Shawn

[Mistress Tatiana]

Why must everything always be so complicated. There doesn't need to be a rule for every single thing. I can't believe you're taking that thread in the OOC forum to that extent. For Pete's sake, you didn't even start that thread. Why now are you going to tell people how they should post in it? :huh I'm not talking about limiting peep to refraining the normal stuff like bad words or flaming, but you're gonna tell people what they are to say in their posts and how?? That's taking things a bit far don't you think? :\

[Lilaena De'Ville]

He is perfectly within his rights, Tatiana. The thread has a long history, and the circumstances of its movement to OOC from the GJO Helpdesk is probably something you should look in to.

IN that thread: yes you are limited to one post, and dicussions should take place in PM or messenger service. Tis a staff decision.

[Shawn]

The purpose of that thread is to be a list of which character are and are not taken. The thread is already large as it is, making it difficult for someone to read through it and look to see if a specific picture is taken. Adding excess discussion will only make it more difficult to navigate.

I honestly don't see what your qualm is. The rules I set in place are not for the entire OOC forum: They're for that one thread, in order to keep it organized and easily accesible. If you're upset about the deleted posts, then I suggest you head warnings from the staff in the future, as I plainly stated that's what I would do.

[Ryla Relvinian]

Yeah, the thread is purely for archival purposes... and having excess conversations would really be counterproductive. :)

[Mistress Tatiana]

It's not so much that I'm upset about the deleted post. I could care less, cause I only made one post and I was just pointing something out to one of the other players as was Charley. It's just the principle of the matter. I just don't see the point in having to control people in how they post in a thread. It's an OOC forum for a reason ya know. But hey, you can do whatever you want so I'm not gonna argue the issue. Just felt I needed to bring this up since I know other people who were also upset by it.

[Figrin D'an]

There already is limited control exercised over how people post in specific threads... the topic tag system. When a thread is tagged [NSP], for example, then it's expected that there will be no spam posted and the thread will remain on topic. On occasion, posts have had to be deleted from a given thread because they violated that request.

This is no different. It's a thread with a very specific purpose. A request for no superflous discussion was made, and should therefore be followed. If people want to have a side discussion about something, it takes just a few seconds to start a new thread.

[Shawn]

I still don't understand your problem. We are in no way stifling what you can say. We are simply requesting that you do it outside of that one particular thread.

It's not a topic of discussion, it's a list.

[sonja]

I don't understand your complaint either.

No one is being controlled. No one is being hindered. We've created an archive based on an already existing informational thread, with permission from GJO mods, and agreement by all staff. No one was hurt, and no post was deleted that contained anything important.

Were you personally affected by this in a negative way? If so, how?

[Mistress Tatiana]

Like I said, I really don't care to argue the point, but to answer your question Sonja, ya, I didn't appreciate what Shawn did. I had made a post indicating to one of the peep there that the pic he had chosen to use was being used by someone else and that he should request permission to use it. It was an informative post, not a "hyjack" post. I went into the thread a little later to find that my post was no longer there, but I happened to notice that Charley had made a post informing that same person about that pic. I aimed Charley and asked him if he had deleted my post cause I saw that he had informed that same poster about his pic. He said he hadn't seen my post at all. I thought it kind of strange, but left it at that. Again I went into the thread a few min later, and saw that his post was also missing. The other guy happened to see Charley's post before it was deleted, and so he was able to edit his post to indicate he would refrain from using the picture and ask for permission. Then I noticed a new thread Shawn started indicating his complaints about people not doing what he indicated in that other thread. That's when I realized he was the one who had been deleting the posts.

I thought it was rude frankly. He just went in there and deleted posts he didn't want to see in that thread because he didn't think it was important. Well, to me it was or I wouldn't have posted it. I don't post for the sake of posting. And you can see that from my post count. All Charley and I were trying to do was help a friend out. They were posts meant to be informative and helpful to those posting. It wasn't just a post to go off onto another subject as many threads do end up going in that direction.

But anyways, the matter with that poster was resolved and that's all that matters to me. I can't stop you from doing what you want with your board. I just felt I needed to voice my opinion on this, so if it's all the same to you, I'll just end this here.

[Morgan Evanar]

I thought it was rude frankly. He just went in there and deleted posts he didn't want to see in that thread because he didn't think it was important. Well, to me it was or I wouldn't have posted it. I don't post for the sake of posting. And you can see that from my post count. All Charley and I were trying to do was help a friend out. They were posts meant to be informative and helpful to those posting. It wasn't just a post to go off onto another subject as many threads do end up going in that direction. But you explicitly failed to follow the directions already stated in the thread.

[Lord Soth]

Quite frankly, Mod, Addie or not...It's the responsibility of the staff to post rules and regulation "before" a particular thread is submitted or started you would think. To change rules mid stream is like telling a group of race car diver's already in the heat of the race that change's have been made and should be followed...Not in the "middle" or towards the "end"...Sounds kind of silly don’t ya think?

[Mistress Tatiana]

Morgan, that's my point. There shouldn't have been rules for that thread in the first place. DT started that thread, not him. If you had started a thread and someone went in there and decided there would be rules on how to post in it, wouldn't that bother you? This is an issue of control here. I think he's issuing too much control by telling people how to post to a particular thread.

Good analogy Soth.

[Shawn]

I had made a post indicating to one of the peep there that the pic he had chosen to use was being used by someone else and that he should request permission to use it. It was an informative post, not a "hyjack" post. Which I specifically requested that you do not do.
I thought it was rude frankly.I thought it was quite rude that you blatantly ignored the instructions laid out before you.
He just went in there and deleted posts he didn't want to see in that thread because he didn't think it was important.Incorrect. I deleted posts that did not fit the guideline I laid out.
All Charley and I were trying to do was help a friend outI understand that. But you could have handled the matter via PM, as I requested.

If you had followed the guidelines, then I wouldn't have had to delete your posts. I didn't say "Don't post this or I'm going to delete it" so you can blatantly ignore that and do it anyway. You are not the exception.
Quite frankly, Mod, Addie or not...It's the responsibility of the staff to post rules and regulation "before" a particular thread is submitted or started you would thinkThe rules were posted before the thread was moved into the OOC forum and made available to the public. Thus, they were there before anyone else was given the opportunity to post to it. It's not changing the rules midstream because the thread was edited to fit that format before being placed in the OOC forum.
If you had started a thread and someone went in there and decided there would be rules on how to post in it, wouldn't that bother you?It was done with permission. So if it bothered him, he didn't seem to notice.

[Lord Soth]

"The rules were posted before the thread was moved into the OOC forum and made available to the public. Thus, they were there before anyone else was given the opportunity to post to it. It's not changing the rules midstream because the thread was edited to fit that format before being placed in the OOC forum."



I didn't see them,...Posted where? And it seems to me that there are other's that missed it altogether as well...ex. below Kelt Nelson in the thread you started.

http://www.swforums.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29322

So you can see where peep would be confused and thrown off buy a “mid post rule setting” and that's my point.

[Shawn]

Post #95 in the Character Database thread.

Being ignorant of the rule does not exempt you from it. If a member of the staff posts something in a thread, it should be read. If people are too lazy to actually read the posts and instead see fit to simply reply to it, there's not much that can be done about that. However, the rules will still be enforced and their posts will still be deleted.

If someone chooses not to read my post and simply reply, that is not my fault. I made sure it was very concise before the thread was moved back out into the open.

Moreover, I'd appreciate it if you'd drop the "This is just Shawn being overly controlling" bit. It was a joint decision by the staff. Another mod started editing the thread and I finished up for them. Since I was the one to finish, I was the one who made the post. It's that simple.

[Taylor Millard]

Okay...I have moved the rules into Marcus' first post to avoid any more confusion. They will remain in Post #95 for people (like me sometimes) who don't read the beginning of the thread. That should fix mostly everything.

[Lord Soth]

“Post #95 in the Character Database thread.

Being ignorant of the rule does not exempt you from it. If a member of the staff posts something in a thread, it should be read. If people are too lazy to actually read the posts and instead see fit to simply post to it, there's not much that can be done about that. However, the rules will still be enforced and their posts will still be deleted.”

Are you implying that I'm lazy Shawn? Everyone is guilty at some point or another of passing up thread post’s, esp. a post as deep as 95# in that particular thread...I mean common, for crying out loud.

Regardless, you’re missing the point. It’s still misleading when you pop in and post in another thread and it look's like new rules are set into motion.

Do what you will, I suppose it all comes down to a power thing now huh?...lol

[Shawn]

Are you implying that I'm lazy Shawn? Everyone is guilty at some point or another of passing up thread post’s, esp. a post as deep as 95# in that particular thread...I mean common, for crying out loud.Actually, people tend to pass up the earlier posts in the thread. In a 100+ post thread, most people will skip over the earlier posts and just see what the current topic of conversation is at the end.

My post was the latest reply before it was moved into the OOC forum, so you'd pretty much have to see it before replying further.

Regardless. Yes, I understand that some people may not have seen it. As you pointed out, Kelt made the same mistake. As you can see, however, he did not complain when his post was deleted: Instead, he apologized for HIS mistake.
Regardless, you’re missing the point. It’s still misleading when you pop in and post in another thread and it look's like new rules are set into motion.When an administrator or moderator has recently replied to a thread, it would probably be in your best interest to read their post.
Do what you will, I suppose it all comes down to a power thing now huh?...lolNo, it comes down to reading very basic directions and following them. You failed to follow directions and you're somehow trying to blame me for enforcing the consequences of not following those directions.

Again: Your's was not the only post deleted. But everyone else apologized for their mistake, whereas you've chosen to try and blame me for enforcing the guidelines placed forth.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Lord Soth
Do what you will, I suppose it all comes down to a power thing now huh?...lol

That comment is reprehensive. This entire process was undertaken so as to benefit the community by providing useful reference material in a concise form. Yet, when posts that clearly violated the thread guidelines were made, and a reasoning for there subsequent removal is given with which you happen to not agree, you ultimately restort to pulling out the patented "power trip" card. Disgusting.



The thread was inititally under GJO jurisdiction. As the discussion about character pic claims progressed, permission was granted to the main board staff to move/prune the thread for OOC forum use. When that happened, the thread fell under the jurisdiction of the main board staff, and they can therefore set the rules of the thread. Such rules were set. Posts violating those rules were made, and they were removed as a result. I don't see a problem here, other than a couple of people not liking that something they posted was deleted. As has been noted, ignorance is not an excuse. When a nearly 100 post thread appears all but instantly, and discussion about the same topic had been going on in other threads, don't you think it would be prudent to find out the exact purpose of the thread before posting to it? How about the simple fact that, when it was placed in the OOC forum, every post in the thread was specifically geared towards listing character pics, with no extra conversation taking place? A bit unusual for such a large thread, isn't it? Perhaps that means that special conditions are in place, and just maybe one should find out what they are before contributing?


This arguement is absurd. Protocol was followed according to the rules of the thread. If there is some kind of personal gripe here, take it up over AIM or PM.

[Mistress Tatiana]

Actually, Soth never had his post deleted, he was just trying to help in getting the point I was trying to make across.

I talked to Tailor over pm and he informed me that he was the one who had deleted my post. So I'd like to apologize to Shawn for accusing him of that action.

I still explained to Tailor the point I was trying to make in here though. As I stated before, it wasn't so much that my post was deleted, it was more a principle of the matter on constraining people in how they are to post. It's perfectly understandable that you don't want a thread to get out of hand and turn into one major hijacked thread, because that happens very frequently. But the posts that were deleted were pertaining to subject matter.

Anyways, I don't think this discussion can be hammered much more than it already has. Again Shawn, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

[DarthHERA]

You know, a little leeway when dealing with posters is a good idea.

I know the Mods/Admins have an insane job to keep things orderly and fair etc. But sometimes people dont always do as instructed, either because things were missed or not understood or whatever.

People make mistakes and a certain grace should be extended on both sides instead of everyone getting mad and making unnecessary remarks. Blaming and flaming is a freakin waste of everyones time.

My opinion is for everyone not to get so damn regimented about EVERYTHING. The boards are made of people, and people sometimes make mistakes. Cant we all be flexible enough to Get over it.

[Pierce Tondry]

A li'l cooldown period might be wise in this instance, if the thread needs to continue at all. If anyone has anything else to say, I'd suggest that they wait until tomorrow to do so, when people will be more level-headed and not prone to insult.

It's not like any of us are going anywhere. :)

[Morgan Evanar]

http://panic.hopto.org/misc/macros/toiletduk_sign_tribble.gif

[sonja]

All day I listen to people say, "Oh, I didn't read that. I can't expect to be responsible for it." Blah. If you keep that attitude you won't get very far in life.

Fine, you missed the post. That doesn't mean you have to turn this into a control issue. I suppose you want damages for your pain and suffering? Geesus people.

The whole point of yesterday's actions, no matter done by who, was for the benefit of the forum. Guess it wouldn't be a normal day around here if someone wasn't pissing on that and creating drama. Pick your battles, but this isn't one.

What's done it done.

[Mistress Tatiana]

Look Sonja, you've missed the point. Obviously you weren't reading what I was saying, and I'm not gonna keep hashing this out.

I don't care that a post was deleted. A notice would have been nice, but Tailor already apologized to me for that. I, in turn, apologized to Shawn for the misunderstanding on that issue.

The problem I have isn't with the deleted post. And no, it wasn't that I didn't see Shawn's post. My problem was that he had made rules in the first place for a thread he hadn't even started and that he was being so anal retentive about it like it was the end of the world.

In my discussion with Tailor, I acknowledged to him that I understood that the rules that Shawn made were to keep the thread from being hijacked. Something which I know happens a lot. It's one thing though to go to the point on telling people how many times you can post and how that post should be made. That is stepping into the boundaries of control. And in my opinion, it's a power trip thing. The posts that were deleted were on the subject and had not trailed off into some other discussion.

I don't go around making posts unless I have a reason for it. And the only reason I brought this up here was because I felt it was an issue that needed to be discussed. (Hence it being here in the mod forum.) I'm sorry you don't like to discuss "control issues", but last I checked, no one said you had to come in here and join it.

It's no surprise to me no one here brings up issues like these, because if they did, they would get slapped in the face for even thinking the thought as I am begining to realize now. Everyone around here are butt kissers.

Your opinion isn't the only one that exists. And just because my opinion happens to differ from a lot of the peep here, doesn't mean it's value is any less. I think you'll soon realize that with that attitude, you won't get very far in life.


With that being said, no one here is being open to what I have to say except for a few. So I see no point to further this discussion.

[sonja]

Wow, you're a sassy one, and nasty at that.

Everything you just said, you've already said. You also already said you were done (now twice). Your entire post touches on things you have already said, and yet goes off on an uneeded tangent with name calling and preaching.

Thank you for your "difference in opinion", but as you can see, it is minor compared to the majority opinion and the good of the whole. It will be noted but archived.

[Lord Soth]

Talking about repeating ones self...Looks like your in the same boat there sonja...lol She repeated it so "You" would get it...Perhaps if you didn’t come off with your “sassy” little attitude there missy, you wouldn’t have got one back huh?...lol

Quote: "Everything you just said, you've already said. You also already said you were done (now twice). Your entire post touches on things you have already said, and yet goes off on an uneeded tangent with name calling and preaching."

Wash, rinse, repeat...Look at your own post’s before ya start pointing finger's...Get the picture. =Þ

Little stressed? Take a break; it'll do ya some good.:lol

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Mistress Tatiana
It's one thing though to go to the point on telling people how many times you can post and how that post should be made. That is stepping into the boundaries of control. And in my opinion, it's a power trip thing.

So, in an RP post, a person shouldn't be allowed to say whom is invited to participate and whom isn't? In a thread calling for civil discussion of a serious issue, you should be allowed insult and flame other people at will? Because you have a right to "not be controlled?" When you create an account, you agree to follow board policy, part of which is to heed the postings made by the board staff. If you chose not to do so, then you must be prepared to accept the consequences of not doing so, plain and simple.


The posts that were deleted were on the subject and had not trailed off into some other discussion.

Irrelevent. The request was made for no additional posting beyond recording character pic information. It wasn't followed. The post was deleted because it didn't comply with the staff request.




It's no surprise to me no one here brings up issues like these, because if they did, they would get slapped in the face for even thinking the thought as I am begining to realize now. Everyone around here are butt kissers.

Yes, because personal slights will get you everywhere, and is such a mature and well-concocted response. (/sarcasm) Perhaps it's mearly that you are in the minority on this issue. You yourself stated that there were differing opinions. Is it so hard to accept that maybe this has nothing to do with a "power trip," and mearly with making sure the thread in question remains concise and streamlined, thus making it easier to navigate and use?



With that being said, no one here is being open to what I have to say except for a few. So I see no point to further this discussion.

You've made you opinion known. You've been heard. People have disagreed with your stance, and provided reasons why. Just because someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean they aren't open to your opinion. Pretty important distinction to make in any discussion.

But, you're right... there is no further point to this discussion.

[TheHolo.Net]

Refresher course time...

From the "contract " you all signed when you joined this forum:
The User hereby grants SWFans.Net Forums a perpetual, universal, and non-exclusive right to copy, display, modify, alter, delete, transmit, and distribute any Content provided by the User to SWFans.Net Forums. The User is the owner of all Content submitted to SWFans.Net Forums, and the User represents that he or she is the legal owner of the copyright to all Content that User submits to SWFans.Net Forums or that the User has permission from the copyright owner to submit the Content to SWFans.Net Forums. The User also hereby grants other Users of the Web Site (Moderators, Super Moderators and Administrators) the right to modify, alter, and delete Content provided by them to SWFans.Net Forums, pursuant to the first part of this section. The owners of SWFans.Net Forums have the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason. And with that and all the other "This discussion is over" type posts, this thread is now closed.