Ok, so

[bryce]

At the advice of Mr. Jonny Spade I decide to create this thread. So basically you can see most of arguement from here:

alphacw.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=gettingstarted&action=display&thread=9237&page=4

My opinion is simply that I don't believe you can unban a person and then still ban a certain character. It just doesn't make sense. I have shown through Bryce and Robertson that when I'm writing I can behave and contribute to the fed just as well as anyone. Sure, sometimes I might not think but then again there is almost no one on this board that you can't accuse of doing that. Yes, my personality may clash with others but it's not like I mean what I say when I get into scuffles. The fact is, out of the many arguements I've been in most have been sorted because I actually try and work out my problems. Sure, I haven't done it in the best way sometimes but hey.

Another point is the fact this is a game. I think everyone is taking it too seriously and me too seriously. I admit I have said things I shouldn't have, but a) I didn't mean it (we all know I say things without thinking >_>) b) People have said things just as bad or far worse and gotten off it with nothing! Yes, I may have picked the wrong person to have a problem but still, if it was two members who had the exact same arguement would you have permanently banned them both? No fucking way. It was double standards. Yes, arguing/flaming a moderator isn't a smart thing to do but people seem to forget I attempted to on multiple occasions to solve the problem - it was him who let his stubborness get the better of him and refuse to. Furthermore, even after I was revealed to be Bryce I again attempted to build bridges with BK but again he basically said fuck off. I know that people aren't going to get on with everyone, and BK has certainly been an amazing contributor but I can't help but feel he didn't act in a mod way. He let it get personal and that's something that a mod should be responsible for not doing.

The fact is I have tried and tried to work everything out, prove people wrong but BK has always been the massive roadblock that has stopped me. He showed his feelings in his autobiography thing and I still believe he holds a grudge against that he won't let go - otherwise on the countless I tried to start a discussion with him he would have at least attempted to find some middle ground.

I know I've been a complete ass on several occasions but so have other people. I believe I have been punished enough - for the past year I've basically floated from character to character, break to break and basically just not enjoyed fedding in the same way. Just think how you would feel if you lost everything you had worked for. To me, Taylor is the fed character I write as. Sure, he is generic. Sure, he might be boring to some. But to me he is what makes writing fun, he is the only character I can true "become" if you will.

I know I'm fighting a losing battle here but I think it's worth it if I can somehow win one last chance as Taylor. Let's be honest here, as Bryce and Robertson did people have problems with me? No they didn't. The only tension came once I quit. I even managed to be on good terms with people I had also had bad arguements with as Taylor. The fact is, this is a game and if the players don't care if I'm reinstated then why you should as the mods? Like I said, I slip up once ban my ass and I'll never be back again. Taylor simply has unfinished business with ACW and it needs to be finished .

P.S I'd like to request that if you reply referring to the arguement that you have been when it happened as you wouldn't understand as well. Yes I'm looking at you CP and you're calc whoring comments

[Dalton]

tl;dr

But, really, I dont see why we cant allow him to have the character back. I mean, before the whole Stan the Cameraman thing (C'mon Taylor, it was pretty bad lol), it was a good character from what I remember. The only problem we really had was his OOC reaction to everything, and sub sequential meltdown (Pun not intended). He has proven since then that he has matured a bit.

Dalton's Vote: Let the guy have the character.

[Adrian Flamingo]

To offer the opposing argument:

I can understand that you want YOUR character back. I really do, I've played a lot of characters in the 5 years of e-fedding I've had and sometimes you just click with some over others.

On to BK, everyone on the internet feels like being a moderator must automatically make you impartial to everything. It's a created title to a created board that's based on a created federation. Fact is, there is no REAL rulebook for how a moderator should act, just their own discretion. Sure they act with responsibility, but the fact is that if you piss someone off they don't have to play nice with you because they're human and that's the human condition. Fact is, Josh, if you had gone out of your way to piss off me like you did BK, you could offer to pay off my student loans and I'd still tell you to fuck off. The fact that you're still on the board is tribute to BK's willingness to hear you out.

Also, constantly whining about it doesn't look good for your case either. Instead, I would've talked to Spade or AK or any mod BUT BK if you were serious about this. BK isn't the only mod and if you pleaded a convincing case to any of the other mods it could go a lot further than you, Freeman, and everyone else taking up a topic that is supposed to be used to help newer people to fed get used to the place. Do you know how bad it would make ACW look if we had people openly arguing in a topic instead of taking it to the PMs or the mods? I can respect that you were trying to keep the discussion in one post, but it was the wrong post to do it in. I think everyone involved with that owe Senator and apology for misusing that topic.

This place dies if there isn't an influx of new members because we all eventually have to move on or take breaks. The last place people want to join is a place where its members openly air out their dirty laundry instead of doing their business out of the public eye.

So, I recommend taking this whole ordeal up with the mods and seeing what will happen down that avenue before taking your case to the boards.

[bryce]

If there was some way for me to have a private discussion with all the mods, then yeah I would. But this is really the only way I can reach all of them. At least this way everyone can see and contribute their thoughts. After all, this is a FORUM. That means it's meant for public discussions and opinions whether it's good or bad. Plus here non-members shouldn't be able to see . The mods can clear up Sennie's topic which I admit was the wrong place to post.

[rosslambert]

May 3, 2009 8:52:18 GMT -5 Adrian Flamingo said:

To offer the opposing argument:

I can understand that you want YOUR character back. I really do, I've played a lot of characters in the 5 years of e-fedding I've had and sometimes you just click with some over others.

On to BK, everyone on the internet feels like being a moderator must automatically make you impartial to everything. It's a created title to a created board that's based on a created federation. Fact is, there is no REAL rulebook for how a moderator should act, just their own discretion. Sure they act with responsibility, but the fact is that if you piss someone off they don't have to play nice with you because they're human and that's the human condition. Fact is, Josh, if you had gone out of your way to piss off me like you did BK, you could offer to pay off my student loans and I'd still tell you to fuck off. The fact that you're still on the board is tribute to BK's willingness to hear you out.

Also, constantly whining about it doesn't look good for your case either. Instead, I would've talked to Spade or AK or any mod BUT BK if you were serious about this. BK isn't the only mod and if you pleaded a convincing case to any of the other mods it could go a lot further than you, Freeman, and everyone else taking up a topic that is supposed to be used to help newer people to fed get used to the place. Do you know how bad it would make ACW look if we had people openly arguing in a topic instead of taking it to the PMs or the mods? I can respect that you were trying to keep the discussion in one post, but it was the wrong post to do it in. I think everyone involved with that owe Senator and apology for misusing that topic.

This place dies if there isn't an influx of new members because we all eventually have to move on or take breaks. The last place people want to join is a place where its members openly air out their dirty laundry instead of doing their business out of the public eye.

So, I recommend taking this whole ordeal up with the mods and seeing what will happen down that avenue before taking your case to the boards.

Flamingo as much as it pains me to disgree with you, that's not a counter-argument to why he shouldn't have his character back but just bitching about the way he went about it which is understandable, his heart is in the right place but what he does with that is questionable.

However, there is no counter-argument as to why he shouldn't have the character because he's matured and keeping him from his character only makes the mod-team look like jerks for making their writers "suffer severely" for their mistakes which if I'm honest is far worse from the fed then dirty laundry wherever you go. This is a place of creative writing nd to restrict someone's creativity is just plain wrong in my opinion. You either ban him, or you don't. Like I said previously, you either stop him from painting entirely or you let him go free-reign. You can't just take his paint brush and expect everything to return to Jackanory.

To quote a famous example, Gustav Streseman after the bitter German defeat of the First World War took it upon himself to cooperate with The Allies because his nation was suffering from the power of The Treaty of Versailles and gradually the treaty's terms were disposed of. I think it's been long enough.

I think the character ban should be straight-up lifted under the condition that one little slip and he's gone for good. No more second chances, no more proxies. That's it, he's straight-up gone from the fed. No questions asked. I'd have straight up left without a word if someone said to me "You were a jerk to me so you can't use Mainer anymore." It just doesn't make sense.

In conclusion, it makes no difference whether he's playing Taylor or not. He's still the same, matured version of himself he was when he was Bryce or Robertson. It doesn't affect anyone but him what character he uses.

[bryce]

That's why I meant to say, thanks Mainer ;D.

But yeah, I think I have matured a bit, sure I still have an annoying personality and don't think before I act sometimes but I have learnt a lot more about writing and don't go crazy when I lose anymore (it's painful thinking back to how I reacted after every single loss x.x).

[Jake]

Dalton, I had Stan the Cameraman......

[rosslambert]

I think he meant Lou the Cameraman. The only good thing about that sequence of drivel was the fact that Lou's poser was JD from Scrubs.

[El Shadowo]

(Damn you Flamingo. I was typing out pretty much the same sentiments when I had to go out. I come home to find you beat me to it )

I know I wasn't here when the shit went down, so to speak, but then, you've posted this on a public board >_> I will promise not to make any presumptions about what happened though. Likewise, I'm not really siding with one or the other (though I have a feeling this will come across as if I am.). I also don't know what the mods, especially BK, think on the subject. This is more me playing Devil's Advocate to some of your points. Alot of this post is going to be presumption.

First off, I hate the argument "I know I said it, but I didn't mean it!", because if you went to all the bother of typing something out and then hitting post, you thought your post through. When you physically speak with someone, you can say thinks before thinking. It takes a hell of a lot longer to post, so if you posted things, then you obviously did mean them. You meant them enough to take the time out to type the sentence or paragraph out, so you had plenty of time to think. What you mean to say is you shouldn't have, and you regret saying them.

As for your problems with BK, obviously I don’t know what happened between you two, nor do I know whats happening now. My main reason for posting this is it reminds me of a problem I had with a user called SoR back in GWF. The guy was a constant pain in the arse for me and for everyone. And punishment did nothing. I remember the first time we banned him for 2 weeks, he started saying he was sorry and pressured everyone into talking to me and trying to convince me to lower his sentence, saying he learnt his lesson. And he had...for a month. Then he went right back to causing shit. So we banned him again. And again, he apologised and made public topics asking to come back cause he changed. So we brought him back....and he ended up deleting the boards. The line that Danny used (“I think the character ban should be straight-up lifted under the condition that one little slip and he's gone for good. No more second chances, no more proxies. That's it, he's straight-up gone from the fed.”) is pretty much the exact same thing I was told back when I had the SoR problem.

Thats not to say you’re the same as SoR, nor that you would ever delete the ACW boards. But it’s a similar situation in that you’ve been punished and you don’t like it. And you’re doing everything in your power now to be unpunished because you don’t find it fair. That’s fine, and I can understand your motivation. But in terms of “It’s a game!”, you’ve got to remember that it’s a game for BK as well, and given it’s his job to ensure this place runs smoothly, then it’s my opinion that his happiness, and the happiness of the mods, comes above ours. It may be a created title, but he has the power here. The very fact he doesn’t get paid means he has no reason to do anything that makes him unhappy. Likewise, if you aren’t happy, then you aren’t being paid and your not under contract. If being Taylor is truly what you think will make you happy, you always have the option to take the character and the backstory to another fed. If you want to stay here, and work under these mods though, you’ve got to realise they’ve laid out conditions for your return, and that they had no obligation to do so. They gave you a chance but now you want more. Its still at their discretion if they unban the character though.

I'm presuming you've tried getting in contact with BK privately and he either didn't respond (probably for a reason) or he told you no. If it's the latter, then you've got your answer. I know I’ve seen him reply to your pleas at least once with the word “No”. All you're doing now is dragging everyone else into the argument, and pitting people against each other. You're going to annoy everyone because either people agree or disagree with you, in which case two factions are formed and bitching starts. Or a third group emerges who are just pissed at the entire situation. Either way, I think you're going about this entire situation the wrong way.

I feel for you, and I know I'd be annoyed if I was told I couldn't play as my character any more. But as I said in the other topic, you've not lost the character completely. You have other options. You caused trouble in ACW, and now you don’t want to face up to the consequences. But you’ve got to realise that its up to BK and co to decide what they think is in the best interest of not only the site, but themselves. And if they choose to keep your character banned, then you’ve got to either live with that or leave.
I don’t like using that ultimatum, but there you go. Thats my two cents on the situation.

[rosslambert]

May 3, 2009 11:11:47 GMT -5 El Shadowo said:

You have other options. You caused trouble in ACW, and now you don’t want to face up to the consequences.

Why should he be punished that harshly though when people here have gotten away with far worse? Compared to what people like Starkweather or Predator had gotten away with in the past Taylor isn't even on the scale.

A more modern example would be Rep, he came here and in the space of a month pissed off more people then Taylor did in his entire career but yet he has absolutely no sanctions imposed on him because A) He didn't argue with a mod and B) There's double-standards going on and C) He's friends with the world champion. We let Rep back in and he's doing some of the best work I've ever seen from him which is good for the fed and it's community, but it seems retarded that we hold up this punishment when the only reason he's still punished is because he argued with the man that kept this fed alive for about 18 months.

[Rattlesnake]

I can honestly say that after what I've read in this topic that Taylor does have some merit in what he says.

People can mature over time and I think Taylor has. It takes a lot of guts to admit things you shouldn't have done.

Onto the whole character ban. The magnitude of things that Taylor said were bad, but it's as he's said...others have said worse and got a better situation. However, I think the problem with this is that it mainly got directed towards one of our mods.

When mods are discussed, that's where I agree with Flamingo. What happens comes down to their own discretion, but at the same time they do have to maintain some fairness. I know that when attacked in one form or another, a mod goes straight into defense mode without really thinking of fairness. Nothing against our mods, I mod other forums and I've been in those situations before I ever saw ACW.

Ultimately, I think Taylor has proven that he wants his character back and I think he should be given a chance. But I suggest something that we've seen before. If Taylor is not provoked by anyone here, if he slips up, he's gone. If Taylor is provoked, and it must be clear that he was, and slips up, then everything is ok for him to stay.

I think that's how I would handle this. We can see that Taylor has been able to behave since being allowed to come back. And if I may make a suggestion, if it helps ease the thought, and no offense to you Taylor, we should probably strike the "Lou the Cameraman" segments from Taylor's calcs.

Taylor, you've shown to me that you can do it without anything like that. I think it would be a fair compromise with that.

[Thunderkiss]

He fucked up twice.
He's out.

/topic

[rosslambert]

May 3, 2009 11:31:34 GMT -5 Thunderkiss said:

He fucked up twice.
He's out.

/topic

He fucked up once, he quit because he was in a dead-end zone being buried because of a retarded grudge.
He should have his character back.

/topic

[bryce]

I get what you're saying Dave, I really do, but I have SHOWN I can behave and be trusted to write. Since I got banned I haven't anything really that bad. I've had minor disagreements, mostly in chat, but that's all.

@snake: I don't even care about calcs anymore. As far as I'm concerned starting with Taylor again with no calcs is the same as it is with calcs.

@tk: I was never properly given a second chance, and I never fucked up a 2nd time. If anything I proved to people I could be a valuable member. I quit yes, that's not fucking up.

@mainer: <3 xD

[El Shadowo]

May 3, 2009 11:26:45 GMT -5 @rosslambert said:

May 3, 2009 11:11:47 GMT -5 El Shadowo said:

You have other options. You caused trouble in ACW, and now you don’t want to face up to the consequences.

Why should he be punished that harshly though when people here have gotten away with far worse? Compared to what people like Starkweather or Predator had gotten away with in the past Taylor isn't even on the scale.

A more modern example would be Rep, he came here and in the space of a month pissed off more people then Taylor did in his entire career but yet he has absolutely no sanctions imposed on him because A) He didn't argue with a mod and B) There's double-standards going on and C) He's friends with the world champion. We let Rep back in and he's doing some of the best work I've ever seen from him which is good for the fed and it's community, but it seems retarded that we hold up this punishment when the only reason he's still punished is because he argued with the man that kept this fed alive for about 18 months.

The problem with this arguement for me is that it opens up a different can of worms, and would suggest to me that perhaps others should be punished more harshly. It doesn't logically follow that Taylor's should be reduced....If what you've said is true, and others acted far worse, it could be argued their punishments should be worse than Taylors.