Free Flight, Free Speech

hans05 wrote:New and hot: Not banning people, just deleting all posts you do not like and then block the topic!!

This is an old technique of theirs.
But if they are deleting your posts now it's almost certain you already crossed the point of no return.
They never care for what you have to say, but now they don't care for faking respect anymore.

I guess you want to tell me that you do not see it necessary to create a category "The Club of People whose Posts get deleted" since I will very soon be official member in the "Club of the Banned", is it that?!?

This club is rather exclusive..... Having a club of deleted posts would rapidly fill up with all kinds of white trailer trash.....

I proudly announce that I am "warning level [2]" now.

Unfortunately I have no idea what that means. Could somebody enlighten me? How close to getting banned am I? Do they ever DEcrease the warning level?

No it's never reduced.... 'Moderators' within FG... be it there, here or anywhere else use a totting up system, it's pretty damn standard.

Every post you write, no matter where gets you closer and closer to the line, eventually you'll cross it... they'll probably tell you it's for continuously instigating, trolling, being a rabid dog, shitting in the corner, digging your own grave... but whatever it'll be your fault that they've ran out of patience and that you need to take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror.

The definition of moderators in any FG forum needs a real look at... because they all aim to be within a cliche of superior individuals, who shall not be talked back too.

Simon

This might be of interest:

While differing opinions are fine, facts are facts. Continual disagreement with facts is considered trolling.

While constructive criticism of the FlightGear project is OK, denigrating the project is not.

On the other hand, Thorsten could follow this advice a bit more, I think:

Don't feed the trolls. If you consider someone is making a contentious post just to get a reaction, report it to a moderator rather than responding

You have nothing to worry about - I have a warning level of 8... banning is not according to warning level but severity of rule violation

123apple wrote:This might be of interest:

While differing opinions are fine, facts are facts. Continual disagreement with facts is considered trolling.

While constructive criticism of the FlightGear project is OK, denigrating the project is not.

I am of the humble opinion that quoting and re-quoting nonsensical statements is a better definition for trolling, and 123apple has just given us a neat example

Lydiot also talking out of this arse it seems....

"Thread title: "Proposition to eliminate all WIKIS"

There's a reason people respond the way they do when you express yourself that way. "could need improvement" and "eliminate" aren't really compatible."

That maybe the title of the thread but surely actually reading the content is of more importance, in which he makes it quite clear... so no Lydiot, considering the times you've had what you've written, misquoted and misrepresented you'd think you'd have some consideration for others.

Here what he actually wrote, his proposition.

"Flightgear WIKIS, in general, harm nominal Flightgear users.
They should be removed from the nominal Flightgear experience (meaning, they should at first be removed from the internet, entirely)
If there is anything valuable in their content, then that content should be reintroduced into Flightgear in a more controlled way, and surely in a way that does not confuse or otherwise harm new Flightgear users.
FlyingHigh."

Simon

IAHM-COL wrote:

123apple wrote:This might be of interest:

While differing opinions are fine, facts are facts. Continual disagreement with facts is considered trolling.

While constructive criticism of the FlightGear project is OK, denigrating the project is not.

I am of the humble opinion that quoting and re-quoting nonsensical statements is a better definition for trolling, and 123apple has just given us a neat example

Thorsten, Curts and some others do that in about every other post considering my person. Your humble opinion would mean that they are a very neat trolls.
What I liked most is when Curst confirmed that I MUST be a FGMEMBER-fake-account-criminal and some few posts later bugman reveals that it is clear to the admin team that I am not fake while it is also clear that I joined this forum AFTER I started my "disussions" in the FG-forum.
It is so obviously about discrediting people, who express criticism in the forum, at any cost.

Generally my humble opinion stays that there are many people in the FG forum who "work" by the book.....of the title "Propaganda and Leadership for Dictators". There is a famous book (that really exists) from the German philosopher Schopenhauer "The Art of Being Right" and either the Curts and Thorstens and some others have read it thoroughly or they are naturals. Important to note is that Schopenhauer himself stated in his lifetime that the contents of that book (they are a collection of notes of him) are NOT meant as an advice but just a collection of what is possible. In fact he himself said that it is VERY bad characters that argue in the ways described in his book. I can only agree. But in FG forum quite a number of people do not.

What I have to acknowledge is, that it seems to be working. I guess the way they are communicating in the forum scares away people like me and what is left is people who agree to the dictatorship-like style. Reminds me of a very dark period of time in Germany and (at least) Europe. And that's the reason for me not wanting to shut up.

123apple wrote:This might be of interest:

While differing opinions are fine, facts are facts. Continual disagreement with facts is considered trolling.

While constructive criticism of the FlightGear project is OK, denigrating the project is not.

On the other hand, Thorsten could follow this advice a bit more, I think:

Don't feed the trolls. If you consider someone is making a contentious post just to get a reaction, report it to a moderator rather than responding

You have nothing to worry about - I have a warning level of 8... banning is not according to warning level but severity of rule violation

Thanks for the info