Action! Notes.

Not open for further replies.
Post two will contain "ban lists". This will be a constantly edited post in order to keep the names, dates and offense up-to-date.

Alien Cockroach - 7 days (2010, 06 Mar - 13 Mar) - Madanthony - Insulting other member
Otheadp - Permanent ban (2010 Mar 11) - superstring01 - Flaming & Abusive language. This was a revolving issue, one which Otheadp continued, was banned and repeated again which earned the permanent ban

Last edited:
Not much "action" in this mundane post- just answering a member's objection about a mod note.

Mod Note: When the author/initiator of a thread reminds others of the thread topic, or refines the thread topic, and requests that the discussion be thus focused, I expect for those participating in the conversation to take heed and comply. I'll intervene here as a moderator when I see participants persistently unresponsive to such reasonable requests as joepistole has made above.

There is one small problem. The request joe made regarding the post he made it for is on topic. He was asked a direct question and refused to answer. Furthermore, the points made in the post are relevant to the topic.

I am sorry this might offend you, but I honestly do not see how those points aren't relevant. Additionally, I also responded to the post on topic.

So this isn't a case where joe decides what is and isn't is it? I mean if so, then why not make joe a moderator?

To joe anything that doesn't agree with him is not on topic, it is too easy to allow joe this much authority in the thread.

You know what it just hit me, never mind. I keep forgetting about the invisible rule that is hidden within these boards. That is only certain people here are allowed to say certain things and I am not one of those people. Which is cool with me, your post just confirmed it.

Thanks hype!

You're welcome. I could say that when someone starts a thread, that member leads by defining the topic, and those who join the conversation can follow or get out of the way. But that's a little bit extreme. Please note that no moderator action had been taken at the point of your objection. In my view, the creator of a thread does have a certain prerogative about defining the thread. This should not be construed as something to hide behind. Thank you for your input.
Post deletion

• "Shoot the Darky" — One post deleted as off topic.

Note: The post posed an inquiry about site policy, which has been answered directly via private message.
Closure and redirect

• "Where's Sandy?" — Thread closed and redirected to AtM.

Note: The thread is off subject in Politics, thus the move. The specific question of the topic post is answered, thus the closure.
Post deletion

• "Pelosi Wants to Stay" — Six posts deleted as off topic.

Note: The following is an example of how not to disagree with someone at Sciforums:

So what if you think that? You've whined and moaned about it and labeled everyone. So go stir up shit somewhere else. Or say something remotely useful.

Look, it's not that complicated: If you can work that kind of bitching into a useful post that actually addresses something other than your well-documented disdain for another member, we probably won't say anything.

But if that's all you've got, maybe you should spare everyone—yourelf included.
Post edit

• "Keith Olberman Suspended Indefinitly by NBC" — Three posts edited to revise pejorative in response to member complaints. One post edited to scrub pejorative from quote.

Note: We must remember that, while people cannot be expected to know the names of the political parties in the United States (there is no "Democrat Party"), Sciforums is too good a community to allow such terms as "teabagger". Never mind that the Tea Party gave themselves the name. It's long-established around here that you can't laugh at the Tea Party for things they do to themselves.

That's just the rule. Deal with it.
Post deletion

• "Republican Tea Party Candidate goons handcuff reporter — Two posts deleted as off topic.

Note: The original member complaint accused "Trolling Flaming Name Calling insulting", and to be sure, there was a bit of that going on.

But here's the thing, and it's real simple: If you want to get down in the gutter and sling mud at people, don't cry to the moderators when someone nails you.

We, the moderators, are well aware the for many people in this community, the one thing that is unacceptable to them is that they should be treated by others as they treat those others. And, frankly, that's just pathetic.

Okay? We hear you. Poor you. Boo-hoo. World's smallest violins, playing, "My Heart Bleeds for You", in stereo, and all that.

Now give us a freakin' break. If you really want us to do something about all the nastiness going on around here, why should we not start with the source? That is, given how many complaints we receive from people who are prime generators of the filth that flies around here, we have a pretty good idea of whose ass to throw out the door.

The fact that so many of those people are still around is explained by competing narratives. That is what it is; but the fact remains that there really aren't any appropriate words to describe what's going on right now. Moderators aren't supposed to call members things like "pussy", "faggot", or "useless bitch", or tell them to "put their man pants on", so we won't. But it would really help everyone in this community if certain people who like to play childish and even cowardly games with one another would grab a drink, ante up, and play some real poker.

Or else just get a hotel room and sweat it all out together.
Last edited:
Closure and redirect

• "Lying Liberal Press" — Thread closed and redirected to Cesspool for targeting an individual member while also managing to be spam.

Note: If one wishes to carry out a disagreement with a specific member, it must be done very carefully. We are not particularly fond of target threads, in which one goes after another they have a grudge against from the outset. And no, I'm not going to teach people how to do it properly. Some things you just have to learn for yourself.

Meanwhile, if one chooses to spam the board with the latest stupid political rant that is going around the internet, my advice is to simply skip it.
• "List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor " — This thread has been closed, pending revision of the opening post to include the author's invitation to a specific political discussion.

Although I cannot commit to helping along every thread with a half-hearted or incomplete opening post, in this case I have offered (through private messaging) for the author to submit a revision and extension of the opening post.

A general reminder (beyond the context of the above thread) to any SciForums Members who may read this:

Please help advance a higher standard of content here, by always putting some careful thought into the creation of any new threads. This is not a bulletin-board for posting items of author's interest without comment or discussion. If you do not feel motivated to craft an invitation to thoughtful discussion, then consider a search, or at least a look down through recent threads, to see if there is already an appropriate subforum and thread for your comment or reference. If it turns out that a passing thought or item of information does not fit in with any pre-existing thread here, and if it is inconvenient to present a clear invitation for specific and intelligent discussion, then please do not post the item here at all.​
Deleted thread "Republicans" which consisted of a link with no commentary whatsoever. Sent PM to author explaining action with advice on proper OP construction.

I've deleted your thread entitled, "Republicans" because you put forth insufficient effort in your OP. You need to make some commentary and offer some topic for discussion. Simply posting a link does not constitute an adequate OP.

Feel free to open another thread under the same name and even with the same link so long as you post some relevant commentary of your own and, perhaps, a quote or two from the article to give the reader some idea of what it is that you want to discuss.

Best Regards,

Last edited:
Not open for further replies.