2135 active members
  232 are online

Year

21

Day

14

Time

17:42:36

Guest
Login
snewsgnewsmessagegeneralfactioninventorycombatroom
Message CenterRPG CenterQuestion Center
Archives » Attitude of some combine players
Page 1 2
Consider the sticky threads sitiuation looked at and commented on.


____________

"May the Grace of Ara go with you, and His Vengeance be wrought upon your enemies."

Only fools and children dream of heroes.
Most of you know my position on this, I dont think any one person should be outlined for criticism. I get in huge arguments with "vets" and their friends defending newbs.

I got in a argument with Hal (no offense against him - he is a good guy) about calling people idiots. I really didn't think that is fair or ever warranted. I think the response to Neo... was extreme as well.

I think we should remember, normally all is required is one person to direct a newb, or vet alike ... in the right direction, and encourage them to participate more but inform them how to actively. Guidance is key.

People, especially vets should refrain from words like idiotic. We must also remember some people may be bullied a lot, and come on SWC to escape hassle from peers, and the like. Quite frankly, calling someone an idiot is extremely condescending, and entirely baseless, especially when several people have already called him stupid.

I agree completely with Ezekiel's first post. I have argued with Ezekiel about this before on irc concerning a ban he imposed on a newb. Sometimes, a kick up the arse is ok, but only in a few, extreme occassions.

When I hear people say, "he is stupid", "my patience is wearing thin", or "I cant handle it" --> I cringe. Why cant people just ignore others they dont like. If you dont like a post... MOVE ON - IGNORE IT!!!

I think far too many people here stick their nose into conversations, they just copy other people's insults, contribute nothing, and generally excuse offensive behaviour with an elitist attitude. The thing I hate most is when i question people on it, one vet said "other people were doing it to"... one person calling him an idiot fine, but several people... wtf?

People will misbehave, and have a bit of fun, get used to it. SWC does not want a bad reputation. More members would make this game good. Quality over quantity. No, there is no such thing as quality. If we had the pick of the crop, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

EDIT: iny deduction in XP, CP, etc will be hugely prejudiced and should only occur in extreme cases by non-players... quite frankly, it is eltist to presume that the sort of etiquette enforced on everyone by a few is somehow gaining a quality of players. It is gaining the same type of player


Edited By: Ekoo Strider on Year 7 Day 175 19:02
____________

\"Tread with care in foreign lands human, if you are lucky you will only lose your pride.\"
Rika Lawson
Rika Lawson
"If you dont like a post... MOVE ON - IGNORE IT!!!"

As nice as it may sound, it doesn't work that way. Everyone will sooner or later not manage to ignore it. Everyone. There's no exception. Not online.


That's ludicrous Rika. there are 3000 players. Take the last newb (or noob) who was bullied (or flamed, the term that is conveniently used by veterans) or take Neo Z's post in the Random Place....

There was 8 people identified by Neo in a "list", about half of the people identified began calling him every name under the sun, and generally agreeing with each other on their insults.

((Names have been blanked))
********, either implicitly or explicity, called him stupid over seven times, ******** twice, ***** twice, **** four times, and ******* once. The rest of the thread was taken up with those people commending each other on great posts, and great behaviour. While *** entered and simply told Neo not to call anyone assholes, because there was a valid (who determines a valid reason?) reasons for calling him an idiot (quite simply, if there is a valid reason to call him an idiot over 15 times, there is for calling these people ass****s). Neo was being called an idiot insesitantly. There was and is no valid reason to call him, or anyone, an idiot, other words can be used to describe his behaviour. There is simply insufficeint evidence to call anyone an idiot, and it is extremely elitist to do so. SWC is hardly full of Nobel Prize winners, and is not a place to start judging others for the innocent, albeit annoying, mistakes.

He could of easily been ignored, over 2,950 players managed to ignore it, including 3-4 people included on his list, but didn't bother posting.

No, not everyone. Not everyone by a long shot.


Edited By: Ekoo Strider on Year 7 Day 179 7:10
____________

\"Tread with care in foreign lands human, if you are lucky you will only lose your pride.\"
And yet, you could easily ignore threads and you never do. Please, follow your own advice before you expect others to do the same.


____________


001.jpg\"
hapan_donator.jpg\"
Patriarch of House Ismay
Kyle Rainer
Kyle Rainer
Keep on topic.


Ekoo, do you HAVE to bring up your own personal anti-veteran agenda in EVERY thread? It's getting almost impossible to have a discussion around here without you hijacking it and flaming everyone who holds an opposing viewpoint from you! The really sad thing is that you're doing exactly what you try to accuse others of doing.


____________

"May the Grace of Ara go with you, and His Vengeance be wrought upon your enemies."

Only fools and children dream of heroes.
Nonsense.... your bringing up excuses Hal, thats all this is.

Your responses here is precisely what I am talking about, you are not even defending the actions in that thread because the response to Neo is completely indefensible.

Why should I ignore threads because you and Willhelm tell me to?

You claim not to be elitist, and harass me whenever I mention it, now you are saying that I shouldn't post. You and Willhelm see no wrong in insulting people rather overtly, questioning their intelligence, grouping together to back up your ludicrous insults, and now telling people where they can and can't post. Then proceed to claim no grouping actually take place.

I have every right to post here as you do. True, some threads I should leave alone, but it shouldn't be a public forum otherwise, I am willing to admit that - but point out, there are other places to post if they do not want people like me to respond.

I can say one thing when I do insult people I can point to posts/actions were I was clearly antagonised and I will not simply join a crowd to hassle a person no matter what I think of his actions. I will not insult someone for behaving in a way I don't, but I will argue with someone indefinitely if they insult me.

You don't want me to post? Don't have public forums.

Willy, you dont want me to post? Then, don't feel you have the authority to declare new players idiotic whenever they behave in a manner you don't agree with, and you don't like.

Two or three people having an argument that is fine, but six or seven players simply entering a thread simply to tell someone how idiotic they are is pointless, and offensive.

If you stop bullying players I will not post.

I am not telling you not to post, I am telling you shouldn't be insulting. Fair enough you can defend yourself, but if you are just going to post 'your an idiot', why bother? You could debate with Neo rather than question his intelligence, which had nothing to do with why or what he posted.


Edited By: Ekoo Strider on Year 7 Day 179 15:03
____________

\"Tread with care in foreign lands human, if you are lucky you will only lose your pride.\"
Neo's post is a terrible example, Strider. He admitted himself that the only reason he called many of those people jerks and bastards (cough) was because he was annoyed with people offering him advice or posting that they disagreed with him or closing his redundant threads, and in very few instances was anyone actually being downright rude to him prior to that post (and even in the post, only one or two people directly fought with him about it, and he did just as much namecalling as the other party). He then went on to post a subsequent apology for overreacting and insulting players.


____________

swcforumsig

the response to Neo is completely indefensible 


Wrong. There is a perfect defense for the Neo situation: He apologised! Yes, HE was the one who apologised for HIS behaviour, and he asked for a clean slate, which everyone agreed to give him.

It's hard to turn that around and claim he was in the right and we were in the wrong, isn't it?

Why should I ignore threads because you and Willhelm tell me to? 


Nobody said you should ignore threads. In fact YOU were the one suggesting that OTHER people should ignore threads. But what I ACTUALLY said was for you not to bring up YOUR personal agenda REGARDLESS of the purpose of the thread.

You've turned a thread about a serious discussion forum into "veterans can't moderate impartially".
You turned a thread about the Empire into "there's massive Admin bias for the established factions, and ship datacards were handed out to favour the veterans".
You turned a thread about GNS posts into "you can't get anywhere unless you're a veteran/suck up to veterans."
How many more threads do you have to hijack for this little crusade of yours, that nobody supports you on?

grouping together to back up your ludicrous insults, and now telling people where they can and can't post. Then proceed to claim no grouping actually take place. 


Consider for a moment, Ekoo, that it might - just MIGHT - be possible for two people to independantly reach the same conclusion, find the same thread, and disagree with the same post... can you imagine that? Can you grasp the concept, and understand that it COULD happen? Because when you do, you'll be making progress. However, as long as you remain convinced that two people posting the same opinion in the same thread is a conspiracy, you'll still be completely deluded.

I will argue with someone indefinitely if they insult me 


This does explain why you repeatedly post the same drivel over and over after your arguments have been completely shredded, at least.

when I do insult people I can point to posts/actions were I was clearly antagonised 


But remember, Ekoo, you said there are NO valid circumstances for calling someone stupid. Hypocrit.

Two or three people having an argument that is fine, but six or seven players simply entering a thread simply to tell someone how idiotic they are is pointless, and offensive 


What you fail to realise is that Neo made a lot of posts in a lot of places, and generally one or two people replied to each of them (some of the same people, some different people). Some replies were polite, some were not, but I think all of them pointed out where he was wrong - they didn't just say "you're an idiot!"
But then Neo started ANOTHER thread, taking the names of ALL of those people, and saying how mean and what jerks there were. THAT was when everybody jumped on him and all flamed (flame - to insult) him all at once. Even YOU admit you'll insult someone when antagonised, and will argue indefinitely when insulted. But you want a different standard to apply to Neo?
My dear Ekoo, that would be bias!

Look at the welcome forum - there have been a LOT of new players posting recently that have read the rules and/or guide, or generally have otherwise been asking sensible questions. Not ONE of them has been flamed/bullied/received negative comments. There is no veteran conspiracy against new people. There IS an overall community dislike for people who don't (or can't) put any thoughts into their posts. Bear in mind that I say this after seeing many people with very little time in the game being just as quick to jump on stupid questions as the veterans are.


____________

"May the Grace of Ara go with you, and His Vengeance be wrought upon your enemies."

Only fools and children dream of heroes.
Syn regardless, the post was made, and 15 accusations of stupidity was simply not needed.

Yes, HE was the one who apologised for HIS behaviour, and he asked for a clean slate, which everyone agreed to give him.

It's hard to turn that around and claim he was in the right and we were in the wrong, isn't it 


It doesn't matter if he was wrong. Over 15 accusations of stupidity is never warranted.

But what I ACTUALLY said was for you not to bring up YOUR personal agenda REGARDLESS of the purpose of the thread. 


MY AGENDA? Your the one who accuses me of prejudice. Maybe you should debate the points rather than the person, and we wouldn't have arguments like this. Stop talking about bias and elitism if it is insignificant. If it is a significant issue keep mentioning it. Why do you keep mentioning? Your personal agenda is to mention elitism whenever i mention anything. It is also to absolve any blame from your and, at times, Willhelm's actions, you call people who dislike either of of you stupid, that is why I suspect large degrees of elitism in SWC.

How many more threads do you have to hijack for this little crusade of yours, that nobody supports you on? 


You care about levels of support, and also who supports you. I came into this conversation because of a post saying that we should effectively discourage new players that don't meet a certain criteria. I believe that criteria is enforced by your type of bullying, that is calling people idiots until they leave, agree with you, or do not contribute in the SWC forums. I think this is creating a unanimity in the forums, that make them boring.

However, as long as you remain convinced that two people posting the same opinion in the same thread is a conspiracy, you'll still be completely deluded. 


That is rubbish. I disagree with people supporting each other's subjective INSULTS for no reason. There is no reason for several people to call one person an idiot. Fair enough, one person can if absolutely necessary, but even two is getting extreme.

But remember, Ekoo, you said there are NO valid circumstances for calling someone stupid. Hypocrit. 


Again with the rubbish. Did I say I called anyone stupid? No. Even if I did, I would say some of my actions have been questionable. There is some posts I should not have made. I am willing to admit that, while you on the other hand will never admit something similar.

Your not a hypocrit, your a bully. You believe you have a right to call people stupid because a few active posters agree with you.




This was not turned into an anti-veteran rant until you mentioned it, like you always do. You refuse to listen and presume too much. You attack the player rather than the argument, and use your friends to confirm your subjective opinions. I am simply saying there is no need to insult newbs, you don't think that is right.

Personally, I believe you, and people like Willhelm, have remarkably similar opinions, and generally use each other, among others, to back up insults. Regardless of what Neo had done, or what other newbs have done, calling him stupid over 15 times is just not needed. It doesn't matter if he has apologised, or if he accepts the criticisms. If you must, one person could call him stupid, I dont think it was necessary considering he just joined, but one person would have done. Then your "hordes" of supporters could have gone about agreeing with him. The fact is he obviously behaved in a way that was forbidden, and he was criticised cruelly for it. He got angry and made a post, he subsequently read the rules, and apologised. If you waited a few weeks, locked his thread, sent him a message or two, he would have realised. He doesn't seem to be very active any more, which is sad.

This is not much of a community for most people, this thread was talking about restricting membership to a "quality" core of a few players. That, my "dear" Hal, is an elitist notion. Whether it is good or bad is irrelevant, as is who is mentioning it. I am not saying it is necessarily bad, I am saying I dont like it. Get your preconceived notions out of your head.

You are in no position to call anyone stupid, or even biased.


Edited By: Ekoo Strider on Year 7 Day 179 19:27
____________

\"Tread with care in foreign lands human, if you are lucky you will only lose your pride.\"
The problem with Neo was that he opened a thread for the sole purpose of calling a group of people jerks and bastards. The point of his post was to be angry and offensive. It's called flamebait, and people will respond in kind. It is that simple. Claiming that people should not have responded angrily is one thing, but the fact of the matter is that he should never have opened a thread like that in the first place. That is the sort of thing we are trying to avoid, and which this thread has thus far been striving to address. Ideally, such threads are closed as soon as they are spotted to prevent this from propagating.

Your problem with Hal should be taken care of in private, and should not litter this previously productive thread.


____________

swcforumsig

Over 15 accusations of stupidity is never warranted 


You've said in the past that 1 is never justifiable. Now you're talking about how many it is. Which is it?

Maybe you should debate the points rather than the person 


I've tried that. You never concede even when your point is shredded. Why should I bother to address points that I have already disputed and you fail to acknowledge the counter-arguments? Attempting to debate with you is futile, as you have proven yourself incapable of it.

you call people who dislike either of of you stupid 


No, I call stupid people stupid. Or people who are acting stupid. I don't care whether people like me or not. If someone disagrees with me, and makes a reasoned post about it, then I'll reply to them, and continue to do so as long as they keep putting thought into their responses and replying to what I post. If they don't engage their brain before their fingers hit the keyboard, then I have problems with them.

calling people idiots until they leave, agree with you, or do not contribute in the SWC forums 


If they're being stupid, I'll tell them so until they stop being stupid. If that can only happen with them leaving the forums/SWC, then good riddance. More often than not, though, they wise up and start contributing constructively. That does not mean the same as agreeing with me/Wilhelm/you/whoever. It means thinking things through before they post, reading sticky threads, checking the rules, and so on. YOU, Ekoo, don't agree with me, but you are capable of contributing constructively. Sometimes you beat topics to death, and not infrequently you ignore valid arguments because you don't like them, but you do contribute.

I disagree with people supporting each other's subjective INSULTS for no reason 


Going back to your example, if you insult 8 people, you should expect to get at least 8 people flaming you in response.
There is some validity to the topic of this thread, that some people (and I am one of them) tend to react to some types of post with a negative attitude, and repeat one another doing so (of course, the same can be said of helpful advice). However, it's not like I send WvI an ICQ message with a message address and say "Here, help me flame this idiot!!"

You believe you have a right to call people stupid because a few active posters agree with you. 


I believe I have a right to call someone stupid because they're (being) stupid. It doesn't matter whether or not other people agree with me - I'll make the call on my own judgement. Having support/weight of numbers is simply a bonus based on how many people you have to argue with at once. But I've done it on forums where the majority was against me, simply because they were being dumb. They'd actually done what you accuse SWC of doing - formed a single opinion on any given topic and beaten down any resistance to it long ago. So when new people came in and started questioning something, they got the entire forum jumping down their necks about it.
While that does happen here on topics such as delayed real time, letting people start as freelancers, skill reassignments (well, actually not so much on this one), on most topics (including these) you can politely phrase a question and get a polite reply/explanation, and even discussion on the topic going.
Of course if you come into it with a bad attitude/insults, you get the same (or worse) in response.

If you waited a few weeks, locked his thread, sent him a message or two, he would have realised. He doesn't seem to be very active any more, which is sad. 


He DID realise. And he had one or two polite/interesting threads after he asked for a clean slate, and then disappeared. Which is sad, but hopefully he's just lurking somewhere playing the game, reading the rules, and not bothering with the forums. In fact... *checks his profile*... yep, his last login was today. So to get technical, the "tough love" approach of making him read the rules and think before posting worked, and he's still active in SWC and not making a nuisance or a fool of himself. The same thing worked on Aiden Cook, who is someone who does still post on the boards.

this thread was talking about restricting membership to a "quality" core of a few players. That, my "dear" Hal, is an elitist notion 


You are right, and I do not support any pre-joining tests for quality. But nor do I support rampant idiocy on the forums, and people spamming questions with obvious answers due to being lazy. If a few people can't learn to educate themselves, and/or think before they post, then I have no problem with them leaving the game. I have the same approach to actually giving help. I'd much rather tell someone where to find the link to the Rules than to post a link to the specific page. If you give them a link, they'll come back the next time they want help. If you tell them how to find and use the rules, they won't be reliant on the forums and others.

It's far better to give people what they need, than what they want. If they want to post dumb questions without looking at the rules or sticky threads, then they need a kick up the pants.

I am not saying it is necessarily bad, I am saying I dont like it. Get your preconceived notions out of your head. 


I will respond with a couple more quotes from your FIRST post in this thread, with certain portions or words in bold:

especially vets should refrain from words like idiotic 


one vet said 


And one from your second post, before I replied:

bullied (or flamed, the term that is conveniently used by veterans) 


There is no need to single out veterans in these statements, except for your anti-veteran agenda. Certainly "flamed" is a common Internet term, and the appropriate one for the situation. It was because of these specific references that I called you on it, not simply your posting in the thread.

You are in no position to call anyone stupid, or even biased. 


But you are? Certainly you made a big deal over bias in a previous thread, and were throwing it around wholesale as an accusation. Interesting standpoint.

*ring, ring*
"Hello?"
"Hey pot, this is kettle. You're black!"
*click*


____________

"May the Grace of Ara go with you, and His Vengeance be wrought upon your enemies."

Only fools and children dream of heroes.
Eric Jackson
Eric Jackson
This thread was going fine 'till Ekoo showed up. =/


____________

I won't go down in ashes without one final cry
Page 1 2