I started a thread HERE to open the discussion to unban these topics.
Long ago in the Age of Trolls© and the time of the Great Edition War® the discussion of political and religious topics was banned because the moderators could not keep up with all the moderation that was required.
I started a thread HERE to open the discussion to unban these topics.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
*pant pant*
How many times has goldy been banned now? He is on, what, his 12th name in as many months. RH is on probably his 14th (though over a longer time span) and from what? Constant bickering over political and religious topics. I do not expect your petition to go well, but I do wish you the best of luck.
*shrug*
Right. 'cause you guys are getting moderated because of the topics, it isn't that topics are getting moderated because of you guys (and thoes of similiar persuasion and temperment). Got it.
Yeah... we are.
And stop talking as if you are a model poster. You are a dick sometimes, like the rest of us.
You get into trouble because you cause problems and work for the mods. Giving you a free hand to vent your pet peeves would not change that. It would just mean that the mods have to mod a thread 5 times a week, instead of simply deleting it the first time it pops up.
Honestly I see no reason why they would desire to make that change.
Lightening up the CoC is only going to make things worse.
Actually if they're smart (and not stupid enough to design and code their own forum.. oh wait) then they'd just exclude the OTT from the front-page as well; that way our flaming wouldn't be visible to the rest of the community. Would probably cut down on the amount of reporting as well, since people are less likely to see things they disagree with (other then the regulars, who don't report usually)
If you ask me, this is a really silly idea. We already talk about politics and religion here and we do so without issue so long as we remain calm and don't get into flame wars. All this thread does is increase the liklihood that more eyes will be watching, that we'll experience another crackdown and things will be even deader here. Why draw attention to this? We were having banned discussions already. Meh, stupid.
Instead of focusing on 'I want', try thinking about 'I have'.
Meh. You guys are aware that there are forums specifically made for political and/or religious discussions? Or are these forums filled with layers of vitrol and hate?
Yeah, but my friends aren't there.
They're here.
And, dare I say it, the "dis-agreement" and "vitriol" is what makes those discussions all the more..."fun"?
I don't want "Yes" men, or people who entirely agree with me.
In any case, Z_B is probably more correct than anybody. Allowing those types of discussons will draw more attention to the OTT... and I think that will be a bad thing overall.
Meh. You guys are aware that there are forums specifically made for political and/or religious discussions? Or are those forums filled with layers of vitrol and hate?
Are you implying these forums aren't?
I can understand wanting your friends around to talk to; but I don't think that it's in the best interest of the forums. Too many people around with lots of ideas and convinced they are right. Like me of course, that's why I love you guys (though, I only delve into the OTF a bit).
That isn't to say there isn't a couple of CoC stuff that needs to be nerfed. Links to sites with obscenities is one. As long as it fits the conversation and isn't sexually related, I don't really care. (Why sexually related? #1. A long time ago when I operated a small clan forum, I had to crack down on sexually related pictures/stuff because the younguns in my clan were getting out of hand. #2. I'd rather look like a jerk than a pervert if someone is happening to walk by and analyzes what I'm doing.)
As a long time lurker I can say that the chances of the CoC being lightened, especially in regards to the OTT, will have about as much success as a screen door on a submarine. quote]
Good analogy!
And I agree.
We also have a group for this sort of stuff.
The group has been kind of quiet.
We also have a group for this sort of stuff.
The group has been kind of quiet.
I admit, I haven't been there in quite some time.
Perhaps it's time to start it up again?
At least then we can have our hate-filled arguments in peace again, right?
Yeah... if we allow some others into the group... if they can at least behave minimally...
EDIT: Oops I meant to post this in the WTF thread
Well, if this works out, goldo and I won't have to worry about making new accounts everytime we say something somebody else doesn't like.
*shrug*
How do you even get an account banned? At my worst, before I started blocking useless losers and still got into raging fights with them, I still only managed to get my account banned for like 1 day every so often. I can't imagine what you would have to do to get an account banned to the point of having to create a new one. And if you can just create a new one, what's the point of even banning the account in the first place?
I can't imagine what you would have to do to get an account banned to the point of having to create a new one.
Well, I've had this one for over a year now...
before, I was almost as bad as goldo... almost...;)
I can't imagine what you would have to do to get an account banned to the point of having to create a new one.
Well, I've had this one for over a year now...
before, I was almost as bad as goldo... almost...;)
Yes, but you didn't answer my question!!!! ::grumble:: If you can't say it here, send it to me privately. I really would like to know what it takes :P
by pissing off the orcs enough. Made easier if it's obvious to the orc that you're a banned poster posting under a new account to circumvent the ban. They're real touchy on that.
Heh. Thanks. Nothing I've ever discussed here was worth the extra effort of making a new account to avoid the occasional 24 hour bans I've gotten. I will agree with people on one thing, though. The CoC is incredibly vague. I've been banned for doing something that I had been doing for years and then suddenly it was bad once, and then when emails back and forth couldn't clearly explain what I did wrong, I kept doing it after and never got banned again for it. ::shrug::
I think the CoC is intentionally left vague so that they can slam people who get on their nerves, rather than slamming people who actually do something wrong.
I will agree with people on one thing, though. The CoC is incredibly vague. I've been banned for doing something that I had been doing for years and then suddenly it was bad once, and then when emails back and forth couldn't clearly explain what I did wrong, I kept doing it after and never got banned again for it. ::shrug::
Yeah... at one point my sig was reported. My sig which had been seen, without comment, by various Mods (before they were Orcs, I think) as well as Webster himself. And then someone reported it and I was told to change it. That made me a happy camper.
It really is up to the whim of whoever responds to the report.
When I ran forums, the first rule was always "Moderators are always right and can ban/permaban anyone they feel like, this will not be discussed".
Because I trusted my moderators to be able to do the right thing. It was a real easy rule to fall back on when people where doing #$@% and it was impossible to prove. We still use that same rule in all the games we make.
Of course, it requires mods that know what they're doing, which is kinda why this wouldn't work here.
So being an ex-MOD, you would say the MODs here aren't that good?
Your still around. Isn't that enough of an answer?
Yes, the problem is entirely the posters. Toasted is right, Iqwin and I probably could have a serious talk about spirituality and what not without it turning into a total flame fest save for the interruption of certain parties. And I don't even know Iqwin.
I'm not saying I'd prefer the lot of you permabanned. I'd dare say this place would lose a fair bit of its charm without certain posters. I'm just saying, like a recovering alcoholic with bottle, most of you should not be given free access to political and religious debate. It's just going to lead to tears.
So being an ex-MOD, you would say the MODs here aren't that good?
They're not. They're doing everything wrong.
Your still around. Isn't that enough of an answer?
It's not. You cannot actually ban people from forums, that's just make-believe. You can try to silence them, up to the point where they just give up, but people with infinite patience can always beat the mods.
At least then we can have our hate-filled arguments in peace again, right?
Yeah... if we allow some others into the group... if they can at least behave minimally...
Given that you seem to treat "liberal" as a dirty word, synonymous with "stupid," I just don't engage with you on these topics. Your mind is made up, and it would be pointless. I wouldn't look to the behaviour of others first, in your shoes, when asking that the debate be kept civil.
Theres a group!?
Why the hell arent I notified of these things!?
At least then we can have our hate-filled arguments in peace again, right?
Yeah... if we allow some others into the group... if they can at least behave minimally...
Given that you seem to treat "liberal" as a dirty word, synonymous with "stupid," I just don't engage with you on these topics. Your mind is made up, and it would be pointless. I wouldn't look to the behaviour of others first, in your shoes, when asking that the debate be kept civil.
Liberal is a dirty word to me.
And no, you won't change my mind, and yes, my mind is nade up.
Why do I have to change my mind? Why don't you change your mind?
And I am civil 98% of the time... until someone with a saucy mouth hides behind the 'net, or makes statements so utterly stupid and false, it has made everybody that read it dumber.
*shrug*
And no, you won't change my mind, and yes, my mind is nade up.
Then why do you discuss it?
And no, you won't change my mind, and yes, my mind is nade up.
Then why do you discuss it?
Because I like to, and because I can.
I think that people get saucy and taunt you for roughly the same reason.
Thanks mom
Looking at me as a mother figure explains why you turned out the way you do.
the way I do?
and besides plu, I turned out pretty good man! Better than some drugged up chav/ned. I work, attend classes AND I don't suck off the government's teet. Whats your idea of a productive youngin'?Low selfesteem maybe?
You're implying that I'd be a bad mother and/or that you turned out into rotten youth
Low selfesteem maybe?
you're right haha I aplogize I'm sure you'd be a great mother.
low self esteem will just turn you into a victim.
Looking at me as a mother figure explains why you turned out the way you do.
the way I do?
Crap, you're one better than me :|
Looking at me as a mother figure explains why you turned out the way you do.
the way I do?
Crap, you're one better than me :|
You don't need the classes bro
Looking at me as a mother figure explains why you turned out the way you do.
the way I do?
Crap, you're one better than me :|
You don't need the classes bro
Nah. The State of Illinois has something that makes it so because my mum has worked at the university for over 6 years that I get half tuition (for up to 150 credit hours) at State Universities. With that and scholarships and commuting (which is a bigger money sink than the tuition now) from school and back, I've only been paying ~$500.
Looking at me as a mother figure explains why you turned out the way you do.
the way I do?
Crap, you're one better than me :|
You don't need the classes bro
Nah. The State of Illinois has something that makes it so because my mum has worked at the university for over 6 years that I get half tuition (for up to 150 credit hours) at State Universities. With that and scholarships and commuting (which is a bigger money sink than the tuition now) from school and back, I've only been paying ~$500.
that was earned as far as I'm concerned
besides when I say sucking off the gov't I mean like wasters, 12 kids just to get more welfare/child support, drugged up, not helping their situation.
You're bettering yourself and if you have an advantage far be it from me to criticize you for it
lol I don't criticize jews for being good at accounting (its cool I'm jewish)[dear reader, don't flame me for that you know it was funny]
The group has been kind of quiet.
That it has. Calron is holdin' up his end but nobody else is workin' at all. What a bunch of lazy, socialist pigdogs we all are (excepting Calron, of course).
The group has been kind of quiet.
That it has. Calron is holdin' up his end but nobody else is workin' at all. What a bunch of lazy, socialist pigdogs we all are (excepting Calron, of course).
what is this group? how do I get to it? how do I work it?
Also, this group does have its own set of rules that must be followed - a loose CoC of sorts. Failure to do so can result in expulsion.
It is a private group for the OTTers to discuss things OTTers are wont to discuss without the pesky ban on those things interfering - and to keep our discussions from disrupting the open boards. As it's private, one has to be invited by the group owner. I am not said owner. Said owner has appeared in this thread, though, and may yet be listening. Behave, young OTTer, and you may be invited.
Also, this group does have its own set of rules that must be followed - a loose CoC of sorts. Failure to do so can result in expulsion.
ohhhhh thank you for this info please accept my offer of an internet high five
Do not want HI-V.
oh ok
Liberal is a dirty word to me.
But I just showered!
Liberal is a dirty word to me.
And no, you won't change my mind, and yes, my mind is nade up.
Why do I have to change my mind? Why don't you change your mind?
And I am civil 98% of the time... until someone with a saucy mouth hides behind the 'net, or makes statements so utterly stupid and false, it has made everybody that read it dumber.
*shrug*
See, that's the problem. Treating "liberal" as a dirty word starts the conversation on an uncivil tone. You clearly do not respect the other side of the debate, and don't really care what they have to say. You are demanding civility and not reciprocating. Assuming from the outset that the other side is stupid, wicked, etc. is not the way to have a civil debate.
My (very conservative, by my standards) friend put it very well: "There are no 'liberal' or 'conservative' ideas; there are good ideas and bad ideas." Attaching these labels to things is a form of branding, and is inherently counter-productive to rational debate. Most of my morality is branded as liberal, but I believe the facts are on my side with the morality I cleave to. But because they're branded as liberal, you will not listen to them/trust them.
To be fair, I am very suspicious of anything coming from a source branded as conservative. I like to think I evaluate things more rationally than most, but I'm only human and all that. Plus drunk right now. But with that friend I mentioned, he's willing to listen to what I have to say, and we have some awesome debates. We don't tend to change each other's minds, but we do clarify our own ideas through the discussion.
There is a dichotomy in US politics these days, and as an outsider to it, it appears to be very unproductive. The debates are all about winning, not about finding facts or truth. Over the past 30+ years, there has been a concerted effort to turn "liberal" into a dirty word. It has succeeded, and as outlined above, I would say it's an incredibly bad thing. It makes one side able to just label the other and the label is automatically negative. But really, we should be evaluating the ideas on their own merits rather than a label that is more-or-less arbitrarily attached to it.
I guess my point is, if you're going to have a group dedicated to political discussion, and suggest that there is not good debate because there are no voices from the other side of the fence, you might want to look to making it a place where the other side isn't just dismissed out of hand. Saying that the other side needs to be civil when you are not is counter-productive to that end. Whether you think you are or not, from where I stand you start from a position of having no respect whatsoever for the other side of the debate. That is not civil, and thus not helpful.
I don't see "liberal" as a dirty word. It's merely a label assigned to people who happen to have difference of opinions (albeit on some critical topics). Essentially, there are good people and jack**** in all political affiliations, races, religions, nationalities, sexual orientations, etc. "Being good" and "being bad" is equal opportunity in the truest sense.
Essentially, it's all about respect and tolerance. If you have those things, you can have discussions with anyone.
That's neither here nor there, though (where is it?) as the other points mentioned are far, far more important. Branding as Liberal or Conservative may be convenient but it also creates sides which then creates conflict with then lessens cooperation. That's a problem. And that's why I try not to identify myself as anything anymore when I can help it. And that is because I've too many things I like or don't like from both sides. I don't fit into either camp. I'm also glad of that.
Would it be better if progress was replaced by improvement? Cause some (not all of course) conservatives oppose the improment we have done to our democraties and improvement we still need to do. Like abortion, women's rights, minority rights, social programmes, gay rights/marriage, worker rights...
And this is an example of the problem. While some conservatives may be against these 'improvements', others certainly are not. Hence the danger of categorization. And this doesn't even touch upon the fact that some may not even be convinced these things would be 'progress' or 'improvements'. Right or wrong, there's a discussion to be had there and that can't happen if you simply say 'we can't talk to you because you're part of side X'.
Liberal is a dirty word to me.
But I just showered!
Heh... EE, you are kinda cute...
But seriously, you aren't as bad as some liberals, and I like you, even if you do lean left.
See, that's the problem. Treating "liberal" as a dirty word starts the conversation on an uncivil tone. You clearly do not respect the other side of the debate, and don't really care what they have to say.
You are correct.
I do not respect liberalism because it deserves none, and does nothing to gain it.
And, no, I don't respect the other side of the "debate", especially when it is nonsensical and doesn't make sense and/or fit with my ideas and attitudes.
Why do you feel I must accept the left? Why doesn't the left accept me?
At any rate...
*shrug*
All the brain seems to be concentrated somewhere in the middle.
edit: The alternative is of course "because 'the left' does not exist, it's just some made up concept that people have breathed life into. There only "leftitst", who either do listen to the other side, or are extremists".
Heh... EE, you are kinda cute...
+1
Heh... EE, you are kinda cute...
Not today I'm not. Shaved the face clean in preparation for Monday and I look like friggin' teenager again. A teenager who needs a hair cut (okay, it's not bad but it's getting kinda shaggy. Need to get it cut tomorrow). I swear, after Monday I'm not shaving for as many weeks as I can get away with.
But seriously, you aren't as bad as some liberals, and I like you, even if you do lean left.
... I'm curious. If I only "lean left", just who the heck counts as "hard left"? Do you have to be anti-military before you count as hard left?
See, that's the problem. Treating "liberal" as a dirty word starts the conversation on an uncivil tone. You clearly do not respect the other side of the debate, and don't really care what they have to say.
You are correct.
I do not respect liberalism because it deserves none, and does nothing to gain it.
And, no, I don't respect the other side of the "debate", especially when it is nonsensical and doesn't make sense and/or fit with my ideas and attitudes.
Why do you feel I must accept the left? Why doesn't the left accept me?
At any rate...
*shrug*
It's called tolerance and respect, if not for anything else than to respect that they are entitled to their opinion. To be intolerant and/or disrespectful of anyone's point of view, whether you agree or disagree, goes against everything that you hold dear as a conservative.
(Warning - The following may shock some people...) I would like to be invited to talk politics as well. The only problem is 1. I'd be viewd as a mod or trying to mod the group. 2. I don't want my views to somehow come back to haunt me for when I do mod. "You're just locking the thread because you disagree with me on the politics thread!"
Sigh....
See, that's the problem. Treating "liberal" as a dirty word starts the conversation on an uncivil tone. You clearly do not respect the other side of the debate, and don't really care what they have to say.
You are correct.
I do not respect liberalism because it deserves none, and does nothing to gain it.
And, no, I don't respect the other side of the "debate", especially when it is nonsensical and doesn't make sense and/or fit with my ideas and attitudes.
Why do you feel I must accept the left? Why doesn't the left accept me?
At any rate...
*shrug*
It's called tolerance and respect, if not for anything else than to respect that they are entitled to their opinion. To be intolerant and/or disrespectful of anyone's point of view, whether you agree or disagree, goes against everything that you hold dear as a conservative.
Ths is a perfect example that demonstrates the difference between an extremist and someone who is capable of engaging is productive dialogue.
Heh... EE, you are kinda cute...
Not today I'm not. Shaved the face clean in preparation for Monday and I look like friggin' teenager again. A teenager who needs a hair cut (okay, it's not bad but it's getting kinda shaggy. Need to get it cut tomorrow). I swear, after Monday I'm not shaving for as many weeks as I can get away with.But seriously, you aren't as bad as some liberals, and I like you, even if you do lean left.
... I'm curious. If I only "lean left", just who the heck counts as "hard left"? Do you have to be anti-military before you count as hard left?
See?
This is what I love about EE..
He makes you think... harder than you want to.
It is a private group Webster: Noone but the members will see it, and, being a mod already, you must know not to take their whineing seriously. If one of them does throw out such an accusation at you, take a page from KGM's playbook: a good old :eyeroll: and go about your business.
Not only that, but I trust the members not to act that way.
Well... if it's still who was there last time I checked.... which was a while ago...
See, that's the problem. Treating "liberal" as a dirty word starts the conversation on an uncivil tone. You clearly do not respect the other side of the debate, and don't really care what they have to say.
You are correct.
I do not respect liberalism because it deserves none, and does nothing to gain it.
And, no, I don't respect the other side of the "debate", especially when it is nonsensical and doesn't make sense and/or fit with my ideas and attitudes.
Why do you feel I must accept the left? Why doesn't the left accept me?
At any rate...
*shrug*
It's called tolerance and respect, if not for anything else than to respect that they are entitled to their opinion. To be intolerant and/or disrespectful of anyone's point of view, whether you agree or disagree, goes against everything that you hold dear as a conservative.
Ths is a perfect example that demonstrates the difference between an extremist and someone who is capable of engaging is productive dialogue.
So I am "labeled" an "extremist" now?
Because I am aggressive in my postings?
...
I really don't know how I feel about that...
So I am "labeled" an "extremist" now?
Because I am aggressive in my postings?
Short answer: yes.
Long Answer
It's not that you're aggressive. Most people go into a discussion/argument/debate/whathaveyou going in with fists flying, thinking they're right, the other guy is wrong and so-on. Where, for many people, you cross the line, is that you not only think the other guy is wrong, you think they're bad.
I'm not going to drag this down with quotes, but how often have you made blanket statements about "the left" and "liberals" and so-on, not just saying their ideas are wrong and flawed, but that for holding them they are bad people? That they're scum, ignorant, evil-minded people trying to destroy our country? That's the sort of rhetoric that, for many people, moves you from column "has strongly held viewpoints" to "is an extremist about it".
I'm not going to drag this down with quotes, but how often have you made blanket statements about "the left" and "liberals" and so-on, not just saying their ideas are wrong and flawed, but that for holding them they are bad people? That they're scum, ignorant, evil-minded people trying to destroy our country? That's the sort of rhetoric that, for many people, moves you from column "has strongly held viewpoints" to "is an extremist about it".
So I am "labeled" an "extremist" now?
Because I am aggressive in my postings?
...
I really don't know how I feel about that...
Yes. It's quite simple.
When you makes statements like:
You are correct.
I do not respect liberalism because it deserves none, and does nothing to gain it.
And, no, I don't respect the other side of the "debate", especially when it is nonsensical and doesn't make sense and/or fit with my ideas and attitudes.
Why do you feel I must accept the left? Why doesn't the left accept me?
You demonstrate and extremist mentality. No matter what "the other side" says, it is "nonsensical’ to you. You don't just disagree with the argument being made; you disrespect the people who make the argument. It is the same tactics used by totalitarian dictator. You can look up clip on what Gaddafi has said about protesters and you get a similar argument. Jhari has pointed out that you are basically going against what conservatives hold dear.
By the way, there is a difference between being aggressive and intolerant. You are about as aggressive as Goldo is controversial. You are an admitted intolerant person though.
As to how you should feel about it... feel however you want about it, but don't start crying about people being disrespectful to you when you have already admitted to not having any respect for those that don't share in your dogma.
EDIT: I like EE long explanation a bit better than mine. Seriously dude, if you ever run for office let me know. I'll gladly move to whatever state you are in an vote for you.
ViolenceJack: You clearly do not care what they have to say.
RH: You are correct.
I don't respect the other side of the "debate"
it is nonsensical and doesn't fit with my attitudes.
Why doesn't the left accept me?
HS: Ths is a perfect example that demonstrates the difference between an extremist and someone who is capable of engaging is productive dialogue.
In other words, he does not even listen to people who express ideas that do not match his emotional state, and further resents them for not embracing his hatred of them and everything he does not agree with. In short, a fanatic.
No, Eschy, I think your completly missing the point here, and in doing so are encouraging RH to grab-and-run with a similiar false conclusions. Let me break it down if I may, into the relevant bits:
ViolenceJack: You clearly do not care what they have to say.
RH: You are correct.
I don't respect the other side of the "debate"
it is nonsensical and doesn't fit with my attitudes.
Why doesn't the left accept me?
HS: Ths is a perfect example that demonstrates the difference between an extremist and someone who is capable of engaging is productive dialogue.
In other words, he does not even listen to people who express ideas that do not match his emotional state, and further resents them for not embracing his hatred of them and everything he does not agree with. In short, a fanatic.
Well said.
Orc_Ertai
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Orc_Ertai
With all due respect, my post contained none of what you mentioned.
They deleted my post that only said I thought I posted something in this thread but couldn't remember. Wikileaks Task Force, man. This does nothing to improve perception of the mod team, I can guarandamn-tee you that.
*waits for post deletion*
They deleted my post that only said I thought I posted something in this thread but couldn't remember. Wikileaks Task Force, man. This does nothing to improve perception of the mod team, I can guarandamn-tee you that.
*waits for post deletion*
That's becaue you are obviously a scumbag aggitator who is starting trouble
Note: Let's see how long this post stays up.
Oh yeah, inb4poof.
Yeah, I guess not remembering things is a CoC violation. I didn't quote any post so it couldn't have been removed for continuity issues. Goofballs.
Oh yeah, inb4poof.
Once it goes *poof* no one will ever believe you that you were inb4poof.
Now I'm off to the beach for a bit (another CoC violation). I wonder how ravaged the OTT will be by the time I get back...
Wait, my post gets to stay?
...
Wait, my post gets to stay?
Is it possible that the ORC fear the wrath of amphibean retribution?