Dry as a Bone, Part 2

[Walkure]

I second those thought exactly..................thanks guys for the Club.


Walkure

[Baron von Beergut]

I have to agree with ksbearski on this. I've been with the club since May '99 and I know Canuck has been around probably about as long. So why should such a long time member be dumped permanently over a message board squabble? And if it is due to private emails, then that should be just that -- private and have nothing to do with the club. Sounds like sour grapes by the board meisters over using their powers as revenge.
I can understand a temporary suspension to the message boards, but not a total banning. In the old days I only recall that happening with that wolf character from Belgium or whereever.
Isn't there somesort of appeals process or are the board meisters arbitrary gods?
Since my fellow 96B JvK has been overtaken by reallife there doesn't seem to be as much fairmindedness when someone rocks the boat.
I admit things got out of hand a few years back when it was decided to dropt the Current Events board. That I didn't agree with figuring if folks didn't like it they didn't have to visit that board.
Over at the American Civil War Game Club they have a sort of honor board to hear all the facts and vote plus a way to appeal.
Here it just sounds like you can't disagree with the powers in charge.
Ok, enough babble out of me. My beer is in the other room calling for my attention... good luck to all in your other pbem battles... BvB/Scott

[Colonel Talvela]

[Colonel Talvela]

Here it just sounds like you can't disagree with the powers in charge.

And another thing. Obviously what you are saying is not true - because you are still here. And Geordie - the everpresent complainer and disrespecter of the "powers in charge" - is still here.

So it is abundantly clear that people dont get banned for complaining about or posting negatives about the moderators. Create a new theory - I suggest one based on Occam's Razor.

[Baron von Beergut]

Like I said, if someone did something in private email it should have nothing to do with banning from here. And I would think what is done here from such a long time member might warrant a temporary ban and not an over reacting permenant one. And you saying I am still here proves me wrong?? This is my first post here in months -- how could one even consider that in relation to banning? Canuck was warned he could be suspended but was then banned instead. Yes he was wrong for repeatedly stirring the pot but not so wrong as to warrant that. When wolf was banned it was from repeated stirring, plus threats to hack into the club and then he kept coming back under different handles so he got what he deserved.
Sounds like no one can post anything not in support of moderators without folks getting defensive...

[Colonel Talvela]

there is a difference between 'not in support of the moderators" and accusing them of foul-play - and I feel your first post was definitely the latter.

It doesnt bother me for someone to disagree and even "stir the pot". But it really irks me when I see people whinning and murming - especially when it is - IMO - baseless conjecture against people that are performing a free service for the whinners benefit.

[Steel God]

Hello Scott;
I'm sorry you feel the Blitz has become such an "unfair" place. We try our best to meet every one's expectations, but with a few thousand members and hundreds of active posters, we acknowledge that we can't please everyone all of the time.

Banning has never been a matter of public discussion in the past. As mentioned previously, most people can not even recall some of the banned players, let alone explain why they were banned. Some are obvious why, like Black Wolf, others neither obvious or known, like Dan Payne. But any "knowledge" that exists about these bannings is not gleaned because the staff posted a list of charges in the forum, but because it either was painfully obvious to everyone, or people talk.

In the end, we do what we feel we must to run the Blitz the way the owners wish it run. If the owners disagree they merely have to ask us to step down and we will do so. As for the general membership, they must deal with the Custodian from their community. If they disagree they can appeal to Randy, then me, then Jim. Failing that they can vote with their keyboards by not coming to the Blitz. But we're not going to change the way the Club is run because any one individual player feels he's entitled to something he was never offered or promised when he became a member, namely you have no right to know the details of business that is conducted between the club and another member.

regards;

Paul

[10th Mnt Div jdsu]

Well that says it all, for the ___th time.

This message board is a community. Someone owns it, someone appointed persons to run it, those persons appointed custodians for each ladder.

Although privately owned, it is a free service and managed mostly by volunteers.

There are rules, well laid out and further clarified (or mystified to certain individuals) by the powers that be through their various posts.

Violations of the rules and how they are dealt with do not have to be posted or made known to the public by the "authority".

Those individuals who wish to dissent or continually berate (probably masters of self-interest lobbying, or city hall politics; and most likely the most vocal denoucers of democracy in general) can do so, within certain boundaries.

Said boundaries, are wonders of wonders set not by the dissenters, but rather the authority.

No one is forcing you to join nor stay. If the community the authorities have created is not to your liking, you can leave. If enough people leave, then the authorities will know that there are serious deficiences in their administration.

Until you decide to leave, be proud that you are the 1%, the thinking elite, the non-sheep. Society (including message boards) can not function or improve without your valued thoughts and articulate writings.

For myself, I cannot thank the authorities enough for providing this community.

To the owners and volunteers of the Blitz, Thank You.


jdsu

[Tanker]

Lol, I can't find that smily for butt kissing.(That's humor, for anyone tempted to take themselves too seriously)

Just let everyone have their say without trying to stifle it.
That's the quickest way for this to die out.

[Baron von Beergut]

Col T - no need to feel that way. Blitz was started when Leader Eaters starting going down the tubes in '98. 3 folks came from there to start this in early '99 and only one of those is still here although not much lately. I watched but didn't join until almost 3 months later. So I've seen plenty of flame wars and just felt that this one wasn't even as bad as some of those and so warranted maybe a suspension more than a ban. I felt that Canuck did get out of hand, but then went to private email to try to carry his case. And that that was passed on to other Mods and then the ban.
Steel God -- thanks for the reasonable reply. Good enough for me I guess.
You're right that the reasons shouldn't be public so in that regard what you guys did was right even if I feel too harsh. I guess it's all a mute point as Canuck probably wanted to leave anyway at that point and then just pushed the envelope too far. I still felt I wanted to put in my two cents and didn't expect or feel I deserved the backlash. But they, like me, should at least have a chance to voice that.
So, salute to your/Randy's time and efforts and good luck in everyone's pbems! BvB/Scott