Well, then, DragonQ, you recognized his IP, so you know he is a smurf of another forum member (something he has explicitly admitted anyway). As if that was not enough, he is trolling the forum and even chose a username that emphasizes this purpose of this account. For that reason, I really wonder why he is still unbanned. In fact, following the CoC all of his accounts should be banned right now. I know I am backseat-moderating, but as this thread shows, backseat moderation is currently just as tolerated as his infringements, and now you have joined the discussion anyway. In that thread mforseti even brags with the fact that he remains unbanned despite the smurfing.

I really wonder what happened to this forum. The moderators no longer seem to have the guts be willing to do their job and enforce the CoC.

Quoted from DragonQ:

In the UK at least you have 7 days to give back items you've bought online for a refund so if I had to buy a new copy of AOM now I would definitely find one online.

Okay, such a rule exists here, too. In fact it is 14 days in Germany. However, the prerequisite is that you are returning the product unused. Once the seal is broken, software can be considered as used as toilet paper, because you can always keep a copy of the disc, the product key, and anything else, effectively keeping the whole product although you are sending it back. For that reason, I do not think you will be able to win in court when the store refuses to take back opened software.

And of course, a local supermarket like the one I saw the game in is no online dealer. They are not obliged to take back any goods.

come now, we're all friends here.

Quoted from DeathAndPain:

Well, then, DragonQ, you recognized his IP, so you know he is a smurf of another forum member (something he has explicitly admitted anyway). As if that was not enough, he is trolling the forum and even chose a username that emphasizes this purpose of this account.

All three staff members that have any interest in this forum know who he is and I think his username is genius.

Quoted from DeathAndPain:

For that reason, I really wonder why he is still unbanned. In fact, following the CoC all of his accounts should be banned right now. I know I am backseat-moderating, but as this thread shows, backseat moderation is currently just as tolerated as his infringements, and now you have joined the discussion anyway. In that thread mforseti even brags with the fact that he remains unbanned despite the smurfing.

I am not going to divulge private conversations between moderators.

Quoted from DeathAndPain:

I really wonder what happened to this forum. The moderators no longer seem to have the guts be willing to do their job and enforce the CoC.

Moderators cannot ever win.

Quoted from Shanks13:

**** my life

All three staff members that have any interest in this forum know who he is and I think his username is genius.

So you are tolerating him, because you know who he is?
That is the perfect example of friends-politics!

So you are tolerating him, because you know who he is?

No. Are you a staff member? Do you know what we are doing? Do you know what we are discussing? Exactly.

Also, me loving his user name has nothing to do with whether I tolerate his behaviour, you have just assumed a link between the two.

Stop. Now. Despite my apparent feigned reticence in the matter, you all feel the need to latch onto the issue and roll it around in the dirt. It does not do any good.

I do not need to justify my actions here, or rather, my lack of action. But to set the situation straight: The user who apparent deserves a ban was on parole, yet that parole has expired by now. Clear? Beyond that, the user, to my knowledge, has not actually broken the CoC to a significant extent, anymore than any of you who attempt to call for his ban have.

Quoted from CoC:

You may not publicly complain about or demand a reason for another user's ban, the deletion of a message, or the deletion/closure of a thread. Any discussion about warnings, bans, message deletion, thread deletion and thread closure should be done over private email between the person concerned and the moderators

I'm thinking our little troll is clear on my terms, and as I said, if he doesn't pull it together, I can deal with him. Yet I won't feel particularly inclined to do so when it is not his actions that directly led to a discussion of who he must be. Drop it and leave it alone. Get back on topic. Please. Thanks.

Quoted from DragonQ:

No. Are you a staff member? Do you know what we are doing? Do you know what we are discussing?

What I do know is that both of you have most obviously stopped doing your moderator job to uphold the CoC. Arus_II is perfectly right: Your enforcement of the CoC is lax and characterized by cronyism. You just give selected users "parole" because you personally like them, rather than treating them equal to all the others, and especially treating them as the CoC dictates. You are not doing your job.

And honestly: There is no real reason to conceal your internal discussion from the public. If you believe you have reason to spare an abuser, you should at least have the guts to make it known!

Quoted from DragonQ:

Also, me loving his user name has nothing to do with whether I tolerate his behaviour, you have just assumed a link between the two.

So do I, because otherwise you would uphold the CoC. That is what your name was turned green for after all.

Quoted from Shanks13:

I do not need to justify my actions here, or rather, my lack of action.

We cannot force you to. But you cannot prevent the community from noticing your inaction, with corresponding conclusions being drawn. And I have spent years of my life here in this forum and will not watch silently seeing it degenerate just because its current moderators are too lazy/cowardly/hesitant/loyal-to-abusive-friends/whatever to protect it from blatant abuse. I am fully aware that this may make you upset and cause you to start banning with me. But that alone would be enough of a sign to the community where this forum is evolving towards. If trolls that brag here with their smurfs remaining unbanned are tolerated, with the mods protecting their true identity, it is probably no longer worth coming back anyway.

Quoted from Shanks13:

But to set the situation straight: The user who apparent deserves a ban was on parole, yet that parole has expired by now.

This means that he is now free to do further abuse? That multiple accounts of them, one of them even (indirectly) named "troll", are to be tolerated?

Quoted from Shanks13:

Beyond that, the user, to my knowledge, has not actually broken the CoC to a significant extent, anymore than any of you who attempt to call for his ban have.

I also have a CoC quotation for you, just in case you did not notice:

"You may not register multiple accounts with intent to violate any part of this CoC."

The existence of his additional troll account alone is already an infringement. And when you read what he posted in the various threads, there can hardly be a doubt that not only his name is "troll".

Quoted from Shanks13:

I'm thinking our little troll is clear on my terms

Because you know him and are apparently good friends with him. At least DragonQ is. Hell, you two do not even have the courage to tell us exactly who he is! How pathetic is that!?

Quoted from Shanks13:

and as I said, if he doesn't pull it together, I can deal with him.

If you could, you would have done so long ago. Yes, you have the power, but apparently not the determination. Cronyism is more important to you that the welfare of this forum.

Quoted from Shanks13:

Yet I won't feel particularly inclined to do so when it is not his actions that directly led to a discussion of who he must be.

It was his actions. People, including me, would not even have started to wonder what his username stands for if he had not acted up to it from the very beginning.

Quoted from Shanks13:

Drop it and leave it alone.

Nnnnnope. Again, I will not sit idle while my favourite forum goes down like that, led by mods that refuse to do their job. If it costs my head, so be it. But I will not silently watch it happen.

Btw, there hardly is an alternative to openly discussing it in the forum. The official alternative is the FMT ("Forum Moderator Team"). LOL. I tried that once by sending a mail to the official FMT address (obtaining the correct email address of it alone was a project).

All I got was a stupid auto-response telling me that since I was no FMT member myself, my mail would have to be approved by a FMT member (i.e. a moderator of the FMT, in other words, a moderator of moderators, a meta-moderator?!?) before being made visible to the FMT.

Well, I never heard about it again. If the FMT got my message, they did not even deem it necessary to respond. If for some reason that meta-moderator decided not to forward my message to the FMT (possibly because he personally did not like it and was afraid of being outvoted if the whole FMT saw it), then he did not even have the guts to tell me that he rejected the message.

This makes it more than obvious that as a regular forum user, if you want your complaint not to be ignored, you must voice it here, where the public can read it. At the same time I suggest revamping this ridiculous FMT process.

I actually agree with DaP. There were quite a few incidents that were never taken care due to hestinence...

However, Shanks is a good person, I highly doubt he is biased or allowing this douche to douche because he's a friend.

DEATHANDPAIN FOR MOD!!!!!!!111!!!!1



And I am 80% sure muforseti is I_r_noob

Hell, you two do not even have the courage to tell us exactly who he is! How pathetic is that!?

Out of interest do anyone really have the right to know?

Why are you turning this into such a big deal DaP? Why not see the fun side of this smurf (I know I do, the way he gets on your nerves is just beautiful) and letting any moderating into the hands of Shanks/Dragon? As far as I know these two people have been doing an excellent job at what they do, and intervene when it really needs to be.

As far as I know these two people have been doing an excellent job at what they do, and intervene when it really needs to be.

Not on this day, as DaP concluded. Its true that the real problem (muforseti) is not a big deal, but what the mods are doing to it is the real thing here.

[This message has been edited by Arus_II (edited 10-10-2008 @ 11:48 AM).]

I back Shank's reasoning behind this. Anyway, I really don't want to get in an arguement about whether or not the staff does a good job in what it does.

They do. At least in my opinion, and this opinion is not open to discussion.

That was my last 2 cents on this.

Dear Kirchhoff,

:>'.'> <( )> <'.'<) ^'.'<) <( )^ (>' .'^ <('.')> ^('.')> <('.')^ <('.')> v('.')^ v('.')> ^('.')v

kirbydance it all.

Why not see the fun side of this smurf (I know I do, the way he gets on your nerves is just beautiful)

1
1
1
1
1

DEATHANDPAIN FOR MOD!!!!!!!111!!!!1

Actualyl I agree with this.

DaP should definitelyl become ein moderator. What harm can he do that cannot be undone within ein short amount of time?

IMO, give him ein chance.

dap 4 mod!!!!11111oneoeneoeneoeneonee

The official alternative is the FMT

I'm standing right here.

A couple of people need to be looking for an e-mail from your truly: DaP, muforseti, Dudis, Arus. That's all. If you want to discuss anything further, e-mail me. Closed.