The Joys of Overzealous Moderators

[Executor]

Apparently, users get banned with no reason or explanation what so ever around here. Or so one (or at least I) would believe?
I'm talking about Calahan here, who just got banned, permanently.

Would any of our glorious mods mind shedding some light on the matter and explaining to us, mere mortals who apparently do not understand the ways of Shrapnel, what the heck just happened?
Of course, I'm just asking out of pure selfishness and self preservation as from what I see Calahan didn't post anything rude, offensive, inflammatory, etc, or pretty much anything at all in the last month or so and still got banned.

[brxbrx]

This'll go down well...

[Valerius]

Noooo, he hadn't responded to my last PM yet! :p I have to admit I was confused as well since Calahan hadn't been involved in any recent arguments (he seems to have deliberately stopped posting in this area - see his absence from the discussion re: neeeding blood slaves for communions) and his last posts were offering map help and YARG 3 postgame commentary. My best guess is that it was because of his sig, which I note has disappeared from his posts. Honestly I think there could have been a compromise position here, remove the reference to any individual (which may conflict with Shrapnel rules) and leave it generic. Something along the lines of "because the people here are dumb-asses I prefer to discuss the game at Dom3mods." ;) And I think llama would have been a good person to discuss it with Cal and see if a compromise were possible.

[Ragnarok-X]

Oi i see another drama coming around, and right so.

[parone]

i have always found callahan to be honest, insightful and helpful.

i think banning him only makes shrapnel's forum weaker. personally, i could use all the help i could get.

a few months ago, i was getting battered pretty good on a thread and callahan stood up for me. he told me in a PM it would likely end up in him getting banned. unfortunately, he may have been right.

[Gandalf Parker]

I dont think it would have been BECAUSE he stood up for you. That would be desirable.
Altho it might have been how it was done.

Most of the bans seem to involve that type of decision from the forum owners. Should the quality justify the mood that goes with it. Thats why there is a fan-based forum. Where the decision flip-flops.

(had to post so as not to disappoint my fanbase)

[elmokki]

Yeah. If the reason is something totally arbitrary like it seems, it sure makes me prefer a forum run by fans who don't get butthurt enough to ban people for trivial things instead of a forum where you never know when you angered some random forum police who'll ban you for something completely meaningless. The net quality of a community doesn't usually go up when you ban the people who contribute the most.

I only know of some little details of this case, so sure, if Calahan really did something completely aggravating and unredeemable, I'll take my words back. Honestly though I think I'll just remove whatever content made by me that I can before someone decides to ban me for this post or whatever I've posted in the past.

[Admiral_Aorta]

Nice to know that shrapnel have no interest in maintaining a worthwhile, informative community for this game and prefer a sycophantic echo chamber that misinforms potential new players.

[Executor]

The net quality of a community doesn't usually go up when you ban the people who contribute the most.


Now this is what boggles my mind.
How does it serve your interests and help You, Shrapnel, to act in such a matter? Are people supposed to tiptoe around this forum, being careful not to say or do anything You (and apparently only you) considered offensive and ban worthy in your delusions?

What you're doing is bringing down a community, one that used to be much bigger and better as I remember. That didn't change due to people moving on to new games and forums, you're the ones who instigated that exodus. Frankly I don't see how that's good for you or your business in any way possible.
You're on a pretty good way to alienating all those long year game fans which have kept this forum alive and running. Actually I think you already did that a while back and are now just finishing the job with banning people like Calahan without even giving an explanation.

I get that you can, should and do run the boards any damn way you please. But providing a simple explanation in such situations ( something you are dead set on never doing from my experience, no matter the cost ), or just being a bit courteous, respectful to the people on the forum goes a long way.
However acting as you do now, without what seems to me the slightest bit of respect to any of your users, goes a long way in establishing a bad reputation and just a net lose to your company.

You've already managed to split the community right down the middle with the Sombre drama. I personally think you handled that in the worst possible way btw. If you'd shown a bit of respect to all those people involved in that drama or given a proper explanation I'm betting half the damn community wouldn't have just up and left. Now I may be wrong of course, but to me it seems the larger, better, more active, helpful and contributing a community you have, the better it is for business overall generally.

Now, how I think this discussion will probably end sadly;
You'll lock down this thread, give some vague explanation (at best!) or why you did what you did, anger a few more members (like myself) along the way, and probably threaten with some more bans if people don't just drop the matter and go away.

Doing a bang up job so far guys.:up:

[PriestyMan]

The biggest joke of them all is that Crapnel will refer to their Terms and Agreement and say he messed up. but in them they have a detailed infraction system that includes infraction points (i know pyg got like 1 point once) and temporary bans before anyone is supposed to get perma-banned. Of course Crapnel has never once followed their own procedure. Just like in the Sombre thing, they just banned and didnt give a **** what their own rules were

[krpeters]

Darn, I was hoping this was a thread discussing Dominions mods that were excessive (1 gold ettins, conj 5 Tartarians, that kind of thing :)

[fungalreason]

Forums that are moderated in this manner make it extremely unlikely that I will choose to purchase future games that are affiliated with shrapnel or recommend them to others. Your customers deserve to be treated with more respect than this.

[Fantomen]

How come it's ok for people to be misinforming passive aggressive arrogant doubletounged selfimportant douchebags, but not ok for Calahan to call them out for it?

[Admiral_Aorta]

I think it says something about shrapnel that they're more interested in banning people who are irreverent as opposed to people who actively spread misinformation about the game.

[WraithLord]

This is not right.

Yes, it's your business alright but if you start throwing customers out like this w/ no explanation and no visible justification it doesn't look good.
In-fact it makes me not want to step into your business anymore.


parone : "i have always found callahan to be honest, insightful and helpful." - Yes, yes and yes. He can be brutally blunt but bottom line he's one of the most helpful players, as in generous w/ his free time and advice and help.

I am posting here for many years but now I'm seriously considering to move completely to http://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods once the games I admin. are through.

BTW - FWIW the only ppl you're hurting are the dom fan community.

[Soyweiser]

I doubt the mods are reading this people.

Also, it could have just been a mistake. Somebody reporting him, and a mod throwing the banhammer at him.

It is annoying that we just don't know what happend and where the line is we shouldn't cross. Sure Calahan could be annoying at times. An wordy... But he also tried to help people out a lot.

I hope he just got a warning before he was banned.

[Admiral_Aorta]

BANS AND WARNINGS

Banning will be done via a point system listed below, but may be tailored on a case by case basis.
Warning by moderator/administrator may be given in some circumstances, but most infractions will result in infraction points. Your level of infraction points will determine how close you are to a ban.
Your first ban will be a 'time-out' ban that will consist of 24 hours. This typically is used as a 'cooling-off' period.
The next temporary ban will last one week.
Following the previous two bans, if a user continues to violate policy, they will be permanently banned.
Following private discussion, some permanently banned users will be allotted the right to return to the community under a different username in the future. However this is very restrictive and in the event that they continue to misbehave, their account will be permanently banned with no prior warnings or temp bans. While we reserve the right to allow certain users re-admittance, do not expect to be given a second chance if you have been permanently banned.
A permanent ban can be applied for any reason and at any time if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community.
Bans and warnings are not to be discussed on the forums. Any inquiries or comments on bans are to be sent in private messages or via email. A moderator/administrator may choose to publicly inform the participants of a forum about bans and warnings if this is in the interest of the forum.
We hate to have to ban members and rarely do so-don't give us a reason to have to!

cool ignoring of your own rules dudes

[momfreeek]

I looked at the rules and this was clearly in bold on the first pagePeople who bait or bash members or mods may be banned without notice.

Sry, I don't want to stir. I only have an idle interest in this matter.

[Admiral_Aorta]

people aren't really arguing that it's a 'legal' problem but a moral one. Those are the rules yes,but they should not be. Also plenty of people on here are rude but only certain ones seem to get banned.

[momfreeek]

Well, I don't want to acuse you of "spreading disinformation" and I'll not hurl insults at you for it but you just changed your tune drastically. Its hard to know what in this thread is realistic complaint.

people aren't really arguing that it's a 'legal' problem but a moral one. Those are the rules yes,but they should not be.You think people should be allowed to bash others at will?

Ofc, I understand there is a demand for this kind of community but surely you understand there are those who prefer a more civil discussion (not sure what words to use.. you know what I mean). It seems there is room for 2 forums.

[Gandalf Parker]

There definitely is room within the Dom3 community for both.
There is a standard, corporate-owned, Q/A forum, support for all aspects of the game, where the mood of the forum is prime.
And then there is a fan-owned, fan supported, fan moderated forum where the quality of the answers is prime over considerations of mood.

It does no good to try and shut down or alter either one since both seem happy with their forums, and have people who feel comfortable there. As long as both are willing to allow mention of the other then I would (irritatingly diplomaticly appropriate because it is on this forum) tend to say that the community in general is happy.

[Fantomen]

Nice theory, but if it was true that this fora is oh, so nice and cosy, then why is all the drama, fighting and inflammatory discussion HERE and not at dom3mods?

Seems to indicate repression as cause rather than solution.

[momfreeek]

Its not "repression" if you are free to leave at any time (just to diffuse hyperboly).

Seems to me that there is much inflammatory stuff on dom3mods directed at individuals on this forum. That this doesn't result in infighting is surely BECAUSE it is written there and not here.

[Soyweiser]

Wow... wait a minute. We do have drama at dom3mods. It was my fault :D. I was pointing out some hypocrisy of a new member of dom3mods and shrapnel. People asked me to do it at dom3mods. So we did.

And the dom3clone thread is also a bit drama like.

@momfreeek
"you are free to leave at any time" you forgot to add, but "leave your stuff behind". This is still the main forum for dom3 newbies. I doubt they would like it if there was a sticky pointing to better places to get your questions answered. (Which is usually Calahans issue, people not explaining the game mechanics in detail enough, usually he did this without any regard for diplomacy).

[momfreeek]

"you are free to leave at any time" you forgot to add, but "leave your stuff behind".Yeah true, I guess it would be repression to be ejected from your own home. In the case of being ejected for not following the forum rules (Calahan claims no innocence) "repression" is hyperboly.

In my experience its very easy for insolence to lead to bullying. One knowledgable individual may insult others for a cause but when others follow his lead and start hurling insults for their own causes (often less righteous) the result is chaos and those who suffer are those trying to be civil. At dom3mods I suspect the sense of unity against a common cause (this one) creates much feeling of brotherhood right now. Doesn't mean it isn't bull**** (disclaimer: poorly informed opinion ;)).

[Peter Ebbesen]

The biggest joke of them all is that Crapnel will refer to their Terms and Agreement and say he messed up. but in them they have a detailed infraction system that includes infraction points (i know pyg got like 1 point once) and temporary bans before anyone is supposed to get perma-banned. Of course Crapnel has never once followed their own procedure. Just like in the Sombre thing, they just banned and didnt give a **** what their own rules were
Say rather that, just like in the Sombre thing, you and several others didn't understand the rules or, more probably, didn't want to understand the rules.

The forum has a detailed infraction system, yes. But this is not the only way to get banned, it is just a guaranteed way to get banned.

The very same section of the rules that contains the infraction system contains the following words, which you and other rules-lawyers usually ignore:

A permanent ban can be applied for any reason and at any time if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community.


In other words, whether you like it or not, the rules are very clear on this issue. You can be banned for anything that is considered, at the sole discretion of the forum administration, to be detrimental to the community mood.

[Soyweiser]

Peter you are the one rule lawyering. (Rule lawyers also tend to write a lot of rules. Which trolls then abuse to make their points. Which leads to the dom3mods rule of ... (and only spambots get banned)).

I think the rest just understands that the rules are just bull, and the mods will do as they please and think up reasons and justifications afterwards.

This whole rule system is worthless. But you know this. You now perfectly well what I'm talking about. As we discussed this to death with you the last time somebody was banned.

We already discussed this the last time. You think written rules are important. I think it is more about unwritten social rules. I imply you do not understand unwritten rules. You imply I do not understand written rules. Etc.

And again, like I said the last time, the problem with shrapnel is that they do not apply any of the other they say they should do. Like having two user accounts for example. A new player here has gotten a new account while he still had an old one. That is allowed. But suddenly calahan gets banned. It is the ambiguity that is the problem.

Look at my posts for example. I have clearly been out of line every once in a while. Did I ever get warned for that? Or infractions? Nope. Not once. The only way for me to see if I crossed the line is to look if I'm banned or not(*). (Not that I want to).

Ps: The infraction system has not been used for years. Just ask the mods. They will either come clean and say "indeed has not been used for years". Or they will make up some story that they cannot give examples because that would void the privacy of the people infracted. Or some other lie that we cannot confirm or deny.

@momfreek. Yeah, I know, gotta pipe down with the mob mentality. But I have not really felt that much community brotherhood of us vs shrapnel myself. And have not seen that much reaction. Not that much people seem to care. (Apart from calahan, executor, and a few of the other posters here).

And I have repeatedly told people when they crossed lines. The constant harassing of batman (we get it, we know who he used to be) and ghoul was really annoying. (And I have crossed some myself of course). Of course, I also cross lines... but yeah.

Once again, Calahan probably deserved it. But why today/this week? Why not when he posted the bad stuff he posted.

Ps: looking at the rules again. I see this:

"Strong profanity should generally be restricted. "Damn," "Hell," and "Microsoft" are all okay."

And this:

"Do not post any material which is knowingly false, and or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, hateful, harassing, racist, obscene, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or that otherwise violates any local, state, national or international law or regulation."

Good job not defaming Microsoft shrapnel.

*: there is also an informal method. Lets call it the Strider way. If he shows up, people get banned. Just like last times "who the **** are you" episode.

[Amhazair]

The very same section of the rules that contains the infraction system contains the following words, which you and other rules-lawyers usually ignore:

A permanent ban can be applied for any reason and at any time if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community.


In other words, whether you like it or not, the rules are very clear on this issue. You can be banned for anything that is considered, at the sole discretion of the forum administration, to be detrimental to the community mood.

Well, I certainly won't argue this point. I also won't argue that Calahan can be quite rude at times.

He's always right mind you, but he doesn't bother to be polite about it. (At least, he usually is frienly enough the first time he argues something, but loses patience when people disagree for unsound reasons.) So honestly, even though I like the guy, I can kinda see where the mods are comming from.

What I am upset about though is a genuninely helpful community member getting banned without a warning, nor being asked by anyone if he'd be willing to change his behaviour*, and at a time when he had actually consciously - and publicly - decided to stop bothering to argue with idiots (There, now even I have been tempted to call people names. Probably the first time in my entire internet career. I hope you're all proud of this achievement, because I doubt this will happen too often in like the history of the world ever and stuff.) and stick to helping (new) people with game settings and maps and the like.

* At least according to him nothing of the sort happened, and I'm inclined to trust him on this.

[Soyweiser]

Explain me this one thing. Why are the rules so important people? I don't get it.

[Gandalf Parker]

"Laws don't stop anyone from doing anything. Tthey aren't really expected to. But they will stop most of the people most of the time, and the rest we will handle as they come." -AAGP

Rules arent laws but the sentiment seems to fit. Maybe if you call them guidelines instead of rules you would be more comfortable. Then the way that some feel they are getting used would be easier to accept. It would be "These are a list of guidelines on what we want our forum to be. And we reserve the right to ban for that purpose at anytime".

[elmokki]

The rule system is hillariously retarded. There is a detailed list of rules and then basically "We may ban anyone permanently should we feel like it".

I do understand if someone does something that obviously crosses the line, but at least for my sense of general internet forum behavior the line here is placed so that I have absolutely no idea what crosses the line. Not that I believe I have a high chance to get banned from anything I post apart from maybe my posts in this thread since it isn't A HARMONOUS CONTENT THREAD. Seriously, if someone crosses whatever random line Shrapnel's forum moderation has pulled out from their place of harmony, ban them for a week and tell them the reason unless it's something that's absolutely obviously intentional and very offensive. Then if they don't stop it for at least a decent time go ahead and ban them forever.

[Peter Ebbesen]

Explain me this one thing. Why are the rules so important people? I don't get it.
Okay. Let's start with the basics.

I don't have a right to post in this forum. You don't have a right to post in this forum. None of us do, save the Shrapnel staff. It is, effectively, a private club. And in a private club, you follow the rules regardless of whether you like them or not. Now, why is that, you ask?

Because I have entered a voluntary agreement, whereby in return for agreeing to follow the forum rules on this particular private forum (the price), I am extended the privilege of posting here (the benefit).

If I violate the forum rules consciously, then I violate my given word.

Which is something I will not do.

If I no longer wish to adhere to my side of the agreement or if I cannot in good conscience do so because I disagree with the rules, then I will no longer post in the forum.

This argument is good enough for me.

The question to you is then, given that you, too, have voluntarily entered this agreement, knowing full well what you agreed to as it was presented to you to read before joining and having all the time in the world to reread the agreement later on, why is obeying the forum rules not important to you?

[Anaconda]

Explain me this one thing. Why are the rules so important people? I don't get it.

This extremely - I underline extremely - good book on the topic; why rules are important and why it is very important people voluntarily follow them:

http://www.schneier.com/book-lo.html

http://www.schneier.com/images/book-lo-175w.jpg

The Finnish review said if there were Nobel Security Price, this time it would go to Bruce Schneier and, having read the book, I second that.

The list of notable (readable) reviews here, the Finnish review among them:
http://www.schneier.com/book-lo-reviews.html

[rdonj]

Explain me this one thing. Why are the rules so important people? I don't get it.
Okay. Let's start with the basics.

I don't have a right to post in this forum. You don't have a right to post in this forum. None of us do, save the Shrapnel staff. It is, effectively, a private club. And in a private club, you follow the rules regardless of whether you like them or not. Now, why is that, you ask?

Because I have entered a voluntary agreement, whereby in return for agreeing to follow the forum rules on this particular private forum (the price), I am extended the privilege of posting here (the benefit).

If I violate the forum rules consciously, then I violate my given word.

Which is something I will not do.

If I no longer wish to adhere to my side of the agreement or if I cannot in good conscience do so because I disagree with the rules, then I will no longer post in the forum.

This argument is good enough for me.

The question to you is then, given that you, too, have voluntarily entered this agreement, knowing full well what you agreed to as it was presented to you to read before joining and having all the time in the world to reread the agreement later on, why is obeying the forum rules not important to you?

If shrapnel sets rules that it intends for us to follow, and it tells us what action it will take if we don't follow their rules, and they ignore that and just do whatever the hell they feel like, there is no sense of order whatsoever. Especially this whole business of not bothering to inform a person why they've been banned is nonsense.

As stated earlier there is no good reason to be banning calahan right now as opposed to times when he actually did something. In fact banning him at this point is sheer stupidity, regardless of whatever reasons shrapnel things they had to ban him. But what else is new.

[Gandalf Parker]

This extremely - I underline extremely - good book on the topic; why rules are important and why it is very important people voluntarily follow them:

Very nice. Added to my Dom3Minions.com store.
http://astore.amazon.com/dom3minions-20/detail/1118143302

[quantum_mechani]

I'm honestly not sure why we are even talking about rules in this context. Obviously, Shrapnel can and does do whatever they feel like with regards to moderation. If Mr. Parker decided to instantly and permanently ban people for, lets say, calling anything under-powered, and that's what Shrapnel wanted then that would be fine and dandy. They wouldn't even have to make an explicit rule about it, much like arguments for legalizing necrophilia or cocaine*, we can simply say what people choose to do in their own time on their own property is their business.

What I think confuses so many people though, is the why. If we take at face value Shrapnel's claim to be promoting a vibrant and harmonious community, some actions seem hard to fathom. I can see very little reason, for example, to refrain from even the briefest of warnings or explanations on bannings. Or why temporary bans seem so seldom used as opposed to permanent ones. These sorts of tools seem easy enough, and indeed as far as I'm aware are used on the fast majority of internet forums.


*I mean to neither support nor disrespect such arguments.

[Bat/man]

...unless it's something that's absolutely obviously intentional and very offensive.
Except that it obviously was intentional and very offensive. Cal made posts in a variety of threads expressly for the purpose of harassing people, including game threads. And not just once - often. It was frequent and flagrant abuse.

Calling someone a "douchebag" for being wrong about game mechanics is inappropriate. Defeat the idea, prove it wrong. Enjoy the presentation of ideas and their merits. Discuss the game. Doing it often is grounds for being banned.

For the record, AFAIK I had nothing to do with his being banned. I didn't report it, I didn't request it, I'm relatively late finding out about it.

But baiting people, harassing them, and maligning them is against the forum rules; claiming that this is anything other than a textbook example of why shrapnel has that statement in their TOS is just willful ignorance.

As for "why now" - I suspect because the administrators here have other things to do. Selling games. Raising families. Whatever. And that they check in to moderate threads infrequently.

I suspect the same reason contributes to why Cal didn't get warned. Presumably no one monitored the threads for a long period of time; by the time someone did a large body of posts were established to show that this was repeat and flagrant behaviour; not the kind of behavior they wanted, and unlikely to be fixed by infractions.

[parone]

well, this sure is a lot of wrangling.

i just don't get this: when callahan stepped in for me, a member was systematically misrepresenting things that i said, taking them apart piece meal, and trying to paint me as a person who had serious mental issues, confidence problems, and a mild form of multi personality disorder. it literally got bad enough that i considered quiting the forum altogether.

that's ok.

but...whatever callahan did, none of us can even figure it out? and he IS banned?

i think the problem here might be a lack of transparency by the moderaters.

[Hrum]

Explain me this one thing. Why are the rules so important people? I don't get it.

This extremely - I underline extremely - good book on the topic; why rules are important and why it is very important people voluntarily follow them:

http://www.schneier.com/book-lo.html

From the end of the IEEE Spectrum review, the link to which is listed on Schneier's site:

"In other words, sometimes rule breakers are a threat to society, and sometimes they are its best hope. If that sounds like Thomas Jefferson’s "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it," we can still thank Schneier for updating this eternal truth for a digital age."

I would agree with this. Yes, rules are important, but there is a reason why it is preferrable to have them applied by a human intelligence that can make a judgement call, that can see gradations, that can interpret grey areas. Shrapnel is doing that, and to the extent that they do it correctly that's great. The problem is that there are a lot of us who are pointing to some very high profile instances when many of us feel that they got it wrong. This is one of those instances.

In this case, re: the banning of Calahan, I am in agreement with others here - I would like to know why Shrapnel banned Calahan. Based on what I've seen of his postings here, Calahan may have given the admins the justification they needed to do so, but there's no question in my mind that his contributions to the community outweigh any offense he may have given. Couldn't some warning have been given? Why can't there be an intermediate step between ignoring borderline behavior and a permaban?

Isn't that passive aggressive? Ignore the rule bending of certain major contributors to the community for months or years and then one day snap and ban them permanently without warning?

[Bat/man]

But I do agree that Shrapnel could spend more time in the forums. Pruning weeding, planting little stakes helps promote a good garden. Doing the same in a forum helps make sure everyone knows the rules and we don't lose interest - either from flame wars - or a forum dwindling away due to disinterest.

[Gandalf Parker]

Isn't that passive aggressive? Ignore the rule bending of certain major contributors to the community for months or years and then one day snap and ban them permanently without warning?

Kindof like being irritated at the neighbors cat always crapping on your lawn, then one day shooting it? Its not hard to agree that its a bad thing. But its not surprising to consider it rather average also. Large corporations tend to buffer such decisions thru multiple channels of people selected for their diplomatic ability.

[Fantomen]

Speaking of hypocrisy, the censorship thingy is ****ing retarded. I mean Jesus ballslapping mother of disney, you can't even write words with *** in them.

I have to admit though that the drama here is entertaining, dom3mods is developing nicely, and the drama here sort of keeps us going. So I'm not sure if I want a smarter Shrapnel or not.

[momfreeek]

How is that hypocrisy? Do shrapnel post swear words?

Thats the third time I've seen you make a completely false accusation in almost as many posts. At least learn the words, there's no dignity in being a rude guy thats always wrong ^^

[Soyweiser]

"Laws don't stop anyone from doing anything. Tthey aren't really expected to. But they will stop most of the people most of the time, and the rest we will handle as they come." -AAGP

Rules arent laws but the sentiment seems to fit. Maybe if you call them guidelines instead of rules you would be more comfortable. Then the way that some feel they are getting used would be easier to accept. It would be "These are a list of guidelines on what we want our forum to be. And we reserve the right to ban for that purpose at anytime".

Yeah, like I said. This is what srapnel says they do:

"We have these rules and regulations, these are the penalties etc. This is what you can expect here."

This is what shrpanel does:

"Look, here behind this shed." *BANG*

Problem solved.

[Soyweiser]

... bla bla bla ...

Dude this is your second account. This is against all rules here. You really should not talk about this.

(You really should not use your old email adres).

[Soyweiser]

How is that hypocrisy? Do shrapnel post swear words?

Thats the third time I've seen you make a completely false accusation in almost as many posts. At least learn the words, there's no dignity in being a rude guy thats always wrong ^^

I doubt I have to search hard for swearwords.

Also, you know that Sexism is on par with racism at shrapnel rules right?

Remember the old sexy woman dom3 ad campaign?

Hypocrisy.

(Edit: and if I recall correctly, there was some talk about somebody use a certain slang word for a certain afrikan/australian minority. But I cannot recall the details, it was a war slang term. But apparnatly highly offensive).

[Soyweiser]

Explain me this one thing. Why are the rules so important people? I don't get it.

This extremely - I underline extremely - good book on the topic; why rules are important and why it is very important people voluntarily follow them:


Yeah, you might also want to read the rest of his works, about security theatre, rules that do not work, transparency. Etc.

(ow, and right, I was creating a strawman or something with my question... ;) )

[Soyweiser]

Okay. Let's start with the basics.

I don't have a right to post in this forum. You don't have a right to post in this forum. None of us do, save the Shrapnel staff. It is, effectively, a private club. And in a private club, you follow the rules regardless of whether you like them or not. Now, why is that, you ask?

Because I have entered a voluntary agreement, whereby in return for agreeing to follow the forum rules on this particular private forum (the price), I am extended the privilege of posting here (the benefit).

If I violate the forum rules consciously, then I violate my given word.

Which is something I will not do.

If I no longer wish to adhere to my side of the agreement or if I cannot in good conscience do so because I disagree with the rules, then I will no longer post in the forum.

This argument is good enough for me.

The question to you is then, given that you, too, have voluntarily entered this agreement, knowing full well what you agreed to as it was presented to you to read before joining and having all the time in the world to reread the agreement later on, why is obeying the forum rules not important to you?

So we agree, the rules are important as a social contact kept up by both sides. The contract should be know beforehand and followed by both sides. Like said before, shrapnel doesn't do this.

Shrapnel is not keeping up their side.

In the rules they say the don't like banning people. Well, apparently they do. They dislike giving out infractions more.

(Look, I have little problem with banning people when desired/deserved, just don't get all high and mighty about a large set of rules and don't follow them yourself. All this acting like you are the moral high ground).

Personally I prefer the organic ruleset. With exceptions, personal communication etc. Not this static high and might stuff.

But communication with people is hard. And doing the right thing for the dom3 community is not high on their priority list. Obviously.

[Soyweiser]

Isn't that passive aggressive? Ignore the rule bending of certain major contributors to the community for months or years and then one day snap and ban them permanently without warning?

Kindof like being irritated at the neighbors cat always crapping on your lawn, then one day shooting it? Its not hard to agree that its a bad thing. But its not surprising to consider it rather average also. Large corporations tend to buffer such decisions thru multiple channels of people selected for their diplomatic ability.

Wow... you shoot your neighbours cat without asking your neighbor? What a dick move.

We tend to talk about our problems with neighbors before we result to drastic methods.

Also, it is the governement shooting the cat. And not talking about it.

[rdonj]

Let's not forget about racist comments made by shrapnel staff, either.

[Soyweiser]

Let's not forget about racist comments made by shrapnel staff, either.

Gonna need proof of that there mister.

Also, following my own personal rules. I'm gonna overlook it if they apologized for it.


Since 1999 Shrapnel Games has been the Internet destination of choice for the discriminating strategy gamer.

(I'm pulling that quote totally out of context btw).

[momfreeek]

lol, sextuplet post! You shoudl get a prize

[Admiral_Aorta]

Gonna need proof of that there mister.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/blog.php?b=438

Watch, in a couple of years some unit is going to be wiped out by a bunch of fuzzy wuzzies with spears.

[Executor]

A permanent ban can be applied for any reason and at any time if the Admins determine it is warranted to promote the harmony of the community.



Sorry, but I couldn't skip over this utter nonsense. And banning Calahan, one of the most contributing members of what is left of this degenerating forum is promoting harmony in which way exactly?
From what I see all you've managed to do is piss off a lot of people. You'll doubtlessly piss off even more when Strider, Anette or whoever shows up here to "promote some more harmony" I recon.
And that "harmony" will result in more people getting banned (maybe myself, soy, admiral aorta...) and more people leaving the forum. :up::up::up:

[Gandalf Parker]

Gonna need proof of that there mister.http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/blog.php?b=438

Watch, in a couple of years some unit is going to be wiped out by a bunch of fuzzy wuzzies with spears.

Ive been wondering where the reoccurring claim was coming from also...
Hmmmm..... I doubt very much that he has come into contact with Hadendoa natives
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadendoa
so Id suspect the more common source of Rudyard Kiplings poem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy-Wuzzy
which praised them for breaking the famed British bayonet square using nothing but spears.
Seems like a reasonable grognard reference to the conversation that was going on.

[Soyweiser]

lol, sextuplet post! You should get a prize

I'm afraid I might get it :D.

[Admiral_Aorta]

he referenced a poem by someone who was also racist! that makes it totally fine

[Soyweiser]

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/146100.html

A derogatory term for a black person, especially one with fuzzy hair.


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fuzzy%20wuzzy

But apprantly, fuzzy wuzzy is also part of the US defense language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanchester%27s_laws). So it is more unintended racism.

I'm going to allow it. If Krol promises to not use the term anymore.

Also, lets stop this line of reasoning. It isn't related to the banning of Calahan.

(And it all these conversations distract me from my blitz).

[momfreeek]

So, what I want to know: was Valerius correct?
My best guess is that it was because of his sig, which I note has disappeared from his posts. Honestly I think there could have been a compromise position here, remove the reference to any individual (which may conflict with Shrapnel rules) and leave it generic. Something along the lines of "because the people here are dumb-asses I prefer to discuss the game at Dom3mods."

[Executor]

Gonna need proof of that there mister.http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/blog.php?b=438

Watch, in a couple of years some unit is going to be wiped out by a bunch of fuzzy wuzzies with spears.

Ive been wondering where the reoccurring claim was coming from also...
Hmmmm..... I doubt very much that he has come into contact with Hadendoa natives
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadendoa
so Id suspect the more common source of Rudyard Kiplings poem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy-Wuzzy
which praised them for breaking the famed British bayonet square using nothing but spears.
Seems like a reasonable grognard reference to the conversation that was going on.

Wir müssen die Juden ausrotten!

I guess referencing something like this is perfectly acceptable here than?
I don't see how your argument caries any weight.

[momfreeek]

PC blunder vs genocidal hatred.

Mismatched characterizations just look ridiculous :/

[Foodstamp]

More tears to fuel the Ermor war machine.

[Executor]

PC blunder vs genocidal hatred.

Mismatched characterizations just look ridiculous :/

Ridiculous. I agree. Mismatched? Perhaps. But both are rules violations from what I see.


Do not post any material which is knowingly false, and or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, hateful, harassing, racist, obscene, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or that otherwise violates any local, state, national or international law or regulation.


Rules are rules.

[momfreeek]

Rules are not rules!

No wait, you are right. Damn you're good ^^

ok, sry I'm just being silly now. I'll stop posting

[Soyweiser]

PC blunder vs genocidal hatred.

Mismatched characterizations just look ridiculous :/

Racism is racism. The minor PC blunders do add up. Esp if the person in question just ignores the offence.

Edit:

But really:
NOT THE ISSUE HERE.

If you want to make something out of this, post it in the general shrapnel forum. This isn't related to dom3 or dom3 community.

[momfreeek]

how many minor PC blunders add up to genocidal hatred? >>

edit: sry cant help myself

[jimbojones1971]

Kindof like being irritated at the neighbors cat always crapping on your lawn, then one day shooting it? Its not hard to agree that its a bad thing.

Tangent time! :-)

In my case, it is the neighbor's dogs. I kinda like the dogs, but am not interested in doing the jail time associated with geeking the neighbor. It sure is a puzzler. I suppose I could cr*p on the neighbor's lawn one night, but that requires a lot of effort and also the risk of frost bite to exposed posterior bits. :confused:

[rdonj]

Buy fake poop and rub some mud onto it. Should get the idea across without risking your posterior region.

[brxbrx]

Gonna need proof of that there mister.http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/blog.php?b=438

Watch, in a couple of years some unit is going to be wiped out by a bunch of fuzzy wuzzies with spears.

Ive been wondering where the reoccurring claim was coming from also...
Hmmmm..... I doubt very much that he has come into contact with Hadendoa natives
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadendoa
so Id suspect the more common source of Rudyard Kiplings poem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy-Wuzzy
which praised them for breaking the famed British bayonet square using nothing but spears.
Seems like a reasonable grognard reference to the conversation that was going on.

A little bit "noble savage" style condescension, but certainly not malicious or overtly detestable.

[Executor]

how many minor PC blunders add up to genocidal hatred? >>

edit: sry cant help myself

What's there to add up exactly? I don't see your point.
What he said is in violation with their own moral conduct rules.
Clearly there are people who consider that post offensive, condescending, racist or whatever.

[momfreeek]

Sure, lets summarise all the opinions:
- gandalf calls it "a poem by rudyard kipling"
- soy calls it "US defense language"
- Executor compares it to nazi propoganda
- I call it "a minor PC blunder"
- brxbrx calls it '"noble savage" style condescension'
- half of us consider it racism
See what you did there? You left the realm of serious discussion.


Ok, so Calahan put a link to a porn site in his sig.

[Executor]

I'm not comparing it to anything.
If such statements, which like I said people clearly mark racist or whatever, are okay solely by being based on references (Gandalfs comment) than any other reference that is as well in conflict with said moral conducts should in fact be considered okay. Otherwise I call double standards on Shrapnel.
Nazies are just an absurd example.

EDIT; Not that that particular comment has anything to do with Kipling.

[Anaconda]

Yeah, you might also want to read the rest of his works, about security theatre, rules that do not work, transparency. Etc.

I have.


(ow, and right, I was creating a strawman or something with my question... ;) )

So you say...

[Admiral_Aorta]

- half of us consider it racism
what does this say about the other half, i wonder

[brxbrx]

- half of us consider it racism
what does this say about the other half, i wonder

Most likely that they are unaware of the ramifications of certain words and the impact of their use. It could also mean that they are in fact racist, but it's better to assume the first

[Admiral_Aorta]

Ok, so Calahan put a link to a porn site in his sig.
lol nope, nice try

[Fantomen]

How is that hypocrisy? Do shrapnel post swear words?

Thats the third time I've seen you make a completely false accusation in almost as many posts. At least learn the words, there's no dignity in being a rude guy thats always wrong ^^

You don't have a sense of humor lying around somewhere? I consider ALL censorship hypocrisy, especially automated censorship. That's my opinion, so it cannot be factually wrong. I could explain why I hold this position but why bother, it's boring to explain the obvious and everyone smart enough can figure it out by themselves. And I'm not a guy, it's getting tired of the default masculinum that makes me use a picture of myself as avatar, but I guess that's not obvious enough.

I assume whatever other post you're referring to being a similar case.

[momfreeek]

I apologise. 1 out of 3 for correctness and 3 out of 3 for rudeness. I don't see your avatar.. maybe I turned them off or smthing.

Ok, so Calahan put a link to a porn site in his sig.
lol nope, nice tryyah, nice troll. Well he has posted a rough facsimile now so at least my idle curiosity is sated ^^

[parone]

your name is fantoMEN. i think that is why people incorrectly think you might be a guy.

i am totally with you on cencorship(except swear words in elementary schools-im pro censorship there)

[Fantomen]

your name is fantoMEN. i think that is why people incorrectly think you might be a guy.

i am totally with you on cencorship(except swear words in elementary schools-im pro censorship there)

Fan-to-men, that breakdown should statistically make me a woman 9 times of 10 and gay male 1 out of 10, the slightly ironic truth is that I'm a lesbian.

[Executor]

your name is fan-toMEN.


Seriously dude?:)
How did you not see that? You break the last word out but don't stop to wonder what the heck it all means.

[Soyweiser]

Did you know, the ****ake mushroom also has medical properties.

[brxbrx]

your name is fantoMEN. i think that is why people incorrectly think you might be a guy.

i am totally with you on cencorship(except swear words in elementary schools-im pro censorship there)

I've gotten in the habit of assuming that everyone on the internet is a male until shown to be otherwise. It's probably a bad habit.

[momfreeek]

anyone think I'm a mom? I'm not. mom is an acronym (nick is >10 yrs old).

[Soyweiser]

I actually assumed you where.

[Anaconda]

Fan-to-men, that breakdown should statistically make me a woman 9 times of 10 and gay male 1 out of 10, the slightly ironic truth is that I'm a lesbian.

Sigh, why girls always turn lesbian after they communicate with me? :eek:

Anyways, Fantomen is Swedish for the phantom with cap P, and being a viking she knows it.

[Executor]

How many of you checked Fantomens profile just now?

Back on important matters now, Shrapnel be hypocrites.

[Fantomen]

Fan-to-men, that breakdown should statistically make me a woman 9 times of 10 and gay male 1 out of 10, the slightly ironic truth is that I'm a lesbian.

Sigh, why girls always turn lesbian after they communicate with me? :eek:

Anyways, Fantomen is Swedish for the phantom with cap P, and being a viking she knows it.

If your nickname refers to your private parts, that could be why.

Fantomen, the phantom, is a classic Swedish comic book hero. Fantomen, the man who cannot die. (which is the real correlation, the presupposition of everyone being men by default never seems to die)

Back on topic, ****nel shape up and make up!

[parone]

let's ask this question-since the prevailing opinion is obviously that a mistake seems to have been made here, is there any chance he will be reinstated? or failing that, that an explanation might be given...

[Redeyes]

Fantomen, the phantom, is a classic Swedish comic book hero. Fantomen, the man who cannot die. (which is the real correlation, the presupposition of everyone being men by default never seems to die)That isn't a Swedish comic book hero at all!

Are you going to tell me Prince Valiant is European next?

[Fantomen]

Oh, right. It's not swedish. I just always read it in swedish as a child and relates it to sweden a lot.

Of course prince valiant is european! Where else was there a middle age like that?

[shonuf]

Oh, right. It's not swedish. I just always read it in swedish as a child and relates it to sweden a lot.

Of course prince valiant is european! Where else was there a middle age like that?

And Lee Falk, the guy who created Fantomen, has a quite swedish sounding surname. Falk = Falcon in swedish.

I remember being kind of surprised when I found out it wasn't swedish too. I mean, we even had Fantomen soda pops here for a while.

[rdonj]

anyone think I'm a mom? I'm not. mom is an acronym (nick is >10 yrs old).

Actually I've always read your name as a man who has a mom fetish.

[Hishtagat]

That makes two of us, rdonj. Ahem.

[Gandalf Parker]

Im old, and many conversations here. For some reason I read it as MoMfreeek (Masters of Magic)

[JonBrave]

That makes two of us, rdonj. Ahem.

You have a mom fetish too? :confused:

[momfreeek]

yeah, gandalf knows. I loved that game

[Gandalf Parker]

The price of it makes Dominions 3 look cheap.
http://astore.amazon.com/dom3-20/detail/B00079V5WQ
and check out some of the other old favorites in the "lives forever" link on the side

[Fantomen]

It's also released as a free download: http://www.bestoldgames.net/eng/old-games/master-of-magic.php

It's legal in case you're wondering, they let it go some years back.

[jimbojones1971]

Wait, so Fantomen is named after the Phantom comic? That is very cool :-)

[llamabeast]

Calahan was banned for his abusive signature.

chrisp and Bat/man have been banned for duplicate accounts.

Needless to say I was not involved in either decision.

[Fantomen]

Thanks llama.

That sounds somewhat fair, still think they could have given Calahan a heads up on that, or at least included the reason with the banning message instead of leaving it blank.

Chrispedersen reaped what he sow I guess, but there was some entertainment value lost there...

[parone]

i took a quick look at callahan's sig once-you mean the link where he was trying to explain something, and the other person kept telling him he was wrong?

if this is why he was banned, i must say that far more abusive things than that go on.

[Executor]

Not that I'm trying to justify Calahans ban now that we know what it was for, but, Calahan, and a lot of other people have done far worse stuff without ever so much as a glance from the mods. But I guess that's an entirely different story.
As for this story, yeah, ban the guy for pointed out the guy with the double account. Once again, great decision.:up:

Oh, yeah, and hypocrites.

[brxbrx]

Wait, so what was the problem with his signature, exactly? Now I'm curious.

I also don't want to make the mistake myself.

[Executor]

Now I'm wondering how long it will take for someone to actually show up here and give some clear answer regarding this whole mess?
Clearly the mods know about this since Llama obviously corresponded with somebody.

-Why exactly was Cal banned?
-Why no warning but a perma ban after nearly two months?
-Why didn't you check up on the whole matter?
-Is it really harassment to report rule violations? (multiple accounts) If so, are you sane?
-If Bat/man is a double account, why isn't CrisP banned as well? Violation of your own rules again
-Did you only take someones word on it and ban the guy for no reason if he's not really CrisP?
-Do you even bother to check when someone reports something?
-Why are you such hypocrites?

My personal guess regarding this whole matter is that Shrapnel has no idea what in the hell they're doing, or how to handle their business.
Do you ever follow your own rules? Why the hell do you even have them than?

Is it an insult to call a hypocrite a hypocrite when you see one?

[Gandalf Parker]

Sometimes its not what is posted as much as how its worded.
Im curious also. But I suspect I would have to see the sig in a PM if the wording of it violates the desired feeling of the forum. Didnt Calahan himself post elsewhere that he suspected the sig was the reason?

[llamabeast]

Uh, I don't really want to get involved in this (since, as I hope you understand, I have no power in the matter). But perhaps I should answer some of Executor's questions with *my understanding* of Shrapnel's actions.

-Why exactly was Cal banned?

I believe his signature was a direct insult of Bat/man. I don't remember it though.

-Why no warning but a perma ban after nearly two months?

The rationale is that it wasn't a slip-up, it was obviously a deliberate attempt to be aggressive towards another forum user. Warnings are apparently offered at Shrapnel's discretion when they believe users may change their ways.

As for the nearly two months - it's not really fair to expect Shrapnel staff to read the forums every day. Really that should be (for example) my job. But I am not much of an enforcer.

-Why didn't you check up on the whole matter?

I think they didn't think Calahan was likely to reform having so explicitly gone against forum rules.

-Is it really harassment to report rule violations? (multiple accounts) If so, are you sane?

Well I think Calahan called him a douchebag or something (not sure), rather than merely reporting it.

-If Bat/man is a double account, why isn't CrisP banned as well? Violation of your own rules again

ChrisP was banned as well, I believe.

-Did you only take someones word on it and ban the guy for no reason if he's not really CrisP?

Shrapnel did check - the two email addresses were the same(!).

-Do you even bother to check when someone reports something?

Yep, they do.

-Why are you such hypocrites?

Er...

---

I will repeat that this was not my doing - I'm just trying to explain my perception of Shrapnel's perception. Personally I'm very sorry that Calahan has been banned.

[Fantomen]

Nope, Chrispedersen is not banned: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/member.php?u=5693

[Soyweiser]

chrisp != chrispedersen iirc.

[Stagger Lee]

chrisp != chrispedersen iirc.

Soy, I don't understand you. I can't find a chrisp listed as a member, banned or otherwise. Everyone here who played a game with him knows chrispedersen signed his (many, many) pms chrisp. Anyone referring to chrisp is referring to chrispedersen. What do you mean?

[Gandalf Parker]

Apparently the proof which caused the ban (or apparently the deletion) only applied to ChrisP being Bat/Man.

Im not sure if there was any overlap in the use of those accounts

[Executor]

I'm sure you have a far better understanding of Shrapnel than me Llama but I'm going to have to call bull**** on this one.
For one, Shrapnel staff have behaved in a much worse fashion than Calahan.
Take S.R. Krol for example. He clearly has a racist comment in his blog which at least two people find inappropriate there (frightlever, archaeolept). Let's not mention that half the people here think so as well, we're only stating the obvious ones. Than you have at least one person who actually reported that blog (though I'm sure other did as well), that person being me. And has there been any action regarding this? No.
On the other hand you have Calahan, who yes posted a sig that's a direct insult to another user. Calahan gets banned.
Explain to me has a personal insult deserves a perma ban while a racial insult merits nothing? So, yes, I say bull**** and hypocrites. And I won't except any rationale that it was a slip up since he obviously had two years to correct it.

As for Shrapnel reading the forums, no, I don't expect them to read every thread regularly at once. Though if they show up two months late I expect them to explain their actions. I think that's perfectly reasonable.

-Why didn't you check up on the whole matter?

What I meant here is once they found (or rather "someone" pointed out) the sig they should have also checked Calahans claim, however rude it was. It turns out he was correct after all.

CrisP is still not banned even after it was established he had a double account.

MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS:
Registering and using multiple accounts is not allowed. If we determine that you have more than one account (by matching IPs, etc), all accounts will lose their posting privileges.

Sorry Llama, I've got nothing but respect for you and this isn't aimed at you, but.., actually, Maerlande stated what I think perfectly at dom3mods (link below) and that's why this whole situation makes me slightly mad.
Lurkers be advised. BTW, Gandalf, there's no reason to hide the fact you follow at least some threads, if not all, at dom3mods. So speak plainly.
http://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods/index.php?showtopic=835&st=15

[Torin]

2 houses not necesarily in the same block could have the same internet IP in some ISPs.

[Soyweiser]

chrisp != chrispedersen iirc.

Soy, I don't understand you. I can't find a chrisp listed as a member, banned or otherwise. Everyone here who played a game with him knows chrispedersen signed his (many, many) pms chrisp. Anyone referring to chrisp is referring to chrispedersen. What do you mean?

Yeah I was mistaken. My bad. Sorry, ignore that.

[brxbrx]

2 houses not necesarily in the same block could have the same internet IP in some ISPs.

They had the same email address. Unless it was a mailinator account (which most forums don't accept), it's a safe bet that they're socks.

[Gandalf Parker]

And apparently ChrisP and Bat/Man were banned (or deleted) since they dont show on the members list anymore.

[Fantomen]

So...

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/member.php?u=5693

[Gandalf Parker]

Exactly. If ChrisPedersen has a different mailbox then nothing.
Even if it was, under mitigating circumstances rolling all accounts into one would fit past corrections also.

[nordlys]

- half of us consider it racism
what does this say about the other half, i wonder

That the other half is sane?

[Soyweiser]

- half of us consider it racism
what does this say about the other half, i wonder

That the other half is sane?

Really nordlys, after the whole drama cools down a bit you want to start it again? This is bovine excrement!

[brxbrx]

Almost makes me wish there was some sort of reverse thanks function I could use to express my disgust

[Gandalf Parker]

Almost makes me wish there was some sort of reverse thanks function I could use to express my disgust
Click those scales on the post.

[Stagger Lee]

And apparently ChrisP and Bat/Man were banned (or deleted) since they dont show on the members list anymore.

ChrisP is a nickname used by chrispedersen, who has neither been banned nor deleted. Bat/man (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/member.php?u=98685) has been banned but not deleted. I don't see any evidence of a user named chrisp. I don't see any evidence of banned user accounts ever being deleted.

pyg (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/member.php?u=13982), Sombre (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/member.php?u=8802), Omnirizon (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/member.php?u=9693), hell even Wikd Thots (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/member.php?u=5699) are all still here, long after their banning.

[Fantomen]

Exactly. If ChrisPedersen has a different mailbox then nothing.
Even if it was, under mitigating circumstances rolling all accounts into one would fit past corrections also.

???

The only thing that would make sense is banning all his accounts, just like they should have done when other dupes were exposed ;)

[Gandalf Parker]

Well if he had a reason and was contrite then rolling the accounts into one has happened in the past.

[Fantomen]

You mean like with your old dual account wikd thots?

Well, then we have two cases where double accounts is obviously ok. They just ban the new account and lets you keep the old one, good to know. Bit inconsistent with the official rhetoric but whatever.

[Gandalf Parker]

You mean like with your old dual account wikd thots?

Well, then we have two cases where double accounts is obviously ok. They just ban the new account and lets you keep the old one, good to know. Bit inconsistent with the official rhetoric but whatever.
You guys are really something about digging up stuff from years ago. That might be a couple years farther back than even the blog incident. Wow.

Actually I was referring to something more recent iirc altho still enough years ago that many here might not remember.
My accounts were blended at the great site conversion along with lots of other people. That was when they did a huge update to the forum software and a bunch of things broke for awhile. The account blending for me didnt go quite like I wanted since my usual account login gp1628 was blended into my name account. But I didnt want to lose my "joined" date to fix it. Its kindof a pain to remember to use my full name to login with instead of the way I do hundreds of other sites.

Most of the blends at the time were for people who remade for reasons like forgetting their passwords or wanting a space login for Space Empires and a fantasy login for posting to Dom3. They all werent mass-banned. Just asked why and it was fixed if they said they would comply from then on. Most got the "chance to volunteer to be banned" conversation that used to be pretty standard altho that was back when there was more staff.

I think the guy you said was already gone long before that.

[Fantomen]

Chrispedersen had no valid reason for his double, it was made deceptively to get a clean slate from his very bad reputation.

And I don't see how there was any valid excuse for wikd thots either.

Both of those were much more clear cases where a total ban was warranted than either Calahan or Sombre.

It smells.

[Gandalf Parker]

Chrispedersen had no valid reason for his double, it was made deceptively to get a clean slate from his very bad reputation.

And I don't see how there was any valid excuse for wikd thots either.

Both of those were much more clear cases where a total ban was warranted than either Calahan or Sombre.

It smells.
Afaik all of TWs got wiped (I think there were 3)
If CP did it for a clean slate then that wouldnt rate on levels such as a temp account to spam sales without getting caught, or to post offensively from an anonymous account, or to multiplay in games that didnt allow it. Those are common reasons for all multiple accounts to be held accountable. Especially if CP didnt use both accounts at once. I think the only offense would be not having deleted the old one.
But I can see where hardcore MPers might feel it was the most capital offense. :)

[Stagger Lee]

Well if he had a reason and was contrite then rolling the accounts into one has happened in the past.

You mean like with your old dual account wikd thots?

Well, then we have two cases where double accounts is obviously ok. They just ban the new account and lets you keep the old one, good to know. Bit inconsistent with the official rhetoric but whatever.
You guys are really something about digging up stuff from years ago. That might be a couple years farther back than even the blog incident. Wow.

Actually I was referring to something more recent iirc altho still enough years ago that many here might not remember.
My accounts were blended at the great site conversion along with lots of other people. That was when they did a huge update to the forum software and a bunch of things broke for awhile. The account blending for me didnt go quite like I wanted since my usual account login gp1628 was blended into my name account. But I didnt want to lose my "joined" date to fix it. Its kindof a pain to remember to use my full name to login with instead of the way I do hundreds of other sites.

Most of the blends at the time were for people who remade for reasons like forgetting their passwords or wanting a space login for Space Empires and a fantasy login for posting to Dom3. They all werent mass-banned. Just asked why and it was fixed if they said they would comply from then on. Most got the "chance to volunteer to be banned" conversation that used to be pretty standard altho that was back when there was more staff.

I think the guy you said was already gone long before that.

It wasn't me, it was some other guy = the alt definition of contrite?

[Foodstamp]

Every time something like this happens, the other forum turns into a victim support group.

[Fantomen]

That's a compliment I think. ****nel treats person x like **** - community turns into support group for person x, hard to see anything wrong with that.

[momfreeek]

ChrisP is certainly getting a hard time of it. I've been told the general history and understand the animosity but you're really out to get him, Fantomen. You have a history with this guy personally?


It wasn't me, it was some other guy = the alt definition of contrite?I see "contrite" but I don't see how its misused. Am I missing another example..?

[rdonj]

Personally I don't think either calahan or chrispedersen should have been banned for the reasons they were. Both were pretty lame reasons for banning, in the scheme of things.

[Executor]

That's my general feeling as well. Buy hey, we all know Shrapnel is in for all or nothing when it comes to these things.

[Fantomen]

I wouldn't want any person banned ever, if it was up to me.

What I would require of Chrispedersen, Gandalf and other people who use alt accounts, is to be honest about it. Do I have a personal history with Chrispedersen? I've played with him and found him a very dishonest and generally frustrating player, but all that I can accept, it's only the part where he creates an alt account to avoid standing up for himself, then keeps acting like a douche, then won't fess up when he's exposed, that I think is really not ok.

What Stagger lee points out in his post is that Gandalf still pretends like he wasn't wikd thots, which was proven, a correct use of "contrite" would require a confession, no? Again, I don't care that he made alt accounts to fake flaming himself, I mean that's actually pretty funny and could be a good joke all around, but it requires that you stand up for what you do.

But the bottom line of all this is the hypocrisy in banning some of the most genuinely contributing members of the community, just because they don't bother to hide their less flattering sides. It's the inability and laziness in not actually bothering to see what's really there. I don't want anyone banned, it's a retarded system, but if you're gonna use it at least use it somewhat responsibly instead of actively harming the community.

[Anaconda]

Just noted that Shrapnel removed their randomly appearing Eat Electric Death -banner ad from the loop of the banner ads at the top of the site after this ruckus started. It is, say, 4 years since the game was unofficially abandoned? Are they waking up?

But last night you could still pick it up from the Gamers Front...

[parone]

remmember, shrapnel doesn't really know or care what goes on here. they don't know the members. don't know who contributes what, who's a decent lass or lad, or who is a total d-bag.

they have what? 20 forums? while we all like dominions and have friends within the community(like callahan), they just throw it on a server and classify it "game support". so it isn't that surprising they might get it wrong now and then.

[Executor]

remmember, shrapnel doesn't really know or care what goes on here. they don't know the members. don't know who contributes what, who's a decent lass or lad, or who is a total d-bag.

And this is the heart of the problem. Shrapnel doesn't seem to realize this affects them, and not in a small way either. And this is also a problem which could have been easily solved with little to no effort from their part.
How they run their forums directly impacts their sales. If they run it badly (which I think they do), don't care about their members, threat them with disrespect, generally don't bother at all with anything and even manage to split the forum in half like is the case with Dominions, than those members will be less inclined to purchase more Shrapnel games and recommend Shrapnel games to others. Further more, the more livelier the forum is the longer said game will last, meaning, more people will eventually buy the game, more people will get involved in projects, be interested in a sequels perhaps, which that same company might publish, etc. Shrapnel doesn't really care about any of that so it's their own problem they are losing business.

A simple solution to this would have been to appoint several very active and appreciated members to supervise the forum they are active in, and leave those mods to handle internal matters regarding those forums. Help new members, organize new projects, intervene in situations like this where two members were pointlessly banned, etc. I'm sure many member would have been glad to help (people like Soy, WL, Frozen, Maer...) and those people would actually be able to promote harmony on the forums and help the company as well.
Is that really that hard to do? And yet imagine how much better this forum would be, how much more people would be here, how many more people would actively contribute and participate on the forums, and how many more people would actually buy this game?

So I can't really accept anything in defense of Shrapnel since it's their own incompetence that's the cause of all these problems.

[parone]

i was not really defending shrapnel. i was just pointing out why i think they made the wrong call here. many good points/suggestions have been brought up, but they are only applicable if someone is paying attention.

[Anaconda]

I was wrong, it is still up :/

[Soyweiser]

regarding the competence of shrapnel. The whole buying frontend could also use a huge makeover. The defaults are bad, and you have to perform a huge amount of clicks before you can buy something. This is very bad for business. Just improving that site would probably increase their conversion rate a lot. (Funny thing, for games that have multiple OS version, mac is chosen first. No auto-detection takes places. (Shrapnel, either pick windows as default (lets be honest, most games will be sold for windows) or get the browser version and make an educated guess.

I already pointed this stuff out before. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showpost.php?p=791168&postcount=2

*crickets* ;)

[Foodstamp]

That's a compliment I think. ****nel treats person x like **** - community turns into support group for person x, hard to see anything wrong with that.

I don't believe that is an accurate translation of what I said, but you're welcome to take it as a compliment.

I'm a little disappointed that you seem to be out to get Gandolf and ChrisP, which would give them 0 options for community since I am pretty sure you guys are not going to accept them with open arms.

I don't see any issue with the multiple accounts, even the ones the banned guys use to post here, I think banning people is kind of dumb anyway unless they have gone through an infraction system or they created an account to simply break the FCOC.

That being said, I love your avatar and that trumps anything you say on the forums that I would disagree with.

[Fantomen]

That's a compliment I think. ****nel treats person x like **** - community turns into support group for person x, hard to see anything wrong with that.

I don't believe that is an accurate translation of what I said, but you're welcome to take it as a compliment.
What is an accurate translation then?

I'm a little disappointed that you seem to be out to get Gandolf and ChrisP, which would give them 0 options for community since I am pretty sure you guys are not going to accept them with open arms. Gandalf is constantly referring to "other" mysterious dom3 communities, so unless he's lying he seems to have plenty of options. Chrispedersen has the option of going back to his old account, as well as joining other forums. And dom3mods welcomes everyone, including Gandalf and Chrispedersen, we just happen to insult everyone as well, if you can take some abuse you'll be fine there. In any case I'm not out to "get" anyone, I just want people to stand up honestly for what they do, and the moment they do all sins are forgiven. Besides, banning Gandalf would also be bad for the community since his server is great for setting up blitzes.

Calling them out for their multiple accounts is to show the hypocrisy in banning other major contributors thoughtlessly. If we can overlook the faults of some, and we should, then we could also forgive the faults of Calahan and Sombre.

Most of all I want Shrapnel to appoint mods from within the community to handle things, to avoid ****ing things up whenever they go on a crusade to promote "harmony".

I don't see any issue with the multiple accounts, even the ones the banned guys use to post here, I think banning people is kind of dumb anyway unless they have gone through an infraction system or they created an account to simply break the FCOC.
Exactly, banning people is dumb, which is the whole issue in the first case.

That being said, I love your avatar and that trumps anything you say on the forums that I would disagree with.
I guess I'll take that as a compliment as well, since that avatar is me.

[momfreeek]

Calling them out for their multiple accounts is to show the hypocrisy in banning other major contributors thoughtlessly. If we can overlook the faults of some, and we should, then we could also forgive the faults of Calahan and Sombre.
Different cases of breaking different rules by different people were treated differently. The difference seems to be that shrapnel value contrition over contributions. I agree this is not good for the health of the community but its not hypocrisy.

If you have something to say in Calahan's defence its best not surrounded by an argument that ignores everything shrapnel say and mostly involves attacking someone else.

[Foodstamp]

That's a compliment I think. ****nel treats person x like **** - community turns into support group for person x, hard to see anything wrong with that.

I don't believe that is an accurate translation of what I said, but you're welcome to take it as a compliment.
What is an accurate translation then?

Gandalf is constantly referring to "other" mysterious dom3 communities, so unless he's lying he seems to have plenty of options. Chrispedersen has the option of going back to his old account, as well as joining other forums. And dom3mods welcomes everyone, including Gandalf and Chrispedersen, we just happen to insult everyone as well, if you can take some abuse you'll be fine there. In any case I'm not out to "get" anyone, I just want people to stand up honestly for what they do, and the moment they do all sins are forgiven. Besides, banning Gandalf would also be bad for the community since his server is great for setting up blitzes.

Calling them out for their multiple accounts is to show the hypocrisy in banning other major contributors thoughtlessly. If we can overlook the faults of some, and we should, then we could also forgive the faults of Calahan and Sombre.

Most of all I want Shrapnel to appoint mods from within the community to handle things, to avoid ****ing things up whenever they go on a crusade to promote "harmony".

I don't see any issue with the multiple accounts, even the ones the banned guys use to post here, I think banning people is kind of dumb anyway unless they have gone through an infraction system or they created an account to simply break the FCOC.
Exactly, banning people is dumb, which is the whole issue in the first case.

That being said, I love your avatar and that trumps anything you say on the forums that I would disagree with.
I guess I'll take that as a compliment as well, since that avatar is me.


More accurately, I was just making fun of the people on the other forum because often it just seems to be a podium for them to disparage other people. Ironic I know.

Beyond that, I think we agree; I hate to see anyone banned from the forums, unless real life threats or attacks (releasing personal information etc.) are involved.

I thought your avatar was a picture of an actress from the black and white movie era. You have a very classic beauty.

[Fantomen]

Calling them out for their multiple accounts is to show the hypocrisy in banning other major contributors thoughtlessly. If we can overlook the faults of some, and we should, then we could also forgive the faults of Calahan and Sombre.
Different cases of breaking different rules by different people were treated differently. The difference seems to be that shrapnel value contrition over contributions. I agree this is not good for the health of the community but its not hypocrisy.

If you have something to say in Calahan's defence its best not surrounded by an argument that ignores everything shrapnel say and mostly involves attacking someone else.

First, this story has a background over years, if you don't get what it is we see as hypocrisy i can't help you. Second, there is no contrition to value over anything else in any of the cases.

I appologize to the community for feeding this troll, he's skilled at it and I fell for it, **** like that always makes me feel dirty.

[momfreeek]

As for contrition, that was the message I got from shrapnel (that they didn't think Calahan was likely to "reform" or somesuch).

Perhaps shrapnel will understand your position, but I don't. good luck.

I apologise for getting angry. I'm not helping the matter either.

[Edi]

Seems that my absence of a couple of months for various reasons has been supremely ill timed. I will need to check in on the whole issue before weighing in any more than that, but if anyone cares to point me in the direction of the relevant threads, please provide links.

I will get back to this tomorrow, it's past midnight here already and I've got to go to work in the morning.

[Executor]

Edi, there are no relevant threads regarding this. Just a sudden decision to ban Calahan for his sig (he put it up about two months ago) which was followed by Bat/man being banned.
Now you know as much as we do.

[momfreeek]

Uh, I don't really want to get involved in this (since, as I hope you understand, I have no power in the matter). But perhaps I should answer some of Executor's questions with *my understanding* of Shrapnel's actions.

-Why exactly was Cal banned?

I believe his signature was a direct insult of Bat/man. I don't remember it though.

-Why no warning but a perma ban after nearly two months?

The rationale is that it wasn't a slip-up, it was obviously a deliberate attempt to be aggressive towards another forum user. Warnings are apparently offered at Shrapnel's discretion when they believe users may change their ways.

As for the nearly two months - it's not really fair to expect Shrapnel staff to read the forums every day. Really that should be (for example) my job. But I am not much of an enforcer.

-Why didn't you check up on the whole matter?

I think they didn't think Calahan was likely to reform having so explicitly gone against forum rules.

-Is it really harassment to report rule violations? (multiple accounts) If so, are you sane?

Well I think Calahan called him a douchebag or something (not sure), rather than merely reporting it.

-If Bat/man is a double account, why isn't CrisP banned as well? Violation of your own rules again

ChrisP was banned as well, I believe.

-Did you only take someones word on it and ban the guy for no reason if he's not really CrisP?

Shrapnel did check - the two email addresses were the same(!).

-Do you even bother to check when someone reports something?

Yep, they do.

-Why are you such hypocrites?

Er...

---

I will repeat that this was not my doing - I'm just trying to explain my perception of Shrapnel's perception. Personally I'm very sorry that Calahan has been banned.this

[Edi]

Edi, there are no relevant threads regarding this. Just a sudden decision to ban Calahan for his sig (he put it up about two months ago) which was followed by Bat/man being banned.
Now you know as much as we do.

Okay, so that came right out of the blue for everyone. This thread also shed some light on the relevant things. Thanks.

[Wendigo_reloaded]

Calling them out for their multiple accounts is to show the hypocrisy in banning other major contributors thoughtlessly. If we can overlook the faults of some, and we should, then we could also forgive the faults of Calahan and Sombre.


This is wrong, the rules have to be the same for everybody: Nobody can get a free pass to harass/abuse other posters just because of who he is. You might discuss the degree of the punishment, but not that there should be a punishment.

This is just a forum about a game of pixel soldiers, and getting banned is not a big deal: the owners have said themselves they have no problem with banned posters coming back under a new identity, if that means they behave properly from then onwards. All the hair pulling in this thread is out of place, getting banned is not the end of the world.

Also, you cannot justify insulting others just by saying that you also insult your buddies (let's be honest, there's a serious difference between friendly poking between peers and the abuse that gets thrown to the ones that are disliked by the hive mind). The mood in the Invision forums is like that of an old boys club: with insiders getting a free pass & outsiders being the target of the real abuse. It's as if you people were back in high school.

I happen to think that our community would be a better place if we all tried to show a minimum respect for each other, including those we do not like.

Young males have always got into fights for the silliest reasons, been there and done it myself, but they are expected to mature and learn sooner or later that their freedom, including their freedom of speech, ends up at that place where it collides with some other people's freedom. If they do not, they will be corrected by their elders or by those that hold the power in their society, as has been the case here.

[rdonj]

Calling them out for their multiple accounts is to show the hypocrisy in banning other major contributors thoughtlessly. If we can overlook the faults of some, and we should, then we could also forgive the faults of Calahan and Sombre.


This is wrong, the rules have to be the same for everybody: Nobody can get a free pass to harass/abuse other posters just because of who he is. You might discuss the degree of the punishment, but not that there should be a punishment.

This is just a forum about a game of pixel soldiers, and getting banned is not a big deal: the owners have said themselves they have no problem with banned posters coming back under a new identity, if that means they behave properly from then onwards. All the hair pulling in this thread is out of place, getting banned is not the end of the world.

Also, you cannot justify insulting others just by saying that you also insult your buddies (let's be honest, there's a serious difference between friendly poking between peers and the abuse that gets thrown to the ones that are disliked by the hive mind). The mood in the Invision forums is like that of an old boys club: with insiders getting a free pass & outsiders being the target of the real abuse. It's as if you people were back in high school.

I happen to think that our community would be a better place if we all tried to show a minimum respect for each other, including those we do not like.

Young males have always got into fights for the silliest reasons, been there and done it myself, but they are expected to mature and learn sooner or later that their freedom, including their freedom of speech, ends up at that place where it collides with some other people's freedom. If they do not, they will be corrected by their elders or by those that hold the power in their society, as has been the case here.

Congratulations on both misunderstanding Fantomen's post and your misconception of the invision board. Yeah, it's quite the old boy's club, in order to get in you have to... not post complete crap? The people that get treated poorly on invision are the people who do questionable things on this one. If you start posting crap though you will get called on it.

[Executor]

Posted at the behest of Calahan;

So I see some of my critics are coming out of the woodwork on Shrapnal now that it's safe to have a go at me just because I can't respond to them directly (how brave of them). Can someone do me a favour and offer my critics this challenge...


The Calahan Challenge - Find any post where I've insulted someone that HASN'T been either a direct result of that person posting misinformation, talking nonsense, or trying to defend suspect playing behaviour (such as cheating/move-blocking/bailing etc). Or that person having a history of doing any and all of the aforementioned things .


Because as I pointed out before with the chicken and egg simile, I would be the nicest and most friendly forumite the world has ever seen* if people didn't post crap all the time, and played with some consideration towards their fellow players. And/Or they spent just a moment of their time to check what they are are about to say is in fact true, or state clearly it is a guess if they can't check. (latter is generally in regards to the game mechanics)


*Ok maybe not, but I can't ever recall having a go at somone who didn't deserve it. So if people stopped doing things to deserve it, then I'd automatically stop having a go at them as a result. See how that works.

[brxbrx]

Is it really necessary to insult someone for being incorrect? Especially since being incorrect in this case refers to a game.

[ghoul31]

I also won't argue that Calahan can be quite rude at times.




Yea he was always making personal attacks against me. So i finally had to put him on ignore. So I can definitely see why he was banned.

[Wendigo_reloaded]

Posted at the behest of Calahan;

So I see some of my critics are coming out of the woodwork on Shrapnal now that it's safe to have a go at me just because I can't respond to them directly (how brave of them). Can someone do me a favour and offer my critics this challenge...


This from the guy who has created a thread exclusively to make fun & take cheap shots at the posters of other forums. Pot, kettle, black. It's not fun being on the other side, right?

Take a step out of your shoes and think about how you can improve your attitude. It's not too late to change. It's called empathy.



The Calahan Challenge - Find any post where I've insulted someone that HASN'T been either a direct result of that person posting misinformation, talking nonsense, or trying to defend suspect playing behaviour (such as cheating/move-blocking/bailing etc). Or that person having a history of doing any and all of the aforementioned things .


And this is where you are, and have always been wrong. If you did this in RL you would get a black eye most often than not. As this is the internet, you only get a ban.

If someone makes a mistake, you are welcome to correct him/her, but not insult & belittle. You go too far.

Seriously, grow up. I'm sure there is an intelligent & kind guy behind all that posturing, you do unselfish stuff as admining games for newbies after all. But you are not a unique snowflake: the world doesn't evolve around your personal peeves & dislikes, you are the one who has to be flexible & adapt to living in society, and not everybody else adapt to your very particular ways.

[brxbrx]

If someone makes a mistake, you are welcome to correct him/her, but not insult & belittle. You go too far.



Exactly. I'm starting to think that banning him was not a bad idea.

[Gandalf Parker]

Cant we all just get along? There are two boards and they are both wonderful, marvelous, fantastic.
They get about the same amount of posting traffic.
They both serve a function.
They both have a user base who seems happy with it.
And, they are both, wonderful examples of what results from their policies.

People keep stating things about one or the other loudly as if they are arguing. I dont see a lot of error in anything that is being said about either board. The other side might not WORD it quite that way and make it sound like more of that boards advantage but that isnt really arguing is it?

There is no reason to try and get either one to operate like the other one. And no need to try and convince them that they should be unhappy with their forum. Everything has its pros and cons. So as long as (A) both boards allow guest viewing and (B) both boards allow the mention of the other board, then people will be able to find the one that fits their preferences. The end result will be decided by Internet Democracy at its finest (usage).

[Executor]

brxbrx, Wendigo, I'm not defending Calahan here, but;
The guy is always helpful but has a short fuse when people are wasting his times and posting BS. He usually gives you one chance before he starts to rant relentlessly, but I get where his frustration comes from.

Personally, I'd be happier if players like you brxbrx didn't bother to always try to answer any question, as from what I see you tend to give wrong answers more often than not. If and when you don't know the answer or are not sure, please don't answer because you feel the urge to answer and end up confusion people. Or if you do, advise people to take it with a grain of salt. Especially since you're a SP fan and anything which sound good in SP is usually crap for MP.
The only worse thing I find is when someone claims something very wrong about a certain game mechanic and won't accept the fact that he's wrong, even when explained or given proof, so he just goes on to spread more BS.
A lot of people, including me for example, have stopped trying to answer any newb question here entirely because is too damn frustrating to have to deal with all the **** that comes with providing a simple answer.

Ideally, I'd like here to be a sticky which directs newbs with questions to dom3mods, since no matter what you all might think, people there are much more helpful and straightforward. BS will be called on, and trolls will be marked as such.

[rdonj]

Of course you put him on ignore, ghoul, you've put everyone who ever publicly disagreed with you ever on ignore. One cannot even tell you simply in polite terms that you're wrong without making your ignore list. So I don't think that being on it means much of anything, honestly.

Wendigo - there are rather some differences, such as a banned person being literally incapable of posting messages. There was recently a guy that came onto the other board just to argue with the invisions people. He never got banned for that :P So you're again arguing a non-point.

[Wendigo_reloaded]

Cant we all just get along?

How are you old chap? it's been over a decade since our first game together, back with the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategy crew, and I see that you are still offering disinterested hosting services, same as then.

You have always been a genuinely good guy. I manage people for a living nowadays, and I guess that makes me much more unforgiving. If you let behaviour like this fester in a corporate environment, the end result is a dead company.

Your conciliatory tone is even more ironic considering how much you have been the target of Callaghan's puns. He should be doubly ashamed. Thrice, considering that you might likely have the age to be his grandfather.

Whatever, if you do not want to push the issue, neither will I. I dislike Callaghan the incarnation, but I have nothing against Callaghan the player: if he joins the forum under a new name & a new attitude, it's a clean record as far as I am concerned. He could call himself Callaghan_Reloaded for all I care, I doubt Shrapnel would care either.

[Wendigo_reloaded]

Executor:
Callaghan is obviously a perfectionist type. i know the type well enough: my wife is the same, and we have been married for over 12 years.

Perfectionists at their best are a great asset to any organization/community, they are incredibly energetic and focused, so they get **** done.

At their worst, however, they are a handicap, they fixate so much on the mistakes of others that they become a source of trouble & conflict, alienating other members and preventing them from reaching their full potential.

It's easy to see how Callaghan has been both things for this comunity.

Rdonj: He has his friends, such as you, to vouch for him. He can re-join and speak for himself. He is far from defenseless. Who vouches for your targets in Invision? I bet anyone that shows to defend himself will rather suffer a piling on. That's exactly the way of old boys clubs, bullies & hive minds. Do not expect an applause if that's the way you choose to act.
Besides, your place->your rules. This is Shrapnel's place, guess who gets to write the rules here.
You are the one who is missing the point because of your coloured glasses, try to be more objective.

Really, the cards are on the table. Callaghan gets to choose whether he wants to be a valuable asset for the Dominions community or just a troublemaker.

[Gandalf Parker]

Cant we all just get along?

How are you old chap? it's been over a decade since our first game together, back with the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategy crew, and I see that you are still offering disinterested hosting services, same as then.

Im 56, my sons are mid 30s. Hopefully not quite the age to be grandpa to those here but I guess it could squeeze thru. I still haunt sissy pigs. Ive been on Internet since before it was called Internet.

You have always been a genuinely good guy. I manage people for a living nowadays, and I guess that makes me much more unforgiving. If you let behaviour like this fester in a corporate environment, the end result is a dead company.Exactly the key. Corporate environment. And its a corporate environment which supports a game. Being compared to a forum which is fan owned and fan operated.

Your conciliatory tone is even more ironic considering how much you have been the target of Callaghan's puns. He should be doubly ashamed. Thrice, considering that you might likely have the age to be his grandfather.Yeah I get flak for that. Ive been told to change (usually for a job) but by now they just have to accept that its me. Change is unlikely. All I did was move on to another job that wanted what I am. Less effort that way. And makes for a very diverse resume.

Now Im health retired so I care even less. :)

[Gandalf Parker]

Cant we all just get along?
Whatever, if you do not want to push the issue, neither will I. I dislike Callaghan the incarnation, but I have nothing against Callaghan the player: if he joins the forum under a new name & a new attitude, it's a clean record as far as I am concerned. He could call himself Callaghan_Reloaded for all I care, I doubt Shrapnel would care either.

Ive fought that battle online since before internet. "You know you cant really keep me out". And the official answer would never be "we dont care". But seriously, Ample gets booted off for being rude and then creates ex-Ample to sneak back in. He contributes to the posts and conversations but to not get caught he acts completely different than he did before.
Oh Ouch.

[Edi]

So, the people carping most loudly about Calahan's banning and how he was such a bad person and always mean to them are the ones whose posts I long ago stopped reading (unless required for thread moderation purposes) on account of it being such a colossal waste of my time 99 times out of 100. How unsurprising.

Calahan may have been an abrasive poster under certain conditions, but given the number of times I had to moderate threads where he participated, it generally came down to the following sort of exchange:

Newbie: *asks question*
Poster X: *specious, incorrect answer*
Calahan: "No, that's not how it works, it's [correct answer]"
Newbie: "Thanks!"
Poster X: "But how can you be saying that because under the conditions of [entirely different situation] my answer..."
Calahan: "Your situation did not apply and even if it did [essay length correct explanation for that situation]"
Poster X: You still don't understand and you're clearly wrong! [holds forth, still on wrong track]
Calahan: *annoyed answer*
Poster X: *more Wall of Ignorance*
Calahan: *pulls out flamethrower*


Sometimes it took a longer time, sometimes it took a shorter while, but that was the general pattern on all those occasions. And when he was told to back down, Calahan did so.

Nobody appreciates having their time wasted and over time people who do waste someone else's time tend to start getting shorter and shorter slack for it until there is nothing at all and they get told to sod off from the get-go.

I'm also rather amused at the indignation toward Calahan for being such a bad person for sometimes being short with certain people or even *gasp* using rude language. Generally (not limited to this forum only) I see that behavior mostly from people who have absolutely no problem wasting massive amounts of people's time, repeating their already discredited arguments ad nauseam and then swooning and reaching for the smelling salts the second someone loses patience with them and calls them out on it. How dare that person be rude to them?! As if it wasn't rude to repeatedly ignore his arguments and waster his time and perhaps even insult him into the bargain, albeit less directly.

Now, which one of those behaviors is actually more offensive?


As another point I would like to bring up, I do not see it as very good sportsmanship to come out of the woodwork to bash a person who was banned without warning and is thus unable to even defend himself at this venue.

There are opinions both for and against the banning among the forum members, as we have seen here, though to me it seems very much that there are a great deal more of those against than those who approve of the events. But for the time being, it is a done deal. The only way it would change is if the Shrapnel administrators decide to reverse their decision through whatever rationale.

If those who agree and approve of the decision to ban Calahan wish to gloat about it, they are free to do so in private elsewhere, but I am not going to put up with it in this thread.

Now, if you like to discuss what types of approaches to debate and making arguments one should preferably use and other such things with the posters here, go for it.

[Edi]

Besides, your place->your rules. This is Shrapnel's place, guess who gets to write the rules here.
You are the one who is missing the point because of your coloured glasses, try to be more objective.

Really, the cards are on the table. Callaghan gets to choose whether he wants to be a valuable asset for the Dominions community or just a troublemaker.

The catch here being of course that given past precedent for banning high octane contributors who may on occasion be troublesome, Calahan got the rawest deal for the least offenses that I have seen in six years, bar none: A summary ban without warning or public explanation.

Aside from including something (I don't know exactly what) about another poster in his sig, he hasn't done anything I haven't done at some point or another, though I did put some additional safeties (such as they are) on the flamethrower way back when I was made a moderator.

So it is not difficult to see why this caused such an uproar, because the question about the consistency of the enforcement of the rules and the basis on which it is done is, to those not privy to additional information, completely legitimate.

[Amhazair]

I also won't argue that Calahan can be quite rude at times.




Yea he was always making personal attacks against me. So i finally had to put him on ignore. So I can definitely see why he was banned.Good job on pulling that sentence completely out of its context. This exactly the kind <edited for language> Calahan called people out on, and exactly the reason many of the other best players with less perseverance have (partially) given up on trying to answer/help/give advice...

You can hardly open your mouth around these parts without some dumb schmuck (Or malevolent troll) ignoring what you said, arguing againt it pointlessly without a shred of evidence to back them up, pulling it out of context or otherwise <edited for language> over every effort to be helpful.

[Gandalf Parker]

Which is exactly what the other forum is for
http://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods
I highly recommend that anyone playing MP games should at least visit it to see what is going on there. AND to their IRC channel. The benefits of such are obvious when you see them in action.

And those benefits are becoming more and more difficult to find here.

[ghoul31]

I also won't argue that Calahan can be quite rude at times.




Yea he was always making personal attacks against me. So i finally had to put him on ignore. So I can definitely see why he was banned.Good job on pulling that sentence completely out of its context. This exactly the kind bulls.h.i.t Calahan called people out on, and exactly the reason many of the other best players with less perseverance have (partially) given up on trying to answer/help/give advice...

You can hardly open your mouth around these parts without some dumb schmuck (Or malevolent troll) ignoring what you said, arguing againt it pointlessly without a shred of evidence to back them up, pulling it out of context or otherwise f.u.c.k.ing over every effort to be helpful.

The rules are that if you launch personal attacks on people, and call them names all the time, you are going to be banned. That is what happened.

If you think that stuff should be allowed then you should hang out on the other forum, not here.

[Amhazair]

The rules are that if you launch personal attacks on people, and call them names all the time, you are going to be banned. That is what happened.

If you think that stuff should be allowed then you should hang out on the other forum, not here.

I'm also rather amused at the indignation toward Calahan for being such a bad person for sometimes being short with certain people or even *gasp* using rude language. Generally (not limited to this forum only) I see that behavior mostly from people who have absolutely no problem wasting massive amounts of people's time, repeating their already discredited arguments ad nauseam and then swooning and reaching for the smelling salts the second someone loses patience with them and calls them out on it. How dare that person be rude to them?! As if it wasn't rude to repeatedly ignore his arguments and waster his time and perhaps even insult him into the bargain, albeit less directly.

Now, which one of those behaviors is actually more offensive?Hey, look at that! I don't even have to bother to type an answer to that, since somebody else already did. :D

[rdonj]

Rdonj: He has his friends, such as you, to vouch for him. He can re-join and speak for himself. He is far from defenseless. Who vouches for your targets in Invision? I bet anyone that shows to defend himself will rather suffer a piling on. That's exactly the way of old boys clubs, bullies & hive minds. Do not expect an applause if that's the way you choose to act.
Besides, your place->your rules. This is Shrapnel's place, guess who gets to write the rules here.
You are the one who is missing the point because of your coloured glasses, try to be more objective.

So your argument is that because you *think* that the invision board is an old boy's club, you *expect* that someone who shows up to defend themselves will be voted off the island. Aside from the irony of saying something like that in this thread with some rather obvious piling on of calahan by a bunch of people who basically never post except when people are banned and the circular logic employed by your argument, the fact is that situations like this on the invisions board play out fairly similarly to how they do here, except that we don't ban people over there. And there are some people over on invision now who had a somewhat dubious reputation on the board at one point who have come over and been accepted now (after due process of an airing out of grievances). So, please stop making things up, kthanks :)

Edi: That was a hilariously accurate portrayal of Calahan, thanks for making me laugh.

[momfreeek]

Lets not pretend its the Land of Milk and Honey over there either..

Who vouches for your targets in Invision? I bet anyone that shows to defend himself will rather suffer a piling on.I got:

"bad poster"
"s**t stirrer"
"troll" (numerous times)
"acting like a d**k"
"d**ksplash"
"nitpicky apologist"
"Shut up, Mr. momfreeek! You are not brought upon this world to get it!"

But there were some welcoming voices and yeah, they didn't ban me. Despite my faults, I think some of them are already coming round to the idea that I might not be a total tool ^^

[Radio_Star]

It's telling that this thread has been the source of more posts in the last five days than the rest of the forum combined over probably the last three to four weeks.

Draw your own conclusions.

[jimbojones1971]

remmember, shrapnel doesn't really know or care what goes on here. they don't know the members. don't know who contributes what, who's a decent lass or lad, or who is a total d-bag.

they have what? 20 forums? while we all like dominions and have friends within the community(like callahan), they just throw it on a server and classify it "game support". so it isn't that surprising they might get it wrong now and then.

I might be wrong, but it seems to me that almost all of the other forums are effectively museum pieces - not much if any posting ever. In fact, at a guess I'd say at least 80% of the forum posts happen in the Dom3 subforum.

Its going out on a limb, but I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that most of the income also comes from Dom3 now.

[Gandalf Parker]

They are support forums for games. Not quite the same as a forum like Dom3Mods is. The criteria for success is abit different. Most of the threads on Dom3 forums is about MP games. Sometimes a question pops up.

Other than game chatter, the Dom3 forum is slightly less than half of the posting traffic on the entire server. But it also gets 8 times as much reading as it does posting.

[Executor]

Thank you Edi, that was an excellent and well argued answer.

[Executor]

Posted at the request of Calahan.

@ Edi

I must say it's pretty unnerving how well you know my forum behaviour. Starts to make me wonder what else you know about me You might want to make note though that I prefer a minigun over a flamethrower, as I find it does more damage at a quicker rate (I recommend you check it out yourself). Although recently I've found the nuclear option to be very appealing, as the time savings you can make with it are just incredible!

Anyway, I thought you might want to know what my signature was which I seemingly got banned for. I'm not 100% sure if the following is word-for-word accurate, but it's around the 95% mark, and is certainly an accurate representation of what my signature was...


*CALAHAN'S FORMER SIG CONTENTS EDITED OUT*

(sorry to further disappoint my critics after Edi took the wind out of your sails, but no porns links were harmed in the making of my signature, contrary to some of the rumours I'm sure you'd all like to believe are true)


And that was it. No idea exactly what part of that signature got me banned, I'm guessing it was the word "stupid", but if so then it appers I effectively got banned for calling an Orange an Orange. I might have used "idiot" instead of "stupid", and in the context of "I can not take idiots like Bat-man...", but I don't see how that makes any real difference unless you are playing Scrabble.

I put that signature in place on, or soon after the 14th May, after finally giving up arguing with Bat-man in a thread on the main forum (and at the same point I firmly convinced myself that Bat-man was Chris-P, and so I also realised who I was pointlessly arguing with, and which therefore prompted me to stop arguing immediately due to significant prior experience). And I was banned (for this signature?) on either 1st or 2nd July (I noticed around noon GMT on 2nd July).

And apologies for the slight mis-spellings. They are there to get around a word fliter that's currently in place on dom3mods.


If the links don't work, which I suspect they won't as they never do when copied from a post (they get displayed in shortened form, and copied as such), then please use the following and add the letter "h" to the start of them. (to make "http" obviously). Most browers do this automatically when you paste the text into the address bar.

ttp://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showpost.php?p=671089&postcount=189
ttp://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showpost.php?p=671414&postcount=205
ttp://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods

Link to this post on dom3mods, in case it doesn't display properly on Shrapnal
ttp://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods/index.php?showtopic=835&view=findpost&p=22015865

[Soyweiser]

The anti Calahan camp is right in one regard. The hive minded abuse of ghoul wasn't nice. In the end it became a bit of a running gag to make fun of ghouls style. The "your mom" joke of dom3mods.

People at dom3mods even acknowledged this. Calahan certainly wasn't the main heckler or the most verbose about it. Still, it wasn't a nice thing to do. (Sadly, I could not find a link).

[WraithLord]

This is my perspective. Calahan is consistently, over the years I know him, helping the community in many ways, like sharing knowledge, doing tests, balancing maps ( he did this once or a twice as a generous favor for games I hosted) & subbing.
He is given much more than, I'd say at least 90% of the forum members. You see, how many vets out there have the will, time or patience to correct disinformation spread to newbs?

If his sig. was over the top the mod should have talked to him about & ask him politely to moderate it.
Many forms of abusive behavior pass under the radar but that does not make them right or any less abusive. I'm talking about P/A, answering wrong answers w/o checking & w/o a simple "ÿes I was wrong" when called out, ditching games etc. Yet such are not banned. Instead a top contributor is out right banned when reported for his sig. (who actually reported violation of forum rules albeit not in a polite manner)

That's wrong. And the sooner it's acknowledged the better. He should be un-banned and if it were me who banned him I'd do two more things - apologize for the harsh & unjust measure and ask him to take it easy and try to moderate his responses. I'm sure he'll comply since he's basically a good guy and has good intentions. But at the very least he deserves a chance.

And Exec is absolutely right about:
"
A simple solution to this would have been to appoint several very active and appreciated members to supervise the forum they are active in, and leave those mods to handle internal matters regarding those forums. Help new members, organize new projects, intervene in situations like this where two members were pointlessly banned, etc. I'm sure many member would have been glad to help (people like Soy, WL, Frozen, Maer...) and those people would actually be able to promote harmony on the forums and help the company as well.
Is that really that hard to do? And yet imagine how much better this forum would be, how much more people would be here, how many more people would actively contribute and participate on the forums, and how many more people would actually buy this game?
"
Although it's not a trivial thing to ask of working, busy ppl I'm sure volunteers would be found.

[Edi]

Okay, listen up everyone!

I don't expect to be a very popular person after this post is through, but it's got to be made. Like it says in the reason for editing Executor's post and removing Calahan's sig contents out of there, this is about preventive damage control.

It was made known to me that posting the contents of the sig second hand, even if the intent was to inform me of what caused this ugly chain of events, is a violation of the terms and conditions of the forum. Fair enough, by reading the T&Cs, it is. So it got removed for that reason, in order to make sure that Executor does not find himself in hot water for no reason.

There is another thing that is relevant here, one which is not spelled out directly in the terms and conditions. However, it can be inferred/deduced from the terms and conditions, so please pay attention:

If and when a member is banned from the forums, it is done to remove them from the discussions for their perceived disruptive or otherwise negative influence, as judged by the forum moderators and/or administrators. The ban makes it clear that the person is no longer welcome and the inference is that they should no longer have a voice in the discussions here. This is not about Calahan specifically, it is the policy with regard to all banned members.

Therefore people should not be posting messages on behalf of banned members, because it can be seen as deliberately circumventing the ban by proxy. That would land the proxy poster in trouble.

If anyone wants to relay messages to anyone else from banned members, it should be done via PM. This way nobody gets in trouble and the message gets delivered. There is also the option to ask the intended recipient of the message to take a look at the message on another venue that is not on these forums, preferably via PM, which again avoids trouble for everyone concerned.

[Edi]

Now, all of that said, there are some other considerations that I wish to make clear, if they were not already so from my previous posts:


I personally agree that Calahan was a valued member of the community for exactly the reasons Wraithlord outlines above and what Executor and others have been saying since the beginning of the thread.

I also agree that the ideal situation would have been for a moderator, such as myself, to ask Calahan to remove or change the offending sig upon spotting it and perhaps issue a warning about such behavior in the future. The problem would have been solved and these events would not have happened.

However, due to the absence of both myself and llamabeast, the remaining active moderators, this did not happen and resolution of the issue was kicked directly to the forum administrators. They felt that Calahan was blatantly and intentionally in violation of the terms and conditions of the forum and out to stir trouble and therefore decided to ban him directly. The fact that offending sig was put up as early as May and stayed up as long as it did certainly did not alter their stance on the issue in Calahan's favor.

So the banishment is in all likelihood going to stick and that issue is not up for debate.


I also agree that it would be a good thing to have other active moderators, especially for the multiplayer subforum, which is the one that sees the most traffic. I and the administrators will certainly take this under advisement, but don't expect new moderators to be named tomorrow. After the recent events and the emotions running high on all sides, making rushed snap judgments not in anybody's interest.

[PriestyMan]

Boy are they mad that they are being made to look silly. lets just censor the discussion down so we don't look any worse.

[Edi]

You can hold the opinion that it is silly to edit out the sig contents from Executor's post, but you can't argue about the consistency of removing a negative statement that was removed from the sig of a member who also got banned for it.

The reason I edited it out is that Executor should not run the risk of being punished for relaying a message to me in good faith, especially since he (or anyone else for that matter) had never been made aware of the particulars explained in my the post where I laid the reasoning out. Removing part of that message accomplishes that purpose and now that the instructions about relaying messages from banned members are laid out, they should be followed. However, I did not feel that things posted before it was explicitly explained need to be removed.

I have discussed this incident with the administrators of the forum and I know exactly how it looks from both sides of it and I understand the why of it from both sides. I'm just trying to make damn sure this crap doesn't get any worse, so I would appreciate it if you refrained from pouring more gasoline on the flames.

[PriestyMan]

Okay, but my question is why does Exec get a warning about that, but Calahan didnt get any warning to edit his signature? i'm sure if someone had asked him he would have changed it immediatly

[rdonj]

Edi - thank you for making the situation a bit more transparent, and looking out for us. I can't take offense to what you've done, but I'm finding myself increasingly frustrated with and intolerant of shrapnel's backwards policies. I don't really expect the outcome of this banning to be changed and never did. Because shrapnel has a thing for sticking to their guns. But it is very gratifying to hear someone more or less on the inside saying that shrapnel is wrong. Hopefully one day they too will recognize that.

[Soyweiser]

Edi: I sometimes post irc logs that answer questions that get asked here. The people that answer the question are banned. Am I not allowed to do that?

(I leave the nicknames visible in the irc logs to provide proper attribution).

[shonuf]

But - the forum administrators are here for the players, right?

And if a majority of the active playerbase thinks that it was a bad decision to ban somebody over something as petty as a forum signature, it is pretty clear that the forum administrators are doing a **** job of looking after the interests of the people actually using the forum.

And what is putting "fuel on the fire" is not people posting about it, it is some administrator being a donkey and refusing to go back and change an obviously crappy decision.

[llamabeast]

Soy: Being as the intent there is clearly helpful I think it's fine.

Everyone: Sorry about this. It's a bit of an awkward spot for Edi and I. I've been a busy unfortunately but thanks are owed to Edi for greatly improving the situation (whether or not it's obvious). In future I believe Shrapnel would like to get more moderators on board, and hopefully it will be possible to avoid direct action by Shrapnel staff if there are sufficient active moderators.

[PriestyMan]

Okay, but my question is why does Exec get a warning about that, but Calahan didnt get any warning to edit his signature? i'm sure if someone had asked him he would have changed it immediatly

This is all i want to know

[Fantomen]

Thank you Edi for bringing sanity to this discussion, you're a great moderator.

I'll also take the opportunity to apologize for being overly aggressive to Gandalf in this thread, in hindsight that was uncalled for.

But the above declaration of censorship via proxy is some of the most disgusting things I've read here so far. So we can't include the relevant information when we discuss the issue? Consistent? Yeah, ****nels policy is super consistent in treating the community like ****, I'll give them that. (No offense to you Edi.)

If it's about preventing personal abuse wouldn't censoring ***********s name from the quote be enough for that?

Personally I will not censor myself, or adapt my posting to some vaguely repressive policy. Never have, never will. If I feel it appropriate to quote from banned members on dom3mods or Irc I will do so. And hopefully the thought police will be busy at the time, or have a rare outburst of common sense and see that neither me or anyone else are out to harm.

[Gandalf Parker]

But - the forum administrators are here for the players, right?
You mean moderators or staff?

Fan-based forums are there for the players. To make them better players and weed out the crappy ones. They can become excellent players if they are willing to listen. We have an excellent forum for that and I highly recommend that anyone interested in becoming the best player they can to take a look at that forum.

An official support forum is more to support the game. Everyone who owns the game or wants to own it. They can play it all ways at all levels. Why would they care about crappy players? Maybe even crappy players would be desirable as long as they are happy playing the way they want since they might get their crappy player friends to want the game also.
Or worse yet, even solo players :)

[elmokki]

It was nice to see transparency about the bans and thanks for that Edi, but it does not change my opinion about the bans: god what bull****.

[jimbojones1971]

While we are talking about banned members, and in the interests of fairness, my understanding (based on chatting to him about it) is that bat/man aka chrisp created his new account because he was unable to log into the old one when he returned after being away for a long time, and despite repeated requests couldn't get the password reset etc.

Now, I can't personally validate this (and don't propose to defend it as this is not my battle - I just think it should be thrown into the mix in the interests of natural justice), but I have certainly had the same experience myself on other forums so its seems very plausible to me.

[Sigil Runestone]

Okay, but my question is why does Exec get a warning about that, but Calahan didnt get any warning to edit his signature? i'm sure if someone had asked him he would have changed it immediatly

This is all i want to know

I think Edi made this clear: Agree with the punishment or not, Calahan's sig seems to havecrossed an obvious forum policy, while Executors actions crossed a much less apparent policy. Therefore Edi, justly, edit the post and clarified the policy.

Please note, I am firmly in the Calahan camp but am just answering the question.

Sigil

[Edi]

Okay, but my question is why does Exec get a warning about that, but Calahan didnt get any warning to edit his signature? i'm sure if someone had asked him he would have changed it immediatly

Executor did not get a warning issued against him! His message post just got edited to remove that part and then there was a public explanation of why it was done and an appeal for everyone not to do that in the future. As in, a more a detailed clarification about how the policy is going to be interpreted in the future, but no ex post facto enforcement of said interpretation to past posts (aside from removing the sig quote).

I believe I also explained how things turned out because the moderators were absent. Had I not been absent, I would have asked Calahan to remove the sig, just like llamabeast would have done had he been around. I never had any problems with Calahan when I had to ask him to do something or refrain from doing something, so I agree with you that it would probably have solved the issue.

However, the administrators had to make the decision they did on the information they had, which was not the same information that would have been at my and llamabeast's disposal.

[Micah]

Thanks Edi. You have once again done the best you could with the mess you got handed, and you don't have to worry about your popularity taking a hit in my book, I think we all know the **** has indeed flowed downhill here.

[jimbojones1971]

So are there plans to draft in a few more moderators, to deal with this sort of thing before it escalates up the food chain and leads to outcomes like this?

[llamabeast]

Yep, that's the plan.

[Soyweiser]

I don't know if shrapnel is open to community suggestions. Perhaps that can be done. (Not that I know of any that would be good enough, and impartial enough to do it).

[Valerius]

(Not that I know of any that would be good enough, and impartial enough to do it).

I agree that it's tough to find the right people. Perhaps an Abysian-style llamabred program to develop new mods is called for?

[llamabeast]

I am open to suggestions, that I can pass on. PM me.

[Executor]

Not to sound pessimistic but, first you'd have to find someone who should be able to do the job as it should be done. Someone trustworthy, objective, someone the community likes. Needless to say there aren't too many people like that left. Next you need to persuade that member to actually take on the moderator duties. I don't think that will be easy to do with all that happened so far. A lot of people, especially vets and long time members carry grudges against Shrapnel. And last, you need to find someone who the Shrapnel staff will actually be willing to have as a moderator here, which probably eliminates all of the people here.
So I don't really see this happening. Though I hope I'm wrong!

I just think this all happened about two-three years too late to make any difference. :(

[brxbrx]

(Not that I know of any that would be good enough, and impartial enough to do it).

I agree that it's tough to find the right people. Perhaps an Abysian-style llamabred program to develop new mods is called for?

What will we do with all the foulspawn?

[Admiral_Aorta]

the same thing shrapnel already does with them, nothing!

[parone]

i love foul spawn

[Gandalf Parker]

the same thing shrapnel already does with them, nothing!
Of course not. Foulspawn are quantity. Quantity over quality.

[legowarrior]

the same thing shrapnel already does with them, nothing!
Of course not. Foulspawn are quantity. Quantity over quality.

As Patton said, Quantity has a quality all of its own.

[Bwaha]

That is attributed to Stalin btw.

I nominate Gandalf Parker for the position of a mod.

I think he's got the best temperament of this forum...

:D

[jimbojones1971]

i love foul spawn

Dude, keep your love life out of this! Unless you want to PM me some pictures of this foul spawn loving, that is ...

[jimbojones1971]

That is attributed to Stalin btw.

I nominate Gandalf Parker for the position of a mod.

I think he's got the best temperament of this forum...

:D

For a moment there, before I fully read your post, I thought you were equating Gandalf with Stalin. My first reaction was "nah, he's more of an Eisenhower, with that penchant he has for planning out massive campaigns". Doh! :doh:

[rdonj]

Yeah, I don't think gandalf would be the ideal man for the job. He actually reads the forums, which is a start, but he hasn't played multiplayer on this forum in a long time, which makes him somewhat unsuitable to moderate the MP forum, and is not really placed to represent the community as a whole. I'm not sure there is an ideal man for the job, and I'd hate to ask anyone to step into that position because there's a very large, gaping hole between different parts of the community and shrapnel itself. It would be a painful job. It needs someone more or less impartial that the dom3mods crowd can respect and trust to understand their point of view, or getting new moderators will accomplish nothing.

[Korwin]

Edi: I sometimes post irc logs that answer questions that get asked here. The people that answer the question are banned. Am I not allowed to do that?

(I leave the nicknames visible in the irc logs to provide proper attribution).

Posting an link to z7 with the answers there sounds like an solution...?

[Edi]

Yeah, I don't think gandalf would be the ideal man for the job. He actually reads the forums, which is a start, but he hasn't played multiplayer on this forum in a long time, which makes him somewhat unsuitable to moderate the MP forum, and is not really placed to represent the community as a whole. I'm not sure there is an ideal man for the job, and I'd hate to ask anyone to step into that position because there's a very large, gaping hole between different parts of the community and shrapnel itself. It would be a painful job. It needs someone more or less impartial that the dom3mods crowd can respect and trust to understand their point of view, or getting new moderators will accomplish nothing.

Sooooo... Are you volunteering...?

Because that post right there is something I would expect from someone who was suitable material for a new moderator. *grin*

[Soyweiser]

Edi: I sometimes post irc logs that answer questions that get asked here. The people that answer the question are banned. Am I not allowed to do that?

(I leave the nicknames visible in the irc logs to provide proper attribution).

Posting an link to z7 with the answers there sounds like an solution...?

I don't see how that is different in any way from just posting the text. It is still allowing the banned users a voice.

Also, sounds like a lot of work. ;) (it is already done in places).

[rdonj]

Yeah, I don't think gandalf would be the ideal man for the job. He actually reads the forums, which is a start, but he hasn't played multiplayer on this forum in a long time, which makes him somewhat unsuitable to moderate the MP forum, and is not really placed to represent the community as a whole. I'm not sure there is an ideal man for the job, and I'd hate to ask anyone to step into that position because there's a very large, gaping hole between different parts of the community and shrapnel itself. It would be a painful job. It needs someone more or less impartial that the dom3mods crowd can respect and trust to understand their point of view, or getting new moderators will accomplish nothing.

Sooooo... Are you volunteering...?

Because that post right there is something I would expect from someone who was suitable material for a new moderator. *grin*

Ugh, no. I don't think so. Not unless someone wanted to pay me :P

[Radio_Star]

Yeah, I don't think gandalf would be the ideal man for the job. He actually reads the forums, which is a start, but he hasn't played multiplayer on this forum in a long time, which makes him somewhat unsuitable to moderate the MP forum, and is not really placed to represent the community as a whole. I'm not sure there is an ideal man for the job, and I'd hate to ask anyone to step into that position because there's a very large, gaping hole between different parts of the community and shrapnel itself. It would be a painful job. It needs someone more or less impartial that the dom3mods crowd can respect and trust to understand their point of view, or getting new moderators will accomplish nothing.

Sooooo... Are you volunteering...?


Because that post right there is something I would expect from someone who was suitable material for a new moderator. *grin*

http://www.myfacewhen.net/uploads/1425-its-a-trap.gif

[Gandalf Parker]

I nominate Gandalf Parker for the position of a mod.
I think he's got the best temperament of this forum...
:D
And my temperament was much better. The first time I did it. ;)
Thanks for the vote. But I was one of the first mods here. I stepped down due to medical and financial concerns. Things are looking better, but not that much better that Id want to take this on again.

[Bwaha]

Oh, you need some help? I'll PM you a patentable invention... ;)

[Gandalf Parker]

Oh, you need some help? I'll PM you a patentable invention... ;)
Oh Bwaha, you should know me better than that by now.
Im the one voted "most likely to waste his potential". :smirk: I have loads of patentable ideas in my notebooks. Each one gets me lots of "really, you should patent that" responses. Its not the ideas I lack. I have half a century of that already.

But I have a plan. When I win the lottery I will simply hire others who are more workaholic to make them happen. But until then, I will just continue spewing them out for others to snag on if they want to :target:


Gandalf Parker
--
I have a very fertile mind. Just throw me a subject. I can fertilize anything.
(wait, that didnt come out right)

[Bwaha]

You ought to take it and use it. I've got a load of others as well...

Most of mine are of a military nature and thus doomed to obscurity...

(The navy hated my anti-torpedo point defense)...

Screw darpa and their cronies...

[Gandalf Parker]

Back to Topic (kindof)
I dont have any major complaints toward the Moderators here (of course).
But, if you feel that you do, then it seems you have been given a chance to suggest who you feel could help out.

Someone who could help out in a specific forum? Such as the MultiPlayer forum?
Or someone who could mediate discussions in multiple forums? Such as Dom3 in general in all of the ways it is played?
Or even someone who could mediate problems in any/all game forums here?

Such suggestions will get passed on. You can post them, or email them, or PM them to Mods, Staff, or even ex-Staff like me. Otherwise, Id expect the complaints to start falling off. :)

[Amhazair]

Otherwise, Id expect the complaints to start falling off. :)Yes, because a vague plan to possibly get more moderators (which I most certainly have no beef with in and of itself) hinted at by two co-moderators who are only passing on what they heard, without any explanation by the Shrapnel staff themselves about what way they intend to go with the forum (If, in fact they do actually want to make changes, and aren't just organizing some window dressing) nor any explanation* about their reasoning in this debacle is certain to reconcile all the malcontents after years of neglect and/or open disagreement. Yep, that should work. And the number of complaints falling off is undisputable proof of it, and nothing to do with any feelings of hopelessness and/or arguing with a stone wall.


* Note that:

1) I don't mean to disrespect Edi's nor Llama's posts, in fact I was quite happy with them, but neither had anything to do with the bannings or knew what was actually going on. And

2) I don't actually expect any statement from Shrapnel staff to actually be helpuful in any way, though I'm allways ready to be pleasantly surprised. In fact the one thing they appear to have learned from the Sombre debacle is that trying to defend their actions only makes them look worse. ;)

[Gandalf Parker]

Yes I guess you are correct. The owners specifically did not say they were going to change what they want here.
And you are correct that the offer to pass on suggestions has never affected the flow of "opinions" here. Not if offered as a direct feed to mods, or staff, or devs, or authors, or admins. Thank you for reminding me of that. I now return you to your regularly scheduled activities.

* Note that:
The offer still stands. Others can take note that I specifically mentioned anyone could make use of email or PM as an alternative method of making a suggestion rather than posting to this thread.

[LDiCesare]

Just saw Calahan's ban.
That's even more retarded than Sombre's ban.

[Mozkito]

I don't post often but I've lurked for a long time and... I've seen things. /sigh
I always liked Calahan. :(