what is this point of this thread and all this garbage?

I think you're bored -___-
go find a hobby  

Posted by Higbey

anywhere without Unixmad and Stefan and Darlene is a Oasis in the sahara.

I think it would be more relevant to say without those three running things about Graal... Since I doubt you'll care if either of the three are in the same store as you or same state... Since they only concern the forums, and Graal.
It only seems wrong to judge them elsewhere.. :x

Posted by Rufus

These things do not, however, remove the fact that they are closed for a reason. Nor will it change anything.

Never said they weren't closed for a reason,
only that the reason was not just.

Will it change anything,
probably not, but it would
be nice to close things that
didn't follow the rules. Rather
than threads that don't follow
one's own opinions of what
should or should not be
contained in a thread.

Posted by Rufus

• A thread is started regarding a situation whereby people were punished in-game for an activity that they otherwise shouldn't have been doing.

• Higbey posted a thread about a messaged he saw out of game.
  
  Image Here
  Sorry, I won't show the picture out of link.
  
  He then talked about, in general, staff not discussing things he felt should be. From what I've seen by his initial thread, nothing was in game about it.
  
  Emera was talking about things he does when he is bored, nothing was in
  game about that as well...
  
  Not sure where you see these are in game issues or problems. The only thing that 'might' concern in game, is a conversation between someone and Pix, which was inside of an image of a thread. He was not discussing the topic there were, but was discussing the results of the topic they had.
  
  

  Posted by Rufus

  • The thread was closed because, as mentioned by the moderator, we don't talk about bans. That rule is not limited to bans alone. With some common sense you should also be aware that it covers other in-game punishments as well.

The first post talking about bans states: "You don't discuss bans," by Rezon
Next MattKan, Pix would be here all day if he had to explain bans.

I have not seen Higbey say anything about bans, so shouldn't both Rezon and MattKans posts be "soft-deleted"?

Posted by Rufus

• A thread is posted with the intent of being funny through providing terrible graphics.

• You may have thought the intent was being funny by providing terrible graphics but he may not have. "Emera's Boredom Development"
  
  http://www.graalians.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6363
  You may as well delete Kiwis thread too.
  And probably threads showing their work,
  but not asking for criticism...
  
  Emera's thread was ... Emeras thread, to post things he does when he is bored. x.x;; Sounds like a Classic Online's thread posting things that Classic Online does when they do things...
  
  Unless we do not have the right to have our own threads...
  In my honest belief, I feel you were emotional that he did not want
  your ill-mannered criticism and said it. You acted in the moment and
  closed it.
  
  Statement said: "Congrats, they are abysmal. "
  
  abysmal |əˈbizməl|
  adjective
  1 informal extremely bad; appalling : the quality of her work is abysmal.
  2 poetic/literary very deep.
  
  No actual constructive criticism given, one could believe
  that said message was an act of "trolling".
  
  Be Nice:
  We want these forums to be an enjoyable experience for everyone involved, so all bullying is off limits.
  
  I really didn't want to bring that up, but it seems this thread became more in depth..
  
  As most young people do, when given a rude remark,
  the make a come back at it... And when that happens
  one is usually upset or appalled by this comeback.
  
  Whereas the sarcasm wasn't as bad as putting ones
  random work down, it is still not too nice.. Both were
  at fault, but doesn't make the whole thread invalid...
  
  

  Posted by Rufus

  • The thread was closed because, as mentioned by myself, we have no interest in non-discussions on this forum.

discussion
noun
the action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas:

Essentially anyone in the creative corner not asking for criticism should be closed... If they are showing their own things.. Once again, on Emeras thread, a discussion could have been made about what others do when they are bored. It does say typically however, so Emera could have continuously posted what he wanted as he was bored... Others might see it, look at it and find it amusing, of interest, and might even talk about certain things, coming up with their own ideas.

Posted by Rufus

'FREEDOMS TO WHAT?!'
What you've outlined does not have any hold on a privately owned website; you are bound by their rules, and we are bound by real laws.

So far none of the rules were broken from what I've seen
and have been advised of. Which is exactly where I was getting at.
Which rules are we following, this websites, or the moderators
own opinions and actions on whim.

Posted by Rufus

Given this, I'd say you've named this thread very appropriately.

Thank you. o.o
Yes, I did have the intent of having it go both by the amendments and
by freedoms without going against the rules. That way if either are off
one still works towards the title. :]

Posted by Rufus

Conclusion

I understand how it feels to be a part of something that you've invested time into, only to see it gradually turn into something that is broken. However, Graalians.com is still a pretty new community and website. You can easily cut your 'investment' here, stick to Facebook, use the official Graal forums, or even make your own. You are not forced to participate, so if you dislike how things are, go elsewhere because it is not going to change.

I don't recall disliking something, only stating rules were broken
and should either be enforced or changed. Once again like you said
this website is a pretty new community and things will gradually
change.

Why else would I propose what could be changed.
I feel that you should reread the starting thread post.

I have not said anything about you being fired,
let alone using your name at all. The only thing
stated are that rules should be more defined,
changed, added, or actually enforced, and not
random whim actions above the rules...

You might think that this is a personal attack on yourself,
and might want to counter attack or whatever, but it is not,
and I will clearly state that it is not.

However, I did just now justify why I believe you
closed one thread. I'm sorry but it felt necessary.

Posted by MattKan

Please stop complaining just for the sake of complaining.

Is complaining for others privileges
and for the sake of fairness wrong too?  

Not reading that. Glad you got it vented though.  

Posted by Rufus

Not reading that. Glad you got it vented though.

You don't have to, all I ask are the moderators take the time to
analyze things before closing threads, and not acting on whim
because they may feel emotional about the thread.

Follow the rules of the forums that everyone else too must follow.  

Posted by David K?

Is complaining for others privileges
and for the sake of fairness wrong too?

In all fairness that was directed at Higbey, but honestly it applies to you, too. If you really believe everything you posted, you should Forum PM Rufus or something, but making a big fuss about it is quite annoying.  

Posted by David K?

Follow the rules of the forums that everyone else too must follow.

Moderators aren't allowed to spam or make threads about bans either so I'd say they're doing pretty good.  

Posted by David K?

Since I'm all about controversies and ethics
I might as well bring this up, even though I
have a feeling it will be closed even though
it does not break any of the rules...

Topic
I've seen two threads closed after two people were
speaking about something relevant to their interests.

One thread showing what they do on Graal
when they are bored, which others might
have responded as to what they also do on
Graal when bored. - Thread closed...

I've seen another thread closed because
it was talking about Graal staff members
hiding information from the public, which
in a lot of games happens. It it were about
power abuse I would actually agree, however
they still had their own right to their opinion.
- Thread closed...

Justifying the Violations
Here are the forum rules, lets compare and contrast.
http://www.graalians.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4

Be Nice:

1. We want these forums to be an enjoyable experience for everyone involved, so all bullying is off limits.
   
   Was anyone bullied by this these posts? I don't think so.
   
2. Don't take disagreement badly, see it as an opportunity to comfortably share your opinions--this means you need to allow others to comfortably share their opinions as well.
   
   Was there disagreement?
   Yes, one thread was about disagreement, the other was not.
   
   Were they taken badly?
   I should think so since both threads were closed...
   Due to both threads being closed, it doesn't seem like either thread creators opinions were comfortably shared.
   
3. However, opinions that put down race, culture, gender, or sexual orientation are not permitted.
   This did not relate.
   
4. Sharing other members' personal information without consent or otherwise involving members' private lives in forum affairs is strictly forbidden.
   
   Well, I would consider one thread as sharing a conversation private.. However that program may have been public, therefore voiding my last statement..

They seemed to have followed the rules in this category.

Be Relevant:

1. Try to keep this in mind when posting, so you avoid posting spammy, useless or irrelevant things.
   
   I believe this concerns the posts after the starting posts. Didn't seem useless, irrelevant, or spammy to them, and it didn't seem spammy to me at least.
   
2. please try to keep thread titles meaningful and to the point.
   
   Well.. one post was to the point, however hiding things, or not telling things that the public does not need to know isn't really having to do with trust...
   Someone might think the title fits... I don't feel it as much. Honestly I can't say a lot of titles do fit.

The rules weren't broken in this category unless you believe it was named wrong.


Be Appropriate:

1. we cannot allow adult material to be present on the forums. Content containing illegal activities and sites with pornographic, grotesque, or violent material are not to be posted or linked here under any circumstances.
   
   Both posts did not seem adult like to me..
   
2. whining about your in-game conflicts with staff and discussing bans is not appropriate here either.
   
   Neither post had to do with in game conflicts, one did have to do with an out of game conflict however (Actually two out of game conflicts if you include the picture, and the post). Neither post discussed bans.

The two threads seemed to have followed the rules of everything.


Freedoms of the People
So lets see where closing the threads went wrong.

Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one's opinions and ideas via speech. - Violated, opinion was closed. Ideas of ?boredness were closed.

Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the freedom of communication and expression through vehicles including various electronic media and published materials. While such freedom mostly implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state, its preservation may be sought through constitutional or other legal protections.
In this case it is basically freedom of speech since we are on two forms of media..

Freedom of information - Long list, Violated.
I believe game companies have their own rights. They don't need to tell anything to anyone, and are allowed to make up their own rights. It seems like Pix did the right thing, I don't see any lies in his statement...
Counter Violated (Not Violated).

Freedom of assembly, sometimes used interchangeably with the freedom of association, is the individual right to come together and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests.[1] The right to freedom of association is recognized as a human right, a political freedom and a civil liberty. - Violated, assembly closed off (to the public) could have been done via messages I suppose...

In games, freedom of assembly can actually help
more than hurt and tell game creators what might
need to be fixed.


Closing
In the rules it states to contact the forum moderator,
so I will respectively do so.

I see either the rules need changing,
or moderators aren't taking the rules
under consideration.

I believe forum rules can go against
freedoms of the people, however so
far the violated threads did not have
rules justifying their closure...

Of course we could always go with
moderators are allowed to do what
they want. But then why have rules.

Discuss?

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/154/912/berneydidnotread.gif (Unsupported image host)  

Posted by Rufus

Moderators aren't allowed to spam or make threads about bans either so I'd say they're doing pretty good.

Obviously you didn't read anything said.
But at least 1/3 rules were followed,
that at least is great, no reason to
continue this debate, unless you are
willing to take the time to take things
a little seriously.

Posted by MattKan

In all fairness that was directed at Higbey, but honestly it applies to you, too. If you really believe everything you posted, you should Forum PM Rufus or something, but making a big fuss about it is quite annoying.

You do not contact management that might
be part of the problem, you contact the
management above. This is for all businesses.

As I stated in the first thread, they were contacted.
As well as this discussion was created to hopefully
discuss what other rules should be changed or
even added.

Contacted:

Site Staff
Jazz

Super Moderators
Cat612
Kavan
Yephenpeace  

Posted by David K?

Obviously you didn't read anything said.
But at least 1/3 rules were followed,
that at least is great.

Let's keep it up?



You do not contact management that might be part of the problem,
you contact the management above.

As I stated in the first thread, they were contacted.
As well as this discussion was created to hopefully
discuss what other rules should be changed or
even added.


Site Staff
Jazz

Super Moderators
Cat612
Kavan
Yephenpeace

Rufus committed these "crimes", so who is above him? God? Rufus is in charge here, and it should be common sense that even if don't agree with him, you're not going to get anywhere unless you approach him rationally instead of making a big deal about it on the forums.

When did Jazz, Cat612, Kavan, and Yephenpeace go wrong? You probably think the easy solution would be to fire them, but I personally think that we're lucky to have people who are willing to spend time moderating these forums--let alone people as mature and trustworthy as that quartet.

I don't really want to throw stones here, but could you use proper paragraphing and condense your posts a little bit? It's obnoxious because you nearly double the size of every thread each time you post. It's much quicker to read stuff like this than having to bounce around the page and constantly be scrolling down.  

Yeah, this is just ridiculous.

If you're falling back on 'let's discuss the rules' then you should know that this is not a democracy. Additionally, if we're following rules here you should understand that you've been bending the 'contact the staff for issues' statement, where it clearly implies that you should be doing it through PM's.

I've let you have your say on things, but like I said, there is little substance to what you're saying and you're not forced to post here.