Asguard's censorship

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by Lord Hillyer, Feb 21, 2008.

  1. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Why is that relevant?
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Normally, people hope that those in positions of authority are worthy, respectable people.
    Otherwise the whole system is doomed to corruption.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bells Staff Member

    If people's avatars offend you that much, you can just turn off the option to be able to view them.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  6. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    And then there's your avatar ...

    You don't care how people view you, but you expect they will respect your authority anyway, right?
  8. Challenger78 Valued Senior Member

    So you like men who only stand for things other than what they believe in ...
  9. Bells Staff Member

    I happen to have had this avatar since, umm, around 2002 and I am very attached to it.

    If you have a problem with my avatar (or anyone else's for that matter) or cannot respect "my authority"

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    because of it, then I suggest you disable the 'view avatar' option.

    This is an internet forum open to all who happen to want to join. I would imagine the majority who join this forum have at the very least, a semblance of a sense of humour and intelligence and are not offended by a cartoon bending forward with it's pants down. Nor would they be offended by a comical image of Yoda giving the finger.

    If you find it offensive to your delicate sensibilities, again, use the disable 'view avatar' function.
  10. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Wait a minute... how is the 'system' doomed to corruption if you can't respect a moderator?
  11. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    People stop caring, they stop taking things seriously, and the quality of their input deteriorates.
    Or quality posters simply leave.

    The attitude of the group reflects the attitude of the leadership.
  12. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    You are defending a double standard.

    If people say "cun t" or "fuc k", the moderators will tend to delete it.

    But these same moderators are practically showing a cun t and a fuc k -
    but that's okay, right?
  13. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    hey i say fuck and derivatives off it all the time and they don't get deleted i get warned yes but they don't get deleted
  14. Bells Staff Member

    You think a cartoon figure of a person bending forward to show his bottom (emphasis added because, as ridiculous as it seems, it is needed) and another with Yoda giving the finger is showing "a cun t and a fuc k"?

    Ermm ok.

    Having looked at my avatar closely, I cannot see where you are seeing a woman's private bits or a sexual act. I definitely do not see either in Asguards avatar. So what we are left with is the thought that you either failed dismally in biology or you are picking at nothing at all because you are in a 'picking' mood.
  15. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    I didn't realize that member quality was dependent on their respect of moderators. Clearly people on this forum lack any kind of means to function otherwise.
  16. Dr Lou Natic Unnecessary Surgeon Registered Senior Member

    I feel like we do need to respect moderators, honestly if asguard reprimanded me or disciplined me in any way, I really couldn't take it and I would make it my business to kick up a huge belligerent stink, and sure I'd probably be banned.
    My own fault right? Maybe, but why have a moderator that baits people into getting themselves banned? Is there a desire to thin numbers? If there is I think this a really snakey way of obtaining the goal.
    Like I said, it feels like an insult, it feels like you're trying to provoke us.
    Maybe it was an honest mistake, and you figured we don't need to respect moderators, well as a member I'm telling you that yeah we do, you were mistaken, please rectify this mistake you made, and then put a little more serious thought into the selection of the replacement mod.
    It would indicate you have some tiny sceric of respect for the members, and that minor gesture would mean a lot at this stage.
  17. Spud Emperor solanaceous common tater Registered Senior Member

    Come on Dr. Lou, take a chill pill.
    Let it wash over and move on.
    You would surely realise you are no angel. I'd hazard a guess that you post bannable material on a weekly if not daily basis and most of it gets the eyeroll treatment from the mods. and that's all.

    Be a big boy, you win some, you lose some.
    Take it on the chin and shape up for more of your usual sparring.
    Come on sunshine.
  18. Dr Lou Natic Unnecessary Surgeon Registered Senior Member

    My problem with asguard has nothing to do with me being banned, there's no incident I need to cool down over, I actually haven't personally had any problem with him, but thats just luck really. I'm saying if I did, I don't respect him enough to take it on the chin. It would eat away at me untill I did stupid things and got myself banned.

    I feel bad talking about it because he's a harmless enough pleasant young fellow, it's not his fault someone made him a mod.
    But someone did, and it's beyond a joke.

    I suppose I can live with it as long as we arrange some kind of agreement where asguard is forbidden from moderating my posts.
    Asguard could be used to moderate the small-talk-posts of orleander and lucifer's angel, etc, that's fine, but it isn't going to sit well with intelligent people when someone who can't spell his own name, litterally, is punishing them for how he incompetently percieves the intentions and meanings of their posts.
    It's just totally ludicrous to have him as a mod, it's insulting to all of us, and I can only assume it was intended to be.
  19. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Survival of the fittest.
    You will only succeed as an Ubersciforumensch.
  20. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Um ... really?

    One of the things I actually appreciate about the nature of some complaints we receive is, frankly, that they're gratifying. Certainly there are issues to handle, but the majority of the complaints tend to involve, at their root, some sort of bitterness. As James R explained in another topic, many of our complaints come from "... a small group of members who constantly complain about moderators they personally don't like. More often than not, they do not point to particular grievances, but rather express a generalised dissatisfaction ...." And while the burden of taking these complaints seriously can be annoying at times, the truth is that the histrionics are amazing. I can't believe the vitriol some people aim at us.

    Moving beyond those, however, are the gratifying ones. One of the difficult choices we make is whether to be monotonous and robotic, or a bit more human. Do you want us as part of the community, or would you rather have us removed to our temple on high to cast judgments down at the people below?

    I prefer to be a part of the community. To hear you express it, we ought to be moral role models for the whole community. "A person who inspires respect"? "Who is decent and reasonable"? Shit, dude. That's too much to ask of our local police departments. And those people carry guns and can throw you in jail. I live in an area where the police beat up the handicapped and plant evidence on them. And compared to Florida, that makes me lucky.

    Now, to consider that standard a little more practically, it is impossible to please everyone all of the time. I just had a dust-up in EM&J where I had to choose between numbers and decency. I went with decency, which, of course, gave me a bigger headache. Of course, I kind of lit the fuse by making the point in the first place, but in addition to insisting on making moral judgments about our neighbors, one of our members reminded me, "I reserve the right to not give anyone the benefit of the doubt."

    In the end, the disagreement was ferocious, and the one thing the angry parties could not do was give a coherent statement of what troubled them.

    To consider that exchange in relation to more reasonable inquiries, frankly, I think you're falling for a ruse, Greenberg. This topic starts out complaining about a moderator's handling of one of our more exploitative members. I don't see the problem with reserving cookie-cutter talking points to a single area instead of letting an insincere hack drown out all other discussions with a pageant of malicious cheerleading.

    I would ask that you take a moment and consider what you're complaining about. Asguard's avatar? Bells' avatar? What kind of Puritan standard would you like to invoke? Would you like your moderators to have absolutely no senses of humor? Would you like us to be wooden and robotic without consideration of context?

    That's one of the things that gets me about people's complaints of inconsistency or double standards. Few, if any of those complaints, actually show any regard for context. I flip a coin on fuck. I only bother semi-censoring myself ("f@ck") because I have this notion in my head that it's expected of me. Sometimes I don't bother, though. Personally, I'm just fine and dandy with the word. For instance, I recently censored myself on that point:

    "Was a time in California when impotence was grounds for divorce, but I really don't think being a lousy f@ck counts anywhere in the United States."​

    Like I said, flip a coin. And I specifically didn't censor other people. Such as:

    "I actually think divorcing someone because they are bad in bed is fucking stupid ...."​

    Or perhaps:

    "Where the FUCK the enlightenment concept of "Romantic Love" falls in all this, I have not one clue."​

    And then there was:

    " I've stopped seeing girls because they were bad kissers, but guess what, I didn't wait two fuckin years to do it; more like after only a few dates."​

    And hey, here's an occasion that I didn't censor myself:

    "So I'm aware that it's horribly perverse, by at least one person's standards, to want a lover to fuck to mutual exhaustion."​

    And even in people's complaints:

    "You've got to be fucking kidding me....

    .... This fucking place is going to hell in handbasket.

    And so on

    "As Mods, that is not your fucking role."​

    —and so forth

    "Fuck it, I'm going to bed."​

    et cetera

    "After the whole mess in this thread why even bring it up again, if it is none of our fucking business!!"​

    —ad nauseam.

    And I know I'm not the only one who permits it. Now, the first question is, do you see a basic difference between the uses of the words in the examples above? The second question is, "What's missing?"

    Would it be, "Fuck you!" Or, maybe, "You're a fucking cock!"

    The third question, then, would be, "Do you see any difference between the examples from people's posts and the examples of what's missing?"

    As to showing a cunt and a fuck? Showing? What, you mean like Bells' avatar? Or by our own word selection?

    Would you, then, propose that we should eliminate the following emoticons?

    • :spank:

    • :shake:​

    I mean, do these offend you? If so, we need to know about stuff like that. And I have to admit, I was surprised to see the shake avatar. Its inflammatory potential is enormous.

    In the end, what strikes me is that right now, none of the issues put before us in this discussion are completely independent. At some point, we need to set aside the ridiculous ones—that is, the angry, fuming, poorly-expressed complaints that aren't intended to actually solve anything, but rather to vent personal frustration—and deal with the rest.

    And in that context, when you're not jumping on the bandwagon of so many angry, fuming, self-appointed defenders of the rude and downtrodden, would you still be calling down a standard that would see the site's moderation relegated to a Puritan, rigid, robotic role devoid of any contextual—daresay human—consideration?
  21. Spud Emperor solanaceous common tater Registered Senior Member

    Ohh, Ohh!
    Can I answer for Greenberg?

    Yes!!, Yes!!

    Nice post btw.
  22. Challenger78 Valued Senior Member

    If the mods were truly biased, we'd be kissing their light side.
  23. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Please input query. Thank you for using Mod-o-Matic 3000.

Share This Page