So why exactly was MJ4H boxed?

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

The question still remains, however. What rule was broken in the first place to attract the attention of the mods?

I personally brought the thread to the attention of Ben because I felt that while no individual image directly violated the rules of the board, the collection of a bunch of borderline images in a thread was not in the best interest of the board and what FOFC is as a community. We are NOT a hot chix board. We do our best to ensure that people are able to access this board from work, and a thread like that puts that goal at risk in my opinion.

So, I brought it Ben's attention. He apparently agreed as he deleted the thread, but did not box/ban MJ4H.

What happened after that gets muddled up in a lot of stuff that was not public on the message board and I was not personally involved with - plus I was not around this weekend on the board. So I cannot speak to it.

However, I wanted to address CW's specific question.

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

linking to a page that had pictures that the mods had deleted from the board for being too "racy" i presume.

Which is still bullshit...it's freaking Twitter...

Honestly, he did nothing wrong but recreate the Dynasty thread and actually posted Poker in it...If someones work radar went off on the twitter thing, then they need to seriously focus on their damn job and not worry about FOFC until they get home.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

This is what I imagined:

"Uh, teach...? We, uh, got the new sheet music this morning. Um... I had no idea Slayer's South of Heaven had been transcribed for symphonic band."

"IT HAS NOW!"

Gold

SI

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Will anyone not be allowed to view the board at work because there are links to twitter/photobucket? Or if there are cheesecake pictures behind spoiler tags that no one will accidentally view?

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by MacroGuru

Which is still bullshit...it's freaking Twitter...

Honestly, he did nothing wrong but recreate the Dynasty thread and actually posted Poker in it...If someones work radar went off on the twitter thing, then they need to seriously focus on their damn job and not worry about FOFC until they get home.

Again, in general terms, finding "ways around" mod decisions has always been frowned upon around here. To think you can just recreate the thread and find another way of getting people to the images was a-ok is just foolish. If MJ4H recreate the poker thread and stuck to poker, we wouldn't be having this annoying discussion.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by wade moore

I personally brought the thread to the attention of Ben because I felt that while no individual image directly violated the rules of the board, the collection of a bunch of borderline images in a thread was not in the best interest of the board and what FOFC is as a community. We are NOT a hot chix board. We do our best to ensure that people are able to access this board from work, and a thread like that puts that goal at risk in my opinion.

So, I brought it Ben's attention. He apparently agreed as he deleted the thread, but did not box/ban MJ4H.

What happened after that gets muddled up in a lot of stuff that was not public on the message board and I was not personally involved with - plus I was not around this weekend on the board. So I cannot speak to it.

However, I wanted to address CW's specific question.

lol, there are hot chix in quite a few threads on FOFC I'd imagine.

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by wade moore

I personally brought the thread to the attention of Ben because I felt that while no individual image directly violated the rules of the board, the collection of a bunch of borderline images in a thread was not in the best interest of the board and what FOFC is as a community. We are NOT a hot chix board. We do our best to ensure that people are able to access this board from work, and a thread like that puts that goal at risk in my opinion.

So, I brought it Ben's attention. He apparently agreed as he deleted the thread, but did not box/ban MJ4H.

What happened after that gets muddled up in a lot of stuff that was not public on the message board and I was not personally involved with - plus I was not around this weekend on the board. So I cannot speak to it.

However, I wanted to address CW's specific question.

Well, this sums it up for me...I guess I need to start visiting a few different boards, but before I head...take a gander at several hundred other threads throughout this board and make sure they get deleted, banned and what not, because we don't want the board to turn into that as well....

Do you need help finding those threads? Because I would be happy to go through and report them for not being "FOFC" type material.

[larrymcg421]

Right, I can understand the reasoning that if someone tried to skirt a decision that the modding team made, then a boxing is warranted.

However, the problem as I see it is people who were reading the original thread didn't see anything objectionable in it, at least compared to other threads. So it'd be nice to get an answer as to why this particular thread crossed the line in the first place so those of us intent on not breaking rules can get a clearer idea of how to proceed.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by molson

I always that there should be a sticky that says who's currently suspended/banned and why.

I understand it's a balancing act. I guess the mods don't want people discussing why people are "disciplined" (and the very fact that someone can be "disciplined" on a message board is just so...stupid). I don't get why such discussions would be so horrible if people wanted to do it. I don't get why mods have to be such babies about that. They could easily just let people state their opinion if they wanted to, and then not respond if they didn't feel it was constructive. I guess they're too sensitive.

I do undertand why people want to know why their posting peers are getting the shaft, and the fact that they're not "allowed" to know - is just dopey. It's like we're children.

I'm not exactly the village gossip by any stretch of the imagination and I'm usually the last one to hear about these sorts of things. In fact, I always find out when these threads come up. But could we have a "banning" thread where it says who is banned, boxed, and why? It could be a locked thread where no one can post but it would be kindof like a giant billboard at the top of the board.

SI

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by MacroGuru

Do you need help finding those threads? Because I would be happy to go through and report them for not being "FOFC" type material.

Leave those threads alone!!

[molson]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Right, I can understand the reasoning that if someone tried to skirt a decision that the modding team made, then a boxing is warranted.

IWhat's wrong with skirting a decision, if by "skirting" it, you get into compliance with the rule?

If a mod says, "hey, can you delete the picture", and the poster instead links to it, is that "skirting", or is that an attempt to comply with the "rule" (whatever it is - that's the problem as they're made up as we go along).

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by MacroGuru

Which is still bullshit...it's freaking Twitter...

Honestly, he did nothing wrong but recreate the Dynasty thread and actually posted Poker in it...If someones work radar went off on the twitter thing, then they need to seriously focus on their damn job and not worry about FOFC until they get home.

i tend to agree, but then again i'm lucky enough (currently) to be in a small and relaxed enough place that i don't have any monitoring software.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

lol, there are hot chix in quite a few threads on FOFC I'd imagine.

Originally Posted by MacroGuru

Well, this sums it up for me...I guess I need to start visiting a few different boards, but before I head...take a gander at several hundred other threads throughout this board and make sure they get deleted, banned and what not, because we don't want the board to turn into that as well....

Do you need help finding those threads? Because I would be happy to go through and report them for not being "FOFC" type material.

There's a big difference, in my opinion, between a post here and there of a hot chick and a thread essentially (masked behind a poker dynasty) dedicated to hot chix.

If you want that, as you stated above, there are plenty of other message boards you can go to dedicated to that purpose.

This board is very, very lenient on the whole. One of the things that has been consistent is that we do our best to avoid folks having work issues due to sexual (for lack of a better term) images.


And again, that being said - MJ4H was not boxed for the original thread.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by wade moore

I personally brought the thread to the attention of Ben because I felt that while no individual image directly violated the rules of the board, the collection of a bunch of borderline images in a thread was not in the best interest of the board and what FOFC is as a community. We are NOT a hot chix board. We do our best to ensure that people are able to access this board from work, and a thread like that puts that goal at risk in my opinion.

So, I brought it Ben's attention. He apparently agreed as he deleted the thread, but did not box/ban MJ4H.

What happened after that gets muddled up in a lot of stuff that was not public on the message board and I was not personally involved with - plus I was not around this weekend on the board. So I cannot speak to it.

However, I wanted to address CW's specific question.

not trying to speak for MJ4H but maybe he was upset to see all of the poker-stuff get deleted moreso than the pictures and that's what (presumably) set him off?

Wouldn't the best solution have been to warn MJ4H and either ask him to promptly edit the pictures out, or have a mod edit them out right then?

maybe that was done...idk.

i've been boxed before - it's not that bad really. you feel like you have a lot to say when you come back and you bump old threads that people have moved on past, but it also frees up a lot of time.

[molson]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

But could we have a "banning" thread where it says who is banned, boxed, and why?

I think they think it would "inflame" people or something. They don't want people comparing situation X where there was a suspension, and situation Y where there wasn't.

It seems simple to me - one stickied thread with discipline and other announcements, and an open stickied thread where people can state opinions about the modding. That stuff would need to stay in the thread, and couldn't be referenced elsewhere. Mods could communicate with people and give explanations on specific points if they chose to.

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by wade moore

There's a big difference, in my opinion, between a post here and there of a hot chick and a thread essentially (masked behind a poker dynasty) dedicated to hot chix.

If you want that, as you stated above, there are plenty of other message boards you can go to dedicated to that purpose.

This board is very, very lenient on the whole. One of the things that has been consistent is that we do our best to avoid folks having work issues due to sexual (for lack of a better term) images.


And again, that being said - MJ4H was not boxed for the original thread.

I'm not even bitching about the Hot Chix picture, it was the heavy handed aspect of it all...a deletion of the thread that had a hell of a lot of Poker stuff in that I was following, the hot chix was a bonus and hidden in spoiler tags to a damn photobucket account...if it was linked to several porn sites then there is a legitimate bitch....he even said what he was doing in the thread.

No one bitched, complained or anything because they were in spoiler tags....but then again, I am still under the impression of, if your work is searching for specific shit and blocking internet access for boards like this and you use creative means to get here, then you should be focusing on your job, and not worrying about FOFC until you get home.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

not trying to speak for MJ4H but maybe he was upset to see all of the poker-stuff get deleted moreso than the pictures and that's what (presumably) set him off?

Wouldn't the best solution have been to warn MJ4H and either ask him to promptly edit the pictures out, or have a mod edit them out right then?

If MJ4H's concern was really the poker stuff, would he have reposted the pictures in an alternate way?

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by molson

IWhat's wrong with skirting a decision, if by "skirting" it, you get into compliance with the rule?

If a mod says, "hey, can you delete the picture", and the poster instead links to it, is that "skirting", or is that an attempt to comply with the "rule" (whatever it is - that's the problem as they're made up as we go along).

Well, I'm not saying he did skirt the rule in this specific case. I was going along with what wade said for the purposes of argument.

There seems to be some dispute as to the facts, so it's hard to figure out who was in the wrong, which is why it'd be nice to get more details from the mods.

[molson]

Originally Posted by wade moore

.

This board is very, very lenient on the whole.

Has anyone tried to count the number of suspensions/bannings? It seems like a ton.

[molson]

Originally Posted by wade moore

If MJ4H's concern was really the poker stuff, would he have reposted the pictures in an alternate way?

Who cares what MJH4H's reasoning was? That just supports the idea that he was suspended for being snooty with a moderator, which is ridiculous.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by MacroGuru

I'm not even bitching about the Hot Chix picture, it was the heavy handed aspect of it all...a deletion of the thread that had a hell of a lot of Poker stuff in that I was following, the hot chix was a bonus and hidden in spoiler tags to a damn photobucket account...if it was linked to several porn sites then there is a legitimate bitch....he even said what he was doing in the thread.

There is a method to "soft delete" a thread. That was done here. If MJ4H really wanted the poker content, all he had to do was ask. Or, again, if that was his real concern why did he immediately race to find another way to post the pictures?

No one bitched, complained or anything because they were in spoiler tags....but then again, I am still under the impression of, if your work is searching for specific shit and blocking internet access for boards like this and you use creative means to get here, then you should be focusing on your job, and not worrying about FOFC until you get home.

Well, #1 - the readership of the thread was VERY low because of the way he posted it. If others had seen it, they may have complained.

That being said, *I* complained as a concerned poster who happens to be a mod and has strict filters at work. As of now, FOFC is *NOT* filtered out because it prevents the posting of these types of things. My work is ok with me viewing these types of boards if they DON'T have this type of content.

To say, "if your work is searching for specific shit and blocking internet access for boards like this and you use creative means to get here, then you should be focusing on your job, and not worrying about FOFC until you get home." is just a complete asshole statement. My work is fine with me occasionally viewing a board that talks about a video game, politics, etc, etc - but not with one that shows scantily clad women, etc. Like I said - I can get to it because that is NOT what this board is.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by molson

Has anyone tried to count the number of suspensions/bannings? It seems like a ton.

Seriously?

You're serious about this?

I don't have a spreadsheet or something that lists them, but outside of spam accounts I'm pretty confident that the number is in the 2-3 a year range.

[molson]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Seriously?

You're serious about this?

I don't have a spreadsheet or something that lists them, but outside of spam accounts I'm pretty confident that the number is in the 2-3 a year range.

I guess we can never know because it's top secret but I'm SURE there are more than 2-3 bannings + suspensions a year.

[stevew]

There hasn't been a suspension in god knows how long.

[Travis]

Only thing I'm seeing here that doesn't make sense to me is that any monitoring software looking for stuff like MJ4H had up in that thread isn't going to care what thread they're in here. Might have been a higher concentration in his thread, but there was nothing there that isn't in other threads on this forum. To say it was an issue because he had more of them there than other threads seems pretty thin/flimsy, especially when he was doing them in such a way so as to keep them hidden from view (for those worried about having a picture just flash on screen while at work) and seemingly (as nobody has said otherwise thus far) to avoid tripping any work place monitors.

The thread deletion/everything after that, different story/discussion, but really, if the picture type/content/hosting isn't different from other postings or an issue in of itself, frequency shouldn't be the issue.

Now if you're saying all pictures like that shouldn't ever be posted here, again, different conversation again. I'm just not getting this, "he had too many of them" theory.

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by wade moore

There is a method to "soft delete" a thread. That was done here. If MJ4H really wanted the poker content, all he had to do was ask. Or, again, if that was his real concern why did he immediately race to find another way to post the pictures?



Well, #1 - the readership of the thread was VERY low because of the way he posted it. If others had seen it, they may have complained.

That being said, *I* complained as a concerned poster who happens to be a mod and has strict filters at work. As of now, FOFC is *NOT* filtered out because it prevents the posting of these types of things. My work is ok with me viewing these types of boards if they DON'T have this type of content.

To say, "if your work is searching for specific shit and blocking internet access for boards like this and you use creative means to get here, then you should be focusing on your job, and not worrying about FOFC until you get home." is just a complete asshole statement. My work is fine with me occasionally viewing a board that talks about a video game, politics, etc, etc - but not with one that shows scantily clad women, etc. Like I said - I can get to it because that is NOT what this board is.

It's not an asshole statement because the reason filters are on at places of employment is because of lost hours due to employees not doing there job. I have been there done that myself, and I just waited until I got home to post.

But with that being said the only way you could see the scantily clad women in that thread was if you hit the spoiler tag which is where he told you he was posting them so you actively searched it, had a panic attack that you would lose precious FOFC posting and reading time from work and swung the stick...

He posted to his twitter account because he had some people that liked the damn pictures.

So with that said, we might as well focus FOFC on what it was and remove OT completely, because Politics, Religion, YouTube and almost every other thread there could set off someones filter.

[heybrad]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Like I said - I can get to it because that is NOT what this board is.

One of the largest threads on this board is dedicated to hot child molesters. How does your work feel about that?

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by heybrad

One of the largest threads on this board is dedicated to hot child molesters. How does your work feel about that?

BINGO!

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by stevew

There hasn't been a suspension in god knows how long.

Bingo.



You guys are very, very good at proving why Ben chooses to mod the way he does.

[molson]

Originally Posted by MacroGuru

So with that said, we might as well focus FOFC on what it was and remove OT completely, because Politics, Religion, YouTube and almost every other thread there could set off someones filter.

I imagine YouTube especially is a huge flag for a lot of fliters, since it's not just about lost work time but can slow down a network (and its a huge brand and easy to filter). How is that stuff allowed in any thread, as a link, or especially embedded?

If someone has a strict workplace internet policy, that's their problem, not ours.

[molson]

Originally Posted by wade moore

You guys are very, very good at proving why Ben chooses to mod the way he does.

Could you elaborate? What's the benefit of the modding style to the board? I don't think anybody even knows. It's just stated in mysterious conclusions. That's how big the disconnect is.

[molson]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Bingo.

When was the last suspension? When was the last banning?

[larrymcg421]

That's a great point. How can MJ4H's thread violate the rules if the child molester thread does not?

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by molson

When was the last suspension? When was the last banning?

I'm pretty sure Anthony / HA hit more than 2-3 / year by himself, and he went through a spat of them not too long ago. Of course since those are usually well deserved we can probably say those don't count...

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by molson

Could you elaborate? What's the benefit of the modding style to the board? I don't think anybody even knows. It's just stated in mysterious conclusions. That's how big the disconnect is.

What I'm specifically referring to is that no good comes of attempting to discuss a mod decision with you people.

[molson]

Originally Posted by wade moore

What I'm specifically referring to is that no good comes of attempting to discuss a mod decision with you people.

The high and mighty act sheds a lot of light on the mod decisions.

"Good" for who? The mods, nobody else. That proves the point. It's not even an articulable policy.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by wade moore

What I'm specifically referring to is that no good comes of attempting to discuss a mod decision with you people.

Because the original decision makes no sense! The hot child molesters thread is a great point brought up.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by wade moore

That being said, *I* complained as a concerned poster who happens to be a mod and has strict filters at work. As of now, FOFC is *NOT* filtered out because it prevents the posting of these types of things. My work is ok with me viewing these types of boards if they DON'T have this type of content.

If your work has the ability to decipher the content of a picture on a photobucket account, using some advanced computer vision algorithm, perhaps they should start marketing it.

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by wade moore

What I'm specifically referring to is that no good comes of attempting to discuss a mod decision with you people.

Because most of the time the decisions are made because a mods panties were tied in a knot by someone.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

That's a great point. How can MJ4H's thread violate the rules if the child molester thread does not?

because it's about news stories?

I mean, under a different thread title, nobody is bringing that thread up.

[heybrad]

Originally Posted by wade moore

What I'm specifically referring to is that no good comes of attempting to discuss a mod decision with you people.

Because it might show that you really botched this one?

[gstelmack]

Everyone is willing to bitch about mod decisions but no one is willing to acknowledge that the board is generally a really good place to visit and rarely devolves into the kind of antics most boards see. I think the results are worth putting up with the occasional mod insanity (and I've really only run across one when a mod changed a title of a thread because some folks didn't agree with the politics in it...)

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by stevew

because it's about news stories?

I mean, under a different thread title, nobody is bringing that thread up.

No...it got it starts because the chick was hot and people started posting pictures of teachers that banged their students.

If you go to that thread for news stories...I have a few other boards for you to check out.

[molson]

Originally Posted by MacroGuru

Because most of the time the decisions are made because a mods panties were tied in a knot by someone.

Exactly.

That's why they can't talk about it. Because it wouldn't sound good. And they think, "oh, 'those people' wouldn't understand". As if modding is some kind science that laymen can't comprehend

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by stevew

because it's about news stories?

I mean, under a different thread title, nobody is bringing that thread up.

I would argue the main point of that thread is to find hot women.

[heybrad]

Originally Posted by stevew

because it's about news stories?

I mean, under a different thread title, nobody is bringing that thread up.

And about posting pics trying to show if they are 'hot or not' along with plenty of discussion on who would and wouldn't fuck their high school teacher.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Everyone is willing to bitch about mod decisions but no one is willing to acknowledge that the board is generally a really good place to visit and rarely devolves into the kind of antics most boards see. I think the results are worth putting up with the occasional mod insanity (and I've really only run across one when a mod changed a title of a thread because some folks didn't agree with the politics in it...)

+1

[stevew]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

I would argue the main point of that thread is to find hot women.

Yeah, especially the ones that are linked from CNN and MSNBC news stories.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Everyone is willing to bitch about mod decisions but no one is willing to acknowledge that the board is generally a really good place to visit and rarely devolves into the kind of antics most boards see. I think the results are worth putting up with the occasional mod insanity (and I've really only run across one when a mod changed a title of a thread because some folks didn't agree with the politics in it...)

I generally like this place, but is it so hard for mods to explain stuff and admit they're wrong if a decision doesn't make sense?

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by stevew

Yeah, especially the ones that are linked from CNN and MSNBC news stories.

But wade moore's filtering software can see pictures, so they're against the rules.