Mass bannings, anyone?

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by James R, Nov 9, 2008.

?

Read the first post, and vote:

Poll closed Nov 19, 2008.
  1. I want mass bannings, according to the suggested process.

    28.0%
  2. I do not want mass bannings.

    54.0%
  3. I abstain from this vote.

    18.0%
  1. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,671
    Let's not exaggerate, it is currently a C. Probably 4-5 years ago it was an A.

    One reason for the slow degradation is that the internet tends to specialize. Just like any group of people with more than 3 enthusiasts having a magazine, they are also having a messageboard. Sciforums is still a hodge-podge of all topics and trying to cover everything. That might not work in the future, because people with particular interest can go to specialized boards, be them biking, wrestling, politics, whatever...They can find their more similar minded people with the same interest.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492


    No it isn't. <flings raisinettes>
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Having been here for years and even using another name around 2001-2002, when i first joined, i would say it was never an A.

    Most of the threads during those times were Iraq War threads and everything related to it. Those have tapered off and at the same time forums in general have slowed down. I attribute this to a boom and the relative newness of them at the time.

    One thing i find strange is that there is no stated mission and the rules are enforced somewhat hodgepodge. Even the FAQ does not state too much along these lines. As a matter of fact the most it tells you is what the buttons do.

    For me, i would say that i am more interested in ulterior\alternate theories that are not discussed in the mainstream. I never understood why people who post\make threads that stretch the bounds of being acceptable science but are interesting theories get vilified and embarrassed and somewhat ganged up on and yet the ones cry on and on about the same subjects and bashing the same people and not about anything scientific either just get a free pass.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Saxion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    264
    James, allow me to nip this in the bud and actually refer to the real problems of the site without exaggerating the need if what people have been asking for, instead of this cherade you have had us all believe; i.e. believing that people are asking for mass ban on people.

    But there is. There is a great deal of people here who need their asses banned, and some of them even include the modship. So what's new? Too many pass the fingers of Plazma, and even more pass your own, until any moral highground has been used to destinguish between those who deserve to be banned, and those who are for no reason whatsoever.

     
  8. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    Look! Pomposity! YAY Saxion! You have that... savoir faire for talking down to people. Very impressive. Do you tell jokes, too?
     
  9. tablariddim forexU2 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,795
    Why don't we just ban everyone and start again with sciforumsII?
     
  10. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    Thespian, judging from your dislike of the administrators at post 12, I would guess that you've been here before under another name. Ofcourse, if you were to admit it, it'd probably be an insta ban, so I understand that you'd have to remain silent on this or outright deny it.

    I haven't been here so long myself- I got here at the end of August. But while I have gotten upset at that evil dog, er, I mean administrator ;-) and Stryder (there can be only one ;-)!), I have never even been threatened with a ban yet. Now I won't tell you that I expect smooth sailing for the rest of my stay here. I'm just trying to let you see that I don't see things the way you do. Are the administrators wrong on some things? I've thought so in the past. However, I have to point out that I've seen some positive changes- for ages, I made it known that I was unhappy about all subjects pertaining to 9/11 had to be confined in one thread. Recently, that has now changed; a new thread was opened by Stryder.

    Maybe what I'm trying to say is that everyone (yes, even admins) respond better to the carrot then to the stick. If a stick must be used, make it a relatively harmless one. Yes, I constantly chided Stryder concerning the fact that only one thread was allowed (the infamous 'mighty tangle' ;-)), but I also listened to what he had to say and tried to treat him as I would like to be treated. I tried to see -his- side of the story and I felt that I did to some extent. Mostly I felt he was more concerned about other issues; I can't deny that I felt humiliated by this. And ofcourse I saw it as unfair as well; I think most posters tend to think that their issues are the cat's meow

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .

    But I kept on trying to see things from his point of view while at the same time acknowledging that he wasn't born as Scott3x and so (clearly) could not see the worthiness of my cause ;-). I may not be the best when it comes to the carrot; my mother has (and does) criticize me a lot and I although I hate to admit it, I know that sometimes I'm a real badgerer myself. I think what ultimately got Stryder to split the 9/11 thread was my humour and perhaps my willingness to defend the admins even if I don't always agree with them.

    I myself have been an administrator in 2 forums; one never took off and the other died out because of certain difficulties that shall remain undisclosed (listen to me, I'm becoming a regular 'need to know' government agent

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ). So I know first hand that it's not easy.

    But essentially, to me it seems obvious that if the admins get more complaints then praises, the solution (in my view) is obvious; make some changes or shut the place down. Seeing as I don't want the latter, that leaves some changes.

    As an aside, as to the latter, yes, maybe I'd be more productive with my time, but is someone going to -guarantee- that? I thought I'd be more productive with my time if I cut myself off from World of Warcraft too. Was I? No. But I -was- terribly bored

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .

    So, on to the changes; I think that in some ways, they may have already been implemented; essentially, no dissing moderators too much; for just as they are the reason this place exists (someone has to maintain the place), they can make it all go away; but in order to avoid that, the first people to go would naturally be the people who are giving them the most grief (whether it's because other posters are ardently complaining about them or whether it's because they themselves have become thoroughly irritated by said people).

    Now don't get me wrong. I'm all about instituting rules for everyone; rules that even admins should follow. Clearly no one can ban the admins, but if they don't follow the rules, the rules (in my view) would be a joke; essentially, just make sure you have a good position, then you can run roughshod over everyone else. Personally, I think the first should be that a certain guideline become a rule:
    No personal attacks.

    Ofcourse, there can (and I believe should) be some leeway in interpreting what a personal attack is. I think that one shouldn't be able to use certain words to describe people (who are here or elsewhere, lest said elsewhere person is someone's beloved cousin twice removed

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ). Here's a list of words that could be black listed:
    any known swear words (F*ing anything, for instance), and moron, stupid, idiot and imbecile.

    If such words were used against a person (or group of people), people could get a strike; 3 strikes could mean a temporary ban and if they came back doing the same, perhaps a permanent one.

    Well, those are my thoughts for the day; tune in some other time, I may have more ;-).
     
  11. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Can I change me vote?
     
  12. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    I think an admin would have to do something for that to happen. But out of curiosity, what did you vote for? And what would you like to vote for now?
     
  13. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    I now think we should ban EVERYONE, start a fresh.
     
  14. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    I think that's a little over dramatic. If people could just refrain from personal attacks (and be warned and later banned if they did it anyway) I think we'd really be going places.
     
  15. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Why can't we just report their posts and the admin/mod can do some work for a change?
     
  16. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Oh this oughtta be good

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Reiku---can't you take a hint?
     
  17. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    That's typically what you're supposed to do.
     
  18. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    When was the last time you complimented one of the admins, at ANY discussion forum that you have EVER posted in when something was great?

    How often have you complained when something was even a little wrong?

    The bottom line is, using member feedback is a (quite generally) shitty way to judge your worth, in ANY facet of life. The fact is, there are more people who love to complain that people who love to give compliments---ESPECIALLY publicly.
     
  19. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    so you recognize a grade shit?
    are you able?
    why not bat then?
     
  20. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=73980

    and that to a fucker that voted to ban my ass

    i am unique

    emote? hell no!
    reason? word up!
     
  21. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    kiss my ass ben
     
  22. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    thanks
    i read the def

    If the idea proves viable and/or popular, the anonymous figure can then declare their interest and advance the concept with little risk of failure. If the concept is 'shot down in flames', the anonymous party will not be 'tainted by association' and can either drop the idea completely or 'bide their time' and wait until a better moment for launching an attack.

    the shit has already failed
    the mob will not rule here again

    bite away tho
    dumbfucksci
     
  23. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Apologies Gustav---you are a paragon of internet discussion contributers everywhere

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page