[split] Forum Bans discussion

Discuss operations pertaining directly about the forum here.

Moderator: Website Maintainers

User avatar
Decay
Under Moderation
Posts: 984
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 8:31 pm
Location: Dweller2 Map11

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#41

Post by Decay » Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:48 pm

I wasn't actually planning on coming around today, but I want to point out I think you guys are twisting what I'm saying, or not understanding my points.

First and foremost, I do not care who got banned. I really don't. What I'm pointing out is that vague reasoning is not good, and I'm harbouring doubts over the length of time (is perma really a good idea?).

Second, I suggested Infurnus relax, given his erratic and borderline aggressive posts because avoiding zdaemon-like approaches to the forums is a good thing.

This is literally all I'm trying to get across.

[quote="Ruin"]You forgot your tin foil hat.[/quote]Well to be fair, staff does come up with some pretty insane ideas, such as

[quote="Seems like good jokes indeed"]
<infurnus> Q m_invisible Forces an Oper to appear to part all channels, however still receives messages. Useful for checking out suspicious channels.
<infurnus> we could easily use this
<infurnus> though I don't suggest using it, at least not while in a bunch of channels
<HeavenWraith> that'd be rather... untransparent
<infurnus> lmao
[/quote]

or

[quote="but don't you guys own this network?"]
<infurnus> should we tell new clans to go to quakenet?
<TheToxicAvenger> Why?
<infurnus> I have a feeling that having clans on our network will lead to problems
<TheToxicAvenger> I don't get it
<infurnus> you remember that skulltag got banned from two irc networks right
[/quote]

Don't be so dismissive of criticism. Everyone dishes it out, and those in a position of power are bound to get some flak.

User avatar
Hammerfest-
Forum Regular
Posts: 206
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:45 am
Clan: A3.33333333333333333
Clan Tag: A3.33333333

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#42

Post by Hammerfest- » Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:58 pm

infurnus wrote:Honestly you two need better reading comprehension. And no, don't try to spin this into a "personal attack"; you actually need to improve your reading comprehension.

Blah blah blah...


I can't really say that I'm surprised at the whole "don't try to spin this into a personal attack" piece. You must of not gotten a lot of attention when you were young or something. I honestly have no personal quarrel with you or anyone that works as staff as far as I'm concerned (It'd be rather silly too.) I wouldn't know if vice versa applies though, but whatever.

infurnus wrote:
Decay wrote:That's about all I have to say about it. Whatever problems Bluewiz had for it, I really couldn't care less.

My point was more about this: You quoted my comment referring to Catastrophe in reply to Hammerfest's reaction/overreaction to an Igor post.
I was citing that the only reason I did so was because it seemed to be something that individuals like yourself would agree with the sentiment of.

But somehow it makes me look like Kilgore or something for reasons still not fully explained?


I wasn't aware about Catastrophe even getting banned until after I had pissed on your 'funny' Igor post (Like I stated previously, I seldom rummage through the forums unless something interesting like that Invasion thread pops up.) As far as I'm concerned, I care not, and I intend to not even bother, with Bluewiz getting banned from the forums. I seldom talk to Bluewiz unless he brings up something about undergrad studies, etc. Whatever led you to believe that I was defending Bluewiz, whether it be teamspeak, the fact that I hang around with people he hangs around with, whatever the case, you have either been misinformed or you were too busy attempting to make me look like an ass rather than approaching me first about it. Regardless though, I'd thought I'd make myself clear on this, just so you can keep it in the back of your head for future reference.

To mifu, read above if that post is/was directed at me. If not, my mistake.

User avatar
Ruin
Forum Regular
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 8:43 pm
Location: The auto-parts store
Contact:

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#43

Post by Ruin » Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:22 pm

I got no problem with criticism Decay, I really don't. If I am doing poorly at something or did something people don't agree with, I want to know about it. My irritation comes from this idea that people think we sit on irc plotting out who to fuck with because they said something we don't like. Have I said things out of frustration? Sure, but my personal feeling do not override my decision making. Do I agree that some ideas brought up in staff channels are less than ideal? Absolutely. It is definitely not an echo chamber in there, however.

(Posting from a phone, sorry if it isn't worded well).
"Secondly, <PRO> is utter shit, and they're only "known" because almost all of them are also staff." - /vr/

User avatar
Ru5tK1ng
Posts a lot
Posts: 703
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:04 pm

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#44

Post by Ru5tK1ng » Thu Oct 02, 2014 8:27 pm

I will have to say that Ruin is probably honest in his statement. From the looks of all the logs, it just seems to be infurnus just plotting all alone by himself. :igor:
Projects

EonDM - With Hatred as my sidekick.
RageCTF - Made 1 map and did much more.
DBAB LMS - Pack made for Last Man Standing.
EonWeapons - Improve vanilla weapons and add stuff for kicks.
Progressive Duel - Leaving the old behind.
IDL201X CTF - Maintaining since 2013.
Strife AA - Helped tested + 1 map

User avatar
Ænima
Addicted to Zandronum
Posts: 3345
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:12 pm
Location: Shpongleland

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#45

Post by Ænima » Thu Oct 02, 2014 9:04 pm

He's right tho, these big debates always come after a major ban. :v

I think that can be a healthy thing though. It brings into focus questions such as "can I be banned just for being an asshole all the time?" and "will supporters of my mods be able to sway opinions?". DoomMarine (Deus Vult), SgtMark (Brutal Doom), and now Catastrophe.
Image ­ ­
­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­
Doom64: Unabsolved: Doom64 and Diablo2 had a baby


ZandroSkins
: a pack made by our community
Squad Radio: a WASD-powered chat menu, add your own sounds
AeniPuffs: neat blood and puff effects

User avatar
CloudFlash
Zandrone
Posts: 1074
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 5:35 pm
Location: Wonderland (except not really)

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#46

Post by CloudFlash » Fri Oct 03, 2014 5:34 am

Ænima wrote: "will supporters of my mods be able to sway opinions?". DoomMarine (Deus Vult), SgtMark (Brutal Doom), and now Catastrophe.


IMHO, just because you support the community by making awesome mods, that doesn't instantly give you the golden star of unbannability - you might be the savior of this community, but you are still a member, and as such rules DO apply.
But I guess I'm in no position to speak anyways, seeing how I'm by no means relevant to this discossion...
https://i.imgflip.com/i5tpe.jpg
*Hey, who wants to hear my solution to the modern world's problems? ^Me! %Me! @Me! #Me! *WELL TOO BAD @Did he just stab himself with this butcher knife? %Looks like it ^Hey, the pizza guy arrived! %Pizza! Yey

User avatar
Dusk
Developer
Posts: 567
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 9:59 pm
Location: Turku

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#47

Post by Dusk » Fri Oct 03, 2014 10:55 am

I'm having trouble figuring out what exactly is going on in this debacle but as someone who is (unfortunately inevitably..) involved with both sides of this argument it seems to me like we have another big misunderstanding at hand with both sides taking each other out of context. Perhaps all this boils down to bad wording from both sides?

CloudFlash wrote:But I guess I'm in no position to speak anyways, seeing how I'm by no means relevant to this discossion...

Nonsense. This is an argumentative discussion with the entire community involved.

Konda
Forum Regular
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:22 pm

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#48

Post by Konda » Fri Oct 03, 2014 1:16 pm

Dusk wrote:I'm having trouble figuring out what exactly is going on in this debacle but as someone who is (unfortunately inevitably..) involved with both sides of this argument it seems to me like we have another big misunderstanding at hand with both sides taking each other out of context. Perhaps all this boils down to bad wording from both sides?


It was difficult for me to understand the direction of the conversation until Decay summed up his own points here. The problem was that initially, along his points he included cheesy implications like "personal vendettas" which caused this. I'm pretty sure mifu pointed this out earlier in the thread - how it's lame to make attacks like that alongside trying to prove a point.
Last edited by Konda on Fri Oct 03, 2014 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Code: Select all

<Synert> fuck
<Synert> plugged in my memory stick and got a bsod

User avatar
Zakken
Forum Regular
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:32 am
Location: House Ylisse

RE: [split] Forum Bans discussion

#49

Post by Zakken » Sat Oct 04, 2014 7:54 am

Not going to hop into the heart of the argument as I'm sure it was wrapped up in IRC a while ago, but someone here thought it was a good idea to continue beating this one dead horse! Perhaps this argument is being dragged out far beyond its worth, thanks to some irritating circular logic I'm seeing here... However, one exception I'll concede is the problem with the apparently omitted or simply incorrect reasons for banning. If a reason is too vague, then it shouldn't hurt to elaborate -- this goes for pretty much any ban. It takes little effort to dig up enough evidence to warrant punishing any common troublemaker, so it shouldn't be a problem to add some details to the bans that are currently set in place, and any future ones. As for the forums, in-game and IRC judgment separation issue, maybe it'd provide less headache to let go of some of those barriers: the administration team has no good reason to limit their own knowledge on a certain person's behavior just because they are supposed to treat those three places as separate lobbies. Shouldn't a moderator be allowed to deliver judgment on somebody if he knows enough about the person to have a good analysis on his character? I'd say yes -- admins should have every right to keep a closer eye on possible liabilities. If somebody has caused good amounts of trouble in any place pertaining to the Zandro community, admins should be encouraged to be wary of this person's moves in all other places that have to do with Zandro, and since his actions, no matter the place, count as incriminating proof, I don't see why not list them as complimentary reasons for any further bans. This would clear some things up, leave less room for doubt and debate, and most likely increase the transparency that the admins strive for.

Another thing that irks me in this thread is the disgusting hypocrisy coming from some. It is fun to call the administration bad, aggressive, comparing them to ZDaemon and all of that jazz, but it's very bold of those people to do so while also throwing jabs at the admins at every chance they get. They can't even concede a point without sneaking in a sassy "was it that hard to say that?" comment! I shouldn't be supposed to teach etiquette in a place like this, but here goes: if you're going to call somebody out on doing something wrong, you should, at the very least, set the example by doing the right thing, otherwise you're being a hypocrite and possibly a projector too. I also don't see much wrong with the leaked logs posted up above. Disregarding the obvious instigating, drama-bait nature coming from the guy who posted them, there is nothing wrong with discussing ideas among the staff. Nobody is born with a pristine sense of judgment, and the best way to properly discuss whether an idea is good or not is in a group of people. That's the main reason why this, and many other administrations are made of groups, not single individuals. Those leaked logs hold about as much water as any ridiculous bill that never saw the light of day, and the fact you went out of your way to get them out of a private channel shows that you're more interested in disrupting the administration as it is instead of being helpful, which would explain your behavior here in general. Though that is not much of a surprise for me.
* Determination.

Post Reply