Originally posted by PhlabibitWhat does my age have to do with the issue at hand? The quoted post completely misses the point, you are trying to insult my be using my age to imply that I am immature and nobody should listen to me. That's just about the cheapest way to attack someone, by referring to something that is not their "fault". Tell me, which of us is acting childish here?
Yay, another little 16 year old girl who thinks she's got everything figured out.
Good, go do your homework.
P
Originally posted by Phlabibitso why haven't i gone yet? 😉
test....
Dang, I wrote a huge thing and it wouldn't post! Dang it.
My post about Uchess is that the unmoderated site became a mess and Russ had to shut it down. Forum Wars is unmoderated, that is where I go to do my real posting... anyone can come. That site can handle it since there are fewer users, and we all have a proper thick skin. When ...[text shortened]... good bash if they are lucky, and just ignores them after that til they get bored and leave.
P
Originally posted by angie88That was a cheap shot, sorry. I had not had my coffee yet. I'll need to avoid that. Again, sorry... as I know if I were younger I wouldn't want to hear that either.
What does my age have to do with the issue at hand? The quoted post completely misses the point, you are trying to insult my be using my age to imply that I am immature and nobody should listen to me. That's just about the cheapest way to attack someone, by referring to something that is not their "fault". Tell me, which of us is acting childish here?
P
Originally posted by PhlabibitLOL! It was indeed a cheep shot, which raises the question of when do you moderate yourself? OK, it wasn't that bad, but I did consider the alaert button... Fortunel, Angie does have the requisit thick skin to survive (or so it would appear).
That was a cheap shot, sorry. I had not had my coffee yet. I'll need to avoid that. Again, sorry... as I know if I were younger I wouldn't want to hear that either.
P
Originally posted by ToeI have been moderated before... I even moderated myself yesterday... said something I shouldn't have.
LOL! It was indeed a cheep shot, which raises the question of when do you moderate yourself? OK, it wasn't that bad, but I did consider the alaert button... Fortunel, Angie does have the requisit thick skin to survive (or so it would appear).
P
I can understand that people get annoyed when amusing posts get removed, but seriously, a thread with any mention of bestiality in the title had to go. Surely this was obvious, and I suspect even shavixmir knew this when he posted it.
And just to be completely unequivocal about this, I am not revisiting forum moderation again for sometime. A lot of last year was swallowed up dealing with this issue, and I have no interest in revisiting it again in the near future. I personally am very happy with the moderation we have - I have no more to say than that.
-Russ
Originally posted by Phlabibiti am certainly not suggesting that these forums go unmoderated...merely that either there should be more discussion about removing posts or new mods should be bought in. i also think that reasons for removal should be publically stated.
test....
Dang, I wrote a huge thing and it wouldn't post! Dang it.
My post about Uchess is that the unmoderated site became a mess and Russ had to shut it down. Forum Wars is unmoderated, that is where I go to do my real posting... anyone can come. That site can handle it since there are fewer users, and we all have a proper thick skin. When ...[text shortened]... good bash if they are lucky, and just ignores them after that til they get bored and leave.
P
i also think that forum wars is a great site to post in, you know i use it regularly and i find it very useful and enjoyable. unfortunatly there are only around 70/80 active users of the site which means we cannot have the conversations that we would like to have with members of RHP, because they are not a forum wars.
another idea would be to get more people involved in forum wars. i would post the URL but it might get moderated so just PM and you can get it.
fred
Originally posted by Freddie2004We do talk about what is moderated, we have our own forum. Russ knows exactly what is going on with the mods, and stands by our decisions.
i am certainly not suggesting that these forums go unmoderated...merely that either there should be more discussion about removing posts or new mods should be bought in. i also think that reasons for removal should be publically stated.
i also think that forum wars is a great site to post in, you know i use it regularly and i find it very useful and ...[text shortened]... rum wars. i would post the URL but it might get moderated so just PM and you can get it.
fred
We used to have a forum where people could question what the mods did, and that was just a fight fest. What is the sense in moderating something out, and posting it again for everyone to talk about? The only people who would talk about it are the people who don't want things moderated, and if someone said they alerted it, they become a target.
Even I got to FW when I want to talk about something I know won't fly at RHP.
P
Originally posted by Phlabibitand so do i as you know. but what i am saying is that we do not know what is going to get moderated and what is not going to get moderated so people post here without realising that they will get modded and then lose they're highly amusing post never to be seen again.
Even I got to FW when I want to talk about something I know won't fly at RHP.
P
fred
Originally posted by RussThe mere mention of bestiality means a thread has to go? If I remember correctly (at the risk of mentioning the "B" word and getting moderated) Shav's thread was disussing a show on commercial TV where people were declaring their "love" for their pets which these people took to em, an extreme. The moderating standards here are now stricter than those on commercial TV? Why?
I can understand that people get annoyed when amusing posts get removed, but seriously, a thread with any mention of bestiality in the title had to go. Surely this was obvious, and I suspect even shavixmir knew this when he posted it.
And just to be completely unequivocal about this, I am not revisiting forum moderation again for sometime. A lot of ...[text shortened]... rsonally am very happy with the moderation we have - I have no more to say than that.
-Russ
What other subjects are taboo? I remember trying to have a discussion about gay marriage where conservatives kept wanting to bring up incest, bestiality, polygamy and other sexual issues. Which ones are we now forbidden to discuss here? I'd really like some clarification because if the forums start denigrating back to the "Sesame Street" type that various individuals were pushing for in August (oddly most of them left the site) then I may well take Toe's advice.
Originally posted by angie88Might I try to suggest a different approach to the subject of moderation?
Yes. I want to say thanks. You have:
-made my life more boring by deleting the interesting posts.
-made my life more boring because the only subject people are talking about is why their posts got deleted.
-made me wonder if you just randomly click the "delete" button.
-nearly succeeded in making me stay out of the forums. Not because you have threaten ...[text shortened]... oint in hanging around the forums.
Thank you, I'm sure my grades will improve lots.
Angie
There are various sorts of humour, for example:
Character based: You build up a character and place him in unusual situations.
Satirical: Making fun of someone elses statements
etc.
One of the easiest forms of humour though, is shocking people.
Imagine my post on bestiality on a site on bestiality by people who practise bestiality. A lot of the "SHOCK" humour in it would disappear. It would be less amusing.
To make proper use of shock humour, you need guidelines, borders and basically a structure. And when you press the borders or step out of the structure, you become rebellious, irritating or funny (or any mixture of the three).
So moderation, banned words, taboo'd subjects and definate "No No's" actually help to create funny and amusing situations.
I don't know if there's a common law on this matter, but if there's not, there should be:
Shocking humour is relative to the amount of restrictions in place.
or:
The more items which are banned, the more items which will inherently become funny.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that this site belongs to someone and it's his/her right to ban whatever he or she wants. But...the longer the list of banned things, the more things there are to poke fun at!
Enjoy yourself!
I think BLACK HUMOR seems to be one of the main issues. I am a huge user of it, it's essentially how I laugh and get others to laugh, it's really the only humor I have. The problem with black humor, is, that half the people you meet will find it hilarious and laugh out loud, and the other half, well, don't appreciate it at all, they may say it's "innopropriate, offensive or imature", this is mostly true with the elder generations, but in fairness, a lot of young goody-two shoes religious women/girls seem pretty stuck up about this issue too. I respect that they simpy do not like the joke, there allowed to think what they want of it and say what they want, however, I disagree with the fact they should have the right to censor myself completely, mute me, and hypcocriticly insult AT SOMEONE over a joke. Especially in the forums, if you don't like where a thread is going, you can always just leave, no questions asked. Anyways, this is the problem on RHP, people use black humor, half like it, half don't, and the half who don't have the power to shut people up eternally with the given policies, an option that does not really reflect real life.
And it's not easy to ask someone to "not use black humor", people who use black humor, I don't know how to explain it, but it's a big part of their personality, character and what makes them a person, it's like asking a guy to never use black humor in a certain social community is like asking a painter not to paint, a chess player not to play chess, etc...