[Alliance]<16:05>[Atom]: i remember the first time i was ever asked to cyber i thought cybering was surfing the netso i began an instructional on using goggle
Anaerion:
At some point, I'd like to see a short article from you about combat ranges. I'd been under the impression that 5000 was the range with Traps; even so, I've been judging combat results empirically. We have a test range going periodically, with me hitting one of my members and vice-versa... Anyway, I haven't been able to find one in your list of posts. If you've got one, could you link it? If not, could you compose one?
That aside...
It was kind of you folks to help me make my point, which is that gratuitous insults rarely help to convey a message. Admittedly, I stacked the deck a bit by suggesting people's behavior; that does often influence results, I find.
In my opinion, the forum moderators are in the right when they penalize people for being gratuitously insulting. It is a proper use of power. I would caution anyone in that position that such power is best used lightly -- to guide people rather than forcing their behavior; people are contrary by nature, especially those that choose to live in an imaginative venue such as these games and forums. At present, I'd say our mods are doing fairly well balancing on this line.
Main Entry: ter?ror?ism
Pronunciation: \ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1795
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
Political activism does not equate to terrorism. Terrorism does not focus on the anticipated outcome, only on the act of inspiring fear through unlawful, violent acts, usually against unarmed civilians. Agitating against a government with the intent to alter that government does not require acts of terrorism.
We're a US company and we follow US law. We don't allow illegal activities on our private domain. You may not hire a hitman here, plot an assassination, deal drugs, or issue threats of bodily harm against others. This is non-negotiable and playing semantics will never change that.
You do, in fact, support censorship. You practice it daily. Censorship has existed for as long as civilization has existed and this inclination to paint it with a fascist brush is simple hyperbole (that means exaggeration.) When your boss says something you don't like, do you tell him he's a moron? Do you tell your mother to "F off" when she's bothering you? Ever told a police officer who has pulled you over that he stinks and needs to brush his teeth more often? Did you admit to your wife that her outfit really does make her look like a fat cow?
Censorship takes many forms. We call it diplomacy and manners and self-restraint. There's a great article on it here:
Censorship
Perhaps, in your home, it is alright for people to use profanity. In my home, it is not. Each microcosm of culture gets to establish their own boundaries of decent behaviour and practice censorship. You bet we do it here, just like every other place in existence. However, it cannot be called oppressive by definition because there is no requirement or necessity for you to participate here on our private domain. You are free to say anything you like on a forum, or use profanity in a living room. But if you choose OUR forum or MY living room, you will endure OUR censorship.
Foxy, Nest is trying to make me buy some crack from him.
*chuckle*
Yeah; I've got the perfect defense against blackmail: abject poverty combined with a perfectly stainless past. I paid a LOT of money for that perfectly stainless past, so now that I have none left, nobody can blackmail me...
Interesting article on censorship. Do you know any of the authorship details? I'm fascinated by the style.
I'm opposed to authoritative censorship when it unduly restricts my freedom of expression. For example, I'm personally doubtful about the phenomenon called "Global Warming"; my own studies show that global cooling is a more likely result of particle and carbon pollution. And yet, I'd be hard-pressed to find any educational entity that would dare risk their funding and public image by permitting an open discussion of the possibility -- this despite the large percentage of experts in the field that disagree with the popular interpretation of climatological events.
In this format, however, it is reasonable to permit the moderators to do their jobs, removing overly offensive content. It would even be reasonable for them to remove my (admittedly) incendiary reference to the phenomenon of Global Warming; after all, does it improve our understanding of the issue at hand? Is it germane to the topic? And, above all, is it likely to incite name-calling and inane replies?
The big question is this: Who watches the watchmen?
What safeguard is in place to prevent our moderators from overstepping their bounds?
I'll answer that simply: We watch them.
If we feel our posts are being ignored, we'll stop posting. If we're being suppressed, we'll go away. And, as those most likely to be censored (barring psychotic personalities) are the most wildly imaginative among us, excessive suppression of these people would remove character and flavor from these forums. They would soon become stale - flat - insipid.
Take a moment. Scan through things. See if this forum is stale.
If it is, they're doing a bad job. If not, if things are entertaining and informative (albeit occasionally inane), they're doing fine.
Even if they censor me.
Banned
That article was posted by the Global Internet Liberty Campaign, located here.
Interestingly enough, they are a group dedicated to promoting free speech and a lack of prohibitive censorship on the internet.I am a huge fan of irony, so when a group dedicated to internet free speech posts up such a lovely article which supports our premise that free speech MUST be limited in venues such as ours, then I jump right on that.
It's a shame they don't list the author(s). I would enjoy having a discussion with them.
I do not see how this article has gotten into a debate. The private site that is owned by Evony, has rules set by Evony, and anyone who has joined in on this debate has agreed to follow those rules when they made an account.
Now maybe if people were forced into Evony Slavery (They wouldn't be plotting that... right?) then they may have an argument about this topic, but until then... I don't see the point.
In the real world (yes that funny looking placeout side your frontdoors ladies and gents) we are allowed freedom of speech, but we are not allowed freedom of hate, terror, disruption, discrimination or any other form of activity that is seen by the greater whole of society as anti social.
In the evony forums, we are given freedom of speech as long as it is relevant to the topic of the game and is not anti social towards the evony community.
Add to that, that evony forums are NOT a democracy - they are private run forums, for a specific group of people for retail purposes. And as retailers of a game they have the right to refuse service to anyone - wether that service is paid for in game or that service is free as in the provision of the discussion board.
Right of entry is always reserved on discussion boards and if you want to be involved in discussion boards (wether its this one or another) the golden rule is play nice, speak nice.
It doesnt get more clearer than that.
In laymans terms - if you aint got something nice to say, or cant discuss something you disagree with in a mature way - keep your mouth shut.
Last edited by Yotanis; 08-08-2010 at 12:54 AM.
www.evony.ourtoolbar.com
Evony Toolbar with links to all Evony Servers, Forums, Guides and Troop Timers
Follow us on twitter http://twitter.com/evonytoolbar and facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Evony-...r/186406713483
Banned
Bookmarks