Total posts: 10,910
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Eh I feel like it's best that I claimed now. You would have had to take press at his word that he was justice. Also we didn't know he was justice. I would have claimed if there was a mass claim dp1 though. The way it is happening now is pretty much a confirmed town win, since sir is town. My worry also was that SA would pull third party shenanigans in lylo and side with maf, but hes confirmed town now, so no worries there.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I realize that, just wanted to see if I could convince you to end this quicker by straight up voting ragnar, but I am okay with playing it the safe way if you are skeptical of my claim.
Unvote, vtl lunatic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Hell yeah. Well there you go, it's confirmed between me and ragnar then. If you are skeptical of my claim, I am okay with being lynched. But if you wanna end this thing quick, vote ragnar.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
@SirAnonymous
Sir, I am assuming is pretty much confirmed 3rd party. If he was telling the truth, he is likely now the town nurse. If he is lying, we are screwed. But I don't think he is, because to lie and be werewolf would have required him to do more research than I doubt he likely did into his amnesiac fake claim. If he is did lie, I say GG to him and say he probably deserves a win.
Drafter, if scum, was incredibly ballsy with his claim DP1, if he was scum and pulled that off also deserves a win, but I am passing him off as confirmed town for that too.
Ragnar's behavior was especially scummy to me last day phase, and his eagerness to lynch SA based on drafter's reasoning seemed a bit opportunistic, especially by using the same werewolf logic as drafter. Drafter being privy to role knowledge makes more sense to buy that theory but even then it is kind of a stretch, and for Ragnar to continuously defend the SA lynch because he lied as third party (obviously he did) just seems outright scummy. I did the same thing when I was scum and knew pie was 3rd party, so I am especially suspicious of that strategy.
So I want to get your thoughts, drafter and sir. You wanna help me lynch ragnar? I am pretty sure it will result in a win, unless again, SA pulled that amazing fake claim, and drafter was insanely risky DP1.
If you are absolutely unconvinced that my theory on ragnar is correct, I will say I am also willing to be lynched. I am the virgin, if I am lynched Mafia will be deprived of a night kill. I am claiming now this because obviously this would seem a convienent in a lylo situation, and I would rather be lynched now then in LYLO if any of you actually scum read me. However if you guys will board on the ragnar wagon with me that would be preferable.
VTL ragnar.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
POE should put the game at a pretty easy decision between me and ragnar at this point. If you VTNL you leave the decision potentially up to SirAnonymous in LYLO, but from what I recall you don't neccesarily trust his claim. Wouldn't it be better to lynch between me and ragnar today?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Oh, don't you just hate it when someone just dismisses everything you said in one sentence by attacking your character instead of making an argument?
Ignore Lunatic. He comes from a corrupt DDO and is still nostalgic over how corrupt it would moderate based on user popularity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Ignore RM. He has a victim complex and everyone he doesn't like is a bully.
Created:
Posted in:
My death is also another scum tell for ragnar. I rarely am killed np0, I have had bad luck lately and tend to lead mislynches, I don't see the current player pool killing me off early. Ragnar's inexperience might explain the kill on me. I recognize this is weak wifom, but just something I am feeling.
Created:
Posted in:
If I die again tonight, please look into lynching ragnar. He's scummy af.
Created:
Posted in:
Trying to spin SA as a werewolf seems a bit of a stretch. Drafter was the one who came up with that idea because he knows these roles better than most of us, but Ragnar trying to bandwagon that idea seems so scummy. If SA really did use that as a fake claim for werewolf that would be clever af (not saying he isn't) but he like me probably didn't even know of the existence of the role until drafter told him. Would have taken a bit of researching the roles to find it out, and he was under pressure pretty early.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
It's an open set up, we know there is 1 third party in the game. Many third party roles joint with town. If there is a real 3rd party not CC'ing, he is stupid, because most win cons for 3rd revolve around surviving to the endgame and there is mutual benefit in trying to joint with town or in the very least taking out mafia. SA is confirmed 3rd party at this point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
He's un CC'ed third party, he's definitely not mafia. He could help town. If your argument was he was third party with negative intentions that would be another thing, latching on to him lying makes less sense.
Created:
Posted in:
Ragnar's post 25 seems a bit opportunist, eager for a lynch. Drafter is probably town for catching the slip. I suppose we can let Sir live today and try to take the nurses role.
VTL Ragnar
Created:
-->
@airmax1227
High Hopes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vpkePCPRSM
New Challenge- We won't be alone ft. Laura Brehm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cguTNNvDgmM
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
Yeah, the mei wall bug sucks.Didn't you used to play Overwatch? I'm almost certain you're familiar with the concept of 'tilt'.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
The restraining order section added, " Additionally, a user may request that an RO be placed between them and another member."
Can we change this rule please? It seems a bit strict, and the punishment kind of unjust. Why can't a user just not respond to an individual who upsets them?
Created:
Posted in:
As you can probably guess, I have a thing against RO's being issued but not enforced.
Why's that?
RO's are of course not a first or second option. Even for slip-ups banning is not the first resort. I'm big on telling people to chill out, and remind them of the CoC.
What is an example of how far an argument would have to go for a restraining order?
It's not. The very nature of this site is all about the criticism of ideas.With how few RO's we've had, it's not that many less posts from avoided flamewars.
The criticism of ideas can often lead to flame wars. Flamewars aren't necessarily a bad thing though, if it brings activity and discussion to a topic. I mean if someone starts doxxing someone over a dis-agreement, might be time to do something. But I don't see the harm in them otherwise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
And you still haven't made a post explaining why you think 7 days are justified for "breaking an RO", you just made a blanket statement defending the mods and attacking a previous one.
I'm not attacking the mod who banned sup or TRN just was curious behind the logic that went into the decision of that lengthy of a ban over something that is arguably pretty trivial.
Created:
Posted in:
So that thread wylted posted was reported so many times, the report feature was literally turned off. So while it was directed at mods, the racist nature of it offended others.But it wasn't directed at them, hence he couldn't be banned for it
THE F- I literally asked you that:
So all it takes is the party receiving the insult being offended and telling the mod?To be banned? No, you just report the post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I have no idea how severe Supa's violation was though, I had no idea he violated the RO until after he was banned
This is the thread where he got banned. I am thinking a post got deleted or something, because I don't get it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Created:
Posted in:
To be banned? No, you just report the post. If it's only once, it'll usually just be a warning. Multiple posts will result in either a hard warning or a ban, depending on how serious it was and how many prior times the offender has been warned/banned.
So that thread wylted posted was reported so many times, the report feature was literally turned off. So while it was directed at mods, the racist nature of it offended others. He wasn't banned. Supa was banned for 7 days over an RO that he says he didn't even know he had (maybe he lied or forgot) because of a Copypasta therealnihilist's argument. That one in particular seemed excessive. Also I've interacted with TheRealNihilist briefly, and yeah he didn't seem to be the most charming guy, but he must of threatened to kill someone's real mother or something if he was banned for 7 days and wylted's thread was ignored.
BTW I am not saying wylted deserves to be banned or that supa or TRN don't deserve to be banned neccesarily, just wondering why the rules are so strict, or why they aren't in other cases, it seems their is some level of consideration put in or discussed about in some mod PM, but that's not so transparent publicly. I know you are just doing your job, maybe these rules were established by bsh1 ages ago, but with a new moderation team it's on you guys to give the rules clarity now, since bsh1 can't answer for them.
Created:
Posted in:
One of the things I loved about Debate.org was the social implications of being able to argue heatedly with someone one day, and agree with each other on something completely different a week later. It fostered an environment that encouraged open-mindedness, and an understanding that you can be friendly with someone even if you disagree with them on other topics. I feel like restraining orders with this severe of punishments kind of ruin that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
So all it takes is the party receiving the insult being offended and telling the mod?Yes, if it's directed at mods, it is dismissed.
For RO's, the two parties cannot @each other, respond to one another's threads, vote on each other's debates or accept another's debates, PM each other, or interact in any other way
Do both parties have to agree to the RO or is it just decided by the mod that two fighting individuals are gonna be on an RO?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Airmax isn't the mod anymore. He can't hurt you lol. For someone who constantly accuses everyone of being a bully, why are you bullying someone who hasn't talked to you in over a year? You constantly shit talk him despite him having no interaction with you lol. Hopefully he doesn't get one of these arbitrary restraining orders against you so you can't even mention his name without getting a 7 fucking day ban lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Do you have anything relevant to the forum being discussed? Why not argue with me about why you think 7 days was a justifiable ban for supadudz, rather than turn this into a with hunt against a guy who barely touches this website and doesn't even interact with you anymore lol.
Created:
Posted in:
I have the proof, you have the lies. I do not owe you any proof. Where is your proof he's such a good guy or consistent applier of rules as a mod?
Your the one making the claims about airmax. You provide the burden of proof. This thread wasn't about airmax, you are just using it as a forum to vent your frustrations about when you were banned.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Dude, you are simply trying to turn me attacking Airmax into you going 'but you're worse, who are you to talk?' or 'where's your proof?'. I do not care what you say, everyone who knows me on here knows I do not fucking lie about important statements on matters ever.
Well then you are very mis-understood. I would be open to hearing an open dialogue between you and airmax to call him out on this to his face though.
You can run around with your mafia mindset and lie to everyone like it's a game, this is not some playground bullshit but as it's an online forum you're free to pretend it is one, just leave the serious chat to people who know who to trust.
This makes no sense, and mafia has nothing to do with it. Also you clearly take the site too seriously. You act like some rebel freedom fighter.
I wonder why Airmax isn't coming here and defending himself, can you ask him to when you talk about your saber music battle?
Because everyone knows you are literally insane, it's why I generally don't respond to you. Don't know why I am bothering to do it now.
He will end up slipping up in ways you can't slip up on his behalf. I will make him admit things and say sorry, you just haven't understood him yet. You don't even know how manipulative he was behind the scenes so you can't talk on the matter and you're demanding proof on another account's PMs on DDO or on a Hangouts chat here or there. I don't care what you think you know about him, you were nowhere near close enough to him as a person to know him well. Even if you met him IRL, you didn't know him. He wears a carefully constructed mask and very few see through, but I do.
Alright, get max in a hangout or a debate and prove that he is some megaminded master villain lol. Your ridiculous.
Created:
Posted in:
Where's your proof for this deep airmax is evil conspiracy lolYou don't get it. He would never say that is why. Qopel, me and so many others. You didn't even pay attention to the website outside of the forums section so you didn't NOTICE how many he wrongly banned as you never got to know them. I watched and got sick of what I was seeing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
No. That was not what took it down. There was spam for many years and he refused to even let anyone help him delete it because he is a megalomaniac who thinks he is the only means to justice.
This statement right here shows your ignorance of the subject. Airmax never had the ability to give someone moderation privileges, only juggle did.
he honestly thinks this, I talked to him and got to know him in ways you other users didn't)'
How you gonna tell me this lol. I talked to max almost every night, this is not him. From my understanding you were pretty friendly with him in hangouts, and just talk shit on him when you don't think he's around to respond. Doubtful you would confront him in a hangout now lol.
He sees a system as either something he should give no shits about the justice of or otherwise one he should entirely control the justice of. I do not care what you say to defend or deflect, the site was already dead before the spam and everyone fucking knew it. People were already using the site less and less, Hangouts had died out. The only reason spam even could take the site down was BECAUSE the entire community around the website had split up pretty much into tiny factions (Bossy and Seventh, REF and Wylted etc etc)
You spent too much time away from the site if you think the spam didn't worsen over time. Like I don't even know how to argue with you if you are this ignorant and stubborn about actual events lol.
Created:
Posted in:
He did ban frequently, you just didn't hear about it as he'd prey on members who weren't popular, usually in the polls and opinions section. He'd tend to just take PetersSmith's word for it and ban anyone she said was causing too much hassle.
I am sure he banned members as needed, but I am doubtful about your claim that he would take someone's word for it without investigating it. Also his bans were not very lengthy unless they were repeat repeat repeat offenders. 7 days was like an imabench style ban.
He would never notify you when he banned, so how do you know he didn't? After Qopel his style changed and he learned to ban quietly.
This is also a lie but okay.
Created:
Posted in:
It's easy to speak respectfully of someone you permanently banned and then blackmailed to stay away with doxxed info.
Lol proof of these allegations? Also if I recall, you had made like a million accounts and kept coming back after being banned. If by doxxing you mean him telling you something like he would report your IP to the police, that isn't doxxing.
Don't think for a single second he is a better person than me.
Your the one putting yourself on a pedestal.
Airmax would sell you out and laugh while doing it if he thought his public image would improve for it.
He has very little interest in his public image. He could have probably been a mod here if he wanted to. Many members were asking about him when DART first sprouted, he was done with it. It was an unthankful position, as evidenced by members like yourself.
Created:
Posted in:
Nah, I just wasn't a snowflake enough to report someone for hurting my feelings.And I have no doubt that Airmax congratulated you on forgiving and forgetting such behaviour if the user who did it was remotely popular.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Seriously this is how you think of another human being? Where has airmax ever talked to you about this way? The things you are saying are appearing to be more true about you than he.No, it's not a bit wacky at all. Airmax is and was a corrupt two-faced [expletives] and I do not give a damn what you say about him, it's the truth
He never earned his position,
This suggests it was a paid or wanted position. There is literally nothing to be gained from being a moderator except for if your a narcissist to like to control others, or you generally want to help. His lack of banning people as frequently demonstrates that he had little interest in exerting control.
never moderated well enough to keep it and was a huge reason why DDO went down the pan,
Hugely dis-agree. It was clearly brought down by the spam. The site continued for years even with max as mod lol. It died because 1 man (airmax) was the only one with abilities to delete the spam, and it eventually became a second unpaid job for him to upkeep it. Juggle is the reason the site is dead.
since he banned any eccentric member who debated from very outlandish views (except for the racist pedo debater Wylted) and kept only the ones that were socially adept enough to keep off of his radar.
This is just an outright lie. Find me where he banned anyone for having an "outlandish view". He was a huge advocate for freedom of speech. ADOL never got banned, and that dude loved sexing animals. lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
But your okay with these threads because they are directed at you? How does this restraining order thing work?
Created:
Posted in:
It is excessive. This site could be more active, but when half of the actual population are moderators and arbitrarily banning members for whole weeks at a time you are actually killing the sites activity unnecessarily. The owner of the site is desperately asking for donations to keep the site going and the moderators are banning people for weeks at a time because someone mentioned or replied to someone they had a safe space restraining order from?I don't see how it's excessive, as the whole point is to deter future behavior. I know I wouldn't miss 1 or 2 days, but 7 actually makes a difference. Besides that, some users receiving 7 days may or may not have received warnings in the past, which influences the consequences
I've been doxxed, argued with, been in flame wars with many many people on debate.org, and had just as many friendly interactions with them later on. If I tattled on them every time I got my feelings hurt, I wouldn't be furthering myself in any regard by dis-allowing myself to think from a perspective other than my own. I'm not saying that everyone else should have as thick of skin as me, but that mods should maybe ban a little less aggressively.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
That is ridiculous,Him making a thread about an RO violation, would until the end of the RO, in itself be an RO violation.
Not every RO violation is equal. Someone under an RO can of course still say 'I don't like some users,' but if they go deep into describing a certain user, clearly they're thinking about them too much. As an example, let's say Franklin and I have an RO, I could still say 'I hate forum spam' or even 'I hate users who make forum spam,' but a violation of the RO would be 'I hate users who start First Post threads in forums I just finished emptying for their deletion.' The first two statements imply no general target of thought, Franklin would be acting very sensitive if he made that connection to him; whereas the third statement describing what he did today, would be clearly crossing the line.
Who implemented this dumb crap, and where can I petition against this? Why is debateart some large safe space? I am totally understanding why this site is dead now lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
"Corrupt" it's a debate site man, we all know you have a bias against airmax, but to make him out to be some evil genius twisting a mustache because you got banned a few times is a little whacky aint it?Ignore Lunatic. He comes from a corrupt DDO and is still nostalgic over how corruot it would moderate based on user popularity.
All I want to know is who comes up with the ban length decisions, and if there is any discretion used, or if theirs just some rulebook with ban lengths and they follow them to a tee here without context.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
There were a couple things, but not strong scum tells. In post 13 when you assumed press was instantly scum because he had a wrong result on you, I thought that was a bit OMGUS'y and close minded if you were town. For example, as town if someone came out with a result on me, I would assume I was framed first, or that the cop was flavored if my lynch wouldn't result in a loss for town. Even though press lied and was conveniently right, the logic would be he would have no reason to lie if he was town (he didn't so idk why tf he did and am eating my own words). Him getting fake results on you wouldn't make sense. But it also worked against press IMO because he was just as close minded about it. Also I thought you WIFOMing about how you wouldn't waive a night kill was a bit scummy, mostly because you were just in a game with me where I did it, and it worked, so you should know there is potential in that as a strategy.
Regardless, I didn't really think any of it was scummy enough to push you over pie, and circumstances around roles and lynching mechanics had more of an effect on my decision than anything. I would have been willing to lynch you, but you weren't a strong read, and I was even second guessing any scum read on you anyway because as scum I didn't think it would make sense for you to counter press by trying to lynch him, as that 1 v 1 would result in your demise upon perss's flip.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I was going to suggest that logic to get you lynched that last day phase, but I decided against it on the offchance you could actually win with town. Figured pie was likely mafia based on events. Looked through the role list pretty thoroughly, but I guess I didn't see your role as an option for him. Pie's inactivity was kind of hurtful but I'm not sure how he would be able to explain away not being able to be lynched anyway.Right, really in the future I think we simply have to not trust any third party
Created:
Posted in:
If Hitler were a dope MC, would he get somewhat of a pass like MJ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
Nah, it is on town if we are relying on PM structure to confirm anyone. It's not only bad logic, it's almost gamebreaking to confirm players using PM structure. People did this on DDO a lot, then I noticed mods would either give scum the town PM structure, or would write out roles differently purposely so this logic would be avoided.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I didn't town read Sir. I would have been down to lynch him if there was support for it. These games feel kind of scum sided though, due to town having to worry about 3rd party and mafia, and being down a number early in NP0. Like with the information available to us, I don't know how I could have played that differently really. I am wondering if in the future I will do this with just one mafia, and the rest townies, no third parties
Created:
-->
@airmax1227
I want vr for PC soooo bad. I am so jealous you can download custom songs!
Created:
Posted in:
Title says it all. I'm not complaining about the moderators btw. I know they are just doing their jobs. Just curious as to who decided punishment lengths and maybe trying to understand the logic behind them a bit more?
For example supadudz being gone 7 days for a violation of a restraining order seems a bit long, especially when the harm in context of the violation seemed minimal. He's also one of the more active mafia players so the community will miss out on a much needed player slot for the next week.
Also I don't know TheRealNihilist well but i know i've seen him post a bit and know his absence effects the activity around the forums a bit. Max commonly temp banned people but I don't often recall that lengthy of bans unless it was a very serious offense or if it was a repeat offence.
Dont y'all think 1 or 2 days is good?
Again I don't know the context so forgive me if I am mistaken about these just went through the mod log and saw all these lengthy bans and was curious how that rule about long ban times was implemented
Created: