Should we revive the Flame wars?

[HayesA]

Yes. But don't you think everyone is entitled to some shred of [free speech?]

The governments of many countries do provide the right to LIMITED free speech for their citizens. However, Conquer Club is under no legal or moral obligation to provide any amount of free speech to anyone, not even to its paying members.

Try Amnesty International -- they are more likely to be moved to compassion for your plight, although I suspect that they may have more serious problems on their hands than helping a handful of children on a privately-owned internet gaming site regain the ability to swear at each other.

Fine. Then lets take it all the way, and lets run a complete filter for swear words, and everything offensive. Oh that's right, offensive things are to each their own. Some random guy walking down the street may take offense to me wearing jeans, while another guy gives me the thumbs up.

Offensive things are really subjective, and having a optional place to vent, like having access to a punching bag instead of babies, saves everyone the hassle of prosecuting that mean-spirited person.

[Timminz]

Free speech and fairness is that too much to ask?

Yes.

How many times, from how many different people, do you need to hear the answer?

Yes. That is too much to ask from this privately owned website.

If you want free speech, go somewhere where no one can hear you. That is the only way you will ever achieve true, freedom of speech.

If you want fairness, go back to wherever the rest of us learned that life isn't fair.

Whatever you do, please stop acting like a fool, so you don't get banned again. I miss your avatar when you're gone.

[KLOBBER]

Free speech and fairness is that too much to ask?

Actually, no, free speech is not too much to ask. I really mean that, but the problem is that you're just asking for it in the wrong place -- a privately-owned gaming website that is in no obligation to anyone in regards to free speech, and has never stated that it is dedicated to providing you with anything other than strategy games.

Actually, by curtailing profanity and personal attacks on its members, they are exceeding their legal and moral obligation to their members, and you should thank them instead of whining. They're selflessly providing us with a service that our contracts don't require them to provide. They are doing an excellent job, and I think they're a great bunch of guys.

If I understand it correctly, I think some of them are even doing this work on a volunteer basis. Forgive me if that's an incorrect assumption, but in any case, they're working hard to make this a website that is welcoming to people of all shapes and sizes, like younger kids for example. Seriously, get your priorities straight and count your blessings. You can swear on the street or in a bar somewhere; nobody has taken that "right" away from you (although I fail to see why you are so concerned about it), but this site does not advocate the use of its forums for spouting profanity or making personal attacks on its members.

Personally, I'm very thankful for their efforts, and I'm sure that the majority of CC members are also.

[stahrgazer]

Fine. Then lets take it all the way, and lets run a complete filter for swear words, and everything offensive. Oh that's right, offensive things are to each their own. Some random guy walking down the street may take offense to me wearing jeans, while another guy gives me the thumbs up.

Offensive things are really subjective, and having a optional place to vent, like having access to a punching bag instead of babies, saves everyone the hassle of prosecuting that mean-spirited person.

Flame Wars wasn't the problem. Those who didn't want to see it didn't have to click that link.

The problem wasn't even that some people get offensive at times. An "I'm sorry, I shouldn't have said that," can take care of that.

The problem was threefold:
1) when someone found something offensive and sent a proper C&A complaint, frequently "no action" was taken, not even a mild warning.
2) With repeated offensives, sometimes warnings were issued but often not followed up when the nastiness continued, depending on how whichever mod felt that day or felt about the person who'd started the nastiness.
3) Those who lodged complaints were harassed for complaining - sometimes harassed by mods.

When nothing is done, when it is known that nothing will be done, and when some instigator is pals with this or that mod so knows nothing will be done... all of these things ENCOURAGE rather than DIScourage general nastiness throughout the site. The third problem merely ensures that people eventually realize this site doesn't care about encouraging a pleasant atmosphere.

All the real problems had nothing whatsoever to do with a forum that allowed people who enjoy nastying at each other for fun, a place to do so. From a "politically correct speech" standpoint, ie. politics, removal of flame wars is a "don't we look like we're doing something good, yay us!" when the actuality is, it does nothing to correct the real problems.

[KLOBBER]

Offensive things are really subjective, and having a optional place to vent, like having access to a punching bag instead of babies, saves everyone the hassle of prosecuting that mean-spirited person.

That is a good point, actually. Please note that this website also does not provide punching bags, and is under no obligation to do so. Same principle applies to the concept of a flamers forum -- they are under absolutely no obligation, neither legal nor moral, to provide you with any such thing.

I know it's been said before, but for God's sake, dude -- get over it!

You are free to purchase a punching bag if you feel that it will help you stop punching babies. You are also free to create a forum of your own where you can swear at each other, attack each other, and explore deviant fantasies about each other's mothers, but not here -- not here -- period.

[stahrgazer]

Actually, by curtailing profanity and personal attacks on its members, they are exceeding their legal and moral obligation to their members, and you should thank them instead of whining. ...
in any case, they're working hard to make this a website that is welcoming to people of all shapes and sizes, like younger kids for example. but this site does not advocate the use of its forums for spouting profanity or making personal attacks on its members.

Personally, I'm very thankful for their efforts, and I'm sure that the majority of CC members are also.

I'm sorry, my experience is, they don't curtail profanity and attacks on members who don't want it, they're not working hard to make it welcoming; and while in the rules they do not advocate use of the forums for profanity and attacks, doing nothing to inhibit these nasties where it really matters is not something I thank them for. And, again, is why I've stopped playing here.

[mpjh]

Deja Vue, all over again.

[KLOBBER]

You and I will have to courteously and maturely agree to disagree on all those points, Stahrgazer.

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

Free speech and fairness is that too much to ask?

Yes.

How many times, from how many different people, do you need to hear the answer?

Yes. That is too much to ask from this privately owned website.

If you want free speech, go somewhere where no one can hear you. That is the only way you will ever achieve true, freedom of speech.

If you want fairness, go back to wherever the rest of us learned that life isn't fair.

Whatever you do, please stop acting like a fool, so you don't get banned again. I miss your avatar when you're gone.

Here's another fine example of someone who trolls and FLAMES others, that don't tow the "party line."

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

The ANTI-FLAMING-FLAMERS are full of nasty attacks. So, you guys are against FLAMING?!?! Too ridiculous.

Double Speak lives and thrives here at the C.C. forum.

[Timminz]

I asked you nicely to stop. Why do you continue? Do you think getting banned again, and again is proving some sort of point? Do you think you're making a difference? Please, for your own sake, don't get banned any more. It's not going to bring back flame wars.

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

I asked you nicely to stop. Why do you continue? Do you think getting banned again, and again is proving some sort of point? Do you think you're making a difference? Please, for your own sake, don't get banned any more. It's not going to bring back flame wars.

Timminz, are you going to personally ban me? I didn't see a moderator badge by your avatar.

Timminz, why would I be banned in the first place? Am I swearing, throwing around personal insults?

Why have all you ANTI-FLAMERS attacking those who want a "civil discussion?" You guys go and personally attack us and do the 24/7 spamming of us and you threaten me with a ban? Are we in the twilight zone forum, where up is down and yes means no?

Is this the "Double Speak" of which some of us read in the book, "1984"

Strange indeed.

[Woodruff]

Georgerx7di's getting redundant. Where's the locksmith at. Nightstrike, get in here. Lock this bitch for being boring.

I couldn't agree more! Night Strike, over to you!

Night Strike you should lock this thread and any future threads of a similar vein should be immeadiatly locked.

CC's decision is final and I wish people would just accept it.

So are you saying it should be locked because:
a) it's boring
b) There are other threads about it
c) you disagree with the premise
d) other

a) by whose criteria? As prowler pointed out, there wouldn't be many threads left open.
b) this is the only active thread on it I'm aware of
c) do I even need to refute that?
d) well?

Why should all future threads on this topic be immeadiatly locked? Are you so scared of discussion about the topic? Is FW a dirty word to you?

Which topics do you find interesting in GD? General congratulations? You know you've been playing too much cc when...?

Rather like FW, if you don't like the topic, don't read the thread.

Xelabale, I could be mistaken, but I do believe joshy is on YOUR side in this debate. I believe he's attempting to use sarcasm. You do remember my point about sarcasm in a text-based medium, right? Another fine example of it here.

[Timminz]

Mr. Stoneham, I am not the reason you have been banned four (4) times in the last month. I don't make the rules. I don't enforce the rules. You need to let that go.

The reason I am asking you not to get banned again (other than the fact that I miss your avatar when you're gone), is that you don't appear to be behaving any differently now than you were before the last ban (and the one before that, etc...). I can only assume that if you continue to act in the same manner as got you banned four (4) times within the last month, you will be banned again before long.

Pick your battles. It has been made abundantly clear by the powers that be, that this is not one you will win.

[Woodruff]

No. Trolling is saying lock this thread lock this thread lock this thread lock this thread.
I am putting forward some ideas and thoughts. Could you explain why this thread should be locked please?

No. That's spamming. The reason it should be locked is because that CC's decision is final and there is NO POINT in this topic. I honestly don't know why people keep on going on about it.

The only thing that could possibly work is if you got a petition with a LOT of players' names on it. Like hundreds and hundreds of names.

Got to go now i'll respond to your posts in about three hours.

Ok...perhaps I was mistaken. <chuckle>

[Woodruff]

Why? Once a decision is taken we shouldn't question it? Once we went into Iraq we shouldn't question that decision? Really?

Questioning a decision over which you have zero authority is a waste of your own time and energy, and an annoyance to those who are exposed to your error.

Oh my...every dictator ever created loves the sound of your words. In fact, if people held your opinion, the path to dictatorial rule would be paved perfectly.

There is nothing wrong with questioning anything (though sometimes there are times when you should wait before doing so, for instance on a battlefield).

Even though I'm quite satisfied with seeing FlameWars gone, I must admit that I tend to agree that there should have been some statement come out from the site leadership regarding the specifics of why. They've simply CREATED arguments and problems by not doing so.

[mpjh]

Yes, vulcans are nothing if not polite -- except in that special season, you know.

[Woodruff]

This website is not a champion of free speech, and has never advertised itself as such. You may have CC confused with Amnesty International or some other human rights organization.

Until you gather some capital and purchase this privately-owned website, you will simply have to put up with the policies favored by its present owner, or go elsewhere. I'm sorry if this frightens or angers you, but that's the nature of the "reality sandwich," sadly.

Who made you the C.C "Thought Police"? Can't you take your ANTI-FLAMING FLAMES elsewhere and leave us alone with our civil discussion?

Klobber didn't flame anyone in any way here.

[Woodruff]

It is not coming back if you want to flame go to a site where there is a Flame Wars like
http://gamerscentral.darkbb.com/forum.htm

Count me in, this place is getting more boring than a Sat night at Hysari's house.

Hey, I guess this site is what the people want


but really this whole thread is spam, NO IT IS NOT COMING BACK!
[case closed]

It's about time that a true authority has finally weighed in on the subject.

[mpjh]

I think they did -- notice stoney is not positing anymore?

[Woodruff]

Yes. But don't you think everyone is entitled to some shred of [free speech?]

The governments of many countries do provide the right to LIMITED free speech for their citizens. However, Conquer Club is under no legal or moral obligation to provide any amount of free speech to anyone, not even to its paying members.

This is certainly true. And yet, good business sense would tend to lead a business toward doing so.

[Georgerx7di]

Come on people 1 paragraph max. I think this thread is fun, but nobodies going to sit here and read a whole page. If I wanted that then I would read a textbook. There can't be that much to say, make your point, crack a joke, and submit.

[Woodruff]

Yes. But don't you think everyone is entitled to some shred of [free speech?]

The governments of many countries do provide the right to LIMITED free speech for their citizens. However, Conquer Club is under no legal or moral obligation to provide any amount of free speech to anyone, not even to its paying members.

Try Amnesty International -- they are more likely to be moved to compassion for your plight, although I suspect that they may have more serious problems on their hands than helping a handful of children on a privately-owned internet gaming site regain the ability to swear at each other.

Fine. Then lets take it all the way, and lets run a complete filter for swear words, and everything offensive. Oh that's right, offensive things are to each their own. Some random guy walking down the street may take offense to me wearing jeans, while another guy gives me the thumbs up.

Offensive things are really subjective, and having a optional place to vent, like having access to a punching bag instead of babies, saves everyone the hassle of prosecuting that mean-spirited person.

Truth be told, you already HAVE "an optional place to vent"...in fact, you have plenty of them. Just not on this site.

[KLOBBER]

Yes. But don't you think everyone is entitled to some shred of [free speech?]

The governments of many countries do provide the right to LIMITED free speech for their citizens. However, Conquer Club is under no legal or moral obligation to provide any amount of free speech to anyone, not even to its paying members.

This is certainly true. And yet, good business sense would tend to lead a business toward doing so.

On the contrary, Mr. Spock, it's better business to make the site appeal to as broad a spectrum as possible, and, like it or not, many people are offended by profanity and personal attacks, and many don't want their small children exposed to such behavior.

[Woodruff]

You and I will have to courteously and maturely agree to disagree on all those points, Stahrgazer.

So you've never been flamed in game-chat, Klobber? Really? Because I certainly have, and she's right.