Where was grief caused? Where was I entertained by this?
I have provided reasons for why Sekretar should not have his chat banned. I have also provided an alternative solution. In other threads, I have challenged the assumptions behind the rules associated with foul language.
The general response has been: Don't question what we are doing. This has taken various forms.
1) It takes time from Vexer's admin duties
2) I(admin) decided it benefits: a. the community; b. business
3) It was an established rule by 4mygod
4) I've had admin positions where handling things "democratically" doesn't work.
It has also been alleged that I have a personal problem on various levels: (1) causing grief and taking satisfaction; (2) anti-authoritarianism; and (3) anti-disestablishmentism. (ad hominem attacks).
These are strategies that have been employed to ensure that people like Noxon, Diddly, and myself will not critically contest some of the decisions that have been administered here on the site. Which, ultimately, is just a gaming community.
I personally have an issue with some of Sekretar's chat. Also, I have refused to play Sekretar for months at a time. Part of me finds it funny that he cannot chat now.
That said, I have tried to put those things aside and support Noxon's claim that Sekretar deserves to chat.
I have supplied reasons, provided alternatives, and broke down unrelated claims that I detailed out in the beginning of this post.
That said, my goal has not been to undermine the time that Vexer has placed in the site. I personally find this valuable and have commented in other arenas on how valuable his work is. However, when his time is used as an excuse to never be questioned, then people are no longer working in the realm of supplying reasons.
If you think the reasons I have supplied are inadequate, then focus on those. My initial response was regarding the arbitrary nature of a rule regarding foul language. I concur with Diddly that no one has properly established what makes something offensive.
If you aren't interested in what community members say, then why supply reasons at all? In fact, why respond with anything other than: This is our site and our decisions. If you want to be involved, apply for an admin position so that you can discuss these issues. If you have a formal complaint, you can submit a letter to the top administrator.
I find value in contesting ideas. (Thorpe clearly doesn't). I am also aware that this is Teck's site. That without people, it would be nothing.
Where was grief caused? Where was I entertained by this?
I have provided reasons for why Sekretar should not have his chat banned. I have also provided an alternative solution. In other threads, I have challenged the assumptions behind the rules associated with foul language.
The general response has been: Don't question what we are doing. This has taken various forms.
1) It takes time from Vexer's admin duties
2) I(admin) decided it benefits: a. the community; b. business
3) It was an established rule by 4mygod
4) I've had admin positions where handling things "democratically" doesn't work.
It has also been alleged that I have a personal problem on various levels: (1) causing grief and taking satisfaction; (2) anti-authoritarianism; and (3) anti-disestablishmentism. (ad hominem attacks).
These are strategies that have been employed to ensure that people like Noxon, Diddly, and myself will not critically contest some of the decisions that have been administered here on the site. Which, ultimately, is just a gaming community.
I personally have an issue with some of Sekretar's chat. Also, I have refused to play Sekretar for months at a time. Part of me finds it funny that he cannot chat now.
That said, I have tried to put those things aside and support Noxon's claim that Sekretar deserves to chat.
I have supplied reasons, provided alternatives, and broke down unrelated claims that I detailed out in the beginning of this post.
That said, my goal has not been to undermine the time that Vexer has placed in the site. I personally find this valuable and have commented in other arenas on how valuable his work is. However, when his time is used as an excuse to never be questioned, then people are no longer working in the realm of supplying reasons.
If you think the reasons I have supplied are inadequate, then focus on those. My initial response was regarding the arbitrary nature of a rule regarding foul language. I concur with Diddly that no one has properly established what makes something offensive.
If you aren't interested in what community members say, then why supply reasons at all? In fact, why respond with anything other than: This is our site and our decisions. If you want to be involved, apply for an admin position so that you can discuss these issues. If you have a formal complaint, you can submit a letter to the top administrator.
I find value in contesting ideas. (Thorpe clearly doesn't). I am also aware that this is Teck's site. That without people, it would be nothing.