Conquer Club, a free online multiplayer variation of a popular world domination board game.
https://beta.conquerclub.com/forum/
king sam wrote:I mean honestly who gets on here and spends as much time defending an accusation of a stranger as calkid has done without ever having played any games or interaction with the accused.
Phlaim wrote:Yeah, I wonder the same.
calkid wrote:you call whining lobbying now?
calkid wrote:again, GET A LIFE PEOPLE haha this is so ridiculous. and who's the nitpicker bringing up the law and the constitution just because i believed in freedom of speech??? haha this is getting a little humorous now.
calkid wrote:i mean....gee....the site owners can limit how people talk? wow! i really didn't know that but big wooptie doo. what does that have to do with my belief in freedom of speech???
calkid wrote:and for anyone who told me to go in to his games and watch his speech and actions, i have to question how much time they have to actually do that their own selves. to stalk this person just to see what he says in chat and just to whine and complain about it later. for god sake. the original poster even admitted he couldn't join a game because codeblue joined first yet he still had time to stalk this guy in games he wasn't even playing together.
king sam wrote:Maybe someone should check into whether or not these 2 are 1 and the same
I mean honestly who gets on here and spends as much time defending an accusation of a stranger as calkid has done without ever having played any games or interaction with the accused.
calkid
codeblue1018
alstergren wrote:Phlaim wrote:Yeah, I wonder the same.
That's just because you got a gay avatar...
king achilles wrote:The list of games will also be for formality reasons. This is a report about his game chat abuse, so it would really help if there are more games to support the allegation. It is marked pending until we have enough evidence to declare the outcome. However, if it stays like this too long then this will be marked noted instead.
If the games are hard to find, I would suggest to anyone to put codeblue1018 in your foes list if you feel that this member is not worth your time.
king achilles wrote:Going back to the report, can we have a list of games where codeblue1018 apparently cursed at his opponents unprovoked?
12XU wrote: Either that, or you could ask the Admin to create a "family zone" setting where anyone can play, but swearing and insults are not permitted.
Bones2484 wrote:12XU wrote: Either that, or you could ask the Admin to create a "family zone" setting where anyone can play, but swearing and insults are not permitted.
Is it that hard to understand the difference between swearing and chat abuse? Occasional swearing and trash talk is expected, but codeblue takes it to a whole new level that I'm sure the site could do without.
2.9
Enough said.
12XU wrote:Bones2484 wrote:12XU wrote: Either that, or you could ask the Admin to create a "family zone" setting where anyone can play, but swearing and insults are not permitted.
Is it that hard to understand the difference between swearing and chat abuse? Occasional swearing and trash talk is expected, but codeblue takes it to a whole new level that I'm sure the site could do without.
2.9
Enough said.
Yes. It is. Please clearly articulate a bright line rule that we can use to determine if someone is merely engaging in "occasional swearing and trash talk" as opposed to "chat abuse."
Bones2484 wrote:12XU wrote:Bones2484 wrote:12XU wrote: Either that, or you could ask the Admin to create a "family zone" setting where anyone can play, but swearing and insults are not permitted.
Is it that hard to understand the difference between swearing and chat abuse? Occasional swearing and trash talk is expected, but codeblue takes it to a whole new level that I'm sure the site could do without.
2.9
Enough said.
Yes. It is. Please clearly articulate a bright line rule that we can use to determine if someone is merely engaging in "occasional swearing and trash talk" as opposed to "chat abuse."
Obviously you haven't read through this thread as you said you have.
12XU wrote:Bones2484 wrote:12XU wrote:Bones2484 wrote:12XU wrote: Either that, or you could ask the Admin to create a "family zone" setting where anyone can play, but swearing and insults are not permitted.
Is it that hard to understand the difference between swearing and chat abuse? Occasional swearing and trash talk is expected, but codeblue takes it to a whole new level that I'm sure the site could do without.
2.9
Enough said.
Yes. It is. Please clearly articulate a bright line rule that we can use to determine if someone is merely engaging in "occasional swearing and trash talk" as opposed to "chat abuse."
Obviously you haven't read through this thread as you said you have.
In fact, I have. I take it that you are unable to answer my question. But I do enjoy how you dodged my question. You can always restate his rank in your next post.
Bones2484 wrote:How is it good for CC if one of a player's first experiences with the site is this:
2008-12-24 19:35:02 - codeblue1018: you cant be any fuckign luckier
2008-12-24 19:35:09 - codeblue1018: 10v1, ends 5v1 for us
2008-12-24 19:35:25 - codeblue1018: 9 armies take 6 with 6 left
2008-12-24 19:35:27 - codeblue1018: joke you are
2008-12-24 19:35:58 - codeblue1018: hence your rank i suppose
2008-12-24 19:37:50 - codeblue1018: 11 armies,,take a 3, a 4 a 2 ??
2008-12-24 19:38:38 - codeblue1018: you patehtic f*ck
2008-12-24 19:38:43 - codeblue1018: foed and all one stars
2008-12-24 19:38:48 - codeblue1018: you low ranks all play the same
2008-12-24 19:38:52 - codeblue1018: fucking horrible
2008-12-24 19:39:09 - codeblue1018: what a shock,,,i already rated you all one stars,,,,foed
There is no "line" that you are asking for. There is only a difference. Yelling at your opponent for your own problems? That is wrong. Swearing in general because you had a bad turn? Who cares?
Not to mention the fact that he is breaking the rules of the ratings system. But that's for another day.
calkid wrote:again, GET A LIFE PEOPLE haha this is so ridiculous. and who's the nitpicker bringing up the law and the constitution just because i believed in freedom of speech??? haha this is getting a little humorous now. i mean....gee....the site owners can limit how people talk? wow! i really didn't know that but big wooptie doo. what does that have to do with my belief in freedom of speech??? haha. who was that? a 9 year old who hasn't been through puberty yet?
12XU wrote:calkid wrote:again, GET A LIFE PEOPLE haha this is so ridiculous. and who's the nitpicker bringing up the law and the constitution just because i believed in freedom of speech??? haha this is getting a little humorous now. i mean....gee....the site owners can limit how people talk? wow! i really didn't know that but big wooptie doo. what does that have to do with my belief in freedom of speech??? haha. who was that? a 9 year old who hasn't been through puberty yet?
9 year old? No. An attorney whose pet peeve is when proles throw out the term "free speech" as if it applies in every possible context. Anytime someone censors your speech, you don't have the right to bitch about "freedom of speech." Read a fucking book, son. I can recommend a few on the topic, since it appears that this is something you really, really believe in.
Freedom of speech is based on the constitution [at least in America]. If you don't want to discuss the law or the constitution, then DON'T FUCKING BRING UP A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW DOCTRINE. Jesus.
If you don't understand why or how the fact that a private party [i.e. not a State actor] is permitted to censor speech is directly relevant to your outcry of "FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!", then I don't think you understand the doctrine that you so fervently believe in.
thegreekdog wrote:So, do you have a bright-line rule you'd like to propose? While Calkid's "free speech" argument may be misguided in the context of Conquer Club not being a state actor, I understand that Conquer Club does have an objectionable speech "law." Therefore, presumably, a bright-line rule may exist. If a bright-line rule does not exist, the moderators/hunters act as the Supreme Court in interpreting Conquer Club's objectionable speech "law." Therefore, either a bright-line rule exists and can be applied or the moderators determine whether codeblue's chat is objectionable in the context of Conquer Club "law."
I believe I've answered both of your (12XU's) questions/concerns. As for Calkid's "get a life" comment... um, we're playing a computer game and "chatting" on the message boards. I think "getting a life" is beyond us (including Calkid) at this point.
I also happen to find codeblue's chat extremely funny and entertaining... but, then, I don't have children that play Conquer Club.
12XU wrote:thegreekdog wrote:So, do you have a bright-line rule you'd like to propose? While Calkid's "free speech" argument may be misguided in the context of Conquer Club not being a state actor, I understand that Conquer Club does have an objectionable speech "law." Therefore, presumably, a bright-line rule may exist. If a bright-line rule does not exist, the moderators/hunters act as the Supreme Court in interpreting Conquer Club's objectionable speech "law." Therefore, either a bright-line rule exists and can be applied or the moderators determine whether codeblue's chat is objectionable in the context of Conquer Club "law."
I believe I've answered both of your (12XU's) questions/concerns. As for Calkid's "get a life" comment... um, we're playing a computer game and "chatting" on the message boards. I think "getting a life" is beyond us (including Calkid) at this point.
I also happen to find codeblue's chat extremely funny and entertaining... but, then, I don't have children that play Conquer Club.
I asked bones for a bright line rule because he implied that it was easy to distinguish between permissible trash talk and swearing as opposed to chat abuse. I don't think it is. My rule? You won't like it, but I'd say everything is OK. As far as adults are concerned, act like one. People can be rude, nasty assholes anywhere. We're on an online, anonymous gaming site. If someone is rude to you, ignore it. Stop playing against them. If someone is a jerk to you at Starbucks or at the gym [or wherever], do you run to the manager like they are some sort of niceness police? Probably not. So why here, do we get so many complaints that 'so-and-so was mean to me?'
As far as children are concerned, I really think it is an issue of parental supervision and responsibility. I don't think young kids should be permitted to browse the internet unsupervised with no restrictions. If you are permitting your children to do so, then be prepared for them to encounter a codeblue or someone far, far worse.
The problem, as I see it, is that we don't have any clear guidelines on what type of speech is prohibited. There has been a severe lack in consistency in the manner in which allegedly abusive speech is dealt with. I find it intolerable that the moderators are permitted such wide discretion in making this determination without any guidelines provided. The "law" or rule as you described is horribly vague. What is "objectionable" speech, and why is it objectionable? How do we go about distinguishing between banter and abuse?
Anyway, I've rambled long enough in my slightly intoxicated state. Since I've already been warned for derailing another topic [a restriction on my speech rights!!! Quick, Calkid, jump to my aid with your 'free speech' cries</sarcasm>], I'll leave it alone for now. BTW, I'm seriously LOL'ing about your comment re. getting a life. Well played.
Mr Changsha wrote:Just spent 15 minutes reading through this thread. Very, very, funny.
Now the chap obviously has as much charm as a 3 day old wank stain on your grandmother's sofa, but I would hope CC can avoid a full ban. Difficult to say of course, because you know our mods are weighing up 25 more lovely dollars for lack against 25 more lovely dollars for lack!
Codeblue1018 may be in trouble.
Just realised that '3 day old wank stain on your grandmother's sofa might be considered unsuitable language for under 10's to be reading. However, it is 2am here in China so I can but ask CC's toddler community "Why are you not in bed?"
Of course they would probably just reply "f*ck you tossfucker!", which is sadly indicative of the state of modern society.
12XU wrote:I asked bones for a bright line rule because he implied that it was easy to distinguish between permissible trash talk and swearing as opposed to chat abuse. I don't think it is. My rule? You won't like it, but I'd say everything is OK. As far as adults are concerned, act like one. People can be rude, nasty assholes anywhere. We're on an online, anonymous gaming site. If someone is rude to you, ignore it. Stop playing against them. If someone is a jerk to you at Starbucks or at the gym [or wherever], do you run to the manager like they are some sort of niceness police? Probably not. So why here, do we get so many complaints that 'so-and-so was mean to me?'