Half of All Recent Threads

[EasilyConfused]

el cid again:
Vaguely insulting and very long explanation of minor point of detail about game. Implication of close consultation with Joe Wilkerson.

Terminus:
Annoyed outburst.

Informed Person:
Explanation of reason for point of detail.

Repeat indefinitely.

[treespider]

That's how it was in the WitP forum for a time...eventually everyone stayed out of the scenario design forum there...hate to see that happen here...although I do believe it will happen soon enough.

[Halsey]

I feel better now.[:D]

I'm not going to let hundreds of hours of hard and selflessly given toil over player mods be swallowed up by one of the most self centered contributors on this forum.

Show some respect for the effort by these individuals.

[Rainer]

[:D]
At first I thought you were lonely or drunk.
Now I see.
And I can't help it - you made me feel better, too [;)]

[treespider]

That's simply precious...[:)]

[Sardaukar]

Game is basically quite solid and well-refined. Devs do not have ability to change everything, for that one would need to go to Gary Grigsby and ask him to do it...[8D]

We can "fine-tune" things here and there by mods, but cannot change fundamentals. Michaelm (bless him) is doing what he can to iron out bugs and make tweaks, but while he is absolutely crazy in his support of this game, even he cannot do miracles. 

Doing something like what "el cid again" does: "OMG, XXX is not based where it is" or "P-1 Mickey Mouse bottle opener is missing from game" is not going to help much. He has as much right to mod the game as anyone, but should understand that in basics it is "what you see is what you get".

[oldman45]

I am just glad that there is the little green button [;)]

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
Doing something like what "el cid again" does: "OMG, XXX is not based where it is" or "P-1 Mickey Mouse bottle opener is missing from game" is not going to help much. He has as much right to mod the game as anyone, but should understand that in basics it is "what you see is what you get".

Which is my difficulty. It isn't whether he has good observations or not: It is his tone.

Many of the items he picks out were already known to the dev team and it was not within their scope to change or it is abstracted in some other form. He fails to acknowledge that. I think if he were simply a bit more careful in his phrasing, most of the issues would never arise.

ORIGINAL: oldman45
I am just glad that there is the little green button

And unfortunately, that is the result for many of us.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

"OMG, XXX is not based where it is" or "P-1 Mickey Mouse bottle opener is missing from game" is not going to help much.

Yup! The funniest part is the haughty indignation, usually along the lines of 'the stock scenario is said to be historical' or some such.

[JWE]

The development community has several issues with Sid which need not be discussed here. The development/user community has 3 basic issues with the man.

1) He posts his natterings one sentence at a time. He is not thoughtful or respectful enough to post his thoughts in 2 or 3 threads, like everyone else, but insists on hijacking an entire forum with multiple, de minimis, thoughts about very little. He hijacks forums for no other purpose than to appear more important. See, eg, Halsey's comments.
2) He claims secret access to developers in order to appear more important. All he does is send 5 emails a day to Joe. And Joe doesn't answer, but that still qualifies as communication. In the AE world, the different Team Leads worked on this and that and Joe doesn't know squat about what went down, because he trusted us to do it right. So communicating with Joe don't signify, because one must communicate with Don/Me, Ian/Tom/Michael, Andy/Joel/James, to know what's going on, and none of us will communicate with Sid.
3) He makes bizarre claims to military knowledge and competence. Basically, he lies about his military service in order to seem more important. This is particularly distasteful to me and to many of the veterans and serving members of the Babes group.

So long as Sid comports with normal useage, we have no issues with him. As to 2), we will occasionally chime in, when he gets too outrageous. As to 3), we will do everything in our power to bring him before a Federal Court the next time he tries to play that card.

And that's it. The man acts normal, no worries. No lies, no hassles.

[Nemo121]

LOL! No lies, no hassles? Wish you'd apply that to your own conduct JWE. Pot, kettle, black. You give out when Sid behaves in a certain way but are more than happy to post lies about others yourself, be outed for them and then simply refuse to apologise.

FWIW I agree Sid's issues are often nitpicking and some of his implications are less than warranted BUT his conduct is actually less of a breach of the forum rules than many members of Da Babes team in recent weeks when responding to him. Careful with those rocks while you are in the glass house. If you're going to target one forum member but ignore others who breach the rules as much or more then you are engaging in hypocricy. Obviously Matrix won't apply the forum rules here as they want the Da Babes Team to continue producing for the golden goose - but the lack of consequences just means you have to rely on your own integrity, as opposed to externally mandated rules and consequences.... and that's where the problem arises.

[chesmart]

Nemo so you want the babes team banned ? What we could do is make a vote if to ban them or not. if the babe teams win you, cid and all other negative posters leave the forum. All the people who bought AE are eligible to vote.

IIRC you had the same problem with cid in WITP days.

[YankeeAirRat]

And so it begins yet again! [8|] The thread of a 1000 daggers.

[Nemo121]

che200,

Nope, I don't want them banned. I want the forum rules to be applied, by the moderators, to all equally as per the rules we ALL agreed to when we registered. That's all.

Your suggestion is both pejorative and not consistent with the forum rules we all, including yourself, agreed to when registering. As such I wouldn't be in favour of it. I AM in favour of the forum rules being applied without favour to all. Simple.

[JWE]

Nemo I have ignored you up till now because you aren't worth wasting time on.

Most of us have been banned at one time or another, but we just didn't feel like calling you up to let you know. But now, you have become annoying. You been reported and a request is in to give you a nice little time-out. Hopefully you will be told just where to put your arrogant attitude.

[Nemo121]

JWE pray tell which forum rules I'm deemed to have broken? Also an explanation as to why you didn't report Osterhaut for posting racist abuse would be most welcome. Double standard? It seems so to me and others but I've never heard you explain the dichotomy. I trust there's a reasonable explanation, I'd love to hear it. I've asked you previously but you've always refused to explain why you practice this dichotomy.

As to ignoring me.... Nope, you posted abuse to me in threads I posted to and accused me of altering the quote in my sig - which others pointed out, in that same thread, was unaltered. I asked you to apologise and you didn't. So, not only did you not ignore me but you broke the forum rules by making an unfounded accusation designed to create conflict. You then didn't have the good grace to apologise when caught. Your method of dealing with disagreement is to make an accusation ( often unfounded ) and then simply disappear leaving the accusation to hang in the air irrespective of whether or not there is any truth to it ( kind of like saying you ignore me after asking Matrix to look at this thread despite the fact that you've followed me in to threads you previously hadn't posted to in order to post abuse to me - rather the antithesis of ignoring me). That's a very dishonourable way of dealing with things and, I believe, in breach of forum rules which clearly forbid posting of falsehoods about others ( which you can clearly be shown to have engaged in).


So, really, there's a difference between disliking what someone posts and them breaching forum rules. People should be banned for breaching forum rules but shouldn't be banned simply for being someone you dislike.

I'd appreciate if you could publicly post whom you contacted since I'd really like to follow this up to:
a) ensure you did report me - I don't, necessarily believe you since you've lied before and
b) ask that they apply the rules to you and Osterhaut also. I say ask rather than ensure because, sadly, Matrix doesn't seem interested in preventing you and the Da Babes team from flagrantly breaching forum rules.

I'd be more than happy to compare my "attitude" to clear breaches of forum rules by Osterhaut ( racism and trolling ) and you ( lieing and trolling ). Let's see if Matrix are willing to be fair and apply their own rules evenly. I'm rather happy you reported this since we'll get to determine how even-handed Matrix is now. Thanks, that should prove interesting.

[jwilkerson]

I can't ban anyone ... so I'll just have to start locking 'em up more frequently ...