Member Discussions

Hooray, it finally happened! TMC is now as bad, if not worse, than Mudmagic. And people like Icculus can be ranked down there with Kyndig. They should just skip the foreplay now and officially join forces as one website.

Honestly didn't think I'd see the day that people on TMC get their accounts locked out (without even so much as a warning or an emailed notice about it) just for poking fun at IRE and Mercthevia (not to mention trying to delete all threads containing any criticism).

Hail MudconnectorMagic, and Fuhrer IRE!

P.s. A moment of silence should be observed for the for both the poor Nameless_, and the freedom of speech, who were both cast into the Gulag all too early in their lives.

What are you talking about?

Maybe you should try skipping the childish
rudeness and actually outline what your concern is
in a clear, supported argument.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

Nameless_, I tried emailing you a couple of times and my emails bounced. I would have thought that having your first post removed would have been enough for you to have tried to contact me to ask about it instead of immediately posting it again and even noting in the post that the first was removed ( for apparently ruffling feathers ).

I am sharing your moment of silence Nameless_, your freedom of speech ended with the libelous content in both of your posts ( something our terms of service clearly instructs you not to do ). Please read our terms of service, does it say you have the freedom to post anything you like, or does it contain guidelines for what is acceptable and not?

I also wanted to note that as soon as you created the new Nameless account I immediately sent an email to the new email address you signed up from explaining why your account was suspended and that I would have gladly unsuuspended it - It speaks volumes to me that instead of responding to my email you decided to post here.

-Icculus

A crazy person said:

A moment of silence should be observed for the for both the poor Nameless_, and the freedom of speech, who were both cast into the Gulag all too early in their lives.

At the risk of inflaming things a bit, perhaps you should step back and reexamine your position. Freedom of Speech as outlined in the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution only applies to the government. Not to private individuals or organizations.

Given that, TMC has a policy in place on what it deems is acceptable and what is not. TMC is not the government. Therefore if a policy existed that said you couldn't use the world "BLUE" in a post, there would be nothing you could do about it if Icculus decided to delete the post, ban your account, and firewall your IP from the system.

TMC is very VERY tolerant of what is and isn't allowed, but there are limits and other people have crossed them in the past and been punished accordingly. Banning your account might seem harsh, but if you were in fact posting libelous content that would have been reason enough for most sites to ban you. There's a huge difference between that and banning dozens of people because two of them had a disagreement over a codebase license.

Yes, comparing Icculus to Calvin because your account here was suspended here for posting libelous content is ridiculous. Calvin did ban people, but not because they posted libelous content. Me, Tyche, Samson, and a handful of others were banned for the above mentioned reason (in Samson's post) and for a thread on MudConnect which Calvin didn't like the content of.

(Comment added by Drizzt1216 on Tue Nov 28 10:10:14 2006)

Oh and just to make sure no one reads that wrong, the part about we were banned was banned from MudMagic, not from here.

Eh what? You kids woke me up for this? Libelous?

Egads.

The word is only vaguely defined. I pulled a definition (one of many) from the web that will show you what I mean...

libelous

adj : (used of statements) harmful and often untrue; tending to discredit or malign

By way of a forensic experiment and at the risk of getting myself banned let's examine two test statements.

Test statement A: "IRE engages in unethical business practices."

Definition keyword one, harmful. Is the statement harmful? Go on now explain how it is harmful, should be a hoot. Be specific... draw me a line from someone seeing it to 'harm' being caused.

Definition keyword two, untrue. Is the statement untrue? Again, subject to debate. If pressed I will call several people to the stand to testify including former IRE staffers and hosts. Guess what, you will not 'prove' that the statement is untrue.

Does the test statement tend to discredit or malign? I am not sure that it could. It seems to be the popular opinion already. I don't see a snow white perfect reputation being unfairly sullied here.

The way I see it, this is simply a fact. That it is inconvenient or cticial of a specific entity (IRE) is their fault, not mine. Envelopes of cash from juveniles sort of did it for me.

Ok now the fun one.

Test statement B: "Mudmagic admins are a bunch of asshats."

I know some of you would argue that this one is true as well and therefore not libelous. I am not sure I agree. This is just namecalling. Nothing wrong with it exactly, sometimes if some minimial wit is employed an insult can make a more effective point or even be amusing.

My impression is that it would be reasonable to edit that statement out of a post. It is Iccys forum after all he really can do whatever he wants including account bans.

If you don't like how TMC is run don't complain. Complaining doesn't get you anywhere. Neither does offering what you think of as constructive criticism... If you don't like it just leave.

As to my earlier comment I'll actually take back what I said, Calvin's not nearly as bad when you speak with him after he's colled down after an issue has long since been blown over, I sent him an email, he responded, I responded back, and I'm now unbanned from MudMagic.

What I'd like to see is, these guys get forced to go on an apology tour around every mud site, claiming they don't know what came over them, and then checking into drug rehab. Meanwhile, Icculus sues them for actual money.

It'd be a hoot.



(Since that's probably too deep for some people, I'll just explain. I'm referring to michael richards landing in hot water for using so-called "freedom of speech" to promote the N-word on YouTube. That freedom pretty much just permits you to make a huge ass out of yourself and then get sued.)

Osiris wrote:

Test statement A: "IRE engages in unethical business practices."

If you were to be sued by IRE for making such a statement, it seems likely that if it was tried in the US (I'm not a lawyer and I haven't consulted a lawyer about this specific case) that the result would be either:
a. It would be judged to be an opinion, and thus not defamatory (the most likely outcome in my opinion as "unethical" is very subjective)
b. You'd have to prove this is true by finding examples where something IRE did violated some standard of ethics within the games industry. This would be essentially impossible, as there's nothing we've ever done, to my knowledge, that violates any sort of ethical guidelines within the games industry.

Of course, it depends on where you were sued as well. The US makes it fairly hard to sue for defamation compared to most of the rest of the world. In some countries, merely insulting the honor of officials is actionable defamation, and even flat-out truth isn't a defense.

In the case of calling MudMagic asshats, no analysis is needed. It's clearly an opinion and thus not falsifiable.

Of course, in this situation, the poster whose post was removed made specific, entirely false accusations against both Mudconnector and IRE. They weren't opinions. He alleged certain facts that were completely made up. Andrew decided it was defamatory and thus removed the post. Quite reasonable.

--matt

Test statement A: "IRE engages in unethical business practices."

Test statement B: "Matt's butt sucks canal water"

Simply put, you're full of it, Icculus. I've never had any issues at all receiving email from anyone to the email address I've been using. That your emails would mysteriously bounce AFTER I've already received emails from you to that account in the past is completely absurd.

Secondly, as to checking emails on the second account, that's a flawed thing at best. This one is simply a temporary account, with a temporary email address. I wouldn't bother with checking it. That you would expect me to is also absurd.

Thirdly, my post before as containing "libilous" content is a load of bunk. My post, which was simply an innocent attempt to find a new mud to play which outlined various things I was and was not looking for, simply contained a mention that the suggested muds should not have anything to do with IRE or Medeivia, because I feel both they and you are corrupt for taking money to get advantages over other games; both a valid and well-known fact. The point of view that it is corrupt is subject to each person's point of view, but my right to assert that it is, is mine alone and not subject to the restrictions in your policies and terms of services and conduct. Unless you want to now tell me I'm not allowed to express opinions; especially those which speak ill of your underhanded dealings.

In which case I still find your actions no better than the antics of Kyndig.

You know, nameless, everything you say seems to
reinforce my perception that whatever your beef
is, it isn't what you think it is.

You're not expressing yourself adequately. Your
statements indicate you are sloppy in your
reasoning and careless in your etiquette. Just
based on the flustered whining you're doing, you lose.

The invocation of Kyndig reminds me of Godwin's
law. And that's how you *started*.

There are plenty of people here who have expressed
disagreement with Icculus. If your point is that
disagreement is not permitted, the burden of proof
is on you, since I haven't seen that.

On the other hand, if you are trying to prove that
childish behavior is not tolerated, then you're
well on your way to making a rock solid case.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

In the world of adults, exchanging advertising for money is done by literally virtually every business in existence. It is not bribery. It is a service exchanged for money. I'm sorry if that's "bribery" in your little fantasy world, but we're not in your imaginary place here.

In this same real world that I mentioned, Black's Law Dictionary defines bribery as offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting anything that has value in order to influence or change the actions of a public official or other person with a public or legal duty.

Given that Mudconnector is a private commercial business with no public or legal duty, perhaps you can explain to us all how paying for advertising is actually bribery, and why every single advertising opportunity in existence is not also bribery (after all, when the NY Times puts an ad for Mercedes in its paper, it is, in your idiotic logic, "giving an unfair advantage" to Mercedes vs. the other car companies.)

--matt

Simply put, you're full of it, Icculus. I've never had any issues at all receiving email

Nameless, would you allow me to post here the bounced mail I received from your mail server, it contains the email address I attempted to mail which is why I am asking your permission rather than just posting it. If you are sure I am full of it, as you suggest, please give me the ok to post it.

Secondly, as to checking emails on the second account, that's a flawed thing at best. This one is simply a temporary account, with a temporary email address. I wouldn't bother with checking it. That you would expect me to is also absurd.

Is it a flawed thing Nameless? Thats odd, as your password was auto-emailed to that address about 5 mins before I emailed you (when you signed up for Nameless2), or did you just choose to ignore my mail or lie about its receipt? I expected you to check it since otherwise you would not have a password to access this account, which you obviously do. Who exactly is full of it?

The last time I checked I do not recall ever accepting a bribe from IRE, Medievia or anyone else, in fact I can't recall a time I have been offered a bribe, but I am flattered to think that I should be deserving of one. Your post was libelous, that you are unable to reason this no longer surprises me.

-Icculus

Iccy, I'll bribe you!! I'll give you, uhmm... 2 BestBuy (tm) Bucks if you can make the Jacksonville Jaguars (tm) win the Superbowl!

--Robbert, who is always busy

Nameless, would you allow me to post here the bounced mail I received from your mail server, it contains the email address I attempted to mail which is why I am asking your permission rather than just posting it. If you are sure I am full of it, as you suggest, please give me the ok to post it.

I don't need to give you permission to post it to be sure that you are full of it, I already have the email I've received from you in the past to know of that for sure. And how could you be so completely dense to think I'd ever consent to that kind of thing? If I wanted my email address known, I would have selected so in my profile when I first made it.

Is it a flawed thing Nameless? Thats odd, as your password was auto-emailed to that address about 5 mins before I emailed you (when you signed up for Nameless2), or did you just choose to ignore my mail or lie about its receipt? I expected you to check it since otherwise you would not have a password to access this account, which you obviously do. Who exactly is full of it?

You obviously expect and think rather on the side of wrong. Once I had the information from the automatic email sent, what in your mind would make you think I would expect to receive further email on that account, and not just close it out after getting my password? Who the hell is going to sit there for five minutes and wait for an email they have no idea is coming?

And as far as your bribe comment goes, you make it sound as though I intone you're somehow doing something illegal (this goes for your comments too, Cratylus, as well as Sarapis). I know what you're doing is perfectly legal, and never once did I say otherwise. However, that doesn't mean it's any less corrupt in my eyes. Considering the way TMC is now, compared to how it used to be, I'd definitely say that things have taken a corruptive turn for the worse.

BUT, the absolute icing on the cake of all of this is the following point:

Instead of handling this situation intelligently, you chose to do it the way Kyndig does; which is delete posts and ban members. What you should have done, which would be the smart thing to do, is to edit out the part you didn't like, then follow up the thread with a post to it something to the effect of a warning that you could count on, 100%, as being received, instead of the still as of yet non-existant email you pretend to have sent.

Why do it the intelligent way, you ask?

A) The post would still be there, so that:
B) I could still receive suggestions for mu*'s to play, and
C) The situation wouldn't have come to what it is now, and I wouldn't have needed to be locked out/banned/deleted/pissed off/etc.

Whether or not what I said was libelous I don't even care about at this point anymore. The above issue is what gets me. I still can't believe you're really that dense to completely eff up this thing so badly. I'm supposed to be able to expect more out of you, since you at least try to pretend you're running a forum that's better than Mudmagic, but I don't see how that's really possible.

So what the hell are you going to do now, Icculus? Ban me entirely, or make things right again?

So instead of doing exactly what the ToS says will happen if someone breaks the rules, he should make an exception for you? Right.

"(this goes for your comments too, Cratylus, as well as Sarapis). I know what you're doing is perfectly legal, and never once did I say otherwise."

I'm pretty sure I made no comments the legality
of the situation. You can stop putting words in my
mouth anytime you like.

You appear to be confusing your anger with justification.

I think that a reasonable person would be pretty
turned off, reading your rudeness and bad attitude.
That's a pretty unintelligent way to approach this
conflict. All you're doing is coming off as an insulting
maniac, while Icculus gets to stand back, let you
make a fool of yourself, and then explain his
position with adequate support. He winds up being the
reasonable adult, you wind up being the petulant child.

Is this the resolution you're hoping for? Because
that's pretty much what I'm seeing.

Even if there were some nuggets of truth and/or reason
to your tirades, your credibility suffers from the
way your expressing yourself. You really might as well
just stop posting, if you're just going to keep
digging yourself a hole like this.

As to whether you care about what was or wasn't libel,
and what you really are or aren't mad about now, this
information is important only to you. Including it
provides ample evidence of a childish narcissism that
is obviously clouding your judgment.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

Some crazy dude said:

The point of view that it is corrupt is subject to each person's point of view, but my right to assert that it is, is mine alone and not subject to the restrictions in your policies and terms of services and conduct.

Excuse me. Your *RIGHT*? Since when do you have rights on someone else's forum? You have privileges. Privileges that can be revoked for any reason at any time, without warning. It's pure arrogance to expect that you should not be subject to the policies you agreed to when you signed up. Twice.

Yes. Even Kyndig has this right. He exercised it. Several of us are banned. We disagreed with the reasoning and have each handled it in our own way, but we did not run back to mudmagic and demand things we had no right to demand.

For public relations reasons, banning people is usually not done without a very good reason. This is where the difference lies. Kyndig didn't have a good reason. He's paying the price for his decision in the form of other people leaving the site and going elsewhere. That he is choosing to begin making peace with those who were not directly involved in the incident shows that he may finally be realizing what he's done.

Icculus banned you for a specific violation in the form of libel. The fact that this is private property is reason enough. He could slam the door in my face for posting this if he wants and there would be nothing I could do about it except rant elsewhere. The fact that there is a written ToS with specific terms just gives him more solid ground to stand on. The fact that the content removed was libelous surely didn't help your side. Allowing such content to remain visible could have easily exposed the site to legal action if Matt felt it necessary. I didn't see what was written but I'm going to guess Matt would probably have been justified in being a bit pissed off.

So you should think long and hard about how your actions might have been very damaging to the site and why you got called on it. Again, keep in mind, the 1st amendment does not apply here. Icculus is not a government official suppressing your political speech. He is a private citizen running a private site.

Samson wrote:

The fact that the content removed was libelous surely didn't help your side. Allowing such content to remain visible could have easily exposed the site to legal action if Matt felt it necessary. I didn't see what was written but I'm going to guess Matt would probably have been justified in being a bit pissed off.


Just a correction: That's not really true. Andrew is highly unlikely to suffer legal action by refusing to comply with a takedown request that isn't rooted in intellectual property. (and thus the DMCA). He is pretty much immune from successful prosecution for any sort of defamatory content his users post, and he's under no obligation to remove it, even if a user requests it.

That he took it down just says to me that he cares about taking reasonable user complaints about violations of Mudconnector's Terms of Service seriously.

--matt

That he took it down just says to me that he cares about taking reasonable user complaints about violations of Mudconnector's Terms of Service seriously.

It also shows that you're a little sissy boy and your limp pinky hits the abuse button everytime anyone says bad stuff about your stupid mud game. Waaahh! Waaahhh! This is the second time this baby asked for and got a post deleted. All you've done is establish a pattern and reputation of a sniveling whiner.

You're so cute in your bitterness.

--matt

You guys are as funny as ever ^_^

You're so cute in your bitterness

You're so cute as a condescending prick.

Drizzt: 1
Matt: 0

Business is business, but I don't see anything that wouldn't be on any normal forum around here, really. Bashing IRE (or more specifically, Matt) and its business is fine, as long as we keep if somewhat tasteful, apparently.

See IRE Boo? RUN BOO RUN!