You all have no understanding of the idea of previous offenses, do you?

Simply trotting out the phrase "previous offenses" doesn't legitimate whether the current incident was sufficient to merit any discipline.

Calling someone a cunt is a legitimate reason to be silenced.

"At the same time, why is it that every 2 or 3 days there seems to be a new censorship debate?"

Because it takes 2 or 3 days for krellin's silence periods to expire.

As the author of the deliberately provocative "Republicans: Traitors to America?" thread, I must say I 100% agree with Maher. What I did was about as "bad" as what krellin did. If you're going to silence him, I ought to be silenced, too.

Either you believe in free speech, with all the inconveniences and hurt feelings that involves, or you don't. Choose!

#freekrellin!

Kuta, you said anyone who called Mr. Obama a traitor was a traitor. That's more outrageous than anything Krellin said. Ban Kuta

Personally, from a military stand point, both sides of the argument should have been silenced as a cool down method. Krellin said some aggressive personal things but the thread itself was a rhetorical attack on a political group (mind you I am in NO way a republican, despise their hypocrisy, but I stand by what is right) and Jeff did make a vague and unnecessary comment about muslims. I think that if the mods want to earn support for the censorship then they should be consistent.

and in this case the mods have several people from both sides of the dispute voicing the same concern.

Bo, your a cunt

I even got +1s. Nice

It's not going to be a mod who's going to come and give reasons for silencing. I'm going to do it. I've done it before and I'll do it again.

This site is a Diplomacy site. First and foremost. We are going to make this site into the best Diplomacy site, not the best forum, not the best free-for-all, not a philosophy debate site. I want to make this crystal clear: this is the direction I'm taking this site. It has been for nearly a year, and it's where it's going to keep going. The mod team and I, working with developers like ACT, will keep making site improvements and we will make this site into the best site for playing Diplomacy. We are not here to provide a whatever-goes forum. The vast majority of users come here to play Diplomacy and that's what I aim to provide.

If any individual can't be bothered to be civil, then they will not be welcomed at this site. I've asked that krellin does not use that kinda of language and rhetoric before, so he knows why I've silenced him. It's also been months since we have had any sort of "censorship" issues.

Folks, please be civil and contribute to make this site into the best Diplomacy playing site.

Thank you,

zultar
webDip co-owner

I have a feeling this thread is going to get closed at some point soon.

I think the community needs to have an open discussion about censorship. The mod team should welcome the fact that so many people are interested in discussing the role of the forum and its corresponding rules, as well as the chance to be held accountable for future actions through the marketplace of ideas.

@zultar - I think you missed the yellowjacket one last week

Ssorenn, please don't talk to me or address me anymore.

Maybe the forum should have an open discussion about civility.

Bo,what did you tell me before, when I asked the same of you.....hmm......mute me! Otherwise deal with it. That was it. Take your own advise

MSHB -- it's all been discussed before, ad nauseum. Go Google it if you're so fascinated with it, but all I'm sensing is that you're trying to incite and ignite the situation. Go to bed.

Okay.

I'm not fascinated. I've been sitting here watching this crap, watching people come and talk about what's happening. I went back and read the threads. I get the draugnar one. Then some dude got banned for "disclosing mod secrets." Now it's forcible silences for using strong language in an over the top thread. Creeping statism at its worst.

Mapu - how about you put your totalitarian head on your pillow?

Mapu, where you been. You were so funny for a while. I've missed you

As a member completely unaffiliated with the mod team I don't disagree with silencing krellin. There's a difference between political inflammation and personal attack, and I think krellin crossed that line. I think Jeff certainly crossed that line too, and I think it's a bit of a double standard to silence krellin, and not Jeff is what I perceive as the problem with the situation. Both got equally out of hand toward each other. Removing one from the conversation, but not removing the other seems wrong.

I'm one of the most irreverent trolls on the site but I know what the limits are. Krellin went way past any reasonable limit for nearly any forum on the internet. Any objective person could see that.

You are free to start your own site and have your own rules, or you stay here and play within their rules, whether you like the rules or not. That's pragmatically the bottom line.

Censorship thread? Oooooooooooh.

Honestly I don't see why krellin should be silenced if Jeff and Tolstoy aren't. That thread was just full of "rule-breaking" type stuff.

But I honestly don't care enough to post anymore about it.

Warden, please tell me how I got out of hand toward krellin. Honest question.

Mapu - I think the question is whether there are actual rules or just caprice

The line between what's allowed and what's not is somewhat inconsistent at times, yes. But it's a lot more predictable than what it used to be. And I'm one of the ones that used to like reading the free-for-all mean-spirited threads that happened daily here when it was anything goes under Kestas.

I've accepted the new system, warts and all, because I don't want to quit the site.

As Mapu indicated, we've debated this before. I'm sure you can search for it, or if need be, someone can link for you.

"You are free to start your own site and have your own rules, or you stay here and play within their rules, whether you like the rules or not." <-- Basically this.

Here are the site rules: http://webdiplomacy.net/rules.php
Particularly this part: "When in doubt about whether posting something is allowed, remember your first responsibility: use common sense and respect other players!"

As I've said, I'm not interested in making this site a freedom of speech site. I only care about making this site into the best Diplomacy site. If you don't like my rules and my site, please feel free to leave.

Maher, if you paid attention or actually cared, you could go read the thread caused every week by someone continuing to push the boundaries of decency and Kestas's/Zultar's generosity.

Anyone who wants free-for-all-dicussion to the fullest extent allowed on American-based servers can go to /b/ or make their own site. The rest of us, and most importantly the site owners, would like a civilized forum.

I want to thank Zultar for being both reasonable and straight forward, in addition to have a pleasant and exciting future for the site.

Alright Valis, you can get off your knees now.