I'm not sure mods should be doing any ridicule for any reason... But that's a different problem. Selling diamonds was an example. It was meant to ask who decides what is inflated and what isn't? P.S. I went and read his first post again. before anyone started trolling. Where does it say anyone should be banned from emc? No he stated how he felt about what happened. He didn't flame anyone nor did he troll anyone. Trolling is the act of making outrageous statements to "trawl" a response out of people.
I will not voluntarily surrender my right to ridicule when something is worthy, moderator or not. I prefer to keep my ridicule private as more than a few have seen in private message ban appeals, but when the recipient of my scorn starts public discussions then they open themselves up to minor public humiliation. Accent on the word minor.
I don't even know what to say. Really if mods are allowed to humiliate people whether it's deserved or not I guess I need to rethink if I want to stay on this server........ (I'm not talking about people that have banned for whatever reason) Can you explain to me why alex deserves to be humiliated?
I think the point is: When Alex posted on that thread, lots of people lost some respect for him, as he was clearly over-reacting. This was clearly a bad thing for him to do, for his sake, as people are less likely to use his business etc. However, he continued to argue his way, clearly believing himself to be right, which shows more a misunderstanding of how a capitalist system such as our rupee economy works, rather than "trolling". On the other hand, he has backed down now, at which I think "good for him", as now I have a better opinion of him as I did before I read his apology, and I presume others do too. I am now less likely to let opinion decide who's service I would use, and I presume the same applies to others too. I think that we're debating the wrong idea here. The old thread has basically been resolved, let's leave that behind. What we should be debating on is on the morals behind a capitalist economy such as our rupee system, as people clearly have divided views on that subject, not just in the context of the "xp grinder crisis".
Perhaps "humiliation" was a bit strong of a word. And it's my sincere hope that he doesn't feel humiliated. But the hard cold fact is that when one states their opinions publicly, they do open themselves up to counter-arguments and if their ideas can't compete then the failure of their arguments may, themselves, embarrass that person. Bottom line, if someone doesn't want to feel humiliated (which, again, I don't think I've personally said anything to ridicule or humiliate anyone) then they need to hone sharper debate skills, or learn to admit that their idea had no merit in the first place. For the record, I've never even looked at the other thread that keeps getting mentioned here, so I find it highly unlikely I humiliated anyone there. The idea that we should protect people's business ideas on EMC is patently ridiculous because there really aren't any ideas in MC that any rational person wouldn't have come up with on their own. The ridiculous is worthy of ridicule by definition.
I'm not saying EMC should enforce copyrights. It would be dam near impossible. What I am saying is in my opinion. Alex did have a right to be upset. I think he handled it fine until people started trolling him. He told the person he was upset and would be banning him from his lots. What was wrong about that? It would have ended right there if no one would have trolled him. I'm not against discussions/debates. If this thread isn't proof of that I don't know what to say
Making a post in a public forum about banning someone from all his Residences, how he's lost all respect for them, and generally blowing his top was a handling it fine? Having re-read that entire thread, that's where it went wrong. A more appropriate approach would've been a private message to the person concerned, or better yet, a post launching his own business and advertising it as MRS did. Anyway, we digress again. Ideas are there to be taken, that stands true of here, there and everywhere. Some people get taken to court over IP infringement, breach of Copyright, etc, others just crack on and make a competing product.
Although some people were "trolling", most people weren't, they were telling him that they disagreed, and that he wasn't in the right to object to somebody launching a similar idea to him, in their opinions.
All I can say is that making a public thread and naming names is one of my pet peeves both as a private citizen and as a moderator. Alex is lucky I didn't see him do that on the other thread because I've been known to give people a little time off for things just like that. Kilmannan's suggestion that he would have been better served making a private message is right on the money, in my opinion. Anyway, before I say more (and risk making a major fool of myself) maybe I should pop over and read that other thread. Before I go do that, I will say that I'm also a fan of debates, although too often they devolve into a slingfest of logical fallacies. Because of the overuse of logical fallacies--especially the ad hominem--one needs to have a thick skin before jumping into the fray, though.
This is a fun debate thread. 4 pages and our main rule of keep it to the topic not insult the person is going pretty well from what I can see. It was hard to get off page 1 in our GameKrib days...I'm proud of you. My opinion on the matter. Do I think Alex acted a bit harsh in the original scenario? Yes, I personally do. However, at the same time it is his right to ban him or anyone from his lots if he wants for any reason. Making it as public as he did might have been a mistake (as some have said they will now use others instead of him for certain services for that public action). However, we're so large that I'm sure it won't affect him and his grinder services in the long run, should he keep doing them correctly. In terms of the stealing ideas theory. Unless you're inventing an actual item/service in real life and choose to get a patent for it, I think this entire idea is silly. Most of my good ideas in MC come from trying to improve on an idea that already exists. EMC itself is us taking an idea (multiplayer game server) and doing it better than the rest. We didn't go and ask other server owners for permission before we launched EMC. I'm also willing to bet that since EMC was out later than a lot of the other 'known' servers, a good chunk of ideas used here that are new to EMC, are somewhere out on Youtube or has been done on another server in the past. Even if you didn't know about it, it would be proper (by the theory of not copying ideas without permission) to put in a hardcore search to see if it has been, and ask them for permission to do it on EMC as well. Of course that's a silly idea and we don't expect anyone to do that...but my point is, if someone does something you're doing, either compliment them on doing it better (if it is), or look at how they improved 'your' idea an further enhance the original idea you had. This is the reason why I always shudder the idea of Nintendo/MS/Sony all coming together (a debate gamers have from time to time). They all copy features from each other when new cycles of consoles come out, which makes them all better each time. If there was only ONE, they wouldn't have to try and get better anymore. Another good example of this. This will apply to a lot less people in the topic I'm going to. Professional Wrestling. I used to watch WCW back in the day when it existed. It was very entertaining and one of the things I HAD to watch every week. WCW and WWF (at the time) had Monday night wars to get ratings. Well, WWF being out first clearly had the good idea as it was successful. WCW came in and copied a lot of it but added their own flare. A funny tactic WCW did at the time: WWF on Mondays were taped but aired the same time WCW was on, LIVE. At the beginning of each WCW show, they already knew what was going to happen on WWF and would announce it at the beginning of their show with a line of like: "Now you don't have to watch them during our commercials!" and would KILL in the ratings. This forced WWF to go Live and put in some better tactics. Both parties rised in the ratings for a good while going head to head. Well, eventually WWF (WWE now) bought out WCW and closed them out. While they were their own competitor now, their ratings slowly went down and the show became much much worse/boring to watch. tl;dr - Competition is good. Use it to better yourself and everyone wins.
Not forgetting that WWF was constantly being dragged through the courts for mis-using the WWF brand after an agreement was reached between them and the World Wildlife Federation for the wrestling franchise not to abuse the name.
I went through the thread again to be sure. He was never rude to anyone else in the thread unless they were trolling him. Anyone that that didn't troll him got a decent explaination. If I'm missing something feel free to link it. There is only 1 owrd I disagree with being in this post. I don't think I have to point it out. He did not blow his top. He did not insult him. He stated how he felt. He did not ask for him to be punished. He did not ask for him to stop. This is only my opinions but iI think if no one would have trolled him he would have never replied again.
I suppose it depends how you define trolling. The troll post example that you quoted before was: Out of context, this looks like trolling, but I don't think that it is. If you read it in terms of the rest of the post, it is an example of what the quoted person's point was saying. Anyway, I feel a bit hypocritical, as I posted above: ...and now I've joined in with the "debating the wrong idea".
These types of debates always make me think of those anti-piracy commercials by the MPAA and RIAA where they show a Ferrari or some other sports car and the narrator says, "you wouldn't steal a car." And I've always thought to myself that, if I had a device where I could walk up to a Buggati Veyron on the street, scan it, and replicate a perfect copy without causing so much as a minor scratch to the original; you're darn right I would! I then wonder if the 24th Century version of Twinings gets all bent out of shape when Captain Picard tells his replicator "Tea, Earl Grey: hot." and receives a piping cup of their product gratis.
Remember, guys. Keep this on topic, and respect EVERYONE'S opinions. I would hate to see this locked because someone overreacted a little and decided that their ideas were so superior to someone else's that they had to go off and call them an idiot. (Of course this hasn't happened yet, I would just like to prevent it.) And might I say again: If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all.
I would too. I always thought they said "You wouldn't download a car", but I could be mistaken. Or maybe they've changed the text since I last saw one. In any case, I always find it disgusting how they try to make file sharing = theft... I'm not advocating breaking any laws or anything. It just bothers me strongly that they deliberately use incorrect terminology (like theft) and derogatory terms (like piracy), both of which have horrible connotations, to get more sympathy from the general public and the legal system. As the graphic is meant to illustrate, both terms are incorrectly applied to file sharers, who neither steal nor pirate. Yes, they are breaking laws, but what they are committing is copyright infringement, not theft, and that is not a minor difference, like some people try to make it out to be. My apologies SecretAznEks, for going a little off topic (though I didn't start it, haha) but I swear I have like a mild form of OCD for accuracy and legality, and EdmundWayne here just struck a nerve with me that I wished to elaborate on. Here, I'll put in a little on-topic stuff too, and then we're all good? Ideas are not copyrightable or trademarkable. It bothers me how people don't know the difference between copyright, trademarks and patents, and it bothers me especially when they all get grouped under the "intellectual property" (IP) umbrella, again typically done to get sympathy from the general public and the legal system. Or rather, it bothers me when people don't know the difference, but still argue in discussions as if they do. If you've brought up copyrights or trademarks in this debate about stealing ideas, you don't know what you're talking about and need to go read up on those topics. Ideas aren't patentable either, per se. A specific use of an idea is, however. Here's a definition: The term patent usually refers to the right granted to anyone who invents any new, useful, and non-obvious process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter. As a real world example, if you can think of a genius new way of making ice cream both taste better and be cheaper to make than anyone before you, you can patent that process and then sell ice cream cheaper than your competitors. However, with what seems to be the case behind this discussion thread, that if you want to start a new ice cream company, the other ice cream companies can't stop you with reasoning like "Hey, we're already selling ice cream, you can't do it too!" The "idea" to sell ice cream or the "idea" to create mob farms are not patentable. If EMC allowed it (which it shouldn't IMO) a specific mob farm design could in theory be patentable, but again, only if it's new, useful and non-obvious.
Two pronged response. First prong: it's perfectly fine, and I get that you think you're getting a little off topic here. IMO you're perfectly alright, as this is a very broad subject and you brought up some very good points. Second prong: that new ice cream maker... Could it be an IcecreamCow?! XD
This isn't what I said, and if I did, I didn't mean it in quite that way - people that trolled on that thread should not have posted, it didn't help the situation and as angry as I felt about it, I could of rightfully ended up with a temp-ban. And the moderator in question also didn't help the situation. I think now, you're just changing every thing I say and making me out to be a totally evil person, which I'm not. Also, I don't see anyone else with the same idea, so I think I did.. Too ICC, Edmund and Company: I said before in my apology, the matter WAS dealt with in a private conversation between me and the other business owner. Everything was sorted out and he explained his reason which I fully understand. To say that I made a public thread about him, that I trolled before anyone else and that I "named names" is wrong. To say that I was harsh, and should not have had a go like that (at the OP, not the trollers) I completely agree with.
Alright, here are the trolls (please excuse my bad copy and pasting): So after looking at all these, you still believe that I was trolling + all of the things I was described as doing? These were posted whilst a moderator and admin were in the conversation, which really disappoints me. After this, I was still described as a troller. ON-TOPIC: Now, back to the actual topic I believe?
