I am makeing a fairly large assumption that the above message is mostly concerning the incident today. If not, then parts of my post are not relevent.
I apologise if my asking you about the logic that lead to a conclusion was taken the wrong way. It was not ment to undermind your authority. Yes, I could have acknowledged your request to stop, but I had stopped. Also, please can you clarify what "being a dick" is. Would it be doing to other people what you would not want done to yourself? That seems a fair assesment of rule one to me, and I was not doing what I would have objecte to myself.
"It is also bad to try arguing that nobody is offended, and therefore you can be offernsive." Technicly, if nobody is being offended, then your can't actualy being offensive, since to be offencive you have to be trying to offend somebody. Which again, I was neither trying to odend someone, nor was I trying to argue that.
I actually responded to 'Veav: Incidentally, impersonation is a Rule One violation.' with 'Simon: Isn't it only a violation if the person you are impersonating in unhapy for you to impersonate them?'. Which in my eyes is a perfectly valid question. I ask questions about 'why', it is how I attempt to reason things out. I wil once agin say I apologise if the question seemed to undermind your authority.
It also seems that you banned me for that question, rather than the offence itself.
'Veav: Okay, I was gonna let it slide.'
'Veav: But now you're trying to defend it.'
'When we tell you to stop something, we don't want a debate, we don't want you to defend your actions - we want the actions to stop.' In that case, would not a simple sentance saying "Because" or "I dont want a discussion about it" been appropriate. In addition, 'the proper response is not to argue.' I was not intending to argue with you. I asked why.
Also, not all admins have that opinion, most I know would have a discussion with the person about their actions, so that is a personal prefference, and an assumption that I knew that.
'So just a friendly public service announcement for anyone who thinks impersonations, dice spamming and unqualified harassment are a god-given right: being called on a violation of Rule One means you're being a dick.' in your definition of the senstance "being a dick", I gave what i considered my definition earlier. I also at not point said, in any way, shape or form, infer it way my god given right to harass people, and I am one fo the people who has a problem with impersonation, WHEN it is for a malicious purpose.
As you asked for Veav, I acknowlede that its your server and your rules, I always have done. However, I feel that in this case it was unjustified and would be happy to have a discussion with you about what happened. In fact, I was trying to when you banned me.
Blackwolf, Chef Brian, Talrea, Klaus and a few other have my IM contact details if you want to talk about what I see as an unfortunate missunderstanding.
I will make an attempt to check this message board over the next few days to see your reply, but i do not generally read the board frequently. |