I just read the new ToS

[B_Hickboy]

A couple thoughts:
1. I should have been banned long ago.
a. Instead, they just delete my posts, which is actually OK with me.
2. A couple of the moderators should step down.
a. Not them, you idiot. The other ones.

People will still be stupid enough to read the rules and get themselves banned anyway. :shrug: :yawn:

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

I banned you 22 times but they kept you around for amusement.

 

[pym]

been there, done that.

 

[D_Hyacinth Harrytwat]

I thought I should read them too (what with the February update) so that I know how to tiptoe around a banning. I'm glad to see that swearing isn't an offense... I played on the safe side, anyway :redface:.

I realized how the new ToS could play into my favour but the mods really don't need more reports to go through. I'll handle my business like a big girl and with the [in]appropriate profanity! HELL yeah!

 

[D_Portelay Porquesword]

There ya go.

 

[mindseye]

I'm pretty familiar with the previous TOS, and there aren't many changes -- just some rephrasings and clarifications.

One change that I think is totally unworkable is the prohibition against "Linking to sites used to defame this site or any of its members". The rule says that if a site defames any member of LPSG, it can't be linked to.

I certainly don't know all the members of LPSG, so how can I know if a site I link to defames one of them? Myspace -- that's out: I'm sure someone's being defamed there. Facebook, Blogger, Photobucket, Twitter? Does anyone dare risk linking to these sites on the (very likely) chance that those sites are being "used to defame LPSG or any of its members"?

Man, I hope Dick Cheney's not a member here, 'cause that would rule out CNN, AP, the New York Times, Google . . .

 

[pym]

Man, I hope Dick Cheney's not a member here, 'cause that would rule out CNN, AP, the New York Times, Google . . .

What....you did'nt know? He's only THE BIGGEST DICK on this site.:biggrin1:

 

[D_Hyacinth Harrytwat]

What....you did'nt know? He's only THE BIGGEST DICK on this site.:biggrin1:

Damn you beat me to it!

I'll agree that the "no linking" rule is a bit vague... But it's new. Let them refine it a bit.

 

[D_Fiona_Farvel]

I think the new TOS are much less ambiguous, but still need a tinkering.

I thought I should read them too (what with the February update) so that I know how to tiptoe around a banning. I'm glad to see that swearing isn't an offense... I played on the safe side, anyway :redface:.

I realized how the new ToS could play into my favour but the mods really don't need more reports to go through. I'll handle my business like a big girl and with the [in]appropriate profanity! HELL yeah!

Profanity prohibited on a penis site?
Hmm, I'll test this one out for you. :tongue:

 

[D_Hyacinth Harrytwat]

I think the new TOS are much less ambiguous, but still need a tinkering.


Profanity prohibited on a penis site?
Hmm, I'll test this one out for you. :tongue:

Technically, a 10 year old could wander onto this site and read the posts, so it's only right to keep it G-rated right :wink:?

 

[B_cigarbabe]

A couple thoughts:
1. I should have been banned long ago.
a. Instead, they just delete my posts, which is actually OK with me.
2. A couple of the moderators should step down.
a. Not them, you idiot. The other ones.

People will still be stupid enough to read the rules and get themselves banned anyway. :shrug: :yawn:

Sorry oh Malevalent One I don't care how many times you read the heartwarming ToS and supposedly follow "the laws" within people get banned for purely personal reasons and you know that better than anyone. You're right about one thing more than a couple should step down and give the new people a chance to sink or swim on their own merits.
C.B. :saevil:

 

[B_cigarbabe]

I thought I should read them too (what with the February update) so that I know how to tiptoe around a banning. I'm glad to see that swearing isn't an offense... I played on the safe side, anyway :redface:.

I realized how the new ToS could play into my favour but the mods really don't need more reports to go through. I'll handle my business like a big girl and with the [in]appropriate profanity! HELL yeah!

Swearing is indeed bannable ask me.:tongue:
Right ladies?

What would thy do without reports from the whiners dearest?
Have sex or something good?
Criminy!!
C.B.:saevil:

 

[D_Hyacinth Harrytwat]

Swearing is indeed bannable ask me.:tongue:
Right ladies?

What would thy do without reports from the whiners dearest?
Have sex or something good?
Criminy!!
C.B.:saevil:

Oh go fuck yourself! Need a hand getting started :wink:?

 

[HellsKitchenmanNYC]

I still say some of the terms need better definition. IMHO.

 

[D_Hyacinth Harrytwat]

I still say some of the terms need better definition. IMHO.

Totally. I just harassed Cigarbabe and I'm still here :biggrin1:. And, being the proficient stalker that I am, acquired her phone number so I can call her and make sure she's off fucking herself.

 

[faceking]

Eh... this is an internet forum... not life. Seriously. It's fun and all... but ...

 

[HellsKitchenmanNYC]

Totally. I just harassed Cigarbabe and I'm still here :biggrin1:. And, being the proficient stalker that I am, acquired her phone number so I can call her and make sure she's off fucking herself.

Oh no. That bitch CB is prob stalking someone or telling someone to fuck off in cyberspace. Imagine! She's no good. And when you go to her house all she has is Crystal Light and weird cheese!

 

[D_Hyacinth Harrytwat]

Oh no. That bitch CB is prob stalking someone or telling someone to fuck off in cyberspace. Imagine! She's no good. And when you go to her house all she has is Crystal Light and weird cheese!

WHAT THE FUCKING HELL? Weird as in "exotic" or weird as in "spray-on from a can"? I don't think I'm going to be breaking and entering her house with malignant intentions if all she has is Crystal Light and spray-on cheese. I'd rather Kool-Aid .

Say Hells... What kind of cheeses and beverages do you keep on hand?

 

[B_Nick8]

The bottom line is the TOS isn't really a set of rules as much as it's a set of guidelines. The reality is that the powers that be can and do interpret it as they see fit and with a certain amount of latitude. I think a big effort is made to be fair and even handed but that's not always true and since decisions aren't made in the open we can never be sure and have to take their word for it. The mods are human and there are better and 'worse' ones. More effective and less effective ones. They bring human qualities to their jobs. They work under a good deal of pressure. It's not a position that's particularly rewarding and the ones who would want it most probably would be the ones least suited for it.

But, as in many situations, the choice is to work for change from within, or rail against it and leave. It's a matter of choice.

Beginning with suggestion #1: it really would be worthwhile to explain the reasoning behind bannings and suspensions, not only to dispell rumors and allay fears but as ongoing object lessons. Not to mention what it would do for the spirit of 'transparency'...discuss.

 

[IntoxicatingToxin]

It's not a position that's particularly rewarding and the ones who would want it most probably would be the ones least suited for it.

I've generally been really calm and kept quiet when people trash the moderators and say negative things about the way the board is being handled because I know that you're usually wrong and I also know that you're just trying to make sense out of situations that don't necessarily make sense to you, so you put the blame on the one group of people that hold the truth. Why everyone feels the need to blame anyone for anything is beyond me anyway. But I must say, I took HUGE offense to this comment. I'm sure some of the other mods might feel the same way. Thank you for openly disrespecting me, Nick8. Much appreciated.