Argonath RPG - A World of its own
GTA:SA => SA:MP - San Andreas Multiplayer => SA:MP General => Topic started by: Frank_Hawk on November 20, 2013, 09:39:05 pm
-
Hi - I would like some clarification. Earlier today, I was discussing project methodologies in /p and was asked to cease the discussion as it can be seen as 'insulting' to developers. I want to bring this to the attention of the wider audience especially the leadership as to why we are not allowed to discuss real life facts around project methodologies.
While Argonath uses the term developer to be involved across the project lifecycle - the term developer in real life is very different. We should not in my opinion be restricted / censored from steering the younger audience who may be aspiring technology professionals in the wrong direction. We are failing in our responsiblity to promote truthful education.
Could we please have some clarity on this?
-
The way you was bringing it into discussion in public chat seemed to be inferring that the Argonath Developers were not good standard, that they didn't know what they was doing as they was not using the business model you was discussing ..
-
Your use of the word 'developer' in the real world is rather limited.
While software developers may not be always the people who are decision making about the products they develop, there are many other kind of developers who would take offense at you mentioneing they have no poer in the real world.
For instance a business developer is the person who makes the general decisions about business strategy. This is also how the word developer was introduced in Argonath, as in the people who develop the community. That is not related to the scripts, but to the strategic direction of the community as a whole.
As during the years the structure has changed by adding a number of people, the word 'developers' has been use mostly for the top scripters. That means those who are in command of taking the decisions on how feasible the proposed script ideas are, and layout the requirements for the actual scripters.
This meansthat the word developers in Argonath matches the software term pretty well, except that many of our current developers also have a leadership role attached to them.
Next time you bring something up, please do not try to limit the context to favour your limited knowledge and opinion.
-
The way you was bringing it into discussion in public chat seemed to be inferring that the Argonath Developers were not good standard, that they didn't know what they was doing as they was not using the business model you was discussing ..
Further than the truth - in fact, the discussion related to project methodologies and the developer's role in that. There was no derogatory comments made about Argonath developers. In fact, Argonath developers should be respected beyond doubt. Being engaged at all levels of the project lifecycle is very difficult and can be overwhelming. The mere fact that they are able to execute the role, with RS5 being a prime example is a testament to their hard work. That said, we should not be discouraging / promoting censorship against real world scenarios. A large portion of this community are aspiring technology professionals and they should be made aware of the 'real life' role of a developer as opposed to the role in Argonath. I normally do not voice my opinion much anymore, but this is outrageous and nothing short than censorship.
-
Your use of the word 'developer' in the real world is rather limited.
While software developers may not be always the people who are decision making about the products they develop, there are many other kind of developers who would take offense at you mentioneing they have no poer in the real world.
For instance a business developer is the person who makes the general decisions about business strategy. This is also how the word developer was introduced in Argonath, as in the people who develop the community. That is not related to the scripts, but to the strategic direction of the community as a whole.
As during the years the structure has changed by adding a number of people, the word 'developers' has been use mostly for the top scripters. That means those who are in command of taking the decisions on how feasible the proposed script ideas are, and layout the requirements for the actual scripters.
This meansthat the word developers in Argonath matches the software term pretty well, except that many of our current developers also have a leadership role attached to them.
Next time you bring something up, please do not try to limit the context to favour your limited knowledge and opinion.
"people are stupid nowadays"
*banned for flaming*
The fact that you generalize it upon yourselves just shows your insecurity on the current topic, I really don't try to provoke, but don't you feel that you are the ones who limit the context to favour your limited knowledge and opinion, and, in addition, your reputation?
-
"people are stupid nowadays"
*banned for flaming*
The fact that you generalize it upon yourselves just shows your insecurity on the current topic, I really don't try to provoke, but don't you feel that you are the ones who limit the context to favour your limited knowledge and opinion, and, in addition, your reputation?
I guess you give examples from the servers that you frequent.
There for this can be ignored.
-
I'd actually like to apologise for any role I played in winding up the situation by debating the various Project Life-cycles used in "the real world" - didn't realise that I was adding to comments which may or may not have been aimed at the Argonath Development team.
If it is of any help, I did not believe the comments Frank made about "developers" were meant to be derogatory towards Argonath. On the contrary, I believe he was indirectly complimenting them by comparing them to projects in RL which fail due to a lack of Dev and Test involvement early on in the project life-cycle.
However, it doesn't forgive that I was tactless in continuing the discussion, sparking more heat in an already heated environment.
I'd like to point out I was not challenged IG for my actions - in spite of this, I still feel somewhat guilty.
--Ben
-
I guess you give examples from the servers that you frequent.
There for this can be ignored.
I took the example straight off your post. If you really feel you cannot answer my question, you are free to add myself to your Ignore list, however do not try to provoke me with your petty insults, it doesn't show you any smarter.
-
Do you try to get banned here?
-
What would the reason be for that ban?
-
What would the reason be for that ban?
Being as flaming that can only spread bnegativity.
-
lol...
-
Also like to point out that Gandalf is one of the big cheeses in Argonath, and can ban people for pretty much whatever he wants!
-
Your use of the word 'developer' in the real world is rather limited.
While software developers may not be always the people who are decision making about the products they develop, there are many other kind of developers who would take offense at you mentioneing they have no poer in the real world.
For instance a business developer is the person who makes the general decisions about business strategy. This is also how the word developer was introduced in Argonath, as in the people who develop the community. That is not related to the scripts, but to the strategic direction of the community as a whole.
As during the years the structure has changed by adding a number of people, the word 'developers' has been use mostly for the top scripters. That means those who are in command of taking the decisions on how feasible the proposed script ideas are, and layout the requirements for the actual scripters.
This meansthat the word developers in Argonath matches the software term pretty well, except that many of our current developers also have a leadership role attached to them.
Next time you bring something up, please do not try to limit the context to favour your limited knowledge and opinion.
Its clear that my point has been missed or perhaps just ignored it. The 'business developer' you refer to is called a 'business analyst' who can be responsible for defining business strategies alongside senior stakeholders. The term business developer is not a term which I've seen promoted as part of any major project methodology so since we're on the topic of educating eachother - how about you assist me in validating your point through a established source.
In the wider context of the subject, we might want to consider relabelling the roles of staff in Argonath to more suitably aligned designations since it might assist those younger to follow it up as a career option. By giving them relevant and accurate information, we are doing our bit. Instead right now I feel that we are failing in our obligation uphold this value.
More importantly, I would like to seek clarity on why we are unable to talk about this subject widely in /p. If it offends developers to talk about real life project methodologies, then I might claim to be offended by the subject of dogs. In that case, will you uphold my right to prevent a discussion about dogs in /p?
-
Also like to point out that Gandalf is one of the big cheeses in Argonath, and can ban people for pretty much whatever he wants!
On the other hand, I can not put anyone on my ignore list no matter if I would want to or not.
Back to the topic of censorship.
Even if it was meant well, which I always presume it is, the administration in game has the right to request you to cease a discussion if they deem it detrimental to the ongoing atmosphere on server. To claim censorship because you were requested to drop a topic can be seen as an attack on the authority of the administration team to regulate and monitor the chat in order to keep a positive atmosphere for all people, yourself included.
Such attacks are frowned upon by HQ, and under previous circumstances during my inactivity I am pretty sure the topic would have been locked or removed, and may have lead to a warning of those in support.
As you may know I have a very open stance with regard to critcism, and prefer to counter by arguments instead of actions.
However if it is clear that certain poster are attempting to create negativity, they will be dealt with. Everyone is welcome to add their thoughts and critisize, however they should do this in a civil and if possible positive and constructive attitude.
Ben is an example of a positive attitude, others are less.
-
Its clear that my point has been missed or perhaps just ignored it. The 'business developer' you refer to is called a 'business analyst' who can be responsible for defining business strategies alongside senior stakeholders. The term business developer is not a term which I've seen promoted as part of any major project methodology so since we're on the topic of educating eachother - how about you assist me in validating your point through a established source.
In the wider context of the subject, we might want to consider relabelling the roles of staff in Argonath to more suitably aligned designations since it might assist those younger to follow it up as a career option. By giving them relevant and accurate information, we are doing our bit. Instead right now I feel that we are failing in our obligation uphold this value.
More importantly, I would like to seek clarity on why we are unable to talk about this subject widely in /p. If it offends developers to talk about real life project methodologies, then I might claim to be offended by the subject of dogs. In that case, will you uphold my right to prevent a discussion about dogs in /p?
In different countries different nomenclatures are used for the same types of jobs. A toilet cleaner may be called a facility manager in some countries.
It is up to us to use whatever titles we wish, if you seek clarity you may refer to the staff page to find the exact position.
As for the discussion, I believe I answered that in my previous post.
-
However if it is clear that certain poster are attempting to create negativity, they will be dealt with. Everyone is welcome to add their thoughts and critisize, however they should do this in a civil and if possible positive and constructive attitude.
Ben is an example of a positive attitude, others are less.
I'm sorry, but I can't remain silent after these words. To get this clear, you claimed a really lose definition, I asked you a completely straight question. To begin with, what makes you think I'm inciting negative attitude, if you were the one to provoke me in the first place by flat out telling me I'm to be ignored? If you explain where I was at wrong I will stop, however I got nothing in response.
-
The day when Argonath told people to not talk about the odd and harmless subject "project methodologies".
-
Gandalf,
It’s convincingly reassuring that this topic has remained open as had it been locked, I would have with no doubt ascertained it was undoubtedly censorship. Since it has remained open – it’s fair to continue questioning how a topic around project methodologies can be considered as detrimental to the atmosphere or offensive for it to be censored from public view.
The judge is the community – in this case, I’m reliant on the community’s support in agreeing that this topic was in no way detrimental to the atmosphere in the server but rather constructive and open. Added to that, I ask that you show me how this was detrimental to the community through evidence which I’m confident you will not find any. Nowadays, I rather shy away from these situations, but today was too farfetched for me not to bring this up.
Since you have not responded to showing me evidence around the ‘business developer’ role being accredited by a reputable project methodology – I have no other option but to accept your point as invalid. That said, I agree with you and haven’t questioned that developers can play roles outside their normal remit. But it is worth mentioning that in the project methodology context, this is not supported for which I am arguing a point for.
As ever, I am reliant on you to steer us to righteousness but the community is the ultimate judge of your words.
-
Gandalf,
It’s convincingly reassuring that this topic has remained open as had it been locked, I would have with no doubt ascertained it was undoubtedly censorship. Since it has remained open – it’s fair to continue questioning how a topic around project methodologies can be considered as detrimental to the atmosphere or offensive for it to be censored from public view.
The judge is the community – in this case, I’m reliant on the community’s support in agreeing that this topic was in no way detrimental to the atmosphere in the server but rather constructive and open. Added to that, I ask that you show me how this was detrimental to the community through evidence which I’m confident you will not find any. Nowadays, I rather shy away from these situations, but today was too farfetched for me not to bring this up.
Since you have not responded to showing me evidence around the ‘business developer’ role being accredited by a reputable project methodology – I have no other option but to accept your point as invalid. That said, I agree with you and haven’t questioned that developers can play roles outside their normal remit. But it is worth mentioning that in the project methodology context, this is not supported for which I am arguing a point for.
As ever, I am reliant on you to steer us to righteousness but the community is the ultimate judge of your words.
As I have mentioned before, when you are in game the in-game administration team has the exclusive right to determine if a topic is detrimental to the atmosphere. The players are required to follow any directions to cease discussion in public chat, and if not they could be rightfully punished.
It has not use to discuss the nature and content of the topic itself, as it is not the community that has the right to judge in-game matters of public chat.
A perfectly harmless topic could still be seen as unnecesary or detrimental and there for can be asked not to be referred to. When in game, players are to obey instructions regardless on their own opinion on if the subject is suitable for discussion in the public chat of a game server.
-
In CBF's defense, the discussion you and I had on main chat could have been considered heated (although we know it was not). It certainly filled up the chat window!
I should imagine that in different circumstances the conversation would have been considered acceptable, but after a misunderstanding/incident involving Argonath Developers, perhaps it was not the best topic to be discussed - certainly could have appeared to be provocative to those more aware.
Obviously CBF perceived it to be somewhat prvocative, and it must be considered that as an Administrative member, he is a member of the community just the same as anyone else!
Business Developer could be a job title in some parts of the world - Certainly sounds legitimate, and brings back some honest looking links in Google Search...
Though that's really a little irrelevant, as I would promote Developers being more involved in the "business" side of things even if totally technical.
-
I'm sorry, but I can't remain silent after these words. To get this clear, you claimed a really lose definition, I asked you a completely straight question. To begin with, what makes you think I'm inciting negative attitude, if you were the one to provoke me in the first place by flat out telling me I'm to be ignored? If you explain where I was at wrong I will stop, however I got nothing in response.
I merely replied that the definition used was invalid, and could be seen as damaging where it is not.
Your reply cam with quotes that were not in any way related to the context and a question that seemed to be provocative. That means I simply mirrored your behaviour, obviously with success.
Where Frank may be trying to look as the contect of the discussion, the fact remains that the issue here is tha he does not wish to follow instructions by the administration to cease discussion of a topic over public chat. That is handled, and if he wishes to discuss the topic in-depth I suggest him to use the Wolrd News section, hopefully linked to a related news item.
For the topic of censorhip, an in-depth discussion regarding the topic he discussed in public chat would actually be off-topic.
-
As I have mentioned before, when you are in game the in-game administration team has the exclusive right to determine if a topic is detrimental to the atmosphere. The players are required to follow any directions to cease discussion in public chat, and if not they could be rightfully punished.
It has not use to discuss the nature and content of the topic itself, as it is not the community that has the right to judge in-game matters of public chat.
A perfectly harmless topic could still be seen as unnecesary or detrimental and there for can be asked not to be referred to. When in game, players are to obey instructions regardless on their own opinion on if the subject is suitable for discussion in the public chat of a game server.
The above statements align well with the definition of censorship being the 'supervision of information' by classifying it through one's own opinion as being harmful to the community. Thanks for making it clear that despite the harmless nature of this subject, it has been warranted as negative despite being a widely promoted subject in the professional software technology world.
Reading the statements above leaves me in no doubt that seasoned veterans views are held in low self-esteem when compared to the likes of 'developers' and admins who in this case I've proved wrong. This directly violates point 2 of the Argonath vision by you refusing to uphold the rights of me as a player. While I agree that there should be a regulation of the chat, I expected you to denounce this action of censoring this topic but instead it seems like you have promoted it instead.
I would not be surprised if many others have fallen prey to similar situations like mine. Unfortunately, for the majority they are unable to articulate their views and suffer in silence. Therefore I felt it was an moral obligation in this scenario to stand up for the people and righteousness.
You've let this seasoned veteran and the wider community down by failing to denounce this unexplainable/flawed censorship.
-
The above statements align well with the definition of censorship being the 'supervision of information' by classifying it through one's own opinion as being harmful to the community. Thanks for making it clear that despite the harmless nature of this subject, it has been warranted as negative despite being a widely promoted subject in the professional software technology world.
Reading the statements above leaves me in no doubt that seasoned veterans views are held in low self-esteem when compared to the likes of 'developers' and admins who in this case I've proved wrong. This directly violates point 2 of the Argonath vision by you refusing to uphold the rights of me as a player. While I agree that there should be a regulation of the chat, I expected you to denounce this action of censoring this topic but instead it seems like you have promoted it instead.
I would not be surprised if many others have fallen prey to similar situations like mine. Unfortunately, for the majority they are unable to articulate their views and suffer in silence. Therefore I felt it was an moral obligation in this scenario to stand up for the people and righteousness.
You've let this seasoned veteran and the wider community down by failing to denounce this unexplainable/flawed censorship.
Please give your definition of censorship, as I believe we are talking about separate things.
-
As I have mentioned before, when you are in game the in-game administration team has the exclusive right to determine if a topic is detrimental to the atmosphere. The players are required to follow any directions to cease discussion in public chat, and if not they could be rightfully punished.
It has not use to discuss the nature and content of the topic itself, as it is not the community that has the right to judge in-game matters of public chat.
A perfectly harmless topic could still be seen as unnecesary or detrimental and there for can be asked not to be referred to. When in game, players are to obey instructions regardless on their own opinion on if the subject is suitable for discussion in the public chat of a game server.
Maybe this is the problem. The community is at the core of Argonath. Maybe not respecting this through actions of putting the community first can cause problems. The very fact that you stated that players are to follow administration instructions on whether or not a topic is up for discussion in not entirely unfair. Say a particular administrator does not like a particular discussion that is occuring in public that, he/she can freely shut it down by scaring the public with punishments regardless if the chat has not brought about any negativity. Say the situation was reversed. What if a few players saw the same conversation as been too sensitive? Frank used an example using the illustration of dogs.
I would like to know why the community is given so little respect.
-
Please give your definition of censorship, as I believe we are talking about separate things.
Perhaps you've been reading too many topics lately to see the underlying points being made here - I suggest you read this topic over again to understand what is being said. I would only be repeating myself otherwise.
-
The above statements align well with the definition of censorship being the 'supervision of information' by classifying it through one's own opinion as being harmful to the community. Thanks for making it clear that despite the harmless nature of this subject, it has been warranted as negative despite being a widely promoted subject in the professional software technology world.
Reading the statements above leaves me in no doubt that seasoned veterans views are held in low self-esteem when compared to the likes of 'developers' and admins who in this case I've proved wrong. This directly violates point 2 of the Argonath vision by you refusing to uphold the rights of me as a player. While I agree that there should be a regulation of the chat, I expected you to denounce this action of censoring this topic but instead it seems like you have promoted it instead.
I would not be surprised if many others have fallen prey to similar situations like mine. Unfortunately, for the majority they are unable to articulate their views and suffer in silence. Therefore I felt it was an moral obligation in this scenario to stand up for the people and righteousness.
You've let this seasoned veteran and the wider community down by failing to denounce this unexplainable/flawed censorship.
How about my rights as a player, developer and admin ...
A seasoned veterans view was taken into account of .... MINE !
And if it was censorship all comments would of been removed, you got asked to stop and at first did not ..
When discussing matters you need to look not just at the subject but how it can be interpreted by others.
You may have seen it as no problem but by referring to the Argonath developers at the start you changed the whole tone of the subject as I saw it. If you had NOT mentioned Argonath developers it may have gone unnoticed or not been stopped in the manner it was..
Too many times players forget to look at the interpretation that others may make of what is being said and cause offense even when they do not intend to do so.
-
The above statements align well with the definition of censorship being the 'supervision of information' by classifying it through one's own opinion as being harmful to the community. Thanks for making it clear that despite the harmless nature of this subject, it has been warranted as negative despite being a widely promoted subject in the professional software technology world.
Reading the statements above leaves me in no doubt that seasoned veterans views are held in low self-esteem when compared to the likes of 'developers' and admins who in this case I've proved wrong. This directly violates point 2 of the Argonath vision by you refusing to uphold the rights of me as a player. While I agree that there should be a regulation of the chat, I expected you to denounce this action of censoring this topic but instead it seems like you have promoted it instead.
I would not be surprised if many others have fallen prey to similar situations like mine. Unfortunately, for the majority they are unable to articulate their views and suffer in silence. Therefore I felt it was an moral obligation in this scenario to stand up for the people and righteousness.
You've let this seasoned veteran and the wider community down by failing to denounce this unexplainable/flawed censorship.
Damn, you hit the nail on the head right there.
-
Perhaps you've been reading too many topics lately to see the underlying points being made here - I suggest you read this topic over again to understand what is being said. I would only be repeating myself otherwise.
Please answer my question, I can not continue until you do.
-
Maybe this is the problem. The community is at the core of Argonath. Maybe not respecting this through actions of putting the community first can cause problems. The very fact that you stated that players are to follow administration instructions on whether or not a topic is up for discussion in not entirely unfair. Say a particular administrator does not like a particular discussion that is occuring in public that, he/she can freely shut it down by scaring the public with punishments regardless if the chat has not brought about any negativity. Say the situation was reversed. What if a few players saw the same conversation as been too sensitive? Frank used an example using the illustration of dogs.
I would like to know why the community is given so little respect.
That is why there is an extensive recruitment and training for the administration team, as well as the possibility to send in complaints on incidents that can be verified by ttime and date of logs.
As for your last line, I wonder where this type of propaganda people seem to be spreading has started.
-
To answer your question, Kirgiz:
The fact that you generalize it upon yourselves just shows your insecurity on the current topic, I really don't try to provoke, but don't you feel that you are the ones who limit the context to favour your limited knowledge and opinion, and, in addition, your reputation?
Gandalf has already stated that the definition in the context relating to Argo is unique from the context in other places, and that the definition can hold many meanings. I don't see how him "limiting" the definition here would make any sense, seeing how it can depend on how it is defined in a specific place, rather than everywhere.
-
Damn, you hit the nail on the head right there.
No he missed it completely.
-
That is why there is an extensive recruitment and training for the administration team, as well as the possibility to send in complaints on incidents that can be verified by ttime and date of logs.
As for your last line, I wonder where this type of propaganda people seem to be spreading has started.
Maybe you should view it as why it started. Not feeling very appreciated tend to cause people to act accordingly. If so many agree, surely it is an issue that cannot be ignored.
The very fact that administration has a bigger voice than the rest of the community is a problem.
For most, actions speak louder than words. Maybe you should reflect as to how you can bring the community back to normal order and not just ignore the outreaching trend of players at the moment.
-
Maybe you should view it as why it started. Not feeling very appreciated tend to cause people to act accordingly. If so many agree, surely it is an issue that cannot be ignored.
The very fact that administration has a bigger voice than the rest of the community is a problem.
For most, actions speak louder than words. Maybe you should reflect as to how you can bring the community back to normal order and not just ignore the outreaching trend of players at the moment.
Maybe you should not buy in to propaganda of people who obviously do not like our accomplishments.
Anyone in the community has a voice and is treated equal. If people do not care about using it, that is not something I can change.
To bring the community back to order one thing must certainly be done, and that is take out the trash that can only give negative opinions and is actually not involved expect for attempting to make it look bad.
That will certainly be done, while anyone willing to help move the community forward will be welcome as they always have been.
And be carefult not to see this as a personal threat or proof of censorship. Critisicm will always be allowed, as well as attempts to improve by seeking alternatives in a positive way.
However spreading lies about how we work or do not care about people will be addressed.
-
Maybe you should view it as why it started. Not feeling very appreciated tend to cause people to act accordingly. If so many agree, surely it is an issue that cannot be ignored.
The very fact that administration has a bigger voice than the rest of the community is a problem.
For most, actions speak louder than words. Maybe you should reflect as to how you can bring the community back to normal order and not just ignore the outreaching trend of players at the moment.
Maybe there should be mutual respect...so when you slam straight into the server owners with ridiculous comments, how do you expect them to respond?
Look at yourself - how can the owners respect you when all you do is insult what they've done for the community?
-
Maybe there should be mutual respect...so when you slam straight into the server owners with ridiculous comments, how do you expect them to respond?
Look at yourself - how can the owners respect you when all you do is insult what they've done for the community?
The problem seems to be that some people ae coming in or being called up to support that are rarely seen.
The poster above has not posted for nearly a month and has announced his 'leaving' in the beginning of September, which means he is obvioulsy eslewhere in a place where people fabricate all sorts of lies after being banned for their own behaviour.
-
The problem seems to be that some people ae coming in or being called up to support that are rarely seen.
The poster above has not posted for nearly a month and has announced his 'leaving' in the beginning of September, which means he is obvioulsy eslewhere in a place where people fabricate all sorts of lies after being banned for their own behaviour.
Its indeed quite interesting that people who have "left" appear again to cause trouble - it pisses me me off because its quite clear it isn't the community they care about, it's aggravating those who started everything.
-
...he is obviously eslewhere in a place where people fabricate all sorts of lies after being banned for their own behaviour.
Sounds like many of Argo's "enemies", who later come back begging to be unbanned, and then rage and ban evade when we tell them no. :lol:
-
The problem seems to be that some people ae coming in or being called up to support that are rarely seen.
The poster above has not posted for nearly a month and has announced his 'leaving' in the beginning of September, which means he is obvioulsy eslewhere in a place where people fabricate all sorts of lies after being banned for their own behaviour.
It is amazing. You just stated that critism is allowed yet you get offended by me voicing my own opinion.
One does not need to sign in to view the forums. I have browsing through certain topics lately and I just based my own opinion on this.
More things are addressed over the forums than in-game, so I would say that my judgement is not totally off.
You assumed that I got my sources from elsewhere. That is a bad judgement right there since it is not the case. Since you considered my posts too harsh, I will stop posting.
Try and review posts more opened minded since I see you yourself have this conspiracy theory of how everyone that is banned or left is against you. If that was the case in my instance, I would not have even spent so much time playing Argonath if I had not considered it enjoyable.
-
I see Gandalf's deduction as a logical one.
If someone leaves, that is up to them. If they choose to come back, that is also up to them.
However, if someone leaves, and reappears to insult the owners, then obviously they've come back for a malicious purpose, not to rejoin the community.
The mere fact that you try to defend your actions is shocking.
-
It is amazing. You just stated that critism is allowed yet you get offended by me voicing my own opinion.
One does not need to sign in to view the forums. I have browsing through certain topics lately and I just based my own opinion on this.
More things are addressed over the forums than in-game, so I would say that my judgement is not totally off.
You assumed that I got my sources from elsewhere. That is a bad judgement right there since it is not the case. Since you considered my posts too harsh, I will stop posting.
Try and review posts more opened minded since I see you yourself have this conspiracy theory of how everyone that is banned or left is against you. If that was the case in my instance, I would not have even spent so much time playing Argonath if I had not considered it enjoyable.
I am not offended at all by your opinion, for me it is simple that anyone who announces to leave yet does not announce that he has decided to come back should not be taken seriously in their opinion.
As for conspiracy theory, the similarity in the songs people sing is too obvious to ignore. Your posts are not harsh, but the contant is simply incorrect and misleading. Combined with your 'leaving' and the fact that you wish to defend the opinion of your group leader, who has a history of using people to create influence, makes it too obvious.
-
As Frank_Hawk refused to post his definiton out of fear of being shown the hollowness of his statements lets take it from here.
The above statements align well with the definition of censorship being the 'supervision of information' by classifying it through one's own opinion as being harmful to the community.
When using this definition every admin on every server is busy with censorship.
After all, every person in the admin team is bound to supervise the visible information and using their own opinion as reference to act or not.
In fact, the purpose of admins is censorhip when going by this definition.
Thanks for making it clear that despite the harmless nature of this subject, it has been warranted as negative despite being a widely promoted subject in the professional software technology world.
As stated the nature of the subject is not relevant. What is relevant is that the administration instructed you to cease the discussion, and you seem to feel that as long as your opinion is that the subject is harmless they can not request this.
In this you are making a mistake in logic.
Reading the statements above leaves me in no doubt that seasoned veterans views are held in low self-esteem when compared to the likes of 'developers' and admins who in this case I've proved wrong. This directly violates point 2 of the Argonath vision by you refusing to uphold the rights of me as a player. While I agree that there should be a regulation of the chat, I expected you to denounce this action of censoring this topic but instead it seems like you have promoted it instead.
I do not see how you make the jump from your case to a general disrespect for seasoned veterans. If the administration regards a discussion about a topic as detrimental they have the duty to stop it. This regardless if the discussion is held by a veteran or by a newly arrived player.
Another clear mistake in your logic and argumentation.
I would not be surprised if many others have fallen prey to similar situations like mine. Unfortunately, for the majority they are unable to articulate their views and suffer in silence. Therefore I felt it was an moral obligation in this scenario to stand up for the people and righteousness.
I also have no doubt that many peole have been requested to drop a topic by the administration. Most of them would simply understand and take it to PM or drop it completely. Only those who have a misplaced feeling of superiority would try to make a fuss about it.
You've let this seasoned veteran and the wider community down by failing to denounce this unexplainable/flawed censorship.
Sorry, but I do not feel that I should undermine the right of the administration team to act if they feel something is inappropriate.
Whenever a player feels that a particular admin did this in error he can send an email to [email protected] in order for us to check the logs of the time and date the incident took place.
However the administration team has, and will always have, the right to request players to drop a topic which is discussed in public chat, and to punish those who can not follow that simple instruction.
If you feel that is censorship by the definition you used in the beginning of this post, you are correct. However as stated the definition used implicates that one of the main tasks of any member of the administration team is censorship.
My definition of censorship is entirely different, perhaps due to a communist background. As you may be aware in Soviet times all publications of press or movie were subject to review before publishing, and should they contain any material found offensive had to be adapted or were denied pubication.
The only place in Argonath where we use this kind of moderation is on the forum, and only for those people who have made multiple offenses with the way they voiced their opinion.
With the definition used by me, there is not any kind of censorhip or limitation of freedom of expression. However people are always held accountable for their expression and may be requested to cease a discussion. On server that means that the administration team has the right to make such request should they feel the discussion does not belong in the publich chat of a game server, regardless of the topic that was discussed at the time.
-
Just a note;
While "voicing your opinion" or "discussing" things with the owners keep in mind that they own the community, literally own it, pay its upkeep from their own pockets, and can do pretty much whatever they want with it. You can make suggestions but know your limits. You don't walk into a bar and dictate terms to the bartender, let alone the owner. After all, nobody forced you inside, you walked in.
That's correct, but we care for this community.
We're the ones to keeps the servers alive. Without us the servers would have been empty.
If players aren't happy for something and the owner refuses to change/improve it, you'll see players leaving and joining other communities instead. Just sayin homie' :cowboy:
-
Sure Ethan, they may leave, but they always come back.
We can all disagree with some changes, but in the end, they are usually for the betterment of the server and/or players. You may feel that some changes make completely no sense and are stupid and should be removed, but those changes could be the reason 20 new players register, and if of those 20 players half stay, then you have 10 new regular players, who might end up being really awesome community members. And that's something we all want here, I'm sure.
-
I do not understand why some say the community is being thrown under the bus, seeing as RS5 appears notably inspired by the community's ideas/complaints/criticisms...
Why has the topic digressed so much? I bore witness to the conversation that sparked the creation of this topic (though admittedly distracted by other matters that were more relevant to me at the time), and as far as I was aware, the topic of Argonath and its developers were barely even brought up, and there was no insinuating whatsoever. The focus of the discussion appeared very far away from Argonath, and it was an impressively civilized (although somewhat flood-ish) discussion at that. Nobody got offended until they chose to be offended.
-
[21:15:19] CMD -> Frank_Hawk (48) : /p Did you know in the real 'business world' the term developer is rather different from the term dev
[21:15:49] CMD -> Frank_Hawk (48) : /p In fact, a developer has no decision making power whatsoever in the real business world - his acti
[21:16:00] CMD -> Frank_Hawk (48) : /p Business stakeholders who own a particular business function.
[21:16:18] CMD -> Frank_Hawk (48) : /p In fact, the lifecycle of project management gives no power of decision making to developers in th
This is not always true though :) Perhaps in banks and large corporations yes, but if you look at the way most tech companies/start-ups operate, you'll see very different methodologies and a lot more freedom compared to large corporations / financial institutions. E.g. Google, GitHub, Facebook, Valve...
GitHub have a culture of 0% management and work on whatever they want. http://zachholman.com/posts/scaling-github-employees/
Google have a rule in which you can spend 20% of your time on whatever you want, from which things like Gmail were born
etc
-
[21:15:19] CMD -> Frank_Hawk (48) : /p Did you know in the real 'business world' the term developer is rather different from the term dev
[21:15:49] CMD -> Frank_Hawk (48) : /p In fact, a developer has no decision making power whatsoever in the real business world - his acti
[21:16:00] CMD -> Frank_Hawk (48) : /p Business stakeholders who own a particular business function.
[21:16:18] CMD -> Frank_Hawk (48) : /p In fact, the lifecycle of project management gives no power of decision making to developers in th
This is not always true though :) Perhaps in banks and large corporations yes, but if you look at the way most tech companies/start-ups operate, you'll see very different methodologies and a lot more freedom compared to large corporations / financial institutions. E.g. Google, GitHub, Facebook, Valve...
Not to mention people who work as freelancers (Like me <3), From my experience usually devs have a very large say in the matter, only exception are mainly the giant 'consultancy' firms who like to go strictly by the book.
-
The poster above has not posted for nearly a month and has announced his 'leaving' in the beginning of September, which means he is obvioulsy eslewhere in a place where people fabricate all sorts of lies after being banned for their own behaviour.
He may be role-playing a dissident. :D
You're not banned, Frank, and you're not in GuLag; this topic wasn't removed and is still here. Doesn't sound like censorship, unfortunately.
-
If you are talking about product-based companies like microsoft, google, github and so on, you are talking about exceptions. While it's true those companies processes are characterized by some freedom, they would never hire an IT outsourcing firm with a CMMI level 1 or 2 / no ISO certification. Most tech companies have strict and well-defined processes.
Great job pointing things out, Frank. And remember: 28 of december is the day of revenge, war Anderson! :war:
-
If you are talking about product-based companies like microsoft, google, github and so on, you are talking about exceptions. While it's true those companies processes are characterized by some freedom, they would never hire an IT outsourcing firm with a CMMI level 1 or 2 / no ISO certification. Most tech companies have strict and well-defined processes.
There are a lot of exceptions then :D
IT outsourcing firms are irrelevant, as we have nothing in common
-
In my opinion this topic is very important , as a "Normal" player..
i dont think that i'm allowed to discuss things about either developers or Admins ,which lead us to this topic , instead of banning people for flaming , why dont you just check if the admin has made anything wrong or something ?
I actually guess that admins or developers can not be blamed , you always make them in the right position , and pretend that they never make a mistake! :uhm:
BUT, this server will be more entertainment when admins and developers be fair with players.
-
In my opinion this topic is very important , as a "Normal" player..
i dont think that i'm allowed to discuss things about either developers or Admins ,which lead us to this topic , instead of banning people for flaming , why dont you just check if the admin has made anything wrong or something ?
I actually guess that admins or developers can not be blamed , you always make them in the right position , and pretend that they never make a mistake! :uhm:
BUT, this server will be more entertainment when admins and developers be fair with players.
Now you've done it.
-
As discussed ingame...
In RL, Developers (and Testers) do have a large say in projects - the introduction of various "agile" life-cycles allowed this to happen. In fact, that was a large part of the logic behind Agile.
The traditional waterfall approach appears to have many shortfalls (both the V and W Models) - mainly being that every stage should be completed before moving on i.e Requirements, Dev, Test etc...this results in a gnerally long wait between a plan being made, and anything at all being output.
Agile brings Dev and Test in as soon as possible, completing work as per roughly shaped Requirements in short sprints, incrementally (or iteratively) increasing the total output, eventually reaching a full system.
This offers flexibility to the client - changes can be easily requested before the product is fully created, which is much more appealing.
Deviated slightly, but the point is that I'm not making it up - Dev clearly get involved early in the process, and have a say in what happens...
-
People see admins not being 'fair' very BLINDLY.
If there are two players, player 1 insults player 2 over /p, and player 2 insults back, and both players get a banana, then player 1 comes and PMs the admins, "What about him? where is his punishment?" You guys MUST realise, just because you cannot see a red damn text saying this person was warned etc, does not mean nothing was done. There are more means and ways of dealing with things other than a command.
If one player is constantly rulebreaking and is of clear knowledge of the rules, then expect to be warned, but when a total new player has come into the community, and breaking those rules, then he will be obviously taught by the admin team, or spoken to, telling him what is and what is not allowed.
Just because you cannot see the punishment, does not mean nothing is done.
Why must it always be a tit-4-tat thing on the server? "i got a warning he must get one too" - That is totally immature.. I mean come on, seriously, most 12 year olds playing on the server are more well behaved than players that are actually in their 20's and late teens.
-
In my opinion this topic is very important , as a "Normal" player..
i dont think that i'm allowed to discuss things about either developers or Admins ,which lead us to this topic , instead of banning people for flaming , why dont you just check if the admin has made anything wrong or something ?
I actually guess that admins or developers can not be blamed , you always make them in the right position , and pretend that they never make a mistake! :uhm:
BUT, this server will be more entertainment when admins and developers be fair with players.
Coming from someone who is been banned since June 2013.. :lol:
-
Coming from someone who is been banned since June 2013.. :lol:
There's a pattern building in this topic then :lol:
-
In my opinion this topic is very important , as a "Normal" player..
i dont think that i'm allowed to discuss things about either developers or Admins ,which lead us to this topic , instead of banning people for flaming , why dont you just check if the admin has made anything wrong or something ?
I actually guess that admins or developers can not be blamed , you always make them in the right position , and pretend that they never make a mistake! :uhm:
BUT, this server will be more entertainment when admins and developers be fair with players.
I think that if you would see the internal discussions you will find that we certainly do not feel everyone is free of making mistakes.
That includes my, as today I issued a forum ban by mistake and had to reverse it.
The key here is that there is a time and place for everything.
If you wish to ask about an admin handling you unfair, all you have to do is to send an e-mail with the time and date. That mail is read by 8 people, and at least three of them will check the logs within a week.
This is not some story, it is the truth of what happens.
To discuss it on forums or in game has no use, as people involved in the discussion rarely have knowledge of the situation. Just like you are banned since June but would pretend to know what is happening in game now.
-
Coming from someone who is been banned since June 2013.. :lol:
Haha, so funny!!
-
Haha, so funny!!
Last Seen Online
June 21st 2013 :hah:
-
Last Seen Online
June 21st 2013 :hah:
:lol:
-
:lol:
h3h3 funney!!!1
Are you serious dude?
Last Seen Online
June 21st 2013 :hah:
What's the point lol
-
What's the point lol
This: . <<<<<<<
-
This: . <<<<<<<
wow suc trol
-
Oh, the banter! Loving it :rofl:
-
wow suc trol
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_-_dStEZJLa4/TQq1iflQzHI/AAAAAAAAAPE/D45yVu7kE5w/s1600/trololo-lolo-trololo.jpg)
-
what
-
hhahhhha what a god :D
-
lol which part did i miss
-
lol which part did i miss
this one
Wall of text removed
-
Coming from someone who is been banned since June 2013.. :lol:
Not funny , and actually , i dont like you at all , you are so mean! :mad:
I think that if you would see the internal discussions you will find that we certainly do not feel everyone is free of making mistakes.
That includes my, as today I issued a forum ban by mistake and had to reverse it.
The key here is that there is a time and place for everything.
If you wish to ask about an admin handling you unfair, all you have to do is to send an e-mail with the time and date. That mail is read by 8 people, and at least three of them will check the logs within a week.
This is not some story, it is the truth of what happens.
To discuss it on forums or in game has no use, as people involved in the discussion rarely have knowledge of the situation. Just like you are banned since June but would pretend to know what is happening in game now.
I'm not pointing anything at you , in fact i see you as a great owner , i was pointing everything i have said to admins +(Mangers) , there is alot of admins and mangers dont deserve their position , you should rethink about the admins and mangers you pick .
-
Not funny , and actually , i dont like you at all , you are so mean! :mad:I'm not pointing anything at you , in fact i see you as a great owner , i was pointing everything i have said to admins +(Mangers) , there is alot of admins and mangers dont deserve their position , you should rethink about the admins and mangers you pick .
lol mind=blown
-
I'm having trouble logging into the panel. Can someone check how active Frank has been?
-
lol mind=blown
:eek: :eek: What !?
-
Not funny , and actually , i dont like you at all , you are so mean! :mad:
Not my problem if you don't like me, I'm not here to be liked by everyone. As long as I do my job properly, I'm good :D
-
Wall of text removed
Why?
Not my problem if you don't like me, I'm not here to be liked by everyone. As long as I do my job properly, I'm good :D
Define your job.
-
Not my problem if you don't like me, I'm not here to be liked by everyone. As long as I do my job properly, I'm good :D
I dont think that you're doing your job properly , and dont think because people speak with you that they like you No! , you are just using your admins power to threat people. :war:
Why?
Define your job.
Banning people , and laughing at them.
-
I dont think that you're doing your job properly , and dont think because people speak with you that they like you No! , you are just using your admins power to threat people. :war:Banning people , and laughing at them.
It's just funny that you come here, saying how the staff team is bad and they should be replaced. Yet you can't even behave yourself and are banned since 5 months.
Look at yourself before posting next time.
-
Not funny , and actually , i dont like you at all , you are so mean! :mad:I'm not pointing anything at you , in fact i see you as a great owner , i was pointing everything i have said to admins +(Mangers) , there is alot of admins and mangers dont deserve their position , you should rethink about the admins and mangers you pick .
Looking at the number of complaints we receive (and then I am not even judging them, just looking at the number) you seem to be incorrect.
-
It's just funny that you come here, saying how the staff team is bad and they should be replaced. Yet you can't even behave yourself and are banned since 5 months.
Look at yourself before posting next time.
I didnt say that i'm prefect pal , look at your self , trying to act like the best manger , i didnt blame the full admin team , i blame admins like you , all you are doing is sitting on the damn chair staring at your PC 24/7 trying to earn respect in a game , pfftt , get a real life man , really you are bulling people , you dont deserve your position in here , and once again you keep laughing at me " look who is talking" like you are the funny guy in here :app: :app: , "you didnt behave" yea i did not , but i didnt bully people as well , "you are banned since 5 months" so what ? like i do care now ? i used to be addicted but now ? man as long as you're playing i wont even think to come IG , people like you who made alot of people leave this game .
-
Not my problem if you don't like me, I'm not here to be liked by everyone. As long as I do my job properly, I'm good :D
Do you get paid? Does Argonath make money at all?
-
Hi.
Wtf you are all talking about, can someone explain me? :uhm:
-
New day, same Arguments, When will it stop -_-
-
I didnt say that i'm prefect pal , look at your self , trying to act like the best manger , i didnt blame the full admin team , i blame admins like you , all you are doing is sitting on the damn chair staring at your PC 24/7 trying to earn respect in a game , pfftt , get a real life man , really you are bulling people , you dont deserve your position in here , and once again you keep laughing at me " look who is talking" like you are the funny guy in here :app: :app: , "you didnt behave" yea i did not , but i didnt bully people as well , "you are banned since 5 months" so what ? like i do care now ? i used to be addicted but now ? man as long as you're playing i wont even think to come IG , people like you who made alot of people leave this game .
Maybe you feel he doesn't deserve his position here, if you only know half as much about how much work a person in a managerial position does to ensure players can have a good time when in-game you would show some form of respect for the time sacrificed so you can play.
Unfortunately it's the sour apples like you that like to complain about things with a lack of knowledge. A poor understanding of a situation is more harmful than no understanding at all.
You want to run around giving others attitude to increase your nether region on a game forum? Be my guest but it certainly won't help you if you plan on being unbanned in the near future.
You say;
I didnt say that i'm prefect pal , look at your self , trying to act like the best manger , i didnt blame the full admin team , i blame admins like you , all you are doing is sitting on the damn chair staring at your PC 24/7 trying to earn respect in a game
Have you ever climbed off your horse and thought about the time he has dedicated towards helping others? Instead your blindness and egotistical thoughts lead you to believe he was just handed a position for no purpose at all.
Bud please look at yourself before throwing nonsense in the wind as the breeze is blowing back in your direction.
-
Maybe you feel he doesn't deserve his position here, if you only know half as much about how much work a person in a managerial position does to ensure players can have a good time when in-game you would show some form of respect for the time sacrificed so you can play.
Unfortunately it's the sour apples like you that like to complain about things with a lack of knowledge. A poor understanding of a situation is more harmful than no understanding at all.
You want to run around giving others attitude to increase your nether region on a game forum? Be my guest but it certainly won't help you if you plan on being unbanned in the near future.
You say;
Have you ever climbed off your horse and thought about the time he has dedicated towards helping others? Instead your blindness and egotistical thoughts lead you to believe he was just handed a position for no purpose at all.
Bud please look at yourself before throwing nonsense in the wind as the breeze is blowing back in your direction.
:hah: :lol: , Mahn!!! I was about to cry from laughing when I saw this , ok then tell me , do you think that you and him deserve to be a mangers ? If yes tell me why , and stop telling " you don't know what a hard work need to be done to be an admin" if you don't like the " hard work" why would you even apply to be an admin ? , it's time to face this problem , I don't like to see this end with no any dicussion , btw I know that you two ove this server and protect it , but you two love to use your admin power to threat players , even if someone joke with you like " mahn you have a big nose" or smth ..
-
Why is it that we should prove ourselves to you? You can't even respect our rules in-game let alone show some sort of respect for your peers?
Honestly, you're the last person to try and criticize anyone within the community bud. We worked for our positions and gave up our time to help the administrators and players alike, what have you done to help anyone besides break rules?
The broken window you are looking through has sharp edges and provides distorted refraction.
-
Why is it that we should prove ourselves to you? You can't even respect our rules in-game let alone show some sort of respect for your peers?
Honestly, you're the last person to try and criticize anyone within the community bud. We worked for our positions and gave up our time to help the administrators and players alike, what have you done to help anyone besides break rules?
The broken window you are looking through has sharp edges and provides distorted refraction.
Stop saying "I'm the last one to " even if I am banned , you still think that I should be quiet , I won't I will say everything I want , you stop trying to act like the wisdom guy , you are full lies , you keep changing the subject and say " you don't follow the servers rules" actually I feel sorry for you , you don't even know what I'm saying , read my posts very well, and you will know that I am right , even if you worked hard for your position , you still make players leave this game because of your selfishness.
-
You think you are right based on senseless information you picked up from the public toilet urinal I guess.
I still don't see any truth in what you have said nor do I see any substance in your claims.
Oh and brilliant, first we don't deserve our rights, then we threaten people and now I am selfish? Go on. :app:
-
You're losing Waka, just quit it.
-
Why is it that we should prove ourselves to you? You can't even respect our rules in-game let alone show some sort of respect for your peers?
Honestly, you're the last person to try and criticize anyone within the community bud. We worked for our positions and gave up our time to help the administrators and players alike, what have you done to help anyone besides break rules?
The broken window you are looking through has sharp edges and provides distorted refraction.
No point in arguing with parasites, Devin :)
-
You think you are right based on senseless information you picked up from the public toilet urinal I guess.
I still don't see any truth in what you have said nor do I see any substane in your claims.
Oh and brilliant, first we don't deserve our rights, then we threaten people and now I am selfish? Go on. :app:
oh ok i am wrong :) what ever you say
You're losing Waka, just quit it.
i dont say that from nothing , i'm just saying what i have seen , its not about winning or losing ,its about me saying my opinion .
-
No point in arguing with parasites, Devin :)
ye ye insult me :lol:
-
Waka, if I look at the moment you were banned you were banned before Devin and Cyril became manager. So I would like to know where you get your opinion about their functioning from.
I guess that unfortunately we will have to push your unban date a bit further as it seems you are ban evading.
-
i dont say that from nothing , i'm just saying what i have seen , its not about winning or losing ,its about me saying my opinion .
You're saying what you have seen? Well... you're saying both Cyril and Devin don't deserve their promotions, yet, you were banned when they were promoted and still are. How would you know if they deserve it or not?
If you rely on other people's words instead of your actual experience, you'll never be right.
You have the right to your opinion in this community, but if it's expressed through bad-mouthing and shit-talking the staff, you'll get nowhere.
-
Argument RPG
-
Waka, if I look at the moment you were banned you were banned before Devin and Cyril became manager. So I would like to know where you get your opinion about their functioning from.
I guess that unfortunately we will have to push your unban date a bit further as it seems you are ban evading.
Damn it man... did you have to beat me to it?
Argument RPG
Nailed it. :lol:
-
ye ye insult me :lol:
Not an insult, just a statement of the obvious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism
Edit: in case it is too overwhelming (simple language): http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism
-
Waka, if I look at the moment you were banned you were banned before Devin and Cyril became manager. So I would like to know where you get your opinion about their functioning from.
I guess that unfortunately we will have to push your unban date a bit further as it seems you are ban evading.
how is that ? i actually was IG when they two were promoted to mangers , and what ever you all want to say about me "wrong or right" i will still be convinced about everything i said , and tell me now , i am ban evading ? When did that happen
-
i am ban evading ? When did that happen
They're referring that before Cyril and Devin got promoted to Manager..You were banned at that time.So how can you know thier attidute?
Only a banevader would know this.They didn't blamed you for ban-evade.
Just an example.
-
how is that ? i actually was IG when they two were promoted to mangers , and what ever you all want to say about me "wrong or right" i will still be convinced about everything i said , and tell me now , i am ban evading ? When did that happen
On banevading acc i guess? :rofl:
-
how is that ? i actually was IG when they two were promoted to mangers , and what ever you all want to say about me "wrong or right" i will still be convinced about everything i said , and tell me now , i am ban evading ? When did that happen
A little insight for you, you were last online;
Last Seen Online
June 22nd 2013
Cyril and myself were unofficially accepted as Managers on the 22nd of July which makes that a month after your ban.
Pretty much shot yourself in the foot.
-
The critic/reviewer is not obliged to perform better on whatever he censures and dispraises.
You have proven your double standards often enough.
It's just that whenever someone takes his energy to write his criticism down and presents it, you won't accept it. Emre and a few others tried it a while back, but your mentality remains the same.
Being part of this community for four years now, I realized there's no point in discussing things like this topic, because whenever your ego is hurt, or the public image of the administration team is in danger, you shut the whole conversation down. And by shutting down, I'm not referring to closing topics, but more like subtly ignoring arguments and twisting words and such.
You can twist people's words and place arguments around yourself as long as you want, but you should know, there are people who see through your double standards and your lack of sense of justice, DESPITE your efforts for the ''community'' which you seem to abuse everytime your ''work'' here is questioned.
And there's absolutely no reason to believe your position and opinion is correct only because you either shut down any type of criticism or don't allow it at all.
I wish more ppl had the guts to freely speak their minds so you'd actually see how many players are unhappy with the way you handle certain things and situations. But this shouldn't be nothing new to you. It has been presented multiple times, and the way you treat Waka_Flocka, although his statements were questionable at some points, just proves you haven't changed a bit.
Let it be simply ignorance or your desperate attempt to publicly castrate people who do not agree with you - playing here means accepting your character weaknesses. You don't even try to understand critical views about you. You won't allow them. You did so much ''work'' for the ''community'' that it simply dispenses you from any kind of criticism.
I'm just waiting for someone to tell me to leave if I don't like it here, implying any kind of critical words are not wanted at all. Keep in mind it's you who praise discussions and eventually ignore everything said before just to return to your original state.
The circle is closing.
To come to a conclusion, please stop pretending, stop placing arguments around yourself. We understand now you won't change and twist words to justify your own position.
You can quit the bull. Stop calling it ''work for the community'', when after all it is only about your pleased ego.
Best regards,
- someone you don't impress
-
After you proving my faults , i think i have nothing more to say .
At Devin i didnt know that i was not IG once u two were promoted,but i know that i have said gratz to u two
-
I'm just waiting for someone to tell me to leave if I don't like it here, implying any kind of critical words are not wanted at all.
Nah, topic lock because the truth hurts.
-
Waka, there's a Moroccan saying: Don't throw rocks at other houses if yours is from glass.
-
Waka, there's a Moroccan saying: Don't throw rocks at other houses if yours is from glass.
Maybe its from blinded glass xD
-
Actually say or tell jokes about, all what i wanted is to get answers on my questions , this may be gone too far from me exactly.
-
Can't we just discuss something without it turning into some episode of Jeremy Kyle. People may be unhappy about certain aspects of the community which is a given there will always be issues that need questioned, but if you can't talk about them in a civilized manner then what's the point of discussing it at all.
-
Nah, topic lock because the truth hurts.
What lock?
-
What lock?
This one
(http://www.phase2technology.com/wp-content/uploads/imports/phase2/9437lock.jpg)
-
Nice picture.
-
:lol: :lol:
-
Nice picture.
Yes, it's from the yesterday's party, remember?
-
:balance: :hah:
-
The critic/reviewer is not obliged to perform better on whatever he censures and dispraises.
What are you talking about?
You have proven your double standards often enough.
It's just that whenever someone takes his energy to write his criticism down and presents it, you won't accept it. Emre and a few others tried it a while back, but your mentality remains the same.
Please give any proof of them, you are making a blanket statement without content. If you may remember Emre and me had a discussion in a locked topic where he had to admit that not his point but mine were valid. Since then he has taking up trolling and cyberbullying, which is why he is no longer here.
Being part of this community for four years now, I realized there's no point in discussing things like this topic, because whenever your ego is hurt, or the public image of the administration team is in danger, you shut the whole conversation down. And by shutting down, I'm not referring to closing topics, but more like subtly ignoring arguments and twisting words and such.
On the contrary, I reply to serious posts with arguments, and mostly after that people decided to be silent. Time and time again I have explained what we do and why, and nobody has been able to bring forward concrete arguments that would convince me to change.
You can try your best, and I will answer.
You can twist people's words and place arguments around yourself as long as you want, but you should know, there are people who see through your double standards and your lack of sense of justice, DESPITE your efforts for the ''community'' which you seem to abuse everytime your ''work'' here is questioned.
And there's absolutely no reason to believe your position and opinion is correct only because you either shut down any type of criticism or don't allow it at all.
Again you are making blanket statements without any backup of what you say. Do you think people will believe you on your blue eyes?
As for shutting down or not allowing it, I allow any type of criticism as long as people do not lie, make up stories, put statements without backing or start flaming.
I wish more ppl had the guts to freely speak their minds so you'd actually see how many players are unhappy with the way you handle certain things and situations. But this shouldn't be nothing new to you. It has been presented multiple times, and the way you treat Waka_Flocka, although his statements were questionable at some points, just proves you haven't changed a bit.
I wis hte same, however I also wish that those who feel the criticism is a pile of male cown manure would speak up as well.
Over time I have taken the effot to check what people write about on forum and look at the chat logs with respect to the situation in game. What has almost every time been hsown is that the people who utter criticism are either highly inactive or banned, and do not reflect at all what is going on in game. It seems more like they are complaining on how things go and are handled on another server in another community.
Let it be simply ignorance or your desperate attempt to publicly castrate people who do not agree with you - playing here means accepting your character weaknesses. You don't even try to understand critical views about you. You won't allow them. You did so much ''work'' for the ''community'' that it simply dispenses you from any kind of criticism.
I guess this is not directed at me as it would be total rambling without logic it it were.
I'm just waiting for someone to tell me to leave if I don't like it here, implying any kind of critical words are not wanted at all. Keep in mind it's you who praise discussions and eventually ignore everything said before just to return to your original state.
The circle is closing.
As soon as someone brings valid arguments we will listen. While people can not backup what they say, nothing will change because of their propaganda.
To come to a conclusion, please stop pretending, stop placing arguments around yourself. We understand now you won't change and twist words to justify your own position.
You can quit the bull. Stop calling it ''work for the community'', when after all it is only about your pleased ego.
Best regards,
- someone you don't impress
That is rather a mirror of what you have been writing here yourself.
-
Sorry for the late response to this topic and posters. As many of you know, I’ve been inactive from the game for over 3 months pending commitments elsewhere. During my absence and in this topic, certain people have taken the opportunity to spread false accusations to undermine the underlying farce that has taken place in-game. Since I do not share the same liberty of time as others in scrutinising posts – I will summarise this issue so that the wider, less content can understand.
Timeline:
1) In-game, I raised a topic about real life software developers, with no intent or malice against Argonath developers. An admin took offense to the points being made in /p and asked me to stop.
2) Since the topic in question did not break the rules or justify itself as being inappropriate for discussion, I questioned further only to be told it was along the lines of being offensive to Argonath developers which I thoroughly disagreed with especially since I did not finish.
3) Despite asking to move the conversation in /pm, the conversation from the admin side continued in /p and knowing that any further responses would lead to a ban, I stopped.
4) Disappointed, I came to the forum to seek clarification.
Remediation:
1) The term ‘developer’ and its context in real life was prevented from being discussed in /p since it was ‘insulting’ to others. Since my right to freedom of expression was being suppressed, especially since the topic bore no contraventions – it was by the definition of many dictionaries undue censorship.
2) Despite categorically overcoming the arguments here and even on acceptance from the owner that it was to a degree censorship – it has been refuted to denounce the action since it would in the owner’s words undermine the admin.
3) The Argonath vision states under statement 2 that ‘equal rights to new, experienced and admin players… do not discriminates between players…’ – this value has been devalued since the owner did not denounce the decision and has paved way to similar situations. For example if a particular admin does not like cats, then cats will not be allowed to be discussed in /p according to the logical argument provided by the owner.
Gandalf,
This is a matter of principle and not inflated egos. Like I’ve said before, I do not speak out unless there is a severe injustice taking place. My place in this community is to live the value of righteousness, not bygones. The arm chair politics exhibited here are astounding enough to undermine your own points which have no relevant value except going in circles and inherently deserve no response. The context of the subject was important since it has driven the need to determine whether censorship was duly right or wrong. Given that you have failed to denounce this undue censorship, it’s my duty as a member of the community to state that you have failed to uphold the Argonath vision and to reconsider recalibrating the moral compass you direct this community with. As ever, I remain committed and despite false accusations remain exclusive to this community for the foreseeable future hoping to look past this dire decision.
Gimli,
Thanks for your response – I hope you are well. Since you’ve decided to grace us with an extract of the conversation in /p, it would be only fair and right to post the entire decision that took place between me and the said admins. It would only then be transparent what really took place and will be at the discretion of the community to be judgemental.
Despite the logs you’ve posted apparently showing my keenness to demonstrate that developers have no real power in the business world would be inaccurate, especially since I was not given the right to finish the subject where I would have gone on to say much more. It is correct that in the context of projects as a whole that developers (the correct term being software developers used universally) can be involved at all stages of the project lifecycle although it is less apparent in larger organisations and depends on the companies working culture. For example, banks might follow the project lifecycle to the line meaning that crossover between roles would be limited since they want to reduce the exposure in risk. On the flip side, smaller, less risk adverse companies may allow software developers to engage at different levels of the project since they have the subject matter expertise to lead the project from inception to transition and especially as it would be cost effective in the context of smaller more defined/scoped projects.
Saying the above, software developers typically cannot unlike project managers and business analysts define business strategy. This is because typically their skill set is not up to the same par as their peer roles. Business strategy is usually defined by business sponsors (the representative of a business function) and those are translated in business requirements by a business analyst. On agreement, software developers write technical documentation to support the business requirements but cannot change or challenge the underlying business process, because this again follows a particular route of escalation being the business analyst > project manager > business sponsor upwards. From the technical documentation stage, developers design components of the functional/non-functional design only to rely on business stakeholders for steer in terms of design, especially since it must meet user acceptance criteria. From that point onwards, the developer does not typically engage in the project until the transition stage where their technical expertise will be called upon to carry out technical dress rehearsals and so on until implementation is complete.
Through the short summarised lifecycle above, the software developer retains very limited business making prowess because ultimately they need to satisfy the conditions of business stakeholders. Other business orientated roles (BA, PM) will differ. You might disagree, especially because of the exposure and entrepreneurial mind you have – but it is a time tested methodology. The approach you’ve mentioned where a software developer can be involved at all stages is discouraged because typically they do not have the correct skill set to elicit, analysis and validate requirements from inception onwards which usually results in failed projects since in the following example the customer asked for a Ferrari but was only delivered a BMW which was not fit for purpose.
I hope this helps.
-
Trank, please read my reply to your last post. It gives the exact clarification on this subject, and your current lengthy respons is either an attempt to take it off-topiv or because you failed to read that reply.
The issue is pretty clear, and the contant of the topic does not matter as I have explained.
-
Gandalf, since many of your points reflect the position of an arm chair politician which holds no apparent clarification except going around in circles they inherently deserve no designated responses. I’ve outlined my response to you in the post above. Ultimately, this is a difference of opinion and moral compass holding between us – one which will rest on the community’s shoulders to be judgemental upon.
-
Yet you are continuing ranting about the difference of 'real life developers' and 'argonath developers' when you created this topic for a completly different reason..
-
Gandalf, since many of your points reflect the position of an arm chair politician which holds no apparent clarification except going around in circles they inherently deserve no designated responses. I’ve outlined my response to you in the post above. Ultimately, this is a difference of opinion and moral compass holding between us – one which will rest on the community’s shoulders to be judgemental upon.
You are the one who is going round in circles. I have clearly shown that you are using a wrong definition and are making illogical conclusions from that. As you can not refute it, you try to go in to the content of a discussion, which is completely irrelevant.
Now if you wish to change the definition of censorship go ahead.
-
You are the one who is going round in circles. I have clearly shown that you are using a wrong definition and are making illogical conclusions from that. As you can not refute it, you try to go in to the content of a discussion, which is completely irrelevant.
Now if you wish to change the definition of censorship go ahead.
Gandalf - there is no substance in your responses to refute providing justification not to respond since I'll be going around the same loop as you have been. I've already explained and disageed that the context of the topic was relevant to the definition but you seem to be oblivious to this. I've categorically argued my points in this topic, only to be perhaps intentionally ignored or given irrelevant cloudly replies.
Zaila, I don't quite understand the point/meaning of your post - could you elaborate?
-
The irrelevancy of some responses to Woka's posts are laughable, despicable, and disappointing - all at once. Some sure do show they know the spirit of debate so gosh-darned well!
-
Gandalf - there is no substance in your responses to refute providing justification not to respond since I'll be going around the same loop as you have been. I've already explained and disageed that the context of the topic was relevant to the definition but you seem to be oblivious to this. I've categorically argued my points in this topic, only to be perhaps intentionally ignored or given irrelevant cloudly replies.
Zaila, I don't quite understand the point/meaning of your post - could you elaborate?
I see that you prefer to dodge my reply, as it was a clear cut case. The one who is attempting to use long texts that are unreadable for most is you, do not try to put that on me.
Now please answer the following points I made:
1. Do you agree that by your definition the job od the administration is to censor?
2. Do you agree that the administration has the right to decide if a discussion is suitable for the public chat at that time?
3. Do you agree that any attempt to undermine the rights of the administration should be punished?
-
The irrelevancy of some responses to Woka's posts are laughable, despicable, and disappointing - all at once. Some sure do show they know the spirit of debate so gosh-darned well!
What is laughable is that you do not know the difference between Waka_Flocka and Woka.
-
The irrelevancy of some responses to Woka's posts are laughable, despicable, and disappointing - all at once. Some sure do show they know the spirit of debate so gosh-darned well!
Now should i laugh ? or what ?
-
I see that you prefer to dodge my reply, as it was a clear cut case. The one who is attempting to use long texts that are unreadable for most is you, do not try to put that on me.
Now please answer the following points I made:
1. Do you agree that by your definition the job od the administration is to censor?
2. Do you agree that the administration has the right to decide if a discussion is suitable for the public chat at that time?
3. Do you agree that any attempt to undermine the rights of the administration should be punished?
Actively clouding your answers with mist is pointless if you want a concise response back.
The definition of censorship is not of primary concern but of how the broad application of it relates to this scenario whereby a topic which was not convincingly controversial was restrained from being discussed. Fundamentally, the expectation of the admin team is to censor out explicit content in /p but not to police the chat based on personal opinions except those which are widely recognised as being unacceptable i.e. nazism. This topic does not fall under that classification.
The time is of limited relevance and the community should be able to bring up suitable topics at their own leisure. The admins have a right to prevent a subject if it falls under the terms stated in point 1 but can be questioned through reasonable means where excessive/outright unjustified decisions are applied.
It depends on the circumstances especially since your question is vague (perhaps intentionally), but in the example I’ve given to date it would not be appropriate since the Argonath vision, statement 2 dictates that Argonath ‘gives equal rights to new, experienced and admin players’ and also ‘does not give any of our players rights to act as better, higher or having more status as another’.
Like I said before in this topic, my time is scarce but out of courtesy I’ve replied to you as soon as I could. Since we’ve already seemingly established that you will not be denouncing the action that took place, promoting undue censorship and subsequently opening a wider concern – we can bring this to a close. Otherwise if you address a reply to me, you might have to wait a while until I can respond to your posts (where it is of relevance) duly.
-
You accuse me of putting long posts circumventing an answer, yet you write an essay on 3 simple questions.
You made adefinition in your post, I requested you twice to give a definition. As you declined to do so I used yours to show that you are completely off the mark with your accusations and jumping to things that are completely beside the issue.
Now you come back with another couple of essays that do not answer the points I made. I wonder how you can say the definition is beside the tpi, as it is the topic name.
So please answer my questions before I will use your definition of censorship on you.
-
You accuse me of putting long posts circumventing an answer, yet you write an essay on 3 simple questions.
You made adefinition in your post, I requested you twice to give a definition. As you declined to do so I used yours to show that you are completely off the mark with your accusations and jumping to things that are completely beside the issue.
Now you come back with another couple of essays that do not answer the points I made. I wonder how you can say the definition is beside the tpi, as it is the topic name.
So please answer my questions before I will use your definition of censorship on you.
There is a difference between a paragraph and an essay - seemingly you have no distinction between the two.
But since you might be straining to extract the right information, I'll happily put it down in black and white for you should it help:
Actively clouding your answers with mist is pointless if you want a concise response back.
The definition of censorship is not of primary concern but of how the broad application of it relates to this scenario whereby a topic which was not convincingly controversial was restrained from being discussed. Fundamentally, the expectation of the admin team is to censor out explicit content in /p but not to police the chat based on personal opinions except those which are widely recognised as being unacceptable i.e. nazism. This topic does not fall under that classification.
The time is of limited relevance and the community should be able to bring up suitable topics at their own leisure. The admins have a right to prevent a subject if it falls under the terms stated in point 1 but can be questioned through reasonable means where excessive/outright unjustified decisions are applied.
It depends on the circumstances especially since your question is vague (perhaps intentionally), but in the example I’ve given to date it would not be appropriate since the Argonath vision, statement 2 dictates that Argonath ‘gives equal rights to new, experienced and admin players’ and also ‘does not give any of our players rights to act as better, higher or having more status as another’.
Like I said before in this topic, my time is scarce but out of courtesy I’ve replied to you as soon as I could. Since we’ve already seemingly established that you will not be denouncing the action that took place, promoting undue censorship and subsequently opening a wider concern – we can bring this to a close. Otherwise if you address a reply to me, you might have to wait a while until I can respond to your posts (where it is of relevance) duly.
There has been no accusation of you 'putting long posts circumventing an answer' but I've expressed concern at your clouded answers who provide no real underlying message. If I'm incorrect, please provide evidence in this thread otherwise duly retract your statement. As for the topic name, this topic has digressed over the course of time. If it helps, I'll be happy to rename it to the context of the subject that triggered it. Also, the answers I've provided are defined, structured and to the point fulfilling the need of the questions you've asked.
-
Once again you try to cirumvent giving an answer.
You state a definition of censorship, and then mention the same definition is irrelevant.
As I mentioned clearly the task of the admin team is to review and administer the server, and that includes keeping an eye on public chat.
While the Argonath Vision allows a freedom of discussion, the players still enter a game server and not a chatroom. There for once the topic is in the eye of any of the administration team too far away from the game, they have the right and even obligation to act.
The topic discussed at the time is not relevant, nor is if the people raising the topic are new players or veterans or even members of the administration. What is relevant is that the administration has the right to request a discussion to be dropped, and the community does not have the possibility to override that as that would lead to anarchy.
Ther for your attempts to distract by looking at the content of the topic are completely irrelevant, indeed the topic could ahve been cats. Also your attempt to show this is proving that we do not care for veterans is incorrect as the acts of administration are not related to the person but to their view the public chat was distracting from the game play.
-
Once again you try to cirumvent giving an answer.
You state a definition of censorship, and then mention the same definition is irrelevant.
As I mentioned clearly the task of the admin team is to review and administer the server, and that includes keeping an eye on public chat.
While the Argonath Vision allows a freedom of discussion, the players still enter a game server and not a chatroom. There for once the topic is in the eye of any of the administration team too far away from the game, they have the right and even obligation to act.
The topic discussed at the time is not relevant, nor is if the people raising the topic are new players or veterans or even members of the administration. What is relevant is that the administration has the right to request a discussion to be dropped, and the community does not have the possibility to override that as that would lead to anarchy.
Ther for your attempts to distract by looking at the content of the topic are completely irrelevant, indeed the topic could ahve been cats. Also your attempt to show this is proving that we do not care for veterans is incorrect as the acts of administration are not related to the person but to their view the public chat was distracting from the game play.
Failure to see responses in the intended/expected layout you desire does not classify as evading your points. In fact if anything your constant claim, represents a sense of insecurity at best since tried and tested methods are not working as well with me as they have with others in the past.
1) The definition of censorship is defined and remains unchanged. Asking the same question over and over and expecting a different reply is an act of insanity or failure to grasp what is being said. What is important though is how the definition is applied to the context of the situation. It has been argued repeatedly that since the subject did not contravene the unsaid guidelines of appropriate censorship meaning it should have been allowed to be discussed. You have openly disagreed claiming the admin has pure discretion over the subject and its continuity meaning that should they not like cats being talked about in /p, they have the right to stop the discussion on cats without the players being able to question why - which is flawed.
2) I agree in nearly all cases but for those that are too far fetched even for the most tolerating veterans should be highlighted so that the practise is stopped and not repeated in the future especially towards somebody less capable of defending themselves. We have a responsiblity to uphold the vision, but those who are true patriots of the community need to defend the community from the community itself.
3) We differ in opnion since I believe the content is hugely important (read by points above). Also in terms of purposely showing the leadership/you in a bad light when caring about veterans interests in this scenario remains true in my view, especially given the demeaning false accusations throughout this topic being a testament to that. That said, our passion for the community is willing to look past it knowing the sarifices we collectively make.
-
Man you guys need to chill. who cares wether u can say certain things or not over /p. not the end of the world. :weed:
P.s Gandalf.. I heard a rumor you made an agreement to let woka back in ? for money $?!
:weed:
-
Frank, why is it that you choose to come back after a long period of inactivity just to start up controversy once more?
-
P.s Gandalf.. I heard a rumor you made an agreement to let woka back in ? for money $?!
:weed:
I heard the same , I aslo heard that Woka have a secret account , he plays argo too .. I don't know if this true or fales .
-
Failure to see responses in the intended/expected layout you desire does not classify as evading your points. In fact if anything your constant claim, represents a sense of insecurity at best since tried and tested methods are not working as well with me as they have with others in the past.
1) The definition of censorship is defined and remains unchanged. Asking the same question over and over and expecting a different reply is an act of insanity or failure to grasp what is being said. What is important though is how the definition is applied to the context of the situation. It has been argued repeatedly that since the subject did not contravene the unsaid guidelines of appropriate censorship meaning it should have been allowed to be discussed. You have openly disagreed claiming the admin has pure discretion over the subject and its continuity meaning that should they not like cats being talked about in /p, they have the right to stop the discussion on cats without the players being able to question why - which is flawed.
You are correct, if the administration would for whatever reason wish a discussion of cats to be dropped it would have to be dropped. Once again, you are in a game server and not a chat server. While we do allow off-topic discussion and banter, it is the perogative of the administration to determine when a topic should be dropped.
In the case thet player feels single members of the adminitration act too limiting they have one single possible action. That is not posting a raging topic on forum, but send an email to have the case reviewed.
2) I agree in nearly all cases but for those that are too far fetched even for the most tolerating veterans should be highlighted so that the practise is stopped and not repeated in the future especially towards somebody less capable of defending themselves. We have a responsiblity to uphold the vision, but those who are true patriots of the community need to defend the community from the community itself.
As I have said time and time again, I welcome any kind of critcism or constructive suggestions. And if they happen to come from (active) veterans they will usually be considered more serious, even if I do not forget that new members of the Argonath community are not necessarily new to any form of roleplay or community behaviour.
That is something that I unfortunately see many veterans miss, all too often the date of arrival is seen as the first time someone ever opened a game and the newly arrived are treated as such.
3) We differ in opnion since I believe the content is hugely important (read by points above). Also in terms of purposely showing the leadership/you in a bad light when caring about veterans interests in this scenario remains true in my view, especially given the demeaning false accusations throughout this topic being a testament to that. That said, our passion for the community is willing to look past it knowing the sarifices we collectively make.
Please point at any false accusations in order to correct them.
As for the content of the topic, the first point makes it clear, so for the rest we can only agree to disagree on this.
-
Man you guys need to chill. who cares wether u can say certain things or not over /p. not the end of the world. :weed:
P.s Gandalf.. I heard a rumor you made an agreement to let woka back in ? for money $?!
:weed:
That rumour is competely false. We do not unban players for money, nor do we sell anything.
As for Woka, I have mentioned to him that I am not in favour of withc hunting. If people manage to ban evade and play as a normal member of the community without revealing their original account or returning to bad habits of rule breaking, I do not care.
However as soon as they start revealing themselves to others, or if they get the attention of the administration by rule breaking which might reveal their account is evading a ban, the rules state there is no alternative but to ban them.
Ban evading does not take a lot of skills, I see no reason why people think it is an accomplishment.
-
If people manage to ban evade and play as a normal member of the community without revealing their original account or returning to bad habits of rule breaking, I do not care.
So you're basically sayin, I can ban evade without revealing my identity. And that's completely allowed now?
Why are many players then banned for "ban evading".
Exceptions included, MOST players never reveal their identity on their ban evading account simply because they don't want to get caught. But still, they get banned sooner or later, regardless of the fact if they revealed their identity or not. Mostly you guys catch him and ban him yourself because their IPs are similar.
So what you're saying is, Ban Evading is now allowed? And Managers are wrong when they ban players, who haven't revealed themselves, for ban evading?
-
amen :app:
-
That is something that I unfortunately see many veterans miss, all too often the date of arrival is seen as the first time someone ever opened a game and the newly arrived are treated as such.
Luckily, that's something I didn't get too plagued with, I think I was instructing other newly arrived and even some veterans within 2-3 weeks though, and everyone kept thinking I'm either old player or a banevador, so that probably did it.
But even if you do get treated as a newb on a community right after you join, that's to be expected, and only thing you can do is prove them wrong :)
-
So you're basically sayin, I can ban evade without revealing my identity. And that's completely allowed now?
Why are many players then banned for "ban evading".
Exceptions included, MOST players never reveal their identity on their ban evading account simply because they don't want to get caught. But still, they get banned sooner or later, regardless of the fact if they revealed their identity or not. Mostly you guys catch him and ban him yourself because their IPs are similar.
So what you're saying is, Ban Evading is now allowed? And Managers are wrong when they ban players, who haven't revealed themselves, for ban evading?
Do not twist my words.
Ban evading is not allowed, and if caught the evading account will be banned. However I do not care to actively hunt after every new registration to see if it might be a ban evader. If they behave and do not attract attention, they might be caught after a long time havig proven them selves and we can let them off knowing they did reform.
If they continue to break rules, soon enough someone will check them and ban, taking stronger measures every time they evade again.
-
But that means exactly like I said.
You're saying that a guy can ban evade and stay hidden and not rulebreak and after a few months you'll see he's changed and you'll allow him to play.
Which basically means you're allowing people to ban evade.
-
But that means exactly like I said.
You're saying that a guy can ban evade and stay hidden and not rulebreak and after a few months you'll see he's changed and you'll allow him to play.
Which basically means you're allowing people to ban evade.
Why must you twist every single thing? He clearly stated that we are not going to run around doing a background check on every single player that registers. Do you feel that is not adequate or something?
Why should we waste time looking into every single registered players background in case he may have been banned? If he brings attention to himself and we see they are banevading they will be removed from the server.
And no, if we know a person is banevading we will ban them without question but we will not run around looking for them under every pebble.
-
But that means exactly like I said.
You're saying that a guy can ban evade and stay hidden and not rulebreak and after a few months you'll see he's changed and you'll allow him to play.
Which basically means you're allowing people to ban evade.
There is a difference between allowing and not caring.
Every time a player ban evades he has to start as new player. Because logs are checked and as soon as he tells anyone he had another account the risk is he will be banned and has to start all over once again. So the ban evader is living like a criminal wanted by the police, every time he encounters a police officer he has to fear to be caught.
Some people can live such life, others prefer to stay honest.
-
Why must you twist every single thing?
Do not twist my words.
If people manage to ban evade and play as a normal member of the community without revealing their original account or returning to bad habits of rule breaking, I do not care.
So you're basically sayin, I can ban evade without revealing my identity. And that's completely allowed now?
I'm sorry, but you're the ones twisting James' words, he obviously meant, in addition, "and behaving like a normal person" alongside with his "without revealing my identity". And that's exactly what you said on the tin. If you sought for something ironic, over the Internet, you failed.
-
I'm sorry, but you're the ones twisting James' words, he obviously meant, in addition, "and behaving like a normal person" alongside with his "without revealing my identity". And that's exactly what you said on the tin. If you sought for something ironic, over the Internet, you failed.
You seem to have some comprehension or reading problem. James seemed to think "it was completly allowed now". Gandalf just said as long as they keep a low profile, he doesn't care.
To not care =/= being allowed.
-
What is laughable is that you do not know the difference between Waka_Flocka and Woka.
What is even more laughable is that you knew exactly whom I spoke of and yet still felt the need to be impertinent about it.
-
What is even more laughable is that you knew exactly whom I spoke of and yet still felt the need to be impertinent about it.
What is incredibly laughable is that you are still trying to pick a fight instead of discussing the original subject of the topic. :)
-
This whole topic is laughable... just archive it or something.
-
You are correct, if the administration would for whatever reason wish a discussion of cats to be dropped it would have to be dropped. Once again, you are in a game server and not a chat server. While we do allow off-topic discussion and banter, it is the perogative of the administration to determine when a topic should be dropped.
This is a statement of contradiction which like many of your replies in this topic is a prevailing theme. That aside and given that you have attempted in part to answer the question I had (though it is surprisingly not that one I had hoped to hear) – this topic has now run its course, so feel free to close it at your wish. There will be no further statements from me – thanks for replying in part.
-
This is a statement of contradiction which like many of your replies in this topic is a prevailing theme. That aside and given that you have attempted in part to answer the question I had (though it is surprisingly not that one I had hoped to hear) – this topic has now run its course, so feel free to close it at your wish. There will be no further statements from me – thanks for replying in part.
It is indeed contradictory, as many of our habits are.
That is because we do not strive for a prison-like system where people are bound by a lawbook, but for an open community where almost anything is possible, as long as the few directions given are followed.
The topic you discussed might at another time not have led to any request to drop it, while in some cases it woud have been stopped faster. just like other topics can be allowed to discuss at one time, yet at another time be disallowed.
That is in itself contradictory, but also allows the maximal freedom and gives players their own responsibility as much as we can.
We do not limit what you can discuss, we do not make a list of allowed topics and what would not be allowed. The single thing we ask is that if at any time the administration team gives you an instruction, for whatever reason, you follow it.
-
Please give any proof of them, you are making a blanket statement without content. If you may remember Emre and me had a discussion in a locked topic where he had to admit that not his point but mine were valid. Since then he has taking up trolling and cyberbullying, which is why he is no longer here.
Boy, do you ever learn?
-
Boy, do you ever learn?
Emre, do you ever learn?
-
merhaba emre