Moderator for the Cesspool?
- Thread starter Athelwulf
- Start date
- Status
I think the cesspool was meant to be a moderator free zone were we could throw away bad threads for their eventual deletion off the server.
Mmh, I got moderated in the cesspool...by Goofy. (alas, that was understandable, I think I posted a link to japanese mutilation porn...)
I am not quite sure if there should be a mod, perhaps it would not be such a bad idea, considering that some people may rn amok down there.
No vote from me at this time...
I am not quite sure if there should be a mod, perhaps it would not be such a bad idea, considering that some people may rn amok down there.
No vote from me at this time...
Do we really want someone to suffer by making them read all the garbage that is there?
I mean I know sciforums members, for the greater part, are apathetic towards life itself, but even they can't possibly, i ngood concious, appoint someone for that much torture.
Which reckless bastard, who's given up on life, will take that job...I shudder at the thought.
I mean I know sciforums members, for the greater part, are apathetic towards life itself, but even they can't possibly, i ngood concious, appoint someone for that much torture.
Which reckless bastard, who's given up on life, will take that job...I shudder at the thought.
(Expletive)-worship?
WCF is correct that the Cesspool was intended as a place to put posts that were just too repugnant to allow to simply drop down the topic list. While, in the past, we have allowed much racist and sexist and generally hateful material to remain in a locked topic, the par eventually fell so low as to become intolerable. There are so many bad topics these days we could fill entire screens with locked topics.
However, we also recognize that people will continue to carry out their fights regardless of where, so short of banning people for arguing vociferously and viciously, it seems logical to leave a place to either wrap those up or let them wind down to nothing.
I'm not sure, though, that anyone really expected the membership of Sciforums to glorify the Cesspool. It certainly wasn't a desired effect to see the low end Sciforums exalted.
WCF is correct that the Cesspool was intended as a place to put posts that were just too repugnant to allow to simply drop down the topic list. While, in the past, we have allowed much racist and sexist and generally hateful material to remain in a locked topic, the par eventually fell so low as to become intolerable. There are so many bad topics these days we could fill entire screens with locked topics.
However, we also recognize that people will continue to carry out their fights regardless of where, so short of banning people for arguing vociferously and viciously, it seems logical to leave a place to either wrap those up or let them wind down to nothing.
I'm not sure, though, that anyone really expected the membership of Sciforums to glorify the Cesspool. It certainly wasn't a desired effect to see the low end Sciforums exalted.
Last edited:
Consider it a concession to the known fact that the posters pretty much ignore the rules all the time, and Porfiry has not seen fit to kick everybody out.
There's a direct correlation 'twixt the size of Sciforums' membership and the difficulty of keeping order. It used to be that we could insult each other relatively intelligently. And then the unintelligent started coming in with the new intelligent, and the unintelligent thought they had the right to be insulting, too. Somewhere in there, things went from the "not unintelligent" (e.g. we used to be able to say "you're acting like a (fill in the blank)" to the downright stupid (e.g. look around).
Strangely, we went through an actual intellectual decline, too. Even more strangely, it coincided with a lull period in Christian representation when atheists had the run of the religion board. There was lots of other things going on, but as time has gone by, either out of sheer numbers or sheer appeal, credibile arguments have become harder and harder to find.
Hell, once upon a time, I got lip from people because I didn't use enough bad, cheap, or vague words in my posts. Seriously, someone who was having trouble sounding out the letters stopped to cuss me out for it along the way.
The one thing I do appreciate about the Cesspool, though, is that one must acknowledge to themselves and others that they're out looking for sh@t when they post there.
Again, consider it a concession to the barbarians.
It's a multifaceted idea; first, we need those bad topics out of the topic list; secondly, closing a combative topic only drives an ongoing fight to another topic. When the Cesspool first opened, there arose a controversy when, after a period, we realized people were actually starting topics in the Cesspool. So Porfiry blocked that access. And people complained.
Giving folks "Free Thoughts" wasn't enough. No, no. They wanted a place to go in order to be horrible bastards at the outset.
Without meaning to pull any sort of rank, let me just say, "Stick around a while". Eventually, one of a few people will think I've gone too far and a horrible but carefully-executed fight will break out in which many people stand around with their jaws open, unable to comprehend that two people are allowed to say those things to one another. They're infamous, nasty affairs that, as I mentioned in another topic, manage to set standards for the low end of the "not unintelligent". At least one of them is buried somewhere in SFOG, for instance. Compared to the low standards people defended in that one, you'd be amazed at what passes for offensive these last few weeks. And it's a relatively short period, all things considered, from that particular fight until now.
(As an aside, this principle is also related to recent debates concerning conduct standards, allegedly petty bannings, &c.)
In the end, we really don't like kicking anyone out. Nor have those posters who have become moderators at any time chosen to become cultish and set specific conduct standards for themselves. We'd rather give folks the leeway to be tempermental human beings and generally-miserable bastards. The Cesspool is an attempt to create a place to stuff the miserable bastards while they're carrying on and mucking up everyone else's experience.
If the Cesspool turns too problematic, I suppose we can always ask Porfiry to simply turn off posting access within the topics, and leave that forum as a museum of Sciforums' least-impressive.
There's more damn crows than bullets, so instead of nuking the area we just give them a rock to sh@t on.
(Living most of my life near Puget Sound, I can say we actually do set aside a rock here and there for birds to sh@t on. An entire island, in one case. The idea translates ... reasonably well.)
"which reckless bastard, who's given up on life, will take that job...I shudder at the thought."
id love the job, although maybe me and athelwolf could share it, im probably not on enough
what seems sensible to me, is that the cesspool mods have permission to move threads INTO the cesspool from the unmoderated sections of the forum - if thats feasible - just a thought
id love the job, although maybe me and athelwolf could share it, im probably not on enough
what seems sensible to me, is that the cesspool mods have permission to move threads INTO the cesspool from the unmoderated sections of the forum - if thats feasible - just a thought
I always find it amazing that people love to wallow in their own muck. The cesspool is, as the label says, the unintelligent community of sciforums. It is a dumping ground for the petty arguments, the innane threads and the threads which really say no more than "look at me! I'm an idiot."
The only reason anybody would want a moderated forum is to help ensure quality. But, by its very nature, the cesspool has no redeeming quality. It is a place threads can be put and then ignored by the intelligent people here, while the low life continues to suck at the bottom of the pool.
The cesspool is the last refuge of those who can't carry on a conversation without insulting other people, or cursing, or just writing the first stupid thing which crosses their tiny mind. It is for those who can't express themselves well enough to join a civilised debate on a topic which matters. It is for the kiddies and the weak-minded.
Moderate the cesspool? What for? Leave the bottom-feeders to it, I say.
The only reason anybody would want a moderated forum is to help ensure quality. But, by its very nature, the cesspool has no redeeming quality. It is a place threads can be put and then ignored by the intelligent people here, while the low life continues to suck at the bottom of the pool.
The cesspool is the last refuge of those who can't carry on a conversation without insulting other people, or cursing, or just writing the first stupid thing which crosses their tiny mind. It is for those who can't express themselves well enough to join a civilised debate on a topic which matters. It is for the kiddies and the weak-minded.
Moderate the cesspool? What for? Leave the bottom-feeders to it, I say.
The moderator could be somewhat of a novelty. Maybe closing threads that aren't bad enough, and swearing at people in the edits. Moving well thought out quality posts to some other subforum, etc.
I really REALLY want to be cesspool moderator. I think I've earned it with 3000+ shitty posts.
I really REALLY want to be cesspool moderator. I think I've earned it with 3000+ shitty posts.
I think it should be confirm with the member to relies that all things in the cesspool are deleted eventually and that old threads on the cesspool are purged regularly to save server space. You people do know this don't you?
I think sciforums and the cesspool should evolve and Dr Lou is the next best thing to natural selection!
I'm getting a bit fed up with the intelligence argument. Humour is a clear sign of intelligence. Surreal humour even more so.
Why are we complaining about intellectual quality? If you post something on a higher level nobody is ever home. Why bother then? Let's not pretend we are an intelligent community on a scientific level. We are not. Let's explore the only option that is left to introduce quality: the cesspool.
Give the experiment a go. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Take a chance for a change. Something good might come out of it.
(But I doubt anything good will come out of it if it is not Dr Lou who will be the moderator)
I'm getting a bit fed up with the intelligence argument. Humour is a clear sign of intelligence. Surreal humour even more so.
Why are we complaining about intellectual quality? If you post something on a higher level nobody is ever home. Why bother then? Let's not pretend we are an intelligent community on a scientific level. We are not. Let's explore the only option that is left to introduce quality: the cesspool.
Give the experiment a go. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Take a chance for a change. Something good might come out of it.
(But I doubt anything good will come out of it if it is not Dr Lou who will be the moderator)
spuriousmonkey said:
I agree completely! One of the most entertaining, human, and thought provoking (I would argue) thread I've come across at SF is in the cesspool .. "Wiping after "Number 2" ". While too many threads are just the same shit all over again, this one was refreshing.
I also nominate Dr. Lou.
Spuriousmonkey said:
I hadn't realized infantile and common humor was a sign of intelligence.
Why did the prevert cross the road? Because he was stapled to the chicken!
(Look at me, I'm a freakin' genius!)
I just think you're overestimating the content of the Cesspool. Sciforums is supposed to be an intelligent community, and no matter how much that disturbs you, no matter how fed up with that fact you are, elevating stupidity to an art form is not a testament to intelligence, but rather sloth.
The real alternative is to simply close the Cesspool altogether and start banning people for posting stuff that would otherwise land there.
What this topic seems to testify is that people don't want an "intelligent community", but are comfortable where they are, and would like the expectations of Sciforums to lower appropriately so they don't have to put any effort into reaching for the bar.
Right now the most recent topics are:
Islam is dragging religion into the gutter
Wiping after "Number 2"
Playboy Bunny
Kill all of the Muslims
Year of the Monkey
Hate WellcookedFetus? Bash here!
The Most Offensive Jokes Ever!!!
(several topics by Alblume27)
How do any of these topics represent "a clear sign of intelligence"?
When Mr. Garrison danced about the kindergarten and then through the streets of South Park, singing, "Shitty-shitty, fag-fag!" was it really a testament to his intelligence? Would you sit affixed to the sofa, stuffing Cheezy-Poofs and microwave popcorn into your piehole if NBC ran a sitcom lineup for "The Night of A Million Shits"? Would your jaw gape at the intelligence of someone being able to say, "Shit"?
Look, if you want to turn it into a cartoon or a movie or a novel or something, yeah, there's genius in profanity. But if it's merely intellectual sloth that motivates crass and rude discussion, I fail to see the genius, or even the "intelligence". I mean, think of it like sex toys. Is there a difference between, say, having a replicant as a sex-slave and having a ten-dollar blow-up doll? A replicant would be a work of pure genius to create. A blow-up doll? Hey, you can stuff it with Ho-Hos or Ding Dongs, but she's not going to swallow.
You ever get the chance to sleep with one of those drop-dead gorgeous people who actually talks about how good they are in bed only to find out that you can't even say they suck? (Actually, I can't say that about my fortuitous encounters with the gorgeous; it wasn't spectacular sex, but it wasn't bad. However, a friend of mine just went through it, and the whole thing came down to, "But ... dude ... she's amazingly hot!" and "Yeah, I know. You'd think, wouldn't you?") The whole point of it is to wonder about the comparative genius of a dead-weight throw that doesn't like full penetration, doesn't like to actually move during sex, doesn't like to stimulate her partner, yet dares make the points to friends that she loves sex and thinks she's a pretty good partner, and the genius of, well, an astoundingly good, long, exhausting shag.
There comes a point when solitary masturbation (mental or physical, as the necessity may be) is better than communion.
Islam is dragging religion into the gutter
Wiping after "Number 2"
Playboy Bunny
Kill all of the Muslims
Year of the Monkey
Hate WellcookedFetus? Bash here!
The Most Offensive Jokes Ever!!!
(several topics by Alblume27)
When Mr. Garrison danced about the kindergarten and then through the streets of South Park, singing, "Shitty-shitty, fag-fag!" was it really a testament to his intelligence? Would you sit affixed to the sofa, stuffing Cheezy-Poofs and microwave popcorn into your piehole if NBC ran a sitcom lineup for "The Night of A Million Shits"? Would your jaw gape at the intelligence of someone being able to say, "Shit"?
Look, if you want to turn it into a cartoon or a movie or a novel or something, yeah, there's genius in profanity. But if it's merely intellectual sloth that motivates crass and rude discussion, I fail to see the genius, or even the "intelligence". I mean, think of it like sex toys. Is there a difference between, say, having a replicant as a sex-slave and having a ten-dollar blow-up doll? A replicant would be a work of pure genius to create. A blow-up doll? Hey, you can stuff it with Ho-Hos or Ding Dongs, but she's not going to swallow.
You ever get the chance to sleep with one of those drop-dead gorgeous people who actually talks about how good they are in bed only to find out that you can't even say they suck? (Actually, I can't say that about my fortuitous encounters with the gorgeous; it wasn't spectacular sex, but it wasn't bad. However, a friend of mine just went through it, and the whole thing came down to, "But ... dude ... she's amazingly hot!" and "Yeah, I know. You'd think, wouldn't you?") The whole point of it is to wonder about the comparative genius of a dead-weight throw that doesn't like full penetration, doesn't like to actually move during sex, doesn't like to stimulate her partner, yet dares make the points to friends that she loves sex and thinks she's a pretty good partner, and the genius of, well, an astoundingly good, long, exhausting shag.
There comes a point when solitary masturbation (mental or physical, as the necessity may be) is better than communion.
- Status