08-31-2007, 10:44 AM | #81 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
Not sure I agree, but in any case, note the
title of the thread. Deletion is necessarily relevant in a thread that discusses it. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 10:52 AM | #82 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
I strongly disagree.
You make assumptions in your post that don't really bear that much scrutiny. You assume, for example, what the policy will be despite admitting to not being privy to its (ongoing) development. I think I'll let that stuff lie. What I will say is that your comparing me to a customer escorted out of a store is not fair. A security problem or a public disturbance is very different from a community member who is reasonably arguing in a context that is specifically for that. This is a forum. It's for discussion. That's what I'm doing. I am not hurting anyone with my words. I am attempting to contribute. You don't see that. Ok. But it is true. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 11:08 AM | #83 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Socialist States of America
Home MUD: SmaugMuds.org
Home MUD: Arthmoor MUD Hosting
Posts: 249
|
Re: Moderation
The forum is for discussion. Not for disrespectful behavior, making demands of the moderators, and making a general ass of oneself. Your words don't need to be hurtful to anyone. You don't need to be offensive, crude, rude, belligerent, sarcastic, witty, nice, a suckup, miss congeniality, or even just a regular guy. If the mods decide you're misbehaving, then that's pretty much it. They set policy. They enforce it however they see fit.
Just like being disruptive and unruly in a retail establishment. You will get kicked out eventually if you continue to be rude and abusive to the employees. If enough of them complain to management then management will take action to remove you. Penalties in "the real world" can result in being charged with disturbing the peace, disorderly conduct, and trespassing. It might even get you civil penalties if the store sues to recover costs incurred in calling the cops. So I figure getting a few posts deleted and a warning or two that you're on "thin ice" is getting off easy, but I dare suggest that thin ice won't hold you up forever. |
08-31-2007, 11:15 AM | #84 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
Okay. I get it.
I don't think I've been disrespectful, an ass, etc, etc, and so on as you list. But evidently I can't sufficiently justify my behavior to you, so I guess I'll stop trying. I continue to find your comparison to retail establishments fallacious, but whatever. You're locked into it. Enjoy it. I suspect that's what the "thin" part means, yep. As I've said before, I'm not trying to get banned. I'm saying the things I say because I think they are true. Perhaps I will get banned (note the picture I created for the occasion). But there's no shame in losing a fight if the fight was right. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 11:22 AM | #85 |
Legend
Join Date: Aug 2007
Name: NewWorlds
Home MUD: New Worlds
Posts: 1,425
|
Re: Moderation
There are numerous styles and methods of posting. Some are sarcasm and some are outright invitations to argument. I think if you have many people complaining about your "style" or you find your posts being deleted or moderated, it might be a time to change tact or at least modify it slightly.
Offense is subjective. Some may be offended by racial slur, others by vulgarity, others by personal insults, and still others by third party insults. Expecting the moderators to accept your style is not part of these forums as far as I can tell, if your style breaks the rules. The trouble arrises when someone plays on the grey area of the rules. Tiptoe'ing around the cutting edge and every so often stepping over the line, but then retreating so as not to get moderators on them. Just because you "feel" you are not acting agressive or offensive, doesn't mean others do not. The most obvious way to get a moderator to bring their finger near the delete button, is to direct something personal and agressive to another member. |
08-31-2007, 11:30 AM | #86 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
My style is utterly conventional and while I am a forceful
advocate, I am neither trying to be offensive, nor do I think I am being so. I am also not breaking rules, and I am not playing games with them. You see me standing right up to what I think is wrong. Tiptoeing is not what I'm doing. I am a standard-issue forceful advocate. Blunting my approach to discussion blunts my participation. If this site is going to be about fuzzy pillows and rounded edges, and forceful advocacy is not permitted, then you can probably look forward to my ejection. In my opinion that would be a grave sign indeed. But since I can be wrong, maybe my ejection will actually make the sun shine brighter and and the grey skies blue. Just strap in and we'll find out. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 11:32 AM | #87 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Socialist States of America
Home MUD: SmaugMuds.org
Home MUD: Arthmoor MUD Hosting
Posts: 249
|
Re: Moderation
And all I'm saying is that continuing to do so when it's been clearly pointed out as being against policy is exactly what will get you banned. You think it's a just cause, that's fine. Obviously nobody is going to be able to convince you that it's not.
The retail comparison is perfectly valid. A store is a private entity and can refuse service to a customer for any reason they see fit, even if the customer thinks it's wrong. A website such as TMS is also a private entity who can refuse service to a member for any reason they see fit, even if that member thinks it's wrong. I don't see how that's an invalid comparison. |
08-31-2007, 11:36 AM | #88 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Name: Chris
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Posts: 358
|
Re: Moderation
Taken from the rules posted by Lasher a couple of days ago:
Scandums post contravened the rule about personal attacks. Cratylus' post contravened the rule about not responding to posts that contravene the rules (confused yet?). Rather than delete the post, I snipped the reference to the deleted post and left the opinion about a flame board as I felt this stood on its own as a viable contribution to this thread. If you are still unfamiliar with the new rules posted by Lasher, you can view them . |
08-31-2007, 11:40 AM | #89 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Socialist States of America
Home MUD: SmaugMuds.org
Home MUD: Arthmoor MUD Hosting
Posts: 249
|
Re: Moderation
There is a very fine difference between being a forceful advocate for your position, and being an annoying jerk while advocating your position. I concede it's an entirely subjective distinction and have never claimed it wasn't but that's really beside the point. Continuing to rail against it when the mods are patiently trying to give you the hint isn't going to serve any other purpose but to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that you're being a jerk.
|
08-31-2007, 11:42 AM | #90 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
The discussion is about deletion. The deletion in this discussion was relevant
to the discussion of deletion. Discussing it did not break continuity. Deleting my statement about it did disrupt continuity. If we keep going on like this, we're going to wind up dividing by zero. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 11:43 AM | #91 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
Are you trying to get your post deleted so you
can then say you support the deletion? -Crat |
08-31-2007, 11:46 AM | #92 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Socialist States of America
Home MUD: SmaugMuds.org
Home MUD: Arthmoor MUD Hosting
Posts: 249
|
Re: Moderation
No, but if my post gets deleted you won't see me railing on about it for 4 pages either. I'll accept the decision and move on. Which is basically what the mods have been trying to tell you all along.
|
08-31-2007, 12:37 PM | #93 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
It's unfortunate that so much of this thread
seems to be about how objectionable I personally am, because that's not the point. And yet this seems to be the thing that is most interesting to folks apparently opposed to my position. Let me try to clarify a couple of things. 1 I think moderation is a necessary part of forums. 2 I think rules are good. 3 I think discussion of rules is good. 4 I think that discussion of the application of rules is good. Now, if you don't think there is benefit to be gained from discussing the rules or their application, then perhaps you could, you know, not discuss them with me, rather than tell me to shut up. On the other hand, I think there is value in such discussions, and that is what I am attempting to do here. In particular, I think that while the rules that govern moderation are not themselves objectionable, the application of moderation has been immoderate. While making this point, I keep getting my on-point, non-flamatory, rules-compliant posts deleted or edited, which provides me further evidence that my opinion is correct. In the meantime, since the posts are gone, I am unable to provide others the evidence that my posts are righteous. Which provides me with further motivation to point out the excess with which the post deletions are happening. Perhaps someone else would meekly bow their head when confronted with misapplication of authority. I don't see what there is to gain by this here. As long as authority continues to be misapplied against my reasonable statements of opinion, I will object to that misapplication. I enjoy participating on this site, I don't think it's headed in the right direction with this trigger-happy deletion, and I'm going to try to help by protesting it. If you don't like it, then for heaven's sake, just don't read it. But calling me a jerk that should shut up before security tosses him out is just not that useful. By the way, in case you're tempted to repeat it, let me head you off: the mods are in charge, they do what they want. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 12:50 PM | #94 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Socialist States of America
Home MUD: SmaugMuds.org
Home MUD: Arthmoor MUD Hosting
Posts: 249
|
Re: Moderation
You're making this as a statement of fact, when it's merely your opinion that their authority is being misapplied. That's the entire core of the argument. It's why I've tried to explain it in as many creative ways as I can, and have even been blunt about doing so at times. Calling the moderation activity "trigger happy deletion" is only furthering your problems because it continues to present the attitude of open defiance and a desire for anarchy, despite you're previous statements in the very same post claiming to support moderation as a necessary activity.
I'm not sure how elese to explain this to you without getting a post deleted in the process, but surely you can see how there's confusion when trying to understand what your real position on the issue is? |
08-31-2007, 12:56 PM | #95 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
I form my statements to indicate how I see things, and
that is how I see them. Someone opposed can then examine them for validity and attempt to refute them. That's debate. Heh, no, actually, I don't see that, so maybe this is where we can just agree that we disagree. I don't see how much clearer I could make it. What I said, I meant. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 01:00 PM | #96 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Socialist States of America
Home MUD: SmaugMuds.org
Home MUD: Arthmoor MUD Hosting
Posts: 249
|
Re: Moderation
Ok, then if you'll indulge me in one last (futile?) attempt to make the point clear, here's how I'm interpreting your position:
Moderation is a necessary activity. Rules are a necessary thing. Application of the rules is a necessary thing. Until they're applied to me, and then I'm going to yell, scream, cry, complain, stomp my feet, make an ass of myself, and be a general annoyance - to the point where I'm threatened with banishment, and call it discussion of the application of the rules. I can't make it any clearer than this without then violating the rules myself. |
08-31-2007, 01:02 PM | #97 |
Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,305
|
Re: Moderation
No, I'm explaining that freedom means that it's Lasher's party. What he thinks is up to him, but it's his forum.
That'd be absolutely fine if I had appointed you to do that job. Just like the moderators have been appointed to do our jobs. Here is a Wikipedia link to help explain it: I have no idea what TIC is. --matt |
08-31-2007, 01:13 PM | #98 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
Then let me try one more time too.
It is not about the rules being applied at all. It is about me disagreeing with the way they are applied. I understand that to you it looks like I'm being a big baby just because the bad thing is happening to me. I'm sorry you think so poorly of me. But this is not what I'm doing here. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 01:15 PM | #99 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 153
|
Re: Moderation
It's a joke. He's referring to The Mud Connector as The IRE Connector.
You might have missed it, but there was some controversy there a while back because IRE muds always show up at the top of any search. -Crat |
08-31-2007, 01:49 PM | #100 |
Administrator
Join Date: May 2005
Name: Derek
Location: Orlando
Posts: 357
|
Re: Moderation
Therein lies the problem. You see it as a fight. You had a post deleted in a thread where you stated the thread had moved onto a tangent. The thread was split off into that tangent. The post was out of place in the old thread and out of place in the new thread, it no longer 'fit' anywhere. You are arguing for arguings sake. Whenever I encounter someone who is just outright determined to be a victim I tend to oblige them early on and the group/game/team goes back to their daily business. Good faith makes all the difference. Someone who needs (and will respond to) some guidance but means well, or someone who doesn't know any better, is an entirely different situation. Putting the phrase 'good faith' in every other post doesn't make it true. I do not believe you are here to help promote and discuss MUDs which is the goal of this forum. Obviously this is a subjective judgement and I may be wrong, but it is made. Thankfully, I know you understand as this is a rule from your own forum: It's also reassuring to see that underneath it all you do understand the dilemma we're in when someone is sucking up your time on their own agenda. Another quote from your own rules: Having read this reinforces my belief that you know exactly what you're doing here, although I can only make wild guesses as to why. Is this a flame? It could be. Should this be in a PM? Absolutely. It is addressed to someone who has asked that they be dealt with in public rather than privately. Instead of having a public interpretation of what was said make it back to some post or other, you can see the exact words here. Maybe I should have posted nothing more than "Cratylus is no longer a member" but this is a new situation with a new team and requires elaboration. If nothing else, in a thread about moderation it is a glimpse into the thoughts of the administrator so that others can make a better informed decision on whether or not they want to take part in these forums. If others have concerns about what this means for your own status on TMS feel free to post them or PM me, but please refrain from piling on with boos and cheers unless they add something to the discussion. |