The Joys of Overzealous Moderators

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally Posted by Hrum

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]

Originally Posted by 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".

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]

Originally Posted by Bat/man

... 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]

Originally Posted by 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 ^^

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]

Originally Posted by Anaconda

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]

Originally Posted by Peter Ebbesen

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]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Parker

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.