Chrono Compendium
Zenan Plains - Site Discussion => Chrono Compendium Discussion => Topic started by: ZaichikArky on June 22, 2009, 09:57:06 am
-
I realize that the complaint wiki won't really address much since it addressed that one problem for which it was started for.
I don't get why members who are banned from the forum have to be banned from the IRC as well. It is completely unnecessary punishment because the forum and the irc are completely different places.
I wish that you guys would unban everyone who was banned from the forum. They should be allowed to use the IRC. They did nothing to deserve being kicked from the IRC and it's just a crappy policy.
-
I realize that the complaint wiki won't really address much since it addressed that one problem for which it was started for.
I don't get why members who are banned from the forum have to be banned from the IRC as well. It is completely unnecessary punishment because the forum and the irc are completely different places.
I wish that you guys would unban everyone who was banned from the forum. They should be allowed to use the IRC. They did nothing to deserve being kicked from the IRC and it's just a crappy policy.
That.
-
When it comes to forum and IRC banning, there are much of the same reasons for each that banning occurs, such as Spamming, Flaming, trolling...etc etc etc.
But when it comes to IRC banning, as long as the IRC user is not breaking the rules of the IRC (even if they somehow where banned on the forums), it is not worth banning them at all.
I will use Teaflower as an example, for she was a productive member of this forum. Even though she was banned from the forum, she did not break any rules on the IRC. So, therefore, banning her from the IRC was an action that was not worth it. It would be different if she were abusing the IRC, but in this case she did not.
The same follows for many other members who followed IRC rules yet were banned from the forums.
Banning from the IRC is something that should be taken with care. IRC is a public chat, therefore gives rights for all users (including banned forum members) to use it as long as they are following the guidelines for the IRC.
-
The IRC is part of the compendium though. If you don't want banned from it then don't get banned from the compendium's forums, and vias versa. It's simple and fair.
-
Was this recent? Cause I've been gone a couple days, and a couple days ago, Tea and Shadow got on IRC quite often.
Interesting. Are they banned from outlaws also? Or is that not a Compendium thing...?
-
Was this recent? Cause I've been gone a couple days, and a couple days ago, Tea and Shadow got on IRC quite often.
Interesting. Are they banned from outlaws also? Or is that not a Compendium thing...?
Yeah, it was recent. What happened was that Ramsus created #Outlaws for all the banned people to go. So instead of one big channel, all the banned people(and some not banned people) hang out at #Outlaws, but just about everyone thinks that they should be allowed on BOTH channels.
-
Our message forums and our IRC services may be different settings, but they're both a part of the Chrono Compendium. When somebody does something serious enough to warrant a ban, we don't want them hanging around on the periphery of the community. That just creates hard feelings. When you're fired from a job, you don't get to keep on hanging out in the breakroom, you know? If you earn a ban, you're finished with the Compendium. That's the only sensible way to do it. This very thread is an example of the ongoing community strife that the banned members' continuing pseudo-presence can cause. Those banned from the forums should be banned altogether from IRC as well.
Lest anyone forget, ZeaLitY is not exactly trigger-happy. Other than Laith, there haven't been any bannings in quite a while, except for those relating to the Cease & Disease crisis--all of whom had willingly chosen to take action that imperiled our entire community. I think those of you who are sore about it need to recognize that actions have consequences. Hopefully those banned will learn a lesson from their mistakes, but that lesson will have to be applied elsewhere. The banned people need to move on with their lives. They'll still have access to the Compendium's resources like the encyclopedia and game scripts, and that's good enough.
Meanwhile, the community needs to move on too. If you're pissed off about this, then you can quit in solidarity. But if you choose to stay here, you shouldn't be complaining and complaining about it on the forums (or in IRC). That's childish and selfish. If you have something to say, fire off a PM to one of the administrators. I guarantee you that they listen. They may not do what you want them to do, but they're not a bunch of monolithic fiends.
-
Our message forums and our IRC services may be different settings, but they're both a part of the Chrono Compendium. When somebody does something serious enough to warrant a ban, we don't want them hanging around on the periphery of the community. That just creates hard feelings. When you're fired from a job, you don't get to keep on hanging out in the breakroom, you know? If you earn a ban, you're finished with the Compendium. That's the only sensible way to do it. This very thread is an example of the ongoing community strife that the banned members' continuing pseudo-presence can cause. Those banned from the forums should be banned altogether from IRC as well.
Lest anyone forget, ZeaLitY is not exactly trigger-happy. Other than Laith, there haven't been any bannings in quite a while, except for those relating to the Cease & Disease crisis--all of whom had willingly chosen to take action that imperiled our entire community. I think those of you who are sore about it need to recognize that actions have consequences. Hopefully those banned will learn a lesson from their mistakes, but that lesson will have to be applied elsewhere. The banned people need to move on with their lives. They'll still have access to the Compendium's resources like the encyclopedia and game scripts, and that's good enough.
Meanwhile, the community needs to move on too. If you're pissed off about this, then you can quit in solidarity. But if you choose to stay here, you shouldn't be complaining and complaining about it on the forums (or in IRC). That's childish and selfish. If you have something to say, fire off a PM to one of the administrators. I guarantee you that they listen. They may not do what you want them to do, but they're not a bunch of monolithic fiends.
This is a forum that specifically deals with ways we think we can improve upon the community.
I put up a suggestion on how the community can be improved by improving one of its brand new policies that many, if not most people don't agree with. If you agree with it, that's your own thing and no one is criticizing that, but why is it selfish and immature to bring up in a mature manner a disagreement in a forum that encourages members to participate in making the community a better place?
-
You're right. This board is for making suggestions, and I perhaps overstepped to call the topic selfish. In the context of all the griping that's been done in the aftermath of the C&D crisis, most of which hasn't been constructive in the least and definitely hasn't been intended for the betterment of the community, I have been wary of this kind of "discussion." See, there's a difference between making suggestions and airing grievances. I interpreted this topic as being in the latter category, and the tone of your reply suggests that there likely is an element of sour grapes in your motive ("brand new policies that many, if not most people don't agree with"). I've studied the meaning that goes into words for most of my life; I usually see right through people's motives. This thread doesn't strike me as the productive effort you claim it is.
However, to the extent we can have a constructive discussion here, then by all means go for it. We could use more of that! Just make sure you take the time to think about what your intentions are, and why you want the "improvements" you do. I've yet to hear a compelling argument for allowing banned users to not be banned in IRC. Why would you want that? Your case so far is that:
1) The forums and IRC are different places (which is irrelevant, because they're both a part of the same community, a community whose common theme is an interest in the Chrono series)
2) There was more discussion going on before we started tightening the IRC rules (which is irrelevant, because much of that extra discussion was trash talk and nosepicking).
Don't be upset with community policies when you can't think of a good reason to oppose them and are left only with your emotional disgruntlement. I too hated to see spirited members of our community like Teaflower get the boot. But she leaked Crimson Echoes, you know? That's bad. Actions have consequences.
-
But she leaked Crimson Echoes, you know? That's bad. Actions have consequences.
And by God she leaked Crimson Echoes AFTER the warning went out. There's no defense and no coming back after that one.
-
You're right. This board is for making suggestions, and I perhaps overstepped to call the topic selfish. In the context of all the griping that's been done in the aftermath of the C&D crisis, most of which hasn't been constructive in the least and definitely hasn't been intended for the betterment of the community, I have been wary of this kind of "discussion." See, there's a difference between making suggestions and airing grievances. I interpreted this topic as being in the latter category, and the tone of your reply suggests that there likely is an element of sour grapes in your motive ("brand new policies that many, if not most people don't agree with"). I've studied the meaning that goes into words for most of my life; I usually see right through people's motives. This thread doesn't strike me as the productive effort you claim it is.
However, to the extent we can have a constructive discussion here, then by all means go for it. We could use more of that! Just make sure you take the time to think about what your intentions are, and why you want the "improvements" you do. I've yet to hear a compelling argument for allowing banned users to not be banned in IRC. Why would you want that? Your case so far is that:
1) The forums and IRC are different places (which is irrelevant, because they're both a part of the same community, a community whose common theme is an interest in the Chrono series)
2) There was more discussion going on before we started tightening the IRC rules (which is irrelevant, because much of that extra discussion was trash talk and nosepicking).
Don't be upset with community policies when you can't think of a good reason to oppose them and are left only with your emotional disgruntlement. I too hated to see spirited members of our community like Teaflower get the boot. But she leaked Crimson Echoes, you know? That's bad. Actions have consequences.
I don't think that I'm opposing community policies just because I have some kind of problem with members being banned. I mean, that's a part of it, but I'm trying to open up an honest discussion.
As of now, my impression is that the mods themselves don't know how to deal with this situation. This happened very recently so someone decided( and I don't know the rationale in the decision or who made it) that the IRC and the forum should be on the same page.
Obviously, I disagree with that. I can get the analogy about leaving the workplace, but CT is not work. We come here on our free time. Obviously what Tea did was a bad thing, but most members agree that she was punished enough. Punishing her from the IRC just seems too strict and I see no good reason to do it. She did nothing wrong in there, so why should she be removed? Her presence really did bring life into it. And it isn't only her, though she is the main example. Some others who frequented the IRC were banned too.
We get that they did a bad thing, and I'm not really trying to argue about that now, but punishing them twice for an action they did once is too harsh of a punishment.
On all the IRCs I have ever been to, this is the very first one where the forums were directly connected in this matter. It goes to show that most IRCs are really in a separate dimension than the forums. They are connected, but very vaguely. Always in the IRC, there are members who really don't post much in the forums and vice versa. They just don't have the same rules, and trying to enforce a universal policy just does not work out....
-
Simply being banned from the forums won't be followed by an IRC ban, unless you also behave inappropriately in the IRC channel. That is my final decision on the matter, however in this case that means the following people will be unbanned from the main IRC channel:
- Shadow D Darkman - His was only a forum ban due to his spammy posting behavior. He had yet to do anything inappropriate in IRC.
However, the following people will NOT be unbanned from #compendium:
- teaflower - teaflower's ban isn't a forum ban, it's a site ban. In this particular case, she's being punished for her involvement in the CE leak.
- Agasa - The same applies to Agasa.
- justin - The same here, too.
- Laith - his ban was due to both his forum and IRC behavior, and as such he's been banned from both.
If I missed anyone, let me know.
-
If I may make a short appeal on tea's behalf:
tea was not immediately removed from the IRC board until quite a bit after her ban on the forums inasmuch as the two punishments have a tangible difference in time. For this I plead autrefois convict, or a dismissal of tea's ban on IRC, on the basis that the two punishments can be construed as separate actions (and further double jeopardy) despite being called a "site ban" (Is she banned from the front page as well? That is more connected to the CC than IRC.) I know double jeopardy has already been plead, but it should be noted that the administration had failed to enforce her ban on IRC in a reasonable, non-tolerant amount of time, and by this, gave up their right, on a legal basis anyways, to ban her from #compendium. I realize this isn't a court of law, but I figured basic constitutional rights would apply here.
-
It's been only 2 weeks since her ban was announced, and about a week since we moved servers and could have even begun to actually ban people from IRC. It's only also been a week since the channel ops were trained in banning.
You make it sound like months went by.
-
Yes, but a tolerant atmosphere was present when tea was around for that duration. ZeaLitY demonstrated his ability to actively kick Laith because he was banned, for instance.
Proof:
*** mode/#compendium [+o ZeaLitY] by ChanServ
*** mode/#compendium [+b *!*44dcaa57@*.com] by ZeaLitY
*** Laith was kicked from #compendium by ZeaLitY [ZeaLitY]
<tea> :o
<kando> lmao
<tea> I take it you napped, Z.
<ZeaLitY> Today BROJ PMed me congratulating me for banning Laith and expressing thanks that IRC wouldn't so fucking stupid now
<Ramsus> The best way to set the tone, however, is by example.
<Jutty> I still don't understand why he was banned.
<Ramsus> Just something to keep in mind.
<ZeaLitY> He's been banned twice before for the exact same thing
<ZeaLitY> He trolls and antagonizes members; I received complaints on the forums and IRC both
<tea> brb
<Jutty> I do think it was because he didn't agree with you and was generally disliked by the "popular kids".
<Ramsus> Actually, he's been banned a few times in the past.
<Jutty> And I don't understand why you would tell someone to kill themselves.
<Jutty> Over an irc conversation.
* Carnivol thought it was a well established fact that internet isn't exactly the place you should put first on the list for "serious business"
<Jutty> I wasn't here for it tho so I only know about heresay.
<kando> ZeaLitY: for the record
<kando> teling someone to kill themselves
<kando> is quite sociopathic
<kando> just a little fyi
<tea> k b
*** ZeaLitY [~ZeaLitY@75.25.70.107] has quit [Ping timeout: 20 seconds]"
Yet nobody did this to tea... Why? I feel no real effort was made to keep tea off #compendium, but apparently for Laith there was.
EDIT: Added entire log, to prevent suspicion.
-
Yes, but a tolerant atmosphere was present when tea was around for that duration. ZeaLitY demonstrated his ability to actively kick Laith because he was banned, for instance.
Proof:
*** mode/#compendium [+o ZeaLitY] by ChanServ
*** mode/#compendium [+b *!*44dcaa57@*.com] by ZeaLitY
*** Laith was kicked from #compendium by ZeaLitY [ZeaLitY]
<tea> :o
<kando> lmao
<tea> I take it you napped, Z.
<ZeaLitY> Today BROJ PMed me congratulating me for banning Laith and expressing thanks that IRC wouldn't so fucking stupid now
<Ramsus> The best way to set the tone, however, is by example.
<Jutty> I still don't understand why he was banned.
<Ramsus> Just something to keep in mind.
<ZeaLitY> He's been banned twice before for the exact same thing
<ZeaLitY> He trolls and antagonizes members; I received complaints on the forums and IRC both
<tea> brb
<Jutty> I do think it was because he didn't agree with you and was generally disliked by the "popular kids".
<Ramsus> Actually, he's been banned a few times in the past.
<Jutty> And I don't understand why you would tell someone to kill themselves.
<Jutty> Over an irc conversation.
* Carnivol thought it was a well established fact that internet isn't exactly the place you should put first on the list for "serious business"
<Jutty> I wasn't here for it tho so I only know about heresay.
<kando> ZeaLitY: for the record
<kando> teling someone to kill themselves
<kando> is quite sociopathic
<kando> just a little fyi
<tea> k b
*** ZeaLitY [~ZeaLitY@75.25.70.107] has quit [Ping timeout: 20 seconds]"
Yet nobody did this to tea... Why? I feel no real effort was made to keep tea off #compendium, but apparently for Laith there was.
EDIT: Added entire log, to prevent suspicion.
The first week or so seemed tolerated because teaflower and Agasa were supposedly investigating the ROM leak a little more.
After that, her still being in #compendium basically came down to the fact that teaflower just whines too much and acts overly pathetic about the matter, and then causes other people to whine over her case as well, making it hard to just straight up kickban her while she's there. Nobody wants to be the target of all that whining and complaining, so it went ignored for another week or so. Eventually someone had to do it though, especially since #compendium was just becoming a hangout joint for supposedly banned members.
When it comes to forum and IRC banning, there are much of the same reasons for each that banning occurs, such as Spamming, Flaming, trolling...etc etc etc.
But when it comes to IRC banning, as long as the IRC user is not breaking the rules of the IRC (even if they somehow where banned on the forums), it is not worth banning them at all.
I will use Teaflower as an example, for she was a productive member of this forum. Even though she was banned from the forum, she did not break any rules on the IRC. So, therefore, banning her from the IRC was an action that was not worth it. It would be different if she were abusing the IRC, but in this case she did not.
The same follows for many other members who followed IRC rules yet were banned from the forums.
Banning from the IRC is something that should be taken with care. IRC is a public chat, therefore gives rights for all users (including banned forum members) to use it as long as they are following the guidelines for the IRC.
You make it sound like those individuals banned were banned because of forum offences, but they were not. They were banned for things like the CE leak or for being disruptive in the IRC channel. That's why your argument, and every iteration of it here, doesn't apply to anyone banned from the IRC channel except Shadow D Darkman. The purpose of the other individuals' bans were either to remove them from the site's community or to explicitly remove them from the IRC channel.
Furthermore, notice that we run our own private chat server. Our IRC server is for use by the Compendium and its community. It is not a general-use, public IRC server. But even if that weren't the case, remember that these individuals aren't banned from the server, they're banned from the #compendium channel.
-
A leaked whatever is a jurisdiction that frustrates the forums rules, let alone the rules of the owner of that leaked information and what-not.
I can also state, about Teaflower, that from what I know, there is an opinion of whining in the case. She talks to those she trusts, as if they were her family. Among such a thing, she relied on this forum as a get-away and a "home", if you will. I bet, if given a second chance, and knowingly (I speak to her almost every day when I am on), she would not have done such a thing. Even on the first offensive, she meerly was enticed and made the wrong decision. You can smoke, but you can also quite.
In any case of the matter, I do feel that this ordeal should be monitored more thoroughly and carefully. I understand that there is a reason at hand for many a member's banning from the IRC channel, but there is also a large amount of nonsense from it as well.
And by nonsense, I mean that this ordeal is being taken too far. As I stated before, just because a member violated a rule on the forum does not mean they are violating the rules on the IRC program. I have seen (for I have experience in both moderation and administrating a web-forum much like this) that many a good member have been banned, but they continue to contribute positive, healthy, and rule-following chat on things such as the IRC and other. It is when a member is breaking the IRC rules and abusing the IRC that they should be banned, not simply chatting with "friends".
-
Yes, but a tolerant atmosphere was present when tea was around for that duration. ZeaLitY demonstrated his ability to actively kick Laith because he was banned, for instance.
Proof:
...
Yet nobody did this to tea... Why? I feel no real effort was made to keep tea off #compendium, but apparently for Laith there was.
EDIT: Added entire log, to prevent suspicion.
The first week or so seemed tolerated because teaflower and Agasa were supposedly investigating the ROM leak a little more.
After that, her still being in #compendium basically came down to the fact that teaflower just whines too much and acts overly pathetic about the matter, and then causes other people to whine over her case as well, making it hard to just straight up kickban her while she's there. Nobody wants to be the target of all that whining and complaining, so it went ignored for another week or so. Eventually someone had to do it though, especially since #compendium was just becoming a hangout joint for supposedly banned members.
First off, good argument(I'm not whining, just arguing for sport ;)), and I think a few more moves and I might have to admit defeat. But...
This was never made official, so why are you using it as an official defense now? At any rate, I question the MO of ZeaLitY in your argument. If I remember correctly, ZeaLitY didn't believe tea one bit as the chat logs made it an 'open and shut' case and he expressed such. Not to mention, tea purportedly almost put ZeaLitY, JP et al in jail for her actions, so why would ZeaLitY consider something that could have affected his real life as lesser priority than the case of Laith and IRC?
-
A leaked whatever is a jurisdiction that frustrates the forums rules, let alone the rules of the owner of that leaked information and what-not.
You fail to understand that the CE leak could have led to SE issuing a take down request on our server. That means, not only would the forums or the site have disappeared, but also the IRC service would have been taken down as a consequence of her actions with the leak. As such, I don't believe that the CE leak is just a "forum rules" issue, nor that she should be able to continue to use the same service that her actions risked destroying.
Also, there's only been 4 IRC bans, one of which was for IRC behavior (Laith), and the other two for involvement with the CE leak. The last one (Shadow D Darkman) was temporary until the banning policy got sorted out and should be removed as soon as he can get an IRC client, join the server, and message one of the IRC operators.
First off, good argument(I'm not whining, just arguing for sport ;)), and I think a few more moves and I might have to admit defeat. But...
This was never made official, so why are you using it as an official defense now? At any rate, I question the MO of ZeaLitY in your argument. If I remember correctly, ZeaLitY didn't believe tea one bit as the chat logs made it an 'open and shut' case and he expressed such. Not to mention, tea purportedly almost put ZeaLitY, JP et al in jail for her actions, so why would ZeaLitY consider something that could have affected his real life as lesser priority than the case of Laith and IRC?
I overrode Zeality's jurisdiction in the case of the IRC service and the CE leakers, even though he had wanted them immediately banned from the service (it was official, just not explicitly stated outside of the admin forum, but it was intended to be implied by the announcement). Then he went away to Europe for a few weeks and came back to find the leak hadn't caused the shutdown of the site or any legal action, so he had probably cooled down on the matter for the time being and was waiting for me to make a final decision on the IRC bans in regards to the CE leakers and then carry out the final actions of banning them, especially since it was only a week or so ago that he probably learned how to ban people from the IRC channel.
Laith's ban, on the other hand, Zeality had sole jurisdiction over, not to mention the support of the admins, and he was also acting on more recent and as of then yet unaddressed causes, so I wouldn't compare the two cases.
-
This was never made official, so why are you using it as an official defense now?
The IRC was new, and because of the same reason that few things are ever updated around here; most of us are busy. I didn't consider these people lesser priority, but the policies hadn't been established yet.
And by nonsense, I mean that this ordeal is being taken too far.
Ah, yes. Let's welcome back Teaflower, and legitimize the entire leak, severely weakening our grounds of compliance with the C&D and encouraging other members to leak later versions since there are apparently no consequences. (If you're a girl, that is, since not a damn person is sticking up for Arutoa, who barely did anything besides condone and help a little.) Tea's position has already been weakened by her two attempts to get back on the site with an alias.
Also, we only had concrete evidence of the people involved with the leak on June 1, so we didn't move to ban anyone before then.
-
Tea's position has already been weakened by her two attempts to get back on the site with an alias.
Z, you just can't prove that. She said that one of the names you accuse her for was her helping to register a friend from her computer. As for the other one, she doesn't even know about.
Besides, no one is even arguing about her being banned from the forums. I'm not sure why you keep bringing that up.
-
I overrode Zeality's jurisdiction in the case of the IRC service and the CE leakers, even though he had wanted them immediately banned from the service. Then he went away to Europe for a few weeks and came back to find the leak hadn't caused the shutdown of the site or any legal action, so he had probably cooled down on the matter for the time being and was waiting for me to make a final decision on the IRC bans in regards to the CE leakers and then carry out the final actions of banning them, especially since it was only a week or so ago that he probably learned how to ban people from the IRC channel.
With Laith's ban, on the other hand, he had sole jurisdiction over as well as the support of the admins, and he was also acting on more recent and as yet unaddressed causes, so I wouldn't compare the two cases.
*sigh* So you had jurisdiction over it. I see...
Good times, but it looks like you win this time. :) Sorry for taking time out of your schedule, and no hard feelings towards the admin, I just wanted to have a little fun.
-
Tea's position has already been weakened by her two attempts to get back on the site with an alias.
Z, you just can't prove that. She said that one of the names you accuse her for was her helping to register a friend from her computer. As for the other one, she doesn't even know about.
Besides, no one is even arguing about her being banned from the forums. I'm not sure why you keep bringing that up.
Probably because it implies that she doesn't care about the reason of her ban and just wants to be back within the community. Allowing her to stay in the IRC channel while she has that outlook only encourages her to further circumvent her forum ban as well rather than live up to the consequences.
As far as duplicate accounts are concerned -- the same home IP address or e-mail addresses known to belong to banned users are more than probable cause to ban new accounts. Otherwise, bans become unenforceable.
-
Her language style was very obviously used both times, with liberal ellipses, "Yo."s, and "...want"s. I mean, it was really obvious :(
-
I don't know, I'm not sure why she'd lie about that.
The point is, if she wanted to, she could rejoin easily, but she wants your approval, because it means something to her. Since she doesn't have your approval, so won't rejoin.
It's easy to circumvent bans these days, anyone could do it.
So it isn't so much about getting her back in, it's asking you to reconsider site bans. But since you won't, then there really isn't much else to say.
-
Ah, from how this is being handled by other members, it seemed to me that an unorthodox amount of banning was going on in the IRC (due to my absence, and from biased viewing).
But, I still do believe (as I am sure many of us do), that this "issue" needs to be sorted out. Sometimes a forum can become a freedom for hope.
-
I don't know, I'm not sure why she'd lie about that.
The point is, if she wanted to, she could rejoin easily, but she wants your approval, because it means something to her. Since she doesn't have your approval, so won't rejoin.
It's easy to circumvent bans these days, anyone could do it.
So it isn't so much about getting her back in, it's asking you to reconsider site bans. But since you won't, then there really isn't much else to say.
As far as I'm concerned, as a result of this discussion, the scope of bans should be determined by the cause of the ban.
People banned for technically disrupting any of the site's functions or services (i.e. attempting to hack them or gain extra permissions) or for using those services to post or publish illegal or highly offensive content should be banned site-wide from all services, but otherwise the bans will be specific to the services being disrupted by that user's behavior.
The rest of the discussion here revolving around teaflower's ban has been in regards to the scope of the ban justified by the cause of her ban, and it's been determined (in my opinion), that a site wide ban is appropriate in this case. If you wish to disagree, do so directly, but don't just repeat the same arguments that have been addressed unless you can find a flaw in the reasoning behind the counter-argument that leaves them somehow unaddressed in your eyes.
Ah, from how this is being handled by other members, it seemed to me that an unorthodox amount of banning was going on in the IRC (due to my absence, and from biased viewing).
But, I still do believe (as I am sure many of us do), that this "issue" needs to be sorted out. Sometimes a forum can become a freedom for hope.
This matter has been sorted out and new, explicit policy on bans is being drafted. The end result is that almost none of the existing bans change under the new policy though.
-
I just have a few things to say:
Yes. Tea helped/took part in the leak. Yes, she tried to return to the site under aliases. Yes, its understandable that you banned her both ways.
However, I have to contest you when you start to describe her like a whiny bitch, or anything about her being annoying. Any time I've been on irc she has been just like any other person on the irc. Please, if you would, post a chat log or something showing this, and I will believe and resepct it.
However, if we wish to talk about annoying... Laith was annoying. yes indeed. But rethinking Shadow D Darkman's irc ban? Umm, he was just as bad as Laith, in my opinion.
Shall I go even further? Yes, I shall.
You, yourself, ZeaLitY, have been quite an annoying at times as well (albeit not as often), like when you post your "FUCK BALLS FISHSHIT DICKSTICKS SHIT ASSCOCK FUCK" rants on irc, and all the supposed "surreal" humor.
Yes, I went there. I know that some people have said that sometimes its just you and your rage and anger being let out, but that still doesn't make it not annoying.
Yeah, go ahead, turn this on me if you wish. My forum posts may be short, and you may think they're annoying, but usually I try to refrain from posting something unless its for a legit reason, like to say I liked something someone said, or maybe to post my short 2 cents into a conversation, or to go along with a joke. However if you still wish to say that my posts are annoying, I will respect that as long as you don't start saying other things that have no basis, or a legitimate basis, from my point of view.
Also, the reason so many people on irc were disappointed in tea leaving, and cared nothing much about the other people, is because tea was really the only one of those people that were ever constantly on irc, she made herself known on irc.
If I knew Arutoa or whoever or anyone else that was related to the incident (that I had any care for) then sure, I would be disappointed in their banning/leaving as well. Thing is, more people knew her than the others. Nothing to do with her girlyness (directly, that is. Her girlyness might have affected/caused some of her irc and forum popularity).
I'm not saying this all out of "I have something against you!!!!". I'm stating this as a "Lets just get down to it."
EDIT: also, it might be constructive to help stop this dispute if someone was to compile a list of arguments, counter arguments, and counter counters to all the reasons why/why not the banning should take place. I personally have no care either way, but some people do. I would make this list myself, however I dont know, and never knew, many of the arguments and counters argued in this situation... so...
-
I don't know, I'm not sure why she'd lie about that.
When you get down to it, isn't the leak a kind of lie? I'm not saying that would be a reason, but one could see that as justification for further ethical/moral situations, I think...If you're willing to do one, then the other (especially lesser) would be that much easier to do...
-
However, I have to contest you when you start to describe her like a whiny bitch, or anything about her being annoying. Any time I've been on irc she has been just like any other person on the irc. Please, if you would, post a chat log or something showing this, and I will believe and resepct it.
I've had to deal with other people protesting her own ban for a few days, and she's IMed me on MSN to ask about if things can go back to the way they were for a few days, now. This isn't mentioning all the white-knighting and e-pussying that was going on over her.
You, yourself, ZeaLitY, have been quite an annoying at times as well (albeit not as often), like when you post your "FUCK BALLS FISHSHIT DICKSTICKS SHIT ASSCOCK FUCK" rants on irc, and all the supposed "surreal" humor.
It's distinct, because it's 1) enjoyed by some members of the community who also participate in it, 2) not malicious in any way, shape, or form, and 3) not trolling. I'm not insulting people or impinging upon their fun.
She risked the entire Chrono Compendium and the personal well-being and financial weal of myself and Agent 12. She nearly made it so no one could enjoy the Compendium: not me, not you, not lurkers, not random visitors stopping by for a quick piece of information. And she's been banned. How can you people support such an incredible breach of ethics and justice by doubting the validity of a ban given for an action that endangered the entire site and threatened two people with extortionate fines?
-
I just have a few things to say:
Yes. Tea helped/took part in the leak. Yes, she tried to return to the site under aliases. Yes, its understandable that you banned her both ways.
However, I have to contest you when you start to describe her like a whiny bitch, or anything about her being annoying. Any time I've been on irc she has been just like any other person on the irc. Please, if you would, post a chat log or something showing this, and I will believe and resepct it.
However, if we wish to talk about annoying... Laith was annoying. yes indeed. But rethinking Shadow D Darkman's irc ban? Umm, he was just as bad as Laith, in my opinion.
Shall I go even further? Yes, I shall.
You, yourself, ZeaLitY, have been quite an annoying at times as well (albeit not as often), like when you post your "FUCK BALLS FISHSHIT DICKSTICKS SHIT ASSCOCK FUCK" rants on irc, and all the supposed "surreal" humor.
Yes, I went there. I know that some people have said that sometimes its just you and your rage and anger being let out, but that still doesn't make it not annoying.
Yeah, go ahead, turn this on me if you wish. My forum posts may be short, and you may think they're annoying, but usually I try to refrain from posting something unless its for a legit reason, like to say I liked something someone said, or maybe to post my short 2 cents into a conversation, or to go along with a joke. However if you still wish to say that my posts are annoying, I will respect that as long as you don't start saying other things that have no basis, or a legitimate basis, from my point of view.
Also, the reason so many people on irc were disappointed in tea leaving, and cared nothing much about the other people, is because tea was really the only one of those people that were ever constantly on irc, she made herself known on irc.
If I knew Arutoa or whoever or anyone else that was related to the incident (that I had any care for) then sure, I would be disappointed in their banning/leaving as well. Thing is, more people knew her than the others. Nothing to do with her girlyness (directly, that is. Her girlyness might have affected/caused some of her irc and forum popularity).
I'm not saying this all out of "I have something against you!!!!". I'm stating this as a "Lets just get down to it."
EDIT: also, it might be constructive to help stop this dispute if someone was to compile a list of arguments, counter arguments, and counter counters to all the reasons why/why not the banning should take place. I personally have no care either way, but some people do. I would make this list myself, however I dont know, and never knew, many of the arguments and counters argued in this situation... so...
Jun 20 2009:18:16 < tea> ... no. Please no!
Jun 20 2009:18:16 < tea> It's fun there, but no one is ever there!
Jun 20 2009:18:16 < tea> No Ramsus, no FaFniR, no ZealitY, no NOBODY!
Jun 20 2009:18:17 < tea> Ramsus, don't make me live there forever!
I'd get that kind of reaction anytime she felt as though her banning might soon take effect. Also, this thread is a good summary/list of arguments for and against her banning. Did you read it?
Also, if you think Zeality should be banned from IRC, feel free to bring up another topic. We can argue that out, and I'll carry out the sentence if he really should be. However, banning Zeality and banning Laith have nothing to do with banning teaflower. Be sure to separate the two topics clearly when you argue any of them.
-
Do you have the authority to do that, Ramsus? Nobody voted you as the site Arbiter, and so, unless ZeaLitY appointed you, you wouldn't have any standing to ban the site owner. Even if you have the technical means, it'd be a pretty severe abuse of power.
(Edited for clarity.)
-
She risked the entire Chrono Compendium and the personal well-being and financial weal of myself and Agent 12. She nearly made it so no one could enjoy the Compendium: not me, not you, not lurkers, not random visitors stopping by for a quick piece of information.
Well, that's only if you think there was a good chance Square would sue you and take down this site over an alpha leak by someone that wasn't you guys.
Her betraying your trust was a legitimate reason to ban her (and the other leakers), but I'm still skeptical that the alpha leak put you or this site in any danger. It misrepresented your work (another good reason to ban the leakers), of course.
I still think the leakers deserved the banhammer, and the important thing is what you perceived the danger level to be, as the risk was yours and not mine.
-
Well, more than a real lawsuit, the issue is just some kind of simple punitive measure. Square could easily come to someone and say "give us $15,000 in settlement or we'll sue you. You cannot tell anyone about this or we'll sue you." Or, Square could just tell our domain to pull the plug on the site; commercial servers usually comply with this sort of thing. So more than being sued, there was a risk of other actions that could easily be fired off.
-
She risked the entire Chrono Compendium and the personal well-being and financial weal of myself and Agent 12. She nearly made it so no one could enjoy the Compendium: not me, not you, not lurkers, not random visitors stopping by for a quick piece of information. And she's been banned. How can you people support such an incredible breach of ethics and justice by doubting the validity of a ban given for an action that endangered the entire site and threatened two people with extortionate fines?
I guess people want to forgive her because she is a very well-liked and was a very important member here. Also, she's very young and impressionable. I think that she really didn't think through what she was doing because she didn't know the harm in it. I guess she figured it out afterwards, but it was too late then. She is sorry about it, and even if you think what she did was inexcusable, I think it's more important that nothing became of it.
-
This isn't mentioning all the white-knighting and e-pussying that was going on over her.
I'll have you know I was 'grey-knighting'! :roll:
...Well looks like it's time to hit the ol' dusty trail. There's really no more good argumentation to this topic as it looks like nobody else is going to get 'unbanned'.
-
It's distinct, because it's 1) enjoyed by some members of the community who also participate in it, 2) not malicious in any way, shape, or form, and 3) not trolling. I'm not insulting people or impinging upon their fun.
None the less it can be annoying. Laith and Shadow D Darkman enjoyed eachother's company and inane comments. However, yes, they trolled and what you were doing was not. So yes, I will accept that distinction. (but it still bothers me =D ehehe)
Now on the matter of tea...It is understandable for someone to make a personal request once or twice...
...however if people are bothering you 24/7, and if shes bothing you everytime you get on MSN, then yes, I would call that annoying.
Also, if you think Zeality should be banned from IRC, feel free to bring up another topic. We can argue that out, and I'll carry out the sentence if he really should be. However, banning Zeality and banning Laith have nothing to do with banning teaflower. Be sure to separate the two topics clearly when you argue any of them.
I posted about Laith because somone had posted about him priorly. Same with teaflower. I posted about ZeaLitY (and myself) as an example, as a statment like "We've all done something wrong at one time or another, we arent 100% innnocent, and no ones perfect." I'm not saying ZeaLitY or myself are ban-worthy... I just got the vibe from this topic that everyone was all like "condemn condemn condemn" and so it just felt so... dark, and condemning.
Do you have the authority to do that, Ramsus? Nobody voted you as the site Arbiter, and so, unless ZeaLitY appointed you, you wouldn't have any standing to ban the site owner. Even if you have the technical means, it'd be a pretty severe abuse of power.
Really dont think he intended to, it seemed just like a smart remark to him misunderstanding the purpose of my post.
-
Well, more than a real lawsuit, the issue is just some kind of simple punitive measure. Square could easily come to someone and say "give us $15,000 in settlement or we'll sue you. You cannot tell anyone about this or we'll sue you." Or, Square could just tell our domain to pull the plug on the site; commercial servers usually comply with this sort of thing. So more than being sued, there was a risk of other actions that could easily be fired off.
I never thought of it that way. That might actually be more of a reason to refrain from bashing Square (which I won't do on here any more, promise), than not to let CE leak, since they could probably demand a settlement right now if they really wanted to. But you do make a good point about the risk you guys are facing if the game is distributed through surreptitious means. Thanks for pointing it out.
-
The IRC is part of the compendium though. If you don't want banned from it then don't get banned from the compendium's forums, and vias versa. It's simple and fair.
Agreed. I don't even see how there can be a debate over it, myself. I didn't know any of the banned folks particularly well, but given their decision to leak the damn thing, and their total indifference toward the possible consequences for the CE staff, they don't have a place in the community IMO.
I think the decision to give them their own meeting place at #outlaws is both generous and appropriate. Shows the admins to have a sense of humour about them by the title.
-
Do you have the authority to do that, Ramsus? Nobody voted you as the site Arbiter, and so, unless ZeaLitY appointed you, you wouldn't have any standing to ban the site owner. Even if you have the technical means, it'd be a pretty severe abuse of power.
(Edited for clarity.)
That would be by my authority as a friend, which I wouldn't consider myself if I let him ruin the very community I helped him build, or if I let him become unruly and tyrannical slave to his own cult of personality simply because he was surrounded by too many yes-men or he made the mistake of removing everyone who'd be honest and frank with him. I know he's better than that -- much better, in fact -- and so I'll never sit idly by and quietly let him become the object of his own disgust.
And ultimately, even I am accountable -- if not to Zeality, then to the visitors of this site and to the sense of fairness and justice naturally ingrained into all social beings.
For the most part though, I want members to openly air out their grievances where the admins and all the visitors can see them. Nothing is worse than only hearing the praise people give you and none of their criticisms. I want them to understand that people aren't banned here for dissent, even if that means I have to use up all my free time outside of work addressing the same complaints over and over again.
She risked the entire Chrono Compendium and the personal well-being and financial weal of myself and Agent 12. She nearly made it so no one could enjoy the Compendium: not me, not you, not lurkers, not random visitors stopping by for a quick piece of information. And she's been banned. How can you people support such an incredible breach of ethics and justice by doubting the validity of a ban given for an action that endangered the entire site and threatened two people with extortionate fines?
I guess people want to forgive her because she is a very well-liked and was a very important member here. Also, she's very young and impressionable. I think that she really didn't think through what she was doing because she didn't know the harm in it. I guess she figured it out afterwards, but it was too late then. She is sorry about it, and even if you think what she did was inexcusable, I think it's more important that nothing became of it.
And no doubt, a lot of people have forgiven her, but that doesn't remove her from having to face the consequences of her actions. When it comes to the Compendium, being banned is not related to how popular or well-liked you are, but rather the level of your decorum and the nature of your crimes. The day that changes is the day I leave.
She risked the entire Chrono Compendium and the personal well-being and financial weal of myself and Agent 12. She nearly made it so no one could enjoy the Compendium: not me, not you, not lurkers, not random visitors stopping by for a quick piece of information.
Well, that's only if you think there was a good chance Square would sue you and take down this site over an alpha leak by someone that wasn't you guys.
Her betraying your trust was a legitimate reason to ban her (and the other leakers), but I'm still skeptical that the alpha leak put you or this site in any danger. It misrepresented your work (another good reason to ban the leakers), of course.
I still think the leakers deserved the banhammer, and the important thing is what you perceived the danger level to be, as the risk was yours and not mine.
I'm not on a first-name basis with our hosting providers, or even on a person-to-person basis with them. I've never physically seen the machine I administrate, and I've never even visited the city it's collocated in. If they got a nasty, corporate letter asking them to take down our server due to an intellectual property violation, would they really know any better? And how hard would that be for SE? It'd just be a 5-minute address lookup and a 30 minute typing job, if not that.
And no, you don't have to sue someone to send out a take-down request to their hosting provider. We've had hosting providers pull out servers from people hosting some of our files, because they were copyrighted MP3s. No warnings, just gone -- the entire server too.
Also, if it seems like I'm always playing out worst-case scenarios here, it's because that's how you judge situations when you have something to lose. Planning along the path of what's probable or most likely is what you do when what you have to gain outweighs what you have to lose, which is common enough, but in cases where the opposite is true that kind of decision making leads to your eventual failure in the game of survival. You have to also consider what's possible in that case and plan accordingly, which is why we do monthly backups now that we run a dedicated server. After all, it's more than possible that we'll get hacked (I've seen a few friends' servers get hacked before), but it's not very probable.
Basically, it's kind of like playing poker. You have to consider what kind of hands he could have before considering what the most likely hand he has is, and then account for what the two of you are willing to gain or lose. Then you have to consider just what kind of person the other player really is -- what's his nature, his character. Then you make your bets and play your cards.
It's not as simple as always playing the odds.
-
I didn't expect anybody to be banned but I understand the reasons for almost all of them. Except Shadow. Apparently he just annoyed a lot of people and spewed spoilers? I just don't know the story there. But I'm sure there's a legit reason.
-
ShadowDarkman comes into #outlaws sometimes. He tells me he got banned for facepalming too much.
Kind of seems to me he should have got a temp ban, but maybe everyone was too tired of the spam....:picardno
-
he was a pretty big annoyance, imo...
-
ShadowDarkman comes into #outlaws sometimes. He tells me he got banned for facepalming too much.
Kind of seems to me he should have got a temp ban, but maybe everyone was too tired of the spam....:picardno
Let me put it this way, he averaged 30-40 posts per day, even after he was put on a probationary status. As a result, he became the center of too many discussions; let's not make him the center of this one too.
-
Even so, he actually manage to gain some friend like tea and Hypernerd. Well, I guess that is because both are good friend each other, and whoever tea makes friend with, Hypernerd follow the same step, except Laith.
I also do not know the story, I guess it can be track down back at the frustration thread, someone mention a big battle of Shadow vs Compendium there :?
Ramsus is right, let we bury this matter and be forgotten once for all.
EDIT::
I afraid of Language Barrier I got sometime whenever I communicate, is that really an annoyance and deserve ban? I always like to practice up my English to perfection, but it might take a long years.
-
EDIT::
I afraid of Language Barrier I got sometime whenever I communicate, is that really an annoyance and deserve ban? I always like to practice up my English to perfection, but it might take a long years.
It may be an annoyance to some, because difficulty in comprehension can be frustrating, but, so long as you make the effort to communicate clearly, I will assure you that it is perfectly acceptable to speak imperfect English, and to practice your English on these forums (so long as your posts are relevant to the topic), and that if any administrators are wavering on the subject, I will stamp on their feet until they see the wisdom of adopting a cosmopolitan attitude. (Really, though, I don't anticipate any disagreement from them.)
-
The IRC bans with channel #Outlaw are splitting the community and really just driving a wedge between sympathizers and people for the bans. Conversation is actually more active in #Outlaws than #Compendium in my experience. Then again I don't even know why I'm typing this since the admin considers me an idiot with zero influence.
-
The IRC bans with channel #Outlaw are splitting the community and really just driving a wedge between sympathizers and people for the bans. Conversation is actually more active in #Outlaws than #Compendium in my experience. Then again I don't even know why I'm typing this since the admin considers me an idiot with zero influence.
Are you saying that we should either get rid of #outlaws or undo the IRC bans, but not have both? Personally, I think this "wedge" and the sympathizers is just the natural result of banning someone who has friends. Naturally, they'll speak up in favor of their friend, even when it's a closed case sort of deal, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't ban someone just because they have lots of friends on the site or their friends try really hard to get them unbanned. The only reason this outcry didn't reach a peak until just now was because the full effect of the CE leak ban didn't set in until just now, so everyone suddenly feels what it means to have a friend banned.
As for the activity levels in the chat room, do we even really want three quarters of the activity to be the same 2 or 3 people who always happen to be there? Should the reason people join the channel be so they can chat specifically with Laith and teaflower about cocks and underage girls or stupid older brothers and sisters, or about not having anything to eat? I don't think so.
The real purpose of the IRC channel is simply to give site members a means to chit chat with each other about little things that would just spam up the forums or to collaborate in real time. It's to keep people from doing what Shadow D Darkman used to do and sit around all day posting 30-40 one-line responses to every new post and topic. There doesn't have to be a ton of crazy bullshit going on all the time just to accomplish that, just enough people to say hi and maybe strike up a short conversation with.
But hell, it didn't even exist more than a few months ago, and may not exist more than another year or so.
Also, what's with all the passive aggressive bullshit? If you have something to say, then say it and stick to it. Quit with this, "But it won't matter because the person in charge won't listen" or "I'd probably get banned for saying" bullshit and just say what you want to say. Do so in a public forum like this one if a private chat doesn't have an effect, and then judge the persuasive value of your argument on the result.
And if you want to complain about someone blowing you off, then address it frankly.
-
I was referring to what Z said about me. #Outlaws will just split conversation. If those people aren't welcome to the community no need to give them false hope or anything just completely get rid of them so they can move on. This is almost the equivalent of leading someone on.
-
The IRC bans with channel #Outlaw are splitting the community and really just driving a wedge between sympathizers and people for the bans. Conversation is actually more active in #Outlaws than #Compendium in my experience. Then again I don't even know why I'm typing this since the admin considers me an idiot with zero influence.
#compendium and #outlaws activity really depends on the time of day. I was in both for most of yesterday and there was hardly a word said in Outlaws, compared to a long running and (mostly) intelligent discussion in #compendium. Maybe it's more active when you're there, because you actually talk. Besides, you can't base judgement about the IRC on just a few days' or weeks' experience. Give it a bit more time before making your verdict.
-
As for the activity levels in the chat room, do we even really want three quarters of the activity to be the same 2 or 3 people who always happen to be there? Should the reason people join the channel be so they can chat specifically with Laith and teaflower about cocks and underage girls or stupid older brothers and sisters, or about not having anything to eat? I don't think so.
Haha, this has to be my most favorite of your arguments =D
-
It seems, besides the very bannable infractions teaflower was involved in, that there is concern for her well-being in real life given that the Compendium had been her escape from real life crappiness. For those of you who have such concerns, remember that the Compendium is one among many videogame-oriented sites with fantastic forum communities. Leaking a copy of Crimson Echoes after the C&D gets a person banned from the Compendium certainly, but doesn't get you banned from other fan communities.
I've been doing some ghosting of the Suikoden fan communities out there, for example, and there's at least three very (http://www.suikosource.com/) active (http://www.suikox.com/) forum communities. (http://gensopedia.duefiumi.com/index.php?title=Main_Page) I imagine that this trend holds with several other videogame series; those who have been banned from the Compendium and feel deprived on an emotional level need to seek out the great beyond, because there's some wonderful things waiting out there.
-
I do agree that the outlaws thing is driving a wedge between the community, but I guess it's because of who goes there. Jutty, I wouldn't say one channel is more active than the other. Sometimes #compendium is more active.
Kid123, don't be silly. If some people comment on your language, just remind them you aren't a native speaker. I have come to realize that the mods here don't just ban people on personal vandettas, so even if it is a "problem" on other communities, it isn't here.
Also, I just want to say that I appreciate the dialog. On most other communities, this thread would be closed before even hitting page two. I appreciate the patience Ramsus has, even though I don't agree with his position.
I guess that makes a nice community, which is why, barring some other new rules, I probably won't leave.
-
I'mma ban everyone from IRL if the emoing keeps up.