Conquer Club

Metsfanmax wrote:I don't understand what the problem is. Why are you upset that you were banned from a room that, if you knew what it was for, you wouldn't have chatted in? It seems like the only thing you're upset about is that LV enforced a rule that wasn't explicitly written down, but should have been. So why are you doing this when you explicitly state:

Juan_Bottom wrote:I didn't make this a thread to complain about abuse.

have you ever felt wronged by someone and they wont explain why ?

this is what happened in this whole thing

juan asked why lv would not reply so what happened juan was after a reply and got booted for it.


in my opinion juan should appologise for his behaviour and lv should appologise for his in this thread then bring this 2 an end

now like i have said before in this thread lv didnt do wrong (but did because he did not explain properly)

now also juan didnt do wrong (but did because he carried it on in live chat instead of bringing it 2 the forum thus disrupting the live chat)

now i have been saying this to 2 of the mods on this site they need to be more clear in what they say to people.

LOL
you are barking up the wrong tree mate. Myself i dont come into livechat to care one way or the other.. As to rules, mwa.. there are only 2 well 3 rules. dont cheat, dont be an ass and use common sense. Everything else is just the gravy over the meat analogy. When a mod asks/orders/tells you to do or do not do stuff, you'd better do it. Now LoVo may or may not be a mod you like, but he has spend countless hours on this site helping the community. Is that relevant? That depends on your point of view. Just as you keep insisting there is no rule. I pointed out a few rules for you. They are blanket one's. Is that what you want to hear? That there are unwritten rules, guidelines and that mods have to feel their way into a situation just like ordinary people? He felt one way, you another and there is not a damm thing you can do about it, and i understand that hurts. But really was it that much to ask for to just comply. Did you really not understand that is was a special chatroom with special rules, not even after it was pointed out to you? even if it was not all spelled out in writen law?

my point is, he is here to help all of us, including you. You are only making it worse for yourself, and i hate to see you do this. But go right ahead. Keep digging a grave, and this is no threat but a promise. If and when its enough, its really enough. And i just hope its you who is going to make that call on this action instead of a mod being forced to do it for you.

now you can argue semantics for a while. i dont mind. But a warning as a threat.. come on! think a little. If lovo really was out to gut you, he would just have banned you for life and nobody would ever have heard from you again.

now to something sidely related to your points. There is currently a discussion about whether we should or should not spell out certain rules or keep it blanket one's maybe with a small specification.. like in the not limited to ect ect.. personally as long as the intend is know, i have said before its okay. Its easier to have a rule, cause thats when people (should) know they are wrong, but its easier to loophole it too. You are trying to loophole here, at least from my perspective. now do me a favour and create a ticket to handle this. if you are right, then you are right and you will be vindicated. If not please have peace with it and try to enjoy your time here. lovo is only one person, i sincerely hope he cannot take away the pleasure you might feel being on this site.

regards,
SirSebstar

Loud noises!

eddie2 wrote: be more clear in what they say to people.

Hey Juan could you create a poll to go with this thread?

jefjef wrote:

eddie2 wrote: be more clear in what they say to people.

Hey Juan could you create a poll to go with this thread?

How do you want me to word it?

Like:

O Moderators can do what they want
O Everyone should follow specific rules

O Juan_Bottom crossed the line
O LOVO abused his power

O Be more clearer
O Clearness is in beholder

I like

O Let it die already

wow.

Juan_Bottom wrote: I happily follow the ones that we already have.

Except the one that says mod decisions are final and ignored warnings don't go unpunished?

rdsrds2120 wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote: I happily follow the ones that we already have.

Except the one that says mod decisions are final and ignored warnings don't go unpunished?

Did I send in an e-ticket? It's pretty clear that I have taken no action against the one-sided decision, other than this thread.

All I did was create a thread where I could talk about LOVO's abuse of trust in the authority given to him. The only argument put forth against it, is that MODs can do whatever they want, whenever they want to. And this has been most fiercely defended by the other MODs. Big surprise. I hate to use a buzz word, but that's fascism isn't it? Yet at the same time, they silently made a new rule about chat, didn't they? Give credit where it is due, I got them to make a new rule, which shows that someone in authority is agreeing with me in some capacity.

Juan_Bottom wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote: I happily follow the ones that we already have.

Except the one that says mod decisions are final and ignored warnings don't go unpunished?

Did I send in an e-ticket? It's pretty clear that I have taken no action against the one-sided decision, other than this thread.

All I did was create a thread where I could talk about LOVO's abuse of trust in the authority given to him. The only argument put forth against it, is that MODs can do whatever they want, whenever they want to. And this has been most fiercely defended by the other MODs. Big surprise. I hate to use a buzz word, but that's fascism isn't it? Yet at the same time, they silently made a new rule about chat, didn't they? Give credit where it is due, I got them to make a new rule, which shows that someone in authority is agreeing with me in some capacity.

Would narcissist be a good buzz word?

Juan_Bottom wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote: I happily follow the ones that we already have.

Except the one that says mod decisions are final and ignored warnings don't go unpunished?

Did I send in an e-ticket? It's pretty clear that I have taken no action against the one-sided decision, other than this thread.

All I did was create a thread where I could talk about LOVO's abuse of trust in the authority given to him. The only argument put forth against it, is that MODs can do whatever they want, whenever they want to. And this has been most fiercely defended by the other MODs. Big surprise. I hate to use a buzz word, but that's fascism isn't it? Yet at the same time, they silently made a new rule about chat, didn't they? Give credit where it is due, I got them to make a new rule, which shows that someone in authority is agreeing with me in some capacity.

Juan, that's beautiful - every word - but it doesn't matter. You didn't listen to a chat mod, he gave you multiple warnings, and this definitely falls into the 'common sense' part of the rules. If you didn't know what it was for, maybe you should have asked? Oh, and you completely blew over my statement by the way. lol.

I'm not bitching about common sense for the chat users, I'm talking about common sense for the moderating team. You're all completely missing the point.
LOVO just isn't qualified.

if i wasnt qualified do you think they (lack/andy/king a) would of made me a multi hunter and gave me those secrets they hold so close esp after the wicked issue.

My argument isn't about how f*cked up it is that I was kicked for breaking rules. Which I got kicked for breaking the rule that says I have to do what any MOD says without question. That sounds like some bullsh*t from Mein Kampf... But this discussion wasn't meant to be about that.

I'm talking about how f*cked up it is that you can't do anything about it, even when a MOD is wrong, or spiteful. He was dead wrong, and it all started out by him lying about the rules.
Which the team admits to being in the wrong by making the rule. Yet no one will even say to me "Juan, you had a valid point so we made a rule."

And you know why? Because they (the moderators) can't personally admit to being even a little wrong.



I hope this makes things easier to understand my POV at least. I'm not after revenge, and I'm not trying to change anything, except maybe where some people place their hearts in this place.

lord voldemort wrote:if i wasnt qualified do you think they (lack/andy/king a) would of made me a multi hunter and gave me those secrets they hold so close esp after the wicked issue.

You're not exactly a people person. You should not be directing traffic. You have a "do what I say because I say it" demeanor. You're not fit to be a chat MOD.

And as I say that, I think about my real-life job where I tell people what to do all day. I have to walk away all the time and take breaks because I get frustrated.

As you have been told countless times...If you feel that you were wronged (which you obviously do) that to take it to Insomnia red or an admin.
you were told this many times in chat. As well as in this thread. Yet you did drag it into the forum. Its only served to make you appear more foolish. Instead of trying to drag my name through the mud as was intended.
I dont know how you cannot see me as a people person. I have been on this website for a long time. And (well I hope) have made some pretty decent internet friends along the way. And a handful of people that I prolly could call my rl friends.
Us moderators will gladly admit when we are wrong. It does happen. And when I have made a mistake I apologised and what not (a certain wrongly busted member knows what im talking about) Same as when jef was accidently website kicked...He was apologised to...although it wasnt me. The point is you wont see me apologizing here at all as I wasnt wrong in the reasons I gave for you being kicked and banned from live chat.
And you will find mods defending me as yer we do stick together. As we do become friends otuside of the public boards.

I agree Juan, there is a check and balance missing. There should be an appeal process and a neutral ombudsman.

Who's watching the watchers?

Who's policing the police?

You should all be asking this sort of question.

Huh, I'll try to clear some things... (key word is TRY )

Against LV was told:
LV-1) He made a mistake
LV-2) He doesn't easily admit when he's wrong
LV-3) He abused moderators' powers

How I see the issue:
a) LV believed that nobody should chat in Trivia room (Whether he's right - it's irrelevant. He most probably haven't got proper, clear&precise instructions)
b) He felt obligated to enforce that
c) He closed the case using the only possible way

Is he authorized to do that way? Yes, he is. His only "sin" - he was unable to give Juan a clear explanation why he insisted on what he insisted.
My verdict would be:
Charge LV-1: not guilty
Charge LV-2: guilty, but that's irrelevant in this case, IMHO
Charge LV-3: not guilty

How about Juan?
He was a victim of injustice, in a way. He has had a full right to clear explanation, but he didn't get one. He fought for his right... a little bit too much. Is guilty for the sin of trolling?
It depends of how much he was aware that LV couldn't give him clear explanation. If he felt it, it was a kind of trolling. If he knew it, it was severe trolling.
How can we tell? There is no way. He might be guilty, but there is a luck of evidence...

I think that this ban should be removed without Juan's further initiative, as well as I think that Juan should finally let thing go.
And especially - I think that this thread should be returned to GD...

If a rule was made so the situation does not recur......doesn't that vindicate Juan?

YES IT DOES.

The ban should not have occurred, an apology is in order.

If there are no chat logs, people will just take sides on who to believe to. That is why we have this:
Because of the dynamic and always-going nature of chat, all rules and guidelines are interpreted according to the situation solely at the Moderator's discretion. Moderator directions and/or decisions made are to be followed without question. If a user has a problem with the direction or decision that the moderator made, the user is not to disrupt the room in complaint but to address the moderator directly through private messaging. If you feel the situation was not resolved sufficiently, you may forward the problem to the Head Chatter or any of the Admin. Be sure to include logs of the attempted resolution.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 8#p1759438

lord voldemort has explained what happened and Juan_Bottom has his own view of what transpired and based from LV has explained, he did not abused his live chat power here. If a chat mod told you not to do something, then don't. In this case he told you to stop. He even told you to let it die. But what did you do? You believe you had a valid point to continue with the trivia thing so you believe you should keep pushing until you see a rule specifically about it.

He continues to ask for the rule where you cannot post in trivia. i quote and and give links to chat guidelines where it says a) social is for social callouts is for callouts etc. The line where this is not an exhaustive list of rules and its up to mods discression. The line where chat is an every growing machine in which you have to moderate on the fly.
He continues to argue about the issue. After a good 45 mins of myself and several other members in chat trying to explain the issue. I then tell everyone to drop the issue. That if juan has an issue about it to take it to insom red or an admin. I warn him that if he doesnt drop the issue i will kick him for trolling and continually being annoying. (1st chat infraction)
He keeps going i give him a final warning...he keeps going again...I kick. (2nd chat infraction)
He comes back in several minutes later. I then post to him to let it die or i will not hesitate to kick and ban him. After 5 mins of him again trying to argue his point. I kick and ban him. (3rd chat infraction (24 hour ban))

So in this case, since you were given many instances to drop the issue and could have probably prevented all this, but yet you did not listen to the chat moderator, do not be surprised of what you got for persisting to do what you were told not to do or even told to drop the subject.

notyou2 wrote: Who's watching the watchers?

I can answer this question actually. And it's exactly why it does no good to ever complain to the mods:

lord voldemort wrote: And you will find mods defending me as yer we do stick together. As we do become friends otuside of the public boards.

lord voldemort wrote:I have been on this website for a long time. And (well I hope) have made some pretty decent internet friends along the way. And a handful of people that I prolly could call my rl friends.

These people are the ones watching LOVO. His friends are the Moderators who brought him into their circle. Hell, even King Achilles comes in here defending LOVO with LOVO's words, and completely missing my point altogether.

(well, ok, LOVO actually answered that question for you. The MOD's loyalties are to each other, not to this site or to their conscience.)

lord voldemort wrote:If you feel that you were wronged (which you obviously do) that to take it to Insomnia red or an admin.

"If you feel wronged, tell my friends about it."

lord voldemort wrote:Us moderators will gladly admit when we are wrong. It does happen.

Your examples are huge mistakes that you can't lie your way out of. Tell me about a bunch of stuff like this.

king achilles wrote:If there are no chat logs, people will just take sides on who to believe to. That is why we have this:

You say this, then you immediately take LOVO's side based on what he told you.
And you used an edited quote of his, which is obviously unfair. Can I have the full version to compare to what I posted?

Also, are you the one who had to add the new rule?
I don't know if you did or not, but adding that rule after-the-fact but all the time telling us we always have to do what you say, is the same as telling us "do what we say even when we lie to your face." How are we supposed to respect that position?

king achilles wrote:
So in this case, since you did not listen to the chat moderator, do not be surprised of what you got for persisting to do what you were told not to do or even told to drop the subject.

I'm not surprised he kicked me. I'm surprised that no one is questioning him or his motivations. I just said:

Juan_Bottom wrote:
I'm talking about how f*cked up it is that you can't do anything about it, even when a MOD is wrong, or spiteful. He was dead wrong, and it all started out by him lying about the rules.
Which the team admits to being in the wrong by making the rule. Yet no one will even say to me "Juan, you had a valid point so we made a rule."

And you know why? Because they (the moderators) can't personally admit to being even a little wrong.

There are plenty non mods who took the time to post that see's no abuse of power. Just drop it.

LV and KS and KA and ES and IR and a couple others are all decent and fair. They are also human. You keep poking them than you can expect less fairness and patience and who could blame em if it came to that.

Juan_Bottom wrote: Yet no one will even say to me "Juan, you had a valid point so we made a rule."

And you know why? Because they (the moderators) can't personally admit to being even a little wrong.

YAY! you helped make a rule by pushing a moderator's buttons... congrats on making yourself a troll by doing so! Juan not all of us are the same..and clumping us all together is just as bad as your comments in live chat today (remember stereo typing? ) And I have made apologies before many times when I have been in the wrong..even unlocked threads over it. So to say that we (mods) never admit to being wrong..well.. I even asked you to stop last night as i saw it happening... knew you pushing it too far.....but some let emotions get in the way...

is that a pink bra on your avatar?

Juan's main complaint here seems to be that there was no rule, so we created one to clear LV. This is NOT the case. The rule was a TEAM CC RULE - given to the Chatters and Entertainment Team with instructions to keep the Trivia Room clear.

It was felt that this didn't need to be made a public rule, as there are enough of those already, but clearly we were wrong when we get people like Juan refusing to do what's asked of him purely because he can't see a stonecold rule written down (apart from the one which says listen to the damn moderators when they ask you to do something).

LV stuck to the rules, did what he was asked to do. Juan didn't.

excuse me but why has this thread went from they were both in the wrong 2 just juan was in it.

like i said before it should be appologise from both partys involved then drop it.(but i know lv cant say them simple words)