Jump to content


Photo

Future of the MT


  • Please log in to reply
394 replies to this topic

#281 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 06 March 2018 - 06:03 PM

In the topics of Abusive Behaviour thread, users are asking questions about why the various libel/slander/lies/power abuse etc cases are there.

 

It is simple.

 

They are ruled under  5.1.1 General Forum Rules:

 

The ones against MT members (Nortrom vs Lonello 1, Karaiskakis vs Napoleon 1er Nortrom vs Lonello 2, Nortrom vs Lonello 3 and Morx vs Lonello 1, ) are about setting jurisprudence. They also refer to

 

1.3 Moderator Involvement in a Case:

 

 

In short: Which amount of slander and lies by a sitting member of MT can be tolerated in the forum?

 

For the great number of cases involving Lonello: I would expect that at some point a pattern is established:

 

-poor conduct (abuse of power, slander,lies in an aim to stop negative feedback from users)

 

-internal or external conflict (currently 3 cases outstanding)

 

 

Well there is a rule that covers those:

 

1.4 Removal of Moderator from Position: For reasons of poor conduct, dereliction of duty, or internal or external conflict a moderator may be removed from his position by either a decision of the Youdagames official representative, Mick Moolhuijsen, or a vote of two-thirds of the current Moderator Team. A moderator may also be removed if the current Moderator Team has at least 5 members, and two polls among the moderators are taken three months apart, with one vote less than two-thirds of the current MT voting each time to remove the moderator in question.

 

I am looking forward to some jurisprudence.


Edited by Morx, 06 March 2018 - 06:03 PM.


#282 MTinsley

MTinsley

    Sergeant

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 March 2018 - 07:36 PM

Morx,

In the future, it is possible that the MT may allow the community to decide if a Moderator is fit for duty. A community led petition would allow all eligible accounts to decide. It's one of the topics mentioned in the recent MT survey published, on Question 6: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KC3B5TJ


Spoiler



A community led petition would be a step in the right direction, in my opinion. I commented upon this in my reply to the survey, and suggested some improvements. For example, I feel it would be better if petitions were decided on percentage of voters rather than an arbitrary figure, and I also think there should be stricter eligibility guidelines to prevent voter fraud. Would you support this idea of a community led no-confidence petition? If not, then what changes would you suggest?

If you're unsatisfied with the idea of a community petition, and also unsatisfied with the current MT responses from Lonello, Tobermory and Napoleon, you could e-mail the administrators and ask them to independently judge the case. The MT recognizes there is dissatisfaction in the community, which is why a lot of site policies may be changed after the results of the recent MT survey. :)

Until then, I hope there can be some peace on the forum. Let's agree to disagree. ;)

Kind regards,
Mike

Edited by MTinsley, 06 March 2018 - 07:45 PM.

  • Lonello and Napoleon 1er like this

#283 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 879 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 06 March 2018 - 07:42 PM

Its funny (not really) that Morx and Nortrom try to shift attention away of Lonello's brave revealing in his recent posts! They are using the same strategy as before in posting a marathon of posts and unnecessary cases only for the purpose of decois. So maybe the 2 posts of Lonello should be pinned on top of forum so all can read what is going on here.

Nortrom and Morx please stop this puppetry and put stratego first!
  • Lonello, Napoleon 1er and DarthRemark like this

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#284 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 March 2018 - 08:17 PM

@ MTinsley. My take on the survey:

 

Satire

Spoiler
 
Spoiler
 
@ Lonello-clone-1
I'm happy to see you were able to decipher lonello's post. I've given my response to the parts I understood from his post and found interesting. Keeping an unfit moderator in office is not "Stratego first" 

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#285 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 March 2018 - 08:18 PM

Friendly reminder http://forum.strateg...he-mt/?p=448215 all questions but 13 and 14 have still not been addressed properly.
 
As it seems we are not getting anywhere since MT is still actively refusing to answer my questions, let's make some sort of deal to get out of this stalemate.
 
For each subset of questions answered, I am willing to share one point of my "plan"
 
[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
[11,12,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#286 DarthRemark

DarthRemark

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 March 2018 - 01:01 AM

I have a solution for this problem.  Since it's clear this dispute has less to do with what's good for Stratego.com and everything to with something else, the following compromise should be acceptable for all:
 
A- Lonello agrees to stop commenting about Nortorm and Morx directly or indirectly.  Another Mod will speak to all issues involving these players going forward.  If Lonello violates his part the MT agrees to immediately remove him as a Mod.
 
B-  Morx and Nortrom stop their insistence that Lonello or other MT be removed and stop polluting the forums with divisive commentary.  If Morx or Nortrom violate their part they receive an immediate PB. 
 
This does not prevent Morx and Nortrom from making constructive recommendations, even if those include some mechanism for removing MT, and/or serving as site staff themselves.
 
C- All involved should agree to bury the hatchet and start over as Stratego friends.  Though unnecessary it would go a long way towards peace and harmony.  

 

 


Edited by DarthRemark, 07 March 2018 - 01:01 AM.

  • Don_Homer, Lonello, sdc81 and 2 others like this

#287 MTinsley

MTinsley

    Sergeant

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 March 2018 - 01:03 AM

Forcing either party into silence won't break the tension.

#288 DarthRemark

DarthRemark

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 March 2018 - 01:08 AM

Peace is the goal.  This is no longer a fun place.  


  • Lonello, sdc81, steelers and 2 others like this

#289 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,226 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 07 March 2018 - 08:10 AM

Darth, I have already long stopped both commenting and reading anything, on both their ranting in PM they started and their ranting on the public forum. The only post of mine was one to signal the aftermath, exposing what they've created leading up to Napoleon's resignation a couple of days ago (exactly what you say last: 'no fun place anymore') and one to get the mysteries out of the way earlier, as you said it was important to expose their goals and come clean with everything we know.

So that's 2 posts to over a 100 at least. Which has been the point all along: they are the worst bullies, and after calling out to purge the 5 MT-members the clear actions to that effect. As explained in my first post, we have indeed seen the resignations, 2 in effect, so they are half way through they would themselves conclude and I am just the next target. The importance of my second post was pointing out that conclusion would not be farther from the truth.

People have called me brave for standing up against these bullies but this constant harassment is ofcourse not only what I take a stand against but also the entirity of MT and the community. This is for the 95% very clear to the eye.

So my mere two posts are compared to all those obsessed posts of their part, and also a dozen of threads opened to distract, or to rant on further. It's all visible for transparancy here (but the PM's ofcourse). All of a sudden they pose to be great communityworkers opening their Strategocollections, puzzles and even firedepartments. Why haven't we seen any communitywork in the last 5 years, and only suddenly a week ago?

What they do is called a fillibuster. So I don't know how many obsessed poppykoks you should have before you put 1 counterpost in but that would be about none from this point as it's useless and ignoring them wil probably cause another 100 rants... they will fade away in the end. Here MT has already the complaint of the topicstarter as he didn't mean the topic infiltrated with all this nonsense. Nor is the Abusive Thread meant for that. So you're right again, Darth.

You can not have everything go unsaid so you have to speak up sometimes, 1:100 rants seems fair enough. We do not need to have our mouths couffed all the way and never speak up but at this point about everything can be ignored now. We've said our piece and it is clear they are running out of steam. We know exactly where this comes from, and what their objectives are. The warfare is just dayly routine for them.

So it's not tension. I shrugg it off and they do not know other. Not for decades. It's their occupation which is fine. All MT has said is to keep their wars off the forum though, from the start, and we will insist so in the end. We keep the eye on the ball and keep this forum an independant one.

Now ofcourse we can expect a lot more bogus cases which we will add to the open caseload we have already. They all in full proove what I described above for warmongering.


Lo

#290 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,458 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 March 2018 - 08:37 AM

I have already long stopped both commenting and reading anything, on both their ranting in PM they started and their ranting on the public forum.


It's like a man walks into a room eating an apple, proudly declaring to the room that he does not eat and never will eat apples, and he actually expects everyone in the room to believe him. I would call that man Delusionello.


  • Nortrom and KissMyCookie like this

#291 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 07 March 2018 - 08:39 AM

@Darth: I will come back later today to your "solution". The unfairness of what you suggest is truly shocking and I will explain all readers  why in a post later today or tomorrow.

 

@Lonello: I am not a bully. I am just sending you feedback you don not want to hear, because I honestly believe you are not suited to be in office. Your reply to this whole thread just exposes your methods. I will make a summary of these also later today or tomorrow.

 

A quote from Lonello: "Why haven't we seen any communitywork in the last 5 years, and only suddenly a week ago?"

 

- In Nortrom vs Lonello #2 you are proven to do this trick with Nortrom, take down the quality of this work and the number of activities he is involved in. The argument goes something like 8 activities are more than the 1 activity you say Nortrom is involved in.

 

I think any (fair and impartial) member of MT involved in this ruling will agree that that 8>1. Let it be 5>1 or 3>1 So far there has been no ruling from MT on this clearly libellous statement and it seems to be witheld for political reasons (as in protecting you from a conviction in this case).

 

I already called you out to address people individually earlier: "What did Morx do?"

 

I have always been involved in community work, mostly to do with live play. 

 

As for posting my Stratego collection: I do not just want to be involved in activities that take energy without building. In Nortroms blog, that was here long before any of this started I posted some pictures and the good feedback made me decide to start that thread. Having a few days off helped as well.

 

This very week TemplateRex asked for an improvement of my board editor made about 5 years ago and I released this new version on Sunday. I opened a thread for it to let other people also give feedback to it. I am sure you find a new complot here to throw at me for this.


  • TemplateRex likes this

#292 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,258 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 07 March 2018 - 09:07 AM

One thing I do want to say though, "Why haven't we seen any communitywork in the last 5 years, and only suddenly a week ago?"

.

This would be because no one ever complained. The MT functions on complaints. No complaints means no action by the MT.

And the result of this approach? The past five years have been fairly smooth-running. Everyone has gotten the justice that the MT was created to provide.

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#293 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 07 March 2018 - 09:32 AM

@Gary, That was a quote from Lonello, he is talking about the community work done by Nortrom and me here. Not about the MT.

 

He is trying to attack our integrity and downplaying the value of the work done by Nortrom and me.

 

I am just exposing that he is doing something similar in Nortrom vs Lonello #2 which is still an ongoing case.

 

I have edited the sentence in the post above to make sure everybody understands this.


  • GaryLShelton likes this

#294 KissMyCookie

KissMyCookie

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 07 March 2018 - 10:14 AM

This would be because no one ever complained. The MT functions on complaints. No complaints means no action by the MT.
The past five years have been fairly smooth-running.

 

I cannot comment on the entire last five years, but this is not a strong argument. Just because someone does not feel pain does not mean that a cancer is not present. MT has ruled successfully in various matters (language abuse), but there have always been discrepancies in Draw Refusal cases, offensive monikers, and uncategorized complaints–the current matters are examples of the discontent that has been festering for quite some time.

 

 

Everyone has gotten the justice that the MT was created to provide.

 

I'm sorry, Gary, but this is not a good statement as the current climate disproves it.



#295 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 07 March 2018 - 02:37 PM

 

Friendly reminder http://forum.strateg...he-mt/?p=448215 all questions but 13 and 14 have still not been addressed properly.
 
As it seems we are not getting anywhere since MT is still actively refusing to answer my questions, let's make some sort of deal to get out of this stalemate.
 
For each subset of questions answered, I am willing to share one point of my "plan"
 
[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
[11,12,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]

 

 

In short: there seem to be negotiations:

 

1 Nortroms questions are currently not being answered.

2 Napoleon 1er said he wanted to see a plan first.

3 Nortrom refused to show his plan till Lonello resigns.

4 Napoleon 1er refuses to answer questions untill he sees a  plan.

5 Nortrom offers the trade above.

 

 

@MT (not Lonello): your move.

@Lonello > Look at step 3 and all the feedback received regarding your functioning and behaviour



#296 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,226 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 07 March 2018 - 03:08 PM

We have put the forumpower back for WCO and also try implementing a new idea around this (in cooperation with WCO actually) so we'll tell as soon as that is OK'd. Myself, I am doing Darth's proposal. My colleagues react and I do not even read their fillibustering. Ofcourse I react to the regular members around here and I'll answer a few questions to that effect now but to them I simply have never reacted anymore after this quote:

 

maar 2 fracties: Dieter en Niet-Dieter.

 

So that was his answer after long digging what was behind all of their behavior - Feb 21st! Mind you he is older than me so he is a grown up. Then to still come with these ancient wars, which were fought somewhere else, like a Waterloo battlefield, when the war is long won.... this is Don Quichote fighting windmills!

If you're so messed up that you still see a site that is dead in the water as the only cause to keep fighting in the whole wide world, then you're simply out of your mind and further discussions are futile. It is utter vendictiveness that drives them, and the overall point is that this world is NOT divided in a camp PRO and a camp ANTI Dieter. It is what they want to make the world about, but 99% does not care. And MT is there for this 99%. The 1% warmongerers may fight their wars back at the Metaforge forum and there file libels against Dieter how unjust Nortrom's PB was at that site.

To make sure: I have zero bias in this. Sure I fought with Dieter and Darth in our Zone team against Metaforge. They abused and bailed, fine. We took the higher ground. That doesn't make me a PRO Dieter in any way. He has put in lots of time for Stratego so I applaud that, but that's about it. The last time I saw him was when he volunteered to be arbiter at the Teamcup, came all the way over from Germany, and I got him and Pim together actually to discuss the square rules with me in between a gameround... the so called Profposalton of Gary and The_Prof. My initiative, and all three of us got along very well. So there are no grudges.

As to his site (that yes got a free pass over Metaforge from Jumbo... don't keep whining about it, bygones be bygones I say and just bite it) I thought it was a great compromize someone came up with to allow mentioning of his site to a certain point, but the subjects to be renamed as ALTERNATIVE PLAYING OPTIONS. Great fun and everybody satisfied. If one is interested, this compromize was initiated as ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS but then I said, what options? It should then be ALTERNATIVE PLAYING OPTIONS. So in finality I am so proud to be the founder of that ultime name ;) . But then one flipflopped and we had no such policy anymore which enraged Morx and he actually got so heaten that he ambushed another Mod into resignation which he was not ashamed about he said after.

There are a few going way back and knowing the whole history. Don_Homer (and I had zero consultations with him so he too is completely unbiased) can be called a Senior by now too so he knows and maybe the post should be pinned indeed so everyone understands the context for whatever they do these weeks on the forum ;). But pinning all that only makes their warmongering more important so it's best to leave it at Darth's proposal. They are exposed now and for all I care may continue fighting the windmills for another couple of decades, but not here on this forum.


Lo

#297 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 710 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 07 March 2018 - 03:40 PM

@Lonello, I asked something else of you in the previous thread, but ok.

 

"We have put the forumpower back for WCO"

 

@MT Thank you for restoring our Orange powers.

 

As all the avid forum readers will know Lonello was the first to threaten us with removing them. After that he actually seemed to have pushed this through to the Admins under false pretence. The story on this changed a number of times. I am not sure we will ever hear the real story about it.

 

@Lonello: if this means you will start going on about "un-staffmanlike" or whatever, note that it does not matter for me if I have these powers or not. My opinion does not switch depending on which color my name is in the forum list.

 

@Lonello: the quote you make is from a PM I send to you with regards to the libel and slander you were outting at Nortrom in your very first entry in this thread.

 

The only thing I tried to say there was that there are roughly 2 factions: the people that want stability (every year a tournament in Dusseldorf) and the people that want Stratego to reach a larger audience, for instance a world championship in Kiev or in Greece or maybe even in the USA.

 

I will probably be opening a seperate case for divulging parts of a PM without written permission. EDIT (Case Morx vs Lonello #2 posted)

 

As the readers of the forum can see I asked Major Nelson if I could show the message I send him

Spoiler

 

It was never posted on the forum without Major Nelsons written permission.



#298 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,200 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 March 2018 - 03:48 PM

@Lonello, I asked something else of you in the previous thread, but ok.

 

"We have put the forumpower back for WCO"

 

@MT Thank you for restoring our Orange powers.

 

As all the avid forum readers will know Lonello was the first to threaten us with removing them. After that he actually seemed to have pushed this through to the Admins under false pretence. The story on this changed a number of times. I am not sure we will ever hear the real story about it.

 

@Lonello: if this means you will start going on about "un-staffmanlike" or whatever, note that it does not matter for me if I have these powers or not. My opinion does not switch depending on which color my name is in the forum list.

 

@Lonello: the quote you make is from a PM I send to you with regards to the libel and slander you were outting a.

 

The only thing I tried to say there was that there are roughly 2 factions: the people that want stability (every year a tournament in Dusseldorf) and the people that want Stratego to reach a larger audience, for instance a world championship in Kiev or in Greece or maybe even in the USA.

 

I will probably be opening a seperate case for divulging parts of a PM without written permission.

 

As the readers of the forum can see I asked Major Nelson if I could show the message I send him

Spoiler

 

It was never posted on the forum without Major Nelsons written permission.

You can post it, I don't care.


  • Morx likes this
Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is.

#299 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,258 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 07 March 2018 - 04:17 PM

MT has ruled successfully in various matters (language abuse), but there have always been discrepancies in Draw Refusal cases, offensive monikers, and uncategorized complaints

.

I don't see it quite this way. I see the current disruption as being about other things. Particularly, people are upset over MT postings outside of decisions. Some of those things fall in the personal vendetta category. Some in the valid category.

Those aside, in all the draw refusal cases that have been adjudicated by the MT in the past four years I've been on the MT, I doubt even 5 would have been decided differently today. So I think there's a solid consistency of service there.

With abuse cases and unacceptable usernames there could be seen some differences, yes. But again I don't think terribly. In my opinion the Team has always avoided extremes in this area and I see that continuing, which means a decent consistency as well. Sometimes we jump to a 2nd or 3rd degree abuse penalty on someone and we discuss that, but we've never gone 1st degree officially on something that we'd now as a Team call PB, or vice-versa, I'm quite sure.

And with usernames having the pass/fail system we do, we might could make a community inquiry as to what they would like to see banned. But I predict the outcome of such a poll would show only too well the wide stretches of opinion on this matter between everyone. As a four or five member Team since I've been a part of it, I truly believe we have functioned well to dispense justice reasonably here also.

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#300 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,458 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 March 2018 - 09:16 PM

 

This is a step/method towards the improvement of every team and should be followed not only by the MT but from the other teams also (TC, WCO, etc)

 

http://forum.strateg...og/#entry448624






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users