sam's trollish nature

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Roman, Dec 28, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    /eek

    my indian princess

    /pant
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. invert_nexus Ze do caixao Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,686
    Ok.
    Thought you were saying that Mountainhare was right on with it.
    Glad we agree.

    I'd hate for a faceless inquisition to become the norm.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. invert_nexus Ze do caixao Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,686
    Now.
    About Roman's thread?
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    You do realise he started this thread before I posted the babies?

    And I was responding to Buffalo in the thread?

    edit: also, do those dead babies in the picture look free (ie liberated?)

    or is Romans freedom the only one worth discussion?
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2007
  8. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    think about a tweak
    this is an issue that comes up often

    rules can be humanely applied. not the letter of the law but the spirit of the law. penalties can be applied if repost is found again in violation of tos. examine the content. it is quite possible that a mod mistakenly censored. review the repost then punish. allow if compliant. send offending mod to gulag for re-education

    the law then works for us and is not just plain adversarial

    /tires
     
  9. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    I delete many posts. many of my posts are deleted or cesspooled (especially by Skin).

    And so what? Why would I repost something that was moderated?

    Why is it essential for me to reiterate the point that a man forcing abortions on his girlfriend is justified because girls who deny men from doing that are like pedophiles who want to rape children?
     
  10. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    you are a lost cause, sam
    take a vacation
    meditate
    do something
    your brain is scrambled
     
  11. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    now i bow out from this shit thread
     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Thank you for your reasonable outlook.
     
  13. mountainhare Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,287
    SAM:
    His wife's opinion, WHICH HE CHAMPIONS! WHICH HE HAS CHAMPIONED FOR YEARS, IN MANY THREADS!!! Anyone with any history whatsoever on sciforums, or even an understanding of context, knows this. I got tired of him doing so, and responded with some satire to show what a sexist his wife (and he) is. And instead of getting appreciation for making a very apt and clever analogy (something which I rarely do these days, because I'm on dial up and have better things to do. And yes, my analogy is apt and hilarious, everyone accept the imbecilic mods agree), I get heckled and threatened with a ban.

    Ya know, if you had suggested nicely with a please, I would gladly have removed the second post, because I'd already made my point adequately in the first. I have willingly removed satire that people have found offensive in the past, if only to keep the peace.

    Perhaps if you had suggested "Whoa, perhaps you need to express that with a little more tact, buddy", or "Well, wouldn't the analogy be more enticing without using the word 'bitches'" I would have been prone to change it (that's not a guarantee, but I'm very likely to return kindness with kindness, within reason, as corny as it sounds.)

    Instead, the mods feel it necessary to railroad everyone and treat them like fucking children, while giving preferential treatment to others (especially other mods and those who share their political/ideological views), and calling anyone who complains a 'whiner'.

    With such treatment from the mods, I will dig my heels in. I will make really outrageous comments out of spite. I won't bother taking the 'proper' avenues to address my gripes about sciforums, because I'll just be disregarded as a 'whiner' by authority figures who like to lock ranks (just like the LAPD!). And yes, I've tried the proper avenues a million times before, with no result.

    And let me say, it's bad enough when a vanilla member fucks with you, but when a mod does it, you feel pissed and powerless. They hold all the aces, and can do whatever pleases them. It's especially long time members, who have invested a lot of time and energy into sciforums, and expect a little bit of consideration. You might think I post shit, but I try to make an effort to post something which hits the nail on the head, while remaining true to what I believe. I make it a rule to not post when I don't have something relevant and useful to add to the convo.

    Ya know, the administration and the mods are welcome to treat their members like shit, they don't have to use tact. They are welcome to censor and punish opinions which don't fit their political agenda. Hell, use a gallon of gall instead of a drop of honey. But don't go expecting any decent treatment in return, and don't expect people not to complain or 'whine', as mods like Tiassa so delicately put it. Don't expect an 'atmosphere of respect' that Plazma called for.

    Because the mods are merely helping perpetuate the cycle of bitchiness. I mean, seriously, has the approach the moderation has taken silenced the 'whiners'? Have things gotten ANY better? How many people are defecting? How many people are protesting? I mean, there will always be the occassional troll, but seriously, why are so many long term contributing members getting shitty?

    What exactly is the moderation going to do next, ban anyone who 'whines'? Three whines and you're out? Because I think that's the way it's heading.

    Because you're an imbecile who doesn't know how to behave like a competent moderator? Why do you think I only reposted my SECOND post? I had no intention of overriding moderator decision. If I did, I would have posted my first post as well, which was far more apt. There was no need to drive the point home with a sledgehammer, I guess. But if you're too inept to do your job properly, that's not my fault, I'm not a mind reader.
     
  14. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
  15. invert_nexus Ze do caixao Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,686
    About the same, really.
    We've always complained a lot here at Sci.

    Need more hugs?
     
  16. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    1. he posted it as his wife opinion, as he always does. As a man with no children, it is an opinion which he may or may not hold, maybe even he does not know. He presented it as his wife's opinion.

    I am not, as you say, a mind reader

    2. You reposted a DELETED post. That IS overriding moderation. You do not need to read my mind to know this. Not as a long standing member with blood and tears invested in sciforums. Not a newbie who does not know better.

    edit: one more thing. Your previous two bans were seven days when they should have been 7 and 14 according to Plazmas rules for moderation, your last ban which I gave you was for fourteen days but should have been a month. I have no vendetta against you. If you did not go out of your way to flame, you would fall off my radar, as Shorty did. My only purpose and aim in moderation is to keep the discussion civil and as scientific as possible. Show me that you want to discuss, not flame and I will accomodate your idiosyncrasies.
     
  17. mountainhare Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,287
    S.A.M:
    He championed his wife's opinion, as he always does. He has, in the past, demanded that the opinion of males regarding abortion be deleted for scifora threads. Try appreciating the context, for once.

    But even if Fraggle were NOT championing said opinion, I am still more than entitled to demonstrate the absurdity of it via satire. It's not 'flaming' to use satire to refute bullshit, as demonstrated by Penn and Teller.

    You don't need to be a mind reader. You just need to have more than a rudimentary understanding of English, OR a history on sciforums. Apparently you are lacking in both.

    For all I know, you could have deleted that post by accident. Nevertheless, you did not warn me for breaking the rules regarding my second post, hence it is reasonable to assume that my second post did not break the rules. You never informed me of a 'decision' to delete my second post, and hence I never overrode your non-existent decision when I reposted. Capiche?

    How generous, especially given that I didn't break any rules. A proverbial 'slap on the wrist' is still unjustified if the slapped is innocent.

    Pull the other one. You go out of your way to moderate me. Like a traffic cop with a grudge, you seek me out.

    I didn't flame, I contributed to the discussion. There's a difference. But as I stressed previously, you go out of your way to moderate me.

    Translation: If you don't post in my forum, I can't moderate you.

    Translation: If you don't play in my sandpit, I won't beat you up for looking at me funny.

    Does that involve championing sexism?
     
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1671479&postcount=11

    Your response:

    I deleted at least six three other posts [in the same thread] with your post. No warnings given for deletions only. No one else reposted.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2007
  19. mountainhare Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,287
    invert:
    I disagree. I think it's gotten worse. But assuming you are correct, why is it the 'same', even after implementing the new, tough measures? If indeed the new tough measures haven't improved sciforums, why don't we go back to the good ole days, where people weren't moderated up the wazoo?

    Hah, maybe!

    All I'm saying is that you can't expect a civil, friendly and chummy environment (which is apparently what Plazma is aiming for) while behaving like an overlord. The reform must be from the top down.
     
  20. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,386
    Well if ever there was a thread that could be called a witch hunt, this would be it. Gustav, I think you dropped your pitchfork and your torch appears to have gone out, the dimness is a huge hint.

    And you have been here long enough to know that is a big no no.

    Had it been someone like goofy who was the mod, you could have found yourself permanently banned. In the olden days, you would not have even received a warning, just a permanent ban and no one would have raised an eyebrow, because overriding a mod edit was always an offence that resulted in a permanent ban. You received a warning and decided it was not worthy of your time and decided to override a mod edit. In short, you don't really have a leg to stand on. You could have reported her to Plazma (if you don't trust James or Stryder), but you chose to go the route that you knew would result in a ban.

    Your racism will not help your cause mountainhare.

    And by the way, Australia DID vote to keep the Queen as a head of State. Thats why her head is still on our currency and why her image still hangs in so many of our Government institutions.
     
  21. mountainhare Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,287
    invert:
    I was warned for the first post, not the second.

    No, I didn't, because I'd NEVER BEEN WARNED for the second post. I wasn't aware WHY it had been deleted. Think about it: If I had wanted to break the rules, why did I only repost the second post, instead of the first? Especially when the first was far more apt?

    Granted, the point is moot, because I was never warned regarding the second post.
     
  22. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Irrelevant
    http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=61381
     
  23. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,386
    Do you mean the "good ole days" when Porf had appeared to have disappeared and there were few moderators and the forums was dying? Or the "good ole days" where we were so strictly moderated that one would get an instant permaban if Porf decided he didn't like you? You forget mountain, some of us have been here longer than you have and we remember all the different "good ole days" this forum has had.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page