Declare Your Independence: Fight the Merger with Apolyton!

[Catharsis]

Oh dear. If this isn't a joke, I'll never be able to show my face here again.

 

[Talkie_Toaster]

April fools ended about...a day ago?

 

[White Elk]

We will see. One positive benefit of this merger may be some consistent mod behaviour!!! I always preferred CFC to Apoly, but then I have grown frustrated by the inconsistent actions of CFC moderators. How can one follow rules which are so inconsistently enforced? Perhaps the merge will yeild an enviroment which promotes discussion and penalizes trolling!

 

[Symphony D.]

Only 5:23 ago EST, which is supposedly the only thing that matters in terms of forum affairs. Given that it's 0523 on the East Coast, and the night before a weekday, I don't see why people are so quick to assume anyone would bother to be on in the dead night of night to shout "April Fools!"

 

[Tee Kay]

We will see. One positive benefit of this merger may be some consistent mod behaviour!!! I always preferred CFC to Apoly, but then I have grown frustrated by the inconsistent actions of CFC moderators. How can one follow rules which are so inconsistently enforced? Perhaps the merge will yeild an enviroment which promotes discussion and penalizes trolling!

Sir, if you had had the chance to travel back to Ancient Rome, you will realise that back then in the days of Augustuses and Caesars, the forums were not a place for mere watered down discussions.

Trolling, flaming and spamming, while bad behaviours, are good in moderation. Excessive moderating takes the "f" out of "forum"

 

[White Elk]

Well despite many circumstances which back up my claim... just today I read a thread where a poster posted a graphic which told me just just kill myself. A CFC moderator posted directly after and made no mention of the rule breaking troll which had occured. Some 12 hrs ago I reported that thread and no cation has been taken and no mods have responded to my concern. The post was clearly against the rules as stated. But a mod ignored it and then posted directly after the offense. This was just the latest in a loooong string of inconsistent moderator enforcement of stated rules.

How can the rule abiders learn that which is accpeted unless they learn by action!?!

 

[White Elk]

You speak of a time taillesskangaru which does not exist today. In that time there were rules. From these rules people learned appriopriate behavior. If in Roman times an offense was ignored, then that set a precedence for others to then ignore the rule. This is what I address here now. Ignoring and inconsistent enforcement of rules which we are all held to. At times they are enforced... at other times they are ignored. How can the lawfull respect the laws when the laws are disrespected so? What good is law if not enforced consistently??

 

[Mirc]

Oh dear. If this isn't a joke, I'll never be able to show my face here again.

Don't worry.

 

[Tee Kay]

Laws can't work if they're too strict. It's the same story everywhere, forum or not.

If law enforcers police the law to the tiniest details, pursuing the tiniest infraction, people soon lose respect of the law.

 

[uat2d]

don't need to worry about, it's only a joke well done

 

[White Elk]

I hope it is just a joke. Though I did look on the bright side.

 

[White Elk]

Laws can't work if they're too strict. It's the same story everywhere, forum or not.

If law enforcers police the law to the tiniest details, pursuing the tiniest infraction, people soon lose respect of the law.

Agreed. Though it has been some 'tiny details' which have led to overhanded moderation. And then it has been some overt ignoring of rules violation which has lead to some violations remaining to be left uninforced which then naturally leads to further rules violations that would never had occured if the 'law' had been laid down (and explained) when appropriate. Why have law if the enforcement of said law does not deter further infractions? Isnt a big part of enforcing law about educating the masses so that they do not inadvertantly break the law?

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Quotes in signatures, for example?

 

[TopDog]

Grrr, wrong option. I too want to fight this. Poly sucks, their layout is so hard to read and paying for some of the stuff! Have you lost it!

Civfanatics=metallica=sellout

 

[Captain2]

not like it means much from me but, long live CFC!

 

[AAHZ]

hmph...

it appears... that i have wandered into enemy territory...

YET if you check out the 'Poly OT... some of your own have already "invaded" and scuffled with me on MY home turf..

after a glorious battle, a truce was made... We both realized how silly we were acting. You can talk a good game... but when its time for war...

...who here will REALLY be ready? I thought "I" was, until i realized what a complete twit i was becoming. This is only the beginning i am afraid...

 

[White Elk]

Quotes in signatures, for example?

???

 

[Mirc]

^ You are not allowed to have quote tags in your signature.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

I pm'd Thunderfall last night and asked him to clarify this mess once and for all, as April Fools was almost over. Within the next half hour or so he posted in the news section (the thread that's getting all the hits) and said that people were overreacting, it wouldn't be that bad, he'd have more details.

On the surface, this would indicate that it is not a joke. Of course, a cynical person would say that it was still April 1, and he was simply perpetuating the frenzy...

 

[White Elk]

^ You are not allowed to have quote tags in your signature.

What do you mean? I use the symbols " and " to bracket a fictional quote of mine. I have seen nothing of this in the rules. And no mods have made mention of this to me.

And I see that you use quate tags as well. WTH?

You must mean the [ QUOTE ] and [ /QUOTE ] tags?