NationStates Jolt Archive

Hello Mods,

My main nation Pirates Roost is currently inaccessible using my password (which has been the same for three years). The "forgot password" function responds that the nation does not have an e-mail addy registered which is not the case, and highly improbable to me since it just UN-ed up last night which requires an e-mail address. Also, my game-playin e-mail address and the one that is listed in the Pirates Roost nation is pirates_roost@hotmail.com (since NS was one of the first online games I got involved in and have used the PR moniker ever since) wi=hich makes it further curious how no e-mail address could be listed.

I did say some rather nasty words (well the letter between E and G anyway since NS's uber-politically correct message checker won't even let a person choose to utter words it find inherently offensive--how can a mere shaping of air be inherently offensive?) to the Mods in TORC, and rather expected their reprobation in some fashion, but this one is quite curious. Instead of your standard deletion, my nation has apparently been set to lock me out. What a curious Moderator action.

The region Pirates Roost is in is in the middle of a raid I was a part of, and Pirates Roost is still doing his job providing a raiding endorsement even though the spirit has been locked away from the body. (I find this funny and somewhat fitting). The region Casablanca shows signs of moderator intervention in the RMB being chopped short.

So what's up Doc?

Did y'all somehow miss while shooting apples in a barrel to delete me, or is this some curious new Moderator chastisement?

Mostly just curious. Deletion would not have been a suprise.

Also,

Since I've apparently been locked out of my main nation and it has UN on it, are y'all Modding types going to whack me for multi-ing if I UN up a new nation? Curious moderation conundrum there. Could make for some great Catch-22 logic.

Nothing new. It's fairly standard treatment for suicide-by-mod types who brag about how much damage they're going to do before they get deleted by the zOMG biased mods.

Thankfully, we don't get a lot of those. Most people are capable of exercising a bit of common sense when they leave.

Don't think I did any bragging. Just used the F letter (since the political correctness filters wouldn't let me use the word) in addressing Mods in general and pointed out what I thought were flaws and concluded by guessing that I would get deleted. But that is niether here nor there and apparently your interpretation was different.

So, may I please have the punishment explained? Does Pirates Roost remain inaccessible but alive forever, or do you delete it sometime or another? If not forever, is there a specified duration for this curse word timeout? Since it has a UN on it, do I get bombed for multy-ing if I UN up another nation? Or do I have to guess?

Do what you feel and keep your foot on the wheel, but tell a guy what's the deal.

Naw, it's not about the cursing.

It was entirely about your rulebreaking. When you announce that you're making a mess just for us, and then do this, which is also against the rules:

@@pirates_roost@@ arrived from %%the_old_raiding_club%%.
@@pirates_roost@@ departed this region for %%the_old_raiding_club%%
@@pirates_roost@@ arrived from %%the_old_raiding_club%%
@@pirates_roost@@ departed this region for %%the_old_raiding_club%%
@@pirates_roost@@ arrived from %%the_cathedral%%
@@pirates_roost@@ departed this region for %%the_cathedral%%
@@pirates_roost@@ arrived from %%the_cathedral%%
@@pirates_roost@@ departed this region for %%the_cathedral%%
@@pirates_roost@@ arrived from %%the_cathedral%%

as clearly stated here:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8784627&postcount=2

Regional Happenings Spam: Going in and out of a region and hence filling up the regional events board with departing and arriving messages is known as Regional Happenings or Events Log Spamming and is not allowed.

and then complain that somehow we're simply making up the rules as we go along or are biased in some way, one has to wonder what you're playing at.

What happens to Pirates Roost is what happens to all nations that are not signed into for 28 days. It eventually dies.

So, spamming a regional message board with coming and goings is a forbidden activity... even if you're the one who owns that region?

Kat,

I think you or some of the other Mods are/were reading something into my posts in TORC that was not there. To the best of my knowledge I never once threatened "to make a mess" for anybody or any such thing. While interpretation can fill alomst any hole no matter how deep, I fail to see how any of the phrasing in my posts could be read as threatening any sort of anti-game action.

I do believe I clearly stated that I was displeased about the apparent DOS of my friend Ramir, that I was tired of walking--actually typing--on tiptoes for fear of Mods and that I would not keep my tongue honeyed for the Mods anymore. I then proceeded to say F the Mods for their decisions I did not like. Have the Mods gone to the point where vigorous dissent is considered threatening?

As for the movement between regions, it is bluntly evident to anyone giving it even the least iota of attention that I was sharing conversation in two regions, TORC and Casablanca. As the conversation in Casablanca had little, if anything, to do with my anger with the Mods (I believe the only mention of Mods in the Casablanca conversation was pointing out the curious punishment, and no invective was hurled there as it was an inappropriate venue) it is one heckuva stretch to claim that the two were related, much less part of some plot only threatened by the biggest of reaching inference to make some sort of unidentifiable trouble.

This RHB spamming charge is mighty flismy. Apparently I spammed up a happening board in a raider region where I am considered a friend and a member and where my postes are enjoyed by the Founder, the Doorman, the Bartender, and all the natives. Apparently I managed this trick while holding down relatively unrelated conversations in two different regions which requires a bit of bouncing back and forth and is a common happenstance in NS. And apparently, this was all of such great concern to some hall monitor who is not even a TORC member, or of such earth-shattering consequence to the Mods that it was endangering the game itself even though the Founder and natives didn't care one iota.

Well apparently, this is the flimsiest put-up job I've seen in quite a while. Shall I produce the Founder to say he doesn't give a rip whether I come and go to TORC every 15 seconds from here until St. Swiven's Day?!?(so long as the doorman gets his customary tip each time of course). Or shall we just say it like it is, that our Mods didn't like me saying F-you, took it as a threat when it was plainly, obviously, and facially a mere insult on their activity, and then grabbed for the first pretext available to head off dissent?

Sorry Kat, I personally always liked you, but claiming that my huge and dangerous offense was RHB spamming in one of my own home regions where the founder and natives don't care and when I was obviously bouncing between convos is a poor pretext for nation lockout. Especially when nobody can point to my supposed threats to the game or the Mods, and in my entire "nefarious" three year history in NS I am widely considered one of the cleanest most rule-following raiders ever. You, as a matter of fact, Kat more than a year back when there was a nasty disagreement over a numebr of threats going back and forth on message boards between Groznia and a number of ADN members lauded me as a "good raider" while asking how and why I was sticking up for Groz in the verbal back and forth.

I told the Mods F-you for DOSing everyone I know who has criticized their rule changes and tried to bring activity back up in raider/fenda play. The only threat I might reasonably have been construed to have made is the threat to continue my criticism. It might even be reasonably inferred that such a threat was to continue using F-you language. But that idea would have been quickly dispelled or limited to use of such language only in TORC or other appropriate regions by seeing that I used no such language in the simultaneous conversation I was having in Casablanca. This clearly shows that anyone who might have infered a threat to use salty language in an inappropriate place was in incorrect inference since it wasn't then used.

C'mon Kat and other Mods, this whole farcical "threat" which no one can produce since it never existed and goofy RHB spamming in a region consisting of my friends is a thin veneer on the real facts that I said F-you and you were understandably annoyed if not put off, and some hall monitor who is not a part of the region where it was said or the culture it was said in saw an opportunity to bring down your displeasure. I don't mind much if that is the case, but we should be adult enough to do it without these petty excuses.

If the "threat" I made is the predicate of the offense, will the supposed "threat" used to indict me be produced at any point?

If the antecedent to the threat is some danger of actual harm to the game, and that in this case was the fear of RHB Spamming, does it make any difference if I produce the Founder who will tell you I am a friend and he doesn't care? (since I fail to see how "RHB spamming" can be a threat to anyone outside the region, especially if it has a Founder--AND, OH DEAR GOD, THIS IS SILLY! You Mods and I both know and were here when RHB Spamming was made an offense, and it was made an offense because raiders were doing it to cover their tracks back in the old days of infiltration raiding, and since I obviously want' doing this in TORC, it obviously wasn't a threat to anybody, but is just a pretext)

If it was the "threat & follow up action" theory that was the actually reason I was chastised, and not the writing of "F the Mods and their F-ing lame arsed game", does that mean that saying such things within the confines of TORC or a region similarly more accepting of salty language is perfectly acceptable so long as the supposed threat is left out? Or is the turn of speech F-the Mods considered a threat in and of itself somehow?

And since the Pirates Roost nation is just locked, but not deleted, what are the consequences of this chastisement? Can I revive and access it later after it dies?

Can I UN another nation in themeantime without multying since I would still be within the rule of only having one UN at any given time (since I obviously don't "have" Pirates Roost anymore)?

And not that it really matters, but doesn't this kind of smack of nation theft by the Mods? (the other questions are quite serious, but this last question is mostly in jest--I actually am not angry and find most of this situation really quite funny)

Also, I may regret pointing this out. But I was still involved in both conversations th enext moring after Pirates Roost was locked, using this nation Pirates Roost 2, and bouncing back and forth about as much. Does that mean I RHB spammed with this guy too?

;)
(hope y'all are seeing the humor in this)

And also,

apparently I have my answer about whether I can UN up another nation. I just got this in the ol' TG inbox:

"United Nations
Received: unknown Unforunately, after due consideration, the UN has been forced to reject your application to become a UN member. This is because your nation has the same e-mail address as another UN member country. You may only have one nation in the UN at any one time."

Kinda hilarious to say another nation with the same e-mail is already in the UN, when the "forgot password" button on Pirates Roost says that the option is unavailable since that nation does not have an e-mail address provided. This is getting to be a really funny farce. We got Catch-22's, obfuspeak, duelling lies from different departments, and the thinest of flimsy pretexts running about. Thanks for the laughs anyway guys.:D


I'm beginning to wonder if y'all Mods really thought out this curious punishment in all its ramifications. I'm obviously not DOS since PR Mk 2 is here and PR Mk 1 isn't deleted either. So it must be a warning or prophylactic of some kind. But unlike the rest of the Mod preventive measures I've seen, this one carries permanent loss of nation (or does it?). And even though the pretext offense is slight and a first time, the chastisement is actually even more severe than a deletion since it blocks having a controllable UN for a month or so. I had previosuly thought that the hierarchy of Mod action had deletion followed by DOS at the top of the pyramid, but apparently this one fits somewhere in between. Heckuva re-ordering of the food chain for a mere preventive measure!

Are ya sure you guys and gals didn't get just a wee bit touched off when I lobbed an F at ya and fired a response salvo back quickly without putting a great deal of thought inot it. The snarky (and admittedly funny) Mod messages that appeared in TORC that night surely make this the most likely case. And the lack of answer my repeated questions about all the consequences of the lockout (do you guys use a different word for it?), especially in re UN and multying kinda indicate that maybe this was more hasty than a regularly used gambit.

But then again, I'm sure like Job in th Bible I will be told that Mods ways are inscrutable.

(((If'n y'all want to take this to a private corner and chat--or outside to kick my butt--I don't have a problem with that either. I might air my dirty laundry in TORC among friends, but don't mind if you would rather keep it out of this venue, ithis one is after all your venue)))

You can claim it was all about the cursing until the cows come home, but no, it's not. It's about rulebreaking and apparently, being shocked and surprised that they apply to everyone.

I don't understand why Pirates Roost 2 was banned from joining the UN unless you put it in immediately: Pirates Roost is not a UN nation any longer. After all, it wouldn't be fair to keep you out of the UN for 28 days would it? I suggest you check again.

pirates_roost:Oh yeah, somebody invited me to the DEN party in Casablanca. Let\'s get wild and trash the joint just for these F-ing "special" helmet wearing, short bus riding, self-flagellating Mods!"

What "interpretation" could a reasonable person possibly place on that, especially considering that your RH spamming began right after it?

Really, now, you're supposed to be a very experienced player -- surely you knew that regional happenings spamming is against the rules and has been for a very long time... that flaming is also against the rules though that didn't figure into the matter in this case... and that announcing that one was going to "trash the joint" just before breaking the rules was also a poor idea?

These protestations of innocence and attempts to deflect attention away from your actions are becoming rather silly.

I'm inclined to agree here. RH spam is a pretty weak claim. However, I'm A-OK with the treatment you received. We don't need you (not to mention want or like) or your attitude. If you can't control your urges to revisit adolescence, go somewhere else. Somebody with your control of the English language could easily make a positive contribution to the lives of our players, but instead you reinforce attitudes that will land them in jail.

In other words, you know better. Stop wasting our time.

Kat,

You've been around long enough to know raiders always "get wild and trash the place" and "party" in a conquered region. However I suppose it is just barely cognizable that a threat could possibly be inferred. The "action in furtherance" (weak RHB "spamming" charge) however was not in the threatened region, but in a friendly region where no native complained and the Founder is a friend who actually gave my posts a huzzah, and would asuredly stand to say he does not mind whatever RHB might have incidentally happened, and welcomes my comings and goings (again so long as the doorman gets his customary tip).

Whatevah.

Actually I made no protestations of innocence, nor have ever asked for reinstatement. I did point out a typical Mod hosejob at any dissent, and asked for particulars of the punishement since it is not typical, and the consequences of the Mod action in question are not described any place that I can see.

Lock PR Mk 1, it is within your scope (unlimited within NS), and prerogative (equally unlimited). But y'all get a might tetchy when queried don'tcha?

The vast majority of consequence questions remain unanswered. Is the theory something along the lines of maybe hoping unliked behavior will be curbed if the offender desires reinstatement? Prolly. A typical Mod tactic.

Well, according to the logic at hand using direct and salty language regarding opinion of Mod action and character seems to be allowable so long as no threat may be inferred. Thanks for the guidance. I'm sure if tested new "judgment calls" will be made.

And thank you Pythagosaurus for recognizing the flimsiness of the put up job. I appreciate that you and others may not think of my actions as constructive and characterize them as juvenile. Luckily for me, I am not beholden to your narrow worldview. I use my faculties as I see fit for the values I recognize. I also appreciate that you hold your values dearly and while I do not agree with them, I do respect that you have them and won't hold them to my scale. It would be apples and oranges since I think the primary constructive thing that can be done in an online game or community is increase activity--conflict empirically does this, while RP, faux constitution building, and UN and issue activity do not according to any measurable metric I have seen in years of play. But again, my scale in enhancing activity, while yours is almost certainly "constructive" in some other way. No reasonable person is going to measure one scale against another until the weights and measures (ie, definitions of what is "constructive") are agreed upon.

Mods, thanks for the punishment. Would have prefered a straight delete. All the truly wonderful people I've met here have gotten one on a main nation. I guess this puts me only halfway into this community's Valhalla or Elysium. Half is better than none. Still, felt great giving a richly deserved flying bird.

I don't care if you raid. It's part of the game. I've done it myself. I'm glad somebody's doing it. I care about the example (or lack thereof) that you set. It's natural to reject authority, particularly when you have no real control over it. Stand up for what you believe in. That's fine. (but don't belabor it; mods have finite patience) If you believe that deliberately provoking authorities is a good thing to teach adolescents, that's not fine. As a person with a notable ability to debate reasonably, you're likely to hold a fair amount of influence in any community you enter. Like it or not, you have a responsibility to use that influence constructively, and your actions must reflect that.

I don't care if you raid. It's part of the game. I've done it myself. I'm glad somebody's doing it.

Glad to hear you've tried all aspect of the game. I made attempts at RP (I was pathetic at it), the Pacific type faux governmental building (I was good, but I get enough real governmental writing at work, this is a game for recreation), and UN involvement and issue writing (again, too much like work). I never tried fending--I don't need to hit myself in the privates with a hammer to know I wouldn't enjoy it. While I don't find any aspect of the game other than raiding interesting, one should at least give most avenues for recreation here a fair shot.

You ever want to hit the high seas of raiding again, give me a shout. I ever try to go back to other parts of the game again, I'll do the same.

I care about the example (or lack thereof) that you set. It's natural to reject authority, particularly when you have no real control over it. Stand up for what you believe in. That's fine. (but don't belabor it; mods have finite patience) If you believe that deliberately provoking authorities is a good thing to teach adolescents, that's not fine.

Why on earth not?

If one believes that the authorities are high and heavy handed, have no meaningful check on the whims of their passions, brook not even the slightest dissent or disagreement, and that the authorities are petty and small people overall--if one sees the authorities as such, I certainly hope he or she believes it is a good thing to teach adolescents by example to dispute and provoke them.

I also personally and politically believe that deliberately provoking authorities is not bad or destructive in the slightest, and that it is often a good litmus test for determining the qualty of person in that mantle of authority. The petty and small will always rebuke even the slightest provocation, usually by find some flimsy pretext to wrap around their hurt and fear. As happened I believe happened to me. High and noble authorities will take provocation in stride, and either respond in kind if they have the capacity and salt, or at least let it slide off them if they lack the capacity for witty response. Provocation often reveals the true character of people, it certainly did here.

As a person with a notable ability to debate reasonably, you're likely to hold a fair amount of influence in any community you enter. Like it or not, you have a responsibility to use that influence constructively, and your actions must reflect that.

Ahhh, the old argument that gifts given to one must be used for the good of the many argument. Sorry, I feel no such responsibility as you claim. I believe Ayn Rand would refer to such an attempt to impose a false social reponsibility as a tool of the looters. My gifts are mine to wield in any way I see fit. The Mods even made that perfectly clear when they at least deign to say we can do as we will, but may face consequences. (Not that they will let us use words they deem bad, since that foccacata filter is in place). So while you may choose to feel some responsibility to use whatever talents you may possess in a way you consider constructive, I feel no such constraint and will lkely never feel such or make my actions conform with a value that I see, with great thought and deliberation, as being false, misleading, and sinful.

Lest you come to the conclusion all my actions be purely self-centered, I should point out where I diverge from the freedom of objectivist thought. I do believe that that which we do ourselves dies with us while what we do for others lives past us. This means that some of my actions in life are purely self centered, while others are equally selfish but geared towards doing for others.

NS is my recreation, not my legacy. What I do here I do for myself and my own entertainment. I think there are deep flaws in this game, not the least of which is the Moderator structure and rules and judgments they have imposed. Like anyone who enjoys his recreation I do what I think best to keep it fun.

[[[[[[[Since I firmly believe it is never fair to criticize if one is unwilling to make helpful suggestions, I think one solution could be getting quite a few more Mods, each with a particular brief for areas and subsets of the game so that each is a specialist who has a deep understanding of their area, and to even the workload so Mods don't feel so put upon. Another would be chunking the entirety of the bad words policy, let the Founders and Delegates enforce manners in their own regions howsoever they will, and limit the NS-wide curb on language to prohibiting only what is illegal in the legal situs of the game (aka where the server and/or legal incorporation of the game is). Another possibility would be to have a Moderation oversight committee of players, who would do no actual Mod work, but who the Mods could explain their actions to in disputed or gray area cases, and whose job it would be to make and post reports so other players might get satisfactory explanations that are not from a Mod who understandably would feel the need to defend his/her action. I don't think any of those would be cure alls, and some almost certainly wouldn't work or would unbalance the game. They're just ideas, and just tossed out for consideration and fairness to the ideal of being "constructive"]]]]]]]

Ahhh, the old argument that gifts given to one must be used for the good of the many argument. Sorry, I feel no such responsibility as you claim. I believe Ayn Rand would refer to such an attempt to impose a false social reponsibility as a tool of the looters.

She'd also tell you that this site is private property and is ours to administer as we see fit. I don't frankly care how you deploy your talents offsite, but as long as you're playing in my yard, you're going to get the hose if I deem it necessary.

If you disagree with a decision we made or how we handled it, fine--but don't go on like you know what you're talking about when you slam the general administration of this site and it's quality (or lack thereof). I've been watching it firsthand for going on five years, and I've compared it with a number of other online communities I've visited in the meantime and NS is by no means the worst or even close, at least from what I've seen.

DISCLAIMER: I will laugh at you--and loudly--if you retort with the claim that I'm biased towards our staff because I'm one of them. While it might sound on the surface like a plausible point to make, there really is a history there you don't know anything about. We're human too and believe it or not we do occasionally disagree (usually when I'm around :p).

If you disagree with a decision we made or how we handled it, fine--but don't go on like you know what you're talking about when you slam the general administration of this site and it's quality (or lack thereof). I've been watching it firsthand for going on five years, and I've compared it with a number of other online communities I've visited in the meantime and NS is by no means the worst or even close, at least from what I've seen.

and to add... you give more explinations than the mods on other sites would give.

and also, you do take time to read the complaints and consider them.


So no where near the worst, but definately close to the best.

She'd also tell you that this site is private property and is ours to administer as we see fit. I don't frankly care how you deploy your talents offsite, but as long as you're playing in my yard, you're going to get the hose if I deem it necessary.

If you disagree with a decision we made or how we handled it, fine--but don't go on like you know what you're talking about when you slam the general administration of this site and it's quality (or lack thereof). I've been watching it firsthand for going on five years, and I've compared it with a number of other online communities I've visited in the meantime and NS is by no means the worst or even close, at least from what I've seen.

DISCLAIMER: I will laugh at you--and loudly--if you retort with the claim that I'm biased towards our staff because I'm one of them. While it might sound on the surface like a plausible point to make, there really is a history there you don't know anything about. We're human too and believe it or not we do occasionally disagree (usually when I'm around :p).

Actually, I assume you are biased towards your site and colleagues. Why bother stating the obvious unless someone obviously isn't grasping the obvious?

I do think it telling however that you consistently refer to this site as belonging to the Mods, and the whole entirety of NS as being your back yard. Ownership and Moderation are not the same thing. At least not in any English definition I've ever heard of. The typical role of Moderator is to settle disputes, hence to moderate. It is not to claim personal ownership over every aspect of the venue in which they moderate.

I am afraid I will go on to, as you put it, "go on like [I] know what you're talking about when [I] slam the general administration of this site and it's quality (or lack thereof)." I stringently disagree with your interpretation of the quality of this staff. This is easily one of the most intrusive volunteer admin staffs of any open internet game or forum I've ever seen. The vast majority are king logs, while the NS moderators are easily the kings of king stork.

In my opinion one of the wonderful fringe benefits of this little fracas has been a beautiful illustration of how condescending, high horse, self-satisfied, and completely thin skinned this Moderation staff is. You all prove it constantly with almost every word.

From Hack carping about what mst have been his reversal with Amerika in another threat to this little travesty here, you all are a better illustration of what is wrong with what you do in the game than I ever could be.

Not that any of this will ever get through. This game has lost the lion's share of it players in a fairly short period of time. But, I'd bet dollars to donughts that almost every Mod here has some pat, flimsy explanation why absolutely none of that is do to Moderation action in any way whatsoever.

Rational thought only advances when people accept facts rationally and act from them, not when they sweep any results under the carpet that don't agree with their cherished little theories.

I have yet to see another website or internet game lose 90% of its base in less than a year in my more than five years of playing (I go back to the old BBS and phone phreaking for LD chum). Obviously something is wrong here. But apparently it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the admin staff, oh no, of course not.

In the meantime this thread also illustrates a basic fact. I received a curious punishment that is clearly to a flimsy pretext for "getting the hose" because I mouthed off to the Mods in "[their] backyard". Fine, sure, whatevah. I didn't even bother to appeal it. I did however ask direct and blunt questions about the ramifications of this unwritten special punishment for dastardly deed doer who--oh dear--spam the RHB. And these Mods won't even spell out the particulars of the chastisement when asked direct questions.

And you guys accuse me of being lawyerly?!? I know law school profs who don't hide the ball as much as y'all Mods.

From Hack carping about what mst have been his reversal with Amerika in another threatPity I had nothing to do with that, huh?

<snipped various bitchery

Nice to see you're so above what you accuse everyone else of. /sarcasm

Been around a long time myself. Don't see this loss of 90% you're going on, have no idea where you're pulling that number from, though I could probably make a fair guess - might be considered impolite however.

It's a free site, it's a big internet. You dislike it so much? There's the door - don't let it hit you in the ass. Funny how you'd waste so much of your time and energy on something that by your estimation isn't worth it. Go fig.

(And no, I don't always agree with the Moderators. But by damn, they do a finer job of it than I've seen in a number of places. I'm quite content playing here, with both the good and the bad. YMMV, and if so, hey - find something else that works better, folks. No big.)

Pity I had nothing to do with that, huh?

I was just guessing it must have been your decision since you were carping about the reversal so much.

The condescension in the replies is pretty typically Moddish though. It's mighty hypocritical to constantly insist on civility and playing nice when the vast majority of Mods put on airs of supercilious superiority in the vast majority of their communications.

RP was the only Mod in that thread who comported himself with any class or savoir faire.

RP and SS are the only Mods I've seen who consistently make an effort to avoid the usual snarky tone that Mods seem to adopt immediately after being beamed up from grovelling hereabouts. Good on 'em. Too bad the example is ignored by their colleagues.

You really will have a much easier time arguing with the mods if you can stick to facts and logic instead of insulting them.

I was just guessing it must have been your decision since you were carping about the reversal so much.Actually, I was "carping" about their claims that the appeal process was insufficient. I never once made a comment one way or the other about the decision itself.

The condescension in the replies is pretty typically Moddish though. It's mighty hypocritical to constantly insist on civility and playing nice when the vast majority of Mods put on airs of supercilious superiority in the vast majority of their communications.Perhaps it's the superfluous sesquipedalian phraseology and belabored syntax we have to wade through in order to execute our volunteer duties.

RP was the only Mod in that thread who comported himself with any class or savoir faire.Herself.

RP and SS are the only Mods I've seen who consistently make an effort to avoid the usual snarky tone that Mods seem to adopt immediately after being beamed up from grovelling hereabouts. Good on 'em. Too bad the example is ignored by their colleagues.Huh. Funny. I was snarky before I was made a Moderator. And I was hardly groveling in my pre-Mod days. But, hey... why let evidence and reality get in the way of the colorful, if twisted, perceptions you've pulled out of thin air?

Oh, darn. There I go... being snarky again... what a horrible, horrible person I am :(

Nice to see you're so above what you accuse everyone else of. /sarcasm

Been around a long time myself. Don't see this loss of 90% you're going on, have no idea where you're pulling that number from, though I could probably make a fair guess - might be considered impolite however.

It's a free site, it's a big internet. You dislike it so much? There's the door - don't let it hit you in the ass. Funny how you'd waste so much of your time and energy on something that by your estimation isn't worth it. Go fig.

(And no, I don't always agree with the Moderators. But by damn, they do a finer job of it than I've seen in a number of places. I'm quite content playing here, with both the good and the bad. YMMV, and if so, hey - find something else that works better, folks. No big.)

Actually I never claimed to be above sarcasm. I rather like sarcasm, especially if done well as found in Swift and Cervantes.

The 90% loss of players number is a fair guess from data available to players. Last week the number of players online during a two hour span at update averaged around 220. When I was actively raiding last year the average online during update was in the 1400+ range. Numbers of players online during the (USA) daytime show a similar if not more pronounced drop over the last 12-18 months. According to the numbers we in the raider community have been able to put together, the loss of activity falls somewhere in a range of at minimum 68% and at maximum 93%. I picked a round number at the higher end of the spectrum to fire for effect a bit. It is still easily supportable by the numbers it is within our ability to get. Metrics of NS forum posting would probably show a drop in that range as well. Loss of nations may or may not fall in the same range, but loss of nations would be a questionable metric since there is no easily discoverable correlation between number of active nations and active players with the data available to players.

Actually, I think my attention to the subject shows that I do in fact like NS. It was a great source of infernet fun. It has grown lamer as activity has declined and Mods have become overweening in their unnecessary intrusion into the game and high handed approach to that intervention.

Heck, I remember the days when a Mod would at least have the decency to explain a punishment and the ramifications of it when asked direct questions.:headbang:

I understand that you and many who will comment here consider me a "bad guy" who brings nothing "constructive" to the game (I'm still fuzzy as to how or why anything in an online game is "constructive", but whatevah). However, since the Mods are fond of pointing out that this is Max's little e-world, I will point out that raiding has never been against the rules. Nor has expressing displeasure with Moderators or their actions. But do either, and these overstuffed referees who believe NS is theirs because they volunteered to do some janitorial work will find the nearest flimsy pretext to silence you.

NS is not the playground of the Mods. The content and play is generated by the active players. (who have dwindled, in part due to Mods overreaching intervention and holier-than-thou attitude).

You really will have a much easier time arguing with the mods if you can stick to facts and logic instead of insulting them.

Actually I am not arguing. I have not and am not appealing their flismy pretext, because what would be the point?

I did ask direct and specific questions about the charge, and especially, the particulars of their punishment. Those particulars cannot be found anywhere and the Mods have, so far, been reticent to give any answers.

Not that I expect much. I think the punishment is a not so subtle carrot and stick act intended to imply to the player that if they play nice and cut out what the Mods really didn't like--not the flimsy pretext charge stated--then they might be willing to give the nation back if the player grovels a bit. Maybe I'm wrong, but without any details, it is hard to think otherwise.

And finally, why should I stick to facts and logic when their primary tools are condescension and sarcasm?

Besides, I'm done begging and grovelling with them here, done quite enough of it over the years to little or no result. From no on I treat them from a manly perspective as I do in the rest of my life. I think they're pulling a hosejob, I'll call it a hosejob. They throw out an enexplained penalty for saying something I stand behind, I'll continue to stand behind it and ask direct questions as to its particulars.

There is no good reason to unman oneself when dealing with a Mod. Feeling the need to do so just to get a fair result mostly just tells you what kind of power-happy smalltimers you're dealing with.

The 90% loss of players number is a fair guess from data available to players. Last week the number of players online during a two hour span at update averaged around 220. When I was actively raiding last year the average online during update was in the 1400+ range.

The world contains 84,958 nations

If 90% of the players left theree would be some 10.000 nations left.


What are you trying to do anyway if you're not arguing?

And finally, why should I stick to facts and logic when their primary tools are condescension and sarcasm?Yeah. We're done here.

See? I'm a nice guy! Now you can run to your Livejournal and post long, misspelled rants about how I'm oppressing you by closing this train-wreck!