Out a moderator! - Page 27

Malachani · 09-27-2006, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanjuNana

I'm not sure what you mean by that. I have absolutely no desire to be a moderator on eq2forums. I've moderated and admined several forums before (none quite as big as EQ2's, however), and it's a headache that I don't wish on anyone. I'm not sure how you can make any of those claims when you don't know me.

My post was merely informational, and wasn't posted with ill intent.

1. Getting harassed in game for actions on the board They are not required to post their in-game character names (and some mods do not, even on their non-mod account). If they choose to do so, they are free to /ignore any harassment, just as anyone else would be.

2. People being able to point and say "He's playing favorites with someone in his guild/on his server Well, if he IS playing favorites with someone in his guild/server, then it would be a problem, wouldn't it? Mods are supposed to be impartial enforcers of the rules.

3. The ability to physically "seperate" themselves from a situation by having to acutally log into another account to do moderly type things Uhh ... what?

4. Easier to "replace" as they just need to change the password and give it to someone new It's not difficult to create a new forum account and flag it to be a moderator, trust me.

hehe sorry. got distracted halfway thru my list and now realize that its incongruent. My apologies.

Honestly, if Sony was going to use players as mods, they should do like my old job did for QA agents. They took people who used to be callers as new QA agents. They were given a list of what to look for, and then sent off to do the job. To maintain anonyminity (since everyone knew who the QA people were) they changed "QA logins" daily. There were up to 15 different logins, and only 7 QA agents. This way, it was damn near impossible for a normal agent to track a single QA report to an individual QA agent. That way, things like accusations of favoritism, or "QA Nazi's" were definately lessened (tho there really were some bad QA nazi's lol).

Sony could have made up a dozen or so anonymous, asexual login names and had the agents rotate who would be playing what roll each week, or each month, or what have you. Then tying a mod to their player account would have become much more difficult.

Arthais · 09-27-2006, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RadarX

I'm sorry YOU pay for what again? Thought so.

you assume:

1) I have only one account

2) That my personal contract with SOE in any way reflects the general terms that the user base, as a whole, is bound by. You note I say "we", as in the general group of players, not I.

Nurta · 09-27-2006, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthais

I say one should be held to the same standard as another because they are both positions. Name me one other profession that doesn't follow similar guidelines.

ok. two examples for ya one paid one not paid.

a guild leader - one hopes they follow guidelines but what binds them? they are unpaid, and they do not always follow that "code of guild leaders do they?"

politician - need I say more?

saying that a moderator should uphold an oath or code similar to that of the hippocratic oath is beyond all hope. Art you're dumber than I thought.

Nurta · 09-27-2006, 03:47 PM

HA!

I got a question for you Art. You're going to a lawyer right? Are you going to work pro-bono or do you expect to be paid for best work?

Arthais · 09-27-2006, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurta

ok. two examples for ya one paid one not paid.

a guild leader - one hopes they follow guidelines but what binds them? they are unpaid, and they do not always follow that "code of guild leaders do they?"

A guildleader is not, in any way, a representative of any publicly traded company, they are private individuals acting for the benefit of no corporation. It is not a job, they serve no interests but their own and the volunteer, private affiliation with which they belong.

Analogy failed, try again.

Quote:

politician - need I say more?

Any politician in the united states is required to swear an oath to the constitution of the united states, and the constitution of their relevant state, if a state politician. Failure to abide by that oath is grounds for termination.

And you should say more, cause i have two words for you.

Jack Abramoff. Just because politicians don't often get CAUGHT doesn't mean the rules for self dealing aren't there, as a few capital hill folks will now testify.

Quote:

Art you're dumber than I thought.

Come at me with examples that WORK in the context. Until you do, don't try to attack MY intelligence.

Arthais · 09-27-2006, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurta

HA!

I got a question for you Art. You're going to a lawyer right? Are you going to work pro-bono or do you expect to be paid for best work?

I, of course, expect to be paid. There is nothing in violation of ethics for lawyers, or ANY OTHER profession to receive compensation for their work.

There IS a violation of that ethics when the lawyer self deals, however. A moderator can moderate, a player can play. A moderator should not be able to moderate in issues he/she has a stake in.

Just as a lawyer can't.

Try ONE more time, you might come up with an example that works. And try not to confuse "compensation" with "self dealing", the two are quite seperate things and you would benefit GREATLY in this discussion when you learn what the difference is between them.

Calthine · 09-27-2006, 03:50 PM

Wow. Y'all give me headaches

Where's my Carebear, I need a hug.

Arthais · 09-27-2006, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calthine

Wow. Y'all give me headaches

Where's my Carebear, I need a hug.

*hugs*

Nurta · 09-27-2006, 03:54 PM

Ahh so now my examples have to represent a company that is publicly traded? Tisk tisk, the guild leader example was a perfect one you merely poo-poo'ed it on a technicality. This community as gamers all have clearly definied ideas of what a guild leader is. And if you're telling this group that they are self-serving and care only for themselves then you're wrong there too.

Don't attack your inteligence? Ok I'll mock you for your big ears, pot belly, and small dick. Is that better? I've heard you compared to Arti Lange though after seeing pictures of you both I think he actually is more attractive.

I gave you an example. You cannot compare an unpaid, untrained, volunteer, to a highly trained professional dimwitt. Therefore I gave you a guild leader and I threw in politician b/c the consensus is that while they have taken an oath many of them are "thought" to be liars as are lawyers

So Howdie Doodie (sp), I'm telling you you're comparing apples to oranges.

RadarX · 09-27-2006, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthais

Can you go to the WoW boards and post without a subscription?

How about Eve?

How about DAoC?

How about EQ2?

No, you can't, you need a subscription to do it, and to do that you enter into whatever agreement you and that company agree to. If you can not use a service without first entering into a financial agreement with that company then you pay for that service.

If you are required to have a subscription to use the forums, and you are required to pay for a subscription, then you are required to pay for the use of the forums.

If you can't follow that logic train I don't know what else I can do for ya.

Yeah actually I can. It's called a free trial. Oops didn't see that one did you?

Here's a logic train for ya...

I know a number of people who haven't had an active EQ2 account in 6 months who could still use the forums. Hmmm now I think that would dictate they were a seperate entity now wouldn't it? I mean legally if I broke that agreement and stopped paying them, I wouldn't have access to the forums right? It's all part of the same subscription right?

Oh by the way, we made all this up. SOE never stated that posting was a priviledge not tied to subscription. Feel free to tell them they are full of shit.