Dear Steve,
The seeds of the creation of this web site, and of the voluntary de-sanction of the Council of Five Nations SFB tournament, were planted years ago, when you started censoring posts on the ADB BBS, posts that in my opinion had no call to be censored by any reasonable person. Especially by the CEO of the company that produces SFB.
I hold up as the most prominent and blatant example the discussion around Jason Gray's "turtle" tactics that won him the National Championship at Origins.
For years, the prevailing thought regarding SFB tactics has been "speed is life". And this guy comes along with some innovative tactics that involve the opposite; a slow deliberate advance toward the enemy ship with judicious use of shield reinforcement and wild weasels. The best players in the world are not prepared for this curveball, and he wins the National Championship. Jason again uses these tactics in an online tournament, and someone complains.
This starts a debate online. Some people think this is "not fair", or cheating in some way. Jason posts to defend what he thinks is an entirely reasonable strategy.
You start deleting Jason's posts, and threaten him with being banned from the BBS if he does not cease talking about this strategy.
Steve, do you realize how counterproductive this is?
These people are debating about your game, Star Fleet Battles. These people are spending their precious time debating the pros and cons of certain tactics employed in your game. The passion of their debate reflects the passion to which they approach and play your game. They wouldn't spend the time or the emotional energy if they were not passionate about your game!
Most game designers (and sellers) would kill for devoted fans like this!
But what do you do? You silence the debate by threatening to ban anyone who raises the topic again!
And worst of all, you do not delete the entire discussion thread. You delete ONLY the posts of the people with whom you disagree! So a casual reader of the BBS who was not present before the censoring wanders in to be confused by posts presenting only half a debate.
Steve, are you blind to the harm this does your reputation as a reasonable and fair man?
This is the kind of thing that has pushed people away from the SFB community. This is the kind of thing that makes people not want to attend Origins.
I know you don't see it that way. I know in your mind you (and Jean) have rationalized that the frequent censorship on the ADB BBS is justified, and for the good of the community.
But Steve, I am telling you here, because you would delete it in a second if I posted it on your BBS, that you are pushing people away from the community. It not only harms the community as a whole, but it harms your customer base and revenue flow.
And to wrap this up, here is the thing that puzzles me most about all this...
We, the members of the SFB community, know you to be a very patriotic man. You proclaim it publicly on your web site, and we know you have "walked the talk" in service to our country.
It puzzles me that such a patriotic man shows such disregard for the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
I know it's your BBS, and you have the right to allow and disallow whatever posts you want. It is not a truly public forum, owned by the public at large.
But what about the sentiment that many of us were taught as school children, the one that is perhaps the very best example of what makes our country great?
"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death defending your right to say it."
Steve, please stop censoring the posts on the BBS, even if you don't agree with them. Please be aware of the harm you are doing to your reputation and to the community.
-Dave Cheng
Not that I expect you to care, but
I second this. It is one of the most frustrating things about the ADB BBS. I (and I expect most people) can accept difference of opinion and even insults. Trying to participate in a conversation when you know the moderator is possibly or even likely to come in and edit the conversation to his liking is just pointless.
These days you have even taking to just deleting posts and pretending like they were never there, which is even worse.
Building a community starts with honesty. Changing things so that everything looks like you want it to doesn't help.
-Paul
GULP!!!
I have not ventured often onto the ADB BBS, mostly because I am intimidated by the superior knowledge of the game exhibited by the regular posters. I just don't want to waste other people's time if I don't know what I'm talking about. Therefore, I have not personally seen what you describe.
But if what you describe is true, then I am surprised that board has not become a dusty wasteland where only tumbleweeds remain.
This is not the only example of corporate censorship I am aware of. The same thing happened on the Axis & Allies Miniatures boards, where pointed criticism of the product (poor production molds, even worse rules) resulted in the Mods shutting down discussion in a very heavy handed way. The worst was their handling of the (understandable) uproar by gamers when they tried to pass off a mold of the Bf 109 as A SPITFIRE!!!. You would think that a company selling to history buffs would have known better, but they just slapped some British decals on the plane and shipped it.
The resulting flames of complaining buyers against Hasbro was dealt with on a par with the Soviet Union handling of the Hungarian Velvet Revolution. I and most of my contemporaries in the game fled the board, stopped buying the product, and stopped playing the game.
Agreed
Worse than just having my posts deleted...I've actually had key parts of my posts deleted, while keeping the remainder, which completely twisted what I was trying to say. Since they require you to use your real name on those boards, I'm now credited with saying something I did not say. I feel violated.
I will not be back to the ADB boards.
No other options
The ADB BBS has managed to survive, because there has been no where else for people to discuss SFB. I'm hopeful that people will take advantage of this forum to have the open dialogues that were not allowed there. That censorship is by far my biggest gripe with ADB and how they treated the community.
Agreed
I find the censorship appalling. I can't think of another website or forum that I visit that comes even close to the amount of *editing* and *deletion* of posts that goes on over there.
Agreed.
The only controversial comments allowed are by SVC himself. Of course, I think most of the deletions occur in the non-game realted threads, which probably shouldn't even be there to begin with.
Intimidated?
Intimidated? Don't be. Plenty of people both here and on the ADB BBS would be happy to get you caught up to any subject matter Star Fleet Universe related. You won't be wasting anyone's time.
Wouldn't be as bad
You know, the whole censorship thing would be much easier to swallow if they folowed the same rules as they put on the rest. I've said it before, SVC is the biggest insulter/abuser of the rules that he puts down, and it is hard to believe he doesn't notice it. Of course, the fact I mocked him flat out about it and he didn't notice was humorous and all, but still doesn't help anything.
Well, it helped me in the humour department anyway.
Anyhoo....I do think censorship of some sort if somewhat necessary, because you can't (I don't, anyway) expect everyone who visits a site to be reasonable...but obviously just nuking anything you think is wrong/negative is hardly going to work in the scheme of things.
He didn't merely not notice it
he actually thought you were agreeing with him. I found that exchange hilarious, myself.
I'm curious. When and were
I'm curious. When and were did that exchange happen?
Here
By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, July 23, 2009 - 09:59 am: Edit
We pointed out to Dave that the inclusion of a certain individual (who is banned from sanctioned events and SFBOL events) would violate his sanction. Many of the players at the event told David to dis-invite this person and encouraged David to maintain the sanction, which was more important to them than any one player. David phoned me and, in a conversation in which he was extremely hostile and confrontational, refused to dis-invite this person, and said he was "fine with dropping the sanction". His players were NOT fine with David dropping the sanction, and to protect the integrity of the tournament system, we had no choice but to cut all contact with David. For David to ignore his players and carry out some bizarre personal crusade, not to mention throwing this action in the face of ADB, Inc., was an intolerable ethical violation. Actions have consequences. The actions were entirely those of David Cheng; the consequences hurt us all. The only thing that would have done more damage was to allow David Cheng to continue to use the BBS to advertise his actions.
We at ADB, Inc., are deeply saddened by the lack of judgement shown by David Cheng. His deliberate decision to void the sanction of his event did a disservice to his players and our customers. ADB, Inc., cannot support someone who abuses our customers for any reason, and David Cheng had no valid reason for his action. Indeed, David Cheng ignored the wishes of his own players, many of whom contacted him and ADB, Inc., urging him to maintain the sanction of his event. ADB, Inc., has set the highest standard of integrity of any tournament organization in the industry, which is why our tournament organization is renowned for its success, and we cannot tolerate the lack of integrity shown by the reckless decision of David Cheng. We deeply regret his actions, but we cannot compromise the integrity of the tournament system, or tolerate those who do so.
____
By Timothy Sheehy (Spydaer) on Thursday, July 23, 2009 - 11:24 am: Edit
Interestingly, all that needs to be said is a quote from above....
"ADB, Inc., cannot support someone who abuses our customers for any reason"
_____
By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, July 23, 2009 - 11:52 am: Edit
...
Indeed, Tim. I was shocked by the callous disregard for the desires of the players, who wanted a sanctioned event, not a pontificating local tyrant proving some obtuse point.
Internet FTL
I was puzzled by Tim's position.... now I get it... the sarcasm did not translate.
It seemed out of character for Tim.
List of "he who shalt not be named"
"inclusion of a certain individual"
I wonder if anybody has a list of "certain individuals who will not be named" over the years ..... at least four that I can think of and I don't even pay that close attention to the BBS.
I won't be happy until
they start referring to me as "The Dark Lord".
Dark Lord
You're way too pale for that.
Ok, I remember that exchange.
Ok, I remember that exchange. Have the agree the sarcasm didn't come through all that well. Additionally, it's hard to match up comments from both boards due to difference in screennames.
Agree on screen name
Which is why I changed my screen name here to just be my real name. I'll go back to my SFB nickname if we find a way to allow the display of both.
Truly unbelievable
I'm a bit of an old-school SFBer and I've followed the SFB BBS silently for the past several years, because I still enjoy the game, but I don't have time to get thoroughly involved.
While following the discussions on the SFB BBS, I've definitely been turned off by Steve Cole's heavy-handedness, although it was always difficult to make a clear assessment, because the posts about which he complained were always deleted by the time I saw them, so I kinda assumed, or at least really hoped, that Jason Gray, or Tim Sheehy or Paul Scott, etc., must have said something pretty inflammatory. It is extremely refreshing to see the other side of the story here.
I've never met David Cheng in person, but reading year after year what he's done for Council of Five Nations, I've felt that he should be nominated for most admired SFB contributor; this is a guy who is worth his weight in gold to the SFB community, and now he's been banned. And for what? Allowing someone on Steve Cole's shit list to play in his tournament??? Is this the way Steve Cole treats such a dedicated, tireless and expert advocate of his game? This is a guy whose local tournament was easily the best in the country and for the past several years, the "real" Origins. Well I imagine Steve Cole will have to learn the hard way when he sees Council of Five compete with Origins for most precipitous plunge.
I do know Paul Scott and I know he's got a strong personality, which can be abrupt to some (no offense, Paul), although I never found it to be so. He is also one of the most creative thinkers I've personally met in SFB and some of his strategies have been flat-out revolutionary. Obviously he shouldn't be treated in a special way in all things because of this, but he certainly commands the respect of one of the all time great SFB players, and I never got a strong impression that he abused that position. He certainly deserves the basic respect that anyone should get.
I followed the Jason Gray debacle a few years back myself, and I watched it inevitably devolve into the usual not fair/non-aggression complaint, which even at the time I thought was an arbitrary and unfair reaction to it. Unfortunately, the SFB world had reached such a state of orthodoxy by that time that this was easily dismissed as heresy out of hand and Jason's greatest SFB achievement fell into disrepute as a result. I frankly thought it was an excellent response to a very tired, uninventive and one dimensional style of play that had developed in the tournament, and people had trouble dealing with it because it was different. Instead of adapting, they complained. Not saying that this characterized the individual players, but it seemed very much like the atmosphere around the tourney. To me, Jason's tactics were like introducing the blitz to a football conference that's fallen into a heavy zone coverage rut (or vice versa). Or in non-American football terms, they reminded me of Admiral Nelson's opportunistic response to the Age of Sail "fighting instructions" that had sapped the creativity out of that era. People would figure the turtle tactics out eventually and they'd deal with them, but this would take effort and they were destined to change the way the game was played, I felt...until Steve stepped in and marched Jason off to the scaffold. It was a great opportunity lost to inject a dose of reality into the whole non-aggression discussion, which has gotten so nitpicky that every EA should now be handled by a specially elected EA Allocation board, instead of by the players themselves.
Cadet_Stimpy, I can't believe they'd ever go and doctor or delete your posts! When was the last time you were *ever* offensive (at least in a confrontational sorta way)?
I remember my last Origins, sitting in the post convention get-together on Sunday morning while the finals were being played (yes, this was back when it took that long to wrap up the Gold Hat, and when Paul Scott would emerge wearing it). Steve Cole went around the room asking players to give him a wish list idea they'd like to see. As you might imagine, he was not terribly receptive to most of the ideas he'd solicited and I remember when it was my turn, I made a wish about the Romulans, which I thought would bring more consistency to them, and he rather bit my head off for daring to wish such a thing (I though he did say "wish list"). It doesn't really matter what the idea was, or whether it had merit, but the crushing of every idea that did not come out of his own head, even in a supposed forum for such things, soured me on the idea of being too deeply involved with the SFB community and since shortly after that, I've limited my SFB play to FTF with friends.
Anyway, I just wanted to add my admittedly long-winded comments, as someone who's really enjoyed the game and has been sorry to see how the community has been treated. I can relate to the difficulties the moderators must feel, because it can be hard to satisfy everyone and keep the community from devolving into infighting, but an angry and abusive online police state is not the answer.
Maybe we should create a petition list and send it to Steve Cole requesting that the names on the list all be banned from SFB and not allowed to play in SFB sanctioned events. Just a thought to support the guys who have been banned already.
John Lafayette
Turtle
I played Jason 2 times on SFBOL against his turtle. I won both, but they were real close. I think what did him in was he tried it in a Fed. Had he been in a Gorn and I had been forced to keep my speed up, I think he would have creamed my ISC.
I agree with everything John said.
I also think it STILL child's play for a Hydran to beat up a Rom. :) (How is that for abrasive there you Ale swilling, pointy eared, cloaker?)
My own two cents (kinda long but I get to the point eventually)
In Fall 2007, I decided to start playing SFB again after a 15-year hiatus.
Don't ask why, I can't tell you. It just popped into my head. I was curious how popular the game was, if it was even still being published. I searched the internet and found the BBS, where I learned about SFBOL and tournament play. I got excited, signed up on SFBOL, and ordered the MRB and T-module.
Online I met a lot of really great people- you folks - and while I was getting slain left and right I had great fun. The BBS had many lively discussions, but even a novice like me noticed that certain opinions were unwelcome and others encouraged. I tried not to let it bother me, after all I just wanted to play and talk about SFB.
In spring 2008 I eagerly anticipated attending Origins. I was still getting manhandled by the sharks on SFBOL (you know who you are!) but was still having fun. After all, it was just like when I first learned the game, I got killed 100 times then started winning a few. Anyway I wasn't into any other games so my focus at Origins was going to be SFB.
What a disappointment! I attended the singalong so I could meet a few people and learn the ropes a bit. I found a seat in the middle of the room near the front with no one between me and the table when the ADB staff was seated. Mr. Cole begain the meeting, and after a few minutes was looking for someone to ask a question (think it was Paul Franz). He looked around the room, stared directly at me, and said "well who are you?" in a loud, obnoxious manner. I felt suddenly like I didn't belong there, or maybe I was in Paul's seat and didn't realize it. I decided to play it dumb, told him my name and that it was my first time there. He did not reply, and continued looking for Paul F. or whoever. No "welcome new guy" or "thanks for coming or even "fresh meat!" from the guy. I was a temporary irritation that he chose to ignore from that point on.
When the tournament began, I was hugely disappointed to find that there were not many participants, and that games were hard to come by. Not that I had a chance to win or anything, but the tournament was the only reason I was there! (in retrospect I should have signed up for the scenario events, but was afraid I would miss chances to play tournament games). I managed to squeeze in four games from Thursday to Saturday, one against a guy who hadn't played in years and wasn't planning to play that year until they shanghaied him.
I also made a trip to ADB's booth to pick up more SFB stuff which I didn't have (almost everything!). I had convinced several of my buddies to start playing after the convention and needed to stock up. I got to the booth and started pulling stuff I wanted- Basic set, modules, CL's, even some minis. Mr. Cole was at the booth and I asked him about the fighter modules. I saw J2, and wanted the first fighter module to go with it, so I asked him if he had a copy of J1. He looked straight at me and said "there is no such thing as J1". No further elucidation. So I ventured "well I found J2, the second fighter module, do you have the first one?" To this he said "there is J, and J2. We have J if that's what you want." I did, and I bought my pile 'o stuff.
I though I might be making too much about Mr. Cole's treatment of me, but changed my mind immediately when a friend who witnessed the exchange commented about how rude Mr. Cole was. It doesn't translate so well into writing but the rudeness was definitely there.
Now that I have been a member of the online community for almost two years, and after my personal experiences with Mr. Cole, I believe I am qualified to say he can be rude, self-centered, and intolerant. Mr. Cole if you are reading this I hope you now realize how ironic it is that you have accused others of customer abuse and of being a tyrant.
Re: Turtle
Hey, if you don't watch out, Larry, I'll complain and get you banned from this board ;)
Welcome John!
Nice to see you here. I do want to point out that Dave has not been banned from the BBS or from sanctioned tournament play. Nor has he been banned from SFBOL. His tournament has merely been de-sanctioned.
I accept some of the blame for the big debate concerning Jason Gray. He knocked me out of the tree at Origins that year using his turtle tactics against my Orion. I was totally caught off guard and he dispatched me in like 4-5 turns. I posted our battle description on the BBS and my position was that I wasn't sure if it was a non-aggressive attack plan or not as I'd never faced anything like that performed at such a high level. So while I never accused him of being non-aggressive, I DID bring it up and it led to a heated argument. For the record, I admitted that he beat me fair and square. And I commended him for his creativity.
Welcome Mike
Hey, you're Akira on SFBOL, right?
One thing I will say about SVC is that he has one of those deadpan senses of humor. So he comes across as a bit more rude than he actually is if you're not expecting it. But still, you had no way of knowing that and he should have been warmer to you than what you described.
I have played Jason many
I have played Jason many times and have never once had a problem with his aggression level. So there!
Not exactly true
"I do want to point out that Dave has not been banned from the BBS or from sanctioned tournament play. Nor has he been banned from SFBOL. His tournament has merely been de-sanctioned."
The first parts are 100% accurate, but I would hardly call what Cole did to Co5N as "merely de-sanctioned." He did remove the sanction, but then also deleted everything about it from the official BBS and called Dave all sorts of names - including, but not limited to "unethical" and "local tyrant" and further, in a wonderful piece of irony, accused Dave of abusing ADB's clients.
Not exactly true
I was commenting on the statement that Dave was banned from anything. And I think the term was "pontificating local tyrant", which still makes me giggle. Yup, Council is currently stricken from the record and that's an entirely different hill of beans. But Dave's status is OK for now as far as I know.
SVC the Evil genius
The part of John's post that got me was the part about the wish list. Reason is I think SVC is an evil genius when it comes to his business plan. It is my firm belief that the ADB business plan is this; have the incredibly presumptiously named G.O.D. (SVC for those who don't know) create a bare bones product that is full of holes and barely playable. Sell it to the fanatically loyal fanbase, wait for them to come to the BBS to complain about all the problems and discuss what they are doing to correct the problems. Decide which of the fixes he likes best and declaring that his idea and the official fix of the problems. He then packages the fixes into a new product and sell it to the same people who did all the work on the BBS creating the fixes.
Add to this, he only has three full time employees. He is able to do this because he "appoints" the biggest fanboi fanatics as "Staff" very few of which get paid (at least as I understand it).
Evil Genius
Oh, so you've worked on an F&E project then?
Yeppers
You've named me!
Eagerly awaiting my ban from SVC any day now :)
Larry, are you agreeing with
Larry, are you agreeing with me or disagreeing
As to the question, I am not a "staff" member but I have, in the past, commented on the fixes and playtested a couple of F&E rules.
F&E
I've got my name on F&E 2000. I was a MINOR contributor to it. Pete D. and Joe S. did the heavy lifting, fighting SVC tooth and nail for improvements to the game..... because, clearly, anytime they suggested something, they were "trying to get away with something".
Re: Welcome John!
Thanks Marcus! Just to clarify my points, I didn't mean to imply in any way that I thought you were whining about the Turtle strategy, and I didn't have any specific names associated with it from my memory. My general impression at the time was that it was a lightning rod for an argument that I felt had already gotten out of hand: the whole non-aggression complaint.
Nobody likes an opponent who is obviously playing the game to stall and stave off defeat indefinitely with no possible hope for victory, but it has seemed to me that the SFB community generally had by that time become quite litigous in its quick reactions towards anything that might hint non-aggression at any point in a game in any one of an ever-increasingly subtle and elaborate list of ways.
Jason's strategy as I understood it was perfectly beatable, as any strategy that is not exploiting a loophole is, but that only gives it further legitimacy in my eyes. It's not a strategy I would have adopted myself, because it did not fit my personal playing style, but I admired it for the fresh approach it presented; an approach all the more refreshing because it wasn't completely new, but rather something recognizable, with Jason's own style injected into it, which had been completely discarded and discredited out of hand under the increasingly narrowly-defined, dare I say, "Book". I think that students of the game should be grateful for such moments when crusty, petrified assumptions are successfully challenged. Perhaps that's overstating things, but those were my feelings at the time, and I was rather shocked by the highly aggressive, highly negative reaction coming from Steve Cole, more than anything.
The really funny thing here in hindsight is that Steve Cole has become his own worst enemy. I never read any of the posts he deleted, but I certainly read his combustably irate posts in response to them, so my memories are not of the bad behavior he allegedly called out, but of his own bad behavior, while railing against a silent target.
-John
In both Fed Com and SFB I
In both Fed Com and SFB I have constantly been accused by Cole of "trying to get away with something." Which, of course, I was. I was trying to get away with balancing the game when Cole put out a poorly balanced product. Ultimately, with Fed Com, I resorted to hiding the source by going through Mike Filsinger. I hate to think of how horribly balanced Orion Attack would have been if I had sent my suggestions directly to Cole and he had, as he typically would, reject them out of hand as one of my "dirty tricks."
As it was, he adopted my changes almost whole sale. Had he actually adopted them wholesale (capping EM shift at +2 instead of his +3) the product would very likely have been well balanced. But at least it is not the atrocity it was when I first saw it.
The company paranoia at ADB really is good for a laugh.
And now
Joe S is banned.
By Joe S I assume you mean
By Joe S I assume you mean Joe Stevenson.
That's one banning that's well deserved IMO.
Joe S.
You can agree but you'd kinda be out on a giant hypocritical limb there. Joe is abrasive, but he never once that I saw made a personal attack. He just doesn't suffer idiots real well...... kinda like someone else I know.
I really cannot see a reason
I really cannot see a reason to ban anyone. BBS's are social gatherings in which one can contribute only words. Absent someone breaking/hacking the boards, what difference does it make if someone says stuff you don't like - even if they do so intentionally with the purpose of inspiring a reaction (e.g. - they are a classic troll). Ultimately their power comes in evoking that response. To which I say either enjoy the flame war or don't participate in it.
Well
I agree with Paul to a great degree here. If you don't like something you are not going to change that person so either engage and enjoy or ignore it. That said, I thought Joe got pretty out of control at times. Telling people (or at least strongly implying) that they were idiots for liking the new Trek was a bit much. That said, to each their own. I did not respond. Others should have followed suit.
Ken
"I really cannot see a reason
"I really cannot see a reason to ban anyone."
Oh, come on ... just threaten SVC's world view!
I got banned for daring to dis the troops in Iraq. Just like that, posts deleted, and discovered myself banned. One e-mail to SVC got a response basically calling me a liar.
So I dropped SFB for several years, and haven't bought a single product since. Which, considering the stack of stuff I'd purchased to that point, kind of shows the piss-poor customer relations SVC is famous for.
The minor detail that, in the incident in question, the troops are now doing hard time, probably doesn't even make a dent in his world view. I mean, really, banning someone for pointing out something even the US military, notorious for cover-ups, had to prosecute (successfully)? What's the world coming to when even the army disagrees with SVC?
No, no. Differences of
No, no. Differences of opinion are very tolerable. Being a hostile, pathological contrarian is not tolerable. There has to be a threshold of bad behavior somewhere.
Joe S. didn't like the new
Joe S. didn't like the new Trek? Dude! I loved it!
One reason
If someone constantly goes on a spamming spree, I'll ban you, laugh. It'd have to be pretty crazy, and I doubt anyone would disagree, just pointing out there is at least one reason I will nuke someone.
Eat at Ned's
Eat at Ned's!
Re: Welcome John! - turtles
Vae_Victus said:
"I didn't mean to imply in any way that I thought you were whining about the Turtle strategy, and I didn't have any specific names associated with it from my memory."
Oh no, I never thought you where accusing anybody of whining. You didn't seem to imply that at all. I'm thinking we should start an "oddball strategies" in the tactics area. Turtle discussion and all other kinds of strange things welcome.
I never said that
"Telling people (or at least strongly implying) that they were idiots for liking the new Trek was a bit much. "
I never did that Ken. What I DID say, 5 mins after I got back from the movie (and was very upset)
quoted as nearly as I can remember it (it's as close to an exact quote as I can make it, it was months ago)
"I saw the Star Trek Move. On the commercial, they say 'it's not your father's Star Trek'
Sadly, it isn't mine, either.
We all die eventally. I hope that when it is JJ Abrams time to do, he suffers a little"
Derek McGee then replied with a personal attack (which misquoted what I said), and then we sniped at each other. Others join in to attack me. Glen Hoefpner kept trying to get Mike/Jean to let him use language that is forbidden on that forum.
But nowhere did I ever attack people for liking it. The closest thing would be that I told Jeremy Grey that I felt that some people who had responded that it wasn't a great movie but 'at least it's Star Tre' perhaps wanted it too badly, and shouldn't have to rationalize something that they weren't keen on (by their own words).
Now as to my comment re: Abrams, I know it upset some, but for one it was hyperbole (as I said, I was in a bad mood after seeing the film), and two, consider this..... has anyone ever said "go to hell"? Well, what's Hell, according to our understanding. Eternal suffering. Is that not worse than what I wished for Abrams, a brief moment of suffereng?
If anyone doubts what I'm saying, or REALLY cares to see what was said, I know Mike Curtis kept a record of it, as he was the first on the scene, and did the initial deletions.
As for SVC stating after I was banned that I came back without apologizing, that's true, because I hadn't done anything. If anyone recalls, I sold my F&E stuff to Rich Abbott, and I posted a goodbye message in the "For sale" section and the "F&E General Discussion" section. For THAT, I was banned.... the evil crime of cross posting. That precipitous banning resulted in Pete Dimitri quitting the forum. So no, I didn't see a reason to apologize for being banned for no reason. But you know how we cross-posters are; we're like a plague.
Incidentally....
Derek McKee, who started the argument with me that got me banned, apparently wanted to find me at Origins to apologize for precipitating the argument; at least that's what Ken Burnside told me. I never ran into him though, although I have no reason to doubt Ken.
Wow, Joe's back for five
Wow, Joe's back for five minutes and already he's stirring up shit. I stand surprised.
Not.
At least get my name right. I don't even know a 'Derek McGee'.
I did not say I would look you up at Origins to apologize, I had no plans to attend Origins, and never have. Nor did I feel I overstepped in arguing with your vitriol on the ADB BBS when you spewed hateful venom wishing a man a slow painful death over a MOVIE (I did NOT misquote you). You didn't say "I hope he suffers a little". Your hindsight wears rose-colored glasses, there.
What I *did* feel badly about, and expressed to Ken, was that apparently our argument was some sort of "last straw" with ADB for you. My intention was not that you be banned. I don't like to see anyone banned from the already-small, shrinking community, and especially felt bad about that considering how involved you were with the F&E community. So yeah, I'm sorry you got banned (as I told Ken). That doesn't make it my fault, or mean that I wanted it to happen.
I did not start the argument. You did. I did not get you banned. You did.
I was misinformed
My apologies, then. The impression I took from my conversation with Ken was different that what you just posted. And for mispelling our last name.
However, I will point out that I was not the one that brought up the subject here. I was responding to a few posts that were made uptopic. I disagree with your position on what happened, but I'll leave it at that.
I'm sure Ken did not
I'm sure Ken did not intentionally misinform you. At some point in our SFBOL conversation I probably told him "I wish I could go to Origins and buy him a beer and tell him I'm sorry he got banned". But I've never gone to the con before and this year wasn't a possibility for me.
So, I would have been quite happy to argue with you at the time, but I didn't want you banned over it, and told ADB as much when they announced you would be banned. They replied that you were being banned for a long list of offenses, not just one incident, etc., etc...
This is certainly nothing worth high blood pressure for either of us, at least in my opinion. But if you want to hold me responsible for your ban, nothing I can do there except tell my side of it.
I agree that Ken would not intentionally mislead me.
He did ask me if I was going to Origins, and when I queried him why he asked, he brought you up, and he at least seemed to think that you were going to Origins. No matter, it's water under the bridge.
No, I have no desire to rehash that incident either. I was only intending to defend myself against some comments that were made uptopic that I feel were inaccurate.
I hope that we can move forward constructively from this point, and if I and you both make it to the event in October, I'll be happy to have a beer with you. Hell, I might even make some for the occasion. :-)
I'll drink to that. And buy
I'll drink to that. And buy the first round. Absolutely. ;)
This year's an outside chance for me at Council, but you never know. Next year, I'm planning ahead.
The Internet
Is a strange thing. Joe, whether you intend it that way or if people just interpret it that way, many of your posts generally come across as "agree with me or you're an idiot." Whatever the reason for that, ADB banning people for such things at all let alone when the community is in disarray is silly. I don't know you and would be a fool to judge anyone based on BBS postings. I agree with Drazi that none of this is worth high blood pressure or banning. I am, however, glad we have a forum here where everyone can tell their story without fear of the iron fist. Welcome!
Ken
I was perhaps not reading the
I was perhaps not reading the relevant posts then, or else it may be that I speak Swedish and have a minor disability regarding social interaction, but Joe didn't appear to me to be annoying.
Not that you do need do much to be banned by SVC: I disagreed with him on the subject of WWII Me 262s late operational introduction.
Was it Hitler or the immaturity of the engines that caused the delays?
Obviously he was right (it was Hitler) and I was wrong (miminal impact), but didn't show any sources to support his view (but I tried). I don't excatly remember his wording but anyway I didn't like the tone of his last post so I simply replied by a short "Ditto". not only got I banned for that one word, but he also removed all the other posts INCLUDING those that simply were links to youtube clips of the new built Me 262s flying. LOL!
Like trying to eradicate all traces of me personally:)
Oh, what was even more funny was that this happened on the thread for common WWII myths that SVC himself started. He thought he was on safe ground himself, but then I opened my mouth... :)
(edited)
Don't challenge SVC's world view
I had a similar experience to Hardcore (Carl). It was during a discussion on the legality of secession. He posted this long list of quotes from speeches and books that seemed to support his position of Secession being legal. I responded (via email so as not to get banned for questioning SVC in the open) showing how each and every instance he was using as support was either wrongly quoted or taken out of context and when put in context meant the exact opposite.
His entire response was "Do more research."
Yep, sounds like the SVC we
Yep, sounds like the SVC we know for sure:)
Would be interesting to hear what Leanna think. Maybe SVC is a mouse at home:)
They certainly take it that way
Ken. It certainly isn't out of any joy of conflict on my part. Fighting causes me physical distress, plus I have high blood pressure (well controlled via medication).
Cole is an ass
Hopefully, that subject line makes my intent for this post clear. But just in case -
I was involved in SFB for about 10 years, starting back in the days of the Designer's Edition. I submitted ship designs, term papers, ran tourneys, etc. Like Co5N, I had a lot of the top players in the country playing in my tourneys; Guy Cheney told me that he played his first ever SFB tournament at one of my events. I enjoyed the game, and I enjoyed the players. Dealing with Cole has always been trying, however, and it was what finally drove me away from the game. I still read the boards, and I laugh (sometimes ironically) at what people put up with from SVC.
Back in the day, ADB had discussion forums on all the major BBSs, at least for a short time. GEnie lasted the longest, Compuserve lasted a while, and for a time there was an official SFB presence on AOL. That presence ended very abruptly when Cole found that, even as a moderator, he could not delete posts. Once his ability to censor the world around him was removed, he retreated from AOL. IIRC, he shut down the board within 2 days of being told by AOL that he could not delete any posts.
The great thing about the internet as it is now is that a board like this can exist. In my experience talking with players over the years, very, very few like him, probably less than 5%. Many people tolerate him because he has the power over what gets published. I suggest that people who enjoy the game group together. Put out your own supplements (ADB seems to be abandoning the game in favor of Fed Commander), run your own tournaments. Enjoy the game, without all the drama. Declare independence from ADB.
BTW, the official board says that the above posts are full of bile and vitriol, or something like that. I read ever post, and I think my response has more vitriol than all of them put together. Most of the posters are simply people imploring SVC to be reasonable. Unfortunately, they're asking for the moon.
Joe's Ban
I was actually chatting to Joe via email about the time of his ban. I dont know him, and was just getting some info from him about F&E.
Then I saw a few deleted posts, so I asked him what it was about and he told me.
As someone who has had a lot of posts deleted by ADB over the years it didnt surprise me. Anyone who ever says anything to upset the favoured few will feel the wrath of Cole.
I thought his comments were mild by comparison to what youd read on any forum discussing a movie. I do like what others said here about Cole being the patriot so being amused by his refusal to accept the 1st Amendment. But that is hardly surprising.
The ban was supposedly also because threats were made, not just for wishing a painful death to the creator of the new Trek movie. But from what I recall Joe's threat was a reply to another threat. But of course, Joe was the troublemaker so he had to go.
And now for my inflammatory comment:
For such gung ho war nuts you'd think theyd have slightly thicker skin...
:)
Hoju
The funniest part....
to me is that after saying a lot of nasty things about me when he banned me, he had the audacity to stick his hand in mine to shake it, as if we were going to be buddies.
What a scumbag.
It was a little weird
Deleted all your posts in every thread he could find. Then talk about how disruptive you are and how youve had too many warnings. Then say youre a wonderful guy and he'd still like you to turn up to stuff.
Maybe he also still thought you could fix all the flaws in the game like you used to...
My experience...
...is that he will always try to smooth things over with you behind the scenes, so that no one knows what really happened. He will then claim that you met his conditions and that he was gracious enough to allow you to come back. He tried this with me, but things dried up when I held the line on him delivering a public apology.
As far as I can tell you have nothing to lose, whereas he risks fracturing the support base for his game.
Moreover...
When HE acts like a jerk, then that's just his style of humor and he was just being playful and you should lighten up because it's just harmless teasing and we're all friends geez why you gotta be so uptight?
When YOU act like a jerk, then you're a terrible idiot and we're all better off with you silenced or banned.
Oh, that's what he's thinking....
"Maybe he also still thought you could fix all the flaws in the game like you used to..."
But that ship has sailed, poured concrete on it, that dog doesn't hunt, and every other insufferable metaphor he uses when he wants to stifle discussion.
"Deleted all your posts in every thread he could find. Then talk about how disruptive you are and how youve had too many warnings. Then say youre a wonderful guy and he'd still like you to turn up to stuff."
Yeah, it's pretty fucked up.
Some TRUTH.....
When he banned me this last time, he said that the "biggest mistake of his life" (grandiose, huh?) was to let me come back "without apologizing" two years ago.
But I was only banned last time AFTER selling all of my stuff, and posting a good bye. I hadn't broken ANY rules at all, and hadn't' had any disagreements with him or anyone else, he had issued no warnings, etc.
But in his banning notice recently, the REAL reason why he banned me back then become abundantly clear....
In his message, he called my behavior a "betrayal". Well, in reality, what he was talking about (IMO) was the PREVIOUS time. He was upset that I left, and considered it a betrayal. So he banned me.
I know he would deny it, BUT I have a couple witnesses that were there and SAW my final posts.
I left a good bye, no bitterness, just a nice "thanks and everyone take care".
And he deleted it and LIED about what I'd done.
LIED LIED LIED.
The only thing he could even pin down as a forum rules violation is that I cross posted by good bye in the "items for sale" topic and the F&E general topic, as the note was relevant to both topics (I sold the stuff ni the for sale" topic).
Yeah, cross-posting a nice message.... that was horrible. And he let me back without apologizing for THAT heinous crime. How magnanimous of him........
[/sarcasm]
In his message, he called my
In his message, he called my behavior a "betrayal".
I think a lot of his behavior revolves around similar issues. If I don't miss my guess, based on things he's told other people and a couple of things he let slip to me, I don't think he had a happy childhood. I think he had no friends, and that he was a huge disappointment to his father. I think he's constantly looking for people that he thinks he can rely on, but then he feels the need to test them and drives them away.
I used to feel sorry for him over this behavior. But, an adult learns to control such outbursts, while a child...well, a child forms a company and uses it to get back at people for things that happened years ago in his life. I don't even come close to feeling sorry for him any more.
I still say the thing to do is to just do your own thing. I've looked over this board, and between this and Co5N you've got a bunch of what seem to be the best players in the country. Is he going to ban them all? I doubt it. I don't think the SFB fan base could withstand that hit, and although he's given up on publishing much new material for SFB he hasn't given up on making money by recycling and repackaging old stuff and calling it improved. Given that, I don't think he can tell a couple dozen people to screw off if they won't kiss his ass. If I don't miss my guess there's probably not more than a couple hundred really diehard players in the country.
Big Mistake
Joe said: 'When he banned me this last time, he said that the "biggest mistake of his life"'
Yeah, I was rocking back and forth in my chair here at work holding my hand over my mouth for fear of insane laughter when I read that. Seriously, how dramatic can you be?
Dramatic Drama...
is dramatic !
Shrinking fanbase....
"I've looked over this board, and between this and Co5N you've got a bunch of what seem to be the best players in the country. Is he going to ban them all? I doubt it."
Agreed. Unless your company name is Ha$bro, you really can't afford to alienate the customers.
The bitch of it is, he said that >I< was driving away customers, but I defy him to name ONE person that wasn't going to buy his product because they didn't like what >I< said on the forum.
I was gone for 3 years or so, and in that time a LOT of people disappeared from the F&E forum. Clearly, something else besides the evil Joe Stevenson drove them away.
Hmm.... I wonder what it was?
"Seriously, how dramatic can you be?"
I liked it to the "Freemen" and other ridiculous groups. What's better for one's self esteem to believe, that one is a small, ineffectual and friendless individual, or that one is the victim of persecution (or betrayal)?
It's pretty comical, when it isn't being dangerous.
I don't mind deletions.
As I said earlier: I don't mind deletions. What I mind is "delete, then insult, then delete the reply". If you want the conversation to stop, then STOP THE CONVERSATION. Don't be throwing elbows after you blow the whistle.
And also, I mind deletions of game-related discussions in the game-related threads. In a way, the issue here is that SVC Is Never Wrong. Remember the discussion of bolt arcs for FX plasma? No, of course you don't, because those posts all Went Away...
RB targets nail head with pinpoint precision....
"What I mind is "delete, then insult, then delete the reply". If you want the conversation to stop, then STOP THE CONVERSATION. Don't be throwing elbows after you blow the whistle."
Exactly.
I can deal with losing an argument, or being wrong.
But when someone makes COWARDLY backhanded comment from which you cannot defend yourself (because you aren't allowed to), THAT'S infuriating.
He is indeed a coward...
...as well as a liar and a thief. And a bad writer. And not particularly bright. And pretty low class, on top of that.
And I have to cop to the fact that I get a kick out of being pretty certain that he's reading all of this and seething that he can't control it.
I'll bet he is at that....
on both counts.
And it is so liberating to be somewhere that this is the case ;-)
Safety glasses
You guys need to be wearing eye protection. Grinding axes makes alot of sparks.
As the old saying goes...
You guys need to be wearing eye protection. Grinding axes makes alot of sparks.
It's all good fun until someone loses an eye.
That's when the REAL fun begins...
"It's all good fun until someone loses an eye.
"
;-)
"You guys need to be wearing eye protection. Grinding axes makes alot of sparks.
"
I'm impervious at this point. Zero he can do to me now.
Well, unless Hinduism is correct, and we get reincarnated, I suppose he could ban my next iteration. But I won't lose sleep worrying about that :-)
Amusing
Two posts on the official site essentially say that they can't understand why you're not big enough to let Cole insult you, intimidate you and lie about you, and one even says that it would be better for your spiritual health if you did.
The reasoning behind that escapes me.
Move these posts
We should combine the Anti Cole threads into the "Censorship" or "As Promised, Why I am Such an *****" Or "Cole Hurt My Feelings and I Cant Let It Go" or something. Kinda consolidate the Cole bashing if you will. I think that's what we had in mind at the inception of this forum anyway. The rest was supposed to be (or so I thought) about how we can improve the game(s) as players in ways the designers refuse to consider, or tactics, or non-game discussions etc.
I for one am starting to feel somewhat unenthusiastic about the negativity in this forum. It seems we may have traded one set of intolerant assholes for another.
Well what did you expect?
There has never been a public place for folks to post negative things about Cole or ADB. As more people who are upset with him learn about this site, they will start posting about their experiences. But I think over time everyone will lose enthusiasm for such discussions as you have.
In the meantime I agree we need to keep focusing on positive stuff. But I would consider this site a success if only one former player decided to start up again once he had the opportunity to vent publicly about Cole or ADB.
Open Letter to Stacy Brian Bartley
You have no email listed on the ADB BBS so I cannot email this message to you, therefore I am posting it here. It does not contain negative comments about ADB or any of its employees, yet I still cannot post it on their BBS. Why is that? Why can't we discuss the board posting policies? I'd like you to think about those questions.
But this is what I really wanted to say: I think everyone, including the angry people, understand and agree that ADB should and could never be forced to allow negative comments about their company or employees on their own BBS. Also, everyone understands that SVC is SVC and will never change. If you argue that altering either of those realities is the goal of the angry folks, you are the one that should "blush with the sheer absurdity of the statement".
No, what the angry people want is the ability to share their side of the story with the rest of the ADB community. No need to share it with ADB, they already know. It is the rest of the community that needs to hear both sides of the story and decise for themselves what they think.
So, back to the questions I raised at the beginning of this letter. Hopefully you can see the irony of the situation- we can't even have a public, civil discourse about this subject without the existence of this open SFB BBS. Do the angry people know what they want? Do they understand what would happen if they got it? Yes, and yes. The real questions is: do you understand now?
Hey Akira Mike Johnson Dude
What did your posts that where deleted on the ADB BBS say anyways?
EDIT: I just read the CO5N thread and I think I have the answer. Move along, nothing to see here.
Who are those posts about?
"Two posts on the official site essentially say that they can't understand why you're not big enough to let Cole insult you, intimidate you and lie about you, and one even says that it would be better for your spiritual health if you did."
I don't read the official forum anymore, so I'm not sure who this is referring to.
Droid,
"I for one am starting to feel somewhat unenthusiastic about the negativity in this forum. It seems we may have traded one set of intolerant assholes for another."
I agree with you that we should move all of the anti-Cole posts into a single thread. I'm not sure what you mean by the 2nd comment, though. I haven't seen any intolerance here from anyone, even from people that I've disagreed with. I haven't seen any flame wars, etc., even on contentious issues like gay marriage, etc..... which proves that collectively was CAN discuss such things in a reasonable way, when not in THAT environment. We all have different ways of looking at things, but I've yet to see anything here get unpleasant.
Mike Johnson,
Very well said. You captured my thoughts exactly.
I also wouldn't consider myself....
"angry" about the situation. It is what it is, and out of my power to do anything about it.
Anger is of the moment. Any more than that is wasted energy.
As anyone that has had to full out an energy allocation form knows. wasted energy = bad thing! ;-)
For example:
David G wrote:
[[[He is indeed a coward...
...as well as a liar and a thief. And a bad writer. And not particularly bright. And pretty low class, on top of that.]]]
Creating this forum was the ultimate act of defiance as far as ADB is concerned, and served notice to them that a large chunk of ADB's customer base is displeased with their behavior. In addition, we have all aired our grievances which, for the most part, have been legitimate, and civil. The goal, at least in my estimation, is to improve the game, breathe some life into the community, and moderate the ADB policies that we disagree with. David's post above goes to far in my opinion. It does nothing but turn this in to a mud slinging contest, and accomplishes nothing but hastening the death of this game.
Different points of view.
"David's post above goes to far in my opinion. "
Well, you are certainly entitled to that opinion.
I would say, though, that while the "And not particularly bright " comment IS pretty much an ad hominem attack , the other statements are a matter of expressing that frustration you mentioned.
(and to be fair, I don't believe the statement that SVC isn't bright is inaccurate. I've never taken issue with his intellect, save that at times he has a propensity for facile answers. My gripe with his creative process is that because he doesn't really play these games anymore, he lacks context to understand the REAL effects of how things work, divorced from what his intent is. For a long time, when the F&E players would tell him that things didn't work the way he thought they did, he seemed to take it that we were telling him what his intent was, which of course would have been silly on our part, and silly for him to think.
"Thief" is a rather strong word, and not one that I would use WRT him, but if that is someone's take, it is fair game to bring it up, IMO. Of course, such a strong statement is potentially actionable, and if not backed up with facts could be construed as libelous, so it is not a word that should be bandied about lightly or capriciously. Again, while I think he may at times have an inaccurate remembrance of of the source of this or that, but I would not label him a "thief"; the fact is, when you make a contribution to the game, there is the understanding that it becomes the property of ADB, so if one really feels the need to be compensated for something, it is incumbent upon that person to make arrangements in advance with ADB to negotiate said compensation.
I'm not apologist for him (and by now you all understand that and the why's), but I do endeavor to be fair.
Anger leads to hate, and hate
Anger leads to hate, and hate leads to... fear?
Damn it ain't easy to remember. I could look it up on WIKi I bet, but i prefered read about others with the same problem:D
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0371.html
Andy wrote:
>>Creating this forum was the ultimate act of defiance as far as ADB is concerned, and served notice to them that a large chunk of ADB's customer base is displeased with their behavior. In addition, we have all aired our grievances which, for the most part, have been legitimate, and civil.>>
Yeah, I gotta say, I'm not real comfortable with the character assassination direction that this has all taken. Like, I'd never say I agree with all the decisions made by ADB as a whole, but really, this site becoming little more than a sounding board for people to trash someone does nothing at all to help anyone's cause. And just makes this place look like it is populated by vindictive cranks.
Let's make this board a fun and happy place
I don't usually post about this sort of thing but honestly I agree completely with Peter. The reason I decided to join this board is because I saw a lot of people who's opinions I have respected on the boards, and who were really nice to me at Co5N last year.
I think that those folks with grievances would make their point much better by promoting a positive friendly environment here so that this board is a happy and fun place to be where all kinds of SFB players want to be. Negativity just breeds more negativity.
Constructive Feedback
I agree with several of the guys above.
The intent of the "Dear Steve" forum is to give honest, constructive feedback to Steve Cole, on the one-in-a-million chance that your (our) words might get through to him and inspire him to try to improve his relationship with the SFU community.
If you look at the first post in this thread, titled "Censorship", I hope my post models that intent.
I encourage people here to start their own new topics/threads here in the "Dear Steve" forum. They don't have to have a catchy title, or a theme, if you don't want them to. I also encourage you to use the "Dear Steve" format - write as if you are writing him a letter directly. Use words like "I" and "you".
Some of you guys are not helping. If you've just gotta vent, then please start a thread titled "I just gotta vent" and do it there.
But I call upon you all to be moderate and constructive in your criticism of SVC here.
-DC
Agreed
I've decided to just leave the ADB BBS. Looking forward to bigger and better things!
P.S. I'm sure everyone saw SVC's response to my post on the ADB BBS. He sent me the same thing via email, and I sent him a response and asked him to post it on his BBS as well. We all know that won't happen of course. So if anyone wants to know how I responded please email me off-list so we can keep thing positive here!
Positivity
I generally see no reason to call people names. Stating facts is generally sufficient (with some argument in support) if your cause is true.
I lack the ability to move posts. This BBS just does not allow it. A moderator can, if they choose, create a new topic, cut and paste the posts they feel are better in a new topic to that topic, and then delete the old replies from this one, but that is all that can be done.
I'd post it
That sort of thing - having a place to post things that ADB will delete - I think is squarely within the purpose of this BBS. This BBS would not exist most likely if ADB didn't delete and edit posts. So, Mike, for what it si worth, if you have a post you had deleted from the ADB boards, I'd just post it here.
Fair Enough
I think that those folks with grievances would make their point much better by promoting a positive friendly environment here so that this board is a happy and fun place to be where all kinds of SFB players want to be.
Lots of people have said the same thing, in more or less similar ways, and I agree with you. Somewhere here someone (I think it was Mike Johnson) posted that people would bash Cole because there's been no forum where that was possible, but that they'd get tired of it at some point. I concur with that statement.
But it WAS fun :-)
Seriously, I hope this forum continues. If this community grows enough and spreads enough it might encourage people like me to return to the game, as long as it was free of interference and drama.
As long as the policies on the main forum don't change...
there will likely always be a component of complaining about it here.
That said, it should not dominate the discussions, or else the forum will be sorely lacking in utility.