Hey Scud

[Scud]

Hi Chuck,

All points taken. The new rules, however, should be warning enough for now. Again, if you don't think the rules apply to you, then they probably don't.

I want to stay strict until it's proven that the need for strictness is no longer necessary. I suspect most will go along, some reluctantly and some with no problems at all. Some will leave in a huff, some will leave and come back quietly over time. Whether it's a waste of my time, time will tell.

You're dead on as far as taking the job and then complaining it's hard. I didn't mean for it to sound so much like a complaint, just came as a surprise. Dumb, I know. We didn't have this problem at my old club that I recall and I was pretty good friends with the moderators. We were a much smaller club, so that's probably why.

I know Jim would not appreciate peolpe not feeling welcome, but he's had to take part in all this as well. Just an FYI, but apparently it's ONLY our forum. Not sure what that says, but being that it's mine, I don't like it, nor should you. We seem to be the "talk of the town" here at the Blitz. Regardless, I'm not sure rules regarding behavior should make one feel unwelcome, but yes, the resulting listed penalties might. I'll take that into consideration, but it will remain for the short term.

So far so good though. Since midnight no bans!

Anyway, Chuck, I appreciate the input. Keep thinking, keep posting your thoughts and I'll keep listening.

Thanks,
Dave

[Von Earlmann]

100 hundred years from now...no one will care...in fact I bet there are at least a billion Chinese who don't care right now......come on guys...suck it up and deal with it....move on .org :-)

VE

[RedDevil]

there are at least a billion Chinese who don't care right now......
VE

sage wisdom :bow:

[Larry Reese]

We need to ship a couple of hundred thousand Mandarin copies of CS to them...

LR

[Chuck10mtn]

Hey Von Earlman good point and well taken, most people in any one state really could care less.

I'm saying this in the most respectful, nonconfrontational manner that I can so please bear with me.
Scud, Are we going to be better off as a forum by forcing people to post only certain ways, saying only certain things. Posting as not to create a nonconfrontational manner could be almost impossible. no argumentative posting of any kind, that pretty much takes any opinion not in agreement with said post out of the forum. If you asked the banned people if in the beginning it was anymore than just a debate they would say no. Your 1st two Mandatory statements seen to be very vague in terms,Giving you sole opinion as to whats respectful, sarcastic, aggressive or argumentative posting. Shouldn't there be a couple of people who would take the post under advisment and look it over 1st. Some people are very good at saying things and others aren't so those who aren't very articulate at speech need to worry that a disagreeable post will be met with minimum 30 day suspension. Trying to force people into a way of posting is in my opinion not the best thing for the forums. It seems that if a disagreement with you happens you can just ban and use any of the above rules for justification. But, sarcastic,aggressive, argumentative, nonconfrontational all fall into the open to interpertation catagory.

That being said do I think people need to think longer and post less sure, do people after some posts in a topic start to push the line sure.
Do some people push buttoms more than others, again sure they do. I just don't want to see peopleof differing opinions get silanced .

[Crossroads]

Some people are very good at saying things and others aren't so those who aren't very articulate at speech need to worry that a disagreeable post will be met with minimum 30 day suspension.

A word from a new guy...

First of all, living at this part of world that I consider mine, being ahead of US some 6 to 10 hours depending whether you live in East coast and West coast, and logging into the site during my morning hours, I've seen some the good, bad and downright ugly as well.

Scud made the point in saying that some of the post are never seen by most of the members, and I can adhere to it. Every now and then, and it is not a case whether there is an IMHO in the sentence or not.

That being said do I think people need to think longer and post less sure, do people after some posts in a topic start to push the line sure.
Do some people push buttoms more than others, again sure they do. I just don't want to see peopleof differing opinions get silanced .

Passion to wargames. People who have been here for over ten years. That's what made me to take the step and register to this site.

For some of the threads, the passion is obviously there and yes, at times it feels that I should step up and say guys let it go. But I haven't. I feel it is not my part to say so.

The passion and sometimes the nitpicking that follows has never stopped me from participating in threads. The reason for not participating come in most cases from the fact that I am at awe to deep knowledge and experience of the series and of the game engine, and retain from making stupid questions or observations.

There was a point made that some of us need to grow a thicker skin so to say. There is a point in this as well. It must be downright demotivating to log into the site as a moderator and the first thing you see is a bunch of complaints about a certain thread.

As I say sometimes and lately, more often, to my two kids: do not come complaining to me, sort it out among yourselves, and if you are not able to do that, I will come and then you are propably both in trouble. I guess that's what Scud is saying to us right now. :smoke:

I agree the new rules seem to be written a bit at the heat of the moment, but let it be so. Sometimes a perhaps needs to be used to drive a point?

That's it from me regarding this topic. Virtual round of to everyone and a Happy New Year! Let the passion continue :)

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Hey Von Earlman good point and well taken, most people in any one state really could care less.

I'm saying this in the most respectful, nonconfrontational manner that I can so please bear with me.
Scud, Are we going to be better off as a forum by forcing people to post only certain ways, saying only certain things. Posting as not to create a nonconfrontational manner could be almost impossible. no argumentative posting of any kind, that pretty much takes any opinion not in agreement with said post out of the forum. If you asked the banned people if in the beginning it was anymore than just a debate they would say no. Your 1st two Mandatory statements seen to be very vague in terms,Giving you sole opinion as to whats respectful, sarcastic, aggressive or argumentative posting. Shouldn't there be a couple of people who would take the post under advisment and look it over 1st. Some people are very good at saying things and others aren't so those who aren't very articulate at speech need to worry that a disagreeable post will be met with minimum 30 day suspension. Trying to force people into a way of posting is in my opinion not the best thing for the forums. It seems that if a disagreement with you happens you can just ban and use any of the above rules for justification. But, sarcastic,aggressive, argumentative, nonconfrontational all fall into the open to interpertation catagory.

That being said do I think people need to think longer and post less sure, do people after some posts in a topic start to push the line sure.
Do some people push buttoms more than others, again sure they do. I just don't want to see peopleof differing opinions get silanced .

Chuck,

Excellent. Well said. Right on! :bow:

I especially do not like the rule where the mods can tack on an extra five days for questioning their ban. An appeal to the mod is the first right of the member? Then to risk further banning and dismissal due to following the club's rules for a right of appeal up the line, is a bit harsh?

>snip< (Self edit to allow both sides the opportunity to state their facts and not upon my knowledge of the facts.)

Both the inforcement and implementation of the rules are very subjective to the "emotional" state of the mods at the time they study an "infraction" or receive an appeal. :chin:

As I agreed earlier. The "martial law" -ness of the new rules may have been intended as a good thing. Your perspective shows that they may have some slight flaws? But, we all can work within them until the mods feel they are no longer necessary?

I'm actually glad that David has allowed this line of open discussion.

I also hope that the many who no longer post here will return and make the forums a content filled, and positive place, for CS lovers to reside while sharing their love of the game and history. :thumbs_up:



RR

[Stryker]

Seeing as how a discussion on this is being allowed, I find the new rules to be insulting to me as an adult, draconian, over-the-top and down right unacceptable... and as is my right, I've decided I don't want to be part of a club with such rules. (and I did say I would leave when my last game is completed, so i'm still here at the moment :P )

If people are being out-of-order, ban THEM, don't tar me.... who in 11 years has never had a problem with any mods... with that brush.....if you see really bad posts, ban the poster for 30 days immediately, what's the problem with that? if you see a thread getting out of hand, tell the people involved to take it off the boards or risk a ban... seems simple to me? although I've never been a mod, so I'm speaking from the outside, I realise it must be hard work / frustrating at times - but still...

There are enough rules and control freaks in real life, especially here in the UK with our unelected marxist dictatorship in government without having my hobby and second "home" ruined by the same kind of crap. Personally I like a lively healthy debate, sometimes they get heated, but what's so wrong with that.. let the fire burn long enough and it dies out, others get bored with it and move away.... that's life...

I know my views aren't held by any other members, but all points of view were asked for, so I gave it, and am doing what I need to do - for myself.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

If people are being out-of-order, ban THEM, don't tar me.... who in 11 years has never had a problem with any mods... with that brush.....if you see really bad posts, ban the poster for 30 days immediately, what's the problem with that? if you see a thread getting out of hand, tell the people involved to take it off the boards or risk a ban... seems simple to me? although I've never been a mod, so I'm speaking from the outside, I realise it must be hard work / frustrating at times - but still...

Superior. Spot on!
Paul, you made it quite simple ... really.
It would streamline the "moderator's" job and would have the posters not look over their shoulders as they are typing, wondering if the words they are using could have double meanings, and will cross a subjective line that would lead to a banning or dismissal.

When I was a mod, I would send an e-mail explaining where and why I believed a post was 'out of order', and needed to be removed or edited, to remain on the forums. It was extra work, for sure, but a hell of a lot less time consuming/frustrating than coming to the club and having to deal with constant complaints and deletion of posts.

The only posts I ever removed without explanation were the "instant attack posts". Seems that if someone did not like a certain poster they would put up posts attacking the person and never discussing the person's posted content. When they fell into that category, they simply did not need to be explained.

Personally I like a lively healthy debate, sometimes they get heated, but what's so wrong with that.. let the fire burn long enough and it dies out, others get bored with it and move away.... that's life...

I know my views aren't held by any other members, but all points of view were asked for, so I gave it, and am doing what I need to do - for myself.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.
I think a blend of courtesy with a bit of "heated debate" could go a long way to making David's job easier. It would also make the forums better. And, the draconian additional rules may just go by the wayside?

I do hope that your last game is one of "many turns" and that you will have some time to see if things are being straightened out, and the new CS specific forum rules are removed, before you leave us.

You've always been a good guy.
I remember when you helped to clear up some "server issues" and other computer related problems that the club was having.
We would be diminished if you leave.

Regards,

Ed

[Scud]

There are too many points being made to start trying to address each one with quotes, so I'll just make a few blanket explanations that will at least clear up a few things.

First, Rule 20 has been in effect since long before my start date. Chop away the rhetoric and it pretty much says the ladder commanders can do what they want with their individual forums. For the record, I've never done that and this discussion is a clear example. You're all included.

That being said, and as a former moderator, MrRR, can attest to, I don't have it within my power to arbitrarily ban anyone. I MUST go through the senior officers. I state my request and give my reasons. Any site officer can chime in and give thier feedback. In the end though, yes, so far senior managers have agreed with my assessment or have disagreed, but said it's my call. My call wasn't always for a ban either, but to give someone another chance. By the way, the really bad posts aren't deleted, they're just rendered invisible to the general public.

There were two suspensions doled out in the final days of 2009. Neither were for violation of the new rules, Ed has been misinformed on this. The five-day appeal rule was waved by me immediately upon receiving the the violators request and explanation. If the new rules had been in effect, his appeal directly to Jim would have cost him more than thirty days. The other suspension was not appealed. The violator knew what he did and has voiced his personal regrets to me several times.

One suspension has already been waved by Jim. I know only that this violator agreed to Jim's conditions. I'm not privy to what Jim's exact conditions were, but I think I can guess. I'll let each of you do your own guesswork.

The second violator, to date and to my present knowledge, has not agreed to Jim's conditions, so his suspension remains in place. Don't read anything into that. Jim might be away or the other guy might not have checked email, dunno.

Of the two suspensions, one was in absolute clear violation of Rule 20. However, I issued only a warning to a previous violation only a few days prior. So there must have been some unknown added to the mix that tipped the scale. It will remain unknown.

The second violation isn't worth discussing. This violater had been given more than his fair share of warnings. By me, by Toni and by senior officers. This includes Jim, the site's owner.

Rudolph:
As for those who have felt insulted by the new rules, I've already stated "if you don't feel the rules apply to you, then they probably don't." I think I've said that three times now(?) I believe I've also apologized to those who feel I was too abrasive. Jeez, I don't want you to leave. Never my intention. I don't think the new rules tar you in any way, but I apologize to you if you've felt I have. Again, not what I intended. Politeness, courtesy and respect. Debate, but don't turn the debate into a fist fight. I know you get this. I know you do.

As for really bad posts, ban the poster, yep that's simple. Agreed. There have been quite a few however, that haven't been quite so simple. There have been some that were provocative, but only to certain individuals. You read it, what's the big deal? Previously, how do I handle those? Now, yep, it is simple. Also, if you've followed certain threads, I've done exactly what you've advised, including the thread that led to the most recent infractions. The thread hasn't been closed or removed. Not hard to figure out which one it was. Bet some of you will even be able to find the post that instigated the fight. It's still there too.

I think you guys need to get over the feeling of walking on eggshells. Rudolph states that in eleven years he's never had a problem with the mods. These rules won't change that. Some of you, no names of course, have had some problems with myself and with other site officers. Some of you have a history that goes back to before my membership start time. These rules might have an effect on how you post and for that all I can say is I hope so.

Last thing, this thread is a debate. Reread it all. No one here has said anything that I would consider disrespectful. I haven't logged off in a huff because some of you have disagreed with me. No one in agreement has said anything to those who disagree that I find argumentative, or agrresively provocative, no one who disagrees has resorted to sarcasm or foul language of any kind. Relax. You know the difference. You've been displaying it post after post right here.

Hey! Day 2.