Banstick is ready.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

As you are familiar with the tags you are probably also familiar with the fact that the insults are still readable if one decides to do so (just as with the spoiler tags).

I'd like to note that this is the second time in this thread that you resorted to name-calling to directly insult a member of this board.

Personally I consider this to be a blatant violation of our forum rules, no matter whether this member is a moderator or a "regular" patron.

Just thought I should let you know

Isn't it also a personal insult to call one a lair? Or to call someone retarded? Or maybe to discout the massarce of about half of one's family because "they deserved it," isn't it, Clegane?

The real maturity of the patrons of the Org shows through in the watchtower, and also, to say someone is acting like an ass does not mean they are an ass, does it?

And, consider the fact that I am regularly insulted in much worse matters with little to no action by the moderators.

So, do you really think I care about your interpretation of the Forum's rules anymore, Clegane? Considering that they seem to differ from patron to patron, some can get away with cursing randomly and others get warned for absolutly nothing at all. Also, considering that Tosa is the moderator of this forum, wouldn't it also be up to him whether what I say is in violation of the Forum's rules or not?

Just saying.

[Ser Clegane]

Isn't it also a personal insult to call one a lair? Or to call someone retarded? Or maybe to discout the massarce of about half of one's family because "they deserved it," isn't it, Clegane?

a) Calling a statement false is not equivalent to calling the person who made the statement a liar

b) Nobody got called "retard" (except for Soly - by DA in this very thread)

c) ??

EDIT: the three points above are in response to the first paragraph of your post.
Regarding what you added later on:

Please show me were you have been called worse than "ass" or "dick" without moderator action.

Regarding your last statement - it is up to me what I consider to be a violation of forum rules, however, only in the Backroom I can (and will) act upon this considerations.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

a) Calling a statement false is not equivalent to calling the person who made the statement a liar

b) Nobody got called "retard" (except for Soly - by DA in this very thread)

c) ??

A. In the case of the Columbus day thread, Soly effictivly implied that I am a hateful, rascist liar.
B. Reread the statement.
C. Remember the Prussian Military Club thread, Clegane?

[Ser Clegane]

A. In the case of the Columbus day thread, Soly effictivly implied that I am a hateful, rascist liar.
B. Reread the statement.
C. Remember the Prussian Military Club thread, Clegane?

ad A) He said your statement was false, he did not call you a liar - about the "hateful racist", I think you youself did a much better job "implying" your leanings.

ad B) I read the statement and drew my conclusions - obviously those are very different from yours

ad C) How could I not remember
However, I challenge you to find the "they deserved it" that you conveniently put between quotation marks.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

ad A) He said your statement was false, he did not call you a liar - about the "hateful racist", I think you youself did a much better job "implying" your leanings.

ad B) I read the statement and drew my conclusions - obviously those are very different from yours

ad C) How could I not remember
However, I challenge you to find the "they deserved it" that you conveniently put between quotation marks.

A. How do I imply that I am a rascist simply by stating the fact that minorities, in the US, have a gigantic advantage over the white majority when applying for jobs, schools, etc? Some of my best friends are either Black or Arabic, so they'd think you're crazy for saying that I am a rascist.
B. Obviously
C. It wasn't an exact quote, if it was, it would have been in quote tags.

[solypsist]

indeed. methinks the lady (or ladies) doth protest too much.

Much Ado about Nothing

[Simetrical]

?=

I like the winking, by the way. Nice touch. I've always wanted an avatar that has a single frame different like every five minutes, so people would occasionally notice it out of the corner of their eye, stare at it for a while, and then give up and think they were seeing things.

[Crazed Rabbit]

That´s not immature and it´s not an insult. It is an explanation why someone does not continue a discussion. The discussion in which he said that was pointless and not going on discussing it was a sensible and mature thing to do.

Did you see the part where he said 'so please continue with your arguments'. He brought up the old line about people on the internet being retarded, and then says that, like 'just keep being retarded'.

indeed. methinks the lady (or ladies) doth protest too much.

Better keep those uppity peasants in line, eh? Wouldn't want anyone disagreeing with you.

Crazed Rabbit

[Togakure]

indeed. methinks the lady (or ladies) doth protest too much.

Have female patrons other than Proletariat posted in this thread? Or is this inferring something else ... ?

[Proletariat]

Dear Proletariat,

You have been warned for one of your posts, which violated The Guild Rules. The reason you have been warned is because:

Minor
(Warning Type = Minor)

For this violation, you have been given : 1 point(s).
The point(s) will remain in your account for 31 days.
After that, they will be removed automatically.

The post for which you are warned can be seen here:

=======================================
Quote:
Originally Posted by solypsist
i'm also familiar with a certain phrase about arguing on the internet and the special olympics. so please continue with your arguments.

Wow. A moderator making a retard joke. Classy.
=======================================

The admin/moderator who warned you, entered this comment:

=======================================
Do not abuse the Report/Alert system with pointless antics.

This notice has been passed on to all staff.
=======================================

Your total Warning Level at the moment is: 1 point(s).

If you reach the maximum of 3, you will be banned from the Forums, for 7 days.

To see details about all the warnings you have received, until now, please click here.

Please reply back if you have a dispute.

Hilarious.

[Steppe Merc]

For gods sake, Soly's a good guy. Whose to say hes biased? Was anyone banned because Soly doesn't like his views? One thread was closed, and there were nasty comments on both sides from what I saw.
I just don't see the proof.

I like the winking, by the way. Nice touch. I've always wanted an avatar that has a single frame different like every five minutes, so people would occasionally notice it out of the corner of their eye, stare at it for a while, and then give up and think they were seeing things.

I agree, that would be cool. Like mabye eyes shifting to look one way or the other, like in a Scobby Doo cartoon. Or smiling, then frowning.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Now that's bullsheiße.

[Steppe Merc]

Prole, it could have been anyone that warned you...

[Proletariat]

That was a pm from soly.

[Steppe Merc]

Ah.

[Strike For The South]

Elp were been represed

[solypsist]

actually, it was a Warning from me. which automatically is also sent to the rest of the staff on here. i don't see them falling over themselves to remove it, either.

That was a pm from soly.

i'm a fair mod, and i'm also not afraid of holding users accountable for their actions and/or words. i don't punish people for their opinions, but if you chuck a bomb in a room and then play innocent (or the victim), well, it isn't going to work anymore.

i've been with this board since before its current incarnation (about five years) and have been a moderator for most of that time. i've been a moderator through three system admins. i wouldn't be a moderator right now if i was in the habit of doing things the staff here felt was not justified.

[Togakure]

indeed. methinks the lady (or ladies) doth protest too much.

My inquiry, above, was in reference to the "... (or ladies) ..." portion of this quote.

Interesting, to read your opinion of yourself, solypsist. If it's simply respect from staff that concerns you, then you are doing quite well.

[Byzantine Prince]

Have female patrons other than Proletariat posted in this thread? Or is this inferring something else ... ?

Yes, he is.

[Crazed Rabbit]

i've been a moderator through three system admins. i wouldn't be a moderator right now if i was in the habit of doing things the staff here felt was not justified.

We all make mistakes Soly.

Crazed Rabbit

[Papewaio]

i am familiar with the word. i'm also familiar with a certain phrase about arguing on the internet and the special olympics. so please continue with your arguments.

Actually the phrase he is referring to used to be a guideline for the moderators of this forum to the point that one of them had it as his signature... Obake-san methinks.

Soly is old school, he is a bit more harsh and comes from a time when we used to close duplicate threads and delete anything after 5 pages or so dependent on the forum.

The backroom is in need of some reforming. In the end you will notice a more informative and friendly environment.

This section of the FAQ is going to be enforced a lot stronger from now on:

Posts containing any generally objectionable material: knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. Posting of copyrighted material, unless the copyright is owned by you or by The Guild, is discouraged. The Guild expects its patrons to remain civil even in the face of disagreements. Any kind of "flaming", slurs or insults adressed to an individual or a group is extremely inappropriate. Please respect etiquette at all times.

This has came about for a lot of reasons, including the religious threads and the possible truth in not going to town on people for attacks on majority groups (yes we Mods have been discussing Christianity and if we have been applying a double standard). Hate groups in particular are going to be targeted, more warnings are going to be slapped down... this is in part because they only last a month now not a year so they really are only 1/12th the impact of before.

The main point we want to get to is:

Please respect etiquette at all times.

While maintaining a lively and fun tavern.

[Togakure]

Actually the phrase he is referring to used to be a guideline for the moderators of this forum to the point that one of them had it as his signature... Obake-san methinks. ...

It was not Obake-san's old signature quote that came to my mind when reading solypsist's statement. There was another statement in another signature that came to mind--one that I distinctly remember Orda Khan (rightfully, in my mind) criticizing specifically in a post. The offensive signature quip was changed soon thereafter. I don't remember whose signature it was or the quote specifically, but it was indirectly (and to some, perhaps, with wit) inferring that arguing over the internet was a "retarded" thing to do, insulting developmentally disabled persons at the same time.

... The main point we want to get to is:

Please respect etiquette at all times.

While maintaining a lively and fun tavern.

Agreed. I think that staff would do well to set the example. A staff member referring to male patrons as "ladies"--however subtley or tongue-in-cheek--is not the best etiquette, imo, particularly in this forum, thread, and under these circumstances. In some cultures, referring to men as women is a grave insult, even when said "in good fun."

When I read what Proletariat posted in the Warning she was issued, it seemed to me that solypsist was referring to the quip about arguing on the internet being retarded, and when he suggested that the patrons continue, was indirectly suggesting that they were "retards." From my point of view, Proletariat was simply very direct in bringing this out in the open. Because she openly criticized a staff member, she was penalized for it. From what I have read here, it seems to me that solypsist is just as guilty of breaching etiquette, though he did so in a manner that was a bit more subtle. Personally, I think mods should set a model example at all times, particularly in the forum(s) which they monitor.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

It was not Obake-san's old signature quote that came to my mind when reading solypsist's statement. There was another statement in another signature that came to mind--one that I distinctly remember Orda Khan (rightfully, in my mind) criticizing specifically in a post. The offensive signature quip was changed soon thereafter. I don't remember whose signature it was or the quote specifically, but it was indirectly (and to some, perhaps, with wit) inferring that arguing over the internet was a "retarded" thing to do, insulting developmentally disabled persons at the same time.



Agreed. I think that staff would do well to set the example. A staff member referring to male patrons as "ladies"--however subtley or tongue-in-cheek--is not the best etiquette, imo, particularly in this forum, thread, and under these circumstances. In some cultures, referring to men as women is a grave insult, even when said "in good fun."

When I read what Proletariat posted in the Warning she was issued, it seemed to me that solypsist was referring to the quip about arguing on the internet being retarded, and when he suggested that the patrons continue, was indirectly suggesting that they were "retards." From my point of view, Proletariat was simply very direct in bringing this out in the open. Because she openly criticized a staff member, she was penalized for it. From what I have read here, it seems to me that solypsist is just as guilty of breaching etiquette, though he did so in a manner that was a bit more subtle. Personally, I think mods should set a model example at all times, particularly in the forum(s) which they monitor.

You can talk for me in this thread for now on, dude

[Big_John]

The backroom is in need of some reforming. In the end you will notice a more informative and friendly environment.

i would like to shake your hand, my good man.

Soly is old school, he is a bit more harsh and comes from a time when we used to close duplicate threads and delete anything after 5 pages or so dependent on the forum.

i may be alone, but bringing back that ethic would give me a warm, fuzzy feeling all over my body.

[Xiahou]

So, Prole while I think that this thread has been started with honorable intentions and is exactly what the "Backroom-Watchtower" has been created for, some responses rather remind me of a witch-hunt and rabble-rousing than of constructive criticism - thus my comment.

Well, now I feel the need to comment. I rarely post in the watchtower, but I do object the the portrayal of complaints as 'rabble-rousing'. I, for one, agree with most of the complaints and find the behavior and its terse dismissal quite off-putting. I know many mods don't agree with me politically, but they have been able to keep their personal views out of the way of their duties with rare exception. I don't find that to be the case with the latest mod at all.

Prole, your warning was flat out, immature, BS. I spent a long moment considering reporting the same comment, but ultimately didn't considering who made it- I knew it wouldn't do any good. I've gone from annoyed to disgusted with this.

Warning someone for reporting your own post is a jaw-dropping abuse of power.

[Ser Clegane]

Well, now I feel the need to comment. I rarely post in the watchtower, but I do object the the portrayal of complaints as 'rabble-rousing'. I, for one, agree with most of the complaints and find the behavior and its terse dismissal quite off-putting.

Please read what I wrote:

some responses rather remind me of a witch-hunt and rabble-rousing than of constructive criticism

If you would please takr a look at some statements:

It does seem to me that a certain mod might be having trouble separating his impartial mod-dom and his partial politics.
...
Soly's just being a "Incompatible language"
...
Quite frankly, I find his method of modding a bit, well, annoying. It was fine before. If he wants to talk politics, there's nothing stopping him, but things look to me like he's alot more apt to shut down threads he disagrees with politically.
...
Personaly I think some 1 has gone crazy with power.

Seems to me more like "rabble-rousing" and "witchhunt" than "constructive criticism" (actually I do not even see what political leanings would have to do with the closed thread this topic was started to discuss).

Criticism is welcome and helpful - OTOH, just throwing around accusations and resorting to name-calling (some more examples of that further down the thread, after I made my initial post) is not really what I call "constructive".

[Redleg]

Just my opinion regarding the placing of a warning - the thread topic is really not something worth discussing - it was just a poorly worded closing of the thread.

solypsist was wrong to place the warning on Proletariat especially given that he actually began the exchange with his initial comment. It smacks of an abuse of power.

Now if another moderator had given both solypist and Proletariat a warning for the exchange then it would have been more then fair - since both are at fault for violating the rules. Who is watching how the moderators are doing their functions and insuring fair moderation is being done? Other moderators are coming to the public defense of solypsist which is to be expected - but what are you doing behind the public display to insure solypsist while moderatoring is not violating the rules that he is to enforce?

I have protested before for actions like this - a moderator who partakes in the discussion in a childish way - has no business moderating that particlur thread.

solypsist might be just what the Backroom needs in some people's opinion however in this instance he did not handle the situation correctly.

[Meneldil]

Huh, I usually don't mind about what the mod are doing, but this warning is IMO crossing the line. I really fail to see how Prole's statement deserved a warning, considering some other replies I read daily on this forum.

[Ja'chyra]

I'm with Mene on this one.

The banstick comment was OTT, maybe, but really no big deal. But, I see no reason why Prole should be given a warning.

The admin/moderator who warned you, entered this comment:

=======================================
Do not abuse the Report/Alert system with pointless antics.

This makes it seem that Prole got a warning for reporting a post Why have a report button if you can't use it? And if all Prole reported was Soly's

i am familiar with the word. i'm also familiar with a certain phrase about arguing on the internet and the special olympics. so please continue with your arguments.

Then he should have just taken it and apologised for offending, he definately shouldn't be giving out warnings to objecting to his posts if that was the case.

[Geoffrey S]

I believe solipsist is being somewhat unreasonable in his function as moderator; I'm all for some stricter moderation in the Backroom but right now a number of solipsist's untactful comments seem to be causing more offense than resolving problems, particularly since they do often seem to be personal attacks. Now if he'd join in debates in a meaningful manner, and actually post why he disagrees with a certain individual's comments with some information to back up his statement, he'd get more positive reactions. As it stands his replies implicate a lack of respect for (certain) posters.

And that whole business about Proletariat's warning, it seems to be uncalled for; heck, Proletariat is one of the milder posters around here, one of the few who has consistently kept to the etiquette of the forums.

Have female patrons other than Proletariat posted in this thread? Or is this inferring something else ... ?

It's a line from Hamlet.