[cerevox]

There is no way he can be serious. He is spitting out semi-legit arguments against dictatorships, but he doesn't seem to realize that as this is minecraft and not IRL, those arguments don't apply. If anything, I suspect that he took a basic class in philosophy and is simply parroting the basic arguments for democracy without actually understanding the argument.

The arguments themselves fall flat because this is an absolute dictatorship, not by the mods but by intelli the server owner. The mods have simply been chosen to enforce his will. There is no need for it to be fair and even, as intelli owns everything here. If he wants to change the server completely and totally, he can and no could stop him.

There is nothing selfish or mean or about it and there is no discussion of natural rights here either, because its a simple fact that intelli is the ultimate authority.

As for the absurd notion that lightbulbs is only trying to improve his odds of becoming a mod, if lightbulbs actually applied for modship right now he would undoubtedly get it. As for myself, i was offered a modship and turned it down, so i suppose in your world view, this would make us the non-governmental elite of minerealm.

cerevox I am tired of having to keep posting. I have already explained why I am posting like this and I am sorry; I will find a fix at some point. Please just accept there is something wrong with the way things work, or at least acknowledge improvements can be made to the forums, the moderator system and the way the server works.

No. I like the system right now. And if you actually were sorry, you would stop posting and fix the problem. Being sorry means you intend to fix the problem, not that you don't care and intend to continue to fill this forums with hideous blocks of text and spam-like multi-posts.

Also, your posts are not treated as worthless because of the way they are written but because they have no value and are actually worthless themselves.

[Lightbulbs]

Lightbulbs you are hard to talk with. It looks like you do not have a very open mind because you said my point of view is 'one of the most pathetic' you have ever read. I respect your opinion. If you do not respect mine than that is just tough for me. I still would like to know why you think questioning authority is so outrageous though.

1) Mainly because this "Authority" you wish to question coded everything this server has that makes it unique. You are spitting on the face of our Lenin, our Washington, our Napoleon.
2) You are spitting on the people that he has personally appointed to prevent griefing.
3) You are saying that by NOT BANNING PEOPLE YOU DON'T LIKE they are a police force.
4) You have done nothing for the server except complain about everything.
That is why I don't respect your opinion.

[LordRamuthra]

I want to make this my last post. I am sorry you feel this way. Cerevox I have read many good comments about you, but you fail to live up to them. Yes you are logical and most of what you say is true. The fact that intelli can do anything on this server is true. You saying my points are worthless is not (I am bound to say that I guess). I may be an idealist, and my view fails to reflect the way things actually happen, in the real and virtual world. But as the saying goes 'The only way is up.' There is room for improvement and movement towards a better reality. In my opinion you are pessimistic, in your opinion you might be realistic. I do not think inequality a good thing, you reply that is just how it is. I assume Intelli is a reasonable person and would not be a 'twat' when making descisions, as someone called me earlier. In general though I think conforming is for those not brave enough to stand up for themselves and I think that you do so but are arguing for the wrong cause. It is a shame. And Lightbulbs - you complain about my complaints which makes you just as bad .

Thanks for speaking with me, nevertheless.
Ryan (a.k.a. LordRamuthra)

[cerevox]

Last post or not, I am still gonna take shots at it.

Regarding your complaints about my pessimism and not being interested in improvement, if you had looked around, you would of quickly discovered that I spend a large chunk of time nitpicking the rules and pointing out flaws and errors in how things are done. I would go so far as to say I have been the most vocal complainer on here regarding the rules and the system. The difference here between me and you is that when I complain, i bring evidence and logic with me, and I try and offer solutions when I find a problem.

On the other hand, you post long, unintelligible blocks of hideous text and propose radical overhauls that don't make any sense and you post without any sort of evidence or support for your position.

Your position on inequality, is as you said yourself, completely at odds with reality and as I have commented in other threads, some people are simply worth more than others.

Honestly, I don't think your a bad person ram. I just think you are dumb and naive. And you have perhaps been reading too much literature on human rights and such without actually understanding any of it.

[panthers17nfl]

1. It is amazing that you think you are in the position to limit the powers of moderators, forum mods, etc. I do not trust the player community one bit to make such democratic decisions, as mob rule on these forums is rarely right. Furthermore, forum mods are elected to the position because of the trust that Intelli places in them, so who do you think does the job better, qualified forum mods, or raging teenage forum readers? Democracy would fail miserably on these forums.

2. Again: the problem is that you think that the "innocent", the player that got griefed, is always right and 100% correct regarding the bans. There have been many ban cases that, for lack of evidence, have saved an uncessary ban. Why? Because the guy writing the request was a raging child and just wanted him banned, and didn't think logically about how much proof would be needed. I also find it funny that you preach democracy in #1, but also argue against innocent until proven guilty in #2.

We do not favor rulebreakers. We just simply can't trust the average player to be right about banning a player. There are SOME players on here that reserve that ability, that trust to be able to get away with much less proof (namely: Kerovon, Cerevox, and other notables). Why? Because they are 100% right and their only intentions are to help the server. More importantly, they are always right about it and are smart enough to be careful how much they accuse players.



I'm sorry Ramuthra, but you have a very slanted view towards Moderators. A view that they are evil and trying to prove you wrong and get at your throat at every turn. We are qualified to make these decisions. It is unfair to us to have you force your "democracy" on the forums, which not only super-complicates things, but also puts power in the hands of incompetent forum users.

I'm not saying you're incompetent. I'm saying that the ideas you present lead to incompetency.[/b]

[savesthedazed]

Jesus, where do I even start?

Let's address this belief that "forum mods can do whatever they want." This is simply not true. I have guidelines that I follow and these largely come from the admins. If I do something wrong, I am corrected. Posts that I have locked in the past have been unlocked, albeit rarely. When it comes down to it, Intelli is the boss and what he says goes. If I make a wrong decision, he or another admin will correct it. The two topics in question have not been unlocked, so unless I hear otherwise, I made the right decision.

As for the original ban request for alienrobot:
There were four pictures posted. All four simply showed the player in question on a bridge and only one showed a mass of dropped items. These four pictures were inconclusive as regards to spawn camping. How do I know this? Because I've read through and examined nearly every ban thread that's been posted. I've seen the evidence that mods and admins deem bannable. Should I have waited for a game mod or admin to respond? Perhaps. But I felt locking the thread was a safe call to make and so I did.

As for the second post about alienrobot's ban request:
1) We had already determined the location of the incident, which happened to be in a PVP area. Not to mention one that is habitually used for PVP battles and is a short walk outside of spawn.
2) The rest of the post was a bunch of garbled nonsense. It is inconsequential. The original ban request was closed for lack of proper evidence and the option was left to make a new topic for presenting new evidence (which you did not). It doesn't get much easier than that.

As for the amount of evidence needed for a ban:
It is not immense. One picture is enough if it contains something damning. If you take four pictures of a person standing on a bridge with a sword, chances are nothing will be done. If you capture multiple pictures of a person standing in front of you while you're dead, then you have a much better chance. A chat log showing repeated swearing will earn a ban. A picture of a broken wall, blocks on the ground and a player with a pick in hand, will likely warrant some action. It's not asking a lot. It is simply quality versus quantity.

As for the locking of threads in general:
I lock a thread when discussion deteriorates into meaningless bicker and name-calling. Even then I generally give a warning and some time for it to get back on track. Ban threads are different. If, after evidence has been presented and discussed, a mod or admin says you're not getting a ban or an unban, that's more or less the end of the discussion.

[dragoncrystal24]

The forum mods can do whatever they want. If they dislike a thread they can just lock it and never look back.

This is what LordRamuthra is trying to change. Topics shouldn't be locked based on only one person's opinions. They should remain free to the public, allowing speculation and discussion to be further carried out. I get when they'll lock a long dead thread when someone refuses to stop posting, but, until then, I'd say to let it stay unlocked.

You are advocating that users should be able to pick and choose what rules to follow. Are you daft or just stupid?

Actually, what I'm TRYING to say is that people should be able to pick and choose what they want to post on. Everybody should follow all the rules, but they should be given a freedom of speech, able to post where they want to. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

I do agree that once some thread starts to turn into bickering and name-calling, it should be locked. There is no need for flaming on the forums. I just think that they should be able to continue speaking until it turns into the name-calling. Just take the time to reconsider.

[Sharingan616]

Wow that's a lot of text that I don't feel like reading. @-@

I feel like people request locks too often. If a forum moderator feels like he should lock a post, he'll lock it.
I also feel like too many topics have been locked unnecessarily. I mean tbh I've seen topics be locked that were dyeing anyways.

For example, I don't see any reason why this was locked: http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... 2&start=20.

I think the locking should be toned down a little.

[savesthedazed]

Wow that's a lot of text that I don't feel like reading. @-@

I feel like people request locks too often. If a forum moderator feels like he should lock a post, he'll lock it.
I also feel like too many topics have been locked unnecessarily. I mean tbh I've seen topics be locked that were dyeing anyways.

For example, I don't see any reason why this was locked: http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... 2&start=20.

I think the locking should be toned down a little.

That particular thread was locked for a couple of reasons. The first was because, not one, but two mods commented in a manner demonstrating that the player would not be unbanned. When it comes to ban appeals and requests, after mods have stated their position, I like to lock them. Why? Well, that leads us to the second reason. A lot of players like to post unnecessarily in what I can only assume is an attempt to boost post counts. This thread already featured several of such posts, like your "This made me lol" in response to Lightbulbs' comic and the discussion about how many ban threads Lightbulbs has had in his name. Many of us laughed at Lightbulbs' comic and I'm sure most of us are painfully aware of the vast number of threads dedicated to Lightbulbs' actions. But it'd be unnecessary clutter for all of us to state that.

I don't lock threads arbitrarily. I have my reasons even if they are not always stated clearly (and this is something that I can address in the future). If you have an issue with a locked thread, you are always free to PM me and seek clarification.

[cerevox]

Ban threads shouldn't be locked if either the ban request/appeal has not been ruled by a mod and the petitioner has nothing new to add OR if there is a point of rule still in discussion. I have not seen saves lock threads in either of those 2 situations, and if its doesn't fall into one of the two situations than it deserves a lock.

Ban threads are not the right place to be chatting about random crap, we have a chat subforum for just that purpose where you can ramble on about non-sense all you want. You could even go make a thread in the chat forum called "My ramblings: A journey through absurdity" and just go totally off the wall with whatever you want.