EPTThe whole point of having a complaint forum becomes a farce when you are banned for presenting your case -.- (this is of course assuming there was no other reason, but as it is right now we can't draw any other conclusion.). That being said there's plenty of good admins but tbh it's not the first time I hear people rightfully complaining about cheloman and I don't even really follow what happenes on Iccup.
Iccup rules/problem - Page 6
| Forum Index > Brood War Tournaments |
Carnac
Germany / USA16648 Posts
The whole point of having a complaint forum becomes a farce when you are banned for presenting your case -.- (this is of course assuming there was no other reason, but as it is right now we can't draw any other conclusion.). That being said there's plenty of good admins but tbh it's not the first time I hear people rightfully complaining about cheloman and I don't even really follow what happenes on Iccup. | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
ok fine , fixed. | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
On February 01 2009 08:17 damenmofa wrote: Its their forum so they can ban whoever they want for whatever they want. Its the same at tl.net and ironically, people here have gotten banned for disagreeing with the majority/presenting an argument far more often than at iccup. Its funny to see people freak out about the injustice when they taste their own medicine at another forum. Bullshit. I've YET to see a person that's been banned for their opinions on TL. Granted TL does do a bad job as presenting to the general public the reasons people get banned, but who has the time for that? I mean , hell , by that logic you would be banned. but i doubt any admin is even going to think about banning ; probably too busy thinking of a counter arguement. ;edit; Lol look at that, next page after i read your post, carnac posts a reply and not even a mention of a ban. <3 tl. </3 u. the only discernible difference from iccup and TL is TL doesn't make shitty people admins that makes the rest of them look bad | ||
|
zobz
Canada2175 Posts
However if the games were played generally the correct number of times each day as according to the rules then it does seem possibly unfair to clean their stats. The rules must be fixed, at least. The purpose of the rules as applied to honest games doesn't even seem obvious. Players might even use the loophole to their advantage simply so that they can play games with friends and mass-game iccup at the same time, without realizing that it's unfair, or maybe not thinking it significantly unfair. After all the rules don't even object to it. And the "true" rank of players like satanik shouldn't even be questioned, so that it's not really unfair for them to have achieved b or something no matter their methods, because it represents their skill level and thus keeps the ladder in working order; however the case of these "GeT" members might be different in that regard. And finally it should be considered, the amount that they actually abused relative to the amount of fairer ladder games they played, vs more various players. But really the admins weren't necessarily being idiotic or abusive, in the case of lesser known and lesser skilled players. It does make sense sometimes to act on unwritten rules. And at least some of the hate in this thread directed at them is based on quite one-sided interpretations of their actions, if you actually read the iccup threads given on the first page with an open mind. Alot of that stuff could be interpretted as reasobly impatient and swift decision making, i think. | ||
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
The fact that they dont even do that... edit: oh wtf ret got banned? | ||
|
besiger
Croatia2452 Posts
I know there are admins who do good hard work, and im glad that in most of my dealings with icc admins i have had the luck of running into the good ones, but i have also seen peoples perfectly valid complaint thread shut down for no reason, and after they try to get a explanation why, they get banned. And about their English, I don't think anyone expects them to be perfectly fluent, but if they are running a community site where people from all over the world play, they should at least be able to speak English so you have some idea what they said, I don't think its arrogant or anything to expect that of their staff, since after all English is the norm for communicating with people from other countries online, and it can be a real bitch trying to explain something to a admin that cant understand you, and vice versa, its not arrogance its just common sense. And yeah, here on TL i dont think anyone has EVER been banned for simply coming a stating his opinion on some mater, in a polite constructive manner, banning ret made no fucking sense at all. And that Monki person is such a fucking tool, looking at his posts makes me queasy, its like one of those kids in elementary school that rats on everybody to get in good with the teacher, and im sure hes not doing this for *justice* or the rules, he has a bone to pick. I swear if this shit keeps going, i will look through all the matches of the top 50 players, and if any of them have violated this rule (and you can be sure some did) il post it and see if they will ban them, but i already know they wont. and WTF is this rule ?? 1.4. It is forbidden to float negative rumors and talk slanderously about the server and its players. Punishment: Warning or Account lock. So what ? If they see some of us posting here how we dont agree with what they are doing and its wrong, we will get banned too ? What the fuck is this, the gestapo ? | ||
|
bioboyAT
Austria1763 Posts
| ||
|
diehilde
Germany1596 Posts
On February 01 2009 08:59 Carnac wrote: I dare you to show me instances of tl.net banning people for presenting a reasonable argument and/or disagreeing with the majority. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=79902¤tpage=8 Hot_Bid: "presented argument in a reasonable way, no need to hide, nobody is gonna ban you" Mani: "Spineless entity, ban!" Now of course you might argue he got banned because of his motivations, but really the motivation of somebody else is just guesswork. Fact is he got banned for presenting a reasonable argument and disagreeing with the majority. Else the iccup admins also could say they banned ret due to his motivation to undermine Iccup admins authority. Let me make this clear, I find it ridiculous to ban ret for what he said, but I find even more ridiculous that tl.net people honestly think and say stuff like this has never happened at tl.net. You really think tl.nets admins are without fail? From all the bans over the years, not one was unjustified?? If you really think so you are naive... | ||
|
sprawlers
Norway439 Posts
| ||
|
Zozma
United States1626 Posts
| ||
|
roadrunner_sc
United States1220 Posts
On February 01 2009 08:17 damenmofa wrote: Its their forum so they can ban whoever they want for whatever they want. Its the same at tl.net and ironically, people here have gotten banned for disagreeing with the majority/presenting an argument far more often than at iccup. Its funny to see people freak out about the injustice when they taste their own medicine at another forum. What the fuck are you talking about? How long have you been here? Cheloman makes tl admins look like absolute saints by comparison. On February 01 2009 08:17 damenmofa wrote: I find it ridiculous to ban ret for what he said, but I find even more ridiculous that tl.net people honestly think and say stuff like this has never happened at tl.net. You really think tl.nets admins are without fail? From all the bans over the years, not one was unjustified?? If you really think so you are naive... No, TL would have never banned someone like ret for simply speaking out, for one post. Go look in the closed ban threads, people are repeatedly given 2nd chances through warnings, temp bans. Mistakes have happened in the history of tl, but you can't compare that to what cheloman did, which was intentional, malicious, and serves only to cover his own ass. You don't make sense. Stop digging a bigger hole for yourself. | ||
|
alphafuzard
United States1610 Posts
On February 02 2009 00:20 Supah wrote: Wow, wtf damenofa, that ban was really truly unjustified. Watching the responses in that thread made me sick to be honest. I agree with the guy, and he presented his points way better than the admins who chose to just ignore his points or call him names like; a retard, a spineless entity or a hypocrite. Not once did he make a personal attack towards the admins, if someone deserved to get a ban in that thread it sure as hell wasn't him. I believe if he had pm'd a mod or even started a blog, as suggested by HB, he would not have been banned. The ban was somewhat questionable if you look only at his post, but when you consider the repercussion, a flame war started in a charity thread, it becomes more understandable. I think a more appropriate response would be to ask him to edit his post, and repost through a more suitable venue, and try and avoid a big fight in a charity thread. If he still picked a fight in the wrong area, then ban. As it was, it was not a shining moment in the tl mods history of bans, but there were reasonable causes for banning. | ||
|
Epicfailguy
Norway893 Posts
I've used iccup as a host for private games a lot of times, and I always host FFA. I honestly don't see the problem, the admin has got a point - you lose more points than you gain, so in the end you'll end up higher rated with 50\50 win\lose ratio. | ||
|
sprawlers
Norway439 Posts
On February 02 2009 01:10 alphafuzard wrote: I believe if he had pm'd a mod or even started a blog, as suggested by HB, he would not have been banned. The ban was somewhat questionable if you look only at his post, but when you consider the repercussion, a flame war started in a charity thread, it becomes more understandable. I think a more appropriate response would be to ask him to edit his post, and repost through a more suitable venue, and try and avoid a big fight in a charity thread. If he still picked a fight in the wrong area, then ban. As it was, it was not a shining moment in the tl mods history of bans, but there were reasonable causes for banning. Yeah but should he be held responsible for the fact that some (mods) decided to flame him? It wasn't a flamewar before those opposing decided to jump his throat. In general they do a way better job than iccup mods, off course, but that one was unjustified. | ||
|
Elsi
United Kingdom8173 Posts
I have to repeat this step everytime I wanna play on iccup! Any solutions please? | ||
|
CDRdude
United States5625 Posts
On February 01 2009 23:48 damenmofa wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=79902¤tpage=8 Hot_Bid: "presented argument in a reasonable way, no need to hide, nobody is gonna ban you" Mani: "Spineless entity, ban!" Now of course you might argue he got banned because of his motivations, but really the motivation of somebody else is just guesswork. Fact is he got banned for presenting a reasonable argument and disagreeing with the majority. Else the iccup admins also could say they banned ret due to his motivation to undermine Iccup admins authority. Let me make this clear, I find it ridiculous to ban ret for what he said, but I find even more ridiculous that tl.net people honestly think and say stuff like this has never happened at tl.net. You really think tl.nets admins are without fail? From all the bans over the years, not one was unjustified?? If you really think so you are naive... I don't want to drive this further offtopic, but I should mention that what you linked was a guy who admitted that jt isn't his main account. One of the TL commandments is "Respect your ID". I'm too lazy to look through the ban thread, but I'd guess that the account was banned because you aren't allowed to have multipile forum accounts. Back on topic, the whole banning of ret is kind of stupid. There were other a lot of others complaining about the same thing in that iccup thread, and none of them were banned. I don't know that chelomen guy ouside of what I've read in this thread, but he seems like a complete tool. Does iccup have a heirarchy of amins? Can someone issue a complaint to a higher power, or is he the higher power? That rule about spreading rumors about iccup is hilarious. Edit: lol, I can't read, the guy from the auction thread wasn' banned at all. | ||
|
PaeZ
Mexico1627 Posts
On February 01 2009 07:52 Sadist wrote: they say something like if you arent directly involved dont post in their thread. Dunno where cheloman is from but apparently discussing things isnt taught and being a prick is the norm.  I hate people who think they have "power" and try to rub it in peoples faces :DHe has always been a retard even since the PGT days, I have had several arguments with him and also been banned from PGT back when it existed. He is from Argentina, has like over 40 years old, is the founder of LG) "latingamers" and currently lives in Barcelona. HE is a prick who doesnt care what others say, if he fucks up and knows about it he wont care and act like a freaking dictator. And damenmofa stop acting like a troll, this is about Iccup and Cheloman's stupidness, not about teamliquid, whose admins are way superior and often give warnings even before banning dont even dare to draw attention away from Iccup's stupid admins. | ||
|
Divinek
Canada4045 Posts
On February 01 2009 22:49 bioboyAT wrote: aren't there any high iccup admins who see what a retard cheloman is and do something against it ? The only people above him are other retards/his friends/too lazy. I believe. He has always been irrational. And I believe anyone with that much control should have fluent control of the english language, unlike his choppy garbage. God damn. | ||
|
Scooge
Iceland144 Posts
And to the guy who said it was easy to just add a whole new system of checks to auto enforce the games per player rule, I'd really like to see you modify PVPGN and submit the code to Iccup to review and add. This thread is pretty ridiculous. We have someone a few posts up comparing Iccup to the Nazi regime. I think some of you are blowing this way out of proportion because the players this hit are your friends or countrymen or someone semi-famous in the community. | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
On February 01 2009 23:48 damenmofa wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=79902¤tpage=8 Hot_Bid: "presented argument in a reasonable way, no need to hide, nobody is gonna ban you" Mani: "Spineless entity, ban!" Now of course you might argue he got banned because of his motivations, but really the motivation of somebody else is just guesswork. Fact is he got banned for presenting a reasonable argument and disagreeing with the majority. Else the iccup admins also could say they banned ret due to his motivation to undermine Iccup admins authority. Let me make this clear, I find it ridiculous to ban ret for what he said, but I find even more ridiculous that tl.net people honestly think and say stuff like this has never happened at tl.net. You really think tl.nets admins are without fail? From all the bans over the years, not one was unjustified?? If you really think so you are naive... First, it was kennigit who banned him, at least try and do some research before spraying bullshit. Also, have you even read the guys 4 posts; he had no "reasonable arguement", and a post like that had no place in that thread- completely out of line. ASIDE from that, his main account isn't even banned? i mean seriously if this is the "best", or worst; you can find , you're just helping TL with their image, as with iccup you could find 100x worse things. Stop trying to nitpick, it's just childish. you're missing the ENTIRE point of this- trying to improve iCCup admin standards- not trying to lower TL's so that iCCup's (the bad admins) might actually seem somewhat decent.(lol?) | ||
| ||
