Rev. You've obviously ignored or chosen to not read either of my last two posts... Either that your you are the worst sore WINNER I've ever met. I said you are right, what part of that are you having an issue with? If you want me to disagree with you so you can bitch, that's fine just say so and I will. Otherwise stop bitching about Daniel's point buy. I said I was wrong and that I would change it. What more do you want?


As for justifying the learning of powers. No, I am not suggesting that one single mention should be enough to justify mastering a power, I'm talking about picking up a single dot in a power. Fact is our 200x bible says it should be justified through RP not how much it takes. And since it doesn't say how much it takes, it is up to the mods to make that call. If you see someone you have issues with report it and we'll make the call, it will probably go over better than the way you approached it with me over Daniel.

Rev. I deleted your last post. You've been warned to stop the name calling. Take the advice of mothers everywhere. If you don't have something nice to say about TF don't say anything at all.

Sorry Sky, deleted your post too. It wasn't written in a bad spirit or did any name calling, but it wasn't helpful either under the circumstances.

Seriously. Seph, Flicker, put a leash on this guy.

Sorry Dave, I won't do that. You picked the fight, and you're the one who won't let it go. You explained that you thought the NP buy was a crock, he agreed and said he'd change it. That should have been the end of it.

From that point forward we could have had a lovely discussion of how to approach this subject in the future to avoid this unpleasantness, and maybe learn something in the process. That's not how it played out. Frankly, this thread is an embarassment, and I am not at all interested in seeing it play out any farther than this.

No worries Fox. Were hashing it out in chat anyays.

WTF? How is this my fault? I said it's no big deal, not to worry, do whatever you like and he kept poking me for grief.

Ugh, never mind, it's not worth it, it just isn't worth it.

Erasing posts now? Fuck this. You people sure know how to suck the joy out of this place.

Deleting posts is lame and made of suck and fail. DO NOT LIKE.

The posts in question were, I am assured, needlessly inflammatory and not helpful to the overall goals of the 200X setting.

I understand that we are all attached to our words, and to write something and then see it disappear is a chilling experience. Some will also wave the banner of freedom or the protest poster reading "censorship."

It is my intention to see to it that posts are only deleted when necessary. Moderation is a necessary component of this forum, and the decision to moderate a post is never an easy one. But there are times when it must be done.

This topic is not open to debate. This section of the forum is overseen by a panel of three moderators, and participation in this section of the forum is voluntary.

Just a thought: Shouldn't we be allowed and trusted to make our stories worth reading? Shouldn't we also be trusted with the fates of our characters?

Come on now. Fox erupted with 10 Nova Points and no one said a thing. It is perfectly within his perview to then determine how his character advances.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, but something that Nova said concerned me.



My concerns are this:

-What are the criteria for deleting a post? I'd hate to spend a lot of time and energy writing something only to have it deleted because it violates some rule.

-Who makes the decision on whether a post is to be deleted.

-What limits, if any, are to be placed on creative freedoms and on speech?

-Will a post be deleted if deemed 'offensive' by a moderator?

Either you trust us or you don't. I have no interest in a lengthy discussion of the topic.

I've had a shit couple of days and missed this fracas completely, so I'm coming at this situation from the outside. I'll try to address your concerns, and hopefully put to bed some of what others have brought up:



In this case, Dave was warned about the consequences of further antagonistic behavior. It's not in my personal prerogative to delete posts or to threaten to delete posts, and I do not think I ever shall. However, as a Mod, that power is within the compass of Fox's abilities, and after delivering a warning, he chose to exercise it. So as for criteria, I'd say "if you've been warned that typing X will result in a deleted post, do not type X if you do not want that post to be deleted".

I frequent a forum where you pay a one-time, ten dollar subscription fee and people get banned for using words like "lulz", and there is no clemency offered. Maybe I just hang in a rougher 'hood, but to be honest, you guys need to toughen up. Fox warned Dave not to do something and laid out the consequences and Dave did it, anyway. Why are any of you surprised or outraged? Did this not merit your concern until the game of Chicken resolved?



The Mods. Specifically, the Mod who issued the warning, and if we see one of our own abusing that authority, that person will probably cease to be a Mod.



Dude, you're equating this to a political debate yet again. It isn't. This forum has always been very forgiving of creative freedom and speech, and it shall remain that way. The first and most important rule of this particular board is "Don't be a dick", and it's an interpretation of that rule that lead to one non-constructive, antagonistic post being deleted. Dave is funny when he's angry and he's sharp with his rhetoric, but trust me, nobody's "creative freedoms" were being infringed upon.



Has that happened yet? Has anything close to that happened yet? No. "Offensive" is different than "antagonistic". If your assertions or preferences happen to be wrong-headed, mean, selfish, or stupid, then speaking for myself, no, I won't delete anything. It's when you start taking that fight to someone else that I have a problem. Using your opinions as a wedge to pick fights with other players is dickery, and dickery gets you the boot.

I thought I was asking some serious question. I now see that I was to be attacked, as if asking the questions was a hostile act.



I don't consider free speech to be a POLITICAL debate. I consider free speech to be a HUMAN RIGHT.

Let me phrase the question like this:
Would the moderators defend a post where I used language deemed so hateful and offensive to them and others, that it shakes them to the core of their beings? Where I used such language, to push the boundaries of what is deemed 'decent', 'tolerant', and 'polite', so that it borders on hotile to what others may believe?

You don't have rights Doc. You either do it the way everyone likes (i.e. The Majority) or leave. It's that simple. There is nothing to disuss on the issue.

Sometimes Human Rights do not extend to a moderated enviromnment, you have to understand and accept that.

Okay, otherwise beautiful post aside I have issue with this.

What we have here is:

Someone (Seph) made a clear and thoughtful post. Maybe it was a little rough around the edges but it had something to say.

Someone (White) responded in a way that the original poster thought was ignorant and purposefully ignorant.

Seph then replies with some venom, brimming with ire at having been (in his opinion) subjected to an absurd and purposefully argumentative response.

White then responds with shock and dismay at the harsh words from Seph.

Seph responds with some more harsh words.


This is what happened yesterday between The Fool and Revenent. For their trouble Fox deleted two or more of their posts due to the harsh nature of the language or the fact that the post wasn't 'helping matters'. And now we have a different mod commit the same sin.

I can see the argument that we have to be civil in our dialogue at all times for this place to work. Honestly I'll have a real fucking tough time doing so as I'm crude, vulgar and not possessing of the sharpest rhetorical tools. But if that is going to be the law of the land that should be the law of the land for all. I'm not interested in hanging around if it's okay for the mods to use insults and blatantly viscious language on the posters here if the posters can't do it to each other.

Fair enough, Craig. Consider the issue dropped.

Vile Bill’s post contains a directed and blatant insult towards Seph. In accordance with the same standards that were exercised against Fool and myself (which the posts contained far less hurtful things than the above) the post by Vile Bill should be deleted in it's entirety.

There should be no favoritism. The same standards set down by Fox (a Mod) should apply to all posts and all players.

Craig was quoting me, Dave. That's why I deleted the post.

As a moderator you should be setting the example, not being the example.

I supported Fox's decision after it was made, but I don't advocate his choice to make it. I advocate people saying whatever they damn well please and letting public opinion take its course. Part of that means my saying whatever I damn well please.

You know what, Dave? You need to take a step back. I have been more than diplomatic with every problem that has arisen here since becoming a Mod, and you are taking a chance to step on my dick because you're still butt-hurt that you got fucked with by someone who's on my team. Take a step back and consider whether you're doing more harm or good, because let me tell you, right now, you seem to be advocating turning this place into a prison colony. I don't want that. Is that what you want? Think about the answer.

Jeesh guys ...

Its not like Moderation is a perfect solution. If it was, we should transport it out into the real world to solve all our governance problems. Our moderation is three people doing the best they can to keep this place running on the Fun Side and not stepping over into the Flaming Pit. If you can't trust this to be their motive, maybe you are in the wrong place.

Nova created this Environment. We are all okay with that.
She chose Seph and Fox to be co-moderators with her. We should be okay with that too.

If the rule is "Posts intended to insult, attack or personally offend a player will be deleted by Moderators" then it should apply to all posts that fall into the above catagory unilaterally and without exception.

That has yet to be the case here as I can still read posts in this very thread that have personal attacks in them.

Fine. Here is the way I will handle the situation in the future.

No more deleting posts.

Instead, I'll act like a kindergarten teacher. It will be a three strike system. The first two strikes come with warnings but nothing is deleted, and then the thrid strike immediately generates a vote on whether a player is a dick and should be booted from 200x?

Bottom line is the behavior that was going on yesterday was pissing off other players (not the victim) and they complained to me as a Mod, and wanted me to take action. I did and I'm not sorry about it and I won't apologize for it.

WR: This is not a free speech issue. It is about maintaining the enjoyment of the forums for the players as a whole. Just like in real life, you can't yell Fire! in a crowded theater; here on the forums you can't be deliberately aggressive and mean spirited to other players and not face the consequences. From now on, it won't be post deletion, it will mean having a vote called for kicking someones ass to the curb. This isn't about what you write IC and whether it is edgy. This is about nastiness to other human beings with feelings who share this environment. Good enough?

If you are a dick to another player you risk getting kicked. I have no problems with that as it's explicitly stated in the Bible.

I was referring to IC writing, not OOC. I was specifically referring to the issue of creative freedom. Being able to write, IC, what I wished to write about. I understand that OOC, we have to behave with some semblance of propriety.

My speech issues were about IC posts.

No IC posts have ever been deleted, and that wasn't what yesterday was about. I would never have deleted an IC post based on other players complaints. If an IC post was ever that massively inflammatory or offensive, the three mods would discuss it and decide what to do about it, but even then probably wouldn't result in outright post deletion.

You know what? Since I went to bed last night there's been 14 OOC hand-waving posts on this topic and only 5 IC posts.

You're doing it the wrong way.

Now knock it off and either trust the mods or get out. I'm done with this so-called discussion. Everybody in this thread has two strikes, and strike three will not go to a vote of the masses. This is not an unlimited democracy.

That's it. We're done. Stop bitching and go write. If you can't do that, then get out of my forum.

In case anyone cares:

Re: Peter Nord:

Character sheet lists 11 BPs accounted for. Missing account for other 4 Bonus points. Appears to have been spent on skills but this is not notated.

2 Taint accounted for. Missing account for 2 Taint. Also, indicates spending 6 QP on Quantum generating 2 taint. However Quantum 5 adds a third dot of Taint, not indicated. If this 3rd dot of taint is included it should be noted and the fourth dot of taint accounted for. All Mega Attribute and Quantum Power purchases add up as not being bought tainted. Where is the 4th dot of taint coming from?

Good catch; thank you for taking the time to crunch the numbers. I look forward to hearing the answer.

There we are: all sorted out. The accounting on the sheet should reflect where everything comes from. Oh, and thanks for the heads up on the BP's

Your Welcome!

Still one dot over on skills. (Excluding free resistance and Endurance dots there should be 23 + 2 (from 4 BPs) + 6 (from 1 NP) = total of 31 dots. You have 32.

You were right about the taint. Forgot to take the Node 3 into account. Also looks like you changed his aberration.

Fek! Okay, sorted as of 2 mins from now.

This is what I get for doing things on the fly at work!