RIght lets clear a few things up here with the help of our good friends at wikipedia:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wiki
Flaming is the hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users. Flaming usually occurs in the social context of a discussion board, Internet Relay Chat (IRC) or even through e-mail. An Internet user typically generates a flame response to other posts or users posting on a site, and such a response is usually not constructive, does not clarify a discussion, and does not persuade others. Sometimes, flamers attempt to assert their authority, or establish a position of superiority over other users. Other times, a flamer is simply an individual who believes he or she carries the only valid opinion. This leads him or her to personally attack those who disagree. In some cases, flamers wish to upset and offend other members of the forum, in which case they can be called "trolls". Most often however, flames are angry or insulting messages transmitted by people who have strong feelings about a subject.
|
This is what I would call a strict definition of a 'flame' - by and large Ascendancy do not 'flame' to a serious extent and get away with it. In fact some of them get banned for doing it.
Quote:
|
Some equate flaming with simply letting off steam, though the receiving party may be less than pleased. Similarly, a normal, non-flame message may have elements of a flame -- it may be hostile, for example -- but it is not a flame if its author seriously intends to advance the discussion. The word flaming is also sometimes used for long, intensive and heated discussions, even though insults do not occur.
|
In my mind this is perfectly acceptable and sometimes insults can be merely incidental to the whole ambit of the post. First of all understand what a flame actually is, then proceed to get a little less highly strung.
As the moderator, it's obvious that Ascendancy have opinions, some stronger than others and they've got them because many of them are clearly experienced at the game. Some of Ascendancy behave like children on the forum, sometimes I suspect quite deliberately; I deal with these people. Others are perfectly articulate and while there are a large number of them, there appears to be no coordinated effort to spam the forum.
What I do recognise is that the fact that Ascendancy have so many posters than can write articulately and make an argument within the rules is that AD does suffer as a result, simply because its very diificult to oppose such a number, a lot of whom seem to be expressing personal opinion as opposed to the Ascendancy line. AD would be better if other alliances chose to take Ascendancy head on - but so far, no alliance has really chosen to do so, which is a shame.