New Rules....

[Don Corleone]

I am quite familiar with the following:

This is The Guild, the discussion forum for the Shogun: Total War and Medieval: Total War fan site www.totalwar.org. Considering the real-time nature of this bulletin board, it is impossible for us to review messages or confirm the validity of information posted. Please remember that we do not actively monitor the contents of posted messages and are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of The Guild or any entity associated with The Guild. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact the administrator of the pertinent forum (displayed at the top of the message thread list) immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, so please realize that we may not be able to remove particular messages immediately. The staff has also the ability to edit all messages by all users, but we rarely use it in order to avoid misunderstandings as to the identity of the originator of any given text. If a post's content is essentially objectionable, it will be deleted instead. Examples of objectionable messages include, but are not limited to:
Posts containing addresses of warez sites or anything piracy-related; note that this includes "hacks" designed to enable Shogun: Total War or Medieval: Total War to run without a CD. The administration is aware of the fact that some use a "no-CD hack" for the perfectly legal purpose of enchancing their system performance, but we feel that the possible illegal benefits from these hacks outweight the legal ones. Anything pertaining to software piracy is in general highly discouraged.
Posts containing information on and/or requests for the Shogun: Total War or Medieval: Total War CD key codes; if someone has actually lost his CD key, he should ask about the matter from Electronic Arts Customer Support. Anyone asking for someone else's here is assumed to be a pirate trying to deny the game's developers their rightful compensation for this work.
Posts containing references or solicitations for, or technical specifications of, multiplayer cheating. Cheating in the single-player game is each user's private matter, but cheating in the multiplayer game detracts from everyone's enjoyment and from the gaming community as a whole.
Posts containing names of people suspected of cheating in the multiplayer game. This clause has been much debated; its purpose is to avoid fruitless controversy. No conclusive proof on anyone cheating in the multiplayer game can be obtained or presented. Therefore, the staff and the majority of the patrons (approximately 70% voted in favor) feel that it is for the best to avoid making accusations; even if truthful, their inconclusiveness will probably lead to "flame wars" which are inconvenient to the forum and its every patron. Keeping of private "cheater blacklists" is allowed, indeed encouraged, but The Guild does not wish to be the medium for such. (Note that in the case of "name posting", the staff will often make an exception and edit out the name rather than deleting the entire message.)
Posts containing "spam", such as advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations. Recommending a game you in your opinion like is not wrong, as long as you are not trying to sell it. User accounts created exclusively for the purpose of posting inconsequential advertisements will be unceremoniously banned.
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.
Several separate forums exists for the purpose of grouping the messages by their primary topic. Care should be taken to post messages only in the forum meant for that type of content. The staff makes every attempt to keep topics in their correct forums. Topics posted in an inappropriate forum will usually be closed shortly, with a final message explaining the transfer to another forum and a link to that forum, where the discussion can continue. Please note that the supposed inactivity of some forums compared to others is not an excuse to post messages in the wrong place. Although The Guild does not and cannot review the messages posted and is not responsible for the content of any of these messages, we at The Guild reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever. You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Guild, Jarvis, Inc. (the makers of the bulletin board software), and their agents with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s). We at The Guild also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or whatever information we know about you) in the event of a complaint or legal action arising from any message posted by you

However, there are apparently some new clauses of which I am unaware, such as:

if there's a third clinton thread then that will be postwhoring, which is punishable. please use this thread to get it out of your system.

and

Great to see people helping destroy fun.

To ensure that I do not violate the forum rules in the future, might I respectfully request the official forum rules be updated to include the new provisions that have been recently established? Offending any one would most certainly be the last thing I would ever care to do, especially the moderators.

[Don Corleone]

As I cannot edit my posts currently, I believe it only fair to include the entire text of the 2nd quote...

______ starts a topic about a video with some fools in it (scene or real) and you start ranting about Nazi Germany?

Great to see people helping destroy fun.

[Redleg]

Tisk, Tisk - I will wait on seeing what developes from the thread entitled Banstick before wanting to see new rules posted in the .Org.


By the way what is post whoring - that is a new term to me?

[InsaneApache]

By the way what is post whoring - that is a new term to me?

Me too...perhaps an exchange of money is involved .....

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Me too...perhaps an exchange of money is involved

Well I never recieved any.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
So you're doing it for amusement?
.

[PanzerJaeger]

New rules are nothing compared to threatening bans. Thats what i am worried about. I didnt know mods could ban automatically like that. But it is good to get all this stuff straightened out before any more warnings or threats are made to members.

[caesar44]

"...we at The Guild reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever..."

For no reason , but why will you do that for ???

[Navaros]

I must admit that I too was puzzled/confused by the "postwhoring" comment.

[Goofball]

I must admit that I too was puzzled/confused by the "postwhoring" comment.

Me three.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

So you're doing it for amusement?

I was accused of it. It could be taken as a personal attack as could your comment smiley and all.

[solypsist]

postwhoring is another word for spamming, but involves starting multiple threads over a short period of time with the intention of disrupting the forum.

nutshell: aggressive spamming by creating unnecessary threads.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Well thanks for thew definition

I still think whoring was taking it a bit too far. Besides that I only made two threads on clinton and Ive never been a spammer nor have I ever up until now been accused of being one. Now thereseem to be a glut of Bushwbashingwhoring going on constantly.

[solypsist]

thus you are safe from the banstick!

I still think whoring was taking it a bit too far. Besides that I only made two threads on clinton and Ive never been a spammer nor have I ever up until now been accused of being one. Now thereseem to be a glut of Bushwbashingwhoring going on constantly.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

thus you are safe from the banstick!

Well I feel, much better now

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Obviously the new mods are like, well, the Gestapo. They have no limits, or so it seems.

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.

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.

These also do not seem to have any effect on certain groups of people, by the way. So they should be edited out, or at least made to say "These do not affect Liberals, Moderators, Liberal Moderators, Moderator Liberals, Anti-Christians, Athiests, or any combination of the above."

[Redleg]

Obviously the new mods are like, well, the Gestapo. They have no limits, or so it seems.

Don't be so hasty with the labelling - some things are going on that we just might not know about yet. Has Solypsist other then the one occassion with Prol actually been unfair or shown favoritism toward another with his moderation.


I was one of the first to point out my dis-satifaction with another moderator because of his statements and moderation methods. Solypsist has not gone to that extreme - nor is his moderation style anywhere close to Gestapo tactics, and Ser Clegane has been a fair moderator.

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.

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.

These also do not seem to have any effect on certain groups of people, by the way. So they should be edited out, or at least made to say "These do not affect Liberals, Moderators, Liberal Moderators, Moderator Liberals, Anti-Christians, Athiests, or any combination of the above."

Again I just don't see any such unfair abuse - I noticed a few spefic occasions of what could be considered unfair moderation - but a whole thread has been turned over to that discussion - let it run its course. If I for a second believed that the moderators has a whole were being terrible - I would go revive this thread here https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=32232 and point out where they have fallen into the same course - And that has not happen as of yet.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

I was one of the first to point out my dis-satifaction with another moderator because of his statements and moderation methods. Solypsist has not gone to that extreme - nor is his moderation style anywhere close to Gestapo tactics, and Ser Clegane has been a fair moderator.
Hyperbole, you get the point.

[Papewaio]

Obviously the new mods are like, well, the Gestapo. They have no limits, or so it seems.

But Kaiser both you and PJ have declared a prefernce for a facist state, so be careful what you wish for.

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.

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.

These also do not seem to have any effect on certain groups of people, by the way. So they should be edited out, or at least made to say "These do not affect Liberals, Moderators, Liberal Moderators, Moderator Liberals, Anti-Christians, Athiests, or any combination of the above."

The irony is that the rule enforcement has been cranked up in response to Dev Dav (rightly) complaining about attacks on Christians, the increase in trolls and the decrease in general forum kindness.

[therother]

I was one of the first to point out my dis-satifaction with another moderator because of his statements and moderation methods. Solypsist has not gone to that extreme - nor is his moderation style anywhere close to Gestapo tactics, and Ser Clegane has been a fair moderator.
Hyperbole, you get the point.

Yes, indeed. But I also recall that TosaInu took a very dim view of patron suggesting that the Moderators over at the .Com used "Nazi tactics". I therefore respectfully suggest you withdraw the Gestapo comment, hyperbole though it may be. Unless you know of some reason why he would not afford the same respect to his own Moderators?

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Heh, in this forum one cannot edit one's posts. Therefore, one such as myself cound not remove one comment from one posts as one such as yourself states. Though I do admit it was a bit over the top, and I aplogize for it.

The irony is that the rule enforcement has been cranked up in response to Dev Dav (rightly) complaining about attacks on Christians, the increase in trolls and the decrease in general forum kindness.

Strange, I never noticed, and I'm a backroom regular
Kindness in the backroom, ptsch, I got in a flamewar with my FIRST BACKROOM POST. EVER. Gawain probably remembers.

Oh and with the fascist state view, THAT ONLY APPLIES WHEN I'M IN CHARGE! Gah!

[Don Corleone]

thus you are safe from the banstick!

It's all a big joke to you, isn't it? Master Soly makes the rules up as he goes, and we all get warnings when we can't keep up. Well sir, all I'm asking for is notice of your 'on the fly' rules when you invent them. Tosa defined spam as

such as advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations.

. You've decided to define it as 'any post or thread that you don't like and seems to occur too frequently for your tastes'. Before you go get Tosa to do your dirty work and warn us all for posting in affront to your 'new rules', why don't you try telling us what they are? Or does that ruin the fun of your game?

[Don Corleone]

Oh yeah, I forgot, this and this are required. There, that makes everything I said okay...

[solypsist]

As I haven't issued any Warnings to anyone over the matter of "spam", and the person I intended it for gets the context and doesn't have an issue with it, I don't understand why you're complaining.

"Thread I don't like," ? Please show me where I ever said that - and you even quoted me on it, so I'm curious to know. If you can't, you may be guilty of posting knowingly false and/or defamatory material. For someone who has referenced the rules so often, I'm disappointed you have trouble following them as scrupulously as you accuse others of not doing so.

. Well sir, all I'm asking for is notice of your 'on the fly' rules when you invent them. Tosa defined spam as . You've decided to define it as 'any post or thread that you don't like and seems to occur too frequently for your tastes'.

[Mouzafphaerre]

I was accused of it. It could be taken as a personal attack as could your comment smiley and all.

.
It's just a joke you walked upon. I'll remove it if you're serious though.
.

[Don Corleone]

Well, you wouldn't warn me anyway, you'd get Tosa to do it for you. And as a matter of fact, maybe Gawain isn't as hunky dory with you shushing him as you seem to think.

You told Gawain you'd had enough Clinton threads and if he posted one more, it'd be a punishable offense. Nowhere in Tosa's rules does it say that. As I said, if you're making up new rules as you go, perhaps you better let the rest of us in on them.

As far as I know, I haven't accused anyone of not following the rules. I've asked you to illuminate the rest of us on what your magnificence has decided as the rule of the day for the given day.

[solypsist]

Nowhere in Tosa's rules does it say that. As I said, if you're making up new rules as you go, perhaps you better let the rest of us in on them.

"Examples of objectionable messages include, but are not limited to..." pretty much covers it.

Please show me where I said, "Threads I don't like." I'm still waiting.

[Don Corleone]

My apologies Soly (boy, I had better get used to saying that...) when i put the quote marks up I was paraphrasing. When I used the actual HTML quote tags, I was quoting you. You are right, I naturally, was wrong, and engaged in an unfounded and unfair attack. Can you ever forgive me?

Look, I know that Gawain, Panzer, Capo, Prole, Crazed Rabbit, DDave and myself are on your short list to be banned. You're the boss, so you get to make that decision. But you know, when you know you're gonna die anyway, it's quite liberating. I get to choose the when, why and how. Until then, I yet again shamelessly grovel at your feet...

[Kaiser of Arabia]

I'm at the top of the list!

[Papewaio]

Okay lets focus have a time out and help each other. Be nice.

Stare at the babe thread or something else.