[Discussion] "Contentious" Flag

[Torisakia]

Can someone please explain to me what is going on? I've seen this "It's only a flag/politics" and "Mallorea and Riva should resign" stuff all over the site recently.

Is there a thread somewhere that explains it?

Apparently, it's bad that a moderator wants to play the game. And something about flags.

By the way, that rule that says "must be flag-like", is that enforced?

[Snowfall the Unicorn]

Anyone else getting "You are not allowed to read posts in this forum" show up every two minutes?

Those who keep snarking about their bad faith posts being removed: Perhaps if you made posts that contained content and not simply unproductive bad-faith sniping that offers nothing constructive to discuss regarding flag rules, then they wouldn't keep being moved to the evidence locker for [violet] to look over.

That is the message you get when trying to access the evidence locker.

Pfft, I always just pick the lock on the evidence locker and take back my stolen goods. If it works in Skyrim, why not here?

I'm sorry. Im tired. I'll shut up

[The Serbian Empire]

And clearly, this thread is going nowhere quickly. Let's get back in the direction of discussing flag rules and any proposed changes to those rules. Thread's getting woefully off track here.

(Image)
~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

I suspect the removal of the "bad faith" posts has only derailed the thread further.

[Free Brisbane]

Anyone else getting "You are not allowed to read posts in this forum" show up every two minutes?

I am getting the same message. Could a moderator explain why this is happening? And could it be about suppressing the flag debate?

No I don't think I'm trying to access the evidence locker, I receive the message when I refresh the page.

[Sebtopiaris]

By the way, that rule that says "must be flag-like", is that enforced?

Hypocrite.

[Victoriala]

Can someone please tell me what is going on? I've seen this "It's only a flag/politics" and "Mallorea and Riva should resign" stuff all over the site recently.

Is there a thread somewhere that explains it?

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=303090. It's about the Liberate Haven SC ruling that was submitted.

[Torisakia]

By the way, that rule that says "must be flag-like", is that enforced?

Hypocrite.

I was asking so I could know if my flag was okay.

Please, jump to more conclusions.

[Reploid Productions]

And clearly, this thread is going nowhere quickly. Let's get back in the direction of discussing flag rules and any proposed changes to those rules. Thread's getting woefully off track here.

Ok. So what are the rules? What has made these flag(s) unaccaptable but other contentious flags are fine? From here it looks like if you call out a mod, you end up getting silenced.

It was, basically, flamebaiting another user in your flag. Flamebaiting in flags is just as against the rules as it is elsewhere. "RandomNationstan should resign from Gameplay!" in a flag would be flamebaiting. "RandomMentoria should resign from RP mentoring!" in a flag would be flamebaiting. "RandomDebater should resign from posting in NSG!" in a flag would be flamebaiting those, and so on and so forth. On these grounds, appeal denied. The fact it is targeting a mod does not magically make it any more allowable.

As already noted, it is not the fact it was targeting a mod, it was the fact it was flamebaiting another user, and that similar flags leveled against non-mods would similarly be deemed flamebaiting.

Other issues of contention with the flag rules are the nature of "political" flags (ie: making an argument such as "Vote for X politician!" or "Abortion is murder" etc etc,) as well as whether or not the whole "flaglike" thing should be there/should be enforced (and what qualifies as "flaglike".)


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[Dragoria]

A summary of the situation, based on what I've seen, for the folks asking what all the fuss is about. People who've been watching more closely than I have are more than welcome to correct anything I've gotten wrong here.
SO.
Pretty much all of the site is on a "if you don't want to do something, you don't have to do it" system.
Don't want to debate? Dont' have to.
Don't want to roleplay? Don't have to.
Don't want to post in chat threads? Don't have to.
Want to do one (or more) of the above, but don't want to interact with a certain individual? Don't have to.
But then one of the Mods submitted a proposal that would effectively mean everyone has to play the raiding/defending thing, whether they want to or not.
People were outraged, wagons were circled, protesting flags were made, people were warned or even banned for the flags when they shouldn't have been, more outrage, more circled wagons, posts disappearing, more outrage...
And it doesn't look to be getting better anytime soon.

[Sebtopiaris]

Can someone please tell me what is going on? I've seen this "It's only a flag/politics" and "Mallorea and Riva should resign" stuff all over the site recently.

Is there a thread somewhere that explains it?

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=303090. It's about the Liberate Haven SC ruling that was submitted.

But it has turned into a protest against much, much more than that. That's the problem about NS threads- they tend to get drailed.

[Nierr]

It said Mallorea and Riva should resign.

And he should- he's been upsetting people and abusing his power, plain and simple, and we're being attacked for protesting that.

Feel free to point out where Mall has abused his power.

And no, submitted a WASC resolution is not an abuse of power.

[Sebtopiaris]

And he should- he's been upsetting people and abusing his power, plain and simple, and we're being attacked for protesting that.

Feel free to point out where Mall has abused his power.

And no, submitted a WASC resolution is not an abuse of power.

People fear mods and respect them because of this. If it weren't for that, his proposal would not have grown legs.

[Mekhet]

By the way, that rule that says "must be flag-like", is that enforced?

Hypocrite.

This, this is not helping this thread.

@Rep, since I'm not sure about why exactly were the motivations for the flag removal warnings, but I would assume it was to prevent potential conflict arising in the best case scenario. If so, I think MOD went to far with the two reasons for justification. The flags in question weren't really bad and I think the trigger was pulled too soon at least those that got of with just official warnings

Would it not have been better for MOD to give unofficial warnings and post a statement of temporary ban of such type of flags until MOD Team could sort it? As I used in an analogy earlier, asking for the President/Prime Minister to resign because you disagree with their actions is that really something that's punishable? So with NS, is that something in this case be punishable as well? Especially out of the blue?

You've already contradicted yourself with the Mall should resign signatures not being held to the same standard, even though the flags warnings were for flamebaity content, which the signatures have the same exact content. A little bit overdone doncha think?

As I mentioned before though, those who re-uploaded after being TG'd did cross the line, the others who did not didn't.

[Nierr]

There was a miscommunication regarding flags. The warning was already removed, and Coltarin has a moderator TG apologizing for the error, should he wish to share it.

Those complaining about their posts being removed, I refer you to [violet]'s instructions here. Please be aware that any posts removed are preserved in the evidence locker where she can easily check to make sure we are not using it to censor useful, good-faith discussion.

(Image)
~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Admin
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

Various people got deated over the flag issue, however. Not to incite a fight with a mod, but that was a miscommunication too? Various long-standing nations, too.

Being long-standing does not excuse you from the rules.

[Dragoria]

RE to the Nega-Oprah'd post about "our resistance met with something unfair", yes, that's why I included the bit about the warns/bans for the flags and further outrage.

[Victoriala]

And he should- he's been upsetting people and abusing his power, plain and simple, and we're being attacked for protesting that.

Feel free to point out where Mall has abused his power.

And no, submitted a WASC resolution is not an abuse of power.

How come trying to force an RP region to the R/D game not an abuse of power?

[Dragoria]

Feel free to point out where Mall has abused his power.

And no, submitted a WASC resolution is not an abuse of power.

People fear mods and respect them because of this. If it weren't for that, his proposal would not have grown legs.

Fearing something doesn't make you respect it. Look at all the people who don't respect snakes or spiders.

[Hyfling]

Apparently, it's bad that a moderator wants to play the game. And something about flags.

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=303090. It's about the Liberate Haven SC ruling that was submitted.

I see, and the moderators actions in the SC thread resulted in the shitstorm that is currently unfolding?

[Yukonastan]

It was, basically, flamebaiting another user in your flag. Flamebaiting in flags is just as against the rules as it is elsewhere. "RandomNationstan should resign from Gameplay!" in a flag would be flamebaiting. "RandomMentoria should resign from RP mentoring!" in a flag would be flamebaiting. "RandomDebater should resign from posting in NSG!" in a flag would be flamebaiting those, and so on and so forth. On these grounds, appeal denied. The fact it is targeting a mod does not magically make it any more allowable.

Based on this statement, the "blank" IT'S ONLY POLITICS flag should have been okay, and shouldn't have been banned as a result, since it didn't contain any sort of flamebaiting message, and notably didn't have red text with "AN UNSPECIFIED MOD SHOULD RESIGN" plastered on it.

[Mekhet]

Feel free to point out where Mall has abused his power.

And no, submitted a WASC resolution is not an abuse of power.

How come trying to force an RP region to the R/D game not an abuse of power?

Can you please stop threadjacking? This is about flags, not R/D.

[Cata Larga]

And he should- he's been upsetting people and abusing his power, plain and simple, and we're being attacked for protesting that.

Feel free to point out where Mall has abused his power.

And no, submitted a WASC resolution is not an abuse of power.

Mall didn't abuse his power.

Mall did, however, act completely intolerably, and if an actual politician had acted as he did, by, perhaps, saying that the residents of a certain neighborhood should be evicted and the space should be used for something much more "useful", like a single flagpole, you can be certain he or she would lose quite a good portion of his or her constituency.

[Sebtopiaris]

People fear mods and respect them because of this. If it weren't for that, his proposal would not have grown legs.

Fearing something doesn't make you respect it. Look at all the people who don't respect snakes or spiders.

But if a hunungous spider/snake asked you to do its bidding and you knew you were in deep shit if you went against it, you would follow it.

[Reploid Productions]

Guys? The topic? Flag rules and where they could be changed/adjusted/what-have-you? This thing is getting pretty far off the rails and drifting toward a lock with all the off-topic stuff.

[Sebtopiaris]

Also, the proposal itself was awful.

[Yukonastan]

It was, basically, flamebaiting another user in your flag. Flamebaiting in flags is just as against the rules as it is elsewhere. "RandomNationstan should resign from Gameplay!" in a flag would be flamebaiting. "RandomMentoria should resign from RP mentoring!" in a flag would be flamebaiting. "RandomDebater should resign from posting in NSG!" in a flag would be flamebaiting those, and so on and so forth. On these grounds, appeal denied. The fact it is targeting a mod does not magically make it any more allowable.

Based on this statement, the "blank" IT'S ONLY POLITICS flag should have been okay, and shouldn't have been banned as a result, since it didn't contain any sort of flamebaiting message, and notably didn't have red text with "AN UNSPECIFIED MOD SHOULD RESIGN" plastered on it.

Retoast to attempt a re-track. I'm aware this is probably on the same page, but this is moving so fast...