A revised foe list for ppl who join games with foes in them

[KLOBBER]

Actually, a restraining order works only one way: the person restrained is not allowed to initiate contact with the one who filed it, and will be subject to charges if he does so.

The person who filed is still allowed to initiate contact with the one restrained without any legal or criminal penalty.

This is as it should be, this is also how the foes list works, and that is also as it should be.

Offenders are put on foes lists by victims, and restricting the victim in any way is unacceptable.

[KoE_Sirius]

Actually, a restraining order works only one way: the person restrained is not allowed to initiate contact with the one who filed it, and will be subject to charges if he does so.

The person who filed is still allowed to initiate contact with the one restrained without any legal or criminal penalty.

This is as it should be, this is also how the foes list works, and that is also as it should be.

Offenders are put on foes lists by victims, and restricting the victim in any way is unacceptable.

If it is proven that a person(victim as such) comes within an area where a restraining order is in place on the restrained.The restraining order becomes void.You can't walk into your attackers houseor follow your attacker to work etc and say nah nah nah.The law is pretty strict on such matter.
Now lets get back to the subject matter.

[KLOBBER]

Thank you for your irrelevant, incorrect, and illiterate post. Now back to the subject:

Restraining orders place no restrictions on the victims, and neither does the foes list.

Both put restrictions on the offenders exclusively, and this is as it should be.

Otherwise, it is a punishment for the victim, which is a "no-no" in any case.

[Soloman]

Actually, a restraining order works only one way: the person restrained is not allowed to initiate contact with the one who filed it, and will be subject to charges if he does so.

The person who filed is still allowed to initiate contact with the one restrained without any legal or criminal penalty.

This is as it should be, this is also how the foes list works, and that is also as it should be.

Offenders are put on foes lists by victims, and restricting the victim in any way is unacceptable.

If it is proven that a person(victim as such) comes within an area where a restraining order is in place on the restrained.The restraining order becomes void.You can't walk into your attackers houseor follow your attacker to work etc and say nah nah nah.The law is pretty strict on such matter.
Now lets get back to the subject matter.

Further more in most states once a order is in place and the filer violates it they are in violation of the order and subject to arrest,i know from having to bail out my aunt for violating a restraining order she filed against her Ex Husband then she went to his house where he lived with new Girlfriend Fight Argument ensued and she went to jail...

[KLOBBER]

That is incorrect.

No restraining order ever places any restriction on the filer. If your friend was arrested, it was because of the fight she started, you know, the one you mentioned in your post.

It was not because she filed a restraining order, nor was it because she "violated" it, as the previous poster has correctly stated that if the filer initiates contact with the person restrained, then the order becomes void.

In any case, the foes list is 100% perfect as it is now, and modifying it to punish the members who use it would be ridiculous. This idea is rotten, and needs to be placed in an air-tight receptacle and thrown into the garbage.

[Soloman]

That is incorrect.

No restraining order ever places any restriction on the filer. If your friend was arrested, it was because of the fight she started, you know, the one you mentioned in your post.

It was not because she filed a restraining order, nor was it because she "violated" it, as the previous poster has correctly stated that if the filer initiates contact with the person restrained, then the order becomes void.

In any case, the foes list is 100% perfect as it is now, and modifying it to punish the members who use it would be ridiculous. This idea is rotten, and needs to be placed in an air-tight receptacle and thrown into the garbage.

NO she was arrested because she violated the order by initiating contact with person she filed against, Judges who are tired of repeat offenses and Orders being used as leverage in relationships, in a lot of states are making both parties accountable to jail time if they violate the PPO, NCO, EOP and subsequent restraining orders that result from the initial ex-parte filing. IS this uniform in all states no, but it is a growing trend. Domestic Violence laws are also being rewritten so that it is not gender biased and all party's are accountable in a altercation based upon there level of involvement and who initiated. Again the states that have made those changes are working to make a uniformed and less abused system...But Back to CC reality if you do not want to play someone they should be on your Foes list and you should not be allowed to play them, if you do want to play them you need to remove from your foes list very simple and fair if it is applied as such...

[firth4eva]

Bad idea. Generally I don't add people to my foes list because I know they won't join games with me and that way I can still read there game chat and forum posts.

[KoE_Sirius]

Bad idea. Generally I don't add people to my foes list because I know they won't join games with me and that way I can still read there game chat and forum posts.

So you are saying you dont add people to your list and you want people with an extensive list to join your games at will.?

[firth4eva]

Bad idea. Generally I don't add people to my foes list because I know they won't join games with me and that way I can still read there game chat and forum posts.

So you are saying you dont add people to your list and you want people with an extensive list to join your games at will.?

No, I don't want to play someone and they don't want to play me. They add me to ignore and don't join any of my games so now I have no need to put them on ignore. Now I can read their posts freely and game chat without playing them either.

[KLOBBER]

Filth4eva makes an excellent point.

Once and for all, restraining orders ONLY restrict the person against whom they are filed, and NEVER the filer.

The idea posited this thread is lousy, and it will never be implemented. Just like filing a restraining order, using your foes list does not punish or restrict you in any way, and this is as it should be, and so it shall remain.

[firth4eva]

Filth4eva makes an excellent point.

I've never heard that one before. Real original.

[KLOBBER]

How do you mean?

[Thezzaruz]

NONE of these limits the number of games I can play in any significant way.

Nope, but you limit the people that happens to be on your list. And regarding some that is even without them ever doing anything (even playing) to you. Do you really think that is fair???

If you find yourself limited, then I would say the real solution is to change your behavior so people don't keep putting you on their ignore lists.

Isn't that a bit unfair to say considering you put people on your list due to the sigs???

Offenders are put on foes lists by victims, and restricting the victim in any way is unacceptable.

If people had been put on the foe-list by mods as a punishment then I'd agree. But as they instead are put there, at will, by anyone for any reason that style of reasoning just doesn't cut it.

Filth4eva makes an excellent point.

Yea he does, but not in the way you think.

His comment (one that has been touched by several other too) shows that the foe-list system needs a make over. There has to be an option to prohibit people joining your games but still let you read their posts and also the opposite to stop showing a players posts/chat but still allow him to join your games.

The current system is flawed in several ways and while I don't see any of them being show stoppers I do think they should be fixed.

[KLOBBER]

The current foes list system is 100% flawless, and it needs absolutely no adjustment whatsoever.

[PLAYER57832]

That is incorrect.

No restraining order ever places any restriction on the filer. If your friend was arrested, it was because of the fight she started, you know, the one you mentioned in your post.

It was not because she filed a restraining order, nor was it because she "violated" it, as the previous poster has correctly stated that if the filer initiates contact with the person restrained, then the order becomes void.

In any case, the foes list is 100% perfect as it is now, and modifying it to punish the members who use it would be ridiculous. This idea is rotten, and needs to be placed in an air-tight receptacle and thrown into the garbage.

What actually happens is this:

person "A" places a restraining order against person "B" because they can show to a judge that there is definite and real reason for A to fear B.

If A then willingly goes back into the company of B, this can be seen as grounds that the restraining order was misplaced. It also will result in at minimum a lecture by the police to "A". If A continues contact with B, then not only is A stupid, but yes, it can invalidate the restraining order. FURTHER, if children are involved, they may be removed from A's custody (but not necessarily placed with B), particularly if police/the judge still feel the original order was justified .. or at least until something close to truth can be sorted out.

Sorry Klobber, but you are just plain wrong, at least within the US. I DO KNOW, because I have, unfortunately, had to be involved in a couple of situations when I was doing childcare.

[PLAYER57832]

NONE of these limits the number of games I can play in any significant way.

Nope, but you limit the people that happens to be on your list. And regarding some that is even without them ever doing anything (even playing) to you. Do you really think that is fair???

I repeat .. .to get on my ignore list, you have to work at it. If you are THAT much of a jerk, you DESERVE some limitations. No, I don't want to play you and that's that. I am pretty tolerant, but I do have limits.

I am not going to play someone who spews out filth, who is an extremely bad sport ... etc. If I were forced to do so, I would leave the site. I come here for fun and entertainment, not to put up with complete jerks.

There are several THOUSAND people active in CC. If you are on enough ignore lists that you are feeling limited in your play ... well, you might want to take some lessons from Miss Manners.

Sorry if you don't like it, but it is true. You can act however you wish, but NOT without consequence.

If you find yourself limited, then I would say the real solution is to change your behavior so people don't keep putting you on their ignore lists.

Isn't that a bit unfair to say considering you put people on your list due to the sigs???

Perhaps. I WOULD like to see the option of seperating Forum foes from game playing Foes, but that option does not exist.

And, if you want to make a huge sig and put in it "another annoying sig" ... well, you can only blame yourself if it also cuts you out of a few games.

Offenders are put on foes lists by victims, and restricting the victim in any way is unacceptable.

If people had been put on the foe-list by mods as a punishment then I'd agree. But as they instead are put there, at will, by anyone for any reason that style of reasoning just doesn't cut it.

NO, the mods are not there to moderate individual game decorum. That is WHY the foe list is there. Some people think it is perfectly fun to insult each other, belittle, dictate to others how to play, etc. CC is a pretty open community. Having the foe list is a compromise that allows people to be as much of a jerk as they wish amongst themselves, but not do so with those who prefer better behavior.

The mods mostly look at forum postings. For games, it is mostly about whether someone is a multi or not. In a couple of cases, extreme racism and such were reprimanded.

A few of the people on my foe list were reprimanded, but it took time.

[KLOBBER]

That is incorrect.

No restraining order ever places any restriction on the filer. If your friend was arrested, it was because of the fight she started, you know, the one you mentioned in your post.

It was not because she filed a restraining order, nor was it because she "violated" it, as the previous poster has correctly stated that if the filer initiates contact with the person restrained, then the order becomes void.

In any case, the foes list is 100% perfect as it is now, and modifying it to punish the members who use it would be ridiculous. This idea is rotten, and needs to be placed in an air-tight receptacle and thrown into the garbage.

What actually happens is this:

person "A" places a restraining order against person "B" because they can show to a judge that there is definite and real reason for A to fear B.

If A then willingly goes back into the company of B, this can be seen as grounds that the restraining order was misplaced. It also will result in at minimum a lecture by the police to "A". If A continues contact with B, then not only is A stupid, but yes, it can invalidate the restraining order. FURTHER, if children are involved, they may be removed from A's custody (but not necessarily placed with B), particularly if police/the judge still feel the original order was justified .. or at least until something close to truth can be sorted out.

Sorry Klobber, but you are just plain wrong, at least within the US. I DO KNOW, because I have, unfortunately, had to be involved in a couple of situations when I was doing childcare.

No, you are just plain wrong, not me, and your post is also off-topic. Restraining orders are just a side-topic, and irrelevant to this subject except that they can be used to illustrate that the victim should never be punished for reporting any type of abuse. This is a universal principle of real justice, and should (and is) practiced here and in the courts.

That goes for the CC foes list, as well as the real world's restraining orders, and that is as it should be.

Are you also of the incorrect opinion that rape victims are jailed for reporting? I would not be surprised if you thought so, as this is the exact same incorrect principle that you imagine exists in the courts regarding restraining orders.

You are completely wrong in every way, on the main issue and also its side-issue. I am very happy that I'm not as confused as you are about so many things.

[Thezzaruz]

I am not going to play someone who spews out filth, who is an extremely bad sport ... etc. If I were forced to do so, I would leave the site. I come here for fun and entertainment, not to put up with complete jerks.

I (or the OP) aren't trying to force you to play anyone. But we do think that you shouldn't be allowed to choose whether you will join someones game if you don't allow him the same choice. You might already do it that way but it's quite clear (from this and other threads) that some do use it in that way.

NO, the mods are not there to moderate individual game decorum. That is WHY the foe list is there.

Oh I didn't say they should do that. What I meant is that the general idea that a player being placed on someones foe-list is a proof of that player being a jerk is a joke.

Perhaps. I WOULD like to see the option of seperating Forum foes from game playing Foes, but that option does not exist.

As I said in my earlier post, I fully agree. I even think that this is a more important change that the one this thread is about.

There are several THOUSAND people active in CC. If you are on enough ignore lists that you are feeling limited in your play ... well, you might want to take some lessons from Miss Manners.

Don't see the relevance of that statement. Especially as I'm not (as far as I know) on anyones foe-list. I'm arguing this on principal reason.

[KoE_Sirius]

I am not going to play someone who spews out filth, who is an extremely bad sport ... etc. If I were forced to do so, I would leave the site. I come here for fun and entertainment, not to put up with complete jerks.

I (or the OP) aren't trying to force you to play anyone. But we do think that you shouldn't be allowed to choose whether you will join someones game if you don't allow him the same choice. You might already do it that way but it's quite clear (from this and other threads) that some do use it in that way.

NO, the mods are not there to moderate individual game decorum. That is WHY the foe list is there.

Exactly it does not matter why someone was put on an ignore list.All I am asking for is that when they join a game with the ignored in it.The person should no longer be ignored.
Its unfair.Lets get it changed please.


Oh I didn't say they should do that. What I meant is that the general idea that a player being placed on someones foe-list is a proof of that player being a jerk is a joke.

Perhaps. I WOULD like to see the option of seperating Forum foes from game playing Foes, but that option does not exist.

As I said in my earlier post, I fully agree. I even think that this is a more important change that the one this thread is about.

There are several THOUSAND people active in CC. If you are on enough ignore lists that you are feeling limited in your play ... well, you might want to take some lessons from Miss Manners.

Don't see the relevance of that statement. Especially as I'm not (as far as I know) on anyones foe-list. I'm arguing this on principal reason.

[Thezzaruz]

I suggest you clean that post up Sirius if you want people to get your point.

[trapyoung]

i still believe what i posted earlier, i think it's crap firth4eva foed me for no reason and has the ability to join my games, i recently foed him to prevent this but it pisses me off some other douche who doesn't want to play me has the ability to join my game under whichever pretenses they pick.

[KLOBBER]

...you shouldn't be allowed to choose whether you will join someones game if you don't allow him the same choice.

The foes list does allow everyone the same choice, as it is now. If you don't want to play a game with someone, put him on your foes list, then he can't join your games. This is a very simple process -- why is it that you have trouble understanding it?

The foes list needs no adjustment whatsoever, and your above statement is actually irrelevant to reality.

[trapyoung]

if you could somehow see whose foe list you were on without having to try to join their games i'd agree klobber, but as is the system is flawed.

[KLOBBER]

That's a whole different issue, and if that's the change you want, then you should start a new thread.

[trapyoung]

that's not the change i want, i want those who foe me to be unable to join my games; i was saying that the only reason the current system should ever be continued to be tolerated is if that was currently the case... so i'd like sirius's recommendation made