mmorpg's review

[Delsus]

This is probably what hit a nerve. Anyway!! This has been a good saga, but time to move on.

Thats not worth banning over, if there site is designed properly he should have been able to deleate that part and give me a reply, wouldnt have minded that.

The only reason they would ban me is because they want to silence me for some suspicious reason.

[Sojiro]

I don't disagree with the score, nor do I deny they do make some very valid points about the current state of the game. I do question why they would not at least hold off putting up the review when a major patch is slated a mere 4 days away that does a complete overhaul of the battle system as well as a plethora of other things, and edit in changes it makes (or is 1.18 still a confirmed "rumour" :P ).

I doubt it would instantly turn the review to a 10, but after a few days some of the things written in the review will just be plain false, and I can see why people would question their integrity on that (although I don't follow MMORPG ever so I don't know about the conspiracy theories surrounding the site). If/when they re-review the game after a few more patches I look forward to seeing what they say again, but hopefully they can hold a review and edit in changes prior to a patch coming just days away.

[darkstarpoet1]

Thats not worth banning over, if there site is designed properly he should have been able to deleate that part and give me a reply, wouldnt have minded that.

The only reason they would ban me is because they want to silence me for some suspicious reason.

if you would have come on here and said something about about se along the lines like this you would have been banned here also or gotten a tos violation email. if a site is in place and you go in attack the site they are within their rights to stop your posting. by saying they better review again after the patch or you were 100% sure the only reason for the bad review was because other games paid them for it you not only attacked the reviewer, but the entire site.

i am not saying you were wrong about what you said so don't take me the wrong way, but had i been a mod there i would have banned you for the post also. i've been moderator on many forums over the years and most sites will either ban you or at the very least delete your post for making posts about the site itself.

if your reply had posted the changes that are being made in this upcoming patch as a rebuttal it would have been alot different than actually talking down the site.

[Abriael]

"talking down" is a big and wide area. Valid criticism can definitely be defined "talking down", and should definitely be allowed on any website or comment section.

In this case this article is the result of a whole chain of poor choices, from the publishing date to the fact that it shows only a few pictures from the very first hour of gameplay and creates suspicion about how much the reviewer actually played the game. Due to that even harsh criticism is entirely called for, and shouldn't surprise anyone.

If a site goes public with any kind of editorial content and doesn't want to be "talked down" when such content is in poor quality and taste (like in this case) they shouldn't have a forum or a comment section and they shouldn't encourage people to comment.

Truth is that many sites enjoy massively the traffic generated by contents and forums, but they are a little too insecure in their footing and content to be able to accept the flak that comes with it in stride.

[Delsus]

if you would have come on here and said something about about se along the lines like this you would have been banned here also or gotten a tos violation email. if a site is in place and you go in attack the site they are within their rights to stop your posting. by saying they better review again after the patch or you were 100% sure the only reason for the bad review was because other games paid them for it you not only attacked the reviewer, but the entire site.

i am not saying you were wrong about what you said so don't take me the wrong way, but had i been a mod there i would have banned you for the post also. i've been moderator on many forums over the years and most sites will either ban you or at the very least delete your post for making posts about the site itself.

if your reply had posted the changes that are being made in this upcoming patch as a rebuttal it would have been alot different than actually talking down the site.

the so called "community manager" wont even reply to my emails, that was 1 line of a post its easy to deleate, the rest of that post was relevent questions which should have been in the review. Alot of people would deleate the line, answer the questions and say "talking about the website in the manner you did will result in action being taken" then I say it again they could ban me.

Funny thing is they have never denied it

[Jynx]

I was a forum moderator for the official forums of Ultima Online once upon a time. Logical debate is one thing, but it's another to make posts that contain wanton insults to anyone especially if it's to the site itself.

You can get your point across and even "Talk down" to the integrety of the web-page and whatnot itself as long as you watch your words and don't flat out insult people.

[Delsus]

I was a forum moderator for the official forums of Ultima Online once upon a time. Logical debate is one thing, but it's another to make posts that contain wanton insults to anyone especially if it's to the site itself.

You can get your point across and even "Talk down" to the integrety of the web-page and whatnot itself as long as you watch your words and don't flat out insult people.

I was only talking down the integrity of the site, nothing I said was aimed at anyone, just the site as a whole.

[Abriael]

I was only talking down the integrity of the site, nothing I said was aimed at anyone, just the site as a whole.

Well, no. I did see a few open insults on your side. Maybe it's a matter of language barrier (you don't seem a native english speaker to me), but if I were you I'd chose your wording a tad more carefully next time.

[Jynx]

Indeed and that can be considered unconstructive conduct, as it doesn't really add to the conversation. Nor does it make the arguement any stronger.

You can point out suspicions all you want but when you start accusing people / places of things you have no proof other than the easy speculation that it might be true, your not helping your case.

As much as I may agree with what you say it's still ground for being moderated. saying things like "No matter what is said it's 100% that your website take money for reviews" is something you can't back up and doesn't add to your case in any way / shape/ form other than being hillarious.

Not trying to argue with you, just saying that they are able to moderate you on that kind of stuff.

[Delsus]

Well, no. I did see a few open insults on your side. Maybe it's a matter of language barrier (you don't seem a native english speaker to me), but if I were you I'd chose your wording a tad more carefully next time.

I am English and if I was insulting people I would have said what I said in an email which is "is Blizzard lining your pockets nicely?" What I said was directed at the website in that case you is the collective noun for the website not an individual

Indeed and that can be considered unconstructive conduct, as it doesn't really add to the conversation. Nor does it make the arguement any stronger.

You can point out suspicions all you want but when you start accusing people / places of things you have no proof other than the easy speculation that it might be true, your not helping your case.

As much as I may agree with what you say it's still ground for being moderated. saying things like "No matter what is said it's 100% that your website take money for reviews" is something you can't back up and doesn't add to your case in any way / shape/ form other than being hillarious.

Not trying to argue with you, just saying that they are able to moderate you on that kind of stuff.

While they are able to moderate it looks to me as if they are hiding somthing for not replying to what I said, its basic psycology that if you are scared you will try to silence somone for getting too close to the mark. If they had nothing to hide human nature would have been to reply to my legit questions, then warn if i throw anymore accusations around they would ban me, that is how I would have moderated it rather than the scared instant ban hammer, indecating they have somthing to hide