Removed from public viewing is as good as deletion.

EDIT: WTF how did my edit turn into a new post?

Edit.

 

Which is ironic, because i'm not being a Buisnessman, i'm retired, I got better [cabbage] to do.

I'm sick and tired of you and a few wankers acting like crybabies.... I mean you guys (since i'm splitting you according to you, you obviously consider the group as one - right?) left out the fact some of you spammed porn, looked up an administrators personal information and posted pictures of their house on the forums and [cabbage] and you're acting like you're mother [bleep]ing innocent? Or did you hope no one would mention that stuff? The admins have been playing nice, really nice.

 

The idiot who posted porn and was banned from here for doing so had no prior affiliation to our "group" at the time.

 

As for the other claim, do you even have proof it was from our "group"?

 

Which is ironic, because i'm not being a Buisnessman, i'm retired, I got better [cabbage] to do.

I'm sick and tired of you and a few wankers acting like crybabies.... I mean you guys (since i'm splitting you according to you, you obviously consider the group as one - right?) left out the fact some of you spammed porn, looked up an administrators personal information and posted pictures of their house on the forums and [cabbage] and you're acting like you're mother [bleep]ing innocent? Or did you hope no one would mention that stuff? The admins have been playing nice, really nice.

 

The idiot who posted porn and was banned from here for doing so had no prior affiliation to our "group" at the time.

 

As for the other claim, do you even have proof it was from our "group"?

*Gulp*.

 

Srs stuff. :P.

In the world I live in, someone telling me that I'm good at something does not constitute a derogatory remark unless whatever I'm doing is something I perceive as wrong.

 

 

That's a pretty petty example. It's obvious that it was a sarcastic response, didn't add anything to what was being discussed, etc.

In the world I live in, someone telling me that I'm good at something does not constitute a derogatory remark unless whatever I'm doing is something I perceive as wrong.

 

 

That's a pretty petty example. It's obvious that it was a sarcastic response, didn't add anything to what was being discussed, etc.

 

I thought this was a thread dedicated to feedback on moderation?

 

I haven't seen the deleted post itself, so I don't know how inappropriate the post was but removing a post complaining about post removal is hilarious.

Funnily enough it was said (by one of the efficientists) in the pasted logs that the bans were by the rules.

 

[1:51:45 AM] The Ancient: is that fundamentally the admins, or at least mods, need to actually be active

[1:51:47 AM] The Ancient: in forums and in game

[1:51:55 AM] The Ancient: in forums because then they can make relevant judgments

[1:52:03 AM] The Ancient: instead of appearing to come out of nowhere

[1:52:09 AM] The Ancient: cause that's how you generate trustworthiness

[1:52:15 AM] The Ancient: and street cred L0L

[1:52:23 AM] The Ancient: for example

[1:52:26 AM] The Ancient: jimmy jim's bans

[1:52:28 AM] The Ancient: came out of nowhere

[1:52:32 AM] The Ancient: i mean they were by the rule

[1:52:33 AM] The Ancient: fine

[1:52:39 AM] The Ancient: but i just have no idea who this guy is

 

Yet all this cabbage was storming about unfair bans. I think that the pasted log was an interesting read, and it confirmed that less time should have been wasted on kittyfooting around. :unsure:

I think what The Ancient was talking about were the bans that caused all this to happen in the first place (he and another poster got banned for "flaming" in the Efficiency Trolls thread, when clearly they were joking with each other). Unless it's about something else...

Funnily enough it was said (by one of the efficientists) in the pasted logs that the bans were by the rules.

 

[1:51:45 AM] The Ancient: is that fundamentally the admins, or at least mods, need to actually be active

[1:51:47 AM] The Ancient: in forums and in game

[1:51:55 AM] The Ancient: in forums because then they can make relevant judgments

[1:52:03 AM] The Ancient: instead of appearing to come out of nowhere

[1:52:09 AM] The Ancient: cause that's how you generate trustworthiness

[1:52:15 AM] The Ancient: and street cred L0L

[1:52:23 AM] The Ancient: for example

[1:52:26 AM] The Ancient: jimmy jim's bans

[1:52:28 AM] The Ancient: came out of nowhere

[1:52:32 AM] The Ancient: i mean they were by the rule

[1:52:33 AM] The Ancient: fine

[1:52:39 AM] The Ancient: but i just have no idea who this guy is

 

Yet all this cabbage was storming about unfair bans. I think that the pasted log was an interesting read, and it confirmed that less time should have been wasted on kittyfooting around. :unsure:

Two things here.

First, ancient was trying to reach some sort of middle ground with Das.

Second, we're also of the opinion that some of the rules need revision.

 

and for goodness sake you realize the size of that conversation log right?

did you seriously search through it to find a single potentially incriminating snippet on ancient?

He doesn't have internet access for about another week, so I'd appreciate it if you don't twist his words when he's not around.

I did not twist any words (neither will I wait to post my reply for a week), and I have read through the full log. :)

 

There was no need to search for anything either, as this was said in the very beginning of the conversation. I did not search for "incriminating" statements, I was just pointing it out as Soma and Curtis mentioned the bans. I see no problems with bringing up actual evidence in a topic like this - especially when it was posted by someone else in the first place. Don't shoot the messenger. Or quoter. The whole conversation is still there for anyone and everyone on this topic to read, so if people want the full context they can just read the whole conversation - or a bigger part of it.

 

As I have said before to others; there are constructive and less constructive ways to go about it if you want rules changed. World 2 Fally riots is rarely effective, neither is being overly argumentative on a forum. Saying this as a user of several forums, where I have influenced both the rules and moderation processes.

 

And a side note: I think I have played RS long enough and have the RS experience and levels to actively participate in this discussion aswell. :-P

To the letter of the law is not always correct, that is abundantly clear for what has been happening,

As I have said before to others; there are constructive and less constructive ways to go about it if you want rules changed. World 2 Fally riots is rarely effective, neither is being overly argumentative on a forum. Saying this as a user of several forums, where I have influenced both the rules and moderation processes.

 

Except that's all water under the drawbridge now. TEF's administrators has already determined that Tip.It is not capable of changing to their liking, hence them moving on to their own forum instead.

In the world I live in, someone telling me that I'm good at something does not constitute a derogatory remark unless whatever I'm doing is something I perceive as wrong.

 

 

That's a pretty petty example. It's obvious that it was a sarcastic response, didn't add anything to what was being discussed, etc.

 

It wasn't modded for being off-topic, it was modded for being derogatory. And in fact, the rest of the comment WAS on-topic. Sarcasm or not, the comment can only be construed as an derogatory if the action that was being remarked upon was considered wrong.

In the world I live in, someone telling me that I'm good at something does not constitute a derogatory remark unless whatever I'm doing is something I perceive as wrong.

 

 

That's a pretty petty example. It's obvious that it was a sarcastic response, didn't add anything to what was being discussed, etc.

 

It wasn't modded for being off-topic, it was modded for being derogatory. And in fact, the rest of the comment WAS on-topic. Sarcasm or not, the comment can only be construed as an derogatory if the action that was being remarked upon was considered wrong.

 

Well in that case, the mod should have just edited out the derogatory/sarcastic comment instead of deleting the whole thing.

Or, you could post without being derogatory in the first place.

True, but if he's still offering something worthwhile to the discussion, there's no reason to remove that portion of his post as well.

Or, you could post without being derogatory in the first place.

Still not sure how complimenting a mod on their post deletion prowess is derogatory, unless that mod feels that they've been deleting too many posts and is sensitive about it.

Or, you could post without being derogatory in the first place.

Still not sure how complimenting a mod on their post deletion prowess is derogatory, unless that mod feels that they've been deleting too many posts and is sensitive about it.

Because it was obviously meant as a sarcastic insult, not sincere and not appropriate.

I'd also like to point out that several TEF members have managed to remain quite civil and not have a single post removed.

The only time I had a post removed was because of advertising in the Metagame, which was understandable though not very clear to begin with.

sounds like progress :)

Read through the second half of the log, lol. Drama...

I was even mentioned as "not scientific enough", made my day :lol:

 

Anyways, I see nothing wrong with deleting posts when they're against the rules. Stop making every deleted post sound like innocent ones that just got deleted as an act of vengeance. :rolleyes:

The only time I had a post removed was because of advertising in the Metagame, which was understandable though not very clear to begin with.

Indeed. This discussion would have gone a lot better if everyone was as civil as you (and Michael for that matter) have been, although I'll admit the staff could have acted a bit more civilly on occasion.

What do people think about limiting where mods have mod powers based on whether they are active in RS or not.

 

For example retired mods would not have mod powers in H&A or Metagaming as they no longer possess the knowledge to effectively mod them.