The Inevitable Thread... - Page 5

st.cronin · 07-11-2006, 09:21 AM

I thought the resurrected thread was a parody, and was disappointed to discover it wasn't. That title has potential.

DanGarion · 07-11-2006, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

I should have clarified.

HA was not boxed because of "racist" remarks. In fact, you'll notice that no one in there did anyone say something about racism other than HA.

HA was boxed for create an offensive, trolling thread that had no purpose or realistic result other than to cause trouble. He made a sweeping, offensive generalization about an entire continent of people. Within 5 minutes it was already headed very quickly down that path, if there are any doubters on the inevitable result of the thread.

So now we are getting boxed for making generalizations? Wow things are going even more downhill here then I thought they were. Soon no one will be posting for fear of saying something with a generalization in it. I'd put an example but I'm afraid I'll be boxed if I do...

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dangarion

So now we are getting boxed for making generalizations? Wow things are going even more downhill here then I thought they were. Soon no one will be posting for fear of saying something with a generalization in it. I'd put an example but I'm afraid I'll be boxed if I do...

Good god, read and comprehend instead of wanting to pick a fight.

He was boxed for creating a thread that had the only intention and end result of trolling and causing trouble. I was merely explaining what it was that made that the case.

End of story.

You should be, and always should have been, in fear of creating a trolling thread that has the only intention and end result of trolling and causing trouble. That's how it always has been and how it always will be.

John Galt · 07-11-2006, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dangarion

So now we are getting boxed for making generalizations? Wow things are going even more downhill here then I thought they were. Soon no one will be posting for fear of saying something with a generalization in it. I'd put an example but I'm afraid I'll be boxed if I do...

While I've posted that I wasn't in favor of the boxing either, this is a ridiculously bad (and dishonest) interpretation of what happened.

Alan T · 07-11-2006, 09:37 AM

I've never had a problem with HA, he's always been respectful to me when I've talked to him on AIM or in ootp leagues in the past. I think its very hard to argue though that what he posted was not inflamatory. He basically is this board's version of a shock DJ I guess you can say. He says things to try to get reactions and that requires him to feel he has to walk that fine line between being inappropriate and being entirely disgusting.

I'm not sure how many people could support what he actually posted there as being ok to post.. from what I am reading people have issues with all kinds of things though, and are using this as an outlet to try to get those points heard.

I could be totally wrong, but it sounds to me that people are arguing if there should be any form of moderation at all, or if the community should self-moderate each other in cases like this. (I have no idea how that would work. It just sounds like thats what some people are wanting.)

It sounds like others have axes to grind with some (all?) of the moderators so use any excuse possible to further that agenda.

It sounds to me like some are just confused to what happened since no one has responded about the Sov boxing and the HA post until recently had been removed..

To be perfectly honest, I could care less one way or another. I have always been and will always be mostly a casual reader/poster on these forums and will leave forum politics to others. I have perfected the ability to learn to completely ignore posts from specific users, and known that I don't really care too much for certain types of threads because they always revert back to the same old trolling as previous ones.

I just think there is a communication issue going on here...

DanGarion · 07-11-2006, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Galt

While I've posted that I wasn't in favor of the boxing either, this is a ridiculously bad (and dishonest) interpretation of what happened.

I'm not the biggest fan of HA, but reading over the thread, that's what I see. He made a generalization (a bad one at that) and he was boxed because of it.

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dangarion

I'm not the biggest fan of HA, but reading over the thread, that's what I see. He made a generalization (a bad one at that) and he was banned because of it.

No one has been banned (besides spammers) since Suicane.

DanGarion · 07-11-2006, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan T

To be perfectly honest, I could care less one way or another. I have always been and will always be mostly a casual reader/poster on these forums and will leave forum politics to others. I have perfected the ability to learn to completely ignore posts from specific users, and known that I don't really care too much for certain types of threads because they always revert back to the same old trolling as previous ones.

That's why I stay out of 99% of the political threads.

DanGarion · 07-11-2006, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

No one has been banned (besides spammers) since Suicane.

Sorry correction. BOXED. You know what I meant.

BrianD · 07-11-2006, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

No one has been banned (besides spammers) since Suicane.

...and WrongWay...twice.

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrianD

...and WrongWay...twice.

Forgot about that one.

John Galt · 07-11-2006, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

No one has been banned (besides spammers) since Suicane.

Not to pick a nit, but wasn't Jesse banned?

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Galt

Not to pick a nit, but wasn't Jesse banned?

blah...

My timelines are off because I wasn't a mod at the time of most of this stuff.

My point was it's been a long time since someone has been banned, and that HA was not banned despite a pretty loud cry from a lot of forum members that he should be.

I thought it was important to make the distinction because of how many have called for it, but I should have just said "HA was boxed, not banned."

BrianD · 07-11-2006, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

blah...

My timelines are off because I wasn't a mod at the time of most of this stuff.

My point was it's been a long time since someone has been banned, and that HA was not banned despite a pretty loud cry from a lot of forum members that he should be.

I thought it was important to make the distinction because of how many have called for it, but I should have just said "HA was boxed, not banned."

But where is the fun in that? This is one of the few times we can actually argue with a mod and be right.

JonInMiddleGA · 07-11-2006, 09:49 AM

That's what HA was boxed for?

Good grief.

Any mod who got upset over that ought to be ashamed to ever show their face in public again, because you've proven yourself to be a complete idiot.

And I don't even like HA at least a third of the time myself but SD you fucked up royally when you picked the mods responsible for this absurdity.

flere-imsaho · 07-11-2006, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Why not just have someone in authority (read: SkyDog) explain the sov and HA boxing a little better. At least that would end the speculation over mod motivation.

Of course, people would still cry about it... but it might help.

On this topic, I've made the following suggestion before, and I'm going to make it again:

1. Create a sticky, locked thread in GD called something like "Bannings/Boxings"

2. In this thread, the mods list, as they happen, bannings/boxings as well as short descriptions as to why such an action was taken.

I think this solves a number of issues. First, it makes the mods' decisions more transparent, and ends some of the endless speculation about bannings/boxings, which is good because such speculation oftentimes turns into further "bad threads" about mods, other people, etc....

Second, such a thread serves as a "living document" that indicates, to any board member new or old, what is and what is not acceptable behavior in GD @ FOFC. I think this, combined with the "basic rules" as laid down by SD, is superior to the "basic rules" plus people's general view on how those rules are applied (people's general view being pretty varied and subjective).

It is my personal belief that in any situation concerning leadership, transparency of the decision-making process is almost always a good thing, except in those cases where those being led are expected to follow rules blindly. Like it or not, SD & the "mod council" are in a position of leadership at FOFC, in that they, knowingly or not, set a standard for what passes as reasonable posts here. In this sense, more information about how they make the rules which set the expectations for behavior around here is always a preferable thing.

ice4277 · 07-11-2006, 09:59 AM

Well, after reading the thread that got deleted/un-deleted, I just have one comment. Wade mentions that the only person to mention race in the thread was HA. Technically true, but only after he was jumped on for what he posted. I have a hard time believing that if he had said "Europeans are animals", for example, that there would have been any sort of comment. I think he was jumped on for making a racist statement, which doesn't seem to be the case. A poor choice of wording, perhaps, but in the end, nothing different than we've seen from him a million times.

John Galt · 07-11-2006, 09:59 AM

FWIW, I think flere's idea is a good one although I don't think it will solve that many problems. But it will probably help a little.

st.cronin · 07-11-2006, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

On this topic, I've made the following suggestion before, and I'm going to make it again:

1. Create a sticky, locked thread in GD called something like "Bannings/Boxings"

2. In this thread, the mods list, as they happen, bannings/boxings as well as short descriptions as to why such an action was taken.

I think this solves a number of issues. First, it makes the mods' decisions more transparent, and ends some of the endless speculation about bannings/boxings, which is good because such speculation oftentimes turns into further "bad threads" about mods, other people, etc....

Second, such a thread serves as a "living document" that indicates, to any board member new or old, what is and what is not acceptable behavior in GD @ FOFC. I think this, combined with the "basic rules" as laid down by SD, is superior to the "basic rules" plus people's general view on how those rules are applied (people's general view being pretty varied and subjective).

It is my personal belief that in any situation concerning leadership, transparency of the decision-making process is almost always a good thing, except in those cases where those being led are expected to follow rules blindly. Like it or not, SD & the "mod council" are in a position of leadership at FOFC, in that they, knowingly or not, set a standard for what passes as reasonable posts here. In this sense, more information about how they make the rules which set the expectations for behavior around here is always a preferable thing.

That's a good idea, but at the very least there should be a statement explaining each and every boxing. Wade moore has made like a million comments on HA, but as far as I know, there hasn't been a single official comment on sov's boxing. Personally, I think that's an absolute disgrace - not that he was boxed, but that there's been no explanation why. It makes the boxing seem capricious, arbitrary, and possibly personal.

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ice4277

Well, after reading the thread that got deleted/un-deleted, I just have one comment. Wade mentions that the only person to mention race in the thread was HA. Technically true, but only after he was jumped on for what he posted. I have a hard time believing that if he had said "Europeans are animals", for example, that there would have been any sort of comment. I think he was jumped on for making a racist statement, which doesn't seem to be the case. A poor choice of wording, perhaps, but in the end, nothing different than we've seen from him a million times.

If you replace every instance of "Africa" and "African" with "Europe" and "European" it would have warranted the same reaction... At least from me and the other mods.

Franklinnoble · 07-11-2006, 10:03 AM

Yeah, HA isn't exactly my favorite person on the board, but that's a little silly. My interpretation is that he read an article and had a strong emotional response to it, and that's what he posted.

You know, not that we've ever had to use it, but over at SportsDigs, we came up with a solution to this. Threads like this are thrown into the "Parking Lot" sub-forum, which is a place for rants, etc. Problem users can be locked off the rest of the board if repeated problems occur. Maybe we could try something like this here?

stevew · 07-11-2006, 10:04 AM

I can't believe he got boxed for that thread. The way a lot of you people made it sound, i thought it was much much worse.

Thumbs down on this action.

WSUCougar · 07-11-2006, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

That's what HA was boxed for?

Good grief.

Any mod who got upset over that ought to be ashamed to ever show their face in public again, because you've proven yourself to be a complete idiot.

And I don't even like HA at least a third of the time myself but SD you fucked up royally when you picked the mods responsible for this absurdity.

You forgot to tactlessly insult the various members who reported the post in the short time it existed.

Don't assume that everyone shares your twisted view of reality and doesn't find such sweeping ignorance offensive.

However, feel free to keep popping off with your characteristic oh-so-sharp-witted venom.

stevew · 07-11-2006, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

On this topic, I've made the following suggestion before, and I'm going to make it again:

1. Create a sticky, locked thread in GD called something like "Bannings/Boxings"

2. In this thread, the mods list, as they happen, bannings/boxings as well as short descriptions as to why such an action was taken.

I think this solves a number of issues. First, it makes the mods' decisions more transparent, and ends some of the endless speculation about bannings/boxings, which is good because such speculation oftentimes turns into further "bad threads" about mods, other people, etc....

Second, such a thread serves as a "living document" that indicates, to any board member new or old, what is and what is not acceptable behavior in GD @ FOFC. I think this, combined with the "basic rules" as laid down by SD, is superior to the "basic rules" plus people's general view on how those rules are applied (people's general view being pretty varied and subjective).

It is my personal belief that in any situation concerning leadership, transparency of the decision-making process is almost always a good thing, except in those cases where those being led are expected to follow rules blindly. Like it or not, SD & the "mod council" are in a position of leadership at FOFC, in that they, knowingly or not, set a standard for what passes as reasonable posts here. In this sense, more information about how they make the rules which set the expectations for behavior around here is always a preferable thing.

I'd love to see flere's illustrated guide to FOFC bannings/boxings. The coffee table edition.

John Galt · 07-11-2006, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ice4277

Well, after reading the thread that got deleted/un-deleted, I just have one comment. Wade mentions that the only person to mention race in the thread was HA. Technically true, but only after he was jumped on for what he posted. I have a hard time believing that if he had said "Europeans are animals", for example, that there would have been any sort of comment. I think he was jumped on for making a racist statement, which doesn't seem to be the case. A poor choice of wording, perhaps, but in the end, nothing different than we've seen from him a million times.

While I again did not support the boxing, I think this comparison isn't apt.

I know people like to find a symmetry with whites, it often doesn't work. I think a closer parallel would be if someone posted a thread about Israel invading Gaza, called all Jews "monsters," and said we should warm up the gas chambers. Calling all Africans animals and saying they should be caged up brings up the ugly legacy of slavery. History matters in these sorts of things. Calling all blacks "cheap" for example is different than calling Jews "cheap." While neither is nice, one has a history attached to it. Saying Europeans should be locked up in cages is kind of like calling blacks "cheap" - it's insulting, probably racist, but not as bad as saying "blacks should be caged up like slaves."

BrianD · 07-11-2006, 10:08 AM

I'm not sure that HA's intent was as horrible as some people say, but I can see why some people would find it offensive. I have no doubt that the thread wouldn't have ended well.

DanGarion · 07-11-2006, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

If you replace every instance of "Africa" and "African" with "Europe" and "European" it would have warranted the same reaction... At least from me and the other mods.

How about if it was Nazi's are animals? (I'm trying to find where the line is drawn.).

stevew · 07-11-2006, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

Well, this is an internet message board. If these people are your 'friends', then I really feel sorry for you. I promise you don't have to worry about me, but thanks for the concern anyways.

BTW, you know I think your the ultimate puss yourself, so Schmidty has some company!

How lovely.

JonInMiddleGA · 07-11-2006, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dangarion

How about if it was Nazi's are animals? (I'm trying to find where the line is drawn.).

I'd say it'd probably be safe to use "capitalists" or "Christians" and there wouldn't be much of an outcry. "Republican" or "conservative" would obviously work without a problem.

WSUCougar · 07-11-2006, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

this is why the people of Africa are all animals, and should be locked in cages just like animals

Quoted for reference.

The brutality of a select few has been transferred to the entire population of the continent. And please don't try and convince me that such wording was unintentional.

John Galt · 07-11-2006, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'd say it'd probably be safe to use "capitalists" or "Christians" and there wouldn't be much of an outcry. "Republican" or "conservative" would obviously work without a problem.

Those poor, downtrodden white christian republican men are always the victims on this board. It must be rough.

WSUCougar · 07-11-2006, 10:17 AM

You forgot wealthy.

John Galt · 07-11-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WSUCougar

You forgot wealthy.

I forgot the rolleyes smiley too. Oh well.

JonInMiddleGA · 07-11-2006, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WSUCougar

You forgot wealthy.

Dang. Sorry about that. I guess it was so obvious that it just slipped my mind.

Thanks.

DanGarion · 07-11-2006, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WSUCougar

Quoted for reference.

The brutality of a select few has been transferred to the entire population of the continent. And please don't try and convince me that such wording was unintentional.

Yeah it's like that one country that had slaves 150 years ago, but the people that live there now are all responsible for it. I hate that.

duckman · 07-11-2006, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevew

How lovely.

It's that fine homeschooling he got.

st.cronin · 07-11-2006, 10:30 AM

flere-imsaho · 07-11-2006, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by st.cronin

That's a good idea, but at the very least there should be a statement explaining each and every boxing.

Thanks!

Here's a very simple example of what such an entry in the "Bannings/Boxings" thread would look like:

-------------------------------------------------

Action: Penalty Box, 2 Weeks

Poster: flere-imsaho

Thread Reference: http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/...49#post1194549

Rationale: Posted posted an in-line gif showing an ultra-realistic stick figure humping a plastic penguin, in violation of our guidelines against posting non-appropriate pictures on FOFC. As this is a first offense, it was decided to Box, not Ban.

DanGarion · 07-11-2006, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Thanks!

Here's a very simple example of what such an entry in the "Bannings/Boxings" thread would look like:

-------------------------------------------------

Action: Penalty Box, 2 Weeks

Poster: flere-imsaho

Thread Reference: http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/...49#post1194549

Rationale: Posted posted an in-line gif showing an ultra-realistic stick figure humping a plastic penguin, in violation of our guidelines against posting non-appropriate pictures on FOFC. As this is a first offense, it was decided to Box, not Ban.

Looks great!

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 10:55 AM

HA: You have a PM from me on IHOF since you guys have blocked my user name from being created at the IFL board.

Glengoyne · 07-11-2006, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

I do not take kindly to personal assaults like this.

You and I have had a private discussion on this issue and I believe I laid out very clearly the way I felt about the issue in very logical terms. I've had told you on NUMEROUS occasions that you are talking out of your ass without any facts to back up your claims and you continue to do so.

I will ask that you please cease and desist with the personal attacks. Not as a mod making threats, but as a fellow board member making the request.

Who's attacking anyone personally? Some guy comes along reads my post, doesn't put it in any sort of perspective, and reports me. Then a couple of mods come along, do ZERO amount of due dilligence and as far as I'm concerned don't string two thoughts together to even contemplate what I was posting about, and box me. I send an email that could best be summed up with "Boxed?, You've got to be kidding me!", and the next morning It is undone. I say revoked, you say "reduced to time served". I say the rest of the mod team got together and bought a clue, you say I deserved it. All I know is that I believe that my boxing was undeserved, and then almost before it started I was reinstated. I'm not going to stop bitching about it, because the mods continue to constrict on what is acceptable to post here, without any effort to communicate those restrictions to the community.

Note: Even if you did communicate the ever changing rules, I'd still be unhappy 'cause this place thrived when it was run pretty much without rules. Now there are too damn many of you looking for opportunities to moderate discussion when you all ought to be looking for reasons not to intervene.

WSUCougar · 07-11-2006, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Now there are too damn many of you looking for opportunities to moderate discussion when you all ought to be looking for reasons not to intervene.

That's the most hilarious thing I've seen all day.

Bubba Wheels · 07-11-2006, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cartman

This is where your (note the correct usage) assumption is dead wrong. I've met several of the posters of FOFC in real life at different times. We've talked, drank beers, the normal things that friends do. Just because first contact was made on an Internet message board, how is that any different from making friends with people you meet at work, church, or school? And how is using the Internet to bridge distances between people any different than calling a friend from school who lives on the other side of the country, or even in a different country? Being a friend means communicating, be it face to face, over the phone, via the Internet, or even the old fashioned way, writing letters.

Well, thought I covered that with the line...'unless, of course...' in the original post. What part of that was difficult for you to understand?

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Who's attacking anyone personally?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Then a couple of mods come along, do ZERO amount of due dilligence and as far as I'm concerned don't string two thoughts together to even contemplate what I was posting about

You answered your own question there.

JonInMiddleGA · 07-11-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

I do not take kindly to personal assaults like this.

Oh cry us a river. If a mod fucks up then they're going to going to hear about it.

Quote:

You and I have had a private discussion on this issue

That must be a favorite tactic of yours ... but here's the problem with it: when you fuck up in public then you're going to get called on it
in public.

Half-assed and/or half-witted moderation actions don't take place via PM, they're out in the open, so I don't believe it's likely that you can hide them from the world. And if you can't handle that then you either ought to stop fucking up or remove yourself from the equation.

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Oh cry us a river. If a mod fucks up then they're going to going to hear about it.

That must be a favorite tactic of yours ... but here's the problem with it: when you fuck up in public then you're going to get called on it
in public.

Half-assed and/or half-witted moderation actions don't take place via PM, they're out in the open, so I don't believe it's likely that you can hide them from the world. And if you can't handle that then you either ought to stop fucking up or remove yourself from the equation.

You're misinterpreting. Personal attacks that stray away from the modding decision itself, I take private.

In Glengoyne's case, he has many facts wrong, and I've told him publicly multiple times. He continued to put those out there, so I discussed it with him privately so that I was not beating a dead horse in public. He continues to do so, so I am discussing it publicly again, although I think it's been beaten to death and Glen continues to state things that are just completley untrue and he has no basis for his statements.

I have no problems with questioning the mod decisions, but it can be done without direct personal attacks on the mods that make the decisions. I know this is a favorite argueing tactic of yours to just lash out with personal insults, but it really adds nothing to the discussion.

I will continue to use the PM feature when I want to discuss things that I believe are direct attacks on me personally rather than the merits of the modding decision. I see this as the appropriate way to handle such things.

TheOhioStateUniversity · 07-11-2006, 11:28 AM

I cannot believe anyone is defending a statement like the one that started HA's rant......interesting.

Quote:

this is why the people of Africa are all animals, and should be locked in cages just like animals

that is the dumbest statement I have heard in a long time and it reeks of racism and bigotry

JonInMiddleGA · 07-11-2006, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wade moore

Blah Blah Blah Wah Wah Wah

Hell, I don't even remember what Glen was boxed for off the top of my head, but that isn't the point here -- the point is that if you fuck up then you're going to hear about it in the same venue in which you made the error.

If you don't want to be critiqued as an idiot, don't do idiotic stuff. Right now, it might serve you well to study the parable of the man who had carnal knowledge of the goat.

wade moore · 07-11-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Hell, I don't even remember what Glen was boxed for off the top of my head, but that isn't the point here -- the point is that if you fuck up then you're going to hear about it in the same venue in which you made the error.

If you don't want to be critiqued as an idiot, don't do idiotic stuff. Right now, it might serve you well to study the parable of the man who had carnal knowledge of the goat.

You are a class act Jon.

Post whatever personal attacks you want without logical discussion of the issue. It just shows the kind of person you are. As I said, i have no problem being questioned, it just has little value when you just throw personal insults rather than logical discussion fo the issue.

Bubba Wheels · 07-11-2006, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOhioStateUniversity

I cannot believe anyone is defending a statement like the one that started HA's rant......interesting.

that is the dumbest statement I have heard in a long time and it reeks of racism and bigotry

Yeah, but its always interesting to me that the very folks usually against this kind of 'free speech' have no problems with flag-burning or swearing in public in front of kids and such. Besides, Africa has people of ALL ethnic backgrounds including white folks. Thus, you are making an (Cartman, this one's for you!) A S S U M P T I O N to call it 'racist' and 'bigoted.'

At least technically.

07-11-2006, 09:21 AM	#201
st.cronin General Manager Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: New Mexico	I thought the resurrected thread was a parody, and was disappointed to discover it wasn't. That title has potential. __________________ co-commish: bb-bbcf.net knives out

07-11-2006, 09:49 AM	#215
JonInMiddleGA Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA	That's what HA was boxed for? Good grief. Any mod who got upset over that ought to be ashamed to ever show their face in public again, because you've proven yourself to be a complete idiot. And I don't even like HA at least a third of the time myself but SD you fucked up royally when you picked the mods responsible for this absurdity. __________________ "I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis

07-11-2006, 09:59 AM	#218
John Galt Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: The Internets	FWIW, I think flere's idea is a good one although I don't think it will solve that many problems. But it will probably help a little. __________________ I do mind, the Dude minds. This will not stand, ya know, this aggression will not stand, man. - The Dude

07-11-2006, 10:17 AM	#232
WSUCougar Rider Of Rohan Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Port Angeles, WA or Helm's Deep	You forgot wealthy. __________________ It's not the years...it's the mileage.

07-11-2006, 10:30 AM	#237
st.cronin General Manager Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: New Mexico	__________________ co-commish: bb-bbcf.net knives out

07-11-2006, 09:37 AM	#205
Alan T Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mass.	I've never had a problem with HA, he's always been respectful to me when I've talked to him on AIM or in ootp leagues in the past. I think its very hard to argue though that what he posted was not inflamatory. He basically is this board's version of a shock DJ I guess you can say. He says things to try to get reactions and that requires him to feel he has to walk that fine line between being inappropriate and being entirely disgusting. I'm not sure how many people could support what he actually posted there as being ok to post.. from what I am reading people have issues with all kinds of things though, and are using this as an outlet to try to get those points heard. I could be totally wrong, but it sounds to me that people are arguing if there should be any form of moderation at all, or if the community should self-moderate each other in cases like this. (I have no idea how that would work. It just sounds like thats what some people are wanting.) It sounds like others have axes to grind with some (all?) of the moderators so use any excuse possible to further that agenda. It sounds to me like some are just confused to what happened since no one has responded about the Sov boxing and the HA post until recently had been removed.. To be perfectly honest, I could care less one way or another. I have always been and will always be mostly a casual reader/poster on these forums and will leave forum politics to others. I have perfected the ability to learn to completely ignore posts from specific users, and known that I don't really care too much for certain types of threads because they always revert back to the same old trolling as previous ones. I just think there is a communication issue going on here...

07-11-2006, 09:59 AM	#217
ice4277 Pro Rookie Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Berkley, MI: The Hotbed of FOFC!	Well, after reading the thread that got deleted/un-deleted, I just have one comment. Wade mentions that the only person to mention race in the thread was HA. Technically true, but only after he was jumped on for what he posted. I have a hard time believing that if he had said "Europeans are animals", for example, that there would have been any sort of comment. I think he was jumped on for making a racist statement, which doesn't seem to be the case. A poor choice of wording, perhaps, but in the end, nothing different than we've seen from him a million times.

07-11-2006, 10:03 AM	#221
Franklinnoble Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Placerville, CA	Yeah, HA isn't exactly my favorite person on the board, but that's a little silly. My interpretation is that he read an article and had a strong emotional response to it, and that's what he posted. You know, not that we've ever had to use it, but over at SportsDigs, we came up with a solution to this. Threads like this are thrown into the "Parking Lot" sub-forum, which is a place for rants, etc. Problem users can be locked off the rest of the board if repeated problems occur. Maybe we could try something like this here?

07-11-2006, 10:04 AM	#222
stevew Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: the yo'	I can't believe he got boxed for that thread. The way a lot of you people made it sound, i thought it was much much worse. Thumbs down on this action.

07-11-2006, 10:08 AM	#226
BrianD Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Appleton, WI	I'm not sure that HA's intent was as horrible as some people say, but I can see why some people would find it offensive. I have no doubt that the thread wouldn't have ended well.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)