Further Attempts at Transparency

[mindseye]

Do you wait for the police (read: mods) to come when someone has you fired up in the street and is kicking you in the shins? Of course you fuckin' don't. You get heated up and fight back. At least, that would seem to be typical human nature. Then the schmucky police come along and arrest both parties, with the more innocent of the two receiving the stiffer sentence. Yeah, that sounds about right.

Alex, I'm offended by your metaphor. Spladle was in no physical danger here, and there was no urgency that required him to fight back.

First, you say he was being funny, and now you're saying he was acting in self-defense. Pick a wussy excuse and stick to it, okay?

 

[jeff black]

Alex, I'm offended by your metaphor. Spladle was in no physical danger here, and there was no urgency that required him to fight back.

First, you say he was being funny, and now you're saying he was acting in self-defense. Pick a wussy excuse and stick to it, okay?

So, how is name calling appropriate?

Frustration is an easy thing to get stuck in. People are gonna be running high on emotions for a while. I don't think that adding name calling is going to be benificial to anyone. This is directed at everyone, not just Mindseye. I quoted him because it was the closest one to my post.

What IS going to happen, is people who are valid contributers are going to get so pissed off that they are going to say shit and then leave. The board will be chaos.

I am all for a little discussion, but let us refrain from resorting to childish retorts.

 

[D_alex8]

First, you say he was being funny, and now you're saying he was acting in self-defense. Pick a wussy excuse and stick to it, okay?

Ffs, he used a lot of irony and satire here. Which you clearly never got. That's point no1.

He also pounced on trolls and savaged them adroitly. That's point no2.

Two different qualities from the same poster. Almost unthinkable, ain't it? Although such a notion scarcely seems to be stretching me mentally. Odd.

Still, you're perfecting the style of being a confrontational poster quite well, although you seem to be dwelling on making the attacks personal rather than generic hyperbole. But keep trying, you may become a worthy replacement for Spladle yet.

 

[mindseye]

So, how is name calling appropriate?

I am all for a little discussion, but let us refrain from resorting to childish retorts.

Was that directed at me? I'm inferring it was, since you quoted my post. If so, why did you find "wussy excuse" more problematic than, say, "schmucky police"?

 

[tallguypns]

*edit* statement withdrawn. Reread.

 

[jeff black]

Was that directed at me? I'm inferring it was, since you quoted my post. If so, why did you find "wussy excuse" more problematic than, say, "schmucky police"?

I added that it was directed at everyone, after I re-read it.

I don't know your profession. Had I known you were a police officer, I would have said that the "schmucky police" was an insult too as apposed to a generalization.

It was a blanketted response. Lex opened this thread up for Intelligent discussion. I just wanted to make sure it didn't turn into a playground fight.

 

[DaveyR]

Mindseye - You appear to be taking these posts as a personal attack on you. This really isn't helping and is contributing to the degenration of this thread.

 

[rob_just_rob]

Alex makes some good points. I can (usually) see the irony in Spladle's "drive-by shittings". And it's fair to ask whether a long-time member should be given more of the benefit of the doubt than a several-days-old member who's done nothing but troll and/or spam.

I guess the problem is threefold - people can be genuinely offended by posts they don't get, and potentially hurt, if they're vulnerable for whatever reason (one takes the plaintiff as he/she finds them). And if everyone who says something stupid gets flamed mercilessly, that could presumably deter people from joining. And this is a commercial site, after all.

Beyond that... where do we draw the line as to which members are free to flame away and which one's aren't? Not by popularity, which is completely subjective. By number of posts? Duration of membership? Membership status (Owner/Moderator/Gold Member/Photo Verified Member/Member)? I don't see how any of these are fair.

Most significantly for the site owner, I think, is the fact that Spladle had several warnings and posted anyway. He was told not to do a specific something (flame BT), but did so, regardless. So what else can be done but to ban him? If Spladle can defy a moderator instruction with no consequences, why have moderators? What's to stop anyone else from doing the same thing, based on their belief that they're right, and the mods are wrong?

Maybe it's a sign of me getting old, but I'm starting to see the merit of living by the rules here, even if I(we) don't agree with them. We've seen lots of dire warnings about the thin ice this site may be on. Remember the underage member issue? Remember the issue of all photos needing an address and name attached to them? A lot of the rules are there to keep this site up and running. I may not agree with some of them - the same way I don't agree that my driving 40 km/hr over the speed limit is inherently dangerous and worthy of a speeding ticket. But if I get the ticket, I pay it. And I don't get too mad about it, because I knew the rules when I got my driver's license. And I also know that I want the police to keep busting people going 120 km/hr over the speed limit, even if it means I get the occasional ticket for 40 over.

I wish a compromise could have been reached in this situation. I'll miss Spladle's posts. There's a lot of people up in arms about the Spladle situation who I'll miss if they decide to leave.

What a sad situation. :sad2:

 

[D_alex8]

Alex, I'm offended by your metaphor. Spladle was in no physical danger here, and there was no urgency that required him to fight back.

You are correct. My metaphor was hyperbolic. I withdraw it and refer readers of this thread to Jeff Black's description of Chase's dealing with the troll in post #20, which I now consider to be a more accurate representation of the situation. I apologise for any offence caused to you through the use of this metaphor.

 

[mindseye]

Alex: I'm being confrontational with you, because you're making a habit of abusing the moderators when we make a decision you don't like. Back in August, we were "crypto-fascists". This month, we're the Keystone Kops.

If we respond too slowly to a situation, well, that entitles Spladle to defend himself in whatever manner he sees fit, TOS be damned. If we respond too quickly to a situation, then we didn't read through enough posts to fully appreciate the context and the humor he was crafting. If we respond leniently, then we're allowing trolls to overrun the board. If we respond harshly, then we're clamping down on free speech and turning The Restaurant into McDonald's.

What you -- and the other members of the board -- are asking/demanding us to do is to set aside the warning we sent Spladle, and let things slide because Spladle was (attractive, popular, funny, a long-time member). I see this as asking us to be inconsistent and show favoritism to some members over others. You're being unfair, and I'm defending myself.

edit: I began typing this post before Alex8's post just above this one appeared when he withdrew the 'police' metaphor. Thanks for doing so.

 

[B_Stronzo]

Do you want our TOS to become that "particular"? A list of what may and may not be said? I claim that "consistently . . . abusive to other members" is specific enough to cover this.

No Heath I don't. I don't think that's what I was saying. But it seems that random decisions of what constitutes "over the top" insults varies according to "him what's doin' it". That's all I mean.

Hell. When I call back to the things that have been said in open posts which have insulted my sense of 'intrinstic worth' a lesser man would have walked away. But this shit's poster-specific.

In other words it's "all in who's doing it". I don't want to name names but certain posters are allowed a carte blanche to insult and slam at will saying whatever they please - indeed lauded for their candor in doing so - while Spladle (though clearly he'd constructed his own demise of late) was held to a separate standard from what I see.

Since no one has ever kissed my ass on here, we may never know.

Bend over. I'd be glad to. :tongue: Then you can kiss mine. :wink::tongue:

 

[rawbone8]

Alex's post pretty much says it all and Tallguypns clever Roman a clef underscored the situation. I've kept out of the mudslinging for a while now and haven't sounded off on this particular issue but I will now.

I lurked for a year here before coming into the light so to speak. I've seen changes and cycles. This is the mudslinging and witch hunt cycle. Whenever this happens, people start taking things too seriously. The cliques become evident and the power trips rage. People come and go with finality, often within the space of the same day.

Spladle was a great asset to this board. We have a cast of all sorts of characters here. I've seen other members, including myself use the same language and phrases he did. I've personally told people (on more than one occasion) many of the things Spladle did. I've told people to die on more than one occasion and felt it was appropriate. 21st Century web vernacular? Absofuckenlutely. Satire and innuendo? Yes. Immaturity running rampant? Fuck yeah.


I agree with most of the bans insituted here but not this one. Quote anything Spladle said and I'll remind you that LPSG is a message board. Period. We can mostly police ourselves here. I came here in the first place because of the nearly total lack of censorship which I need to feel totally comfortable. I now realise why I left several months ago. This is nauseating. Ban Spladle? Give me a fucking break.

Amen.

 

[joyboytoy79]

I came here almost exactly 4 weeks ago.

There was no Spladle at the time.

What i found when i got here, much to my surprise, was a vastly welcoming, cognitively stimulating group of mature adults (in sence of mind quality, not physical age). I embraced my new community, and felt it was mostly embracing me.

Call me conceited if you like, but i consider myself to be of above average intelligence. I in no way consider myself a genius. I came, and i stayed, and i can think of at least 2 other members who joined around the same time I did who are also of above average intelligence. Yes, i've been here for a scant month. I realize my greenness, which one strong reason why i stayed out of this mess while Spladle was turning my playground into a battlefield on his now defunct thread. I did PM a few members, and discussed my grievences with them, with great civility and respect.

I spoke with members who were "for Spladle" and those who were "against Spladle." All of them really seemed to be concered with the same thing: preserving the integrity of this grand cyber-scape. Yet, while that thread was active, it hogged all of the energy that used to be applied toward genuine support and fun elsewhere. LPSG was, and in some ways still is, centered on one scary display of childish antics. All focus was on Spladle, and he reveled in it. To me this speaks not of a hero who was martyred for the greater good. I simply don't see it that way.

I don't disagree with Alex8. I think Spladle (Chase) has a lot of potential, and it's sad that he isn't using it here. But i fully feel that was Chase's choice, and not something that was forced on him by an opressive hierarchy of self-righteous oligarchs. "Potential" rarely evolves into "greatness" without learning to accept criticism. Chase was criticised. His form of artistic expression was questioned, and he chose not to reflect on that criticism. It was his choice. As a direct result of his choice there is now a gaping hole in the middle of my playground. I just hope it's not indelible.

I really saw a lot of "if i'm going down, i'm going to bring the whole ship down with me" bravado here. It worked. A lot of very intelligent people played into it. Chase may, very well have instigated the begining of an end. I hope that's not the case. I hope people are able to see this for what it was. It was one man's refusal to accept criticism, it was his refusal to change "I hope you kill yourself" into "I hope your computer sees the idiocy of your ways and kills itself lest it be party to your further displays of ineptitude." The way i see it, he was given a creative challenge, a chance to further evolve his wit, and he turned it down. Too bad for him, and too bad for us.

 

[D_alex8]

Alex: I'm being confrontational with you, because you're making a habit of abusing the moderators when we make a decision you don't like. Back in August, we were "crypto-fascists". This month, we're the Keystone Kops.

I will state categorically: the mods do a wonderful job here. One seldom sees a board so troll- and spam-free, and issues are generally dealt with quickly. I would not be a mod if you paid me (well, maybe if you paid me enough ), and make no bones about the fact that I turned down the offer of such a position from Rob.

Nevertheless, I think the members, both paying and otherwise, are allowed to have a say (even a whinge if the mood so takes them) when decisions are made with which they disagree. I've given enough hours of time freely and happily to LPSG ... and have likewise benefited personally on various levels from my time at the site... to care, and to feel a strong vested interest in the place. One should be more concerned if I were using wishy-washy terms about the mods rather than selecting pointed phrases intended to make a mark... as the former would indicate merely a sense of apathy on my part. If I take issue with certain matters, then it's because I see things happening that jeopardize LPSG's potential for greatness in my eyes...

Of course Spladle was going to end up banned. As I said above already, numerous of us felt this from the very first post of 'his' thread. Nevertheless, despite this sense of inevitability of his demise, he was able to stop long enough to initiate this discussion about just where the lines should be drawn at LPSG in terms of what one can say in humor, what degree of satire is permitted, how much one may flame a troll, etc.

IMHO, a definite feeling of change has set in at the site of late, in terms of what can be said... and I'm not sure that moving from the Land of Cunt-Breathing Fucktards to Miss Manners' School for the Prim and Proper is appropriate to a site like this, which attracts fakers, fools, trolls and other assorted vermin by its very nature and subject matter. I think some members who have been here even a relatively short while are wondering whether LPSG has gone from being a place where one can speak openly to being a kind of nanny state where everyone must mind their p's and q's. The mods have been asked by enough serial report-button-pressers to wipe asses following every little spat, and one fears that you may have started (unconsciously, perhaps) to take this task too seriously, after rallying against it for so long. Spats and arguments, confrontation and directness... are ONE of the very things that help to fuel an animated, engaging community though, just as in real life; no, they should not consume the board.. but they are an integral part of 'family life' here. To sanitize LPSG would be an abominable watering-down of its potential. And the mods and the membership are all better than that.

EDIT: the typos were eating me alive.

 

[Lex]

... I don't want to name names but certain posters are allowed a carte blanche to insult and slam at will saying whatever they please - indeed lauded for their candor in doing so - while Spladle (though clearly he'd constructed his own demise of late) was held to a separate standard from what I see.

Well you should since we are talking poster specifics. To whom are you referring? Make a case.

Dr. Rock? --not here.

Zora? --posting far less.

Me?

 

[Lex]

I will state categorically: the mods do a wonderful job here. One seldom sees a board so troll- and spam-free, and issues are generally dealt with quickly.

Thanks for that Alex. It is a rather thankless job. I don't begrudge any of you for being upset.

...I would not be a mod if you paid me (well, maybe if you paid me enough ), and make no bones about the fact that I turned down the offer of such a position from Rob.....

And there is the rub. Everyone's a critic and no one wants the job. Many good posters turned down the chance to be a mod. Hell--I almost turned it own and have been considering stepping down for weeks. I have joked with some in PM about coming on board and they gave me a quick NO THANKS. Rob_E first said that new mods may be appointed in the future are time moves on.

What we have here is Monday Morning Quarterbacking at its best. This is not unlike in sports when a popular team member is traded or released. Remaining team members are pissed and heartbroken. The hard part is that the team must move forward, hopefully with stronger resolve and renewed growth.

 

[Dr. Dilznick]

Anyway, who's out next? Shelby? Dilznick? Because they're both excellent, confrontational pot-stirrers as well.

That was months ago. I've been "reprimanded" before.

I think I'll save my acerbic wit and bile for the message board I moderate. I've even considered hanging up my hat and allow these parasites to feed on the ashes of my empire. :-/

 

[B_Stronzo]

Well you should since we are talking poster specifics. To whom are you referring? Make a case.

Dr. Rock? --not here.

Zora? --posting far less.

Me?

Ah. You want to get personal here. Okay.

Well I think it serves no purpose for me to discuss others unless they're asking specifically. But as for you since you ask yes. You're guilty of it.

Are those other two posters among the parties to whom I refer? Yes. There are others too.

But to you personally, I think the only time you really stepped over the line is in your "upper crust" post. It smacked of a reverse bias. It can be read no other way.

I attempted to take our personal regard for one another into private then too but you needed to "shout me down" as the popular board expression goes. But generally I take no issue with you in this sense. I was once temporarily banned for insulting someone's 'intrinsic worth'. Yup. That's the reason I was given. Yet others remained happily crucifying me while I was in my little naughty chair over in that corner. It's to this misapplication of the TOS that I address my concerns here. Others do it at the drop of a hat and (again it's lauded as candor) merrily post on because they're the "popular kids". I do it and it's "upper crust" snobbishness and utterly reprehensible. Go figure.

Look - I'm equal to it. That's why you never see me reporting anything anymore. It falls on deaf moderator ears. But it does leave me to defend my take here since I don't think it's kosher to take unprovoked personal shots at people. I also realize all you moderators are human and learning as you go. That's why I'd strongly suggest you read what alex, sorcerer, and several others have written in order to gain a broader perspective on this place in which we all now find ourselves.

However -

Please let's not make this another 'Stronzo against LPSG thread'. I was illustrating only an imbalance in the application of rules. And as for the the posters you mention (Rock and Zora) both have made those decisions on their own. It's their option. This is roughly the third time you've alluded to their lack of visibility here. I guess I'm to infer I'm to blame?

Oh please.

Yet as for Chase? His options were removed. Much as I enjoyed reading and was heartened by those posts which were emailed to me when I was temporarily banned I hope Spladle sees his share of this shit so he knows he's missed.

He is too. One thing you cannot call the dude is boring... nope never. And I'll take a Spladle any day over someone who wants to talk about semen odor. Silly me.

 

[ClaireTalon]

What annoys me more is the racket that has been made about this relatively small matter. I don't see a sense here, the rules are there, and the enforcement of them is the task of the moderators here. Also they have to be enforced without considering the popularity of a board member, Lex has said that right on his last post in the thread before, and I fully back him up on that. As it is now, Spladle has been a bad boy, and since this apparently isn't a single mishap, but has happened more than once, Pecker has drawn a line and warned him. Nothing bad there, that doesn't make anyone a fascist.

I don't know if anyone remembers, the thread has been deleted meanwhile too, but I had come under attack by some very lovely dickhead last year, who started a thread asking me whether I've had a sex change. I guess that was before there were any moderators, and the discussion in that thread had become rather heated, but at some point I filed that with the thread starter, "bigdude". When the thread was heated again a few months ago, it got deleted. The handling of trolls and dickheads is task of the moderators.

 

[dong20]

What annoys me more is the racket that has been made about this relatively small matter. I don't see a sense here, the rules are there, and the enforcement of them is the task of the moderators here. Also they have to be enforced without considering the popularity of a board member, Lex has said that right on his last post in the thread before, and I fully back him up on that. As it is now, Spladle has been a bad boy, and since this apparently isn't a single mishap, but has happened more than once, Pecker has drawn a line and warned him. Nothing bad there, that doesn't make anyone a fascist.

Claire, that's one of the few comments in this (and its related) thread(s) that has a realistic sense of perspective.