AO Brouhaha - An Observation

[PBX Ronin 23]

What happens when Someone who is attempting to correct a malfeasance in AO and is told to go (expletive) himself?

From what I gather, the brouhaha was ignited with an attempt to civilly address an existing problem concerning a Signature that linked to a forum that may have been ill-suited for minors. A Mod properly asked a formerly-banned Member to "remove" a link to a site where subjects that's ill-suited to the PG environment of AO were openly discussed. Granted that 90% of AOers probably wouldn't have been offended by the contents of the "other" site and in all likelihood will get a kick out of it, it was nonetheless against the acceptable level of decorum in AO.

If any viewers of AO were to 'click' onto that site which did not have any mechanism to prevent under-aged viewers from reading its content, AO by virtue of providing a launch point to enter that site is complicit in providing that minor with material that's inappropriate for their age.

It is my understanding that the Mod would have also accepted keeping the link if the site were to institute some protocol that would have hidden the sensitive materials from "unregistered" guests. But before further discussion can be carried out, the Member in question became hostile and wouldn't listen to the reason why it had to be done. Instead, said Member resorted to expletives during a discussion with said Mod on Chat. Hmmmm.

AO Mods should like NPPL Refs (an Analogy).

When I reffed an NPPL event in the past, we were told that regardless of whether you agree with a call made by a fellow ref, we all needed to stand united together behind that call and that Ref. We couldn't show any sympathy for players harmed by a bad call since that call couldn't be taken back and the outcome of the game couldn't be changed. Failure to act uncompromisingly in unison will only lead to an uglier post-game spectacle that would slow down the tournament.

One Ref undermining a fellow Ref can only lead to confusion on the field and bigger problems for everyone involved.

Being a Mod is a thankless enough job. Mods were selected from their perceived ability to equally and non-discriminately enforce the policies of AO. Some may be better at the job than others. But when things go wrong, a united front they must remain while they sort out what went wrong and implement corrective measure.

The perceived factitiousness of the Mod Team did not help their cause. If for nothing else, an unquestioned sense of empathy should be extended amongst the Mods for they all have to perform the same thankless and unpaid task of policing the forums.

The Real Troublemakers should stay out of it.

What good did it do for a non-contributing member to come out after months of absence just to assail someone for implementing AO's policies. This particular person has had a history of crossing the line in particular attacking a fellow member (who he has had disagreements with in the past) at his work place.

The level of vindictiveness displayed wasn't even openly criticized in this very forum.......for shame. But worse yet is the perceived harboring of such an individual by those who felt slighted with the enforcement of policies that are the requisite of a Mod's job.

The melee that ensued could have been prevented or at the very least minimized by not having someone whose only intent was to incite ill will participate in the argument.

AO has been a Smoldering Cauldron of Dissatisfaction.

This has been the underlying theme that everyone seems to bring up in my conversations with them. Sad but true. No one can seem to pin point the reason why. The closest thing to an explanation that I've gotten seems to point out two relatively new members of AO who have been incessant in their post-whoring and disruptive/disrespectful behavior.

The two individuals in question in my estimation should have been perm banned a long time ago. AO should change its existing rules to deal with such disruptive individuals who do nothing except cause turmoil in the forums.

In my research of these two individuals in questions, I have yet to find a meaningful enough post to suggest that they are indeed contributing towards the overall well-being of AO. They have been given enough latitude by the Mods but there has to be a certain limit to the Moderating Teams generosity.

If the Mods are indeed the guardians at the gate, perhaps a more visible attempt to correct this problem should have been enacted. Letting it stew only leads to further dissatisfaction amongst the members.

Whinny Members.......

Just stop whining. If a current situation is not to your liking, then take a sabbatical until things get corrected. If things don't get corrected to your satisfaction, then exit gracefully and with little fanfare.

Some of the threads started seemed to be begging for attention because the authors are unhappy with the current state of affairs.

AO isn't going to go down because some individuals have left or will be leaving. AO is digressing because of the relative lack of quality discussions and the jovial nature that it once exemplified has waned. We can all point fingers at one another but in the end we must all choose whether we want to be part of the problem or part of the solution.

The first step to correcting the problem is to accept that there is a problem....not to whine like little kiddies. Accountability is the mature way to deal with things. Going away whining isn't.

A community is only as good as the willingness of its members to maintain the quality of life within that community. It is incumbent upon those who claim that they value this community to do something positive on the community's behalf. Lip service gets you no where. If you do indeed still care about what happens here, then do your part.

Find things to build....not things to break down.

[Miscue]

This sort of overturn has never happened before to my knowledge. Normally, we support each other even if in mild disagreement.

Speaking of referee analogies... this is what we did:

[PBX Ronin 23]

Sorry Miscue but I can't seem to read what it is that you posted.

[Thordic]

What happens when Someone who is attempting to correct a malfeasance in AO and is told to go (expletive) himself?

From what I gather, the brouhaha was ignited with an attempt to civilly address an existing problem concerning a Signature that linked to a forum that may have been ill-suited for minors. A Mod properly asked a formerly-banned Member to "remove" a link to a site where subjects that's ill-suited to the PG environment of AO were openly discussed. Granted that 90% of AOers probably wouldn't have been offended by the contents of the "other" site and in all likelihood will get a kick out of it, it was nonetheless against the acceptable level of decorum in AO.

If any viewers of AO were to 'click' onto that site which did not have any mechanism to prevent under-aged viewers from reading its content, AO by virtue of providing a launch point to enter that site is complicit in providing that minor with material that's inappropriate for their age.

It is my understanding that the Mod would have also accepted keeping the link if the site were to institute some protocol that would have hidden the sensitive materials from "unregistered" guests. But before further discussion can be carried out, the Member in question became hostile and wouldn't listen to the reason why it had to be done. Instead, said Member resorted to expletives during a discussion with said Mod on Chat. Hmmmm.

Since this post was brought to my attention, and addresses me in particular, I'll reply to this part.

I was messaged on IRC saying my sig was gone, and that I was not allowed to link to my website / forums on AO anymore. Now, I have had my forums linked on AO since Feb. 5th, 2004, the day they were created. If you do the math you'll see that they have been linked for just shy of a year, and NEVER has any mod or other member made any sort of complaint to me. Not once had I heard anyone even HINT that it wasn't allowed, or that it should be removed. Not only that, but I'm sure many around here remember the Team Black Cell forums. Their forums were easily more offensive than mine, especially due the fact that pornography was in open view there. And they were linked to AO for a long time, and at no point were they shut down or told they could not link to the forums on AO. I saw this as not more than a little bit of hypocrisy in the application of the rules.

I told the mod who removed my sig I didn't agree with his actions, and that I would take my case to Webby. He told me that it had already been decided in the mod forum, and there was no point going to talk to Webby. Now I was rather upset because my sig had been allowed for over a year, and yet now the mods, 90% of which whom I know and have met personally, are talking about it behind closed doors, and all the while not a simple request was made of me to do something about it?

There was no option for changing the sig given. At no point was I informed that there were any alternatives. Had I been contacted prior to the removal of my sig and the following statement that there was nothing I could do short of going to Tom or Zupe or whoever, something could have been worked out.

Such options were NOT presented when my sig was removed. For some reason it seems to have been assumed by a lot of people that I was given options and simply chose to ignore them, but this is not the case. I was told that the decision had already been made, and I'd just have to deal with it.

Honestly, I was hurt by this attitude. I've known most of the mods and been friends with them for years. I don't expect preferential treatment if I break the rules, but I do expect some sort of respect. At some point while it was being discussed in the mod forum, someone could have contacted me (there are various easy and well-known methods of doing so, being as most of the mods have everything down to my cell phone number) and informed me there was an issue with linking to my forums. And a compromise could have been reached. But it wasn't approached this way.

Between this action, and the fact that AO as a whole has been deteriorating over the past months, I decided I had enough of AO, so I posted that I was leaving. It wasn't the most polite exit, but at that point being polite was the last thing on my mind.

As for all the actions that exploded afterwards, I'm still rather clueless. I left for Atlantic City the next morning and was gone all weekend. But its been brewing for a long time. Discontent has been on the rise lately around here. And you can't say it was a "clique" thing entirely, as people whom I have had prior disagreements with on many occassions were involved in the situation and we found ourselves looking at it in the same way. A lot of people have felt for months now that AO has been starting to crumble, that its feeling of community and family has been falling apart. THIS is what the reaction was to more than any single action taken by / against me (or by / against LPB, who has also been named as the "cause" for what occurred).

I applaud the mod team for finally realizing there is a problem, and taking steps to fix it. Personally, I plan on sticking with what I said earlier. I don't intend on returning to AO in any real manner. I'll read a few posts over here every now and then, but thats about it. I just felt that as someone who is seen as the cause of a lot of the drama that has gone on here in the past few days, I should try to give some sort of response.

[Target Practice]

EDIT: Okay, okay, okay...so it's not over.

Yet.

[Miscue]

You forgot People who beat a dead horse after everything has blown over.

Nah, it's not quite to that point yet. Almost.

[bofh]

You forgot People who beat a dead horse after everything has blown over.

It would have to be over for that phase.

I don't think this little tempest in a teapot is over yet.

[PBX Ronin 23]

No offense intended to you anyone but couldn't it be readily seen that with AO's policy towards "cursing" with the implementation of filters be seen on a broader plain to include providing free access of the same type of material via a link to another site?

Do I agree with the linkage? Maybe, maybe not but that doesn't matter. What I see is a Mod interpreting it as problem that needed to be addressed. Perhaps a little clarity on this is in order.

This is not a judgemental thing on my part. I, on a frequent basis use expletive in my spoken words everyday....unabated. I will not take a universal stand that doing so is a bad thing. But I will take the position though that if you are in someone else's house, that you should abide by the rules in that house. That's neither professing values or morals. It's just basic manners.

As for beating a dead horse, the problem with what people perceive has a "long simmering" issue would probably been more readily solved with intelligent and mature discourse. Was that adequately done in the past? Perhaps not. Perhaps in the wake of the brouhaha, we can all collectively discuss the issues and formulate an acceptable response to the problem. As always there are choices in life. We can choose to sweep everything under the rug or we can choose to fix the problem in a fair minded manner.

The choice is ours, as a community, to make. In the end, the loss of some valuable contributing members and Mods on this forum is a loss that doesn't serve the community to its fullest. And this we must all see as the truth.

[Thordic]

No offense intended to you anyone but couldn't it be readily seen that with AO's policy towards "cursing" with the implementation of filters be seen on a broader plain to include providing free access of the same type of material via a link to another site?

Considering the fact that my forums had been linked for such a long time, and the mods were generally in full knowledge of the existence of my forum, coupled with the fact that it had previously been stated on numerous occassions that events & happenings on other forums that may or may not be related to AO (specifically the Team Black Cell forums) fell outside of the Moderators sphere of influence, I would argue that if anything it could have easily been assumed that any such links were perfectly acceptable.

As for your definition of "material", a lot of people seem to believe that pornography is available and openly linked on my forums. This is quite simply not the case. While I do provide a forum for people to link to such resources if they so wish (I do not provide any images / video clips, etc myself), it is approved access only, and anyone who wishes to gain access must be granted access by myself. It is not "freely available", assuming this is one of the types of material to which you are referring.

As far as cursing goes, as I said earlier I would have been willing to make some slight modifications to my forums with regards to access, such as putting certain forums under a mask allowing them to be viewed by registered users only. I would have also been willing to include some sort of disclaimer, clearly visible upon signing up to view my forums, that the content to be found within was not related to Automags.org or any of its owners / operators / sponsors in any manner, shape, or form.

But as I previously stated, at no time was it presented to me as an issue. Due to prior "rulings" by moderators about off-site content (TBC forums), and the implied consent due to the length of time my sig had been utilized, that the moderators had no issues with me linking my site here on AO.

[rkjunior303]

not to mention, that a couple of those mods were in fact contributing members of the thorums well before there were any problems with the signature

[Miscue]

To remove links to Thordic.com... we would have to also remove all links to PBNation.com as well as other sites, to maintain consistency. I'm not equating them as equals, but where is the line drawn? Do we disallow yahoo.com as well, because it is a gateway to offensive material?

We can't police the Internet. The only sites we can fairly concern ourselves with are those with pornographic materials, which of course are not allowable.

[PBX Ronin 23]

Considering the fact that my forums had been linked for such a long time, and the mods were generally in full knowledge of the existence of my forum, coupled with the fact that it had previously been stated on numerous occassions that events & happenings on other forums that may or may not be related to AO (specifically the Team Black Cell forums) fell outside of the Moderators sphere of influence, I would argue that if anything it could have easily been assumed that any such links were perfectly acceptable.

As for your definition of "material", a lot of people seem to believe that pornography is available and openly linked on my forums. This is quite simply not the case. While I do provide a forum for people to link to such resources if they so wish (I do not provide any images / video clips, etc myself), it is approved access only, and anyone who wishes to gain access must be granted access by myself. It is not "freely available", assuming this is one of the types of material to which you are referring.

That's why there needs to be more clarity and a uniform application of existing rules. From my understanding, not everyone may have seen your site until prior to the recent incident. Can non-action be construed as acceptance?....absolutely. Would I have felt the same if I was in your shoes?....perhaps.


As far as cursing goes, as I said earlier I would have been willing to make some slight modifications to my forums with regards to access, such as putting certain forums under a mask allowing them to be viewed by registered users only. I would have also been willing to include some sort of disclaimer, clearly visible upon signing up to view my forums, that the content to be found within was not related to Automags.org or any of its owners / operators / sponsors in any manner, shape, or form.

But as I previously stated, at no time was it presented to me as an issue. Due to prior "rulings" by moderators about off-site content (TBC forums), and the implied consent due to the length of time my sig had been utilized, that the moderators had no issues with me linking my site here on AO.

I laud you if you have indeed attempted to correct the problem because it was the right thing to do. But what can be deemed as "unacceptble" doesn't just fall within the province of the pornographic. Spoken words that others may be offended by also has to fall within that realm. This in and of itself should be clarified beyond a shadow of a doubt by the framers of the new "clarified" rules.

Now, I don't want you to view this discussion as either an admonishment or judgement against you. Personally, I find the stuff that you have on your forums to be entertaining and very AOesque in intellectual content.

What is important for everyone to grasp is that if fences are to be mended, the first thing to do is open a channel of communication and have a mature discussion about the issue on hand. Hopefully this thread serves as one.

BTW, for my own edification, how did you find out about confidential "rulings" made by Mods when such things are supposed to be made in private?

[Thordic]

That's why there needs to be more clarity and a uniform application of existing rules. From my understanding, not everyone may have seen your site until prior to the recent incident. Can non-action be construed as acceptance?....absolutely. Would I have felt the same if I was in your shoes?....perhaps.

I think inaction is the leading cause of problems in the long run on any moderated internet community. If you are going to have rules, they need to be applied universally and equally. Decisions should be fairly uniform and more objective than subjective.

In the short run it may lead to complaints, but in the long run it makes for a healthier community and less drama like we've seen.


I laud you if you have indeed attempted to correct the problem because it was the right thing to do.

Even after I was banned there was little communication with me. Since I have decided to more-or-less leave AO, and as you can see I have not replaced the link in my sig, I've made no changes. Had I decided to stick around then I would have made changes. But I don't advertise my forums here anymore so I don't see the need. Its not out of spite, just out of laziness and lack-of-purpose.


BTW, for my own edification, how did you find out about confidential "rulings" made by Mods when such things are supposed to be made in private?

Tunaman told me himself that it had been discussed by the mods when he removed my sig. He said a ruling has been made, or wording to that effect.

[PBX Ronin 23]

not to mention, that a couple of those mods were in fact contributing members of the thorums well before there were any problems with the signature

And this is where the crux of the argument lies. How can one Mod act towards a certain issue when other Mods have implied their complicity and acceptance of an issue by participating in it. I am neither admonishing any action taken by anyone but some clear cut distinction of what is acceptable and what is not must be publicly made and posted for all to see. This definitely is not fair to either Thordic or the Mod in question.


To remove links to Thordic.com... we would have to also remove all links to PBNation.com as well as other sites, to maintain consistency. I'm not equating them as equals, but where is the line drawn? Do we disallow yahoo.com as well, because it is a gateway to offensive material?

We can't police the Internet. The only sites we can fairly concern ourselves with are those with pornographic materials, which of course are not allowable.You can draw the line as follows....PBN implements a curse filter, Other may not. PBN, regardless of the intellectual depth of most of their participants do not openly contradict AO's intent to remain PG.

No disrespect intended but Mods are not expected to police the internet by any means....just AO. You guys are the Guardians at the gate. You have to be armed with unequivocally clear rules and policies and they should be meted out without prejudice.

Banning Knuckleheads, well clearly define what a Knucklehead is and ban-away. I'm with some of the Defectors on this. We have too many non-conforming and non-contributing individuals who troll through our forums and do nothing except degrade the whole community. If they fail to meet the standards that we all should call for, then with a swift hand they must be dealt with.

Do some of what I'm espousing sound a little too Draconian? Well perhaps at this point that is what is indeed needed.

[Lohman446]

I think, the name AO mod team, shared by the moderators, may solve a lot of the issues. Let the moderators do what they need to do under that name, discuss it privately, and if they need to go back and undo something after a private discussion they can - and then only the moderators know which one screwed up. Mistakes happen, it becomes a problem when one cannot live down there mistakes... this will allow action, and retraction if needed, wtihout making any individual look bad if mistaken.

[Python14]

Dishing out draconian style bannings is only going to attract more of it, you do know that, right?

[Thordic]

Dishing out draconian style bannings is only going to attract more of it, you do know that, right?

Only for a short while, and only by those who want to cause trouble, assuming the rules are made well.

If the rules are fair, then enforcing them strictly shouldnt be a problem.

[Python14]

Could AO survive that period though?

[Thordic]

Yeah, because only idiots would get banned. The rules of AO aren't unfair in the first place, as they are written, and they are modifying them now to make them better. They shouldn't be hard to follow.

The issue is in the RULES not in the enforcement of them. Assuming the rules are well-written, then AO would be better off.

[PBX Ronin 23]

Dishing out draconian style bannings is only going to attract more of it, you do know that, right?
Part of the main complaint that the dissidents have is the lack of action on the Mods part to cleanse AO of non-contributing and distracting knuckleheads. If this is the case, those who abide by the rules shouldn't have a problem, those who don't will give the Mods justification to take action.

The time for half-measures are over. Although I realize that what I may be saying may be unpopular. Perhaps someone really needs to step up and be heard on this matter. Let's stop sweeping it under the rug.

[PBX Ronin 23]

Suggested Addendum to the Rules posted by Webmaster.

Maintain Decorum. Remember that the site is intended for PG consupmtion. Show the same level of respect to your fellow members that you would expect others to extend to you.

Site Linkages. Only links to sites that have the same PG rated policies as AO for openly and publicly displayed materials should be allowed. Sites with material considered to be for adults should have said material available only to authorized registered individuals who have executed the proper disclaimer.

Do not Post Graphic Materials that some members may find offensive. Posting pictures of a carcass does nothing to contribute to the overall quality of AO. Think first if what you're posting contributes to the greater good.

Unauthorized Access to Illuminati and the public sharing of information found therein will result in non-negotiable Perm Ban. The Mods have the right and duty to keep what's going on inside Illuminati a secret. It is none of any Members' business what goes on inside.

[Tunaman]

Brian, as I stated in my post on your forums, this had nothing to do with you personally, as you know as well as I do we have no issues between us and have been friends for a long time. I also would like to keep it that way. I only wish you could understand that what happened in chat that night happened so fast that there was no time for me to get in another word before you blasted me and logged off. You KNOW now that there was a simple solution to fixing it. So did I at the time. I do not believe enough talk time transpired between us to even get into that. I do wish the converstaion could have continued and probably none of this would have happened. According to the sig rules which you are aware of, we (mods) do not need to contact you if the sig or link is offensive. Apparently, we think some things on your site do not meet the criteria for AO, as it is at least R rated. I have no problem with R rated material or even X rated material for that matter. It is my opinion that you are well aware of the material on your site and have no cause to care who sees it. Speaking for the few mods that were in agreement on removing the link, we felt it was the best thing to do at the time. I understand that the link means alot to you and I have no problems with you linking to your site. I can only wish for the good of AO and the younger crowd and their parents that view AO that you might hide some of the explicit material from unregistered users, or anyone who might click on that link. As for comparing it to Blackcell, you can blame the administrator of that site for allowing it. I am sure he realizes that providing access to pornagraphy without age verification is a violation of federal law. I havent been to that site in ages and had no idea what was there and really dont care. Again, This was not meant to turn out this way and I sincerely hope that you dont take it personal. I was doing this sucky job, and and I wasn't alone in making the decision. We all know now that it could have been avoided, and if we had any inkling it would have gone this far we may not have made the decision that we did. I hope you understand that it isn't as it appears. You do know me better than that.

Just a final note.
We were well aware of the length of time your link has been there. Have you ever stopped to consider the fact that some/most of the content that we used to make our decision was not there for the entire year and posted recently?

[skife]

solution.... anarchy!


kidding...

just stop beating a dead horse. what happened happened and its done now.... so everyone please stop.

[PBX Ronin 23]

Beating a dead horse for the purpose of revisiting the incident is not what we're after here. What we're after is to identify the problem and come up with some tangible solution for it.

Aren't you sick and tired yet of issues getting swept under the rug only for the discontent to simmer and rear its ugly head dwon the road?

Let's take the time now and have the stomach to face the problem so that it can be fixed permanently.

[PBX Ronin 23]

BTW, in all fairness, let's talk a look at things from a moderator's viewpoint.

We all know already that it is a thankless job. But many of the mods here are friends with most of the members of AO. Doesn't it blow that they can potentially be caught between enforcing the rules and compromising their existing relationships with members?

Also, let's face it, some of the mods here do their mod-thing during regular business hours while they're on the clock. Apparently there may be a perceived threat from a former AOer that has had a documented history of attacking a member at their place of employment. Kinda tough to do something that doesn't monetarily compensate you and simultaneously deal with the thought that a vindictive knucklehead can endanger your livelihood.

Shhheesh. Now I can only imagine what went through Uncle Phil's mind. Between dealing with the bs and having to watch your back. Pheewww. If I was in his shoes I would have quit months ago.

[1stdeadeye]

Wait, if the problem is adult material there is no problem.

In the Thorums, you need to have permission to access the Adult oriented area. The worst anyone not already a member WITH PERMISSION could get to is cursing which they can get on PBN.

What's up with that? :confused:

[PBX Ronin 23]

1DE, apparently text relating to adult related content was the issue. Not the graphic stuff....which I have yet to see.

[ogre55]

1DE, apparently text relating to adult related content was the issue. Not the graphic stuff....which I have yet to see.

As Miscue stated above:


To remove links to Thordic.com... we would have to also remove all links to PBNation.com as well as other sites, to maintain consistency. I'm not equating them as equals, but where is the line drawn? Do we disallow yahoo.com as well, because it is a gateway to offensive material?

We can't police the Internet. The only sites we can fairly concern ourselves with are those with pornographic materials, which of course are not allowable."

PBN has been linked to extensively on these forums. Sure, the Thorums can be "colorful" but no worse then many of the other sites one can access by linking through these forums.

So the questions comes back to the mods, why did you decide to police this particular site? Did someone complain? Did some make some decision that the mods were asked to implement? I think that what led to this most recent blow-up is the secrecy and the seeminly unilateral decisions.

Ogre

[FistS]

Basically,
It was handled in the wrong fasion.
It's been stated before, that in order to view the adult forums, you needed to be a registered user and be granted access by Thordic himself. I'm not trying to beat a dead horse, but simply re-asking the ultimate question(s).

Why was Thor's site illegal after almost a year of being linked?
Who in the heck speculated that Sarah used Army's account to view the Mod's Only forum?
Why do woman drive big suv's when they don't know how to drive? - JK, had to lighten it up?-

Meh, long live the Thorums. After this is all said and done, whens the next big meet? IAO? <3 :cry:

[PBX Ronin 23]

The more I hear what came down, the more I think this whole drama filled weekend wouldn't have happened if a certain chat conversation lasted just a few sentences longer.

As for the second issue, no one really knows but.......


Suggested Addendum to the Rules posted by Webmaster.

Unauthorized Access to Illuminati and the public sharing of information found therein will result in non-negotiable Perm Ban. The Mods have the right and duty to keep what's going on inside Illuminati a secret. It is none of any Members' business what goes on inside.

[RobAGD]

I couple of problems were threads titles eg.

I f'ed a fatchick last night !

I f'ed your mom today!!

etc.

I had never been to the thorums until there was a question about the content. I went looked around and to be honest I didnt like some of what I saw. My advice was to Break the links, leave the sig image. If they type in the url thats differnt than just click through.

I know mods had been to thorums and they may not have wanted to say anything due to friend ships. One of the reasons the links lasted as long as they did. A mod went and found questionable content.

First rule is to break the links or delete the sig. Then deal with it, Sigs can be replaced. We miss things, sometimes we ignore small things for people typically in good standing. We DONT go out of our way to pick on someone, I save that for the Chat room :D

Too many people think stuff is done for personal reasons. Its quite simple we found a violation and corrected it. Some rules are a tad vauge on somethings to give us some laditude on what we do. If someone is being just a prick, and a PM dosent curb the behavior they get a ban. He may not have "broken" a rule per say but the action needed to be taken for the better of the board. And Thats why we do what we do.

People need to look in the mirror before blaming the mods/admins for problems, we are reactionary in what we do, people do naughty things we fix by whatever means we have to.

-Robert

[PBX Ronin 23]

I hope that this brings a little more clarity. Thanks Rob.

[Target Practice]

How is it that the Mod's decide what is appropriate when 5 of the Mods belong to the Thorums. One of them joined up for the sole purpose to flame and threaten Thordic with the very same language that would get anyone banned over here; the very same language that is considered taboo over here.

Sounds kinda hypocritical, I'd say. But hey, I'm just a member, right?

[Lohman446]

How is it that the Mod's decide what is appropriate when 5 of the Mods belong to the Thorums. One of them joined up for the sole purpose to flame and threaten Thordic with the very same language that would get anyone banned over here; the very same language that is considered taboo over here.

Sounds kinda hypocritical, I'd say. But hey, I'm just a member, right?

Not at all - just because I stay in the rules of this site (generally) does not mean I agree with them. I simply have enough respect for the site owner(s) and operator(s) to stay in the rules they have put out. The Thorums operate under more lenient rules, and if posting on that site, I would stay in those rules rather than these. I don't adopt these rules as a moral standard for everyday life or everywhere, I adopt them as the rules for this site.

[hitech]

The Mods are tasked with evaluating the material on AO and deciding if it is allowable. The owner of AO decides what type of material is allowable. The mods are carrying out the "will" of the owner of AO.

What the individuals who perform the moderation of AO do in the Thorums should have nothing to do with AO.

[Target Practice]

Not at all - just because I stay in the rules of this site (generally) does not mean I agree with them. I simply have enough respect for the site owner(s) and operator(s) to stay in the rules they have put out. The Thorums operate under more lenient rules, and if posting on that site, I would stay in those rules rather than these. I don't adopt these rules as a moral standard for everyday life or everywhere, I adopt them as the rules for this site.

I understand what you're saying. I too have the respect to stay inside of the rules here (generally). I also stay inside the rules on the Thorums, where I am an active member. But the vast majority of the people who got banned didn't break any rules. I didn't. Thordic didn't. TSC didn't. We DID operate under the rules. The problem arose when Mod's began thinking in terms of right and wrong, instead of what was and what wasn't against the rules.

Summary: It just seems like the whole argument is based on what's right (here) and what's wrong (there).

Like I said, my two cents.

[PBX Ronin 23]

Summary: It just seems like the whole argument is based on what's right (here) and what's wrong (there).

I hope you don't interpret this as an attack or criticism of members who have been affected by this weekend's brouhaha.....but.

It seems like there's a feeling of persecution that is pervading the group of AO members that frequent both sites. Based on my conversation with some people, there was no marching order ever given to go after anyone. The discovery of the material in question happened purely by happenstance.

Whether adequate opportunities were given to properly correct the problem or not...well no one seems to know.

The bottom line is that there was material found linked to AO that can be construed as contrary to the standards set by the owner of AO. Nothing more, nothing less. Can every linked site in violation of these standards be subject to the same outcome....Yes. Is it a likelihood that they will....unless you directly send the Mod Team on a search and destroy mission, I doubt it.

The thing to remember is that we are all guests in this house and whether we believe or agree with the house rules, we must all still abide by them. Such rules will obviously vary from house to house.

[Target Practice]

The Thorums have been linked from AO since they were created in February of '04. I find it rather hard to believe, with mods as members of those forums and the forums being owned an operated by a friend of many of the mods, that it's content has gone unnoticed since it's conception.

Perhaps the question that should be asked is, what happend to trigger the sudden and uncalled for attack against something that had been accepted for almost a year?

EDIT: Spellers Untie

[GT]

How is it that the Mod's decide what is appropriate when 5 of the Mods belong to the Thorums. One of them joined up for the sole purpose to flame and threaten Thordic with the very same language that would get anyone banned over here; the very same language that is considered taboo over here.

Sounds kinda hypocritical, I'd say. But hey, I'm just a member, right?


Its kinda like going out to a club or hanging out with your boyz versus your deamonor at work. Would you get drunk at work and slap all the nice ladies on the behind?

[PBX Ronin 23]

Its kinda like going out to a club or hanging out with your boyz versus your deamonor at work. Would you get drunk at work and slap all the nice ladies on the behind?
LOL. That's a novel way of looking at it.

[RobAGD]

TP TSC and a few other were bans for comments aimed at the mods. And others for flying the Throums banner in defiance.


I think that the mods that are members of the thorums were not doing thier job if they knew about the links and the materials. As the Admin I dont goto his site so I didnt know. When it was brought to my attention and I saw what I would consider materal that shouldnt be linked I told the proper Mod and action was taken.

That simple. Just because for a year it was ok, something changed or something was found and it was no longer ok. Just like there use to be part of NV that didnt have a speed limit, The now have a speed limit, you cant argue to the cop writing you a ticket that the road use to not have a speed limit so you dont derserve a ticket. It dosent work that way.

-Robert

[tsc]

TP TSC and a few other were bans for comments aimed at the mods. And others for flying the Throums banner in defiance.

No, Rob, the reason I was given was that I "flamed" a member. That ban has since been overturned, well before it's expiration.

[RobAGD]

The reason I got in our forums was something to do about a Mod.

As for the ban being over turned there were a few mods that went a bit out of thier reach in taking people off thier bans. That issue has been delt with. There was a warentted reason for the ban give the info I was given.

-R

[Target Practice]

What comment did I make toward a mod? When did I "fly the Thorum banner"?

I have never linked the thorums in my signature. I would go so far as to say that I have never linked to the Thorums in any of my posts.

I was told by a mod after the fact that writing the address to the Thorums was the same as linking to it.

Really?


If they type in the url thats differnt than just click through.

Huh.

EDIT: Stuff.

[RobAGD]

TP TSC and a few other were bans for comments aimed at the mods. And others for flying the Throums banner in defiance.

That was typed poorly it shoudl have been

TP - TSC and a few other were bans for comments aimed at the mods. And others for flying the Throums banner in defiance.

I have no idea bout your ban. I was speaking about TC and a few others and I was also speaking in general terms.

Also when a crap storm starts, when we have people that are flaunting the current issue the mod has the ability and authority to ban users until things settle down.

And TP dont try to argue the general to the specific it's a flawed argument.

And your starting to get the " I was attacked by a mod" feel to your post.

-Robert

[Target Practice]

I bring no hostility to the table in this discussion. All I'm doing is hunting for information. Rob, with all due respect, you can't tell me that you, a site Administrator, can't find the specifics or the reason I was banned. If you want, tell me that it's none of my business, and I'd be done with it. In the new environment of AO, where the details of the ban are for public view, do I get to know what I was banned for?

I don't need an answer now, I'm just curious. One mod says one thing, another mod says different. Who better to go to for answers than the top dog himself? If you'd like, we can continue this in PMs, as to not clutter up Mel's thread.

[Ityl]

Disable signatures, save lives.

[PBX Ronin 23]

If you'd like, we can continue this in PMs, as to not clutter up Mel's thread.

You're not cluttering it TP. As a matter of fact, I believe that an open discourse is exactly what is needed so long as we remain within certain acceptable boundaries.


Disable signatures, save lives.

That's a lot of depth..... :rolleyes:

[Target Practice]

You're not cluttering it TP. As a matter of fact, I believe that an open discourse is exactly what is needed so long as we remain within certain acceptable boundaries.


An open discourse is what I've been trying to achieve. Okay, well, your thread, your call.