I replied in the previous thread that is currently locked.

I just posted this to someone else in the hopes to further clarify our position:

I love your script posts. I think they are great.

However, I don't care for anything that is posted for the purpose of, or in response to, the quest for cheating which is what started this whole thing.

Maybe you should publish your tutorial/code on some other site if the situation hasn't been clarified here.

Since the other topic is locked...That comment from liltc to stryder wasnt necessary he even agrees with that but at the time with all the attacks stryder kept coming at him with he was a little fed up with him, and hes wondering why wasnt the orginal poster banned then for having wallhacks??? and the code liltc posted for him was just a quick demonstration code where if you stayed where you exactly spawned it would show an automatic aiming to show that all you really needed was the stock function "vectortoangles" to make such a mod.
So now then when he did post an actual turret tutorial why was that deleted when it was really a turret tutorial? yeah he showed the similarities of an aimbot mod with the turret mod but thats all he did, was show similarities when he wrote the turret mod he didnt make an aimbot mod like you guys asked him not to do which now revolves around the question why is matty aloud now to write a turret mod when liltc wasnt? because liltc showed similarities between an aimbot mod and a turret mod?
and why is it that when iznogod wrote a fully functionaly aimbot mod he wasnt banned like liltc? liltc's aimbot mod didnt even work completely it was a demonstration but iznogod writes a fully working one (which the guy did get his hands on and is using probs right now) and you guys just delete the script and no further actions were taking? does anyone reading this see liltc's point? all these attacks are just directly towards liltc for what? because he proved them wrong multiple times and was right about everything he said? who knows really but none of their actions were properly applyed.

if stryder didnt keep attacking him the way hes been attacking liltc the way he did liltc wouldnt have said what he said to stryder. so liltc tells stryder to kiss his ass but its okay for stryder (after the multiple attacks from stryder thrown towards liltc) who is a moderator to tell liltc hes a douche? "OK you immature douche" and no actions were even taking? well we get it because you guys are all friends but you can understand where liltc is coming from now cant you? http://modsonline.com/Forums-top-163445.html

so to sum it all up, no correct actions were taking by site admins at all and still no correct actions are being applyed. and they ban liltc for saying what had to be said. great website you guys are running here huh?

edited on Oct. 25, 2012 11:26 am by pluxy

This is exactly why i created the other thread: To keep threads like this clean of these discussions.
Dont know why it got closed as it doesnt seem to stop the discussion....

Again, my point I made in the other thread still stands: censorship is bad, hmkay.

I agree that you guys should ban/kick/whatever for cheating. The code posted/requested was indeed meant for creating a cheat. But it could have had so much more purposes, and had a lot of educational power....


And yes, I admit i posted a fully working script, just to check where the limit was of what is allowed to be posted and what wasnt. Found said limit. Asked admins in my post to only delete the code, but whole post (including useful arguments) was deleted. :(

But, as most mods can be used in a cheating manner (UAV anyone?), shouldnt you guys open up a bit more about what is allowed and what is not, especially for cod2 which is obviously dying out slowly.

Heard from multiple people they dont agree with your "censoring" policy and are thinking of leaving modsonline forever. This would be a very bad thing, as modsonline is already quite empty (especially the cod2 sections...)

Im not encouraging people to leave, but I know I would if you guys decided to censor with a policy I dont agree with.

Your site, your rules. If I disagree with your rules and get banned from your site, I might just as well find another site tbh.

I too am thinking of never coming back to this site. And that's because of the level of arrogance that Stryder - a senior member of staff - has displayed towards the members of this site. For one, he called everyone who likes Call of Duty an "idiot". His words. A direct quote. Seeing as this site is almost wholely dependent on Call of Duty and those that love it, he has effectively labelled the entire user base as "idiots".

Secondly, when dealing with Tyler, he thought it would be wise to trade insults with him and directly called him a "douche". I do not think this is appropriate behaviour for a senior member of staff. If there are rules which prohibit flaming or name calling, then why does he think he is exempt from those rules? He would probably answer and say that it is his site, as he helps pay the bills, and it is therefore one rule for everyone else, and another for the staff. I do not agree with that.

Thirdly, there is the staggering level of arrogance the man has towards the user base. When necessity called for a clarification on what scripts would cross the line between mod and cheat, he thought it was beneath him to explain. So, rather than issue a simple clarification and thereby nip the discussion in the bud, he thought it best to slavishly quote the rules over and over, as if we are all too dumb to know what the rules are or need it telling to us again and again.

So, in light of all this, I am all for a mass walk out. This particular "idiot" thinks that we - the user base - should simply pack our bags and leave the site to him and his cronies. I will not be called an idiot simply because I happen to like a game. And I do not approve of a senior member of staff forgetting the principle of noblesse oblige - position obliges responsibility. And that responsibility means not behaving in such an arrogant manner to the users to this site. Even when a user crosses the line and needs moderation, he should conduct himself in a manner which is beyond reproach.

If I do not get an apology, I would ask Foyleman to please delete my account here. I would want nothing more to do with the site.

The use of "idiot" is being taken out of context here in this discussion. Perhaps Stryder could have chosen his words more carefully. And since I am an admin here, I am going to stand up and apologize on behalf of the site.

However I will point out that others instigated argumentative discussion that lead to this instance. I'll accept some blame here, but I'm also going to dish it out.

You are welcome to visit this site as often and as little as you like. It's been run the same for over 10 years. I'll live either way.

I want to address pluxy's comments by simply stating that if you don’t like it here – there’s the door - and if your friend liltc had heeded the NUMEROUS warnings he was given he would not have been temp banned - perhaps he will behave and follow the forum rules on his return - if not he will be removed again. To clarify – it was not me that temp banned him, and I had no say in his judging (however the standard ban time set for his infractions is 1 month so he should consider that he got off lightly)

I want to address IzNoGod's comments as follows:
Complying with our forum rules by removing posts that are in offence or contradiction to those rules is not censorship. If a member posted racial slurs would it be censorship to remove those posts? No – and as similarly dictated in our rules of conduct are the rules about posting cheats and hacks. Our stance on cheating has always been so and won't change now.

You knowingly violated the site rules by posting a cheat code – and then went so far as to describe the methodology behind said code. You asked that we only remove the code if it was in violation of our rules (which you knew it was); but the whole post was in violation of our rules. As well (to further explain our process) unless we go in to manually edit a user’s post – the most simple tool available to us is to remove the offending post – and at that point we (the admins) were not about to manually edit posts surrounding the topic of cheating.

As well, to clarify - a mod (your stated example UAV) would not be considered a cheat as it is a server rule that ALL players play to. If you were to post a player sight cheat - that accomplished the UAV minimap positioning similar to a perk - but was only ever accessible to you (the player running the script) - it then becomes a cheat or hack. In the entire context of this discussion – it was entirely based around a cheat and NEVER a turret mod.

I would conclude that reply by saying that you are free to post whatever you want on your own website, or hell - go post cheats at the RGN forums or some other modding forum - but cheats remain unwelcome here.

And lastly I will address Tally’s comments...oh Tally....

Let’s start with "direct quote" - if you are going to “direct quote” something - you had best make sure it is in fact a direct quote rather than taking a single word out of a sentence and twisting the general concept of the discussion to something that you want it to mean...because that is called fictional writing – and if you try and make it out as a direct quote then it turns into slander.

Now - the word that you seem so offended by
idiot
n idiot [ˈidiət]
def - a foolish person

In the context it was used: “[H]ere’s a conspiracy theory for you - maybe even Activision has gotten tired of mailing in these CoD titles every year and have tried to kill the game from the inside - by just seeing how much you [foolish people] will actually pay for the poo-poo they grind out” (BTW – that’s how you do a direct quote)

Nothing offensive in that - and nothing personal - nothing was directed at any one person - merely my statement of a conspiracy theory

Secondly - even as an administrator I am entitled to my opinion. We have to deal with varying levels of (im)maturity in our members, and we experience them on a regular basis; We work on average 8-10 hours a day and are tired of having to come home and deal with this poo-poo. Some people don’t agree with the way we handle things - others accept it. You too are entitled to your opinion - if you don’t like that set-up - too bad.

Thirdly - your assumptions about the way this progressed is so out in left field it is astounding. If you had bothered to read any of the posts from Welshy, foyleman and myself you should have a clear understanding about why the code was removed, about why the posts were removed and why liltc had his forum privileges removed. If you had bothered to read the posts requesting clarification (yes - in which I referred you to the forum rules) you would see that I DID provide you the clarification in that a turret script was fine however an autoaim script for a player was not – I even went so far as to explain the theory and reasoning behind our decision.

As for an apology - I am truly sorry that foyleman apologized – it was not his place to do so.

I regret, and apologize for calling liltc an “immature douche” and hope he is not emotionally scarred for life because of it.

For you Tally - I owe you no apology - in fact you owe me one - you have incited hostility in this community almost since day one and have slandered myself and others members on a regular basis - you can consider this your one and only official warning. If you so much as nudge on crossing or violating any site rule in the slightest you will be banned – period.

I'm a nobody.

After having followed these theads I whole hearted agree with the moderators stance, it is their site after all.

It's unusual to see Tally/Dante demanding an apology for something that needs no apology, lol, but you'd better watch out Stryder or you will end up on Tally/Dante ignore list, which is a fate worse than death......apparently :)

edited on Oct. 25, 2012 07:22 pm by L4chy

StrYdeR writes...

You could have chosen your words better, there is no denying that..

Actually, the direct meaing off 'idiot' is

1.A stupid person.
2.A mentally handicapped person.

Idiot is used as an offensive word or as an attack. If I said to my boss 'you where foolish for releasing the software that early', he would be okay with it. If I said 'you where an idiot for releasing the software early' I would probably be fired.

I know off a very very widely used swear word which only mean 'sex', but you do not see that being okay do you?

Although I am not directly on anyones side.. Tally is a very helpful person in this community, when I first started off modding he was probably one the most helpful people I have ever met - although he can be sturn with his words - so you can a lot of the moderators here. I presume they are allowed to though on modsonline?

PS: Thanks for the 1,000 views on this thread - but ultimately destroying it



edited on Oct. 26, 2012 09:11 am by 1337MattY

Oh Matty,

I guess the site that you clicked on and the one that I clicked on in the results from entering "idiot definition' into the search engine of personal choice was slightly different.

HOWEVER, this does not change the FACT or meaning of the statement as shown below:

[original]


[my stated definition]


[your stated definition]


Again, nothing offensive in that, and nothing personal or directed at any one person - and nothing changes in meaning on any of the above scenarios - they are all a statement of a conspiracy theory and nothing more

If your company has a policy that allows for them firing you for expressing your opinion on any topic, then I would fully expect that you should be fired for violating the rules of employment (which I have to only assume would be posted and that all employees of that company be expected to obey (and by accepting employment - agreed to conform to) as a condition of their employment.

It appears that the only person who has called anyone an "idiot" lately has been Tally (in which he appears to be calling himself an idiot)

unless, that is, he is directing his assessment of idiocy towards someone other than himself; in which case he should have worded his statement better - perhaps he can clarify?

I do not disagree with this statement, but for whatever reason Tally also seems to feel a sense of entitlement and that he should be beyond reproach. It also seems that whenever there is a thread of any conflict Tally is in there "stirring the pot"

Your threads destruction began when liltc decided he was going to further violate forum rules after being warned against doing so. It continues to become of little to no value because rather than trying to put it back on track certain members continue to try and force an issue

as foyle previously stated:

now - you can either post your codes - or not; either way - we'll be here; but we all grow weary of this drama