|
Post by JonathanE on Apr 7, 2009 4:26:30 GMT -5
The issue is when a pic is the only "rebuttal". That's when it's spam. Or when it's part of every rebuttal. Sometimes, a post is so ridiculous and stupid, a well-placed "pic" can be a very effective response. Sometimes, a post's only worthy response is hysterical laughter. A well placed pic in response seems perfectly legitimate, especially when the post in question has been a repeated response to a legitimate question. Besides, sometimes the pics are downright amusing, and entirely relevant to the original post.
|
|
|
Post by Lady Renae on Apr 7, 2009 4:29:44 GMT -5
I'm not condemning anything done thus far. I'm just saying "don't overdo it". Actions like those referenced previously would be overdoing it. Again, I respectfully disagree. No one has threatened to flood the post with "pic spam"*. Really? Then please explain to me what was meant by the discussion of "cross posting" and "100 pages of fail". Please also explain to me why it was implied that the thread could become a site of gratuitous chest pictures, if you're so superior in your psychic ability and heightened objectivity. Enlighten me. I invite you. No, and no. Please read my posts before you decide to dismiss them out of hand. I said the atmosphere was becoming a bit more mud-clogged than I'd like. I said it was just this side of F&B, but still on this side, which made it just barely acceptable. Context is everything. Keep that in mind. That's called "enforcing the rules" and is also known as "moderating". We're doing our jobs. If you have an issue with that, take it to the mod in question and/or the designated thread in F&B. As to the "censorship", yes we reserve the right to edit your posts when they contain things that violate what FEW rules and guidelines we have. Again, we're doing our jobs. No. There's a single standard. That standard is this: if we catch you making more of an ass of yourself than we feel is appropriate and/or necessary, we step in. End of story. See Napoleon's post. He made his point rather succinctly, and he was the one who pounced on Julian's picture to which you refer. If you have an issue with it, take it up with him or go to the thread in F&B. This is not the place for it. I agree. A FEW pictures are fine. Again, see Napoleon's post. It seems to me you and I had a similar discussion already before I became a mod. In light of that, let me reiterate. The only new thing happening here is we are actually enforcing the few rules and guidelines that already existed on the old boards but weren't getting much play. We are cracking down on behaviors that we shouldn't have allowed to thrive and making it clear that we really are in charge around here, regardless of what some posters would like to believe. We do not intend to abuse this power. We do not intend to 'stifle free speech'. We DO intend to keep the forums from becoming chaotic again, and we WILL do what it takes to achieve that goal. Now how about we get back on topic, ok? If you really want to discuss this, there is a thread in F&B that is perfect for it. Yes, that is an official mod request. If you like, I'll even make it green so it can be perfectly obvious to anyone paying attention to how I've posted it.
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Apr 7, 2009 4:36:22 GMT -5
I will let your words speak for themselves. I certainly don't want to "derail" further an already hopelessly derailed thread. I do not dispute your "being in charge around here", I simply asked for clarification and an explanation of the new boards and certain rulings. Your eloquence on the matter is beyond discussion, and my response is an acknowledgement of that fact.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 7, 2009 4:45:07 GMT -5
The word "filthy" was not in reference to any pictures, but rather the attitude and atmosphere that has been building up. It hasn't reached F&B levels yet, which is why it hasn't been moved, but the aforementioned "cross posting" and the implied desire to start flooding pictures like the above aren't acceptable. That is all. Attitude like what? Mormons are fucked and we are talking about it. Nobody is flooding pictures and frankly I am disturbed by the insinuations that I've only seen from YOU. I can't see that anything is any different from a million other threads that we've had on this site or the old one. And once again, mormons ARE fucking nuts. I will say this till I die and I will and can show reasons that support why I think this way. That is in NO way a flame.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 7, 2009 4:53:17 GMT -5
The issue is when a pic is the only "rebuttal". That's when it's spam. Or when it's part of every rebuttal. I have to agree whole-heartedly with Jonathon on this. Nap, when it is 'part' of every rebuttal? First, I don't see ANYBODY doing this. Secondly, so long as there was more to it, as implied in "part of every rebuttal" what would be the harm? If there is an explanation AND a picture, how is that a bad thing? I understand if it was someone's ONLY answer or most every time they posted or something, but how would the inclusion of an apt (arguably perhaps but are we going to start monitoring what is "apt" or "appropriate (aside from dirty stuff i mean)" picture to a thought out rebuttal be spamming or whatever? Everything so far that was looked at cock-eyed for its POTENTIAL for abuse has been on the level so far as I can see. I am neither trying to fight, but I see mods as I do cops; they don't need to be in my backyard bbq unless something is actually happening. When they show up and hang around looking for problems I get nervous.
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Apr 7, 2009 4:54:22 GMT -5
*Points to F&B*
The Lady asked that further discussion on this specific topic be taken where appropriate. Meaning PMs or F&B's "Bitch About the Mods". Please do so.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 7, 2009 4:55:27 GMT -5
The issue is when a pic is the only "rebuttal". That's when it's spam. Or when it's part of every rebuttal. Sometimes, a post is so ridiculous and stupid, a well-placed "pic" can be a very effective response. Sometimes, a post's only worthy response is hysterical laughter. A well placed pic in response seems perfectly legitimate, especially when the post in question has been a repeated response to a legitimate question. Besides, sometimes the pics are downright amusing, and entirely relevant to the original post. And this is opposed to posts that some folks will leave where they only respond with a smiley or "yeh" or "LOFLMAO!" Nobody ever got mad at folks who do that. At least a picture is more work than that. Besides, a picture is worth a thousand words. Or it used to be anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Apr 7, 2009 4:59:05 GMT -5
*sigh* Red, please read the thread through before replying to individual posts...
Pause button lock is all...
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Apr 7, 2009 5:02:53 GMT -5
Now then...
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 7, 2009 5:11:03 GMT -5
Again, I respectfully disagree. No one has threatened to flood the post with "pic spam"*. Really? Then please explain to me what was meant by the discussion of "cross posting" and "100 pages of fail". Please also explain to me why it was implied that the thread could become a site of gratuitous chest pictures, if you're so superior in your psychic ability and heightened objectivity. Enlighten me. I invite you. What is the matter here?
Jesus christ, he started his response with "I respectfully disagree" and then explained why he held that stance. Your response is "if you're so superior in your psychic ability and heightened objectivity. Enlighten me. I invite you."?
How is THAT good for the boards? No, and no. Please read my posts before you decide to dismiss them out of hand. I said the atmosphere was becoming a bit more mud-clogged than I'd like. Exactly. YOU made that call and we don't see it. But I guess it was wrong and rude and assholish of him to ask about that and "respectfully disagree"? I said it was just this side of F&B, but still on this side, which made it just barely acceptable. Context is everything. Keep that in mind. The context was there was a conversation going on that hinted for a minute that it MIGHT turn to something you didn't like.
Context IS important, I agree.That's called "enforcing the rules" and is also known as "moderating". We're doing our jobs. If you have an issue with that, take it to the mod in question and/or the designated thread in F&B. As to the "censorship", yes we reserve the right to edit your posts when they contain things that violate what FEW rules and guidelines we have. Again, we're doing our jobs. That's great, only nothing was happening. YOU created any hostility that now exists here. No. There's a single standard. That standard is this: if we catch you making more of an ass of yourself than we feel is appropriate and/or necessary, we step in. End of story. See Napoleon's post. He made his point rather succinctly, and he was the one who pounced on Julian's picture to which you refer. If you have an issue with it, take it up with him or go to the thread in F&B. This is not the place for it. Again, I didn't see anybody doing anything wrong, and when you were asked about it you seemed really defensive and then got rude, all in the name of keeping a civil board. I agree. A FEW pictures are fine. Again, see Napoleon's post. It seems to me you and I had a similar discussion already before I became a mod. In light of that, let me reiterate. The only new thing happening here is we are actually enforcing the few rules and guidelines that already existed on the old boards but weren't getting much play. We are cracking down on behaviors that we shouldn't have allowed to thrive and making it clear that we really are in charge around here, regardless of what some posters would like to believe. We do not intend to abuse this power. We do not intend to 'stifle free speech'. We DO intend to keep the forums from becoming chaotic again, and we WILL do what it takes to achieve that goal. That's super and all, but how your reaction to his question above "helpful" exactly?
And what "problems" are happening exactly? It seems to me that me that the more that folks follow the rules the more that things are looked for to bitch about.
of course I COULD be wrong...Now how about we get back on topic, ok? If you really want to discuss this, there is a thread in F&B that is perfect for it. Yes, that is an official mod request. If you like, I'll even make it green so it can be perfectly obvious to anyone paying attention to how I've posted it. I was already having a conversation and I think we were all "on topic", I was just curious as to what the hell you were talking about.
Now I'm sorry I asked.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 7, 2009 5:13:09 GMT -5
*Points to F&B* The Lady asked that further discussion on this specific topic be taken where appropriate. Meaning PMs or F&B's "Bitch About the Mods". Please do so. That's swell, but she brought it up.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 7, 2009 5:14:22 GMT -5
Ah, I'm on his total ignore list, now, and I so wanted to see a discussion of JS's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar. That little document is totally lulzworthy. It sure makes apologetics squirm. The beauty of it is, it's a real publication, really written by the JS hisself. Can we talk about this now please?
|
|
|
Post by canadian mojo on Apr 7, 2009 5:17:11 GMT -5
If this thread becomes a spam source, it will be locked. It's filthy enough in here as it is. Don't push it. If you want it to reach the "100 pages of fail", keep talking. Pic spam will not be tolerated here from ANYONE. The talk about cross posting was a joke. It would have wound down much quicker if not for the fluke of Red posting the same picture I did. I'm pretty sure that Skyfire et al. can hit the 100 page mark without me resorting to spam. I can use more smilies in the future if that will help any.
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Apr 7, 2009 5:19:40 GMT -5
Good plan.
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Apr 7, 2009 5:28:57 GMT -5
|
|