Night of the Long Knives?

[Lingchih]

Apparently, entire threads can be deleted at the will of this board's management. I am speaking, of course, of the discussion of Sombre's banishment.

Me...? I don't care much for Sombre. He's done some great things for the game. And he's a great contributor (or was). Is he an ***? Yes, he can be. But he is what he is, and always has been.

But deleting the entire threads concerning his banishment is not the act of a democratic state. It is a totalitarian act. Shades of 1984.

I'll probably get banned for this post, or just deleted again. And why? for Sombre? No, I could care less about Sombre. I am posting for the democracy of the board.

I'll leave off my sig this time. This post is too important for my frivolous sig.

[Maerlande]

Oh don't feel too bad Lingchih. I was able to print to file most of those fun threads. Maybe they should go up on the wiki?

[earcaraxe]

Could you send me those? I'm interested in whats happened.

[vfb]

Ling, sorry to hear you are under the impression that the Shrapnel boards are some sort of democracy.

This happens to be a private forum where it is the prerogative of the owner, Shrapnel Games, to determine what is and is not appropriate to post on their forums.

At best, it's a benevolent dictatorship. The best you can hope for is more benevolence.

[TwoBits]

I can understand banning someone if necessary, but I can't understand not even allowing a discussion of the specifics of it.

I mean, how do I know if it was warranted in this case, if no one can share information on it? Hm, perhaps I just answered my own question...

[Edi]

I can understand banning someone if necessary, but I can't understand not even allowing a discussion of the specifics of it.

I mean, how do I know if it was warranted in this case, if no one can share information on it? Hm, perhaps I just answered my own question...

Had it only been discussion of the specifics, but most of those threads that have been moved were out and out spam as well as people essentially picking fights with other people who didn't catch the innuendo right off the bat.

So, if people do want to have a discussion about it, let us have it calmly and constructively. If it's just going to be spam, yes then the moderators will make it disappear.

vfb is correct that this place is not democracy. It's a private club with its own rules.

[Quitti]

Indeed, this is not a democracy. No privately owned message board even should be. And while Sombre can be an *** at times, I don't think he deserves to be permabanned for what I've heard he's done - he's/he was a good member of the community who frequently contributed content (mods) to the one game that we share here.

But it's not mine to decide. I don't run and moderate this place, though I'd do it differently if I did.

[rdonj]

I can understand banning someone if necessary, but I can't understand not even allowing a discussion of the specifics of it.

I mean, how do I know if it was warranted in this case, if no one can share information on it? Hm, perhaps I just answered my own question...

Had it only been discussion of the specifics, but most of those threads that have been moved were out and out spam as well as people essentially picking fights with other people who didn't catch the innuendo right off the bat.

That is an interesting, if blatantly untrue misrepresentation of the particular thread being referenced. While it is true that people got uppity in that thread, it was actually the people who didn't get it who seemed to be aiming to start a fight (and who were a bit rude to the OP, I might add). Of course, then certain freedom fighters leapt eagerly into said fight. But they did not start it.

The characterization of the rest of it as spam is a reasonable one. I wouldn't have said that though! Bad, bad idea.

[TwoBits]

I can understand banning someone if necessary, but I can't understand not even allowing a discussion of the specifics of it.

I mean, how do I know if it was warranted in this case, if no one can share information on it? Hm, perhaps I just answered my own question...

Had it only been discussion of the specifics, but most of those threads that have been moved were out and out spam as well as people essentially picking fights with other people who didn't catch the innuendo right off the bat.

So, if people do want to have a discussion about it, let us have it calmly and constructively. If it's just going to be spam, yes then the moderators will make it disappear.

vfb is correct that this place is not democracy. It's a private club with its own rules.

Fair enough. But, if there were troublesome threads (and I can see your point there), wouldn't it have been better to lock the thread, with an explanation (as was done with the Political Theory thread)?

When threads just suddenly disappear (or were moved - to where?), it leaves people scratching their heads.

That said, if this is going to be kept open as a legitimate place for discussion of the "Sombre Incident", does anyone care to spill the beans on what happened, so others can form their own opinions on whether a useful, if problematic, member was fairly banned?

Yeah, I know, maybe it's all just blowing smoke, because, as people said, this isn't a democracy, and Shrapnel can do what it wants with its Forums. But maybe, at least, this would serve people as an example of what lines are best not crossed.

[Jack_Trowell]

What, Sombre has been permabanned ?!

He's one of the best contributors to the modding scene, what has he done that would get such a harsh result ?

I could understand a temporary ban as a warning, but that ?

Is it possible to get some informations about what happened ?

[Kheldron]

You'll find some, if not all, details here : http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=45498

The most relevant part imho is the breaking of the forum's own rules. Indeed, it's not a democracy here and everyone should know better than breaking the rules. I mean everyone. Including its moderators as their utmost reponsiblity is to ensure those rules are law, hard as steel.
You know what happens in real life when the police baffle the rights of a prisoner, as guilty as can be? He gets released because of it, regardless of his faults.

If Sombre was indeed that foul-mouthed, he rightly deserved a temporary ban...which he never got. As some have pointed in the above thread they couldn't have made more damage to the forum's integrity by breaking their own rules.

There are weeks that start with a sad, grey and rainy day and this is one of them.:(

[Edi]

I can understand banning someone if necessary, but I can't understand not even allowing a discussion of the specifics of it.

I mean, how do I know if it was warranted in this case, if no one can share information on it? Hm, perhaps I just answered my own question...

Had it only been discussion of the specifics, but most of those threads that have been moved were out and out spam as well as people essentially picking fights with other people who didn't catch the innuendo right off the bat.

That is an interesting, if blatantly untrue misrepresentation of the particular thread being referenced. While it is true that people got uppity in that thread, it was actually the people who didn't get it who seemed to be aiming to start a fight (and who were a bit rude to the OP, I might add). Of course, then certain freedom fighters leapt eagerly into said fight. But they did not start it.

The characterization of the rest of it as spam is a reasonable one. I wouldn't have said that though! Bad, bad idea.
I was asleep when that thread happened and I skimmed it when I logged in. The impression I got was that people who missed the innuendo took it as a serious discussion and got mocked for it and told they don't have a clue. When they asked what it was about then, more mockery. At that point it's hard to blame them for getting riled, since it is a rather unreasonable expectation that everyone follows everything that is happening on the board religiously all the time.

The post you quoted reflects that impression. I do not intentionally try to misrepresent anyone or anything, so apologies if I did give the wrong impression.

As far as more information, I need to hear from Annette before I say anything else. Her comments in the thread Kheldron linked were a bit on the terse side and rather clear on how much information would be provided:

Absolutely, the details of the violations have not, and will not, be posted. And you're right,many assumptions have been made. I know the majority of those interested don't understand why we took the action we did, but I'm not going to share details that would help you decide whether you agree or disagree. It is what it is.

So I would rather keep extra trouble to a minimum and doing something without getting permission first is going to be precisely the wrong thing to do.

Rest assured that the situation is not being ignored.

[Fantomen]

Rest assured that the situation is not being ignored.

Glad to hear it. We're somberly waiting for for a happy ending.

[Foodstamp]

Edit: Eh actually I just read why he got banned.

[Maerlande]

Well, as the one of the biggest instigators of the spam and probably the biggest I find the permanent ban of Sombre to be a bizarre, arbitrary and poorly considered move on the part of the moderation team.

Here's my view on the issue. This board is here to help sell games and make shrapnel money. Pure and simple. This section, Dominions 3, is here to sell the game Dominions 3.

This is a fine goal and suitable for a corporation or any business. I would do exactly the same if it was my game.

People like Sombre help sell this game for Shrapnel. Just like I do. How do we do that? Sombre does massive amounts of free work building mods that freshen the game and keep it interesting long after it's normal shelf life is over. Modding communities keep games going.

I work very hard to support, guide, and coach new players. I help with the wiki. I spend hours daily coaching new players on IRC. I sponsor games for new players. Players new to these boards PM me for help who don't even know me. Does this help Shrapnel? Of course it does.

Shrapnel needs to maintain some order on this forum. They own it and have the right to control it. It's thiers. They have a set of rules. But IF you publish rules you better follow them. Otherwise you just end up looking like arbitrary poofters. If you don't want to follow your own rules, don't post them. Just act in an opaque manner so no one knows where they stand.

I've been banned. It was short but fair. I lost my temper and was excessively rude to another player. So I learned. I'm not stupid. I love this place and the friends I've made here and Sombre is one of the best of them.

I also push the boundaries of the rules a lot. I love making funny posts. I also like teasing people about their fixations. Will I get more bannings? Hopefully not. Will I get more warnings or infractions? Probably. Does this mean I am not adding to the monetary value of this forum? No it does not. I add value.

Shrapnel: I don't have very much money so I don't spend a lot of money in your store. But I do buy your games. I am your customer. Listen to me. Sombre belongs here. He's a huge part of this community and permanently banning him is bad business. If we can't convince you just based on the morals and rights of the situation, stick with the business logic. Sombre is good for business.

Regards,
Maer

[Squirrelloid]

For what its worth, Sombre has been totally forthright about his end of the situation via IRC, including direct quotations of PMs. So protecting Sombre's privacy seems to be a moot point.

I'm not sure moderators or administrators should be able to claim privacy for decisions made in an official capacity, since those decisions should be open to scrutiny.

No assumptions have been made as to the sequence of events by those of us who talked to Sombre - we got them right from the horse's mouth as it were. The only thing uncertain is what the people on the administrative end were thinking at each step of the process. If those details aren't going to be shared then I think people are rightfully upset because a permanent ban seems to be without just cause from the evidence available, based on the forum's own rules. And while Sombre's stature as one of the primary contributors of new content makes us care quite a bit more than if he were some wet-behind-the-ears poster, the lack of sufficient apparent cause should be worrying regardless of who it is.

Based on the events as they are known to me, should I have been acting in an administrative capacity, I might have temp banned him. I probably wouldn't even have done that. The initial penalty seems to have covered the only real offense he committed. His lack of concern over what amounts to a slap on the wrist from a forum that is at best related to an elective luxury activity should be somewhat expected -- if that lack of concern led to more disruptive behavior than that behavior should have been punished as appropriate. Punishing thoughtcrime seems a bit Orwellian even for a 'privately-owned forum'.

[Annette]

Maer,

I greatly appreciate your productive post. You are correct - while these forums are not a profit center for Shrapnel Games, they do exist as a sales tool. Two very important components of the tool are our customers who contribute valuable content and our moderators who volunteer their time to help us maintain a peaceful, productive environment. Without their unpaid help, Shrapnel Games would have a difficult time keeping these forums open for our customers' use.

We all understand that tempers will flare and posts will be made that violate the rules we've put in place. And we appreciate cooperation when a moderator must step in to calm things down. The problem in this situation, and the reason I exercised our right to escalate beyond our infraction system, is that Sombre indicated to us that he did not intend to honor our requests to follow the standards we expect of all our users and that he would ignore future private messages asking him to refrain from using personal attacks. Would a temporary ban change his mind? So we're faced with the question, do we allow one user to post in a manner that we would not tolerate from anyone else?

[Soyweiser]

Maer,

I greatly appreciate your productive post. You are correct - while these forums are not a profit center for Shrapnel Games, they do exist as a sales tool. Two very important components of the tool are our customers who contribute valuable content and our moderators who volunteer their time to help us maintain a peaceful, productive environment. Without their unpaid help, Shrapnel Games would have a difficult time keeping these forums open for our customers' use.

We all understand that tempers will flare and posts will be made that violate the rules we've put in place. And we appreciate cooperation when a moderator must step in to calm things down. The problem in this situation, and the reason I exercised our right to escalate beyond our infraction system, is that Sombre indicated to us that he did not intend to honor our requests to follow the standards we expect of all our users and that he would ignore future private messages asking him to refrain from using personal attacks. Would a temporary ban change his mind? So we're faced with the question, do we allow one user to post in a manner that we would not tolerate from anyone else?

But why not follow your own set of rules? Just let him ignore the rules. Get banned 3 times -> permaban. Just ignore that he doesn't care. Follow your own set of guidelines.

Now he was permabanned for saying he didn't care. And a huge ****storm went down on the forum.

[reverend]

Still I say it's bad PR to ban him and not provide ANY information - letting rumours and speculation run rampant, then closing those threads as well.

[Peter Ebbesen]

I'm not sure moderators or administrators should be able to claim privacy for decisions made in an official capacity, since those decisions should be open to scrutiny.

If this were a public discussion forum, you would have a point.

However, it is not. It is a private forum for a commercial entity with very clear rules. As most other moderated commercial forums, it bans public discussion and second-guessing of moderator actions as that sort of discussion very seldom provides any sort of benefit to the company or to customers as a whole but do take up a lot of moderator time, keeps grievances going (self-perpetuating and escalating in the worst cases), and gives a bad impression to new forum members.

As is, you may not feel sure that this is the right way for things to work, but you don't have a say.

We are essentially in a private club with clearly stated rules and your choice is to accept the rules (even if you disagree with them) or to get out of the club.

Attempted rules-lawyering of the "I don't think A warrants action B" or "surely their own rules prohibit this because they say that A=>C (if we ignore the anti-rules-lawyering clause in the rules that says that these are guidelines* and the management retains the right to do as it sees fit**)" is futile in any well moderated forum. EDIT: And in case anybody is in doubt; The REASON that it is futile is because the management does not ignore its own anti-rules-lawyering clauses or its retained right to do as it sees fit to better serve the cause for which the forums exist.

* point #1 in the banning section, "but may be tailored on a case by case basis"
** point #7 in the banning section "A permanent ban can be applied for any reason if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community"


If somebody's response to moderator actions taken against him for violating the rules is to categorically reject changing his actions to avoid doing so in the future, he is likely to be kicked out of the club (for some time or forever), no matter how valuable other members consider him to be; Being popular does not exempt one from following the club rules.

How relevant is my last paragraph to the case on hand with the user Sombre? I neither know, nor care. What I do know is that the forum rules state explicitly how you are supposed to deal with disagreeing with forum moderation: sending a PM or email to the relevant moderator or administrator.


And yes... I too have valued Sombre's positive contributions to this community but I value a well-moderated forum even more. My views on game forum moderation are shaped by experiences ranging from Blizzard's WoW forums (the cesspit of civilized discourse) and Paradox' strategy forums (at the opposite end of the spectrum). The Shrapnel Games' forums definitely belong in the higher end where the signal-to-noise ratio is high and most violations of the forum rules are done when tempers occasionally flare rather than as par for the course - and I really, really, really, hope it stays that way. :)

[Soyweiser]

Still I say it's bad PR to ban him and not provide ANY information - letting rumours and speculation run rampant, then closing those threads as well.

Perhaps creating a subforum in which infractions and bans are listed is an idea.

[Baalz]

This community is not big or robust enough to lose the few people with enough drive to really contribute to it. Got no idea about the details of what happened, and I don't really care. Sombre was an overwhelming net positive for the community and I really can't imagine doing most anything in a single thread to change that outside of something illegal. Because he broke the forum rules? I don't think its really all that much of an exaggeration to say this sort of thing (along with all the ripple effects) is a catastrophic blow to a community that possibly can't take it. Presumably the "forum rules" are there to protect and nurture this community but its not the mods that make the community, and it's not Sombre that's assaulting it.

This is *our* forum. The people who write the mods, the people who write the guides, the people who help the newbs start games. The forum is created 100% by this community. You can argue that it's your site, but I promise if people don't feel like this is their community it is going to dry up very quickly. While you've got the undeniable power to pull the plug, you are hosting *our* community and banning people contrary to what the community wants is a surefire way to very rapidly kill it.

[Maerlande]

Maer,

I greatly appreciate your productive post. You are correct - while these forums are not a profit center for Shrapnel Games, they do exist as a sales tool. Two very important components of the tool are our customers who contribute valuable content and our moderators who volunteer their time to help us maintain a peaceful, productive environment. Without their unpaid help, Shrapnel Games would have a difficult time keeping these forums open for our customers' use.

We all understand that tempers will flare and posts will be made that violate the rules we've put in place. And we appreciate cooperation when a moderator must step in to calm things down. The problem in this situation, and the reason I exercised our right to escalate beyond our infraction system, is that Sombre indicated to us that he did not intend to honor our requests to follow the standards we expect of all our users and that he would ignore future private messages asking him to refrain from using personal attacks. Would a temporary ban change his mind? So we're faced with the question, do we allow one user to post in a manner that we would not tolerate from anyone else?

Well Annette. I think your posted policy of 2 temporary bans leading to a permanent ban would have been quite sufficient in this case. Put Sombre on probation. If he doesn't want to then follow the rules you've got a much stronger case. If the plan was to reduce disruption by removing a disruptive influence it failed miserably. Sombre's level of disruption is rarely that bad. Besides, a bit of disruption provides drama and keeps excitement going.

Unless I'm mistaken I didn't suggest that Sombre get off without consequence. But this decision to permanently ban him is extreme and I strongly believe it failed to serve your purposes. It also clearly pissed me off a lot. If you permanently banned me for the same infraction I'd work very hard to move all my friends and games over to Something Awful or some other dominions 3 environment. But I prefer to stay here.

When I acted in much the same manner as Sombre, you gave me a temporary ban. And honestly, when I go on a terror run here I make a much bigger mess than Sombre. Look at last night. The only difference appears to be I didn't tell you that I won't follow the rules in the future. But my offence was significantly greater than Sombre's. I got a polite warning this morning and replied positively. I stopped spamming.

Should you make a special case for certain members of this community? Why not? You have all the power and can rewrite the rules as required. You own these boards. The question is really why make a special case for Sombre. Because he's important to this community. Besides, you made a special case already. You immediately permanently banned him for what could very well be just a fit of anger.

[Valerius]

And yes... I too have valued Sombre's positive contributions to this community but I value a well-moderated forum even more.

Well said.

The problem in this situation, and the reason I exercised our right to escalate beyond our infraction system, is that Sombre indicated to us that he did not intend to honor our requests to follow the standards we expect of all our users and that he would ignore future private messages asking him to refrain from using personal attacks. Would a temporary ban change his mind? So we're faced with the question, do we allow one user to post in a manner that we would not tolerate from anyone else?

The strange thing is that Sombre is being presented as a victim. He was asked to stop making personal attacks and refused to do so. I gather his defenders would say that the importance of his contributions outweighs the importance of forum rules. I disagree. To me, having the type of civilized forums Peter Ebessen refers to is more important (even than something crucial to the MP community like the hosting llamabeast and Gandalf provide).

[Zeldor]

Huh, Annette trying to derail discussion again and blame others. Did we not see it before?

We, as a community, were patient when Shrapnel decided to transform forums. They did things that should never happen - long outage, huge data transfer problems, etc etc. But we were promised that new forums will bring new and better quality. But in exchange we got broken functionality, PM limits, message countdowns even for experienced users, lame social addons, etc, etc. And on top total ignorance of Shrapnel, including you, Annette.

And now you are trying to use that trick again? "Make the community better, purge the evil element"? And where will it stop? Ban everyone that thinks Shrapnel is bad company [that would be everyone?]? Ban everyone that breaks rules? Oh, wait, wouldn't it mean banning mods and you, Annetter too? You know, for allowing some users to break rules? I'm pretty sure you know what I'm talking about :) Shrapnel loves some forum trolls and has different rules for them.

Of course Maerlande was not serious about business approach - that would mean he really thinks that Shrapnel has any idea about making money and taking care of customers. You just happen to own rights to Dominions. And Illwinter seems to be not focused at all on sales etc. Is there anything Shrapnel did to make dominions popular? I really doubt it. It's just community selling it. And you are getting money only because of us. And now you are trying to pay back this way...

[Rookierookie]

The only difference appears to be I didn't tell you that I won't follow the rules in the future.
I think that might be a major difference, just a hint.

Should you make a special case for certain members of this community? Why not? You have all the power and can rewrite the rules as required. You own these boards. The question is really why make a special case for Sombre. Because he's important to this community.
Oh, wait, wouldn't it mean banning mods and you, Annetter too? You know, for allowing some users to break rules? I'm pretty sure you know what I'm talking about Shrapnel loves some forum trolls and has different rules for them.
Now I wonder, if they do have to listen to the users, which side should they listen to.


This incident isn't something unique to these forums. Hell, I almost got kicked out of school once for doing something quite similiar. This isn't school, and it's not like one forum will make much of a difference in your life or anything.

Frankly, if I'm not happy at how a site runs things, I'm just going to walk away and never give a second glance back, because they don't deserve my attention. This isn't school or a job, where you don't really have the freedom to walk away when you want to. That's what Burnsaber says he will do in another thread, and I respect that. It's fruitless to call the people you aren't happy with "Nazis" or such and then try to get them to listen, because if they were they would certainly not listen to you, by definition. To lash out at unrelated passersby and anybody who isn't in your in-group, as some people did last night, is really quite pathetic. Makes it look as though you are taking your anger out on other people because you couldn't shake your main target.

[Raiel]

I could be wrong, but I strongly suspect that the "rules" mean little or nothing to the majority of the members of this community. They certainly don't mean a thing to me... but I rarely would consider doing something outside of most of those "rules" because, in general, they represent orderly conduct.

Perhaps Shrapnel took what Sombre said out of context of his normal behaviour. As has been said, he "can be a bit of p***k at times, but I've always just seen him as a cantankerous curmedgeonly type that does amazing work."

So, he's stepped out of line how frequently and how severely? Has his conduct actually been outside of forum guidelins on a consistent basis? No... but not because he gives a hoot about the rules. This comes across as a power trip along the lines of, "if you can't respect the rules because we made them, you're out of here."

[Graeme Dice]

The only difference appears to be I didn't tell you that I won't follow the rules in the future.
I think that might be a major difference, just a hint.

You're presuming that rules deserve to be followed simply because they are rules. That's ridiculous.

Frankly, if I'm not happy at how a site runs things, I'm just going to walk away and never give a second glance back, because they don't deserve my attention.

I suspect that most of us are quite happy with Illwinter, but despise Shrapnel for being ineffective and incompetent. It was what, six years before Shrapnel finally admitted that they had made a mistake by not selling Dominions in digital form?. It's funny how Gandalf stopped spouting the party line about how physical media and manuals prevents piracy as soon as the game was available for download.

[WraithLord]

( Just learned about this whole episode from this thread and the link that was given. )

I couldn't have phrased my opinion any better than Baalz said it.
I've just this tiny bit to add -
I do like the forum's overall tone to be as polite and constructive is it's generally is and I appreciate both the mods. efforts to that end and the natural good will of most players to keep it that way.
I think permanent ban should only be applied in extreme cases and according to the forum’s stated 3-strikes-and-you’re-out-rule. Extreme cases in my dictionary are, cheating, advocating for piracy, spamming, consistently stalking other player/s etc.
This doesn’t seem to be the case here.
I would like to humbly ask that Sombre’s sentence be sweetened. Please temp ban him as per the forum rules. Consider this, if you will, an act in favor of the community.
We would think no less of you, on the contrary we will appreciate and respect you more for that!

[Rookierookie]

The only difference appears to be I didn't tell you that I won't follow the rules in the future.
I think that might be a major difference, just a hint.

You're presuming that rules deserve to be followed simply because they are rules. That's ridiculous.


When I'm in somebody else's place I do follow the rules, even if it is to speak in 1337 24/7. Like I said, if I'm not happy with the rules, I can perfectly leave with no cost to myself. This isn't a situation where I might lose money or sacrifice my career by just turning away and leave.

Maybe you consider this your home, but I don't. I follow the rules here because I don't have to follow them outside of what little time I spend on the boards, and if I don't like the rules, I lose nothing by not coming here.

For what's worth, I actually don't think Sombre's perm ban was appropriate for the offense, from what information I've been able to gather. But the reactions of some of the other members are really quite jarring, for example in the communions thread last night.

[Maerlande]

Now I wonder, if they do have to listen to the users, which side should they listen to.

To continue my argument, this is easy to answer. The one that sells the game. There are a number of ways to look at who helps sell Dominions. Personally, I think it's the big contributors who write guides, help noobs, make mods. So if it was me, I'd sure as heck listen to Baalz, QM, Sombre, lch, Llamabeast, GP and so on. Because, like I said, the entire purpose of this forum is to make Shrapnel and Illwinter money.

Again: What makes Shrapnel money? Selling games. How do you sell an old game like Dominions? Advertise. And what the heck is cheaper advertising than free content, guides, mods etc. Heck, they even get free multiplayer servers with hosting fees paid by volunteers.

[Maerlande]

What communion thread?

[FAJ]

Did Sombre even want to stay on these boards? The moderation team tells him, "To stay here, you have to follow the rules". He says, "I will not follow your rules". Was his ban a surprise to him? He never came off as an ignorant person to me, I am sure he knew the consequences.

Sombre is a great contributor, and like everyone else I am not happy he is banned from the community here. It is a niche game with very few active contributing members of his magnitude; it sucks hard that he had to be removed.

I don't think the moderation team is in the wrong for banning him. I just think it sucks and the community is worse off for it.

[ano]

I would like to humbly ask that Sombre’s sentence be sweetened. Please temp ban him as per the forum rules. Consider this, if you will, an act in favor of the community.
I'd like to second this.
I never used any of Sombre's mods, and I never liked the most of his peppery words, and I do not think that people should be treated in different way depending on their contributions (to community or wherever), but, as many people said here, the rules say there should be some temporary bans before permaban and if moderators are here to check the fulfillment of the rules, they are supposed to fulfill them themselves. It doesn't matter who the banned user is, the rules should aim for being equal for everybody (although it is clearly unreachable)

[Agrajag]

Hi. I've been away from this forum for a very long time (because of lack of time for things like the mega timewaster that is Dominions.), and I've recently resumed lurking and now I feel like I need to post.
As an ex-moderator (ex due to the same lack of time that caused me to leave this forum), I think that the case of someone explicitly stating the he refuses to follow the forum rules (which I understand is the case) is a very complicated one from a moderator's perspective because intentionally breaking the rules is much worse than breaking them by accident (including in a fit of anger).
That said, I found that the best solution in case of repeat offenders that are important contributors to the community is to repeatedly punish them (in escalating gravity) until they realise that the severe punishment is not worth the short term "fun" in breaking the rules. Even if they disregard the rules, they eventually stop breaking them out of fear of punishment, while still contributing to the community. IMO a permaban is a tool reserved for obvious spammers or trolls (mostly people that are unproductive and don't contribute, and that have been spamming\trolling since their first day on the forum.)
So to sum up my opinion from what I've been able to gather on this event by reading the forum, it seems like the punishment is too great and not in the best interest of the community, but it is not unjustified because openly disregarding the rules and explicitly stating your disregard for them is a very difficult thing to put a moderator through and doing so does not only show disrespect for the moderator (for putting him through it) but for the community as well.
Personally, from what I remember of Sombre back when I visited the forum consistently I find it hard to believe that he would act in such a way.

That is all I have to say and I shall now resume lurking (since I have little time for more than lurking.)

[rdonj]

Well, it appears to be a bit of a moot point anyway, since sombre has stated now that he doesn't even want unbanned at this point. He is not coming back.

Neither is burnsaber. So the two most prolific modders in the community are gone for good, and that section of the forum will be much, much quieter without them.

[sector24]

I would say the forum is run "efficiently". I wouldn't say it's run "well". Here's why I think this; when I moderated forums in the past, I always made sure that I was also a member of the forums that I moderated. I contributed in a positive fashion, occasionally joked around with the members, but most importantly the members knew that I was a fan of the game first, and a moderator second. And if I had to bring down the ban hammer, I did it with the member's understanding that I am one of them and it was best for the community. They didn't always agree with me but they understod that I understood their interests. The people who work at Shrapnel are distinctly "outside" the community.

I don't know if you have a favorite Dominions nation/spell/unit, or a list of things you like (or don't like) about the game. I don't even know if you play Dominions 3 or have even tried it. I don't even know if you like video games or just work at Shrapnel because your husband does. You have invested nothing personal to Dominions 3, so when you are called in to ban someone its like you're the meteorite from deep space that purges Atlantis from the seas.

When this happens in the future, I think a better approach would be for one of the volunteer moderators who is a "member" of the forum to do the banning and you support them in your decision. When Shrapnel Games does the banning it makes you look like the faceless entity the draws universal ire while at the same time making it look like the volunteer moderators can't actually moderate without you. Additionally, it's very poor form to delete threads without explanation. A simple, "We are removing this thread from public view pending a review" goes a long way towards appearing less totalitarian.

I don't post this to be negative, I hope something constructive can be taken from it. Even if your decision was correct, you lack (and have always lacked) the soft touch that makes hard decisions bearable. I think the biggest stink about the whole thing is that it doesn't seem like the community believes that Shrapnel Games has the best interests of Dominions 3 at heart.

[Ragnarok-X]

I feel like sombre is trying to force Shrapnel into granting him free passage, like THEY should ask him to please return. That is wrong.

[Squirrelloid]

Sector24: Part of the problem is that our community-raised moderators rarely participate in the community anymore. Since I've joined I've only seen Edi really contribute to the bug reporting thread, and Ballbarian seems to not have done much more than post his map making utility. So to anyone who hasn't been around forever, both of them seem like outsiders.

[Humakty]

I'm all for the rules, and fully support the decision of the mods/admins (what would I do in their stead ? Not that easy to figure out, methinks), but it is sad to see a pillar of the modding community disappear like this, especially when, like me, you've used their production for hours of play.

[Quitti]

I feel like sombre is trying to force Shrapnel into granting him free passage, like THEY should ask him to please return. That is wrong.

No. He's not asking for anything. Other members of the community are. There is a certain distinction there.

[Maerlande]

Yes. Sombre does not want to come back. And he in no way influenced my efforts on his behalf. I did it entirely on my own based upon what I believe is good for Dominions 3 and playing this great game.

I come here to play dominions 3. Side effects are to make friends, have fun, and enjoy lively conversation. It wouldn't matter in the least to me if this was a vicious forum full of infighting. IRC is exactly that. Pure anarchy and I love it.

So all that matters about this forum is the ability to play Dominions 3. I've checked out some other forums and while they have strong Dominions 3 communities they stink for other reasons. Mainly, they don't have the top quality fan made content that exists here: guides, strategy discussion, mods, maps etc.

This forum has one key advantage: It's better organized. But when the quality of play for Dominions 3 here drops too low I won't bother coming here.

[Sicaire]

does anyone seriously think banning this guy does any good to the community, or to the game, to the forums or to anyone around?
is the main point of the rules to make sure that rules are properly enforced as per the HOLY TERMS OF USE? ooooooh man he said he would not abide by the RUUUULES! this is soooo evil it threatens the SYSTEM!
man this is soooo "legal" we're talking about a GAME (remember this is supposed to be FUN?) forum you bloody losers
DO YOU REALISE YOU ACTUALLY MADE THIS PLACE A POORER SADDER PLACE just by bringing this debate in? for what gain?
just set your damn ego aside moderators, invite the guy back and if he's smart somehow he wont boast about it and we can start PLAYING again and forgetting this whole sad story!

[Swan]

does anyone seriously think banning this guy does any good to the community, or to the game, to the forums or to anyone around?
is the main point of the rules to make sure that rules are properly enforced as per the HOLY TERMS OF USE? ooooooh man he said he would not abide by the RUUUULES! this is soooo evil it threatens the SYSTEM!
man this is soooo "legal" we're talking about a GAME (remember this is supposed to be FUN?) forum you bloody losers
DO YOU REALISE YOU ACTUALLY MADE THIS PLACE A POORER SADDER PLACE just by bringing this debate in? for what gain?
just set your damn ego aside moderators, invite the guy back and if he's smart somehow he wont boast about it and we can start PLAYING again and forgetting this whole sad story!

This is the right way to close this topic.
Caps lock is shouting, and this is bad karma.
There are rules, you accepted them when you wrote here, calling the mods loosers is not going to fix anything.
Now, calm down and say something interesting or shut up.

[Peacekeeper]

Maer,

I greatly appreciate your productive post. You are correct - while these forums are not a profit center for Shrapnel Games, they do exist as a sales tool. Two very important components of the tool are our customers who contribute valuable content and our moderators who volunteer their time to help us maintain a peaceful, productive environment. Without their unpaid help, Shrapnel Games would have a difficult time keeping these forums open for our customers' use.

We all understand that tempers will flare and posts will be made that violate the rules we've put in place. And we appreciate cooperation when a moderator must step in to calm things down. The problem in this situation, and the reason I exercised our right to escalate beyond our infraction system, is that Sombre indicated to us that he did not intend to honor our requests to follow the standards we expect of all our users and that he would ignore future private messages asking him to refrain from using personal attacks. Would a temporary ban change his mind? So we're faced with the question, do we allow one user to post in a manner that we would not tolerate from anyone else?

you handled this poorly. Be big enough to admit it and move on.

[Valerius]

I feel like sombre is trying to force Shrapnel into granting him free passage, like THEY should ask him to please return. That is wrong.

No. He's not asking for anything. Other members of the community are. There is a certain distinction there.

True. He's refusing to do something (refrain from attacking others). Some members of the community are defending him and asking for either a temporary ban before a permanent one or that he just be allowed to ignore forum rules.

As far as him not being given a temporary ban first, I can see the grounds for that objection - if he was willing to following the rules going forward. But Sombre was forthright that he wouldn't comply with Shrapnel's request so I'm not sure there's much point in postponing things.

The idea that he should be allowed to ignore the forum rules is in my opinion obviously a bad idea. Either you make an exception for him or you drop the rules completely for everyone. I don't think either of those two is a good idea (though the first one is worse). Maerlande mentions that IRC is anarchy. That's great; I'm glad people enjoy it. But I don't think the Shrapnel forums have to be the same - having two different arenas with different standards is a good thing.

Look, I understand that people are defending Sombre both because they're friends with him and because they value his contributions to the community and feel they outweigh any negatives. But people place different value on different things. Some people value a friendly community more than they do a huge availability of mods. And it's not an invalid point of view.

Also, some people dislike Shrapnel (not sure why since they seem like a decent company to me) but you can't possibly imagine they wanted this. I think they put this off precisely because it's a no-win situation for them.

This is a situation of Sombre's creation and it's his choice whether or not to resolve it. My guess is all he has to do is refrain from attacking people. So there's some people who really annoy him. Just ignore them and interact with the people you like. It doesn't seem like too much to ask. It's unfair, to say the least, to put all the burden on Shrapnel and ask nothing of him.

[Sicaire]

i think for most forums users this was just a non event up to the point when they felt obliged to ban him.
Sombre has been on the forums for years and I dont think anyone can say the forum have not been a mostly courteous place. I dont think either he suddenly turned into a rampaging troll threatening the forums integrity when he answered he would not abide by the rules. The question was pointless and the answer somehow inappropriate as well certainly.
This is a great example of using a vastly inadequate response force against a blatantly dismissable offense.

@Swan: I get your point and actually regret making the harsh statement.

[Squirrelloid]

For the Record: Sombre never said he would not abide by the rules. He disparaged the -10 point penalty for the initial offense as meaningless. To whit:

"-10 points oh noes"
'[the penalty] means as much to me as forgetting to buy milk at the grocery store.'

(second one paraphrased because i'm going off memory)

Neither of these constitutes guilt denial of violating the rules or a refusal to follow the rules. What they do is deny that penalty (as applied following the mod rules) was something he really needed to take seriously. Pretending Sombre said he refused to follow the rules is shameful and wrong.

If Sombre's disdain for the penalty had gone on to cause further incidents and appropriate responses, leading up to a full ban, so be it. But it didn't, he was banned summarily merely for stating how he felt about the 'punishment'. Thoughtcrime is doubleplus ungood citizens.

[Sicaire]

aha moderator of lies thou art forsworn! answer this or thou shall be banned to Kokytos (in summer) and Inferno (in winter).

[Soyweiser]

But Sombre was forthright that he wouldn't comply with Shrapnel's request so I'm not sure there's much point in postponing things.


Under the current rules I'm not entirely sure that a permaban would have happened eventually. The infractions are designed to go away after a while. Sombre just said he didn't care, he thought the whole system was a joke, and part of a powertrip by the mods. (As he explained on IRC). That he was banned only proves his point.


The idea that he should be allowed to ignore the forum rules is in my opinion obviously a bad idea. Either you make an exception for him or you drop the rules completely for everyone.

True. Why then the exception for Sombre? No tempbans, do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars.


Look, I understand that people are defending Sombre both because they're friends with him and because they value his contributions to the community and feel they outweigh any negatives.

You are forgetting one reason. Defending him because he is right. He should not have been banned and it was part of a powertrip. (Not saying that I agree with this, but it is a valid reason).

[WraithLord]

Well, it appears to be a bit of a moot point anyway, since sombre has stated now that he doesn't even want unbanned at this point. He is not coming back.

Neither is burnsaber. So the two most prolific modders in the community are gone for good, and that section of the forum will be much, much quieter without them.

Now that is really sad news and a substantial loss for dominions :(
It doesn't matter whose right or wrong, the damage is done and two of the top modders of dominions 3 are gone from here.

Sad.

[Swan]

For the Record: Sombre never said he would not abide by the rules. He disparaged the -10 point penalty for the initial offense as meaningless. To whit:

"-10 points oh noes"
'[the penalty] means as much to me as forgetting to buy milk at the grocery store.'

(second one paraphrased because i'm going off memory)


I am a fan of "fan-made justice" but can a mod come here and tell me this a lie?
No really, someone tell me he wasn't permabanned for this.

Neither is burnsaber. So the two most prolific modders in the community are gone for good, and that section of the forum will be much, much quieter without them.

I see dark times ahead

[theenemy]

wow, i never play dom3 anymore and hardly visit the forums. but when I do there is always something interesting going on.
so, they have banned Sombre, huh? well, he could be an *** sometimes, but banning... that's a bit harsh don't you think? I mean, compared to the youtube-kids he is practically a stoic:o

[AdmiralZhao]

For those of you upset about the impious bannination, I would point out that Starcraft 2 is now in open beta. :) I'm playing it, and really loving it. I think I'm going to finish out the last Dominions game I'm in (playing as Skavenblight, a wonderful mod nation by Sombre), and then call it quits. SC2 is also supposed to have a really great set of modding tools, just in case anyone is interested...

[theenemy]

For those of you upset about the impious bannination, I would point out that Starcraft 2 is now in open beta. :) I'm playing it, and really loving it. I think I'm going to finish out the last Dominions game I'm in (playing as Skavenblight, a wonderful mod nation by Sombre), and then call it quits. SC2 is also supposed to have a really great set of modding tools, just in case anyone is interested...

Well done Admiral Zhao! Now you must kill the airbender!:happy:

[Maerlande]

Starcraft 2 is not even in my consideration as a substitution for Dominions. First it's RTS and I generally hate RTS because it's almost always a click fest. Second it's a lame sequel to a barely satisfactory game. If that's strategy I'd love to duel you.

[Valandil]

I’ve been away from the forums for a few years studying philosophy and generally trying to do something worthwhile with my life, whilst lurking here and downloading mods and maps from time to time. I’ve never had any interaction with Sombre, and I know nothing of the specifics of this situation. Still, my shameful pedantic scholasticism compels a bit of a reply to what I see as an abuse of ‘justification’ contained in this thread.

First off, I just want to point out that, before I could post this reply, I had to ‘accept’ Shrapnel’s forum policy. I did this fully intending to violate that policy, and I actually hope to be banned in a certain sense because then my point will be made, to wit, in the grandiose jargon of ethical discourse: Shrapnel Games and Annette acted within their rights as a company and as an authority, but contrary to the principles of justice.

It seems to me indisputable that Shrapnel has the legal right to enforce whatever arbitrary rules they want to on their forums, and that Sombre, acting as he did, violated the terms of an agreement which he must have signed, and is therefore subject to the penalties enumerated etc (which include the little subclause that lets Shrapnel permaban without warning, as it were.) I don’t really think anyone wants to argue that point, so I’ll let it alone for now and move on to the second portion of my charge. Annette has stated, rather briefly, her position:

Annette:
We all understand that tempers will flare and posts will be made that violate the rules we've put in place. And we appreciate cooperation when a moderator must step in to calm things down. The problem in this situation, and the reason I exercised our right to escalate beyond our infraction system, is that Sombre indicated to us that he did not intend to honor our requests to follow the standards we expect of all our users and that he would ignore future private messages asking him to refrain from using personal attacks. Would a temporary ban change his mind? So we're faced with the question, do we allow one user to post in a manner that we would not tolerate from anyone else?
That is to say, Sombre merited a more extreme penalty because, in addition to the initial offence, he committed the secondary offence of Lack of Respect for Rules. Thus, Annette acted expeditiously to preserve the integrity of the forum system, since the standard protocol would, clearly, not have worked.

The trouble, of course, is that “Lack of Respect for Rules” is simply not an offence. Even in the form Annette wishes to characterize it, “Intent to Re-offend,” it isn’t an offence. It’s not an offence under Shrapnel’s own terms of use, and it isn’t an offence to Universal Justice. Mill’s dictum in On Liberty applies here- do what thou wilt, unless it harms the liberty of others. What Annette (I’m using “Annette” metonymically here, because of course it’s easier to write a polemic against a person than against a company.) proposes is pure thoughtcrime, pure victimless crime. It’s simply not the case that “Intent to disturb the peace” translates into “Disturbance of the peace.”

Even more damning, the thoughtcrime in question wasn’t even intent, but merely the aforementioned ‘lack of respect.’ I, personally, do not respect the Hate Speech Act (in Canada.) I view it as an unconstitutional limitation on our right to free speech. But that does NOT MEAN that I can be convicted of Hate Crimes unless I am demonstrably inciting hatred. Nor does it indicate intent to be hateful, nor does it demonstrate that I am a bigot. Sombre’s ‘secondary offence’ amounts to no more than that. In a court of law, it would be meaningless.

Shrapnel Community forums are not a court of law, and Annette is under no obligation to be just. However, to the extent that Annette’s decision reflects Shrapnel Policy, that policy must be regarded as unjust, and, following Thoreau, we are morally obliged to ignore it. So we come full circle: Sombre’s action not as contemptible indication of a poisonous mind, but as moral necessity. OF COURSE we shouldn’t give a rat’s arse about the rules, or about punishments. What we should care about is justice.

Valandil Out.

[rdonj]

For the Record: Sombre never said he would not abide by the rules. He disparaged the -10 point penalty for the initial offense as meaningless. To whit:

"-10 points oh noes"
'[the penalty] means as much to me as forgetting to buy milk at the grocery store.'

(second one paraphrased because i'm going off memory)


I am a fan of "fan-made justice" but can a mod come here and tell me this a lie?
No really, someone tell me he wasn't permabanned for this.

Neither is burnsaber. So the two most prolific modders in the community are gone for good, and that section of the forum will be much, much quieter without them.

I see dark times ahead

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure no one can do this. :(

[Trumanator]

For the Record: Sombre never said he would not abide by the rules. He disparaged the -10 point penalty for the initial offense as meaningless. To whit:

"-10 points oh noes"
'[the penalty] means as much to me as forgetting to buy milk at the grocery store.'

(second one paraphrased because i'm going off memory)


I am a fan of "fan-made justice" but can a mod come here and tell me this a lie?
No really, someone tell me he wasn't permabanned for this.

Neither is burnsaber. So the two most prolific modders in the community are gone for good, and that section of the forum will be much, much quieter without them.

I see dark times ahead

Apparently, the privacy of those banned would be violated if the reason for their banning was revealed.

[Frozen Lama]

Its sad but true that Sombre isn't going to get unbanned. That would require Shrapnel to admit they were wrong, and that just can't happen. Besides, they don't give a F*** about you guys anymore anyways. you already bought the game, they have your money so buzz off. Or, be like shrapnel staff and stick very large implements up your rear.

[Foodstamp]

Its sad but true that Sombre isn't going to get unbanned. That would require Shrapnel to admit they were wrong, and that just can't happen. Besides, they don't give a F*** about you guys anymore anyways. you already bought the game, they have your money so buzz off. Or, be like shrapnel staff and stick very large implements up your rear.

I am trying to decide if you are twelve or just stupid.

[Radio_Star]

The saddening reality is that we, as game-consumers and forum-goers have little recourse in this matter. The one option we always have is that old truism, 'vote with your wallet'.

To that end, this is my last post. Dom 3 will be the last Shrapnel product I purchase.

I find the course of action the moderators have pursued is sufficiently distasteful to prompt this response.

I have greatly enjoyed this amazing product that the wonderful developers have assembled. I have found as much, if not more pleasure in the aftermarket mods and community support it enjoys. On the whole, the game has been a very positive experience. That fact makes it only that much harder to walk away, but I sincerely feel that I, again with limited recourse, have no other means of expression.



To the developers and the community, thank you all for the great times.

[Foodstamp]

The saddening reality is that we, as game-consumers and forum-goers have little recourse in this matter. The one option we always have is that old truism, 'vote with your wallet'.

To that end, this is my last post. Dom 3 will be the last Shrapnel product I purchase.

I find the course of action the moderators have pursued is sufficiently distasteful to prompt this response.

I have greatly enjoyed this amazing product that the wonderful developers have assembled. I have found as much, if not more pleasure in the aftermarket mods and community support it enjoys. On the whole, the game has been a very positive experience. That fact makes it only that much harder to walk away, but I sincerely feel that I, again with limited recourse, have no other means of expression.



To the developers and the community, thank you all for the great times.

Bad timing seeing how they just released a preview of the dominions RPG mechanics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

[militarist]

I was not on a irc channel when Sombre explained what happened, and for me it's hard to imagine that sombre was punished for what he thought. It looks for me that he was punished for what he said. There is always a difference between these 2. From my understanding - he just had a conflict with some inexperienced admin. And then another, more experienced admin, who probably is higher in hierarchy, made a decision to save face of organization in eyes of all admins, and not demotivate them by letting Sombre ignore them. Nobody likes to be ignored, and even less like to hear something like what sombre told. But this move of administration smells like Chinese style of governance - they feel they should sacrifice 1 person to keep admins happy and the system unharmed. There is a big difference between China and the other world. And since we are not employees of Shrapnel, and internet is associated with the word freedom and pluralism, what administration does can be understood but it really hurts. And if administration pays so much affords to develop modders and players community, it would be smart to consider such people as Sombre more as investors, who have voice, rather then employees who can be just fired from forum. It's your business, and you can legal right to o whatever you want, but if you want us to feel as a community, let us be this community. Otherwise many of us will have huge issues with own integrity, and that's not really good for anyone.

Shrapnel is not only a forum, it's a niche social network and it's value is in it's members.

Anyway, I would like to thank you, Shrapnel, for parental attention. I appreciate your affords and resources you spend on game and community. But are we really so little children that we deserve such kinds of punishment and control ? Or criminals? I would really understand if Sombre have shown some public disrespect to Shrapnel. But banning for Private messages exchange with one admin, whose input can be much lower then Sombre's? That's hard to understand.

[rdonj]

The saddening reality is that we, as game-consumers and forum-goers have little recourse in this matter. The one option we always have is that old truism, 'vote with your wallet'.

To that end, this is my last post. Dom 3 will be the last Shrapnel product I purchase.

I find the course of action the moderators have pursued is sufficiently distasteful to prompt this response.

I have greatly enjoyed this amazing product that the wonderful developers have assembled. I have found as much, if not more pleasure in the aftermarket mods and community support it enjoys. On the whole, the game has been a very positive experience. That fact makes it only that much harder to walk away, but I sincerely feel that I, again with limited recourse, have no other means of expression.



To the developers and the community, thank you all for the great times.

Bad timing seeing how they just released a preview of the dominions RPG mechanics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Who's 12 now?

[Foodstamp]

I was not on a irc channel when Sombre explained what happened, and for me it's hard to imagine that sombre was punished for what he thought. It looks for me that he was punished for what he said. There is always a difference between these 2. From my understanding - he just had a conflict with some inexperienced admin. And then another, more experienced admin, who probably is higher in hierarchy, made a decision to save face of organization in eyes of all admins, and not demotivate them by letting Sombre ignore them. Nobody likes to be ignored, and even less like to hear something like what sombre told. But this move of administration smells like Chinese style of governance - they feel they should sacrifice 1 person to keep admins happy and the system unharmed. There is a big difference between China and the other world. And since we are not employees of Shrapnel, and internet is associated with the word freedom and pluralism, what administration does can be understood but it really hurts. And if administration pays so much affords to develop modders and players community, it would be smart to consider such people as Sombre more as investors, who have voice, rather then employees who can be just fired from forum. It's your business, and you can legal right to o whatever you want, but if you want us to feel as a community, let us be this community. Otherwise many of us will have huge issues with own integrity, and that's not really good for anyone.

Shrapnel is not only a forum, it's a niche social network and it's value is in it's members.

Anyway, I would like to thank you, Shrapnel, for parental attention. I appreciate your affords and resources you spend on game and community. But are we really so little children that we deserve such kinds of punishment and control ? Or criminals? I would really understand if Sombre have shown some public disrespect to Shrapnel. But banning for Private messages exchange with one admin, whose input can be much lower then Sombre's? That's hard to understand.

You were able to deduce all that from what someone told you in IRC? That the morale of the admins was in jeopardy so Sombre had to be made into a martyr?

Sombre made mods, people like mods. Sombre was rude to people, including new players and forum users, people don't like that. Shrapnel is probably breaking even between people he attracted (I doubt he attracted anyone, retain is probably a better word) through mods and people he ran off by being rude. His mods were cool, and it appealed to a lot of people, especially forum vets, but his attitude was a detriment to the community, especially new players, who are just as important customers as any of us.

[Soyweiser]

Sombre was rude to people, including new players and forum users, people don't like that.

I kinda disagree there, watching the drama can be very much fun :)

"Game forums. Come for the game, stay for the drama."

And lets not overreact. Sombre wasn't always an pain in the backside.

[militarist]

And one more moment I'd like to mention. If you gave him "-10" points for something, from the point of view of the "feeling of is right" of the majority, Sombre definitely deserves +1000 points for his community supporting affords. And though Shrapnel doesn't formally appreciate modding, it would be wise to do it at least informally. everybody would understand if you banned somebody who did not invest any time into the game, and just ignored Sombre's bad mood or his awkward expression of his though. I start to have feeling that Sombre was banned EXACTLY because he invested so much. Because his words were treated as a show of arrogance from the person who doesn't take the world in an adequate way. To give a good example to all other Dom's dinosaurs, with a message "we watch you more then others". But who really have shown arrogance in this case? And if Sombre, who is our friend and part of our heart as he is part of commmunity, said something awkward which could be understood (quite subjective though) in a way that can be treated (also subjective) offencive way, why just not to ignore him several times, just to see if he really because inadequate destructing monster , whose existence threatens to the community, sales plans of our initiative to advertise the game?

Do you really beleave that thouse who are here, on this forum - we still play Doms because the game is great? :) No. We really appritiate the game, but many of us would not play it SP. And in MP good game partners and friends, and a feeling of community is a necessity. And he is our friend.

[Trumanator]

Well you see, shrapnel has refused to publish the reasons behind Sombre's banning, so naturally we're forced to assume that what we have heard from him is true.

Oh, and you do realize you can post Tim Brooks, instead of just thanking your tools.

[Foodstamp]

Sombre was rude to people, including new players and forum users, people don't like that.

I kinda disagree there, watching the drama can be very much fun :)

"Game forums. Come for the game, stay for the drama."

And lets not overreact. Sombre wasn't always an pain in the backside.

I agree the drama can be fun to watch, I am as guilty as anyone when it comes to enjoying that. I blame it on my MMORPG trash talk days :). It's one of the reasons I responded in this thread, people get so worked up about the silliest things, and then they become easy pickings.

[Strider]

The only explanation I will add to this discussion, is that this decision was not made in-the-heat-of-the-moment. This has been an ongoing problem for quite some time, that all the moderators have been in on. I supported the decision that was made. I have no personal interest in this situation, so I was able to base my opinion on what has transpired over time. A number of you are pointing to one or two PM references...this is not the entire picture.

This thread is being left open, for the time being, to allow people to get this out of their system. But, some are pushing it and trying to use it for a free-for-all. Stay on topic and keep your opinions civil.

[Rookierookie]

everybody would understand if you banned somebody who did not invest any time into the game
So a nobody should get perm-banned for the same things then?

[militarist]

"
You were able to deduce all that from what someone told you in IRC? That the morale of the admins was in jeopardy so Sombre had to be made into a martyr?

Sombre made mods, people like mods. Sombre was rude to people, including new players and forum users, people don't like that. Shrapnel is probably breaking even between people he attracted (I doubt he attracted anyone, retain is probably a better word) through mods and people he ran off by being rude. His mods were cool, and it appealed to a lot of people, especially forum vets, but his attitude was a detriment to the community, especially new players, who are just as important customers as any of us.[/QUOTE]

My feeling were hurt by a mix of several reasons which, maybe wouldn't happen in case on not being a mis. But this mix is poisioning.

1. Shrapnel didn't explains why he did it. It's a Shrapnel's right, but still it hurts.
2. It's a community, not a Shrapnel's blog, so some some level of democracy is expected, regardless of those forum rules most of us don't even read, because we expect them to be just usual, reasonable, and based on an common sense.
3. I hate political correctness, as thouse who demend it are rarely the same people who contribute. From my life experience, politically correct people (I mean in extreme way, like demanding from Shrapnel to ban the offender) and those who really do something are very rarely the same person.
4. Even If I was not so much against political correctness -if someone was publicly offended - that's bad. And for public offense. There should be punishment. But if it was private - the offended have a great opputrinity to save his mood next time by avoiding games in which Somber plays with his friends. And Shrapnel could just ignore it. It's PRIVATE. I don't know if it was private or not.but..see point 1.

[Foodstamp]

The forum is littered with public instances where Sombre has been "not so nice". The last modding thread I interacted with him in he kept freaking out because he didn't think we were answering the original poster's question properly. Ultimately the original poster responded and said we were answering exactly what he was asking.

Here is the thread:

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=45313

A quick search of his replies would bring up similar threads where he was basically trying to e-bully people for god knows what reasons.

[Maerlande]

Naw. Foodstamp he was just ebullying you because he doesn't like you.

[Annette]

[For the Record: Sombre never said he would not abide by the rules. He disparaged the -10 point penalty for the initial offense as meaningless. To whit:

"-10 points oh noes"
'[the penalty] means as much to me as forgetting to buy milk at the grocery store.'

(second one paraphrased because i'm going off memory)


I am a fan of "fan-made justice" but can a mod come here and tell me this a lie?
No really, someone tell me he wasn't permabanned for this.

Really, do some of you believe I would ban any user for writing, "-10 points oh noes"? No, Swan, Sombre was not banned for this alone. But that nugget didn't help his case.

Its sad but true that Sombre isn't going to get unbanned. That would require Shrapnel to admit they were wrong, and that just can't happen. Besides, they don't give a F*** about you guys anymore anyways. you already bought the game, they have your money so buzz off. Or, be like shrapnel staff and stick very large implements up your rear.
If we truly didn't care about you and our other customers, would we bother with these forums? Of course, we'd like to sell more games...after all, that's our job. But if we wanted to take your money and run, why are we here?

I have no expectation that anything I say is going to make those of you in an uproar change your minds. But I'm going to try to address some of the crap being tossed around here.

Amongst the Annette and Shrapnel bashing, we have heard some very compelling arguments why the decision to ban Sombre should be reconsidered (and I appreciate those considered posts). The reality is, it's a moot point. As far as I know, Sombre has no desire to return. And if he did, we would reconsider only if he were willing to respect our terms.

I have a thick skin, and I'm actually quite impressed how some of you have managed to put words in my mouth. Sombre was not banned for one post, nor for one private message. He was banned because he continually violated, and later indicated that he would not abide by, the terms of use we set forth for these boards. Apparently there are many of you who think, 1) we should have no rules or, 2) we should let Sombre have his own set of rules. I have absolutely no wish to hurt the community (what does our company stand to gain from that?), nor am I interested in any kind of power-play. But Shrapnel Games will not successfully run a company forum with either points 1 or 2 above in play.

Everyone who buys our games or is considering buying our games is welcome here, if they abide by the rules. These are Shrapnel Games' forums, and what we allow to happen here reflects on us as a company. That is why we have the rules we do. We won't allow anyone to intentionally disregard the rules. And we won't allow anyone to intentionally run off new members.

Sombre will continue to make his mods I am sure, and there are many places he can post them. So talk with him about where he is going.

[Maerlande]

The only explanation I will add to this discussion, is that this decision was not made in-the-heat-of-the-moment. This has been an ongoing problem for quite some time, that all the moderators have been in on. I supported the decision that was made. I have no personal interest in this situation, so I was able to base my opinion on what has transpired over time. A number of you are pointing to one or two PM references...this is not the entire picture.

This thread is being left open, for the time being, to allow people to get this out of their system. But, some are pushing it and trying to use it for a free-for-all. Stay on topic and keep your opinions civil.

Honestly dude. Who the heck are you? I have NEVER seen you participate in anything on this dominions forum so how can you possibly have an intelligent opinion about Sombre? I suppose it's possible you just lurk around like some kind of sekret mod guru, but get real. If you want us to take you seriously you should at least have some reputation amongst this community. And I sure can't figure out why you supporting this decision should matter to me.

And this threat is sweet. "Play nice or we'll delete you" Get it out of our systems? That is so pompous it makes me vomit. This isn't my system.

Let's get real. It's pretty bloody common practice amongst professional associations that discipline is transparent. In my association, they even publish that you didn't pay your dues.

Bah. I can't even articulate my disgust with your post Strider. It's drivel. You jump in to basically say "Look dudes, I'm god. STFU or we'll discipline you too"

[Maerlande]

Annette. In some previous posts you stated you would not discuss why you banned Sombre. Now you are discussing it.

Perhaps you aren't quite understanding that it's exactly that sort of talk tha offends us poor peons who just use these forums to play dominions.

If you aren't going to talk about it DON'T. If you are, don't say you won't.

[militarist]

The best way, from my opinion is just unban him without any explanations and warnings and consider it not as a faliure of administration and dangerous achievement of users community which can lead to something extremely terrible which doesn't come to my poor imagination. And start following your own rules - no permabanning before temp bans. Ideally no permabanning at all. If someone was tempobanned 3 times, and still returns and makes new mods :)... yes, I would give him 4th tempoban. As exclusion. And then 5th, etc. If he is such a maniac that he returns each time and makes new mods - Shrapnel should be just proud of it. It means he is a very loyal citizen of Shrapnel world. It's pretty cool. And sometimes people with lack of communication skills, if they have weight in community, they DESERVED it. And, having weight in community DE-FACTO in comparison with many admin's DE JURE means a lot. We are young people, we like democracy and fun. If we were serous old farts in a costumes who think too much about rules we wouldn't play computer games at all.

Please make this world, which you create for us (I hope so!) a pleasant place for US, even if it in this case will be less pleasant for you, those who regulate. You are earning money for being in this world. And we are - not. We are here only because of pleasure and only for it.

If you say you banned Sombre not for yourself, but for community...I didn't hear much voices from unpaid community users who would support you. That's a reality.

[Frozen Lama]

I have a thick skin, and I'm actually quite impressed how some of you have managed to put words in my mouth. Sombre was not banned for one post, nor for one private message. He was banned because he continually violated, and later indicated that he would not abide by, the terms of use we set forth for these boards. Apparently there are many of you who think, 1) we should have no rules or, 2) we should let Sombre have his own set of rules. I have absolutely no wish to hurt the community (what does our company stand to gain from that?), nor am I interested in any kind of power-play. But Shrapnel Games will not successfully run a company forum with either points 1 or 2 above in play.






Glad to see you continue to be deliberatly obtuse about one of the main questions. If he was "continually violating" your sacred rules, why didnt you follow your own sacred procedures? continually means overtime. i guess you just decided to make a special case for Sombre by permabanning him and not give him your three strikes rule. seems pretty darn hypocrtical to me. And if you use the other part of the rule that lets you permaban him instantly, well good job. you've made the community more harmonius. We aren't giving him his own special set of rules. you are. And you look stupid for it. We know by now that your ego's are too hurt to back down at this point, but maybe, just maybe, we can get you to admit you were a little overzealous.

[Lingchih]

Thanks to the Mods for not banning me, and allowing this discussion to continue. It does have it's place on the board.

[Trumanator]

Sombre was not banned for one post, nor for one private message. He was banned because he continually violated, and later indicated that he would not abide by, the terms of use we set forth for these boards. Apparently there are many of you who think, 1) we should have no rules or, 2) we should let Sombre have his own set of rules. I have absolutely no wish to hurt the community (what does our company stand to gain from that?), nor am I interested in any kind of power-play. But Shrapnel Games will not successfully run a company forum with either points 1 or 2 above in play.


So the new story is that you banned him because of a perceived lack of respect for the rules. So somehow the fact that he didn't give a rat's @ss about your two bit warnings and almighty mod powers made an instant perma ban somehow applicable under this rule:
A permanent ban can be applied for any reason if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community.

Great job, I can see that you've successfully promoted harmony in the community. Leaving that aside however, tell me how in the hell his private communications with you could possibly affect community harmony? Obviously they can't because they're PRIVATE. So really, you're just trying to cover up the fact that you broke you're own policies because you couldn't stand someone who didn't "Respect mah authority," or you violated your own policies that called for a preliminary temp ban.

[Rookierookie]

Sombre was not banned for one post, nor for one private message. He was banned because he continually violated, and later indicated that he would not abide by, the terms of use we set forth for these boards. Apparently there are many of you who think, 1) we should have no rules or, 2) we should let Sombre have his own set of rules. I have absolutely no wish to hurt the community (what does our company stand to gain from that?), nor am I interested in any kind of power-play. But Shrapnel Games will not successfully run a company forum with either points 1 or 2 above in play.


So the new story is that you banned him because of a perceived lack of respect for the rules. So somehow the fact that he didn't give a rat's @ss about your two bit warnings and almighty mod powers made an instant perma ban somehow applicable under this rule:
A permanent ban can be applied for any reason if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community.

That's not a new story. That has been her original point all along.

[Squirrelloid]

I have a thick skin, and I'm actually quite impressed how some of you have managed to put words in my mouth. Sombre was not banned for one post, nor for one private message. He was banned because he continually violated, and later indicated that he would not abide by, the terms of use we set forth for these boards. Apparently there are many of you who think, 1) we should have no rules or, 2) we should let Sombre have his own set of rules. I have absolutely no wish to hurt the community (what does our company stand to gain from that?), nor am I interested in any kind of power-play. But Shrapnel Games will not successfully run a company forum with either points 1 or 2 above in play.

First, I want to make clear I'm not trying to bash anyone. I have no personal agenda here. I don't even personally like Sombre, although I do respect the modding work he's done.

What does bother me is that what you say doesn't match up with either what he's said (and I have no reason to believe he's lied) nor his infraction record. He had a warning that was long since expired, and the -10pts he received from the current violation that sparked this entire chain of events. That's not an especially 'continual' problem. If Sombre was such a continual problem, why doesn't he have a long record of disciplinary action? Where are the temp bans?

I don't like being lied to, and I don't like seeing people treated unfairly. Unfortunately, all the evidence available suggests that is exactly what is happening here. If you want to change people's minds, its going to require actual evidence. As a trained scientist, I for one tend to prefer the hypothesis that the evidence actually supports.

[Annette]

So the new story is that you banned him because of a perceived lack of respect for the rules. So somehow the fact that he didn't give a rat's @ss about your two bit warnings and almighty mod powers made an instant perma ban somehow applicable under this rule:
A permanent ban can be applied for any reason if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community. Great job, I can see that you've successfully promoted harmony in the community. Leaving that aside however, tell me how in the hell his private communications with you could possibly affect community harmony? Obviously they can't because they're PRIVATE. So really, you're just trying to cover up the fact that you broke you're own policies because you couldn't stand someone who didn't "Respect mah authority," or you violated your own policies that called for a preliminary temp ban.
New story? How so? My post from last night:

I'm the one who banned Sombre. Don't blame our volunteer moderators, please. We're all very saddened by this and don't take it lightly. We (Shrapnel Games' staff) understand that Sombre has made many positive contributions to these boards. On the other hand, he/she continually violated the rules we have established and expect every forum member to observe. We actually gave some extra rope in this case, encouraging Sombre to continue participating positively without breaking our forum guidelines. Unfortunately, Sombre was not willing to do this.

[Frozen Lama]

i guess she ran out of drivel to spout and is now reusing her old rhetoric. once again - why no temp bans if it was a continual problem?

[rdonj]

Sombre is hardly the only person with discipline problems on this board... not including maerlande, who has finally gotten his. Sure took him an awful lot of effort to get it, in comparison.

[Squirrelloid]

Sombre is hardly the only person with discipline problems on this board... not including maerlande, who has finally gotten his. Sure took him an awful lot of effort to get it, in comparison.

And lets not mention Wikdthots - was any discipline ever handed down about that at all?

Edit: that is, given he was a sockpuppet, did the person responsible suffer *any* consequences?

[Baalz]

To those who are angry, I'd like to ask that the discussion be elevated above what I'd expect out of other forums. Regardless of your grievance this isn't accomplishing anything other than making people look like petulant children. If you really feel fed up enough to leave then just do it.

To the admins I'd like to expound on the real reason people are angry, and I alluded to it in my previous post. Most of us identify with Sombre, even if we found him abrasive. He was part of the community and (at least those that are protesting think) he contributed much more than his abrasiveness subtracted. Your actions feel unilateral, arbitrary and an attack on our community. If he had been consistently unpalatable then not only would everyone understand why he was banned, they'd thank you for it. This feels like some outsider decided that enough respect was not paid to him and attacked our community, only to be fully supported by the powers that be. Let me be clear that I don't know or particularly care about the specifics of what happend, I'm just telling you why people are mad as they're not doing a good job articulating it.

It's not that there is a feeling that there should be no rules, it's that the feeling is that how this is enforced is an attack on our community. If you banned Sombre then who else? Obviously Sombre is not coming back, and I'd expect that several other people are gone for good over this...and the feeling is why in the hell are you swinging a big club around like that when nobody else saw a problem? This whole thing could have been greatly mitigated by publicly asking, then warning, then being clear about consequences for further behavior and bringing the community along with the decision. *Obviously* important members of the community deserve special consideration - they are what makes the community. If there is a compelling reason that one of the pillars of a community needs to be removed you can't just unilaterally do it with no transparency...unless you want considerable backlash.

[Foodstamp]

This thread has been very entertaining. Let's wrap it up with a ban to Frozen Lama for personal attacks on a moderator so he can join his buddies on the free forums.

[Trumanator]

I'm glad you've had fun with this thread foodstamp. You've gotten all kinds of thanks from Brooks for being his tool.

[Foodstamp]

I'm glad you've had fun with this thread foodstamp. You've gotten all kinds of thanks from Brooks for being his tool.

Thanks for being mine :).

[Frozen Lama]

This thread has been very entertaining. Let's wrap it up with a ban to Frozen Lama for personal attacks on a moderator so he can join his buddies on the free forums.

I smell a future moderator in the maiking.....

and what? no infraction? no temp bans? oh.. right. the rules mean nothing lately.

[Trumanator]

To those who are angry, I'd like to ask that the discussion be elevated above what I'd expect out of other forums. Regardless of your grievance this isn't accomplishing anything other than making people look like petulant children. If you really feel fed up enough to leave then just do it.

To the admins I'd like to expound on the real reason people are angry, and I alluded to it in my previous post. Most of us identify with Sombre, even if we found him abrasive. He was part of the community and (at least those that are protesting think) he contributed much more than his abrasiveness subtracted. Your actions feel unilateral, arbitrary and an attack on our community. If he had been consistently unpalatable then not only would everyone understand why he was banned, they'd thank you for it. This feels like some outsider decided that enough respect was not paid to him and attacked our community, only to be fully supported by the powers that be. Let me be clear that I don't know or particularly care about the specifics of what happend, I'm just telling you why people are mad as they're not doing a good job articulating it.

It's not that there is a feeling that there should be no rules, it's that the feeling is that how this is enforced is an attack on our community. If you banned Sombre then who else? Obviously Sombre is not coming back, and I'd expect that several other people are gone for good over this...and the feeling is why in the hell are you swinging a big club around like that when nobody else saw a problem? This whole thing could have been greatly mitigated by publicly asking, then warning, then being clear about consequences for further behavior and bringing the community along with the decision. *Obviously* important members of the community deserve special consideration - they are what makes the community. If there is a compelling reason that one of the pillars of a community needs to be removed you can't just unilaterally do it with no transparency...unless you want considerable backlash.

To add to this, you might try having junior mods who the community actually respects, instead of mods who contribute nearly nothing to the community and therefore enjoy no respect from it.

[Foodstamp]

This thread has been very entertaining. Let's wrap it up with a ban to Frozen Lama for personal attacks on a moderator so he can join his buddies on the free forums.

I smell a future moderator in the maiking.....

and what? no infraction? no temp bans? oh.. right. the rules mean nothing lately.

This thread is a perfect example of why no one would ever want to moderate a forum lol.

[Annette]

This is exactly the problem, Baalz. Sombre was granted extra leeway because of his history here. His ban didn't come out of the blue, and I'm sure he would agree. I'm certain he knew it was coming. Because we were lenient with him, there is not a record for you all to see. It's a Catch 22...I'm hearing we should be willing to bend the rules because of his contributions, but I've created an uproar because I allowed the rules to be bent.

I'm not sure what lesson we'll take from this. Will we bend the rules again for someone who has contributed greatly over a long period of time? Probably. Will that person then ignore our requests to play nice with others? Hopefully not.

[SciencePro]

Amongst the Annette and Shrapnel bashing, we have heard some very compelling arguments why the decision to ban Sombre should be reconsidered (and I appreciate those considered posts). The reality is, it's a moot point. As far as I know, Sombre has no desire to return. And if he did, we would reconsider only if he were willing to respect our terms.

Okay, I have a suggestion then. In cases like this, institute a temporary ban and require that, as a condition of reinstatement, the member calms down, acknowledges that he or she broke the rules and agrees to follow them in the future. If the person isn't willing to follow the rules or continues to be hostile in general, then continue the ban indefinitely. If the person gets angry and quits then fine.

If the person is re-instated and the problem reoccurs then bring out the perma-banhammer.

[Strider]

People...the moderators had a lot of 'reports' concerning Sombre's posts, by forum members, not moderators. Most, if not all of those who made those reports, are also long standing and respected members of this forum. And in some of the reports, it wasn't against the person who made the report, but "for" someone else, especially for the newer people.

[Frozen Lama]

annette you didn't bend the rules. you simply broke them. its that simple. basically you're simply lying to us. and i think about 50% of the anger isn't so much about him being banned anymore. its that we see ourselves being blatantly lied to. answer us. why didn't you follow your own rules to try and remedy the "continual problem"

[Graeme Dice]

Sombre made mods, people like mods. Sombre was rude to people, including new players and forum users, people don't like that.

He was a lot less rude than Septimius Severus, who is the user who actually caused the altercation by misrepresenting Sombre's words.

[Valerius]

I noticed a couple of references to Orwell in this thread. It seems like some (*not* all) people on one side of this discussion are certainly engaging in a Two Minute Hate (though it's obviously gone on a lot longer than two minutes). Though I doubt it will change anyone's mind it's worth pointing out that the reasoned, calm posts supporting Sombre carry a lot more weight than the more extreme ones.

While I'm sure it's invigorating feeling part of a righteous crusade, it doesn't really help when your martyr is unsympathetic and has brought the problem down on himself. It's actually real simple. What's more important to Sombre: participating in the forum or acting the way he wants? Obviously it's the latter. Equally obviously, there's a misalignment between Shrapnel's view of the forum and Sombre's desired behavior. That doesn't really leave many options.

[Foodstamp]

Sombre made mods, people like mods. Sombre was rude to people, including new players and forum users, people don't like that.

He was a lot less rude than Septimius Severus, who is the user who actually caused the altercation by misrepresenting Sombre's words.

I don't remember Septimius, and for the record, I never reported Sombre for anything.

[Trumanator]

People...the moderators had a lot of 'reports' concerning Sombre's posts, by forum members, not moderators. Most, if not all of those who made those reports, are also long standing and respected members of this forum. And in some of the reports, it wasn't against the person who made the report, but "for" someone else, especially for the newer people.

ROFL, cuz septimus severus,and Kuritza are "respected members of this forum." Besides, you and Annette are now giving conflicting stories. She just said that there isn't any actual evidence because you guys were supposedly treating sombre w/kid gloves, and now you're saying that there were a lot of reports? Try coordinating before trying to lie to your forumgoers.

[Foodstamp]

Nice ninja there, did you feel bad for dissing the third guy?

[Lingchih]

Just lock this thread, Annette. I started it, and I request it be locked. I do not think it should be deleted though.

[Valerius]

You know, the real problem here is that Truman, Frozen and Squirrell are all in the Cripple Fight game. This doesn't bode well for me. NAP, guys?

[Annette]

annette you didn't bend the rules. you simply broke them. its that simple. basically you're simply lying to us. and i think about 50% of the anger isn't so much about him being banned anymore. its that we see ourselves being blatantly lied to. answer us. why didn't you follow your own rules to try and remedy the "continual problem"

I take your accusation of lying to you very seriously. What have I lied about? I posted earlier why I exercised our right to circumvent the infraction system.

Trumanator, the reports go to the private moderator's forum. I said there is not evidence that YOU can see.

This is going nowhere. You're angry. I get it.

[militarist]

It looks like one group of users attacked another with support of admins then. And admins , having got "numerious examples" of Sombre's misbehavior were in such a rush, that didn't want to waste time of temporary bans. You are busy people. Hope you get payed for it. And hope it's nothing "personal" in what I say. Admins is a role in a community. I hope we are allowed to discuss it as well, as customers.

[SciencePro]

Meh I think the complaining here is going way overboard.

It seems pretty clear that annette was a little too hasty with the ban-hammer. And I think she would to better to leave the door open in case Sombre calms down and agrees to behave himself.

But to call Annette a liar and big brother and a nazi and whatever is just silly. Can't we try to all be a little more respectful?

[Trumanator]

I take your accusation of lying to you very seriously. What have I lied about? I posted earlier why I exercised our right to circumvent the infraction system. Thanks for finally admitting that you went outside your own T&Cs, I appreciate the honesty.

Trumanator, the reports go to the private moderator's forum. I said there is not evidence that YOU can see.


So basically, you're telling us to trust you. Obviously that's not going to fly anymore. Obviously sombre isn't going to give a damn about reports on his posts, so really the only reason to not share the evidence is to conceal the lack of it.

[SciencePro]

ROFL, cuz septimus severus,and Kuritza are "respected members of this forum."

well forum moderating is a subjective business so there is no way to be totally consistent. But I think for the most part people behave themselves or are met with measured responses. Just because one person may have overreacted one time doesn't mean the whole system is broken.

And I wouldn't use Kuritza as an example. He quit back in January and has only made one post since.

[militarist]

Though a lot of posts of users are not always very mature (but what you would expect from those who play games?), sometimes childish and aggressive, and mod's replies are more structured, when someone whose friend was hit buy a big club is screaming, it worth sympathy. He has no club, and it is natural not to love those who have and who find ways to justify use of it instead of finding all means to forget about it.

I believe forum needs admins who can rule with sense of humor and charisma rather than headcutters armed with ability to cast bans and terror. It's a community, not an army.

[Foodstamp]

It was a hammer, not a club. Clubs are for seals, hammers are for trolls.

[Frozen Lama]

"-10 points oh noes"
'[the penalty] means as much to me as forgetting to buy milk at the grocery store.'

[Squirrelloid]

This is exactly the problem, Baalz. Sombre was granted extra leeway because of his history here. His ban didn't come out of the blue, and I'm sure he would agree. I'm certain he knew it was coming. Because we were lenient with him, there is not a record for you all to see. It's a Catch 22...I'm hearing we should be willing to bend the rules because of his contributions, but I've created an uproar because I allowed the rules to be bent.

This is entirely believable, and I have no reason to doubt it. I think the big issue here would be: Was sombre aware that he was near a permanent ban because of a history of infractions, even if he wasn't penalized for them? I mean, the stated forum 'justice' system serves two purposes - to punish misdeeds and to warn abusers that they are getting closer to more serious consequences. Permanent ban without appropriate forewarning would be a little harsh.

I am only aware of the recent PM exchange Sombre was involved with, so I don't know anything about a history of mod-Sombre interactions.


I'm not sure what lesson we'll take from this. Will we bend the rules again for someone who has contributed greatly over a long period of time? Probably. Will that person then ignore our requests to play nice with others? Hopefully not.

If some members of the community are being treated specially, they should still be duly warned even if they don't actually receive the penalties. Knowing how close more severe penalties are is a disincentive to committing additional violations. (And if they don't care, then they shouldn't care when the banhammer does come down).

Possibly also keep a 'shadow-record' so you have something to show for it.

Edit: Finally, I don't think showing disrespect for the rules in private PMs should be construed as a violation of the ToS or reasons for disciplinary action since (1) it isn't a violation of the posted ToS and (2) saying something and doing something are two very different beasts.

[Frozen Lama]

annette you didn't bend the rules. you simply broke them. its that simple. basically you're simply lying to us. and i think about 50% of the anger isn't so much about him being banned anymore. its that we see ourselves being blatantly lied to. answer us. why didn't you follow your own rules to try and remedy the "continual problem"

I take your accusation of lying to you very seriously. What have I lied about? I posted earlier why I exercised our right to circumvent the infraction system.

Trumanator, the reports go to the private moderator's forum. I said there is not evidence that YOU can see.


Well the blatant lying that i see is when you say that he was bad enough to cause you to escalate. yeah you can give us hints about your secret caches of evidence, but we know what sombre actually said in the pm's that got him banned.

and basically you are lying when you say that he refused to follow your rules. he just said he could care less about the 10-point infraction. nothing about him not caring about your rules, and nothing that would indicate that a temp ban would be totally ineffective.

"-10 points oh noes"
'[the penalty] means as much to me as forgetting to buy milk at the grocery store.'

[rdonj]

If I reported people's posts every time they pissed me off... well, in the future no more words, since apparently those count less than clicking on forum widgets.

[Rookierookie]

People...the moderators had a lot of 'reports' concerning Sombre's posts, by forum members, not moderators. Most, if not all of those who made those reports, are also long standing and respected members of this forum. And in some of the reports, it wasn't against the person who made the report, but "for" someone else, especially for the newer people.

ROFL, cuz septimus severus,and Kuritza are "respected members of this forum." Besides, you and Annette are now giving conflicting stories. She just said that there isn't any actual evidence because you guys were supposedly treating sombre w/kid gloves, and now you're saying that there were a lot of reports? Try coordinating before trying to lie to your forumgoers.

Way to jump on forum members who have never been named until this post. So much for the community.

[Foodstamp]

What is the -10 point thing anyway? Is there a way we can check this in our profile?

[Frozen Lama]

nope. its more of the super secret forum justice system. when you get to 100 you get permabanned.

[Foodstamp]

Well I am not terribly concerned. I'm the reigning Hexxagon Champion so I should get a little leeway like Sombre did.

[Jarkko]

Funny thing. I always thought Sombre is above all laws and rules of the forum. He was spitting poison and bile on everybody who did dare to ask any questions. Helpful was he? Did he make new players feel welcome? Did he alieanate long time forum members?

There is no doubt Sombre has made wonderful work with mods. Yet he seemingly was above rules and was allowed to attack and rampage who ever he felt like (which was pretty much anyone who isn't a known excellent modder). How many people did he drive away from these forums? I know I prefer to post Dominions stuff on other forums, don't have the risk to get sombred in those places.

Hopefully this forum will now be slightly more friendly towards people with questions about the game in general and about modding spesifically.

[Annette]

Mmm...he probably forgot to share with you another pm. At any rate, I'm closing this at the request of the OP. Good night.

[Frozen Lama]

as you can clearly see Jarkko, as a result of his ban, this forum is now much friendlier. harmonius too. and i'm sure the new people see this thread and just feel very very safe and welcomed.

[Trumanator]

Indeed, farewell to this ****hole.

[Tim Brooks]

We are locking this thread as it is going nowhere now. Most of you posting over and over are just wanting to argue.

For those who want to be treated rudely you can go here:

http://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods/index.php?act=idx

[Frozen Lama]

you showed your ugly face