naming policy rules... what are they?

[SchadenFreude]

Originally Posted by astarothel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Want a cookie?

OK, you have had your fun trolling. That accomplished, are the words "Schaden", "Freude", or "Schadenfreude" offensive to you? Just curious what your stance is.

[astarothel]

Originally Posted by SchadenFreude [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

OK, you have had your fun trolling. That accomplished, are the words "Schaden", "Freude", or "Schadenfreude" offensive to you? Just curious what your stance is.

How about this?

Originally Posted by Cyrius [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No titles, Name and Lastname should not form words or phrases, Names should not be phrases, brand names, etc. ...

I extend this meaning of phrases to include expressions of speech, like idioms, or colloquialisms.

[SchadenFreude]

Originally Posted by astarothel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How about this?

Originally Posted by Cyrius
No titles, Name and Lastname should not form words or phrases, Names should not be phrases, brand names, etc. ...

I extend this meaning of phrases to include expressions of speech, like idioms, or colloquialisms.

Nice dodge. You didn't answer the question, and instead referred to what the guide believes to be the naming policy. The problem is, the only rule regarding names that is posted has to deal with "offensive" names. Cyrius doesn't know the name policy that he is enforcing. At some point in the future I fully expect to see revised rules which will include, verbatim, what Cyrius believes should be the name policy. Until that time, however, the only rule regarding names is "it cannot be offensive".

However, if they fully intend to create a policy that states "names cannot be words", more than half of the server is already, unknowingly, out of compliance. They will be in for a very rude awakening when the name-hammer swings with impunity.

[astarothel]

Originally Posted by SchadenFreude [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nice dodge.

Dodge this:

I think every one of you whining and crying babies have pursued it the wrong way.

At this rate with the progression of the thread it is only going to end in forum bans, or RnF rather than with any constructive change toward a formal naming policy.

Bitch. Cry. Spread your bullshit. Get banned. Ragequit over how unfair the entire thing is. I don't give a fuck.

All I know is that I would rather have Cyrius overseeing it than one of you.

Wanna know why? He's tolerated your little shitflinging crusade against him, in Server Chat rather than RnF no less, when he could have straight up had a number of you tanked for going after him personally (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1594) in a thread which should have been sent to RnF three days ago.

[pickled_heretic]

Originally Posted by astarothel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

post

Personally, I believe I have been conducting this dialogue with integrity, always sticking to the facts (as usual). Nothing I have said here has violated the rules. In addition, people that I defend or associate with in this thread are not me - if someone else violates the rules it's not my problem, even if they're in the same camp as I am.

Ultimately, our actions here have resulted in creating several opposing factions. I agree with you that this may be counterproductive to positive change if one is only looking to get the naming policy reformed. Please realize that some people have other ideals to stick to.

I also agree that I would probably make a terrible GM. I don't have the time or dedication to this project to do it. However, that doesn't mean that I can't criticize actions if I see injustice. Just because I'm unwilling to become a soldier doesn't mean I can't cry foul when I see one shooting an unarmed civilian. Just because I don't want to be a member of a jury doesn't mean I wouldn't proclaim injustice if I saw a verdict that was clearly wrong.

It's true that I get enjoyment from participating in these kinds of threads, but I also feel as though there's true injustice taking place, and because of that I feel obligated to participate in this thread, even when it may sometimes be unpleasant or dangerous for me to do so.

[astarothel]

Originally Posted by pickled_heretic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I also feel as though there's true injustice taking place, and because of that I feel obligated to participate in this thread, even when it may sometimes be unpleasant or dangerous for me to do so.

Civil disobedience card on an internet forum -- amusing I gotta say. Every person in the thread knows that a post like Nalkin made just now was the way to handle it, they just wanted to throw a shitfit.

[pickled_heretic]

Originally Posted by astarothel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Civil disobedience card on an internet forum -- amusing I gotta say. Every person in the thread knows that a post like Nalkin made just now was the way to handle it, they just wanted to throw a shitfit.

Civil disobedience? It would be civil disobedience if I was breaking some kind of rule or law. If this was your best response, then I consider my rebuttal to be a success.

But yes, there are dozens of posts just like Nalkin's, and yet here we still have a problem.

[Cyrius]

Originally Posted by SchadenFreude [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nice dodge. You didn't answer the question, and instead referred to what the guide believes to be the naming policy. The problem is, the only rule regarding names that is posted has to deal with "offensive" names. Cyrius doesn't know the name policy that he is enforcing. At some point in the future I fully expect to see revised rules which will include, verbatim, what Cyrius believes should be the name policy. Until that time, however, the only rule regarding names is "it cannot be offensive".

However, if they fully intend to create a policy that states "names cannot be words", more than half of the server is already, unknowingly, out of compliance. They will be in for a very rude awakening when the name-hammer swings with impunity.

You are so wrong. Just wait till we are ready to post the final worded rules. Now stop the attempt to bash me, it bores me to reply to this thread every day.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3278

The developers of this project put way too much time into this for us to be put on the spotlight every single time we make a decision, ESPECIALLY when you ASSUME you know all the facts. 90% of the time, you don't.

[SchadenFreude]

Originally Posted by Cyrius [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are so wrong. Just wait till we are ready to post the final worded rules. Now stop the attempt to bash me, it bores me to reply to this thread every day.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3278

It appears, to me, that you just admitted the naming policy that is posted is not the one you are enforcing. Which also means everything I have stated is true: The only rule is a name cannot be "offensive", you are enforcing a policy that does not exist (yet), and when it does change it will be identical to what you believe it should have been.

Unless you include the non-GM account you have been using to post in this thread (yeah, it is pretty obvious which one that is), you (Cyrius) have not posted in this thread since June 19th. Stop making claims that are easily disproven.

That isn't a bash on you, that is simply stating the facts in a clear and concise manner.

[Cyrius]

Originally Posted by SchadenFreude [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It appears, to me, that you just admitted the naming policy that is posted is not the one you are enforcing. Which also means everything I have stated is true: The only rule is a name cannot be "offensive", you are enforcing a policy that does not exist (yet), and when it does change it will be identical to what you believe it should have been.

Unless you include the non-GM account you have been using to post in this thread (yeah, it is pretty obvious which one that is), you (Cyrius) have not posted in this thread since June 19th. Stop making claims that are easily disproven.

That isn't a bash on you, that is simply stating the facts in a clear and concise manner.

First of all, i do not play on this server, so i do not have a "non-GM account". So oh, i just have to post every 2 days, still annoying. What you still do not get is, i am not the only person that is a "Staff-Member". I do not make such decisions on my own, we make them as a team. Your "facts" are only excistant in your head. If it was only me making those decisions i would have posted that naming policy right in your face.

Nothing you say is "true", besides that the posted naming policy is not up to date yet.

Besides you obviously can not read, i do not have to "admit" that i do enforce stronger naming rules. To quote Nilbog in this thread:

With that being said, he is following almost the exact same naming policy as live GMs used.

We will post more formal rules when we can. (Yeah I don't give a fuck how soon anyone thinks I should do it. The name policies are being reviewed by the Developers and guides.)