Moderators

[The Hitch]

Equating the members suspension thread to public hangings is a bit like Lance equating his post career ban from cycling to a death sentence.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Make that 7 active members. How productive some are is questionable:

Thehog and ebandit are banned........

Not surprised. The good, new hog was a hard act to keep up.
Back to the old hog and soon back into the sin bin.
So, it's now one out, all out.
Certainly nips any silliness in the bud.
Maybe this is the way forward.

 

[the sceptic]

let me be clear, i have no competence, much less objections to the mod actions quoted above, simply b/c i have not seen nor participated in the subject threads...

but 5 active, productive members banned at once ?! ...well, the impression i got was of the excessively repressive approach made public.

again, they may have deserved the short vacation, but - pls, hear me out - slamming so many productive members so loudly in public, is sick.


jeezus, can't you people work smarter and more discretely ...like putting the sinners in the post preview in stead of making the hangings public as if they will help preventing anything. again, i heard plenty of the arguments about the public hangings being a communication tool, but that's an obvious bs because several recent hangings were
mystery b/c the henchman chose so despite the standing practice...

I have no idea what the rest of your post means, but you cant be serious about this part. Whats the alternative? posters disappearing quietly in the night to unknown bans?

First of all, everyone posting here are doing so anonymously, so who cares about getting banned in "public". And second of all, im sure it wont be a big blow to anoyones internet reputation to have been banned for a few days. Thirdly, if it really is that big of a deal, then maybe avoid doing things that is likely to get you banned.

 

[MarkvW]

I have no idea what the rest of your post means, but you cant be serious about this part. Whats the alternative? posters disappearing quietly in the night to unknown bans?

First of all, everyone posting here are doing so anonymously, so who cares about getting banned in "public". And second of all, im sure it wont be a big blow to anoyones internet reputation to have been banned for a few days. Thirdly, if it really is that big of a deal, then maybe avoid doing things that is likely to get you banned.

I don't see how a ban for bickering and disrupting can be any more "sick" than the rude backbiting that prompted the ban.

I also agree that there's not much 'Internet Reputation' damage going on here. One of the rudest posters here had an earlier iteration that was even ruder. He was able to get the website to delete his earlier identity along with his earlier posts.

If this a sign of an increased emphasis on civility, I'm all for it.

 

[python]

Equating the members suspension thread to public hangings is a bit like Lance equating his post career ban from cycling to a death sentence.

you should be the last one whining then...


some time ago, i have seen a string of your indignant , loud posts protesting a simple deletion of your post (cant recall the details exactly now) but it was something like a mod deleted one single post you called a poster a name (being an idiot ?) you exploded with hundreds of indignant word when it was your personal sensitivity involved but you show the remarkable insensitivity to my simple point - please, mods, show respect to the posters personal sensitivities, regardless of the interwebs issues, if the objective was to have them post productively in the future.

in one word, it sound as a perverted notion, as long as it was about another poster's sensitivity, not mine, it is fine to humiliate that poster...


my point simply was about the moderating mode considering the posters, regardless of who they are, their ego and personality to make the moderating more efficient...if that's too complicated, sorry, i'm not with you.

 

[pmcg76]

let me be clear, i have no competence, much less objections to the mod actions quoted above, simply b/c i have not seen nor participated in the subject threads...

but 5 active, productive members banned at once ?! ...well, the impression i got was of the excessively repressive approach made public.

again, they may have deserved the short vacation, but - pls, hear me out - slamming so many productive members so loudly in public, is sick.


jeezus, can't you people work smarter and more discretely ...like putting the sinners in the post preview in stead of making the hangings public as if they will help preventing anything. again, i heard plenty of the arguments about the public hangings being a communication tool, but that's an obvious bs because several recent hangings were
mystery b/c the henchman chose so despite the standing practice...

I don't know where you are from Python but I think the word productive means something different than it does in the rest of the world.

 

[python]

I don't know where you are from Python but I think the word productive means something different than it does in the rest of the world.

then,if you dare to speak for the rest of the world, i will dare to assume you're overdoing, otoh, i only spoke for myself.

 

[the sceptic]

I don't see how a ban for bickering and disrupting can be any more "sick" than the rude backbiting that prompted the ban.

I also agree that there's not much 'Internet Reputation' damage going on here. One of the rudest posters here had an earlier iteration that was even ruder. He was able to get the website to delete his earlier identity along with his earlier posts.

If this a sign of an increased emphasis on civility, I'm all for it.

Yes, I dont think anyone should complain about getting banned for a few days.

Its too bad Vortex got permabanned. I would love to see him go up against python in a posting battle.

 

[The Hitch]

Its too bad Vortex got permabanned. I would love to see him go up against python in a posting battle.

July 2012 I see is your join date.

That explains your post

 

[python]

Yes, I would love to see him go up against python in a posting battle.

this comment alone means - every time the doc chose to belittle and humiliate you, despite me never taking nor participating in his lead, he was likely having a point regarding the content of your contributions. rip vortex, you were right.

 

[the sceptic]

this comment alone means - every time the doc chose to belittle and humiliate you, despite me never taking nor participating in his lead, he was likely having a point regarding the content of your contributions. rip vortex, you were right.

you and vortex going to battle would be like vortex vortexing himself. Why would anyone want to miss that?

I must say, my internet ego has taken a massive hit now. Not sure if it can recover, especially since you chose to stone me in public.

 

[python]

wstone me in public.

you stoned yourself, genius.

 

[ChrisE]

you and vortex going to battle would be like vortex vortexing himself. Why would anyone want to miss that?

I must say, my internet ego has taken a massive hit now. Not sure if it can recover, especially since you chose to stone me in public.

They went after it for several days when Contadoper was appealing his ban. It wasn't as exciting as you may think, and I for one was torn over who to root for. Vortex is the only clown that can make me consider python is reasonable.

 

[Hugh Januss]

CN Mods < asshats. IMHO.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Related to the previous, but not really a part of it, Somewhere in here I want to mention Dr Mas. Because, you see, Dr Mas is an interesting case. He repeatedly made threads unreadable. After all, he was the reason "Vortex" and "vortexing" joined the local lexicon! (History got made there!) During many personal conversations with him (of the warning type), both by myself, and others of the mods (and Dan, too), we were ALL convinced, repeatedly, that he did not INTEND to disrupt or destroy threads. Apparently that was just the level of detail Dr Mas thinks at. But, even tho he claimed he never intended to be, he was consistently disruptive. Which would mean the mods had to get involved to reduce the disruption. My guess, from what we saw in public, is that there was little or no attempt to communicate the mod actions to Dr Mas in this last go-round of post deletions and mod actions.

On the other hand, given that Dr Mas had been disruptive for MONTHS, and actively so, one can understand that there might be a viewpoint in favor of dealing out the perma-ban. Personally, I think he was the "lively conversation" type of disruptive - but that is just me, and I am nobody.

wow
I want to read this before it disappears!

 

[MarkvW]

Related to the previous, but not really a part of it, Somewhere in here I want to mention Dr Mas. Because, you see, Dr Mas is an interesting case. He repeatedly made threads unreadable. After all, he was the reason "Vortex" and "vortexing" joined the local lexicon! (History got made there!) During many personal conversations with him (of the warning type), both by myself, and others of the mods (and Dan, too), we were ALL convinced, repeatedly, that he did not INTEND to disrupt or destroy threads. Apparently that was just the level of detail Dr Mas thinks at. But, even tho he claimed he never intended to be, he was consistently disruptive. Which would mean the mods had to get involved to reduce the disruption. My guess, from what we saw in public, is that there was little or no attempt to communicate the mod actions to Dr Mas in this last go-round of post deletions and mod actions.

On the other hand, given that Dr Mas had been disruptive for MONTHS, and actively so, one can understand that there might be a viewpoint in favor of dealing out the perma-ban. Personally, I think he was the "lively conversation" type of disruptive - but that is just me, and I am nobody.

I completely agree. Except for the part where you say that you are nobody.

 

[mewmewmew13]

posters are disappearing in the night…
I'm leaving my light on

 

[42x16ss]

Wow! Looks like I missed a lively weekend worth of banter...

WTF happened? Half the forum is banned

 

[mewmewmew13]

Wow! Looks like I missed a lively weekend worth of banter...

WTF happened? Half the forum is banned

watch your tail




ps edit : I tried to quote the whole thing..must be too long for this forum software??

 

[sittingbison]

disappearing into the nacht (thats my night)? Not as badly as hrotha jokes, as they will be back in a couple of days.

All these guys are very experienced, thousands of posts each. They have ALL seen and had countless warnings to play the ball not the man, shoot the message not the messenger. Finally their luck run out...at 10pm Sunday night my time.

Waving imaginary yellow cards. being 3rd man in. retaliating. shoving the ref. Sorry gentle(wo)men, these are going to get my goat....especially late Sunday night.

Adrian@sitting_bison 2h
@Netserk93 @TheMountainPass you and others should have thought before being "3rd man in" when you acknowledge there was already a problem

good tweet bison

 

[Granville57]

but 5 active, productive members banned at once ?!

Maybe this is the way forward.

Damn straight. And it's about time that group bannings took place, if bans are to take place at all.

I'm amazed at how many times only one of usually three or four instigators will get a ban when the whole lot is equally responsible. I can just imagine the snickering when one of their foes is banned but the others slip quietly away as if innocent of exactly the same.

My opinion? Less moderation in general, to be sure. But if bans are to be handed out? (and they are certainly warranted at times) Then it makes a helluva lot more sense to round up the lot of 'em instead of pretending that only one was dancing by themselves.

I also believe that informing the rest of us of such actions is a necessary part of the process if it is to be effective at all.

 

[jennifer]

edited by mod

 

[King Boonen]

I approve of this new way forward.

 

[King Boonen]

Moderators,

I have been away for a while and have returned like the spring classics...

I seem to remember there was a rule in the clinic that you couldn't just state people were doping, you either had to back it up with evidence or clearly dfine the point as an opinion.

Does this rule still exist?

 

[Carols]

The moderators have a tough, thankless job. It is like herding vicious cats at times and I do not envy them one bit.

If mass bannings are the way that makes people sit up and pay attention instead of behaving like juveniles over and over again I am totally in favor of it.

Mostly I just ignore the Clinic, it is vortex central, and I just don't need that crap, I'm to old

THANKS mods for taking on a job you couldn't pay me to do!