Devils Advocate
Posts: 4,539
Aug 23, 2012 10:02am
She is obviously talented and a multi tasker.FatHobbit;1252856 wrote:What the hell is this from? It's feaking hilarious.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Aug 23, 2012 10:31am
Thing is, what you're advocating here is the epitome of subjective. As it stands now, if some Mod has a personal vendetta and tries to infract a poster when the rest of the Mods can see it wasn't an offense against the rules, the poster has a case that the infraction was unjustified.SportsAndLady;1252795 wrote:I mean I kind of understand banning troll idiots, or just complete extremists on a particular subject...but mods have to know who the good posters who didn't mean anything by their comments and who are just trying to get a rise out of people. You really can't tell the difference between me and say, that zombaypirate idiot on Browns threads? lol I'm in the same category as that fucking guy?
Little subjectivity never killed anyone.
As for the reason for the rules, they were to appease the Google AdSense people, I believe. Not to bring new posters. All the members in the world don't pay for this site without advertising, and a lot of legitimate CPC networks have terms similar to Google's about what kind of content can be on the site.
T
thavoice
Posts: 14,376
Aug 23, 2012 10:46am
You are half right. I am not a fucktard regarding the Reds..I just try the whole reverse jinx on them. If ya noticed, when they went on that little losing streak it was when I was bant and could post to work my magic! At the time I didnt know i could still post in the basment.!SportsAndLady;1252282 wrote:I know ya didn't thavoice...you're a big ****tard (at least when it comes to the reds and your wife) but you're not a snitch.
I guess we can't curse at people these days on here..oh well
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Aug 23, 2012 11:03am
Subjectivity gets a bad rap. In my business, should two of my employees, one a star, the other average, be treated the same for the same offense? Not IMO. No different here, there's a difference between a good poster who steps outside the rules and a bad poster, and the line isn't particularly blurred. No real reason they should suffer the same fate.O-Trap;1252883 wrote:Thing is, what you're advocating here is the epitome of subjective.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Aug 23, 2012 11:19am
That's a fair opinion, but there are two issues I would raise:queencitybuckeye;1252915 wrote:Subjectivity gets a bad rap. In my business, should two of my employees, one a star, the other average, be treated the same for the same offense? Not IMO. No different here, there's a difference between a good poster who steps outside the rules and a bad poster, and the line isn't particularly blurred. No real reason they should suffer the same fate.
1. Many posters have been complaining about different Mods being "inconsistent" in how they enforce the rules. Subjectivity breeds inconsistency between one Mod and another.
2. A subjective take on enforcing the rules will only work if the members trust the Mods' judgments. Do you think that is the case on here?
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Aug 23, 2012 11:26am
Valid, but I'd ask under what scenario the membership would not whine about the enforcement of rules? For some, it appears to be about their only contribution.O-Trap;1252923 wrote:That's a fair opinion, but there are two issues I would raise:
1. Many posters have been complaining about different Mods being "inconsistent" in how they enforce the rules. Subjectivity breeds inconsistency between one Mod and another.
2. A subjective take on enforcing the rules will only work if the members trust the Mods' judgments. Do you think that is the case on here?
DeyDurkie5
Posts: 11,324
Aug 23, 2012 11:26am
turks against the chatter.
FatHobbit
Posts: 8,651
Aug 23, 2012 11:44am
I've never had a problem with the mods.O-Trap;1252923 wrote:2. A subjective take on enforcing the rules will only work if the members trust the Mods' judgments. Do you think that is the case on here?
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Aug 23, 2012 12:06pm
That, indeed, is the crux issue, I suppose.queencitybuckeye;1252926 wrote:Valid, but I'd ask under what scenario the membership would not whine about the enforcement of rules? For some, it appears to be about their only contribution.
That's good to hear. Others do not feel the same way.FatHobbit;1252938 wrote:I've never had a problem with the mods.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Aug 23, 2012 12:17pm
Pretty much sums it up. There are users on here that solely look for the moderators to make an error in judgement or to apply a grey area to anything. Then they are relentlessly blasted until action takes place; which it typically does because each infraction sets a precedent for the next one. If SAL calls someone a fucktard and doesn't receive a warning, I guarantee some users are on here are itching to call someone else a fucktard hoping for a warning to call out the moderator who set the poor precedent.O-Trap;1252923 wrote:That's a fair opinion, but there are two issues I would raise:
1. Many posters have been complaining about different Mods being "inconsistent" in how they enforce the rules. Subjectivity breeds inconsistency between one Mod and another.
2. A subjective take on enforcing the rules will only work if the members trust the Mods' judgments. Do you think that is the case on here?
Never-the-less, I think SAL should be un-banned. It's a joke we place productive users in the basement where nothing of value is produced.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Aug 23, 2012 12:20pm
Also, if thavoice didn't give a fuck, then why the hell step in and infract?
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Aug 23, 2012 12:20pm
Some of us call those people "free entertainment". Of the trainwreck fashion, like with a couple co-workers who constantly are getting calls from bill collectors and (in the case of one) got her phone shut off...yet they still both go out to lunch every day and talk about getting manicures, body wraps and all sorts of silly money-wasting things. On one level, they're very annoying...but their stupidity is entertaining in a way.queencitybuckeye;1252926 wrote:Valid, but I'd ask under what scenario the membership would not whine about the enforcement of rules? For some, it appears to be about their only contribution.
B
BR1986FB
Posts: 24,104
Aug 23, 2012 12:34pm
LOL, yeah..."I'm not paying my rent, mortgage or car payment but I'll be damned if I'll let them shut off my 'lifeline' (iPhone)". Idiots...Heretic;1252968 wrote:Some of us call those people "free entertainment". Of the trainwreck fashion, like with a couple co-workers who constantly are getting calls from bill collectors and (in the case of one) got her phone shut off...yet they still both go out to lunch every day and talk about getting manicures, body wraps and all sorts of silly money-wasting things. On one level, they're very annoying...but their stupidity is entertaining in a way.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Aug 23, 2012 12:41pm
Because a rule was clearly broken, plain and simple. I have absolutely nothing against S&L, he brings good convo to the Reds threads, but you can't just break the rules that Justin put in place, and asked us to enforce.like_that;1252967 wrote:Also, if thavoice didn't give a fuck, then why the hell step in and infract?
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Aug 23, 2012 12:42pm
When people stop complaining about consistency and reporting 50 thousand posts to "back-up" their "This person did the same thing" claim than we can be more subjective.
Honestly, its easier to not even look at the username than to go to the mod page and sift through the bullshit of "consistency".
Honestly, its easier to not even look at the username than to go to the mod page and sift through the bullshit of "consistency".
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Aug 23, 2012 12:57pm
sleeper;1252964 wrote:Pretty much sums it up. There are users on here that solely look for the moderators to make an error in judgement or to apply a grey area to anything. Then they are relentlessly blasted until action takes place; which it typically does because each infraction sets a precedent for the next one. If SAL calls someone a fucktard and doesn't receive a warning, I guarantee some users are on here are itching to call someone else a fucktard hoping for a warning to call out the moderator who set the poor precedent.
Bingo.
As for his post, it still probably should have been edited, as once again, having "fucktard" allowed even as a word is not going to help bring back AdSense.
Truth. I almost wish there was a limit to the number of posts you could report in a week. Pretty sure we've had at least a couple people report over 30 in a single week, most of which were stupid.Laley23;1252984 wrote:When people stop complaining about consistency and reporting 50 thousand posts to "back-up" their "This person did the same thing" claim than we can be more subjective.
Honestly, its easier to not even look at the username than to go to the mod page and sift through the bullshit of "consistency".
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Aug 23, 2012 1:14pm
Ball busting should not be a broken rule. Also he recieved a warning for "GTFOHWTS." What rule does that break?se-alum;1252983 wrote:Because a rule was clearly broken, plain and simple. I have absolutely nothing against S&L, he brings good convo to the Reds threads, but you can't just break the rules that Justin put in place, and asked us to enforce.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Aug 23, 2012 1:21pm
This. What rule does referring to a children's book character break? Because some mod thinks I'm referencing a valuable member on this forum? GTFOWTS.like_that;1253018 wrote:Ball busting should not be a broken rule. Also he recieved a warning for "GTFOHWTS." What rule does that break?
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Aug 23, 2012 1:23pm
I agree. It's a shame we don't have moderators capable of using subjectivity in their moderation duty. They've set so many broken precedents that the web has become entangled and members feel disenfranchised enough to want treatment applied equally to all members.Laley23;1252984 wrote:When people stop complaining about consistency and reporting 50 thousand posts to "back-up" their "This person did the same thing" claim than we can be more subjective.
Honestly, its easier to not even look at the username than to go to the mod page and sift through the bullshit of "consistency".
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Aug 23, 2012 1:51pm
I didn't give him the warning, but I'm guessing it's along the lines of the same reasoning infractions are given for GFY. Just because you're using an acronym, doesn't mean it doesn't have the same meaning as typing it out.like_that;1253018 wrote:Ball busting should not be a broken rule. Also he recieved a warning for "GTFOHWTS." What rule does that break?
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Aug 23, 2012 1:52pm
You're the ringleader of the "chosen few are treated better than others" brigade. So you're one of the reasons subjective moderating doesn't work.sleeper;1253026 wrote:I agree. It's a shame we don't have moderators capable of using subjectivity in their moderation duty. They've set so many broken precedents that the web has become entangled and members feel disenfranchised enough to want treatment applied equally to all members.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Aug 23, 2012 2:00pm
I've already repeatedly given my suggestion on how to fix this whole issue. Your decision to continually ignore ideas that don't come from the ivory tower of LJ; these are the consequences. If we had a mod staff who in the aggregate knew what they were doing(I mean it's only been 2+ years :rolleyesse-alum;1253040 wrote:You're the ringleader of the "chosen few are treated better than others" brigade. So you're one of the reasons subjective moderating doesn't work.
, then this wouldn't be a problem.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Aug 23, 2012 2:00pm
So if I say "get the fuck outta here with that shit," I will get an infraction? LMAO. What's the difference between that, and somebody calling somebody's post idiotic?se-alum;1253038 wrote:I didn't give him the warning, but I'm guessing it's along the lines of the same reasoning infractions are given for GFY. Just because you're using an acronym, doesn't mean it doesn't have the same meaning as typing it out.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Aug 23, 2012 2:14pm
Exactly. The vast majority of us do not mind a little obscene criticism. Stop catering to those who never post and only complain about those who actually post and your forums will be fixed overnight.like_that;1253047 wrote:So if I say "get the fuck outta here with that shit," I will get an infraction? LMAO. What's the difference between that, and somebody calling somebody's post idiotic?
Big_Mirg_ZHS
Posts: 2,079
Aug 23, 2012 2:17pm
Dont you guys get the cussing isnt about the cares of a chosen few its and effort to appease the adsense gods....