tain.totalcodex.net

This is how Project Magma handles people that disagree with them. Thinly veiled threats.

I'm not part of Project Magma. I'm someone who knows your track record from the past and what you're trying to do now.

I was not threatening you. I was warning you. I knew if you were to continue an admin would take action. I suspect you knew this as well and want something to happen.

It is rather nice to be able to ban people who disagree with you, isn't it?

Disagree =/= Start trouble.

This was talked about beforehand. It was decided that Killery's reviews did not add anything. He didn't play the maps, which is enough for me to consider them null and void. He gave no analysis on why most of the maps he rated were lowly rating other than "not a very good map".

I can understand being annoyed that reviews are being removed, but defending false reviews kinda undermines the whole system. If reviews are there to be abused, why have them at all? 'Specially in a community this small. For example: if one person writes a review after playing the map, giving it 5/5, and having the review go into detail about the good and bad points on a map, then someone comes along and writes "lol didn't play, sucks" and gives it a 1/5, it will reduce the overall score by a lot. Somehow that doesn't seem fair to the author of the plugin, or the people looking for cool new plugins to play.

If there is a legitimate concern here, I am sure that it will be considered, however, when confronted, you just quoted people being annoyed at you, and no real reasonable response.

I'm Jon God, and I approve this message.

Jon God wrote:Disagree =/= Start trouble.

This was talked about beforehand. It was decided that Killery's reviews did not add anything. He didn't play the maps, which is enough for me to consider them null and void. He gave no analysis on why most of the maps he rated were lowly rating other than "not a very good map".

I can understand being annoyed that reviews are being removed, but defending false reviews kinda undermines the whole system. If reviews are there to be abused, why have them at all? 'Specially in a community this small. For example: if one person writes a review after playing the map, giving it 5/5, and having the review go into detail about the good and bad points on a map, then someone comes along and writes "lol didn't play, sucks" and gives it a 1/5, it will reduce the overall score by a lot. Somehow that doesn't seem fair to the author of the plugin, or the people looking for cool new plugins to play.

If there is a legitimate concern here, I am sure that it will be considered, however, when confronted, you just quoted people being annoyed at you, and no real reasonable response.

I'm Jon God, and I approve this message.

Killery saved me a LOT of time, as I could trust his ratings to tell me if a map was ugly or not. I personally found Killery's reviews helpful, and he is being singled out, as there are numerous reviews with nothing in them, or very little. Your very reason for deleting Killery's reviews was that he just looked at the cmap. Well you ignored Ducky's review of majestic falls, which does JUST THAT. He hasn't played the map, all he did was compliment the cmap, then give it 5 stars. This is very selective review deletion.

How is killery supposed to get people to PLAY these obscure netmaps with him considering the state of activity, as well as apathy, of myth?

Jon God wrote:Disagree =/= Start trouble.

If there is a legitimate concern here, I am sure that it will be considered, however, when confronted, you just quoted people being annoyed at you, and no real reasonable response.

I'm Jon God, and I approve this message.

Pyro wrote:I was not threatening you. I was warning you. I knew if you were to continue an admin would take action..

I was confronted by people threatening me with a ban if I continued to discuss this matter

Zaknafein wrote:I was confronted by people threatening me with a ban if I continued to discuss this matter

I have no idea what lead you to this false conclusion. No one said you would be banned for discussing the matter. You were warned for your trolling reviews. I'm sure you knew that, but you like pretending to be the victim even when everyone else can see you are no victim.

Bottom line is, this isn't a democracy. You don't like how the site is run? Then don't visit it! No one is twisting your arm and forcing you to come here. You're acting like you're somehow entitled to have a say in how this place is handled, and you really aren't. It's like walking into Burger King and demanding that they serve caviar and white wine because you don't like burgers and fries.

This is really stupid, you guys cant really think that monitoring your own reviews is a good idea. So what if you think Killerys views are biased. It makes him look like a bad reviewer nothing more.

You start meddling with the reviews because you dont like them, then your pretty much destroying any credibility you have for criticism as a map-maker. Start Deleting my stuff because you dont like it? Each to their own that is why its called a Review..

I'm just trying to protect the integrity of this website and point out inconsistencies in the review deletion policy. I have never claimed this was a democracy or that I had inherent rights. I like how that is the go-to argument when someone points out flaws in a decision made by mariusnet or magma admins is to say "this isn't a democracy". I am well aware of that, and I also am aware that you can be banned here if someone feels like you are trolling.

Neither have I claimed to be a victim, I'm just pointing out that your "warnings" reveal just how intolerant people are here towards opposing points of view. I wish we could stick to the matter at hand, but when confronted with my observations the subject seems to get changed by one person or another.

Zaknafein wrote:It is rather nice to be able to ban people who disagree with you, isn't it?

This is how Zak gets to survive longer than other people who are just trying to cause trouble, he accuses everyone of persecuting him and being draconian and tries to act like he is leading some kind of player revolt against "the man" as he fights for "integrity" and "fairness". Of course everyone knows Zach has more dummy accounts than he has functioning brain cells and is known for dummying during MWC tournaments, so I am not sure how much he even understands about the concepts he is supposedly "fighting for", or why he thinks anyone should take him seriously. But all the BS phony reasons Zach gives for his behavior aside, from past exchanges here it's pretty clear that Zach has some serious issues with people in authority, or people he thinks are in authority, or probably even people who know how to spell authority.

Zaknafein wrote:I'm just trying to protect the integrity of this website and point out inconsistencies in the review deletion policy.

I doubt that's your motivation, but if you are trying to make the point that any deletion 'policy' should be clearly spelled out and enforced consistently, I would agree. IF Magma is going to be deleting reviews, it should be clearly stated what constitutes a valid (e.g. non-bogus) review, and what constitutes a review that will be deleted. If brevity or no explanation is the criteria than that should be stated. If it' s a rating that doesn't match the text of the review (a one-star map with a review that says "Great Map!" then that should be stated.

Zaknafein wrote:I have never claimed this was a democracy or that I had inherent rights. I like how that is the go-to argument when someone points out flaws in a decision made by mariusnet or magma admins is to say "this isn't a democracy". I am well aware of that, and I also am aware that you can be banned here if someone feels like you are trolling.

You don't claim it is, but you act as if you expect it to be and you use your 'wouldn't it be better if the community made the rules' or you complain about how intolerant and dictatorial magma admins are as your 'go-to argument' whenever someone in authority does something that you don't agree with.

Zaknafein wrote:Neither have I claimed to be a victim, I'm just pointing out that your "warnings" reveal just how intolerant people are here towards opposing points of view. I wish we could stick to the matter at hand, but when confronted with my observations the subject seems to get changed by one person or another.

You don't claim to be a victim but whenever someone lets you know you are getting close to going over the line you act like a hurt puppy and play the martyr card "I am just fighing for truth, justice and the american way against the evil forces of forum authority" (paraphrased).

so if you want other people to stick to the matter at hand, maybe you could try doing it yourself? Lead by example.

vinylrake wrote: so if you want other people to stick to the matter at hand, maybe you could try doing it yourself? Lead by example.

I'll give it a shot, lets start by ignoring your post.

Wow, this thread has gone full retard.

Zaknafein wrote:

Melekor wrote:Zak: You will only be tolerated up to a point, don't push it too far.

I like how you've edited my quote, fundamentally changing what I was saying. Compare the original:

Melekor wrote:Zak: Your mild mannered trolling will only be tolerated up to a point, don't push it too far by adding any more intentionally bogus reviews.

And yes, everyone knows you're trolling. Your exploits are practically a legend in the community. How many times have you been banned from mariusnet? However in the past (on these forums) it's generally been somewhat humorous, and as I said, mild mannered.

But if you are adding bogus reviews for the purposes of trolling me about this topic, that's creating extra work for me, and it won't be tolerated. (BTW, that's a regular threat, not a thinly veiled one.)

Zaknafein wrote:I'm just trying to protect the integrity of this website and point out inconsistencies in the review deletion policy.

There is no deletion policy. This was basically a one-time cleanup of the reviews of a single person who had systematically abused the rating system, rating stuff that he hadn't even played. If you think this constitutes some kind of draconian censorship, you're an idiot.

kingthrall wrote:You start meddling with the reviews because you dont like them, then your pretty much destroying any credibility you have for criticism as a map-maker. Start Deleting my stuff because you dont like it? Each to their own that is why its called a Review..

Re-read the thread. No one is deleting your stuff, no one is deleting reviews because they don't like them.

Works for me, as long as we get to ignore all your off-topic posts.