because i insist on being not a particular player.
i deem it necessary to permafuckingb4n @Ckit for slapping the „violator” label on someone who arguably hasn’t violated the rule in question (impersonation). does a deem translate into a warranted action ?
is „WRONG !!!1!” an appropriate response in this case ?
he is also ignoring key arguments. he also stated that he would move the posts to the other thread — implying that the posts r better placed there —, but for an unjustified reason, decided to postpone the moving until the situation gets much worse than it is now.
This is a legitimate concern to be brought up. You should just drop the renaming incident and try avoiding to mix it up with forum stuff though. I don’t think renaming you was totally WRONG given you did ‘‘impersonate’’ an admin and kept using the name afterwards. The problem here is not what you did with the name, it is just because of the name itself and the rules don’t really work in your favor there (even without the grey area stuff).
As a reminder, in-game issues on a game server (even GrangerPub) is not a forum moderation issue. There is already currently an open topic regarding the above mentioned renaming issue in the Grangerpub Report Players and Request Unbans Category, which is the appropriate place to discuss in-game player/admin issues for the GrangerPub server.
Other issues that only concern the GrangerPub server, but does not involve a player/admin report/appeal belong in the GrangerPub Servers category.
This GrangerHub Meta category is for discussion of issues related to the GrangerHub forums and GrangerHub website as a whole which would include forum moderation issues.
I can only speak for myself. There is no indication of me seeking to garner a reaction from you (AKA “trolling”) nor was your request “crapped” on after I gave you my reasons in atleast 2 responses. Its not reasonable to assume that it is in my best interest to piss you off further.
It seems that the actual crux of the problem you have is that you disagree with the reasons given (after providing reasons against) and are frustrated that I refused to respond to you further (and change my decision) once you’ve decided to resort to personal insults (admittedly atleast backed up with further reasons).
The problem I have is that you made a request and I refused to act. The issue isn’t about “sucking NIGGERadmin cock”, its about making a request and thinking I was going to continue engaging with you after explaining my reasoning twice. It isn’t reasonable to expect cooperation at that point. You sabotaged your own request.
Now, lets set aside that and concentrate on why I “ignored” your “key arguments”. Three posts (that stemmed from Blizz’ observation of the thread that then went into RC hopping strategies) isn’t enough to derail your thread to the point where moving was necessary. If that is the case, then we’d be moving posts every single day. Discussions are not always going to be completely 100% ontopic, thats why I promised to move them had it continued.
That is why I also made this post:
This is the last time I am going to engage with you on this issue. There is plenty of evidence to show I have given serious consideration to your request. I disagree that this was a situation where I’ve attempted to troll or crap on you (let alone being classified as “abuse”). If anything, I’m probably the one being trolled right now. Flag the posts and move on with your life. Your thread will survive.
Now, regarding impersonation:
You have decided to bring up this issue under GrangerHub meta instead of GrangerPub. I believe I need to remind everyone here that it is in our best interests to keep Ghub and Gpub discussions separate. We are currently talking to DevHC as Ghub moderators without the other Gpub staff, that is already a red flag.
There is already a thread dedicated to this issue. It is still open for discussion. There is no reason to discuss it here, unless you are attempting to obtain a different administration result by splitting up the discussion elsewhere.
Impersonation is against the rules. You weren’t subtle about it. Your attempt to justify “dGr8LookinSparky[1][1]NOT” isn’t winning you any favors.
PS. For the record, I have never renamed you.
You have been responded to. Continue to make unnecessary “ping” posts across several threads (such as this one) in the future and I will remove them personally. Kthx bae.
re-explaining ur reasoning won’t make it stronger against my counter-reasoning (unless u detect that i misinterpreted ur reasoning, but such case r absent here).
what is right and WRONG is significantly conditioned upon non-pertinent sympathy/non-sympathy associated with transports of reasoning ? ie., GOD™(R)(C) factually exists, because some atheist blew his/her one-time chance to disprove its existence, during a low-profile moderated debate ?
i’ll repeat for the final fucking time: the fact, that something isn’t „necessary”, doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be done, and definitely not that it isn’t slightly beneficial to do. moving definitely makes topical organization better. (Q1) what do u (or even the community) lose by moving, ie., why do u put multiple hours of reading and writing just to show minimal reason behind not making 10 clicks to move 3 posts ?
u also provided no backing to why u moved a post in the opposite direction,1 and tried to lie that the post was originally where it is now. (Q2) what did u gain by doing this, ie., why did u spend 5 clicks worth of effort to move the post, and resorted to the fabrication of (non-)facts to appear to show minimal reason ? (Q3) additionally, u argued that u’re operating in a way where u perform a move only if it is „necessary”; so why was the opposite-directional move „necessary” — or (Q3B) what do u operate by ?
1 u moved 1 post from topic B to topic A, whereas the request was to move 3 posts from topic A to topic B
ofc moving isn’t 100% necessary, but the „if we do it here, then we have to do it everywhere” (fairness) argument is applied fallaciously here. there r 2 notable things to consider:
whether something is necessary. obviously, if something is necessary, it shall be done. (u considered this.)
whether something is specifically, strongly needed by someone. if something is otherwise not necessary, but just plausible, then a rare, specific request should tip the consideration. this is what u neglected (or, i am yet to receive an answer for Q3B above.). also, even if all such requests r considered, this won’t result in heavy-duty post moving, because most users don’t give a cock about the academic value of clean threads, and those that do only give a cock for a small subset of existing threads.
and u have not explained this. why not move the posts now ? ie., what defines whether moving is necessary ?
i was referring to @Ckit primarily. however, u also neglected to address some of my arguments (some re-formulated as questions above).
this is the 2rd repetition (3rd mentioning) of the same comment, as explained after the 1st repetition, which didn’t stop another repetition — crap-on.
there is a nonsensical comment — trollage (fucking success, btw).
how is this @Ckit imbecile a high-level admin anywhere ?
that was the first thing i did.
yes, but only to reflect on the improper handling (basically, the least u could do is encourage Hub-related admins to process my issue reports properly).
what am i suspicious of ?
yes, and even then, discussing it here is only needed if other admins fail to reach a different consensus after reading through the posts. unfortunately, perhaps my posts require unusually careful reading.
yes, contents of this post could be better split and moved to the other appropriate threads, but that would mandate that u split ur post first.
if u read my posts properly, u should know that i do not debate whether impersonation is against the rules, but whether my actions fall into the class of impersonation, ie. identity theft for the purposes of maliciously misleading others or defaming the identity.
aaand before @Hendrich and most reasonable admins like @dGr8LookinSparky had time to take more detailed part in the debate, the top-right half of the DICKBUTT decided to slap his ultimatum on the naming-related thread, and even went with as far as to unlist (censor against finding) the thread to prevent embarrassment.
for the final COCKFUCKING goddamn time: everything was calm and everyone was happy — in particular, noone suffered from social engineering or defamation —, until: some f4gm1nz decided to start pushing a wanton interpretation that my name had a malicious purpose.
how about instead of being a fucktarded f4gg0t, u begin ur disillusionment by realizing that u’re one of the worst community organizers in existence,1 and make way for rather intelligent and fit personnel.
how about u help the community by curbing this wantonery of a flock of f4gm1nz — oh w8, u’re also infected with this mental disease.
don’t u mean that it’d be a good reason to avoid (further) fucking with me to avoid any „additional additional consequences”, and even to remedy some past (one-time and to-this-day-lasting) fuckery to lighten some already-existing consequences such as PERMANENT™_VACATION(R)(C) ?
what part of the pseudo-code did u fail to lexically analyze, parse or semantically unwind ?
To be fair, when vague threats are made, it is not unreasonable to consider that “additional consequences” might include violations of the Terms of Service which may require banning/permabanning as a result. That may not be your intention, but how is anyone but you suppose to know that for sure?
Anyways, in the long term, making threats is not an effective approach to encourage cooperation in something that most of us consider a hobby that we do in our free-time without monetary compensation. Rather than resolve issues, making threats can aggravate and escalate issues. There is a tendency to build more walls than bridges metaphorically speaking.
Due to this problem only being in discussion admin’s will enforce the re-name of you how they wish until told that it’s incorrect™
Maybe instead of a huge problem and request perma-bans;
Maybe we can [quote=“MaeJong, post:3, topic:2512”]
This falls into a grey area; admins considered your name to be worthy of confusing some players, they renamed you, you decided to ignore this and still renamed yourself on several occasions, and now you’re getting pissed at yourself for using this name and triggering additional sanctions.
[/quote]
Seeing that his name was “Border line rule broken” I am not fully aware if admin’s or high admins enforce rules being border lined but if an admin was;
1.Constantly renaming you
2.Warning you about it
3.Kicking/Banning for the problem
Is possibly ok? Since this problem about re-name abuse is only in discussion we don’t have a stern way to handle the situation admins may handle it in different ways that might be more rule enforcing than others but it is still; [quote]Grey area[/quote] problem.
Seeing all this fighting and stuff, what happend to “This should be posted civilly or in a civil way”
I get that you might be mad about the Re-Name abuse but the problem is not fully term’ed out.
to this point, i’m still waiting for a detailed reply from @dGr8LookinSparky, a rather intelligent admin. however, when he doesn’t have time to respond in detail, idiocity from other admins break loose, as they consider the debate to be their battle.
wtf ? u ignored the key questions because u couldn’t comprehend them ? dafuqq; there is nothing non-layman in those questions, so at most i’d be using more words to convey the same data. re-read them, and try to answer them as best as u can — i will only complain if an answer is dissatisfactory.
The same reason you’d put this much effort into the un-moving of 3 semi-offtopic posts, because I don’t agree.
Have I fabricated non-facts? From what I remember:
i see that ckit has moved the post where you told blizz that his idea belongs in it’s own thread, which i believe should have stayed
At the time, I moved the post because I genuinely believed he made a mistake. If that was in itself a mistake, I apologize.
See above.
I’d only consider moving posts if they derailed the overall discussion to the point where the main discussion is no longer relevant to the original OP:
Based on the very thread you created.
Two responses regarding RC Jumping based on Blizz’s post based on the OP. A discussion of a “strategy” in a “high-level decomposition of strategies” thread. I don’t agree that the “semi-offtopic” nature of these posts warrants moving them because prolonged forum discussions are bound to have posts dip into “semi-offtopic” territory. That is why I move posts until “necessary”.
You are free to continue complain, as I am free to continue to answer. Considering everything up until this point and the irregularity of the attention you have sought and been given, this is hardly “idiotically trolled”, “crapped on” or “abuse”.
