Mods: be more specific!!
- Thread starter Pellaken
- Start date
Pellaken
The one and only.
am I really THAT had to understand?
what I MENT was that rules should be made specific. AKA, I knew that posts about HOW MANY POSTS YOU DID slash DID NOT HAVE were illigal, but I did not know that posts about simple postcount were illigal as well. I am saying we need more specific and clear cut rules.
what I MENT was that rules should be made specific. AKA, I knew that posts about HOW MANY POSTS YOU DID slash DID NOT HAVE were illigal, but I did not know that posts about simple postcount were illigal as well. I am saying we need more specific and clear cut rules.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2000
- Messages
- 12,615
Not really, because the rules are written somewhere (i.e. posts), but are not listed on the forum rules page.
SlowThinker
Prince
I agree there should be more precise banning rules written on the site: what acts are forbidden, what is a ban, the fact that you needn't to be warned before the ban etc..
I was banned due to posting a way how to remove the password from the .mp files. I don't feel offended at all, but I think some kind of people could feel hurt in similar situations. The problem is that I didn't violate any "general rules", but a rule that was never said in the thread, only intuitively thought by one of the mods (Sun Tzu).
The ban occured and the following debate started in Civ2 - PBEM Games > BLACKLIST of PBEM Dropouts thread:
Starlifter started a detailed analysis in this post: post #67. My suggestions are written in this post: post #84
Edit:
it looks the links to posts dont work perfectly...
I was banned due to posting a way how to remove the password from the .mp files. I don't feel offended at all, but I think some kind of people could feel hurt in similar situations. The problem is that I didn't violate any "general rules", but a rule that was never said in the thread, only intuitively thought by one of the mods (Sun Tzu).
The ban occured and the following debate started in Civ2 - PBEM Games > BLACKLIST of PBEM Dropouts thread:
Starlifter started a detailed analysis in this post: post #67. My suggestions are written in this post: post #84
Edit:
it looks the links to posts dont work perfectly...
Pellaken
The one and only.
yes, any banworthy rule should be written. my point exactley
I don't completely agree with my esteemed colleague. I try to give a reason why people are banned so as to not promote a sense of unfair banning. Now if in the thread the banee was warned about this behavoir or a blanket warning was given out already, I feel no need to explain in detail and will just state quickly why that person is banned. I have a life also and don't want all my free time sucked up.The only thing I have been dinged with lately is for calling a person that was banned an ass..or something like that.
pellaken, your name would be listed in the Banning Rules, this isn't a democracy i mean really, why do you try to change the site rules? is it going to change the minds of stupid suicidals muslims in Israel? or whatever....no its not so i suggest quiting crying about the rules and us mods and just be a friggin poster...
SlowThinker
Prince
I don't suggest that you explain every ban. I suggest to place something like
Don't expect mods will always explain you why you are banned, please comprehend their time may be limited...
somewhere on the site .
and also:Mods don't vote if you should be banned: If one of the mods thinks you do something good but another one dislikes what you do and thinks you shall be banned then you may be banned.
starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
Since this has spilled into the Site Feedback Forum, I'll make a post on an ongoing, unresolved issue.
All Civilization players may feel free to examine the issues and register their vote on the question "Should discussion of PBEM cheating be allowed? "
It is incredible that this is even an issue... Civ is just a game, and attempts to muzzle certain discussions about Civ strategy, methods, techniques, and even what some (but not all) call cheats, is just insane.
But yet, there are definitely super-secret, unpublished, unknown, unposted landmines that can get certain players summarily banned with no warning (the big ban -- 7 days), yet other Civ 2 players are allowed to post and leave posted other cheats that are 100% acknowledged to be cheats.
The torch of knowledge does not burn bright in the PBEM world... some those that know how to cheat do not want to allow others to discuss it, and actually state that the newbies cannot be trusted with the same knowledge tht they have because they would not be abe to restrain themselves from cheating if they knew about it. Some people actually support banning selected players by unequally applied standards.
It was interesting to learn that SunTzu, somone whom I've had only respect for, actually stated he sometimes bans "peasants" because he's in a bad mood.
Like Ming said (and SunTzu said he agreed with),
Further, no one even agrees on what a cheat is, and what a technique is. Much less what the "rules" are.
Further, another Mod of the PBEM forum (Smash) has posted that he opposes both suppression of discussion (including "cheat" methods), and the 7-day summary ban of Slow Thinker for participating in a discussion of Civ 2 cheats (the ban is over and done with now).
So what is the deal? No rules, no guidelines, no rational explanation.
I would like Thunderfall to carefully read, not skim, the thread. Many people in it have various states of confusion, and almost all have indicated a need for further clarification. I've posted a lot, and taken time to do the research and post it.... but cannot figure out what the deal is over there.
Thanks in advance.
The Thread.
Here are the 12 basic questions (#3, 8, 12 are now answered) -- they potentially affect all CFC memebers that post in Civ Forums:
EDIT: Updated the status of the 12 questions
.
All Civilization players may feel free to examine the issues and register their vote on the question "Should discussion of PBEM cheating be allowed? "
It is incredible that this is even an issue... Civ is just a game, and attempts to muzzle certain discussions about Civ strategy, methods, techniques, and even what some (but not all) call cheats, is just insane.
But yet, there are definitely super-secret, unpublished, unknown, unposted landmines that can get certain players summarily banned with no warning (the big ban -- 7 days), yet other Civ 2 players are allowed to post and leave posted other cheats that are 100% acknowledged to be cheats.
The torch of knowledge does not burn bright in the PBEM world... some those that know how to cheat do not want to allow others to discuss it, and actually state that the newbies cannot be trusted with the same knowledge tht they have because they would not be abe to restrain themselves from cheating if they knew about it. Some people actually support banning selected players by unequally applied standards.
It was interesting to learn that SunTzu, somone whom I've had only respect for, actually stated he sometimes bans "peasants" because he's in a bad mood.
Like Ming said (and SunTzu said he agreed with),
Further, no one even agrees on what a cheat is, and what a technique is. Much less what the "rules" are.
Further, another Mod of the PBEM forum (Smash) has posted that he opposes both suppression of discussion (including "cheat" methods), and the 7-day summary ban of Slow Thinker for participating in a discussion of Civ 2 cheats (the ban is over and done with now).
So what is the deal? No rules, no guidelines, no rational explanation.
I would like Thunderfall to carefully read, not skim, the thread. Many people in it have various states of confusion, and almost all have indicated a need for further clarification. I've posted a lot, and taken time to do the research and post it.... but cannot figure out what the deal is over there.
Thanks in advance.
The Thread.
Here are the 12 basic questions (#3, 8, 12 are now answered) -- they potentially affect all CFC memebers that post in Civ Forums:
EDIT: Updated the status of the 12 questions
.starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
Well, I see the 2 threads of discussion at the PBEM Forum are closed. I'm not sure what the deal is now. 
I sure do dislike confusion and secret rules, and I'm now of the opinion that TF should just take half an hour and read everyone's input in the now-closed threads....
Here is the "end" of the one that was last going:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=353759#post353759
I sure do dislike confusion and secret rules, and I'm now of the opinion that TF should just take half an hour and read everyone's input in the now-closed threads....
Here is the "end" of the one that was last going:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=353759#post353759
SlowThinker
Prince
starlifter, I welcome SunTzu takes it with humor
. Joking means he views "the case" from above. But you should add some more serious explanation too, Sun Tzu, and not to take up a pose of a dead fish
. At least it would be polite if you take in consideration the amount of time that starlifter put in his posting although he is not a PBEM player. unfortunately Smash don't view it from above, he closed threads : perplexed: . What are you afraid from, Smash? I don't see any problem in the debate...
Pellaken
The one and only.
you guyes lack 100% of the understanding of my point, so here's an example:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=353921#post353921
Smash isn't afraid of anything (well not on this subject)...you have him mistaken. Maybe asking him why he closed it without insinuating a lacking of backbone would be better whay of addressing this?Originally posted by SlowThinker
starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
I'm guessing that since the bulk of the discussion has been made, that he just does not want it to continue at PBEM because the questions and issues were not getting answered in that Forum.
He's probably right, but I was hopeful that the basic issues would have been answered by SunTzu early on and it would be done with by now. It is a matter of principle and having a good and fair atmosphere in PBEM.
When I first visited PBEM last week, I though it might be a fun thing to do. With the undercurrents and bizzarre stuff going on over there, I now think it is a dangerous place for people to post freely and honestly. I have never seen discussions of Civ 2 strategy met with summary major bans before.
One of the PBEM posters said their PBEM world was having problems with people, even possibly their best players, cheating, and that they have recently been wringing their hands.
But that is no excuse for strange and unexplained censorship of some posters, like you, while igoring the same in others. Almost everyone over there, even Case, has called for the Mods to write some rules down.
Right now, one mod is selectively banning people for doing what the other mod says is a "good" thing.
So it is a strange strange place over there. Waht concerns me on top of that, is the 12 questions I have posted. Those affect all players at CFC, even in Civ 3. Very fundamental issues need resolving pronto, IMHO.
Despite what SunTzu said about banning people just because he's in a bad mood, I'm still going to give him the benefit of the doubt, even though he said he didn't want to take the time to explain what was going on (which belies his statement that he supports Ming's post "100%" , here
And at this point, I now agree with one of the mods that it is for Thunderfall to take some time and solve things. What a pity, as he's a busy person already, and none of this crap even need be an issue to begin with!!
I just don't understand.....
PS, Even though I was not directly involved in that stuff, private notes from PBEM players support these questions, but I think some are sort of uneasy to raise these questions themselves. That's why I've spent so much time trying to sort it out. That atmosphere over there is unhealthy, when you can't even talk about a silly game without secrets and bans infesting the place. Honestly, to me, if I was shafted or insulted like some in PBEM have been, I'd probably pack my bags. I can't tell about the internal politics over there, but maybe that's what some actually want to happen. Which is stupid.
He's probably right, but I was hopeful that the basic issues would have been answered by SunTzu early on and it would be done with by now. It is a matter of principle and having a good and fair atmosphere in PBEM.
When I first visited PBEM last week, I though it might be a fun thing to do. With the undercurrents and bizzarre stuff going on over there, I now think it is a dangerous place for people to post freely and honestly. I have never seen discussions of Civ 2 strategy met with summary major bans before.
One of the PBEM posters said their PBEM world was having problems with people, even possibly their best players, cheating, and that they have recently been wringing their hands.
But that is no excuse for strange and unexplained censorship of some posters, like you, while igoring the same in others. Almost everyone over there, even Case, has called for the Mods to write some rules down.
Right now, one mod is selectively banning people for doing what the other mod says is a "good" thing.
So it is a strange strange place over there. Waht concerns me on top of that, is the 12 questions I have posted. Those affect all players at CFC, even in Civ 3. Very fundamental issues need resolving pronto, IMHO.
Despite what SunTzu said about banning people just because he's in a bad mood, I'm still going to give him the benefit of the doubt, even though he said he didn't want to take the time to explain what was going on (which belies his statement that he supports Ming's post "100%" , here
And at this point, I now agree with one of the mods that it is for Thunderfall to take some time and solve things. What a pity, as he's a busy person already, and none of this crap even need be an issue to begin with!!
I just don't understand.....
PS, Even though I was not directly involved in that stuff, private notes from PBEM players support these questions, but I think some are sort of uneasy to raise these questions themselves. That's why I've spent so much time trying to sort it out. That atmosphere over there is unhealthy, when you can't even talk about a silly game without secrets and bans infesting the place. Honestly, to me, if I was shafted or insulted like some in PBEM have been, I'd probably pack my bags. I can't tell about the internal politics over there, but maybe that's what some actually want to happen. Which is stupid.
starlifter
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2001
- Messages
- 4,210
by PH76:
I totally agree with PH76. Smash is not afraid of anything. Smash is probably caught in the middle of something that is not in his domain to solve, which is why I took his advice and PM'd Thunderfall while ago on behalf of the principle of the thing.
My belief is Smash is doing the only thing he can, and that is move the issue out of the PBEM threads since basically all that can be discussed is now discussed. The 2 threads are there for people reference, and any questions, etc. from Thunderfall or SunTzu might as well be done here instead. But Smash is doing his job, IMHO, in keeping the rest of the PBEM Forum focused on the other issues.
I totally agree with PH76. Smash is not afraid of anything. Smash is probably caught in the middle of something that is not in his domain to solve, which is why I took his advice and PM'd Thunderfall while ago on behalf of the principle of the thing.
My belief is Smash is doing the only thing he can, and that is move the issue out of the PBEM threads since basically all that can be discussed is now discussed. The 2 threads are there for people reference, and any questions, etc. from Thunderfall or SunTzu might as well be done here instead. But Smash is doing his job, IMHO, in keeping the rest of the PBEM Forum focused on the other issues.
SlowThinker
Prince
I had a feeling he was "afraid" from future course of those threads.
I think threads were closed in bad moment. The debate about the ban moved here; I had tried to bring order to the debate about posting cheats by collecting my arguments and asking other side (Case) to do the same thing. The debate could start to be constructive...
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2000
- Messages
- 12,615
The way I see this case is that Case reported SlowThinker to SunTzu and asked him to give Slowthinker a ban, SunTzu asked Slowthinker not to post cheats, SlowThinker refused and continued to post cheats, SunTzu then gave him a ban. Correct me if this is not the case... I don't have time to read thru the threads thoroughly.
A little rules clarification is necessary: I have no problem at all with people posting cheats. Someone should help me compile a complete list of known cheats and I will add it to our Civ2 Cheats section.
Anyway, let's end the debate here. There is no need to escalate this incident any further.
A little rules clarification is necessary: I have no problem at all with people posting cheats. Someone should help me compile a complete list of known cheats and I will add it to our Civ2 Cheats section.
Anyway, let's end the debate here. There is no need to escalate this incident any further.
SlowThinker
Prince
Thunderfall,
I think there are two things you should solve:
1) Banning system
I don't think this is an incident, but an example that uncovered some imperfection in the system of forums and banning system. Now nobody knows what is allowed and what is not in the PBEM forum especially (see the 12 questions that starlifter posted higher Edit: I was typing too fast, stalifter's questions are related only to cheats...). I suggest you to engage in the problem, you should keep rules clear here.
For me personally this is not a problem, I don't write to CFC very often, I can be banned often
2) 2 threads and poll where we discussed if posting ways to cheat is useful or bad are closed
I don't know if I can start a new thread or if I will be banned for that...Is talking about this problem allowed here?
Edit: After second reading of TF's post it looks it is allowed...If so I suggest to reopen these threads.
I think there are two things you should solve:
1) Banning system
I don't think this is an incident, but an example that uncovered some imperfection in the system of forums and banning system. Now nobody knows what is allowed and what is not in the PBEM forum especially (see the 12 questions that starlifter posted higher Edit: I was typing too fast, stalifter's questions are related only to cheats...). I suggest you to engage in the problem, you should keep rules clear here.For me personally this is not a problem, I don't write to CFC very often, I can be banned often
nothing of these things hapenned. But I don't think this is important. Sun Tzu explained he needn't warn before banning. But other stuff remain unexplained.
2) 2 threads and poll where we discussed if posting ways to cheat is useful or bad are closed
I don't know if I can start a new thread or if I will be banned for that...Is talking about this problem allowed here?
Edit: After second reading of TF's post it looks it is allowed...If so I suggest to reopen these threads.
SlowThinker
Prince
I posted this to the thread in question (BLACKLIST of PBEM Dropouts)
I think there should be more precise banning rules written on the site. I suggest always to warn before the ban. Otherwise some kind of people could feel hurt in similar situations and maybe leave CivFanatics.
An idea: maybe the banned or warned people should be allowed to post to the Site Feedback Forum and to defend. Any ban echo would go there.
In our case Peregrine would start a thread in the Site Feedback Forum and add a link here. Starlifter would join Peregrin's thread, I would be able to do it too. If I would like to react before Peregrin, then I would start a new thread myself and ask SunTzu to add a link here (because I wouldn't be able to do it myself).
And what about one "sticky" closed thread with special posting rules in every forum that needs it?
Is any forum user obliged to read the thread carefully before posting?
Similar threads
