Whatever happened to...

[Ming]

Well it's obvious that Ming and rah wanted on-topic moderated ... loosely. (Witness their actual public acknowledgement and "special casing" of some trolls in on-topic forums.) On topic died for me because of that. I'm certainly not very enthusiastic about spending a couple hours of my life to research and type up an on-topic post when it's just going to get buried in pages of flames and epeen contests. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

When I brought this (need for a more controlled environment for on-topic posting) to the attention of Ming and rah, they seemed incapable of even acknowledging my existence. At best they were responding to me by grouping me in with a nebulously defined "SOME" who were saying off topic was killing on topic. (Whereas what I was saying was on-topic moderation mimicing off-topic moderation was killing on-topic.) Some of the "wimpy" on-topic mods told me they had been trying to convince Ming and rah of the same thing.

It makes me wonder what really went on in the admin forum.

There is one simple fact that keeps getting ignored... the on topic forums were dead years before we became more loose in the OTF... which was the only forum really providing any traffic. So how can you blame that for killing something that was already dead. But again, feel free to change reality and blame everything on something that couldn't have had an impact back when the traffic actually died in the on topic forums.

Maybe if all the on topic people actually took the time to try to add good content to the dead forums, they wouldn't be dead.

[Jon Miller]

When I was allowd into the Staff Forum, Ming looked like the voice of reason compared to many of the other members.

I gained appreciation for Ming that day.

JM

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ming ****ing fought for us!

I couldn't really say it before (because of all the fights there and people were still mods/admins), but he kept this place from become a moderation Hell.

[Nikolai]

To be clear, I don't have an account on that site.

JM

Neither has Asher, although he claimed the other day to own the account "Asher" over at WPC, it belongs to another individual on the site.

[Maniac]

I guess they never bother to show the screenshots where they look "paranoid absolutely bat**** crazy nutcase"

I hope it's clear that I don't think Solver/Locutus/Dale are saints. So I'm always willing to change my opinions. You can always PM me actual dialogue which makes them look crazy. Until then...

I can say strongly that there is no poisonous plans being cooked up
here on Poly against any other site...Especially on the staff board.

I'm talking about the time before CyberShy took over.

[notyoueither]

He's partially right, Ming, IMO.

The lack of moderation in the OnT was a problem, and it was a problem going back to when OnT was thriving. It was a factor in some of the better OnT posters giving up on Poly for serious discussion, as he just told you.

The mistake, IMO, was that the senior admins never recruited people from the community that Civ3 formed on this site, other than weak personalities for joe-jobs. It is true that some OnT people stopped coming here to produce and discuss content, but you might want to ask yourself why that came to be.

Moderation isn't the only answer, but it is on the list.

[Aeson]

There is one simple fact that keeps getting ignored... the on topic forums were dead years before we became more loose in the OTF...

Well either you're just trolling now (perfectly fine) or you really do have some sort of mental block about this issue. In any case it's a perfect example of what I was talking about. You cannot accept the valid complaints about on-topic moderation.

Time and again I've said it was the loose moderation in ON-topic forums. Time and again you respond by saying loose moderation in OFF-topic had nothing to do with on-topic dying. Which is technically true, but has nothing to do with what you were responding to.

So how can you blame that for killing something that was already dead. But again, feel free to change reality and blame everything on something that couldn't have had an impact back when the traffic actually died in the on topic forums.

You are the one who is trying to change reality by being utterly incapable of differentiating between OFF and ON in my posts... or in your moderation for that matter.

(If you are intentionally doing this, congrats. Best troll ever. You killed the forum. )

[Nikolai]

@ the Bible trivia thread. And the gushing, Flounder-like "oh boy is this great!" posts.

It's great fun. Never been participating in one before. It's nothing wrong with having a trivia thread. Is it because it's subject is teh ew0l religionz?

[chequita guevara]

http://www.eventis.ws

It, like WePlayCiv, was all the rage for a week or so.

Liar! It were two weeks! Turth!

[Krill]

He's partially right, Ming, IMO.

The lack of moderation in the OnT was a problem, and it was a problem going back to when OnT was thriving. It was a factor in some of the better OnT posters giving up on Poly for serious discussion, as he just told you.

The mistake, IMO, was that the senior admins never recruited people from the community that Civ3 formed on this site, other than weak personalities for joe-jobs. It is true that some OnT people stopped coming here to produce and discuss content, but you might want to ask yourself why that came to be.

Moderation isn't the only answer, but it is on the list.

Yeah...Some might remember when EoN started flaming the CIV forum calling the game retarded, how civ 2 was so much better, more strategic etc and having the balls to challenge anyone on the forum to a 1v1.

That went on for almost a week and no moderator ever stopped it. It only stopped when I stepped in and beat him in his challenge. Moderation would have stopped that, and I don't think there was a propper forum mod back then for the general and strat forums.

That's just one example, but I'm sure there are more. An iron fist in the ontopic forums might have stopped them withering away. Looseness in the Off Topic is definately appreciated by me though.

[chequita guevara]

Ming ****ing fought for us!

I couldn't really say it before (because of all the fights there and people were still mods/admins), but he kept this place from become a moderation Hell.

Ming

[curtsibling]

I'm talking about the time before CyberShy took over.

It cannot seriously be considered that the Poly staff would
waste their time with such David Icke-esque conspiracies?

...

[self biased]

apologies, nikolai, i've never met someone devout who wasn't in some way hypocritical, and had compromised their values. sure, we all make mistakes, but i'd rather take the noble savage any day of the week.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well either you're just trolling now (perfectly fine) or you really do have some sort of mental block about this issue. In any case it's a perfect example of what I was talking about. You cannot accept the valid complaints about on-topic moderation.

Time and again I've said it was the loose moderation in ON-topic forums. Time and again you respond by saying loose moderation in OFF-topic had nothing to do with on-topic dying. Which is technically true, but has nothing to do with what you were responding to.



You are the one who is trying to change reality by being utterly incapable of differentiating between OFF and ON in my posts... or in your moderation for that matter.

(If you are intentionally doing this, congrats. Best troll ever. You killed the forum. )

When did Ming start moderating On Topic forums? I know that he was Off Topic Moderator starting in 2000, but it was a few years after that before he was responsible for other parts of the site, IIRC. Maybe that's why he's responding that way. By the time he was responsible, it didn't matter?

[Krill]

Ming ****ing fought for us!

I couldn't really say it before (because of all the fights there and people were still mods/admins), but he kept this place from become a moderation Hell.

I do have to give Ming more kudos for that though. Thanks Ming, for fighting to keep this place like a good female coed