The_Dayman [Bigotry] [busted]lv

[jricart]

Accused:
The_Dayman


The accused are suspected of:
Breaking Site Guidelines
Bigotry

Game number(s):
Game 7441101


Comments:
I posted a previous report against him http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=124034, and he keeps going:

2010-08-11 10:04:01 - The_Dayman: what a faggot

I understand that trash talking is allowed in the Game Chats, but what is not allowed is any form of bigotry.

You might also consider:
Game 7423060
Game 7417757
Game 7409852
Game 7403673
Game 7388943

Please do something about this. This guy need to be suspended!

Thanks.

[alster]

Well, I don't think that this is your battle to fight. If anyone he plays has any issues, the report should come from he or she. If they are fine with the game chart or doesn't care, I see no reason for you to post this. The game chat is between the players and not for third parties. If you keep going through his game chats and feel offended, well, simply stop going through his game chats. I've posted much worse stuff than this in game chats, not much to whine about.

[jricart]

I feel offended by him on this Game 7441101

Im a nice person and I try not to have issues with players, but one thing Im not going to tolerate is to somebody that I don't know to call me fagot.

I posted some other game numbers as an example.

[danes]

Lol ... so instead of foe-ing him and not having to play with him again, after your first report, you decided you wanted to still play with him for some reason, he acted the same as he had the previous time, and you filed another report?

Did I miss anything?

[lord voldemort]

yer its the same game he continued on....read the chat

[jefjef]

Well, I don't think that this is your battle to fight. If anyone he plays has any issues, the report should come from he or she. If they are fine with the game chart or doesn't care, I see no reason for you to post this. The game chat is between the players and not for third parties. If you keep going through his game chats and feel offended, well, simply stop going through his game chats. I've posted much worse stuff than this in game chats, not much to whine about.

Well I do recall some people being warned for slinging f slangs around. Not really any diff than the N slangs being slung around.

As far as it being in game chat is neither here nor there. It's viewable by the CC public just like the wall is.

[gcwca_4_life]

Same thing will happen as last time. This will be closed, and you will be advised to foe him..



Myself, I am adding him yo foe now.



And no matter how many people agree, or disagree, talk like that is uncalled for. Hell, there are kids that play on CC.

[the.killing.44]

False, he will be warned for bigotry.

[owenshooter]

Same thing will happen as last time. This will be closed, and you will be advised to foe him.

he will be given the proper punishment under the bigotry guidelines... and to alster, just because it isn't your game doesn't mean you can't report it. bigotry is bigotry, even if it isn't your game.-the black jesus

[1931roadster]

The accused is obviously trying for the idiot record, along with the worst ranking.
However, in a current game, I witnessed jricart, the infamous complainer, say totally groundless and damaging chat himself.
Was very surprised by ricart's anger and aimless banter.

[jricart]

The accused is obviously trying for the idiot record, along with the worst ranking.
However, in a current game, I witnessed jricart, the infamous complainer, say totally groundless and damaging chat himself.
Was very surprised by ricart's anger and aimless banter.

You are right! but Never use "gay" or "fagot" against anybody after I got my own punishment couple of months ago. Because of that, Im helping this site and I will report any broken rules.

[TheForgivenOne]

What's with everyone turning a thread against the accuser?

[jefjef]

What's with everyone turning a thread against the accuser?

Allstar - roadstar and dames isn't everyone.

The real question is why is this still open and not been already dealt with. (with something other than an eye roll)

[lord voldemort]

because its the weekend...well not now
hence this is closed...He has indeed been punished to the appropriate level

[azezzo]

because its the weekend...well not now
hence this is closed...He has indeed been punished to the appropriate level

Lord Voldemort, How do you explain your lack of consistency, in the previous thread you replied with the following,


"Re: The_Dayman - Flaming

New post by lord voldemort on Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:11 pm
Yep i agree. Whilst its not pleasant. Not against the rules. just give him bad ratings etc...
closed "

Unless C.C. has changed the rules, Again game chat is not typically regulated by the mods, hence your previous response to the situation, I am not defending the Daymans actions, personally, I do not agree with how he acts , but by the same token, I do not need Conquer Club protecting me from people who act like that either, rather I am more offended by the lack of consistency that occurs with the moderators on this site. Unless I am missing something, dayman simply repeated his lack of good manners in each of the games listed.

[Metsfanmax]

The difference is that the last thread was about him flaming. No bigoted remarks were made before the first thread was made, and then Dayman called jricart a "faggot" for posting the first thread. The first comments were just bad sportsmanship, but the second comment was vulgar and offensive.

[azezzo]

oh, well, then by all means i was mistaken, and Conquer Club has a responsibility to protect the "children" and everyone else who is overly sensitive and might get their feelings hurt. Great Googaly Moogly, For fucks sake, Suck it up cup cake.

[lord voldemort]

So you would rather us not punish people who post bigotry??
Im more than happy for friendly banter and smack talk in game chat....when it crosses the line to bigotry then im also more than happy to step in as it is definately against the rules. Bigotry in any form will not be tolerated.

p.s posting in large bold writting only makes yourself look silly.
Read the forum guidelines...

[azezzo]

lord voldemort you have been here long enough to remember how this site was originally run, back in the days of feedback. somewhere along the way, someone in authority felt that a kinder gentler C.C. was needed. Prior to that C.C. didnt feel the need to censor posts, or ban people for not playing nice with one another.

You ask if i would prefer if C.C. not punish people who post bigotry?? Yes I would prefer a much more hands off approach like in the old days. C.C. allowed such things in the past, I will provide proof if you like. If allowed is the wrong word, they didnt stop it.

my guess is that your being 21 versus my being 42 your generation is much more sensitive and insecure, that if someone doesnt talk nice to you, you dont know how to stand up for yourselves, your mommys are not in the real world to protect you.

"Suck it up cupcake" used to be a routine response in the forums to frivolous complaints.

and if C.C. is going to use the, "we need to protect the children" as an excuse, then create adult games and forums, it would be less time consuming than having mods police the site as much.

Ebay and other web sites for example, simply has a member self identify as being over 18 and agree to viewing adult content.

By clicking the "I agree" button below, you agree to the above Terms of Use. If you do not agree with these Terms, please click "Cancel" below and you will be directed away from the Adult Only category.
I agree
Cancel

[Metsfanmax]

lord voldemort you have been here long enough to remember how this site was originally run, back in the days of feedback. somewhere along the way, someone in authority felt that a kinder gentler C.C. was needed. Prior to that C.C. didnt feel the need to censor posts, or ban people for not playing nice with one another.

You ask if i would prefer if C.C. not punish people who post bigotry?? Yes I would prefer a much more hands off approach like in the old days. C.C. allowed such things in the past, I will provide proof if you like. If allowed is the wrong word, they didnt stop it.

my guess is that your being 21 versus my being 42 your generation is much more sensitive and insecure, that if someone doesnt talk nice to you, you dont know how to stand up for yourselves, your mommys are not in the real world to protect you.

"Suck it up cupcake" used to be a routine response in the forums to frivolous complaints.

and if C.C. is going to use the, "we need to protect the children" as an excuse, then create adult games and forums, it would be less time consuming than having mods police the site as much.

Ebay and other web sites for example, simply has a member self identify as being over 18 and agree to viewing adult content.

By clicking the "I agree" button below, you agree to the above Terms of Use. If you do not agree with these Terms, please click "Cancel" below and you will be directed away from the Adult Only category.
I agree
Cancel

azezzo, it seems like your arguments are out of place. Are you upset that lv is enforcing the rules, or are you upset with the rules themselves? If it's the latter, you're doing it in the wrong place.

[azezzo]

i entered this discussion after what appeared that Lord V was being inconsistent with his rulings, you then explained that his ruling occured prior to the dayman calling the op a faggot, I am not upset that Lord V is enforcing the rules, but rather that the rules have changed and the enforcement of said rules is inconsistent , perhaps you are correct that this is not the best place to bring that up, a mod can feel free to move my posts to a more correct location. I will get off my soap box now. Feel free to go back to protecting the children.

[Metsfanmax]

I think you should start a thread in the appropriate forum, because it does seem like an important issue to discuss. Regular freedom of speech should not be infringed upon unless there's a good reason for it, and if you think that there is no good reason for the bigotry rule, then do something about it.

[drunkmonkey]

I think you should start a thread in the appropriate forum, because it does seem like an important issue to discuss. Regular freedom of speech should not be infringed upon unless there's a good reason for it, and if you think that there is no good reason for the bigotry rule, then do something about it.

There's no such thing as "freedom of speech" on any private forum. It's up to the admins to define what is/isn't appropriate.

[Metsfanmax]

I think you should start a thread in the appropriate forum, because it does seem like an important issue to discuss. Regular freedom of speech should not be infringed upon unless there's a good reason for it, and if you think that there is no good reason for the bigotry rule, then do something about it.

There's no such thing as "freedom of speech" on any private forum. It's up to the admins to define what is/isn't appropriate.

I don't want to start this discussion in this thread, but I'll just respond to this comment - your statement is both obvious and meaningless. My comment was not a statement that the admins were violating the Constitution, but rather simply that as a pragmatic action, they should desire to keep freedom of speech to the fullest extent possible, because that way you don't have people like azezzo who feel that they are being restricted in their actions. The intent of my statement is that if azezzo doesn't like the current policy, he should appeal to the admins, to get them to change their mind on what is appropriate. If you have further comments, please make them in an appropriate forum.

[drunkmonkey]

I think you should start a thread in the appropriate forum, because it does seem like an important issue to discuss. Regular freedom of speech should not be infringed upon unless there's a good reason for it, and if you think that there is no good reason for the bigotry rule, then do something about it.

There's no such thing as "freedom of speech" on any private forum. It's up to the admins to define what is/isn't appropriate.

I don't want to start this discussion in this thread, but I'll just respond to this comment - your statement is both obvious and meaningless. My comment was not a statement that the admins were violating the Constitution, but rather simply that as a pragmatic action, they should desire to keep freedom of speech to the fullest extent possible, because that way you don't have people like azezzo who feel that they are being restricted in their actions. The intent of my statement is that if azezzo doesn't like the current policy, he should appeal to the admins, to get them to change their mind on what is appropriate. If you have further comments, please make them in an appropriate forum.

Believe it or not, lots of people are confused on that issue. By starting your sentence with, "Regular freedom of speech should not be infringed upon," you appeared to be one of them. Sorry for the "obvious and meaningless" comments.
I'm done here.