zultar,

Thanks for the clarification. Sorry to have misread your attitude toward intellectuals. As for your remarks on "intellectualizing" or "appearing intellectual," I'm not really sure what to say. My posts in this thread have been extremely concrete. While I enjoy intellectual conversation as much as you do, nothing either of us has posted in this thread seems to me to be "intellectual" at all. Anyway, sorry to offend.

Thank you also for the clarification. I'm genuinely interested, and so far as I know, I have not previously been exposed to that rule in that way. I wouldn't have expected it, partly because the rule is explicitly about "creating threads," not posts on other people's threads (and this distinction was actually discussed at the time the rules were made).

I'm sure nothing I can say will convince you this is earnest, or anything other than an attack, but because I *do* care about the site and think iti's good to have good guidance, here goes: do you think it might be clearer to change the rule to remove the "create a thread" language, and then maybe clarify a bit the difference between attacking (what krellin is referring to in the post right above mine perhaps) and abusing?

This is not (whatever you may think) an attempt to question your decision here, nor do I think that the suggestion that the rules be modified to reflect reality is some kind of high-fallutin' intellectual ideal. As you've said, it's your site, and you can moderate however you want. If the rules are to do anything, presumably they're there to give people a heads up about how you do that, and I think that change would do that better. Take it for what it's worth.

Hey semck,

How many times have I asked you to send us concerns if you have them to the mod email? I'm thinking probably over 20 now. It amazes me that you can continue to insist you want to offer helpful advise and yet continue to disregard our request to offer it in a way that would actually be helpful.

I had no idea this conversation was going on, because I had no interest in the thread OP. And for that same reason I personally will not be reading this thread. If you have something you want the moderator team and or Owner(s) to consider then PLEASE EMAIL us!

Until then, no, no one on the mod team will be able to take you seriously when you say you are being earnest about wanting to help.

We really are looking and willing to take feedback from our members. But we want it in a location that is going to make it easy for the whole team to contribute and reference the concerns, instead of hidden in a thread about a topic that is completely unrelated to the concern.

I personally would appreciate it, should you have any lingering concerns after your conversation with Zultar, that you summarize them and send them to [email protected] so that the mod team can review them without risking misunderstanding your intent or point.

Much Appreciated,
WebDip Admin

Yes, i have not played any games since 2014, yes i answer questions and discuss diplomacy on the forums, not there is not always a lot of interesing diplomacy related topics to discuss.

If the mods wanted to ban non-diplomacy related topics, they could.

They clearly don't so i suspect not playing games isn't an issue - if i'm not controbuting to this site i'm sure they have the power an willingness to ban me.

I have in the past year played two games of diplomacy, one face-to-face game, which ended with new members joining the site to play webdiplomacy, and one spawned from a forum thread - was me putting my money where my mouth is, by play-testing a variant on vdip.

I don't need to justify my 1000+ D or whether i've got the time to commit to any games at the moment. Being on the forums answering newbie question is a contribution.

And if you ask me, generating interesting discussions which keeps people looking at the forum is also a positive contribution. The more time we spend here the more eyes on other diplomacy threads when they do pop up.

If this forum was exclusively diplomacy related threads i think it would feel rather quiet... And again, if the mods feel they disagree with my behaviour, i'm sure they will let me know! :)

Thanks for doing a hard, good and often thankless job! To all the mods, we appreciate your tireless work!

Thanks JMO. Probably just a misunderstanding here, though. I did decide, after our last conversation, that I should at least consider raising concerns about wrong decisions with the mods. But as I've said several times, I wasn't here actually questioning the decision or saying it was wrong. I haven't said that anywhere -- I think it just looks like I have because zultar seems to have interpreted it that way.

Anyway, thanks for the reminder. I'll keep it in mind should I disagree with some mod decision in the future, and will consider doing it with the suggested rule change, above.

Krellin, that is how you consistently take shots at the mods and then not get silenced. ^

"because I *do* care about the site and think iti's good to have good guidance, here goes: do you think it might be clearer to change the rule to remove the "create a thread" language, and then maybe clarify a bit the difference between attacking (what krellin is referring to in the post right above mine perhaps) and abusing?"

So that isn't a recommendation you want Zultar or anyone on the mod team to consider? I didn't say if you're questioning a decision, I said email us if you want to give advise. What I am saying, is that if you feel you have an idea that would help the site, which it seems like you do from the quoted text above, then please email us that idea.

Now if that wasn't your intent, and you aren't making a recommendation then I'd advise you to take a minute to reflect on the fact that multiple people are misunderstanding your intent, and your point(s) are not being made clearly and need to be communicated differently.

Thanks

Bo - I don't take shots at mods, and don't get silenced for taking show at mods. I do take shots at you, though - a Convicted Cheater and Former Mod, who likes to fraudulently portray himself as a moral authority.
What's your point?

+1^

JMO,

Thank you. The text you're quoting was referring to my *question* about which rule was in violation. My question was not advice. It was a question. As I already said at the end of my prior post, I *am* considering emailing with the suggested change for consideration, and will probably do so if I can make it coherent enough in the time I have.