41

[COTG Fan]

RealityImpaired said:

Like Watching Paint Dry for whatever reason you have clumped and stereotyped posters of a message board. This can be a brief summary of sociological trends associated with the function of a message board community but it's not a true representation, in the fact, that you can't assign labels to each individual. The fallacy lies in the assumption that personalities, even on a message board, can be categorized simply. Sure you can establish social norms as with anything else in society; but they are just patterns of individual behavior summarized to its lowest common denominator.

I find the irony thick as you also claim that people turn the character or persona into the main topic, similar to the alteration of the topic of a CPC discussion into rant about the characterization, and dissolution of posters who have join a message board. What say you and I start a relevant topic instead of interrupting one; we can go and start a 'Pro or Con registration topic'

The whole reason to post to a message board is to have discussions regarding topics on the related subject matter as well to culture a database of information. This storage and retention simply can't be described as ephemeral in any way.



The fact that you're posting this is trolling. Why you might ask? It would appear that you are speaking to people who seem to have a grasp of the concept of message board utilization and by way of telling them the nuisances you've observed it ranks as condescension in any context.

It's nice to see a poster who has a command of the English language and a varied vocabulary. I complement your eloquence but am detracted by your cynicism. I'm inclined to agree with some of what you've said, taking it in an unrefined form; yet, there is a time and a place for those discussions. You have yet to leave any information that's productive to a Cotg player.

While you claim we miss the forest for the trees while you miss the ideology in this statement: "One who fights monsters should see to it that they themselves do not become a monster; when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into you."

Dude, Jim Steinhoff is everything that guy said he is and I'm glad somebody finally said something.

[Mr. Jimmyface]

Oh no - my secret identity

ROTFL ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Actually, Noodles, he was talking about you. Thanks for being bitter and jealous of me for over a year since the Wolf debates of 2003. I couldn't be the internet celebrity I am today without you - love ya

[Old Schooler]

Seriously Jim - now you're just making true the observations of my boy 'Paint.' I've seen you, what you look like and if you need to think of yourself as an internet celebrity, then that's just sad. You get all worked up over a little discussion on this board that questions the game. Uhh that's gone on since the inception of this website so to decrease your stress, you should start to accept it. Disagreement leads to improvement and it is what this country is based on -the right to disagree and have opinions that do not always the ones of the majority or 'the powers that be. '

[Mr. Jimmyface]

Ahhh... point taken!

OK, maybe I have gone too far into character, and forgotten that this is place of fun.

Truce?

Seriously, I'm tired of us sniping back and forth - let's get over ourselves and have fun with COTG!

[incognito]

I haven't agreed much with the various (one?) guest such as swarm (s?) at least in this topic.

1) I don't think the CPC writing sucks, if I did I wouldn't be anticipating the next set every six months. That being said I wouldn't mind if the writing shifted away from managers and managment a little to wrestler Vs wrestler. Zed Marlow vs Jack of Dimonds could become a blood feud on the level of Star Warrior Vs Thantos, Chaos vS Alpha Force, or Mandrill Vs Shield if it focused more on Jack Vs Marlow than Jack Vs King.

2) Everybody has that right to express thier opinion about the game on this site, both the things they like and the things they hate, and things theyed like to change. But when someone comes in and say's the game sucks, they could write an awsome edition with only 24 wrestlers, and the posters are boring; it comes off as malice for the sake of ego; not constructive criticism.

3) I don't understand how you think that CPC wrestlers are too strong, for the most part CPC wrestlers would be midcarders in the GWF. even the the Top CPC wrestlers (Raven, Jack, Zed, Enigma, Ect.) would only have an outside chance of winning the official Galaxian title and most of the time would be fighting over the interstelar belt. I think they stack up about right when commpared to the GWF.

4) I happen to like "all the worlds a stage". That being said they could use a better feud than the Void. Maybe Varsity and a group of "serious" wrestlers?

5) When did 24 wrestlers become the determining factor in how well Tom and Mark write? Both of them seem more than capable of writing a story that would be fun to play out over six months with only 24 wrestlers, but why should either of them handicap themselves to do that? If they think the story is better with more wrestlers why should they make the story worse by removing charaters? I'm also waiting for that awsome story lines with 24 wrestlers you said you could create.

and there are more, but what I agree with you on is that you don't need to be registered to post, or to have those posts taken seriously.

While there are advantages too regerstering, such as nobody else can post pretending to be you, a track record that does give some weight to your arguments, a sence of community and belonging. Nobody has to register if they don't want to. If sombody such as Swarm or Paint want to come in only as guest to post more power to them, if people want to lurk and read thats great, I like the fact that some people are interested in what other people say, we need more people to listen anyway. And if any of them register or post as guest thats great also.

This is a discusion board and it wouldn't be as interesting if only regestered users were allowed to post. Infact I like the idea of guest posting, varity usally imroves things. Some people don't trust or like to register, that's there perogative. It doesn't mean that they shouldn't post or that there arguments carry no weight because of it. Hey, this discusion has gone three pages because of the posts of guest posters
if you agree with them or not.

[Chris Ingersoll]

incognito said:

While there are advantages too regerstering, such as nobody else can post pretending to be you, a track record that does give some weight to your arguments, a sence of community and belonging. Nobody has to register if they don't want to. If sombody such as Swarm or Paint want to come in only as guest to post more power to them, if people want to lurk and read thats great, I like the fact that some people are interested in what other people say, we need more people to listen anyway. And if any of them register or post as guest thats great also.

This is a discusion board and it wouldn't be as interesting if only regestered users were allowed to post. Infact I like the idea of guest posting, varity usally imroves things. Some people don't trust or like to register, that's there perogative. It doesn't mean that they shouldn't post or that there arguments carry no weight because of it. Hey, this discusion has gone three pages because of the posts of guest posters if you agree with them or not.

That being said, I don't know if you guys can see them, but the Commissioners and I can see the IPs of every post right in the body of the message. I don't mind Guests, as long as they're really guests -- or at least people who haven't registered. At least one "guest" in this thread HAS registered, however, as he went on to make a registered post in this same thread (I won't name the account at this time).

Do Paul and I (and if necessary, the rest) need to start policing this place more closely? We don't want this to dissolve into the chaos of the Guestbook (or at one point, even the old board) and we can temporarily ban you if necessary. We'd really prefer not to, so let's keep things in the open, shall we?

[j]

Chris, we can't see IP's but I was wondering if you could since I had an idea that some of the "guest" posts were actual members who didn't want to be known. I'm glad you can and also glad your keeping an eye on this, I don't think this has gotten out of hand or anything but like you said I don't want this ending up like the last DB.

[Mr. Jimmyface]

Agreed - I shouldn't have taken the bait from an anonymous source who wanted to push my buttons. I should never have given him/her the satisfaction. So, to all of you who may have been offended by my statements, I apologise for that. I will not promise to never ruffle feathers, because I am human, but I promise to be accountable for all of my content.

That said, let's get back to spinning the dice and having fun!

[moparpaul]

It's all good Jim.

I don't think anything got too far out of hand.

I do agree with Chris that about posting as a guest when you already have a registered account.

I'll keep a closer eye out for that in the future as well.

[Joe]

I am confused as to why the name someone posts under would be a problem. I always post under my real name, but I could care less who posts under what, and I really do not understand why others would concern themselves with it.

It is funny that this is seemingly a problem now, upon a few "guests" making waves and creating an interesting, argumentative discussion when I do not recall it being an issue before. After all, I have seen posts on here by Cowboy Bill Watts, Paul Heyman, Stephen Jackson, and Kellen Winslow. I am not certain what Bill Watts is doing these days, but I am certain that the other three guests I named are a little busy to be as overly concerned with COTG as they appeared in their respective posts.

I also question the justification for threatening to bar such individuals who post under different guest names. As one poster said previously, pulling an imaginary name out of thin air and registering under it is not exactly devulging one's true identity. Dare I say it, but I doubt that Wildman, Lars Toxic, Incognito, are the birthnames of those who use them.

My final statement is the comment made by Mr. Ingersoll concerning this board, and the possibility that it may "dissolve into chaos" by allowing individuals to post under whatever name they feel. I think that is slightly over dramatic. It seems to me that the result of those actions thus far has been the creation of more interest in a CPC topic than has previously existed on this board.

[Mr. Jimmyface]

This will be my last post on the 41 topic. And I'd like to start off by stating that I will no longer be posting as Lars Toxik. Long story short, by assuming the position of a character I created (and who will available at Galacticon, by the way - cheap plug ), I will admit that it did have the potential to deliberately provoke people by assuming a persona of a heel media figure. And judging from some of the comments here, it did just that.

That is not what this guestbook needs.

That is not what everyone in this guestbook deserves. While some people like the abrasive character, I see it as something that distracts from the main purpose of us being here - having fun!

So, I will be posting under my nickname, Mr. Jimmyface. I use the name not out of shame of regret for my actions, but to make things more fun than irritating. I am proud to say that I have have had fun with this game since 1988, and I hope to keep having fun with it.

As far as the issue with guests and names, I have more of a concern with people who sign on anonymously in order to "snipe" or "troll" people. This is nothing new to me or to anyone who is on these boards. I have sent my feelings on this to Paul and Chris, and that truthfully is what I should do. Everyone should be entitled to their opinion, but to deliberately try and disrupt a board is not the best way to express oneself. That's my opinion on the matter, and I hope to live up to that in my future posts.

Besides, I love some of the names people come up with here! I would never want to limit that!

(The comment from earlier about gazing into the abyss is not lost on me, either - thanks for giving me a moment of clarity)

[moparpaul]

Joe,

The problem isn't the name someone uses. It's when that name is used to agree with yourself or to keep a point going that you already made under another name.

It would be like you coming back in as a guest named "kati fan" and saying "I agree with Joe, this banning stuff is crap!"

Let's say you get a response. Let's say someone disagrees with you.

What would then prevent someone else from coming back as a guest and posting under the same guest name that you did, and totally ripping that person?

Now it appears as though that this guest has been in the discussion twice when in fact he hasn't.

Though not exactly in that fashion, something very similar to that happened in this thread.

This is part of the reason the orginal guestbook was taken down. Things can get out of hand quickly.

That is why I like the idea of registered posts. Regardless of the name that is used, people know who is who.

As far as the topic "41". This thread is now in it's 4th page and I bet there might be 6-7 posts that are actually about the 41 members in the CPC. So the guests (and non guests alike) haven't really contributed that much to a CPC topic. JMO on what I've seen.

Anyway I, like Chris, don't mind guests as long as they are just that. I hope this helps clear the air a bit.

EDIT: For crappy punctuation. Those responsible have been sacked.

[abe froman]

aw

I, for one, will miss the posts of Lars Toxic!

Oh, if Lars is Superman, and Jim is Clark....is Mr. Jimmyface the Joker?

[Chris Ingersoll]

Paul said:

A bunch of stuff I agree with 100%, except maybe the firing for poor punctuation. Anyone can have an off day.

Seriously, those would pretty much have been my exact words on the subject.

[Like Watching Paint Dry]

Agreed 100 percent with Joe. It seems that this 'problem' with guests has only materialized with this threads breaking of the mechanical 'group think' that has become a routine on the CPC forum. While I agree that someone posting under multiple names (both guest & registered) is a potential problem, it's strange how this 'all of a sudden' is now a problem.

Chris, if your going to bring up the topic of one of the 'guests' double posting under a registered name, I'd encourage you in the future be responsible enough as a moderator to either go 'all the way & name names' or have the foresight NOT to bring it up publicly. A simple e-mail to the offender would end the situation privately if you don't wish to 'out' the offender.

As a guest who has posted under only one name of this thread, I don't appreciate the implication caused by the hanging allegation. It's bush league and a turn off.

I would hope keystone cop like moderation is not the future trend of this board. The chest thumping 'I'll look more closely into this' hyperbole from both yourself & Phillips is not reassuring.

By all means take steps to raise the bar, but as moderators, lead by way of personal example...not as contributors to the problem.

[Chris Ingersoll]

You want moderation? Fine. This thread, having been derailed a long time ago, is locked.