Darth Wong wrote:RSA decided that he would nullify debate on his biggest points of vulnerability by simply declaring them to be "board policy". After the shit he pulled here, this was hypocrisy of the highest order, and we called him on it. Boo hoo.
As a matter of fact, there was an entire section open for you to argue about that in detail. You should be aware, you posted there.
Missing the point again, I see. The problem was not traffic; the problem was the fact that he wanted a discord-free discussion of a subject which invariably produces discord: something he of all people would know all too well.
Actually, dealing with several points at once. I firmly believe a
civil discussion of any matter so trivial as this one is quite possible.
Wow, so a high posting volume proves that NationStates is not anal-retentive?
There are plenty of huge boards on the Internet; their size does not vindicate their policies.
Again, I'm addressing several points here. NationStates.net is host to what may well be the widest political diversity of any website on Earth. I could be wrong, but we probably come close. I recommend familiarizing yourself with our policies before talking about them.
Rules set by someone who made no effort to observe such decorum when he himself posted elsewhere on the Internet. Excuse me while I get a tissue for him to cry in.
Here, let me pass you one of mine.
If we had really gone in there en masse with the sole intent of trolling, you would know it. Almost all of the posts we made were on-topic; we just treated him the way he treated us.
I have no way of knowing what posters were and were not SD.netters with certainty, with a few exceptions, but a great deal of off topic posting occurred. "US Marines Vs. Redshirts" ? Two topics? Please. B5 comparisons? And anal sex has what to do with SW vs ST?
I condoned people from here going there, but did not call for it. That is not a "hostile invasion"; if we had decided to initiate a hostile invasion (of the sort that we have suffered on numerous occasions), it would have been pretty damned obvious.
It looked pretty obviously hostile to me, and it also looked (fairly obviously) like an invasion. Ergo, hostile invasion. I'm also aware of how much impact a site admin condoning but not explicitly calling for something can have on eager forum members.
Board policy here is not anal-retentive, and most importantly, I do not hypocritically run around on the Internet breaking all manner of rules which I expect people to follow on my own board.
I assume you're sniping at Darkstar here rather than really talking about the issue at hand. Perhaps I should start making redundant topics, but that would be silly of me. I don't really have anything I need to say here.
PS. If you prefer anal-retentive moderating policies, you are free to get the fuck out and take your whiny holier-than-thou bullshit with you. So far you have provided not a single example of genuine misdeeds, and have contented yourself with wide-cast generalizations and sanctimonious declarations of moral outrage because we treated Darkstar the same way he treats others and laughed when he demonstrated his hypocrisy by treating it as a crime. Excuse us while we don't give a shit.
I have currently given examples. There are, incidentally, a surprising amount more I could run through, considering how few posts the board had when it was locked. You are free, of course, to ban me from this site if you like, for the crime of being holier than thou. However, please do
not sacrifice goats to me, however holy you may consider me. I don't approve of animal sacrifice, thank you very much.
