Jediphile

Again, there is a difference between saying that corresponding has taken place and telling other people about what was said in that correspondence. I said "net-nazi", which you cannot take to be a stab at your political position, of which I know nothing. That is not the same as a nazi, despite your attempt to infer it, and while you may not like, your out-of-the-blue deletion of inoffensive posts without warning or provocation should be expected to result in a harsh response. You could have discussed the matter. Instead you chose to just delete stuff and then forget about it. What do you think that tells me about your respect for Ztalker or me? I don't think "long live the dark side" is particularly insulting in light of the discussion. Besides, I did not do that on the open forum where you're rediculed in public. You could at least acknowledge that. But you could apply the rules equally to everyone instead of applying in one way towards Niner and another towards me. "Equal under the law" is a fairly common principle in any most societies based on legal principles. I should like to think that goes for Lucasforums too, but I've seen little that supports that.

I suppose I'm looking for some glimmer of the possibility that the mods might reevaluate their initial positions on matters like this one and not repeat those actions in the future. For example, El Sitharino has bascially stated that it was fine to delete my entire post because he felt some of it was objectionable and the rest was too immaterial to be allowed even though it was on-topic. I have yet to see the mods actually say that deleted stuff just because they don't think it's constructive despite being on-topic is wrong. Besides, it's scarcely as if there is much indication of progress here, which means we'll just be repeating this exercise in the future - if not with me, then with someone else. You seem open to consider this matter, and Niner certainly has with his recent comments. I don't know about Jae. But El Sitharino and Darth333 seem adamant that I'm just being willfully difficult and should go away or just stop talking altogether. I see little or no change there. What I'd want is a restoration of my faith that events like this one will not occur again in the future. Not deleting post with extreme prejudice would be a pretty good start. Actually taking complaints serious and do something about them instead of ignoring them in the hope that the problem can then be killed by silence would be another step. Talking to people when these things happen and actually listening to to what they say in return instead of dismissing them and hand down the verdict quickly from high like in a drumhead trial would also help. Now, that's a conceit, of course, as there will always be issues like this one. But if the alternative is cynicism and rejection of any attempt at making progress, then the first option still seems better to me. Sometimes you just have to choose to be naive because the alternative is even worse.

Actually, if I'm going to split hairs, it was Niner, when he said I did not use them. But there is a difference between saying that PMs have been posted between people, as I did, and referring to specific things stated in them, as Darth333 did. I have not made references to the PMs between you and me, for example, even though I could use them in support of my position. Because to me those PMs are private and not for the board, unless both sides agree that they are. In light of prompt deletion out of the blue, I felt it was an appropriate comment to make, given that I was to accept Niner's humor as well. But it would seem I'm not allowed to have a sense of humor. Or to mirror El Sitharino's position: Is it my fault if Darth333 did not see it that way? For someone claims that I insist on seeing things from the worst possible angle, she sure did little to promote the opposite herself... What significant point can't you say that about? Sure it could go that way, but it's still important to ask those questions now and then, even if you can never get a definite answer. If you do not believe in discussing these things, then go right ahead. In that case I'll have to conclude that discussions like this one are banned here and that the mods are above criticism and above the rules.

So what you're saying is that no matter what is posted, it will not be deleted unless at least two people complain about it first? This is so bad logic that it's just begging to be pointed out. That people did not complain does not automatically mean that they were fine with it. It just means that they didn't complain. To infer otherwise is to invoke "the silent majority". Heck, I can do that too and claim that there are few people on these boards because they are all annoyed with the lousy moderating, but just can't be bothered to complain about it. You'll note I generally don't do that. I leave that to really bad politicians... DISCLAIMER: The latter does not mean that I'm a politician, but is just an attempt to disprove the idea that I have no sense of humor. I deny that utterly. Since I quoted Niner, you can call my post only tauting if that was true of his as well. Both were stated during heated debates on the verge of flaming. If my post served to make matters worse in that situation, then surely so did Niner's. It's sad to watch how the mods insist on sticking together in order to cover up Niner's blunder here. Just the fact that my post was deleted underscores the problem quite well, and frankly it's somehow perversely amusing to see how the mods now backpedal to differentiate between two virtually identical situations. But I'll bite. Since you just said that it would take more than one complaint for you to delete or revise Niner's post, let me ask it openly: How many complaints did you receive about my posts before you deleted them? And, of course, even if I were to agree that quoting Niner is acceptable - which I don't - that still leaves the matter of what it was necessary to delete the entire post. Basically what you're saying here is that it was okay to delete the entire post, because YOU didn't think the rest of it was of a high enough quality. Sorry, but that is elistist in the extreme! It's also utterly untruthful, since the mods scarecely go through all the posts here and delete all those that are not of "sufficiently high quality". Basically you're saying that the rest of what I wrote did not have a quality that warranted its existence on these boards. Excuse me, but how DARE you judge the content of on-topic material like that?!? I mean, what if a new poster came to this board and said in his first post: "Hi, I'm new here, but I like KotOR, and I really hope they make KotOR3 and preferably soon, though I hope Bioware makes, because TSL sucked so bad, since all the Sith Lords were the worst in Star Wars history. Bye." Now, does this post add anything constructive to the discussion? No. It's all been said before. Is it inflamatory? Since it voices strong criticism of characters in TSL that other people care about, it could be. Should therefore be deleted? No. Yet by saying that what was in my post was "tacked on" and therefore fit for deletion, you're establishing a level of quality in posts here. That's elitist. Also, please point this rule out to me in the forum guidelines. Okay, ED. Take a deep breath, please... Okay? First, while I acknowledge that I very blunt here, I do believe it's relevant to point out the double standard here, and I would humbly ask that you look into the links I posted before judging solely on the bluntness of my comments here. Sadly that will be difficult, of course, since the allegedly offending posts are deleted and cannot be recovered And yes, my comments are blunt. More blunt that I would like. So why is that? Sadly, it's because it is my experience that it is the only way the mods will even acknowledge my existence. While the mods say here and elsewhere that being reasonable and tolerant will yield better results, that has - unfortunately - not proven to be my experience on many occasions. I frequently back down when people tell me that something I've pointed out is being considered by the mods, but here I find that's usually all that happens, and that if I leave it there, I'll have to wait until there are two thursdays in a week AND a cold day in Hell, if not longer... If you find my approach childish, then I can't blame you, but how can you fault me when it works, while the alternative did not? Niner actually responded this time and considered the matter. I too lament this. But if others will only be reasonable if I convince them that they must be because I'm so very unreasonable, then I'm left with little recourse. You're right that it's double standard, but can you blame me for following the examples of the mods? Sadly it was the only way to underscore my point, since nobody wanted to deal with it otherwise. And since I do believe the standards of the moderation and the rules of the forum are relevant to discuss, I maintain that it was necessary to bring this to a point, where the mods had no choice but to resolve the matter. What you conveniently neglect to mention here - referring to a PM not posted to the board and reffered to without my consent, I might add - is that that PM was an angry response to your decision to simply delete completely inoffensive a single post each by Ztalker and myself, where we wondered about what was permissible in response to Niner's now infamous "nerd rage" comment, which killed the discussion between liayd and myself. There was nothing offensive in those posts, and given that they were in response to mod's post about the level the discussion could be taken to, I don't think it can be considered to be unwarranted and fit for deletion. If we had continued, perhaps it had been relevant to step in, but we only posted one each and then stopped. Yet it was just deleted. If you act like a net-nazi, then don't be surprised if I make comments like your chosen name is fitting. That's humor, which I thought you liked, given that you had refused to do something about Niner's post. Let me ask something in return. Is it permissible to mention things from PMs openly on the board, as you do here? Because it seems to me that I'm being deleted for quoting something Niner say on the board... And your intents here can hardly be called humorous IMHO. Interesting. Basically you're saying that the staff will "grow some tolerance" once everybody else has. I see the other way around: Perhaps the rest of us would grow some tolerance if the staff did first by example. And that remains to be seen. When? I have yet to see it yield ANY results. What Niner has said in this topic is actually the closest thing I've witnessed since I joined this forum. Others have appeared reasonable at times, yes, but has remained with only words of sympathy that disappeared quickly once those were called upon to be anything more... Indeed... If LIAYD and myself were the only ones, then why bother? tk102 had already said something. Obviously. No, I absolutely deny that. It's true that I did find your comment funny, but it's not true that I intended to taunt you or have obvious dislike of you. At most you could accuse me of testing whether the comment was indeed as funny as the mods had claimed. I did not think so, so when I saw a similarly heated debate between especially yourself and another poster, I felt it wholly appropriate to quote the comment and then agree with it. After all, if it was just humor, then that would be okay, and if not, then would confirm my initial reaction to it. Since the mods did not like and repeatedly deleted my post, the latter would seem to be the case in the mods' eyes, despite their original claims to the contrary. Actually, I'm arrogant enough to believe that I have contributed constructively at times - http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=177894 And I dare to believe that even this topic can be constructive if we allow it to be. How many times am allowed to see the same pattern repeat itself before I'm allowed a conclusion? It becomes increasingly difficult to avoid as it continues to happen, you know. Have you considered the possibility, just the possibility, that it could also be because I'm the only one who endures to take the confrontation rather than just give up and run away? Much as I criticise the mods, that should suggest something positive to you. Thank you. Please believe me when I say that I resort to "taking justice into my own hands" only because I see no other recourse. You think I enjoy being universally hated by the mods? I don't. But I frankly find fair and open discussion without fear of random deletion by the mods and with fair rules that are applied equally to everyone to be a more important issue than Star Wars. That's the point here: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who does watch the watchers? I'm frequently left with the impression that nobody does, and that the mods care more about basking in their own autority and prove their relative power by making snide remarks at posters and then get away with it because they're mods and think themselves above the rules. That's not a stab at you or anyone in particular, but it's what I've been wondering for some time, and that's a problem. I sense The Source voicing something similar (please forgive me if I'm mistaken), and it worries me. I visit a number of other of other boards and forums, and this is the only one where I have ever seen it to that degree. It's also the only board where people have called me overly sensitive. Food for thought?

No, you're wrong. I might have edited the post, because I usually type pretty fast and then edit to correct spelling mistakes. But there was a first post that was deleted completely, and a second that was also deleted completely. Don't insult my intelligence by claiming otherwise. Bring you proof. I have no fear of it, since it can only be rope to hang yourself with. EDIT: Besides, the rules here give me little choice but to edit, since I'm not allowed to doublepost. If you started by acknowledging that I respect the rules in this regard instead of immediately using it as a pretense to clobber me over the head, maybe we could make some progress here. My point exactly. Which means you also get to make no claims as to me intents. The door swings both ways. Given my response, I should think I've have surely proven the opposite. And why exactly must I accept this on your part if you refuse to accept it for me? You made it in jest. Fine. So did I, when I quoted it. Why can't YOU accept that? I ask for the same standard to be applied to both posts. Why is that unacceptable? They are very similar. Either they both violate the rules, or neither does. Sophistry. The point you inferred that "nerd rage" was acceptable because I was to take offense. Isn't that enough? Or let me ask it this way: How many people must find a term objectionable, before you delete the post? 2? 5? 10? 50? Should we take a vote every time? Or is it just a matter of whatever the heck the mods happen to feel like at the given time? Then why do you refuse to see me comment the same way? I didn't like the comment the first time, but everyone told me I was wrong, so I took it to heart and moved on. Now that's apparently wrong too... I guess I just spoke above my caste, then... You did, so why can't I? It didn't violate the forum rules, after all. Ah, because you're a mod? Well, double standard... That remains to be seen. Indeed, the utter refusal of the mods to acknowledge the problem here is at the very heart of this topic. The continued denial to accept it as such just escalates the whole matter. So the question remains: 1. Why do mods resort to blatantly delete my posts rather than edit them? 2. Why do they they refuse to talk or even inform me of the matter? I will not have my posts deleted without reason. Make your case and I'll listen, though I can't promise I'll agree. But just trying to silenty kill me by quietly deleting my posts will only prompt me to fill my mailboxes with angry PMs and post topics like this one. Ah, now you put your foot in it. You know full well that I posted to several PMs to both Darth333 and tk102 on this very matter. In short, you're just plain wrong. I DID use the PM system. That especially Darth333 preferred to just ignore me is a big part of the problem here. And yes, those PMs can be produced to prove this. Thus you're either ignorant or lying when you say I have an aversion to using PMs. If the former is the case, you'd have more credibility if you actually took the time to find out what you're talking about. Your position is totally baseless. No. But I'll admit that I expected this to happen, even though it was fine for you to do. Clearly what you write is not nearly as important as who is writing... Actually, that was a yes/no question. Do you have an aversion to simply answering yes or no? EDIT: Oh, I'm quite willing to do that. It does require that people acknowledge their flaws first, however. After all, if they will not be reasonable, when these things are pointed out to them, then why should I be? Why should anyone? What rules were broken? I did what Niner did. His posts were not deleted or revised. Nothing in the forum rules states that I cannot quote him in the way I did before I make on-topic comments. I'll play by the rules, but they must be applied equally and to us all. It cannot be okay that Niner can make an comment about nerd rage and have that accepted, if I cannot then later quote it. That's double standard. It's actually quite plain.

I did not edit it. I posted a new post, where I did make on-topic comments. For example, Sephira concluded that Revan could never defeat Sidious because there were no circumstances that could allow it. I said that there are always circumstances in any fight, including shifting battlegrounds or - as happened - somebody betraying Sidious and stabbing him in the back. Now, who are you to tell me that is not an appropriate on-topic comment to make? If you answer that you're a moderator/administrator, then we're back to living in a caste-system on this forum, where the mods/admins are of a higher class than everyone else. And even if you were right and I posted for the reasons you claim - and that is not an admission in my part - it still does not change the fact that I can make just the same claim about your "nerd rage" comment a while back. After all, I have no doubt that you also made that comment to condescend and then added - to use your own words - "some on-topic material to cover your ass". Why can you do that while I cannot? Don't presume to know my intent - only I can know my mind. If you get to interpret, then so do I. So what does that mean? Does it mean that if I call you a D***head and can convince everyone else to accept that it is then okay to call you that? I shouldn't think so. But let me put it this way, looking back at it now and seeing what your comment caused, do you now feel that you helped or hindered the problems you saw back then? Does your answer make you part of the solution or part of the problem? Which would you rather be? If I had felt the matter had been taken seriously back then rather being rediculed for being too sensitive, there would have been no problem now. Apparently I'm not the only sensitive person here, given that it is so problematic that I dared to quote something you said... And naturally it will become increasingly difficult to see your "nerd rage" comment as the innocent joke you claim to be the more you and the other moderators protest now. That's your interpretation, not a fact. Besides, even if you were right, does that mean that my "on-topic material to cover my ass" must also be deleted? You admit that was on-topic. But it's still deleted, and you accept that. Even if you think I was trying to stir up trouble with the quote, that's a problem, especially for you as a mod, since you must set the example. Do you think you're off to a good start here? And no, I did not post it to stir up trouble. I deny that completely. I did it to prove a point. It's too bad that you all took it hook, line and sinker rather than actually talk to me about it. But as I said, it's what I've come to expect. Mods here seem to like throwing their authority around rather than actually trying to solve the problems. That this matter was blatantly ignored in the first is the reason this topic now exists, so it would befit the mods not to claim innocence themselves. Methinks thou doth protest too strongly. Furem fur cognoscit et lupum lupus. EDIT: Does that mean you admit to the police-state? If so, you have but to say it, and I shall must assuredly remove my sorry self from your illustrious presence.

I do not try to play innocent, but the fact remains that I posted a comment just like Niner's and made on-topic comments just like him. Yet his post was permitted, while mine was deleted. Why? How is that reasonable? How is my post against the rules when - as you say yourself - it was not inflamatory for its content? What, I'm not allowed to quote Niner and then agree with him?!? As for the intent, he posted it to a heated debate where he felt it was appropriate. I did not agree, but the mods did, so I have little choice but to accept it. But when I then do the same to a similarly heated debate, my posts are deleted. The little game I have had enough of is your attempt here to infer that my post was made in a heated debate where it was problematic, while Niner's was not. That is not true. The discussion between lukeiamyourdad and myself had certainly reached a point where several mods had stated that we should cool down. Was Niner's comment okay in that context? If so, then I fail to see how mine was any different. True, it was against my better judgment in that I objected to Niner's post in the past. But I don't make the rules, and I merely followed the guidelines that you yourself set down by example, when you said Niner's post was okay. Apparently that was fair enough. Until I do it, that is. Hence we have bigotry, double standards and hypocrisy. QED. If you're going to set down the rules like that, then isn't it fair that they apply equally to everyone? I don't agree that Niner's comment was okay, but then I'm not a moderator, and I don't make the rules. If that's the board you want, then fine, but I and every other poster must then be judged by the same rules. By allowing Niner's post and deleting mine, you are effectively judging him by a different standard than me. That's hypocrisy of the highest order. Why should any poster here tolerate that? Then why can't I repeat that? Honestly, I find your blatant attempts to villify me rather than deal with the issue in extremely poor taste. Sure, it's easier and certainly far more convenient to villify me than it is to resolve the matter. After all, you can just ban me and thereby dodge taking the fight among the moderators, but it doesn't change the fact that something stinks here. My comment was made in exactly the same spirit and context that Niner's was. If you think that's a problem, then okay, but then apply the same standard to Niner, please. Your attempt to rather villify me is frankly below board. Sadly I cannot claim surprise. It's what I've come to expect here. But it's okay, if you want that. If you insist on continuing the police-state, then at least have the decency to say so that I might seek political asylum elsewhere.

Wrong. The first post, perhaps, but the second was definitely on-topic, as I made several remarks Revan's power vs. Sidious'. Now, I cannot show you that, since you people deleted it, but if you find it, you'll see that was so. Therefore the rule on spamming does not apply. If it did, then it applied just as much to Niner's post as it did to mine. Either we were both right, or we were both wrong. Yet my post was deleted while his was not. Hence: Double standard. QED. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

I merely quoted Niner. Thus I did nothing to change it. Also: The forum rules do not specify the humor rule. Thus I cannot be in violation of the rules that apply here. http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=169078