[Banned]

Appocomaster: Since you complained about the length of the original post, here's the condensed version:

me: hm. I need an alliance related channel. I'll go to #cservice
#cservice: you need to go to #support.
#support: you can't have one, it needs to be named after your alliance
me: ok, I'll rename my alliance
#support: lol, no
me: ok, I'll start a new alliance
#support: no, this is only meant for people who don't do those things
me: that's not terribly useful then, is it?
#support: rules are rules!
me: that's not very helpful

Originally Posted by Appocomaster

Whilst I hate systems myself, you were very much trying to 'adapt' the system purely to get a channel for your alliance bot, which is certainly not what it's setup for, without being an alliance rep, which is what it's setup for.

My entire involvement with Planetarion and my alliance currently revolvess around this alliance bot. Either my involvement with Planetarion is wrong or the system is wrong. And while the former is very much possible, I don't see why you should be of that opinion.

I don't think that a 'bad' standard of support (i.e. not getting what you want) when asking for support for to mis-use the alliance channel system whilst not actually playing in an alliance (let alone being an alliance rep) in what's generally discussed in alliance rep channels is a terrible failing, to be honest! Ace did talk to CService, who were not willing to waive the agreement that alliances have to have the same name as their alliance nickname (which you already have registered to yourself), and we weren't willing to rename your alliance this round, which you admitted you were generally against.

The standard of support was good. A lot of people were very reasonable, helpful and understanding. Not everyone was, but enough people that this wasn't my complaint. The problem is that you were basically fighting rules you yourself have put into place.

It's like scene out of Brazil. You didn't think of this contingency, so it can't exist. Reread Jeekay and Jedi's posts if you want to see how to correctly deal with this sort of thing.

The alliance channel isn't always that active. You make it sound like some sort of constant forum of discussion and activity! Do you not trust alliance representatives to represent their alliances?

I think you misunderstood. #ascendancy is too active for me to realistically discuss Munin technology with the 2 other people currently interested. #ascendancy generates about 7-8k lines of logs per day. It's simply not reasonable to expect people to skim through all of that to catch a few lines about refactoring a parser. In addition, I would like the channel to be open to the public so that other contributors that aren't members can stop by.

I know this is a general point. When we don't stick to the rules we create though, several people (including yourself!) complain that our rules are inconsistently applied and that we need to not make exceptions to them. I'm sure you'd be willing to name these rules we have for the sake of having them

In this instance there were several parties involved (alliances, via their reps, Planetarion representatives, and CService) with there being pre-agreed rules in place. The only rule I can see you having an objection to is 'Alliances must have the same name as the channel they register', which CService require us to have and refused to waive.

I repeat:

me: ok, I'll rename my alliance
#support: lol, no
me: ok, I'll start a new alliance
#support: no, this is only meant for people who don't do those things

What form do I need to fill out to change the name of Ascendancy to Munin? Does it need to be delivered in triplicate? Who do I need to sign the forms? Are there any officials that need to be bribed?

I'm not even saying that you should change the rules just for us. I'm just asking how to comply with them given our alliance's requirements. Help me out here.