StarGateWars Forums

whos the one and why , spill yr wrath over here

What's the point?
Ah, yes, obviously, flaming. As if there wasn't enough of it already...

Me thinks the public dump is the logical fate for this thread.

Should be over here
viewforum.php?f=128

And what an interesting topic

dastupy wrote:Should be over here
viewforum.php?f=128

And what an interesting topic

*grin* Well.. wouldn't you like to know what people think you're doing wrong, points to enhance our service at, presented in a civilised and wholesome fashion? I'm sure you're one of the more popular ones..

Its me and SuperSayian... Feel free to flame our inboxes

Aye well we talk about users a lot why not mods when as for activity there are as many mods as active users , sometimes mods picks on users smt they help.
so why not ...

i think Haz is overacting a bit in the GC knowing the activity is going down there

Lithium wrote:Aye well we talk about users a lot why not mods when as for activity there are as many mods as active users , sometimes mods picks on users smt they help.
so why not ...

It could actually be a good idea. But that's what the whole 'feedback' section is for.
viewforum.php?f=128

Lithium wrote:i think Haz is overacting a bit in the GC knowing the activity is going down there

Does that make him a bad mod? He's visible, and approachable.. some people might say his activity is just the opposite, showing he's a good mod. Can you explain your reasoning?

overacting for spam where spam is the only thing left in this forum.

Lithium wrote:overacting for spam where spam is the only thing left in this forum.

Hm, doesn't that say more about the quality of the rest of the posts than it says about Haz' modding? After all, if you and I are agreed that it's spam, why shouldn't Haz (or any mod for that matter) act against it?

I see your point, it might leave an empty forum, but I get the impression Haz is simply sticking to the rules. Maybe the rules should be subject to admin evaluation; but as long as they are the way they are, spam will be removed. Am I wrong?

I accept this prize on behalf of Bias Mods everywhere.
I'd like to thank..

Malx wrote:I accept this prize on behalf of Bias Mods everywhere.
I'd like to thank..

So you moderate bias? How does that even work?
Argh, all these Nimras clones with their "bias mods" instead of properly calling them "biased mods".
Sorry Ashling, it's not your phrase, I know. Still. Using it does make you the worst mod. *glare*

Juliette wrote:

Malx wrote:I accept this prize on behalf of Bias Mods everywhere.
I'd like to thank..

So you moderate bias? How does that even work?
Argh, all these Nimras clones with their "bias mods" instead of properly calling them "biased mods".
Sorry Ashling, it's not your phrase, I know. Still. Using it does make you the worst mod. *glare*

You really mean that?

Moved.

My response is fairly similar to Juliettes. I go based on the rules, and the rules say to keep the spam out. With the GC, some war banter is allowed, but there is a clear line between banter and spam.

On a side note, I do have a feeling this topic was made due to recent (mod) actions, the mod abuse topic, and then this one...

Lithium wrote:i think Haz is overacting a bit in the GC knowing the activity is going down there

The thing with that is we all have our certain approaches to modding, in the GC at the moment the mods in charge 4 of the 7 are involved in the topics that take the most modding ie mH/DDE vs TL

Haz is pretty much in charge of taking care of that topic and it's the one you post in the most I'd guess, the other two mods tend to monitor SGW general.

As for worse mod I'm gonna say Earendil, he makes me do all his dirty work

Juliette wrote:

dastupy wrote:Should be over here
viewforum.php?f=128

And what an interesting topic

*grin* Well.. wouldn't you like to know what people think you're doing wrong, points to enhance our service at, presented in a civilised and wholesome fashion? I'm sure you're one of the more popular ones..

Calling someone the worst mod, whether they give reasons our not, is not constructive criticism.