Author Topic: Rule breakers (Read 16213 times)

lightningninja · « **Reply #100 on:** August 13, 2011, 03:24:42 PM »

Rereading the rules again I actually think they are fine. The rule is not that "you can't make excessive spam." The RULE, if you will, is that if you do it will be deleted. So really they are not rules but rather guidelines for the moderators. And if you look to threads like "there is a picture of a goat in this thread" or the cheese thread you can see that they are indeed following those rules.

Or are they?

Bobbert · « **Reply #101 on:** August 13, 2011, 09:09:48 PM »

Quote from: soul seeker on August 13, 2011, 02:22:50 AM

After all, do you really want to be like the prophet Jeremiah?

Of course not. Jeremiah was a bullfrog.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #102 on:** August 13, 2011, 09:10:41 PM »

Quote from: lightningninja on August 13, 2011, 03:24:42 PM

Rereading the rules again I actually think they are fine. The rule is not that "you can't make excessive spam." The RULE, if you will, is that if you do it will be deleted. So really they are not rules but rather guidelines for the moderators. And if you look to threads like "there is a picture of a goat in this thread" or the cheese thread you can see that they are indeed following those rules.

Or are they?

Then don't call them rules.

And don't disobey them.

And don't selectively enforce them.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #103 on:** August 13, 2011, 09:12:11 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 13, 2011, 09:10:41 PM

Then don't call them rules.

RULES! RULES! RULES!

Red · « **Reply #104 on:** August 13, 2011, 09:13:26 PM »

Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls not YMT or LN)

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #105 on:** August 13, 2011, 09:16:31 PM »

Clearly I am not a troll, but a jötunn.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #106 on:** August 13, 2011, 09:19:04 PM »

Quote from: Red on August 13, 2011, 09:13:26 PM

Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls not YMT or LN)

Bro is mad.

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on August 13, 2011, 09:16:31 PM

Clearly I am not a troll, but a jötunn.

I'm not really sure what that is, but it sounds awesome.

Red · « **Reply #107 on:** August 13, 2011, 09:24:30 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 13, 2011, 09:19:04 PM

Quote from: Red on August 13, 2011, 09:13:26 PM
Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls not YMT or LN)

Bro is mad.

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on August 13, 2011, 09:16:31 PM
Clearly I am not a troll, but a jötunn.

I'm not really sure what that is, but it sounds awesome.

Troll is very hungry but Troll will not be fed.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #108 on:** August 13, 2011, 09:26:37 PM »

Real life image.

lightningninja · « **Reply #109 on:** August 13, 2011, 11:06:41 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 13, 2011, 09:10:41 PM

Quote from: lightningninja on August 13, 2011, 03:24:42 PM
Rereading the rules again I actually think they are fine. The rule is not that "you can't make excessive spam." The RULE, if you will, is that if you do it will be deleted. So really they are not rules but rather guidelines for the moderators. And if you look to threads like "there is a picture of a goat in this thread" or the cheese thread you can see that they are indeed following those rules.

Or are they?

Then don't call them rules.

And don't disobey them.

And don't selectively enforce them.

I was under the impression that you were sick of the stupid semantics and wanted actual change and actual results, not a renaming of what is happening and then a continuation of it. So no matter what they are called they don't ACT as rules, but rather guidelines for the moderators.

I do, however, very very very much so agree with the fact that they are selectively enforced, and that does make me slightly aggravated at times (your comment about a spell check requirement, for example, would be very nice). And the "this is spam I will delete it now" vs. the "this is spam let's join in and spam with the kids" mentality is also slightly confusing, and frustrating, at times.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #110 on:** August 13, 2011, 11:11:49 PM »

Quote from: Red on August 13, 2011, 09:13:26 PM

Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls...)

Red · « **Reply #111 on:** August 13, 2011, 11:13:36 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 13, 2011, 11:11:49 PM

Quote from: Red on August 13, 2011, 09:13:26 PM
Quit trolling it only shows how immature you all are.(This is directed at trolls...)

That's copyrighted bud. You owe me a $5 fee.

soul seeker · « **Reply #112 on:** August 13, 2011, 11:14:49 PM »

FTR: I likely would not be a gracious moderator and delete it all. Therefore, it is good for the well-being of all that I have limited powers as a moderator.

How the above statement applies: Each moderator moderates to the best of their ability and judgment. Different personalities and thought patterns interpret rules/guidelines/whatever differently. That is what the real breakdown is since each moderator is different and controls different aspects of these boards.

Red · « **Reply #113 on:** August 13, 2011, 11:16:10 PM »

I personally would have blasted this thread to kingdom come along time ago had I been mod.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #114 on:** August 13, 2011, 11:21:30 PM »

Each mod shouldn't be different. That's why rules exists. So we have consistancy. Just because Redemption rules aren't consistant doesn't mean the forum shouldn't be consistant either.

It's lame that stuff like the goat thread gets locked when it didn't hurt anyone and was a productive discussion but the same mods let us form exlcusive groups like TNT LLC or SQF. It's stupid that I can't spam but I can talk about magic, even though both are against the rules.

Either we need to update the rules, enforce the rules, or admit we don't have rules.

Quote from: Red on August 13, 2011, 11:16:10 PM

I personally would have blasted this thread to kingdom come along time ago had I been mod.

If it makes you feel better, you'd probably have left this forum a long time ago if I was mod considering how many warns you'd have for your early years. This thread has been much more productive than virtually any other thread in off topic. It's designed to get people talking about how ridiculous the current ruleset of the forums is, and it did. I am in complete favor of a harsher mod team in some areas that need to be dealt with.

COUNTER_SNIPER · « **Reply #115 on:** August 14, 2011, 01:37:20 AM »

This thread was decent until the last 2 pages. Now it's an amalgamation of completely ridiculous posts that aren't constructive to the original topic. Simply put, it's a trainwreck: the longer you look at it, the worse it gets.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #116 on:** August 14, 2011, 01:46:52 AM »

It depends on which parts you're looking at. Unfortunately, some people are taking this as complete spam and are actually spamming the thread itself. soul seeker and Olijar's posts have had some very good points.

COUNTER_SNIPER · « **Reply #117 on:** August 14, 2011, 01:58:08 AM »

Hence, my pointing out the last 2 pages as the culprits. I'd rather this get back onto topic and I wish it were a bit more formal. True, moderation practices have been spotty and seemingly erratic at times, yet, unlike most forums on the internet, this forum hardly has contained any true objectionable content in the past. It would be nice if there was some clarification to the rules, and a definition of "rule" provided. They do seem like guidelines rather than law, but that's not how they are portrayed. Actually, up until this thread, I had kind of forgotten there was such a thing as rules. It's a tad bit annoying to see a topic that had potential begin to dissolve into a broken refrigerator of spoiled spam.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #118 on:** August 15, 2011, 12:37:11 AM »

I'll agree with both Alex and SoulSeeker. Alex has some great points that I would like to see answered as both a mod and participant. (with no overall guidelines, stuff like the pickup lines thread gets deleted without explanation, and the SQF reigns freely). However, it wasn't presented in the best manner for a response.

Alex, you've got a PM.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #119 on:** August 15, 2011, 12:39:36 AM »

Quote from: SomeKittens on August 15, 2011, 12:37:11 AM

However, it wasn't presented in the best manner for a response.

That was half the point of this thread from post 3.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #120 on:** August 15, 2011, 05:23:33 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 15, 2011, 12:39:36 AM

Quote from: SomeKittens on August 15, 2011, 12:37:11 AM
However, it wasn't presented in the best manner for a response.

That was half the point of this thread from post 3.

FTR, I agree with SK that your approach did not seem serious at first.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #121 on:** August 15, 2011, 06:00:08 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on August 15, 2011, 05:23:33 PM

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 15, 2011, 12:39:36 AM
Quote from: SomeKittens on August 15, 2011, 12:37:11 AM
However, it wasn't presented in the best manner for a response.

That was half the point of this thread from post 3.

FTR, I agree with SK that your approach did not seem serious at first.

The very fact that this thread exists still supports the threads original claims. It's an irony thread.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #122 on:** August 15, 2011, 06:04:24 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 15, 2011, 06:00:08 PM

The very fact that this thread exists still supports the threads original claims. It's an irony thread.

I don't disagree. I was just supporting SK's claim.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #123 on:** August 15, 2011, 06:06:23 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on August 15, 2011, 06:04:24 PM

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 15, 2011, 06:00:08 PM
The very fact that this thread exists still supports the threads original claims. It's an irony thread.

I don't disagree. I was just supporting SK's claim.

I never really attacked his point per se, I rather countered it with another issue he might have not noticed.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #124 on:** August 15, 2011, 06:12:25 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on August 15, 2011, 06:06:23 PM

I never really attacked his point per se, .....

You dismembered his point.

News:

Author Topic: Rule breakers (Read 16213 times)

Warrior_Monk