[Mousebounce]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Purist

Yeesh.....

I ain't got time to read through all of this and properly comment on it right now cuz I gotta run to work. For now, just let it be known that I agree with the general consensus and I'm not the only Mod who feels this way, so this painting the Mod team with broad strokes ain't accurate. At least 3 of us are in agreement with the general board population.

I'm sure by the time I get back to this it will be 10 pages long.

I am glad you posted this, because I feel the same way. I popped on a few minutes from work today, but couldn't do anything because the connection is so darn slow.

I understand the frustration around here, and I can sympathize to a point. I do agree that trashing a thread is pointless, because it only brings on new threads. Also, when a thread is locked, an explanation should be provided by a moderator. I made the mistake myself of not doing this at first, but learned quickly that it doesn't help things.

But on the other hand, some of you are trying to "see" how much you can get away with, avatars anyone , just so you can complain when action is taken. It is getting to be a bit of a game trying to see how far some of you can push things around here, and then reacting when something is said about it. Personally, I think us reacting is the worst thing to do, because the game is not fun anymore if it doesn't cause a stir. But as Jim says, I digress.

I don't think that a policy will do much good. The policy has always been light moderating only when necessary. Mostly, this involves editing posts with name calling or locking threads that get totally out of control. Other than that, this board has been running quite well over the years without a bunch of guidelines for people to follow. But as much as this board allows all of this wonderful freedom, some need to chill out a bit when it comes to pushing the limits.

[spunkywho]

*sigh* for once there is fun on this board and I am swamped at work

Glad to see that there are some rational mods on this board too

[Becky]

Brooke's right. It probably wouldn't do any good to post a policy. The Filesharing policy is posted and no one heeds it. But she's also right that some of you push the limits just to see what you can get away with just so you can complain about it when you're asked to remove something. It's amazing that some of you find it so difficult is it to respect the minimal guidelines around here that are meant to protect the board legally and financially.

Becky

[Mongoose]

You know, I read about two posts in this thread..and got very sleepy

[jess]

Originally Posted by Iceman

No, it doesn't. It means "do not feed the troll". If someone's trolling (acting stupid only to cause a stir), don't give him/her anything to play with. Ignore it. It has nothing to do with debating.

Ice

I must say you explained it better. I would have told what a troll is .... but the idea is the same, and it includes debating, if you feed this person instead of ignoring him/her, you can be sure it can turn in a bad debate if you see what i mean.
Sorry i think i will never be good at explaining myself

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by Becky

Childish and malicious name-calling has been edited for ages. Maybe some of you haven't noticed that, but it's been done for years.

Edited does not mean deleted.

The problem with splitting a thread for a single post is that every post made after that thread gets sent with the one before it to the trash.

?? No it doesn't. Don't you people know how to use the tools?

The post that was trashed this morning had gotten to the point where it was decided that it would be more effective to trash it than to edit it.

MEaning you were too lazy to edit it.

If you find a better way to effectively phrase yourself without resorting to names, then it won't be an issue.

You're making it sound like WE did something wrong, when in fact it was one of the backstabbers, who now, thanks to you, is laughing his ass off to the stupid policies on JT.

Kev's not lying to anyone when he says the team acts as a team.

Then why have 4 mods expressed they don't agree?

Ice

[Supersonic]

Aloha !

Originally Posted by Becky

The problem with splitting a thread for a single post is that every post made after that thread gets sent with the one before it to the trash.

No it doesn't. Otherwise the splitting a thread thing is not really something that's handy for moderating now is it?

The post that was trashed this morning had gotten to the point where it was decided that it would be more effective to trash it than to edit it.

So someone who comes at this board, makes silly, stupid posts, starts name-calling and screws up a topic gets what he wants = the topic is deleted and people have stopped moaning about it. The topic could easily have been there if you would've splitted the topic and kept the JRNY02 posts out of it.

If you find a better way to effectively phrase yourself without resorting to names, then it won't be an issue.

You're making it look like name calling is an issue even when someone isn't hurt. It's not an issue when it's that way. It's obvious that JRNY02 didn't get what he wanted - offended Jovitalkers. In fact the replies aimed at that person were just to piss him off even more and to point him at a few things; that all his name-calling didn't have any effect. You should not compare two different things with eachother.

Originally Posted by Iceman

Then why have 4 mods expressed they don't agree?

Ice

Exactly. Such great teamwork when moderators admit a mod was wrong. Face it, Kev is Jovitalk obsessed and I bet his d1ck grows bigger everytime he gets the chance to moderate. Oh I'm so controversial right now but I know you think the same - don't deny it.

Salaam Aleikum,
Sebastiaan

[StoneDeaf]

Guys, dunno bout the rest of the people involved, but I do appreciate few of u coming forward about not supporting the idea of wiping out threads. I do see the point about namecalling & foul language, but as said wiping out threads will just create more threads and more controversy. IMO case discussed here wasn't even badly out of hand. Can't help having the feeling that someone's on a powertrip with statements like "Moderators do not NEED to give explanations" or "Moderators decision(s) are final". That gives the impression that someone truly thinks one is above others, and is in position to decide what's to be discussed and what's not. That's not "open board" from my point of view, that's someone's personal playground. We're all running in circles here, u with the power not willing to admit that u f**ked up & rest of us speaking for more open board.

I know I have had my disagreements with mods before as well, but it must mean something that every time I run into trouble there mod (or few of them) who aren't just wiping out everything before seeing both sides of things. I guess u know who u are, so cheers & heads up.

"team decisions" right. Kev, what's been posted in this thread makes u appear as, well, not so truthful. Not saying u lied mate, but u don't possess the whole truth either.

[StoneDeaf]

Originally Posted by Supersonic

Such great teamwork when moderators admit a mod was wrong. Face it, Kev is Jovitalk obsessed and I bet his d1ck grows bigger everytime he gets the chance to moderate. Oh I'm so controversial right now but I know you think the same - don't deny it.

U said it man. And no problem for me to point out that I completely agree with u. But hey, *we* are them a**holes around here anyway ain't we

[StoneDeaf]

Originally Posted by Mousebounce

The policy has always been light moderating only when necessary. Mostly, this involves editing posts with name calling or locking threads that get totally out of control.

So you're saying that wiping out thread so easily is someone's personal policy instead of board policy? Since thread in question here was not by any means outta control. Some goddamn mods are what's outta control