International board, or something, and the mods, and ciao

[Andres]

To avoid all misunderstandings. I agree that the pm Shibumi received in reply to his pm to the moderator contesting the warning is not done. I also agree that some of the comments posted here are not what you might expect from .Org staff. I'm also absolutely not impressed with Louis posting "Muslim fag" and it not being edited and not all by the way he reacted on it in this thread when Drunk Clown brought it up here.

However, the warning Shibumi received, seems correct, imo.

The thread in which he posted was opened by a moderator and the OP clearly stated the following:

Unpopular opinions are not disrespectful as long as they are carefully worded with regard to others' feelings and views. Similarly, opinions are not going to be censored merely because they may go against received wisdom.

That's very clear and is, in fact, nothing more than a reminder of how the .Org is run.

I watched the news fuss about it, had a beer, and thought: "cheers to whoever it was that slammed them"

This clearly crosses the line. Adding "but I'm joking" doesn't change that. There are a zillion better ways to express your opinion on those events.

If Shibumi's opinion is that the he doens't understand the fuss about 9/11 while more and bigger crimes against humanity have been committed which don't get as much attention, then he's entitled to that opinion. It's even a valid opinion. And everybody here is allowed to voice such an opinion, even in that very same thread. But not how Shibumi did it.

The warning in itself is not the issue here; it's the follow-up PM after Shibumi contested his warning that's the problem and on that point, I agree with Shibumi.

[phantom]

sorry but i simply do not get the 'unpopular opinions' comment. i also do not understand a moderator opening a thread with extra rules at the top?

'unpopular opinions' differ greatly with geographical location and political views. in a political debate or discussion there will be 'unpopular opinion' otherwise it will be a forum where everyone agrees? i do not get what you are trying to achieve with that forum.

if someone posts something like shibumi posted, i also see no immediate requirement to censor and kick that person out? it is a private forum so what is the danger? it appears that this was done on an impulse and that the moderator in question should apologise.

andres, it is difficult to speak out against the system which you are part of, risking losing friends. but you should not let your argument lose its focus now and take steps backward. you should be commended for correcting your friends. if they cannot see that, they are not good friends anyway.

[Andres]

sorry but i simply do not get the 'unpopular opinions' comment. i also do not understand a moderator opening a thread with extra rules at the top?

'unpopular opinions' differ greatly with geographical location and political views. in a political debate or discussion there will be 'unpopular opinion' otherwise it will be a forum where everyone agrees? i do not get what you are trying to achieve with that forum.

I see what you're trying to say.

Are only unpopular opinions to be carefully worded? What about popular opinions? Don't they have to be worded carefully as well? Why is it only the unpopular one that has to be carefully worded?

Yes, that phrasing leads to confusion. If you're asking that opinions are to be carefully worded, then you have to ask that all opinions have to be carefully worded, not just the unpopular ones.

You raise a valid point

if someone posts something like shibumi posted, i also see no immediate requirement to censor and kick that person out? it is a private forum so what is the danger? it appears that this was done on an impulse and that the moderator in question should apologise.

I don't know the history that lead to Shibumi's ban but I would be very surprised if he was banned only because of this one post. I assume there have been other occasions on which he crossed the line. I'm afraid that's something only staff and Shibumi themselves can clear out for us, if they want to.

I agree that a ban for that post alone seems way over the top, but I'm going to assume there is more than just that one post.

andres, it is difficult to speak out against the system which you are part of, risking losing friends. but you should not let your argument lose its focus now and take steps backward. you should be commended for correcting your friends. if they cannot see that, they are not good friends anyway.

Don't worry

[PanzerJaeger]

I see what you're trying to say.

Are only unpopular opinions to be carefully worded? What about popular opinions? Don't they have to be worded carefully as well? Why is it only the unpopular one that has to be carefully worded?

Yes, that phrasing leads to confusion. If you're asking that opinions are to be carefully worded, then you have to ask that all opinions have to be carefully worded, not just the unpopular ones.

You raise a valid point :bow"

Eh.. not really. How does one know what opinions are popular and which are not before they are posted? It is pretty clear that BQ was actually broadcasting to those who do not fall in line with the completely sympathetic viewpoint toward America that is often expected by Americans. He was attempting to open the discussion up as opposed to placing new limitations on it. He was saying that opinions that proved unpopular would not face punishment as long as they were baseline respectful. He was reinforcing a commitment to objective moderation.

Had Shibumi endorsed a version of the 'blowback' theory or any other critique of America and/or its foreign policy in a thoughtful and respectful way, his comments could have been as provocative as he liked and he would have faced no issue - regardless of their popularity with other members. Instead, he chose to shamelessly troll the thread by dropping a three sentence missive into the conversation that served only to insult without adding any depth - as he has done since he joined the backroom. And the thing that trolls feed on is the drama. If they cannot instigate it on the forum, they'll take it to an endless private message game of Hoola Hoop where righteous indignation and equivocation are standard operating procedure. The best way to deal with that tactic is to dismiss it outright.

[Zim]

Not even speaking as a mod but as a member who's been around quite some time I can confirm that Shibumi has a long history of seemingly purposefully stepping far over the line. Enough so that even I've noticed it and I very, very rarely visit the backroom.

I can't speak for the mod who gave the infraction but I would be very much doubt this wasn't a major factor in the degree of the infraction given, and that it would have happened had a similar post been made in a thread about any other disaster, especially a memorial thread about an event long passed.

I don't know the history that lead to Shibumi's ban but I would be very surprised if he was banned only because of this one post. I assume there have been other occasions on which he crossed the line. I'm afraid that's something only staff and Shibumi themselves can clear out for us, if they want to.

I agree that a ban for that post alone seems way over the top, but I'm going to assume there is more than just that one post.

[Drunk Clown]

It is agreed that Shibumi's post was crossing the line. But how the particular moderator acted is shameful and needs to be justified. Shibumi's post is not relevant anymore as we all agree it was a tasteless joke not appropriate for this forum. So no more "Shibumi did this, Shibumi did that", we are past that. It's the inequity on this forum which needs to be discussed.

Back to Louis' post.
It is outrageous that the moderators did not adjust Louis' post.
For I do get an infraction for this:

Dear Drunk Clown,

You have received an infraction at The Org.

Reason: Minor Infraction
-------
Drunk Clown,

Asking in a serious manner whether someone is a fascist is a provocation not appropriate for the gameroom.

CR
-------

This infraction is worth 1 point(s).

Original Post:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=2053365988

The reich shall prevail I'll wait for the release this game seems intresting

Wo... what? "The reich shall prevail"? You're not some sort of fascist, now are you?

Granted, I crossed the line and I don't harbor any bad feelings for the moderator who infracted me. As I agree with him.
But why am I not spared as it was a joke?

Another example, this time from the "One Word Story III":

Dear Drunk Clown,

You have received a warning at The Org.

Reason:
-------
Warning

Good evening, Drunk Clown.

Thank you for bringing the One Word Story posts of Populus Romanus to my attention, but in doing so I also noticed your own posts, two of which lowered the tone of thread and may have contributed to PR following suit. "Rape" and "sodomy" aren't really appropriate terms to bandy around the Org, after all.

I have changed both of the offending posts to something more appropriate yet in keeping with the structure of the following posts; please keep it clean next time! :3

- Sec.
-------

Original Post:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=2053356700

rape

All the best,
The Org

I used rape and sodomy for making awkward sentences, though it was inappropriate. It's no excuse because it's a joke. Just like you said slut and "muslim fag" it was inappropriate no matter in what context. Heck, I was infracted by CountArach (2 points!) for using words like dick and this was in a thread in which we discussed whether we should tolerate some minor swearwords. Subsequently miss Froggbeast was allowed to use such words. Also got a warning for asking Prussian to the Iron (in his women boasting thread) if he was the girl's bitch. Then how is it possible that Louis' can get away with such a post?

I respect this warning from Secura, as she said it was inappropriate for the Org. And NOT saying this forum is PG 13. Which brings me to this point: The game this forum is all about is 16+. How does it make sense that the forum is PG 13? We don't swear because it's more civilized! Not because now and then a ten year old boy gets on this forum. If you say, just like secura, that it's inappropriate to use such words you make sense and know what it's about.

As final,

I demand that Louis gets 2 infraction points when he makes such a post again and that it gets deleted and that his post in gender will be deleted or edited. You moderators would do the same if I made such a post.

Also the moderators and other members who troll and make thrash posts (like Lemur and Psychonaut) should get warnings for making shameful, not-contributing and spam posts. Because, when I troll or make not-contributing posts I DO get warnings. However, this will not happen as we don't want to hurt our own class, don't we Moderators and friends?

P.S.
Respect to Andres, he's the only one of the in-crowd who admits that it's not acceptable that such things happen. In-crowd, you should all take him as an example for how to behave.

[Gregoshi]

The assumption being made here is that the staff does not discuss these kinds of issue amongst itself. That we are thought of as one mindless, hive entity is rather disappointing.

In-crowd, you should all take him as an example for how to behave.

As should the out-crowd.

[Husar]

Yet the funny thing is that one moderator refers only to my use of bad language. he does not dare challenge his established circle of friends or the other staff.

And you know this because you're the phantom or what? (hint: you're wrong)

It's also rather hypocritical of you to accuse the moderators of breaking the rules and then blatantly breaking them yourself since you feel secure behind your anonymous account. Hypocrisy isn't just possible on the Moderators' side you know.
It gives me the feeling that you're here to stir up trouble and divide the moderatorship, not something I feel the need to support.
I have no desire to feed a black sheep to a troll because I strongly prefer the sheep in that case.

Maybe I'd be more willing to listen to you if you unmasked your IP and used your regular account, if that is not possible since it's banned then I guess my point above is perfectly correct and you're here to take some sweet revenge on the moderators.

[phantom]

why the hostility?

all accounts are anonymous here, or did you publish your name and address somewhere? i will not go any further than that because i do not have to.

so i am simply here to 'stir up trouble', is that the only way you know how to deal with dissent and disagreement by casting doubt on the users integrity?

so now i am ex banned user? because i have posted something you disagree with? my ip address is unmasked without an ip address i would be unable to connect to this site.

i am not going to defend this any more than that, because your claims are stupid and aimed at ending this uncomfortable thread quickly.

all i can say to this is

QED.

And you know this because you're the phantom or what? (hint: you're wrong)

It's also rather hypocritical of you to accuse the moderators of breaking the rules and then blatantly breaking them yourself since you feel secure behind your anonymous account. Hypocrisy isn't just possible on the Moderators' side you know.
It gives me the feeling that you're here to stir up trouble and divide the moderatorship, not something I feel the need to support.
I have no desire to feed a black sheep to a troll because I strongly prefer the sheep in that case.

Maybe I'd be more willing to listen to you if you unmasked your IP and used your regular account, if that is not possible since it's banned then I guess my point above is perfectly correct and you're here to take some sweet revenge on the moderators.

[drone]

Heck, I was infracted by CountArach (2 points!) for using words like dick and this was in a thread in which we discussed whether we should tolerate some minor swearwords. Subsequently miss Froggbeast was allowed to use such words.

That post contained multiple f-bombs and one use of the c-word, which would explain the infraction.

[Lemur]

I demand that Louis gets 2 infraction points when he makes such a post again and that it gets deleted and that his post in gender will be deleted or edited.

The Org does not have a mechanism for giving warning points to mods. As Gregoshi indicated, we have extensive discussions about whether a certain action or post was in- or out-of-line. In some cases as mod is asked to pass the case off to someone else; in extreme cases mods have been demodified. I would think this was self-evident, but maybe it bears stating again.

I think you're making a bit much of this "in crowd" notion. This ain't Heathers.

Also the moderators and other members who troll and make thrash posts (like Lemur and Psychonaut) should get warnings for making shameful, not-contributing and spam posts.

What's a "thrash post"?

[Husar]

why the hostility?

Why ignore the point I made about your hypocrisy?

I also haven't claimed that you are this or that, I said you give me a bad feeling, you're the one who started to assume things about me which aren't true, at least I worded my "accusations" very carefully and told you under which circumstances I'm willing to give your advice more credibility.

Our tech admins found out that your IP belongs to an anonymous proxy, I called it masking since it's not the IP of your home, that is a lot more anonymous than most other members here, if you are not banned with your normal account, why don't you use it?

I don't really see what you proved either, you just come up with more baseless assumptions about me that you write down like they are facts, at least I don't hide the fact that I'm assuming although it seems that you either didn't notice it or ignored it on purpose.

You come here with an anonymous account, which means nobody can even guess your agenda if you have one (not giving your name and address is not the only thing that makes one anonymous, in this context your agenda and history here may be quite important) and then you start suggesting to others that they criticise their friends here, as soon as Andres criticised some moderators, you encouraged him to keep it up.
For someone who doesn't want us to know who his friends are and who his loyalties lie with that's pretty rich IMO.

It's possible that you are genuine but as I said, your behaviour and the fact you are hiding who you are (in the context of this forum) make me very, very suspicious of you.

I'm not anonymous here in the sense that everybody can look up my stance on Watchtower issues from back when I was a member, everybody can have a look at my friends and some of the members here should know that I only warned them and tried to resolve rule breaking in a friendly manner when an infraction may have been warranted (so much about me considering them lower class).

You however, obviously felt the need to start this discussion with a clean history, and I wonder why that is and what it says about your true motives?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Take the hint, don't do it immediately again and move on. For all you know Louis got a whole week's worth of toilet cleaning and feeding the hamster that powers the ORG's server for that one. Come to think of it, compared to before he's been somewhat more quiet and withdrawn from the Backroom since as well.

[Drunk Clown]

You guys fail to see the point. Except for Andres you haven't replied on my argument about Louis' post.

Yet you do view my post made in that swear debating thread and say it was a justified infraction. I never claimed it was unjustified, I do however claim it was injustice that miss Frogbeastegg did not get censored for mentioning "dick" and I did get censored.

But why do you focus on that point of the post? It's all about the inequality on this forum that some people have a free pass to say things other members can't. You begin with the motives of Phantom, it's irrelevant, he's spot on, no matter his motives. It is obvious that you don't exactly know what to say as you guys try to get around the main point. None of the reactions after my post are focused on the main problem. Which I find odd.

I think you're making a bit much of this "in crowd" notion. This ain't Heathers.

I'm not over exaggerating, do you think I would make the effort to address this problem if it wasn't that big? Heck, I find it even this big that it puts me off from posting in other threads. I am really sincere when it's about the inequality on this forum, even in this thread it's present.

And Gregoshi, of course the "out-crowd" should behave too, but it's about you guys this time. Andres is the only one who has the guts to agree that there's injustice in the moderating on this forum.

That moderators can't be warned isn't a problem, you shouldn't even make aggressive/provoking/etc. post in the first place. It's your job to execute the rules, and somebody who does that should under any circumstances follow those same rules they punish others for.

Now as it's late and I want to get some rest, so one last question of which I really would appreciate if the moderators plus other members who are active in this thread would answer this one question:

Was it justified that Louis did not get a punishment (as I do not know what you do to a moderator as you can't warn or infract them, according to Lemur) for making such an inappropriate (and against the rules) post in the Gender thread?

P.S. By thrash-posts I made an error I wanted to say trash-posts which mean posts full of garbage who aren't even worth mentioning.

[Tellos Athenaios]

It's not an issue really. Not every post is read by a moderator, and I know for a fact that as a moderator you can't be arsed to correct every little toe crossing that fine line all the time. I don't mean to be petty but this is really like one kid complaining to his mummy for telling him off when she didn't tell the sibling off for something else earlier. But.. but... but... he did it, too! Mummy told me early on that just 'cause that village idiot might jump in the lake doesn't mean I should.

If there is an in crowd I know of it would be the EB team. I can assure you Louis is not part of it. Anyway, we've effectively got our own suite, with jacuzzi and all and a roomservice for free. And the management doesn't really bother with how messy we make things. Even the public bars where the fans hang out are moderated very leniently compared to the rest of the ORG.

[Shibumi]

First of all, I have recieved some PMs, cheers guys!

Wow.

I had no idea my post here would stirr up such a hornets nest!

To a lot of you, I say thank you :)

My history has been questioned - yes indeed, I have once before got 3 warnings points over my time here. With that said, I have made a whole lot of posts that did not get warning points, I might stretch it as far as saying I am more than confident in the fact that my posts at large are not deemed worthy of a warning.

However, that is not the main point, is it?

Was my initial joke in bad taste? YES! Yes yes yes. YES.

Did I two posts down make it utterly clear it was a joke, well, YES! Yes yes yes. YES.

Read that again from my perspective: "me as a general US basher says I dont care, but of course, I do, hence I point out this is a joke"

3000 lives lost is 3000 lives lost. It is bound to do what vacuums does. Is it worse than the other tragedies happening on a daily basis, specially ten years after, well, the jury is still out on that one.

That is, however, not my point. I said it was a jest, two posts down I once AGAIN made it clear it was a jest.

Are we supposed to be more sensitive to 3000ish Americans who died, not allowed to jest about it, compared to the thousands of kids who die a day cause of starvation? Are those 3000ish americans who died ten years ago somehow deserving more respect than, say, the gay rights or the struggle of the third world? If so, educate me as to why this would be on an international board.

From the way I see it, this board only allows allowed "different oppinions". We are utterly free to have different oppinions, as long as we adhere to what is ok to be different. To use "fag" as a derogatory term is quite ok eventhough it alienates 1/30th of the human population or so. But don't you dare jest with a fraction of the numbers of people killed by US carpet bombings over Afghanistan, or the people who have died in the war in Iraq because of their Weapon of Mass Destruction because these americans were INNOCENT.

Again, we have some things we can jest about, and some things we can not. This on a "international board".




Then we have the other thing, the way the mods are actually handling this.

"shoo fly" <- Obviously not demeaning. It is written by a mod - gettit? He means that as a jest, we are all sure, and it should be obvious to the reader.

The mod answering my PMs in the way he did - it is BQ, he would not do anything wrong. And if you see his answer to me as derogatory you obviously have a reading disorder.

And about Louis, we all know he mean well, far be it from him to have a malicious thought behind anything he writes. Because he is, you know, perfect, and thus whatever he writes could not possibly be taken as something negative except by someone clearly not meant to be on this board.

PJ, thanks for that post, but no, I could not possibly be back. The term set for me to get back is that I repent - and do I really seem eager to? If not, I am banned for life.

[Tellos Athenaios]

I thought the problem was the mods had put out a little green notice they were in a serious mood (tm) not appreciative of bad jokes for the day and you decided you had to go ring the doorbell regardless. It's like you're one of those people who just walk into these things.

For a comparison our national statistics bureau/agency (charged with tallying all sorts of important and less important stats for the Netherlands) decided that they'd do a housing poll. So they'd cast ballots or whatever and picked me. So they sent me a letter. I read it, I didn't have time/energy/mood for filling in some online questions form which is invariably written by someone who should for the betterment of the Internet be made to live somewhere without Internet or computers and strictly forbidden to ever search or acquire or use any form or semblance of same. So I threw away the letter.

They didn't get the hint the first time, they sent me another one. I threw that one away as well.

They didn't get that one either. So they sent a third. In which they informed me that they might attempt to contact me by phone or in person instead because it was ever so important that they waste my time and patience again. They've made it on my ignore list which shows how remarkably effective they were at annoying me since (a) I don't have ignore lists on the Internet, and (b) RL doesn't even have ignore lists built in yet to begin with.

[Shibumi]

I thought the problem was the mods had put out a little green notice they were in a serious mood (tm) not appreciative of bad jokes for the day and you decided you had to go ring the doorbell regardless. It's like you're one of those people who just walk into these things.

For a comparison our national statistics bureau/agency (charged with tallying all sorts of important and less important stats for the Netherlands) decided that they'd do a housing poll. So they'd cast ballots or whatever and picked me. So they sent me a letter. I read it, I didn't have time/energy/mood for filling in some online questions form which is invariably written by someone who should for the betterment of the Internet be made to live somewhere without Internet or computers and strictly forbidden to ever search or acquire or use any form or semblance of same. So I threw away the letter.

They didn't get the hint the first time, they sent me another one. I threw that one away as well.

They didn't get that one either. So they sent a third. In which they informed me that they might attempt to contact me by phone or in person instead because it was ever so important that they waste my time and patience again. They've made it on my ignore list which shows how remarkably effective they were at annoying me since (a) I don't have ignore lists on the Internet, and (b) RL doesn't even have ignore lists built in yet to begin with.

I am quite confident in saying that your National Statistics Bureau does not have a link, from their main forum page, to skip to the last post in the last forum topic.

If the mods does indeed want to mark some threads as under special rules, not that I can understand why they would, they might want to make it clear that posters does have to scroll back and read everything leading up to that post, and that the posters can NOT just reply to that post.

This all just seem absolutely.. Nevermind.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The only people who probably have more infraction points and warning than me are Strike and Meth. "Bad history" is such a cop out. I flooded the EB forums with Meth 4 different times with mundane back and forth conversations in 15 threads at the same time.

The ban was over the top because no one liked his opinion and no one likes him.

You all talk as if you are very hard on each other behind closed doors, give me a break guys. It's basic psychology. You are more lenient toward those you know and respect than some "stranger" in the group. You justify (subconsciously) the different lines that you draw because you "know" the motives of those you like and you don't know the motives of those you don't like.

Louis showed his sleezy Frenchman side which is disappointing, because he is much more tolerable when he is trying to be Tocqueville. He should have been punished but wasn't and that hasn't gone answered. But that's because everyone knows Louis and likes him so whatever right?

I don't mind the fact that you long timers all treat each other a bit nicer than others when the time comes to lay the hammer down, but don't try to deny it with clever jokes. Yeah, Strike has a lot of infractions but for the most part his insults are blunt and straight to the point and doesn't have a shred of fancying up to them. No offense Strike, you are my boy and I am not dissing you I am just saying that your insults are the kind that can't be ignored.

It isn't an "in-crowd" it is just a tight network of friends who have been on here a long time and because everyone here is human, they naturally differentiate how they treat those in their sphere of friendship and those that are not.

Most of the time, it isn't bad. But when this **** comes up: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?137437-Women-know-your-limits

And everyone decides to just roll with it, as if it was some well crafted, thought provoking question that needed an answer? No lock? No infraction? Well Frags has been a mainstay of the org community since '03 so everyone knows it's just Frag being Frag right?

[Catiline]

You all talk as if you are very hard on each other behind closed doors, give me a break guys.

Ha!

For once I think I can genuinely speak for all of us in rags when I say 'If only you knew'.

[PanzerJaeger]

PJ, thanks for that post, but no, I could not possibly be back. The term set for me to get back is that I repent - and do I really seem eager to? If not, I am banned for life.

It seems to me that the post itself was the problem, not the opinion behind it. Surely a PM that says essentially the same thing that you've already stated about the post in this thread would go a long way... from my experience the mods only want to have confidence that you understand why the posted crossed the line and that you will make an effort to use more discretion in the future. They don't want to muzzle you!

In any event, it would be a shame to lose your perspective, as much as I disagree with it.

Most of the time, it isn't bad. But when this **** comes up: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?137437-Women-know-your-limits


And everyone decides to just roll with it, as if it was some well crafted, thought provoking question that needed an answer? No lock? No infraction? Well Frags has been a mainstay of the org community since '03 so everyone knows it's just Frag being Frag right?

Why would he get an infraction or a lock? Far more controversial subjects have been discussed in the backroom than whether women are capable of being funny. Members are allowed to hold, share, and discuss politically insensitive/incorrect opinions in the backroom as long as they maintain a baseline level of decorum. It's all laid out pretty clearly in a sticky in the backroom, which highlights another important point.

Some members seem to be surprised and/or upset at the fact that some are given more leeway than others in the eyes of the moderators. Well, at least in the backroom, both that fact and the rationale behind it are spelled out pretty clearly.

Trolling

Trolling is the art of provoking angry reactions. Some trolls are subtle, others show all the delicacy of an air-raid on an orphanage. This is an area of engagement that stretches the moderators, as one person's opinion may well look like a troll to their opponent. We tend to look at the poster and their track record, and punish accordingly. Yes, life is unfair. Your best remedy is not to get a reputation as a troll.

There it is: member inequity - stated plainly in the rules. There's no conspiracy, no secret in-crowd, and no subconscious favoritism - there is only your own reputation. If you are a relatively new member who has tangled with the mods repeatedly without contributing much to the forum, then yes, you are going to be given less leeway than a member like Louis, who, at this point, has racked up years of worthwhile contributions. And if you're an old member with years of mod battles under your belt, your posts are going to be scrutinized more closely than those with no such history.

People need to take five minutes to read through the rules.

[Drunk Clown]

There it is: member inequity - stated plainly in the rules. There's no conspiracy, no secret in-crowd, and no subconscious favoritism - there is only your own reputation. If you are a relatively new member who has tangled with the mods repeatedly without contributing much to the forum, then yes, you are going to be given less leeway than a member like Louis, who, at this point, has racked up years of worthwhile contributions. And if you're an old member with years of mod battles under your belt, your posts are going to be scrutinized more closely than those with no such history.

People need to take five minutes to read through the rules.

That is when trolling is involved, that isn't always the situation.

If your rules said: "Hi, most of our moderators don't take it lightly when you don't agree with us so you better be careful"
And: "We moderators and our favorites are above the rules"

If that was the case, then I would say: "Congratulations, you are sticking to the rules".

And Tellos don't say it isn't an issue, since it is. Of course it's not an issue for you, you are not affected.
Your comparison with mummy and her children isn't that adequate. If it happens over and over again then it gets annoying. At first, as I noticed it since the beginning I joined this forum, I let it be. I thought: "these things happen" just like your mummy comparison. But you can only take so much, at a certain point you are fed up with it. As I am now.

Still noticing there's no answer for my previous question. I still hope you get to a point where you are able to answer.
I also see Louis' post hasn't been edited yet, which I find strange. You say it's PG 13 right? So do it for those children you want to "protect".

[a completely inoffensive name]

Why would he get an infraction or a lock? Far more controversial subjects have been discussed in the backroom than whether women are capable of being funny. Members are allowed to hold, share, and discuss politically insensitive/incorrect opinions in the backroom as long as they maintain a baseline level of decorum. It's all laid out pretty clearly in a sticky in the backroom, which highlights another important point.

It was blatantly disrespectful, the only thing keeping it from being in 4chan territory is the fact he didn't say, "When will they get back in the kitchen, amiright?". It doesn't matter what his track record is if it was a purposeful attempt at pissing people off. He did the same thing with the eugenics thread, which finally got closed after someone came to their senses about how the OP presented the topic. He then made a second eugenics thread that was baiting again and that got closed. Talk about a track record....

You know, the one thing about the women thread I noticed is that I can't recall a single female posting in it. I wonder if someone actually called out how terrible that thread was, someone would have done something.

There it is: member inequity - stated plainly in the rules. There's no conspiracy, no secret in-crowd, and no subconscious favoritism - there is only your own reputation. If you are a relatively new member who has tangled with the mods repeatedly without contributing much to the forum, then yes, you are going to be given less leeway than a member like Louis, who, at this point, has racked up years of worthwhile contributions. And if you're an old member with years of mod battles under your belt, your posts are going to be scrutinized more closely than those with no such history.

This is stupid and is favoritism enforced within the rules. I contributed nothing to this org for 2 years before making some fun threads I wanted to read that others enjoyed. It was great that the mods took notice of that, but the opposite has to be noticed as well. When someone who has been around for a while starts to dick around, you gotta place the hammer down. Otherwise it is favoritism. Praise where praise is deserved and punish where punishment is deserved. Nothing more, nothing less. Louis can call people fags jokingly in a PM.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

After all, I get a warning for something simple like this:

If I see one thing here, it's that people over idolize Morrowind. Just wake up.

Most of your arguments are rubbish anyway. Fast travel is a choice, you're not forced to do it. More options is better according to you, so why not fast travel.

This whole point of you missing places around Cyrodiil caused by fast travel isn't a flaw of the game, it's a flaw of you, you used fast travel right?
It's just pathetic, you want to convince others so much that Oblivion sucks that you look for non existent problems.

You said this to someone for "over idolizing" Morrowind and you are upset about being infracted?

And this was a 0-point warning.

[InsaneApache]

It was blatantly disrespectful, the only thing keeping it from being in 4chan territory is the fact he didn't say, "When will they get back in the kitchen, amiright?". It doesn't matter what his track record is if it was a purposeful attempt at pissing people off. He did the same thing with the eugenics thread, which finally got closed after someone came to their senses about how the OP presented the topic. He then made a second eugenics thread that was baiting again and that got closed. Talk about a track record....

You know, the one thing about the women thread I noticed is that I can't recall a single female posting in it. I wonder if someone actually called out how terrible that thread was, someone would have done something.


This is stupid and is favoritism enforced within the rules. I contributed nothing to this org for 2 years before making some fun threads I wanted to read that others enjoyed. It was great that the mods took notice of that, but the opposite has to be noticed as well. When someone who has been around for a while starts to dick around, you gotta place the hammer down. Otherwise it is favoritism. Praise where praise is deserved and punish where punishment is deserved. Nothing more, nothing less. Louis can call people fags jokingly in a PM.

The Backroom is all about controversial topics. Otherwise it would be called the Frontroom. It's not the topics, it's the posts in that thread. (all within the rules of the forum, after all we are guest in his house) There are plenty of members on here who are over 13 you know.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The Backroom is all about controversial topics. Otherwise it would be called the Frontroom. It's not the topics, it's the posts in that thread. (all within the rules of the forum, after all we are guest in his house) There are plenty of members on here who are over 13 you know.

Then there is still a problem, because the eugenics thread was closed because upon the way the OP presented the question.

[Drunk Clown]

You said this to someone for "over idolizing" Morrowind and you are upset about being infracted?

And this was a 0-point warning.

Are you unable to read? This is (I believe) my third post saying it's not about the infraction I got, but about the inequality on this forum.

It's bull**** that I get infraction for things I post while other members do the same but don't get the infraction just because they are buddies with those moderators.

By the way, I see what you moderators are doing. Let's not post in this thread anymore so it can die. Real professional guys, bravo.

And where's the answer to my previous question? It's yes or no, pick one. But you can't admit you're wrong now can you?

[Populus Romanus]

Would Andres' name color change have anything to do with the opinions expressed in this thread?

[Kekvit Irae]

The Org runs on a hierarchy and not a democracy. Members cant overrule Assistant Moderators, Assistant Moderators cant overrule Moderators, and Moderators cant overrule an Administrator. If you have a problem with how a Moderator is acting, or if you feel like other Moderators are overlooking such actions, send a private message to an Administrator. It gets better results than posting about the problem in public. If you feel the Administrator is not helpful, then by all means, rant away, but do at least take it up with them first.

[Lemur]

This is (I believe) my third post saying it's not about the infraction I got, but about the inequality on this forum.

So you believe that the Org is surmounted by an elitist corps of mods and their pet favorites, and that the rules are unevenly enforced, and so on and so forth. And you're fightin' angry about it.

Do you have any positive suggestion about what should be done? Beyond, say, you being put in charge?