Warrior General Games

approximately 50% of my bans are from VT

probably more, but apparently I'm not one of the people who are cool enough to see my own ban history (which, by the way, is another issue I have with the current system)

Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Deathblade

Originally posted by Catullus 16

Originally posted by Deathblade

Originally posted by Catullus 16

it doesn't matter why they're upset. they will always be upset. or GLB comes crashing down on their side, and then you guys would be upset. there will always be this disagreement... it will never go away.
It does if you ignore it for long enough.
but then it just escalates... you need bort to ignore it, too.
or just wait until GLB runs out of new users.
lol @ GLB running out of new users if people don't like CPL.
If people are in CPL, they have already been around for approximately a year.

i meant new users period.

as in: the game is done.

nooooooooooo uurrrrrrrr dooooooooooone

Originally posted by Azure Dreams
Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Azure Dreams
Nothing to mock if they're banned imo.
welcome to CPL?
to what?

who says the mini-mods of the CPL subforum couldn't ban whomever they pleased (within just that subforum) for whatever reason?

Originally posted by Catullus 16
being upset =/= having complaints

by complaints, i mean something justifiable to forward upstairs. i'm guessing neither side would be happy being relegated to a subforum... but sometimes that's how compromises work.

But should there be a new subforum made, with new rules, every time 5-6 users decide they don't like a forum, the community of a forum, or the way the rules are?

If I get 6 people from CPL, and we decide that we don't like how Europe East A7 is ran, we can complain until we get a co-subforum system?

Originally posted by Azure Dreams
complaining to pallow is fine of them imo.
But the "other mods" they summon are just as immature and butthurt as them because of the shattastic mod-selection process.

in your opinion.

again, not saying that you're wrong... but it's not the universal view. nor is it likely pallow's view, for starters.

Originally posted by Gturtle
approximately 50% of my bans are from VT

probably more, but apparently I'm not one of the people who are cool enough to see my own ban history (which, by the way, is another issue I have with the current system)

Damnit...I haven't banned you yet. I've banned Untouchable, and DO a couple times I think.

Originally posted by Azure Dreams
Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Azure Dreams
That said: I'm not necessarily wholly against an addition of a new sub-forum for them, i'm just saying it won't help so if we go into things with that plan it would be tantamount to starting GLB with someone like DD in charge of customer support.
so... why do you think it wouldn't help?
BECAUSE THEY WANT JIMMYS PARENTS DEAD

can you dumb this one down for me?

i completely missed your point.

Originally posted by Chessey
TBH I didn't think that there was much moderating being done in CPL, but believe it or not there are people with extensive ban histories hailing out of CPL
So that "VT is playing favourites and only banning the people that don't frequent CPL!!!1111!" notion is wrong
Originally posted by Azure Dreams
Almost every ban I've ever received was from VT.
Every single ban I've ever deserved WAS from VT.
I've also received a couple unwarranted bans from VT, and I bitched at him for it.

there are two counter-arguments there...
- that VT/etc will swoop in an token ban someone (often releasing them shortly thereafter) to prevent that person from getting a longer ban or coming to the attention of the admins
- that no amount of CPL banning will ever change the behavior of the CPL, since the people getting banned don't care in the first place.

and once again, my disclaimer -- i'm not saying any of that is actually true, i'm just reporting what the counter-arguments are.

Originally posted by Catullus 16
can you dumb this one down for me?

i completely missed your point.

Jimmy is a kid right, and they want his parents to die

Originally posted by Deathblade
Oh goddamn Cat, just go make a GG thread.

?

Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Azure Dreams

Originally posted by Catullus 16

Originally posted by Azure Dreams

That said: I'm not necessarily wholly against an addition of a new sub-forum for them, i'm just saying it won't help so if we go into things with that plan it would be tantamount to starting GLB with someone like DD in charge of customer support.
so... why do you think it wouldn't help?
BECAUSE THEY WANT JIMMYS PARENTS DEAD

can you dumb this one down for me?

i completely missed your point.

Basically the GG Dot crowd aren't happy until we're unhappy.

Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Deathblade

Oh goddamn Cat, just go make a GG thread.

?

I know that's what you are arguing for. Itching to make a GG thread in CPL.

Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Chessey

TBH I didn't think that there was much moderating being done in CPL, but believe it or not there are people with extensive ban histories hailing out of CPL
So that "VT is playing favourites and only banning the people that don't frequent CPL!!!1111!" notion is wrong
Originally posted by Azure Dreams

Almost every ban I've ever received was from VT.
Every single ban I've ever deserved WAS from VT.
I've also received a couple unwarranted bans from VT, and I bitched at him for it.

there are two counter-arguments there...
- that VT/etc will swoop in an token ban someone (often releasing them shortly thereafter) to prevent that person from getting a longer ban or coming to the attention of the admins
- that no amount of CPL banning will ever change the behavior of the CPL, since the people getting banned don't care in the first place.

and once again, my disclaimer -- i'm not saying any of that is actually true, i'm just reporting what the counter-arguments are.

tbh, VT's bans are pretty fair, with the possible exception of the period in time that I could exchange a 1 day ban for "SI is a fag" in order to get a thread locked.

also, that exchange program was well worth it, because those threads were shit

Originally posted by Gturtle
tbh, VT's bans are pretty fair, with the possible exception of the period in time that I could exchange a 1 day ban for "SI is a fag" in order to get a thread locked.

SOUNDS PRETTY FAIR TO ME