I was 1 click away from posting this in the original thread, but decided that rather than take a bull**** ban I’d post it here. If you wanna skip the Shii bashing, I bolded the first line of genius ideas.

Shii Posted:

That’s the thing; it’s not that CZ picked top buildrs to be a part of this task force, it’s that intelligent, well-spoken, creative players typically tend to be good at ForumBuildr too. That’s the same reason the Apprentice team has a lot of faces in this rules committee too.

What I don’t really get is how anyone is complaining; in all honesty, I can’t remember ever being involved on a game/forum that directly let users help discuss and implement rules and onsite policies.

You guys are ****ing about “not being represented,” would you have preferred there be NO players and let the mods and admins “do all the representing?” Cuz that’s your other option. Personally, I think we’ve accomplished a good amount, from letting shock be postable in RP to this new community ban measure, so I don’t see why there’s so much bumhurt going on in this thread.

Maybe next time, CZ can just involve no players in their site policy discussions, and we can see how much better that works out.

I’m surprised you can type with JB’s male reproductive organ so far down your throat. This post is precisely why people don’t like you (that and the whole wanting-to-****-wolves thing).

You may as well have posted *garblblble slurrrrrpr* I’m intelligent *gfgfffghjhjhh* ...representative sample… *gjhjfhjhjhskhjh* I Log in to see images! JB *slllululululuurp*

IMO who was in the rules club should have stayed secret if only for the reason that NO ONE of any consequence feels like Shii is representing their opinions. Your first sentence alone is one of the most douchy posts I think I have ever read. Your whole post contains more trolling than in all of AH’s posts combined.

I guarantee you that if anyone came in this thread and posted things saying the exact opposite of what you just said, they would get banned for trolling.

Instead of coming up with reasons to ban someone, what you fabulous persons SHOULD be doing is completely rethinking the ban system.

For example… the number 1 thing that should happen is:

This would get rid of 99% of the selective modding threads and complaints. It would work as follows: Everyone not permabanned gets a clean slate when it comes to bans. Then, if someone clearly breaks a rule, they get a 24 hour ban. The next time they break a rule, they get a 3 day ban. the next time, a 7 day ban. The difference is, if you go a month (or however long you want to do it) without a ban, you go back a step (if I troll a CD thread, I get banned for 24 hours. If I go a month after that without being banned, my next ban would be a one day ban).

Another big change that should happen is in CD, the OP is not always innocent. For example, if Shii were to make a thread about the rules committee and starts it with his first post, he should be banned for trolling. Saying “everyone in the rules committee/ good at forumbuildr/is an apprentice is smarter than you” should be the same as someone saying “You are dumb” which counts as trolling.

Everyone not in the Rules committee should post their suggestions here IMO. That way no one can **** about being underrepresented because Shii is a fabulous person.

[quote=I’m a huge fabulous person]This is a horrible idea and Shii is an excellent user. What inspires you to be so malicious?

Edit: I almost forgot, downvoted.[/quote]

you’re a huge fabulous person, downvoated.

Lee_Harvey_Oswald Posted:

you’re a huge fabulous person, downvoated.

you obviously missed the joke. downvoted.

Log in to see images!

****in A. THanks for not posting this in CD, Fail Log in to see images!

Also yeah. high horse- get off it shii- kthanks Log in to see images!

Raepdog Posted:

I agre, there should be standardized lengths for bans and categories for them.

This might be a good idea. If done, then instead of the OP idea about stepping down a level after a month, how about each time you are banned you get banned for the sum length of all bans you’ve deserved, and then when it “cools off” the least offensive ban gets removed. I am fine with reliably long bans for people that post my home address.

ssorryy i cantt0 poutt my iuppoinions in a asmsanrt wayy they dodn’t count.

FAIL Posted:

yeah I mean it isn’t as black and white as my example… but like Raepdog said there could be different ban categories, with the steps varying based on the severity of the offense.

Sorta like this.

Mild Ban A day

Moderate Ban A Week

Sever Ban A Month

Permaban A ****ing Life Time

Each one would have different explains like for swearing in Gd or posting personal information, with tweaks for repeat offenders.

Well firstly, I’m glad you didn’t post that in CD.

Annnyyywaaayy, as to my responses:

FAIL Posted:

I’m surprised you can type with JB’s male reproductive organ so far down your throat. This post is precisely why people don’t like you (that and the whole wanting-to-****-wolves thing).

You may as well have posted *garblblble slurrrrrpr* I’m intelligent *gfgfffghjhjhh* ...representative sample… *gjhjfhjhjhskhjh* I JB *slllululululuurp*

IMO who was in the rules club should have stayed secret if only for the reason that NO ONE of any consequence feels like Shii is representing their opinions. Your first sentence alone is one of the most douchy posts I think I have ever read. Your whole post contains more trolling than in all of AH’s posts combined.

The members of the “rules club” were supposed to stay secret; MC Banhammer inadvertently spilled and that’s that. Yeh, it was a pretty douchey post, the first line especially, but when people are throwing accusations and false bases around at their leisure, bumuming whatever they’d like, I felt like it was a necessary post.

Just for your own information, Hobart thanked me for being one of about 2 players involved in this committee to even step up and discuss it, rather than be completely silent. And if I recall, in Fran’s post she agreed that I was one of the players she felt was a good candidate for the team. And we all know how much of a Person of Consequence she is. Log in to see images! I could’ve just ignored the thread and the complaints and let you guys think what you wanted; if that’s what you’d have preferred, then I’m sorry.

Also, I don’t exactly see why “people not liking me” is relevant to this discussion. I’ve never tried to be one of the “cool crew” or one of the “popular, liked players.” Believe it or not, my well-being is not dependent upon what a group of players on an online game think of me. And we both know that you’re actually aware of this, but you’re ****ed off at me at the moment, which is fine.

FAIL Posted:

I guarantee you that if anyone came in this thread and posted things saying the exact opposite of what you just said, they would get banned for trolling.

Instead of coming up with reasons to ban someone, what you fabulous persons SHOULD be doing is completely rethinking the ban system.

For example… the number 1 thing that should happen is:

STANDARDIZE BAN LENGTHS

This very point has been hashed and re-hashed several times. The problem with it is that yes, while it sounds good on paper, putting it into practice is nigh impossible when you still have 7 different moderators who all have their own subjective whims and decisions.

So you have a standard ban length, FINE! This does you no good whatsoever when you’re still being banned for something you think is completely legitimate. Who cares if you get 3 days or 7 days on a bull**** ban; it’s still bull****.

That’s why it hasn’t been implemented; we were trying to work on ways to reduce the subjective nature of the mod’s decisions.

FAIL Posted:

This would get rid of 99% of the selective modding threads and complaints. It would work as follows: Everyone not permabanned gets a clean slate when it comes to bans. Then, if someone clearly breaks a rule, they get a 24 hour ban. The next time they break a rule, they get a 3 day ban. the next time, a 7 day ban. The difference is, if you go a month (or however long you want to do it) without a ban, you go back a step (if I troll a CD thread, I get banned for 24 hours. If I go a month after that without being banned, my next ban would be a one day ban).

Except those 99% you claim that this will get rid of aren’t concerned with the length of time they receive for a ban. They’re ****ed because they did something that they didn’t feel was banworthy.

Take your bummilk, for instance. Were you ****ed because of the length, or the fact that there was a ban at all?

Fingerz Posted:

Also:

MEGA BOO @ MOD-MEMBER RELATIONS TEAM for allowing shock to be embedded wherever the **** ppl feel like it in RP forums. Idiots. Seriously. You all BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW about nobody RP’ing anymore, and GEE I WONDER WHY. Good job.

That got implemented because of a bunch of trolls saying shock should be legal. It really sucks when people say “do something because we want it” and then when it happens you get ****ed at us for doing it.

You can’t please everyone.

FINAL COMMENTS: While I don’t deny that my post was pretty douchey, and pretty high-horsey, it’s very difficult to make post in defense of something we did as a secret group without sounding like I’m trying to be holier-than-thou.

And for all the accusations of admin-male reproductive organ-sucking, remember that every time you insult the decisions and the outcomes of that group, you’re insulting work that I put in on it too. It’s not like JB was the only one who did anything; in fact, as most members will attest, he wasn’t even THERE more often than not. It’s not male reproductive organ-sucking on anyone when I try to defend the positions that we adopted as a committee, it’s trying to get another viewpoint that isn’t currently being represented out into the public.

1337xxxxxxxxxlolololololololololxxxxxxxxx1337 Posted:

why are thses ****ing retards in my cklan idc wtf hobo thinks bye

anywya shii, no1’s gonna read that.

I know lol, I looked at it after I wrote it and I was like, ‘tl;dr’