Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'equal-opportunity-discussion'.
Found 1 result
To any moderator: Please afford me the patience & clemency that is afforded to vastly more severe & uncivil topics, as I actually do intend to facilitate an important discussion. Although, I realize some points I may make can be construed as somewhat inflammatory, please bare with me as for some comments I, as a human being (beep boop), will be naturally expressing frustration. I'll add clear delimiters to the whole post so if I must, I will happily edit out problem spaces if asked, to maintain the discussion. However, I respect LO's level of communication & transparency and I believe you can understand my perspective as to why the whole picture is worth presenting forthwith. (Start of somewhat inflammatory but necessary part) Top of the evening to y'all, it's Rumple your completely irrelevant drivel spewing post nice lady. You might remember me from worthless drivel-based discussions that prompted such comments as: Anyway, I think we deserve some reasonable clarification on what belongs in the Social District if were going to punished for it. I mean I would at least appreciate it since my usual drivel resulted in a warning. That's right guys, Rumple is a little salty rn. (End somewhat inflammatory, but necessary part) (Begin meaningful discussion part) I think it's unreasonable to punish unevenly and unclearly. (Rumple argues against himself like a madlad) Technically speaking the best argument to be made against myself would be I made a "non-contributory post". However, the "non-contributory post" language is a pretty big grey area, we all understand why it has to be, and can I easily pick out 10 topics trending in Social District at the time of writing that we could have a debate on whether or not are "non-contributory posts". (Rumple calls into question the behavior of his critic) More importantly, is the correct behavior to reach out to mods directly in an unrelated thread and link another unrelated thread? That's more cut-and-dry of a "non-contributory post", actually since this person not only posted this subject but then went into my topic, did not post but proceeded to down-vote the first 8 posts, one could argue this constitutes harassment, which is strictly against the "Forums Rules". And I would say is a bigger offense. Also they perpetrated harassament against multiple people. (Rumple attempts to rally his fellow mind numbing drivel posters) @BXNNXD @NotZombieBiscuit @Similarities @Puffdragon how do you feel about the harassment leveraged against you? Clearly they fear for their lives as our senseless drivel is being targeted by pseudo-mods. (Rumple becomes justice incarnate - treat us equally or don't treat us at all) Was this person also given a warning? At the very least the "Forum Rules' are being applied unevenly. Surely, LO doesn't want users to crawl the forums policing content as some pseudo-mod? And if you do, you need to define the appropriate content more clearly, as "Discuss all things APB Reloaded related here!" is apparently too broad. My topic in question is a topical topic (haha that's fun to say), directly referring to another trending Social District topic both of which relevant to APB. Both my derivative topic and the source that inspired it were posted and discussed upon in the same forum section. Both topics were not treated equally, the source topic remains in the Social District forum and that OP wasn't harassed by a pseudo-mod and given a nondescript warning. (Rumple gonna learn you some maths) Are you familiar with the Transitive Property of Equality? If "Topic A" belongs in "Forum B" and "Topic C" subject matter is equal to "Topic A" then "Topic C" is permitted in "Forum B". My topic was "Topic B". (Rumple gonna learn you some copyright law) Are you familiar with L.H.O.O.Q, more commonly known as The Mona Lisa With A Moustache? This a famous derivative work that is copyright protected, a.k.a granted the same permissions & protections as the original source material by the same governing body. That's an evenly applied rule. (Rumple is probably the first person to reference the three-fifths compromise of 1787 in any APB forum, ever. Albeit, it's a weak reference. I just wanted to reference it I guess.) I've just demonstrated using math and legal precedence that I've been treated unequally. LO surely, I don't have 3/5th's the privilege and rights as any other forum user, pseudo-mod or not? Surely... (Rumple makes a slightly inflammatory comment, but it drives a point home.) By the way, the warning messaging being completely uninformative is a problem, but that's a separate discussion... or is that more drivel? Could a pseudo-mod tell me? I don't want a 72 hour ban (Rumple ascends and achieves absolution with some PG-13 inflammatory remarks & sick references bro) Oh and by the way, how dare anyone calls out people like @BXNNXD and us post whores. Guess who kept this forum & game alive when your May 2018 6 post pseudo-mod motherclucker patootie didn't give a hoot. I participate in this community because I love APB and us sick twisted people who are "post whores" in some unimaginable and evidently ungodly way achieve some sense of pride and accomplishment from even the smallest of contributions we make to the forum. And yes, what we do is make a contribution to this forum & this community. God forbid we permit individuals within the APB community to have fun and be social in the Social District forum, you lint licker. So... How do you feel about the clarity, or lack thereof, in the forum rules and pseudo-mod issue APB? Clearly, pocket mods can be just as much as a problem as pocket GM's. But enough about my viewpoint, I wanna facilitate discussion and hear the community. OH WAIT! How's my drivel? Report me to my union rep. TL;DR - Apply the forum rules evenly or don't apply them at all. To enable applying the rules easily, perhaps the forum rules should be more clearly stated instead of allowed to be so broadly interpreted. A forum user shouldn't incite a forum moderator to punish another forum user while willfully not applying the same rule against the broader community. This is harassment & abuse of power. If it isn't meant to be an abuse, make the rules more clear and apply it to all instead of a few. And especially don't allow staff to be used to target forum users. Jokes & salt aside I make a reasonable argument that I was target & treated unfairly and I can continue to do so with a topic by topic or post by post example. We can't have pocket moderators or pocket game masters.