Moderator Abuse...again

Anything About Anything...
Locked
Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4168
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Word »

aP|Nelg wrote:
Word wrote:I'm sorry chrisd, you missed out on the part where he threatened to hack arma forums.
Never happened. Post the proof.
Nelg, you can be sure that when I say something like that, it usually isn't intentionally deceitful. Perhaps you can find that yourself next time, and then post. :roll: http://forums3.armagetronad.net/viewtop ... es#p291874
Note that Durf later indirectly confirmed all this when he said that he doesn't understand what's so bad about his behaviour there.

User avatar
ConVicT
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 1004
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:33 am

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by ConVicT »

I'd say he was implying "who do you think you are", and saying that he's not some little numpty you can push around.

What could he do with that anyway; start editing posts for a laugh, like Lucifer?
It would serve no purpose for him to take control of these forums, unless "just to piss off" mods! Eh?

User avatar
Ratchet
Match Winner
Posts: 780
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:55 am
Contact:

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Ratchet »

aP|Nelg wrote:
Word wrote:I'm sorry chrisd, you missed out on the part where he threatened to hack arma forums.
Never happened. Post the proof.
"Pop"

That was your head coming out of your ass.
Durf wrote:Don't make an enemy you can't handle; don't abuse your powers, and make sure Lucifer doesn't either.
That is a demand. Comply or force will be used to deal with you incompetent moderators the next time I'm abused.
You failed to appreciate the choices I've made this time around, and you failed to be even a half decent moderator.
If you want to test my capabilities then go for it.
Here's a preview:
Judging by your overall incompetence and the rate of development being done, chances are you haven't updated phpBB in a while. Which means (most likely) there are vulnerabilities that allow me to gain control of the founding administrator accounts (ID: 0 - probably Tank's account). Even if this exploit has been fixed, there's plenty more at my disposal that grant me just as much.
Durf wrote:What the threat should mean to you:
You took advantage of my kindness (by asserting your fake authority to avoid me trying to follow proper procedure by disputing), and you won't be able to do it a second time.
"Pop"

That's you shoving it back up there.
Image
"Dream as if you'll live forever,
Live as if you'll die today." -James Dean

Amaso
Core Dumper
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 1:34 am

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Amaso »

Durf is hacking you all now

Durf
Match Winner
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:35 pm

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Durf »

Responses to posts made on Page 5:
Venijn wrote:I didn't mention Zman. He posted what you wrote. I'm capable of having my own opinion (does that shock you?) I believe it is a threat, and you can dress it up as you like, clearly it is.

I won't reply anymore, because you interpret things in a skewed manner to fit your response. My analogy implies I felt you had wronged me.
Never said you did. I was pointing out in a manner similar to what you did, that just because Z-Man thought it was an excuse, doesn't make it one. Just like how it's not just because I think it isn't that makes it not one. That's where evidence and proof have precedence over anyone's opinion.
You analogy didn't even serve to imply that you felt I had wronged you. If you had a gun and suggested that you might use it on me, that in itself can be interpreted as a threat - but I'm not dumb enough so as to not ask why. And even so, it's more like saying that you have a loaded gun, and should you be forced to defend yourself, that is an option available for you to do so with. No matter the context, that is not a threat you can take to court. This is specifically why Z-Man is just being unreasonable; this is why you have just bought into his propaganda, and why I even bothered to show the relation of Z-Man's opinion in wording you should have recognised. Perhaps you don't see this as a discussion to realize, but I'm here to talk about things; this isn't a thread for you to point fingers and blame without reason to; that's just harassment.
_____________________________________

Word wrote:I admire Venom for his talent to nail jelly to a wall in just a few sentences. I hope more people notice what Venom asked and what Durf replied. "If a threat directly threatens your existence, do you consider that a threat?" - "No, what if I'm a zombie afterwards", says Durf. He just can't wrap his head around the idea that he's wrong.
^ Word, stop trying so hard. You don't even know how to use that idiom (as you are making contradictory arguments). Regardless, I know what you meant and in the end, he is nailing jelly to a wall because he fails to actually have a point. Much like you.
The zombie thing might have been a poor choice for people like you to understand. Put simply, it meant that you (with the gun) should actually feel threatened and justified in using it when there is actually a threat that is threatening you; meaning if I'm just some person standing in front of you, and you shoot me because you felt threatened, you go to jail. If I became a zombie and went after your brains or otherwise actually threatened you in some way, then you won't go to jail.
So another example you might understand this time (like I said to Venijn): Saying you own a gun and might use it, can be considered a threat, but isn't necessarily so. Just about every American can say they own a gun and might use it. They can even say they might use it on you! The fact is that that is true; no one knows what the future holds and there could be a very legal reason for them to use it on you. That being said, Z-Man, and you, and Venijn, have made a deliberate choice to be selective with the context. You're purposely perceiving it like I was saying "I own a gun and I might use it on you" unprovoked to Z-Man. I wasn't; it was more like "I own a gun and will exercise self-defense laws if you (abuse) me like last time". The "if" isn't a condition that threatens to cause harm upon meeting it; it signifies how I've been tolerant the first time and gave him a fair chance (the benefit of the doubt that he could be reasoned with before I just un-banned myself, no questions asked).
What I can't seem to wrap my head around is agreeing with someone who can't prove they are right. "If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong"; I'm not about to subject myself to a stupid / ignorant existence. I'm going to get to the bottom of the issue and learn, in detail, the correct solution.

Maybe you should actually try to prove anything you've said, and you might start getting somewhere. Each time I've called you (or anyone else) out of their bullshit, its the same things: either no response at all, or complete and utter bullshit / angry response without any reason or logic.
_____________________________________


@F0RC3: lol! Though, I don't "hate" anyone here. I don't even hate the moderators, despite all the abuse and harassment. Funny song though.
_____________________________________


@desgorn: No bullying whatsoever. It was to signify that I could easily just unban myself, and to show the relation between a "Durf" who actually tries to reason things out with you (in case I'm wrong), with one who doesn't. The irony is how you think this is bullying them at all when Lucifer has publicly called me a woman hating pig, pure evil, and don't even get me started on his Nazi or general racism against Canadians nonsense.. Even if you don't compare the two, my words are nothing threatening to them.
Read my post @Word. I explain the difference between what is a threat and what isn't; how something can appear to be a threat but in the entire context just isn't one.
What do they have to do? First of all, it's not a threat. Second, I made it perfectly clear: Z-Man has shown that I don't have a fair chance at disputing an unjust ban and/or actually getting an apology for it. That being said, they've basically been out to make an enemy this entire time / there's no point in me trying to dispute anything with them. Given all this, why would I even bother when I can just unban myself anyway? This alone should tell you my intentions; I'm not even out to troll this place. So what they would have to do is do what they did before: unjustly ban me (note: that doesn't mean for any bans I merely think are unjust; I am actually reasonable enough to accept punishment when I think I deserve it - but if, like this time, I can't see how I broke the rules, and they can't prove it, then I didn't and it was abusive). There is nothing threatening about it - it's merely a declaration of playing by another set of rules, as per Z-Man's request.
_____________________________________


@Monkey: Read my post @Word. I explain the difference between what is a threat and what isn't; how something can appear to be a threat but in the entire context just isn't one. If you are prepared to actually discuss things and see the entire context, then by all means, I'd love to hear your input. If you're only going to be ignorant yourself, then why should I care? You're only buying into propaganda and negative rumors being spread by Z-Man, only to be distracted from ALL the disputes he's been avoiding for the past few weeks; starting with the whole reason why the PM History thread even exists in the first place.
When I say I am not making threats, it's because I know what a threat is, and I didn't make one. When I refer to "threat" in my PM, it is in a sarcastic way but using a terminology that Z-Man would understand what I'm talking about; should be obvious that I'm not acknowledging it as a threat.
Also, Tell me why I would even care to wait for any action on their part when I have the capability anyway? Think about how logical it is for that to even be a threat. If I was after your passwords, or "hacking" this website, or banning Z-Man, I would have just done it by now, no questions asked. They've abused me and if I was going to make a threat, I wouldn't be so stupid, I'd just do the actions I said I would do. Please...think about this a little more; be open minded to the context of the entire PM chain.
Secondly, you write far more than is necessary. Unfortunately, this is something that is hard for me to "prove"; it should be something that you just "get". Some people do get it, some people don't. Unfortunately you are one of those that doesn't get it.
Well I figured that my illustration about the dartboards would have helped you understand, but apparently you don't. You're seemingly too intolerant to even consider that people just speak differently.
I suppose in theory I could take some of your posts and rewrite them to show you how much more concisely you could write to get all of your points across
I asked for that specifically.
In practice, however, it would take such a long time to do so (because they are so long) and I can't be arsed.
Don't half ass something if you can't fully ass it (lol? That's makes sense I hope). Point is, you complain and complain about the way I write, yet throughout all that, you haven't accomplished anything and would have been better off not wasting the energy. If you're going to try to "fix a problem" such as the way that I write, then do the job properly. If I'm blind to something, how do you expect me to suddenly see it just because you tell me that there's a problem I need to see? You fail to realize that when solving miscommunications, you need to get the faulty party to see what you see - you haven't done a single thing to explain your point of view. You've only ever complained and stated there was a problem...but HOW? And even then - are you sure you're not just intolerant to reading? You obviously understand what I say, so what is the problem you're having? Aren't you being just a little too anal if you're complaining someone saying more than they have to?
_____________________________________


@Nanu Nanu: I never said that I considered threatening these forums to be a petty issue. I will explain that in a bit. First, what I said isn't a threat. Read my post @Word. I explain the difference between what is a threat and what isn't; how something can appear to be a threat but in the entire context just isn't one. If you are prepared to actually discuss things and see the entire context, then by all means, I'd love to hear your input. If you're only going to be ignorant yourself, then why should I care?
Now, back to the "petty issue":
Maybe you're right, just Z-man claiming something to be a threat doesn't necessarily make it one. However, everyone else that reads the specific PMs he posted that you are referring to, can decide for themselves whether or not what you're saying is actually a threat. This is an assumption, but I do believe it's very likely that most of the users feel threatened by what you have said.
The thing is that they can't decide for themselves...that's not the topic of that thread, and there isn't a thread available to post about that in. This means that Z-Man lied to you; was operating under a false pretense. That thread was forced to be there BY Z-MAN because of "slanderous claims". So it is PETTY for him to avoid being proven unreasonable by starting more bullshit drama about a threat that I didn't even make (which only happens to prove how is he even more unreasonable than before). However, like, I've said, why do the opinions of those who won't care enough to question what's been said even matter to me? When they prove themselves to be ignorant, and if they refuse to be anything other than bigoted, what is the purpose in trying to discuss it with you? Where is the motivation?
I assume that some of the users of these forums can be reasoned with, yes? Be reasonable, and we will be able to work things out.
Simply saying it's not an issue as long as the moderators don't abuse you doesn't make what you said okay. I should hope that as users of this forums we all have some mutual idea that this place is useful if not enjoyable to us, and that we would not like to see any harm come to it. You obviously do not have this level of respect for the community if you are willing to threaten it. Now, I expect you to think that you are just targeting Z-man as you specified in the PM history, but messing with the administration of any website is a potential danger for the entire website.
Again, no threat at all has been made. Look up the definition of "threat" and see for a fitting definition; even if you find one, you'll have to look for it in the full context. I, by no means, made any threat or otherwise said that any harm would come to anyone or any website. I don't appreciate you perpetuating a negative rumor (aspersion) that Z-Man started. Furthermore, like I've told other people, I already have the capability to do everything you're afraid of (because Z-Man made you afraid). That alone should tell you my intentions since I haven't done anything to this website. Even so, it should tell you just how full of shit this rumor is - if I wanted to do it, it would be done by now. You think I'm the type of person that would care about waiting around? Clearly, everything rumored about me is simply not true. Don't question the respect I give this community (seemingly undeservingly; all I'm ever met with is intolerance lately; says a lot of you even if I'm just an abrasive individual)

What makes this really petty, proving their incompetence, etc..etc..:
1) There is no actual threat being made; I'm not a threat to this website.
2) Given the above, Z-Man wanted to post that PM solely for the reason of convincing you (the public) that I am a threat.
3) Why? Because after 3 months, they finally think they have something they can use to say "see! I knew that guy deserved that ban that happened 3 months ago... I'm a good moderator".
4) Z-Man forces the PM History to be posted by extortion. TO DISPROVE MY CLAIMS, that he was unreasonable.
5) Z-Man posts this entirely unrelated PM merely to divert attention away from my claims be proven true, and other subsequent cases of moderator abuse being ignored.
6) Given that the PM history was posted by extorting a user, the entire thing was orchestrated by Z-Man merely to start the rumor in the first place.
I never, at any point said that a threat to this website is petty; that is a real serious issue and should such a threat ever arise, you can rest assured that I will offer my services to help (even though I've offered my help many times before and in many different ways, each time, they refuse).

What is petty, is Z-Man's excuse for what he's doing on these forums lately. Honestly think about it, as moderator...wtf is he doing? ...something petty.
You speak of the necessity of Z-man and Lucifer learning from the mistakes they have made, but are you willing to do the same? I understand that this cannot be done unless you accept what you have done as a mistake, but hopefully we can convince you that threatening in general is not appropriate.
I hope you read my post @word, and this post to you, so I don't have to explain it any further why what I said isn't a threat, and how we aren't really at liberty to discuss that in any of these threads while staying on topic. Besides that: I've been saying that they need to admit to and learn from their mistakes. Their mistakes have both been proven and have been recurring (now in public for all to see). The "mistake" you claim I've made is only one, it's a misunderstand that can easily be explained if you are tolerant enough to listen (Z-Man isn't obviously), and even if I did make a mistake, why are you enabling Z-Man to make his mistakes continuously, but force me to answer to mine as though I'm some hypocrite? Did you forget all the issues that Z-Man himself started but was unable to finish? Did you forget that the PM he posted was OFF TOPIC? I'm perfectly willing to discuss my mistakes - in fact, I WANT to discuss them as I WANT to learn from my mistakes. I only ask that you explain it in a way that I can depend upon (proof). I'm not about to listen to someone that has it wrong, so show me how you aren't.
That being said, I'm surprised you haven't been able to see what's been going on / that you just buy into such a rumor. It's offensive to hear that you'd think I'd do something like that in the first place. Honestly wtf is wrong with this community? If I were to claim that you were purple and had wings...would everyone believe me without question? Or does that ability only come from after many years of abusing users?
Seriously though, you make a hilariously ironic point: Z-Man has a heck of a lot to answer for, BEFORE I even need to answer to any "mistake" I've apparently made.
While you may be right that this issue distracts from the issue of your ban appeals, it's very hard to find value or meaning in your claims of doing things for the betterment of the community when you threaten that same community.
^ this is where I would point you to all the times that I've been saying that Z-Man is trying to publicly deface me. WHY DO YOU THINK? YOU JUST SAID WHY. The entire reason why he started the rumor is only to avoid the disputes and proofs being given about his own unreasonable and abusive actions. Which in itself is yet another form of abuse. It's more than just avoiding the problems put before him (you're aware of that already, that's good!), but how he's going about it is all that is left for him to do - a pitiful attempt to discredit any (note, anything he can grab onto) of my words so as to somehow validate his own in juxtaposition. The thing is, I've probably proven through more than a dozen examples now, how Z-Man is unreasonable. That alone is enough to say how he can be abusive as a moderator, but I also have other examples to prove his abuse to you should you want to see them. Even if I were to be proven to be unreasonable this one time (oh noes!) it wouldn't change much of anything regarding Z-Man being unreasonable and abusive. Put simply, if one person is unreasonable and the other isn't; then the one who wasn't also becomes unreasonable, you only have 2 unreasonable people. They haven't switched reasonability. In the end, the entire purpose of avoiding the claims is nullified.

Now either Z-Man will finish what he starts, or continue to try to start more convoluted drama to avoid a resolution that proves him to be unreasonable.
It's not that hard.
Start a thread regarding my threat, and I'd be happy to discuss it there in full.
_____________________________________


@Ratchet: Yea, and I probably will misspell your name in the future on occasion. Is it that much of a problem? If so I will setup a script (autocorrect) to ensure I never get it wrong again. I certainly did not intend for it to mean rachet. But in all seriousness, I'm having trouble determining if you feel that to be a serious issue or not.
Second: Didn't the United States already do that? Exactly that? Also, pointing a devastating missile is only an international threat if it's armed and ready (meaning that it carries a payload, and it capable of being launched with a push of a button). Typically, something of that magnitude is executed by more than one person, and the missiles themselves usually have some way of being inactive until the moment before launch, to ensure no mistakes are made.

So you kind of fail to make your point in more than one way: The choice to arm the missile is taking the responsibility of the actions = introducing the possibility of harm. Pointing such a missile at another country is a threat, which the US did do at one point, and war was technically a possibility. But if the missile was never armed, then there was never a threat, no matter where it was pointed. Even so, you failed to realize that your scenario did occur because of civil rights and the US DID threaten war because of it. You tell me, does your analogy still work if the US was protecting the civil rights of ordinary people? (iirc, nothing ended up happening and the US pulled out because they're not US citizens in the end, not sure of all the details - definitely worth looking into).
But, I never said that it wasn't a threat because "so long as they don't abuse me nothing will happen". This thinking is flawed: Basically you're operating under the assumption that they can and WILL abuse me in the future - you're trying to excuse further abuse with your words. You're not fixing any problems.
I only ever say it's not a threat because I'm not threatening anything (look up what a threat is, I have not given any indication that I would cause harm in any way. That was assumed by Z-Man, and everyone who bought into his crap.)
Should I bother talking about the psychology behind boasting one's ability to do something malicious and then claiming it's not a threat (and that you would never do such a thing)?
It wasn't boasting, rather a fair warning as a result of the little respect I have for Z-Man as a person. I feel he deserves to know just who he decides to make an enemy out of. And I'm not boasting about my abilities. Frankly I don't care about them - Z-Man cares the most about my abilities. I have never gave any indication that I would do anything malicious, so yes, I can claim that it's not a threat.
I don't know exactly what you're trying to start, but you haven't made a single point yet. The psychology behind it is simple: I'm setting expectations for when I no longer play by the rules, because there were never any rules to begin with (as proven by Z-Man). Saying "I'm going to unban myself" isn't a threat in any way.

Now, Ratchet, either you will work towards getting along, or you will be making an effort to make an enemy out of me. Which will it be? Are you tolerant? Are you reasonable? Can we talk about this? Or will you continue with your pattern; there's a difference between making a vigorous/passionate argument, and just attacking someone without good reason. I hope I shouldn't have to ask you as many times as I have asked Word to stop making ridiculous claims about me and actually try working things out before you jump to conclusions.
After all, it was after the entire PM History posted in public before I came to the conclusion that Z-Man was unreasonable, I would hope that your attention span would also surpass a single PM so as to search for truth.
As previously mentioned (and as has been quoted for the umpteenth time): you clearly (no questions asked) stated that you'd take over Tank's account to modify your account as well as, potentially, Z-man's. And you expect Tank to reason with you and consider removing one (or both) of his moderators? Seriously?
Yes. What are you having trouble with about that? If a moderator abuses so consistently, and leaves no options to reason things out, then it's essentially their fault I am left with no other option but to handle things myself in the ways that I can. They specifically started acting up while Tank Program isn't around as well (in case you haven't noticed), like as if that helps their case. The fact remains that I have faith in Tank Program's reasonability, and he should be able to see how even though I have the capability to severely mess things up, I never have, and all I've ever done is try to help / work things out / solve problems. So, yes. I'm dead serious. You just think it's ridiculous because you see what I've said as a threat.
I'd be surprised if Tank even finds you worth his time to respond
^ this almost made me lose all respect for you as a person, and almost got me to stop responding to you entirely. You're despicable. I've been abused by moderators and refused a fair chance at a dispute. EVEN IF I DID SOMETHING WRONG, you're saying that the only person left to give me that fair chance shouldn't? Ratchet...**** you.
And, if he does, believe me: you'll wish he hadn't. I think all you're going to find is that Tank wholly trusts Z-man and Lucifer, and certainly won't send them packing. I could see him trying to reason with you, and MAYBE apologizing on their behalf, but it'd mostly be to get you to 'shut up', so to speak.
Even so, it'd be more than anything the current moderation is capable of. And I will finally have my answers to if this place is a joke, and if the moderators are supposed to be abusive, or if I am to take this place seriously. Regardless of Tank's decision, I will be glad if he does what you describe.

"Proving that you're wrong":
It's not impossible to prove me wrong. If a claim is made, and there is no provided support, why would I believe it? Do you believe everything you read on the internet? Or do you question it? Seriously that shouldn't be hard to understand.
I'm glad you've quoted me those 4 times - it shows that EACH TIME I call someone out on their bullshit, there is no response, or if there is, it's only yet another angry one without any support for their claims. Again, should be easy to understand, if you're right, you should be able to explain it even to an idiot.
This isn't about me being stubborn, but about trolls and abusive moderators (essentially anyone that tries to do something unfounded) simply being too ill-equipped to play their own game. I've questioned myself far more than you have ever questioned me, and I'm not some idiot that types without being sure of what I'm saying (having proof to back it up).
Even your link to supposed prove that I've called someone ignorant simply for disagreeing with me, only serves to prove my point. Did you even read the post? Or did you just search for a post that contained the word "ignorant"? The only part of that post that is CLOSE to disproving what I've said is the part about his ignorance when he used the phrase "self-proclaimed martyr" - and I left out dictionary definitions because they were already posted and people keep on complaining about post length. So either complainers and trolls like you will force me to include EVERY resource required to properly explain my point and you'll just have to get over the post length, or you will have to learn to accept that I don't talk out of my ass like many others here do. Even then, that instance can easily be proven by looking at the definition; calling someone a "self-proclaimed martyr" is ignorant to what a martyr is (someone who is murdered) - it is quite literally impossible for me to proclaim myself as a martyr.
I hope I shouldn't also have to tell you to not try so hard?
_____________________________________________


@Z-Man: You're just trolling at this point. Anyone can draw diagrams, and anyone can easily switch your name for mine. All it shows is that to you, you consider me to be unreasonable. And yet, who's the only one proving they're unreasonable? You are. Those graphs prove nothing, and while it may contain some mediocre creative effort, it has not value in a real discussion, even if it was true. Let alone having relation to this or the other thread. You're both off topic and harassing.
The post was initially edited because it did not fit previously stated conditions. I revised that decision because even though those conditions were not met, I thought the user deserved to be heard. No mention any more of that I changed my mind. I move one pace forward, Durf moves ten back.
And, of course, he attempts to censor by proxy (via reports) whatever he does not want to hear.
I gave him the reasons why I think he was misbehaving. Instead of going "Oh, I see, I won't do that in the future, then" as he claims he naturally would, he dismissed them.
What about your posts that violate your own conditions?
Regardless, your starting more bullshit drama by trying to spread rumors (again) - Z-Man, either step up as moderator and show this community that you aren't continuously starting and and are putting in effort to fix things, or continuously give more and more proof why you shouldn't be a moderator...it's your choice. I do not attempt to censor anything via reports, I report what is against the rules. I am not like you, Z-Man, I am perfectly capable of hearing anything. You can tell me anything, and I won't "react" like you do. Your assumptions are harassing. STOP IT. STOP HARASSING ME.
Work towards fixing things Z-Man. This thread is about moderator abuse, this isn't a place for you to start more rumors about me and continuously harass me.
You say you gave me reasons why you think I was misbehaving, but that's all you think you had to do (which you didn't even really do mind you). You never proved anything you said; given that you were PROVEN to have misunderstood what I've said in the past, and given that you were PROVEN to be unreasonable, YOUR WORDS NEED TO BE QUESTIONED if I'm to remain at all credible; I'm not going to blindly listen to the likes of you - you have to prove yourself.
And, of course, I did not permanently lock the other thread to "get the last word".
Wanna talk about the other Moderator Abuse thread then? Unless you're admitting to having locked that too, only to get the last word in.... If it was just to lock the thread, then that's all you needed to do. Posting claims that suggest I'm sexist or use sexist/misogynistic language is uncalled for if the only reason to lock the thread was because it needed to be locked. So why did you post in it then lock it? You were obviously abusing your status, and didn't want to be proven to be full of shit as usual. You don't even know enough about what sexism is to say that I've used misogynistic language. Unless you prefer the look of an abusive tyrant, you'd take on the look of someone who was mistaken and admit to your mistakes; allow such threads to develop until their end. Finish the bullshit you start.
Durf completely misrepresents what I said and did. The things mentioned above are just the cases where it is reasonably easy to demonstrate.
^ LIes (I'm leaving this at that, to illustrate the value in what has been claimed - no proof was given, no proof is needed)
____________________________________


@/dev/null: Not sure who you're talking to. I seem to have thicker skin than a majority of the pansies here.
I'm not adding words though (yes technically I am, but not for the sake of adding them / not to make my posts longer).
Frankly there are convoluted bullshit topics constantly being brought up and what people have failed to realize is that I have an unlimited patience to deal with ALL of it. I will NEVER be too tired to deal with ALL the bullshit so long as we can finally reach an end to it all. If it takes talking about B and C before was can finish talking about A, so be it. I will talk about B, C, D, E, F, etc... all just so we can finish talking about A. The problem people fail to see is that their attempts to make any of this more convoluted in the hopes that the issues with be forgotten or dropped, well, they're futile.
Like I've said, they're far too ill-equipped to finish what they start. I don't discourage them though. They gotta learn somehow.








(more to come later for pages 6 and 7)

Durf
Match Winner
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:35 pm

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Durf »

Page 6 wasn't so bad:


@Ratchet: You must have me confused with Z-Man. I never dodge any credible argument. I only ever question their "credibility". Z-Man has consistently avoided discussing issues, and has even admitted to it (that being said, I should be able to do the same if I wanted to, without it seeming like such a bad thing to do since Z-Man has done it more than a dozen times by now).
Even so, what credible argument have been made exactly? I have yet to see one.
You fail to see how I'm working towards a resolution, but perhaps my threshold for what is acceptable is much higher than yours. Perhaps you're just too impatient / intolerant of effort, to be able to get down to the bottom of an issue. Regardless, I am here willing to discuss anything you want. No avoiding whatsoever. Will you be willing to discuss all the topics no matter how any of them end?



@Word: I'm still a server admin and content contributor...plus, the credibility of Z-Man wouldn't rise just because mine would go down (which is hasn't at all actually, for years it hasn't and it's not about to because I'm not making such ridiculous claims that I can't backup - I know what I'm saying before I say it). Besides your chart being flawed..it is also the same form of trolling (apparently defined as acceptable by Z-Man) as these graphs don't actually prove anything and only serve to besmirch me. This is the kind of aspersions that I've been asking you for weeks now to stop. STOP IT WORD. STOP HARASSING ME.
I shouldn't have to ask again. Given that Lucifer and Z-Man aren't doing anything about it, I will be forced to take it up with Tank, and I will make sure he sees every example of your harassment. Might as well stop now while the lists of offenses is minimal (even that's putting it lightly).



@Amaso: Lucifer and the Anti-christ...well it's starting to make sense I guess.



@Light & ConVicT: LMAO. Pretty sad though when you have to force someone to be right about something. Still humorous though (assuming you're sarcastic).



@chrisd: Thanks! Glad someone is capable of showing appreciation. Though I don't think that should excuse me from anything wrong I've done - but I'm not about to agree to punishment I don't deserve either. Anyway, there's a lot more I will create :D



@compguygene: I am a little disappointed to read your post. You seem to have blatantly bought into Z-Man's propaganda. First of all, in my other post, @Word, I explain how it isn't a threat, and why it can't be discussed in either thread. Sufficed to say it's not a threat, and I'm perfectly willing to discuss if it you are. If you aren't, you prove that you don't care about what actually happened or what I have to say; you prove to be a bigot. Now I don't think you are, but I think you made a natural (social) mistake of actually thinking what Z-Man is saying is true, WITHOUT QUESTIONING IT. I've been saying that he's been trying to publicly deface me, and this is how he's doing it. I can even prove it, but neither of these threads would allow for it to be "on topic". Start the thread and I will discuss it with you fully. For now, this shows that Z-Man went out of his way to 1) avoid the actual topic of discussing whether or not he was a reasonable moderator - if it was just about showing the public what they need to see, he would have started a new thread, not mislead you like that with his lies. 2) he went out of his way to start MORE drama in public (after people have expressed their distaste for public drama) showing that he doesn't care about you or me, he cares about his feelings and some kind of social status than solving any problems. 3) He never cared to discuss the matter with me at all - he made an assumption and acted on it. Like I said, I'm perfectly willing to discuss the matter - the ones who aren't (bigots) prove themselves with their actions (rather inaction / refusing to discuss the matter fully).
Second, you say that they have had to tolerate abuse...what abuse have they had to tolerate? And would you like for me to post even more examples of their abuse? Frankly I figured we could stay on topic and work through this one (on topic) example of abuse, and be able to move on and grow as a community no matter the outcome of the topic, but they seem to only want to create more convoluted bullshit (seemingly) as a means to avoid actual progression (perhaps out of fear that the outcome is one that is disagrees with their intent to be abusive without repercussions). If you would like to make this into a counting game, I've already won and can win 3 times over with the examples at my disposal. I'm perfectly willing to discuss all of them and willing to accept if they are not abuse; so why is it that they can't just stay on one topic / finish what they start? What I've said is not a threat, and I'm willing to discuss that. Are you?
I don't understand why Durf or anyone thinks that they need the dev's permission to contribute to the game. Create your own branch on Launchpad or anywhere, improve things. If you want your changes to be included in the main game code, ask for a review of your code and ideas, and do it on Launchpad. It is an Open Source game, so yes, you can do what you want. There is a long history of the devs incorporating other peoples code and/or ideas. Sometimes to try to keep the code from turning into a worse mess than it is, stuff just can't be hacked into the mainline code to prevent future bugs.
I asked "how" not "may I". And I asked because they can also provide some guidance into the convoluted mess that is the source code. Besides that, the devs have said (or implied? in some thread or another) that they wouldn't like someone to just create another branch or fork the project. But that's essentially what it comes down to (after the discussion I've had since I asked). Having a branch wouldn't be ideal as my intentions were to do some major cleanup and updating (bring it out of the 90s); which may require recreating it from the ground up even. The type of restrictions I was referring to are the same type that probably haven't gotten this game some real progression in a long time (by real progression, I mean this game should have been finished by now. 1.0). Anyway, had nothing to do with permission; specifically, Z-Man didn't want me to fork the project. But given that they don't want my help and seem to only want to antagonize, it seems that I'm forced with that option in the end. Though you can rest assured that that won't happen too soon; I still have plans for Armagetron.

More on-topic: Z-Man is being abusive by pursuing and pressuring the community to believe in a silly rumor, instead of being a good moderator.



@Lucifer & Ratchet: That was 1) clearly from a website that isn't credible, and 2) clearly not written by someone who understand a thing about it and has written correct answers out of context. The overall effect is probably worse than if you didn't read it, simply because now you think you know but if you believe that, then you'd only be wrong. Plus, "autism" is too ambiguous to even write about in an article like that.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum for some REAL reading.
But since you're lazy:
Image
"Autism" (like used in that article) is just an umbrella term to refer to any of the conditions on the autistic spectrum...in other words: Allistic
Did you know that Einstein had Asperger's Syndrome?
Or perhaps this will make you feel better. (Funny thing is I basically did that in fallout 3 and pwnt it).
The one thing you could actually do, if you wanted to learn about it, is ask. The one thing you can do wrong is come to the conclusion that you understand because in truth you will never truly understand (it's kinda like...you don't know what it's like to ride a bike until you do - you can't "know" it without experiencing it first hand, no matter what people tell you about it - even then, the only people that can tell you about it are the most misunderstood people on the planet, so you need to be a good listener).

The article though, while it does have some truth to it, I wouldn't recommend that at all, to anyone, ever. I kindly ask that you not perpetuate any negative stereotypes, as the entire subject is off topic anyway.





@Nanu Nanu (from page 5):
7) Publicly posting about an "exploit" that someone could make use of is the sign of incompetence I was talking about. Perhaps it's his inexperience, but the thing is, I warned him before he posted it in public so he didn't care (he was being emotional; petty; incompetent to do his job). To give you perspective: someone of my capability only needs to see a mention of "exploit" to go running off looking for it. There may be others here with my capabilities, and they don't need to wait for any conditions to be met to make use of the exploit. Even a GUEST (someone just passing through) can try to make use of the exploit. So the act of posting a potential major security issue in public, all for a petty reason, is what makes Z-Man utterly incompetent. As I said, perhaps it's his inexperience...but the thing is, he isn't showing any growth / improvement.
If you read some of my posts, you'll see that that was my motivation the whole time. I was never hiding what I said. I stand by my words. I was actually showing more concern for this website's security than Z-Man was.





I be derpin' over to page 7 now...

Durf
Match Winner
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:35 pm

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Durf »

All caught up:


@Nelg: You can't reason with that which cannot be reasoned with.



@Word: Stating that a vulnerability exists is by no means a threat. Stating that I have the capability to use it is by no means a threat. Stating that I will use such measure to ensure I won't be abused by the moderators is by no means a threat. Regardless of any of that, your next argument fails anyway because I've never said I didn't understand. I understand perfectly well why you think it's a threat - why Z-Man wants to believe that I've made a threat, and why the both of you want to grasp at straws. The fact remains that your behavior is irrational and ignorant/bigoted if you don't even question the validity of the claim / hear an explanation. You're only proving the type of continuous abuse I get from Z-Man that is just uncalled for. I mean seriously, when can he learn to just let it be / finish what he starts - I don't need to be moderated (out of everyone here, seriously.. >_>).



@ConVicT: You make an excellent point. Though I only ever intended to use that to unban myself.
Unlike some people around here, I know that having true power is knowing when not to use it.
I did give implications that I would ban Z-Man / Lucifer; but only as a means to put an end to further abuse from them (everyone knows I was unjustly banned...we all know it was abuse - that's what I mean). I have since realized that I could just remove their permissions so they still have access. No one needs to be banned to solve that problem.
Again though, you make me wonder...I mean, the moderators like to be trolled right? Perhaps something should be done for "shits and giggles".



@Ratchet: As I've mentioned somewhere before, not sure to who, when I used the word "threat" it was in a sarcastic kind of terminology basically patronizing Z-Man (it is a threat to his pride and ego - but no actual damage is being proposed - nothing of a threatening nature in itself, only his mind's reaction to a concept he disagrees with). It wasn't meant to acknowledge his claim and I perhaps should have written it as "threat" (with quotes).

Regardless, I'm basically repeating myself from other threads when I say that I made no threat, and this thread isn't the place to discuss that topic.
You're only perpetuating rumors without the full context or even trying to reason through an explanation. You prove your bigotry by your intense desire to actually prove something against me (guess what you can't - there's a reason why Z-Man hasn't banned me and it's not out of fear of being hacked, it's because he knows very well that it would be abusive since HE KNOWS it's not a threat. It is only petty bullshit drama from Z-Man as a means of avoiding other disputes as he usually does).

Either you're willing to discuss it or you aren't. Which is it? Are you reasonable or aren't you?
Or is your head too far up your own ass to tell? (don't start what you can't finish)
Seriously though, start a new thread for that topic and by all means, let's discuss it. If it is proven to be a threat, (even though it was never my intention to make one) we can then discuss which rule that even violates. By all means, I'm perfectly willing to accept and learn from my mistakes...are you? Is Z-man? We know Lucifer isn't so there's little point in asking.

Don't just call me out, follow through. Finish what you start.



@Amaso: LOL! An obvious attempt at trying to create some form of chaos (no matter how small). Kinda funny when you think about how ineffective it was. You're turning out to be a real Z-Man (no offense - I know you take pride in trolling and was complimenting ... that, I guess)
Seeing things from my point of view, and how this is recently after Z-Man started a rumor to scare the public into hating on me, well...it was kinda funny.
But I don't think you made anyone want to take this seriously by doing that.
Ultimately your post served no purpose for any on (of off) topic being discussed.



.
..
....
........
................
................................
................................................................
I should hope that everyone can stay on topic or learn how to create a new thread for a new topic?
This is to discuss moderator abuse. There's many different instances we can discuss, take your pick..
Shall I post more examples of their abuse? (examples that are in PMs they hide from)

Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4168
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Word »

Two more posts like that and someone can complete the bingo sheet based on the other thread.
You fail to realize that when solving miscommunications, you need to get the faulty party to see what you see
:roll:
Last edited by Word on Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Venijn
Round Winner
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Venijn »

Durf wrote:Responses to posts made on Page 5:
Venijn wrote:I didn't mention Zman. He posted what you wrote. I'm capable of having my own opinion (does that shock you?) I believe it is a threat, and you can dress it up as you like, clearly it is.

I won't reply anymore, because you interpret things in a skewed manner to fit your response. My analogy implies I felt you had wronged me.
Never said you did. I was pointing out in a manner similar to what you did, that just because Z-Man thought it was an excuse, doesn't make it one. Just like how it's not just because I think it isn't that makes it not one. That's where evidence and proof have precedence over anyone's opinion.
You analogy didn't even serve to imply that you felt I had wronged you. If you had a gun and suggested that you might use it on me, that in itself can be interpreted as a threat - but I'm not dumb enough so as to not ask why. And even so, it's more like saying that you have a loaded gun, and should you be forced to defend yourself, that is an option available for you to do so with. No matter the context, that is not a threat you can take to court. This is specifically why Z-Man is just being unreasonable; this is why you have just bought into his propaganda, and why I even bothered to show the relation of Z-Man's opinion in wording you should have recognised. Perhaps you don't see this as a discussion to realize, but I'm here to talk about things; this isn't a thread for you to point fingers and blame without reason to; that's just harassment.
Everyone is bored of your filibustering tactic. I said I wouldn't respond, but you're horribly disrespectful to people without realising it. You call it propaganda, I call it reading what you wrote. You imply I am a sheep when I posted something stating my own opinion. Try telling me I wasn't insulted by your response.

It's not really harassment to call you out on what you have said. You can write a three page reply, but it is still a threat, regardless of your inevitably long response.

Okay, I'll tell you what... so most of the forum by some distance see it as a threat, and very few do. Answer me this would you, 1) what were you intending to imply you would do exactly? 2) Please elaborate on what you would have done, and 3) exactly which parts of your texts you would have carried out had you continue to feel disrespected.

We have our proof, where's yours? There's no proof, even without context, that this isn't a threat. You asked for our proof, I ask for yours.

I feel they are three very reasonable questions.
Click. Image

User avatar
ConVicT
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 1004
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:33 am

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by ConVicT »

Venijn wrote:
Okay, I'll tell you what... so most of the forum by some distance see it as a threat, and very few do. Answer me this would you, 1) what were you intending to imply you would do exactly? 2) Please elaborate on what you would have done
Durf wrote: I only ever intended to use that to unban myself.
Unlike some people around here, I know that having true power is knowing when not to use it.
The answers you're looking for are already there.
For this being a site where you can only either read things, or write things, nobody seems to like reading, or they complain about writing...
Mind boggling :?

Monkey
Match Winner
Posts: 725
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:36 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Monkey »

Durf wrote: I seem to have thicker skin than a majority of the pansies here.
Is this kind of insulting behaviour acceptable Durf?
Durf wrote:You're only buying into propaganda and negative rumors being spread by Z-Man
No I'm not; I have my own opinions. Note that I don't agree with everything that Z-man or Lucifer have said or done. What matters is that hacking the forums for any reason is still hacking the forums, so hacking the forums to "unban" yourself is still hacking the forums...that is a fact.
Durf wrote:are you sure you're not just intolerant to reading?... You obviously understand what I say, so what is the problem you're having?... Aren't you being just a little too anal if you're complaining someone saying more than they have to?
I'm not intolerant to reading in general, just to reading how you write. I would still understand what you were saying if you wrote much less, with no loss of useful information. I'd like to point out that I've managed to survive many years of reading other people's writing with very little problem at all. I've had very few issues with how everyone else on these forums writes, even if I've had problems with what they are writing.
Durf wrote:Point is, you complain and complain about the way I write, yet throughout all that, you haven't accomplished anything and would have been better off not wasting the energy.
You complain and complain about Z-Man and Lucifer, yet throughout all that, you haven't accomplished anything and would have been better off not wasting the energy.

Durf, I know that you're actually a nice guy. However, you're arrogant, patronising, insulting, less intelligent than you think you are and inefficient (certainly when it comes to writing anyway). Also, it should not be my job to "prove" this to you. You are intelligent. Use your brain to fix these issues and your life will be so much better. That is not a threat, it's merely friendly advice. Now feel free to pull me to shreds like I know you're going to attempt to do in your own special way :P
Playing since December 2006

Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4168
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Word »

Come on, let's not have the same discussion over and over. Z-Man has proven everything and Durf confirmed it, even though he denies it's the kind of offense that it is. We shouldn't have descended to that level in the first place, as if there was a serious question whether this kind of behaviour is a threat. He won't understand it.

Durf won't give in and feels in the right (or pretends to) even if about 30-40 people told him here that he isn't and he cites the silent majority that neither reads this nor posts in his defense to say that he has a point, like when he posted some random quotes by historical figures earlier. The only guys defending him now are a few jerks whose opinion really doesn't matter here. Most people who thought Lucifer's ban was wrong have shut up long ago. This is madness, plain and simple.
I'll just list them all.

Non-Durfs in three threads I just skimmed through:
Lucifer, Z-Man, Nanu Nanu, Ratchet, Venom, Goody, Gonzap, Magi, Liz, Phytotron, kyle, Monkey, Light, dev/null (I think), dinobro, Titanoboa, desgorn, Soul, Boxed, Gazelle (?), Word, Orion, tak, CPU, 16, Taz (yes, he used irony), Olive, that syagexxx guy, ppotter, compguy, wap, madmax

Durf is essentially saying what all of these (~30!!!!) people - people who have their own disagreements with one another - think about him is wrong.

and that asdasd troll.

Durf-fans (the ones who can be assumed to have actually read stuff, I'm not counting nelg, overrated or chrisd because they're reasonable and didn't say much here):
Amaso
Convict
Maybe Deep (who's been quiet lately)
Maybe Malachi (who's been quiet lately)
Maldor (did he read about the hacking stuff?)
Oh, and Durf.
Last edited by Word on Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:21 pm, edited 8 times in total.

Amaso
Core Dumper
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 1:34 am

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Amaso »

Durf owning you puny mods. Mods surrender?

User avatar
ConVicT
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 1004
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:33 am

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by ConVicT »

Word wrote: Non-Durfs in three threads I just skimmed through:
Lucifer, Z-Man, Nanu Nanu, Ratchet, Venom, Goody, Gonzap, Magi, Liz, Phytotron, kyle, Monkey, Light, dev/null (I think), dinobro, Titanoboa, desgorn, Soul, Boxed, Gazelle (?), Word, Orion, tak, CPU, 16, Taz (yes, he used irony), Olive, that syagexxx guy, ppotter, compguy, wap, madmax

Durf is essentially saying what all of these (~30!!!!) people - people who have their own disagreements with one another - think about him is wrong.
I'd say only ten of those people are competent of having their own opinion and not just being a sheep.
They will see an opinion of someone they respect and / or look up to, and they pick that side.
I'm sure I've had this argument with you before. Sure I even called you a suck up (or something to that effect).

Let me put it this way: If the argument was reversed, I think you'd still be agreeing with the mods!

About the people that support Durf's argument (I'm one, as you mentioned). There are a lot of people that just can't be bothered, there are also a few that don't want involved, a few that would get involved but you all confuse the shit out of, there are also a few that would get involved but don't want to incase it turns out they picked the wrong side (people that don't know their own mind in my opinion).

That's just knowledge I've gathered from some in-game conversations.

The people who are replying in this seem to also post after each other, you know, the ones that play together?
I suspect they ask the other one to go and reaffirm what they were saying.
Y'all know who I mean there!

Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4168
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Moderator Abuse...again

Post by Word »

Huh? If the mods threaten to hack arma forums? And you're wrong, the only thing that unifies all of these 30 players is that they think Durf should shut up or get banned. Of all the players in that list, there are like two or three I'm sort of affiliated with and five I regularly clash with. I'm sure most of the others feel the same.
"People who just can't bothered" obviously don't make a strong case either. If they don't use the forums that Durf is spamming, why should they have a say?

Locked