DKellis

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"You guys can vent all you want, but if you want to actually do something about it your frustrations are better spent elsewhere." -- ThePaladin

Hey Paladin. Valid. Specific suggestions?

[/ QUOTE ]

Write your damn Congressman.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have one.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Me neither... And saddly/luckly my contry is alot less sue-happy then the US of A... so no one would bother....

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't have one either.

If past trends are any indication, my country is likely to follow the US's lead in whatever they decide for computer/videogames.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hence, any attempt to link violence with new inventions, is ultimately illogical.

[/ QUOTE ]

Off-topic: Throw in the clause about how new inventions can increase the effectiveness of violence (it's hard to compare a flint axe with a rocket-propelled grenade), and I'd agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it was a bit off topic, and if I may say so kinda irrelevant to this particular discussion.

If a person poses an argument to support a particular point of view, just because a second person attempts to insert other "requirements", relevant or not, into the pre-stated conditions, it does not suddenly invalid the original argument. This is like someone saying "I am sweating, so I think today is too hot.", then have someone else comes along and declares "If you also throw in 'sweating causes your body to lose salt' then I'll agree."

[/ QUOTE ]

I was agreeing with your original point. I was also in a hurry, so I didn't reply to the original post of the thread. Apologies if I caused any misunderstandings.

I don't know what to think about the video, in the sense that I just cannot understand the message that it is trying to convey. It's like someone randomly coming up to me and saying that the world is made of smoked cheese: it doesn't fit the version of reality I'm familiar with, and I simply have no response to it that would fit the context of the discussion.

A part of me wonders if this is just another example of sensationalism, and the rest of the world will go on as it is. However, there is historical precedent for sensationalism, intentional or otherwise, getting a rather serious reaction (Wertham being the primary example), so I have no idea how seriously to take this one.

[ QUOTE ]
Hence, any attempt to link violence with new inventions, is ultimately illogical.

[/ QUOTE ]

Off-topic: Throw in the clause about how new inventions can increase the effectiveness of violence (it's hard to compare a flint axe with a rocket-propelled grenade), and I'd agree.

Wow, this is a blast from the past.

I wonder if anyone's managed to compile all of these. Perhaps into a wiki or something, with an easy link to all of it in one page.

[ QUOTE ]
And my original point Zeus, god of blunder, is that by engaging in name calling and openly breaking a forum rule, IE doing EXACTLY what should get a post yanked or a thread locked, did NOT in fact have any impact on this thread. Bringing up ... AGAIN my POINT that moderation is inconsistent and THAT is my problem with Lighthouse. Part of his job is to ensure the moderators are on the same page. He isn't. He should.

So are we clear now? or did you just skip that paragraph?

[/ QUOTE ]

One possible factor to consider is that we are pretty certain that the mods are aware of this whole thread in general, and this thread, by its very nature, violates the forum rules, but this thread still exists.

That suggests that the "rules" are placed in discretionary abeyance, at least for the moment.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you’d have to misinterpret both this thread, and that particular rule, to think it applies to this thread in particular. This isn’t a thread about censorship. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if this is the first time the word “censorship” was used at all in the entire thread. It’s a thread about many things… styles of moderation, what people prefer and don’t prefer, whether or not people are happy with current personalities and whether or not people are disgruntled about the new trends that seem to be hitting the board. Censorship? Not even in discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd have to disagree here. The word "censorship" does not have to be used for a thread to be about censorship.

Now, there is the obvious disclaimer that this is entirely subjective interpretation. But the following passage from the OP seems to refer to board censorship of rants (which are also against the board rules):

[ QUOTE ]
More and more discussions/rants are being closed down by Lighthouse. I realize he is the Community Relations go-to person, but in trying to establish his unique presence in that role, I feel he has gone a bit too far at times, more than not.

I cringe everytime I see his name in a discussion. Maybe I am not very sensitive to people's feelings but Lighthouse seems to be politically correct to the extreme. Someone could use the word "butthead" in a post and he will close it down. Have we become such a community that we cannot tolerate even minor rants and dissenting responses?

I wonder how many respones this will generate before Lighthouse closes this thread down.

[/ QUOTE ]

Moderation is related to censorship, in a way. It's about a specific variety of censorship that may be codified in the rules, and is used to (theoretically) keep things running smoothly. The mods delete rant or "I'm leaving" threads because those threads violate the forum rules; in other words, they censor them.

I would argue that the rule in question applies in this case, as this thread is about board moderation, and that rule is, semantics aside, about threads referencing board moderation. Now, whether this thread will get deleted/locked or otherwise is up to the mods, but from a strict following of the rule, it is against that rule.

EDIT: In addition, there is also the rest of that rule:

[ QUOTE ]
No personal attacks against forum moderators. If you disagree with an action taken by a moderator, you can send your complaint via PM to the moderator or go to http://support.plaync.com and submit your issue to us via the “Ask a Question” tab.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seem to remember several posts in this thread making personal attacks against Lighthouse (whether blatant or subtle), or against the "Moderator#" mods.

[ QUOTE ]
So if indeed you do see this thread as a matter of respect, and people either should or should not respect authorities, then I think it's pretty easy to say that this particular authority is not getting the respect that an authority usually relies upon to do his job correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Minor difference with what I meant, actually. What I meant, applied to this scenario, was that people should respect Lighthouse as a person, rather than as authority. I really don't care if authority gets extra helpings of respect or not, but several of the posts made thus far have made ad hominem attacks on Lighthouse, which suggests that this basic human respect is missing, or at least deficient.

I'm posting all this in the full knowledge of the possibility, or rather the probability, that this thread will get deleted for breaking the No Censorship Posts rule. I understand that this thread only exists on the sufferance of the mods who have probably decided that there should be someplace for people to air their grievances, even though the airing of grievances is against the forum rules in the first place.

I do get the feeling that the moment this really goes south into bashing and flaming, this thread is gone.

[ QUOTE ]
And for the record, respect is earned never given.

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally, I'm of the belief that basic respect should be given as a matter of course.

"Basic respect" in this case meaning respecting the other person enough to discuss matters with them calmly and rationally, without resorting to personal attacks, and recognizing that the other viewpoint may well be valid, even more valid than one's own. That kind of "basic respect".

But then that's just me.

[ QUOTE ]
We're not talking about weight, we're talking about consistency.

Also, nice jab at gaming fora. It's not true, either - I've never seen an active forum that didn't eventually need moderation, regardless the subject matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Granted about weight vs. consistency. I take that comment back.

And I suppose I should mention that I seldom see large non-gaming hobby forums (NaNoWriMo forums come to mind) require enough moderation to make consistency an issue. However, this is only my experience. (I do go to Gaia Online occasionally, so I understand that exceptions exist.)

I have to jab because it's really what I've seen based on my experiences. I don't know why it is, but it seems to hold true thus far for me.

Personally, I'm not sure I've ever seen a large gaming forum survive as a "nice" place without heavy moderation.

I've also seldom seen that sort of heavy moderation required for other large hobby forums not related to gaming.

[ QUOTE ]
okay noob alert! what the heck is IBTL? I am going to cool down an stop posting for at least the night.

I have no problem with mods doing there job. I really don't. I just am really annoyed when it is not consistent.

Sorry if i have gotten anyone ticked. I really do enjoy the forums and find them really helpful in my enjoyment of the game. It just leaves a bad taste. Thanks for letting me at least blow off steam

[/ QUOTE ]

IBTL means "In Before The Lock". Meaning that the person who says it expects the thread to be locked.

I think this exchange more or less illustrates why rants are against the messageboard rules.

[ QUOTE ]
I am not particularly annoyed by the staff or the rules, but Christ and Horus in a crap game, folks, do you really go through life bowing to "the rules" this way? Accepting the dictates of authority because it IS authority, and telling others to do the same?

[/ QUOTE ]

Speaking personally, yes.

[ QUOTE ]
No, you're right. Cryptic's HQ is in California, and NCSoft's is in Austin.

Which leads me to the conclusion that Cryptic is taking over running the community portion of the business from NCSoft, if Lighthouse is a Cryptic employee, as that hiring post implies based on location. Or maybe just an NCSoft employee working at Cryptic's offices.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be wrong, but after poking around NC's website, I think it's pretty much that NC HQ is in Austin, and Cryptic is in California, and NC also has various branches, one of which is in California near Cryptic, and where Lighthouse (and any potential hirelings) resides.

As for the moderation style, I personally enjoy the tighter moderation, but I'm also aware that it's likely (as here) to cause friction and sparks. I'm just hoping that we'll all get through this without too much trauma.

Then again, I've also been surprised at how many forum posters, even the regulars, have never read the rules and guidelines. It's scary at times.

[ QUOTE ]
Then we'll get the torches and pitchforks and head to Austin.

[/ QUOTE ]

The hiring post makes me think that he's in California, though.

I am confused.

[ QUOTE ]
Are the boards not supposed to be entertaining?

[/ QUOTE ]

The boards are, I believe, meant to be first informative and educational, and then entertaining.

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder how many respones this will generate before Lighthouse closes this thread down.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's well within his rights to lock or delete this thread.

[ QUOTE ]
6. Censorship Posts.

All posts referring to message board censorship will be removed. All message board content is allowed/removed at the discretion of NCsoft. These posts will be removed and the poster warned. Any further posts will be removed, and the poster will be banned from the message boards. Also, working around a ban to continue posting is also prohibited and may incur an extension of a current ban.

Threads designed to announce, appeal or contest a forum or game banning decision on behalf of a third party will be removed without notice.

No personal attacks against forum moderators. If you disagree with an action taken by a moderator, you can send your complaint via PM to the moderator or go to http://support.plaync.com and submit your issue to us via the “Ask a Question” tab.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Heh, you're durn tootin it's not a scientific poll. Not when the PvPers started a thread to drum up support to come over here and pad their votes...

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what the point of doing that is, to be honest.

Somehow I don't think this poll really matters in the long run. It's like the random polls I see on Slashdot. In that case, why bother padding? (Not a rhetorical question.)

I'd say that my favourite thing about this game (apart from soloability) is the freedom of character creation.

Which would simplify down to "costumes", I suppose, even though "open feel" and "open stories" also play into it.

[ QUOTE ]
Interestingly enough, there's been some science news in the last few days that indicates that the moon really is geologically active!

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally what boggles me isn't that the Moon may or may not be geologically active, but that such activity might have such a significant effect on Earth.

Then again, I can roll sevens on a six-sided die in CoH, so I suppose anything is possible.

[ QUOTE ]
So he denies the Greek and ancient history but stays mum on the Urotsukidoji option. Right then. <begins to limber up multiple tenticles>

[/ QUOTE ]

Hence, Dark Blast and Kheldians.

[ QUOTE ]
A) Assuming Cryptic owes them more than it does. (Cryptic, by terms of service, only owes you access to the servers for your 15 bucks a month. Everything else was never guaranteed - it was merely something decided on as a way to entice customers. Yes, I would quit without that stuff - but that doesn't mean they *owe* it - it merely means its a good way to retain customers.)

[/ QUOTE ]

A very minor comment: I think it's NCSoft who takes our money for access to the servers. Cryptic takes our money (however indirectly) for access to their content. And it's kind of hazy on exactly what this "content" is, which I think is the reason for a lot of the ranting on the forums.

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, though, has there been much evidence of a concrete philosophical shift apparent in the game's development or in game changes? Perhaps it's the political skeptic in me, but I haven't seen that much of a shift. I have seen some spin and hype surrounding a shift, but I haven't really seen a lot of changes to reflect the shift. Maybe there'll be more evidence with after I8's out of the can.

[/ QUOTE ]

I figure that it's something that's going to take a bit of time before we see any significant changes. I'm not sure when the philosophical shift was decided at Cryptic (I think it was announced only recently?), but if they've already planned out up to, say, I11, then that philosophical shift may take a long time to materialize.

I know it's close to Halloween, but all these zombie threads are getting a bit stale.

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, then it was "Where are the lost in Kings Row?" Now I don't know what it is people ask for in KR.

[/ QUOTE ]

From my experience, the top three in no particular order are teams, someone to clean up their high-level ambush, and Paladin construction sites.

[ QUOTE ]
Which is why most people use "char" or "alt". Bugs Bunny is a toon. A video game character ain't. Unless it -is- Bugs Bunny or his ilk.

[/ QUOTE ]

I remember a thread quite a while back where someone complained about the use of "alt". I think the argument was that it trivialized the characters, implying that they were all "alternates" and only a second (or third or more) choice.

"Char(s)" has also been rejected before as being too confusing to the power Char. "Charrie" has been rejected for sounding twee.

So I suppose the only thing that seems acceptable is "characters" in full.