Deleting threads, stupid or not

[AirAssault]

I find it funny that some threads were JUST deleted, I was looking at them literally 1 minute ago, tried to post, then they were gone. FFS is that what it's coming to? How about leaving them up so other AOers can join in. Dont like the content, don't go into them. I think its a joke that AOers can't discuss things that bother them about the forum. There were no bad things going on, whoever took it off simply didn't like the content. Yes AO is a private deal, but without the members, there would be no AO. So sad.

[Ninjeff]

jeez....this is getting crazy.

[Ruler_Mark]

i run a webforum myself and sell a product through it, we arent as big as this site but still. We pride ourself in free speech and anti-banning. The respect from that has resulted in nill spam and couple that with a regisration that prevents spam bots we rarely see spam. just my .02$. dont believe me pm me for the address i'd rather not have it be public. top 40,000 in alexa, 16k members 60+ users online @ night 200 during peak.

[CKY_Alliance]

Ye I posted in one of them and seriously a minute later it was gone.. silence the masses..

So PBlegion.com is a good forum? Ill have to check it out.



As I said in the deleted thread, Im glad others are recognizing the double standards...its about time.

[Piranti]

I for one think the point came across to the powers that be. I do not think a mass exodus is needed there are a lot of good people here a 'few' need not ruin it for everyone, whether they are justified or not.

I do think this forum still has a lot to offer folks, and we are seeing a resurgence of members to AO via moving over to mags, mainly the woodsballers and scenario players. Should we as members of this community (help) ruin it for them? Personally no even though I am probably just as guilty of helping ruin what is and should be a great community to belong to and participate in.

Personality conflicts can and will happen, people in power can and will overstep their bounds as well. Remember we are all still just humans, not perfect machines.

The intent of bringing this to light should not be to smear or attack anyone personally but to just make people think before they act, post, or hit a delete button. This goes for both sides.

[CKY_Alliance]

Looks like Tom's on..

[pyrodragon]

Well i have the second page of my thread, all i could go back to, but there's proof that it existed.

why are you'll dragging this out. i'm sitting on the fence laughing. it's all a pointing game. for all your efforts, all your doing is adding a bunch a fuel to the fire, and what are you gonna get in return? i'm gonna miss BigEvil and RogueFactor, but it's not like they have disappear off the face of the world or the web for that matter. i know rules are rules, sometimes they get bent and sometimes they get broken but for the most part, the problems lays between those that got banned and the ones that banned them. if you don't like it, then go over and join them over on PBlegion. no one is forcing you to stay. on the other hand i've been a member of this forum a long time and like anything in this world we all have to go through a cycle. this isn't the first time this has happen and it won't be the last. i was a member of this forum before this all happen and will be for as long as it last. i'll join PBLegion just so i can stay on top of the newest from RPG. point is your fighting an endless fight. choose your battles. peace "P"

[txaggie08]

yah dude, I believe he's in the process of banning you btw...

[Beemer]

I find it funny that some threads were JUST deleted, I was looking at them literally 1 minute ago, tried to post, then they were gone. FFS is that what it's coming to? How about leaving them up so other AOers can join in. Dont like the content, don't go into them. I think its a joke that AOers can't discuss things that bother them about the forum. There were no bad things going on, whoever took it off simply didn't like the content. Yes AO is a private deal, but without the members, there would be no AO. So sad.

Well ITS not funny Really.

Ok I moved it here. The others were removed for various reasons. Its to bad like you said. There were many Posts worth quoting.

So lets try it here and see how it goes.

Oh ya I would also like to say I am sorry to the members who took the time to make a good post in those threads that were removed.

[pyrodragon]

Yeah, because i called him on his crap, i didn't do anything against the rules, he's just trying to abuse his power again. I say let him.


what you gonna do about it? boycot? talk more hot air? ur letting a mod prove how much control he has over your feelings. rather the mod is wrong or right, does it really matter to get all bent out of shape over? for God's sake this is childish.

[Ninjeff]

well that sucks. And i had a funny post with Huey lewis And The News, a Back to the future video and everything.

Sign.

Oh well.

:rofl:

[DevilMan]

bwahhahahahahaaa

Looks like Snoopay got a 1 week furlough....

bwahahhahahaaa...

Man alive..... I love this place..... when I hit NEW POSTS... usually there is a page full...

now because of all the banning, thread deleting, post modding and what not... there are 3 NEW POSTs...


How freakin sad is that....

Tell ya what AO.... I may not be anything to you and BEEMER this is AIMED at you... So read what it says..... I may not be anything.... but you keep banning people and changing crap around and modding posts.... and there will be a head count of ZERO.... That may not matter to you either.... but know this.... these things KILL sites.

So you keep it up... and your mod'ing days are numbered....

And telll you another thing..... Do me a favor and edit one of my posts.... Just one.... And you'll be banning me as well.

DM

[Beemer]

I for one think the point came across to the powers that be. I do not think a mass exodus is needed there are a lot of good people here a 'few' need not ruin it for everyone, whether they are justified or not.
I do think this forum still has a lot to offer folks, and we are seeing a resurgence of members to AO via moving over to mags, mainly the woodsballers and scenario players. Should we as members of this community (help) ruin it for them? Personally no even though I am probably just as guilty of helping ruin what is and should be a great community to belong to and participate in.

Personality conflicts can and will happen, people in power can and will overstep their bounds as well. Remember we are all still just humans, not perfect machines.

The intent of bringing this to light should not be to smear or attack anyone personally but to just make people think before they act, post, or hit a delete button. This goes for both sides.

Hmm good post. Ya I looked. Yours is one that was removed. :(

Some simple removals was better then lots of bans.

[Beemer]

bwahhahahahahaaa

Looks like Snoopay got a 1 week furlough....

bwahahhahahaaa...

Man alive..... I love this place..... when I hit NEW POSTS... usually there is a page full...

now because of all the banning, thread deleting, post modding and what not... there are 3 NEW POSTs...


How freakin sad is that....

Tell ya what AO.... I may not be anything to you and BEEMER this is AIMED at you... So read what it says..... I may not be anything.... but you keep banning people and changing crap around and modding posts.... and there will be a head count of ZERO.... That may not matter to you either.... but know this.... these things KILL sites.

So you keep it up... and your mod'ing days are numbered....

And telll you another thing..... Do me a favor and edit one of my posts.... Just one.... And you'll be banning me as well.

DM



Oh boy, see how this works AirAssault. Looks like he wants a ban to me. Its YOUR thread what would YOU do?

[CKY_Alliance]

I made my thread first and put it in FC...but you locked mine thats wack.

I sound like a five year old I know..but I felt the need.

[drg]

Mountain out of a molehill, IMO. You guys want to figure out how to fix AO, look in the mirror.

[MedicDVG]

I guess that AO has to go through this type of blood letting every few years.. Wasn't this very discussions (albeit different precipitating circumstances) held like 2-3 years ago when everyone started crying foul over some topic, a whole host o folks got permanent vacations... I think it took about 6-8 months to sort out entirely...

This is a "Discussion" forum... so allow us the opportunity to discuss. Certainly moderate for personal attacks and gross rule violations, but the current round of bannings and hand spankings are counter productive to the "discussion" part of discussion forums.

Maybe it would be helpful to have a moderated approved list of topics we CAN discuss freely as apparently patent issues and industry credibility aren't one of them.

[CKY_Alliance]

NVM..

[Beemer]

Mountain out of a molehill, IMO. You guys want to figure out how to fix AO, look in the mirror.

Ding, Ding, Ding, Ziiing..............

[DevilMan]

Oh boy, see how this works AirAssault. Looks like he wants a ban to me. Its YOUR thread what would YOU do?


And this is part of your issue Beemer.... You can't see things right.

"Looks like he wants a ban..."

I didn't say I wanted a ban.... I said.... Edit one of my posts and I'll give you a reason to ban me.... simply because I have been here long enough to see many souls come and go through this board.

You don't run off the folks that make AO what it is.... you do that and AO is worthless. The point is being made that something was done unjustly. And when folks see that happen, it gets a bit out of hand. NOW if the people that had issues had resolved them either in PM or via a chat or email or with a 3rd party arbitrating..... these last what???? 8??? 9?? threads that you locked, blocked, edited or deleted wouldn't be here and we'd all be talkin about the upgrades that we did or the way we love our mags or what mods would be cool and what color looks best with my running shoes.

BUT because it was handled improperly this whole ordeal is coming across like the gustapo is running AO....

That is what needs to change....

And it HAS to start with the MODS.... SINCE little ole users like me.... can't talk back or try and make our point if we get the stick....

It says you're in the military no???? Try acting like it. Quit giving the rest of the folks a bad rep.... And please do not start any crap with me about my service. Of which you know nothing about.

DM

[CKY_Alliance]

And this is part of your issue Beemer.... You can't see things right.

"Looks like he wants a ban..."

I didn't say I wanted a ban.... I said.... Edit one of my posts and I'll give you a reason to ban me.... simply because I have been here long enough to see many souls come and go through this board.

You don't run off the folks that make AO what it is.... you do that and AO is worthless. The point is being made that something was done unjustly. And when folks see that happen, it gets a bit out of hand. NOW if the people that had issues had resolved them either in PM or via a chat or email or with a 3rd party arbitrating..... these last what???? 8??? 9?? threads that you locked, blocked, edited or deleted wouldn't be here and we'd all be talkin about the upgrades that we did or the way we love our mags or what mods would be cool and what color looks best with my running shoes.

BUT because it was handled improperly this whole ordeal is coming across like the gustapo is running AO....

That is what needs to change....

And it HAS to start with the MODS.... SINCE little ole users like me.... can't talk back or try and make our point if we get the stick....

It says you're in the military no???? Try acting like it. Quit giving the rest of the folks a bad rep.... And please do not start any crap with me about my service. Of which you know nothing about.

DM


This man speaks the TRUTH!

[ThePixelGuru]

Hah, you guys talk like Rogue and BE are never coming back. It's not a permaban...

Still, there've been some pretty ridiculous bans flying around recently. Speaking of which, the opinions in this thread seem far less against moderation than the others that got deleted. Funny how the more critical ones ended up being the ones that got deleted, while the threads with more support for the mods got moved. Oh well, I'm sure it's just a coincidence. :rolleyes:

[Beemer]

I made my thread first and put it in FC...but you locked mine thats wack.

I sound like a five year old I know..but I felt the need.

Doh my bad. I see by four min. Sorry. I was in talk cleaning House when I moved it then saw yours. Want I should do a Redo or do over? :ninja:

[drg]

And this is part of your issue Beemer.... You can't see things right.

"Looks like he wants a ban..."

I didn't say I wanted a ban.... I said.... Edit one of my posts and I'll give you a reason to ban me.... simply because I have been here long enough to see many souls come and go through this board.

You don't run off the folks that make AO what it is.... you do that and AO is worthless. The point is being made that something was done unjustly. And when folks see that happen, it gets a bit out of hand. NOW if the people that had issues had resolved them either in PM or via a chat or email or with a 3rd party arbitrating..... these last what???? 8??? 9?? threads that you locked, blocked, edited or deleted wouldn't be here and we'd all be talkin about the upgrades that we did or the way we love our mags or what mods would be cool and what color looks best with my running shoes.

BUT because it was handled improperly this whole ordeal is coming across like the gustapo is running AO....

That is what needs to change....

And it HAS to start with the MODS.... SINCE little ole users like me.... can't talk back or try and make our point if we get the stick....

It says you're in the military no???? Try acting like it. Quit giving the rest of the folks a bad rep.... And please do not start any crap with me about my service. Of which you know nothing about.

DM

Then again you could just go on talking about the upgrades that you did or the way you love your mags or what mods would be cool and what colors looks best with your running shoes and stop whining about the mods. You've made your point, if you let it degenerate into a flamefest then you're part of the problem.

Funny you should bring up the military. What would your superiors do if you (yelled) at them about their orders, fair or not?

[DevilMan]

What would they do???? Well for one they don't get yelled at. For 2 they got QUESTIONED MANY TIMES By me... and for 3 I went to Captains Mast 8 times in 6 years....

that's right 8!!!!

And I still have an honorable discharge, and I was asked by my Superiors on MORE than one occassion to re-enlist.

More than once my questioning kept someone from getting hurt, from working where they weren't supposed to and for doing something that they thought they should do.

So there ya have it.... What about yours???? Or are you one of the Yes Ma'am No Ma'am people no matter what the cost?

As for the rest of it... You know I could go on talking about the upgrades, the mods and the running shoes.... but it's hard to do when there is noone around to converse back. Last I saw folks that conversed with themselves only often ended up in padded rooms so they wouldn't bother other folks....

Catch the point yet???

DM

[trevorjk]

wait what???

can some one recap what this is all about?

Do not circumvent the filter. One and only warning. Army

[ThePixelGuru]

wait what???

...can some one recap what this is all about?
Big Evil got banned for telling off Rabid, and then Rogue got banned for telling Beemer to pay less attention to BE and Rabid and more attention to the porn links posted by a spambot in the other forums. A bunch of people have been noticing the oddly-applied ban policies, and now they're all talking about it at once... and usually getting their threads removed, unless enough people who disagree happen to post in the same thread.

Oh, and I'd watch out for triggering the wordfilter. Not like it explicitly says it anywhere in the rules, but I've learned it's ban worthy (depending on what kind of mood the mods are in).

[trevorjk]

Big Evil got banned for telling off Rabid, and then Rogue got banned for telling Beemer to pay less attention to BE and Rabid and more attention to the porn links posted by a spambot in the other forums. A bunch of people have been noticing the oddly-applied ban policies, and now they're all talking about it at once... and usually getting their threads removed, unless enough people who disagree happen to post in the same thread.

Oh, and I'd watch out for triggering the wordfilter. Not like it explicitly says it anywhere in the rules, but I've learned it's ban worthy (depending on what kind of mood the mods are in).


gotcha. pretty funny to be honest (in a sad sort of way) and if i got banned for using a word that describes whining and moaning and pissing and groaning all in one. that would also be pretty funny (in a sad sort of way)

[Beemer]

And this is part of your issue Beemer.... You can't see things right.

"Looks like he wants a ban..."

I didn't say I wanted a ban.... I said.... Edit one of my posts and I'll give you a reason to ban me.... simply because I have been here long enough to see many souls come and go through this board.

You don't run off the folks that make AO what it is.... you do that and AO is worthless. The point is being made that something was done unjustly. And when folks see that happen, it gets a bit out of hand. NOW if the people that had issues had resolved them either in PM or via a chat or email or with a 3rd party arbitrating..... these last what???? 8??? 9?? threads that you locked, blocked, edited or deleted wouldn't be here and we'd all be talkin about the upgrades that we did or the way we love our mags or what mods would be cool and what color looks best with my running shoes.

BUT because it was handled improperly this whole ordeal is coming across like the gustapo is running AO....

That is what needs to change....

And it HAS to start with the MODS.... SINCE little ole users like me.... can't talk back or try and make our point if we get the stick....

It says you're in the military no???? Try acting like it. Quit giving the rest of the folks a bad rep.... And please do not start any crap with me about my service. Of which you know nothing about.

DM

Ok I will TRY and answer. Been here Just a little longer then you. Have seen just a little more here then you.

The unjust thing is not true. BE knows and so does RF. I saw rudz take the hit and not be a cry baby and I didnt swing the stick on him. rudz has the class.

I put my name on it and will stand by it. What you think is unjust is because you dont have all the facts. Believe me I would very much like to post more but cant at this time as it would
not be any good.

As for all the other crap it was removed because that is what it was. Well not ALL of it but I already said I was sorry for that in a previous post.

[DevilMan]

The point being made by myself and many others is this.

Something happens.... Someone gets ticked and someone gets banned.

NOW if it's all a great big understanding between the parties that got BANNED and the BANNERs... Then I don't see where there would be any discussion here.

And it would seem as though that is the view that the MODS have. That everyone is in agreement... So long, farewell.

Now to us lesser ups.... Do we know the full extent of what happened??? NO we don't. But when we enquire as to what went on, instead of an edit, delete, lock, ban reaction it could have been handled in PM or EMAIL to said persons and not brought to light. The said persons could have then been talked to and defused and could have edited their post willingly.... Something to the affect of... " I understand now what went on, edited post to clear the air. Carry on."

That would have stopped this long ago.

The wipe and erase attitude only brings it up to someone that the mods have something to hide. Is it OUR bizness the full story??? Nope... not at all. But when a number of folks start wondering why someone who's been here all of a sudden disappears.... questions get asked. The answer should not be..... "There's nothing to see here... move along!!!" ESPECIALLY HERE ON AO!!!!! That should be a VERY good idea to grasp. AO'ers are NOT SHEEPLE!!!! If we were.... we'd all be talkin about the color kit for our IONs!!!

It was a simple discussion about simple matters that got handled the wrong way that caused the malestrom....

What happens when it passes????

I guess only time will tell.

DM

[Target Practice]

Serious lollin' at people who complain about moderation who weren't around for the Fruitcat Massacre.

Edit: Page 2 Snypa.

[druid]

Well...I sure missed a lot in my absence.....doing my job elsewhere, left me out of the know of what transpired here, so forgive my ignorance - I didn't get to see all of what went down.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I got the basic gist from this thread, plus over at PBL and as a Mod on 2 other forums, SuperMod on one of them...all I have to say is that this whole thing is just..........petty.

I've really only seen one person's side of it and have to guess about what I see here - but -

It sounds to me like a personal conflict has transpired between a few parties and spilled out into the open forum. I hear that some goading was involved...I hear someone (or few) got their panties in a bunch...If this is the case, then all I have to say is that all of those involved need to grow up.

Mods have a job to do and that's to keep basic order on the Forum. Period. Not necessarily micromanage conversations...per se...but certainly not to ignore spambots in the process. Good Moderators need to wage the greater war...and yet themselves behave in a manner that sets an example for the rest of the membership.

We also don't abuse our permissions/powers out of revenge or with malice, simply because we happen not to like a particular person or post. IF that happened, or were to happen, that Mod should have their permissions stripped and then be banned themselves.

Even though I'm still a dinosaur and using 56K dialup...I can watch precariously natured topics on my forums - and still get to other pages that the bots post; to remove them before minors view them...and be back in a few minutes to observe the monitored thread again.

I don't know if this forum has it but ours does:

A Code of Conduct for Moderators and SuperModerators.

It is a set of guidelines designed solely for US, so that the Admins and other Supers have total control of how we conduct ourselves in our position of "power." One mishap from us and it's one warning (unless it's severe)...the next one is DONE...no more Mod-ship and possible ban.


Now having said all that....

I said before, I really have no idea what really transpired but ultimately, a person was apparently banned for reporting a spambot that linked to porn. I'd personally have thanked the individual in the case that I [as a Mod] missed it. Could it be that the person posted it in a wise-cracking manner? Absolutely. Could it be that it was done to demean the Mod who was directly involved in a conversation? Quite possibly. Does it deserve a ban because of it? Well, I don't know because like I said...I don't have full knowledge of what was going on but a good 'warning' sure sounds like it could have sufficed.....

I don't know...I think a lot of growing up needs to be done on-line in general. People come to forums like this one, just to get away from the Nation-esque atmosphere found everywhere else. It would be a damned shame to lose a forum because of a mass exodus over trivial matters such as these. People need to grow up and others need to get a thicker skin....to whom does this apply? I don't know. Only the reader can decide which applies to them.

[ThePixelGuru]

druid - agreed, for the most part. Thing is, for me (and it seems like more than a few others) this isn't just about that incident. That particular incident was just the thing that got us all talking about how some mods don't obey the rules and policies of the forums, and apply bans unevenly based on the kind of mood they're in and if they like the user or not.

I had a pretty annoying experience with being banned from AO. Certainly wasn't the end of the world, but I did feel it was unfair and poorly handled, and now it's really seeming like I'm not the only one who's had those sorts of thoughts.

[Lohman446]

I recall once when a popular member got banned and a group of pretty common posters complained about the mods, about policies, and whined. Didn't really work out.

Let me clue you in on this. TK supports, financially, this forum at basically no gain to himself. Make this into work, into a problem, and the plug can be easily pulled on it. For those who think that RF has not abused the rules in the past - you have not looked, its just that often his posts are simply edited. If Rogue wants this as his own private sales forum, and wants to be held above the rules, I simply suggest he ponies up the money, buys it, and pays for it himself.

Beemer was appointed the newest mod and directed to enforce the rules, because in the past letting them bend just caused them to bend further and further until it was unacceptable. This whole thing that is happening now - posters whining and threatening and leaving - happened then to.

"But I run a forum and...." - its not this forum. You don't own / pay for / or moderate this forum.

Its a week. I don't question for a moment that it was deserved (and I am willing to bet warnings were issued). Get over it guys, its no big deal and you are really really not helping matters by making it into a problem.

[druid]

druid - agreed, for the most part. Thing is, for me (and it seems like more than a few others) this isn't just about that incident. That particular incident was just the thing that got us all talking about how some mods don't obey the rules and policies of the forums, and apply bans unevenly based on the kind of mood they're in and if they like the user or not.

I had a pretty annoying experience with being banned from AO. Certainly wasn't the end of the world, but I did feel it was unfair and poorly handled, and now it's really seeming like I'm not the only one who's had those sorts of thoughts.


Well then it seems to me that a different avenue should be traveled if the Mods are behaving in an un-Mod-like manner...such as PM/Email an Admins/owners.

If a person feels as if the Moderators are stepping out of the accepted scope of their duties, the screen-shot the pages, save them to photobucket at the 17" screen size and send them to Admins via PM or email.

Proof is in the pudding. Give them evidence that the mods are disorderly and I'm sure the Admins will take care of it....somhow, some way. Even if they don't, you were the better people if you DON'T engage in an epic battle that ultimately you, the non-Mods, will lose.

[druid]

1. I recall once when a popular member got banned and a group of pretty common posters complained about the mods, about policies, and whined. Didn't really work out.
2. Let me clue you in on this. TK supports, financially, this forum at basically no gain to himself. Make this into work, into a problem, and the plug can be easily pulled on it.
3. For those who think that RF has not abused the rules in the past - you have not looked, its just that often his posts are simply edited.
4. If Rogue wants this as his own private sales forum, and wants to be held above the rules, I simply suggest he ponies up the money, buys it, and pays for it himself.
5. Beemer was appointed the newest mod and directed to enforce the rules, because in the past letting them bend just caused them to bend further and further until it was unacceptable.
6. This whole thing that is happening now - posters whining and threatening and leaving - happened then to.
7. "But I run a forum and...." - its not this forum. You don't own / pay for / or moderate this forum.
8. Its a week. I don't question for a moment that it was deserved (and I am willing to bet warnings were issued). Get over it guys, its no big deal and you are really really not helping matters by making it into a problem.

1. Mkay...well popularity contests rarely do [work out]. I don't care if Im the most popular do0d in the building...if I break the rules, then I should expect no less than the discipline DESERVING of the offense.
2. Agreed...which is why I said what I did above.
3. Well, "simply editing" posts without issuing warnings only tells the OP that "...it's OK to do it because we'll just redact without bothering anyone"...which in itself, is wrong. Since I don't have access to your Admin Panel, I can't make a judgement call on who's doing right or wrong and in what instance. Regardless...if a Mod needs to edit a post, then the reason needs to be documented in the warning issued to the poster...whomever it is.
4. ...and yet if Rogue were to stop selling his products to AO members...or making Mag aftermarket products all together...who'd be one of the first persons to start crying about it?
5. What I get out of this is: "Rookie Mod gets the tough detail of ____, now do it!" and that's completely Bull. ALL the Mods need to be doing their jobs and the dead-weight simply removed - and being that he's new, he needs to be hand-held a little bit because new Mods have a tendency to be overzealous in their "jobs." Like it or not, it's true. Now, I have no reason to think Beamer is guilty of this...but I've never given anyone a reason to even THINK about banning me - but it does happen and we all know it.
6. As is always the case and never anything new. Like I said...fanclubs and popularity contests will make trouble for anyone.
7. I really hope your're not directing that at me...because I only offer some helpful tips on how to SUCCESSFULLY run a forum. If you don't like what I have to say, feel free to ignore my post all together. If it's not directed at me, then I guess I'm just misunderstanding what you mean and I'll entertain a better explaination...if you even care to.
8. If it's not that big a deal, then why are you so willing to defend beemer's honor and say "screw" the guys that got banned - with "it's only a week, get over it" rhetoric? You say that {QUOTED FROM ABOVE}"....(and I am willing to bet warnings were issued)"...which means...you don't have a clue that they were issued or not. Therefore, your opinions matter...what? About as much as those defending the ones who were banned...

IDK...is there a Moderator fanclub or something that the banned users aren't privy to (or care to be in?)? Who's running for President?

I think Tom should step in here and lay down a ruling...since it's HIS forum...right? If Mods need a spanking, then so be it. If members need to be banned, then so be it. EVERYONE needs to add a few years of maturity to themselves and everything should just pan out fine....right? Right.

[teufelhunden]

I originally posted this in the "This is stupid" or w/e thread and it was on my clipboard [due to network wishy-washyness last night] so here we go:


My feeling on this is mixed; I was around back whenever it was that CPhil just went nuts and nobody could figure out why. That whole thing is why he's no longer a mod (yet is allowed two accounts now ;)) and we have the AO Mod Team username and the banlist. I've been on the "omgwtfbbq" side of the issue but now I'm on the other end. Guess one grows up a bit as his college years wane.

First, there's a lot of stuff that happens without anybody seeing it. I'm sure that the majority of the spam on the site is gone before the bulk of the active userbase has any idea of it. If one is to peruse the banlist, he will see a lot of nonames banned for a lot of the same things that these complaints are about.

Second, this whole thing is a far cry from the CPhil situation so I can't get my panties in a bunch about it.

Third, the ever popular fact that this is, in fact, privately owned and operated and is to be run as such. [Meaning you have no first amendment rights here, the mods aren't communists when the edit something, or whatever]. Whatever rules are in place are the rules that are in place and we can't pick and choose them; we can pick and choose coming here. For example, those rules (somewhere) indicate that tripping the swear filter (meaning you get ****) is a violation of said rules and a punishment may be in hand. Also, flaming isn't allowed either, and to be honest, we get a substantial amount of leeway on that front. Taking BE's situation, in the same post he both swore/tripped the filter and changed rabid's name [in a quote] to something of a derogatory nature, and I would bet the latter is what got him banned, as the post stood with an edit for the swear for a while.

I can't comment on the RF situation as I wasn't around when whatever it was went down. I did see somewhere [PBL?] that Beemer said the post was never actually reported [there's a button on every post]... doing that is surprisingly efficient, I've done it with spam and it's been gone pretty fast.

I don't think a lot of users here understand the BS involved with moderating a large and established forum. You have a lot of users, are targeted for spam, have old vs new users who have a different idea of what should happen and what shouldn't, etc. People have track records which come into play when something happens. I'm not commenting on the Rogue thing, but he has at times had his brushes with the mod staff. Someone like him should be extremely cognizant of what goes and doesn't here given how much revenue he generates from the dealer forum, so from a business standpoint he should put some consideration into things. As far as I am aware, Rogue has not had to compensate AO/AGD for any of the gains that have come to him as a result of this community. The point of this paragraph before I got to my rambling was simply to note that it isn't easy and it ends up taking a lot of the enjoyment out of coming to a place like this.

Cut the mods some slack. They're equivalent to referees, and they for sure don't get it right every time, neither do the mods. There have been instances here when bans have been reversed or shortened due to applying hindsight to a situation. Who knows, that might happen here. Or maybe not. But neither of these users were banned for good, they're free to come back if they so choose after their ban. This isn't the end of the world, it's a website, it's no skin off any of our backs if BigEvil doesn't come back or if he does come back. There have been so many people who have come and gone from here, so many times has AO's demise been declared, and AO has allegedly been declining since 1742. I've been around PB forums for a while, I think I first registered on PBN in late 01 under a different name, everybody wants everything to be different and how it used to be. Yet PBR and PBN have been around a long time, MCB/AO/etc. have survived, and the universe is in balance. Members come, members go, and it's not the end of the world. Same with BigEvil and RF (even though I'm sure RF will be back as there's a profit motive for doing so, BE I don't care and don't know).

So get up, get some fresh air, and leave if ya want. :) We'll be fine without you.

[bofh]

Serious lollin' at people who complain about moderation who weren't around for the Fruitcat Massacre.

Edit: Page 2 Snypa.

Indeed.

Ahh. Good times... Good times.

[Babylon 5]

I know I'm reletively new here but when this thing started to blow up over a mod named Beemer "I was like who the heck is Beemer?" I think that is one of the problems, the mod team needs to be made up of active members that post with some regularity so they are a visible part of AO. Also when they post they need some sort of tag that points out they are a mod. The members are what makes AO and the mod team needs to come from the members of AO.

[Altimas]

Tldr.

Attica!

[Lohman446]

Do you think Beemers name was drawn out of a hat? Or do you think TK might have known, met, and trusted Beemer to do the job based on what Beemer has done and been involved with (not just on a forum) in the past?

Hint: Its not the first one.

[punkncat]

Reposted here as "requested"

Is getting banned or attempting to cool now?

So Big E and Rogue got banned here and now a whole bunch of guys spent the better part of yesterday acting like martyrs and trying to get themselves banned too. I see at least one if not more of you did.

What is being disruptive and causing problems really going to do?

If you have a problem, and post it in the appropriate place( with appropriate wording) then I am sure it will get due attention. This "e cool" hitman stuff is just rediculous.

Honestly, do y'all want to upset Tom to the point that he just decides to be rid of AO?

If one of the mods has upset you then stay out of his way. Don't make him play his hand. What does it really mean to you anyway? Can those banned members not take up their own torch at the end of the week, or choose for themselves not to come back?

I mean nothing personal against either of the banned people and consider both of them to be "internet friends". But guys, let them handle thier own business, and let AO just be a paintball board.

[Babylon 5]

Do you think Beemers name was drawn out of a hat? Or do you think TK might have known, met, and trusted Beemer to do the job based on what Beemer has done and been involved with (not just on a forum) in the past?

Hint: Its not the first one.
I think everyone has friends that are good people, but it doesn't mean that you would want them working for you or that they would be good at their job.

I know I do.

[CKY_Alliance]

Doh my bad. I see by four min. Sorry. I was in talk cleaning House when I moved it then saw yours. Want I should do a Redo or do over? :ninja:

I actually could care less which thread is closed...



Big Evil got banned for telling off Rabid, and then Rogue got banned for telling Beemer to pay less attention to BE and Rabid and more attention to the porn links posted by a spambot in the other forums. A bunch of people have been noticing the oddly-applied ban policies, and now they're all talking about it at once... and usually getting their threads removed, unless enough people who disagree happen to post in the same thread.

Oh, and I'd watch out for triggering the wordfilter. Not like it explicitly says it anywhere in the rules, but I've learned it's ban worthy (depending on what kind of mood the mods are in).


Oh and triggering the curse filter is not in the rules, therefore it should not be a bannable offense. After all you are putting it to it's use. You type a curse word and allow it to censor you..but wait I've been banned for it..

Meanwhile circumventing (like trevor did) is against the rules...therefore a bannable offense..

[joelbird]

This post illustrates the attitude by which everyone is PO'd with you. The guy is standing up for himself, and you are trying to be some sort of Deputy cleaning up the town. I think you are doing a good job as a mod, but step back and let someone else clean it up before things get worse. And BTW deleting stuff seems to have just pushed the knife in deeper to a lot of people.


speaking of cleaning house. whats up with the unreadable posts in the dealer forums that have been there for a while? ( the newest one just deleted) and the one about using an itunes application for some kinda crap. i think these are the problems that are neglected because we are fighting about other crap. my two cents from a lonely observer.

[txaggie08]

5. Beemer was appointed the newest mod and directed to enforce the rules, because in the past letting them bend just caused them to bend further and further until it was unacceptable.


Then enforce the rules in the manner laid out in the TOS, not make them up as you go along.

I have remained mostly silent on this, but let's talk about rules for a moment. The rules clearly state that:



Mild offences will probably result in a post being edited, locked, or deleted by the moderators. If a topic is locked, we will give you a quick explanation as to why. For more severe offences we will delete the post and give you a warning - maybe two. After that you will be banned. Bans last from 3 days to forever, depending on the offence and your reaction to the moderators when they try to correct your behavior.

I was banned, I cannot speak to rogue or bigE, with no warning what so ever, and the post was not locked or deleted. I had also(and the mods should be able to check there backlogs...)never received a prior warning for anything. So, as I see it, I violated the TOS once, but the offending moderator did so twice in failing to A. Delete the post, and B. Banning me without warning in clear contradiction of the agreed upon rules and guidlines.

I would therefore like to lodge a complaint with the site administration against said moderator for commiting multiple infractions on the TOS. If I can be banned for one infraction, and have no warning, certainly a person responsible for maintaining the standards of this forum, and charge with enforcing an agreed upon set of rules, should be punished for doing so.

I'm very serious btw, I would apreciate this issue being adressed quickly and effeciently by site administration(preferably AGD). I'll also be saving a copy of this as I have no doubt it will be gone ere shortly.

[Dend78]

Then enforce the rules in the manner laid out in the TOS, not make them up as you go along.

I have remained mostly silent on this, but let's talk about rules for a moment. The rules clearly state that:



I was banned, I cannot speak to rogue or bigE, with no warning what so ever, and the post was not locked or deleted. I had also(and the mods should be able to check there backlogs...)never received a prior warning for anything. So, as I see it, I violated the TOS once, but the offending moderator did so twice in failing to A. Delete the post, and B. Banning me without warning in clear contradiction of the agreed upon rules and guidlines.

I would therefore like to lodge a complaint with the site administration against said moderator for commiting multiple infractions on the TOS. If I can be banned for one infraction, and have no warning, certainly a person responsible for maintaining the standards of this forum, and charge with enforcing an agreed upon set of rules, should be punished for doing so.

I'm very serious btw, I would apreciate this issue being adressed quickly and effeciently by site administration(preferably AGD). I'll also be saving a copy of this as I have no doubt it will be gone ere shortly.

i feel that some of what you just said is a good point, for instance the fact that you hanvent been warned, thats something that could be useful a way of keeping tabs on warnings would be a stellar thing for the mods. i mean dont get me wrong im not siding with anyone here im just pointing out things that i see as a good idea. as far as a complaint goes there should be if there isnt already mods above mods. i know most forums i am part of there are, im actually part of one that has several tiers of mods, ie basic mod - just steps in to say hey keep it clean and under control, mod step 2 - has the power to warn or ban unruly members including the basic mods and so forth. i didnt read the threads or anything so im not gonna jump in and try to act like i know whats going on becuase i dont. im just going off of what ive read here.

[teufelhunden]

Oh and triggering the curse filter is not in the rules, therefore it should not be a bannable offense. After all you are putting it to it's use. You type a curse word and allow it to censor you..but wait I've been banned for it..



I would equate it to case law or precedent. Army has posted about it.

[warpig13]

I don't have a problem with people coming over here and talking about it. It was infact a senseless ban. And I don't think anyone was trying to get banned. I argued case and point, but I did it without the use of profanity and in a manner that was respectable.


I lose all sympathy for someone when they choose to be ignorant in their arguement.

[kosmo]

If we are all gonna sit around and complain, I might as well too.

When I get banned, at least put that you banned me and why in the banned thread. I dont spend enough time on here to remember what the last metaphorical pointy stick I was poking beemer or Army with was all about. And "You know why" for a reason aint gonna cut it either.

[Lohman446]

I don't have a problem with people coming over here and talking about it. It was infact a senseless ban. And I don't think anyone was trying to get banned. I argued case and point, but I did it without the use of profanity and in a manner that was respectable.


I lose all sympathy for someone when they choose to be ignorant in their arguement.


Rogue does often seem to post for no other reason than to be disruptive (when not selling things). Telling me that it was senseless or this is not true.... I just don't buy it, doesn't pass the sniff test.

[ThePixelGuru]

Wow, lots of misconceptions flying around here. I'm going to at least try to set the record straight about why I care.

I don't care about this just because BE or Rogue got banned. BE knew he would probably get banned, and Rogue knows he's not immune to the rules. Still, linking to a thread on AO that links to porn and should be removed isn't linking to porn like Beemer implied at first.

I'm not trying to get banned or tear AO down. This is one of the dumbest ones - we're complaining about getting banned, why would we try to get banned? We're trying to fix this problem for a better AO without frivolous bans, why would we be trying to destroy it? Sorry some of you folks seem to have such a low opinion of us.

The mods are not following their own rules. That is what this is about. When I got banned, it annoyed me because I didn't break any of the rules. I got banned for posting four asterisks in a row. It was pointed out to me that there's a rule against cussing - great, I didn't cuss, I posted four asterisks. It's been pointed out to me that there's a rule (or at least precedent, in no way stated in the "Rules" thread) against tripping the cuss filter - great, I didn't trip the cuss filter, I posted four asterisks. It was the first time I ever was aware of such a rule, and I'd been doing it for a year or so without anyone ever having a problem with it. Also, according to the rules, we're supposed to get a warning before a ban. I never got a warning - if I had, I would have gone and edited every single one of my posts immediately.

The mods are not enforcing the rules consistently. Some users get banned for posting four asterisks or links to other AO threads, while others stick around for a long time even though they have usernames that reference fecal exits, location tags containing homophobic slurs with only a single letter blocked by an asterisk, and custom user titles that explicitly mention male sex organs. Some of us think this is a little hypocritical, and that if the mods want to enforcing punishments for these little violations in single posts they should start enforcing punishments for users who have these violations in every single post they've ever made.

We're not asking for perfection, we're asking for consistency and a complete set of rules that the mods will actually follow. Every single ban should be able to be backed up by a citation of a rule from the official "Rules" thread, and every single violation of a rule from that thread should result in either a warning or a ban. This might not happen all the time, but it's happening far less than it should and something needs to change.

For those of you who will tell me to get out if I don't like it, that's one of the dumbest things I've heard. I think AO is a great community, and I try to add what I can to it and help to make it better. We're all part of this, and if you think that AO is the "Beemer Show" then I think you completely miss the point of this kind of forum. We're not complaining about this to make trouble, we're complaining about this because helpful, upstanding members of this community are getting banned for minor incidents which don't violate the rules of this forum just because the mods felt like it that particular day.

[warpig13]

I don't like how we are singling out Beemer.

He has his work cut out for him. You don't see the other mods as much as you used to so he has done a good job picking up the slack. He doesnt have time to monitor every post.

POOF

But complainig won't get us anywhere, if you want to "fix" AO then we would have to work at it. I know as well as anyone the glory days are gone, but that doesnt mean the remaining days have to be completely bad.

3 day for blatant cussing. Army

[Dend78]

good stuff TPG you are right every ban that gets handed out aside from the spam bots, should be posted in the thread or at least sent to the banned person the rule that was broken. that seems to be a very fair thing. i mean i understand that takes some extra time off the mods who like the rest of us have lives and things but at the same time its good for people to have an something to go off of. i know the one time i was banned was for a stupid forgetful reason but i was at least given the exact reason for the ban, and it was clearly in the rules.

[CKY_Alliance]

Wow, lots of misconceptions flying around here. I'm going to at least try to set the record straight about why I care.

I don't care about this just because BE or Rogue got banned. BE knew he would probably get banned, and Rogue knows he's not immune to the rules. Still, linking to a thread on AO that links to porn and should be removed isn't linking to porn like Beemer implied at first.

I'm not trying to get banned or tear AO down. This is one of the dumbest ones - we're complaining about getting banned, why would we try to get banned? We're trying to fix this problem for a better AO without frivolous bans, why would we be trying to destroy it? Sorry some of you folks seem to have such a low opinion of us.

The mods are not following their own rules. That is what this is about. When I got banned, it annoyed me because I didn't break any of the rules. I got banned for posting four asterisks in a row. It was pointed out to me that there's a rule against cussing - great, I didn't cuss, I posted four asterisks. It's been pointed out to me that there's a rule (or at least precedent, in no way stated in the "Rules" thread) against tripping the cuss filter - great, I didn't trip the cuss filter, I posted four asterisks. It was the first time I ever was aware of such a rule, and I'd been doing it for a year or so without anyone ever having a problem with it. Also, according to the rules, we're supposed to get a warning before a ban. I never got a warning - if I had, I would have gone and edited every single one of my posts immediately.

The mods are not enforcing the rules consistently. Some users get banned for posting four asterisks or links to other AO threads, while others stick around for a long time even though they have usernames that reference fecal exits, location tags containing homophobic slurs with only a single letter blocked by an asterisk, and custom user titles that explicitly mention male sex organs. Some of us think this is a little hypocritical, and that if the mods want to enforcing punishments for these little violations in single posts they should start enforcing punishments for users who have these violations in every single post they've ever made.

We're not asking for perfection, we're asking for consistency and a complete set of rules that the mods will actually follow. Every single ban should be able to be backed up by a citation of a rule from the official "Rules" thread, and every single violation of a rule from that thread should result in either a warning or a ban. This might not happen all the time, but it's happening far less than it should and something needs to change.

For those of you who will tell me to get out if I don't like it, that's one of the dumbest things I've heard. I think AO is a great community, and I try to add what I can to it and help to make it better. We're all part of this, and if you think that AO is the "Beemer Show" then I think you completely miss the point of this kind of forum. We're not complaining about this to make trouble, we're complaining about this because helpful, upstanding members of this community are getting banned for minor incidents which don't violate the rules of this forum just because the mods felt like it that particular day.

True that..especially on the curse filter thing.. There's no rule saying you cannot activate it. Just don't circumvent it...and if you are gonna make your own rules and ban one person for it then ban everyone for it.

[Army]

Rule #1 is no cussing. The filter makes sure your words are not visible by using an asterisk. If you did not curse, the filter would not activate.

Rule #7 is for those who insist on cursing anyway.

So yes, there is a rule that says you cannot activate it. Playing the semantics game is childish.

[CKY_Alliance]

Rule #1 is no cussing. The filter makes sure your words are not visible by using an asterisk. If you did not curse, the filter would not activate.

Rule #7 is for those who insist on cursing anyway.

So yes, there is a rule that says you cannot activate it. Playing the semantics game is childish.


So what if I just want to make a picture with asterisks or something? Is it automatically going to be presumed as cursing? Because I've really been feeling the urge to draw one..honestly they're just so nifty.

[DevilMan]

Rule #1 is no cussing. The filter makes sure your words are not visible by using an asterisk. If you did not curse, the filter would not activate.

Rule #7 is for those who insist on cursing anyway.

So yes, there is a rule that says you cannot activate it. Playing the semantics game is childish.

Hey ARMY..... if I type **** what did I just type????

It's the same as if I typed... #### only with another number. Or %$#@@!$#%$#.... See... The filter don't trip on those.... and there is no CUSSING involved. You follow yet????

When someone wants to say BULL**** The ***************** * ** * ** ** * ** * * Can be added by the person typing. NOW if AO wants to say that BULL**** is a cuss word... then so be it... but I hear crap on regular radio and tv all the time that says crap isn't a cuss word.

You follow what I'm saying??? It's been pointed out that some folks can type the * * * * * in place of a cuss word. NOW if that is an issue then that should be stated. And the filter should NOT just ********* As it is... the filter catches it and says okay bad word, change to **** there you go. All good. So therefore the filter is allowed to say.... *************** so therefore a person typing should be allowed to say... * * * ***** * ***FY*#($#(*$&@#(%&$#(*&^$#($&!@(&$#)#%

You understand now???? Some of the folks that posted here.... posted it as an ASTERISK!!!!! The SHIFT + 8 Key combo.... and THEREFORE did not cuss. So then they were BANNED because a little ***** Showed in their thread. The MODS took that **** as a sign that they cussed and without warning banned them.

SO..... If **** is considered cussing.... then the filter should be changed and the rule stated. Everyone is all riled up ..... what can you do..... I can say a number of things that when leaving 1 word out you can still fill in the blanks in your head as to what is THOUGHT and it's not cussing. Like.... I have a girlfriend and man does she love to ****.... Now what did I just say???? What did the CUSS FILTER catch???? I could make it.... I have a girlfriend and man does she love to _____.... Is that different now??? It's a fill in the blank.... With NO context to base it off of... I could be saying a number of things.... Cook, Read, Sew, Drink, Party, Skate, Shoot, etc.

Is the light bulb flickering yet???? Maybe if you want to SEPARATE what is a cuss word and what is an ***** then maybe someone should enact a thing where the CUSS filter instead of ***** Replaces the word with :nono: or another icon or symbol that we lower class users don't have access to..... Like if I said.... I have a girlfriend and man does she love to :nono: ..... See now that would make a difference... could it be hacked and circumvented?? Sure it could.... but the general user isn't gonna go through the trouble to do that....

Anywho.... it's now past my bedtime.....

Ciao!

DM

[DevilMan]

I don't like how we are singling out Beemer.

He has his work cut out for him. You don't see the other mods as much as you used to so he has done a good job picking up the slack. He doesnt have time to monitor every post.

POOF

But complainig won't get us anywhere, if you want to "fix" AO then we would have to work at it. I know as well as anyone the glory days are gone, but that doesnt mean the remaining days have to be completely bad.

3 day for blatant cussing. Army


Hey ARMY..... What did he say that was a cuss word??? Was it the **** word?? Or the ***** word???

DM

[CKY_Alliance]

Hold on...so warpig gets banned for asterisks, but trevorjk circumvented the filter and got a warning? This is what people are complaining about.

[Target Practice]

Hey I know why don't we all argue over the semantics and legitimacy of a very simple-to-understand rule with a guy whose job isn't to make the rules but to enforce them. Never mind that since he is, you know, sacrificing the comforts of civilized life to fight for your freedom and stuff, he might have other stuff to worry about other than a bunch of whiny dickheads on an internet message board.

Edit: Dave if "dickheads" is against the flaming rules then I guess I'll take one for the team but for the record it felt really good.

Edit: Part Deux: The Reckoning: 5 days till Christmas but I'm still all :confused:.

Edit: Part Tres: La Mochila: Page 3 Second Gunman.

[Lohman446]

We have so had this discussion before. It was decided that activating and ignoring the cuss filter could be bannable if done in a way meant to be inflamatorry or get you a warning if otherwise - though if you had had repeated warnings it became bannable. We also decided being a smart aleck and "faking" activation with *s would also merit the same result.

[DevilMan]

Alright Lohman.... Can you please tell me where this was stated???? Because I missed it. And I'd be willing to bet that the rest of the folks did as well.

That's just a guess on my part, but I know I've never seen the ruling that says typing *** *** * ** is an offending thing.

DM

[DevilMan]

So Typing the * is bannable???? Or worth a warning????? So what happens when someone has ******* In their TAG under their name??? Is it not worthy of a warning????

But yet, it's not an issue to the MODS.

DM

[Crighton]

Have to toss my $.02 in and say.

This is the most heavily modded board I read. Some people enjoy that, personally I do not.


:cry:

[bofh]

Alright Lohman.... Can you please tell me where this was stated???? Because I missed it. And I'd be willing to bet that the rest of the folks did as well.

That's just a guess on my part, but I know I've never seen the ruling that says typing *** *** * ** is an offending thing.

DM

Try here http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=166992

I suppose you could search too

[DevilMan]

Try here http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=16699

I suppose you could search too

ummmmm a thread from 01 talking about 45 grip panels????

Ahhhhhhh I see the connection!!!!!!


/Sarcasm Off

DM

[Dend78]

Try here http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=16699

I suppose you could search too



:confused:

[kosmo]

I guess someone thinks Bonds is innocent...

/756*
//ninja delete

[bofh]

ummmmm a thread from 01 talking about 45 grip panels????

Ahhhhhhh I see the connection!!!!!!


/Sarcasm Off

DM
it's corrected now.

And yet you still didn't search

[DevilMan]

welllllllll wasn't quite sure what to search for.... Maybe if you had said...> Search for... *** or Ban or a thread number.... then I would have been more than happy to search.

But just saying "You could search" Don't mean alot to me. Yes I very well could have. However I'd be here forever and ever if I just did a search by starting at the front of the dictionary and working my way back.

DM


it's corrected now.

And yet you still didn't search

[DevilMan]

ohhhhhhhhhhh I got it now....

Somehow something that was brought up in 2005 (Almost 2004) Is supposed to pop up on the radar for this discussion.

And it's not really an answered question.

Soooooo according to that thread.... cussing is NOT allowed. And substituting in *** or ** %#@(#$#$% for a cuss word is NOT allowed..... Alright.. Got that...

Now a request for some logic.... Which do you think is safer for the minors here and for being PC.

Saying BULLCRAP!!!!! or BULL****......???? or saying He's a ***** or saying He's a (Male Genitalia)????

I personally.... of course would rather just see the ******* But thats me. I don't see how the answer is.... "Of course, you could always find a none cuss to put in its place, it is doable I am sure" When in the end it's all the same meaning.

Blatant cussing???? Sure warn the folks and ban.... A slip up from normal talking???? The filter hits it.... send the poster a note. Hell watch TV today folks!!!! Look what gets said there!!!

DM

[Lohman446]

Gonna go back to this. Private board, you don't pay for, owned by someone else. You're opinion on if a rule is fair or not, or if it is enforced correctly or not of very minimal value.

[bofh]

welllllllll wasn't quite sure what to search for....

I suppose the terms "cuss" "filter" never occurred to you? Since you used them several times in your post, I assume you're familiar with them.


Somehow something that was brought up in 2005 (Almost 2004) Is supposed to pop up on the radar for this discussion.
As for a thread from 2005 being something being important... Yeah, it is. Looks at this Mod's creation date http://www.automags.org/forums/member.php?u=23380 You were around then.

[DevilMan]

Gonna go back to this. Private board, you don't pay for, owned by someone else. You're opinion on if a rule is fair or not, or if it is enforced correctly or not of very minimal value.

You know Lohman.... For once I agree 100% with you.

On part of it at least. My opinion is "NOT OF VERY MINIMAL VALUE" Meaning it is has a very HIGH VALUE.

So thank you for seeing things my way.

Now on to the "I don't pay for" part. That is correct. I don't pay for it. But if a board is going to be respected and filled by folks that are to be respected then the RULES set forth by the OWNER of the board shall be FOLLOWED by the members of the board. NOT to be enforced and tossed around as the USERS of the board see fit. The MODS do NOT OWN the board. And are therefore in the SAME shoes as I am as a USER of the board.

Go back to it all you like. It still don't change that fact that THIS IS A PUBLIC FORUM... People can come and go as they please. If you are going to COME INTO THIS FORUM.... You AGREE TO FOLLOW the RULES AS STATED IN THE TOS. THAT MEANS YOU FOLLOW THEM HOW THEY ARE POSTED!!!!

So as a MOD breaking the RULES. They are therefore eligible for the BAN or the WARNING or whatever else the punishment shall be.

RULES are not something that you can go and override just because you are MOD and think your title means you are "above the law".

I'm suprised from the looks of it these days that some of the folks here can fit their head inside of a 5 gallon bucket.

DM

[Pacifist_Farmer]

Has anyone stopped to consider the fact that this is a message board? That's right a message board. Sure I'm all about free speech and an end to hypocrisies, but this is a message board, on the internet.

Do so many of us have so much extra time in our lives that we can spend hours arguing over the fairness and justification of Bans in a forum we neither own nor run.


Maybe some of us should take a step back and try to do something productive with our lives.

Just sayin.

[Hexis]

Go back to it all you like. It still don't change that fact that THIS IS A PUBLIC FORUM... People can come and go as they please. If you are going to COME INTO THIS FORUM.... You AGREE TO FOLLOW the RULES AS STATED IN THE TOS. THAT MEANS YOU FOLLOW THEM HOW THEY ARE POSTED!!!!


Wrong, it's a private owned forum that is open to registered members to participate in.

The Administrators are given certain duties and responsibilities. As long as the ownership is happy with their efforts, they are fulfilling their responsibilities. Both your and my opinion does not figure into the mix.

Unrelated to DevilMan:

Let's just drop the 1st amendment argument. Here's the 1st Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

AGD, TK and AO Admins are not congress (or the us government). They can abridge the freedom of the press in this venue all they want and still not run afoul of the 1st Amendment.

[Lohman446]

RF and BE knew the rules, they were around for those discussions. Now you know the rules - no reason to keep causing a disruption over them.

[bofh]

And are therefore in the SAME shoes as I am as a USER of the board.

Well, if that's the case, why don't you ban one of the Mods?

Oh, you can't? Perhaps those shoes are different after all.

[teufelhunden]

Gonna go back to this. Private board, you don't pay for, owned by someone else. You're opinion on if a rule is fair or not, or if it is enforced correctly or not of very minimal value.

I believe Lohman meant to write that Your opinion on if a rule is fair or not, or if it is enforced correctly or not, is of very minimal value.


You know Lohman.... For once I agree 100% with you.

On part of it at least. My opinion is "NOT OF VERY MINIMAL VALUE" Meaning it is has a very HIGH VALUE.

So thank you for seeing things my way.




He missed a word and some punctuation but you just look silly.

[Lohman446]

He missed a word and some punctuation but you just look silly.

Oops, I should learn to proofread. :P Thanks for clearing it up for those that don't get it.

[txaggie08]

So what rule did rogue break? He apparently said "hey beamer, this thread (insert link) has porn in it, why don't you go moderate instead of arguing"(or something to that tune...). This is against the rules and worthy of a ban, especially of a contributing member? I'm really baffled by that one.

[Target Practice]

Bofh, haven't seen you in a while. Let me clue you in: this here group is just not worth the time arguing with. Best to just leave them to their own devices and let them wallow in their pointless debates. However, if you must post, be sure to make passive-aggressive posts like this one.

[DevilMan]

Bofh, haven't seen you in a while. Let me clue you in: this here group is just not worth the time arguing with. Best to just leave them to their own devices and let them wallow in their pointless debates. However, if you must post, be sure to make passive-aggressive posts like this one.


So it's a pointless debate??? Much like the rest of the worlds issues I would say. I mean why care for anything at all that don't affect you. Say for instance the helmet law. Should it be mandatory??? Well if you don't ride then you don't care do you??? But what about when you decide you want to ride??? Then it would matter to you don't you think???

If RIGHT and WRONG don't matter to you. The why don't you keep your "I don't care" and pointless posts to yourself. After all it don't matter right???? So the time that it took you to type it up to nitpick on myself and the rest of us that are here trying to make things right you could have more easily kept it to yourself and moved along. If it don't matter to you then why visit the thread at all????

Funny how the ones that are thinking, shut up and get over and leave it lie are the ones posting up for others to do it and themselves not heeding their own advice.

If the threads and the reasons of the banning don't matter to YOU then why bother with it. Now how would you feel if you were the one who pointed out the issue and therefore got banned for it??? Would that matter to you then???? Would you not think you had been wronged in some way??? Well what if noone else gave a crap about what you had NOT done to get banned. And noone cared if you came or went???

It's too easy for people these days to say..... "mehhhh It don't affect me, so I'm not gonna get involved" And that's why the corruption and the deceit grow so rapidly. Until all of a sudden its so large that it DOES affect you now and now that you have turned your back on everyone else and not cared you have noone around backing you up.

Just so you know.... I know squat about Rogue... and even less about BE.... But I'm not the person who is going to roll over and say... "It don't matter to me" when someone is wronged.

I've gotten in the face of more than one person in my life to explain to them that what they were doing was unethical as well as against the law/rule/tos/etc. And I had no dog in the fight to start with.

But justice and fair treatment is something that should ALWAYS MATTER TO EVERYONE!!!! If it don't to you.... then roll over, go back to sleep and keep your nose on your face.

DM

[txrabbit]

have to agree with DM on this, not that my opinion is going to matter, seeing as how i'm not a mod. over the past couple of weeks, it does appear that some of the mods have strayed from their jobs as moderators. why would a mod stop doing his job to argue with members? why would one member get banned for "flaming" another member, when some would say that both were guilty of flaming? rogue shouldn't have been banned for pointing out that the mods aren't doing their job. BE shouldn't have been banned for "flaming" rabid. yeah, it was only a light one-week tap from the banstick, but still. it's the principal of it all. by banning rogue, one can make the assumption that by pointing out that certain mods aren't cutting the mustard, you're gonna be banned.
think off all the things that rogue and BE have done for the boards, and people that use them! think of all the great products rogue has brought, keeping the mag market alive. it's undeniable that persons of such high caliber are an asset to the sport, the company, and to these boards. both were always eager to answer any questions regarding the markers most of us love so much.
as far as deleting threads are concerned, what do the mods have to fear from other members, when they tote the all mighty ban stick? do they think that by deleting the threads, all of this will just go away? why not lock the threads so that the information is still there, but can't be added to? because these threads were deleted, they've opened the door to all the persons that think that they'll endear themselves to the wronged by throwing themselves on the cross, if you will. personally, i think that the deleted threads should be restored, but locked.

[Dend78]

good stuff DM, pick him apart all you want he is right there

:cheers:

[Hexis]

Silly trivial issues with an internet forum are hardly world issues.

Personally it does effect me, not in a banning way, but in a flurry-of-useless-cruft polluting the forum. Please just stop. You are not going to create any change. In a very real sense, your options are: to live with it, or go elsewhere.

[Lohman446]

So it's a pointless debate??? Much like the rest of the worlds issues I would say.

Wait... what?

Did you just honestly compare this message board whining to more serious issues that acutally mean something? Or to matters of public safety?

Are you serious?

[drg]

Silly trivial issues with an internet forum are hardly world issues.

Personally it does effect me, not in a banning way, but in a flurry-of-useless-cruft polluting the forum. Please just stop. You are not going to create any change. In a very real sense, your options are: to live with it, or go elsewhere.

Hear HEAR. Your manic bloviating has grown tiresome. You get in people's faces whose business you have no part in? That makes you a jackass.

[DevilMan]

Wait... what?

Did you just honestly compare this message board whining to more serious issues that acutally mean something? Or to matters of public safety?

Are you serious?


Yes Yes I did. Why??? Because this is the WORLD. We are all part of it. What happens here and what is expressed on this board is a direct reflection of what we are to the world. Now if for instance you are a poser and a fake. Then that my friend is on you. However for those of us here that carry ourselves OFF the web like we carry ON the web then it's a reflection of our true selves.

How is that related to REAL world issues? Simple. Would you go to a doctor for heart surgery if the previous week/month you found that same doctor talking online about how he makes more money when the patient dies than when they live.... Would you not think that may AFFECT your outcome? The WEB is NOT FAKE. It's VERY much real. It can be fantasized and it can be used to hide a transform ones true self into a being more likable and lovable. However, the people that do that are only lieing to themselves.

Hypothetical again for you. You want to take a trip. You research online and find someone who will take you on that trip. You make the plans and you show up for a flight up into the mountains somewhere. You're in a great mood because it's going to be a great fly fishing trip!!! You get there and you go get loaded up and everything and the pilot of the helo gets in and starts jackin up all kinds of things before finally getting to a very rough and unnerving lift off. You being white as a sheet and about to crap yourself bite your tongue. As you are finally having to breathe you ask the pilot if he knew what he was doing and again how long he'd been flying because on the WEB he told you that he'd done this trip 8 years straight!!!! And now he tells ya that he just got his license yesterday and this was the first flight he'd ever done... Now how would you feel?

A tangent??? Yes very much so. The point being made??? Be true to who you are and do what's right. Don't lie to yourself and you won't be so easily convinced to lie to other people. Follow the rules that you agree to follow with the expectation that those around you that have also agreed to follow them will do the same. If you don't AGREE with the rule then by all means don't AGREE to follow it. But when you agree to follow the stated rules, then those around you that have also agreed should be held accountable for their breaking of the rules.

This way of life and train of thought applies to REAL LIFE as much as it applies to WEB LIFE.

DM

[DevilMan]

Silly trivial issues with an internet forum are hardly world issues.

Personally it does effect me, not in a banning way, but in a flurry-of-useless-cruft polluting the forum. Please just stop. You are not going to create any change. In a very real sense, your options are: to live with it, or go elsewhere.


And as I have stated.... Your options were to live with it... or go elsewhere. And yet you chose to come into this thread which obviously don't concern you or affect you to post your thoughts about what I should do.

One should not attempt to instruct others as to how to live their life, without first living their own the way they instruct.

DM

[Lohman446]

This way of life and train of thought applies to REAL LIFE as much as it applies to WEB LIFE.DM

Well... I guess I can give up trying to prove you're an idiot.

And now, we start exposing the flaws. If you want to meld real life and what happens on this message board (we are not discussing a message board that states qualifications for something that actually matters, such as pilot training) lets do that.

Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Those who complain it is too hard to "search" for history and expect all of the answers and rules to be neatly put out in front of them are going to make themselves fools. This way of thinking applies as much to the web as it does real life :p .

Say you are in my shop / restaurant / whatever and say something I don't like. I remove you. Say customer XX does the same thing and I don't remove him. As long as my decision was not based on race / creed / sex you have no right to say boo about it. That way of thinking applies as much to the web as it does real life :p .

Say you send an editorial into my paper and I chose not to print it or anything else you ever write again. Say person XX does the same thing and I pring it. Again, as long as that relationship was not based on race / creed / sex I have every right to use my discretion. That way of thining applies as much to the web as it does real life :p .

Say you, and several other people are speeding. A police officer pulls you over. You broke the rule, you pay the price. He might write the next person a warning. Oh, and that officer, probably speeds by the same speed trap on his way home. Guess what. There will be no action taken against the officer. That way of thinking applies as much to the web as it does real life :p .

[DevilMan]

Well... I guess I can give up trying to prove you're an idiot.

And now, we start exposing the flaws. If you want to meld real life and what happens on this message board (we are not discussing a message board that states qualifications for something that actually matters, such as pilot training) lets do that.

Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Those who complain it is too hard to "search" for history and expect all of the answers and rules to be neatly put out in front of them are going to make themselves fools. This way of thinking applies as much to the web as it does real life :p .

Say you are in my shop / restaurant / whatever and say something I don't like. I remove you. Say customer XX does the same thing and I don't remove him. As long as my decision was not based on race / creed / sex you have no right to say boo about it. That way of thinking applies as much to the web as it does real life :p .

Say you send an editorial into my paper and I chose not to print it or anything else you ever write again. Say person XX does the same thing and I pring it. Again, as long as that relationship was not based on race / creed / sex I have every right to use my discretion. That way of thining applies as much to the web as it does real life :p .

Say you, and several other people are speeding. A police officer pulls you over. You broke the rule, you pay the price. He might write the next person a warning. Oh, and that officer, probably speeds by the same speed trap on his way home. Guess what. There will be no action taken against the officer. That way of thinking applies as much to the web as it does real life :p .

I'm glad you're giving up on the trying part. It's a very difficult undertaking and you are not the first to fail trying to do such a thing.

Your examples.... are ALL correct up to the COP part. You see. The Resturant/Shop/etc is YOUR domain. We don't sign papers saying we will obey YOUR rules when we enter. The paper.... Private corporation as well. It may say "Nowhereville Weekly" but that does not mean the paper is paid for by our taxes.

NOW the cop part..... That part you are wrong about. The sentence for the same crime should be the same NO matter who it is. Whether it's a cop thats off duty or not. WHY??? Because MY money PAYs that cop to do his job FAIRLY and EQUALLY. To UPHOLD JUSTICE and to be fair in the execution of that job. He is SWORN to uphold said law equally. To be followed as it is written and printed.

NOW does it happen that way???? NO it does not... Does the fact that it don't happen like it should make it RIGHT???? NO IT DON'T!.... Someone hacks up little babies and tosses em in the lake. No prints and no proof... but that don't make it RIGHT does it????

DM

[devildog]

now here is the real issue at hand:

is cheese cake a cake or a pie?

[Lohman446]

I'm glad you're giving up on the trying part. It's a very difficult undertaking and you are not the first to fail trying to do such a thing.

Your examples.... are ALL correct up to the COP part. You see. The Resturant/Shop/etc is YOUR domain. We don't sign papers saying we will obey YOUR rules when we enter. The paper.... Private corporation as well. It may say "Nowhereville Weekly" but that does not mean the paper is paid for by our taxes.


One seldom continues to try after the point is made.

Let me ask you this then. If the difference is public or private let me ask you this: is this public or private? Its private, the rules are not a contract, the owners of this forum are not bound to them - they can allow anyone to post anything they want here and it can change by person or whim.

And just so this point is not lost. Rogue was not banned on whim.

[TheTexan]

Seems like everyone is attacking DM instead of making a point. If you don't think AO has gotten in a downfall then just look at the amount of members lost. I think management needs to turned up a little bit just my thought.

[Hexis]

now here is the real issue at hand:

is cheese cake a cake or a pie?

It's a baked custard.

THE CAKE IS A LIE!

[Hexis]

Seems like everyone is attacking DM instead of making a point. If you don't think AO has gotten in a downfall then just look at the amount of members lost. I think management needs to turned up a little bit just my thought.

00oh N0es! Entropy!

[Papa_Smurf]

00oh N0es! Entropy!
to the max.

[Anjin3515]

Well... I guess I can give up trying to prove you're an idiot.

.


Really is there any need to get into denigrating the guy? You disagree, fine, you want to have a debate fine....but calling him an "idiot" does nothing but take the conversation to a lower level.

[LinearGoose]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GsVkV3AZqqI

[Lohman446]

Seems like everyone is attacking DM instead of making a point. If you don't think AO has gotten in a downfall then just look at the amount of members lost. I think management needs to turned up a little bit just my thought.


I've made no points? The thing is some people think that "fair and just" are of utmost importance on this forum. A point gets lost in this: Rogue was banned for a long term track record of disruptive behaviour, he had it coming. In the end if you agree with this, or disagree with this it is of little import. AO is a privately owned, privately funded, and privately moderated forum. You have no rights. The ownership and administration has the full right to refuse you service (ban you) for any reason not related to race, religion, or sex. Or, for that matter, no reason at all.

Apparently the administration felt the ban was just. Apparently ownership either agrees or does not beleive that it is a serious enough problem to undercut the moderators authority from here on forward. Or ownership leaves it to the mods and simply does not care. Either way, it doesn't matter what you think.

Want to run things differently, want new mods, want new rules? Rumor is, from TK himself, that AGD is for sale, I'm sure AO could be included in any deal reached. Don't like how things are done, simply pony up the money and then you can have ultimate say, your opinion can matter.

[Lohman446]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GsVkV3AZqqI


Oh come on. He compared this message board spat to serious geo-political issues in the world and somehow expects people to not call him on the obvious problems in correlation. What would you call it?

[TheTexan]

I've made no points? The thing is some people think that "fair and just" are of utmost importance on this forum. A point gets lost in this: Rogue was banned for a long term track record of disruptive behaviour, he had it coming. In the end if you agree with this, or disagree with this it is of little import. AO is a privately owned, privately funded, and privately moderated forum. You have no rights. The ownership and administration has the full right to refuse you service (ban you) for any reason not related to race, religion, or sex. Or, for that matter, no reason at all.

Apparently the administration felt the ban was just. Apparently ownership either agrees or does not beleive that it is a serious enough problem to undercut the moderators authority from here on forward. Or ownership leaves it to the mods and simply does not care. Either way, it doesn't matter what you think.

Want to run things differently, want new mods, want new rules? Rumor is, from TK himself, that AGD is for sale, I'm sure AO could be included in any deal reached. Don't like how things are done, simply pony up the money and then you can have ultimate say, your opinion can matter.
Big E already did that so I don't haft to. I used to post on AO but now its going to just have to be pbl. I wanted to sell on AO and so I thought a over all change would be nice. And beemer isnt the owner but acts like it with all his bs bans because someone said something about him he didnt like
and you sir just attack DM calling him an idot I dont even know that guy but thats not right

[LinearGoose]

Oh come on. He compared this message board spat to serious geo-political issues in the world and somehow expects people to not call him on the obvious problems in correlation. What would you call it?


Nope. Bad choice of link. Army

[DevilMan]

ohhhh grasshopper... but they are all related.... As is everything.

Some day when you get there you may understand as well.

Tis funny though.... Mr Point Maker is the first to start calling names.... so much for constructive discussions eh???

It's alright Loh....

DM

[Lohman446]

You have yet to actually address any of those points though and tell me the flaw in them. So, he who would want to see himself as having some great understanding has little more than talking points with no logical backing that has anything to do with the situation at hand.

[Target Practice]

Yes, YES, flame me my little puppets! Dance around while I pull the strings! Muahahahahhahahha! Look at them daaaaaaaaaaaaaance!

[TheTexan]

let's not be silly with the link. Army

haha call beemer

[drg]

The delusions of grandeur in this thread are ... pathetic.

[kosmo]

Im grande.

[Sumthinwicked]

lets all pull out our e well u can guess the rest and compare sizes i call mine the white mamba ahahahahah :ninja:

[Hexis]

lets all pull out our e well u can guess the rest and compare sizes i call mine the white mamba ahahahahah :ninja:

I call mine the "baby carrot".


Wait, I'm not supposed to share that am I?

[p8ntbal4me]

sigh

Linear;

You get a warning for this one yet?

~ P8nt

[LinearGoose]

Linear;

You get a warning for this one yet?

~ P8nt
No not yet, dont think its against the rules sinces I put a warning but rules seem to pop out of no were now days...

[teufelhunden]

No not yet, dont think its against the rules sinces I put a warning but rules seem to pop out of no were now days...


I don't think a warning makes it ok... like, if I was to call the PD and give them the heads up that I was gonna drive 70 in a 25, I'd still get a ticket... and if I was to warn that the rest of this post contained harsh language it wouldn't change anything.



Seriously? The rules here ain't hard to follow. If you guys just gave it a shot and didn't try and push the envelope all the time then complain about enforcement it wouldn't be an issue.

[LinearGoose]

I remember back in the day I saw someone post that its ok as long as you gave a warning or something. Where did I see that post at? Ill have to look.
EDIT:
Links
http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=178976&highlight=cussing
Not the one im looking for but it gives an example.

[txaggie08]

The rules here ain't hard to follow.


apparently even the mods have trouble on occasion.



I better shut up at this point, I still like the popular BST section here..... :ninja:

[DevilMan]

apparently even the mods have trouble on occasion.



I better shut up at this point, I still like the popular BST section here..... :ninja:


DUH AGGIE!!!!

There are no rules for the mods... :D

How ya doin over here anyway Army???? Doin well I hope.....

I guess Loh gave it up....

too bad.... it was starting to remind me sooooooo much of the BG/PBN thread.

Hey Army.... I really do truly applaud you on the deletion/removal of the vid for BraveHeart. Though in all honesty I don't think what gets said is anything more than what's seen on TV... but no worries. But you removing it and making a note of it is much better than just knocking people around. The whole deal is we aren't asking for anyone to get special treatment.... but that means everyone. Anyway, you have yourself a good night.

DM

[Lohman446]

I guess Loh gave it up....

too bad.... it was starting to remind me sooooooo much of the BG/PBN thread.




I asked you to address any of the points that I have made and why your side of the argument would continue to have validity - you started doing some grasshopper thing as if pretending to be enlightened strengthened your argument somehow.

[ThePixelGuru]

Try here http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=166992

I suppose you could search too
Oh, that's funny. Somehow when I read the "Rules" thread I thought that all the rules would be there. I obeyed those rules, I got banned. I was not aware that I was supposed to actively seek obscure rules threads posted before I joined the forum. Silly me. Furthermore, no mod ever states in that thread (or any thread provided so far) that substituting asterisks for curse words results in a ban. I'm a fairly good forum user, and if I read a rule I won't break it. But the rule I broke was never posted. How am I supposed to obey rules that aren't ever stated?


A point gets lost in this: Rogue was banned for a long term track record of disruptive behaviour, he had it coming. In the end if you agree with this, or disagree with this it is of little import. AO is a privately owned, privately funded, and privately moderated forum. You have no rights. The ownership and administration has the full right to refuse you service (ban you) for any reason not related to race, religion, or sex. Or, for that matter, no reason at all.
Lohman, you're a category of debater that particularly bugs me. You don't reply to the important points people make; rather, you reply to the points that you think you have the best argument against. This isn't about Rogue's ban, this isn't about Big Evil's ban. This isn't about my ban. This isn't about any one particular user getting banned. This is about a moderator who enforces rules that were never posted and applies bans seemingly at random.

I'm not saying this is strictly Beemer's fault - maybe we need more mods who can revamp the rules thread so we actually know what rules we're supposed to be following, and that larger mod staff could actually come up with a coordinated system where they warn and ban users according to an actual pattern rather than whims or moods. I'm not arguing against enforcement, I'm arguing against uneven enforcement. This is like watching a guy doing 80mph in a 60mph zone whip past a cop and then getting ticketed by that same cop for going 65mph. I know he's got a tough job to do, but I'm still irked that it was me who got the ticket.

For those of you who will tell me my opinion doesn't matter - I'm sorry, but I was under the impression that it was the users who made a forum great. I thought what we had here was a great community that worked together to better itself, based on a common interest in quality paintball information and equipment. I though I contributed to that, I thought I added something to the community, and I thought my input was appreciated. What I'm hearing now is that I've been mistaken these last couple years, that everything can be thrown to the wind based on the whims of a single moderator, and that this forum is no longer receptive to the ideas and opinions of its members.

Hopefully some of the mods here will eventually realize that this sort of heavy-handed and uneven approach isn't any way to keep a userbase happy and flourishing. Based on moderator responses to this thread, though, I'm not holding my breath.

[Lohman446]

Lohman, you're a category of debater that particularly bugs me. You don't reply to the important points people make; rather, you reply to the points that you think you have the best argument against. This isn't about Rogue's ban, this isn't about Big Evil's ban. This isn't about my ban. This isn't about any one particular user getting banned. This is about a moderator who enforces rules that were never posted and applies bans seemingly at random.

Who was banned, and not just warned, for a rule that they were not aware of (or should have been aware of)? Not you not aware of, but they were not aware of.

[Lohman446]

This is like watching a guy doing 80mph in a 60mph zone whip past a cop and then getting ticketed by that same cop for going 65mph. I know he's got a tough job to do, but I'm still irked that it was me who got the ticket.




And yet in no way changes the fact you were guilty of disobeying the rule and your punishment is merited.

[ThePixelGuru]

Who was banned, and not just warned, for a rule that they were not aware of (or should have been aware of)? Not you not aware of, but they were not aware of.
Uh... what? I don't even have a clue what you're trying to say here, but it appears to be about the specific bans of specific users, which I just said wasn't the point. Kind of reenforces my other point about you responding to the wrong portions of an argument, doesn't it?


And yet in no way changes the fact you were guilty of disobeying the rule and your punishment is merited.
That's true, but the cop has a responsibility to stop the guy going 80mph, too, and any rational individual would argue that the more severe and prior offender should be the higher priority. Still, I suppose a more apt analogy would be a 60mph zone with no signs marking it as such. Guy goes through at 80mph, cop doesn't seem to have a problem with it, you go through at 65mph and get a ticket. Surely you see my point - but you're probably willfully misinterpreting it because it's easier to argue against that way. Regardless, banning some users for offenses and completely letting others off the hook is arbitrary and unfair. I'm not complaining that I got banned, I'm saying it's lousy policy to ban some users for certain offenses and turn a blind eye when they are perpetrated by others.

My argument here is based on two simple facts.

1. Users are banned for violations of rules not contained within the actual forum rules.
2. Users are banned for offenses while identical or worse offenders are let off the hook.

These are truths, and if you think you can disprove either I'd like to hear it. Where we differ appears to be in that I believe forums and their moderators owe some degree of respect to their members, just as members owe some degree of respect to their moderators and the forum to which they belong. Willfull disregard of their own rules and code of conduct is a breach of that respect and tears at the fabric which holds communities like this together. As much as you'd like to believe that we're doing this because we want to tear AO down, we're doing this because we feel we've invested enough time and effort into this community that preserving it is worth standing up to a moderator on a power trip.

[Lohman446]

You can't use just broad sweeping generalizations without some specific example to actually back it up though.

[DevilMan]

Very good TPG!!!!

Well stated and well put.

And Lohman. You can't argue. You can't debate. You come off on me telling me that I go into the "grasshopper" part telling me that I'm not addressing the issues???

Who started the name calling??? Come on. You've gotta be kidding me. The rule states that substituting characters or spaces for letters to bypass the cuss filter is not allowed.... Let me show you some examples....

P A I N T ball..... d00d00he@d.... p00pf0rbr@!n$

You get the picture??/ None of those words are blanked out. And if you can't figure out how to make em then that's on you. I'm not gonna push the button to prove my point as I can do it with validity without breaking a rule. THE RULES DO NOT STATE that saying ***, ****, ********* **** * * ** * * * is a violation. Go read em.

And for someone who likes to argue that the members here have no merit and don't mean anything and can be tossed out like a piece of trash... I would like to see you make a post saying that that's what you believe in in the general forum for ALL to see and see how it gets taken. See how well received your ideas are. And see just where it gets you.

Why don't you give that a whirl and get back to me. After all this is AO.... This is about opinions and ideas is it not?? Why don't you post up a poll and see what the rest of the folks here think???

DM

[ThePixelGuru]

You can't use just broad sweeping generalizations without some specific example to actually back it up though.I assume you're referring to:
1. Users are banned for violations of rules not contained within the actual forum rules.
2. Users are banned for offenses while identical or worse offenders are let off the hook.
...which forces me to wonder if you've actually been reading the thread. As for 1, I got banned for posting four asterisks in a row - not tripping the cuss filter (which isn't a rule anyway), not cussing, and not circumventing the cuss filter. For 2, starring out the fecal portion of the phrase "bullpoop" is, in my opinion, less of an offense than the guy (his nick escapes me, but I don't want to get anyone else banned here anyway) whose custom location contained the three letter slur for gay males with only the "a" blocked with a "*". There are tons of other examples in this thread alone, and if you open your eyes you can see it happening all over the forum. I'm fairly astounded that you can claim this doesn't happen, especially given that it happened just earlier in this thread when one user was banned for posting a few asterisks while another was warned for circumventing the cuss filter. Or in the tons of threads before this in which Beemer banned the people who started them and locked or deleted the threads, compared to just moving them to the Friendly Corner (like this thread). Or how linking to pblegion.com is apparently a ban-able offense (seems to be the only forum link this is true for, hmm?). This hardly seems like evenly applied policy to me.

Now, would you argue that a) moderators not following their own rules is a good thing, or b) that they have been following their own rules? I can see why you dance around the issue - if you let me nail down your beliefs about it we could quickly determine just how ridiculous a stance you're taking on this.

[bofh]

For those of you who will tell me my opinion doesn't matter - I'm sorry, but I was under the impression that it was the users who made a forum great. I thought what we had here was a great community that worked together to better itself, based on a common interest in quality paintball information and equipment. I though I contributed to that, I thought I added something to the community, and I thought my input was appreciated. What I'm hearing now is that I've been mistaken these last couple years, that everything can be thrown to the wind based on the whims of a single moderator, and that this forum is no longer receptive to the ideas and opinions of its members.

You know what's neat about that paragraph? You start off thinking you opinion matters, and by the end, you realize otherwise. Oh and AO hasn't changed, it's been that way from at least 1/20/05.

Users do make a forum, as they provide the content, and without content a forum is nothing.
Moderators are occupied making the board inviting for other users to provide content.
Don't make the mistake that this means your opinion on they should run the board matters. It makes you a disruptive force.

You are the nail standing out, and not the squeaky wheel.

[Lohman446]

I assume you're referring to:
...which forces me to wonder if you've actually been reading the thread. As for 1, I got banned for posting four asterisks in a row - not tripping the cuss filter (which isn't a rule anyway), not cussing, and not circumventing the cuss filter. For 2, starring out the fecal portion of the phrase "bullpoop" .

Which is a violation of the rules and has been very clearly stated in the past (albeit not in the rules section). And since one argument here is "it applies just as much on the web as in real life" :rolleyes: I'll take it and run with it. You are responsible to know the rules / laws of life and follow them, even if they are not all neatly set out in one easy form. The only portions of your complaint that holds any sense of validity is that they are not all in the same place and that they are not always enforced fairly. Since there is a judgement call in any enforcement not everyone will always agree they are enforced fairly, so I'm going to go with questioning if that is that great of a valid point. Its a ban, it didn't cause you harm, and now you know. Get over it.

[maxama10]

Lohman 08! :clap:

[DevilMan]

Which is a violation of the rules and has been very clearly stated in the past (albeit not in the rules section).

VERY CLEARLY STATED.... Albeit not in the rules section?? So members here are responsible for reading ALL threads that may or may not have a RULE explained in them to know that they are may or may not be breaking one???

• No cussing
• No racial, religious, or sexually inflammatory language
• Avoid topics containing religious, racial, or political discussion (they are the top three flame starting toipcs)
• No "hitting" on other members of the channel - they are here for paintball, not for a date
• Do not type in all caps - it means you are shouting
• Do not use excessive colors, bold letters, or ASCII characters
• Do not try to circumvent the cuss filters by using spaces or other characters
• Do not spam or flood the channel with repeated statements or questions
• Do not ask to be a moderator
• Do not exhibit disruptive behavior
• Post topics under their respective forum. For example, a tech question goes in the Tech Forum
• Do not post the same topic in multiple forms
• Off topic posts are allowed, but they must be reasonable and civil, and in the "Friendly Corner"
• Do not threaten or "flame" members of the board
• Do not try to circumvent a ban placed on you

Typing the ***** into a message is not trying to circumvent the filter by using spaces or other characters. According to the way this has been handled the posting of the ***** **** is acceptable as that is what the cuss filter posts. The cuss filter does not remove the context of the post or change it around in any way other than change the cuss word to a set of asterisks. If the person themselves is not allowed to do that... then why is that the FIX for the filter is to post ***** in its place??? If you had read what I posted before that perhaps it could be replaced with something that we are not able to reproduce then that way when it got filtered it would be a special icon/symbol that would mean we did say a bad word that was in play and that we would be suitably punished. But seeing ***** on the board don't mean I typed a bad word that the filter caught.

If you will read my examples above you can see where one can insert spaces and $PEC!@L characters that the filter would miss and therefore most certainly spell out the word to alot more legible format than *****.

Why don't you guys take a minute, get off your highhorse, take a look around and put all this fighting and bickering aside and just for a moment try and see the view from the other side of the glass.

So far not one of you have said anything other than... We are mods!!! What we say goes!!!! And you all keep going with the... "You don't know the whole story" And such... And well buddy... I'm quite sure that there are only 2 folks that know the WHOLE story. And if you ask either one of them they will differ on what happened. The story that MOST of us do know is this. Something went down. Some saw it as being unjust. They spoke up about it. AND INSTEAD OF EXPLAINING WHAT HAPPENED. The thread got deleted. Instead of the MOD taking the high road and saying look guys... here's what happened, here's how we see it, here's why it was done. You instead go and do the.... WE ARE MODS!!!! What we say GOES!!!! Question us and be banned!!!! Sorry folks.... don't buy it. Don't have to. As it's been said.

How much would it have been if someone had said.... Look folks... there were some hiccups... Some triggers were pulled prematurely, some folks got overshot... and yeahhhhh too bad some of them were on the same team.... but hey that's the way it goes.... But we all made amends, we talked it over, we are good to go. Those that got banned know why and are cool with it, those that got warnings also know why.... and those that pulled the trigger too soon, know and understand it and will try better in the future.

This isn't about who is right and who is wrong... It's about BOTH sides giving up some and to quit being so bull headed about something this trivial. Yes it is trivial in some ways.... But the lack of the MODS (Since they are the ones that can post, as the banned ones can't) the mods have REFUSED to do anything of the sort.

Is it required?? Is it your POSITION to do such a thing???? Nope it isn't. But would it have stopped this ordeal dead in it's tracks 4 pages ago?? More than likely. So what is worth more to you?? 5 pages of bickering??? Or taking the high road and admitting that something was done incorrectly, that we are ultimately all human (Though Lohman is questionable) and that mistakes get made.

Instead of all of this fighting... we could be well into our next set of games with the overshooting, bunkering and friendly fire issues behind us.

Over and out,

DM

[Lohman446]

The rule is no cussing. Getting the *s means you were cussing and gives you a warning to edit it out. Using *'s instead is using characters to circumvent activation of the filter. Most of the time, unless it is inflamattory or a repeat offender, people have gotten warnings. Posting *'s to bait the moderators is distrubtive behavior. I guess it is in the rules after all now that I consider it.

However, for those who wanted the clarification, and had bothered to use the search function, this was very very clearly stated in the past.

[bornl33t]

Seriously, get out of the house and do something, you're all making a four page mountain out of a molehill.

[DevilMan]

I'm not in the house.... I'm outside in the middle of the lake on a jetski.... thank goodness for those new AirCards!!!!

And if you don't have anything constructive to say regarding this matter then why do you insist on posting to it??? See there we go again, proving points. The ones that folks that don't care and only want to say, "making a mountain out of a molehill" crap. And has nothing better to say on the subject, yet they come here anyway. I am discussing points related to this thread. You are not. IF you wish to discuss the Mountain vs. Molehill dilemna why don't you start a new thread of that nature???

So by your definition getting the ****** means I was cussing???? WRONG. As I've stated before and as you have obviously failed to read/grasp my explanation. Which I find totally whacked out as you yourself just posted *'s in your post. So therefore that means you were cussing. Right???

And WRONG again on using ***** in place of a word does not mean you were using special characters or spacing to circumvent the filter. Why don't you stop and read a bit before just flyin off the handle. You obviously have a very weak grasp on the obvious.

See my examples on what counts as a rule violation. Spacing or special characters. As what I put. Now if you would like I can PM you some examples with the proper cuss words spelled out.... however it will be known here that it was requested.

You are just too bullheaded to step off and look at the logic.

DM

[DevilMan]

You know what's neat about that paragraph? You start off thinking you opinion matters, and by the end, you realize otherwise. Oh and AO hasn't changed, it's been that way from at least 1/20/05.

Users do make a forum, as they provide the content, and without content a forum is nothing.
Moderators are occupied making the board inviting for other users to provide content.
Don't make the mistake that this means your opinion on they should run the board matters. It makes you a disruptive force.

You are the nail standing out, and not the squeaky wheel.

If his opinion don't matter..... Then what makes you think yours does??? So why did you just waste your time typing it up?

It has nothing to do with his opinion on how he thinks the board should be ran. ZERO to do with it. It has EVERYTHING to do with his thoughts on the way the RULES stated on this BOARD are enforced. Noone here has said squat about how they think it should be different, or how we should be able to VOTE on the rules. BUT we have stated emphatically and repeatedly that the rules are stated as such and are to be followed as such and to be enforced as such.

Don't try arguing a point that's not being argued with someone who is arguing other topics.

DM

[Lohman446]

And WRONG again on using ***** in place of a word does not mean you were using special characters or spacing to circumvent the filter. Why don't you stop and read a bit before just flyin off the handle. You obviously have a very weak grasp on the obvious.

See my examples on what counts as a rule violation. Spacing or special characters. As what I put. Now if you would like I can PM you some examples with the proper cuss words spelled out.... however it will be known here that it was requested.


You are telling me I'm wrong that posting the *'s can be treated by the moderators as circumvention or baiting? Funny - the discussion in the past (as has been pointed out repeatedly to you in this thread) stated clearly it can be enforced as such. Don't like it, fine. It really doesn't matter what you think when the administration of the board has clearly stated how they consider it.

Perhaps you didn't know, now you do. Live with it and move on.

[bofh]

If his opinion don't matter..... Then what makes you think yours does??? So why did you just waste your time typing it up?

It has nothing to do with his opinion on how he thinks the board should be ran. ZERO to do with it. It has EVERYTHING to do with his thoughts on the way the RULES stated on this BOARD are enforced. Noone here has said squat about how they think it should be different, or how we should be able to VOTE on the rules. BUT we have stated emphatically and repeatedly that the rules are stated as such and are to be followed as such and to be enforced as such.

Don't try arguing a point that's not being argued with someone who is arguing other topics.

DM

I have witnessed 100% FAIL, and it is you.

Continue to exhibit disruptive behavior and see where it gets you.

[DevilMan]

You are telling me I'm wrong that posting the *'s can be treated by the moderators as circumvention or baiting? Funny - the discussion in the past (as has been pointed out repeatedly to you in this thread) stated clearly it can be enforced as such. Don't like it, fine. It really doesn't matter what you think when the administration of the board has clearly stated how they consider it.

Perhaps you didn't know, now you do. Live with it and move on.


And yet the point being made is that the Mods did not reveal or write up or announce this rule. Nor did they WARN those that used the **** before banning when the mods themselves have used the same ***** In posts. Because what??? A mod knows that another mod wouldn't post a **** in a post that meant anything bad???

And NOPE I'm not saying that the mods can't take the ***** as baiting or circumvention... That's not what I said. I can't control how the mods take anything whether it be a tic tac or a rectal thermometer. I can say that by posting ******* it is NOT circumvention of the cuss filter.

What I did say was ^^^^^^ up there. Has to do with spacing and special characters. (Explaining it yet once again)

DM

[DevilMan]

I have witnessed 100% FAIL, and it is you.

Continue to exhibit disruptive behavior and see where it gets you.


Alright.... So tell me what is DISRUPTIVE about my behavior??? The fact that I call a spade a spade?? If that disrupts you... A. Don't come to this thread... and B. Don't play cards.

And yet again I ask you to explain what your post has in relevance to this thread???? From where I sit, you are the one being disruptive. Adding nothing to the discussion and only piping up for your own ego is giving this thread nothing.

Consider that for a moment.

DM

[Babylon 5]

You are telling me I'm wrong that posting the *'s can be treated by the moderators as circumvention or baiting? Funny - the discussion in the past (as has been pointed out repeatedly to you in this thread) stated clearly it can be enforced as such. Don't like it, fine. It really doesn't matter what you think when the administration of the board has clearly stated how they consider it.

Perhaps you didn't know, now you do. Live with it and move on.
If the rule was clearly stated in a thread years ago then that just proves that the current mods and administrators are not doing their job because they have had an excessive amount of time to update the rules.

Moding isn't all about bans you know.

[drg]

Righteously arguing a wrong or unprovable position over many posts and many pages is disruptive, and is similar to what Rogue does on a regular basis and why he was prime for a ban. It's flaming and sometimes trolling.

[bofh]

Alright.... So tell me what is DISRUPTIVE about my behavior???

Are you going to say with a straight face that you behavior in this thread is not disruptive?

All that I've seen in this thread is a lot of whiny "This is injustice" posts, and random capitalized words.

http://cache.bordom.net/images/533cec2166a9e3242c899788a13c7cae.jpg

[Lohman446]

Alright.... So tell me what is DISRUPTIVE about my behavior??? The fact that I call a spade a spade?? If that disrupts you... A. Don't come to this thread... and B. Don't play cards.

And yet again I ask you to explain what your post has in relevance to this thread???? From where I sit, you are the one being disruptive. Adding nothing to the discussion and only piping up for your own ego is giving this thread nothing.

Consider that for a moment.

DM


You don't call a spade a spade. I have heard a lot of sweeping generalizations that cannot be quite backed up with specific examples so far.

You have been told that the rule has been clarified that using *s is in fact bannable. You have been shown the thread where the administration has specifically stated it. And yet you continue to whine about it. Then, you argue that this point is specific to the thread and somehow still valid. Not knowing the rule clarification was ignorance, which we all have on certain subjects and is easily forgiveable. You can guess what most people think continuing to argue the point is.

Others have argued that for some reason members of the board are due on explanation of banning. While an explanation may be polite to give, and reasonable to ask for it is not something that is in fact due you, and moving from a request to a demand is ego-centric at best.

I have even heard the argument that the members should be given a vote on administrative issues. The logistics of this alone make it unreasonable. The theory that you are entitled to such a vote is ludicrous.

Of course, you are the great enlightened one checking websites and making long drawn out posts from the middle of a lake on a jet-ski. :rofl: ;)

[Lohman446]

If the rule was clearly stated in a thread years ago then that just proves that the current mods and administrators are not doing their job because they have had an excessive amount of time to update the rules.

Moding isn't all about bans you know.


The rules say no circumventing the cuss filter and no disruptive posting. It was decided that the *'s were at least one of those. When law is "defined" through court action, does the law get rewritten entirely? No, you are responsible to know the law, and how it has been defined. At worst someone was temp-banned for not know, and now a lot of people educated and warned. What real harm was done?

[BigEvil]

Righteously arguing a wrong or unprovable position over many posts and many pages is disruptive, and is similar to what Rogue does on a regular basis and why he was prime for a ban. It's flaming and sometimes trolling.


http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mfl/lowres/mfln130l.jpg


:rofl: I've seen you play that game with Rogue plenty, if he should be banned so should you.

[txaggie08]

Big Evil jacking my pictures again...

[BigEvil]

Are you going to say with a straight face that you behavior in this thread is not disruptive?

All that I've seen in this thread is a lot of whiny "This is injustice" posts, and random capitalized words.

http://cache.bordom.net/images/533cec2166a9e3242c899788a13c7cae.jpg


Wasnt it stated 'somewhere' that posting of owls and lolcats was prohibited on AO?

[drg]

:rofl: I've seen you play that game with Rogue plenty, if he should be banned so should you.

I'd take my banning like a man if it happened and not try to rally people to my cause on another site. That's just sad.

I know the risks of playing the game and accept mod actions if they are taken. The best players in any sport play at the edge of the rules, and refereeing is always full of judgment calls.

[Lohman446]

[IMG] :rofl: I've seen you play that game with Rogue plenty, if he should be banned so should you.

I know this wasn't directed at me. In fairness, if I ever actually do cross the line and a moderator decides to call me on it I accept that I have skated close enough to it often enough that I earned it. Its a few day ban, I'm sure I can live. I expect many people feel the same way - I'm willing to bet its not far off. Sometimes you have to say oops, yeh officer I might have been speeding, I'll take my ticket now.

Unfortunately some people escalte this and become problems. "But, look at everyone else..." "Don't you have better things to do" "You caught up with me..." etc. Sometimes our actions invoke consequences, sometimes the same actions do not. Because sometimes people do not apply the letter of the law perfectly does it mean that you are culpable if you break it?

Isn't it far more respectable to stand up and say "yeh, I probably deserved that" than to whine about it (and I do beleive you have not been whining about it)? After all, we are discussing a short term ban from a web forum.

The fairness argument though I find weak at best. After all, private "property" does not have to apply rules fairly or evenly. I have engaged the argument here only because far too many people whine if I do not directly address the point. I have addressed it now, and still go back to - private forum, administered at and to the owners desire.

[BigEvil]

I'd take my banning like a man if it happened and not try to rally people to my cause on a third site. That's just sad.


A real man wouldn't be a hypocrite. That's sad. I find it very encouraging how many people will stand up to something they see as wrong even when they are not involved or dont have a stake in it.

People are passionate about this stuff and are not willing to sit back and let a handful of malcontents ruin what they care for.



Have fun gentleman. I have my own concerns to attend to.

[drg]

A real man wouldn't be a hypocrite. That's sad. I find it very encouraging how many people will stand up to something they see as wrong even when they are not involved or dont have a stake in it.

Are you calling me a hypocrite? How so? I have never denied any claim on my character, but then again it's not the subject here.


People are passionate about this stuff and are not willing to sit back and let a handful of malcontents ruin what they care for.

Irony ...

[ThePixelGuru]

You know what's neat about that paragraph? You start off thinking you opinion matters, and by the end, you realize otherwise. Oh and AO hasn't changed, it's been that way from at least 1/20/05.

Users do make a forum, as they provide the content, and without content a forum is nothing.
Moderators are occupied making the board inviting for other users to provide content.
Don't make the mistake that this means your opinion on they should run the board matters. It makes you a disruptive force.

You are the nail standing out, and not the squeaky wheel.
No, I still think my opinion matters, just as I think yours and Lohman's matter. That's why I'm bothering to address these opinions, and clearly you think my opinion matters because you took the time to respond. Funny how you say "Moderators are occupied making the board inviting for other users to provide content." That's exactly how I would define a moderator's responsibility, and that's exactly what I feel they are not doing. Random bans outside the bounds of the rules does not foster and inviting environment, and thus the moderators are not living up to their responsibilities. Also, consider where we would be without disruptive force. Yeah, it's a good thing no one's ever stood up to anyone before, clearly the right thing to do is always to cave. :rolleyes:


You don't call a spade a spade. I have heard a lot of sweeping generalizations that cannot be quite backed up with specific examples so far.
Funny, you keep saying that and I keep backing up my examples. Of course, you never specify which "sweeping generalizations" you mean, or provide any reason why they're unfalsifiable or any counter examples which might falsify those claims. I suggest you do so, because until you provide any of this you're just the kid sitting in the corner sticking his fingers in his ears and screaming to drown out the arguments you think might bring yours crashing down.


Which is a violation of the rules and has been very clearly stated in the past (albeit not in the rules section). And since one argument here is "it applies just as much on the web as in real life" :rolleyes: I'll take it and run with it. You are responsible to know the rules / laws of life and follow them, even if they are not all neatly set out in one easy form. The only portions of your complaint that holds any sense of validity is that they are not all in the same place and that they are not always enforced fairly. Since there is a judgement call in any enforcement not everyone will always agree they are enforced fairly, so I'm going to go with questioning if that is that great of a valid point. Its a ban, it didn't cause you harm, and now you know. Get over it.
You keep claiming that this rule has been "clearly stated," but it hasn't. In fact, if you read the linked thread, the only thing any moderator says in the thread is when the AO Moderation Team closes the thread, saying, "Cussing or bypassing the filter results in a ban. It is subject to our interpretation." Posting asterisks is not cussing, nor is it bypassing the filter. Hell, it's never even explicitly (though it is implicitly) stated that activating the filter is a ban-able offense. It's not stated in the official rules, it's not stated in that other thread. So until you can quote and link to where it is explicitly stated, stop saying that it is explicitly stated. Even if it was explicitly stated in this other thread (which it isn't, I've never encountered a forum that expected you, unprompted, to search the entire forum for additional rules not contained in the rules thread. Please tell me how we were supposed to know to do that. And again, this isn't about specifically my ban, and it's not about any one ban. It's about the uneven application of ban policies and the application of ban polices never discussed in the forum rules.

All we're asking is that the mods update the rules thread to reflect the rules which they will actually enforce, and then enforce those rules. Is that really so much to ask?

[DevilMan]

All in favor????

AYE!!!

DM

[drg]

All in favor????

AYE!!!

DM

This isn't a democracy. Not even a casual one.

[DevilMan]

This isn't a democracy. Not even a casual one.


bwahahhahahaaa..... So that's an AYE for you as well !!!!

WOOT!!!! There's 2!!!!

:P

DM

[MANN]

Are we seriously still arguing about this? :rofl:

[bofh]

No, I still think my opinion matters, just as I think yours and Lohman's matter. Good for you. But I got news for you, Lohman's and My opinions on how this board should be moderated are worth as close to zero as my calculator goes to the mods here. (except, perhaps Army, because he's like that.)


All we're asking is that the mods update the rules thread to reflect the rules which they will actually enforce, and then enforce those rules. Is that really so much to ask?

Of the times before, this has come up, and not been answered... It maybe too much to ask. FC. FC man.



Oh, and

Wasnt it stated 'somewhere' that posting of owls and lolcats was prohibited on AO? Perhaps... but isn't this thread about how the mods don't do their job?

[DevilMan]

bwahahhahahaaa.... nope....

weeez bee havin skushuns!!!!!

:D

Ya see the best part of beatin a dead horse is getting to laugh at fool that hits it when it's gotten ripe and pops!!!!! :D

;)

DM

[ThePixelGuru]

Good for you. But I got news for you, Lohman's and My opinions on how this board should be moderated are worth as close to zero as my calculator goes to the mods here. (except, perhaps Army, because he's like that.)
I've got news for you. A board that doesn't listen to the desires of its members is not going to do well. We've already established that members make the forum as no forum exists without content. Not listening to those members is a pretty bad choice. Look at Facebook - they do something their members don't like, and their members complain. Does Facebook have to listen? No, but they do, because without members their site is worthless. Any site operator or forum moderator worth a damn recognizes that pissing off your members is detrimental to the site, and won't do it without a very good reason. This happens all over the internet, and I'm surprised that you all seem to think AO is an exception.


Of the times before, this has come up, and not been answered... It maybe too much to ask. FC. FC man.
Yes, because if you try and fail, the lesson is to never try again. That's a great philosophy for life, you'll get real far with that. Explain to me how this is not a reasonable request, and what AO gains from ignoring its members and having ill- or undefined rules that have no bearing on what the moderators actually do.

[Lohman446]

AO gains from ignoring what has changed from a request to a demand from a vocal minority. AO gains by not allowing a vocal minority to somehow gain status by being more vocal and more disruptive to get their way. AO gains by banning those who would seek to be disruptive across multiple threads because the moderators did something they did not agree with. AO gains by not allowing a vocal minority to beleive that their opinions are worth far more than they are. Once you give some vocal minority something, because they have been vocal and not doing so may be disruptive, you have opened the door and others will learn from it.

I'm not against an update to the rules and clarification for people who can't seem to understand what is disruptive posting, or baiting moderators. At one point we did not need them, but apparently the time when people were respectful to the forum, the rights of its ownership and administration, has passed.

[bofh]

I've got news for you. A board that doesn't listen to the desires of its members is not going to do well. We've already established that members make the forum as no forum exists without content. Not listening to those members is a pretty bad choice. Look at Facebook - they do something their members don't like, and their members complain. Does Facebook have to listen? No, but they do, because without members their site is worthless. ny site operator or forum moderator worth a damn recognizes that pissing off your members is detrimental to the site, and won't do it without a very good reason. This happens all over the internet, and I'm surprised that you all seem to think AO is an exception.

Members, members, members...

You speak of two things, almost interchangeably, your opinion (as the thepixelguru), and the wider plural opinion (when you speak of "Members") Those are not the same thing.

There's maybe 5 of you that got your panties in a wad over this. If you actually want you voice to have weight, then you need to pose a threat to what the moderators care about. ie. content. Gather up more people that will pledge to not provide content unless your changes are met.

Make a list,
Make a manifesto.
Organise.
Rally.
Until you do that, you just a minor voice crying about injustice.



Yes, because if you try and fail, the lesson is to never try again. That's a great philosophy for life, you'll get real far with that.

One of the working definitions of insanity I use, is trying the same thing, and expecting different results. So this time around, you're going to have to better the last attempts.

As for me, validating the request. I've always thought it was reasonable. Going on three years now.

[teufelhunden]

What exactly did facebook do that its users wanted? We've all been sick of 700 application invites per day but they aren't doing anything about that, there was a huge outcry about news/minifeeds but they still exist, you still can't make it so you have to approve any pictures you're tagged in, etc. etc. etc.

[ThePixelGuru]

AO gains from ignoring what has changed from a request to a demand from a vocal minority. AO gains by not allowing a vocal minority to somehow gain status by being more vocal and more disruptive to get their way. AO gains by banning those who would seek to be disruptive across multiple threads because the moderators did something they did not agree with. AO gains by not allowing a vocal minority to beleive that their opinions are worth far more than they are. Once you give some vocal minority something, because they have been vocal and not doing so may be disruptive, you have opened the door and others will learn from it.

I'm not against an update to the rules and clarification for people who can't seem to understand what is disruptive posting, or baiting moderators. At one point we did not need them, but apparently the time when people were respectful to the forum, the rights of its ownership and administration, has passed.
Oh, I see. A minority has never been right, it's only large groups of people who can have good ideas. :rolleyes: I like how you can take an argument that many agree is right on principle and justify ignoring it on principle. Somehow the moderators are right for being butthurt and digging in their heels because we got a little peeved when they brushed us aside and ignored a perfectly reasonable request.


Make a list,
Make a manifesto.
Organise.
Rally.
Until you do that, you just a minor voice crying about injustice.
Fair enough. I don't think we're a minority, and if we are I doubt it's by much. Point taken, though, I don't have concrete numbers to back me here.


What exactly did facebook do that its users wanted? We've all been sick of 700 application invites per day but they aren't doing anything about that, there was a huge outcry about news/minifeeds but they still exist, you still can't make it so you have to approve any pictures you're tagged in, etc. etc. etc.
Privacy stuff, mostly. They introduce features like the Mini-Feed, then users hate it so they add an opt-out. They have a new feature (called Beacon, I think) that tells people when you buy something from Amazon, a movie ticket, or rent something from Blockbuster. It was an opt-out system where the only way to stop it was to click a little pop-up within 20 seconds of making the purchase. Users complained, Facebook added an opt-out that you could check in your privacy settings to disable Beacon. They didn't have to do any of that, but it's in their best interest to keep users happy so they don't deactivate their accounts and leave. That sort of behavior is fairly standard of any site that listens to its userbase and understands that people will leave if they don't get the respect they feel they deserve.

[Lohman446]

Oh, I see. A minority has never been right, it's only large groups of people who can have good ideas. :rolleyes: I like how you can take an argument that many agree is right on principle and justify ignoring it on principle. Somehow the moderators are right for being butthurt and digging in their heels because we got a little peeved when they brushed us aside and ignored a perfectly reasonable request..

No, the minority here whining about "rights and justice" are wrong. I'd actually agree the rules could be written better. I disagree with the concept that members should be immune to them because they are not.

There is a big difference between "Oops, I did not know that was the rule, perhaps for future members it should be clarified better in the rule sections" and "you have no right to enforce it because I'm important to you and I didn't know, this is an injustice.... blah blah... Berlin wall... blah blah.... Nazis.....". Not you, but DM compared this to worldwide socio-political injustices.

[DevilMan]

Unjust behavior, policies and treatment are UNJUST no matter how large or small the affected group is.

1 person can be treated unfairly, and it's UNFAIR no matter how you cut it.

You seem to be the only one here Loh that thinks that what you have to say AGAINST us matters to us, when you can't sit there and tell us valid reasons as to why it's RIGHT.

Instead of trying to PROVE us wrong, why don't you try and PROVE your point RIGHT????

We already know that you can't prove us wrong. Being treated unfairly, is in fact UNFAIR.

Care to argue that point?

DM

[ThePixelGuru]

No, the minority here whining about "rights and justice" are wrong. I'd actually agree the rules could be written better. I disagree with the concept that members should be immune to them because they are not.

There is a big difference between "Oops, I did not know that was the rule, perhaps for future members it should be clarified better in the rule sections" and "you have no right to enforce it because I'm important to you and I didn't know, this is an injustice.... blah blah... Berlin wall... blah blah.... Nazis.....". Not you, but DM compared this to worldwide socio-political injustices.
We might not hold as different opinions as you seem to think. I don't believe any member should be immune, and I've said that before. I've also said before that any one member and any one ban is not the point here. Furthermore, I do argue that I didn't know the rule but that it does now occur to me that it should be a ban-able offense, and I do want it clarified for future/new members. I see a lot of people breaking rules who would have been less likely to break them had they been clearly stated. It'd be less work for the mods so they could spend less time catching users who are doing something wrong by accident and more time catching those who aren't in line with the ideals of this forum, ie spammers, trolls, intentional troublemakers and willful rulebreakers.

[bofh]

Fair enough. I don't think we're a minority, and if we are I doubt it's by much. Point taken, though, I don't have concrete numbers to back me here.

Well, if you are in the majority, then it should be rather easy to withhold content and have your changes implemented.

Of course, if you're a tiny minority, then no one will notice or care that you've gone elsewhere.

[Hexis]

1 person can be treated unfairly, and it's UNFAIR no matter how you cut it.


Life is unfair. Get a helmet.

[Lohman446]

Unjust behavior, policies and treatment are UNJUST no matter how large or small the affected group is.

1 person can be treated unfairly, and it's UNFAIR no matter how you cut it.

You seem to be the only one here Loh that thinks that what you have to say AGAINST us matters to us, when you can't sit there and tell us valid reasons as to why it's RIGHT.

Instead of trying to PROVE us wrong, why don't you try and PROVE your point RIGHT????

We already know that you can't prove us wrong. Being treated unfairly, is in fact UNFAIR.

Care to argue that point?

DM

How do you prove a negative? My point is that noone has been banned unfairly or unjustly. I have yet to see an example fo who actually has been. Might they have been banned for a misunderstanding of the rules? Sure. Could the rules be written better? Sure. Was the ban unjust or unfair? No, nor have you given me a single concrete example of one that was. You are comparing some message board spat to major socio-political events, its ridiculous.

[maxama10]

cry babies...

[ThePixelGuru]

Well, if you are in the majority, then it should be rather easy to withhold content and have your changes implemented.

Of course, if you're a tiny minority, then no one will notice or care that you've gone elsewhere.
Hmm. You claim we should make demands and that requests are worthless; Lohman claims we should make requests and that demands will be ignored. The vote's already 9-1-6-0-2 in the other thread... perhaps I'll just let the numbers speak for themselves. So much for it just being five of us.


How do you prove a negative? My point is that noone has been banned unfairly or unjustly. I have yet to see an example fo who actually has been. Might they have been banned for a misunderstanding of the rules? Sure. Could the rules be written better? Sure. Was the ban unjust or unfair? No, nor have you given me a single concrete example of one that was. You are comparing some message board spat to major socio-political events, its ridiculous.
Apparently linking to pblegion.com is a ban-able offense - you call that just? Sort of reminds me of the Berlin Wall. You know, keeping people in because you think they'll run at the first chance. Yes, it's a huge difference in scale and degree, but I don't believe it's a difference in kind or type. Like most of your responses, though, I suspect this one willfully misinterprets the argument because you have a stronger case against the argument if you take it farther than he intended.

As for those of you telling us to "get a helmet" or calling us "cry babies," I hope you understand that would likely not fly in the other threads. If I came in here to insult people without contributing anything to the conversation, you can bet they'd ban me, but that's because I'm not telling it like the moderators want to hear. Hell, bofh admits over on some other forums that he's trolling me and DevilMan, trying to get us to say something ban-worthy. Army knows, he's there too, responding in the same thread. Trolling is certainly a ban-worthy offense, but I'm not expecting bofh to get banned any time soon because he's telling it like the moderators want to hear it. Funny how that works.

[maxama10]

Hehe, I feel like I'm finally part of this thread. :dance:


Edit: Tell me, who got banned for posting a link to Pblegion?

name someone.






Although, didn't quite understand what the deal with closing that thread was. (?)



/meh.

[Lohman446]

Apparently linking to pblegion.com is a ban-able offense - you call that just? Sort of reminds me of the Berlin Wall. You know, keeping people in because you think they'll run at the first chance. Yes, it's a huge difference in scale and degree, but I don't believe it's a difference in kind or type. Like most of your responses, though, I suspect this one willfully misinterprets the argument because you have a stronger case against the argument if you take it farther than he intended..

I don't think I can take it farther. You just compared a message board spat to the Berlin wall and... well I hope the "father than intended" portion doesn't apply to not keeping a situation to scale in ones mind. I had said I thought it was only DM who was pulling out these wild examples and analogies (while not posting a single concrete example significant to the conversation at hand), apparently I was mistaken.

[bofh]

Hmm. You claim we should make demands and that requests are worthless; Lohman claims we should make requests and that demands will be ignored. The vote's already 9-1-6-0-2 in the other thread... perhaps I'll just let the numbers speak for themselves. So much for it just being five of us.

I'm surprised you *only* got that many.
But, of those who agree, how many of those will withhold content to actually make it happen? It's one thing to say you agree, and it's another to back it up with actions. I'd still say less than five.



Army knows, he's there too, responding in the same thread.Oddly enough, requesting that I don't... Funny you left that out.

So how much of the rest of your plight have you edited out inconvenient facts?

[DevilMan]

Okay, you've been wanting it, now you will have your week long ban.

Posting with full intent to be disruptive, is a ban worthy offense...and THAT'S in the rules.

Keep it up when/if you come back, and we can make it permanent. Army

[Army]

Apparently linking to pblegion.com is a ban-able offense...
Since you still have no idea about the reality of the whole affair, your rantings are null and void.

The Mods will ponder and usually discuss any complaint or suggestion from any member. If we deem it necessary to make a change for the better because of their opinion or idea, we do. Otherwise, we take the ignorant whining of a vocal minority with a grain of salt.

[ThePixelGuru]

I don't think I can take it farther. You just compared a message board spat to the Berlin wall and... well I hope the "father than intended" portion doesn't apply to not keeping a situation to scale in ones mind. I had said I thought it was only DM who was pulling out these wild examples and analogies (while not posting a single concrete example significant to the conversation at hand), apparently I was mistaken.
Once again, you willfully misinterpret a post to better support your argument. I'm saying there is a difference in scale, but not in kind. It's an analogy, and as my dictionary defines it that's "a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification." Scale is the mutable factor here, and until you can prove a difference in kind the point stands. Proving a difference in scale is in line with what I'm saying, and as much as you'd like to pretend it refutes my point it doesn't.


I'm surprised you *only* got that many.
But, of those who agree, how many of those will withhold content to actually make it happen? It's one thing to say you agree, and it's another to back it up with actions. I'd still say less than five.


Oddly enough, requesting that I don't... Funny you left that out.

So how much of the rest of your plight have you edited out inconvenient facts?
Again, Lohman claims that demands are invalid while requests are valid, and you claim requests are invalid and demands (with ultimatums) are valid. And, again, I'll let the numbers speak for themselves. The moderators would be not only foolish but just plain disrespectful and rude to ignore the wishes of so many. It doesn't matter that we're not threatening to withhold content - if the moderators wish to ignore so many users, you can be sure a drop in content will follow. People contribute to what they're passionate about, and this sort of disrespect will certainly lead to a drop in passion (and, by extension, content).

Alas, you seem to be succumbing to a touch of the Lohman disease. You're claiming that I said Army encouraged you - I didn't. I merely said he was aware of your intent to troll, which he certainly is (and hasn't yet banned you for, surprise surprise), and that he's waiting for an excuse to ban us (which he implied he is). If you're going to complain about the editing out of inconvenient facts, you may want to have a talk with Lohman. He still seems to prefer to answer what he wishes I said rather than what I actually said.


Since you still have no idea about the reality of the whole affair, your rantings are null and void.

The Mods will ponder and usually discuss any complaint or suggestion from any member. If we deem it necessary to make a change for the better because of their opinion or idea, we do. Otherwise, we take the ignorant whining of a vocal minority with a grain of salt.
Glad you decided to rejoin the discussion. Like I've said to you before, perhaps you'd be so kind as to enlighten us regarding the "reality of the whole affair." Rogue and Big Evil seem to have no problem discussing it, so I can't imagine they'd object to you discussing it. And before you bring up the argument about not wanting to air AO's dirty laundry, consider that if you didn't you wouldn't be involved (on this or any other forum). Now that you're here, though, please tell me why having the rules reflect the policies that you'll enforce and actually sticking to those policies isn't worthy of implementation.

[bornl33t]

AO gains from ignoring what has changed from a request to a demand from a vocal minority. AO gains by not allowing a vocal minority to somehow gain status by being more vocal and more disruptive to get their way. AO gains by banning those who would seek to be disruptive across multiple threads because the moderators did something they did not agree with. AO gains by not allowing a vocal minority to beleive that their opinions are worth far more than they are. Once you give some vocal minority something, because they have been vocal and not doing so may be disruptive, you have opened the door and others will learn from it.

I'm not against an update to the rules and clarification for people who can't seem to understand what is disruptive posting, or baiting moderators. At one point we did not need them, but apparently the time when people were respectful to the forum, the rights of its ownership and administration, has passed.

This is golden. I wish I had the time, patience, cunning and speech to debate like this man.

[bofh]

You're claiming that I said Army encouraged you - I didn't. I've claimed, or implied no such thing. But I see the disconnect here. When Army said "Nah" I didn't ignore him. When I ask somebody, and they say No, then that's my answer, I don't go ahead and do it anyway.


I merely said he was aware of your intent to troll, which he certainly is (and hasn't yet banned you for, surprise surprise),

You seem to be a little worked up about this "intent to troll." and my so called "trolling" in this thread.
I have not incited you with name calling, or bringing up subjects outside this thread, or turning this into a threadwreck.

I've seen how these movements go down on AO, I've been around for a couple. If you want be successful at this, you have to do it different/better than the last few times. I actually have given constructive advice, which have taken me up on.... Is that what you consider trolling?


and that he's waiting for an excuse to ban us (which he implied he is). If you want to get all worked up about what you read into a mods post on another forum, well, I can't stop you. But don't let it cloud what you see on *this* forum.


If you're going to complain about the editing out of inconvenient facts, you may want to have a talk with Lohman. He still seems to prefer to answer what he wishes I said rather than what I actually said.

As the differences between Lohman's and mine posts subject matter, that's explained by us having differeneces of opinion, since we're different people. And I don't read his replies.



And to bring this back on thread


Make a list,
Make a manifesto.
Organise.
Rally.
Until you do that, you just a minor voice crying about injustice.
I can add one that you might want to look at.

Stay on message - Don't get caught up in a thread moving the subject around, or into metaphors. All this dilutes your message. The more your message get diluted the more it gets trivialized.

[Lohman446]

Once again, you willfully misinterpret a post to better support your argument. I'm saying there is a difference in scale, but not in kind. It's an analogy, and as my dictionary defines it that's "a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification." Scale is the mutable factor here, and until you can prove a difference in kind the point stands. Proving a difference in scale is in line with what I'm saying, and as much as you'd like to pretend it refutes my point it doesn't.

You do realize they shot people on the Berlin wall right? They didn't ban them from posting on a message board for a few days.

[bofh]

Army's post

Ah the usefulness of subscribing to threads.


That wasn't a request that you NOT do it. I've address this earlier, but if I ask a question, and the answer is no, I don't just do it anyway. You're insane if you think I'm going to ignore an answer to my direct question. Otherwise, why would I bother asking?


snip ...Trolling behavior is doing something for the sake of ruffling feathers without adding anything of pertinence to the conversation/topic at hand. Which is what you are doing.

I guess you missed the part where I've actually provided constructive advice, on how to actually DO something, which was even acted on.

Which compares to your contribution of... tantrum throwing and whining?

[Lohman446]

Glad you decided to rejoin the discussion. Like I've said to you before, perhaps you'd be so kind as to enlighten us regarding the "reality of the whole affair." Rogue and Big Evil seem to have no problem discussing it, so I can't imagine they'd object to you discussing it. And before you bring up the argument about not wanting to air AO's dirty laundry, consider that if you didn't you wouldn't be involved (on this or any other forum). Now that you're here, though, please tell me why having the rules reflect the policies that you'll enforce and actually sticking to those policies isn't worthy of implementation.



Plan A) Ask for explanation
Result: Receive explanation


RogueFactor one week disruptive behavior

Rogue knows the rules, Rogue pushes them, and I think Rogue knows that. Oops, crossed them, its not like he was shot or something.

B) Make several threads to whine about it and further disrupt the forum. Wonder why anyone gets banned for this. Question if disrupting the forum is enough of an explanation, because apparently we don't understand that in our enlightenment.

C) In the thread that is allowed to stay up make major broad strokes comparing bannings to major soci-political events. When asked for specific examples dodge the question as best possible giving vague answers of perceived injustices.
Note: Make sure to take the time out of your incredibly busy life to do this from the middle of a body of water from youre jetski. And since you are enlightened you realize even if this is true that noone will beleive it for a second. But its ok, someday they'll grow up to be just like you and understand :rolleyes: .

D) Allow a small handful of members to expose the circularness of your argument, but keep trying to convice them. Never stop to consider that continuing a circular argument just causes it to go into a death spiral and expose the flaws to everyone. Hint: Compare to specific major socio-political events at this point, it will help :rolleyes: . Still make sure not to specify which message board event you are referring to that compares to that major socio-political event.

E) Remember, on a privately owned message board, you have rights. Ownership isn't important, not allowing you to post and share information is a great injustice, rising up to the levels that Joseph Stalin would pale at.

They don't allow me to use enough :rofl: :rolleyes: emoticons to express my opinion adequately.


It reminds me of something a few weeks ago. Three people come in to rent a vehicle that I do not have available. After explaining this to them for some time they just don't seem to get that I cannot manufacture a vehicle at the last minute to fill their needs. We discuss the competition and the possibility of the competition being able to fill their needs. Its early in the day, I'm the only one working, and one of them says something to the effect "its not safe to be working here alone". I take two steps back from the counter, put my hands behind my back, smile, and ask them to leave.

Say a friend or someone I trusted not to cause a problem made the same statement. Would I ask them to leave? Hint: the answer is no.

Somehow lets say there was an observer sitting there. Did I commit some great injustice in not dealing with the two the same? Does the fact I own the business change the level of injustice?

Yet somehow I'm supposed to buy that unpaid moderators on a message board are supposed to be held to some higher standards. Somehow I'm supposed to beleive it is their duty to answer to the public?

There are days I am thankful we live in a representative democracy and people are not allowed to directly vote on most issues. If for some reason we decide to ever change this arrangement I will be glad threads like this exist to indicate why we don't allow people direct votes on issues.

[Lohman446]

We might not hold as different opinions as you seem to think. I don't believe any member should be immune, and I've said that before. I've also said before that any one member and any one ban is not the point here. Furthermore, I do argue that I didn't know the rule but that it does now occur to me that it should be a ban-able offense, and I do want it clarified for future/new members. I see a lot of people breaking rules who would have been less likely to break them had they been clearly stated. It'd be less work for the mods so they could spend less time catching users who are doing something wrong by accident and more time catching those who aren't in line with the ideals of this forum, ie spammers, trolls, intentional troublemakers and willful rulebreakers.


We agree on these points:

The rules could be written better, it would not be too hard to do.

You didn't know.

We disagree on these:

Not know is grounds for immunity. A short ban is little more than a warning, no real harm, no foul, now we move on

That this is some great injustice. The moderators responded to a series of threads that in their very nature sought to be disruptive. Because of the nature of these threads the rules were applied strictly. Had the same things been done in a thread about, I don't know, the Roman failings against the Persian army, noone would have cared. Content is important, and moderators should consider content. If you are going to make a thread intending to be disruptive, that line you can skate close to is not as close to breaking the rules as it would be in another thread. Thats life, its not unreasonable, and its not unfair.

And your great manifesto "win". Noone has argued the points in it. Making a poll that had people vote on how ridiculous comparing this message board spat to major socio-political events would not lessen the points of it, but it would show the lack of support of the extreme of your position.

I agree with BOFH on this. A lot of members agree that changes could be made to better the forum. There was a very small minority that relly got their panties in a bunch over this.

[bofh]

Again, Lohman claims that demands are invalid while requests are valid, and you claim requests are invalid and demands (with ultimatums) are valid.

Don't "Make demands", but instead "Gather momentum to positively effect the community."



I been careful to call them Voices, and Opinions. Calling them "Demands" and "Ultimatums", just highlights a conflict. You probably don't to lead off with hard conflict, so use the soft words until you have overwhelming momentum.

Conflict, Demands, Ultimatums, Rights, it's hard language, disruptive language. It polarizes people, makes them choose sides. It taints emotions, and makes people behave irrationally.

Voices, Opinions, Withholding, they're softer, lighter words, no, "Voices" don't polarize people, no one can argue with a "Voice" or an "Opinion" "And "Withholding," well, that's how they acquire your taxes from your paycheck.

[maxama10]

srsly guys, i missed it, who got banned for posting pblegion?

[warpig13]

Im back from my 3 day vacation, so who's been banned now?

[txaggie08]

Some of you seem to be under the delusion that using a historical reference to elaborate a point requires the point to be as bad as the example.


I'm sure we are all very well aware that noone is being shot here, that staff is not breaking into our members homes and killing them in the night. However, there is no taboo against historical references being used as a point of emphasis. Some of you need to stop being the bloody PC police(and like it or not that's what your doing).


This comes from a senior history major. If you get bent out of shape about this, stay out of a history classroom.

[warpig13]

Some of you seem to be under the delusion that using a historical reference to elaborate a point requires the point to be as bad as the example.


I'm sure we are all very well aware that noone is being shot here, that staff is not breaking into our members homes and killing them in the night. However, there is no taboo against historical references being used as a point of emphasis. Some of you need to stop being the bloody PC police(and like it or not that's what your doing).


This comes from a senior history major. If you get bent out of shape about this, stay out of a history classroom.

Yeah

But your an aggie, so it doesnt count :p

[kosmo]

I'm sure we are all very well aware that noone is being shot here, that staff is not breaking into our members homes and killing them in the night.

You obviously dont remember the time we had some Islamic terrorist spammer. Im pretty sure Army killed that guy.

[Lohman446]

Some of you seem to be under the delusion that using a historical reference to elaborate a point requires the point to be as bad as the example.


I'm sure we are all very well aware that noone is being shot here, that staff is not breaking into our members homes and killing them in the night. However, there is no taboo against historical references being used as a point of emphasis. Some of you need to stop being the bloody PC police(and like it or not that's what your doing).


This comes from a senior history major. If you get bent out of shape about this, stay out of a history classroom.


No, I'm calling people on trying to come up with a historical reference for a justified banning of someone on a message board for creating a distubrance. I'm calling them on the fact they compare it to some of the worst acts in human history.

[ThePixelGuru]

Lohman, I'm going to say all this one last time and then I'm not bothering with you until you learn how to debate the actual issues instead of the pretend ones. Please realize that I don't think I, or anyone else, should be immune to rules that they don't know about, but I do think that a reasonable attempt should be made by the moderators to let users know about these rules. This isn't about any one ban, not mine, not anyone else's. This is about the ban policy. Also, please learn what an analogy is, and how the two events it can compare can differ in scale and still be alike in kind. And finally, please recognize that it is not the bans specifically that upset people (or "get their panties in a bunch," as you're so fond of saying when you think you're being clever), but rather the lack of an informative policy about them and the moderator's disregard of requests to change that policy that upsets people. Until you make a post that actually addresses the issues at hand and don't just nitpick at tangents and assure us of your level of amusement, I'll be ignoring you.

bofh, your exact statement was "How far should I poke DevilMan and ThePixelGuru to do something bannable?" That's not a "should I do this," it's "to what extent should I do this." The difference is that the former requests a positive or negative, while the latter assumes a positive and requests a degree of positivity. That's why I assumed your intent to troll - and the good trolls are the subtle ones, by the way, not the blatant flaming ones. That being said, I'll admit you make far more sense than Lohman, as you actually appear to grasp the concepts at hand, and have actually made points that have caused me to rethink or create a course of action. I have to confess, however, that I don't really have any idea where to go from here. It seems that many people (a majority, even), including yourself and Lohman, agree that the rules need updating, and only slightly fewer agree that the moderators should make at least a token effort to abide by them. Threatening to withhold content is not likely to happen - at that point, most people either have already left or don't care enough, and the moderators are so dug in that they won't budge regardless. Requesting these changes is not enough - moderators can already see that people want this to happen, but they don't do it and delete or lock pretty much all threads about it. So if we can't force the issue and the moderators won't heed requests, what can we do?

[bofh]

bofh, your exact statement was "How far should I poke DevilMan and ThePixelGuru to do something bannable?" That's not a "should I do this," it's "to what extent should I do this." The difference is that the former requests a positive or negative, while the latter assumes a positive and requests a degree of positivity. -snip-

Army answered my question with a negative. I did word my question to exclude a negative, but that's what I got.


Threatening to withhold content is not likely to happen... Overtly? No, you shouldn't even use the word threat. Too much of loaded word. Withholding content is something that's implied and alluded too. It's action thru inaction. Never, never use a conflict word like threat.


So if we can't force the issue and the moderators won't heed requests, what can we do?

The manifesto thread is a good start, encourage people to post in it, in addition to voting. Spread the idea that behind those poll numbers there are names, and people, and experience that are disenfranchised. Make the thread into a rally. But soft words, not conflict, get it simmering about ideas on positive change.

Then... "Quis custodiat ipsos custodes?" It's a slightly different from the normal phrase, but it translates to "Who *can* watch the watchers?"

And there's your answer, TK and Zupe. The people that grant the power to the Moderators.

[maxama10]

Lohman, I'm going to say all this one last time and then I'm not bothering with you until you learn how to debate the actual issues instead of the pretend ones.


Ever seen Thank You for Smoking?

Enough said...






and errr...seriously, tell me who got banned for posting a link to pblegion? :confused:


for real.



edit:

i lol'd

[Army]

and errr...seriously, tell me who got banned for posting a link to pblegion? :confused:
OK, last time...

Nobody was banned for simply linking to PBL. The member in question was banned for his actions against the wishes of the moderators and the owner of this website, concerning the reason for the link.

[Lohman446]

Lohman, I'm going to say all this one last time and then I'm not bothering with you until you learn how to debate the actual issues instead of the pretend ones. Please realize that I don't think I, or anyone else, should be immune to rules that they don't know about, but I do think that a reasonable attempt should be made by the moderators to let users know about these rules. This isn't about any one ban, not mine, not anyone else's. This is about the ban policy. Also, please learn what an analogy is, and how the two events it can compare can differ in scale and still be alike in kind. And finally, please recognize that it is not the bans specifically that upset people (or "get their panties in a bunch," as you're so fond of saying when you think you're being clever), but rather the lack of an informative policy about them and the moderator's disregard of requests to change that policy that upsets people. Until you make a post that actually addresses the issues at hand and don't just nitpick at tangents and assure us of your level of amusement, I'll be ignoring you.


I understand the concept of an analogy. I also undertsand the concept of picking one so far out of proportion to make it ridiculous. I also understand the concept of trying to use "hot-words" in those analogies that couse that problem in scale.

I have tried to debate the issue. However I hear "people are banned unfairly" and then I ask who and I get responded to "people".

When pressed its not against any actual ban its against a general policy. However, unless you provide an actual example of where this policy resulted in some form of unjustice I'm going to question how its a problem.

So... its down to policy alone. Which I have stated I'm not against evolving he rules. Apparently the common sense and decency people had in being able to keep AO in line with what the owners and administrators desire is gone and we need to spell out the rules so even enlightened people can understand them.

So all this disruptivenss, all this whining, is about policy solely. Not policy that has actually been enforced against anyone, because there are apparently no unjust bans so far (after all, this isn't against any particular ban).

Basically it comes down to. A group of members made a disruption on AO because they did not like exactly how things were spelled out. There wasn't any actual moderator action they had a problem with (when pressed for an example they point vaguely to policy and fail, time and time again to come up with a specific example ofd moderator action). But thats ok, cause they have analogies.

I'm the one who can't debate? I have, more than once, stated that I agree that the rules could be evolved to help out the people who obviously can't understand them. I agree more moderator presence would help. What I see a problem with is the group that became unglued over policy alone. What I see a problem with is a group that made thread upon thread to be solely disruptive and then wonders why they got results. This is about the great injustice of unfair bannings - and yet I have not been given a single example of one.

There are many old laws in various states that are not enforced and would likely put a good portion of the population in jail if they were. Maybe you should crusade against those. It would be the same thing. Make sure you call it an injustice, rally people to your cause, compare it to Tienemin Square, the great civil rights movement, and make a mountain out of it. When asked who has been injustly harmed by the law make certain not to give concrete examples, just complain about the policy in general. When you protest and some of your members interfere with traffic and go to jail for one night, make sure you consider them martyrs against some great injustice and just whine louder. You like analogies, there's one for you.

[maxama10]

OK, last time...

Nobody was banned for simply linking to PBL. The member in question was banned for his actions against the wishes of the moderators and the owner of this website, concerning the reason for the link.


Oh, alrighty. Err sorry. Thanks Army!

[BigEvil]

The member in question was banned for his actions against the wishes of the moderators and the owner of this website, concerning the reason for the link.


Hey Army - I have to respectfully disagree with that...

The situation that RogueFactor was banned for was posting a link to www.pblegion.com and the wish of the moderator(Beemer) was that Rogue not link to www.pblegion.com

Which by the way, is contrary to the story Beemer gave for RogueFactor's banning. The mods can't even get on the same page about why he was banned - or do not know the whole story. Beemer posted on AO that Rogue was banned for his link to an Automags.org SPAM thread that hadn't been moderated and contained porn. Beemer's post has since been deleted by one of the mod's.

So, then to be perfectly clear here Army, can anyone post links to www.pblegion.com now? Or are you saying that posting to www.pblegion.com is against the wishes of the moderators and owner of this website?

And will it get me (Or anyone else) banned? Or is it that only RogueFactor cant post to www.pblegion.com? Because that would crack me up if it were only him. :D

^I cant believe I used to do this stuff for him^

[TheTexan]

quick question DM is making a fair debate while lohman calls him an idiot and him friends post pictures and name calling post with no meaning and DM gets baned?
Someone post www.pblegion.com and they get baned because it isn't good with the mods. Lets not even start with beemers closing locking and bans that shouldn't have been. Its a shame this place has gone. On the good side cheers to pblegion :cheers: :cheers: lets get a beer bigevil.

[Lohman446]

quick question DM is making a fair debate while lohman calls him an idiot and him friends post pictures and name calling post with no meaning and DM gets baned?
Someone post www.pblegion.com and they get baned because it isn't good with the mods. Lets not even start with beemers closing locking and bans that shouldn't have been. Its a shame this place has gone. On the good side cheers to pblegion :cheers: :cheers: lets get a beer bigevil.

DM got banned for innappropriate posting. As did the person supposedly banned for just posting a link, Army has stated both. If you are going to call reality wrong (because it is inconvenient for your position), and state whatever you want regardless of truth it is hardly a fair debate.

[TheTexan]

DM got banned for innappropriate posting. As did the person supposedly banned for just posting a link, Army has stated both. If you are going to call reality wrong (because it is inconvenient for your position), and state whatever you want regardless of truth it is hardly a fair debate.
your right it isnt because you had not points

[Lohman446]

your right it isnt because you had not points

Rogue was banned for disruptive behaviour. Noone was banned for simply posting a link to PBL. Are you arguing that someone was even after Army stated noone was?

Even *if* someone was banned for posting a link comparing it to major socio-political events was a ludicrous stretch of analogies that represent a seeming lack of understanding of those events. Regardless Army has told us there was not. Is it reasonable to beleive that the moderators are engaging in some cover up? I would think not, after all if the moderators wanted to prevent someone from doing something they could simply warn them. If after a warning someone continued to do it it would indicate a total lack of respect for the owner and administration of this forum as well as an intent to be disruptive. At that point any ban would be, to use words some seem so found of "fair and just".

[TheTexan]

Rogue was banned for disruptive behaviour. Noone was banned for simply posting a link to PBL. Are you arguing that someone was even after Army stated noone was?

Even *if* someone was banned for posting a link comparing it to major socio-political events was a ludicrous stretch of analogies that represent a seeming lack of understanding of those events. Regardless Army has told us there was not. Is it reasonable to beleive that the moderators are engaging in some cover up? I would think not, after all if the moderators wanted to prevent someone from doing something they could simply warn them. If after a warning someone continued to do it it would indicate a total lack of respect for the owner and administration of this forum as well as an intent to be disruptive. At that point any ban would be, to use words some seem so found of "fair and just".
No I am not arguing what army said and I don't even want to debate with you because you will cry to army like you did to DM.

[RogueFactor]

Rogue was banned for disruptive behaviour. Noone was banned for simply posting a link to PBL. Are you arguing that someone was even after Army stated noone was?
And that disruptive behavior was posting a link to PBL, which is not against the rules. As usual, you dont know what you are talking about Lohman...again.


If after a warning someone continued to do it it would indicate a total lack of respect for the owner and administration of this forum as well as an intent to be disruptive.At that point any ban would be, to use words some seem so found of "fair and just".
There cant be intent to be dispruptive if the action committed isnt against the rules. Your logic...is flawed.


Let me clue you in on this. TK supports, financially, this forum at basically no gain to himself. Make this into work, into a problem, and the plug can be easily pulled on it.
Let me clue you in to reality. This is but one of many examples where you have bad info. Zupe pays for the upkeep of this forum, not Tom. This has been known for years. Except by a few who have no clue whats going on around here.

[Lohman446]

And that disruptive behavior was posting a link to PBL, which is not against the rules. As usual, you dont know what you are talking about Lohman...again.

Army specifically said it was not Rogue. If I beleive Army (and obviously you don't) of course our opinions of the outcome are going to be different.


No I am not arguing what army said and I don't even want to debate with you because you will cry to army like you did to DM.

Read my posts on the the Thorums and see if I ever asked Army to have anything to do with this. However, seems how you don't seem to disagree with what Army said and make no point to argue it and accept "noone was banned for simply linking to PBL" what is the problem?

[RogueFactor]

Army specifically said it was not Rogue. If I beleive Army (and obviously you don't) of course our opinions of the outcome are going to be different.
Right, so you have 3rd hand info? And Army 2nd hand info? Im the one who CC'd Army the PM's between me & Beemer :D

I have first-hand info. It was me and Beemer, and me & RobAGD. Army wasnt involved except as a spectator. I have no 'dirty laundry' to worry about airing. So Ive let it be known exactly what happened.

You, youve got bad info. Believe it if you want, doesnt mean its factual. Opinions are based on a lack of fact. Thats why what you believe is an opinion.

[RogueFactor]

Hey I know why don't we all argue over the semantics and legitimacy of a very simple-to-understand rule with a guy whose job isn't to make the rules but to enforce them. Never mind that since he is, you know, sacrificing the comforts of civilized life to fight for your freedom and stuff, he might have other stuff to worry about other than a bunch of whiny dickheads on an internet message board.

Edit: Dave if "dickheads" is against the flaming rules then I guess I'll take one for the team but for the record it felt really good.

Edit: Part Deux: The Reckoning: 5 days till Christmas but I'm still all :confused:.

Edit: Part Tres: La Mochila: Page 3 Second Gunman.

http://www.automags.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2461022&postcount=61

BTW----Was this thread ever going to be moderated, and the user banned for cussing?

[ThePixelGuru]

Lohman, you're still debating the wrong issues here. There are plenty of specific examples of weird bans in this thread if you'd just stop reading only the parts you want to. Anyone who's been banned for tripping the cuss filter has been banned for breaking a rule that was never stated. Rogue got banned for posting a link to PBL, though it was called "disruptive behavior" because he was warned not to link to PBL (justify that warning, if you can). Any time a user is not banned for flaming even when they admit to flaming (like teufelhunden in the Manifesto thread), registers with a dirty name (I won't call them out by name, but there's a flying vagina and a trash butthole, for example), or you see the guy who dodges to cuss filter to use a gay slur in his location tag, that's what we're talking about. Any time a user asks for a reasonable explanation of the rules or their enforcement and the moderators delete or lock the thread instead of offering or even just allowing reasonable discussion, that's what we're talking about. Any time a thread is locked because someone posted a PBL link, or when a link is deleted, that's what we're talking about. How's that for specifics? I just didn't get into specifics because I didn't want to distract from the main issue, which is the ban policy, and not the bans that are over and done with. It's clear to me that you do want to drag in semantics about these specific instances because it allows you to avoid discussing the real issue at hand, which is the ban policy.

As for your counter-analogy, it's invalid. You're talking about laws that are never enforced against anyone, while I'm talking about rules enforced selectively against personal enemies/grudges of the moderators. That's a difference in kind, not in scale. The Berlin Wall and deleting links to PBL are both the same kind of intent and goal (that being to keep people from leaving), the difference being the scale of the effort. Shooting people and banning them are kinds of enforcement, different in scale. Hence, the difference between the situations is in scale, not in kind, making it a valid analogy. Your analogy, however, is invalid, because the issue of non-enforcement and selective enforcement are different in kind. Again, scale is the mutable factor here, and can change to make one's point. In fact, this is the very definition of an analogy. If I said that two fat people running into each other was like two planets colliding, you would understand that I was attempting to convey the kind of collision here and not the scale. Again, though, I'm not sure if you are really this bad at debating, logic, and analogies, or if you're just trying to derail the discussion further.

To recap: there are many specific instances in which the moderators have not followed their own rules, and analogies are a valid way to talk about an issue and require similarities in kind, not in scale. None of this is the point. The point is that the ban policy needs to be changed, and moderators need to follow it. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming. :rolleyes:

[Lohman446]

Tipping the cuss filter means you cussed - the rule is no cussing. There is another rule that says no circumvention. Is this not accurate?

[ThePixelGuru]

Tipping the cuss filter means you cussed - the rule is no cussing. There is another rule that says no circumvention. Is this not accurate?
Oh wow, you caught me in a misspeak. I should have said "posting four asterisks in a row," which has the same end result. I could have asked you what "tipping the cuss filter" was, but I didn't because that's not the issue you meant to bring up. Try that sometime, then maybe you can say something useful or relevant to the issue at hand. I'm ignoring you until you do.

[Lohman446]

Oh wow, you caught me in a misspeak. I should have said "posting four asterisks in a row," which has the same end result. I could have asked you what "tipping the cuss filter" was, but I didn't because that's not the issue you meant to bring up. Try that sometime, then maybe you can say something useful or relevant to the issue at hand. I'm ignoring you until you do.

So, asking you for clarification is not ok? Whats the difference between typing in four asteriks where a cuss word fits and circumventing the filter?

[TheTexan]

Army specifically said it was not Rogue. If I beleive Army (and obviously you don't) of course our opinions of the outcome are going to be different.



Read my posts on the the Thorums and see if I ever asked Army to have anything to do with this. However, seems how you don't seem to disagree with what Army said and make no point to argue it and accept "noone was banned for simply linking to PBL" what is the problem?
the reason I don't argue some things because I am not trying to just disagree with everything anyone ageist me says. I think some bans are needed and some people have over stepped the bounderys when arguing ageist the bans. I also have realized that as much as it is bad and unfair and beemer is a pain in the butt. This is a free place for us to come and get together. Free is the best part of that,we can also sell,buy,talk about tech stuff,talk to friends, and also talk about current events. So the bans are unfair but lets drop it to all because its free and beemer just relax and calm down lay off the ban stick and close threads.

[Lohman446]

The point is that the ban policy needs to be changed, and moderators need to follow it. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming. :rolleyes:

The funny thing is I never really disagreed with this to some degree. The need for change maybe, I kinda think things are going fine. I don't disagree that sometimes people get away with things and sometimes they don't. I don't disagree that there is a lot of discretion in moderating the forum. I don't disagree that the rules could be better written and the ban list more complete.

However, I don't have a problem with that discretion. I skate close enough to the edge often enough that when I am banned for it, even if that particular time wasn't that bad I am going to have to just shrug and accept it. I don't think anyone banned has not pushed the envelope often and, more often than not, gotten away with it.

I kinda like the "looseness" of the moderation. For one there are not enough moderators with enough time to handle it to the letter. That's another issue but just naming moderators in this situation does not help. Any new moderators will be too mired in controversy from the beginning. Generally speaking, unless a topic (over a series of threads) or a thread gets out of hand its let be. Only when it becomes a disruptive issue is it really dealt with.

CPhilip (forgive me if I missed the SN by a few letters) was probably one of the best moderators I have seen on any forum. He gave out far more warnings than bans, but he did back his warnings. He made rules and consequences on the fly (remember the great reset post counts to zeros for post whoring thing) and enforced them, and then went back and handled the appeals on those privately if needed. He joked in the forums, and when not inappropriate could push the envelope as much as anyone. But he knew when to lay down the law and people respected the fact.

It would be possible I suppose to moderate with software and force everyone to obey the rules to the letter all the time. I don't really think thats what anyone wants. There was really no issue of "the content you bring is not appreciated, never come back". People made that an issue somehow. It was more of a don't do this which was ignored and became disruptive (or not, again I can accept there are two sides of this) that turned into a moderator having to force authority because people would not show the decency of following his request. That comes off as far more combative than it was meant to be, tone it to your view of the situation.

[Lohman446]

Since I have had history "experts" :rolleyes: and debate "experts" :rolleyes: try to school me on the use of analogies let me discuss them.

To be useful in debate an analogy must be reasonable in size and, to some degree,
context. The excample from the other side as to why.

The actions of those who would seek to disrupt the forum even if it costs them their own existance on it are like Islamaic fanatics who strap bombs to themselves.

It has all the hot words to get someone drawn in, and is just defendable enough that when someone calls you on it you can circle the wagons and defend it.

Said Islamic fanatics beleive they have been slighted, that the world is unjust. All they seek is justice. They are willing to show the world how wrong it is even if costs them, well at the same time causing as much disruptiveness as possible - most suicide bombers attack targets with minimal military value, instead aiming to disrupt society around them.

Then I would leave you to prove it wrong. As long as I narrowly define my analogy it would be hard to do. Some of you feel you were slighted, it was unfair and unjust. Your actions caused disruption to the forum, but you didn't care about being banned because it was for the greater good.

Obviously none of it has the finality of death. Then again, if the Berlin wall analogy was "good" this one is just as valid.

I find the Islamic extermist side idiotic. Sure its got the hot button words, it evokes feeling and instant pictures. Its not valid, its scale is blown too far out to be useful in debate or discussion. This is not using an analogy to teach (the earth is round like a ball) its using it to debate, and the considerations of using one must be stricter.

[txaggie08]

Since I have had history "experts"


You can roll eyes and insult me as far as you would like, I'm telling you that the manner in which these people have used these examples would not be condemned, even in the academic realm.


Your a very good at "bait and troll" methodology. :bounce:

[kosmo]

Hitler


/There, someone said it
//Argument over

[bornl33t]

And that disruptive behavior was posting a link to PBL, which is not against the rules. As usual, you dont know what you are talking about Lohman...again.


There cant be intent to be dispruptive if the action committed isnt against the rules. Your logic...is flawed.


Let me clue you in to reality. This is but one of many examples where you have bad info. Zupe pays for the upkeep of this forum, not Tom. This has been known for years. Except by a few who have no clue whats going on around here.


Common sence will tell you that advertising a paintball forum on a paintball forum will get you in trouble. IF for no other reason, you should be banned for the lack of this. I REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY wish someone would moderate this and the 5-6 other topics on the matter because to "me" this topic has become disruptive in that it's pitted AO against each other.

I'm right, period. Don't try to argue with me, I will not reply.

[Lohman446]

You can roll eyes and insult me as far as you would like, I'm telling you that the manner in which these people have used these examples would not be condemned, even in the academic realm.

You say that like academia is a center of common sense and decency.

Hey, if their Berlin wall analogy is valid, so is my Islamic extremists.

[RogueFactor]

Common sence will tell you that advertising a paintball forum on a paintball forum will get you in trouble. IF for no other reason, you should be banned for the lack of this. I REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY wish someone would moderate this and the 5-6 other topics on the matter because to "me" this topic has become disruptive in that it's pitted AO against each other.

I'm right, period. Don't try to argue with me, I will not reply.

High horse, come on down. Linking to another site that allows me to host pics isnt advertising.

Common sense? LOL...that implies its commonly understood. If that were true:
1) The other 50+ threads that have links to PBN, MCB, SpecOps, SCP wouldnt have been created, or would have been removed too. They arent.
2) RobAGD, AO admin, wouldnt have said "AO has never had an issue with linking to other forums".
3) manike, a long-standing member of the paintball community, involved with AGD, and site admin for PBN, wouldnt have said "I thought AO has never censored links".
4) It would be in the rules, with everything else thats common sense(no cussing, no flaming, etc)

Is this where I put in "I'm right, period. Don't try to argue with me."

'Nuff said.

[Lohman446]

I noticed you edited out all the posts where people said my child whines less you guys do.

[ThePixelGuru]

The funny thing is I never really disagreed with this to some degree. The need for change maybe, I kinda think things are going fine. I don't disagree that sometimes people get away with things and sometimes they don't. I don't disagree that there is a lot of discretion in moderating the forum. I don't disagree that the rules could be better written and the ban list more complete.

[snip]

It would be possible I suppose to moderate with software and force everyone to obey the rules to the letter all the time. I don't really think thats what anyone wants. There was really no issue of "the content you bring is not appreciated, never come back". People made that an issue somehow. It was more of a don't do this which was ignored and became disruptive (or not, again I can accept there are two sides of this) that turned into a moderator having to force authority because people would not show the decency of following his request. That comes off as far more combative than it was meant to be, tone it to your view of the situation.
There we go, much more on topic than the last few, though somewhat repetitive. All we're arguing for is those changes you mentioned in your first paragraph, which even you agree should be made. I don't think that the mods are trying to chase us off, and I'd be surprised if anyone else does. What I'm saying is that their refusal to make (or even discuss) these simple, logical changes shows a degree of disrespect for the members, and that disrespected members don't provide as high quality/quantity content. I'm not threatening this, I'm trying to avert this. It's the moderators' refusal to discuss or implement these changes and their decision to delete and lock all threads about it that created this situation, not some desire to create conflict.

As far as your suicide bomber analogy, that's off base because it assumes a different intent and method than we exercise. We're not trying to get banned to prove our point, we just don't care if we get banned trying to prove our point (though we try not to get banned). That's more like a soldier willing to die for a cause than a suicide bomber who intends to die for his. What you're trying to do is draw an analogy between the situation and something with a negative connotation, because it creates the kind of kneejerk reactions people like you rely on to win opinions. The analogy thing has been beaten to death, though, and the Berlin Wall thing was never important to my argument. Let's just drop it and discuss the real issues, because clearly the analogy is more distracting than helpful.

[Lohman446]

There we go, much more on topic than the last few, though somewhat repetitive. All we're arguing for is those changes you mentioned in your first paragraph, which even you agree should be made. I don't think that the mods are trying to chase us off, and I'd be surprised if anyone else does. What I'm saying is that their refusal to make (or even discuss) these simple, logical changes shows a degree of disrespect for the members, and that disrespected members don't provide as high quality/quantity content. I'm not threatening this, I'm trying to avert this. It's the moderators' refusal to discuss or implement these changes and their decision to delete and lock all threads about it that created this situation, not some desire to create conflict.

As far as your suicide bomber analogy, that's off base because it assumes a different intent and method than we exercise. We're not trying to get banned to prove our point, we just don't care if we get banned trying to prove our point (though we try not to get banned). That's more like a soldier willing to die for a cause than a suicide bomber who intends to die for his. What you're trying to do is draw an analogy between the situation and something with a negative connotation, because it creates the kind of kneejerk reactions people like you rely on to win opinions. The analogy thing has been beaten to death, though, and the Berlin Wall thing was never important to my argument. Let's just drop it and discuss the real issues, because clearly the analogy is more distracting than helpful.

Did you just accuse me of using an analogy just to get a knee-jerk reaction? Isn't that interesting.

Your the ones who used the BERLIN WALL to try to get that same kneejerk reaction and now your telling me its used by "people like me"

Mutliple threads that were aggressive in nature were disruptive. I would guess your "terroristic" (I think I'm going to continue using that analogy, its fun even though I know its as invalid as yours) approach did not gain you any favor and was not helpful in bringing the administration to the discussion table.

[behemoth]

I'm not gonna lie Loh, berlin wall made me chuckle.

[ThePixelGuru]

Open Letter to the AO Moderators

Dear AO Moderation Team,
Why won't you implement or discuss any of these aforementioned changes? We've suggested updates to the rules, and even those who defend you agree that those updates should be made. We've asked for some sort of consistency in enforcing these rules, and received no assurance of intent to be equal and fair; in fact, all current indications point to a continued unequal application of the rules. We feel we are being disrespected. You refuse to discuss any of the issues at hand, except to say that we are uninformed. When we ask for information, you are silent. When we ask pointed questions to moderators who have posted in our threads, you are silent. When we don't understand policies and express concern and alarm, you delete and lock our threads. When we don't stop asking, you ban us.

We realize we are not the law here. We realize you have no obligation whatsoever to indulge us. We also realize that your actions in this matter are harming AO. We make no threats, but we wish for you to understand several things. Without us, you have no content. Without content, there is no AO. Yes, you can wait us out and we will go away, but when we go away so do our contributions. We don't want this to happen; we want AO to survive and flourish. Do not make the mistake of interpreting our desire to support AO as our satisfaction with your methods and intent. If you do not respect us, you will lose us.

Why can't these reasonable changes be made? Why can't you discuss any of these changes? Why do you ignore us? Why do you disrespect us by calling us ignorant and refusing to respond to our questions and concerns? We have nothing but the best intentions for AO. What do you have to lose by helping us achieve these goals, or by setting the record straight about which goals we should be trying to achieve? We are willing and eager to work with you, but we cannot work with you if you won't work with us. We don't want AO to suffer, and we don't want to leave, but we feel that, given your lack of response, we have no reasonable option but to take our opinions and contributions where they will be listened to. Please, help us continue to make AO great. We all have the same goal in mind, let's be open about our methods for accomplishing it and continue to foster the kind of cooperation and communication that made AO great in the first place.

[ThePixelGuru]

Did you just accuse me of using an analogy just to get a knee-jerk reaction? Isn't that interesting.

Your the ones who used the BERLIN WALL to try to get that same kneejerk reaction and now your telling me its used by "people like me"

Mutliple threads that were aggressive in nature were disruptive. I would guess your "terroristic" (I think I'm going to continue using that analogy, its fun even though I know its as invalid as yours) approach did not gain you any favor and was not helpful in bringing the administration to the discussion table.
Whoops, you took a step back, buddy. ;) First, I didn't bring up the Berlin Wall analogy, I just said it was an analogy and that your attempts to discredit it on basis of scale were ridiculous and illogical. Second, although the Berlin Wall analogy also attempts to draw a correlation to a negative event, it's valid while your analogies lack similarities in kind, making them invalid. The intent of the Berlin Wall analogy was to provide a greater understanding of the problems with the situation, whereas your analogy attempts to compare us to unethical enemies of the state bent on pointless destruction. Finally, none of this is the point, so, like I said before, let's drop the analogies and get on with the discussion of the actual issues. Maybe you'll have a better chance of understanding them, though I do find it funny that you continue to use an analogy that you acknowledge is invalid.

Concerning the multiple threads, all I can say is that the more you try to stamp out an idea the more people get interested in it. The mods tried to stamp out the fire and only succeeded in spreading it around. Hopefully next time they'll address the issue instead of trying to sweep it under the carpet.

[Lohman446]

You do know they shot people on the Berlin wall right? If the Berlin wall is valid so is the Islamic terrorist analogy.

That said, neither analogy really helps the issue at hand.

[Muzikman]

You don't run off the folks that make AO what it is.... you do that and AO is worthless.

It's post like this and people like you that drove me away from AO, not the mods. I don't think I ever had a mod edit, delete or ban me because of any of my posts. I think this is because I am a rather upstanding citizen and play nice. Something that many AOers can't figure out.

[MaxPowers]

Wow look at all of the old timer AO guys showing up out of no where? Glad to see some familiar names.

[shartley]

It's post like this and people like you that drove me away from AO, not the mods. I don't think I ever had a mod edit, delete or ban me because of any of my posts. I think this is because I am a rather upstanding citizen and play nice. Something that many AOers can't figure out.
Honestly, good people (and people in general) have been run off/drove off of AO for many reasons... some because of mods, some because of cliques let run rampant and out of control, some for personal reasons, you name it. I don't see a totally righteous and "clean" side left on AO. Heck has there ever been?

Things have always been centered around friendships or dislikes of another member(s), with very little impartiality. It has seldom been about WHAT is being done, but WHO is doing it. And equal enforcement of rules (even concerning mod/admin actions) has been far and few between. But whether folks agree with it or speak up seems to be centered directly on how they feel about those under the axe or those doing the chopping, NOT what is actually being done or not done.

Then we see threads like these pop up and what is being argued is more so about who is arguing and the "side" they choose to be on at this particular moment than it is about realities or what is right or wrong. And we see this type of thing pop up every couple years or so. Funny though that I seldom see it on any other forum I belong to and actively post on. Yet it has become "tradition" on AO for some reason.

So no, it is not one side or the other in this issue that makes AO what it is and causes members to leave or participate very little (if at all). It is BOTH sides and the fact that nothing changes... it only runs in cycles.

I only post this because it is not fair for one side to act as if the ONLY good people are on "this side" or "that side", or that it is only those who see and post about problems that are "the problem". I have seen good people on every side of issues run off, and bad people on every side of issues doing the pushing. But folks are more interested in forming "teams" and demonizing anyone on the other side. or those who don't see things like they do.

Folks can't just state their opinions and let things go, but have to then FIGHT with anyone who disagrees with them. I was guilty of this as well in the past, but for reasons some may not realize was there (to create a draw and increase forum participation and membership). I was willing to take the roll of "heavy" and have folks love or hate me... until things went way too far and real reasons for all the discussions was lost in the "hunt" and "kill" by forum members and staff.

But we see it here still to this day. Look around. Only the "players" have changed. The situations and drama has not. And THAT my friend is the real reason people leave AO and AO continues to have the problems it does. The problem lies in the AO culture/sub-culture that has been allowed to continue, and it is not the fault of only one "type" of member on one "side" of the clique borders. It is because of general actions by members and staff alike that frankly would not be allowed on most reputable forums.

So many of us only come back from time to time to say hello to friends and see if anything new is happening. Well.... the answer to that question is no. And many of the "bad guys" blamed for problems in the past are no longer here (along with a lot of other great folks), yet we still see the same crap going on. Folks love to rag on PBN but AO is little more than another soap opera on a different channel.

And nothing will change when the blame for fault is isolated to only PART of the problem. Yes, sometimes our "friends" can be at fault too. But when lines are drawn by friendships and not FACTS, nothing will change.

[AutomagRT1483]

Man o man....I missed the bomb drop on this one. I leave AO for a while and come back for the aftermath.

[wimag]

Open Letter to the AO Moderators

Dear AO Moderation Team,
Why won't you implement or discuss any of these aforementioned changes? We've suggested updates to the rules, and even those who defend you agree that those updates should be made. We've asked for some sort of consistency in enforcing these rules, and received no assurance of intent to be equal and fair; in fact, all current indications point to a continued unequal application of the rules. We feel we are being disrespected. You refuse to discuss any of the issues at hand, except to say that we are uninformed. When we ask for information, you are silent. When we ask pointed questions to moderators who have posted in our threads, you are silent. When we don't understand policies and express concern and alarm, you delete and lock our threads. When we don't stop asking, you ban us.

We realize we are not the law here. We realize you have no obligation whatsoever to indulge us. We also realize that your actions in this matter are harming AO. We make no threats, but we wish for you to understand several things. Without us, you have no content. Without content, there is no AO. Yes, you can wait us out and we will go away, but when we go away so do our contributions. We don't want this to happen; we want AO to survive and flourish. Do not make the mistake of interpreting our desire to support AO as our satisfaction with your methods and intent. If you do not respect us, you will lose us.

Why can't these reasonable changes be made? Why can't you discuss any of these changes? Why do you ignore us? Why do you disrespect us by calling us ignorant and refusing to respond to our questions and concerns? We have nothing but the best intentions for AO. What do you have to lose by helping us achieve these goals, or by setting the record straight about which goals we should be trying to achieve? We are willing and eager to work with you, but we cannot work with you if you won't work with us. We don't want AO to suffer, and we don't want to leave, but we feel that, given your lack of response, we have no reasonable option but to take our opinions and contributions where they will be listened to. Please, help us continue to make AO great. We all have the same goal in mind, let's be open about our methods for accomplishing it and continue to foster the kind of cooperation and communication that made AO great in the first place.

dude... do yourself a favor and turn off the box for a while. You are getting worked up over something that is not really worth it. seriously.

[nmib]

With all those posts Lohman maybe might have seven useful ones now. Maybe.

[Lohman446]

With all those posts Lohman maybe might have seven useful ones now. Maybe.

Probably not, the ratio used to be about 1 in a thousand.

[behemoth]

so your ratios are goin' down, eh?

[Lohman446]

so your ratios are goin' down, eh?

Yeh... sad times.

[ThePixelGuru]

You do know they shot people on the Berlin wall right? If the Berlin wall is valid so is the Islamic terrorist analogy.

That said, neither analogy really helps the issue at hand.
Scale vs. kind, that's how analogies work, and the correct ones can clarify situations provided people are bright enough to understand them. If you don't get it by now, you never will. You'll just keep using it to mislead people in slanted polls. :rolleyes:

[Lohman446]

Scale vs. kind, that's how analogies work, and the correct ones can clarify situations provided people are bright enough to understand them. If you don't get it by now, you never will. You'll just keep using it to mislead people in slanted polls. :rolleyes:

No, you simply took away all parts of the Berlin wall that were not suited to your analogy, and then expect me to take full consideration of everything surrounding mine. Neither analogy is good, but I suppose you can try to keep yours and bash mine if it makes you feel better. I think they are both ridiculous personally.

[Target Practice]

Open Letter to ThePixelGuru


1 week for harassment. Army

[Foxworthy]

Sigh.

[Target Practice]

Sigh.

A++++++++++ WOULD READ AGAIN

[ThePixelGuru]

Open Letter to ThePixelGuru


1 week for harassment. Army
Hah, I guess you can only get so blatant before the moderators are forced to stop ignoring you. Better luck next time, maybe I'll even get to read it. Oh, and thanks, Army.


No, you simply took away all parts of the Berlin wall that were not suited to your analogy, and then expect me to take full consideration of everything surrounding mine. Neither analogy is good, but I suppose you can try to keep yours and bash mine if it makes you feel better. I think they are both ridiculous personally.
So then let's do like I keep suggesting and stop talking about 'em and start discussing the real issues.

The easiest change to make (and the most agreed upon) is updating the rules thread. It's not that hard, and even people who disagree with me in general agree that it's needed. My question is why the moderators won't do it, and what we need to do to get them to see that it's a good change to make. Let's start with having a comprehensive set of rules, and then we can move on to the more complicated issue of enforcement. Any ideas on how to get this one done?

[Lohman446]

You've told the mods what you wanted. Your choices are now to either hope they make those changes or be disruptive until they do. Obviously the disruptive side did not work out well.

So now you have new choices. Learn to live within the rules as you now understand them or don't. Their not great choices but they are whats available it seems.

[MANN]

It is sad that this is the most active thread on AO. :(

[ThePixelGuru]

It is sad that this is the most active thread on AO. :(
It is pretty sad, but it's the most active thread for a reason. AO has chased off a lot of great posters, and, as a result, we get fewer good topics that actually incite thoughtful responses and discussion and people who are trying to fix that and post here to talk about it. While it's sad that we need to do it, it's good that people come out and try to make a difference.

[Beemer]

I find it funny that some threads were JUST deleted, I was looking at them literally 1 minute ago, tried to post, then they were gone. FFS is that what it's coming to? How about leaving them up so other AOers can join in. Dont like the content, don't go into them. I think its a joke that AOers can't discuss things that bother them about the forum. There were no bad things going on, whoever took it off simply didn't like the content. Yes AO is a private deal, but without the members, there would be no AO. So sad.

I posted before, it aint funny. It aint a joke either. That is why THIS thread stayed.

See post number nine. :eek: What did you want to say. If I am not mistaken you havent posted in your thread since you started it.

Oh ya, I never answered your original question. It is stupid not to remove a thread that is disruptive and stupid. :ninja:

[maxama10]

I posted before, it aint funny. It aint a joke either. That is why THIS thread stayed.

See post number nine. :eek: What did you want to say. If I am not mistaken you havent posted in your thread since you started it.

Oh ya, I never answered your original question. It is stupid not to remove a thread that is disruptive and stupid. :ninja:


Huh? :confused:

[Ole Unka Phil]

...some thing just never change do they? :p :D

[warpig13]

...some thing just never change do they? :p :D

Haha I'm just glad you haven't.

It's not over until Ole Unka chimes in :D

[Army]

...some thing just never change do they? :p :D
HA!

Did you ever cut yer hair and become a respectable member of society, or are you still playing with the college kiddies?

[Target Practice]

...some thing just never change do they? :p :D

HOLY HELL