PETITION: Save the CoN Forum! - Like This If You Agree

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Simple wrote:

      I do not understand why they decided to close forum. Forum is not the same as Discord, these are two different things, can't they see ? On Discord is just a big mess.
      NOTICE: All good threads come to an end - SUNSETTING FORUM
      As for Discord being a big mess, are you using this third or fourth thread about the forum closing to suggest that the Forum isn't also a big mess?
      Why do you have to be a smart a**

      This thread was made as a petition. Is it somehow the third or fourth petition?

    • Mother Hen wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      Simple wrote:

      I do not understand why they decided to close forum. Forum is not the same as Discord, these are two different things, can't they see ? On Discord is just a big mess.
      NOTICE: All good threads come to an end - SUNSETTING FORUMAs for Discord being a big mess, are you using this third or fourth thread about the forum closing to suggest that the Forum isn't also a big mess?
      Why do you have to be a smart a**
      This thread was made as a petition. Is it somehow the third or fourth petition?
      Well, since you asked:


      So far there are at least four five overlapping threads connected to Dorado's decision to close the Forum - Wasn't this one the third one? Maybe it was the second? Is 2nd vs 3rd a big deal? I don't see why your undies are in a wad over me writing that there are three or four threads about the forum closing. It's a simple fact.


      And, even though the first of those threads (in the "News and Updates" section of the forum) was Dorado's unambiguous announcement and Dorado's description of why the decision was made, apparently @Simple neither looked in the News & Updates section for the news he wanted, nor paid the least bit of attention to whether or not this thread was made as a "Petition".

      In other words, @Simple was contributing to making a mess out of the forum and its five closure-related threads - And was doing that without any hint of recognizing the irony created.


      That's why I wrote what I wrote.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by KFGauss ().

    • Simple wrote:

      For example on Discord "questions and answers" , you have to scroll all the way back to look or nobody had the same question if you want to ask something. Who does that ? I guess nobody. It will be given 10 -100 times the same question. :rolleyes:
      search function actually works a lot better on discord

      Simple wrote:

      The same is with reports on Discord. If it will be a bug in the game then 10-100 players will report about one and the same thing. :rolleyes: In the Forum you can have discution about one thing separete from other things, but on Discord it is impossible, all in one or two places.
      Neither are actually the right place to file reports; so nothing changes there
      I am The Baseline for opinions

    • Hakville wrote:

      you do this to every thread,you're not actually discussing the topic /subject.

      Mother Hen wrote:

      IKR, theres only one thread about a petition against closing the forum. So KFG just go away.
      Let's keep our facts straight shall we?
      • If you want to be picky about it (and I wouldn't argue) a so-called "petition" thread would be full of yes or no votes.
      • However, this thread contains a litany of posts (numbers 2, 3, 5, 6 (I especially like #6), 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, and beyond ) that are not yes or no votes.
      • In post 16, @Simple asked a question - I gave a short simple answer (post 17) that pointed @Simple to the info they wanted, and observed that the Forum had/has 3 or 4 threads about the forum-closing. This thread is one of those.
      • Simple decided to add 3 more one-line posts (posts 18, 19 and 20) that were not yes or no votes.
      • Then, after I chastised @Hen in another thread, part of Hen's sulking was to launch into a specious and frivolous complaint here (posts 21 & 25) that boils down to forbidding me to call this a thread that's related to the forum closing.
      • And @Hak decided (and wrote into his post #24 (that, OBTW, isn't a yes or no vote)) that I am somehow forcing @Hen to behave like a sulking child when @Hen complains explicitly to me about my reply to @Simple.


      <Sarcasm>So - Yes- Obviously I'm using my evil, psychic, mind-control powers to force everyone (count the posts and authors) to fill this thread with posts that aren't yes or no votes, and to force @Hen to stir the pot by accusing me of doing something wrong (when I wrote a short simple reply to the @Simple question) by lumping this thread (that's related to the forum closing) into a group of 5 threads that are about the forum closing</Sarcasm>

      PS: As I have done in the past, I'll gladly delete this post and the ones I wrote after #17, if the other folks involved will do the same. You first, I'll follow.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by KFGauss ().

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Hakville wrote:

      you do this to every thread,you're not actually discussing the topic /subject.

      Mother Hen wrote:

      IKR, theres only one thread about a petition against closing the forum. So KFG just go away.
      Let's keep our facts straight shall we?
      • If you want to be picky about it (and I wouldn't argue) a so-called "petition" thread would be full of yes or no votes.
      • However, this thread contains a litany of posts (numbers 2, 3, 5, 6 (I especially like #6), 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, and beyond ) that are not yes or no votes.
      • In post 16, @Simple asked a question - I gave a short simple answer (post 17) that pointed @Simple to the info they wanted, and observed that the Forum had/has 3 or 4 threads about the forum-closing. This thread is one of those.
      • Simple decided to add 3 more one-line posts (posts 18, 19 and 20) that were not yes or no votes.
      • Then, after I chastised @Hen in another thread, part of Hen's sulking was to launch into a specious and frivolous complaint here (posts 21 & 25) that boils down to forbidding me to call this a thread that's related to the forum closing.
      • And @Hak decided (and wrote into his post #24 (that, OBTW, isn't a yes or no vote)) that I am somehow forcing @Hen to behave like a sulking child when @Hen complains explicitly to me about my reply to @Simple.


      <Sarcasm>So - Yes- Obviously I'm using my psychic mind-control powers to force everyone (count them) to fill this thread with posts that aren't yes or no votes, and to force @Hen to stir the pot by accusing me of doing something wrong (when I wrote a short simple reply to the @Simple question) of lumping this thread (that's related to the forum closing) into a group of 5 threads that are about the forum closing</Sarcasm>

      PS: As I have done in the past, I'll gladly delete this post and the ones I wrote after #17, if the other folks involved will do the same. You first, I'll follow.
      What's next?

      We will introduce forum bot that will automatically delete all posts that don't answer OP's question.
      Forum is here to talk about this game and share thoughts, not to give us advices about google searching (what is the most off topic)

      If you don't like how this forum works, you are not forced to read it anymore.

    • Tzztzttztz wrote:

      What's next?
      We will introduce forum bot that will automatically delete all posts that don't answer OP's question.
      Forum is here to talk about this game and share thoughts, not to give us advices about google searching (what is the most off topic)

      If you don't like how this forum works, you are not forced to read it anymore.
      What on Earth are you replying to? None of that is pertinent here and none of it has anything to do with my post that you quoted.

    • Tzztzttztz wrote:

      I find it unnecessary that you analyzed every post in the thread.
      It looks like you're trying to prove everyone wrong and that they have to follow imaginary rules.

      Let people talk, this is a forum, not (write the name of the place where such rules exist).
      Neither of these two points is what you wrote in your initial rant (post #27) - Are you going to change the topic every time you write a post?

      I'm not at all trying to prove "everyone" else wrong.

      However - Hen is all wet here, and Hak's claim was wrong too - Two people is far from being "everyone".

      No one stopped anyone from talking - Just look - You're doing a fine job of spouting off.

      However, I have been responding to whiny BS posts that have been written directly to me - Instead of having those conversations here, if people want to use my Forum Wall, or start a Forum Conversation with me, I'm fine with that - But so far, they have chosen to winge here.


      Go back and look at posts #16 and #17 in this thread - Then notice everything after those two short, simple, on-topic posts has been kicked off by people other than me.

      Your complaint would have more weight if it was aimed the instigators instead of the person who responded to them.

      Have a nice day.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Go back and look at posts #16 and #17 in this thread - Then notice everything after those two short, simple, on-topic posts has been kicked off by people other than me.

      Your complaint would have more weight if it was aimed the instigators instead of the person who responded to them.
      Still searching for your post that actually contributes to the thread.


      KFGauss wrote:

      Neither of these two points is what you wrote in your initial rant (post #27) - Are you going to change the topic every time you write a post?

      I'm not at all trying to prove "everyone" else wrong.

      The topic was not changed by my post nor it would be problem if it is.

      I agree with the rest.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Tzztzttztz wrote:

      I find it unnecessary that you analyzed every post in the thread.
      It looks like you're trying to prove everyone wrong and that they have to follow imaginary rules.

      Let people talk, this is a forum, not (write the name of the place where such rules exist).
      Neither of these two points is what you wrote in your initial rant (post #27) - Are you going to change the topic every time you write a post?
      I'm not at all trying to prove "everyone" else wrong.

      However - Hen is all wet here, and Hak's claim was wrong too - Two people is far from being "everyone".

      No one stopped anyone from talking - Just look - You're doing a fine job of spouting off.

      However, I have been responding to whiny BS posts that have been written directly to me - Instead of having those conversations here, if people want to use my Forum Wall, or start a Forum Conversation with me, I'm fine with that - But so far, they have chosen to winge here.


      Go back and look at posts #16 and #17 in this thread - Then notice everything after those two short, simple, on-topic posts has been kicked off by people other than me.

      Your complaint would have more weight if it was aimed the instigators instead of the person who responded to them.

      Have a nice day.
      Yeah I’m wet, and imma stick it up yo mama

    • I don't know if the forum will close. But the forum is not very attractive for me. There seem to be "owners" of the forum who are not moderators and I see moderators not intervening in these cases. I've seen some forum participants become moderators. And I had a bad experience when I created some threads. When someone creates a thread, a comment soon appears that this subject has already been dealt with or because there is no interest. This comment is made by moderators and by others who are not, they are always ready to play that role. I watched "wars" between participants. Anyway, really in the middle of a lot of thread, there are sometimes some interesting things.
      To improve I make the following suggestions:
      1-Create a forum with only 3 types of subjects:
      A-Doubts about the game: for new players to clarify doubts. In this matter, obligatorily a moderator has to answer. Other members do not participate.
      B-Patch and News: only information about game news. In this matter, there are only threads created by administrators about these news. No member participation
      C-Discussion of issues related to the game: thread created by the moderators oriented towards specific subjects as happened recently, in which they asked for an opinion on a possible new elite unit for season 11. Who creates the thread is the moderator and the members give your opinion on the matter.

      2-Delete Discord. Or leave Discord for free discussion.

      This is what officially should exist.

      If someone wants another place to pose as a moderator or war with someone, they can create their own space for that, but not officially.

      I want to clarify that I have nothing against anyone. What I criticize is the complacency of the moderators with some members who consider themselves to be moderators and the immediate intervention with other members who only want to participate. The exhaustive repetition of the argument that this subject has already been dealt with or is of no interest. This inhibits everyone's free participation. I only speak from what I see. I don't mean to attack anyone, just make the forum more appealing.


      Note that the game has changed. Some units have changed characteristics. Some older threads may have addressed issues that are now out of date.

      Forgive me for trying to improve. That's my aim.
      “The dog does not bark out of courage, but out of fear.”
      Chinese Proverb

    • I must admit that the possibility of the company considering, from a business perspective, to close a social place where close to a thousand people interact daily, to keep the place where 20 people in the big days interact, is very low.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.

    • Opulon wrote:

      I must admit that the possibility of the company considering, from a business perspective, to close a social place where close to a thousand people interact daily, to keep the place where 20 people in the big days interact, is very low.
      Do they value 20 Elves, or close to a thousand Orcs? :)
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD