bunglehead Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Hmm, I wonder what would happen if spray was shut down for a day? Would the other boards start to fill up with shit like spray? Quote
minx Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Formaldehead said: minx said: lets add banning to the list of topics that have been beaten to death and quit wasting time with it. Do you feel the same way about the Holocaust? no, but i do feel the same way about you Quote
Formaldehead Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 minx said: Formaldehead said: minx said: lets add banning to the list of topics that have been beaten to death and quit wasting time with it. Do you feel the same way about the Holocaust? no, but i do feel the same way about you You want to beat me to death? This, surely, is cause enough for BANISHMENT! Quote
minx Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Formaldehead said: minx said: Formaldehead said: minx said: lets add banning to the list of topics that have been beaten to death and quit wasting time with it. Do you feel the same way about the Holocaust? no, but i do feel the same way about you You want to beat me to death? This, surely, is cause enough for BANISHMENT! nope, i just feel you're a waste of time and thus i am done participating in your meager attempt to prove a point. Quote
jon Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Formaldehead said: jon said: The reason for banning purely has to do with the mood the moderator. Like for instance if I'm in a good mood I will just send the person to PM politely asking them to knock it off. On the other hand if I am in a mood like I am today, which seems to be a reoccuring theme, I really don't give a shit what you think and will ban people just so I feel better. I don't know what it is about banning people, maybe the sudden rush of endorphines from my pituitary gland, that makes it so fun. "Moods are for cattle and love play" Why'd Necro get banned? Did it make you hard, when you hit the button and cut him off from the rest of the world?? You like many others here continue to push a line of acceptability, or inacceptability, that I think is more then clear. We tolerate of a lot of crap here, but things along the lines of bashing of gays, racism, and children molestation is not tolerated. You opinion is welcome, your hatred is not. We have said it before and I don't feel like I have to say it again, this is something that I think should be assumed. In your case you have been added to the list of persona non grata. Quote
marylou Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Hey Jon, if gay bashing is on the list of no-goes, maybe you ought to look at the thread in Freshiez on the subject of gay ski week in Telluride. I tried to incite with sarcasm last night to get the thread pulled, but there it sits. Quote
jon Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 Why would I be reading a thread about a gay ski week? I ski but I'm not gay. My point is I don't read everything here, in fact today is pretty much the first time I've even had a chance to look at the site all week. If you see something that is inappropriate send a email or PM a mod for that forum. Quote
tele_nut Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 marylou said: I tried to incite sarcasm last night to get the thread pulled, but there it sits. Does sarcasm usually do the trick? Quote
allthumbs Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 tele_nut said: marylou said: I tried to incite sarcasm last night to get the thread pulled, but there it sits. Does sarcasm usually do the trick? if it does, she has it in spades Quote
Off_White Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 klenke said: It should be noted that none of us except Jon and Timmy "own" this site. It is at their whim to ban, unban, cuss out, slobber over, spit at, or otherwise through a medium that is of their making. But, moderators, on the other hand... Possible solution: rotating moderators. Or make it an elected position maybe once a year. If we as users feel that any one (or more) moderator is getting too big for his britches or her panties, then we can simply vote the lame Locke out of his/her office. But Jon and Timmy shall lord supreme. Gods to us ordinary cc.com mortals. My current theory is that the title is all wrong. People expect us to be all "moderate" and polite and considered and shit. If we were to change the label to "Warlord" as in Afghanistan, unprincipled whimsical rogues free to rule their realms as they see fit, you'd all stop bitching about how we're just not Officer Friendly enough for you. Quote
jaee Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 Off_White said: My current theory is that the title is all wrong. People expect us to be all "moderate" and polite and considered and shit. If we were to change the label to "Warlord" as in Afghanistan, unprincipled whimsical rogues free to rule their realms as they see fit, you'd all stop bitching about how we're just not Officer Friendly enough for you. Better take a grammar lesson. A moderator is one who moderates, not one who is moderate. Their job is to remove improper material. Call yourself a warlord and ban away if you want. Delete, move, lock, whatever level of corruption your tiny bit of power incites you to do. If the "warlords" choose to rule by fear I doubt the site will prosper. If you want respect, clarify the rules and live by them. Tell people if they cross the line they'll be banned by IP, not avatar. Sure, some will go to the library or computer lab and keep posting, but most won't hassle with it again. Otherwise, banning is pointless if it's by avatar. Takes 30 seconds to login as another annoyance. Or so I've heard. Quote
Off_White Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 Okay, I'll be serious. The ip address thing has been used some in the past, but in some instances it has locked out everyone who works at Microsoft or posts from UW. Some people have very stable ip addresses, due to dsl or cable connections I think, but my knowledge on the subject is pretty limited. Anyway, it's not the solution to your problem. One can keep at it, doing away with the new puppets of an individual as they can be identified, but I believe the goal is behavior modification, and only rarely is complete expulsion the desired result. Quote
chucK Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 Chockstone said: One time at banned camp... Quote
allthumbs Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 Off_White said: Okay, I'll be serious. I believe the goal is behavior modification, and complete expulsion of the demon is the desired result. Quote
klenke Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 OW said mods should maybe be called "Warlords" akin to those in Afghanistan. I don't think this is going to work because this would mean Jon and Timmy are eponymous with Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar. Quote
mattp Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 Wouldn't it actually make Jon and Timmy NATO commanders? Quote
lI1|1! Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 i think jon and timm@y should have a internet-hosting-cost fundraiser where they basically sell the right to ban people (well, avatars to be precise). they could sell a one time ban ticket for i dunno $10 or something. the banning of high profile avatars could be auctioned off. you wouldn't need any special software, just do it with pencil and paper accounting and pm's. Quote
klenke Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 I think the warlords over there are more accepting of the terrorist point of view than the UN/NATO/Hamid Karzai camp. The UN/NATO/Karzai authority doesn't extend beyond Kabul, apparently. Quote
lI1|1! Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 klenke said: I think the warlords over there are more accepting of the terrorist point of view than the UN/Hamid Karzai camp. The UN/Karzai's authority doesn't extend beyond Kabul, apparently. thread drift. you wanna take this to political spray, bubba? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.