StarGateWars Forums

Since you appear to either not get your private messages or just refuse to answer them, I will address my concerns here.

Firstly, the outstanding reply to;

RepliJake wrote:Subject: Thou shalt not take my name in vain!

Agapooka wrote:Gonna lock this and talk to FS...

kthxbai

I've just been sent this warning by DaDigi

This is a warning regarding the following post made by you: viewtopic.php?f=68&p=976621.

Defy is defined as:
resist or confront with resistance; "The politician defied public opinion"

22. You may not publicly defy the moderators. If you have issues with a moderator, refer to rule 6.

Any questions/comments/concerns please do no hesitate to PM or MSN me.

I'm complaining about it so I'm messaging you, an admin.

I find it offensive that I am warned for asking where or how the rules were broken, I was not defying or confronting, I simply was confused as to why someone would be banned for a very off interpretation of the rules, without a warning and asked him along with anyone else that can shed some light on it.

If this is now the line the forum administration is taking, banning people for interpretations of the rules wherever it suits the situation then by all means warn me and ban me but if he is posting what rules she's broken in a thread without pointing out where or how she was supposed to know that someone taking offense amounts to abusive posts and I can't ask about it, is this really a community or more like a prison with you all being the guards?

And you best ban Jason/Forum to for making past posts referring to Gods too.

Looked to me more like it was an excuse to ban her...

Sent on Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:43 pm

Secondly, EtL's ban, he was given 3 warnings within a minute of each other, 2 of which were for the same thing (abusive language and insulting a mod) which was only in reference to him saying she should use her brain before insulting a forum member, the fact that the post where she was the person insulting was removed when he was given his warnings. And the other warning was for informing people of a false update, which is not true as you very well know.

I want to know why warnings are called warnings if they are not to "warn" if the person is receiving 3 warnings at the same time, they have no time to correct their actions so the warnings are pointless.

And thirdly, mods choosing what rules to follow and what ones not to, like a mod insulting another forum user.

And thirdly, mods choosing what rules to follow and what ones not to, like a mod insulting another forum user.

I agree with this, some mods do decide to follow random rules when it suits them, some do insult forum users and if that said user replies they get warned for being abusive to a mod, sort it out people.

Dearest Jake,

The PM you speak of refers to you being warned after publicly questioning geisha's ban, correct? Well, as you say, it's been a while, but if you so vehemently desire to lose the old warning, I may be able to help you. My lack of reply may have been due to a factor that I cannot, at this moment, recall. As for KGC's PM, which you may or may not also be referring to, I did not answer with words, but I did answer with action. You'll notice that Teal'auc was suspended from mod duty because of her words towards you.

In looking back at EtL's suspension, I agree that the manner whereby the warnings were given did not flow with the purpose a warning ought to have, that being to warn. That said, EtL's actions did warrant a suspension, although that ought have been handled differently. Falsifying a game update? If it isn't released, it's not an update, and argumenting that "it was going to be released but it wasn't" is grasping at straws.

All of this said, I do agree with you that there are definate problems with the moderator team. They will, at times, do their own thing and follow their own rules. Warnings are given out too easily in some cases and problems arise when moderators become too emotional.

In the near future, however, moderators will have their moderator identities seperated from their player identities so that their words cannot be justified as that of a player's. A zero tolerance policy is being introduced that will not allow the moderator identity to even behave in any way, shape or form as a player is expected to. The same is expected of other members: they may not behave like moderators.

This is of benefit to the members because moderator bias not only diminishes, but is more easily handled. It is also beneficial to the moderators as the anonymity not only helps them moderate without bias, but allows them to be players as well as moderator. It should never be an issue of "we and them," as it has become. When it becomes thus, everyone, whatever their role may be, needs to rethink their whole perspective.

The truth is moderator bias is not the only issue - member bias is just as pertinent. To put this even more into perspective, there are more members than moderators, and so members generally have more power when it comes to the creation of a "Community Attitude."

Agapooka

I thank you for your reply Agapooka, I will just have to disagree about the whole banning thing. We were informed that Teal'auc stepped down from being a moderator, I guess one is true... My problem with the whole EtL thing was that it was a direct result of not only a moderator (Teal'auc) insulting a member (me) but another moderator (FreeSpirit) openly condoning it.

Anyway, could you also not say that a friend of mine has been messing with board settings when he has not, please.

Jake

Again, thanks for taking the time to reply

Replijake has an exellent point, this link is very intersting on that subject

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/ ... rpooka.jpg

Almost38 wrote:Replijake has an exellent point, this link is very intersting on that subject

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/ ... rpooka.jpg

They are called Private Messages for a reason.

-Goodie

goodie wrote:

Almost38 wrote:Replijake has an exellent point, this link is very intersting on that subject

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/ ... rpooka.jpg

They are called Private Messages for a reason.

-Goodie

it looks like it was a forum post not a PM, since you can see part of another message above it


so it was probally leaked from another forums mod

Almost38 wrote:

goodie wrote:

Almost38 wrote:Replijake has an exellent point, this link is very intersting on that subject

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f364/ ... rpooka.jpg

They are called Private Messages for a reason.

-Goodie

it looks like it was a forum post not a PM, since you can see part of another message above it


so it was probally leaked from another forums mod

In that case.

Its the Private Moderator forum for a reason.

Whoever is leaking everything is doing a good job of it, they are taking posts out of context, and out of date and making the mods look bad.

-Goodie

sept 15th was yesterday

Almost38 wrote:sept 15th was yesterday

Was i tasking about that post? I was talking about leaked posts in general.

Also, get over yourself you cocky american, unless you know who is releasing those, it could be up to 2 days old (its the 17th here).

Not everyone keeps US time, in fact most of the world doesnt.

-Goodie

so who cares if its one more day old

Calm down people, we dont want a fight on our hands

i believe there already a fight well imo there is

Well, since posting pictures from the mod forum is so popular, I think <EDIT OUT BY ADMIN> will pour light into the situation...

Enjoy.

J

Agapooka wrote:Well, since posting pictures from the mod forum is so popular, I think <EDIT OUT BY ADMIN> will pour light into the situation...

Enjoy.

J

etlrtehhaxxor