NationStates Jolt Archive

New Idea for Mod Elections: Instead of direct mod elections or the "non-binding" that I proposed earlier, here's a new idea: current mods pick a list of candidates (but players can suggest who they think should be on the list). Players then select from the candidates. That way, the new mods chosen would be acceptable to the current mods.

Please, be more polite: Mods, please, when turning down a player request, don't simply say "no" or "not gonna happen" and then lock the thread. Say sorry (for politeness' sake), and explain why. The thread can also be left open so that the merits of said request can be discused (regardless of whether it's going to be implemented).

Pre-emptive thread locking: Please, no pre-emptive thread locking. When a thread may turn into a flame, but has not turned into one, prehaps it would be better to delete individual posts instead.

Creation of NS "Criminal code": Congrats to Melkor for creating the code. Hopefully all precidents/mod rulings can be included. Indeed, when many people were talking "reform", this is what they were talking about. Thanks Melkor!!!

No or not gonan happen is polite in my mind. They could say a lot worse if you think about it.

I personally, don't see the system changing that much, and I don't really see any need for a change in how mods are appointed. Getting new mods does not seem to happen that often anyways.

I think mods should do pre emptive locking of a thread when called for. If a thread is started and is already offensive then it deserves to be locked plain and simple.

No or not gonan happen is polite in my mind. They could say a lot worse if you think about it.

I personally, don't see the system changing that much, and I don't really see any need for a change in how mods are appointed. Getting new mods does not seem to happen that often anyways.

I think mods should do pre emptive locking of a thread when called for. If a thread is started and is already offensive then it deserves to be locked plain and simple.

1) I guess it depends on how you see it, but my impression is that it's rude. Sorry mods.

2) It's a compromise for players who want mod elections. Also, now that you mention it, I think we do need a couple more mods for faster issue coding, faster processing of complaints, and to lessen the workload of current mods. Sorry Salusa, but I also think that we need another tech admin to do the things that Salusa doesn't have time for.

3) As for pre-emptive thread locking, I meant threads that are non offensive in nature.

Well, you have a point on the last two points. I feel the mods do a great job, but at times they do seem overwhelmed.

I didn't realize what you were referring to in regards to the preemptive thread locking, sorry.

1) We do not men to be rude, but we're often in a hurry and answering the same question that's been asked many times before (and should have been found via the search mechanism or FAQ)
2) No offense taken. But I'm rather confused. My turn around time for bug-fixes is very short. As is my turn around for everything except for new features and appeals.
-Development on this game formally ceased before I even joined. The only reasons that any development has occured at all has been because I've had some time to kill and an itch to scratch. Therefore here I'm greatly exceeding what needs to be done. I just rebuilt a significant part of the game's backend for the moderators.
-Appeals get dealt with when I have the time as they are rarely time sensitive and usualy require a great deal of thought.

I did not know any of that stuff. Thank you for the dedication and hard work. :):)

1) We do not men to be rude, but we're often in a hurry and answering the same question that's been asked many times before (and should have been found via the search mechanism or FAQ)
2) No offense taken. But I'm rather confused. My turn around time for bug-fixes is very short. As is my turn around for everything except for new features and appeals.
-Development on this game formally ceased before I even joined. The only reasons that any development has occured at all has been because I've had some time to kill and an itch to scratch. Therefore here I'm greatly exceeding what needs to be done. I just rebuilt a significant part of the game's backend for the moderators.
-Appeals get dealt with when I have the time as they are rarely time sensitive and usualy require a great deal of thought.

1) I understand. That's why I proposed more mods.
2) I'm talking about rewriting the code. Often, that's why player requests for features are turned down, because it would require game code to be "completely rewritten".

Pre-emptive thread locking: Please, no pre-emptive thread locking. When a thread may turn into a flame, but has not turned into one, prehaps it would be better to delete individual posts instead.

If a thread is going to turn into flame, but just hasn't yet, doesn't that mean that the thread is probably flamebait, which is also against the rules?

New Idea for Mod Elections: Instead of direct mod elections or the "non-binding" that I proposed earlier, here's a new idea: current mods pick a list of candidates (but players can suggest who they think should be on the list). Players then select from the candidates. That way, the new mods chosen would be acceptable to the current mods.

As it is now, I'm pretty sure that the mods gather a list of candidates and then decide on who they think would do the best job when seeking a new member of the mod squad. (I heard once from a mod who's now retired that I was considered but denied...lol...not sure on that one though. Good while ago.) Personally I trust their judgement more than the majority of NSers.

That's why I proposed more mods.

Yeah, NS seems to need a few more to do things the mods say they don't have time for, but this is hardly our concern. Tsar was just appointed a week ago, so the Mods and the Admins seem to recognize this shortage. Give 'em time. If they deem more to be necessary, more will come.

In conclusion, you guys need to let this topic die. This is what, the third thread on it? Honestly, it's been discussed and there has been some excellent imput, however the continuation of this topic is far from necessary.

As it is now, I'm pretty sure that the mods gather a list of candidates and then decide on who they think would do the best job when seeking a new member of the mod squad. (I heard once from a mod who's now retired that I was considered but denied...lol...not sure on that one though. Good while ago.) Personally I trust their judgement more than the majority of NSers.

Yeah, NS seems to need a few more to do things the mods say they don't have time for, but this is hardly our concern. Tsar was just appointed a week ago, so the Mods and the Admins seem to recognize this shortage. Give 'em time. If they deem more to be necessary, more will come.

In conclusion, you guys need to let this topic die. This is what, the third thread on it? Honestly, it's been discussed and there has been some excellent imput, however the continuation of this topic is far from necessary.

Regarding selection of mods: It is the mods judgement. Players simply narrow their choice down for them. As for the number of mods, I think that, at this stage, a couple of more mods would be beneficial even if it's not "necessary", provided that those chosen are "good" mods. It's probably just that it takes time for the mods/admin to search for a "quality" candidate, rather than them feeling no need or desire to do so.

Also, SB, I'm being sensible here. I'm not screaming mod corruption, and I'm not advocating extreme ideas. I'm simply pushing ideas that will satisfy both mods and players as much as possible. True, not all players will be satisfied, and perhaps you will say that the majority of players are already satisfied, but at least, with these reforms, more players will be satisfied than now.

UNTIL THERE IS CHANGE, TOPICS LIKE THIS WILL BE NECESSARY!!!

UNTIL THERE IS CHANGE, TOPICS LIKE THIS WILL BE NECESSARY!!!
Once again, there are those who disagree with your sentiment.

I've submitted plenty of requests for mod intervention, and the few that were somewhat time-sensitive were usually dealt with in perfectly adequate time. The ones that aren't time-sensitive ... well, what difference does it make if it takes a day or a month to archive a thread.

Most of the complaints I've seen about mod-inaction revolve around invasions and nation-deletions. In the latter case, it's almost certain that a deletion reversal weill be denied. There is no time-sensitivity to it at all. In the former case, I've usually assumed that apparent inaction doesn't necessarily imply that nothing has been done. Often problems are resolved without the forum topic being updated in a timely manner. So what? It's not vital that the community be instantly informed if the principals have been dealt with accordingly.

I don't want player input into the mod selection process. I've seen the quality of "popular" candidates, and I want no part of it. Management knows the job requirements, and they are in the best postion to evaluate the candidates. I've yet to see a mod that was unfit to do their job, and I've been reading most every post here for well over a year. The process works.

Also, SB, I'm being sensible here. I'm not screaming mod corruption, and I'm not advocating extreme ideas. I'm simply pushing ideas that will satisfy both mods and players as much as possible. True, not all players will be satisfied, and perhaps you will say that the majority of players are already satisfied, but at least, with these reforms, more players will be satisfied than now.

UNTIL THERE IS CHANGE, TOPICS LIKE THIS WILL BE NECESSARY!!!

I'm not saying that you're being crazy, screaming corruption and whatnot. However, these ideas which you "push" will never take place. If there is change to the mod format, it will not be the result or conclusion of a thread like this, but instead an inter-mod discussion unknown to us all. Topics like this do no more than confuse the general public as to what their role is. You act as if we have say. We don't, nor do we deserve it.

Once again, there are those who disagree with your sentiment.

I've submitted plenty of requests for mod intervention, and the few that were somewhat time-sensitive were usually dealt with in perfectly adequate time. The ones that aren't time-sensitive ... well, what difference does it make if it takes a day or a month to archive a thread.

Most of the complaints I've seen about mod-inaction revolve around invasions and nation-deletions. In the latter case, it's almost certain that a deletion reversal weill be denied. There is no time-sensitivity to it at all. In the former case, I've usually assumed that apparent inaction doesn't necessarily imply that nothing has been done. Often problems are resolved without the forum topic being updated in a timely manner. So what? It's not vital that the community be instantly informed if the principals have been dealt with accordingly.

I don't want player input into the mod selection process. I've seen the quality of "popular" candidates, and I want no part of it. Management knows the job requirements, and they are in the best postion to evaluate the candidates. I've yet to see a mod that was unfit to do their job, and I've been reading most every post here for well over a year. The process works.

The process works, but let's make it better.

What many people here don't seem to understand is that the mods/admin judge and evaluate the mods first. Therefore, all candidates up for player election have been "pre-approved" by the current mods/admin and so "quality" is ensured.

I never said that the current mods were unfit to do their jobs. I simply believe that with this proposal, they will "win the hearts" of more players, because they will be seen as adopting an (at least somewhat) widely-held sentiment. New mods selected under this process will also "win the hearts" of more players, because they would have been chosen by players themselves (although all candidates would be pre-screened). This is good for the mods themselves, because it reduces hassle by lessening those who "question their authority".

I'm not saying that you're being crazy, screaming corruption and whatnot. However, these ideas which you "push" will never take place. If there is change to the mod format, it will not be the result or conclusion of a thread like this, but instead an inter-mod discussion unknown to us all. Topics like this do no more than confuse the general public as to what their role is. You act as if we have say. We don't, nor do we deserve it.

1) Actually, if there is a change to the Mod format, Max will need to be notified of the changes being proposed, and his input will be necessary. So it's not just something between the admin and the mods.

2) I don't think that anyone here is confused. If so, i will explain.

3) I will say this another time: Just because you are not obliged to do something doesn't mean that you shouldn't.

Yes, we have no say (as of now). Yes, the admin/mods are not obliged to give us a say. But does that mean that the mods/admin shouldn't give us a say? NO! We are not entitled to a say, but it would be nice to give us one anyway. Also, keep in ming that the mods/admin, plus Max, will still have the final say on everything. They don't have to give us a say, but we deserve it!

They don't have to give us a say, but we deserve it!
With that statement, you demolish your entire argument. We the players have done nothing whatsoever to "deserve" anything. It's a private site, and Max can do whatever the hell he wants. Your argument now boils down to, "I want it, therefore I will keep defying locked threads and mod rulings until I get what I want."


It's the old "I'll hold my breath until my face turns blue" argument. Grow up.

With that statement, you demolish your entire argument. We the players have done nothing whatsoever to "deserve" anything. It's a private site, and Max can do whatever the hell he wants. Your argument now boils down to, "I want it, therefore I will keep defying locked threads and mod rulings until I get what I want."


It's the old "I'll hold my breath until my face turns blue" argument. Grow up.

Sandpit, you act as if you're trying to start a revolution. I'm have expecting to see some sort of declaration of independance talking about our god-given rights and how they have been abused soon. This is not a question of our civil rights or our player rights. Your whole thing seems to revolve around the mods being nicer to you and the members in general. Sandpit, mods aren't there to make you feel better and brighten your day...they have a very unforgiving yet necessary job to do that naturally breeds conflict, stress, and irritation. Them being here is good enough, and as long as they follow the rules as well (which they do) there is little problem with how things are run now. Reform is unnecessary. Why fix it if it's not broken?

With that statement, you demolish your entire argument. We the players have done nothing whatsoever to "deserve" anything. It's a private site, and Max can do whatever the hell he wants. Your argument now boils down to, "I want it, therefore I will keep defying locked threads and mod rulings until I get what I want."

It's the old "I'll hold my breath until my face turns blue" argument. Grow up.

Sorry, that was just a "sound bite".

We should clarify: when I said "deserve", I meant that we should (ie. it would be nice for us to) get a say. They don't have to give us a say, but they should. Not because we are entitled to one, but because it would be nice for us to have one.

The process works, but let's make it better.

What many people here don't seem to understand is that the mods/admin judge and evaluate the mods first. Therefore, all candidates up for player election have been "pre-approved" by the current mods/admin and so "quality" is ensured.

I never said that the current mods were unfit to do their jobs. I simply believe that with this proposal, they will "win the hearts" of more players, because they will be seen as adopting an (at least somewhat) widely-held sentiment. New mods selected under this process will also "win the hearts" of more players, because they would have been chosen by players themselves (although all candidates would be pre-screened). This is good for the mods themselves, because it reduces hassle by lessening those who "question their authority".

You seem to think we have a whole pool of people we think would be good mods, we just don't bother appointing them.
Wrong.
To give an idea of timescale, I was first mentioned as a potential moderator in December 03. I was appointed moderator in April 04.
Popularity isn't a particular concern; moderators just need to do a job and do it well.

Sandpit, you act as if you're trying to start a revolution. I'm have expecting to see some sort of declaration of independance talking about our god-given rights and how they have been abused soon. This is not a question of our civil rights or our player rights. Your whole thing seems to revolve around the mods being nicer to you and the members in general. Sandpit, mods aren't there to make you feel better and brighten your day...they have a very unforgiving yet necessary job to do that naturally breeds conflict, stress, and irritation. Them being here is good enough, and as long as they follow the rules as well (which they do) there is little problem with how things are run now. Reform is unnecessary. Why fix it if it's not broken?

It's not broken, but let's fix it to make it better.

I understand the stress that the mods go through. That's why my first proposal is to increase the number of mods by, let's say, three (for now). The mods probably want to do that too,but it takes time to find quality candidates, plus more mods may lead to more disagreements.

Like I said, we're not entitled to anything, but we should get something, because we are the lifeblood of NS (true, everybody leaving NS and leaving it to be an abandoned wastelant is just a hypothetical situation, but still, the statement is true: NS would be nothing without the players).

True, mods don't have to make me feel better and brighten my day. But they should, because cause the purpose of a game is to make me feel better and to brighten my day. I realize that mods go through a lot of stress, but if more mods were selected to reduce their workload, then they may finally ahve the time and be in the mood to make me feel better and brighten my day, as well as for all the players, and this would be wonderful.

Let's strive for the best in moderation!

You seem to think we have a whole pool of people we think would be good mods, we just don't bother appointing them.
Wrong.
To give an idea of timescale, I was first mentioned as a potential moderator in December 03. I was appointed moderator in April 04.
Popularity isn't a particular concern; moderators just need to do a job and do it well.

Popularity makes a mod more respected, and this helps them to do their jobs, because less people will flame them or question their authority, and more people will be wiling to listen to them and obey their orders. This reduces stress for both mods and players.

Also, Myrth, you speak as we have a shortage of "quality" candidates, so few that there is no room for the mods to choose ten or so "quality" candidates, and then for the players to narrow it to two or three. Hopefully that is not true.

Popularity makes a mod more respected,
Doing their job well makes a mod more respected. I'd never heard of Tsaraine before he was appointed (I don't frequent the RP forums), and I'd had very little contact with Katganistan and Unfree People prior to their appointment. All three have proven to be fair, reasonable, and competent.

Myrth was by far the most 'popular' player who has been appointed in my NS lifetime, and he's easily the most often listed as being 'unfair' or 'prejudiced'. No, he's just the most active. (do you ever sleep, Myrth-boy?). His player popularity has done nothing to the level of respect he is accorded as a moderator.

Sandpit, your premise is wrong, your arguments don't work, and your conclusions are not reflective of the bulk of helpful members of Moderation and Technical. What they do reflect is the wishes expressed by spammers and other rule-breakers who want site rules relaxed so they can do whatever they want. Some of us like it just fine the way it is.

True, mods don't have to make me feel better and brighten my day. But they should, because cause the purpose of a game is to make me feel better and to brighten my day. I realize that mods go through a lot of stress, but if more mods were selected to reduce their workload, then they may finally ahve the time and be in the mood to make me feel better and brighten my day, as well as for all the players, and this would be wonderful!

Wrong. The purpose of this game is to sell Jennifer Government. All "day brightening" is unintentional, however hardly unwanted.

The mods aren't supposed to brighten your day, good mood or not. They're supposed to do their job, which they do. Anything else is extra. They're volunteers for god's sake.

Wrong. The purpose of this game is to sell Jennifer Government. All "day brightening" is unintentional, however hardly unwanted.

The mods aren't supposed to brighten your day, good mood or not. They're supposed to do their job, which they do. Anything else is extra. They're volunteers for god's sake.

I know it's extra. What I'm saying is that it's nice to have extra, and it would be possible to have extra if they weren't so stressed. One of the ways to reduce mod stress is to select more mods. I have proposed a new way od selecting mods.

I know it's extra. What I'm saying is that it's nice to have extra, and it would be possible to have extra if they weren't so stressed. One of the ways to reduce mod stress is to select more mods. I have proposed a new way od selecting mods.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree then. I too think that a few more mods would make things run more smoothly, yet there is no way in hell I'd want to be a player-selected mod, even if I somehow benefitted from that kind of situation. It's just not a good idea, and like I said, there's no reason to change the current way.

Doing their job well makes a mod more respected. I'd never heard of Tsaraine before he was appointed (I don't frequent the RP forums), and I'd had very little contact with Katganistan and Unfree People prior to their appointment. All three have proven to be fair, reasonable, and competent.

Myrth was by far the most 'popular' player who has been appointed in my NS lifetime, and he's easily the most often listed as being 'unfair' or 'prejudiced'. No, he's just the most active. (do you ever sleep, Myrth-boy?). His player popularity has done nothing to the level of respect he is accorded as a moderator.

Sandpit, your premise is wrong, your arguments don't work, and your conclusions are not reflective of the bulk of helpful members of Moderation and Technical. What they do reflect is the wishes expressed by spammers and other rule-breakers who want site rules relaxed so they can do whatever they want. Some of us like it just fine the way it is.

True, doing their job well makes a mod more respected, but popularity also helps. The reason that Myrth is the one most often listed as being "unfair" or "prejudiced" is likely because of his curt style, and he is seen as being rude and aggogant (sorry Myrth). I have addressed this issue in my first post, and Salusa referred to it.

Second, where have I talked about changing or relaxing the rules? I believe that the more controversal rules should be subject to further mod/admin review, or even by Max if necessary, but "review" does not equal "change" or "relax". Also, you might "like it just fine the way it is", but is this the best that NS can be? Do you believe that no more inprovements are necessary?

It always amuses me to see that the vast majority of players advocating changing the system here have been around for a relatively short amount of time, where the players most keen on things remaining the same are the ones who have been around a lot longer.

This is one of those never ending debates. I mean, you could have mods that are "popular" but then they'd be accused of being biased. To fix that, we have mods who aren't that well known and they're disliked because they've never been heard of before.

And yea, if you've been here for a long time you'll see that there's nothing really that wrong with the mods. Mabye the fact that a lot of older players are fairly happy with the system shows you that it's stood the test of time.

It always amuses me to see that the vast majority of players advocating changing the system here have been around for a relatively short amount of time, where the players most keen on things remaining the same are the ones who have been around a lot longer.

Well, you know what they say: the older you are, the more conservative you become. Older people (or nations in this case) fear change, or believe that advocating change is futile. In this case, they may also have horror stories about the "pre-Jolt" era.

I wouldn't mind more mods.

Well, you know what they say: the older you are, the more conservative you become. Older people (or nations in this case) fear change, or believe that advocating change is futile. In this case, they may also have horror stories about the "pre-Jolt" era.

Is that a fact? I neither fear change nor think it futile. I just do not feel it is necessary. The moderators have done their job and done it admirably since they were first appointed.

Well, you know what they say: the older you are, the more conservative you become. Older people (or nations in this case) fear change, or believe that advocating change is futile. In this case, they may also have horror stories about the "pre-Jolt" era.

Exactly. It's all in perspective. I originated in a time of no mods and basically no forums. (barring a time period between 2 and 3 EST that they worked...lol)

The mods have been a grand edition.

I wouldn't mind more mods.

More moderators would likely be a good thing, but player-elected mods would be another disaster.

Is that a fact? I neither fear change nor think it futile. I just do not feel it is necessary. The moderators have done their job and done it admirably since they were first appointed.

Just because change is not "necessary" doesn't mean that it wouldn't be nice to have change. And I also think that the mods have done their jobs well, but this does not diminish my desire for reform.

More moderators would likely be a good thing, but player-elected mods would be another disaster.

Please read the whole thread. It's semi-player elected mods. Quality is ensured because current mods/admin choose the candidates.

Player elected mods would probably kill off the boards altogether. All it will become is a popularity contest and some egomaniac will come in and get all his mates to vote for him.

At the end of the day this is Max's site and he'll run it they way he wants with the mods he feels will put in the best job.

Please read the whole thread. It's semi-player elected mods.

I did read the entire thread, thank you. Any player-elected moderators would be a poor idea, because us players as a whole have no idea what would make the best moderator, whereas the current moderators do. It would be a popularity contest, pure and simple, and the best person for the job might not be chosen. And that just hurts the game in the end.

I did read the entire thread, thank you. Any player-elected moderators would be a poor idea, because us players as a whole have no idea what would make the best moderator, whereas the current moderators do. It would be a popularity contest, pure and simple, and the best person for the job might not be chosen. And that just hurts the game in the end.

Because the candidates are selected by current mods, no matter who the players choose, that person would be best for the job.

Because the candidates are selected by current mods, no matter who the players choose, that person would be best for the job.

So you propose the moderators make a list of the best candidates for the job, and the players elect the one that they want. Say they make a list of 10 people. Obviously, they will have a good idea of who is number one and who is number ten. If the players elect number ten on the moderators' list, then how is that the best person for the job?

So you propose the moderators make a list of the best candidates for the job, and the players elect the one that they want. Say they make a list of 10 people. Obviously, they will have a good idea of who is number one and who is number ten. If the players elect number ten on the moderators' list, then how is that the best person for the job?

Well, "best" is pretty subjective, but even if number ten was not "best" for the job, he or she would be "extremely suitable", otherwise he/she would not be considered. Plus, often what was thought to be the "best" may not actually turn out to be the "best". It should also be noted that, often, there is little difference seperating number one and number ten.

I did read the entire thread, thank you. Any player-elected moderators would be a poor idea, because us players as a whole have no idea what would make the best moderator, whereas the current moderators do. It would be a popularity contest, pure and simple, and the best person for the job might not be chosen. And that just hurts the game in the end.


What crap

What crap

Why's that?

Why's that?

Explain why a mOd elected mOd is better

You are just sucking up..

Explain why a mOd elected mOd is better

You are just sucking up..

Because Max chooses who he feels is better for the job since it's his site.

Explain why a mOd elected mOd is better

You are just sucking up..

Because the mods know what being a mod is like. They're more able to identify what it takes to be a good mod more than you or I are.

And I don't need to suck up. Everyone already loves me.

Because the mods know what being a mod is like. They're more able to identify what it takes to be a good mod more than you or I are.

And I don't need to suck up. Everyone already loves me.

what you get is more mOds like the existing mOds and nothing ever changes..

Speak for yourself How can you say thing about me and my abilities?

Also, Myrth, you speak as we have a shortage of "quality" candidates, so few that there is no room for the mods to choose ten or so "quality" candidates, and then for the players to narrow it to two or three. Hopefully that is not true.

You'd be suprised.

what you get is more mOds like the existing mOds and nothing ever changes..

Speak for yourself How can you say thing about me and my abilities?

What do you mean speak for myself? Who else have I been speaking for? I'm just saying that I think that the mods are better able to identify good moderator candidates than you or I are.

What do you mean speak for myself? Who else have I been speaking for? I'm just saying that I think that the mods are better able to identify good moderator candidates than you or I are.

Don't include me in that comment. You have no idea

what you get is more mOds like the existing mOds and nothing ever changes..

Change is not necessary.

Change is not necessary.

It is

Once upon a time, I seemed to be a fairly popular denizen of General...

Don't include me in that comment. You have no idea

Which is why I said I think. You know, my opinion. My opinion is that you are less capable of identifying a good moderator candidate than someone who has experience as a moderator.

It is
Your opinion is apparently not congruent with the current administration of this site and the vast majority of users.

The Mods are doing a good job. Though there possibly needs to be Mods from different timezones, at least to ensure that at least one is on to rapidly terminate with extreme prejudice, the flaming and the spamming.

However, I should state that I don't believe the Mods' current procedures, policies or methods of delegating/assigning/promoting new Mods should change.

I'm talking about rewriting the code. Often, that's why player requests for features are turned down, because it would require game code to be "completely rewritten".
A question--are you a programmer or have any experience in programming, by any chance?

Your opinion is apparently not congruent with the current administration of this site and the vast majority of users.

anything that does not change will die

Once upon a time, I seemed to be a fairly popular denizen of General...


Cute too! As far as I could tell with that camera in your face..

anything that does not change will die

The world contains 122,142 nations in 14,797 regions.

Doesn't look like death to me. 99% of those nations have probably never come across a moderator, because they behave.
A loud yet tiny minority demanding change doesn't present a particularly strong case for reform.

The Mods are doing a good job. Though there possibly needs to be Mods from different timezones, at least to ensure that at least one is on to rapidly terminate with extreme prejudice, the flaming and the spamming.

However, I should state that I don't believe the Mods' current procedures, policies or methods of delegating/assigning/promoting new Mods should change.

I agree. I think that more moderators would be a good thing, but I don't think the current system of choosing and promoting moderators should change.

The world contains 122,142 nations in 14,797 regions.

Doesn't look like death to me. 99% of those nations have probably never come across a moderator, because they behave.
A loud yet tiny minority demanding change doesn't present a particularly strong case for reform.


Most of them might well be scared to speak up.

One day you will see I'm right.

It seems to me that this has already been discussed (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=386638), and with more class. Now we're going to revisit the same old discussion with a new twist on it. Let the players review the candidates chosen by the moderators!

Put simply, no. Players are not good judges of what makes a good mod and what doesn't. They have no say in the process. They have no need of a say in the process. Insisting that they do will not change anything. We don't need it, most of us don't want it, and making more noise about it merely demonstrates the weakness of your own arguments.

Let it go, please. Besides, we're all puppets of one player (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/member.php?u=93600) anyway, so it really doesn't matter, does it?

I think I have said all I need to say on my opinion of this whole issue right here (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=386638). Including addressing the supposed need of some to be given more say, more access, more ... validation, perhaps, in regards to the forums, this game, and how it is run.

Steel has already reiterated said opinion and expressed his own, and imagine that - I happen to agree with him.

All the same, as I have stated elsewhere, discussion is fine and well - discussion is great. Arrogantly demanding is where things start going swirly. Not saying that's happening here, just gently reminding.

The game isn't dying on account of 'the will of the people' not being heard, supposedly. The game is overall, going just fine. Sometimes things change, sometimes things remain the same. I guess time will tell, neh? In the meantime, I myself will continue to voice my opinion on things I feel strongly enough on, and leave well enough alone the things I don't - as will most I suppose. I don't expect anyone to give my opinion any more or less weight than anyone elses on account. I'm sorry to offend the sensibilities of some when I say that even without knowing How It All Works™, I'm willing to go on a little faith here based on past and current performance overall by the mods.

Good luck, folks - I'm afraid you're gonna continue to need it.

--Nathi's Player

Let's elect mods that hate each other and then waste their time with whining whenever they lock a topic.

...

Good luck, folks - I'm afraid you're gonna continue to need it.

--Nathi's Player


Agrees..

Your opinion is apparently not congruent with the current administration of this site and the vast majority of users.

Change is not necessary.


Short and to the point. This is why Myrth is awesome.

Short and to the point. This is why Myrth is awesome.


kissup

kissupAs opposed to kissing up to the guy you agree with?

kissup

No see I think hes a cool guy. If he wasnt a mod and he talked like that I would still say it. On a side note I got my results back from exams today and passed everything, yay me.

No see I think hes a cool guy. If he wasnt a mod and he talked like that I would still say it. On a side note I got my results back from exams today and passed everything, yay me.

What about me?

Congrats.. :fluffle:

Let's elect mods that hate each other and then waste their time with whining whenever they lock a topic.
Yes! Bastard Moderators from HELL! (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=282874)

:D

No time to nick over.

SandPit, you seem to be laboring under incorrect assumptions. If we could agree on 10 canidates, we'd mod them all. It isn't like we've got six or seven potential mods floating in the background and are just waiting to mod them.

Just recently Tsar was made a mod. If we had put the pool before the players it would have been a little like this:

Which of the Following Would You Like to Be a Mod?

a) Tsaraine
b) Tsaraine
c) Tsaraine
d) All of the above
e) None of the above

Not much of a vote, is it?

No time to nick over.

SandPit, you seem to be laboring under incorrect assumptions. If we could agree on 10 canidates, we'd mod them all. It isn't like we've got six or seven potential mods floating in the background and are just waiting to mod them.

Just recently Tsar was made a mod. If we had put the pool before the players it would have been a little like this:

Which of the Following Would You Like to Be a Mod?

a) Tsaraine
b) Tsaraine
c) Tsaraine
d) All of the above
e) None of the above

Not much of a vote, is it?

I'd vote d. 3 are better than one :p . Prehaps more modpower needs to be used to look at potential mods. In the short run things might be a little hectic but it should pay off well.

Well, depending on who you ask (http://s6.invisionfree.com/PCRA_Central/index.php?showtopic=32&st=0), they did get two for one. Or one for two. Or is that just one masqurading as two? Seeing as I'm supposed to be Tsar, or Tsar me. Or some such silliness.

That's right folks. We are all the Nathi. JOIN THE COLLECTIVE! (http://www.wearethenathi.com)

--Nathi's Player

This post delivered tongue-in-cheek, and should recieve all the serious attention which it deserves - that being absolutely none. Carry on about your business. Nothing whatsoever to see here. Yes, that means you. Go on now. Shoo.

That's right folks. We are all the Nathi. JOIN THE COLLECTIVE! (http://www.wearethenathi.com)

I actually clicked on that and thought you guys really created a web site to joke about this. :p

Sigh...

This is never going to die is it? OK folks, look at it this way. Creating new mods is an administrative decision. Now, imagine you own a business. Hirig new people, also, is an administrative decision. How would you like if three or four customers came to you and demanded that they have a say in who you hire? Furthermore, they demand that the remainder of the customer base [who appears content with your staff, being that the majority of them don't complain] also have a say in this process. It's ludicrous.

Cheez, if I were a mod, I'd just suggest all the mods making puppets, letting the players who (for some insane reason want mods elections) elect their favourite puppets, and then be done with it. Although that would still be a worthless waste of time. And a pain to implement. Maybe I'd just delete as many players as possible and then quit, instead.

Sandpit, you keep saying 'we deserve it! Oh wait, you're right, we don't actually deserve it... but we SHOULD get it!"

No. We don't deserve *anything*. And saying we 'should' get something is just claiming we deserve it, and it's still untrue. The game is NOT here to make us happy. It does. That's great. It *could* make some people happier. But it doesn't need to. Fact is, NS will do just fine without satisfying a vocal minority. Because there are a huge majority of players who have zero contact with the mods. There are people like me, who *like* the mods and think they do a great job. And there are people who just don't give a damn, as long as the mods don't ban them.

The only thing I'd come close to agreeing with so far in this thread is the 'more mods in different timezones' thing. But guess what? I trust that if it's that big a deal, the mods will deal with it. If it's not, I'm not complaining. The occasional flame-fest that has to wait an hour or two before getting closed isn't going to turn me away from NS.

And if my nation got deleted by accident, I wouldn't chuck a tantrum - I'd bloody well come back and ask why, because NS is a huge part of my life (god, how pathetic...). But I could manage that without assuming that the moderators *owe* me something. If a mod deleted me out of some random vendetta, I'd be pissed. And then I'd move on, and find another damn forum. People act like they've paid for this site, or for their nation. Which is bullshit. You're getting *free* entertainment. You should be thankful there are people willing to give up their free time to deal with the scum of the site, and that you're lucky enough that you get to spend your time playing the game.

And really, I'll just restate what I said in the other thread (or *one* of the other threads :rolleyes: Either (dislike of mods) > (enjoyment of game) or (enjoyment of NS) > (dislike of mods).

If the former is true, I don't understand why you are here. If the latter is true, you have nothing to complain about, since you're getting a net gain in enjoyment for free.

Either way, this whole topic is ridiculous and I wish it would go away and stop making my head hurt. At least with abortion debates I can feel like it's a worthwhile issue to debate, and that the occasional homicidal rampages are warranted. This is just stupid.

Bleagh.

TH - That would take time and effort that I really don't have, as funny as it could be. *grins impishly* Sorry, but I simply could not resist.

As for the Melkor post ...


OMG CONSPIRACY! HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE IN TRANSIT FROM EUROPE! OMGOMGOMG!!!
but he does have a good point there ...

Now the question is ... is it live, or Memorex? (or is it just another Nathiclone?) :eek:

--Nathi's Player

(Yes, again, not being serious. No, really. It's just a joke, people. Relax. No, no curse it all, do not start posting that there is a new secret moderator. AAAAAGH! *thunks head against wall* It is a myth! Not to be confused with Myrth, who is another matter entirely! Gah!)

not yet, Nathi. My plane doesnt leave for another 5 hours. We just have to get up and out of here because the maid has to come in at 10 for some reason.

Hooray for chilling at the airport for 3 hours.

Ssssssshhhhhhh! Yer spoiling a good conspiracy theory, dammit! Oh ... is this thing on 'public' broadcast? >_<

*ahem*

I ah ... yes. Pay no attention to the Nathi behind the curtain.

Safe travelling, boyo. Hope you get a better seat this time, neh? 3 hours ... hell, that's 3 hours to chat up the pretty passengers and passing stewardesses. *grins* Go Melky!

Well, depending on who you ask (http://s6.invisionfree.com/PCRA_Central/index.php?showtopic=32&st=0), they did get two for one. Or one for two. Or is that just one masqurading as two? Seeing as I'm supposed to be Tsar, or Tsar me. Or some such silliness.

That's right folks. We are all the Nathi. JOIN THE COLLECTIVE! (http://www.wearethenathi.com)

--Nathi's Player

This post delivered tongue-in-cheek, and should recieve all the serious attention which it deserves - that being absolutely none. Carry on about your business. Nothing whatsoever to see here. Yes, that means you. Go on now. Shoo.

From what I can tell, it appears to me a puppet of Nathi's.. I'm sure we all recall her from other postings on this forum. Now I was shown a little bit of evidence to suggest it's not her, but I still have my doubts. Although even if it's not Nathi..(I remained unconvinced) the person is still part of her group, a little more than nepotism went on in that appointment. Tsaraine = Followed by = Which leads you right back to Nathi and if you're looking for nepotism... look who the members are..

lmao...and just when I had respect for steph... :(


...hey...I've been here longer than Nathi...and...I...DON'T HAVE A PUPPET NATION THAT'S A MOD! Then again...there is that Cogitation puppet of mine...not to mention the Scolopen...oh nevermind.

Steel has already reiterated said opinion and expressed his own, and imagine that - I happen to agree with him.

Oh quiet Nathi...lol

We've agreed before...on occasion...haha

I know we have, Steel. *grins* I was just funnin'. We've agreed on a surprising number of things considering a forum this big with this varied a populace, really.

On a more topical note, considering moderation and the proper usage of it and such, here is something for your consideration:

This is an example of what Sandpit calls 'proper moderation' (http://s6.invisionfree.com/PCRA_Central/index.php?showtopic=23&st=45), or at least, what one would gather seeing as it is his site - the one he promotes in his sigs. I don't know about you folks, but given the evidence, I find it questionable to say the least that he is an appropriate bannerman for this supposed 'crusade for change'.

That isn't the sort of thing I'd like to see going on with the NationStates forums.

As Cogitation so often says ... Think about it.

--Nathi's Player

(Just another concerned player, folks. Take it for what it's worth. I'd say 'The Truth is Out There' but I fear it might look a bit too cliche.)

While character assassination's kinda underhanded, Nathi, (lol...not that it keeps me from doing it either at times) I'd have to say what I got from your post was a demonstration of Sandpit's utter lack of mod experience as shown on his board.

I'm sorry if you all don't agree with me, but it's really hard for a person who has never been a mod to completely understand what the mods go through on a day to day basis. I'm sure there are those out there and even among us that can understand it fine, but being a moderator, like most things, is also a learning experience. You get better as you go, and if you're just starting out, you're hardly the best.

Now Steel, if I were character assassinating, believe me, y'all would know it. *grins* I simply take issue with folks who claim to know what is so much better for us, and for the site, and for the moderators when it is clear that they don't. I'm merely using the evidence at hand to prove a valid point:

We're all 'experts' on everyone else 'til the ball's in our own court. Then it starts to become more clear that it just isn't always the case. Simple as that.

--Nathi's Player

I simply take issue with folks who claim to know what is so much better for us, and for the site, and for the moderators when it is clear that they don't.

We're all 'experts' on everyone else 'til the ball's in our own court. Then it starts to become more clear that it just isn't always the case. Simple as that.

Agreed, but it's natural for people to try to inflate their own importance. Can't say that I haven't done it on occasion either...then again...I don't really "crusade" much...much less over the internet. Rarely is there someone humble enough to not think of themself at all.

I often have wondered what NS would be like if various different people had that metaphorical ball that you're referring to and a chance to score. Not that I'm suggesting anything...just rambling on in a thread that seems good for it.

Leading By example at the MDSC: http://s6.invisionfree.com/PCRA_Central/index.php?showtopic=36

I know we have, Steel. *grins* I was just funnin'. We've agreed on a surprising number of things considering a forum this big with this varied a populace, really.

On a more topical note, considering moderation and the proper usage of it and such, here is something for your consideration:

This is an example of what Sandpit calls 'proper moderation' (http://s6.invisionfree.com/PCRA_Central/index.php?showtopic=23&st=45), or at least, what one would gather seeing as it is his site - the one he promotes in his sigs. I don't know about you folks, but given the evidence, I find it questionable to say the least that he is an appropriate bannerman for this supposed 'crusade for change'.

That isn't the sort of thing I'd like to see going on with the NationStates forums.

As Cogitation so often says ... Think about it.

--Nathi's Player

(Just another concerned player, folks. Take it for what it's worth. I'd say 'The Truth is Out There' but I fear it might look a bit too cliche.)

Now, now, Nathi. You can't expect me to be on all day, and right now I'm the only mod/admin.

Hey, like I've said: your board, your rules.

Well, considering said abuse has been going on for longer than a day, and that I have seen you active online in the meantime - even having spoken to you on IRC ... no, I don't expect you to be on all the time.

I would hope that you had more consideration for those on your forums than you have illustrated, however, given your comments and criticisms of methods on these forums.

As I said - take it for what it's worth. Your opinions may vary.

--Nathi's Player

Well, considering said abuse has been going on for longer than a day, and that I have seen you active online in the meantime - even having spoken to you on IRC ... no, I don't expect you to be on all the time.

I would hope that you had more consideration for those on your forums than you have illustrated, however, given your comments and criticisms of methods on these forums.

As I said - take it for what it's worth. Your opinions may vary.

--Nathi's Player

Well, I try to be more accomodating. I give more "second chances" than the NS forums. However, I have taken action against the offender: a 48 hour suspension (again, probably less strict than what you're used to at the NS forums), but further action can be taken if necessary.

I am also in the process of selecting a new mod, which hopefully will allow the MDSC to take action against offenders faster.

In reading he was warned several times, and persisted in his rather horrific abuse ... but hey. Your forum, your rules, as stated.

I stand by my statement that this is not the way I wish to see the forums run here.

--Nathi's Player

Well mods...the sun is setting on another one of these threads that so increases my post count. Closing time?

In reading he was warned several times, and persisted in his rather horrific abuse ... but hey. Your forum, your rules, as stated.

I stand by my statement that this is not the way I wish to see the forums run here.

--Nathi's Player

Yes, those members who were kind enough to warn him while I was gone are the candidates I selected to be up for election as mod.

Also keep in mind that a major difference between the NS forums and the MDSC is that the MDSC's traffic tends to go in surges that lasts for days. There could be no one there for days, and then all of a sudden 30 people can be there. During the quiet times I moderate there less often, only going in there to check if there are any new posts. I can only guess when the quiet periods will end. If they ended without my knowledge, then I am most likely unavailable.

This is why the MDSC is selecting a new mod.

Okay, I'd like to ask that we stop discussing Moderation policies for offsite forums. Are there any new, unanswered comments or questions regarding NationStates Moderation policy?

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

RE NS mOd deletion policy:

Is it not customary to warn a nation prior to deletion?

RE NS mOd deletion policy:

Is it not customary to warn a nation prior to deletion?

There is a thread specifically for questions at the MDSC. It's called "Ask an ex-Moderator", although Steph (who started it) no longer seems to be interested in continuing the thread for fear of revealing too much. Perhaps I can persuade her to reconsider, or another mod (current or former) can take over, provided that the questions are non-OPSEC related.

ok

RE NS mOd deletion policy:

Is it not customary to warn a nation prior to deletion?

It depends on the offence.

It depends on the offence.

May I get specific?

RE NS mOd deletion policy:

Is it not customary to warn a nation prior to deletion?
Usually, yes. However, there are some offenses that are so severe that they will result in a deletion-without-warning:

Severe violations of the invasion rules. (That is, leaving natives on the banlist, failing to distribute the password, using UN multies in an invasion...)
Using a puppet to violate NationStates rules. (In this case, the puppet is deleted without warning and the pupetmaster is warned.)
Posting pornographic images.
Attempting to break into the account of another NationStates player. (For example, stealing passwords.)
Impersonating a NationStates or Jolt Moderator or Administrator.
Threatening another NationStates player with physical violence.

There is a thread specifically for questions at the MDSC. It's called "Ask an ex-Moderator", although Steph (who started it) no longer seems to be interested in continuing the thread for fear of revealing too much. Perhaps I can persuade her to reconsider, or another mod (current or former) can take over, provided that the questions are non-OPSEC related.
It's one thing to advertise an offsite forum for unofficially discussing NationStates policy. It's quite a different thing to attempt to redirect someone away from the "Moderation" board when they're attempting to get an official answer to a NationStates policy question.

Do not do this again or you will be officially warned for spamming. Do I make myself clear?

"Think about it for a moment."

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

Usually, yes. However, there are some offenses that are so severe that they will result in a deletion-without-warning:

Severe violations of the invasion rules. (That is, leaving natives on the banlist, failing to distribute the password, using UN multies in an invasion...)
Using a puppet to violate NationStates rules. (In this case, the puppet is deleted without warning and the pupetmaster is warned.)
Posting pornographic images.
Attempting to break into the account of another NationStates player. (For example, stealing passwords.)
Impersonating a NationStates or Jolt Moderator or Administrator.
Threatening another NationStates player with physical violence.



"Think about it for a moment."

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

I did none of those things, granted I was spamming a tad, but I got no "think about it a moment" from anyone. Ur6 if you don't recall.

It's one thing to advertise an offsite forum for unofficially discussing NationStates policy. It's quite a different thing to attempt to redirect someone away from the "Moderation" board when they're attempting to get an official answer to a NationStates policy question.

Do not do this again or you will be officially warned for spamming. Do I make myself clear?

"Think about it for a moment."

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

I'm sorry Cog.

Perhaps what I should have said was that we should create and sticky an official "ask a question" thread in the NS Moderation Forum specifically for asking questions. That way, all the questions will be on one thread (for easier viewing), and it will reduce clutter on the moderation forum.

I'm sorry Cog.

Perhaps what I should have said was that we should create and sticky an official "ask a question" thread in the NS Moderation Forum specifically for asking questions. That way, all the questions will be on one thread (for easier viewing), and it will reduce clutter on the moderation forum.

Given the speed with which topics go through Moderation, you'd have to search through pages and pages to find individual quotes relating to the issue you wanted to talk about. I think it would be close to impossible to follow an actual discussion.

Perhaps what I should have said was that we should create and sticky an official "ask a question" thread in the NS Moderation Forum specifically for asking questions. That way, all the questions will be on one thread (for easier viewing), and it will reduce clutter on the moderation forum.

But that's the function of the entire moderation forum. As Erastide rightly said, cutting virtually the whole forum into one thread would result in a huge, bloated monstrosity nobody would be willing or able to read.

But that's the function of the entire moderation forum. As Erastide rightly said, cutting virtually the whole forum into one thread would result in a huge, bloated monstrosity nobody would be willing or able to read.

What I should have said, then, is limit the questions of said thread to questions about established rules and procedure, like the one that Word Games was asking. "Why was such-and-such nation deleated" threads, modalerts, and discussion (which, at least according to what I see, comprise most of the Moderation forum) will continue elsewhere in the forum.

....snipped for length....
This is an example of what Sandpit calls 'proper moderation' (http://s6.invisionfree.com/PCRA_Central/index.php?showtopic=23&st=45), or at least, what one would gather seeing as it is his site - the one he promotes in his sigs. I don't know about you folks, but given the evidence, I find it questionable to say the least that he is an appropriate bannerman for this supposed 'crusade for change'.

Whisky.
Tango.
Foxtrot.

That forum scares me. I used to really respect Steph, but after seeing some of the stuff on that forum... wow.

I do have one (relatively) relevant question for Sandpit and co.:

How do you justify over-ruling what some players want in favour of what you want? You all talk so much about democracy, and how great it would be for more players to be happy. You also talk at great length at how bad censorship is, and how everyone should be allowed to voice an opinion.

However, you also come here hoping to force change on the forum. I for one see that as a direct attack on my happiness. I can only assume you've decided that, because I support the mods, my happiness doesn't matter, and that whether or not the forums, or indeed the game, are pleasant for me is a non-issue.

It would make me feel much better if you could either explain why some players opinions mean nothing to you (especially in regards to me, since I greatly suspect this entire group is using the age-old tactic of demonizing the opposition), or else explaining why what you as a group wants means more than what another group on these forums want.

And that's leaving aside the entire issue of 'you don't own the site, so your opinion is worth exactly the same as mine: nothing'. I'm just curious how you get past the cognitive dissonance of claiming to fight for freedom for the players, while simultaneously telling the portion of players that disagree with you to, essentially, get stuffed?

Whisky.
Tango.
Foxtrot.

That forum scares me. I used to really respect Steph, but after seeing some of the stuff on that forum... wow.

I do have one (relatively) relevant question for Sandpit and co.:

How do you justify over-ruling what some players want in favour of what you want? You all talk so much about democracy, and how great it would be for more players to be happy. You also talk at great length at how bad censorship is, and how everyone should be allowed to voice an opinion.

However, you also come here hoping to force change on the forum. I for one see that as a direct attack on my happiness. I can only assume you've decided that, because I support the mods, my happiness doesn't matter, and that whether or not the forums, or indeed the game, are pleasant for me is a non-issue.

It would make me feel much better if you could either explain why some players opinions mean nothing to you (especially in regards to me, since I greatly suspect this entire group is using the age-old tactic of demonizing the opposition), or else explaining why what you as a group wants means more than what another group on these forums want.

And that's leaving aside the entire issue of 'you don't own the site, so your opinion is worth exactly the same as mine: nothing'. I'm just curious how you get past the cognitive dissonance of claiming to fight for freedom for the players, while simultaneously telling the portion of players that disagree with you to, essentially, get stuffed?

First of all, to be fair, Steph edited out probably everything that scares you. She cooled down, and I respect her decision to retract what she said.

Anyway, I did not come here to "force change". I came here to persuade others to support change, and for the mods/admin to implement change (and yes, Max will have to agree first). I do not intend to "force" or "overrule" anyone (if I have done so, let me know), and I do not think that your opinion (or the opinion of anyone who disagrees with me) are worthless. I'm simply advocating my ideas, which I think are the best (of course...otherwise why would I be advocating them?). I don't support your opinion, but I also do not think that they are worthless.

Also, my opinion (and yours) is worth something when the mods/admin listen, which they already did.

I used to really respect Steph

Really, kewl, cause I haven't a clue who you are..lol :P

Well mods...the sun is setting on another one of these threads that so increases my post count. Closing time?

*whistles*

Is there still a point to this?

But that's the function of the entire moderation forum. As Erastide rightly said, cutting virtually the whole forum into one thread would result in a huge, bloated monstrosity nobody would be willing or able to read.

It is not serving this function at the moment. my question remains unanswered see below...

QUOTE=Cogitation]Usually, yes. However, there are some offenses that are so severe that they will result in a deletion-without-warning:

Severe violations of the invasion rules. (That is, leaving natives on the banlist, failing to distribute the password, using UN multies in an invasion...)
Using a puppet to violate NationStates rules. (In this case, the puppet is deleted without warning and the pupetmaster is warned.)
Posting pornographic images.
Attempting to break into the account of another NationStates player. (For example, stealing passwords.)
Impersonating a NationStates or Jolt Moderator or Administrator.
Threatening another NationStates player with physical violence.


"Think about it for a moment."

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator[/QUOTE]

I did none of those things, granted I was spamming a tad, but I got no "think about it a moment" from anyone. Ur6 if you don't recall.

Right there, no answer. Is this being ignored?

Gah, easy on the formatting...It's difficult to read. Since I wasn't the moderator who handled your case I don't know the exact circumstances of the deletion; it's noted that you were 'deleted for willfully spamming at all possible times.'

Really, kewl, cause I haven't a clue who you are..lol :P

Many people don't have a clue who I am. Including me, according to poll results.

:p

Gah, easy on the formatting...It's difficult to read. Since I wasn't the moderator who handled your case I don't know the exact circumstances of the deletion; it's noted that you were 'deleted for willfully spamming at all possible times.'


Still I got no warning. You guys all stick together, so I doubt anyone will fess up, I just wanna know who dun it.

Still I got no warning. You guys all stick together, so I doubt anyone will fess up, I just wanna know who dun it.
If a nation committs a series of offenses in rapid sucession or if the nation committs multiple offenses and is only detected until later, then this can also result in a deletion-without-warning. Note, however, that I'm only speculating as I'm not familiar with the details of your case.

We don't reveal which Moderator handled a particular case. We will let the Mod responsible know; it will be up to that Mod to decide whether or not to step forward.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

I was kinda pissed at banning word games..

Really, kewl, cause I haven't a clue who you are..lol :P

It's the return of the mature Steph!

Ok people - here and now is not the time and place to get into discussions on who is or isn't mature, or to illustrate whatever piddly little off topic points you wish to, or to make digs, or for the airing of your personal vendettas or issues. Unless I'm really missing something here.

Cog said 'keep it on track'. While I'm not a Mod, thankyouverymuchdrivethrough, I'm gonna ask y'all to remember just the same.

Honestly, now. This is what I meant in that other thread about 'moderating ourselves'. Like the mods have the time to or want to deal with this sort of silliness, neh?

--Nathi's Player
(Who is still getting tired of some of this bs. You too I take it, Steel? *passes a soda and just shakes her head*)

I don't believe that this thread serves any further purpose by staying open.

iLock.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation