Tumbly said and was edited on: "So, AGAIN: Annihilat0r was BOOTED FROM CLM because he is also [EDITED], lied about it, and was an ass about it. He won't be getting back in."

[Edit] Yarr. [/Edit]

And, I'll say it again: alts who function as, OR ARE BELIEVED TO BE FUNCTIONING AS, a coherent 'character' are the proper subject of any RP thread interested in the subject.

Oh. You'll have to wait for her answer; I was not aware of that.

Edit: Hehe, very attentive eh Dr. Lecter?

Also oddly, I called him an ass in 3 different posts, but only one was deleted, and the second was edited for his alt content, but not for the "insult." Cunjo also responded by calling me an ass as well, and yet that post was never touched.

So again I say, why can't you mods consistently apply your own rules?

This is sensitive information that you are revealing. There was also more content in the deleted post (mentioning it would defeat the purpose of its deletion).

The Rules of Conduct also state that you may not infringe on privacy rights. It can be debated that you are infringing someone's rights by revealing their other identities. That may very well be why you're being edited.

And yet you haven't done made any of the same changes. Shoot from the hip eh? I guess you'll all hit your targets sometimes... Might be better to just use the EULA as a guide, since you know, that's probably why it was written.

But then you all wouldn't be free to just do whatever you want!

[EDIT] PS It's not private info when you reveal it yourself, or worse, are caught trying to keep it a secret.

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy where this information (in-game RP characters, who broadcast the very information being 'revealed') is concerned. RL player information? Sure.

[Edit] Moreover, the very use of such alts could arguably violate the RoC: "You may not defraud other players." [/Edit]

I've made such changes before. To expect only myself to do them all is quite a bit much. What's happening here is the messageboard is converging to the ideal; it can't happen instantly. I'm sorry if the speed of the process bothers you.

The RoC is written for this very reason.

The deleted post alluded to RL information.

Thank you for your insight Dr. Lecter.

tumblemonster, I'd like to just clarify that you did kick the player out for a valid reason.

Edit: As for using the EULA as a guide... well, I heard it has some humor in it. I guess we could all use it to lighten up eh?

FMG: Your statement, "the deleted post alluded to RL information", is factually incorrect. Tumble's post indicated that several characters, purely RP creations, were in collusion. It did not in any way tie those characters to a specific account or the player behind them. He merely said that the characters Cunjo, Annihilat0r, Dihelical Synthesis and Aquitas Talon were all a single entity working together in the RP universe.

Thank you for bringing that up. That was not the information in question.

Edit: I'm talking about a completely deleted post... I believe you are talking about edited posts.

Gee, I guess I somehow misread "Annihilat0r was BOOTED FROM CLM because he is also Cunjo, Dihelical Synthesis and Aquitas Talon, lied about it, and was an ass about it."

[edit] Um, no, though Tumble could correct me if I'm wrong. That was his first post (in addition to some random offensive langauge), which was deleted. He reposted, and it was edited. [/edit]

[Edit part dux] LOL Yeah, I do recall seeing that. But it was so ridiculous as to be an obvious joke, so I figured it couldn't be what was at issue. *rolls eyes* [/edit part dux]

Firemage is correct, my initial post did include a crack about Cunjo also being jex and miharu, although I'm not sure how it made referenece to real life. This still doesn't explain why one of my posts was edited for alt content, while another was not. I don't care if there's some "humor" in the ELUA, it's irrelevant. If you cannot consistently apply your rules, might as well have none at all.

/me gets on his highhorse.
All this crap because of poor RP-ing by Cunjo/Annihilator/Dihelical/etc etc. (Poor = mixing up OOC/IC information).
/me gets off his highhorse.

Here, have a drink!

Ya can't mix OOC an' IC cap'n, th' ship'll explooode!

To Tumbermonster et. al.

I see this situation like a sports game. You disagree with a call one of the refs made and have requested an instant replay. Fair enough. So another ref has reviewed the event and supports the orginal call. You forfit one time-out and game-play resumes. This isn's a court of law were you can appeal and reappeal a decision.

You're right in that edits and moderation are a judgement call based on the instructions given to the guides by the devs. That is one reason there are human moderators; if it was a simple yes/no list AIs would probably be moderating most forums in existance. What was originally written was deemed in need of an edit and so it was edited. These forums allow most players to express themselves in a constructive manner and the community is pretty good at self-regulation rarely requring overt intervention. However there are times when a moderator does deem it necessary step in. It appeared to me that the original edits were orignially a gentle nudge to avoid flaming and seemed to be pretty low-key. I admit that I have less tolerance for certain things (ninny lock anyone?) and therefore moderate those instances as I notice them. However by the same line I also tolerate somethings more and am slower to react. The guides are rarely going to be in a 100% agreement but do provide good coverage because our sensibility overlaps. Also, the devs do have a log of the actions taken by the guides and are not shy about telling us if something was overdone.

To keep posting and reposting text that was previously edited is so 4th grade and doesn't do much to support your position. To me it looks like a desire to escalate events which is usually counterproductive. What would be a better way to express your needs?

Something else to consider is that complaining about a fellow guildmate in this forum is bad form and is a matter better suited to disucssion in a less public forum like CLM's message boards.

In before LOCK!

(Oh yeah, I don't sleep.)

I didn't complain about a fellow guild mate in this forum, I explained why a former guild mate got kicked out. When I did, you didn't edit as you say you did, there wasn't a "gentle nudge", you summarilly erased the post. I removed the offending "insults", and then you edited out the "pirvate infomation" (Cunjo's alts) which everyone knows anyway and he was caught red handed using.

So yes, of course I reposted (and Lecter later also reposted my statement), because that edit was nothing more than vindictive. Why is it that I call someone a pompous ass and the post gets deleted, but I'm called an ass or worse, and these posts are ignored? Hell, it happened right here in the thread! Further, I'll point out that I didn't bring this up at all, Cunjo did by calling me out in the fifth post of this thread.

Now apparently it's ok for a guide to patronize and "insult" a player. This isn't anything like a sports game, unless the outcome is fixed and the ref a big fan of one team, because your actions even within this thread are inconsistent at best, obviously biased at worst.

Since I seem to be included in the "et. al." (oh, and FYI, you might want to look up punctuation for those tricky Latin abbreviations before venturing into public with them--it's et al.), I'll reply in the same sort of "oh, how cute but beneath me that you could make such a silly error" tone.

What would be a better way to express your needs?

*raises hand* Oooh! Oooh! I know! I know! A better way would be to (1) state our premises, (2) show that they support our conclusion and (3) rebut any cogent, on-point dispute of either (1) or (2) via an equally logical method. Oh, wait. That's what I did. And while I received a brief reply from FiReMaGe, (s)he basically deferred to you.

A not-better (and I'm straining hard to use such a euphemism here) way would be to (YOU) ignore the specific cited premises, (YOU) make vague allusions to an irrelevant analogy and the general rules of the forums and (YOU) conclude by stating obvious generalities and then effectively shrieking NINNY!

I'm not coming from quite the same angle here as Tumble, but since there's that "et. al."... How about an actual response? Feel free to just lock or delete the thread, but I'd rather see an attempt at explaining how stating, in an RP forum, that one character is also/is in collusion with another character or two... is a violation of forum posting rules. I find general blather about how guides operate pretty useless there. But hey, those of us at a mere 4th grade level are missing your deeper understanding of the situation and maybe we just don't get it.

Allow me to be the first to say that nothing more needs to be, or should be, stated by either side. I've seen everything there is to see in online forums, including all the behavior here.

Here are the facts. A post was made. A moderator sought to fix it, as they are empowered to do. Some think they did a shitty job and said so. The moderators replied, more or less, 'shut up.' Nothing beyond my hideous choppy statement remains unsaid, or needed.

I'd call for everyone to 'be the better man' at this point, but again, I know from past experience that I will be ignored.

as they are empowered to do.

No, that's the contentious issue at hand. Trying to slip that one into a Facts section could get me thrown in a cell =P

The word "shitty" was removed from two of my posts. It's likely Armarth's use of the word will stand. This is the issue I have here. Biased, inconsistent application of the rules, followed by irrelevant explainations and then insults from the same guide censoring me for the same behavior.