Censorship

[Shorty.]

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.

[Rusty]

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.

[Gandalf]

Nah, topic lock because the truth hurts.

What lock?

[Petarda]

What lock?

This one

[Zaila]

Nice picture.

[Ragdoll]

 

[Petarda]

Nice picture.

Yes, it's from the yesterday's party, remember?

[Alfreddo.]

  

[Gandalf]

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.

[Frank_Hawk]

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.

[Gandalf]

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.

[Frank_Hawk]

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. 

[Zaila]

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]

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.

[Frank_Hawk]

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?