The x86 Dictatorship

[trust]

Many fellow members of the x86 boards, and especially members of the group, can remember back to a USWest Battle.net clan called The Enlightened Ones (e1). Many notable Battle.net members were apart of this clan, such as Raihan, MyndFyre, iago, and Stealth. It was a fun little group, or at least I thought.

However, some members had friends that were not in e1 who would periodically be kicked or banned from the channel. This created problems. Members argued that I had no authority to be unfair to non-members, even though they were, in fact, not members. They implied that non-members had many of the same rights as members and should, to put it simply, not be treated as inferior/unequal/etc. I have always upheld the notion that any group should provide more privileges to it's members than non-members, and in the case of e1 that was protection from being removed from the channel. I was called many things: abusive, a tyrant, etc. Many members of the clan left for other ventures (many moved to x86), and shortly after e1 died...despite a continual effort by me to keep it active. Oh well, things happen.

Now, nearly 4 years later I see administrators of x86 doing the same things they criticized me for. Non-members, and even some members, are not treated as equals. Oddly enough, some non-members are treated with favoritism over members (i.e. Rule over CrAz3D). I cannot speak for them however, so I will speak for myself. Ever since I've joined this forum I have been faced with negativity/banning (starting with Tuberload, continuing with deadly), and now it continues with iago, Sidoh, rabbit, etc. I'll admit that some of my posts are controversial, but I call things as I see them. If somebody is saying that they would never consider something related to the armed services an honor, then I find that to be unpatriotic. If I notice that members are obviously changing their views, eMannerisms, etc. to conform with iago et al, then I'll say that. (Joe, mostly, but also Sidoh come to mind). Granted, the things I've posted are nowhere near as bad as some things members have said (see my signature for confirmation regarding deadly.)

Most likely nobody will read this because it's too long, I'll be somehow belittled, the thread will be trashed, and I'll be banned for somehow angering somebody. Oh well. It pisses me off that I make a thread in CrAz3D's forum and it was trashed by somebody other than CrAz3D. My post was not spam, it was not pornographic, it was not racist, etc. I didn't break any rules, yet an administrator still usurped CrAz3D's moderatory powers to fulfill their own anti-Trust agenda. That is worse than what I did by banning non-members. I'm guilty of being a little ban happy, but not for trying to censor what people said. My interpretation of a discussion forum was that it promoted discussion, but lately it seems that discussion can not happen if there is a differing argument. CrAz3D and I are continually called ignorant, incapable of algebra, etc. based upon our political views. We don't respond with these sorts of insults (I think the worst I've done is call somebody a pussy), yet are the ones always catching flack for what we say. It is the other posters who are unjustifiably belittling us, or in the case of deadly, wishing physical harm. What is done to these people? Nothing. Nothing is ever said, and on some occasions there is obvious agreeing. It's gotten to the point where I don't reply to a lot of topics, or don't say what I would normally say, because I don't want to deal with the backlash from people who disagree. It doesn't require me to just defend my position, but also myself on a personal level.

This forum has gone down hill, and if I'm banned for calling out the dictatorship at x86 then so be it...that will further prove my point in regards to the controlling administration's (who seems to always be anti-government control) censorship. If I'm not banned and my post is not trashed, then it's probably because of PR reasons. In any case, the x86 forums remind me Animal Farm. iago is now walking on two legs and wearing men's clothing. Although everyone is equal, to me it seems like certain members of this forum are a little more equal than the rest.

[iago]

Haha, that's the best propaganda I've seen in awhile! I'll start with calling out the most obvious fallacy: if I trash this thread, I prove your point, and if I don't, it's because of PR. So no matter what I do, I lose. I love it! By the way Trust, how many babies have you been caught killing? (Joking, obviously, but it's the identical fallacy). In any case, I'll do neither -- I'll move it to the General forum, which allows people who don't read CrAz3d's forum to see it. (Sorry CrAz3d -- if you really want this thread on your forum, PM me and I'll move it back)

You weren't banned because you had different opinions. If that was true, then I would have already banned CrAz3d, rabbit, rule, warrior, and pretty much everybody else who has an opinion, since I don't know anybody who I completely agree with. No, having differing opinions is fine, and encouraged.

Here's the problem -- ever since x86 started, you've hated it. Whatever happened with e1, it collapsed, and x86 basically took its place in the community. You took that as a personal insult, and I don't blame you. You had every reason to be upset about that, but we were all much younger at the time. However, do you really think that so many members would have jumped ship so readily if they were happy? Most members that I talked to were unhappy, which is why Newby and darkness created x86 in the first place. That's the history of x86/e1 from my angle, take it or leave it. The point is, you had an agenda against x86 back then, and it still continues to this day. When you see a crack or a chip in the leadership, you do your best to stick a knife in and twist as hard as you can. In the past, you've often leveraged clan members to help you (warrior comes to mind). However, we've always handled the situation and continued going, and that always bothers you.

There is a reason this clan is set up democratically. We have three leaders, and, if members don't think those leaders are fulfilling their duties to the best of their abilities, they can vote for somebody else in the next election, or even remove a leader between elections.

That being said, let's look at the posts that, in my opinion, caused the issue:

I would comment on the issue, but my opinion is not allowed at x86.

No, you weren't banned for a day for your opinions. You were banned for repeatedly posting the same thing, designed to cause problems. I moved that post to the trash as soon as I saw it because by responding, I'm giving you what you want. I strongly believe in the "don't feed the trolls" policy, and that's 100% what that was. By responding here, I'm giving you exactly what you want, and I hate doing it, but I don't think I have an option in this case.

I was reading the rules and it doesn't say a member must motion to ban a member, so I'm motioning to ban rabbit. Let's hear it!

That wasn't just a standard "I feel xxx way about yyy post" like you seem to be implying. That was a direct, "let's cause problems" post and nothing more. So again, under my don't-feed-the-trolls policy, I trashed it. A minute or two later, you posted the exact same thing. At that point, it becomes spam. So I solved it in the same way that I always solve that problem -- I gave you the shortest possible ban. I figured by the time the 24 hours were up (or however the forum calculates a day), you would stop repeating that message, so that's what I did.

So there are examples of you trying to cause problems. Now, let's look at some stuff before:

Here's one example of flamebait you recently posted:

you just seem like you would be a good Canadian, all you need to do now is smoke weed and sponge off of the government.

You can't honestly believe that by demonstrating total racism against other members, you'd provoke interesting discussion? No. You were trying to take a stab at Canadians. And that isn't the first, there was at least three examples of outright racism in that thread, and I didn't even go through the whole thing. Why would you post that? The only reason I can imagine is flamebait. You were trying to piss people off and incite problems.

Not to mention:

...Stop being a Canadian liberal loving girly-man...

Another pure insult towards a member (in fact, a leader -- that was directed at Sidoh).

So the post before that one insults the Canadian members (me and Blaze), and the second insults Sidoh directly. Now, is there a pattern? Yes -- those are the three leaders.

So the question is raised, are you directly trying to piss off the leaders? Perhaps. Why? To destabilize the clan? The only thing after insulting the leaders would be to find a way of getting yourself banned (spamming is a good way). Then, once that happens, post a thread that can't possibly be argued (hey, look at this!).

I may be making invalid assumptions here, but the case seems pretty clear to me. It wouldn't surprise me in the least bit if all or part of this series of events was planned solely for the purpose of taking that swing at x86 that you've always wanted to make.

So to wrap it up (and because I just spent my entire lunch break typing this...), you're welcome to be here and to express your opinions here and to debate topics. However, don't insult others and don't use empty rhetoric to make other people feel dumb (members or not). Yes, there are others who do that too, and I've talked to them privately about it (the difference with you is that you brought it to a public forum, so here we are). You're welcome here as long as you follow that simple guideline.

Get it?

Oh, and yes, I read your entire post, twice. It wasn't too long for me. Hopefully you don't consider this post belittling,

[ZeroX]

A community of 10 strong is really that upsetting to you trust?

[Sidoh]

I'm not allowed to change my views and "eMannerisms" as I learn things and mature?  Just because my views tend to align with iago's and not yours doesn't mean I'm conforming.  I don't agree with iago on everything, you know.  This exactly the kind of crap you spew that frustrates me.  It doesn't offend me on a personal level because I don't take anything you say to heart, but if you want to post flamebait and knowingly provoke arguments that become personal, then know that someone will probably want you gone.  Also let it be known that I did not propose the vote.  I probably never would unless you did something way worse than your usual.

I'll be the first to admit that I've changed my mind on a lot of things in the past few years, as I'm sure some have noticed.  I'm not religious and I'm more liberal than conservative (but I consider myself a libertarian).  Why is it you believe I'm not allowed to change my opinion on something?  I grew up in a small town, surrounded by conservative people.  My family is conservative, so I was raised to be a conservative, most of my teachers were and nearly all of my classmates were.  I went to college and started to see how uneasy my own opinions actually made me feel.  I slowly began to reject them and here I am today.

I'm not sure how you can claim how some people unjustifiably favor Rule over crazed.  I have far more respect for some people than I do others, as I'm sure is the case with you.  If you want to call that faoritism, then that's fine, but how the hell can anyone treat everyone with a blank slate all of the time?  It doesn't work that way.  While I agree that Rule sometimes steps out of line (as does crazed) and I don't like that, I see a great deal of value in the posts where he doesn't.  You can disagree, but I think Rule is fantastic, aside from him directly insulting people (even when it'd normally be considered "called for").

You should also know that this doesn't only happen to you, so stop acting like an innocent victim.  There have been proposals to ban a number of other people, including some that you would want banned as well, I'd imagine.  They rarely pass, though, and the only two standing permabans I can think of are for c0n and Topaz.

Trust, I can't see how you can claim that a response to a long, thought out post calling me a lilly-livered Canadian constitutes a discussion.  It seems you believe that you're being treated unfairly and for the reason you have different opinions.  I'll tell you right now that's not the reason your ban was proposed -- and, again, it wasn't me who did so.  It was because you post flame bait crap that adds no value to a thread.  If you don't know what I'm talking about, refer to Towelie's Naval Academy thread and look at all your posts.  If you can't see a single one of them that classifies as that, let me know so I can point you to the ones we're referring to.

Someone proposed you be banned, trust.  There's a vote up now where members are voting.  We will NOT defy the result of the vote.  Every member I've talked to except Ender agrees that leaders (if there's a consensus) can ban a member for a very limited amount of time if they become a problem, which I think you did.

If you take anything from this, let it be the following: you weren't banned for 24 hours because of your opinions.  This and the ban proposal which is being voted on by all members right now is a result of your insults that were contrived to do nothing more than get a cheap laugh at the expense of others.

[iago]

I don't agree with iago on everything, you know.

I disagree with that.

..... crap!

[rabbit]

Trust, you're an idiot.  Here's what you're doing:
1. You provoke and insult people of Group A
2. Group 1, the leaders of Group A, punish you (the 24 hour ban)
3. You complain to Group A that Group A sucks and is being unfair and that you demand better treatment

Now, with your logic, we should all listen to you otherwise we're queerdo Canadian liberal pussies.  In actuality, complaining to a group about the SAME group is stupid.

It's been said several times already in this thread, but I'll say it again, and not as sugarcoatedly as the others have said it: You're not being banned because you have different opinions, you're being banned because you're a self-centered asshole.

If you don't believe me, then look at it this way:
1. You and CrAz3D have almost the same opinions
2. You're an ass, CrAz3D [usually] isn't
3. CrAz3D is a MEMBER, so even when he IS an ass, we put up with it, because it's not his norm and we understand that
4. You're a CANCER.  No matter what treatment we apply, you come back and often times worse than before

Do you see the logic yet?

Stop complaining and pushing your double standards on us (like iago said, no matter what we do you're the innocent victim and we're the evil conspiratorial government or something) and SHUT THE FUCK UP.  Learn to live with people not liking you when you insult and belittle them.

[Newby]

Most members that I talked to were unhappy, which is why Newby and darkness created x86 in the first place. That's the history of x86/e1 from my angle, take it or leave it.

To clarify, me and Darkness formed x86 for two reasons:

1. We wanted a cool clan tag for playing D&D on Warcraft III. What's sad is it died there, too, since I thought the name Newby[x86] was too long.
2. We liked x86 assembly.

Then, when e1 was starting to crumble, we decided to take off with it.

When I get some free time (not today and definitely not tomorrow, possibly Friday) if this topic is still alive, I'll post my two cents.

*continues reading*

[ZeroX]

Trust, you're an idiot.  Here's what you're doing:
1. You provoke and insult people of Group A
2. Group 1, the leaders of Group A, punish you (the 24 hour ban)
3. You complain to Group A that Group A sucks and is being unfair and that you demand better treatment

Now, with your logic, we should all listen to you otherwise we're queerdo Canadian liberal pussies.  In actuality, complaining to a group about the SAME group is stupid.

It's been said several times already in this thread, but I'll say it again, and not as sugarcoatedly as the others have said it: You're not being banned because you have different opinions, you're being banned because you're a self-centered asshole.

If you don't believe me, then look at it this way:
1. You and CrAz3D have almost the same opinions
2. You're an ass, CrAz3D [usually] isn't
3. CrAz3D is a MEMBER, so even when he IS an ass, we put up with it, because it's not his norm and we understand that
4. You're a CANCER.  No matter what treatment we apply, you come back and often times worse than before

Do you see the logic yet?

Stop complaining and pushing your double standards on us (like iago said, no matter what we do you're the innocent victim and we're the evil conspiratorial government or something) and SHUT THE FUCK UP.  Learn to live with people not liking you when you insult and belittle them.

Not stating what you said wasent true. But in a more diplomatic sense I think thats what people are trying to get across to you trust =/

[MyndFyre]

Trust, I've been against banning you from the start.  I've been one of the more staunch defenders of you, in fact.  But this kind of shit is lame and annoying.  

The problems we had with e1 is that your bannings of non-members were seemingly more arbitrary than vL's.  At least most of the time vL's bans were because someone had pissed a member off.

Now, I certainly don't agree with a non-designated-moderator-of-a-member's-forum trashing a thread within a member's forum.  But I'm also not a leader anymore, and my influence extends only so far as I care to flex my voice.  I don't know how you can know with certainty who trashed your thread; I can't, and I'm a member here.

There are always going to be favorites of members and non-members.  Equal treatment is not guaranteed by the rules; the rights and privileges of members are clearly delineated, however, and non-members certainly haven't enjoyed rights of members, nor have members been denied privileges given to non-members that aren't listed in the rules.  Personally I like CrAz3D a lot less than when he joined; I think he's gone downhill.  I like Rule a lot less even than CrAz3D (though I like him more than I liked GameSnake, that's for damn sure - but I quit being leader so I could head up the charge to get him kicked out).  Still, one way or the other, I think that saying that it's a dictatorship is unfair.

[Chavo]

Trust,  here is my point of view:

I joined the clan with zero knowledge of its history or dealings with you, e1, and for the large part even vL.  At the time, my impression of you was that you were just another high school kid that I didn't really have anything in common with.  I did not dislike you, you did not upset me, but I never had anything to talk to you about so I didn't talk to you.  That is just me.

If you will recall, we had a bit of a disagreement not long after you graduated from high school and began your transition to what I classify as the typical freshman frat boy.  When you started showing a guiltless, racist attitude towards some serious topics, my opinion of you declined rapidly and I chose not to have anything to do with you anymore.  Now that is two strikes against you in my personal playbook.  I hate frats and I hate racists.  The former is your life decision and while I do actually have friends that were/are in frats, I would not consider any of them to be my closest friends.  Before this turns into a post that looks like I'm just flaming you for the things I don't like, my point is this:  I don't like you and it has nothing to do with any history of this clan or any other.  If I am able to dislike you this easily, perhaps people that know you better and for a longer time are not completely off their rockers.

[iago]

Now, I certainly don't agree with a non-designated-moderator-of-a-member's-forum trashing a thread within a member's forum.  But I'm also not a leader anymore, and my influence extends only so far as I care to flex my voice.  I don't know how you can know with certainty who trashed your thread; I can't, and I'm a member here.

I'm ok with saying that I did that.

I normally won't moderate members' forums, except by accident, but Trust has posted multiple anti-x86 threads in CrAz3d's forum for the purpose of inciting problems. I thought it was important that they be trashed before they caused a bigger issue, so I did. Same with this thread, which was posted in CrAz3'd forum -- I moved it to general because it didn't really belong in a personal forum.

CrAz3d -- I'll move any of the three threads back, if for some reason you want them.

[CrAz3D]

I agree and disagree with trust.  Many of his posts I can see being offensive if you're on the recieving end.  I'm often on the recieving end of many offensive posts here, but I either fire back or brush it off.  Trust does tend to spark things, but I've yet to see anything AT ALL that justifies banning him (at all).

iago, you talked about trust's "ban rabbit post."  By deleting it you were responding to him.  You very much "fed the troll" whether you intended to or not.  Even though we know trust's intentions aren't exactly to ban rabbit because of XXXX, trust might have some sort of valid point about non-members requesting bans.  Maybe we should amend the rules.
I believe that it's best to let small 'rebellion' difuse on its own accord, not try to stop it ... unless there is a real threat that is.


As for insulting posts ... might I suggest you read rabbit's post where he attacks trust on a personal level.  This thread isn't even about me and he has taken steps to indirectly insult me.  I don't think it's fair to ask something of non-members we can't ask of ourselves (I'll be the first to admit I'll attack people personally, but not usually with the ferocity rabbit does)

Trust, you're an idiot.  Here's what you're doing:
1. You provoke and insult people of Group A
2. Group 1, the leaders of Group A, punish you (the 24 hour ban)
3. You complain to Group A that Group A sucks and is being unfair and that you demand better treatment

Now, with your logic, we should all listen to you otherwise we're queerdo Canadian liberal pussies.  In actuality, complaining to a group about the SAME group is stupid.

It's been said several times already in this thread, but I'll say it again, and not as sugarcoatedly as the others have said it: You're not being banned because you have different opinions, you're being banned because you're a self-centered asshole.

If you don't believe me, then look at it this way:
1. You and CrAz3D have almost the same opinions
2. You're an ass, CrAz3D [usually] isn't
3. CrAz3D is a MEMBER, so even when he IS an ass, we put up with it, because it's not his norm and we understand that
4. You're a CANCER.  No matter what treatment we apply, you come back and often times worse than before

Do you see the logic yet?

Stop complaining and pushing your double standards on us (like iago said, no matter what we do you're the innocent victim and we're the evil conspiratorial government or something) and SHUT THE FUCK UP.  Learn to live with people not liking you when you insult and belittle them.

I like Rule a lot less even than CrAz3D

I feel the love in the air!   !!!  hehe

[Warrior]

I think this is the result of really a lot of things. No single event, or even handful of events can be blamed.

There's the downlfall of e1, the birth of x86, bad blood for Trust, and probably equal bad blood for founding members (minus me of course, no one is this foolish) as just a few of the main causes.

I really think, that these outlined causes while they hold weight in as to why some of the anger is there do not tell the whole story. A lot of this is also from assumptions of continued hatred on both sides, which therefore fuels more hatred, and as a result even more hatred on the side of Trust.

Maybe there's a possibility that one side began not to hate the other as much as he originally did. We've been here a while, and past grudges may not have at one point been held anymore. The problem is, there may of been a lack of communication, and the continuous hatred by one side oblivious to what was going on may of been enough to keep the conflict alive.

There's probably no doubt that either side has invited themselves for insults, that's a given. The problem is, most of this is a reaction to something prior and it just keeps gaining momentum and volume like a snowball going down a snowy mountain side. It's hard to see just exactly what triggered the snow ball, but that's irrelevant. The problem now is that it's still rolling on.

People have personal vendettas against Trust, and I'm sure Trust has had intentions of bringing out a rise in plenty of people. The problem here, is that in seemingly unrelated topics there is an inevitable provocation by either or both sides to join the flame war.

It's getting tiring, mostly because not only don't I give a flying shit if anyone's opinion get's hurt, but I also become annoyed by the constant back and forth almost childish like attitudes employed by both sides.

No one is right, both sides are wrong in one or more places. This is more like the "one day a long time ago that kid would not let me play with his ball so he cant come in the sandbox with us"

That would be sort of logical if the kids in the sandbox were not 40 year old males who should of dropped it years ago.

[rabbit]

First off, when I met Trust, I liked him fine.  Second, my thread was not full of insults, it was full of my recent observations of Trust's behavior.

[CrAz3D]

"You're an asshole"
"You're CANCER"
"You're an ass"

... those aren't insults?  Surely they're not compliments and they are definitely comments towards Trust as a personal, not a criticism of him or his ideas.