| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1jesse.two.coinsJul 04, 2011 17:52:40 | WoTC wasn't happy with me posting their link to customer service complaints. This is blatant censorship. Someone find the link again and post it here please. It should be in the email they send you after a moderation. EDIT: I got it deploy.ztelligence.com/start/survey/surv... |
| #2sallaJul 04, 2011 17:54:47 | WoTC wasn't happy with me posting their link to customer service complaints. This is blatant censorship. Someone find the link again and post it here please. It should be in the email they send you after a moderation. Censorship is an action by a political entity. This is WotC's private property, and they have every right to moderate it in whatever manner they see fit. |
| #3Robin_HoodlumJul 04, 2011 18:09:18 | WoTC wasn't happy with me posting their link to customer service complaints. This is blatant censorship. Someone find the link again and post it here please. It should be in the email they send you after a moderation. So in other words, when they get mad, they take their ball and go home. *shrug* I expected a little more maturity from Wizards, but meh... And it is "odd" that they delete such a thing. But I'm not really surprised by bias and favortisim on this site anymore... |
| #4mudbunnyJul 04, 2011 22:59:03 | Any discussion of moderation that goes beyond a broad overview and drops into the details is almost guaranteed to get deleted pretty quick. WotC has always been pretty clear about that. Now, that being said, WotC *is* aware of the problems that some people have with the moderation of the forums as well as the info (or lack thereof, depending on the case) that is given out. They are also aware of the (and this is my term) "lack of consequences" for repeatedly breaking the CoC, and the immense dislike that numerous posters have for that as well. They are discussing changes to the moderation, but, given that there are *numerous* groups, both in WotC as well as potentially Hasbro, that may need to sign off on changes as significant as that, it may take a while. |
| #5boraxeJul 05, 2011 14:55:38 | WoTC wasn't happy with me posting their link to customer service complaints. This is blatant censorship. Someone find the link again and post it here please. It should be in the email they send you after a moderation. No, in other words it's their court and they decide what rules apply. |
| #6Robin_HoodlumJul 05, 2011 15:45:34 | WoTC wasn't happy with me posting their link to customer service complaints. This is blatant censorship. Someone find the link again and post it here please. It should be in the email they send you after a moderation. Like I said. |
| #7homicidal_squirrelJul 05, 2011 15:53:44 | WoTC wasn't happy with me posting their link to customer service complaints. This is blatant censorship. Someone find the link again and post it here please. It should be in the email they send you after a moderation. It's funny... for some reason I thought you would be in agreement with a private corporation setting up a website and dictating it's own rules on that website instead of allowing a bunch of people that haven't paid anything towards the website, and get to use it free of charge, complain about how the corporations moderation of its own website isn't fair. |
| #8Robin_HoodlumJul 05, 2011 16:07:20 | The rules are fine, the implementation sucks, as does the moderation. |
| #9homicidal_squirrelJul 05, 2011 16:08:56 | The rules are fine, the implementation sucks. And here I thought the private sector was better at implementation ![]() |
| #10Robin_HoodlumJul 05, 2011 16:10:16 | The rules are fine, the implementation sucks. It is. Are you suggesting the gov't would do better than Wizards? OMG, this place would be a madhouse! |
| #11homicidal_squirrelJul 05, 2011 16:11:50 | The rules are fine, the implementation sucks. It couldn't possible be any worse. |
| #12LFKJul 05, 2011 16:13:18 | It couldn't possible be any worse. Careful: that sounds like a challenge. |
| #13Robin_HoodlumJul 05, 2011 16:13:19 | The rules are fine, the implementation sucks. Kind sir, I beg to differ! |
| #14homicidal_squirrelJul 05, 2011 16:22:51 | The rules are fine, the implementation sucks. So far the U.S. hasn't blown up. The government seems to have been able to run the country well enough that we are here today. |
| #15pluisjenJul 05, 2011 16:44:18 | For these forums to get any worse they'd have to not only do something, but actively try to do something wrong ![]() |
| #16trappedsliderJul 05, 2011 16:48:04 | For these forums to get any worse they'd have to not only do something, but actively try to do something wrong and hope that more responsible and growen up forum useres don't report the coc violations |
| #17jesse.two.coinsJul 05, 2011 16:52:09 | For these forums to get any worse they'd have to not only do something, but actively try to do something wrong not trolling but is english a native language for you? |
| #18trappedsliderJul 05, 2011 16:54:29 | For these forums to get any worse they'd have to not only do something, but actively try to do something wrong yes and I consistently fail on my spelling check and no i don't use a browser that has a bulit in spell checker |
| #19jesse.two.coinsJul 05, 2011 17:00:01 | For these forums to get any worse they'd have to not only do something, but actively try to do something wrong try google chrome its pretty nice. |
| #20trappedsliderJul 05, 2011 17:00:40 | For these forums to get any worse they'd have to not only do something, but actively try to do something wrong no thank you,i'm happy with my IE |
| #21ADHadhJul 05, 2011 17:14:21 | IE doesn't have a spell checker? I have two in my Firefox, Polish and American English. But I don't usually use the Polish one, for obvious reasons. Too bad the browser itself is a little slow. |
| #22jetshieldJul 05, 2011 17:34:39 | There's a polish spell checker? I thought polish was an entirely phonetic language... Guess that's what I get for thinking. |
| #23ADHadhJul 05, 2011 18:16:47 | There's a polish spell checker? I thought polish was an entirely phonetic language... There are things that sound alike despite being written in a different way. For instance, "sz", "rz" and "ż" sounds, which all sound the same to English speaker perhaps, but the "sz" is very distinct from the other two for us... which sound the same ![]() |
| #24Robin_HoodlumJul 05, 2011 18:38:26 | There's a polish spell checker? I thought polish was an entirely phonetic language... I have a special place in my heart for the Polish people. I also have a great respect and admiration of them. |
| #25GarthanosJul 05, 2011 20:55:08 | For these forums to get any worse they'd have to not only do something, but actively try to do something wrong I just cant ahem cough cough cough.... magine that. |