Censorship

[SugarD]

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.

[Gandalf]

Damn, you hit the nail on the head right there.

No he missed it completely.

[PSVITA]

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.

[Gandalf]

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.

[Ben.]

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?

[Gandalf]

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.

[Ben.]

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.

[SugarD]

...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.

[PSVITA]

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.

[Ben.]

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.

[Gandalf]

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.

[Gandalf]

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.

[Ethan.]

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' 

[Pingster]

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.

[Leon.]

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.