OG proposal #1 (June 09) - Cull worthless members?

do you think the people who voted yes assume its not them and the people who voted no assume it is them?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No. I think most would think its not them. Who here would think of themselves as a noob or a woowoo? Woowoo and noobs generally are oblivious that they are behaving as such.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

i agree, how are "members" that haven't posted useless?

if the join date and the number of posts are also included it won't take an advertiser long to realize the list is padded.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

hey uh....dumbo
the list aint .......padded

all those that joined but did not post, left in disgust at the periodic witchhunts conducted here
they said: "we shall have no part in this insanity. our good names shall neither be sullied nor tainted by an unsavory association with the profligate licentiousness and debauchery of these shameless scribblers"

so they ran
ran like motherfucking hell

 

maybe it isn't a witchhunt.
maybe james wants to know why a certain member should be banned, not necessarily that they should be.

i realize in the strictest use of the term the members list isn't "padded".
"hasn't been purged" would be a better term.

 

Since he is the one who [perma]bans most members , maybe he should tell us his criteria instead?

 

i would assume his criteria would be the general rules of the site and his bosses.

 

i could think of several people here i would describe as useless but wouldn't want them gone. Their train wreck entertaining.

 

im sorry to say this but if its to come to pass then i vote draqon. Not for his opinions but rather for the way he turned a whole thread into a "oh woe is me everyone is breaching protcal xx by being mean to me"

 

Oh bloody hell. Dragon is ok, he's not the only one who's dedicated a thread to him or herself. Cut him some slack why don't ya.

 

i think your exadurating a bit there

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Alot of people havent started threads on themselves

 

We would, but the slacks been all used up, Lucy darling. There just isn't anymore left.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

There is only so much lenience that you can give people before enough is enough really. Being compassionate doesn't always mean being nice. Sometimes, it means being rough and harsh if it's in the best interest in everyone involved. It's hardly as major as everyone is making it out to be, all melodramatic and "save the whales". It's an internet forum, our of hundreds of thousands of forums out there...

If draqon and Tnerb posted their self-loathing, woe-is-me posts on a blog and came here just to talk about other stuff, it wouldn't even be mentioned. Hell, if a lot of these people left their baggage on their blogs it wouldn't be so hard to get through a whole thread without it being derailed by some sort of meltdown or personal conflict.

 

I'll miss you drag:bawl:

What if he bought us off with good russian vodka?

Well I wouldn't vote him off. Actually I don't have anyone to vote off.

 

ALL from one thread, (a three page thread i might add which initially had nothing do with him), if he wants to complaine about a post (or multiple posts) he is free to use the report button but delibratly disrailing threads is unhelpful to say the least. This isnt the first time he has done it either

As for buying people drinks, how about he just knocks off the "wow is me you are breaching these rules and im going to go cry about it" all the time.

 

Were the rules breached? If they were, that may be one of the reasons he continued to cry about it. Or are the rules just there to suit the convenience of the moderators to apply when they wish?
Silly me. That is exactly how it seems to be done.

 

Ophiolite possably, probably not (concidering james was involved in that debate and chose to take no action) however rather than keep posting winey posts why didnt he just hit the report button?

If a thief was stealing your car you would call the cops not stand there and winge that theft is illegal.

 

Maybe he felt he could deal with it one on one, no need to cry teacher.

 

Know what, boys? I told you precisely why I'm fine with it until you start saying, "Well, so-n-so didn't need a warning because s/he knows," but someone runs their mouth about molesting a girl, and you simply warn them.

James, in response to, "Well, you wouldn't like it if you got banned without warning," if I was talking about molesting underaged people, I kind of expect it.

I guess being "fair" holds most important above all else when it comes to child molestation. Wouldn't want to be unfair and just outright ban him for an unsolicited PM about fingering a young girl. We never said that wasn't okay.

As I told you earlier: I don't want to tell you how to do your job. I want you to do it. I don't want to be a mod. I want you to use your brain. I consider it part of your job to keep people who commit sex crimes that almost all people agree are atrocious off the boards.

And that is absolutely all I have to say, now or ever with regard to you, James.

 

James has made his pont (once agan)... that opinions on who shud be baned is like azz-holes... almos everbody has one.!!!

PS
I say... give James the pat on the head he needs for the adgervaton assoiated wit bein an adminstrater ((((-BIG-PAT-)))... an also... a 1 day ban for startin this thred to "use" members to make/prove his pont insted of jus statin his case.!!!

 

Asguard and lucifer's angel have to be two of the most useless. Potentially they could be very usefull indeed, but since we're discouraged from insulting them and often punished for doing so, I really don't see any reason for them to be here. They're just ban-bait, only serving to disrupt the forums, ultimately driving good members away due to how incredibly frustrating it is to interact with people like this in a "no insults" environment.

Like I said though, their potential is outstanding, as far as the internet goes they're diamonds of a brilliance rarely encountered, you can't buy or artificially replicate what they so effortlessly provide, so I'd rather just change the rules.
This forum is stupidly uptight, no one should ever take the internet as seriously as it is taken on sciforums. All this effort put in to make sciforums "mature" ultimately comes across as extremely immature. Basically if you feel you're too mature to be immature on the internet, you have a lot of growing up to do.
This is an internet forum, not a courtroom, it exists for entertainment purposes, it should be silly, it should be filled with outlandish comments from strange people that are ridiculous, absurd, inappropriate, overtly offensive, etc, inflammatory, so as to ignite vigorous and hopefully entertaining discussions.
What people get punished for at sciforums are precisely the qualities that fuel good forums.

So I guess the most useless members, the most unnecessary, the most counterproductive, well if we're being realistic that would be jamesr, tiassa, plazma, etc. What are our chances of being rid of them?