Admins/Mods

[mpjh]

I truly don't understand. I know that Andy facilitated several complaint threads and implemented changes in the rules as a result of the discussion in those threads. All I see in the thread are repeated generalized negative feelings against the mods and admin.

I also find the insult against those of us over 60 interesting because no one seems to be able to provide specifics supporting dropping those of us in the better years.

[notyou2]

I personally feel the max of a 6 month forum ban was a small step in the right direction. BUT, it should have been retroactive to all that received a perma-ban for forum infractions.

Actions speak louder than words. Your failure to make it retroactive says you have a vendetta against some, or all, that received permanent forum vacations.

In Owens case, he repeatedly complained about racial slurs. They may have been perceived or real. But he is the one that suffers for his complaints. Is that fair and just? I see it as heavy handed and an inappropriate response from Idi Admin.

In Kotaro's case, do you think he would have point dumped (not proven/formally announced yet to my knowledge) if he hadn't received a lengthy forum ban?

The problem here as I see it, are the rules are either partially enforced (meaning some but not others), or are not enforced against certain members. Also, some are pretty lame when applied to members that are vocal against injustices, such as getting a warning (me) for reviving an old thread. The thread in question had several posts by a member who publicly renounced his membership and abruptly left, saying never to return. He was a vocal proliferate poster, and when he came back, I revived a thread he was involved in when he left, and had gone quiet for his 5 week absence. I was interested in what his next comment would be, but I got my first warning. This is ludicrous. Is this site run by a dictator and his lackies? Are the mods and admins in high school and on power trips?

Power corrupts.

[Woodruff]

In Kotaro's case, do you think he would have point dumped (not proven/formally announced yet to my knowledge) if he hadn't received a lengthy forum ban?

Thoroughly irrelevant. You cannot control how others will act (those who give you the forum-ban), but you can always control how you react to their actions (his point-dumping). What they did is IRRELEVANT to what he did.

The problem here as I see it, are the rules are either partially enforced (meaning some but not others), or are not enforced against certain members.

Absolutely true.

The thread in question had several posts by a member who publicly renounced his membership and abruptly left, saying never to return. He was a vocal proliferate poster, and when he came back, I revived a thread he was involved in when he left, and had gone quiet for his 5 week absence. I was interested in what his next comment would be, but I got my first warning. This is ludicrous.

I remember that post of yours - you got a warning for that? I guess that shows they found the thread as embarrassing as I hoped they would. Pretty stupid you'd get a warning for that.

[notyou2]

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23289&start=270

This thread was revived Oct 19/2009 after a 22 month hiatus. Was a formal warning issued?

I highly doubt it, but then again,it doesn't appear that it is threatening to the admins, unless there is a fear that masturbation will keep people from paying and playing.

[mpjh]

Was a complaint lodged about the thread -- what rule does it violate?

[notyou2]

necro bumping I believe

I'm not lodging a complaint, because I think its a stupid rule

Was a complaint lodged about the thread that I bumped, and received a formal warning for? I bet there wasn't.

[mpjh]

OK, so you don't know whether a complaint was lodged for the necro bump; you don't know whether any action was taken short of locking the thread; and you don't see any reason for any action regarding that thread. You only know that you got a warning for doing a necro bump on another topic in another thread altogether. Do I have that correct?

[notyou2]

notyou2 wrote:Sam,

The thread was interesting. The last individual to post left the site shortly after that thread as I am sure you are aware. I simply wished to see if some of the individuals that had contributed to that fine thread wished to elaborate now that one of the key contributors had returned.

I fail to see why this merits disciplinary action/warning.



I'm not saying the thread was not interesting, the thread had been dead for just over a month. Whether the individual left the site or not does not make trolling right. If you want to add some new meaningful content to the thread to bring it back then that is fine, but necrobumping as outlined in the Community Guidelines is an annoyance and is part of the Minor Infractions Scale. If you want to know if they want to contribute, i suggest using the private message system in future.

~Sam

* Quote samuelc812

Re: Disciplinary Measures

Sent: 30 Sep 2009 09:21
by samuelc812

notyou2 wrote:Sam,

The thread was interesting. The last individual to post left the site shortly after that thread as I am sure you are aware. I simply wished to see if some of the individuals that had contributed to that fine thread wished to elaborate now that one of the key contributors had returned.

I fail to see why this merits disciplinary action/warning.



I'm not saying the thread was not interesting, the thread had been dead for just over a month. Whether the individual left the site or not does not make trolling right. If you want to add some new meaningful content to the thread to bring it back then that is fine, but necrobumping as outlined in the Community Guidelines is an annoyance and is part of the Minor Infractions Scale. If you want to know if they want to contribute, i suggest using the private message system in future.

~Sam

* Quote samuelc812

Disciplinary Measures

Sent: 30 Sep 2009 05:39
by samuelc812
Hello notyou2,

You have received a formal disciplinary warning.

Issued by: samuelc812

Comment:

notyou2,

It seems you've engaged in Trolling and the Necrobump of a dead thread, Re: Your post which has been deleted in this thread.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=91670

Woody's back.

Care to continue where this was left off............??

Necro-bumping when not posting any new or meaningful information, and trolling in the forums, is annoying. This is your 1st infraction as per the Minor Infractions Scale in the Community Guidelines so this is your official warning. Should you be involved in any future Minor Infraction, you will be given a 24hr Forum Vacation. So let's hope we don't need to go that far.

~Sam


Regards,
The Conquer Club

[notyou2]

No complaint is mentioned

[hwhrhett]

No complaint is mentioned

people make complaints all the time...

nobody probably noticed because it recieved so many posts shortly after the necrobump...

and the person that bumped actually was discussing it, rather than just bumping it here are the two in comparison:

How does engaging in masturbation equate to being a pedophile? I figure if you're too busy with your hand on your schlong you don't have time to defile innocent young children.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that this would be equivalent to saying that one bad thing is okay if it keeps you from something worse. This is assuming that Masturbation is wrong, of course (which I think it is).

Woody's back.

Care to continue where this was left off............??

[MeDeFe]

No complaint is mentioned

people make complaints all the time...

nobody probably noticed because it recieved so many posts shortly after the necrobump...

and the person that bumped actually was discussing it, rather than just bumping it here are the two in comparison:

How does engaging in masturbation equate to being a pedophile? I figure if you're too busy with your hand on your schlong you don't have time to defile innocent young children.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that this would be equivalent to saying that one bad thing is okay if it keeps you from something worse. This is assuming that Masturbation is wrong, of course (which I think it is).

Woody's back.

Care to continue where this was left off............??

Seeing how the ball was in Woody's court that's actually a fairly reasonable post for reviving a comatose thread, methinks.