If you see Whatislacked,

Forget me, but the most eloquent of them all, Oluvai, is a GIFT member. He has in very clear terms explained the problems facing battledawn today, while also clearly explaining what he and the rest of us expect from battledawn and even has offered solutions to these problems. If you still think its NO complaining, then you must be blind to this fact?

Or maybe like you said, you did not have the time to read any of the previous threads and made an arbitrary comment.

Agreed to some it might give the wrong idea. But the only way to avoid that would have been to not start the thread. But that isn't possible either when people are in disagreement and this is the only place anything can be resolved.
Secondly if someone asked for a gist Id go - "We were in the middle of a war, when the admin interfered unfairly. We are dealing with that situation now". That is more apt. But people should take the time to read whats written. Anyway, what people think happened does not matter, the issue at hand does.

Business-wise, BD management should see if the way they are running this game makes their community getting bigger or not, both in players and in supporters.
If they are happy with what they see, they should keep on doing what they do.
All others can speak until tomorrow about supporters leaving or not, it's meaningless.
i dont know the answer, all i know is that JD left and i am leaving as well. but who knows, maybe 3 new ones got in because they read Ping's post and heard that there are good admins in BD. how would i know...

more people even, people who are not in NO.

Allen. You're keeping this going for dozens of pages... when all Seth did was get rid of your shielded OP.

You still had 400 mobile squads in Africa. Seth didn't change that. So the dead horse you're beating is not even responsible for stopping your great attack.

I am past that point Kevin. I am not worried about what happened on E4 or whether it was a great attack or whatever.

All I am pointing out is subjective decisions, based on a series of events that happen ingame, is not the right way of administration, be it a genuine case of cheating, or a grey area. Either clear rules exist or they dont. Either you prove someone is guilty or you dont. If you neither have rules, nor can prove someone cheated, then dont ban the person. Its fair enough.

Ping,

There is no evidence that any portion of the community, save Kevin, does not agree with me on the substance of my points.

You, for example, and many others who have not taken up the call for change have yet to actually address the question at hand.

So, for clarity, do it now.

1. Should administrative action be taken on people who have done nothing wrong but who the admin thinks COULD eventually? Yes or no. I suspect you agree with me, you've just not bothered saying so.

2. Should BD have a clear set of rules, easily understood, followed and published outlining activities which are in clear violation of the rules AND the punishment for them, or should this be a secret moving concept, unknown to all and adjudicated based on the moment by moment feelings of any particular admin at any given time?

Again, I suspect you actually agree with me, because not doing so speaks ill of you. It is plausible some portion of the community legitimately finds flaw in the thinking any known individual should be able to play his colony within the interests which make him happy and provide him game enjoyment, though, even that I doubt is controversial. My core points remain unmentioned by you.

While I appreciate in this case you liked the outcome, that's intellectually dishonest. And, I assure you, there'll be DIRECT evidence supporters do not support the decision Seth made. That you do, is tragic and embarrassing, but, fine as an individual election.

I assure you, there's DIRECT proof tokens and spending dried up dramatically sometime Saturday afternoon and will not pick up. And that it's quite likely Seth's next several eras are financial under performers. You will not be privy to that info, but it'll occur, and I suspect in a few eras you'll actually understand that by something which takes place to make it clear.

Fortunately for you, I will not presume you are so daft and dim as to think it's ok to pre-punish someone who's done nothing wrong because the admin thinks he might -- as Seth says he did here and routinely does. I know you know better, in spite of being singularly unable and unwilling to say so.

I forgive you for this vanity.

If you really were past it, the vitriol would be much less.

This whole thread reeks of spite, not of genuine concern.

Oluvai's agreement with you is out of ideological differences in how this game should be run, which don't meld with the type of game it is, but his opinion stands.

I don't see anyone who isn't on your side posting here. From my experience most people are quite happy with Seth's administration. He's the most active and unbiased from what I've seen, having been on both sides of issues with him.

Yes. Something has happened.

Calling attention to seriously questionable behavior achieved the following results to this point.

1. The admin in question was forced in to public to defend his actions. He did so, early with some vigor. This is a community positive. The inspection of the community and clear exchange between rulers and community is good.

2. The admin later wrote, for him, something nearly conciliatory. An "olive branch" he called it. A skeptic would say he's already seen donations plummet and responded, or that Michael has seen them plummet and asked him to. An optimist would say he, himself, was so moved by the passion of those he impacted as to take a step back and ACTUALLY ask himself if he may not have been perfect in the first place.

That also is positive.

Serious looks at one's own actions are difficult to inspire and awesome to behold when witnessed.

When Seth or BD makers post you the graph of spending on E4 before and after the incident, you'll understand the impact as I know they do now