Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Makoto Priano
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd. Arataka Research Consortium
8523
|
Posted - 2016.07.28 22:38:02 -
[31] - Quote
I'd have to say this one's a bit 'one size fits all,' to be honest.
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries: exploring the edge of the known, advancing the state of the art. Would you like to know more?
|
Jason Galente
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
668
|
Posted - 2016.07.28 23:54:50 -
[32] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:Jason Galente wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:Who was banned?
Also, impartial moderation never seems fair when you're on the receiving end, as everyone is biased towards themselves. Actually, I think I've been rather fair about this. I broke the rules, I got a warning. Fine. Now give similar warnings for similar breaking of said rule. QED
Are you trying to imply that my response itself is proof of your argument with no further argument as to why? That would be circular logic, specifically, begging the question. Unfalsifiable, therefor unreasonable assumption to make.
I indicated I was fine with it as an application of the rules, and merely added that all similar cases should be treated similarly. That would imply that my response actually refutes your claim that "impartial moderation never seems fair when you're on the receiving end". The moderation was perfectly fair. The problem is that it was insufficient because it was targeted at only one offender where multiple offenders existed. And that discrepancy is what would be unfair. Not the application, but the inconsistent application.
Only the liberty of the individual assures the prosperity of the whole.
And this foundation must be defended.
At any cost
|
Jason Galente
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
668
|
Posted - 2016.07.28 23:58:53 -
[33] - Quote
Vizage wrote: Many of you here are guilty of being the primary agitators in egging "you know who" on either through surreptitious summoning acts by sprinkling in random insult towards her which you know will only draw her in to derail an entire threat, or by actively engaging with her when she fires off in whatever toxic hate-filled diatribe she chooses.
This is a very odd argument for me. The language you use in referring to "her" is so kid-gloved.. it's as if you're talking to a child who has yet to reach the age of maturity. Kim is an adult who is fully responsible for her actions and the consequences of those actions. She doesn't get a pass, and the rest of us should be held to the same standard as her. The very fact that she is the single consistent thread in all of this tells you really what you need to know, full stop. This is something The Summit moderation figured out and specifically argued 2 years ago when getting rid of her.
Only the liberty of the individual assures the prosperity of the whole.
And this foundation must be defended.
At any cost
|
Ria Nieyli
45806
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 00:17:48 -
[34] - Quote
Jason Galente wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:Jason Galente wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:Who was banned?
Also, impartial moderation never seems fair when you're on the receiving end, as everyone is biased towards themselves. Actually, I think I've been rather fair about this. I broke the rules, I got a warning. Fine. Now give similar warnings for similar breaking of said rule. QED Are you trying to imply that my response itself is proof of your argument with no further argument as to why? That would be circular logic, specifically, begging the question. Unfalsifiable, therefor unreasonable assumption to make. I indicated I was fine with it as an application of the rules, and merely added that all similar cases should be treated similarly. That would imply that my response actually refutes your claim that "impartial moderation never seems fair when you're on the receiving end". The moderation was perfectly fair. The problem is that it was insufficient because it was targeted at only one offender where multiple offenders existed. And that discrepancy is what would be unfair. Not the application, but the inconsistent application.
"slang" is shortened language for "shortened language"
|
Jason Galente
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
668
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 00:25:53 -
[35] - Quote
Yarosara Ruil wrote:Here's an idea. Just hear this out!
Stop provoking Kim, stop taking advantage of her personality and stop taking it so personal that she hates all things Gallente.
That is terrifically easy for you to say.
Only the liberty of the individual assures the prosperity of the whole.
And this foundation must be defended.
At any cost
|
Jason Galente
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
674
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 00:35:08 -
[36] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:
Apparently, moderation will be stricter from now on. You, however, are calling for retroactive application of said stricter control and calling the lack of it inconsistant. How am I supposed to interpret that?
His shutting down of my thread was already a retroactive application of said stricter control. Check the dates.
All I am asking is for him to be consistent.
Only the liberty of the individual assures the prosperity of the whole.
And this foundation must be defended.
At any cost
|
James Syagrius
Reclamation Technologies
1341
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 01:00:31 -
[37] - Quote
James Syagrius wrote:What is of particular concern to me is GÇÿwhose codeGÇÖ? Who gets to choose?]. And this... is the very thing I alluded to in a previous discussion.
GÇ£Here also are the heralds of his praise."
|
Eve sharon
Eureka-Stockades
4
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 01:17:11 -
[38] - Quote
One of the reasons I read this forum is for the drama. Until recently I was too shy and disengaged to post myself.
Correct me if I'm wrong but some on this site receive too much criticism for roleplay. The EULA for this forum distinctly encourages roleplay. Therefor I enjoy reading people revelling in their race and character.
Kim and her friends are the best of this forum, please let them continue in-character without prejudice. |
Ria Nieyli
45806
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 01:19:42 -
[39] - Quote
Jason Galente wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:
Apparently, moderation will be stricter from now on. You, however, are calling for retroactive application of said stricter control and calling the lack of it inconsistant. How am I supposed to interpret that?
His shutting down of my thread was already a retroactive application of said stricter control. Check the dates. All I am asking is for him to be consistent.
Or maybe your thread is what prompted the warning from Mr. Auliette, and since content in it didn't improve afterwards, it was used as a warning to everyone.
"slang" is shortened language for "shortened language"
|
Jason Galente
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
676
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 01:58:54 -
[40] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:Jason Galente wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:
Apparently, moderation will be stricter from now on. You, however, are calling for retroactive application of said stricter control and calling the lack of it inconsistant. How am I supposed to interpret that?
His shutting down of my thread was already a retroactive application of said stricter control. Check the dates. All I am asking is for him to be consistent. Or maybe your thread is what prompted the warning from Mr. Auliette.
I very highly doubt that judging by the content/demeanor of it compared to, again, pretty much any thread of the last two years.
Only the liberty of the individual assures the prosperity of the whole.
And this foundation must be defended.
At any cost
|
|
Elmund Egivand
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
1272
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 02:23:25 -
[41] - Quote
Eve sharon wrote:One of the reasons I read this forum is for the drama. Until recently I was too shy and disengaged to post myself.
Correct me if I'm wrong but some on this site receive too much criticism for roleplay. The EULA for this forum distinctly encourages roleplay. Therefor I enjoy reading people revelling in their race and character.
Kim and her friends are the best of this forum, please let them continue in-character without prejudice.
Not to the point of being disruptive. She wants to make nationalist rants? Let her, but confine those to threads that actually has something to do with nationalist rants. You wouldn't appreciate having that unpopular do-no-good uncle crash into your family dinner day in and out to talk about the latest RSS conspiracy theory he came up with every single time now, would you?
A Minmatar warship is like a rusting Beetle with 500 horsepower Cardillac engines in the rear, armour plating bolted to chassis and a M2 Browning stuck on top.
|
John Revenent
Revenent Defence Corperation 404 Alliance Not Found
492
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 02:23:25 -
[42] - Quote
Capsuleers these days..
"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned."
|
Ria Nieyli
45806
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 02:57:45 -
[43] - Quote
Jason Galente wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:Jason Galente wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:
Apparently, moderation will be stricter from now on. You, however, are calling for retroactive application of said stricter control and calling the lack of it inconsistant. How am I supposed to interpret that?
His shutting down of my thread was already a retroactive application of said stricter control. Check the dates. All I am asking is for him to be consistent. Or maybe your thread is what prompted the warning from Mr. Auliette. I very highly doubt that judging by the content/demeanor of it compared to, again, pretty much any thread of the last two years.
Which brings us back to my original point. You feel like everyone needs to be subjected to the same standard for it to be fair. They probably will, however it will be going forwards in time, not backwards. Additionally, a three posted on an open forum is it's own entity, and as such can be targeted for termination, rather than the participants in it.
"slang" is shortened language for "shortened language"
|
Slayer Liberator
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
81
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 03:57:15 -
[44] - Quote
Elmund Egivand wrote:Eve sharon wrote:One of the reasons I read this forum is for the drama. Until recently I was too shy and disengaged to post myself.
Correct me if I'm wrong but some on this site receive too much criticism for roleplay. The EULA for this forum distinctly encourages roleplay. Therefor I enjoy reading people revelling in their race and character.
Kim and her friends are the best of this forum, please let them continue in-character without prejudice. Not to the point of being disruptive. She wants to make nationalist rants? Let her, but confine those to threads that actually has something to do with nationalist rants. You wouldn't appreciate having that unpopular do-no-good uncle crash into your family dinner day in and out to talk about the latest RSS conspiracy theory he came up with every single time now, would you? Who would. .. Oh wait I saw him |
Felise Selunix
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
33
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 04:53:51 -
[45] - Quote
I don't have a chip in the game, but I keep wondering: 'Is there really no other way to deal with someone who's being disruptive than snarking back?' It just seems that that tactic only furthers the derail.
Some people like to say inflammatory things to see if they can get a rise out of people. Still others just have inflammatory personalities for one reason or another. I've never known any grouping of people that hasn't included at least some form of this kind of thing and after awhile, trying to respond tit for tat with it just gets old to me.
I get a lot of Matari related crap from time to time and I'm not interested in giving them any satisfaction for doing it. I swear that if I jumped out of my pants overtime someone tried to bait me with offensive language, I'd spend most of my life running around half naked (which isn't such a bad way to go under the right circumstances).
Point is that when the derailing begins, rather than striking back, or changing the channel, a third possibility is to stay and practice the kind of behavior that I want to see. It's possible to just not go there. In my experience, humor, wit, absurdity, and empathy are good countermeasures to that kind of noise. Just because someone is suggesting that we have an inflammatory conversation, doesn't mean that I have to agree. Negotiation rule #10: Make sure to have the kind of conversation that you want to have.
Unless of course, a back and forth flame war was what I was interested in from the start. If that's the case, I just own it and sell tickets to the thing. It's much less stressful than denying it. |
Valerie Valate
Church of The Crimson Saviour Sani-Sabik
1509
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 05:22:06 -
[46] - Quote
As one of the greatest IGS posters of all time, I have decided to share my wisdom on how to deal with an objectionable post.
When you read a thread, and encounter a post you do not like, then, this is one way in which to respond:
Objectionable Post wrote:Objectionable Content
Your Response wrote:Nothing
An alternative method, which can sometimes be employed in difficult situations is this:
Objectionable Post wrote:Objectionable Content
Your Response wrote:Zing !
These, and other strategies, can be successfully used to ensure a quality posting atmosphere.
Doctor V. Valate, Professor of Archaeology at Kaztropolis Imperial University.
|
Karina Ivanovich
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
189
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 05:42:03 -
[47] - Quote
Valerie Valate wrote:As one of the greatest IGS posters of all time, I have decided to share my wisdom on how to deal with an objectionable post. When you read a thread, and encounter a post you do not like, then, this is one way in which to respond: Objectionable Post wrote:Objectionable Content Your Response wrote:Nothing An alternative method, which can sometimes be employed in difficult situations is this: Objectionable Post wrote:Objectionable Content Your Response wrote:Zing ! These, and other strategies, can be successfully used to ensure a quality posting atmosphere.
Nothing
/s
Some call me insane. If the universe is sane, then I embrace that label.
|
Ashlar Vellum
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
278
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 07:35:22 -
[48] - Quote
Jason Galente wrote: I indicated I was fine with it as an application of the rules, and merely added that all similar cases should be treated similarly. That would imply that my response actually refutes your claim that "impartial moderation never seems fair when you're on the receiving end". The moderation was perfectly fair. The problem is that it was insufficient because it was targeted at only one offender where multiple offenders existed. And that discrepancy is what would be unfair. Not the application, but the inconsistent application.
Quite a tantrum you are making for being fine with a fair warning.
You are right though, such discrepancy is indeed unfair. So in the name of fairness and consistency OP should get a ban or a warning and this thread should be locked. |
Aux Aliette
DED
34
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 10:25:20 -
[49] - Quote
The warning issued by the CRC was left open to discuss its content.
Refrain from creating further threads.
IGS Communications Director-á ||-á Directive Enforcement Department-á ||-á CONCORD Assembly
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |