Author Topic: Forum Napoleons @ WW2OL (Read 758 times)

Vulcan · « **on:** February 22, 2004, 04:15:48 AM »

OMG, you guys think the anonymous censors in AH are bad... try this (from this thread : http://discussions.playnet.com/viewtopic.php?p=667262#667262 )

Hello vulkan,

You are receiving this email because you have been warned for violating the
Playnet Terms of Service agreement on the WWII Online or WWII Online HQ forums.

Please review the Playnet Terms of Service and modify your
behavior in the future.

Playnet Terms of Service: http://www5.playnet.com/bv/tos.jsp
Forum Code of Conduct: http://www5.playnet.com/bv/wwiiol/forum_code.jsp

Moderator Remarks:

\\\"Excuse me Mr Mod.

But when a player makes flat statements on the 20mm effectiveness based on his \\\"experience\\\" yet has never used the 20mm on the live server in an Axis ride - posting stats that verify this is NOT a personal attack and IS a factual statement.

When that players statements, which are not based on facts nor are \'\'constructive\'\' arguments yet posts remain untouched it does make me question the motive behind deleting pure factual posts.\\\" | We discourage discussions of the board itself or of moderator decisions. If you have questions or comments, send them to megadeth@playnet.com

Related Post:

[Now you've earned a TOS. The thread is not about player stats.]-Mod

Sixpence · « **Reply #1 on:** February 22, 2004, 05:03:04 AM »

I posted about how another game I played(and I didn't mention the name of the game) didn't allow a side change for 12 hours and asked if it might be a good idea.
They edited the post(erased my words and put in their own)and locked the thread. Their BB is a waste of time and space.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #2 on:** February 22, 2004, 05:39:15 AM »

It looks to me like WW2OL is to online gaming what Soviet Union was to this planet.

Lies, threats, distortion of truth and corruption.
// edit: Oh and horrible products

I'm glad the open beta never came, god forbid I might have ended up paying them something.

Habu · « **Reply #3 on:** February 22, 2004, 06:08:49 AM »

Actually I agree with the moderators actions over there. They are doing a pretty good job keeping the game play fun by not listening to the hysterical historical accuracy nerds who have nothing better to do with their lives than go to some obscure military library on Sunday and research why the Hawker Hurricane is nerfed.

Then they get on the boards and upset everyone by claiming that their research is right (when it is only a friggin game and it is impossible to make it accurate as weather, intel, radar, pilot fatigue, lack of oxygen at high alt and a ton of other things are not modeled in the game) and agitate for changes that only help one side.

Every thread they start has some idiot claiming "I am canceling my account until they fix this" so censoring such threads is as Martha Stewart would say "A good thing".

Kieran · « **Reply #4 on:** February 22, 2004, 08:08:16 AM »

Habu, that would be okay if they called it "Fighter Ace", or "Crimson Skies". They called it "WWII Online" and billed it as the most realistic thing out there. What kind of players would they expect to attract with that kind of billing?

lazs2 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 22, 2004, 11:35:46 AM »

well... it's not like they said "the most accurate" and... honest. I mean they hired doomie... if the man has learned anything about WWII and it's aircraft by now he is most likely ignoring it.

lazs

Vulcan · « **Reply #6 on:** February 22, 2004, 12:08:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
well... it's not like they said "the most accurate" and... honest. I mean they hired doomie... if the man has learned anything about WWII and it's aircraft by now he is most likely ignoring it.

lazs

LOL lazs... scarey thing is, I'm starting to believe you from stuff I've been hearing.

lazs2 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 22, 2004, 12:11:12 PM »

eventually..... everyone does.

lazs

Dinger · « **Reply #8 on:** February 22, 2004, 12:24:13 PM »

Yes, in most discussions bringing up an opponent's performance is an ad hominem circumstantial attack, and an invalid form of argumentation. If said opponent, however, constructed an argument based on his performance, then who the opponent is, and what that performance is, are at issue.

It's the difference between:

"Bill Clinton was never in the military; therefore is unfit for public office"
(ad hominem circumstantial)

and

"Bill Clinton was never in the military; so his claim that "back in my army days, it was expected for junior officers to fellatiate their superiors" is utterly groundless."

and yeah, why get in an argument over there anyway?

Vulcan · « **Reply #9 on:** February 22, 2004, 01:30:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dinger
and yeah, why get in an argument over there anyway?

Well, its because I have a lot of fun with my squaddies there (3rd Panzer), but CRS have screwed the pooch and Axis equipment (air anyway) is nerfed at the moment, its turned into one big pissing match.

NUKE · « **Reply #10 on:** February 22, 2004, 01:35:14 PM »

Vulcan you are an arse there too?

Vulcan · « **Reply #11 on:** February 22, 2004, 02:01:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
Vulcan you are an arse there too?

Funny you imagine me as an arse - have you consulted anyone professional over these homosexual fantasies?

Staga · « **Reply #12 on:** February 22, 2004, 06:31:18 PM »

Well he lives in phenix so what did you expect ?

Fishu · « **Reply #13 on:** February 22, 2004, 09:53:07 PM »

I've got a warning of a TOS for laughing at someone for talking total BS

Vulcan · « **Reply #14 on:** February 22, 2004, 10:18:26 PM »

Oh my, try and be reasonable and the power-tripping Mods come after me again, interesting how people telling each other to STFU and are left to it:

Hello vulkan,

You are receiving this email because you have been warned for violating the
Playnet Terms of Service agreement on the WWII Online or WWII Online HQ forums.

Please review the Playnet Terms of Service and modify your
behavior in the future.

Playnet Terms of Service: http://www5.playnet.com/bv/tos.jsp
Forum Code of Conduct: http://www5.playnet.com/bv/wwiiol/forum_code.jsp

Moderator Remarks:

\\\"TOS for what? I posted a factual statement related to this thread. A player posted saying in his experience and yet has no experience in flying the current FM and DM for the 109.\\\" | 3. We discourage discussions of the board itself or of moderator decisions. If you have feedback on either of these two topics, please direct your questions to megadeth@playnet.com Do not try to argue with moderator decisions on the public forums. If the first warning didn\'\'t make that clear, perhaps this one will.

Related Post:

[quote:df41e71ed1="vulkan"][Now you've earned a TOS. The thread is not about player stats.]-Mod[/quote:df41e71ed1]

TOS for what? I posted a factual statement related to this thread. A player posted saying in his experience and yet has no experience in flying the current FM and DM for the 109.

I'm a reasonable person, I didn't abuse a player, I only posted clear facts. If you find clear facts frightening to the extent where you have to TOS me while another player is allowed to use abusive language towards other players (such as "STFU"), so be it - I think we really know whats going on.

p.s. I hope a cool head prevails, seeing as I was being reasonable. Last thing you want is bad publicity from other potential custoemer bases