Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

[Murphie]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

Well, I didn't mean to derail. Back to the arguing!

[Feba]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

No, RD couldn't be considered a troll unless you're living in Mhurron's personal twilight zone. You're a troll just looking for attention because little kids wont pump your e-peen like they did at Allahk. Seems to me you just brought a bunch of friends with you this time around.

oh no, an internet flame.


Troll is very much perspective based, in the way you use it.

Won't respond to RD unless he makes a new point, however.

Translation: I can't win.

Correct Translation: RD hasn't answered any of the old points i've asked him to, so I'm not
going to answer his.

Translation: I can't win.

Translation: I don't like you, so I will flame you and try my best to make you look bad.

[M_X]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

How reliable is it? There have been 4 names taken off the RMT list in about a year and a half, or however long it has been. There have been no complaints from anyone on Seraph about the names on the RMT list besides that 1 instance. I think 1 error in a year+ is good service.

I think that one instance might have been a friend of mine. She came back to the game after several month (she stopped playing before RMT got realling ingrained into the game), and joined a exp party of sellers.

RD contacted her and ,she not knowing anything about The List of RMT, just ignored RD. She was then added to the Parties With Sellers section. I believe 4 to 5 people from our LS (including myself), posted in her defense; that she was just uninformed. She even signed up for Alla and posted a apology that she was unaware of current game issues.. She was removed without inncident and everything was fine.

And how many of those people have seen the list? Can you guaruntee them a voice?

See above. Word or mouth (or type in this case).

(mostly Feba's rabid obsession).

This is because he's just trying to jack up his post count. He did it on Alla, now he's doing it here.

And in the end, I believe the content of this thread can be best described by Beseiged participant's favorite phrase: <Yawn>

[Amovorite]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

Hmm.... could've sworn a certain moderator locked the original thread for some reason...... and yet a certain someone starts up a "Part 2" to the thread that was locked for some reason.... therefore defying that moderator's decision to lock the original thread for some reason, by making a continuation of said locked thread.....

And here are new people. Arguing the same old points, so I'll join in the fun and reiterate a few of my own (old points).

You don't get to offer RD crap as far as making 'adjustments' or 'improvments' to the list. He has done so in accordance with PiNG's requests. Therefore, the head honcho has given him the okay to keep his list where it's at. But just to appease some people who STILL whined about it, he made a few non-admin-requested changes. Outside of that, he's done. Your suggestions hold no weight and he isn't obligated in any way to adhere to them.

Also, it's nice for many of you to jump on the lack of proof for people listed as RMT, not people who party with RMT (though I might have seen one example, among the 30-40 something or so). Sadly, your reading comprehension has faltered, as it states in the new rules that proof must be provided for PEOPLE WHO PARTY WITH SELLERS, and not the suspected RMT themselves. Once you understand that, you can realize why the time you wasted on that post went out the window.

Oh, and Feba, I could've sworn that in the Blacklist drama thread, when you got your post deleted for posting about the List, in which it was stated that those posts weren't allowed, you stated you would just keep it to PMs with PiNG from then on. I assume you got nowhere, 'cause here you are, bringing it back to the public, to rally public support for your disagreements with the List. I could almost understand why..... but wasn't getting shut down the first time a good enough sign that you're not going to 'win' this one?

Double Post Edited:

And in the end, I believe the content of this thread can be best described by Beseiged participant's favorite phrase: <Yawn>

Heh... notice how no one does that anymore when it's the Undead Swarm?

[Shopee]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

he isn't obligated in any way to adhere to them.

If you think there was any assumption otherwise, I have no idea where you picked it up.

Also, it's nice for many of you to jump on the lack of proof for people listed as RMT, not people who party with RMT (though I might have seen one example, among the 30-40 something or so). Sadly, your reading comprehension has faltered, as it states in the new rules that proof must be provided for PEOPLE WHO PARTY WITH SELLERS, and not the suspected RMT themselves. Once you understand that, you can realize why the time you wasted on that post went out the window.

No, my comprehension has not faltered.

If I was amiable to the rules as written I wouldn't be discussing the proof issue.

[Feba]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

mm.... could've sworn a certain moderator locked the original thread for some reason......

Yes, because of the flames which, in this thread, are coming solely from the side supporting The List.

Not to mention this is for a seperate problem than that the original thread dealed with.

it was stated that those posts weren't allowed, you stated you would just keep it to PMs with PiNG from then on.

PiNG was responding to my PMs for a time, then suddenly stopped, fyi.

PiNG has not said anything to myself, or in the open forum as far as i'm aware, concerning the list in a while.

[Amovorite]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

No, my comprehension has not faltered.

If I was amiable to the rules as written I wouldn't be discussing the proof issue.

Then perhaps your discussion should be with PiNG, as PiNG is the final word on the matter, and has already given consent to the list as long as that rule exists.

Yes, because of the flames which, in this thread, are coming solely from the side supporting The List.

Not to mention this is for a seperate problem than that the original thread dealed with.

Interesting. Here is Icemage's post (final post on the original thread) stating why it was locked:

Ok folks, this topic has run its course after 31 pages.

I've read the entirety of this thread, and I see no change in attitude and no switching of sides; at this point I consider further discussion pointless.

The existence of the List is, at this time, still officially sanctioned. Please do not bombard PiNG or AKosygin with any more messages. This issue is already under active discussion in the staff forums, and we are and have been taking action where it is warrented.

As such, I am closing this thread, and opening a related thread regarding the uses, abuses, and reasoning behind the use of blacklists here:

http://www.ffxionline.com/forums/ge...list.drama.html

If you would still like to discuss this topic in general, please post your thoughts there.

Some advice for our forum members in general:

If you are not on the Seraph server, please curtail your criticism of The List. It does not affect you or your playing experience in any way, and unless you are on the server and able to judge the veracity of the claims made, then I ask that you refrain from making blanket assumptions in any case. I understand that many of you feel that you have valid points to make, but, given the reactions shown in this thread, there is no profit to be made in bringing those issues up. As can be seen from this thread, parties from both sides refuse to be swayed in either direction, so save your typing fingers and let's have a little peace, shall we?

If you are a player from Seraph and have issues with The List, please PM myself or another member of the staff here with your situation and we will bring any evidence into consideration during our staff discussions surrounding this thread.

If you have issues with my closure of this thread, please PM me.


Icemage

FFXI Forum Super Moderator

I don't see his reasoning including flames, coming 'solely' from the supporters of the list. I see that his reasoning was that the discussion had run its course and that neither side was going to sway on the matter. Furthermore, he also states that if you have any more issues with the list, to PM him or any other moderator about it, not make yet another thread, regardless of issue, made up of a title suggesting a continuation of a previously locked thread.

Fabrication of reasoning and not following a mod's requests? Not too good on your part.

[Shopee]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

Then perhaps your discussion should be with PiNG, as PiNG is the final word on the matter, and has already given consent to the list as long as that rule exists.

If you paid attention to Icemage's post which you quoted, you would see this is not the case

Please do not bombard PiNG or AKosygin with any more messages.

As such, I am closing this thread, and opening a related thread regarding the uses, abuses, and reasoning behind the use of blacklists here: http://www.ffxionline.com/forums/ge...list.drama.html If you would still like to discuss this topic in general, please post your thoughts there.

Now while this isn't that specific thread, it has dissapeared off the map. No mod has locked this one, which should lead one to assume this thread is that thread's effective replacement.

[Feba]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

coming 'solely' from the supporters of the list.

flames which, in this thread, are coming solely from the side supporting The List.

Thanks.

Furthermore, he also states that if you have any more issues with the list,

If you have issues with my closure of this thread, please PM me.

Thanks again.

[Amovorite]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

Hahah.... that first quote was a nice try to derail me. Let me show you where you slipped up:

[Yes, because of the flames which, in this thread, are coming solely from the side supporting The List.

What you are saying here is that the original thread was closed because of the flames, and then you added that the ones in this thread are coming solely from the list supporters as a side note. However, on one of the previous pages, I believe there is someone against the list slamming RD as being a McCarthy or something or other, which is still a flame of sorts. So yes, you're wrong, and you're wrong again. On top of that, Icemage didn't include flames or insults as his reasoning for locking the original thread.

The second quote, however, is a mistake on my part. I overlooked the part where Icemage said that you you were FROM Seraph and had a problem with the list, to PM a moderator. However (yes, I like that word), you still made a thread labeled as a continuation of a thread that Icemage himself locked, and are still trying to make arguments for your personal war against the List. You could have PM'd Icemage with your example, and used that as your reasoning that the original thread should remain unlocked. Instead you went over his head and tried to attack the List from a different angle. That shows a lack of respect for the moderators decisions on your part.

What was your topic about in the original thread? It was about the List and how it isn't effective and should be removed from this site.

What is your topic about in the original thread part 2? It's about the List and how it isn't effective and should be removed from this site, plus an example.

You shouldn't thank me if you're not going to cover your bases well enough.

If you paid attention to Icemage's post which you quoted, you would see this is not the case

You are right. There is a request not to send anymore PMs to PiNG about the matter, which would lead me to believe that PiNG has heard more than enough arguments (same ones over and over to be annoying enough for reiteration), to hear any more. If through several pages and hundreds of posts, RD hasn't budged any further than the administrators wished, why reiterate the same arguments as if you would think he would listen to you? The only person who would matter in hearing comments about the list would be PiNG, and since you can't send PMs that way.... arguing it further would be pointless.

[Icemage]

Re: Greivances With The List - Pt.2 (Condemning Innocents)

NO.

This is NOT going to go around and around again on this forum.

Jeez, I take my eyes off this place for a few hours and all Hell breaks loose.

I will re-iterate what I stated before in the previous closed thread.

(1) If you're not on Seraph, and have "strong feelings" about The List, PM a moderator or RunningDemon personally. The List does NOT AFFECT YOU. No matter how much you may argue otherwise, until such a copycat list appears for your server, kindly keep your opinions to yourself on this topic. (Yes, this includes you too, Feba).

(2) If you are on Seraph and you object to the presence of The List, please PM me or another moderator and we will bring such evidence to the administrators under due consideration. For the moment, the List remains sanctioned by PiNG, the site owner, and so any discussion thereof is completely moot until such time as that ruling is reversed by him.

THREAD CLOSED


Icemage