"Paid for" shit & shame on the SMF team

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,079
Re: "Paid for" shit.
« Reply #105, on August 2nd, 2011, 08:49 AM »
Yes.
But they're easy to guess.
Heck, they would have been my first guesses. After all, they're the ones who fucked with me over and over last year... And one of the two was 'sorry' about the post-ban, but could actually lift it and never did -- heck, he actually did worse over time.
No wonder he would abuse his rights to censor the only place where I can speak freely at simplemachines.org........

Name your thoughts now :lol:

live627

  • Should five per cent appear too small / Be thankful I don't take it all / 'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman
  • Posts: 1,670
A confident man keeps quiet.whereas a frightened man keeps talking, hiding his fear.

billy2

  • Trying to earn brownie points for a lads trip to the Red Sea. Minus 1 already - just for asking!!
  • Posts: 350
Re: "Paid for" shit.
« Reply #107, on August 2nd, 2011, 09:14 AM »
Quote from Nao/Gilles on July 31st, 2011, 11:03 PM
Pete, you're still feeling too concerned about SMF.
After 45k+ posts at SM, whether he is a member or not and even after being treated like a twat, he will still have a place in his heart for the software,
Its a bit like a wayward child.......... whatever it does, you will still love it.
<br /><br />cough, cough.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: "Paid for" shit.
« Reply #108, on August 2nd, 2011, 09:24 AM »
I know, I know, pick me, pick me!

Here's a couple of clues:

The person who reported it was very adamant that he wasn't going to adhere to being told he couldn't use SMG on his site. And a very, very long, pointless and stupid argument ensued, and it was public too.

The person who I understand to have changed it is not the project manager and not a Customizer, and therefore should have had nothing the hell to do with it. That said, the Customizer team are the ones charged with maintaining the mod site and we all know how up to the task they are at present...


I'm not even surprised that either of the individuals involved are actually involved. I'm more annoyed that they won't 'fess up to it or at the very least bother to tell either of us what's going on. (Interesting point, then, why haven't they censored AeMe itself since last I saw of it, it had an active link here...)
Quote from billy2 on August 2nd, 2011, 09:14 AM
Quote from Nao/Gilles on July 31st, 2011, 11:03 PM
Pete, you're still feeling too concerned about SMF.
After 45k+ posts at SM, whether he is a member or not and even after being treated like a twat, he will still have a place in his heart for the software,
Its a bit like a wayward child.......... whatever it does, you will still love it.
Yup, you called it pretty good. I still care - if I didn't, I probably wouldn't be here, would I? As I've said before, the entire scenario is a whole lot of mindfuck, but think about it: had Nao and I been involved in development rather than how it turned out, 2.0 would have been finished a whole lot sooner and with less bugs left in it. We would still probably have gone our own way at some point but it would have been with far less of a grudge, and far more of that we are too adventurous compared to the "I'm a forum" mindset SMF has.[1]

We can make great sweeping changes that affect many things - can you imagine, for example, if I'd proposed my changes to the ban system in SMF itself, and how it would be jumped on as 'that's not how we do things'?[2]
 1. Don't get me wrong, I have a certain amount of respect for that, because it means they know what they want and they want to keep it as a pure forum, so that they focus on that.
 2. Note that I'm not trying to disparage them here; that response is a valid if not entirely desirable one, and it falls very much under the "if it isn't broken, don't fix it" mentality, even though it is my considered opinion that it is broken.
When we unite against a common enemy that attacks our ethos, it nurtures group solidarity. Trolls are sensational, yes, but we keep everyone honest. | Game Memorial

live627

  • Should five per cent appear too small / Be thankful I don't take it all / 'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman
  • Posts: 1,670
Re: "Paid for" shit.
« Reply #109, on August 2nd, 2011, 09:36 AM »
o... my... god! What a fucking double-crosser! He's not winning the war, right?

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: "Paid for" shit.
« Reply #110, on August 2nd, 2011, 09:43 AM »
You might even go so far as to say that it is a form of marketing.

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,079
Re: "Paid for" shit.
« Reply #111, on August 4th, 2011, 09:16 AM »
Quote from Arantor on August 2nd, 2011, 09:24 AM
I know, I know, pick me, pick me!

Here's a couple of clues:

The person who reported it was very adamant that he wasn't going to adhere to being told he couldn't use SMG on his site. And a very, very long, pointless and stupid argument ensued, and it was public too.
And a very funny one at that.
Yes, it would seem you are right on. :whistle:
The name of their overzealous informer is Akyhne.
He already was a shameless backstabbing jerk last year. He still is.
Quote
The person who I understand to have changed it is not the project manager and not a Customizer, and therefore should have had nothing the hell to do with it. That said, the Customizer team are the ones charged with maintaining the mod site and we all know how up to the task they are at present...
Absolutely.

That person's name starts with a "Kin", and ends with a "dred".
He's already the one who post-banned me and later stripped me of my Friend status, SVN read rights and beta testing reporting rights.

All in all, he's got a mission: to kill SMF faster than *we* could. For instance by listening to an idiot's complaints about me, and thus ensuring Aeva Media will be removed from their website.
I've always been wondering whether I'd do that. They simply made it clear that *they* wanted it too.
Quote
I'm not even surprised that either of the individuals involved are actually involved. I'm more annoyed that they won't 'fess up to it or at the very least bother to tell either of us what's going on. (Interesting point, then, why haven't they censored AeMe itself since last I saw of it, it had an active link here...)
Well, I assume the guy wanted to make sure the update got unnoticed. Of course, it would have been less obvious had he correctly left the closing center tag in.

As per their site rules, mods may contain advertising material in them.
Actually, their site never mentions that we can't link to the competition. There is NOT A SINGLE PLACE on the sm.org website where they say they'll censor links. Which they do!
Heck, after the tremendous amount of work we both put into SMF for many years, I feel it's only natural they should leave us do what we feel we can do.

Does ANYONE here think that I'm abusing my 'rights' by putting a link to wedge.org in my WEBSITE LINK? Which, as far as I know, is used by everyone to link to THEIR website? And does anyone here think that my website is anything else than wedge.org, considering I'm blogging here and I'm spending all of my days here?
Why are they not removing links to IPB, vBulletin or xenForo then?

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: "Paid for" shit.
« Reply #112, on August 4th, 2011, 09:23 AM »
Quote
Does ANYONE here think that I'm abusing my 'rights' by putting a link to wedge.org in my WEBSITE LINK? Which, as far as I know, is used by everyone to link to THEIR website? And does anyone here think that my website is anything else than wedge.org, considering I'm blogging here and I'm spending all of my days here?
Why are they not removing links to IPB, vBulletin or xenForo then?
To be fair to them, the only times I've seen a link to the competition sites, are:
1. In adverts, so that they can be banned via Google AdSense.
2. Pointing out something the competition have done, that's cool or neat, or stupid.

We present a new angle that they haven't had to deal with before. But the only rules that I can remember on the subject seemed to apply to paid ads - I do not remember being advised of any rules about this, until after we did it.

You're not abusing your rights: it's your website after all. But at the same time it is always going to be controversial - even if we'd ended up a totally friendly fork, I doubt they'd have let links be in there.

You know them: they'll make the rules to suit themselves, because that's what's always been done.

You know, it's almost as though those little things called Core Values don't really apply, even though they swore on some relation's digital blood that they'd follow them, or something.

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,079
Re: "Paid for" shit.
« Reply #113, on August 4th, 2011, 09:36 AM »
Quote from Arantor on August 4th, 2011, 09:23 AM
To be fair to them,
Do we really NEED to be fair to them? Why do we always have to be the good guys, the ones that don't ban anyone, the ones that don't fight back?
Quote
the only times I've seen a link to the competition sites, are:
1. In adverts, so that they can be banned via Google AdSense.
2. Pointing out something the competition have done, that's cool or neat, or stupid.
Like xenForo being an existing competitive software that was just about to be released...............
.........Tell me, isn't that what Wedge is about?
Interesteding how it isn't allowed to discussing the upcoming Wedge when the up and coming xenForo was all the right over there?
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=394724.0
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=404068.0

In contrast, no one seems to be bothered with Illori's outstanding post:
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=200401.msg3104124;topicseen#msg3104124
Quote from Illori
any posts about wedge will not appear on this forum as we do not allow advertising for other forums here.
(Confirmed by the Kin as he posted just a couple of posts below that one without contradicting it.)
Quote
You're not abusing your rights: it's your website after all. But at the same time it is always going to be controversial - even if we'd ended up a totally friendly fork, I doubt they'd have let links be in there.
I don't mind if they remove our links, yes it's their website, yes they dictate the rules, like we do.

But if they do, then they should also remove:

- their pseudo 'Core Values' page. They never stop violating most of them. As soon as a flame war erupts, they just don't give a shit about these 'values' anymore. I'm tempted to think no one in the team ever read them. If you're going to edict a series of rules to convince people you're so cool, then either live by them or die with them!

- all links to all other forum packages, including friendly forks and paid-for competitors. Otherwise it's clearly an attack against us.
Quote
You know them: they'll make the rules to suit themselves, because that's what's always been done.
But they don't acknowledge that.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: "Paid for" shit & shame on the SMF team
« Reply #114, on August 4th, 2011, 09:55 AM »
Quote
Do we really NEED to be fair to them? Why do we always have to be the good guys, the ones that don't ban anyone, the ones that don't fight back?
I didn't say that we don't have to fight back, per se, but that if there is retaliation of any kind, it is done with the best information available, and that we do it as ethically as possible - which includes acknowledging their side to the situation.
Quote
Like xenForo being an existing competitive software that was just about to be released...............
.........Tell me, isn't that what Wedge is about?
It comes under the category of what the opposition is doing, which is naturally allowed. The caveat of course is that 'as long as the competition isn't Wedge.'
Quote
Interesteding how it isn't allowed to discussing the upcoming Wedge when the up and coming xenForo was all the right over there?
http://www.simplemachines.org/…unity/index.php?topic=394724.0
http://www.simplemachines.org/…unity/index.php?topic=404068.0

In contrast, no one seems to be bothered with Illori's outstanding post:
http://www.simplemachines.org/…sg3104124;topicseen#msg3104124
Yup. It's all fine for the team to go 'hey, look at what that other system is doing' to indicate how awesome it is, but all bets are off if it happens to be us, and that's always been, and always likely to be, the case.
Quote
I don't mind if they remove our links, yes it's their website, yes they dictate the rules, like we do.
There's a difference between having rules, enforcing rules and telling your users about said rules. Like I said, there weren't any rules I'd been advised about prior to the message from Oldiesmann asking me to remove Wedge from my signature.

I'd have been fine to comply with rules if I'd seen a shred of evidence to validate the fact that this was a rule that applied equally to everyone, as opposed to what feels like it was made up on the spot.
Quote
- their pseudo 'Core Values' page. They never stop violating most of them. As soon as a flame war erupts, they just don't give a shit about these 'values' anymore. I'm tempted to think no one in the team ever read them. If you're going to edict a series of rules to convince people you're so cool, then either live by them or die with them!
Oh, don't even get me started about the Core Values bullshit. I demonstrated that vbgamer had broken just about every single core value on the list, but every single point was argued - by Kindred, no less - as being not important.

After the January 2010 drama+BS, every returning and every new team member was supposed to electronically sign an agreement, including promising to adhere to the Core Values. You can obviously see how well that worked out.
Quote
- all links to all other forum packages, including friendly forks and paid-for competitors. Otherwise it's clearly an attack against us.
Of course it is.
Quote
But they don't acknowledge that.
If you did that, would you openly admit it? Or would you start explaining what the rules are before expecting people to follow them?

It's a bit like one of the episodes of the very first season of QI. It's an odd-one-out round and Phil Jupitus exclaims: "What kind of hellish quiz is this? Guess which one's the odd one out... haha, NONE of them!" People have a set of expectations, whether rightly or wrongly. Phil's expectation, for example, is that on a quiz show, the questions being asked should be feasible to answer and that in a round entitled the 'odd one out' round, one of them is demonstratably the odd one out compared to the others, i.e. that the rules as presented at the start are the rules actually followed later on.

Here, the only way I can see it is that they've taken a rule that was never fully explained, broadened its horizons to suit, and applied it to us. The best bit was that when I argued this originally, Kindred explained to me that the 'no competition' rule was something I should have known about at the time, because of the no-competitive-ads rule. At that point, I actually gave up trying to argue with him because the rules don't seem to apply in his brain properly.

Then you have things like: http://www.bryandeakin.com/index.php/topic,941.msg9346.html#msg9346 going on.

I'll let you make of that what you will, but for someone who hasn't told any actual lies, per se, I'd say he's done a decent bit of skirting the truth on occasion, and he has actually implicated RR in libel, on the basis of claiming that Les (ARG) was actually RR being a troll under another name. (Which means, if you're going to call someone out like that, you really, really should be able to back up your assertion especially when it doesn't take much to refute it.)

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,079
Re: "Paid for" shit & shame on the SMF team
« Reply #115, on August 4th, 2011, 10:47 AM »
Quote from Arantor on August 4th, 2011, 09:55 AM
I didn't say that we don't have to fight back, per se, but that if there is retaliation of any kind, it is done with the best information available, and that we do it as ethically as possible - which includes acknowledging their side to the situation.
They don't communicate at all.
The only thing I know is that they censor our stuff.
If that's their way of sharing their feelings.....
Quote
It comes under the category of what the opposition is doing, which is naturally allowed. The caveat of course is that 'as long as the competition isn't Wedge.'
Then they should make it clear. ::)
Quote
Yup. It's all fine for the team to go 'hey, look at what that other system is doing' to indicate how awesome it is, but all bets are off if it happens to be us, and that's always been, and always likely to be, the case.
It's as if it were Jan' 10 again. This time it's 'them' versus Nao, Pete, and all of our ex-teamie friends who felt that Wedge was the only future for SMF. Difference being, at the time the exes were working Jaelta but it never worked out. This time it's called Wedge and it's a real threat to SMF.

They only forgot one thing in this.
In both situations, Jan 10 and Aug 11, the splits happened because the SMF team abused some people (either by forcing them to sign a stupid paper, or exploiting them over and over again), so the SMF team only has ITSELF to blame for.
Actually, the simple fact that they're censoring the Wedge links right now, shouldn't be compared to their relationship with competitors -- it should be compared to how they used to ban people on a whim during the Jan/Feb flame war.

In three words: step back, guys.
Quote
There's a difference between having rules, enforcing rules and telling your users about said rules. Like I said, there weren't any rules I'd been advised about prior to the message from Oldiesmann asking me to remove Wedge from my signature.
But you at least had the courtesy of being contacted about it.
I was not. All of my stuff was always erased behind my back. My signature ---- multiple times --- my website link and my AeMe links.

Basically, they WANT AeMe in SMF because it gives their software an edge over the competition. But they don't want to compete with Wedge, which is actually the future of both AeMe and SMF.

Fuck. I don't even know why I still have AeMe online over there...

Even my posts. They're not contributions. Give that to a lawyer, anyone will laugh at them.
Remove my 6000 posts, guys. It's my right. I wrote them, I own them. I don't owe you shit.
Quote
I'd have been fine to comply with rules if I'd seen a shred of evidence to validate the fact that this was a rule that applied equally to everyone, as opposed to what feels like it was made up on the spot.
Yep.
Quote
Oh, don't even get me started about the Core Values bullshit. I demonstrated that vbgamer had broken just about every single core value on the list, but every single point was argued - by Kindred, no less - as being not important.

After the January 2010 drama+BS, every returning and every new team member was supposed to electronically sign an agreement, including promising to adhere to the Core Values. You can obviously see how well that worked out.
Sigh.
Quote
Quote
But they don't acknowledge that.
If you did that, would you openly admit it?
Well, I don't do that kind of shit, for starters.
And yeah, I'll happily admit any kicks to the groin that I gave to anyone in my life. Any undeserved and unjust actions, I'll admit happily. I'm not a kid anymore.
Quote
Here, the only way I can see it is that they've taken a rule that was never fully explained, broadened its horizons to suit, and applied it to us. The best bit was that when I argued this originally, Kindred explained to me that the 'no competition' rule was something I should have known about at the time, because of the no-competitive-ads rule. At that point, I actually gave up trying to argue with him because the rules don't seem to apply in his brain properly.

Then you have things like: http://www.bryandeakin.com/index.php/topic,941.msg9346.html#msg9346 going on.
I couldn't help but reply.
Quote
I'll let you make of that what you will, but for someone who hasn't told any actual lies, per se, I'd say he's done a decent bit of skirting the truth on occasion, and he has actually implicated RR in libel, on the basis of claiming that Les (ARG) was actually RR being a troll under another name. (Which means, if you're going to call someone out like that, you really, really should be able to back up your assertion especially when it doesn't take much to refute it.)
Yeah, I remember that, too. It's not hard -- just a few days ago.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: "Paid for" shit & shame on the SMF team
« Reply #116, on August 4th, 2011, 11:00 AM »
Quote
They don't communicate at all.
The only thing I know is that they censor our stuff.
If that's their way of sharing their feelings.....
There was communication for a while. I did spend a while trying to talk Kindred round, far, far more than was ever really known. But so many times I found myself banging my head on my desk because he and I never saw eye to eye on anything.

I didn't mention this much before because in the place it happened in, only 4 people had access to the board, and all of us agreed up front that we wouldn't mention it to anyone else, in the hope we could avoid bias and getting off topic. The fact that absolutely nothing changed and the fact that I said to Kindred multiple times that I had the feeling he was just participating for the purpose of keeping up appearances of listening, and that nothing I was saying was getting through, should have been a clue really. His response to my such comments was simply that 'just because my opinion disagreed with his didn't necessarily mean he had to do anything about it' or words to that effect.
Quote
Then they should make it clear.
:lol: This is the SMF team we're talking about here. Making rules clear? The only time I ever saw clarity in the rules are when there was a fuss made about mods that had adult site links, and Unknown understandably got very annoyed with it.
Quote
It's as if it were Jan' 10 again. This time it's 'them' versus Nao, Pete, and all of our ex-teamie friends who felt that Wedge was the only future for SMF. Difference being, at the time the exes were working Jaelta but it never worked out. This time it's called Wedge and it's a real threat to SMF.

They only forgot one thing in this.
In both situations, Jan 10 and Aug 11, the splits happened because the SMF team abused some people (either by forcing them to sign a stupid paper, or exploiting them over and over again), so the SMF team only has ITSELF to blame for.
Actually, the simple fact that they're censoring the Wedge links right now, shouldn't be compared to their relationship with competitors -- it should be compared to how they used to ban people on a whim during the Jan/Feb flame war.

In three words: step back, guys.
I have nothing to disagree with here, except what we should do about it. Instead of any further retaliation, let's instead do the one thing they can't prevent from doing: making Wedge better and better. The better we make Wedge, the stronger it stands on its own - and people will notice it and use it.
Quote
But you at least had the courtesy of being contacted about it.
I was not. All of my stuff was always erased behind my back. My signature ---- multiple times --- my website link and my AeMe links.
I know, and I complied - initially, but fired back a message trying to make some sense out of it.

I think the difference is, because you'd been post-banned, you wouldn't have been able to reply to a message, so they figured they wouldn't bother.
Quote
Basically, they WANT AeMe in SMF because it gives their software an edge over the competition. But they don't want to compete with Wedge, which is actually the future of both AeMe and SMF.
Of course it does. It also means there is a free competitor to vbgamer's paid stuff. I wonder whether he will be encouraged to make it free once AeMe disappears.
Quote
Fuck. I don't even know why I still have AeMe online over there...
Neither do I.
Quote
Even my posts. They're not contributions. Give that to a lawyer, anyone will laugh at them.
Remove my 6000 posts, guys. It's my right. I wrote them, I own them. I don't owe you shit.
The team will argue that they are contributions under the CLA. I already had this argument with them.

live627

  • Should five per cent appear too small / Be thankful I don't take it all / 'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman
  • Posts: 1,670
Re: "Paid for" shit & shame on the SMF team
« Reply #117, on August 4th, 2011, 11:07 AM »
Quote
Fuck. I don't even know why I still have AeMe online over there...
Maybe you should void it now before they revoke your ability to.

I would suggest to remove the files, blank the page, then delete, no,sorry, remove it from the list. Possibly even wipe the actual post, if a post-ban didn't remove that ability. So as to maximise the damage, so to speak.

billy2

  • Trying to earn brownie points for a lads trip to the Red Sea. Minus 1 already - just for asking!!
  • Posts: 350
Re: "Paid for" shit & shame on the SMF team
« Reply #118, on August 4th, 2011, 12:10 PM »
Quote
Fuck. I don't even know why I still have AeMe online over there...
I thought it was because you were enjoying watching Kindred's support responses  :niark:

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: "Paid for" shit & shame on the SMF team
« Reply #119, on August 4th, 2011, 12:59 PM »
Either that or not give them yet another excuse to throw insults etc. in our direction. There is something to be said for leaving it there in that respect, shows you're taking a moral higher ground. But I'm surprised it's still there to be honest.