Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Open Forum => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Alex_Olijar on July 31, 2011, 01:42:38 AM
-
8. There is to be no formation of groups or other clubs that will in any way exclude other members on this board.
This sure sounds a lot like Open Discussion. Let's look at the facts:
1. There is a rule against exclusion of members.
2. There is an exclusive board based on an arbitrarily set number.
3. A board could be construed as a club.
If this rule is not being followed, can I break this rule?
2. Entire threads of spam will not exist in this forum. Any excessive spam posts will be quarantined or deleted.
-
Personally, I think the rules should be re-written anyway. The SQF didn't get shut down, and that excluded any members who wouldn't say the oath. The current rules are really really old.
-
Personally, I think the rules should be re-written anyway. The SQF didn't get shut down, and that excluded any members who wouldn't say the oath.
This is another valid point. Especially since the following rules are consistantly broken:
2. Entire threads of spam will not exist in this forum. Any excessive spam posts will be quarantined or deleted.
Every post by some members.
3. We want to encourage people to discuss and debate here within the guidelines of appropriate Christian behavior and good taste. Inserting totally irrelevant or downright frivolous posts into an otherwise worthwhile discussion will not be allowed. Any such posts will be quarantined or deleted.
Every non-Ruling Questions Board posts some members make.
4. Insults and derogatory remarks will not be tolerated here. If we have any cause to think that you intend to ridicule, belittle or insult someone with your post, we will quarantine or delete it. If such behavior continues after enough warning, we will have you banned.
Most posts in Open Discussion.
8. There is to be no formation of groups or other clubs that will in any way exclude other members on this board.
SQF/Open Discussion
9. With the growing popularity of the Redemption® trading card game, some overzealous entrepreneurs (some joking, some serious) have been producing all sorts of graphics, shirts, etc. with copyrighted Cactus images and logos on them. This will not be tolerated without permission from Cactus Game Design.
What it is: Copyrights© and Registered Trademarks® are expensive. The person or company usually goes through an attorney who researches the copyright, applies for it, and upon receiving it, makes sure it is honored. Copyrights protect an individual's intellectual properties (properties that can cost significant money to bring to the market and to promote and sell.)
What Cactus has protected: Anything with a © or ® or on it is off limits without permission from Cactus Game Design to use it. In fact, some of the images we have used in Redemption® come with their own © on them, closely regulating how Cactus may use them. For example, unless we get the property owners permission we cannot use any of Jeff Haynies works (Authority of Christ, etc.), any AOCOM, any Eternal Studios, any Jamison artwork, or any NLightning images on anything except Redemption® cards. Shirts, posters, etc. violate the © agreement.
Things off limits to use without our permission:
- Redemption Logo
- Flaming Sword image
- Illustrations
- Card Layout and Design
- Redemption Game Mechanics
If any of these are used without our permission, we have the right, by law, to take legal action. This can range anywhere from having servers to taking down a website to legal action in a courtroom.
What Cactus expects from you:
1.) Do not assume anything. Ask permission. It is not that hard. Just send us an e-mail (cactusrob@frontier.com) and you will most likely be cleared to use it.
2.) List somewhere on the page/image that the images are for instance ©2011 Cactus Game Design. Used with Permission.
3.) Do NOT sell the item. Making profit from our © names and games without permission will not be tolerated. All items you wish to produce using our logos and images must be first approved and will be subject to certain restrictions. (For example, all sales of Redemption® related items are subject to a 10% royalty to be sent to Cactus Game Design Inc.)
The New Card Ideas Board.
So what rules can I break without concern?
-
well there goes awesome looking playmats. guess i'll stick with my mtg and ygo mats.
-
well there goes awesome looking playmats. guess i'll stick with my mtg and ygo mats.
There are always casulties in the fight for virtue.
-
Dear admins,
I'm excluded from the Playtesters club. I'm denied access to their forums, which sounds like exclusion to me. Please fix this immediately.
Amor,
Salsa
-
The rules need a MAJOR rewrite IMO.
-
I must ask... what is your point in posting this?
You're one of the more frequent posters in Open Discussion, and now you want it gone or something?
what is this i dont even
-
You're one of the more frequent posters in Open Discussion, and now you want it gone or something?
I don't think he wants Open Discussion gone. I think he wants the rule gone.
-
either he wants the rules to be changed. or has given mods a reason to become stricter and start cracking down on everything he has detailed.
-
Dear admins,
I'm excluded from the Playtesters club. I'm denied access to their forums, which sounds like exclusion to me. Please fix this immediately.
Amor,
Salsa
Comprende! Thank you for your support Comrade Saucy Pants!
The rules need a MAJOR rewrite IMO.
The first thing I would suggest is that we legislate the requirement for proper grammar.
I must ask... what is your point in posting this?
You're one of the more frequent posters in Open Discussion, and now you want it gone or something?
what is this i dont even
I never said I wanted anything gone. I just want the elitism of the boards to go away if it is actually a rule. If it isn't a rule, I want to know why I have to listen to any other rule. Why can't I link to other boards for recruitment purposes, for example? I am in a group, so why can't I break that other rule?
Since the main culprit seems to be the Open Discussion board, I say we just delete that and be all good. I'm "old enough" but I don't go there any more for the aforementioned reasons. No one ever changes their mind anyway. I hear the same opinions over and over and over and.......
Good call, bro. Solve elitism with elitism. Brilliant!*
*Copywritten by Guiness Draft Beer. BRILLIANT!
either he wants the rules to be changed. or has given mods a reason to become stricter and start cracking down on everything he has detailed.
My bad, bro. Didn't know the internet was a country club.
-
This thread is fantastic.
This post is not spam.
I'm not doing this to prove a point.
Carry on.
-
my point is its probably best to not shed light on things that are happening that shouldnt be happening if you want it to continue happening...if open discussion is gone tomorrow, well, everyone now knows where to look.
-
This thread is fantastic.
It's because the thread starter is in the top percentage of thread starters.
This post is not spam.
You are implying Spam is bad and wrong, which at this point in the thread, is a very dicey hypothesis to be working under.
I'm not doing this to prove a point.
Liar, Liar Pants on Fire!
my point is its probably best to not shed light on things that are happening that shouldnt be happening if you want it to continue happening...if open discussion is gone tomorrow, well, everyone now knows where to look.
My bad, broski. Next time I see that kid on the street, I won't say anything, because I want get rich through the system of business magnates raping the poor working folk, and helping that hungry kid would detract from that goal.
-
thats the point. if you're one of those rich 'business magnates' that realizes helping that poor little kid on the streets will detract from your goal, why would you help him? pretty much proved my point. through sarcasm. wow, sarcasm. thats original!
-
thats the point. if you're one of those rich 'business magnates' that realizes helping that poor little kid on the streets will detract from your goal, why would you help him? pretty much proved my point. through sarcasm. thats so...original.
Chillax, dude. I didn't prove your point. I made you admit that helping poor kids is bad if you want to be rich. Who looks cool now? Not the child abuser, that's for sure.
But, seriously, you wouldn't help a kid if it would detract from your career? This calls for a Stephen Colbert picture:
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1098.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg364%2Fawost1%2FJSaRu.jpg&hash=e2a24e9ba29865fa2a056b18a4f0f1db2b813ba7)
-
But, seriously, you wouldn't help a kid if it would detract from your career?
I have no obligation to answer this because it is an impossible scenario for two reasons:
1.) When is the last time you saw a needy kid in the rich part of New York?
2.) Helping the kid would be good for my career. Just let me call up a couple news agencies, my PR guy said this stuff is gold.
-
I have no obligation to answer this because it is an impossible scenario for two reasons:
1.) When is the last time you saw a needy kid in the rich part of New York?
2.) Helping the kid would be good for my career. Just let me call up a couple news agencies, my PR guy said this stuff is gold.
1. Good point. I live in LA though. And by LA, I mean Beverly Hills. And only Beverly Hills.
2. My PR guy told me that I should only help little girls. Little boys grow up into gang members, so if they die, no one cares. Little girls grow up into women, and everyone likes women these days.
-
everyone likes women these days.
I live in LA though
You're nearing a fine line. Don't forget you're just a short drive from San Francisco. You don't want to make them mad while they're still of use.
-
You're nearing a fine line. Don't forget you're just a short drive from San Francisco. You don't want to make them mad while they're still of use.
Being as I am a utilitarian*, that's a very compelling argument.
*u·til·i·tar·i·an·ism –noun
the ethical doctrine that virtue is based on utility, and that conduct should be directed toward promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons. Also known as likely to cause a flame war on CGD message boards.
-
You two are extremely bored aren't you?
-
You two are extremely bored aren't you?
I think this post breaks rule number 4. Considering you are a mod, can I take that as a passive condoning of the breaking of rule number 4 without consequence?
-
I have to disagree - If I said "You two are both lazy lay-abouts, good for nothing" (Clearly what you read in my innocent question) Then I would agree with you, however, you are choosing to interpret a question posed to you as an insult, which frankly, is insulting to me.
-
Also known as likely to cause a flame war on CGD message boards.
I wouldn't worry about that. I have some really good topics in mind that can cause a bigger flame war, which will divert the attention of the first one. Similar to how the government kills celebrities when they want to commit war crimes, so the major news stations ignore the latter.
-
I have to disagree - If I said "You two are both lazy lay-abouts, good for nothing" (Clearly what you read in my innocent question) Then I would agree with you, however, you are choosing to interpret a question posed to you as an insult, which frankly, is insulting to me.
Based upon this suggestion that interpretation of the reading is paramount to the meaning of the post, I would have to suggest that virtually every post breaks rule number 4. That being said, I must therefore conclude that rule 4 is clearly allowed to be repeated broken without consequence.
Since rule 4 is no longer valid, RDT, you are the biggest noob I have ever met. Who plays a Disciples Type 2 deck without a Fishing Boat? Only you would.
Also known as likely to cause a flame war on CGD message boards.
I wouldn't worry about that. I have some really good topics in mind that can cause a bigger flame war, which will divert the attention of the first one. Similar to how the government kills celebrities when they want to commit war crimes, so the major news stations ignore the latter.
I heard that they also reprogram famous convicted felons (except Lindsay Lohan) so that the redemption stories can overcome the stories of the dead celebrities.
-
Since rule 4 is no longer valid, RDT, you are the biggest noob I have ever met. Who plays a Disciples Type 2 deck without a Fishing Boat? Only you would.
Better Question - Who builds a T2 Disciples deck without fishing boat. I'm innocent of this crime - I was simply the pilot. Even Armstrong would have crashed into the Moon if his shuttle was built poorly.
-
Since rule 4 is no longer valid, RDT, you are the biggest noob I have ever met. Who plays a Disciples Type 2 deck without a Fishing Boat? Only you would.
Better Question - Who builds a T2 Disciples deck without fishing boat. I'm innocent of this crime - I was simply the pilot. Even Armstrong would have crashed into the Moon if his shuttle was built poorly.
If you consider a deck that won a Regional Tournament equivalent to a shuttle crashing into the moon, I only have this to say:
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1098.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg364%2Fawost1%2FLionsstupidityfacepalm.jpg&hash=f16f77a2663ba1723faaf63def6c4ab420b06ce7)
-
If rdt doesn't use Fishing Boat it's more like rdEZ. BURNSICK*.
*Do not check the origin of that word. Starcraft has overtaken my vocabulary.
-
If rdt doesn't use Fishing Boat it's more like rdEZ. BURNSICK*.
*Do not check the origin of that word. Starcraft has overtaken my vocabulary.
Please do not distract from the importance of this thread. Can I or can I not spam, seeing as I can join an exclusive group?
-
(╯°□°）╯︵ spoɯ
That's literally an image of me overthrowing the system. I'm not going to be part of your system. NOTE: This is an art. It is not meant to be taken literally by the first definition.
-
Is that Kirby picture actual size?
-
I've got an exclusive group known as the "Rochester Raiders." We only allow those who live in Rochester (NY) to join. Am I not allowed to do this anymore?
The above statement could be seen as frivolous. Am I not allowed to say that?
I'm also a mod. Can I have an opinion here at all?
-
I've got an exclusive group known as the "Rochester Raiders." We only allow those who live in Rochester (NY) to join. Am I not allowed to do this anymore?
I don't think that's a board related group, so you should be ok.
The above statement could be seen as frivolous. Am I not allowed to say that?
I took it very srsly. It was on topic.
I'm also a mod. Can I have an opinion here at all?
Of course. If I didn't allow you to have an opinion, that would be an exclusive group (like the playtesters and the admins).
-
There's a bunch of us on the boards. Seems related.
-
There's a bunch of us on the boards. Seems related.
It's not based on the boards in anyway, but rather it is brought onto the boards because of the fact several of you are on the boards. Therefore, it should be ok, because the boards was not the central place where the exclusive club was formed.
-
So I can have all the exclusive clubs I want, as long as they weren't formed on the boards?
-
So I can have all the exclusive clubs I want, as long as they weren't formed on the boards?
It's been my interpretation of the rules that you can not use the boards to facilitate the creation or sustainment of any exclusive clubs. Doing so violates the rules of the boards as laid down by former administrator Doug Gray.
-
Ah, I missed the sustainment part. So this post isn't ok?
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/official-tournaments/rochester-ny-tournaments/ (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/official-tournaments/rochester-ny-tournaments/)
-
Ah, I missed the sustainment part. So this post isn't ok?
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/official-tournaments/rochester-ny-tournaments/ (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/official-tournaments/rochester-ny-tournaments/)
I believe that post would be ok, because it is not discussing a closed local tournament. Technically, anyone could travel to such a tournament, it's just we choose to stay home because of distance/money/etc.
-
So we're discriminating against those at extreme distance/lesser financial standing.
-
So we're discriminating against those at extreme distance/lesser financial standing.
It's my personal decision to pay my car off rather than attend your tournament. It is not location-based discrimination in anyway.
-
ITT: serious business.
-
ITT: serious business.
I think you mean srs bsns.
-
ITT: serious business.
I think you mean srs bsns.
That, too.
-
Bump for moderator clarification.
-
Yes i agree a amendment should be made to Constitution of the Cactus Game Design Online Message Board (or some other official name)
"We the players, in order to form a more perfect union, establish Que and ANB....
...to be required in every deck! No, then the supply would run out.
-
Yes i agree a amendment should be made to Constitution of the Cactus Game Design Online Message Board (or some other official name)
"We the players, in order to form a more perfect union, establish Que and ANB....
...to be required in every deck! No, then the supply would run out.
Some people have a monopoly on them already...
I'm really kinda surprised this thread is still alive.
-
Seems like a good place to ask this: WHERE IS THE JOKE THREAD????? WHO DONE GOTTEN IT DELETED?
What rule was broken that it got taken down? I've seen FAR WORSE stuff posted on this forum and a JOKE thread in OFF-TOPIC gets deleted? Seriously lighten up (Dead serious, no pun intended)
-C_S >:(
-
Bump for moderator clarification.
-
Come to think of it, my pickup lines thread was locked for no reason. I'd like a ruling on that.
/not to mention several of my non-offensive posts that were deleted.
-
Someone deleted my thread about discipling children with a guillotine, too. Clearly there is an overzealous moderator running amok.
-
And I would like my encouragement to be restored to its full value.
-
This thread contains so much win.
Alex I hope you're at natz so I can buy you a cookie :)
-
And I would like my encouragement to be restored to its full value.
I put "has over 900 respect" on my resume.
-
I can't believe I actually wasted the time to read this. I thought it was going to be worth while but guess not. And I'm a troll???? Goodness... Well IMO (which matters like -900 here) The message boards/rulings are a construct of a house of redemption cards loosely put together in an attempt to stroke certain people's egos and make you feel better about yourselves. I enjoy playing the game but find these boards distasteful and lacking substance. Good day sir!
-
I can't believe I actually wasted the time to read this. I thought it was going to be worth while but guess not. And I'm a troll???? Goodness... Well IMO (which matters like -900 here) The message boards/rulings are a construct of a house of redemption cards loosely put together in and attempt to stroke certain people's egos and make you feel better about yourselves. I enjoy playing the game but find these boards distasteful and lacking substance. Good day sir!
aaannnd thats why no body likes you :)
-
I can't believe I actually wasted the time to read this. I thought it was going to be worth while but guess not. And I'm a troll???? Goodness... Well IMO (which matters like -900 here) The message boards/rulings are a construct of a house of redemption cards loosely put together in and attempt to stroke certain people's egos and make you feel better about yourselves. I enjoy playing the game but find these boards distasteful and lacking substance. Good day sir!
aaannnd thats why no body likes you :)
I was wondering who was going to have their feelings hurt first by that statement... We have a winner!
-
haha relax i was joking
-
haha relax i was joking
and you have my apologies :)
-
...in an attempt to stroke certain people's egos and make you feel better about yourselves.
This is coming from a guy with a member name "theselfevident." ;)
I would not take anything in this thread seriously. The entire thread was spam7 from the first post. We like you. Please stay.
7But not the last two sentences before this footnote. ;D
-
but the last two were spam?
-
taken from the Preamble "we find these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal"... I'm not going anywhere, I was just trying to voice an opinion and trying to be funny =)
-
but the last two were spam?
They were knot spam.
-
I can't believe I actually wasted the time to read this. I thought it was going to be worth while but guess not. And I'm a troll???? Goodness... Well IMO (which matters like -900 here) The message boards/rulings are a construct of a house of redemption cards loosely put together in an attempt to stroke certain people's egos and make you feel better about yourselves. I enjoy playing the game but find these boards distasteful and lacking substance. Good day sir!
You insulted everyone who posts here on a regular basis, and are surprised when you get responses? Either that, or you're exactly the troll you were called.
-
I can't believe I actually wasted the time to read this. I thought it was going to be worth while but guess not. And I'm a troll???? Goodness... Well IMO (which matters like -900 here) The message boards/rulings are a construct of a house of redemption cards loosely put together in an attempt to stroke certain people's egos and make you feel better about yourselves. I enjoy playing the game but find these boards distasteful and lacking substance. Good day sir!
You insulted everyone who posts here on a regular basis, and are surprised when you get responses? Either that, or you're exactly the troll you were called.
When did I say I was surprised? Oh, and I'm pretty sure I only offended the people who have the biggest egos.
-
Or you offended everyone and some of the people with big enough egos to handle criticism decided to post on the behalf of those with small self-esteem.*
*Not saying everyone has small self-esteem I'm just aware that some people are hurt by this but don't post about it because A) They don't want to be criticized further. B ) Don't want to be part of a rapidly approaching flamewar C) They aren't allowed in this exclusive "Open Forum" club.
-
This is all great but still no mod clarification
-
This thread contains so much win.
Alex I hope you're at natz so I can buy you a cookie :)
I will be, but I won't accept your cookies. I am a pure and true Jedi.
I can't believe I actually wasted the time to read this. I thought it was going to be worth while but guess not. And I'm a troll???? Goodness... Well IMO (which matters like -900 here) The message boards/rulings are a construct of a house of redemption cards loosely put together in an attempt to stroke certain people's egos and make you feel better about yourselves. I enjoy playing the game but find these boards distasteful and lacking substance. Good day sir!
Keep your opinion to yourself; all that matters is the truth. I have the truth*.
*Unproven
You insulted everyone who posts here on a regular basis, and are surprised when you get responses? Either that, or you're exactly the troll you were called.
I don't think it's trolling to call everyone something that they are.
When did I say I was surprised? Oh, and I'm pretty sure I only offended the people who have the biggest egos.
You only offended people who gave your opinion weight.
This is all great but still no mod clarification
Hey, kid, get your spam out of this thread.
With all that responding, I almost forgot:
Bump for moderator clarification.
-
Bump for moderator clarification.
-
Bump for moderator clarification.
-
Bump for moderator clarification.
-
Stop spamming, Warrior. Even if it's not against the rules, it's in bad taste.
-
Similar to white castle shirts.
-
Similar to white castle shirts.
Only Gosu people can sleep for 1 of 32 hours and be good at booster (which is 99.9% luck).
-
Redemption is skill unlike Bang.
-
My Bang! skill is unprecedented. I will Bang! you all.
-
Stop spamming, Warrior. Even if it's not against the rules, it's in bad taste.
I am spamming no more than Alex is. and since i did exactly the same thing as him and we both wish for Mod clarification,
either both of us are spamming or neither of us are. Even if you disagree this may even draw attention to rules about spamming that might
need to change (after all this thread is about rules being broken/changed). either way i have added something to the conversation and have therefore, not spammed
-
This is my thread, therefore I say Warrior is not allowed to psot on it now because the forums are anarachy because no rule is legitamate right now.
-
This is my thread, therefore I say Warior is not allowed to psot on it now because the forums are anarachy because no rule is legitamate right now.
Rules were meant to be broken...
-
This is my thread, therefore I say Warrior is not allowed to psot on it now because the forums are anarachy because no rule is legitamate right now.
And how exactly do you plan to stop Warrior from posting? Will you lock the thread, keeping him from posting at everyone else's expense? Will you remove it, dashing all hopes of the mod clarification you've been all but begging for the last couple days (and that Warrior actually helped in proving you weren't the only one who wanted it)? Will you try to get him banned because he was doing something that you yourself were doing?
-
Will you take this thread to be your lawfully wedded wife?
-
Will you take this thread to be your lawfully wedded wife?
In sickness and in death.
This is my thread, therefore I say Warrior is not allowed to psot on it now because the forums are anarachy because no rule is legitamate right now.
And how exactly do you plan to stop Warrior from posting? Will you lock the thread, keeping him from posting at everyone else's expense? Will you remove it, dashing all hopes of the mod clarification you've been all but begging for the last couple days (and that Warrior actually helped in proving you weren't the only one who wanted it)? Will you try to get him banned because he was doing something that you yourself were doing?
He won't post because he knows this thread has the mark of Colin and as its creator I have to power to choose the entrants.
-
This is my thread, therefore I say Warrior is not allowed to psot on it now because the forums are anarachy because no rule is legitamate right now.
And how exactly do you plan to stop Warrior from posting? Will you lock the thread, keeping him from posting at everyone else's expense? Will you remove it, dashing all hopes of the mod clarification you've been all but begging for the last couple days (and that Warrior actually helped in proving you weren't the only one who wanted it)? Will you try to get him banned because he was doing something that you yourself were doing?
He won't post because he knows this thread has the mark of Colin and as its creator I have to power to choose the entrants.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.sodahead.com%2Fprofiles%2F0%2F0%2F1%2F7%2F2%2F1%2F6%2F3%2F5%2Fu-mad-40005935331.png&hash=27346a3c583c951fd61dc71a3939204d5b33256d)
-
This is my thread, therefore I say Warrior is not allowed to psot on it now because the forums are anarachy because no rule is legitamate right now.
And how exactly do you plan to stop Warrior from posting? Will you lock the thread, keeping him from posting at everyone else's expense? Will you remove it, dashing all hopes of the mod clarification you've been all but begging for the last couple days (and that Warrior actually helped in proving you weren't the only one who wanted it)? Will you try to get him banned because he was doing something that you yourself were doing?
He won't post because he knows this thread has the mark of Colin and as its creator I have to power to choose the entrants.
i haven't had a good argument in a while... the Joybell threads were that most awesome threads ever... speaking of arguments i haven't seen Raven around much anymore.... ANARCHY!!!
-
Gonna double post cause Warrior did.
-
+1
-
+1
+1
-
Bump for moderator clarification.
-
+1
-
Bump for moderator clarification.
-
I see you lurking this RDT.
-
I can't see him lurking because he's doing it over my shoulder.
-
I want my clarification. This is anarchy RDT, anarchy.
-
You should have all the moderators and administrators you can handle at Nats (including head guru Rob) to deal adequately with your questions/accusations. Take some action and engage them in conversation (read debate).
-
I read seven pages hoping than an administrator would go bonkers and lock something. Oh well.
-
You should have all the moderators and administrators you can handle at Nats (including head guru Rob) to deal adequately with your questions/accusations. Take some action and engage them in conversation (read debate).
I'm busy trolling for rule changes, rather than boards changes.
I read seven pages hoping than an administrator would go bonkers and lock something. Oh well.
Thanks for adding nothing to the discussion. If a mod would answer the original question, maybe this would go away.
-
Thanks for adding nothing to the discussion. If a mod would answer the original question, maybe this would go away.
Hardly. As a mod of a completely unrelated board, I can see the future of this thread if a mod would truly engage you. The way you posed your question and/or position automatically sets the mod up for an impossible position. They can't agree with you, so therefore they must become your adversary in debate.
Oh, and a debate is guaranteed! They will take an opposing position and you will proceed to lay out your well-thought-out attack. However, the whole debate will mostly revolve around semantics and how each of you define terms. Ultimately, after 12 or so pages, nothing will be resolved and the mod will win because they contain all the power of these boards.
However, will the mod really win? You will not consider yourself defeated, but instead you will retreat back into the shadows until you gain a stronger force (see ANB crew, cannot save demons crew, & Save Que crew). Once you feel your force is strong enough, you will attack again from all sides with a similar laid out plan of logic.
Knowing all of the above, the mods feel it is easier to ignore this entire thread and wait for you to grow tired of "crying out in the wilderness." After all, do you really want to be like the prophet Jeremiah?
-
They could easily agree with me, and then say they will reqrite the rules.
-
They could easily agree with me, and then say they will reqrite the rules.
Rewrite them to what? "Rule 1: Anarchy and chaos is the best mode of controlling an internet chat site so that no one complains."? 8)
I'm assuming you have suggestions for this waiting in the wings. :-*
-
ANARCHY
-
Rereading the rules again I actually think they are fine. The rule is not that "you can't make excessive spam." The RULE, if you will, is that if you do it will be deleted. So really they are not rules but rather guidelines for the moderators. And if you look to threads like "there is a picture of a goat in this thread" or the cheese thread you can see that they are indeed following those rules.
Or are they?
-
After all, do you really want to be like the prophet Jeremiah?
Of course not. Jeremiah was a bullfrog.
-
Rereading the rules again I actually think they are fine. The rule is not that "you can't make excessive spam." The RULE, if you will, is that if you do it will be deleted. So really they are not rules but rather guidelines for the moderators. And if you look to threads like "there is a picture of a goat in this thread" or the cheese thread you can see that they are indeed following those rules.
Or are they?
Then don't call them rules.
And don't disobey them.
And don't selectively enforce them.
-
Then don't call them rules.
RULES! RULES! RULES! :P
-
Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls not YMT or LN)
-
Clearly I am not a troll, but a jötunn.
-
Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls not YMT or LN)
Bro is mad.
Clearly I am not a troll, but a jötunn.
I'm not really sure what that is, but it sounds awesome.
-
Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls not YMT or LN)
Bro is mad.
Clearly I am not a troll, but a jötunn.
I'm not really sure what that is, but it sounds awesome.
Troll is very hungry but Troll will not be fed.
-
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbios.weddingbee.com%2Fpics%2F68853%2Fdont_feed_the_trolls.jpg&hash=48c43b3b337c96c8e551b70d5717e3340c6f28b2)
Real life image.
-
Rereading the rules again I actually think they are fine. The rule is not that "you can't make excessive spam." The RULE, if you will, is that if you do it will be deleted. So really they are not rules but rather guidelines for the moderators. And if you look to threads like "there is a picture of a goat in this thread" or the cheese thread you can see that they are indeed following those rules.
Or are they?
Then don't call them rules.
And don't disobey them.
And don't selectively enforce them.
I was under the impression that you were sick of the stupid semantics and wanted actual change and actual results, not a renaming of what is happening and then a continuation of it. So no matter what they are called they don't ACT as rules, but rather guidelines for the moderators.
I do, however, very very very much so agree with the fact that they are selectively enforced, and that does make me slightly aggravated at times (your comment about a spell check requirement, for example, would be very nice). And the "this is spam I will delete it now" vs. the "this is spam let's join in and spam with the kids" mentality is also slightly confusing, and frustrating, at times.
-
Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls...)
-
Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls...)
That's copyrighted bud. You owe me a $5 fee.
-
FTR: I likely would not be a gracious moderator and delete it all. Therefore, it is good for the well-being of all that I have limited powers as a moderator.
How the above statement applies: Each moderator moderates to the best of their ability and judgment. Different personalities and thought patterns interpret rules/guidelines/whatever differently. That is what the real breakdown is since each moderator is different and controls different aspects of these boards.
-
+1 I personally would have blasted this thread to kingdom come along time ago had I been mod.
-
Each mod shouldn't be different. That's why rules exists. So we have consistancy. Just because Redemption rules aren't consistant doesn't mean the forum shouldn't be consistant either.
It's lame that stuff like the goat thread gets locked when it didn't hurt anyone and was a productive discussion but the same mods let us form exlcusive groups like TNT LLC or SQF. It's stupid that I can't spam but I can talk about magic, even though both are against the rules.
Either we need to update the rules, enforce the rules, or admit we don't have rules.
+1 I personally would have blasted this thread to kingdom come along time ago had I been mod.
If it makes you feel better, you'd probably have left this forum a long time ago if I was mod considering how many warns you'd have for your early years. This thread has been much more productive than virtually any other thread in off topic. It's designed to get people talking about how ridiculous the current ruleset of the forums is, and it did. I am in complete favor of a harsher mod team in some areas that need to be dealt with.
-
This thread was decent until the last 2 pages. Now it's an amalgamation of completely ridiculous posts that aren't constructive to the original topic. Simply put, it's a trainwreck: the longer you look at it, the worse it gets.
-
It depends on which parts you're looking at. Unfortunately, some people are taking this as complete spam and are actually spamming the thread itself. soul seeker and Olijar's posts have had some very good points.
-
Hence, my pointing out the last 2 pages as the culprits. I'd rather this get back onto topic and I wish it were a bit more formal. True, moderation practices have been spotty and seemingly erratic at times, yet, unlike most forums on the internet, this forum hardly has contained any true objectionable content in the past. It would be nice if there was some clarification to the rules, and a definition of "rule" provided. They do seem like guidelines rather than law, but that's not how they are portrayed. Actually, up until this thread, I had kind of forgotten there was such a thing as rules. It's a tad bit annoying to see a topic that had potential begin to dissolve into a broken refrigerator of spoiled spam.
-
I'll agree with both Alex and SoulSeeker. Alex has some great points that I would like to see answered as both a mod and participant. (with no overall guidelines, stuff like the pickup lines thread gets deleted without explanation, and the SQF reigns freely). However, it wasn't presented in the best manner for a response.
Alex, you've got a PM.
-
However, it wasn't presented in the best manner for a response.
That was half the point of this thread from post 3.
-
However, it wasn't presented in the best manner for a response.
That was half the point of this thread from post 3.
FTR, I agree with SK that your approach did not seem serious at first.
-
However, it wasn't presented in the best manner for a response.
That was half the point of this thread from post 3.
FTR, I agree with SK that your approach did not seem serious at first.
The very fact that this thread exists still supports the threads original claims. It's an irony thread.
-
The very fact that this thread exists still supports the threads original claims. It's an irony thread.
I don't disagree. I was just supporting SK's claim.
-
The very fact that this thread exists still supports the threads original claims. It's an irony thread.
I don't disagree. I was just supporting SK's claim.
I never really attacked his point per se, I rather countered it with another issue he might have not noticed.
-
I never really attacked his point per se, .....
You dismembered his point. :maul:
-
Alex and others, I am a mod and I am a human being. Here is my approach to what I have been asked to do here in this section of the boards:
1) I watch active threads from a distance, not usually getting involved in the conversations.
2) When I do get involved, very rarely is it from a mod perspective but as a board member.
3) When I do get involved as a mod, I handle the situation through PMs 90% of the time (this being in the rare 10% handled in posts).
4) The result is that it may appear that no moderating is actually happening.
In relation to the exclusive groups being formed, I actually don't see them as breaking the spirit of the "rules" since they are in good humor and anyone can be a part of it (like the Redemption community as a whole). When things are discussed that are against the "rules" they are watched and shepherded through PMs. My role is not the Tyranical Overlord...that has already been filled very successfully by another. You probably noticed how I keep putting quotes around rules. The reason being is that I do see them as guidelines rather than hard and fast limits. Feel free to PM me with any further concerns you may have in relation to this topic.