Well there is something in the old saying since senori likes them "If it isn't broke , don't fix it".
Your job as a mod is a custodian not a tyrant, listening to the vocal community is part of the job and ignoring it just makes things much worse.
Opposing change simply to oppose change is being inflexible, however. It results in not giving a fair chance to something that could very well be an improvement.
To be plain about it, I've been getting the impression from multiple users that the only "fix" they'll find acceptable is to stick with Viricide's system and not deviate at all from it.
If I felt that there was a genuine problem on the part of WCT posters in creating an unwelcoming atmosphere for a minority of silent and sensitive persons, I would certainly take actions to address that.
I would not attempt to make a new policy - because as has been stated many times before, the existing rules set an adequate benchline and adequately delineate the appropriate scope of your authority to intervene.
As suggested previously, the mod hat and the user hat are two separate things, but the mod hat does give you the ability to verbal the hell out of insensitive jerks, and then infract them if they don't carry through on a reasonable request.
Work through your existing framework. It's more than adequate to your needs, and it won't result in all this purposeless kerfluffle in CI over policies that smack of holding the userbase's hands.
Opposing change simply to oppose change is being inflexible, however. It results in not giving a fair chance to something that could very well be an improvement.
Right, but in our (collective it seems) experience, the old system was fine, maybe not perfect but certainly good, and the new system is doing one thing: appealing to a group of users that may or may not exist at the cost of a group that is 1. much more obviously displeased with the changes than the old group was 2. much more active
I guess OP wants it to be 'keyworded' like "dies" was. What word would you replace ETB with though?
When Aegis Angel is born?
When Huntmaster of the Fells arrives?
When Kitchen Sphinx lands?
When Faerie Imposter busts in?
When Dread Cacodemon pops in?
When Malfegor shows up?
Opposing change simply to oppose change is being inflexible, however. It results in not giving a fair chance to something that could very well be an improvement.
Why do you and Senori feel the urge to change something that everyone was fine with?
Why do you and Senori feel that you have the right to force the entire subforum to adapt to you, instead of you two adapting to the subforum?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I was driven from this once-great site by abusive mods and admins, who create rules out of thin air to punish people for breaking them (meaning the rule does not exist under forum rules) and selectively enforce the rules that are written on the forum rules. I am currently lurking while deleting 6 years and 2 months of posting history. I will return when ExpiredRascals, Teia Rabishu and Blinking Spirit are no longer in power.
Opposing change simply to oppose change is being inflexible, however. It results in not giving a fair chance to something that could very well be an improvement.
what improvement? no one posts anything anymore. i have seen the same threads there for weeks with a few respones here and there.
There isn't half the activity that there was.
As to your larger point, I don't honestly know what we can do to help you here. When we try to make the rule specific you shoot it down; when we make it vague you shoot it down. When we try to restrict it you shoot it down; when we make it broad you shoot it down. So maybe, ultimately, the problem is that you're shooting down everything we suggest?
No the problem is implimenting rules that aren't needed that are mostly covered already by the general rules of the forum.
your trying to make this PC zone and people aren't wanting to post anything for fear of getting warned or infracted.
there isn't a need for all these rules. it stifles discussion it stifles people posting.
Well there is something in the old saying since senori likes them "If it isn't broke , don't fix it".
Your job as a mod is a custodian not a tyrant, listening to the vocal community is part of the job and ignoring it just makes things much worse.
I very much enjoy the fact that you, harkius, Azrael, Logicx and several other users put my thoughts into words much better than I can.
I really dislike the fact that Teia is saying everything is fine when it most obviously isn't. There is a problem and she is ignoring it. That is not something I want to see with a moderator.
I find this rule to be incredibly biased. I personally don't plan on browsing WCT until something is done to make it feel like a welcoming place.
And as others have said, we don't need parents or tyrants, we need moderators Objective ones. Not ones who are going to thought police every post.
I honestly do hope that the WCT team succeeds and finds a happy medium. I wish the best of luck to all mods but when there is a problem there is a problem. My main issue still continues to be that I feel like many (not all) complaints are just being brushed off and the WCT team has a one track mind and no one is going to change that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI Level 1 Judge-
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane for the awesome Sig.
Then back down leave the forum how it has been before you arrived and try again in a month or two after people get accustomed to you as a mod.
This is, in fact, what we explicitly said we were doing in the previous CI thread. We stated we were going to mod the forum in a more Viricide-like style until a new rules system, tempered by user feedback (the stage we're ostensibly in) could be put in place. Then to address concerns of uncertainty over what would merit action and what wouldn't, we stated our plans to introduce changes gradually, with verbal reminders and other light touches to start with so people would know where the boundaries lay.
However, the impression I'm getting from your suggestion here, combined with what other people are saying, makes me feel that "later" is just a codeword for "never."
As to your larger point, I don't honestly know what we can do to help you here. When we try to make the rule specific you shoot it down; when we make it vague you shoot it down. When we try to restrict it you shoot it down; when we make it broad you shoot it down. So maybe, ultimately, the problem is that you're shooting down everything we suggest?
Autocorrect indeed. My apologies. It's been fixed.
I don't think you're giving some of us(me) enough credit. When I first posted in this thread it wasn't "This is unacceptable and cannot be made to work".
Here's my concern with the vague portion of the rules now. Take the "zombie survival plan thread". Is the response "I plan to save all the women with good birthing hips and hide in a prison", family friendly and safe? Or is it misogynistic and inappropriate? Or is it just a sarcastic joke? When that report comes in your inbox, and someone complains about how they feel unsafe posting in WCT now and that it's not a friendly place, what do you do?
Take the "ruined fresco" thread. Is the response "Wow, what an idiot. How can someone be so stupid. Unbelievable." trolling? Is it flaming? Is it cyber bullying? Is it just the kind of thing you'd likely hear around a water cooler?
Your rules as they stand are too vague for me to be sure. I don't see anything wrong with either post if it were in those threads.
And this is what I expressed. Look at my sig even. It's pretty much a direct troll post directed at a conservative base. Is it acceptable? Is it "safe" and "friendly"? I'd say no to the first and no to the latter two, no matter how much I agree and how amusing it is.
The problem is you're only seeing the specifics you put forth as an option, and the vague answers you put forth as an option. I'd invite you and your team to explore more specific rules that aren't the ones you have tried yet. They do exist, and I believe you, Frox and Teia are capable of finding a medium that satisfies the vision you have and the frequent users who are upset.
Because conservative bias is a far, far worse thing. Liberal bias doesn't, statistically speaking, make people stupid. Conservative bias (or at least Fox's version of it) does.
They do exist, and I believe you, Frox and Teia are capable of finding a medium that satisfies the vision you have and the frequent users who are upset.
We aren't upset as much as frustrated as to why all these new rules are required.
The main rules of this forum say no flaming or trolling.
those are already covered.
now we have to have extra rules to cover posts that aren't trolling or flaming because someone might get offended at a statement (huh?). that is the problem.
Now it includes statements that could cause an arguement or some other issue.
what can you post on then?
It seems as if there is some wierd kinda PC establishment trying to be put into place and this is the result that you get.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Lincoln? I wonder what his perspective would have been about the WCT mods designating certain topics (slavery, for example) as "too inflammatory" a subject for posters to be permitted to talk about.
Yeah, but this isn't the floor of the US Senate. That's Debate, man.
The paternalism inherent in these proposed rules is positively stifling. The users aren't lilies who are going to wilt if someone has the stupidity to ask why the Chinese are passive-aggressive.
There are people who don't post here because we allow people to bash ethnicities. I can say that as an absolute fact.
So far as I'm aware, the only Chinese people who have been angered in the slightest by what's been going on in WCT are the ones who feel that you're trying to reduce their community to a kindergarten classroom.
Yeah, because you don't have to talk to people who won't post here because of it. That's what I'm here for, and I'm telling you that you're wrong.
Well there is something in the old saying since senori likes them "If it isn't broke , don't fix it".
Your job as a mod is a custodian not a tyrant, listening to the vocal community is part of the job and ignoring it just makes things much worse.
Something was broken, even if you don't (or won't) understand that fact.
If I felt that there was a genuine problem on the part of WCT posters in creating an unwelcoming atmosphere for a minority of silent and sensitive persons, I would certainly take actions to address that.
I would not attempt to make a new policy - because as has been stated many times before, the existing rules set an adequate benchline and adequately delineate the appropriate scope of your authority to intervene.
We tried that, as I've said several times, and people objected, so we put up a new rule so that things would be clear. You cannot have this both ways. Either we go by the main rules, and people object, or we go by WCT rules and people object for the reason that it's a WCT rule? Do you not see the catch-22?
Quote from Azrael »
As suggested previously, the mod hat and the user hat are two separate things, but the mod hat does give you the ability to verbal the hell out of insensitive jerks, and then infract them if they don't carry through on a reasonable request.
Except people flamed us for trying that.
Work through your existing framework. It's more than adequate to your needs, and it won't result in all this purposeless kerfluffle in CI over policies that smack of holding the userbase's hands.
Right, but in our (collective it seems) experience, the old system was fine, maybe not perfect but certainly good, and the new system is doing one thing: appealing to a group of users that may or may not exist at the cost of a group that is 1. much more obviously displeased with the changes than the old group was 2. much more active
Opposition and inflexibility go both ways, I have found the staff being inflexible and oppossing users simply for the purpose of flexing some imaginary muscle.
I've seen the staff bend over backward to try to fix this for you all and get not even the slightest respect from some users in return. Yeah, this is a two-way street.
Quote from Belgareth »
Trust/respect/appreciation all the things I have heard the staff complaining they are not getting are all earned .
If you truly want to prove yourself a good mod , want the community to respect you , trust your ability to suggest helpful changes ?
Then back down leave the forum how it has been before you arrived and try again in a month or two after people get accustomed to you as a mod.
Coming in as a controversial mod and then making sweeping regime changes just ends up in noone trusting/respecting you or being willing to give you a chance.
I was a controversial mod to begin with? Come on. No-one said a word against me until all of this came about.
Why do you and Senori feel the urge to change something that everyone was fine with?
Why do you and Senori feel that you have the right to force the entire subforum to adapt to you, instead of you two adapting to the subforum?
Because it wasn't fine, and because there were problems.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sing lustily and with good courage.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
The main rules of this forum say no flaming or trolling.
those are already covered.
With all due respect, flaming and trolling may be covered, but applying the general forum rules regarding them to WCT has been met with staunch resistance. There are a lot of complaints that seem to argue that WCT should have a lower-than-default rules enforcement level, whereas we as mods believe that the forum rules should be enforced as written and intended.
now we have to have extra rules to cover posts that aren't trolling or flaming because someone might get offended at a statement (huh?). that is the problem.
WCT is not Debate. It would therefore seem logical to take reasonable steps to codify the specifics of that difference.
Sing lustily and with good courage.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
It's very unusual for me to reach a level of frustration in a conversation where I want to physically shake someone and shout into their ear. I'm going to wander off before I reach that point and wait until admin arrives and try to contemplate what exactly on earth was wrong with how past admin handled Arnnaria and Mandershex's virtually identical gaffes... (Hint: it didn't involve fifteen bazillion CI posts)
*seethes*
*seethes some more*
*scowls furiously*
*kicks a puppy*
Didn't someone write a guide for mods to assist them on how NOT to antagonize people? Could we try whatever that guide suggests? I'm trying really hard not to be antagonized, honestly, but this level of obstinacy in the face of genuine disappointment is as helpful as piloting a zeppelin into a wildfire. Please help me not be angry with you.
There are people who don't post here because we allow people to bash ethnicities. I can say that as an absolute fact.
since when? i have been here for years and never seen this. the people that did were warned or infracted and even banned for constantly doing it.
they don't post here anymore.
Yeah, because you don't have to talk to people who won't post here because of it. That's what I'm here for, and I'm telling you that you're wrong.
this seems to be the main arguement from all 3 of you yet we still have no proof.
again anyone that has ever bashed a group of people or person has been warned and or infracted because flaming people are against the rules of the forum.
Something was broken, even if you don't (or won't) understand that fact.
yeah that is why forum participation has gone to almost 0 now except for a few posts here and there because it was broken before.
Either we go by the main rules, and people object
no one objected. you 3 came in out of no where started handing out warnings and infractions then 2 days later posted a new list of rules.
I've seen the staff bend over backward to try to fix this for you all and get not even the slightest respect from some users in return. Yeah, this is a two-way street.
EH not really. People that have brought up the issues have been ignored, threatened, in some instances told to verbally F off (context was clear).
when logical arguements are made they are simply dismissed and people told they are wrong with no evidence to support the claim.
I was a controversial mod to begin with?
the actions are what are controversial.
Because it wasn't fine, and because there were problems.
To the majority of users that post in the WCT this is not the case. hence why you are running into problems.
With all due respect, flaming and trolling may be covered, but applying the general forum rules regarding them to WCT has been met with staunch resistance. There are a lot of complaints that seem to argue that WCT should have a lower-than-default rules enforcement level, whereas we as mods believe that the forum rules should be enforced as written and intended.
No it wasn't it was met with resistance when people started getting warned and infracted over issues that you have bias against. that is when people began to complain.
things that should not have been warned or infracted on that should have been taken for the jokes that they were caused the problem.
yes it is the WCT. there is some leeway in discussions. that wasn't happening.
WCT is not Debate. It would therefore seem logical to take reasonable steps to codify the specifics of that difference.
then close the forum. people are going to disagree and not agree with other people. simple as that.
besides this does not address what i said.
I said now we have rules to cover things that aren't flaming and trolling simply because someone might get offended.
that is called thought policing.
IE: you take a stance that i or others don't agree with therefore you are flaming/trolling even though what you said isn't.
therefore here is your warning/infraction.
I'm trying really hard not to be antagonized, honestly, but this level of obstinacy in the face of genuine disappointment is as helpful as piloting a zeppelin into a wildfire. Please help me not be angry with you.
Yeah well this is what we have been dealing with for months now.
Because it wasn't fine, and because there were problems.
I don't seem to recall there being any complaints about the WCT subforum until after you and Teia became mods. Then, all the proverbial **** hit the proverbial fan.
The simple fact that so many people who couldn't otherwise say a civil word to each other are united in opposition to these (unwarranted?) changes should be a loud and clear message to you and Teia and the admins. Hell, even LogicX actually came to my defense after I was suspended, and I can count on one hand the number of times him and myself were in a thread together and weren't at each others throats.
Another message to you and Teia and the admins should be the relative lack of activity in WCT. It went from being a busy highway under Viricide/Brandon to being a barely used two lane blacktop under you and Teia. It's not a sign of good leadership when people using the forum as much when you take over.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I was driven from this once-great site by abusive mods and admins, who create rules out of thin air to punish people for breaking them (meaning the rule does not exist under forum rules) and selectively enforce the rules that are written on the forum rules. I am currently lurking while deleting 6 years and 2 months of posting history. I will return when ExpiredRascals, Teia Rabishu and Blinking Spirit are no longer in power.
again anyone that has ever bashed a group of people or person has been warned and or infracted because flaming people are against the rules of the forum
I certainly did plenty of this during my tenure over WCT. I'm sure NS (:Patriot:) and Brandon did as well.
I will however be extremely disappointing if we are here once again in the future. And I do feel like there are still things unsaid and views that need to be looked at by the WCT team.
However I support closing the thread.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI Level 1 Judge-
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane for the awesome Sig.
Because conservative bias is a far, far worse thing. Liberal bias doesn't, statistically speaking, make people stupid. Conservative bias (or at least Fox's version of it) does.
I'm not saying it should be closed. I am saying that this is something that can be returned to in two days. I have a feeling that there are things going on with the staff right now that can't be returned to in two days.
Harkius
It can always be re-opened when needed. If you want to give them time and not have to respond to 30+ posts when they do get a chance then the best option is to close it.
Edit: As an aside I find it very disheartening that the conversation here has made Azrael feel like he is being antagonized. I find him to be a very upstanding member and think it says something that he feels this way.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI Level 1 Judge-
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane for the awesome Sig.
I'm not saying it should be closed. I am saying that this is something that can be returned to in two days. I have a feeling that there are things going on with the staff right now that can't be returned to in two days.
Harkius
I fail to see why anyone should be accommodating of the staff's colossal failure to handle a situation properly by putting aside another situation that they're failing to handle properly. I see the writing on the wall too, Harkius, but that doesn't detract from the fact that the issue with the WCT is a significant problem and the longer it continues to be a problem the more people are going to turn away and not look back, regardless of how well it gets fixed in the future.
The problems of the staff are problems of us all, AzureShadow. The fact that they can't handle everything simultaneously merely means that they are humans, not failures.
Patience, good man. Patience.
Harkius
The speed at which they're responding has nothing to do with how badly mishandled it is. That is what I consider a failure, not the speed.
It is clear that no matter how much we argue this issue with Teia and Senori, they have decided that everything really is fine and their changes really are needed, despite the fact that both have still been unable to prove their case for these changes. I don't expect any progress to be made on this issue, as we have hundreds of posts already with no progress, and a completely entrenched staff to deal with.
Seriously, how do we come out of both these CI threads with Teia stating that everything is working pretty well? They are burying their heads in the sand, that's how. And dealing with their, frankly, delusional self-assuredness is the most frustrating experience I have ever had on these forums.
Was that the plan all along? Handwave and ignore for long enough and the complaints will go away, leaving you with the shell of our former WCT that you are convinced is needed despite all the evidence pointing the other way?
Lol, yeah, I'm sure they planned to have one of the most out-of-the-blue, epically painful drama bombs to ever hit this site just to carry out their initiative. Machiavellian!
Lol, yeah, I'm sure they planned to have one of the most out-of-the-blue, epically painful drama bombs to ever hit this site just to carry out their initiative. Machiavellian!
No, that is what they did after the drama bomb already hit. I no longer believe they are conducting this discussion with anything other than stubbornness and most solutions from the other side already off the table.
No, that is what they did after the drama bomb already hit. I no longer believe they are conducting this discussion with anything other than stubbornness and most solutions from the other side already off the table.
What your ignoring here is that many who would speak on their behalf are stunned into silence by the callous nature of the opposition's attacks, or are scared of (to use the vernacular of the Forum Rules I hope you understand and this shouldn't be taken as an insult) "feeding the trolls." Thus we have sought to provide our opinions in other, non-visible venues, and you're fallaciously taking that as a sign that you are in the right because you can't see it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Opposing change simply to oppose change is being inflexible, however. It results in not giving a fair chance to something that could very well be an improvement.
If I felt that there was a genuine problem on the part of WCT posters in creating an unwelcoming atmosphere for a minority of silent and sensitive persons, I would certainly take actions to address that.
I would not attempt to make a new policy - because as has been stated many times before, the existing rules set an adequate benchline and adequately delineate the appropriate scope of your authority to intervene.
As suggested previously, the mod hat and the user hat are two separate things, but the mod hat does give you the ability to verbal the hell out of insensitive jerks, and then infract them if they don't carry through on a reasonable request.
Work through your existing framework. It's more than adequate to your needs, and it won't result in all this purposeless kerfluffle in CI over policies that smack of holding the userbase's hands.
Right, but in our (collective it seems) experience, the old system was fine, maybe not perfect but certainly good, and the new system is doing one thing: appealing to a group of users that may or may not exist at the cost of a group that is 1. much more obviously displeased with the changes than the old group was 2. much more active
Why do you and Senori feel the urge to change something that everyone was fine with?
Why do you and Senori feel that you have the right to force the entire subforum to adapt to you, instead of you two adapting to the subforum?
what improvement? no one posts anything anymore. i have seen the same threads there for weeks with a few respones here and there.
There isn't half the activity that there was.
No the problem is implimenting rules that aren't needed that are mostly covered already by the general rules of the forum.
your trying to make this PC zone and people aren't wanting to post anything for fear of getting warned or infracted.
there isn't a need for all these rules. it stifles discussion it stifles people posting.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I very much enjoy the fact that you, harkius, Azrael, Logicx and several other users put my thoughts into words much better than I can.
I really dislike the fact that Teia is saying everything is fine when it most obviously isn't. There is a problem and she is ignoring it. That is not something I want to see with a moderator.
I find this rule to be incredibly biased. I personally don't plan on browsing WCT until something is done to make it feel like a welcoming place.
And as others have said, we don't need parents or tyrants, we need moderators Objective ones. Not ones who are going to thought police every post.
I honestly do hope that the WCT team succeeds and finds a happy medium. I wish the best of luck to all mods but when there is a problem there is a problem. My main issue still continues to be that I feel like many (not all) complaints are just being brushed off and the WCT team has a one track mind and no one is going to change that.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane for the awesome Sig.
Currently Playing- EDH
GGGOmnath, Locus of the LifestreamGGG
BBBShirei, Lord of PoniesBBB
UWRasputin Dreamweaver, Russia's Greatest Love MachineUW
UBWZur, Killer of FunUBW
UGWTreva, Princess of CanterlotUGW
RWTajic, Master of the Reverse BladeRW
RRRZirilan, How to Train Your DragonRRR
PDH Decks
Gelectrode
Ascended Lawmage
Blaze Commando
This is, in fact, what we explicitly said we were doing in the previous CI thread. We stated we were going to mod the forum in a more Viricide-like style until a new rules system, tempered by user feedback (the stage we're ostensibly in) could be put in place. Then to address concerns of uncertainty over what would merit action and what wouldn't, we stated our plans to introduce changes gradually, with verbal reminders and other light touches to start with so people would know where the boundaries lay.
However, the impression I'm getting from your suggestion here, combined with what other people are saying, makes me feel that "later" is just a codeword for "never."
Autocorrect indeed. My apologies. It's been fixed.
I don't think you're giving some of us(me) enough credit. When I first posted in this thread it wasn't "This is unacceptable and cannot be made to work".
Here's my concern with the vague portion of the rules now. Take the "zombie survival plan thread". Is the response "I plan to save all the women with good birthing hips and hide in a prison", family friendly and safe? Or is it misogynistic and inappropriate? Or is it just a sarcastic joke? When that report comes in your inbox, and someone complains about how they feel unsafe posting in WCT now and that it's not a friendly place, what do you do?
Take the "ruined fresco" thread. Is the response "Wow, what an idiot. How can someone be so stupid. Unbelievable." trolling? Is it flaming? Is it cyber bullying? Is it just the kind of thing you'd likely hear around a water cooler?
Your rules as they stand are too vague for me to be sure. I don't see anything wrong with either post if it were in those threads.
And this is what I expressed. Look at my sig even. It's pretty much a direct troll post directed at a conservative base. Is it acceptable? Is it "safe" and "friendly"? I'd say no to the first and no to the latter two, no matter how much I agree and how amusing it is.
The problem is you're only seeing the specifics you put forth as an option, and the vague answers you put forth as an option. I'd invite you and your team to explore more specific rules that aren't the ones you have tried yet. They do exist, and I believe you, Frox and Teia are capable of finding a medium that satisfies the vision you have and the frequent users who are upset.
We aren't upset as much as frustrated as to why all these new rules are required.
The main rules of this forum say no flaming or trolling.
those are already covered.
now we have to have extra rules to cover posts that aren't trolling or flaming because someone might get offended at a statement (huh?). that is the problem.
Now it includes statements that could cause an arguement or some other issue.
what can you post on then?
It seems as if there is some wierd kinda PC establishment trying to be put into place and this is the result that you get.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Yeah, but this isn't the floor of the US Senate. That's Debate, man.
There are people who don't post here because we allow people to bash ethnicities. I can say that as an absolute fact.
Yeah, because you don't have to talk to people who won't post here because of it. That's what I'm here for, and I'm telling you that you're wrong.
Something was broken, even if you don't (or won't) understand that fact.
We tried that, as I've said several times, and people objected, so we put up a new rule so that things would be clear. You cannot have this both ways. Either we go by the main rules, and people object, or we go by WCT rules and people object for the reason that it's a WCT rule? Do you not see the catch-22?
Except people flamed us for trying that.
^^
Tyranny of activity.
I've seen the staff bend over backward to try to fix this for you all and get not even the slightest respect from some users in return. Yeah, this is a two-way street.
I was a controversial mod to begin with? Come on. No-one said a word against me until all of this came about.
Because it wasn't fine, and because there were problems.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
With all due respect, flaming and trolling may be covered, but applying the general forum rules regarding them to WCT has been met with staunch resistance. There are a lot of complaints that seem to argue that WCT should have a lower-than-default rules enforcement level, whereas we as mods believe that the forum rules should be enforced as written and intended.
WCT is not Debate. It would therefore seem logical to take reasonable steps to codify the specifics of that difference.
Oh, sorry, hard to keep track of all these posts.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
It's very unusual for me to reach a level of frustration in a conversation where I want to physically shake someone and shout into their ear. I'm going to wander off before I reach that point and wait until admin arrives and try to contemplate what exactly on earth was wrong with how past admin handled Arnnaria and Mandershex's virtually identical gaffes... (Hint: it didn't involve fifteen bazillion CI posts)
*seethes*
*seethes some more*
*scowls furiously*
*kicks a puppy*
Didn't someone write a guide for mods to assist them on how NOT to antagonize people? Could we try whatever that guide suggests? I'm trying really hard not to be antagonized, honestly, but this level of obstinacy in the face of genuine disappointment is as helpful as piloting a zeppelin into a wildfire. Please help me not be angry with you.
since when? i have been here for years and never seen this. the people that did were warned or infracted and even banned for constantly doing it.
they don't post here anymore.
this seems to be the main arguement from all 3 of you yet we still have no proof.
again anyone that has ever bashed a group of people or person has been warned and or infracted because flaming people are against the rules of the forum.
yeah that is why forum participation has gone to almost 0 now except for a few posts here and there because it was broken before.
no one objected. you 3 came in out of no where started handing out warnings and infractions then 2 days later posted a new list of rules.
EH not really. People that have brought up the issues have been ignored, threatened, in some instances told to verbally F off (context was clear).
when logical arguements are made they are simply dismissed and people told they are wrong with no evidence to support the claim.
the actions are what are controversial.
To the majority of users that post in the WCT this is not the case. hence why you are running into problems.
No it wasn't it was met with resistance when people started getting warned and infracted over issues that you have bias against. that is when people began to complain.
things that should not have been warned or infracted on that should have been taken for the jokes that they were caused the problem.
yes it is the WCT. there is some leeway in discussions. that wasn't happening.
then close the forum. people are going to disagree and not agree with other people. simple as that.
besides this does not address what i said.
I said now we have rules to cover things that aren't flaming and trolling simply because someone might get offended.
that is called thought policing.
IE: you take a stance that i or others don't agree with therefore you are flaming/trolling even though what you said isn't.
therefore here is your warning/infraction.
Yeah well this is what we have been dealing with for months now.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I don't seem to recall there being any complaints about the WCT subforum until after you and Teia became mods. Then, all the proverbial **** hit the proverbial fan.
The simple fact that so many people who couldn't otherwise say a civil word to each other are united in opposition to these (unwarranted?) changes should be a loud and clear message to you and Teia and the admins. Hell, even LogicX actually came to my defense after I was suspended, and I can count on one hand the number of times him and myself were in a thread together and weren't at each others throats.
Another message to you and Teia and the admins should be the relative lack of activity in WCT. It went from being a busy highway under Viricide/Brandon to being a barely used two lane blacktop under you and Teia. It's not a sign of good leadership when people using the forum as much when you take over.
I certainly did plenty of this during my tenure over WCT. I'm sure NS (:Patriot:) and Brandon did as well.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
I will however be extremely disappointing if we are here once again in the future. And I do feel like there are still things unsaid and views that need to be looked at by the WCT team.
However I support closing the thread.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane for the awesome Sig.
Currently Playing- EDH
GGGOmnath, Locus of the LifestreamGGG
BBBShirei, Lord of PoniesBBB
UWRasputin Dreamweaver, Russia's Greatest Love MachineUW
UBWZur, Killer of FunUBW
UGWTreva, Princess of CanterlotUGW
RWTajic, Master of the Reverse BladeRW
RRRZirilan, How to Train Your DragonRRR
PDH Decks
Gelectrode
Ascended Lawmage
Blaze Commando
To be fair, was this not true before it was decided changes needed to be made?
It can always be re-opened when needed. If you want to give them time and not have to respond to 30+ posts when they do get a chance then the best option is to close it.
Edit: As an aside I find it very disheartening that the conversation here has made Azrael feel like he is being antagonized. I find him to be a very upstanding member and think it says something that he feels this way.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane for the awesome Sig.
Currently Playing- EDH
GGGOmnath, Locus of the LifestreamGGG
BBBShirei, Lord of PoniesBBB
UWRasputin Dreamweaver, Russia's Greatest Love MachineUW
UBWZur, Killer of FunUBW
UGWTreva, Princess of CanterlotUGW
RWTajic, Master of the Reverse BladeRW
RRRZirilan, How to Train Your DragonRRR
PDH Decks
Gelectrode
Ascended Lawmage
Blaze Commando
I fail to see why anyone should be accommodating of the staff's colossal failure to handle a situation properly by putting aside another situation that they're failing to handle properly. I see the writing on the wall too, Harkius, but that doesn't detract from the fact that the issue with the WCT is a significant problem and the longer it continues to be a problem the more people are going to turn away and not look back, regardless of how well it gets fixed in the future.
The speed at which they're responding has nothing to do with how badly mishandled it is. That is what I consider a failure, not the speed.
Seriously, how do we come out of both these CI threads with Teia stating that everything is working pretty well? They are burying their heads in the sand, that's how. And dealing with their, frankly, delusional self-assuredness is the most frustrating experience I have ever had on these forums.
Was that the plan all along? Handwave and ignore for long enough and the complaints will go away, leaving you with the shell of our former WCT that you are convinced is needed despite all the evidence pointing the other way?
No, that is what they did after the drama bomb already hit. I no longer believe they are conducting this discussion with anything other than stubbornness and most solutions from the other side already off the table.
What your ignoring here is that many who would speak on their behalf are stunned into silence by the callous nature of the opposition's attacks, or are scared of (to use the vernacular of the Forum Rules I hope you understand and this shouldn't be taken as an insult) "feeding the trolls." Thus we have sought to provide our opinions in other, non-visible venues, and you're fallaciously taking that as a sign that you are in the right because you can't see it.