Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Catullus 16
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.

I have evidence on my side.

Originally posted by Deathblade
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?

ha, you love slippery slope arguments (a fallacy, by the way)... it's surprising that you're not the one championing a structural solution here.

for starters, i think we can agree this is a singular situation... and there is some precedent for GLB making one-off decisions of this caliber in other settings (e.g. creating GD instead of evicting FFA).

and this is hardly a case of 5-6 users... and especially not a case of 6 people from one league trying to change another league's forum.

here's the conflict as i see it: either the CPL is a league forum and behaves like every other league forum (i.e. subject to universal forum rules and under the universal jurisdiction of all full mods)... or it's quite simply not a league forum. the impulse even in this PF to create custom rules speaks to this.

Originally posted by Gturtle
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.

Sometimes he gives unfair bans to shut people up and avoid drama.

I was once banned for posting that someone is a douche bag in a private forum because someone else told him about it. I was not arguing with or attacking him. I was telling a long story and one line was "this guy's a douche" and he bitched and I got a ban.

Originally posted by Deathblade
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.

i'm sure they were pissed.

Originally posted by Catullus 16
here's the conflict as i see it: either the CPL is a league forum and behaves like every other league forum (i.e. subject to universal forum rules and under the universal jurisdiction of all full mods)... or it's quite simply not a league forum. the impulse even in this PF to create custom rules speaks to this.

Again, the rules are enforced.

Just because some people think they are not, doesn't mean they are not.

Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Deathblade

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?

ha, you love slippery slope arguments (a fallacy, by the way)... it's surprising that you're not the one championing a structural solution here.

for starters, i think we can agree this is a singular situation... and there is some precedent for GLB making one-off decisions of this caliber in other settings (e.g. creating GD instead of evicting FFA).

and this is hardly a case of 5-6 users... and especially not a case of 6 people from one league trying to change another league's forum.

here's the conflict as i see it: either the CPL is a league forum and behaves like every other league forum (i.e. subject to universal forum rules and under the universal jurisdiction of all full mods)... or it's quite simply not a league forum. the impulse even in this PF to create custom rules speaks to this.

I behave the same way in other league forums as I do in CPL. You can't remove league forum status for CPL just because it happens to have a bunch of like-minded individuals in it.

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.

oh yeah, that's the third counter-argument... that the CPL only "bans" its own so that it can ban people it doesn't like.

(note how the CPL becomes and anthropomorphous "it" in that claim.)

Originally posted by Catullus 16
i'm sure they were pissed.

That's the thing, people in CPL don't throw fits about bans unless they are ridiculous...like 7 days for posting a PM, or calling someone gay.

Originally posted by Catullus 16
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.

oh yeah, that's the third counter-argument... that the CPL only "bans" its own so that it can ban people it doesn't like.

(note how the CPL becomes and anthropomorphous "it" in that claim.)

SI never got banned in those instances though

Originally posted by Gturtle
also, that exchange program was well worth it, because those threads were shit

see... but you guys are supposed to care about bans.

they're supposed to prompt you to change your behavior and prevent further bans.

mods should cry a little inside when they have to resort to banning.

it hurts them more than it hurts you.

Originally posted by Azure Dreams
Originally posted by Catullus 16
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.
I have evidence on my side.

don't we all...

Originally posted by Azure Dreams
Sometimes he gives unfair bans to shut people up and avoid drama.

I was once banned for posting that someone is a douche bag in a private forum because someone else told him about it. I was not arguing with or attacking him. I was telling a long story and one line was "this guy's a douche" and he bitched and I got a ban.

also see Complaint-Based Moderation

Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Gturtle

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

see... but you guys are supposed to care about bans.

they're supposed to prompt you to change your behavior and prevent further bans.

mods should cry a little inside when they have to resort to banning.

it hurts them more than it hurts you.

I actually masturbate furiously whenever I ban someone.

Originally posted by Catullus 16
Originally posted by Azure Dreams

Originally posted by Catullus 16

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.
I have evidence on my side.

don't we all...



nope. The only evidence that someone is a good mod is lack of evidence that they're a bad mod. The fact that I can support the latter in a very valid fashion discredits the former.

Originally posted by Deathblade
Originally posted by Catullus 16

Originally posted by Gturtle


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

see... but you guys are supposed to care about bans.

they're supposed to prompt you to change your behavior and prevent further bans.

mods should cry a little inside when they have to resort to banning.

it hurts them more than it hurts you.

I actually masturbate furiously whenever I ban someone.

And I masturbate furiously whenever you masturbate furiously.