speaking of banning people . . .

[RegentBob]

i finally found this place you spoke of. but by this point i have developed the opinion that any posts deemed derogatory toward civ3, or anyone here who counts, are destined to be labeled spam, most likely criticized for being posted in the wrong forum, and promptly closed.

it has occurred to me however, that this place truly is what it claims to be. it is a forum for civ fanatics. all others need not try to fit in. it is a place for constructive criticism at worst and excessive praise preferably. it is not a place for 1st Amendment rights to be certain.

the game is good. i'm not sure if it improves on Alpha Centauri or not. obviously the graphics are improved, but the gameplay is not drastically different than previous incarnations. it definitely could be improved upon. i do not believe the game merits the general level of worship given to it here however.

all that said, i see no need to post anything in the future. it likely would be deemed off-subject, improperly posted, or somehow defamatory in content. but if anyone is still reading this, here is my suggestion to you:

there is nothing wrong with the forum rules. just be careful you are not too quick to smite the infidels.

 

[ainwood]

Can you post a link to tell us what this is in reference to?

Seeing a I don't know, I'll guess: You (or someone you know) was banned for slagging off Civ III or PTW?

AFAIK, there is no problem with people slagging off either product on this forum. What is not OK is threadjacking or spamming beliefs about either, whether you hate it or like it!

If there is a discussion about a particular unit, and you highjack that thread to prattle on about how the AI is useless, or the programming poor, or the quality control non-existant then you will be pulled-up about it. You will most probably not be banned straight away - you will get a warning first.

There are people on this forum who never post in the Civ 3 fora. They are either Civ II players, or hang out in OT. They certainly aren't civ 3 fanatics!

And another note - the Civ3 moderators deal with the most new posters who often aren't aware of the rules. As such, they are among the most tolerant moderators around, I think they do an excellent job.

 

[floppa21]

I say we ban him.

 

[Wolfe Tone]

Originally posted by floppa21
I say we ban him.

Is there anyone you don't want banned?

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

One would have to assume that a person who does not like civ, but comes to a fanatical civ site, is looking for conflict.

 

[zulu9812]

They could just be looking for an avenue to vent their frustrations. I've certainly been pissed off at Infogrames for their handling of PTW's European release, for example (still waiting, btw)

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by RegentBob
i finally found this place you spoke of. but by this point i have developed the opinion that any posts deemed derogatory toward civ3, or anyone here who counts, are destined to be labeled spam, most likely criticized for being posted in the wrong forum, and promptly closed.

it has occurred to me however, that this place truly is what it claims to be. it is a forum for civ fanatics. all others need not try to fit in. it is a place for constructive criticism at worst and excessive praise preferably. it is not a place for 1st Amendment rights to be certain. . .

Hey, it's a BUSINESS. I have no problem with that, just don't BS me. By promoting this flawed disappointing game and the buggy PTW the site gets more hits. Same goes for Apolyton, which is actually more reasonable. It's a BUSINESS - not a platform for your "free speech"! The business is promoting the game. Again, I have no problem with what is obvious to everyone. I'd do the same.

I got unjustly banned for a month; didn't even try to come back for several months; and then in a thread about a possible Civ 4 I said the best thing would be for Firaxis NOT to do it, I was promptly threatened with another month's ban. I then posted I would not comment for fear of the post being unjustifiably called "off-topic" - and I was banned for a week!

So, don't talk "free speech" on a private site. It is not relevant. Doesn't work that way. That's business.

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
One would have to assume that a person who does not like civ, but comes to a fanatical civ site, is looking for conflict.

Sort of like going into a Church and debating the existence of God.

You confirm what I said.

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

Well zouave has figured it out

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

A few quick comments:

it has occurred to me however, that this place truly is what it claims to be. it is a forum for civ fanatics. all others need not try to fit in. it is a place for constructive criticism at worst and excessive praise preferably. it is not a place for 1st Amendment rights to be certain.

A civfanatics forum for civfanatics. How ironic.

But I think if you look closely, you'll see there are far more than just civfanatics posting, in fact, we have lots of regular posters who really don't care for civ. Posting dislike for civ is ok, so long as it is in someway constructive and of course, ON TOPIC.

Can you post a link to tell us what this is in reference to?

What? and incriminate whoever he's referring to? Fat chance in a whine thread.

If you still have questions, refer to this burst of wisdom from Zouave:

So, don't talk "free speech" on a private site. It is not relevant. Doesn't work that way. That's business.

Thank you

I receive more PMs on this subject than any other. People don't understand while their post was edited or they were warned. Generally they assume it was because it was anti-Civ3. What you need to understand is I could CARE LESS about your feelings towards civ. If you post w/in the forum rules and in a relevant thread, it's ok, unfortunately most people are so eager to tell everyone how much they hate civ they feel the need to find a way to post it in every thread they see.

So NO, you cannot post "civ3 sucks" or "PTW sucks" or even a long educated post on why you don't like civ3 if it's in the wrong place.

As a good rule of thumb for those who are worried that they might be posting off topic, you won't get in trouble if the post has something to do with the thread topic. Go figure, an amazing concept to say the least

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

how about instead of whining do something constructive: like say how you would fix the game. Right a program for the game, make a unit, but stop complaining about the games. You should never expect to see a pc game as involved as civ is to not be buggy.

Note i have yet to experience a problem with PTW, aside from having dial up lag my games out, but im sure thats fixed now, havent tested it. Stop giving the mods more work to do by reading whine threads

 

[Flatlander Fox]

I have posted MANY things derogatory about Civ 3...

But then again, I play Civ 2 MP exclusively anymore.

Take heart, you are not being censored, only not heard (Like many of the naysayers).

 

[Chieftess]

Posting constructive criticism and what you did (or would like to do) to make it better is fine (that's what the Civ3 Creation & Customization forum is for), but... posting criticism in almost every thread you come into contact with (from someone you don't agree it) starts turning into trolling the entire forum. Simply coming here to complain about Civ3 is only going to create problems. Not only for the users on the forums, but new users who are coming to the forums. That is why we have to warn and ban users who constantly troll and flame.

 

[CurtSibling]

I developed a dim view of the most negative aspects of CIV3 and it's spawn, PTW.

But making critical remarks must be counterbalanced by intelligent reasons for doing so...

I have shown disrespect for CIV3 in the forums and still stick by the view that it is flawed.
But I gave reasons for saying so...Whenever I slag off something, I make sure I have a valid reason.

Not just spam-tastic bad vibes.

 

[Zouave]

All I can say is I can't even imagine the huge number of times I posted asking for this or that feature be added, or a change of something, with specifics, to improve the game. I was doing that in the years before Civ 3 was even released. But the game appeared with whacky stuff no one asked for (Culture Flipping for one), with specious history, and without things we all wanted (some of which we now finally have after four patches for Civ 3, PTW, and a patch for it).

We still don't have scenario editing as good as Civ 2. And I still want my cheat mode back. It was great for switching sides, or running a slow game several centuries quickly to see how things turn out.

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

Now there's a great example of an off-topic post.

This thread isn't, and never was, about anyone's opinion of civ3.

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by gonzo_for_civ
Now there's a great example of an off-topic post.

This thread isn't, and never was, about anyone's opinion of civ3.

Oh jeez.

FionnMcCumhall

how about instead of whining do something constructive: like say how you would fix the game. Right a program for the game, make a unit, but stop complaining about the games. You should never expect to see a pc game as involved as civ is to not be buggy.

Note i have yet to experience a problem with PTW, aside from having dial up lag my games out, but im sure thats fixed now, havent tested it. Stop giving the mods more work to do by reading whine threads

And that was so different from mine?? I just responded to what he was saying.

I am posting this here as this is the Site Feedback section. Otherwise I'd PM.

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

I was pointing out that your post as it is an example of what was discussed as innapropriate earlier in this thread. I won't say I disagree with you on all points but it didn't belong here anyways.

Saying you were responding to someone really doesn't help if you break the rules.

Fionn's post may not have been appropriate, that isn't a concern to me as I don't moderate this forum. I was only using your post as an example.

Anyways, I would have no problem if you'd like to start a thread in the Civ3 forum about what you'd change in civ3, provided that it is an informed thread, rather than just rantings. The problem isn't people posting dislike for civ3, it's when it becomes a nuiscance that it becomes a problem.

 

[Thunderfall]

Give Zouave a break, gonzo. I don't find his post terribly off-topic. Even RegentBob gave his opinion of Civ3 in the first post...

It's not feasible to ensure every thread is completely on topic. I really don't care if a poster goes off-topic a little bit briefly, as long as the thread goes back to topic soon after.

As for banning people for bashing Civ3, we rarely do that. We do allow Civ3 bashings, if you do it correctly (ex. don't post the same comments in every thread you find).

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by Thunderfall
Give Zouave a break, gonzo. I don't find his post terribly off-topic. Even RegentBob gave his opinion of Civ3 in the first post...

It's not feasible to ensure every thread is completely on topic. I really don't care if a poster goes off-topic a little bit briefly, as long as the thread goes back to topic soon after.

As for banning people for bashing Civ3, we rarely do that. We do allow Civ3 bashings, if you do it correctly (ex. don't post the same comments in every thread you find).

Finally, some sanity.

I also wasn't off topic in another thread when, regarding Civ 4, I posted that one of the best things would be for Firaxis not to do it all given their record. Why would anyone here care which company does it so long as it is done well?? Gonzo threatened me with a banning for a month! I then commented on it saying only I wouldn't comment for fear of being "off-topic" - and got banned for a week for "spam". Such is why I hadn't even looked at this site for about three months until a few weeks ago.