A discussion on the iopq ban

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

10-02-2009, 06:00 AM
XTR1000

lock the drama, it´s ridiculous. Hes gone, the majority is happy about it, so what?

Deriving new emotional/personal arguments between pro- and contra ipoq-people is just retarded.
10-02-2009, 08:18 AM
a500lbgorilla

Quote:

Originally Posted by linaker

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyms

Have you seen one mod or mid/high stakes player here complaining or asking for a reversal. If IOPQ was so good at bringing it to the forum why are only a half handful of people protesting, and one of them is Sir Pownalot.

If iopq was so bad, then why is anyone protesting? And it is generally accepted that for each person who protests there are numerous others that think the same way. But that obviously does not matter if none of the "right" people protest.

Unfortunately, I can not relay private conversations from the mod forum. Whatever is said there, stays there. I shouldn't have even quoted UG's words but he said it as well as I could think of.

There is an element of he pissed off the wrong people. Those people were the owners, admins and moderators that try to run FTR. When great posters move away from the forum and cite him, we had to consider taking action. Those long standing internal beliefs solidified when I finally made a move to ban him for good.

We discussed it at length, and we all decided that even though I publicly handled it about as bad as possible, the ban was still for the good of the forum.

I don't really have the authority to lecture you on the "that's life" aspects of this debacle. But the forum moves on and I would appreciate it if you stay and participate in discussions.

If you ever feel that one of the "right" people is unfairly treating one of the "wrong" people, I promise that you'll find an open and understanding ear with Xianti, givememyleg or taipan.
10-02-2009, 08:38 AM
Monty3038

I am less confused. Thank you for the clarification.
10-02-2009, 09:18 AM
kingnat

Quote:

Originally Posted by BankItDrew

This is the first I've noticed anyone having a problem with iopq.

I guess I filter shit much better than the rest of you sensitive pussies.

yeah I'm sure it has nothing to do with your complete lack of emotions...

Rills is awesome. And I would've been verily depressed were he out of the jungle. 500lb4lif!
10-02-2009, 09:23 AM
kingnat

Also, for a bit of context, I posted the above from my iPod Touch, while taking a morning dump that was flavored with some of the Wild-flavored hot wings from BW3s last night... because *sobsob*... cauze I ruv me sum rilla!!!
10-02-2009, 09:26 AM
BennyLaRue

What does Wild taste like anyway? That could go a lot of different ways. Could taste spicy, could taste like panther pheremones...don't know.
10-02-2009, 09:26 AM
Luco

SPR
10-02-2009, 09:51 AM
Ash256

Quote:

Originally Posted by linaker

Quote:

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

I disagree on the last point. Bad posters are bad for the forums.

Please would FTR define what is a bad post and put it in the rules, so we all know the standard we have to achieve, as being a bad poster is apparently a banning offence.

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/7303/badpost.jpg
10-02-2009, 10:17 AM
Muzzard

I woudl rather have luckyslevin back than IOPQ and that is saying something!
10-02-2009, 10:31 AM
WillburForce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muzzard

I woudl rather have luckyslevin back than IOPQ and that is saying something!

is Slevin still playing/losing do we know?
10-02-2009, 10:59 AM
Da GOAT

Many years from now, our childrens children will see Rilla as a true legend, a great warrior poet, the last action hero!!
10-02-2009, 11:01 AM
BennyLaRue

Honestly, this isn't my house. I'm just glad to be let in. You guys do whatever you want.
10-02-2009, 11:13 AM
frosst

i wonder if there's any correlation between the people thinking he was banned because of commune activity only, and said thinkers rarely, if ever, leaving the commune.
10-02-2009, 11:42 AM
Halv

I rarely, if ever, leave the commune and even I knew iopq to be bad for the shnl forum.

I actually didn't mind having him in the commune.
10-02-2009, 11:54 AM
Micro2Macro

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyms

Your opinions on the past are scewed by emotions, you probably should try and relax a little. This is not the first time I have said something to someone else and you have quoted me and had something to say. Are you really just itching to pick a fight, because that horse has left the barn, it's waaayy too late, I've moved on.

yeah I'm the one who isn't relaxed and steaming, lol. glad you've moved on.
10-02-2009, 12:33 PM
BooG690

Can't we all just get along?
10-02-2009, 12:35 PM
dranger7070

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ash256

Quote:

Originally Posted by linaker

Quote:

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

I disagree on the last point. Bad posters are bad for the forums.

Please would FTR define what is a bad post and put it in the rules, so we all know the standard we have to achieve, as being a bad poster is apparently a banning offence.

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/7303/badpost.jpg

This isn't getting enuff luz imo.

nh sir
10-02-2009, 02:09 PM
surviva316

Quote:

Originally Posted by bode

wait, why was dozer so butt hurt over this?

lmao.

in case anyone cares what i think about this:

i have been ok with the "ends" of the decision for a while, since there was talk in the BC {edit: i mean irc} about how iopq's content made A LOT of respected posters stop posting. i definitely agree that if this is the case than this decision is certainly addition by subtraction.

however, i was really uneasy with the "means" of the decision until this statement was made. i thought it was a bad precedent to set to ban someone just for making "bad posts" and giving bad advice and pissing off great players. BUT now i feel completely ok with it having heard that he received repeated warning through various mediums. who cares whether he actually received strikes or not, just so long as he was being warned by the powers to be that he should stop being such a nuisance.

this last point makes it absolutely understandable how completely antagonizing everyone in the God thread after being repeatedly warned that he was being a nuisance could be the last straw. without knowing this context, though, i think you guys could see how this came off as weird for the 48 hours or so between being banned and being explained.

yeah 'rilla you made a slight mistake in judgment by making a joke out of it, but i could see how you didn't expect to get much backlash from it because the majority of people hated him
10-02-2009, 03:32 PM
mixchange

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xianti

Posting nonsense in the Community forum is not even an issue here. A lot of good posters had stopped posting and/or reading the strategy forums because of iopq. It's my sincere hope that the quality posters who had had enough of iopq and simply stayed away will return to become active with good, quality content once again.

As far as dealing with Rilla's bad handling of this affair, that's between him and me, and it is being discussed.

I hate to see anyone banned :( GL IOPQ, but I'll take Xianti's word that some good posters had stopped posting in the strat forums because of him -- I wouldn't be surprised as a lot of his approaches were abrasive.

Sometimes I felt like he really jump started some discussions in SHNL, and other times completely derailed them.

I'd rather have the top quality posters in the strategy forums to help everyone's bottom line than to keep IOPQ on -- just being selfish on the quality of the strat forums here. Sorry IO, and thanks Xianti/Mods for keeping such great forums
10-02-2009, 04:09 PM
daven

Quote:

Originally Posted by surviva316

BUT now i feel completely ok with it having heard that he received repeated warnings through various mediums.

um, I don't think this happened.
Could either Xianti or 'rilla confirm?
10-02-2009, 04:52 PM
surviva316

Re: A discussion on the iopq ban

Quote:

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

He’s been given warnings, complaints and the like through several channels, but never a classic strike.

this is what i was referencing. don't really think the officiality of a strike is necessary so long as someone's warned
10-02-2009, 05:43 PM
a500lbgorilla

I can confirm he has received warnings/complaints by mods and admins privately.
10-02-2009, 06:02 PM
bode

Quote:

Originally Posted by daven

Quote:

Originally Posted by surviva316

BUT now i feel completely ok with it having heard that he received repeated warnings through various mediums.

um, I don't think this happened.
Could either Xianti or 'rilla confirm?

i can confirm that rilla confirms this
10-02-2009, 07:15 PM
daven

Quote:

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

I can confirm he has received warnings/complaints by mods and admins privately.

i stand corrected, my mistake.
10-02-2009, 07:29 PM
Xianti

iopq was indeed asked in private by several people on several occasions to cut down on his posting or simply stay out of their forums (by Moderators). This had gone on for many, many months -- perhaps over a year.

In hindsight, it was a mistake on all of our parts (Moderators, co-Admins and me) to neglect to give him Strikes to go along with the private warnings. I've spoken to all current Mods and Admins to ensure that such "nuisance posting" in the future will be considered Strike-able violations so that if it leads to banning, it will not be a shock to the public.

Strike-able/bannable "nuisance posting" is for extreme cases, particularly with long-time members. Solicitors and trolls will not be given due process, but long-time members will definitely be given fair warning. No one should be hesitant about posting legitimate comments or questions. When/if you get to be an annoyance to many, you will know it, as you will be told. iopq knew it.

Rilla is no longer an Administrator. I will be promoting someone to take his place as co-Administrator. Rilla is staying on as Moderator of the Community forum.

{locked}

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page