Discussion Thread related to Multipolarity IOT

[Dem Taqat]

Dem, you do know we have this smiley?:

But that one doesnt make me laugh...
DT

 

[SamSniped]

Bored, so translated into Latin:
Res principii declaro auxilium mei clamori communi in Foro Imperii Offtopici hic in Civilizatione Assectatoribus Centro, de consiliis miseris moderatorum et eis tyrranidibus evidentibus. Culpa hominum omnium, qui putant in civitatibus naturalibus, est recusare ubi spectant aut audiunt peccationem ponderosam, facto uni alio, atque non neglegeo culpam, quam cecidit ad me et omnia Imperii Offtopici.

Literal:
A matter of principle, I declare my support for the general strike in the forum of Imperium Offtopicum here in Civilization Followers Center, because of poor decisions by moderators and their apparent tyranny. The responsibility of all men who believe in natural rights is to object when they see or hear significant wrongdoing, when another does to one, and I will not neglect the responsibility, which fell to me and all of Imperium Offtopicum.

Original:
As a matter of principle I do hereby declare my support for the General Strike in the IOT forums here on CFC due to some poor moderator decisions and their apparent tyranny. The responsibility of any human being that believes in natural rights is to raise objection when they witness or hear of a significant wrong done to one by another, and I shall not spurn that responsibility that has henceforth fallen to me and all other IOTers.

 

[bestrfcplayer]

Hell, after reading some of this, I say that Bird locks the IOT forum for a few days to make you all realize that this is a really, really stupid thing that's being fought over.

 

[Sonereal]

Judging by the other thread, you have no idea what is going on anyway.

 

[Patriotic_Fool]

Hell, after reading some of this, I say that Bird locks the IOT forum for a few days to make you all realize that this is a really, really stupid thing that's being fought over.

I agree. Stop being babies. Stop whining about it.

He's the mod, he has the backing of the CFC Crew, those who made this forum in the first place. He wouldn't have gotten his position if he wasn't responsible.

I think regardless of whether you guys think his decision is correct, it doesn't matter. He's the mod, he can lock, unlock, and delete threads as he pleases. I see alot of people acting like they are entitled to have this forum being ran their way. That's unacceptable.

A few in the IOT community may not make decisions regarding the entire community. Just because 1/4 or 1/3 of the IOTers are going "on strike" does not mean they should be listened to.

You guys are ruining these forums for the non-protesting majority, and its immature, rude, and just plain stupid.

 

[Sonereal]

You're free to go play other games, now aren't you? Your continuous posting in this thread keeps it at the top, for which we thank you.

Very much.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

Patriotic, have you ever GM'd an IOT, I think not, It is our sub forum, we are the Alpha, we are the Omega, we create the games, and we wish to have a certain power over them.
You do realize we can relocate to another community in like 24 hours.

 

[bestrfcplayer]

Can't we just come to this compromise: The GMs can control their game, the mods keep tabs on the GM and players to make sure their not breaking any rules. Crisis over.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

That seems fair enough.

 

[Lighthearter]

BRFC, that's what I've been proposing. The mods aren't having it.

-L

 

[filli_noctus]

Really, there's been practically zero mod input to this thread which I suspect indicates it's being discussed in the super-secret forum.
If I may interject with a suggestion, I recommend all debate be tabled until the staff make known what's going on. If not I fear this will only end badly.
By badly I mean a chunk of the community leaving for Tani's forum, another chunk going full time NESer and the rest hanging round as IOT gets folded back into Forum Games.

 

[Patriotic_Fool]

Really, there's been practically zero mod input to this thread which I suspect indicates it's being discussed in the super-secret forum.
If I may interject with a suggestion, I recommend all debate be tabled until the staff make known what's going on. If not I fear this will only end badly.
By badly I mean a chunk of the community leaving for Tani's forum, another chunk going full time NESer and the rest hanging round as IOT gets folded back into Forum Games.

I concur, all this garbage is only going to end in death, raping, and pillaging.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Actually an idea just hit me.

A problem I encountered in MP2 was there was no clear boundaries between GM, sub-GM, player, and mechanical authority.

As such, I suggest the following idea to Birdjaguar:

There should be a topic - locked and stickied, I presume - that clearly demarcates where moderator and GM authority lie. While it's been established that bans are not allowed with moderator permission, what about penalties? What classes as metagaming? At which point can a GM be relaxed yet not be passively endorsing breaking of the rules? At what point is a player engaging in OOC disputes and not IC ones?

Just a few of the questions that could be remedied in a single document, that could be modified as gray areas arise.

This will also save Birdjaguar time as well; a lot of problems could probably be resolved simply by looking at this set of rules, rather than GMs continually needing to ask for guidance.

We think alike. Such a thread will be forthcoming once we have worked our way through this discussion.

@Aleidhoo: This isn't about silly vs. serious nations in IOT anymore. It currently is a "fight" undertaken by several GM's to remain the supreme rulers if it comes to their IOTs instead of a moderator

Point of fact: GMs are not supreme, but they can run their games as they please within the bounds of the rules of CFC and discretion of the moderators. Moderators have the responsibility and ability to open and close threads and edit posts as they deem necessary to support the goals of CFC. We can and do delete threads and posts that are not, in our opinion, in the best interest of the site. In addition, we have the ability to infract or ban members who we feel have violated those rules. Those are the facts and you cannot change them.

How those responsibilities and powers are implemented is a whole other issue. Each CFC mod has his/her own way of using their mod powers. In forums that are moderated by multiple mods, like OT or Civ5, mods discuss and come to consensus on how to respond to reported posts and how to address the ongoing problems of a forum. Many forums just have a single mod to oversee what goes on and respond to reported posts. And while I do help out in OT, my primary forums are NESing an IOT. My modding style is pretty loose and I don't like to infract; I'd rather ban players for 3 to 7 days. In general, I'd rather point out the failure of a post and ask you to stop and have you then actually stop. I do have pet peeves:

1. Preventing members from joining games or creating an environment that discourages them from participating
2. Posting personal animosity and dislike of particular members; hateful or mean spirited attacks against other members, especially if they are meant to discourage them from participating in CFC

If you cannot keep these out of your posts, I have no problem responding harshly. I will ask you to stop and maybe remove your post. Your best response is to do so.

So where does that leave us? Well, out side of the games it is pretty clear all CFC rules apply and will be enforced by the moderating staff. The question, of course, is about in game. I am quite happy to let GMs run their games as they see fit unless game actions cross the lines outlined above. If players want to gang up and crush a player, they can. But, if every time a player joins, he is ganged up upon and crushed, then I will step in. As i have said several times before, if a GM thinks a player will be a problem in a game, they just have to let me know who, why and how the bad behavior will be exhibited. I will then speak to the player before the game begins and/or monitor posts during the game. If that player is disruptive, I will allow him to be kicked from the game by the GM.

Generally, I do not read through the game threads, I respond to reported posts; that is what got this whole episode started. Several people felt that someone was being mistreated and reported 4-5 posts posts. I read through the thread from the beginning and agreed.

Exactly. A moderator should not be allowed to lock a thread because he disagrees with an embargo. He shouldn't be allowed to go back through player orders and edit them either. If the moderation feel that they're ultimately the ones in charge of the games, then they should run them.

We are ultimately in charge, but we don't want nor have to run the games.

The people making this only about silly versus seriousness are completely missing the point. The problem isn't that the thread was locked. The problem is that the thread was locked in a way that went over the GM's head and, after the lock, had the moderator go through and edit orders. At no point did TF have a say in the thread being locked, and the moderator intervened in the way that pretty much said "lololo this is Sonereal's fault, he gonna have to beg for forgiveness for me to unlock it".

Moderators do not need a GMs permission to lock or unlock a game or other thread.

How much has moderators contribute to these games? Notice, we had none of these problems before we had a moderator thrown at us. The mechanics and history of this genre have been forged and refined by the Game Moderators, not the Board Moderators. If you remove the Moderator from the administration of a game, you lose little. Player being an asshat? Kick them. He keeps complaining in thread? Ignore him or report as spam. The moderator doesn't have to be proactive. You remove the Game Moderator from the administration of a game, you lose the game. No two ways around that.

Yes I do remember how in the past IOT was a beacon of happiness and fair play without rancor or personal animosity.

A moderator was "thrown at you" because there were so many problems being reported. I know that the key GMs miss their former absolute power and don't want an outsider interfering with how they do things. I'm sorry, but your treatment of those you don't like drew staff attention and you are stuck with direct moderator oversight.

So, it goes back to the "you don't have an IOT without a game moderator" because it is the game moderators who improve and push the game. Not the board moderators, who do nothing but lock and edit player orders they don't like.

Rhetorically strong, but grossly inaccurate and an over simplification of the past months that I have been the IOT moderator.

 

[Osmowstroyer]

So, what is this, a debate? Or a competition about "he who trolls more, wins".

 

[Mosher]

For the most part, IOT was stable and happy (relatively). Any problems or discrimination against players came from said players disrupting games and ultimately lowering the enjoyment of those games... not because we personally disliked them.

 

[Sonereal]

A moderator was "thrown at you" because there were so many problems being reported. I know that the key GMs miss their former absolute power and don't want an outsider interfering with how they do things. I'm sorry, but your treatment of those you don't like drew staff attention and you are stuck with direct moderator oversight.

Rhetorically strong, but grossly inaccurate and an over simplification of the past months that I have been the IOT moderator.

It isn't my fault they refused to be hammered to fit the slots.

Notice that I'm not the only person running IOTs. After all, if individuals do not like my GM style, they are usually very much free to go play a different game.

And by "key GMs", do you mean "damn near all?" Because every GM of an action IOT has approved of what we're talking about. If this was just a sole, isolated thing, then why has the entire sub-forum ground to a halt?

The inciting incident was clearly your overstepping in, locking of, and editing in MP3's sign-up.

Again, if people don't like it, they are free to start their own IOTs, aren't they? That must be why so many people are exploiting the sudden lull in non-striking activity to post the games they've had on the backb-oh, sorry. That isn't happening it seems.

Yes I do remember how in the past IOT was a beacon of happiness and fair play without rancor or personal animosity.

It built character. If you were in the outs, you should take steps to find out why you're in the outs and readjust. True, we occasionally have someone who comes that get off on the wrong foot. Christos was on the wrong foot for a while, but we love the guy how. Kiwitt was on the wrong foot for a wee bit, but we loved his GMing of IB and his general attitude now and everyone considers him a welcomed addition to the roster.

If anything, I blame the moderation for weakening the spirit of IOT with their silly notions of "fair play" and "no meta". Anyone who has GM'd a game will tell you that these games will never truly be a 100% "fair". Metagaming will always exist. Backroom deals will always exist, so why fight it?

The new players who rose up in this atmosphere should almost feel proud of being able to say they either leapt the wall or crawled over it after hitting it a few times. The only players you are helping are the players too stupid, too weak, too unwanted to rethink their strategy of getting past the wall. The only way is over, but we got some that are trying to dig under, go around, and go through.

And none of those are going to work. But, with the right driving spirit that breeds fierce competition, they can be helped over the wall once they take appropriate measures.

And if they don't notice the cues? Well, they will keep hitting the wall I suppose.

 

[Lighthearter]

Sonereal is right. I would elaborate, but he's said anything I could think of.

-L

 

[Birdjaguar]

It isn't my fault they refused to be hammered to fit the slots.

Notice that I'm not the only person running IOTs. After all, if individuals do not like my GM style, they are usually very much free to go play a different game.

And by "key GMs", do you mean "damn near all?" Because every GM of an action IOT has approved of what we're talking about. If this was just a sole, isolated thing, then why has the entire sub-forum ground to a halt?

The inciting incident was clearly your overstepping in, locking of, and editing in MP3's sign-up.

Again, if people don't like it, they are free to start their own IOTs, aren't they? That must be why so many people are exploiting the sudden lull in non-striking activity to post the games they've had on the backb-oh, sorry. That isn't happening it seems.

It is of no concern to me whether or not anyone posts or starts new games. If you and the other IOTers stop playing, it doesn't matter to me. You are all big boys and will do what you want. A strike is not something I need to respond to. Mean spirited posts, yes; strikes, no. If you "pick up your marbles" and take your games elsewhere, no one at CFC is going to try and stop you.

If you are serious about bringing IOT games to a halt, I can help. Just tell me which ones to lock. Any GM can have their game locked anytime simply by asking. I will also unlock it when asked.

It built character. If you were in the outs, you should take steps to find out why you're in the outs and readjust. True, we occasionally have someone who comes that get off on the wrong foot. Christos was on the wrong foot for a while, but we love the guy how. Kiwitt was on the wrong foot for a wee bit, but we loved his GMing of IB and his general attitude now and everyone considers him a welcomed addition to the roster.

If anything, I blame the moderation for weakening the spirit of IOT with their silly notions of "fair play" and "no meta". Anyone who has GM'd a game will tell you that these games will never truly be a 100% "fair". Metagaming will always exist. Backroom deals will always exist, so why fight it?

The new players who rose up in this atmosphere should almost feel proud of being able to say they either leapt the wall or crawled over it after hitting it a few times. The only players you are helping are the players too stupid, too weak, too unwanted to rethink their strategy of getting past the wall. The only way is over, but we got some that are trying to dig under, go around, and go through.

And none of those are going to work. But, with the right driving spirit that breeds fierce competition, they can be helped over the wall once they take appropriate measures.

And if they don't notice the cues? Well, they will keep hitting the wall I suppose.

It is nice to see that you are so open to new participants.

 

[Lighthearter]

As long as new participants play by the community's rules, we're open to them. In fact, I think CFC has a similar stance.

-L

 

[Mosher]

I can safely say there has never been a player, beyond one example of an extremely inflammatory person who joined IOT: Valkyrie, who has been universally disliked by the community and excluded from games, at least that I know of (Patriotic has certainly toed the line with some of the stuff in MP2 and Christos has until recently been a bit of a wild card).