NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12776827&postcount=5


If I remember right, hoping someone gets raped has previously been ruled to fall under the ban on extremely malicious statements.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12776875&postcount=8

And I have my doubts on whether or not this picture is a go.

Yes, I do realize how ironic it is to post anti-censorship posts on moderation.

This isn't the first time this player has made that suggestion. It will be the last.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9034462&postcount=113

Kat, has DC become DoS? Or can he come back with another nation? You have to admit...he lasted for quite a long time this time...yes, I'm pleading for leniency.

Neesika, he did PRECISELY the same thing that he did last time, and he was told then in no uncertain terms what the consequences would be for a repeat.

He's not a child. The rules about what images are acceptable and what are not are clear. The rules about what posts are acceptable and what are not have been made clear as well. He's had four nations deleted for the same behavior.

Enough is enough.

Damn damn damn.

I can't argue about the post...yikes. And I didn't see the pic, only read your description of it. But does a picture of an inanimate object in bondage gear really violate forum rules? For my own knowledge...

Because it was a cartoon drawing of a naked green lady with a ball gag in a leather harness that made her breasts pop out.

It goes back to the "what is, approximately, appropriate for a PG-13 posting".

Ah.

There is no doubt that the post that hasn't been deleted not only crosses the line, but tramples all over it. There is also no doubt that such a post, coupled with any history of remarks like it, should result in a harsh punishment.

I have to disagree, though, that it should lead to a DOS order, and really would ask that whether such a punishment is just in the circumstances is reconsidered. The post by Fris that Kat has linked to is over two years old; the length of time that has past simply has to be taken into consideration.

I do honestly believe that something such as DOS should be saved only for spammers or the worst kind of trolls. DCD is more than capable of being a valid and rule-abiding member of the General community; yes, he has clearly shown in the past that he can go way too far, but I think that his general contributions, coupled with the length of time since that post, must be taken into account.

A lengthy ban, such as three months, would send just as strong a message to him as a DOS order, but would enable him to return in the future and hopefully reintegrate into the forum. Can we not try the long prison sentence, and rehabilitation, rather than the finality of an execution?

I hate to disagree: four nation deletions, plus a repeat of a post that got him banned for two weeks show pretty clearly a failure to learn.

I hate to disagree: four nation deletions, plus a repeat of a post that got him banned for two weeks show pretty clearly a failure to learn.

He learnt for two years from a two week ban. That's a pretty good punishment to learn ratio.

He learnt for two years from a two week ban. That's a pretty good punishment to learn ratio.

Obviously, given the references, not enough to stick. How many deletions, how many bans, how many warnings do the mods have to give out before enough is enough?

As many players operate here without many of any of those, one wouldn't think it would be so difficult to adjust one's habits after one or even two. This guy's had more than enough opportunities it seems. *shrugs* Choice, accountability, consequences.

He learnt for two years from a two week ban. That's a pretty good punishment to learn ratio.
I disagree. A good punishment to learn ratio, worst acceptable case scenario, would have occurred after the first nation delete. Upon deletion they would have endeavored to never again cross the line, and when they did they would have realized it and either apologized or come to this sub forum requesting forgiveness and the deletion of their remarks. Even that would only have happened a few times, and those would have been extremely rare. The number of punishments required to be inflicted on this person to get them to behave for two years is much more than should be needed to get someone to behave as a reasonable human being.

Obviously, given the references, not enough to stick. How many deletions, how many bans, how many warnings do the mods have to give out before enough is enough?

As many players operate here without many of any of those, one wouldn't think it would be so difficult to adjust one's habits after one or even two. This guy's had more than enough opportunities it seems. *shrugs* Choice, accountability, consequences.

I disagree. A good punishment to learn ratio, worst acceptable case scenario, would have occurred after the first nation delete. Upon deletion they would have endeavored to never again cross the line, and when they did they would have realized it and either apologized or come to this sub forum requesting forgiveness and the deletion of their remarks. Even that would only have happened a few times, and those would have been extremely rare. The number of punishments required to be inflicted on this person to get them to behave for two years is much more than should be needed to get someone to behave as a reasonable human being.

I have an enormous, and genuine, respect for the moderators of this site and the decisions they make. I can honestly say that there have been more times than I can count that they have made decisions that I would not have made, and yet in hindsight are clearly the right course of action.

On these facts, I can honestly say that I again agree with the decision. The posts were way over the line, and given DCD's history, should have led to severe consequences. Please note that I am not disputing his deletion, nor a temporary ban on him returning.

What I do feel, however, is that the imposition of a DOS order is a step too far. It is a punishment that should be saved for the worst of offenders. If the breaches that lead to DCD losing four nations were all in the space of a week, or a month, or ever a year, then perhaps it should be considered. When the warning came over two years ago, however, then I feel that it is disproportionate to impose it at this time.

I believe that it will serve no purpose, as DCD may sometimes be trouble but he is hardly a constant offender to the extent that every one of his 18,000 posts required moderation. To permaban him will not make the forums any more 'safe', and will deprive the community of a much valued member.

Histories stay with the accounts - always have. Length of time on the boards should not give anyone the 'right' to more leniency. And hey - DoS hasn't been instated yet - read again. He's been given YET ANOTHER CHANCE, so chill. If he blows it this time, he really doesn't have much room to complain, neh? In which case, neither do you. :)

And hey - DoS hasn't been instated yet - read again. I think you're reading the wrong link.




He's been given YET ANOTHER CHANCE, so chill. If he blows it this time, he really doesn't have much room to complain, neh? In which case, neither do you. :)
I don't see where you're getting that he has been given another chance.

DC has been here since Aug. 2004, when he was Joey P. Taken all together, his infractions seem to be numerous, but how many of his tens of thousands of posts actually crossed the line? Everyone can have a bad day, and if you're here long enough, chances are you're going to have more than a few of them. He has been punished each time, but as Philosopy pointed out, it was a good two years since his last serious warning.

The posters that are given DoS status are generally the worst kind of troll, who come back only to cause havoc on the forums or wage some sort of stupid war against the mods. DC has never been that type of poster.

His current actions certainly warrant a reaction by the Moderation team, and a long forumban would not be excessive considering his history. But he HAS contributed positively to this forum over the years. We're just asking that a DoS order please be reconsidered.

I see no reason to reconsider. After burning through four nations and countless warnings, it's quite clear that he only follows the rules when convenient to him. Furthermore, his latest... "contribution"... shows that he has no respect for the rules, and doesn't give a damn about them in the slightest.

DoS is typically reserved for the "worst kind of troll", but it's also used for players who simply refuse to learn. Considering his history, I'd say he's refused to learn. You'd think he would have learned his lesson after losing his first nation. Or his second. Or his third. Why on Earth should we think he'll learn it after the fourth?

Apologies - seems I missed the date on that. Statements however stand - it's obvious he was given multiple chances, and the mods made their stance patently clear. He chose to risk it, and lost on this particular gamble.

It's not as though there haven't been ample complaints involving this player, whether acted on or not - I'd suggest there might be something of a pattern of behavior contributing to the decision, though I'm not privy to anything other than what's been laid out in public.

You'd think after a multitude of deletions and bans, one would learn. He didn't, and this time it seems the price was upped on account. I'd say that's fair enough - would expect the same for anyone, regardless of post-count or length of time on the boards under whatever guise. That shouldn't give anyone more rights or privs than the next player, period.

You're free to think otherwise, but that hasn't been how these boards have been moderated. If anything, those of us who've been here longer have more of a responsibility to observe the rules and restrictions than the newbs, because frankly, we should know better. Less excuse that way. *shrugs*

Just my opinion, take it or leave it. Said all I care to on the subject, apologies for not being more sympathetic - I just can't agree.

I see no reason to reconsider. After burning through four nations and countless warnings, it's quite clear that he only follows the rules when convenient to him. Furthermore, his latest... "contribution"... shows that he has no respect for the rules, and doesn't give a damn about them in the slightest.

DoS is typically reserved for the "worst kind of troll", but it's also used for players who simply refuse to learn. Considering his history, I'd say he's refused to learn. You'd think he would have learned his lesson after losing his first nation. Or his second. Or his third. Why on Earth should we think he'll learn it after the fourth?

Perhaps he won't learn; perhaps, one day in the future, he will again make a remark such as this, and will again lose a nation. Perhaps he will then still fail to learn, and will lose another nation. And so on and so forth.

However, I ask you to consider that this is the worst case scenario. The very worst that will happen is that at some point in the future, months, even years away, you will have to tell him off again. Yes, DOS will prevent you from having to do that, but what will we have lost in the meantime?

This is a major breach of the rules, yes, but it is a rare one; I believe that imposing DOS is like using a nuclear warhead to crack a nut; effective, yes, but somewhat disproportionate to the scale of the problem.

It's really simple, Philosopy: obey the rules, or get punished. He hasn't obeyed the rules and has thus been punished. Numerous times. Enough is enough. He doesn't get to run rough-shod all over the rules just because you like his other posts.

Had it been my ruling alone, I might have joined in the case for leniency. But as I clearly stated two years ago, as a result of "a discussion between three Game Mods and two Forum Mods, we have decided to give you one last chance."

We've bent over backwards to allow this player to remain in the game, and he's tossed that effort into the trash. Hundreds, even thousands of players manage to contain their anger and language well enough to never need intervention from the mods. DCD doesn't meet that standard. There comes a time when we have to say "enough is enough". This is that time.

I concur with the decision made by my colleagues. He's gone.

I've read and re-read all of the posts in this thread, and I really can't think of anything new to add that I haven't already said. I'd like to think there was some magical argument or point that would make you all change your mind, but I know this place well enough to know when a decision is final.

All I can say is to add for the record my deepest disappointment with this decision and at the scale of the punishment. I realise that in the grand scheme of things my disappointment on a small internet game is not exactly the biggest deal in the world, but, given the fact that I am powerless to do anything more, I feel it is the least I can do. I shall not pursue the matter any further.

Phil, look at it this way. DCD has made probably somewhere in the region of 30000 posts here all told, and he's had numerous warnings and bans, not to mention, what, five ex-nations? Drunk Commies, Drunk Commies Reborn, United, Deleted, and Jesussaves - yeah, 5.

By his standards you should have managed at least one DEATed nation by now, plus several warnings and a scattering of bans. Sure, we've lost an active (and controversial) member of the forum, but, y'know, I think the forum will survive.

Phil, look at it this way. DCD has made probably somewhere in the region of 30000 posts here all told, and he's had numerous warnings and bans, not to mention, what, five ex-nations? Drunk Commies, Drunk Commies Reborn, United, Deleted, and Jesussaves - yeah, 5.

By his standards you should have managed at least one DEATed nation by now, plus several warnings and a scattering of bans. Sure, we've lost an active (and controversial) member of the forum, but, y'know, I think the forum will survive.

Damn, I didn't mean to get him banned or anything...

Well...At least we still have LG.

Who wants to be our new Minister of Weird News?

Phil, look at it this way. DCD has made probably somewhere in the region of 30000 posts here all told, and he's had numerous warnings and bans, not to mention, what, five ex-nations? Drunk Commies, Drunk Commies Reborn, United, Deleted, and Jesussaves - yeah, 5.

By his standards you should have managed at least one DEATed nation by now, plus several warnings and a scattering of bans. Sure, we've lost an active (and controversial) member of the forum, but, y'know, I think the forum will survive.

WAIT!!! WHAT!!! HE WAS JESUSSAVES?!?!

*cries* :(

WAIT!!! WHAT!!! HE WAS JESUSSAVES?!?!

*cries* :(

You didn't know that? I wasn't even here when JesusSaves was posting, and I STILL knew he was JesusSaves.

I'll miss his warped sense of humour. I'm surprised that that two-year-old "final warning" didn't bite him in the arse a bit sooner, though.

Anyone know if he has IM? I'd like to keep in touch with him.

If so, please TG me.

I'm with the ANCap, I would like to keep in contact with DCD.

Well as much as I don't like that this system (or any of them for that matter) runs on disobeying of the rules alone (also while reading this thread I was a tad annoyed by the mods using the terms game and players like people care :rolleyes:). He probably should have learned. I respect the mods decision to get rid of him.

Also... I wonder how long Zarakon's going to be remembered for this?

Well as much as I don't like that this system (or any of them for that matter) runs on disobeying of the rules aloneAs opposed to...?

I can't believe it took mods this long. The mods were far too lenient on this for too long. DCD was rather provocative at times; I couldn't reply because I would have burninated big time if I did.

I remember all the warnings; I remember the BS and I think the mods were too nice over the years given that others got banned for less. I won't name names because it's not nice but it's good to see that the mods are doing the right thing.

Thank you for doing the right thing, mods! :)

Also... I wonder how long Zarakon's going to be remembered for this?
Do you remember who reported Eutrusca for the final time? I don't.

Also... I wonder how long Zarakon's going to be remembered for this?Oh please. Because he obviously researched back two years, learned about the outstanding final warning and then decided to come here to get him a DOS in the guise of reporting a mere over-the-line post.

Oh please. Because he obviously researched back two years, learned about the outstanding final warning and then decided to come here to get him a DOS in the guise of reporting a mere over-the-line post.

It's true. I conspired with Ruffy.

:p

Also... I wonder how long Zarakon's going to be remembered for this?

Not long at all most likely. DCD just seemed like feeling committing suicide by mod. I don't care for the decision myself but he still ignored the warnings given to him, what did he expect could happen? I've come to be more annoyed at him then anyone else even with the harsher sentences of late for rule breaking.

Meh, most people have short memories, this "controversy" won't even be remembered by some in a month or so.

I must protest. DOS is waaay to far, his post was so hugely mild. If you ask every single person on earth if you found it offensive, probably only 2 will actually claim to be offended. I have seen people get away with posts 100000 of times more offensive, but because it doesn't contain rude words like rape, there can't be a ruling on it. Regarding that picture, he was not deliberately trying to cause havock, it was just a simple misunderstanding of the rules about what is and isn't PG-13. How you could decide to make a DOS ruling from that is just adnormally harsh. I ask you to reconsider, at least give him an actual warning first before going straight to DOS. He has no incentive to break the rules after all.

Edit: And no, a 2 year warning is not fair. I doubt he would have even remembered it.

Oh, I wish you'd all just quit whining. DcD fucked up; he fucked up a number of times, he knew he was fucking up, and yet still chose to do so, even with the knowing that he was on a short leash for his past history of fucking up.

And leave Zarakon the Hell alone, it's not his fault that DcD decided to dance with the Devil in his thread. If it hadn't have been Zarakon, it could just as easily have been someone else. I think this whole incident should be regarded as a cautionary tale for those among us who are considered, by general consensus (or simply by themselves) to be "forum royalty".

No-one is above the Law... so skate on that thin ice at your own peril. And if you fuck it up, be prepared to suck it up folks. Anyway, I did happen to like DcD and I will miss him - but I'm not going to rant and rave and demand the rules be repealed in order to get him back.

Agreed. Best to just say goodbye.

Agreed. Best to just say goodbye.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if he returns with an IP cloak in few days.

Regarding that picture, he was not deliberately trying to cause havock, it was just a simple misunderstanding of the rules about what is and isn't PG-13.

Where is it considered appropriate to show a depiction of nude woman wearing a ball gag and leather harness to a thirteen year old?

http://imdb.com/List?certificates=USA:PG-13&&heading=14;USA:PG-13

Here's a list of PG-13 films. Any of them depict nudes in bondage gear?

You'd think after all the years of being a member here (which some of you are bringing up over and over as some sort of pass for poor behavior), and seeing all of the rulings regarding appropriateness of picture, there would not have been any misunderstanding about what we allow and don't allow in terms of pictures, behavior and language on DC's part.

Yes, I know you're going to miss him. Yes, I know we are totally so unforgiving that we never give anyone another chance to give it a go, right? Yes, I know it's utterly unfair that we only gave him four second chances. Yes, I know I am an utterly horrible human being for holding him accountable -- as we promised him we would. But let's not be so insulting to his intelligence that we try to say that he just didn't know he was out of bounds.

a DOS has always, in my opinion, been a situation where an individual has become so disruptive to a forum that continued presence in any form is a detriment to the community.

And I don't think such a thing has happened here, not even close. Did it break the rules? Sure. But it falls far short of being of the nature of disruption such that it necessitates someone being removed, permanently.

Frankly speaking I can't agree with it.

It's sad, but he did fuck up, and if you break the rules with that many warnings/ DEATs then the Modhammer is going to come down pretty hard on you. Evidently, DCD was no exception.

Here's a list of PG-13 films. Any of them depict nudes in bondage gear?

The 5th Element had a woman strapped down and brief frontal nudity.

Boogeyman has quick flashes of bondage torture

The Notorius Betty Paige had reproduction scenes of some of the nude and bondage photos of...well...Betty Paige

Dodgeball has players competing in bondage gear


Those were just 4 I came up with in a minute or two of looking.

The 5th Element had a woman strapped down and brief frontal nudity.

Boogeyman has quick flashes of bondage torture

The Notorius Betty Paige had reproduction scenes of some of the nude and bondage photos of...well...Betty Paige

Dodgeball has players competing in bondage gear


Those were just 4 I came up with in a minute or two of looking.

Pfft, if you are going to list films you should at least give Titanic (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120338/) as well, that film while PG-13 actually gave you a shot of one of Kate Winslet's breasts.

I suppose this is my main issue with the DoS. We all fuck up from time to time. Okay, maybe some of us never do...but most of us will get a warning here and there. Some of us (moi? no...) even get a nation deleted. Perhaps a few. The point is, each infraction piles up, and the longer you are here, the more likely you've built up enough bad credit that one day you're just going to go BOOM. What isn't taken into account is the long amount of time you have posted within the rules. No 'good behaviour' to offset the bad.

Do we do that to students? Do we punish an incident of bad behaviour despite two years of good behaviour, just because there were past incidents as well?

Yes, we're talking about (mostly) adults here, but I don't see how the principle should be any different. It's not a case of 'oh he's been here so long, give him, the forum royalty, a pass'. Few people are arguing that his posts weren't actionable.

Yes, we all know he's been deleted numerous times, warned numerous times...but has he ever seriously disrupted the forums? Gone on a rampage, flaming, trolling, calling the mods out, making an inescapable nuisance of himself? DC is no Oct3. He's not even a Johnny Wadd.

I have to agree with Philosopy's earlier point. What's the worst that could happen? You let him back, and at some point, maybe two years down the road, have to tell him off again. In the meantime, he contributes to the forum. Yes contributes...like anyone else does here.

I understand that there is a need for people to respect mod authority, and get it through their skulls that certain behaviour is not okay. But I don't think anyone takes a long forum-ban lightly unless they actually don't give a shit about the forum. DC gives a shit, or he wouldn't have been as active as he was.

It's not about the Mods being evil, and uncaring, and oh no, let's cry conspiracy and all that assorted shit. I'm very thankful this IS a moderated forum. It's not about DC being 'above the law'. It's about realising that this IS a community, and sometimes people step out of bounds, and need some time to get it together. One bad day in two years?

Alright, I'll give it a rest now.

Damn, I didn't mean to get him banned or anything...

Well...At least we still have LG.

Who wants to be our new Minister of Weird News?

You'll always have LG. No bans, no deletions. One warning. I'm in good shape. I've turned skating the line into an art form. :cool:

The 5th Element had a woman strapped down and brief frontal nudity.

Boogeyman has quick flashes of bondage torture

The Notorius Betty Paige had reproduction scenes of some of the nude and bondage photos of...well...Betty Paige

Dodgeball has players competing in bondage gear


Those were just 4 I came up with in a minute or two of looking.

Personally, I don't care what movies have bondage and/or nudity. I DO care about what could get someone fired if his boss happens to be walking by at the wrong time. I consider posting NSFW stuff very serious, and frankly if I were a mod here (God forbid), I would have been one of the hard-liners on this. Just my 2 scents.

-snip-

Yet, it's still not the most offensive thing you can do, and can crop up in some pg-13 films as Neo Art showed.

I wouldn't have cared so much if it was just merely a deletion, but a DOS? I really can't get my head around it, it's totally illogical. Do you really think DCD is just gonna make a new nation and go HA, you think you can stop me *FLAME* *FLAME* *SPAM* *TROLL*.... of course he wont! If hes not gonna pull shit like that, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to DOS him.

And yet, that's pretty much what has happened.

You may not agree with it, but when it's our friends we tend to look at the situation differently than when it's someone we don't know well. That's only human nature. Unfortunately, it doesn't change the forum rules, it doesn't change his pretty clear warning, and it doesn't change that he chose to post the same old "raped by AIDS patients" song that got him slapped with a two week forum ban and a warning he'd be DOS'd the next time.

What's the longest forumban handed out, short of a DoS? Could you double it and slap him with that?

The 5th Element had a woman strapped down and brief frontal nudity.

Boogeyman has quick flashes of bondage torture

The Notorius Betty Paige had reproduction scenes of some of the nude and bondage photos of...well...Betty Paige

Dodgeball has players competing in bondage gear


Those were just 4 I came up with in a minute or two of looking.

I thought the 5th Element was R, same with The Notorious Betty Page.

Although, honestly, the image DCD posted really wasn't that much worse than one of the more common banner ads on jolt.

I thought the 5th Element was R, same with The Notorious Betty Page.

Although, honestly, the image DCD posted really wasn't that much worse than one of the more common banner ads on jolt.

...which one? The only one that comes to mind might be the add for Londinivm.

What's the longest forumban handed out, short of a DoS? Could you double it and slap him with that?

Jolt allows for bans of up to two years. Not that it matters, really. The book is closed on this one.

i don't understand why people are arguing over what is PG13, DC breaching that line was the lesser of the 2 things he got banned for i think. advocating rape as justice is repulsive and far worse than image spam. having said that i wouldn't have banned an otherwise decent poster for that. but then that, among many other things, is why i'm not a mod.

And yet, that's pretty much what has happened.

You may not agree with it, but when it's our friends we tend to look at the situation differently than when it's someone we don't know well. That's only human nature. Unfortunately, it doesn't change the forum rules, it doesn't change his pretty clear warning, and it doesn't change that he chose to post the same old "raped by AIDS patients" song that got him slapped with a two week forum ban and a warning he'd be DOS'd the next time.

Jolt allows for bans of up to two years. Not that it matters, really. The book is closed on this one.

Good call mods, good call. The two posts that got him banned were in more than bad taste. I'm glad he got what was coming to him. A fortnight ban would have been ineffective at this point if he had been banned and warned before.

Not defending DCD here or even asking for his return - as, in this particular case, his post was a bit TOO offensive - some people here raised an interesting point: Is there no "statute of limitations" of sorts? I'll take my own example here: About a year ago, I got threatened with deletion should I get one more "warning", even for something mild (Mostly due to the thread in which Whittier favored attacking Venezuela, and I live in Brazil). I do moderate myself now, but, after one year, does the threat still stand? Or it's conceivable that, while there's no statute of limitations for the most hardcore offenses (QED DCD), the milder ones or the non-repeated ones do get such a statute, especially given that one of the bans that contributed to my current position were, quite literally, for having posted (but not flamed or posted anything objectionable) in a thread that became a flamefest even after I ASKED the others that were flaming not to, precisely due to fear of getting banned as well (Essentially I got banned for being at the wrong place in the wrong time)?

Good call mods, good call. The two posts that got him banned were in more than bad taste. I'm glad he got what was coming to him. A fortnight ban would have been ineffective at this point if he had been banned and warned before.

What the hell? His post may have been a little crude, and maybe offensive to about 2 people in the world, but no way did it deserve a DOS. Even added with the debatable breaking of the pg 13 rules (ZOMG HOW EVIL), I don't understand where people come up with this "he had whats coming to him" shit. His last major warning was 2 years ago, for two years he's been a rule keeping poster, with maybe a few minor rule breakings here and there. I doubt you will find one person who felt that NSG was really a major irritating troll that shouldn't be allowed on this forum (which is what the DOS is designed for). I'm sure people could list hundreds of active posters who troll the forums and cause way much more havock then DCD ever did. Mods, you seem to be only DOSing DCD based on a technicallity, isn't this a little unfair? I mean, you've shown that the rules can be bent in some circumstances, such as beeker, when you allowed him back in. Why not do this with DCD?

Hydesland, I think you're conveniently forgetting the rest of the posting history (not just one other post), and the whole 'raped by someone with AIDS' bit and focusing on the picture, which wasn't, according to the Mods comments here and elsewhere, the main focus of the ban.

If you don't find someone advocating rape as a punishment, let alone the rest that went with the comments, I really don't know what anyone can say to satisfy you on this point.

As for appeals to popularity, I don't see why that should ever be a basis for lack of punishment. *shrugs* If they start running the site based on how well-liked or how disliked a player is, I for one will be sadly disappointed. Either the rules apply to everyone, or there's no point in having them. And personally, I'd hate to see what this place would be like without some moderation.

Maybe if you could put aside the emotions for a moment, and look at the facts publicly put forward here, it might help you understand why it was done. No one forced the guy to post what he did. Arguments about 'didn't know better' are an insult to his intelligence - it's hard to forget a two-week ban for the exact same thing, and the warning that came along with it. Many other arguments could have been used to express strong feelings about any given topic, and weren't.

I'm not going to get all 'got what was coming to him' about it, but you can't really argue that he wasn't adequately warned, or didn't freely choose his actions with any real validity there. Choice, accountability, consequences - pretty simple, whether it's a popular result or not. I'm sorry your friend is no longer able to post here. However I'm not sorry that the Mods have chosen to not allow that sort of discussion to go unaddressed.

What the hell? His post may have been a little crude, and maybe offensive to about 2 people in the world, but no way did it deserve a DOS.
Him losing five previous accounts to flaming and trolling is what made this deletion a DOS. And he was wishing that people were raped. After he had received a 14 day forumban for wishing the same and told that his next offense was going to be a DOS.

Whatever, I don't think i'll be able to convince the mods so I guess i'll just drop it.

I somewhat pity the mods. Were the decision another one, other people would be decrying DCD as a "teflon troll". Can't please everyone. :p

I say bravo to the mods. I applaud the decision to DoS DC for one reason.

Anyone who posts such a blatantly NSFW picture, as in one that would get the average office worker fired for being caught viewing it, should be given an automatic DoS order. No ifs, and, or buts, no trials, no tribulations, no whining to the mods about it. Even if it was suicide by mod, it's still suicide, and DC deserves the DoS order, and may he/she/it never come back.

I say bravo to the mods. I applaud the decision to DoS DC for one reason.

Anyone who posts such a blatantly NSFW picture, as in one that would get the average office worker fired for being caught viewing it, should be given an automatic DoS order.

You know what else gets office workers fired? Surfing the internet instead of working. The reason for the PG-13 status of the forum is not to save your ass from getting canned when your boss notices you goofing off.

You know what else gets office workers fired? Surfing the internet instead of working. The reason for the PG-13 status of the forum is not to save your ass from getting canned when your boss notices you goofing off.

If they want to stop people from surfing, maybe they need to give people more to do. It's not my fault I don't have enough to do at work.

And anywho, there has to be a standard, so don't go turning it around and making my statement into a personal attack.

Do you remember who reported Eutrusca for the final time? I don't.

Eut was deleted? I always thought he just kind of left the forums.


Anyways, I personally wouldn't have made the decision the mods have, and I'll miss DCD. He certainly crossed a line sometimes, but I'd usually just ignore the threads where he did. He was nice to have around. It's pretty obvious from the rest of this thread that nothing I say is going to change the decision, however.

And anywho, there has to be a standard, so don't go turning it around and making my statement into a personal attack.
Then don't make the standard about you, personally. It isn't.

About the ban on Eut...is he DoS as well? I just figured his nation was deleted and he was given some 'time off'. Other posters have mentioned that he still RPs, and I'm certain he posted on General once or twice since. (and not unobtrusively)

Not defending DCD here or even asking for his return - as, in this particular case, his post was a bit TOO offensive - some people here raised an interesting point: Is there no "statute of limitations" of sorts? I'll take my own example here: About a year ago, I got threatened with deletion should I get one more "warning", even for something mild (Mostly due to the thread in which Whittier favored attacking Venezuela, and I live in Brazil). I do moderate myself now, but, after one year, does the threat still stand? Or it's conceivable that, while there's no statute of limitations for the most hardcore offenses (QED DCD), the milder ones or the non-repeated ones do get such a statute, especially given that one of the bans that contributed to my current position were, quite literally, for having posted (but not flamed or posted anything objectionable) in a thread that became a flamefest even after I ASKED the others that were flaming not to, precisely due to fear of getting banned as well (Essentially I got banned for being at the wrong place in the wrong time)?
I am not going to comment on weather I think what happened to DCD was fair or not but I am going to quote this post because I am intrested in the answer to it

Is there a statute of limitations? or is it just figured into the ruling informaly?

More out of curiosity then anything I have not gotten so much as an informal warning before but I think it could be relevant to the topic

Fris very recently answered this.
There is not, and will not be, a definitive list of punishments or hierarchy of mod escalations. Nor will we publish any details about ... how warnings are recorded, when they go away, how multiple nations owned by the same player can affect each other how game actions can affect forum warnings when 'spam' becomes 'way too much spam' what the exact criteria are for when flaming crosses the line how much trolling is too much how many UN multis you have to have before we delete rather than eject how long you can run your multis before we decide to act how old posts must be before they're not actionable how many regions you can spam before we decide to delete you what sequence of actions leads to a Delete on Sight order how we make the determination to IP ban how we track puppets how many bans we allow before we perma-ban or delete... or any of the hundreds of other things we consider on each individual ruling we make. Administering this game is not cut-and-dried.

...He certainly crossed a line sometimes, but I'd usually just ignore the threads where he did...

We, as moderators, are not afforded that luxury. You seem to be implying that you'd be more than happy to just look the other way whenever he did something wrong. Seems to be a common attitude, and it may account for some of the reasons why people are upset about this. I think a lot of people are missing the simple fact that we can't just look the other way, because if we do, we're not doing our jobs.

Is there a statute of limitations? or is it just figured into the ruling informaly?

As far as I know, there is no "statute of limitiations," and I'm not really thrilled with the idea. It would be a pain in the ass to set up and enforce, and I'm sure in the meantime many people would demand retroactive application of said statute.

We, as moderators, are not afforded that luxury. You seem to be implying that you'd be more than happy to just look the other way whenever he did something wrong. Seems to be a common attitude, and it may account for some of the reasons why people are upset about this. I think a lot of people are missing the simple fact that we can't just look the other way, because if we do, we're not doing our jobs.

Oh, I'm not missing that. It's the reason I'd never be a mod and I can't recall ever reporting anyone to moderation. I just don't worry about it. I follow the rules (with the possible exception of a slip-up here or there), but I really don't worry about those who don't. I recognize that you guys do, and that it is the reason we have mods in the first place.

I also recognize that this decision has been made, for better or for worse, and nothing I say is going to change it. I'd like to see DCD back sometime, but if it can't happen, then it can't happen. =(

We, as moderators, are not afforded that luxury. You seem to be implying that you'd be more than happy to just look the other way whenever he did something wrong. Seems to be a common attitude, and it may account for some of the reasons why people are upset about this. I think a lot of people are missing the simple fact that we can't just look the other way, because if we do, we're not doing our jobs.
No, not look the other way. But if this is the first really actionable thing he's done in TWO years, we're saying that those two years should be taken into account.

It makes sense that you guys don't want to publish any sort of definitive 'this is how we moderate' list. We all know the kind of BS that would cause. So yeah, it's a series of judgment calls. But when you have a poster who has essentially reformed themselves for the space of two years (his incarnation as DCD lasted longer than his other nations combined) who, for whatever reason slips up...are the mods really just waiting in the sidelines to snap him up?

It's not as though we should each be given a fresh start when one of our nations is deleted for rule-breaking. But on the flip side, it also doesn't make sense that an infraction can lie in wait indefinately, and then lunge out and take you into DoS status the second you fuck up once more. There's got to be some sort of middle ground.


As far as I know, there is no "statute of limitiations," and I'm not really thrilled with the idea. It would be a pain in the ass to set up and enforce, and I'm sure in the meantime many people would demand retroactive application of said statute.
Yes, but it could be set up as informally as the rest of the moderating 'rules'. If a player genuinely wants to come back after a long ban...why not let them back, on a short leash? People change.

Except smokers. Smokers stay the same:p

Eut was deleted? I always thought he just kind of left the forums.

I believe he has a new nation somewhere and occasionally posts on the regional messageboard. He may also participate in NS offsite activity. All of which is fine with us.

It seems to be the case that DCD's adherence to the rules for two years means nothing, and I find that sad. Is a poster to be judged solely by the transgressions he commits rather than the positive contributions he makes? While he wasn't exactly a model poster, he was a valuable asset to this forum for a substantial amount of time, and it seems overly drastic to forevermore prevent him from posting here again. He was able something unique to this forum; no other poster can hope to equal DCD at this welcome ability.

NSG threads typically tread (try saying that 10 times fast) over the hackneyed ground of politics, asking for advice, trolling, and religion; DCD offered a refreshingly new, quirky style that helped lighten the day of many forum-goers. He was able to ferret out obscure but humorous news stories for the enjoyment of everyone. Should all that be sacrificed for one error?

Sure, he may not always be entirely civil in his posting; he may have had a history of flaunting moderator warnings; he may have ignored certain rules; because of this, he was only given one more chance. But was that decision just? Is the role of the moderators to go to any length whatsoever in order to screen out negative content? Or do they have an interest in promoting good content, too?

It's true that DCD may have gone over the line on many occasions, but when evaluating his worth to this forum, more than that needs to be taken into account. We're all human; we all make mistakes. Yet DCD's mistakes pale in comparison to his other posts. By permanently banning DCD, you seem to be sending the message that he has been a detrimental influence on this forum, when the truth is the exact opposite.

DCD reminds me of the stereotypical drunk genius (hell, the word drunk is right there in his name): someone who is frequently callous, ill-disposed, uncaring, and abusive. But every so often, he's able to crank out a masterpiece that pardons all of his past sins. DCD somewhat resembles that image: he's a gung-ho poster who says what's on his mind whether others like it or not; that's enough for him to earn the ire of many. Even if such "insensitivity" to the feelings of others is deemed bad, the amount of good he did for this forum more than compensates for it. While he's no Shakespeare and doesn't produce masterpieces, I would pick one of DCD's articles over Macbeth any day.

By deleting DCD, you are depriving this forum of one of its most colorful, ingenious, and distinctive posters. He will be sorely missed.

DOS seems to be going way overboard on this one. DOS status should really be reserved for offenders who disrupt the forum to the point where their return is going to lead to immediate (or close to immediate) disruption. It's been two years since the last time DcD acted out, he's hardly a threat to forum stability in any way, shape, or form. It seems to me that a ban is exactly what is in order. DOS is for a different kind of troublemaker.

He's had a few nations deleted already.
He continued to be a disruptance and broke rules.
He got what he deserved IMHO.

It seems to be the case that DCD's adherence to the rules for two years means nothing, and I find that sad. Is a poster to be judged solely by the transgressions he commits rather than the positive contributions he makes? While he wasn't exactly a model poster, he was a valuable asset to this forum for a substantial amount of time, and it seems overly drastic to forevermore prevent him from posting here again. He was able something unique to this forum; no other poster can hope to equal DCD at this welcome ability.

NSG threads typically tread (try saying that 10 times fast) over the hackneyed ground of politics, asking for advice, trolling, and religion; DCD offered a refreshingly new, quirky style that helped lighten the day of many forum-goers. He was able to ferret out obscure but humorous news stories for the enjoyment of everyone. Should all that be sacrificed for one error?

Sure, he may not always be entirely civil in his posting; he may have had a history of flaunting moderator warnings; he may have ignored certain rules; because of this, he was only given one more chance. But was that decision just? Is the role of the moderators to go to any length whatsoever in order to screen out negative content? Or do they have an interest in promoting good content, too?

It's true that DCD may have gone over the line on many occasions, but when evaluating his worth to this forum, more than that needs to be taken into account. We're all human; we all make mistakes. Yet DCD's mistakes pale in comparison to his other posts. By permanently banning DCD, you seem to be sending the message that he has been a detrimental influence on this forum, when the truth is the exact opposite.

DCD reminds me of the stereotypical drunk genius (hell, the word drunk is right there in his name): someone who is frequently callous, ill-disposed, uncaring, and abusive. But every so often, he's able to crank out a masterpiece that pardons all of his past sins. DCD somewhat resembles that image: he's a gung-ho poster who says what's on his mind whether others like it or not; that's enough for him to earn the ire of many. Even if such "insensitivity" to the feelings of others is deemed bad, the amount of good he did for this forum more than compensates for it. While he's no Shakespeare and doesn't produce masterpieces, I would pick one of DCD's articles over Macbeth any day.

By deleting DCD, you are depriving this forum of one of its most colorful, ingenious, and distinctive posters. He will be sorely missed.

Making a popular statement won't make anyone like you anymore on this site.

Noooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please find a way to overlook one more return for DCD. We'll sacrifice a n00b to the Mods to show our appreciation.

Making a popular statement won't make anyone like you anymore on this site.

That was a little harsh.

Noooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please find a way to overlook one more return for DCD. We'll sacrifice a n00b to the Mods to show our appreciation.

I say we crucify our lord max barry, to give each sinner a second chance (or in DCD's case, a 5th chance).

I say we crucify our lord max barry, to give each sinner a second chance (or in DCD's case, a 5th chance).

I dunno, man. I don't think he'd look as good with holes in him. Besides, why should Max die for anyone's 'sins'? He's not getting anything worth that out of this site. Besides, if multiple deletions don't grab one's attention, I doubt the crucifixion of others they don't really know will. :p

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/Nathicana/NationStates/Max.jpg

Making a popular statement won't make anyone like you anymore on this site.

If I wanted people to like me, I would write a short post extolling the virtues of liberals in the general forum. If I wanted to advocate on behalf of DCD, I would write a longer post in the moderation forum. Not everything is about me, as hard as that may be for you to believe; this is about DCD and it should be kept that way.

I dunno, man. I don't think he'd look as good with holes in him. Besides, why should Max die for anyone's 'sins'?


It's his divine duty!

Do you remember who reported Eutrusca for the final time? I don't.

Eut was deleted? Damn, I go away for 2-3 years and all the cool kids (or not as it may seem) go away :(

Eut, DCD, next you'll be telling me they deleted Rotovia while I was gone.

I believe he has a new nation somewhere and occasionally posts on the regional messageboard. He may also participate in NS offsite activity. All of which is fine with us.

query... can a DOS player still create a nation and participate in-game but NOT on the forum?

can a DOS player still create a nation and participate in-game but NOT on the forum?

No.

Delete-on-sight applies to both game and forum access. DoS status is actually much more common on the game side of things, it's just not as visible except within the region.


And no, Eutrusca wasn't declared DoS. We just deleted his main nation. If he wanted to come back on the forums, he'd be welcome.

Eut was deleted? I always thought he just kind of left the forums.

Eut was deleted? Damn, I go away for 2-3 years and all the cool kids (or not as it may seem) go away :(

Kinda proves my point, I think.

Eut has another nation, Etrusciana (I think), with which he's made a few posts in General (and possibly elsewhere, but I wouldn't know).

I totally agree with the ban - though I would prefer it to be a permanent IP ban.

He's been calling for an illegal activity (one of the sickest, in some people's books THE sickest - rape) and has been warned repeatedly. The mods have been very lenient, even to the extent that the ban seems to be temporary.

In short, he deserved AT LEAST a temporary ban.

I totally agree with the ban

So you found it necessary to reinforce that by posting agreement on a two-year-old thread, and then posting here in Size 5 font?

Delete on Sight is more substantial than a temporary IP ban. Please don't tell us how to do our jobs, when you clearly don't understand the process.

So you found it necessary to reinforce that by posting agreement on a two-year-old thread, and then posting here in Size 5 font?

Delete on Sight is more substantial than a temporary IP ban. Please don't tell us how to do our jobs, when you clearly don't understand the process.

Someone's touchy tonight. Read what you quoted please, thanks.

Someone's touchy tonight. Read what you quoted please, thanks.

One sentence of agreement doesn't counter posting in bad format and several other sentences of ignorance.

Someone's touchy tonight. Read what you quoted please, thanks.

I think he's more annoyed that you wrote in particuarly large writing and gravedug, rather than the point you're making.