Wiglaf's ban

[Robert Plomp]

This situation has clearly escalated out of hand. I understand you thought you were being funny, but you actually violated our on topic rules, which are completely 100% different from off topic rules, for some reason. Because you rarely, if ever, post in the on-topic forums, I will let this slide with a warning 2 days ban (ending tomorrow). If it happens again, you will receive a three month ban from the entire site.

Your original review will remain eligible for the contest, do you want me to place back your original review?

[Robert Plomp]

I'm going to remove all the stuff about this issue from the review forum/threads.

[Asher]

It's unfortunate that this happened.

Wiglaf's review was genuinely hilarious and poked fun at Civ. A smarter man would've embraced it and maybe even submitted it to other sites like reddit.

Some sites pay people to write **** that still doesn't compare to what Wiglaf wrote and gave you freely.

[Robert Plomp]

It was embraced and it was published at our front page, where it still is. That was done b/c I did consider it to be genuinely hilarious, and it also had some sense in it.

We removed it when later edits placed all kinds of lines into it that was far against the on topic rules.

just an honest question from me: Do you guys not read/understand what I wrote above (and wrote before) or do you chose to ignore it for the sake of troll art?

[Nikolai]

The DL deserved a proper reaction, and a ban is in order. But 3 months???

[Wiglaf]

Asher, and everyone else who exposed this ban for the nonsense it was and got it lifted

What constitutes "humor," and what constitutes "crass, non-acceptable on-topic material" is a highly subjective judgment. For any administrator or staff member to think that using words like "ejaculate" or "gay" automatically puts a post in the latter category, and justifies banning the poster for months, is especially embarrassing when literally no one else outside of the Apolyton staff agrees with that determination.

It is just a shame that what little community you have left can't stand you, Plomp. Apolyton was always run by incompetents, but at least MarkG had a posse that would support some of his bizarre decisions.

[Ming]

What constitutes "humor," and what constitutes "crass, non-acceptable on-topic material" is a highly subjective judgment. For any administrator or staff member to think that using words like "ejaculate" or "gay" automatically puts a post in the latter category, and justifies banning the poster for months, is especially embarrassing when literally no one else outside of the Apolyton staff agrees with that determination.

Maybe if that's all you did... that would be one thing. But to edit your post and start talking about blow jobs, accusing a staff member of being a pedophile, and other BS in the On Topic forums and the front page of the site just doesn't cut it. You've been warned before about the differences of the ON TOPIC vs the OFF TOPIC. If you aren't smart enough to figure it out after multiple warnings, then you deserve a long ban. Stop acting like a total moron. The original review was funny and well worth a read... what you did after that was simply a troll and BS, and did indeed violate the rules of this site. So just cram it and fall off that high horse you think you are sitting on.

[Wiglaf]

What a shocker, a staff member is here to complain about the edits. You continue to prove how out of touch you people are. Literally no one except for you officious, power tripping idiots has complained about the review

I really question whether you people have psychiatric problems, sexual performance deficiencies, daddy issues, or situations at home that lead you to exert meaningless authority and rigidly enforce unpopular and pointless rules on online message boards. You in particular tend to berate posters you ban by demanding that they "read respond or be restricted" and bow to your authority before you release them, which I always thought was frightening from a psychiatric perspective.

Also, not that I should have to spell this out to anyone over the age of 5, but I never accused a staff member of being a pedophile, nor did I accuse anyone of being a pedophile. Saying "I'd be shocked" if a picture of a Firaxis designer wasn't on a sex offender registry is called a "joke" based on someone's "creepy, disheveled appearance", not an accusation that someone has actually sexually assaulted children. Jokes are amusing to people who are not unintelligent prudes.

[Zoetstofzoetje]

ah, feeling regret already, Plomp?

[Wiglaf]

Any more douchebag, officious staff members want to whine about me here, and demonstrate how out of touch you are with everyone else on the site and how wedded you are to your stupid on-topic rules in your pathetic excuse for an on-topic forum that no one visits?

[Robert Plomp]

Dude, you're so boring. Come up with something new please. Entertain us again, like you did with your original review. This is all so.... dull
I'm dealing with my 3 kids everyday and they show more creativity in their trolling attempts and their 'test the limits' behavior. Even the 10 months old baby I have is able to do a new trick once in a while.

You're just an one in a billion 30 year old internet troll. Get a life.

[Wiglaf]

Any more? I think there's a few more staffers still out there

[Alexander's Horse]

Robert, you have 3 children? congrats man, enjoy them