These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Moderation discussion thread

First post First post
Author
Reptail
#81 - 2012-10-17 09:36:39 UTC
Even a saint couldn't resist to get mad at you, now please stop talking to me.

You just try to drive people mad so that they maybe swear at you and get banned.

If these are the kind of people you people like, I'm not sure where the world is heading , lol.

Ground Shiwer

CCP Gargant
C C P
C C P Alliance
#82 - 2012-10-17 11:41:07 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Gargant
Becka Goldbeck wrote:
I agree with Amber I don't see how any objective person could look at these forums and say with a straight face that they aren't over-moderated. It seems to me that practically every thread has an ISD posting in it, conducting some sort of subversion. As MailDeadDrop was saying, it's clear that the ISDs are conducting themselves and even cultivating a forum persona in ways completely inappropriate for their position.


I suppose I should ask you what you think is appropriate for their position? There is no right way to be a moderator, everyone has their own approach to that job just like every other job in the world. You see how the Community Team approaches the forums, we all behave in our own little quirky way. We operate within our own rules and moderate in accordance with them, but we still don't take this deathly serious because it's a forum for a game and it is more fun to have a little fun.

Becka Goldbeck wrote:
How would they like it if I had mod powers?


If you think you want to, go apply to the CCL. We are always looking for good candidates.

Becka Goldbeck wrote:
If I posted as I do now and then had the gall to modify and delete other's posts, or any other regular poster for that matter. That is what seems to be happening now with these ISDs.

The working definition of trolling which has been adopted is so unnecessarily strict, that unless you delete almost all the threads you leave yourself open to the necessity of selective moderation, at the mercy of the mod's bias, whether it be conscious or unconscious.


Moderating a forum boils down to hundreds of judgement calls each and every day. To sanity check our judgement calls, we have the forum rules. These forum rules were created when the forums started, so this 'unnecessarily strict definition' has been here the entire time. I don't know if you are familiar with the old CRC. They used to do exactly the same thing the CCL does now except sometimes they were harsher and stricter. Then came a period of very little moderation on the forums and that entire thing fell on the three-man Community Team. This was all recounted in Navigators post when the CCL was started up. And before you start stating that the forums were better without moderation, many can testify that the days with the CRC were best.

And now for the biggest and loudest argument we will ever have on a forum, ever. Selective moderation. As I stated above, this job is an endless series of judgement calls. Moderating is intrinsically a selective procedure because there is no way to define do's and don'ts any better than we already have. We are dealing with human behavior here and trying to come up with precise guidelines for human behavior is like trying to herd cats.

I will reiterate what I have said many times now since joining the Community Team. Post constructively, leave out unneeded insults and personal attacks, and bring something to the table and you can post to your hearts content. Spouting falsities, insults, bad manner, inflammatory remarks, and other drivel is not a form of expression we want on our forums.

Becka Goldbeck wrote:
The Devs like to say that they try to be "hands-off" as much as possible in-game.

Why in the world should it be any different on a FORUM, where we come to express ourselves?


If anyone wants to express themselves in a way that violates our forum rules, they need to go somewhere else and do it there. As to our involvement on the forums, that is because we are Community Representatives. We communicate with players here because we are the communications team. I do not believe that is comparable to in-game activities.

CCP Gargant | EVE Universe esports Coordinator

Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
#83 - 2012-10-17 11:57:57 UTC


My opinion is that transparency combined with genuinely taking on board feedback from players will eventually breed a system that the community agrees is an acceptable level of moderation.

If you look at the Something Awful forums if a user is banned for a post, it says so on the post. Everyone can view the ban history of a poster. Personally I think that's great, if you're trying to lurk a bit and find where you fit in with everyone looking at a post with a mod stamp saying "USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST" gives you an idea of what NOT to post. Likewise if you think a mod is being over zealous, you can simply look up all the users they banned and why, then call them out on it (or in the case of EVE-O file a petition etc).

Plus it means that people can never claim "over moderation" without being able to say "For example ,here, here and here" because if they don't have examples they are probably making it up.

I mean I started a GD thread which got locked (because it was terrible and thats why I made it) but I think thats pretty much the only interaction with the ISD I've ever been aware of.

I know it's more of a forum coding rather than moderation team thing, but I think moderation needs to be a lot more visible. I honestly think the CCL team wants to listen to player feedback so the best way to use that is to make moderation as visible as possible.

At the moment posts edited by mods usually say why etc. I think that's a good start but other actions too I think are a good thing.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli

Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#84 - 2012-10-17 13:56:55 UTC
Reptail wrote:
Even a saint couldn't resist to get mad at you, now please stop talking to me.

You just try to drive people mad so that they maybe swear at you and get banned.

If these are the kind of people you people like, I'm not sure where the world is heading , lol.

There is self moderation available if you cant control yourself from irrational attacks. Click my name and choose to hide posts.
Becka Goldbeck
#85 - 2012-10-17 14:06:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Becka Goldbeck
CCP Gargant wrote:


Imagine a neighborhood, this neighborhood has a handful of police officers assigned to it. They generally look after everyone, make sure no criminal enterprises spring up and if an alarm goes off they respond. Everything has a general feeling of order but people barely notice they are there. Now imagine that all of a sudden one day volunteer positions open up for the job of "security guard", dozens of teenagers and young adults apply.

"Wouldn't it be nice and fun to include them? Everyone will be safer and things will feel more inclusive. Not to mention the fact they will make our jobs easier. No one in their right mind could ever be opposed to this" they say.

So one morning citizens of the neighborhood awake and things seem at first as they usually do. But they quickly come to notice that there are 'security guards' patrolling the street. They're questioning people as they pass and peering through windows. The general feeling of order has transformed to an ominous controlling presence and it's impossible for it to go unnoticed.

The security guards are the ISD in that scenario in case you didn't pick that up. Your response to this seems to be

"I don't see a distinction, the security guards are the same as us. Besides, were you not under these same laws before? I don't see how things have really changed at all and in the ways that they have you could argue that things are even better now!"

You claim all this while specifically stating we are not allowed to use examples in order to illuminate the ways in which you are wrong.

You and the ISD seem to like writing me off, telling me to just apply to be a mod (everyone must have the same penchant for authority that you two have right?) Let's say just for fun that I was one in the ilk that we see around today. I would first edit your OP, claiming "this is bad manners" then I would delete your post and say "I think it's obvious as to why, we can all see the trolling going on here"

And you would defend this right? Since you seem to be such a big fan of selective moderation?
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#86 - 2012-10-17 14:09:36 UTC
Bubanni wrote:
If a thread is contentless it would die out by itself... if people are responding, there is either an element of content or humor
I call a thread "dying out by itself" withering. You state that content-less threads wither as if it is a certainty; that it always happens. Perhaps, but in my experience those threads (as a group) only mostly wither -- there are an annoying few that are like some horrible zombie and just won't die. My personal example: the "what is the avatar above you thinking" thread. For heaven's sake, somebody please put a stake through its heart*. After 40 or 50 or 100 pages all of the humor that can be mined has been, and yet the damned thread is up to 217 pages now and still on the front page of GD! I assume that the moderators leave it open because locking it would cause more forum discontent than leaving it open, and that it doesn't otherwise reflect badly on CCP. So I just grit my teeth and silently say another prayer for humanity. *sigh*

Sorry; got a little off-track there. So, not all threads wither which should. Furthermore, even among that large portion of threads that do wither they may not wither fast enough. So we still need moderators judging threads as a whole as "unworthy to grow in the garden of Eve's forums" and lopping them off. Heh. Earlier I was casting moderators as custodians, now as gardeners. Well, at least it's a greener job!

Actually, on reflection, "gardener" is a wonderful analogy!
  • vegetables: all the "completely appropriate, on-topic" threads
  • weeds: nuisance threads which are, on balance, off-topic or similarly low-level undesirables
  • nettles: threads which seem to have the intention of being demeaning, pornographic, hateful, etc.
  • wildflowers: unexpected and perhaps off-topic threads which are humorous or have other redeeming qualities
I'm sure there are other plants you can fit into the imagery. This paints a picture of the challenge before the moderators: how do they know whether that new green shoot over there is nettle or a weed or a wildflower? Has this tomato plant borne all the fruit that it likely will, and should be cleared to make room for new plants? Who the hell let all these bees/goons in here OMG GET THE INSECTICIDE ... ok, I go a bit too far. Lol
MDD

* Yes, I realize I'm mixing my monster motifs here.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#87 - 2012-10-17 14:17:12 UTC
Amber Accelerando wrote:
CCP Gargant wrote:

The internet was an extreme solution to a problem that never really existed. Times change.

Another thing I'd like to point out is that this thread is a response to the fact that a certain degree of overmoderation did happen sometimes. As we have said, mistakes happen and sometimes we are wrong. By doing this we are trying to give you binoculars to watch the watchers, so to speak.


You think?
By
Quote:
did
you mean past tense?
Sorry beg to differ.

Not helpful Amber. Your post comes across as needlessly egotistic. It's ok to disagree with Gargant's implication that the over-moderation has ceased (I'm not certain he actually claimed it has ceased, but no matter). But to simply say "I disagree" without providing a basis for that disagreement misses the opportunity to advance the discussion. Why waste the audience's time like that?

MDD
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#88 - 2012-10-17 14:30:41 UTC  |  Edited by: MailDeadDrop
Becka Goldbeck wrote:
The Devs like to say that they try to be "hands-off" as much as possible in-game.

Why in the world should it be any different on a FORUM, where we come to express ourselves?

I read this in the forum rules wiki page yesterday and I nearly spit my drink out. It's the first sentence actually:
Quote:
The EVE forums are intended to provide a warm, friendly atmosphere for the EVE community.


Warm and friendly? In my Eve?

But this points to a significant disconnect between CCP hf.'s expectations and the Eve playerbase's expectations. If CCP really wants the forums to be warm and friendly, then having more involved moderation (i.e. more "hands-on") on the forums than they have in game is practically a requirement.

Becka, the forums are not the game. They both belong to CCP, and they are within their rights to dictate the rules for each. So while we can discuss (and perhaps negotiate) the rules, I don't think we players can use "the rules should be the same in both environments" as an arguing point.

Edit: well, can't argue it, unless you want to back up and argue whether CCP's expectation that the forums are "a warm, friendly atmosphere" is appropriate.

MDD
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#89 - 2012-10-17 14:34:34 UTC
Reptail wrote:
Do you realize this is a game forum and not your job, courth or jail forum? In my point of view you are doing quite the opposite than attracting people, if someone new reads your posts more than twice cuts his/her veins, boring!

Reptail, attacking RSB doesn't advance the conversation here about CCP/ISD moderation. You can disagree with his points without being disagreeable.

MDD
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#90 - 2012-10-17 14:40:29 UTC  |  Edited by: MailDeadDrop
Reptail wrote:
It is pointless to argue with you , stay well.
You can dismiss someone's points without being dismissive. Posting it is needlessly provocative.

Reptail wrote:
Edit and I meant "job forum" "jail forum" or "courth forum" not that isnt your right to post,
Do you really think someone would really commit suicide by reading your posts?(might happen) lol. it was ironik,
Actually, it's hyperbole not irony. And it did come across as provocative, although it's possible that written English isn't your best communication medium and maybe you didn't intend to provoke hostility.

But little, if any, of the exchange between you and RSB (on either side) seems to be on-topic for this thread.

MDD
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#91 - 2012-10-17 15:15:18 UTC
Becka Goldbeck wrote:
Imagine a neighborhood, this neighborhood has a handful of police officers assigned to it. They generally look after everyone, make sure no criminal enterprises spring up and if an alarm goes off they respond. Everything has a general feeling of order but people barely notice they are there. Now imagine that all of a sudden one day volunteer positions open up for the job of "security guard", dozens of teenagers and young adults apply.

Interesting aside: did you know that the prefrontal cortext is the last portion of the human brain to finish development? Did you know that this area is responsible for judgement (known in psychological terms as "executive function")? Did you know that the prefrontal cortext development continues until roughly age 26? I bet many of you are having "ah HA!" moments right about now...

Becka Goldbeck wrote:
... while specifically stating we are not allowed to use examples in order to illuminate the ways in which you are wrong.
I'll agree that this prohibition is uncomfortably vague, I'm not certain I agree with you that it is a complete prohibition. CCP/ISD appears to want to allow us to cite examples to support our claims, while avoiding the situation where someone would cite a specific moderator action with the intent to dispute that particular instance (which should be handled via petition). It's a very faint distinction.

Becka Goldbeck wrote:
And you would defend this right? Since you seem to be such a big fan of selective moderation?
I might argue that selective moderation isn't necessarily a bad thing. In fact, a moderator can't be merciful (a critical skill) without being selective. What I think we would agree on is that they should avoid adversely biased moderation. That is perhaps what you meant, and simply made an imprecise word choice. Also to be avoided, and distinct from "adversely biased", would be oppressive moderation, which is what I would ascribe to your interesting analogy.

MDD
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#92 - 2012-10-18 11:14:46 UTC
Consistency is thread locking would be a great thing to have.

I see a consistent amount of threads needlessly locked for 'lack of content' but am amazed that these threads all found in General Discussion are allowed to continue

  • The like and get likes thread (i mean, if this isnt mocking the ridiculously pointless 'like' system i dont know what it is)
  • What is the avatar above you thinking
  • Rate the avatar above you
  • Hate the avatar above you
  • What would you say if you woke up to the avatar above you in your bed?


If you were moderating the forums consistently these would/should have been locked a long time ago as they are all pretty much nonsense threads with no content, what makes them special?

While im not here to really talk about the issue of whether the forum community needs volunteer moderators at all (i think we got on just fine before they arrived) I think you should leave the issue of whether a thread needs to be locked up to the forum posters themselves.

If a thread is useless, redundant, duplicate or whatever, people will eventually just ignore the thread and let it fall through the pages. If you lock it yourselves, you often just incite the OP to create a new thread along the same lines.

If you are serious about maintaining standards i will be expecting you to lock all the previous threads that i highlighted above, OR, on the other hand, expect you to stop locking threads so often and let the community decide what threads they want to post in.

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#93 - 2012-10-18 12:26:11 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
You raise some god points Skippermonkey, there's no simple answer but if you'll allow me, I'll post a few observations and a few facts and hopefully, some hope!

First, to address your point regarding threads locked for 'lack of content'.

You might notice a trend of change in this recently; I've personally just gone back through the last few pages of this forum and the only things that are locked are:

CCP posts that have expired their necessary usefulness.
Posts that are opening new threads to discuss things that should be in the official comment threads.
Posts that are blatantly against the rules from post 1.

We are reviewing our policy* of locking and whilst we're not going to do anything retroactively:

  • You will notice more threads being moved.
  • You will notice more threads being temporarily locked for cleaning.
  • You will notice more threads getting ISD posts contributing or guiding in some way.


There has to be a trade off, there's simply not enough room in GD for everything!
We also want to try our best to be as informative as possible when we lock something, so that it should be clear why it's happened.
We know that some folks who posts here in GD, believes their post belongs here and that being moved is some kind of punishment because other forums are quieter. This is *so* not the case.
I'm a firm believe that if posts are put into the right forums in the first place, then those forums will attract visitors.

If you see anything that you consider to be needlessly locked going forward, I ask you to report it for review or petition it.
As leads, Eshtir and my self have the ability to undo excessive moderation in some cases, so let us know.
If you report the OP and start your report 'FAO CCL Leads' then only Eshtir, myself or CCP will look at it.

As to why those previous threads have stayed open ?
There are a number of reasons; they're harmless / authorized by CCP / encourage positive posting (mostly!) / help the forums feel lively.
Another point is that they're about Generally about EVE in it's broadest definition and they're not hurting anyone being there.

I know that wants to promote the point "why them and not others"; but there's no way to answer that satisfactorily.
We've made mistakes in the past, and we've not been uniform in our actions - this is understood.
Part of the reason I'm here now is to make sure that moderator behavior is unilateral and fair.

I can't undo the mistakes of the recent past, but I hope I can stop them from happening again though.
I will repeat my statement though - we are not going to do this retroactively, at least CCL is not.
The Community team can and will address that, if they believe there's any necessity to do so.

What you say about 'useless/redundant/duplicate or whatever' threads. In a perfect environment, people would ignore them; but they don't. We get 'Wat' posts (Hi Jim o/) , 'IBTL' posts, 'Your bad and you should feel bad' posts.

These sorts of threads break down and become dysfunctional very quickly.
That's not (intended to be) a gross sweeping statement there, it's fact.
We've let some of these threads slide as an experiment, and by the second page, to a thread, things have gotten out of hand. "Why aren't ISD doing their job", "Why is this still here" etc.
Of course, that in itself breeds more, those posts bump it to the top and breed more comments of people complaining.

We're very interested to hear what you might suggest can be done to fix that though - it's one of the things that we invariably end up locking.

To remark on your last paragraph, with regards to " let the community decide what threads they want to post in."
I think CCP Gargant has put it in the best way:

CCP Gargant wrote:

I will reiterate what I have said many times now since joining the Community Team. Post constructively, leave out unneeded insults and personal attacks, and bring something to the table and you can post to your hearts content.


If you stick to the rules, we welcome you to post anywhere you'd like!

* that is to say, CCLs internal and future training policy.

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#94 - 2012-10-18 12:31:52 UTC
ISD Suvetar wrote:
To remark on your last paragraph, I'll quote CCP Gargant:

CCP Gargant wrote:

I will reiterate what I have said many times now since joining the Community Team. Post constructively, leave out unneeded insults and personal attacks, and bring something to the table and you can post to your hearts content.

I didnt think my last paragraph was an insult or attack... a little demanding maybe :p

Maybe you need a new forum area then, as threads like those i previously mentioned arent really 'General Discussion' about EVE, they are just fluff.

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#95 - 2012-10-18 12:49:59 UTC
I didn't think you did, sorry!

I just meant to illustrate that the community can post where it wants as long as where it wants isn't a violation of the rules, is all!

One of the things we're thinking about is new forum areas, it's one of many options.
What do you propose ?

I was half jokingly discussing with my team that we could have an 'Opinions' forum, but it would only allow one post to be made per thread; and it would have a Like button and Dislike button Pirate

Ok, that's unlikely to happen but we're open to suggestions from all avenues. Just remember as Navigator has said, CCP has a legal obligation to keep the forums PG13; we're unlikely to ever have an *anything goes* forum.

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#96 - 2012-10-18 13:17:36 UTC
Have you discussed allowing people to create Polls?

As its easy to lose the general consencus of opinion sometimes when a bunch of people 'go to war' as it were within a thread

I guess 'likes' were kinda of a first step towards this aim, but as many have said before, likes are irrelevant when there is no method of 'disliking'

I like the reddit style of upvote/downvote karma, to see who is appreciated by the community and who isnt (or just who is controversial). Much like reddit, it would be great if you could see the player score (positiv or negative), and the score for an individual post.

Another thing, that doesnt really affect the forum use much, but is more visual, to have some kinds of 'post count' underneath the player avatar, either in number form, or visual, like colored pips or something (im thinkign like the level indicator on Bejeweled 2 Endless mode :p). This would also be useful if you allowed dislikes as well as likes, as currently, 'likes' are a basic form of identifying the more prolific forum posters

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#97 - 2012-10-18 14:02:24 UTC  |  Edited by: MailDeadDrop
ISD Suvetar wrote:
To remark on your last paragraph, I'll quote CCP Gargant:
CCP Gargant wrote:
I will reiterate what I have said many times now since joining the Community Team. Post constructively, leave out unneeded insults and personal attacks, and bring something to the table and you can post to your hearts content.

Skippermonkey wrote:
I didnt think my last paragraph was an insult or attack... a little demanding maybe :p

ISD Suvetar wrote:
I didn't think you did, sorry! I just meant to illustrate that the community can post where it wants as long as where it wants isn't a violation of the rules, is all!

Suvetar, I'll add that I, too, thought you were rebuking Skippermonkey. At least I did on the first reading, but I tend to read posts multiple times (that way all the voices in my head eventually get a turn...) so eventually I decided that maybe it wasn't a rebuke. I suppose that just demonstrates how what one writes can be so easily misunderstood.

Skippermonkey wrote:
Have you discussed allowing people to create Polls?
Polls certainly seem overdue; players have been limping along on band-aid solutions for quite a while now (example: the crowd-sourced wish list of changes). I would ask that if polls are added to the forums that voting be restricted to non-trial characters which are members of player corporations. Allowing NPC characters to vote seems to too easily permit sockpuppetry shenanigans. Restricting voting from characters in non-player corporations will irritate those players who insist on remaining in non-player corporations (frequently die-hard carebears), so you (CCP et al.) would need to be prepared. But to my thinking it would simply be another inducement to get into a player corporation (just like the NPC tax rates).

Also I realize that the above is more of a "Features & Ideas" discussion than a "Moderation" discussion, so it does fall a bit off-topic for this thread. But don't blame me; Skippermonkey started it! Lol

MDD
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#98 - 2012-10-18 14:06:10 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
Skippermonkey wrote:
Have you discussed allowing people to create Polls?

I haven't personally - but I'm intrigued, what moderation issues do you think that might help resolve ?
In terms of scenarios, that kind of thing ?

Skippermonkey wrote:

.,.I like the reddit style of upvote/downvote karma...


Downvoting/Karma is a great idea in principle, we're just concerned how to have it without it being gamed or frankly abused.

I'll be honest, if you let people down-vote ISD, some people will do it to make a valid point (hi MDD!), Some people might do it to be funny (Hi Surfins!) and a lot of people will do it to troll or abuse.

I fear that the effect it would have though is causing new people in the forums to receive an institutionalized/pre-disposed opinion that moderators are disliked and unhelpful!

I too would like to see post counts though, there are times it would help us do our jobs too!

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#99 - 2012-10-18 14:06:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Skippermonkey
MailDeadDrop wrote:
Restricting voting from characters in non-player corporations will irritate those players who insist on remaining in non-player corporations (frequently die-hard carebears), so you (CCP et al.) would need to be prepared. But to my thinking it would simply be another inducement to get into a player corporation (just like the NPC tax rates).

As satisfying as it would be to remove NPC corp players from voting, in the interests of fairness, they have to be included.

The best reason for this thinking is they might be voting on something that influences their decision to stay in the NPC corp in the first place.

The only way i can see polls working is if they are restricted to 'one vote per account'

edit - in response to your above post, you could argue the case for 'authority figures' like ISD's and DEV's to be removed from the up/down votes all together

As for the players being subject to 'block voting', well, thats just a reality that people will have to accept

edit2 - in regards to the 'what would polls do for moderating', you might be able to gauge the public reception to ideas or behaivor with more clarity to see if it is a prevailing mood of the community or just a grumpy forum poster pushing his agenda to the front of the queue

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#100 - 2012-10-18 14:13:49 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:

Suvetar, I'll add that I, too, thought you were rebuking Skippermonkey. At least I did on the first reading, but I tend to read posts multiple times (that way all the voices in my head eventually get a turn...) so eventually I decided that maybe it wasn't a rebuke. I suppose that just demonstrates how what one writes can be so easily misunderstood.


Quite so - I've amended the words I used, didn't mean to sound like I was having a go at anyone; we're having a really productive discussion here Oops

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]