My apologies, that was just my opinion. So have you handled it, then? I'm not seeing that post removed for flood ^_^

Wow, that's just immature... Veiled insults, not the way to go ^_^

Welcome! ^_^ You should get a day ban for flood. He explained why his English isn't perfect, so your post was quite pointless and slightly irritating...

Hahahahaha! That... was... funny! That awkward moment when someone thinks you're joking and you're not.

4, I think. Not though, that's owned by jok ^_^

Eid Mubarak guys ^_^

May I guess whether you are a certain flea or not?

Yes, it was a rare example of decent discussion. And it's an on-off thing, so as soon as @Imgoingtowreckyou has time to reply, it'll be fairly active again. Should be more debates in the forum, but clearly we're all too restricted at the moment. At least there have been more controversial, topical discussions recently.

See you, and good luck.

Context or intention does not decide whether something is insulting - it's the words themselves. You can't swear at someone and then explain that it doesn't deserve a ban because the intention wasn't bad...

^I actually have, unfortunately. The-Player, I agree with you 100%, and even read le block of text rather than skipping to the end first :P

Yep, I have four - the fourth is actually “GoIdRock4“ with an i, as someone predicted I'd have to make it and took that account name :lol:

Once? Wow, you're lucky.

To be honest, we'd like to see some actual change, though I appreciate what you have said here. It's easy to blame the lack of discussion on the forum on trolls, and fair enough, the mods have mistakenly locked topics, but there is clearly a larger issue with the system itself - the forum wasn't always like this. 'Voting on best assistants' would merely be a superficial (though interesting) addition, that is of course 'if we are mature enough'; to me, that statement sounds patronising and seems to suggest that we'll only be given privileges if we use them the way you want us to... We're not little kids, you know... And, as always, I don't see how discussing of the moderation is immature if it is done with respect and politeness. Maybe it's time to consider how unpopular this rule is, and give the community a chance to publicly express their thoughts on those who manage them. If this happens, I for one will be completely satisfied, and I am sure many of us want to show you, the administration, that we would be prepared to act maturely if allowed to discuss your roles. To me, the mod discussion rule is what is strangling this community at the moment. There needs to be more transparency. As an alternative, I would like to resuggest having a group of players who unbiasedly observe the mods and their Skype chat, ie as official regulators who can deal with players' complaints fairly. I know you think this is not needed, Semyon, but hold a poll and see; most players would love to see an unbiased and self-critical regulation system, and in the end, it is the players' views that count. How about you keep the mod discussion rule, and set up a regulatory board of players, partly elected by the players themselves and partly decided by you?

*ahem* Yes or no? If no, why not? ^_^

Unless another reporter decides to write it, I meant.

:o Sheesh, he's just giving some feedback of his experience of that section... Though I agree with you (and so disagree with the OP), a more appropriate and professional response would surely be "Thanks for the feedback, you may have a point; we can look into it with the mods who post in that section, and review how we can simplify our solutions. However, before we do so, could you possibly provide any examples of this? Thanks once again, we appreciate that improvements can be made"? I am sure that all players opinions should be valued, in any case ^_^ Of course, I am prepared to PM you so we can discuss this further, FBI, as I do not wish to purposely break any rules here.

Skit wasn't referring to anyone in particular... and so the question that should be posed is why mods were "inevitably downvoted"... Of course, you can put some of that down to trolls (and maybe ban such trolls from using the feature), but if it were reintroduced for mods, it would be turning a blind eye to assume that all downvotes mods would get would be the work of trolls. It seems you're suggesting that anyone who disagreed with a mod by downvoting their post(s) was a troll - instead, you could ignore the downvotes made by known troll accounts, and then try to use this feature to examine legitimate down/upvotes and so see why players disagree, and what needs changing, as skit phrased it ^_^

I catch it, and start reading :lol: I drop a banana.

An entrepreneur.

You're welcome, but there won't be one AFAIK ^_^

Community being ready = community only upvoting mods' posts if the feature is returned. I'm sure that if this upvotes/downvotes for mods come back, and mods get a lot of downvotes, the feature will be removed again.

His font size is allowed by the rules, it isn't too big. The point of this topic is to discuss the issue raised - this is Off-Topic Discussion, right? My answer to the questions raised would be yes. Any one person has the ability to change the world if they set their mind to it, for better or for worse.

Yes, I had... but I deleted it upon being fired. There's no reason for me to re-write it, since this isn't my contest anymore ^_^ Impostor, I would never put a full stop before a smiley... It's either one or the other with me :P

Erm... I don't see how that will work, since you won't be able to compare whether the entries would be better than my own ending (since I never finished the series off), but good luck with that.