Do you think AK did the right thing when he deleted spamalot

kwanton · Post by **kwanton** » Mon May 21, 2007 9:09 am

OK BK Barunt I see this will escatlate into a pointless argument which will serve nothing more than bore me so let's put this in fast forward shall we?

Kwan:Rebuttal for accusations. Big words.

BK:Quotes something kwan said for proof of previous accusations. More big words.

Kwan: Quotes something right next to BK's quote which shows BK's quote is out of context. Makes point as to BK being wrong. Even more big words.

BK: Repeats something Kwan said in sarcastic manner with a question mark at the end. Says something along the lines of "Lol thankyou for helping me prove that you're a brown-noser" Big words continue.

This goes on for a few more posts. At some point I would use the word "zeitgeist"(my personal favorite). Then this ends in one of two ways.

1. Argument continues but each time one side relents little by little until argument is dissolved. Both parties left with sour taste in mouth whenever they see other party post.

2. 3rd party injects itself into conversation stopping the argument. BK and Kwan still dislike each other but cease argument.

There. I hope I've derailed this pointless and, eventually, boring conversation/argument. Stop now BK. If you want to continue with this then the ball's in your court.

podge · Post by **podge** » Mon May 21, 2007 9:58 am

kwanton wrote:OK BK Barunt I see this will escatlate into a pointless argument which will serve nothing more than bore me so let's put this in fast forward shall we?

Kwan:Rebuttal for accusations. Big words.

BK:Quotes something kwan said for proof of previous accusations. More big words.

Kwan: Quotes something right next to BK's quote which shows BK's quote is out of context. Makes point as to BK being wrong. Even more big words.

BK: Repeats something Kwan said in sarcastic manner with a question mark at the end. Says something along the lines of "Lol thankyou for helping me prove that you're a brown-noser" Big words continue.

This goes on for a few more posts. At some point I would use the word "zeitgeist"(my personal favorite). Then this ends in one of two ways.

1. Argument continues but each time one side relents little by little until argument is dissolved. Both parties left with sour taste in mouth whenever they see other party post.

2. 3rd party injects itself into conversation stopping the argument. BK and Kwan still dislike each other but cease argument.

There. I hope I've derailed this pointless and, eventually, boring conversation/argument. Stop now BK. If you want to continue with this then the ball's in your court.

b.k. barunt · Post by **b.k. barunt** » Mon May 21, 2007 11:24 am

Zeitgeist is a personal favorite of mine too - not that many people are familiar with it. The first time i saw it used was when Martin Luther King referred to Rosa Parks (the black woman who wouldn't relinquish her seat) being "siezed by the zeitgeist". I apologize for my irascible behavior. I am old and ornery, and abuse of authority gives me a serious case of the red ass. Go figure.

kwanton · Post by **kwanton** » Mon May 21, 2007 11:29 am

Good. I am happy we diffused this before it escalated.

kalishnikov · Post by **kalishnikov** » Mon May 21, 2007 12:17 pm

yeti_c wrote:
Vincent M wrote:May 15 2007 - Spamalots Deleted

May 21 2007 - Still Nothing

(I am not complaining but I am )
On a similar note...

May 15th - Lots of Empathy from general forum.

May 21st - General Forum bored of it all.

But then again - maybe that's the plan?!

C.

I think everyone's just sick of hearing about it, whether the action was justified or not. For several days damn near every thread you entered, it was the conversation being discussed. I've even seen a few Spamalot members saying that they were sick of talking about it and to stop posting about it.

Just for the record, before I get the "you weren't there, you don't know anything" response, I followed the first few hundred pages of Spamalot, but then you guys were making to many pages/day (it started with one of your 'parties'), so I had to quit. Mafia games are pretty much the only reason I visit the Social Lounge, but I read most threads while waiting for turns or playing mafia.

Anyway, my point is the time for action has come and gone. It seems to me that they are trying to string you Spamalot fellows and ladies along on slim hopes, without any decisive words one way or the other until they get that update that allows new user groups/subforums to be created.

Your not going to get your thread back, in my opinion. If the thread was going to be re-instated, it would have been by now (again, in my opinion). I honestly don't believe it's out of malicious intent on the mods part, but new clans are coming soon. They probably just feel that it's unnessacary (sp?) to put it back up. Also, if they did "un-delete" it the thread, it would imply that AK was in the wrong when he pushed the delete button. Whether he was or not, you know one Mod won't imply that about another; they must present a unified front, as do any group that hold power.

My turn should be ready in our semi-rt, so I'm done now.

quoiam · Post by **quoiam** » Mon May 21, 2007 12:20 pm

I dont know much about spamalot from other then this page...but it seems as though it was totally off topic...and about as silly as some of the other posts...it should totally be allowed!!! Spam is no worse then having dumb pop-ups every time u log on the internet...everyone hates them...but they are funny!!!

kalishnikov · Post by **kalishnikov** » Mon May 21, 2007 12:26 pm

quoiam wrote:I dont know much about spamalot from other then this page...but it seems as though it was totally off topic...and about as silly as some of the other posts...it should totally be allowed!!! Spam is no worse then having dumb pop-ups every time u log on the internet...everyone hates them...but they are funny!!!

Shhh..... You are uniformed, and not being constructive. I'm not trying to be mean, but this thread is already full of "spam is teh cool, it awesome yay, bring it back!!!!!!" posts. They don't help either side of the arguement's cause. Please refrain.

Sorry for the tone, and thank you in advance..

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Mon May 21, 2007 12:35 pm

Kalish's post was the most interesting I've read on here in awhile. Thanks for responding.

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Mon May 21, 2007 12:43 pm

Just an update... the spamalot discussion has sparked many other discussions as well, that's why it's taking so long (and ironically, our 'speed of response' is one thing also being discussed). It's not just a matter of giving it back or not giving it back, but also what stance we wish to take on "spam" in the future, among other things. Your patience is appreciated.

Aries · Post by **Aries** » Mon May 21, 2007 12:59 pm

Your welcome

b.k. barunt · Post by **b.k. barunt** » Mon May 21, 2007 1:11 pm

kalishnikov wrote:
yeti_c wrote:
Vincent M wrote:May 15 2007 - Spamalots Deleted

May 21 2007 - Still Nothing

(I am not complaining but I am )
On a similar note...

May 15th - Lots of Empathy from general forum.

May 21st - General Forum bored of it all.

But then again - maybe that's the plan?!

C.
Whether he was or not, you know one Mod won't imply that about another; they must present a unified front, as do any group that hold power.

So wicked (since you liked this post), is this true? Do you guys feel that you can't be honest with us, and have to "protect your own" in order to hold on to your authority? I would have thought better of you. At any rate, the main issue in the eyes of the membership is AK's abuse of authority. How you handle spam in the future has no bearing on the resolution of this immediate problem, so why use it as an excuse for dragging ass? We're waiting to see how honestly the mods will deal with the problem of the misbehavior of one of their own, and you do not have to wait until you can solve all the other woes of the forum to do that. Very simple, basic question - was AK right or wrong? If he was wrong, he owes the membership an apology. Can we settle that and move on to the spam problem, or are you going to drag this out some more(rhetorical question)?

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Mon May 21, 2007 1:14 pm

That all will be addressed, I promise you. And yes, we will be completely honest.

How you handle spam in the future has no bearing on the resolution of this immediate problem, so why use it as an excuse for dragging ass?

BK, that is at the very heart of the discussion, and has everything to do with why the thread was deleted, so yes it has bearing.

hecter · Post by **hecter** » Mon May 21, 2007 3:26 pm

wicked wrote:That all will be addressed, I promise you. And yes, we will be completely honest.

How you handle spam in the future has no bearing on the resolution of this immediate problem, so why use it as an excuse for dragging ass?
BK, that is at the very heart of the discussion, and has everything to do with why the thread was deleted, so yes it has bearing.

Is spam the reason why the thread was deleted, or is it just an excuse? I think that that is a big issue with this.

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Mon May 21, 2007 3:27 pm

That should be addressed in the explanation as well.

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Mon May 21, 2007 4:44 pm

wicked wrote:That should be addressed in the explanation as well.

When will that be? Days or weeks from now?

AAFitz · Post by **AAFitz** » Mon May 21, 2007 10:40 pm

b.k. barunt wrote:
AAFitz wrote:To those that think this is dragging out, I do think you should consider that the very fact that its taking a long time, shows they are taking it seriously.
I have to disagree with you here Fitz. The basic issue here, i.e. AK using his mod position to settle a personal score, is not that complex, and certainly doesn't need over a week to act on. But if they are going to close ranks and do nothing to AK, then it's going to drag out, as they try to determine how best to muddy the waters by blaming Spamalot and God knows what or who else. I think the inordinate amount of time delay here is insulting to the membership, and they are basically letting us know that "it's my ball, so if you don't like it, go find another game". Sadly, i think a number of us may take them up on that.

you could be right of course...but I think they know they struck a nerve, and they are trying to find a professional response that is fair and even handed. If they posted quickly, they would have had no choice but to back AK 100%...it would have undermined all authority if they didnt...but...that didnt happen...its taken them a week to decide what to do...even if they say AK was perfectly within his rights to do it....were glad he did it...it took them a week to do so....In any case the delay shows it has been taken seriously, and that they know they have offended many players....

Like most, I never saw spamalot thread...no reason to go there...dont really care what was in there...bunch of kids chatting I gather...but I do know that the reason this site is so popular, is the forums...I played on a site with more options, better graphics, easier controls, and less people so I was at the top of the pack quickly, an owner that could play damn well, but I left it because it was just too quiet. Had no sense of community, so I didnt really care about the game...

This has been posted many times by many players...I know the mods know this, and I know they like this about the site...most of them got picked up as mods because of their posts in the forum. I think there will be some new guidelines, but I will be very surprised, if they take the chance of alienating a lot of players, by being too forceful in here. Again...were talking about the deletion of spam by someone with 5000 posts...hopefully they do a good job on this one...Im pretty sure they will.

Serbia · Post by **Serbia** » Mon May 21, 2007 10:56 pm

wicked wrote:That should be addressed in the explanation as well.

I'm only interested in the explaination. Bottom line, this is an online forum, and the mods operate at the owner's pleasure, and are therefore free to do whatever the owner allows them to do. So, whatever. I just want to hear why they deleted it when they did. Coulda just locked it, could have done a lot of things... but whatever, it's over.

b.k. barunt · Post by **b.k. barunt** » Tue May 22, 2007 12:03 am

Fitz, the main point we disagree on is that the mods must "back AK 100%" to preserve their authority. One of the main things i remember about my father is that he would admit when he was wrong, and apologize to me and my brothers. To do so certainly did not diminish his authority in any way, but rather enhanced it. Fear of authority is something i have always had a problem grasping, but if you have my respect, you got me. A good leader can socialize with his underlings, and he can be honest and open with them. An insecure leader cannot socialize with his underlings - that would compromise his authority - and he cannot admit when he is wrong for the same reason. Until this incident, i had the highest respect for the mods, and their confident, creative leadership. To see this leadership compromised because of one egotistical wanker is giving me a serious case of the red ass, in case you hadn't noticed.

wiggybowler · Post by **wiggybowler** » Tue May 22, 2007 12:14 am

Let's just sit back and wait. I am very disappointed about what happened but it's not the end of the world. Let the mods come up with the best possible solution and then we can take it from there. Until they do make a desicion we are doing nothing but speculating or stating something of no importance because they might have already solved that problem but are working out some other part of the ordeal.

Thank you mods for a least taking the time to look into this a trying to give a fair judgement. To me it shows you want everyone to be happy and don't want to unfairly rule against anyone.

WIGGY

b.k. barunt · Post by **b.k. barunt** » Tue May 22, 2007 12:39 am

. . . 2 weeks later . . . well i think the mods are doing a great job in taking this long, because that means they care even more . . . 3 weeks later . . .

AAFitz · Post by **AAFitz** » Tue May 22, 2007 6:41 am

b.k. barunt wrote:Fitz, the main point we disagree on is that the mods must "back AK 100%" to preserve their authority.

I didnt say that....i said that if they quickly posted they had to say that

the default position is to defend management, in any situation...it goes without saying...unless its government...then they are thrown to the wolves...but lets not compare the mods to them...just isnt fair...

and youre not the only person who doesnt like it... I dont even chat incessantly with the kids the way you do, and I think it was wrong...

but I also realize, they would have ended this right away if it wasnt important to them.

They simply could have said: "it was spam...they were warned against spam, and we deleted it as such" right afterwards....what would have happened? everyone leave? No. some would have, but most would have just not posted as much spam... maybe even you(or me)would have cut down....possibly... but they are spending time going over it...talking about it...coming up with plans...and quite frankly if you caused this much work for your fellow mods, and made this many people disappointed, how would you feel. I love that its taking a long time. I love that its caused this much debate. Only way to get to the bottom of things sometimes...

but since your so impatient...heres their answer...its almost obvious:

we regret the post was deleted without real warning...Lately we have been enforcing spam more, but have not made that clear to all, so AK was just enforcing that policy. However, we should have made that more public, before deleting such a large thread. So we are sorry it got deleted, but may be deleting threads like it in the future, if they are filled with too much spam.

The reason for this is it has gotten out of control, and we feel we need to do something, because many players are complaining, and threads are becoming increasingly hard to read through.

The new policy for spam in threads is this:

rule 1-5...

AK will probably make a public apology at that point, and that will be the end of it. Some may still rebel...but most wont...and in the end...there will be a little less spam, and the mods will probably be a little more careful about rash decisions like this in the future.

its just a guess, but it seems like the only possible course of action...im sure they are just getting the wording right as we speak.

jiminski · Post by **jiminski** » Tue May 22, 2007 7:54 am

hehe, a bit of work on the punctuation and i reckon they can use yours Fitz.

diddle · Post by **diddle** » Tue May 22, 2007 9:41 am

just one thing, why is it taking so long, how hard can it be to come tot a decision?

kwanton · Post by **kwanton** » Tue May 22, 2007 10:00 am

diddle wrote:just one thing, why is it taking so long, how hard can it be to come tot a decision?

As long as it takes for everyone to forget about this

Vincent M · Post by **Vincent M** » Tue May 22, 2007 10:31 am

kwanton wrote:
diddle wrote:just one thing, why is it taking so long, how hard can it be to come tot a decision?
As long as it takes for everyone to forget about this

If that is the case

Im Pissed

Do you think AK did the right thing when he deleted spamalot

Was he?