What took so long?

[Cyclotron]

Panang? Why? I would rather...

Actually, I'm not going to get into a "who do you want to see banned" discussion. Instead, let us all hope that Coracle has learned his lesson... and if not, let us hope that he is suitably annoyed to never come back.

[Skanky Burns]

Three cheers for the... well... good news

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by GP

Now can we do something about panag?

Hell yes!!

have a nice day

[Ming]

Originally posted by cyclotron7
Actually, I'm not going to get into a "who do you want to see banned" discussion.

Yes... let's not turn this into a "who do you want to see banned" discussion... that is, unless somebody wants to be restricted for doing just that

[Dauphin]

Actually, I'm not going to get into a "who do you want to see banned" discussion.

You don't need to. Just use the ignore feature if its a personal dislike.

[Scouse Gits]

What does the ignore feature do?

SG[1] - thinking about Eyes

[Lefty Scaevola]

This thread appears to be close to the "personnal attack thread" catagory.

[Capt Dizle]

This quote by DeepO is typical of the abuse that those of us who campaign to have changes made in game have to tolerate.

Coracle, you're sure you and jimmytrick are not two online personalities of the same socially impaired basement-kid?

It is clear that we have a double standard going on. I don't really mind it so much because it exposes the owners/moderators as shills for the game and Firaxis.

I personally don't think anyone should be banned for mild insults, spam that disrupts the site is another thing. Intellectually, I have no respect for posters who label as spam viewpoints that they do not like, claim threadjacking whenver someone offers a dissenting opinion, or pms the mods in an effort to get someone banned.

[MarkG]

jimmy, apparently you made the above comment before seeing deepo's apology

meanwhile, coracle still argues that he has done nothing wrong, that he has been mistreated by the system...

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
spam that disrupts the site is another thing

Actually, Coracle himself liked to bring up culture flipping and razing in nearly every topic he posted in, whether the topic had anything to do with those issues or not. I consider that spam that disrupts the site and the topics in it.

[Capt Dizle]

Well, I consider signatures to be spam. I also consider a lot of the stuff in them to be insulting. But I don't think they disrupt the site.

Cyclo, your sig indicates to me that your approach to people who have criticisms is simply to be rude. It doesn't reflect any better on you that Coracle's rants reflected on him, IMHO.

At the end of the day, we would all be better off leaving out the personal stuff and we would definitely be better off without the heavy hand of censorship.

I am looking forward to seeing Coracle come back. We need some balance around here.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

I gotta kinna agree with JT onthis one. Campaigns to get folks banned I find repugnant. In the same vain as the little kid going and telling teacher that Jimmy pushed Mary on playground.

Banning is inthe hands of the mods., parties offended have the right to ask the mods to intercede. OTOH, it is not appropriate behavior IMHO to make the boards a cliquish arrangement where in this faction fights that faction.

I've seen Coarcle in action. He rails against CIV3 b/c he thinks he's doing a service to the world of TBS. If you don't agree ignore it and move on.

Same with JT and for 90% of his stuff he tries to pose the arguements to have meaningful diaolgue. Clever trolls perhaps but stimulating nonetheless.

[TCO]

I like jt's stuff. I also liked teasing the combat whiners..

[Cyclotron]

Signatures are spam? Well, I suppose that's one way to look at it... btw, since it bothers you, I took the offending phrase off of my sig. However, I think your reaction to it is distrurbingly disproportionate to the actual implication of that harmless phrase. Coracle can put "**** Soren" on his sig for all I care, because I make it a point to judge sigs with humor and lightness, not with the tremendous gravity that you seem to attach to them.

I think that nothing done here has been "censorship." In fact, the actual intent of Coracle's posts were to point out what he considers a flaw in the game. He could have made that point perfectly well without personal insults, and he most likely knew that.

In addition, I would like to add that I never asked for Coracle to be banned, and IIRC never reported one of his posts. I did report one of yours though, jt... but you were trying to get yourself banned on that occasion. I think you should drop the conspiracy theories of the forum working together to get rid of Coracle, because that's ridiculous. The decision that Mark made was made without me, and Mark is under no obligation of any sort to listen to people pleading for his banning. There is no "cliquish arrangement" between "factions," it's just your resentment of the fact that somebody who you agreed with got canned. So don't blame people like me, because the only person responsible for Coracle's banning is Coracle.

[Tuberski]

That's correct, like I said before I find his comments amusing. He just needs to come up with some new one.

jt when somebody is discussing something with you, you respond. Coracle doesn't EVER respond to somebodies reply to his posts.

How is that discussion?