|
Remember to post respectfully, but feel free to voice how you actually feel about the change |
Blazinghand
United States25561 Posts
The fact that the kush ban was even contested is a little silly. Like, I'm a really aggressive and outspoken guy, so I have zero trouble justifying my bans and pushing them through, and when I get pushback I do hilarious things like demand even more bans. I'm the perfect host, in a way, for the current system, because I include things in my personal rules like "I can modkill and/or ban you for any reason, completely arbitrarily. You have only vague guesses to go off of to figure out how not to get modkilled" and then I warn people, then I modkill them, and then I argue a lot. It's really perfect for me. I don't anticipate changing much about my hosting under any new rule.
The issue isn't guys like me, who got it covered. The issue is guys who are afraid to be like me, and need something to point to when people start shitting on them in the ban list thread. They have to be able to say, "hey man, dem's da rulez" cause they lack the intense spinality that I have.
I don't think the specific rule change I've proposed, which is that the standard behavior language which is already in every game be required to be in every game (remember, it's already in every game) and a clarification be added to this language so it's clear what's inside the rules and what isn't.
I think most people won't change their OPs significantly, since everyone already uses this kind of language. I think it'll make meek hosts better though
|
Yeah so you are like me. Harsh and "unliked" for some ppl. That's okay. I am not contesting the bans you have ensured, i didn't just remember the one you brought up, i was curious.
After the first chapter imo you are 100% right. And that's what i am arguing avout here. Apparently other peopl are not. :/
|
On June 14 2014 08:32 Blazinghand wrote:
The issue isn't guys like me, who got it covered. The issue is guys who are afraid to be like me, and need something to point to when people start shitting on them in the ban list thread. They have to be able to say, "hey man, dem's da rulez" cause they lack the intense spinality that I have.
Then tell those guys to man up. Tell them they have your support and the support of the people in charge of the banlist. Make this clear to them and everyone else and this problem should be solved or if it isn't then it will never be.
This does not justify a general rule change IN ANY WAY. Hell, I don't even think the rulechange would help in that regard.
|
Blazinghand does that all the time JAT. 
|
On June 14 2014 08:47 raynpelikoneet wrote:Blazinghand does that all the time JAT.
Then I don't see the problem.
|
He's agruing "for us", i just dcan't undestand him all the time (because people do not speak Finnish ^^).
But yeah there is no problem here.
|
On June 14 2014 08:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
He's agruing "for us", i just dcan't undestand him all the time (because people do not speak Finnish ^^).
But yeah there is no problem here.
No, he isn't. He wants the change.
|
Blazinghand
United States25561 Posts
On June 14 2014 08:53 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2014 08:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
He's agruing "for us", i just dcan't undestand him all the time (because people do not speak Finnish ^^).
But yeah there is no problem here. No, he isn't. He wants the change.
This doesn't have to be so oppositional, man
|
On June 14 2014 08:57 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2014 08:53 justanothertownie wrote:On June 14 2014 08:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
He's agruing "for us", i just dcan't undestand him all the time (because people do not speak Finnish ^^).
But yeah there is no problem here. No, he isn't. He wants the change. This doesn't have to be so oppositional, man
You are right. You could also just admit that I am right ^_^
|
Blazinghand
United States25561 Posts
On June 14 2014 08:59 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2014 08:57 Blazinghand wrote:On June 14 2014 08:53 justanothertownie wrote:On June 14 2014 08:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
He's agruing "for us", i just dcan't undestand him all the time (because people do not speak Finnish ^^).
But yeah there is no problem here. No, he isn't. He wants the change. This doesn't have to be so oppositional, man You are right. You could also just admit that I am right ^_^
Yes, you're right: I'm right.
|
I also want "the change". I am just unaware what needs to change and BH has presented the perfect arguments for that. ^^
Can all the hosts agree to be like BH and the problem is solved. I am serious, no joking here.
|
On June 14 2014 09:03 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2014 08:59 justanothertownie wrote:On June 14 2014 08:57 Blazinghand wrote:On June 14 2014 08:53 justanothertownie wrote:On June 14 2014 08:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
He's agruing "for us", i just dcan't undestand him all the time (because people do not speak Finnish ^^).
But yeah there is no problem here. No, he isn't. He wants the change. This doesn't have to be so oppositional, man You are right. You could also just admit that I am right ^_^ Yes, you're right: I'm right.
Excellent. No opposition anymore.
On a more serious note: I won't change my opinion on this. I think it's pretty clear that the rulechange is not warranted and if there is a problem then it is not the solution.
|
On June 14 2014 09:05 justanothertownie wrote:
...I think it's pretty clear that the rulechange is not warranted and if there is a problem then it is not the solution.
I think this is a fact but you can't argue about it here. I am in a same boat but it does not any good for anyone to argue about this here. Let's just support/argue what we CAN change/(or not). It's more productive.
|
Fuck this feels like politics and i hate it.
|
I am gonna modkill myself if we ever need to vote on something other than a lynch.
|
On June 14 2014 06:58 raynpelikoneet wrote:
I just want people to state what their problem is.
I mean, i just told what my problem with Aquanim is, what he did was he addressed 1/10 of the post (what he felt confindent in commenting on - textbook mafia). Fucking asshole. Tell me where i have done wrong, publicly, not just dance around the issue.
Be a man you pussy.
yes i hate pussies like that, say what you have to say ffs.
What do you mean I addressed 10% of your post? I told you that everything you said about the unreasonableness of my actions in Cultured Mini Mafia was wrong (based on the opinions of the other players and my cohosts who I sought the opinion of, which was most of them IIRC), and that the conditions under which I left the forum were considerably different to yours. As far as I could tell, everything else you had to say was contentless ranting. How am I supposed to answer an argument like "half of your post is pure bullshit"? You haven't even said which half... because you don't WANT to argue that point.
Also: I don't necessarily expect anyone here to take up Rayn on his offer of "tell me why you don't like me/whoever".
Why?
Because you can't do something like that in a small community like this, and there not be any consequences. I can do it because I'm perfectly fine with burning my bridges on this forum by antagonising some of the most influential people here. Rayn can do it because a) I'm not playing here again anyway so he has nothing to lose by antagonising me and b) he's a big enough bully that he can just scream at anyone who disagrees with him until they go away.
EDIT: Let me make my position perfectly clear.
In my opinion, if the behavioural state of this subforum is to improve, the banlist must explicitly endorse the behavioural rules which mods intend to enforce to accomplish that improvement. Without out-of-game consequences for breaking behavioural rules, those rules are not enforceable.
Do I think all hosts should be required to uphold stricter behavioural rules? No, not really. If you want to host a more lax game, go for it.
I have my doubts that a change like this can fix this community, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth trying or that it won't help at least somewhat.
|
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
Did this thread just go full circlejerk?
Last time I posted we went back to exactly what BH was saying a couple of posts above. And it was agreed as a good change since now "meek" hosts such as myself can be amazing as BH is.
The thread seems to have pretty much run it's purpose imo
|
Those against it general concept: Hosts don't need special rules to be an amazing host like the great BlazingHand. They can just warn and then modkill if the behavior continues, no need for any changes on the rules side.
Those for it general concept: The new rules feel empowering to hosts who feel more comfortable having a more developed and spelled-out set of guidelines for behavior so they can enforce those rules more consistently without fear of reproach.
Those against the rule change: What those who are pro-change are arguing for is already entirely possible with the current rules.
Those for the rule change: Everybody's equal which puts a nice face on everything we do here in this lovely subforum, so as to make it more welcoming to new guests as well as players who left for personal / time reasons.
repeat circle ad nauseum
I wrote this before but it bears repeating: hosts can host how they want to host and they have my (and hopefully, our) blessing to run their games how they want to up to and including behavioral guidelines and personal attacks and [the nebulous concept of] excessive posting.
My bottom line: The rule change merely formalizes what is already possible/available to hosts so that as few butts can be hurt as possible while maximizing community appeal and accessibility to the game.
|
On June 13 2014 14:42 Aquanim wrote:
The problem with the forum isn't the rules enforced by the hosts. The problem is the community. Both the toxic players (Rayn, Geript, most of the OMGUS folks, etc.) and the others who enable them with their approval (Marv, DP, JAT, etc.).
IMO, the toxic parts of the community are certain people who think they're better than the rest. But I'm just a lowly member of the unwashed masses. You should institute these rules despite our objections because we don't know what's good for the community (us) and you do. By your own admission you'll never play another game here again so your opinion should not matter, not even a little, in this discussion.
|
On June 15 2014 00:56 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2014 14:42 Aquanim wrote:
The problem with the forum isn't the rules enforced by the hosts. The problem is the community. Both the toxic players (Rayn, Geript, most of the OMGUS folks, etc.) and the others who enable them with their approval (Marv, DP, JAT, etc.).
IMO, the toxic parts of the community are certain people who think they're better than the rest. But I'm just a lowly member of the unwashed masses. You should institute these rules despite our objections because we don't know what's good for the community (us) and you do. By your own admission you'll never play another game here again so your opinion should not matter, not even a little, in this discussion.
Not that I agree with what Aqua is saying entirely, but that statement is just wrong. What does it matter if people play here anymore? More specifically what if the conditions here (Which is obviously the case in this scenario) have dictated said persons choice in NOT playing here? I 100% don't think that person should just be ignored because they no longer play here because they have a problem with something here. They have an issue with something, thus they left, you should totes not ignore their opinion about it. Else what is stopping more people for leaving for the exact same reason?
I am not going to elaborate much more other than ye, BH sums it up ok. The short story of the facts as I see;
All these rules really do is lay that framework out over all games. Mods can choose to be super strict on it or not. Obviously TL mafia doesn't have a ton of mods running around threads and just auto banning people based on "their opinion". To be honest these last 10 pages seem pretty silly. All these changes seem to do in my mind is empower "less confidant" host to make request in the ban list thread post game. I honestly can't see what else this will change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
