The official server flamewar topic

[GARRETTtheGREAT]

The way I now choose to see it, both copies of the TMW are equally unauthorized.

There's no way Platyna has zero rights to the save data and there's no way that the TMWC et al have zero rights**. Assigning each party a percent ownership is useless and arbitrary at best. Even if one party owns 99% and the other 1% interest in the data, there's no way to define who owns what part, and as far as I know, all owners have to consent for the data to be used. Considering both servers are run by part owners and the owners are entitled to use the data they own, you could say both are authorized copies or both are not authorized copies, but there's a stalemate either way.

So, in my opinion, the current scenario of two servers run by two sets of ex-partners is the best one we're ever going to have and it's pointless to try and argue over the trifles, when they won't sway the argument either way.

As for me, that's my final answer. Both sides of the issue have done things that I disagree with at some point in time. Play the game however is going to make you sleep better at night. Both sides have some good ideas I don't want to see go to waste, so I guess I'll ride the fence and take my special place in hell when that day comes.


** Why I am making the above assumption ***
If we assume Platyna owns all of the data that was created under her care, there was still an original set of data that pre-dates the Platinum server which would be the previous owners'.
If we assume TMWC owns all of the data, they would have inherited that ownership from the GHP, of which Platyna was a member and she would have had to forfeit her rights in order for her to now have none.

You could argue that ElvenProgrammer, the TMW community, Jesus Christ, or anyone else owns the data, but the above two scenarios make the most sense to me, and neither assigns full ownership to either party. I could go on to argue every other theory on the ownership, but I either don't put any faith in those theories, or they don't put 100% ownership in either party's hands. I'm beyond tired of thinking about it. I'm going to go do something productive.

[Crush]

Concern Troll

From http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Concern_troll:

A concern troll visits sites of an opposing ideology and offers advice on how they could "improve" things, either in their tactical use of rhetoric, site rules, or with more philosophical consistency.

A typical formulation might involve the troll's invocation of a site's espoused ideals alongside a perceived example of hypocrisy (such as contrasting "we value free speech" with the banning of a "dissenter"), and with a call for some relevant reform by the troll. This reform will frequently be burdensome or silly - the concern troll's message is: "I have some concerns about your methods. If you did these things to make your message less effective, it would be more effective.". Surprisingly, there are people who spend so much time on the Internet that this is actually a thing they worry about.

One common tactic of concern trolls is the "a plague on both your houses" approach, where the concern troll tries to convince people that both sides of the ideological divide are just as bad as each other, and so no one can think themselves "correct" but must engage in endless hedging and caveats. This preys on a willingness to debate critics and allow dissent; everyone wastes time discussing the matter and bending over backwards, so as not to appear intolerant of disagreement, all to the great amusement of the troll.

From http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... cern+troll:

A person who posts on a blog thread, in the guise of "concern," to disrupt dialogue or undermine morale by pointing out that posters and/or the site may be getting themselves in trouble, usually with an authority or power. They point out problems that don't really exist. The intent is to derail, stifle, control, the dialogue. It is viewed as insincere and condescending.

+1

[blackrazor]

ad-hominem: Marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made.

If you cannot support your argument, just attack the person instead. It's easier.

ex: Person A is a concern-troll (or insert any other thing here), therefore the critique and suggestions put forward have no merit. It helps that we are quite comfortable with the new status-quo right now, so please go take a long walk off a short pier.


http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacie ... minem.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad%20hominem

[o11c]

Newsflash: saying that someone is not making a valid argument is not an ad-hominem attack.

[blackrazor]

Newsflash: saying that someone is not making a valid argument is not an ad-hominem attack.

Newsflash: Implying that someone is a concern-troll instead of addressing the actual issues is exactly an ad-hominem attack. It's okay though. It was bound to happen, sooner or later. It wasn't you, o11c.

[Big Crunch]

Newsflash: We're all idiots at this point. At least Al Einsteins version of insane...

BC

[Nard]

At least Al Einsteins version of insane...

It is likely that Einstein is not the author of the quote you refer to, at leats not in the form which is most quoted.

Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein → under the "Misattributed" frame.





Edit: Only o11c is allowed to say that someone is an idiot.

[Big Crunch]

At least Al Einsteins version of insane...

It is likely that Einstein is not the author of the quote you refer to, at leats not in the form which is most quoted.

Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein → under the "Misattributed" frame.





Edit: Only o11c is allowed to say that someone is an idiot.

stop being mean

[Len]

Can I get free advertisement for my server like .Net If I go to war with .Org too? (being in off topic is no fun )

[Frost]

Can I get free advertisement for my server

Absolutely not. Whispers of Avalon is terrible and never in a million years would I visit your rotten web site http://woa.freeforums.net/

Peck poo, you profligate piece of protuberant pixel perdition!

[Len]

Lol, thanks

[Nard]

As someone who actually bothered to READ that law, I can say that what we've done is allowed on either of at least two completely independent clauses.
Come back when you've actually read the thing, instead of just repeating things you heard.

This is not because yoy read it that you understood it

Again, you complete miss the point. The community *has* voted both in-game and on the forums

When did it happen? I may have missed it. Anyway If you "read the thing" (and understood it) the user's agreement (and not a vote) should have been asked before the move, especially for a move outside EEC.

I can't speak with certainty of how the playerbase sees Platyna now, but she used to be known as the one who made drunk @broadcasts and did trivias. I *can* speak of how players see *me* - as an admittedly-distant figure who does important things to keep the game running.

admittedly-distant figure is not the word I would choose, especially now that you do not fear anyone. I don't think you really see how players see you.

I wasn't here more than 3 years ago, so I don't know what it was like back before that. However, it is fair to say that, over the last few years, The Mana World has stagnated under Platyna's care.

First you are not really kind with the developer team who was in charge 3 years ago: Platyna yes but also Bjorn Freeyorp, Jaxad, Wombat, Enchilado, i, Meway, Chicka, MadCamel, Alastrim not to speak about 4144... and do you really think TMW content stagnated during last 3 years?

[WildX]

[*] ElvenProgrammer, as the owner of the domain, has final authority over major decisions.[/list]

So him being completely inactive for over 4 years is not a problem to you? If you started asking Elven permission for every major change to the game and he didn't reply to you, you'd probably have to kick him out as well. The only difference is that you directly bypass his permission every time (except for when you kicked Platyna out, that time you just convinced him that she was completely inactive and TMW was about to die in order to get a murmured "yes" out of his mouth).

I am leading the timeline initiative. I would hope that everyone involved could trust me as a neutral arbiter here.

I insist that all events must be neutrally, factually worded and objectively backed up with references such as forum posts or IRC logs from public channels. I have been pushing to declassify many relevant threads for this purpose. If you do not feel the end result is representative of the truth, I of course will be open to factual, objective amendments. In advance, to everyone: No ad hominem, please.

I have reached out to all sides to get as many statements and responses as possible, and will repeat the exercise before its release. Unfortunately, some people seem to feel that this is not worth their time, or that asking for responses to statements by the other side constitutes my defending the other side. I hope that everyone would be more open in the closing round, in order to represent as wide and as factual a range of events as possible.

I have already reclaimed all of my old IRC logs prior to 2010-07-27 and after 2011-12-23, with the rest physically en route via UPS. Almost everything happens via IRC, so referencing key events there will be crucial.


---Freeyorp

I'm glad you're doing this, but I'm convinced this should have been done before the server move, like a sort of trial.

[Len]

Again, you complete miss the point. The community *has* voted both in-game and on the forums

When did it happen? I may have missed it. Anyway If you "read the thing" (and understood it) the user's agreement (and not a vote) should have been asked before the move, especially for a move outside EEC.

He means they voted through action, by staying with.org rather than running off to .Net.

I'm glad you're doing this, but I'm convinced this should have been done before the server move, like a sort of trial.

I'd be afraid to anger someone whom could do a lot of damage out of spite (not that she would do such a thing).

[Nard]

He means they voted through action, by staying with.org rather than running off to .Net.

I understood that Len. however I cannot say this is a vote nor admit it can be interpreted as a vote. Most players come to this server because their friends are on this server and because TMW is bookmarked here. Not because they support an admin or another. If conditions change a bit, after server bugs for example, and you will see how fast players can move ( not necessarily to original server but it has an advantage). As a player I behave mainly as sheep, just as a couple of contributors of this thread.