Formal apologies between me and Brigadier Graham.

**Каие** · May 17, 2010, 07:09 PM

Originally Posted by Legio

Guys, let's listen to Simetrical and go back to the original purpose of the thread. Some parties may feel that they have been snubbed, but let's leave it at that. This thread has gone on long enough and I think that we have all seen eachother's true colors now. Let's listen to Sim and quit the bickering.

^^ Who's this guy?

**gambit** · May 17, 2010, 06:46 PM

Id rather argue more

**Justinian** · May 17, 2010, 08:26 PM

At any rate I have no interest in continuing this dialogue when Graham refuses to apologize or even explain himself, so that's that.

**Justinian** · May 17, 2010, 10:45 PM

Besides, the same things happened on Anagennese in its early days

**Garbarsardar** · May 17, 2010, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by Justinian

Besides, the same things happened on Anagennese in its early days

No Justy, not really, especially not in the early days. What happened in Ana was a semi-organised effort to attack the then administration of the site over specific issues as the "hacker attacks" and the ineptitude of the ON administration. The people who took part risked very long bans and even the deletion of their accounts. And while to a casual observer it was another instance of web bickering, you and I know well that there were issues involved pertaining to the existance of TWC as a site. I am loath to use the words "higher purpose" and "moral imperative" but that is exactly how we all felt, including you.

So no, this is not the same thing as trolling or calling for the trolling of a single member. I agree it was not an organised effort, by TWC standards at least, and I think Sim never said it was. I read the word "encourage" in his post and nothing more dramatic or pointing to a conspiracy.

On a side note the way many of you fellas posted in this thread and the depths of

ing that occurred in the Symposium of all places, is quite disappointing. But please go on, I'm just an old fart...

**Justinian** · May 18, 2010, 12:09 AM

Originally Posted by Garbarsardar

No Justy, not really, especially not in the early days. What happened in Ana was a semi-organised effort to attack the then administration of the site over specific issues as the "hacker attacks" and the ineptitude of the ON administration. The people who took part risked very long bans and even the deletion of their accounts. And while to a casual observer it was another instance of web bickering, you and I know well that there were issues involved pertaining to the existance of TWC as a site. I am loath to use the words "higher purpose" and "moral imperative" but that is exactly how we all felt, including you.

Well that's true, my point is that what's happening on a satellite site like Shamb or Ana always seems worse to people who aren't actually a part of it. Just like how people legitimately believed that Ana was influencing Curial elections through a bloc vote which all Ana members had to be a part of. Shamb members have an unfair stigma associated with them because of misconceptions like Brig's and because of the actions of a few, mostly early in the site's history. The guilty by association thinking and smearing tactics I've seen offend me because several people whom I consider to be my friends are lumped in with that misconception and insulted, and I defend my friends -- even internet friends. Honestly Brig has been complaining about Shamb consistently for a while now and this whole business was the straw that broke the camel's back, that's why I've taken this so personally -- and there are few things on the internet I take personally.

**Simetrical** · May 18, 2010, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by Justinian

He said concerted effort. Boeing can no more control people posting on Shamb telling people to troll than you can control people posting racist diatribes in the Mudpit; in neither case is it encouraged.

You're correct on that point.

Originally Posted by Justinian

Well that's true, my point is that what's happening on a satellite site like Shamb or Ana always seems worse to people who aren't actually a part of it. Just like how people legitimately believed that Ana was influencing Curial elections through a bloc vote which all Ana members had to be a part of.

Both Anagennese and Shambhala have been the target of inaccurate rumors for the same reasons. If you snub people by rejecting them from your forum, they'll resent you, and you encourage them to make complaints about you. If you keep the contents of your forum private, then no one can rebut any complaints that might be made. This is how rumors arise. If you don't like it, you could open the forum to public viewing. Pretty simple. Of course, then you open yourself up to more legitimate criticism, which you may or may not prefer.

Originally Posted by Justinian

Shamb members have an unfair stigma associated with them because of misconceptions like Brig's and because of the actions of a few, mostly early in the site's history. The guilty by association thinking and smearing tactics I've seen offend me because several people whom I consider to be my friends are lumped in with that misconception and insulted, and I defend my friends -- even internet friends.

A man is known by the company he keeps. If you voluntarily spend much time at Shambhala, that tells everyone that it's the kind of place where you want to spend your time. I think most of its own members would agree that it's basically a place to spam and make crude jokes. A brief glance at any of its forums will confirm that there's very little serious discussion there. Is there anything wrong with hanging out in a place whose contents are practically all spam? No, but it does say something about you. Involvement in Anagennese says something quite different (at least, did when it was still alive).

Originally Posted by Tony83

What concerns me is that a Citizen is being called to task, alledgedly as a result of an anonymous complaint! Is this true? How can it be that someone can make serious allegations such as this in this manner. This "unsigned note under the door" behaviour is something one reads of about the vilest repressionist regimes (Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia spring to mind), not here at TWC. If I were to be accused of something myself, I would at least expect to have the opportunity of facing my accuser. I hope that what I have heard is unfounded.

The procedure is specified in the Constitution. The accuser's identity is concealed from the defendant, but the defendant receives a full copy of the complaint. The CdeC is normally told who made the accusation, although that's only convention.

**Каие** · May 19, 2010, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by Simetrical

A man is known by the company he keeps. If you voluntarily spend much time at Shambhala, that tells everyone that it's the kind of place where you want to spend your time. I think most of its own members would agree that it's basically a place to spam and make crude jokes. A brief glance at any of its forums will confirm that there's very little serious discussion there. Is there anything wrong with hanging out in a place whose contents are practically all spam? No, but it does say something about you. Involvement in Anagennese says something quite different (at least, did when it was still alive).

Yeah, Sim. It says we are bunch of 17-22 year old university/college 'students'.

Originally Posted by Tony83

(I'm assuming that anyone on the CdeC with Shamb associations will recuse themselves).

**karamazovmm** · May 18, 2010, 10:28 AM

Let's just make this real simple, Graham is NOT going to apologize anymore.

What are you going to do about it?

Will the CdC make any moves against him?

If not then this is really a profuse with pointless rants. Be practical people be realistic.

Either you make a move or let it die, no more action is going to come from Graham.

**Lysimachus** · May 18, 2010, 10:31 AM

And give one valid reason why he shouldn't apologise, besides "LA LA LA IM NOT LISTENING SHAMB IS EVIL LA LA LA" which is all he's done so far.

**karamazovmm** · May 18, 2010, 10:37 AM

I never stated there is not something to apologize or that there is, I only said that he is not going to.

**Lysimachus** · May 18, 2010, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by Mr MM

I never stated there is not something to apologize or that there is, I only said that he is not going to.

If he's going to post on the forum like a Victorian gentlemen then he should have the courage to apologise, being honourable "and all that". Urgh, I can't believe I just used Duffer speak.

**karamazovmm** · May 18, 2010, 10:45 AM

lysi be real, he is not going to. He hasn't he passes this thread as he just passed now and do nothing. There is also something called honor in a victorian gentlemen.

**Lysimachus** · May 18, 2010, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by Mr MM

lysi be real, he is not going to. He hasn't he passes this thread as he just passed now and do nothing. There is also something called honor in a victorian gentlemen.

It's an internet forum for crying out loud. What's the worst that could happen? The later he leaves it, the worse it'll get, and the greater the rift he'll be making between himself and quite a fair number of members on here for his inability to man up. What doesn't make sense here is that he has the guts to serve in the military but doesn't have the guts to apologise to a bunch of strategy gamers.

**karamazovmm** · May 18, 2010, 10:50 AM

I give up, discuss all you want. For me it has reached a peak in the kindergarten rate

**Lysimachus** · May 18, 2010, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by Mr MM

I give up, discuss all you want. For me it has reached a peak in the kindergarten rate

Give up because you know i'm right? I noticed all his little Duffer friends supporting him on his profile too, a shame they're unable to realise how far in the wrong he is regarding his accusations.

**karamazovmm** · May 18, 2010, 10:59 AM

I actually pmed him saying that he will be on his own on this (not that he made any contact with me before on this matter), aside that I posted that today just after I posted in this thread (check the time).

Wrong or not I never said any, I just said as always that he will not apologize.

Give up or not does not have against any instance in this matter as I don't have any. I just pointed out that either you move or let it go. Aside that for its not a behavior that I would make in any day.

**Lysimachus** · May 18, 2010, 11:05 AM

I actually pmed him saying that he will be on his own on this (not that he made any contact with me before on this matter), aside that I posted that today just after I posted in this thread (check the time).

Well he has two choices. Apologise for his vile accusations, admit he was wrong and then we can move on. The other choice is to try and ignore the problem. If he does the latter, then well I personally would find that disgraceful that he would be unable to man up to his mistake (and a big one at that, too).

Wrong or not I never said any, I just said as always that he will not apologize.

Which as I said is just outrageous. Come on, seriously. Accusations of child porn and organising troll attacks, both of which were lies. Yes, the latter was bad, but child porn? Seriously? What kind of pedophilia circle does he take Shamb for? It's shunned upon by staff on here, but i'm pretty sure they can say that it's never harboured any form of child porn.

Give up or not does not have against any instance in this matter as I don't have any. I just pointed out that either you move or let it go. Aside that for its not a behavior that I would make in any day.

Oh, regardless of what happens we'll have to move on, it's just that there will be consequences if he doesn't apologise.