Let's Avoid Certain Garbage

[RobBob]

That thread yesterday/last night was a real shitbird. Pages of garbage.

 

On the other hand, New Girl in Seattle was If that wasn't a April Fools joke then I'm a monkey's uncle.

[ChrisT]

One man's garbage is another man's...how does that saying go again?

[iain]

...refuse? trash?

[RobBob]

One man's mountain is another man's hill

[iain]

overheard a coworker say "well that's a whole nother ballcourt isn't it?"

[RobBob]

Hey, I went back and re-read part of that garbage thread (trying to figure out where these spitting references are coming from)...there were a few Zappa posts thet were worthwhile!

[erik]

i agree with your request robobobobob

 

though the sad thing is that everyone will play nice for like 5 minutes and then resume normal levels of bullshit.

 

personal attacks no matter made by who for what reason and regardless of the intent will be erased and the poster will be banned.

 

nothing personal towards anyone or anything.

 

hate is about as useful as well shit it aint useful for anything.

 

 

[Peter_Puget]

Erik -

Right On!

 

PP

[Necronomicon]

erik said:

i agree with your request robobobobob

 

though the sad thing is that everyone will play nice for like 5 minutes and then resume normal levels of bullshit.

 

personal attacks no matter made by who for what reason and regardless of the intent will be erased and the poster will be banned.

 

nothing personal towards anyone or anything.

 

hate is about as useful as well shit it aint useful for anything.

 

 

I hate you, shit.

[erik]

NECRO TOO OBVIOUS AND PREDICTABLE.

 

[Necronomicon]

and I thought I was all subtle and stuff...

[Off_White]

erik said:

personal attacks no matter made by who for what reason and regardless of the intent will be erased and the poster will be banned.

 

 

[Cpt.Caveman]

I'll make all my attacks in person with glee.

 

Ban this

 

[minx]

erik said:

i agree with your request robobobobob

 

though the sad thing is that everyone will play nice for like 5 minutes and then resume normal levels of bullshit.

 

personal attacks no matter made by who for what reason and regardless of the intent will be erased and the poster will be banned.

 

nothing personal towards anyone or anything.

 

hate is about as useful as well shit it aint useful for anything.

 

 

erik

 

 

[j_b]

personal attacks no matter made by who for what reason and regardless of the intent will be erased and the poster will be banned.

 

what do you mean by personal attacks? I think there is a big difference between someone reacting with angry words within the context of a thread and another using extraneous, vicious rumors to put another down (i.e. Allison aggressively discussing the identity of a poster and being called a whore in return - in the literal sense of the word). the exception to this may be that those who resort to such means leave themselves open to similar attacks (which clearly is not hte case with Allison).

 

In general, I am not for banning people who have something to contribute which is clearly the case with Ray (although we haven't seen much of that recently). I also think the disrespectful humor is a good thing as long as it does not turn into character assassination. I understand that mods may find it difficult to draw the line, and perhaps it is the users themselves that should 'enforce' what is OK.

[erik]

j_b said:

personal attacks no matter made by who for what reason and regardless of the intent will be erased and the poster will be banned.

 

what do you mean by personal attacks? I think there is a big difference between someone reacting with angry words within the context of a thread and another using extraneous, vicious rumors to put another down (i.e. Allison aggressively discussing the identity of a poster and being called a whore in return - in the literal sense of the word). the exception to this may be that those who resort to such means leave themselves open to similar attacks (which clearly is not hte case with Allison).

 

In general, I am not for banning people who have something to contribute which is clearly the case with Ray (although we haven't seen much of that recently). I also think the disrespectuous humor is a good thing as long as it does not turn into character assassination. I understand that mods may find it difficult to draw the line, and perhaps it is the users themselves that should 'enforce' what is OK.

 

hate

 

what are your moral and ethical standards? welp thats them!

 

 

[Cpt.Caveman]

You guys can't moderate it when I show up to your "public" events and tell you I hate your fucking guts in person.

 

Tooshay!

 

Allison deserves all the shit slung her way. What a bitch.

 

Later on you fags

[RobBob]

(that's touche )

[Cpt.Caveman]

RobBob said:

(that's touche )

 

Intentionally spelled wrong to incite more flamage from people that think it's important.

[allthumbs]

wrong; it's "douché"

[Off_White]

It's a good question J_B. What I laid out for me (in the Arab Goods Boycott thread) is pretty easy to be objective about, the difference between insult and threat is clear. Erik's standard is both more rigorous and more nebulous, but I support him on that. Here's a good case of the difference between individual moderators. Caveman bashing Allison is a different thing than Trask slamming DFA. One is much more about hate and the other a consensual free-for-all, and deciding which is which is a subjective call made on the basis of personal knowledge of the participants. That situation is an easy call by Erik's standard, but how do we treat some of the stuff slung at you and Sexual Chocolate? I've found some of that stuff quite offensive, but I've never had a complaint from either of you. I know my more lienient standard is not acceptable to you, but it does constitute something I can enforce that is not based on my personal sense of outrage. That said, Erik gets my support.

[Cpt.Caveman]

Off_White said:

It's a good question J_B. What I laid out for me (in the Arab Goods Boycott thread) is pretty easy to be objective about, the difference between insult and threat is clear. Erik's standard is both more rigorous and more nebulous, but I support him on that. Here's a good case of the difference between individual moderators. Caveman bashing Allison is a different thing than Trask slamming DFA. One is much more about hate and the other a consensual free-for-all, and deciding which is which is a subjective call made on the basis of personal knowledge of the participants. That situation is an easy call by Erik's standard, but how do we treat some of the stuff slung at you and Sexual Chocolate? I've found some of that stuff quite offensive, but I've never had a complaint from either of you. I know my more lienient standard is not acceptable to you, but it does constitute something I can enforce that is not based on my personal sense of outrage. That said, Erik gets my support.

 

It's another of the "feelings police".

 

Take a shower you stink.

[sk]

Off_White said:

It's a good question J_B. What I laid out for me (in the Arab Goods Boycott thread) is pretty easy to be objective about, the difference between insult and threat is clear. Erik's standard is both more rigorous and more nebulous, but I support him on that. Here's a good case of the difference between individual moderators. Caveman bashing Allison is a different thing than Trask slamming DFA. One is much more about hate and the other a consensual free-for-all, and deciding which is which is a subjective call made on the basis of personal knowledge of the participants. That situation is an easy call by Erik's standard, but how do we treat some of the stuff slung at you and Sexual Chocolate? I've found some of that stuff quite offensive, but I've never had a complaint from either of you. I know my more lienient standard is not acceptable to you, but it does constitute something I can enforce that is not based on my personal sense of outrage. That said, Erik gets my support.

 

Off White as usual rules I think that the key here is complaint. If someone complains about what is said to or about them, than perhaps it warents some looking at by the modertaters. If not than how is the monderater suposed to know if someone is offended or not. there are examples where the mods just know... lest I bring of CPB and his sick child molestation joke but that is what i think... if some one has a problem with something than it should be looked at. My .02

[allthumbs]

shut up

[sk]

for the record I sort of felt bad when Tomcat got banned when I was talking( for lack of a better word) with him. I sort of called him out and started it.