, I see no difference in that then waiting to read the pm, saying often I can't send offline messages on msn.

Regarding offline messages i'm pretty sure you can and you could.

Fact is as the Mod Admin you should not have left the issue the way you did, you could have easily waited until Sempers unbanning on Saturday then approach him upon his return and inform him about his removal. But nah you chose the cowardly way out and PM'd him to use that to cover your own back so you could say i did inform him... and left it for other people to tell him. Yes of course that's how the Administration should handle the removal of all their staff.

I have to agree you should have an air of Proffessionality aboutthe whole thing.

If you remove someone or fire them, then you should let them know personally, Via a way that they will be able to know about it without hearing about it first.

E-mail
Msn
Mobile phone (Me and Duderanch both have his phone number...)

If you can spend the time argueing that you didnt have the time to do it on this thread, then surely that time can simply be better spent organiseing a better line of communication? To say you arnt gunna do it cos you have this to do or that to do, means you arnt doing your job!

I know, I am perfect and i shouldnt hold people to such high standards...


OH, <3 Earendill <3

In order to affect a timely halt to deteriorating conditions, and to ensure the common good, this thread is closed. Channels for debate have been pointed out, this thread served its purpose and its time.