Peace QCDN.

[Peregrine]

The point is, the changes would have been better recieved if there had been a mod/admin roundtable, if there had been a more gradual change, and if the reasons for the changes had been more transparent. Honestly, it felt like Sculli had just gone Born-Again Christian and felt this was a crucial step to cleansing his sins.

Instead of a smooth, less chaotic transition to the new QCDN, we had mods stripped of modding with no notice, new mods put in without standards to follow, a 'community guidelines' post that was 90% copy/paste, and rules that seem to be modified and added without notice, and in some cases, without any word that the rule was added.

This has been close to two months of wheel-spinning by Sculli and others that could have been avoided with two or three weeks of foresight, and the ship keeps springing leaks like this that divide the community and make Sculli look like an incompetant admin.

And don't give me the 'hobby' excuse. If you want people to follow your guidelines, put the effort in to enforce those guidelines or find people who share your vision who do.

Barring that, sell the goddamn site and get someone in here who doesn't treat it like that.

The real point is that people who have spent the last few months doing nothing but whining are the only problems. Strip the bad mods. Cut those who won't shape up IMMEDIATELY, because they don't NEED time. Don't blame admin that people are slow. You want a timeline? No, you just want more time to whine and be given a grace period to **** on the boards. Quicken up. The rest of us aren't going to slow down for you.

 

[Rappa]

I agree with Cubs and Mokk both. But instead of "lolsigquoterebellion", how about more of this serious discussion about what should and shouldn't be done? Instead of trying your best to break the new rules, how about opening the floor to how the new rules could be modified or changed?

 

[Peregrine]

Hey, man, i gave you an out without having to cop to having rules that weren't on the books. If that's the gig great, you might think about adding these 'longstanding rules' that no one knew about to the guidelines and standards so it gives situations like this some credibility in future. As i said previously, it's a bad idea, lends itself to abuse .. but ultimately your call, naturally.

Again, get with the times, because it's not realistic to highlight every rule and every violation. What part of making fun of people in your sig do you not get? You honestly need to be told that that's not acceptable?

Doesn't work like that. If you need to be told that, the forum doesn't really need you around. So an explanation and a highlight of that rule? No, you'll just find another to break that Sculli didn't write down for you in plain block letters.

 

[Mokk]

I agree with Cubs and Mokk both. But instead of "lolsigquoterebellion", how about more of this serious discussion about what should and shouldn't be done? Instead of trying your best to break the new rules, how about opening the floor to how the new rules could be modified or changed?

http://www.qcdn.org/showthread.php?t=28548&highlight=community+stand

Just one of a few threads that tried to address this ... same people responding as usual when it comes to fixing things or trying to work it all out. Less turnout than the screenshot contests and ultimately fell in to obscurity even though it was mentioned in the newsletter to get the community interested in working things out or at least get the moving on how to improve things around here.

As i said earlier, the community is exactly the problem. Not allowing members to sort things out themselves on some kind of level just provides for an administrative nightmare.

 

[Bajaratt]

Mokk, I have a question, when you noticed that Sculli had missed something, why did you choose to sit on it so you could throw it in his face later rather than just bring it to his attention and let him handle it as the rules say he will? You're going on and on about how the standards should be upheld equally, but then you don't do anything to help uphold them.

 

[Mokk]

Again, get with the times, because it's not realistic to highlight every rule and every violation. What part of making fun of people in your sig do you not get? You honestly need to be told that that's not acceptable?

Doesn't work like that. If you need to be told that, the forum doesn't really need you around. So an explanation and a highlight of that rule? No, you'll just find another to break that Sculli didn't write down for you in plain block letters.

you've needed to be told that numerous times, as have i, the air's a bit thin up there on that high horse i'm sure. Now with your words in mind let's take the thread betting rule that i inspired. BFD, you handle the new ones that pop up and it doesn't happen again as opposed to recurring violations where there's more than enough content around to scaepgoat off of, but that's not the case right now.

You know as well as anyone else that people are predictable, foolishly so. Anyone that haden't seen this sort of thing coming based on the lack of effort provided to actually effect change really just wasen't paying attention.

 

[Trippyhippy]

Honestly folks, get with it or get out of it. You put violations in your signatures, you get banned anywhere else. Deal with it or go away. You want to put that you don't belong here in your sig, you go ahead and do that. Make every one of your posts shout that you really have nothing to contribute to these boards. Do it. The faster you do, the faster you're gone, and good riddance. This is how forums work.

Got it memorized?

Understandable. If it was written in the signature guidleline post. It isn't. If this is something that's done all the time, then it should mostdefinatly be a part of the guidelines.

Having a set of rules to adhere by is a good thing. Having the rules be more of a living document is too... If it's a democracy. QCDN is not. Make your rules. Adhere to them. Don't change them based on what all of 3 people (less than .1%) want you to change them to. I understand this is your board Sculli. It would be nice if you ran it as such. A lot of other rules and decisions have been made with little to no reguard to how the user base feels. Obey the rules or leave. This wasn't a rule. I've never seen it mentioned before. Shaidalyn was being a crybaby and you let her have her way so she wasn't offended by her own words.

This is a rediculous arguement. You are gonna do what you want to do. What's next? No quotes in sigs from users? Then no pics of anything that isn't in-game in sigs and avatars? Then no pics? You can't please everyone all the time, but you can lean towards the majority. Granted that would be a bit democratic of you, but still. All this twas started because of 1 non-offensive quote in 3 different signatures.

 

[Sculli]

The point is, the changes would have been better recieved if there had been a mod/admin roundtable

Cubs, you know as well as I do that there are simply not enough people who can be bothered to contribute, and if you keep it in a small circle of those who actually care, then you will be accused of "old boys club" and similar things.

Seriously, look around, even before the FB was removed, very very few people did actually care about improving the board. I could name specific examples of where people said they would do something or other for the general QCDN population, but didn't follow through.

I understand that too, there is only so much time in a day, and this is after all just some place on the Internet.

Could QCDN be better than it is now? Absolutely.
Could I make it better even if I would spend 24 hours a day on it? Not in a million years.

Check out more recent examples, the Ballista League was well received as an idea, but again, no one stepped up to take the lead and make it happen. Perhaps it wasn't that great of an idea anyway, but I am just saying.

 

[CubsWoo]

I agree with Cubs and Mokk both. But instead of "lolsigquoterebellion", how about more of this serious discussion about what should and shouldn't be done? Instead of trying your best to break the new rules, how about opening the floor to how the new rules could be modified or changed?

I didn't agree with how the rules were changed in the first place so I see no reason why an admin should be able to use my opinions on how the board should be changed to show a vision I feel is wrong.

I felt there was nothing wrong with QCDN three months ago. That opinion is obviously worthless on these boards, so I don't know why anyone would be asking me to change it for the sake of making the board something it doesn't need to be.

The real point is that people who have spent the last few months doing nothing but whining are the only problems. Strip the bad mods. Cut those who won't shape up IMMEDIATELY, because they don't NEED time. Don't blame admin that people are slow. You want a timeline? No, you just want more time to whine and be given a grace period to **** on the boards. Quicken up. The rest of us aren't going to slow down for you.

I can sure as hell blame the admin for not 'removing the slow people' because if you're going to make a paradigm shift worth of changes to the boards, don't expect those changes to be recieved without a paradigm shift worth of modding. And not limp-wristed post deletions and warnings, take those who are violating the 'standards' and get rid of them. Just put up a place where the admin can give a reason (not necessarily the actual post) to say why and for how long this person is probated/banned.

 

[Mokk]

Mokk, I have a question, when you noticed that Sculli had missed something, why did you choose to sit on it so you could throw it in his face later rather than just bring it to his attention and let him handle it as the rules say he will? You're going on and on about how the standards should be upheld equally, but then you don't do anything to help uphold them.

A.) i'm not a mod. Nor do i think it's worth my time to psuedo-mod the board.

B.) i have a sense of humor.

Enforcement is best exercised via observation, plain and simple. That i can point these things out only speaks to the predictability of the situation and my preparedness for conversations on the matter.

 

[Sculli]

All this twas started because of 1 non-offensive quote in 3 different signatures.

I believe that this was started because there is a core group of people who have made it their lives main purpose to find every single thing that they could possibly call QCDN out on. The reason I think that is that none of the couple dozen people who have asked someone else to remove their quote from the sig have raised such drama about it. Am I right? No idea, you decide.

 

[Peregrine]

Understandable. If it was written in the signature guidleline post. It isn't. If this is something that's done all the time, then it should mostdefinatly be a part of the guidelines.

Again, if you have to be told that making fun of people in your sigs is out of line, you're really not worth telling things to. You'll just find something else that isn't written straight in the rules, do that, then try to argue that you should get away with it because it wasn't in the rules. They change that, you do something else that's "not in there."

It was always in there. You just didn't get it. I've been in about 10 different sigs, and thought this board a monumental joke that those users weren't hammered. It is not acceptable on a forum. Has never been. You want to talk about FF having problems becuase this is the first MMO for a lot of them? Well this board must be the first for a lot of you all to be coming in here and trying (and horribly failing) to argue that you should be able to do what isn't specifically pointed out in rules. This isn't kindergarten because Sculli is watching. This is kindergarten because some really are acting like this is the first time they've ever interacted with a group on the internet.

Spirit of the terms. Learn it or leave it. That is how forum rules work.

 

[Dowzer]

You don't recall my proposal in staying here at QCDN, so I won't recall your "allowance to remove a quote which was demanded by the OP".

Sculli, this is a perfect example of the "I disagree" button.

Do you remember my hypothesis?

Well it's in full force now. I told you this board would react to the loss of the flameboard.

Hey, man, i gave you an out without having to cop to having rules that weren't on the books. If that's the gig great, you might think about adding these 'longstanding rules' that no one knew about to the guidelines and standards so it gives situations like this some credibility in future. As i said previously, it's a bad idea, lends itself to abuse .. but ultimately your call, naturally.

Honestly I don't recall Pupusa ever changing someones signature, or quote, whichever.

But hey, if you want to keep pulling new rules out of your asshole...Be my guest.

 

[Peregrine]

Well it's in full force now. I told you this board would react to the loss of the flameboard.

Terrorism 4tw. Unfortunately like them you don't really represent this board and are trying to bring it down in the name of a group who really doesn't claim you.

 

[CubsWoo]

I believe that this was started because there is a core group of people who have made it their lives main purpose to find every single thing that they could possibly call QCDN out on.

Go back a bit farther and it was started by a fringe group of posters/non-posters who made enough noise about the most popular portion of QCDN and called it out enough to get it removed. Sadly, the 'core group of posters' (aka people with post counts and long-standing discussions with mods and admins) are waved away by the admin unless they're being used to help the mod/admin team make their decisions and do the police work for them.

 

[Dowzer]

Terrorism 4tw. Unfortunately like them you don't really represent this board and are trying to bring it down in the name of a group who really doesn't claim you.

Wow, you're totally off topic. You must not remember my hypothesis about the "Thank-you" button.

 

[Rappa]

All I know is that right now the community, instead of trying to work up some kind of solution (aside from creating their own n.W.o.ish sideboard) is instead making things worse. Someone gets hit up for a rule they don't like and their brilliant solution is to mass break the rule and encourage everyone else to do so as well. Even in daycare they teach you that two wrongs don't make a right, so why would you try it here?

It's okay to not like the new rules. But honestly what do you think you are going to accomplish by coming here and just being a complete ass by repeatedly breaking the rule over and over? Are you hoping to become a "martyr" or something? Because honestly no one's going to remember a week from now. Your time is better spent making a topic saying "I don't understand why we have such and such rule" and going from there.

If in the long run the rule stands, just adapt and grow to handle it. By suiciding your account you are accomplishing little more than making yourself look like a complete fool.

 

[Tec]

So many people obsessed with me today. You aren't after my package too, are you?

Just pointing out what you said about Dowzer bragging.

 

[Nasya]

Honestly I don't recall Pupusa ever changing someones signature, or quote, whichever.

Pup wasn't the origional owner of this site, Sculli was... Sculli passed the tourch to Pup... and than later came back b/c Pup stopped being active for whatever reason... so, it is entirely possible that this was one of his longstanding rules. Also, while it is best for administrators to be very clear about all of their rules, because it covers their ass... it isn't something i expect... All of the "you can" or "you have the right to" rules are often neglected in Forums, or even public charters for organizations and what not, because in general the "You can't" rules are more important, and more apt to come up.

That being said... I agree with Mokk, and some others... Saying dumb stuff will undoubtly come back and bite you in the ass... and quoting someone elses poor choice of words or sentiment is hardly flaming them, or even harassing them.

/shrug

btw Eulore, (please post in response to this) did Shaid ever ask you to remove the quote yourself?

 

[CubsWoo]

(aside from creating their own n.W.o.ish sideboard)

This will work fine until the bookers and Judy Bagwell start getting titles.