Chief Wiggum

No need to post the actual images. @Alex will check the message in-game.

Ok, a lot of people received it. No reason for all of them to make the same report.

I wouldn't be against 1-2 jabs in this thread, but the actual result was 30% or so of the thread at that time being just the exchange of those jabs. Keeping in mind this also took place in the very first page of the thread, I found it appropriate to hide these comments, to help people focus on the main topic of the announcement. I am sure that the OP would prefer for people to have a discussion on the actual treaty too, instead of a random discussion about colors. For the record, that's the reason I kept some of those posts around. Since you reported the remains of that discussion though, I just hid them too. I am kind of surprised you want them back now, after reporting them. No warnings were issued and I am pretty sure you and Inst had your fun and exchange of jabs, so I don't think any harm was done.

Lack of knowledge for new players is an issue. If you are unlucky enough to end up in a not-well-established alliance, the main issue is not as much as that you don't get funded/protected as that you don't get to learn the game. Having a common knowledge repository available to everyone (integrated in the wiki?) would be good enough to resolve this issue. To that direction, the experienced players/ alliances could (should?) share their guides and work together to perfect them. Most of them get leaked anyway, one way or another. tl;dr: Open guides for everyone, created by experienced alliances/players.

I think that the spirit of the rules as they are phrased already (e.g. "you can post if you have specific evidence to provide regarding the report") is clear enough. In any case, I've updated the phrasing of the rules for now.

The fact that you are the one being reported doesn't mean you can post anything you want. You have to specifically provide evidence that e.g. explains/defends yourself from the report. Besides, at any parts of the forum, posts including only "lol" or the like fall under the "no spamming" rule. I don't know about this event. I would have to see the actual post to decide whether the warning was justified or not.

All reports pass through at least two moderators and are open for all moderators to discuss. There is no room for biases. Only for collective human mistakes. If you have concerns about the structure of the moderation team, feel free to make a report and state your rationale behind them.

This has been handled, Alex. Although too poetic, the DoW mentions only TKR, TCW and some "neutral" alliances, against which Camelot is indeed in a state of war. The DoW is open again.

off-topic: off-topic posts have been nuked. Here is an advice for future reference: When you are in page 3+ of a thread and your message exceeds 10 lines, take a deep breath, check the topic again and ask yourself whether your current post is off-topic. Due to cascading effects, the probability this is the case is quite high. At that point, respect the OP and either stay on topic or say nothing and continue your debates to other threads. on-topic: I really enjoy the current war/state of events. Nothing better than coming back home, opening the P&W forums and seeing 173 reports to go through.

Most of the time, the posts get nuked, actually. Personally, I do remove just some offensive/rule-breaking parts when they offer nothing to the discussion but the whole post does offer something. We do not dictate how politics should run, but we are following politics, else keeping the Alliance Affairs subforum clean from spam/troll threads would be impossible. This has been done in the past (e.g. see fake war declarations on The True The Polaris or meme declarations following repetitive patterns). If we had kept the threads up, this would also De-Facto pick a side at the current war argument: the side of the ones posting the threads. There is no escape for the mods on that part. Regarding the legitimacy of the wars per-se, Alex's current (numerous) actions of negating in-game wars based on the aforementioned "DoW"s kind of proves our moderation call was not a wrong one. P.S. / off-topic: Camelot's DoW is back, after careful re-examination of the DoW per se.

The "RoH" was taken down since it was (partly) fake. The state of war between UPN and non-Coalition B alliances was never disputed. Unless you have something serious to add, I will go ahead and lock the thread in a few hours.

"UPN recognizes a state of war with Farksphere and all of non-Covenant Memesphere" Leaving the cheating/trolling part aside (let's say these do not matter), UPN has zero wars with non-Covenant coalition B members. That alone is enough to consider the RoH a fake one on its own. The situation is even simpler than the other "RoH" announcements, where some actual wars were/are taking place in-game.

There is a rule about hate speech though, which is violated, breaking both in-game and forum rules. You can declare in-game for whatever reason, as long as you don't break the in-game rules. And you can also post a CB on the forums, as long as it doesn't break forum rules. For example, launching an OOC attack against someone (not just out of game context but a personal one, like "you are a pedophile") is a no go in a DoW. I am sorry, I don't understand the question. Maybe I am not reading it right. To the OP, sorry for the derail.

In-game, you can declare war on anyone for any reason (in terms of casus belli), as long as you don't break rules such as slot-filling etc. What you cannot do is make an announcement at the Foreign Affairs forums that includes OOC attacks (completely irrelevant to IC and the game as a whole).

sips tea I will be waiting.

Welcome on board. Have fun!

What's wrong with "Meatopia"?

Leaving aside the flaming part (I won't bother starting a debate on that), the specific post was also irrelevant to the main topic of the thread, and thus was under the category "thread hijacking/derailment", etc.

Thanks for calling 911. Kind reminder to everyone to stay on topic.

Are you trolling us?

From what I see, you are using a Confederate flag and your nation name also points towards in-game support of the Confederate. Why do you consider the above declarations OOC ones?

As you wish.

I will only intervene since it looks like my post caused some confusion. I never stated from whom the leak was. I thought that was obvious. In case it isn't, you can just check the corresponding thread.

Gratitude, friend! Most of my days at the forums, I am like this... So, thanks for your consideration.