RE: moderation interpretation? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


juliaoceania -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:08:50 AM)

quote:

Why can't people just say what they want... indeed if you don't like it just block them or go somewhere else.
Join the exchange with enthousiasm i say, the less moderation the better in my book.


Sometimes blocking the offender is the best way of handling it, but then again, if the offender is disrupting the natural flow of conversation, moderation is necessary. The things that are in the TOS are the ones that have been shown to disrupt conversation, human beings being human beings.



quote:

When a thread is not to your liking why not contribute to another one?
Unless gross illegal stuff is being talked about... why on earth would anybody complain to the mods about anothers opinion?


I think this shows a gross misunderstanding of how the moderation on this site works. I have not noticed entire threads moderated because of "opinions" because "opinions" within the TOS are not moderated.

quote:

Why do certain people get away with things others don't?

That was explained by the mods on this very thread, unless of course you refuse to believe them.



quote:

Why do threads get locked after it is considered to be out of hand, if things must be done then why not just delete the lot and let them start again... if anybody can be bothered?


Have you notice, the actions taken on trainwrecks vary based upon the trainwreck. It is a subjective decision made by human beings... since they are the human beings tasked with this subjective decision, my question to you "why don't you respect their decisions as having as much merit as your opinions about them""?


quote:

Why are people on [awaiting approval] still allowed to post anything at all, that is just adding to the work load and totally unnecessary.


If had my way, people would just be moderated into silence. I think their [awaiting approval] status is disruptive to the flow of the thread... but that isn't a big deal to me, either.


quote:

Why are there no CLEAR rules? it all seems to depend on the moderators own interpretation, and i have read the TOS (to be found in tiny letters in the bottom corner of the front page)... well it doesn't really tell you a great lot.


If there was no ambiguity in rules, we would not have a court system. Since being moderated isn't the same thing as being put in prison, we just have to rely on the judgment of the moderators... again, no biggie


quote:

Why do some post get pulled, but then the responses to the post that was pulled remain up? That is just totally naf.

Why do posts with quotes of pulled posts get scensored so the pulled post that was quoted gets edited out, but the rest of the post in reply still stands?
... i mean what is the point of that, if the original post is gone, then surely the response does not matter a jot any more either, the whole thread just becomes even weirder then.





Because it is hard to edit a thread that is completely out of hand, and it is hard for me to sometimes understand the flow of threads as a participant, much less as someone who is coming into a 30 page thread filled with personal attacks that they haven't contributed to. It ain't perfect, but neither am I.



quote:

Why is it possible but considered *not done* to respond to a three month old thread?


I think this is a norm that varies from site to site, but I can tell you, it is annoying to put a reply on a thread that was 3 years old that you contributed to originally in the middle of the thread.. it makes you feel stupid.


quote:

Why are so many *old* posters allowed to totally rip new posters appart?


you have been here long enough to be considered an "old poster" and you have enough posts to justify that designation too....

I think that if you see something happening that is against TOS, it is really your responsibility to report it, or not to comment on it... have you reported it?

I think that you got your nose way bent out of shape by how your own posts were dealt with by management... and I think you know the common sense reasons behind why things are done here, but you just don't agree with it. Personally, if I am at someone's home, and their rules do not make sense to me, I either try to understand them or I leave.




popularDemand -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:13:52 AM)

please me if you can (whomever, this isn't to anyone specific)

This 'block' thing:

so hey, I block someone on the forum becuase they annoy or whatever... their posts on the boards disapear I take it?

so, the threads will lose continuity, am I right?

pD




juliaoceania -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:27:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: popularDemand

please me if you can (whomever, this isn't to anyone specific)

This 'block' thing:

so hey, I block someone on the forum becuase they annoy or whatever... their posts on the boards disapear I take it?

so, the threads will lose continuity, am I right?

pD


As long as you do not block gobs of people it really doesn't interfere drastically. I find that the people I choose to block do not contribute so much to the forums that it impedes me at all. Many others find the same people to be offensive, so they are not responded to as much as it might seem.




juliaoceania -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:46:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

quote:

I got one on hide. Thanks for the heads up on that one, julia.

I'm proud of you both. [:D]



you think you are that special? please, grow up.


See? A perfect example of a post designed to do nothing more than bait... why give the person what they want, which is a response....




LaTigresse -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:50:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I tried to block myself once a long time ago, ModeratorEleven told me to knock it off.



Some people ain't got no sense of humour a-tall...




mnottertail -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:51:27 AM)

It is a joke.  I hold no animosity towards ME.




popularDemand -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:55:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

It is a joke.  I hold no animosity towards ME.


You'll learn.

pD




mnottertail -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:58:02 AM)

Nah, If I get de-nutted by the mods, I never think that it is personal animosity, no matter how much any one of them may hate me (or not).

I haven't ever seen that 'I am gonna get you, fucker' sort of retribution out here ever, by mods. 




LillyBoPeep -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 11:58:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

Why is it possible but considered *not done* to respond to a three month old thread?


I think this is a norm that varies from site to site, but I can tell you, it is annoying to put a reply on a thread that was 3 years old that you contributed to originally in the middle of the thread.. it makes you feel stupid.



i think that's mostly because if someone's asking a specific question like "i can't figure out how to get my sub to vote," then by 3 months or 3 years the situation has likely changed, and a lot of times the person asking stops signing in.
so if you want to keep discussing the issue i guess they want you to make it more general.
one of my threads came back and Rho said that it was just at the 3 month mark, and it was a general topic, not a specific situation so it was okay.

so i think it depends on the thread itself.




Arpig -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:03:50 PM)

quote:

I thought the "good old days" were anything but, allowing trolls to run riot (although it's still a fairly troll-rich environment even now)
I guess it takes one to know one eh dude?

You are of course entitled to your own opinion. Your views on this topic have been noted, as has the fact that those views are wrong.[:)]




Phoenixpower -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:04:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss

Once we get to a certain stage, we don't even get love letters from the Mods anymore when our stuff is pulled. They know we know. Or that's how I interpret my empty inbox.


dito [8|]




juliaoceania -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:05:32 PM)

They used to have the attachment symbol on threads that were really old and moldy. It was not a big deal because you could see it was an inactive thread by the paperclip on the side of it. They changed that to being an attachment symbol (which is the standard for attachment), so now there is no visible cue that the thread is old.

It would be nice if they came up with some symbol that old threads would automatically get if they were a certain age, so we would realize how old they were before contributing,....like they used to have.




mnottertail -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:06:43 PM)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph7oZnBH05s




SpiritedRadiance -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:11:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

I thought the "good old days" were anything but, allowing trolls to run riot (although it's still a fairly troll-rich environment even now)
I guess it takes one to know one eh dude?

You are of course entitled to your own opinion. Your views on this topic have been noted, as has the fact that those views are wrong.[:)]


Well I guess it takes a troll to call another person a troll, seriously what are you Five?

Aside from your OPINION not fact opinion... is that the mods are doing a glad jolly old good time, and that if you want to do it better volunteer..

Sorry I have a life outside of the collarme forums and dont spend enough time here to warrant being too upset with how things are run. But i liked life better under mod 11, and dont like the new moderation, its why my forum contributions are down and i dont spend as much time here as i used to, in my opinions the mods arent your friends they arent here to be buddy buddy with you, there here to do their job, wither or not they get paid for it.

And you cant tell someone that their opinion is wrong, just because you dont agree with it. Because you really dont want to hear my views and opinions about yourself and your recent posts...




heartcream -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:17:19 PM)

I dont have the energy or interest to read most of the blah blah blah threads and many of the people here give me the out right creeps. I wouldnt bother blocking someone on the threads and I dont really care enough to care what is going on here or not. I have had posts pulled and sometimes found it annoying when I felt folks were being really funny and the rightwing posters ;P would get their knickers all tied up huffing and puffing.

Notice Jeff and domi arent really around here anymore? All you hoping for their title can move seamlessly into their vacant place and try and fill their funny shoes, g'head.




Icarys -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:20:32 PM)

quote:

Notice Jeff and domi arent really around here anymore?

Can't say that I've given it much thought.. Probably ended in divorce. I wouldn't be surprised.




heartcream -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:21:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance


Well I guess it takes a troll to call another person a troll, seriously what are you Five?

Aside from your OPINION not fact opinion... is that the mods are doing a glad jolly old good time, and that if you want to do it better volunteer..

Sorry I have a life outside of the collarme forums and dont spend enough time here to warrant being too upset with how things are run. But i liked life better under mod 11, and dont like the new moderation, its why my forum contributions are down and i dont spend as much time here as i used to, in my opinions the mods arent your friends they arent here to be buddy buddy with you, there here to do their job, wither or not they get paid for it.

And you cant tell someone that their opinion is wrong, just because you dont agree with it. Because you really dont want to hear my views and opinions about yourself and your recent posts...



Haha funny post! As to the bolded part, he actually can tell someone their opinion is wrong. He can and he did. Then again you really could also post your view and opinions on the 'pig, I would find that interesting reading!




popularDemand -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:22:11 PM)

'citin!

pD




heartcream -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:24:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

quote:

Notice Jeff and domi arent really around here anymore?

Can't say that I've given it much thought.. Probably ended in divorce. I wouldn't be surprised.



I betcha have. I betcha give it thought allll the time! You can rest assured there has been no divorce though. Quit trying to break them up and get between them.




SpiritedRadiance -> RE: moderation interpretation? (6/18/2011 12:25:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: heartcream


quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance


Well I guess it takes a troll to call another person a troll, seriously what are you Five?

Aside from your OPINION not fact opinion... is that the mods are doing a glad jolly old good time, and that if you want to do it better volunteer..

Sorry I have a life outside of the collarme forums and dont spend enough time here to warrant being too upset with how things are run. But i liked life better under mod 11, and dont like the new moderation, its why my forum contributions are down and i dont spend as much time here as i used to, in my opinions the mods arent your friends they arent here to be buddy buddy with you, there here to do their job, wither or not they get paid for it.

And you cant tell someone that their opinion is wrong, just because you dont agree with it. Because you really dont want to hear my views and opinions about yourself and your recent posts...



Haha funny post! As to the bolded part, he actually can tell someone their opinion is wrong. He can and he did. Then again you really could also post your view and opinions on the 'pig, I would find that interesting reading!


There i fixed your bolded part for you and made it a little larger to drive home my point...

Just because you dont like it doesnt mean that its wrong, it means that you dont like it.

If its wrong and you have factual evidence its wrong, thats a different story, but because arpigs only dislike of RFs opinion is it doesnt match his, it doesnt hold to the true style of debate.




Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.25