I don't think it really was about threatening to silence anyone. What happened is that people got so tired of krellin that a little angry mob formed in this thread demanding that abge take action. It then got worse when krellin entered the room in his usual way. Abge just tried to make everyone feel that everyone's concerns, i.e. both sides, were being taken seriously the best way he could. I don't envy him for having to do that.

"We use abge's yardstick, since he is the moderator. Do you think you would be a better moderator than him?"

No, I do not. However, this kind of comment is clearly why people were complaining that you were on this site for only 2 weeks and were under the impression you knew how it was run. Currently, locking threads or silencing players has only been used against people who break the site's rules. As far as I'm aware, being off-topic is not a site rule, and even if it were, I'm sure many users would've been silenced before krellin entered the scene.

"Kestas has pretty much given him carte blanche"
Was not entirely aware of this. It does however seem like an abuse of power to me, given what I've seen of Kestas' views on forum moderation. However, I've not seen a comment from Kestas in a long time and my understanding of how he wants the forum run may be deeply flawed.

@Shock

In retrospect, once the conversation had moved to site policy, I probably should have just opened a new thread. However, at the time, it appeared there was good momentum here and I didn't want to risk losing it by moving to a new thread.

This conversation was just one of many that I've been using to gauge the state of the forum. While i understand your concern that some people may not have been able to participate, they have had plenty of opportunities in the past and will have opportunities in the future.

I work very closely with kestas and keep him informed of all my decisions. We both want as free and open forum as possible. However, neither of us want to see good diplomacy players leave because of a toxic forum. It is a fine line to walk, which is why I'm always open to suggestions.

"However, this kind of comment is clearly why people were complaining that you were on this site for only 2 weeks and were under the impression you knew how it was run."

You act as though understanding how a forum is run is rocket science. I don't need two weeks to figure it out. I can figure it out in a less than an hour.

""Kestas has pretty much given him carte blanche"
Was not entirely aware of this."

For instance, unlike you, I was fully aware of this.

"Go with it and contribute within abge's rules, or go somewhere else."
Very well then; I suppose I should contribute my two cents on this forum moderation thread abgemacht has wisely commandeered rather than continuing to kick up a fuss.

I should start by saying that this thread should never have been locked in the first place, as it was quite clearly not spam, a cheating accusation, an ongoing gunboat discussion, or something that is clearly illegal in most countries. I do not see the issue krellin creates, one advantage of this site's forum, and what makes it unique is that no point of view, regardless of how unacceptable it is by popular opinion or how poorly it is presented is censored. Likewise, all retaliation against such a point of view krellin raises is not censored. The solution is simple. Allow krellin to be a bigot, and allow the other users to relentlessly attack him for it if they so desire, provided no threats of actual harm occur (as you're stepping into the bounds of what is illegal). There's a distinctive lack of sticks and stones around here, so I think everyone should be fine. Sure, people will get upset from time to time, but it's not going to be the sort of emotional trauma that impacts the rest of their life.

And please, if someone were inclined to believe what krellin says is true in his bigot rants while there are sensible people pointing out why what he said is completely untrue and derogatory (which there always is), that person is obviously as beyond saving as krellin.

lol...I have to laugh every time someone accuses me of bigotry who's name is a thinly veiled honorary nod to some of the most violent, bigoted soldiers in history. lol

http://media2.giphy.com/media/TbRXNJJJbgIkE/giphy.gif

I've yet to see a decent diplomacy player give up because they found this forum toxic. Yes, I've seen many a player steer clear of any thread that wasn't purely diplomacy related (and I would recommend a more hands-on approach to moderating these threads, though so far I've not seen one get hijacked into a vitriolic argument). So long as the diplo threads stay clean and the live game advertisement doesn't get spammed off the forum, we should be okay.

"lol...I have to laugh every time someone accuses me of bigotry who's name is a thinly veiled honorary nod to some of the most violent, bigoted soldiers in history. lol"

You actually misunderstand where my username originates. It is not the german shocktroopers of WW2 that I borrowed the name from.

"I've yet to see a decent diplomacy player give up because they found this forum toxic. "

Why do you think you'd be privy to such information. People have left this site because of the forum. That is a fact.

Makes sense to me. Although this forum is by no means unique in its anything goes mentality. In fact, there are places where even more goes.

that was in response to shocks longer post.

"People have left this site because of the forum. That is a fact."
In my experience the only way you can keep a forum civil on the internet is to take a totalitarian approach. I'd recommend you prevent all discussion pertaining anything unrelated to diplomacy to avoid being accused of taking sides and alienating some of the userbase as a result. I doubt that players will stop playing diplomacy just because they can't discuss politics on this forum on the side.

I suppose you could ban petty insults, but people will still be offended by the points behind civilized arguments if they're particularly nasty. Really, on the internet there is no middle ground, it's all or nothing: there are so many people that at least one will attempt to stretch the rules to every degree possible, regardless of how much you ban these people.

"In fact, there are places where even more goes."
I know, but those places tend to not have the intellectual capacity that diplomacy players usually have, and as a result everyone just capslock screams like krellin. On this forum, people like that are a minority.

Might I suggest now would be a good time to start that new thread and resume this discussion. Seems there is more to discuss after all and we should be visible to all who may wish to partake in the conversation.

Just put a mod warning up front that the thread is a moderator (and heavily moderated) thread and going off topic or falling into personal attacks will *not* be tolerated.

Let us discuss this more thoroughly, shall we?

Basically, you need to decide with Kestas whether you want this site to facilitate diplomacy as the top priority and as such the forum is moderated in a way to facilitate that, or whether you want to have freedom of ideas on this forum as top priority, and potentially sacrifice the optimal running of diplomacy on this site. It would be sad to see the forum I know go, but if gathering diplomacy players is top priority full fledged freedom on the forum will need to go out the window. As they say, you can't have a cake and eat it too.

Well, I won't because I don't actually have time to monitor a real discussion. Anyone is free to create a thread with a clearer title, although I'd like to avoid having several conversations going at once.

"You actually misunderstand where my username originates. It is not the german shocktroopers of WW2 that I borrowed the name from"

Oh....I just misunderstood....I see....just as *you* misunderstand parody and sarcasm for my true thoughts and feelings, which I *have* stated quite clearly ad nauseum about equal, fair treatment of all. Yeah....see how that works there, buddy?

If anything, you failure to grasp my beliefs is far less excusable than my failure to properly interpret what - to everyone - is an obvious nod to the Nazis...

no, I think his name is from the shock troopers in Star Wars but I could be wrong

You're both mistaken - the concept of the "Shock Trooper" or "Storm Trooper" actually dates from WW1 well before the rise of the Nazis.

well we wont KNOW until he tells us himself

@ERAU - They were stormtroopers in Star Wars, never shocktroopers. Clone Commandos became Imperial Stormtroopers under the Emperor.

@Draugnar - yes I am aware of the stormtroopers but there are also shock troopers. if you do not believe me, then check this out.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Shock_Trooper

I've never gotten into the mythos beyond what is in the movies. The rest was just a way for Lucas to make more money. The movies never referred to Shock Troopers by name, and that is what the majority of the non-geek culture knows of Star Wars.

the only way I found out about shock troopers was by playing Star Wars: Battlefront. Im not a geek. ive never read any of their books or anything else besides the 6 movies and the video game I previously mentioned.

"Im not a geek."

You're debating Star Wars terminology on a Diplomacy website. I've got some bad news for you; you may wish to sit down.

By virtue of the fact you got it from a video game, you are a geek. Hate to tell you (well, not really. I'm actually enjoying telling you).

but I am sitting down. and I am just providing Draugnar with the correct information.