Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: To Have Moderators Or Not To Have Moderators? That Is The Question.
The BUST Lounge > From the Top > Ladies Who Lounge
Pages: 1, 2
bunnyb
Here it is BUSTies and BUSTers, a poll to vote on whether we want moderators to help us with the ongoing troll problem.
I've kept it simple and covered the basics (you are only allowed three poll questions) and we can always have additional polls for who should be moderators -if applicable, depending on poll results- and other grievances later.

Please add any comments, suggestions and constructive comments about having moderators below. Perhaps we should have an open discussion (with turbojenn and quantumspice weighing in, if possible) about the pros and cons of moderators before we vote our gut instinct (although feel free to vote if you're already convinced/have heart set on it).

Who knows whether LoungeLady will even listen to us and act on any decisions we collectively make but there's only one way to find out!

Happy voting.

eta: okay, I've just realised Q2 is a little unclear answer-wise: let's say that yes is you do want across board powers, no is you only want sensitive thread powers and maybe is obviously maybe to them having full board access.
sixelacat
See, I think the hang-up will be on what is deemed "offensive". Some things are obvious, like the nasty pics. But what about some of the other things that have been called "troll behavior" lately? I think "psychofemme" is rude, obnoxious, and condescending. However, I don't think she's a troll and wouldn't want her posts/threads deleted as such. And I feel that way having read all her posts in context. She's a bitch, and to me that's just not the same thing.

"Looking" poses an even more complicated problem. I remember him (yeah, for some reason I think it's a guy) when he first posted last fall. He was pretty much ignored and only posted a few times then went away. When he showed up again, his posts were pompous and inappropriate to the discussion at hand. And yet, at that point I wouldn't have said the posts were worthy of deletion, even with the rapid revisionist fantasy he was making. To me backtracking, bullshitting and lying are still not being a troll, just someone not worth listening/paying attention to. BUT, when he flipped his lid entirely and re-edited all his posts (and added more) to make it seem like "some kids" jacked his computer or account and were posting craziness all over, I ABSOLUTELY would have deleted all his posts. I would not, however, have wanted his account deleted. He is still making some small effort to be part of the community, and I think that as long as he stays on his meds that is fine. It's not like I'm forced to respect or even care about what he has to say.

And I wouldn't have deleted "Lynda" either. Being rude, crude, and socially inappropriate, even in sensitive topic threads, still doesn't merit deletion to me. Not as long as we have the ignore function.

So I guess what I'm saying is that while I think it is an EXCELLENT idea to have some moderators, I would only want it to happen with a "less is more" attitude. I think some home-grown Bustie mods would have more time and inclination to do a more thorough job of clean-up when clean-up is needed (seriously, you couldn't get ALL the pics LL?!), as long as there are strict limits/guidelines to what can be done.

*edited slightly for grammar
faerietails2
sixel, I agree 100%. i would also agree that looking and psychofemme are just bitches rather than trolls, and i wouldn't delete them either (well, looking tends to delete himself after a while, anyway rolleyes.gif). Lynda was just plain stupid, though I would've deleted some of the posts she made in the abortion thread, in particular. but do I think she warranted entire deletion? probably not.

posts i think would warrant deletion: spam, dead baby pics, the same long-ass bible passages over and over (bible spam?).
pepper
you know that number two is an either-or and not a yes-no question right?

i think being a moderator will be a horrible, terrible, no good, very bad job. people are going to know that you have the power to delete and are going to come after you to get rid of stuff they don't like and get pissed off if you don't. i'd like to think we'd all be reasonable about it but you know how crazy it gets in here sometimes. i've personally had some serious throw-downs about who's a troll, what's offensive, etc etc (baby shaped pinata, hello!). we all have different ideas about that and we co-exist with some kind of magical happy balance that only blows up out of whack now and then for brief periods. we work it out together, and that's what keeps up going here and, i think, part of what makes this forum so unique and wonderful and tight knit. throwing a mod into the mix might very well change all that. not that i didn't vote yes to a mod with delete powers, i did. those pictures were freaking horrible. i have a small daughter that i hold in my lap sometimes while i'm on the computer. you can imagine how i felt when i all of a sudden could see those. i'm still smarting from it. i would love to have those gone for good so i'm not afraid to venture too deep into the threads again.

six and ft, i HAVE to disagree. psychobitch is so totally a troll. a CLASSIC troll, what with the claims of innocence amist the frou-ferah it creates itself. passive agressive to the n-th degree. i would delete that cow so maude damn fast. someone who comes here for the sole purpose of aggravating and stirring shit up, name calling, starting threads with NO consult in the community forum, etc is not a community member. it has Zero reason to continue it's shit but it persists. not because it's welcome here, it clearly is not. simply because it's spoiling for a fight and knows how to get one. if that isn't a troll than what is?

see? how do we agree on this without knickers getting into knots?
bunnyb
pepper, I messed up with question 2 but I put that in my post.

I think anyone that anyone who took up the role as moderator would have to fully comprehend what they were getting themselves into and realise that they are probably going to receive countless PMs and have people disagreeing with their decisions; however, I know there are posters who are willing to take that on because it's potentially better than what we currently have.

I think we should have a thread -like BUSTing trolls or take it outside- where we discuss each troll in turn and decide collectively whether they are indeed a troll and whether their posts should be deleted or not, because obviously we're not all going to agree but we need to talk it through. Ultimately the mod would have the final decision but that requires them to be objective and levelheaded and there are a few BUSTies out there who have those traits. However, none of us are going to disagree with Steve's posts being deleted and he is at the crux of this situation.
Mr Pugs
I think the moderators should have the power to delete offensive posts and threads, but should report to LL to have users deleted. That way it kinda keeps the pecking order in check. I have had experiences on other boards where I didn't agree with a user and it got into an argument, only to find out that the person I was arguing with was a moderator and my account was deleted. I think that the moderators should do the main cleanup (see the scary world posts still up) but LL should have the final say so. This method should free up LL a little so maybe more time will be spent on keeping the boards friendly.
culturehandy
If moderators are put in place, I don't think that anyone but LL should know who they are. That way one can be accused of favouratism.

I think that mods should have the power to delete posts only. Deleting threads and accounts would ultimately be left up to LL.
LoveMyPugs
Could we all perhaps vote on which two or three busties we think would make the best moderator? It's a hell of a job so I think many would think twice about voting for themselves. Maybe we could set up some kind of poll for that (not sure how the polls work here). The person with the most votes gets to be a moderator.
bunnyb
QUOTE(LoveMyPugs @ Nov 8 2007, 02:30 PM) *
Could we all perhaps vote on which two or three busties we think would make the best moderator? It's a hell of a job so I think many would think twice about voting for themselves. Maybe we could set up some kind of poll for that (not sure how the polls work here). The person with the most votes gets to be a moderator.


pugs, this was suggested in CF (I threw a few names in the hat) but I don't know if we can do this if moderators are to be anonymous... what do people think? should moderators be anonymous so we don't bother them/bug our friends? could we nominate people (and later vote) and then LL could ultimately decide?
pollystyrene
QUOTE(culturehandy @ Nov 8 2007, 07:36 AM) *
If moderators are put in place, I don't think that anyone but LL should know who they are. That way one can be accused of favouratism.


I think that's a very good idea, culture. As long as everyone is discreet about their status, it would work.

And I think bunny's suggestion of discussing whether to delete or not to delete on a case-by-case basis (in gray-area cases other than steve....to quote Strong Bad, DELETED!!) is a good idea.
mornington
would it be possible to throw some names around - I wouldn't want anyone to become a mod who didn't want to, so people should be able to opt out. At the same time, I think while the final say on who is a mod should be up to LL (and be kept secret) - maybe there should be a "mod" account - it might help LL to know who we would put forward. Does that make sense? I know it seems like a popularity contest, but personally I wouldn't know who to choose!

I think there needs to a a consensus on what is bad behaviour and what is out-and-out unpleasant. We can all put nasty/stupid people on ignore, but removing robot spam (and innaproriate spam - say escort ads in the survivor thread) and steve's photos needs to be done and done throroughly. I mean, we all discuss trolls anyway, and they usually bugger off after a bit - but maybe some sort of consensus should be given for deleting troll accounts?
pollystyrene
I just noticed your "headline" there, mornington! laugh.gif

anarch
Maybe LL would be more receptive if we proposed something modest to begin with (power to delete posts only, and only those consisting of 1. spam, 2. long bible quotes, 3. photoshopped pics - I think we can all agree on those)? Then after a trial period (3 months? I dunno) if no flamewars happen, we could take another poll on expanding the mods' powers. That would take care of Robo-Fundie.

I like the idea of anonymous mods. Seems to me anonymity would make the job easier on them.
anarch
I mean, giving mods basic powers would take care of Robo-Fundie, which is the most pressing issue. Then after seeing how the trial period goes, see about proposing expanded powers to LL if enough of us feel it's warranted.

Sorry for the double post. I guess I should learn how to edit my own posts but I'm not feeling up to it right now.
kittenb
QUOTE(anarch @ Nov 8 2007, 01:12 PM) *
Maybe LL would be more receptive if we proposed something modest to begin with (power to delete posts only, and only those consisting of 1. spam, 2. long bible quotes, 3. photoshopped pics - I think we can all agree on those)? Then after a trial period (3 months? I dunno) if no flamewars happen, we could take another poll on expanding the mods' powers. That would take care of Robo-Fundie.


I like this idea a lot. Especially since it would be the first time that the Board had been moderated a trial period would be nice. And I think that the mods would be able to learn where deleting is needed from the converstations going on in the Busting Trolls thread as well as a few others. Of course some of them are just out and out offensive (thinking the pictures) so little debate would be needed in that case rolleyes.gif . However, the ones that we are uncertain about, well everyone does have the ability to "ignore" someone so unless they have a truly horrific avatar, can probably just be ignored.

Does that make sense?

Thanks, bunnyb, for setting this up.
turbojenn
I think I'm in a small minority here, in sticking to not wanting mods....I've just seen this go afoul WAY too many times in other forums, power-tripping, etc...that I just would rather happily add to my "ignore" list as often as I need to, and accept the culture here as is.

That said, if there *were* to be mods, I would agree that they would need to be hand-picked by LL & Co., and that person remain secret on the board. In that case, I think it could be managed. But, I also agree with pepper in the no-fun, demanding nature of the job (been there, done that), and you've got to go into it eyes open, titanium armor firmly in place. smile.gif

ETA: Another thought that keeps running through my head is how the trolls actually have brought a stronger sense of community here - we all come out of our respective residential threads to bang our heads, and talk pastries, and I've definitely gotten to know so many more busties through our shared experience of interlopers. Strange, but it feels true.

Interesting discussion, here, for sure....lots of good things to think about.
roseviolet
Actually, Kitten, I have heard some long-time members say that Bust did have moderators once upon a time. I think it was way back n the late '90s. I believe Quantum Spice has mentioned it before. I have no idea why they were phased out, though.

I am a member of another forum that happens to be moderated. There are a few moderators assigned to each section of the board and two administrators who oversee the moderators. The moderators have certain limitations like those that have been mentioned. They are not allowed to ban users, but they can occasionally suspend someone's account for a week.

I agree that we need to have moderators who can quickly and easily delete obvious troll posts that disrupt the entire Lounge. However, I am exremely hesitant to label anyone as a troll and I would hope that our moderators would feel the same. Insensitive behavior is not always trollish behavior. It may warrent a one week suspension, but perhaps not a total ban.


girltrouble
i've been here (off and on) close to forever, and i don't remember there ever being mods...not even in my early buttacup or later butta days. there were, i think, 3 people who i know were here before me, like maimy, ven, and mandolyn (i think q spice and i arrived about the same time), but far as i remember no mods...

on reflection, i think we ought to have 2 mods. one for steve and his ilk across the boards who can delete posts and threads, and another for the sensitive threads who can temporarly suspend offensive posters in those threads, (and possibly delete posts). the sensitive threads, i think demand a different kind of mod, who knows the thread, but is vigilant for noobs/people who may not be aware that certain threads must be aproached with a different, well, sensitivity. they would warn, and hopefully suspend rarely. if steve or one of his clones appears, the first mod would take care of him in all threads. each mod would have their own tool to deal with their task, but i think the sensitive threads need one that is more deft, more delicate, and can keep things balanced.
mouse
i'm with turbo--i think the mods shouldn't be known, if we do have them..."wisely chosen busties" is a term that makes me shake in my boots. as much as i love this board and you ladies, everyone's well aware that there are definitely certain factions that have their own little hierarchies, and while this is well and fine, if we start picking superlatives of anything there's bound to be conflict. :/
dj-bizmonkey
i have been a bit hesistant to get involved in this whole issue, as i am relatively new to BUST. i suppose my only fear would be that newbies might be wrongfully identified as trolls simply because they couldn't figure some of the unspoken rules of the forums. some people are going to be offensive and annoying to us simply because we don't agree with what they have to say and i don't think anyone should have the power to silence some one just because they don't share the same opinion.

that being said, i think we can all definetly agree that creepy freakazoid douchebags like steve have no place in this forum and no one should have to look at photoshopped dead babies for more than 5 micro-seconds (if that even).

i don't like the idea of mods being able to delete entire threads, as the useless ones usually drift to the bottom anyway.

i suppose i'm open to the idea, with some hesitation, but i'm willing to go with the flow and give deference to those posters that have been here since the lounge's inception.

i agree with turbo's comments about trolls actually bringing us all closer and i also like the idea of anonymity (sp?) of whoever becomes a moderator. maybe we could have a list of 5 or 6 busties, vote but have the outcome be secret? or maybe that defeats the whole purpose......i dunno, like i said, i'm willing to go with the flow on this issue.

makes me think of that scene in 'o brother where art thou?' where john toturro says, 'who elected you president of this outfit?' and they have an election, just the three of them. george clooney says, 'well i'm votin' for yours truly,' and john toturro says, 'well i'm votin' for yours truly too,' and delmar says, 'well i'm with you fellers!'
pepper
~tiny issue~ one thing about superfluous new threads is that other threads sometimes get bumped right off the board. now this doesn't happen often as valid threads that are seeing action stay near the top BUT sometimes when you go looking to recover an older thread it's gonzo and there's some lovely fundy bullshit or other nonsense taking up the space where it could be instead.

as far as da mystery mod, i think that sucks. what kind of terrible secret would that be to have to have? and how tempting to tell just one friend here, only one who would never let it slip out to anyone else. just one. ok, maybe two. etc.
and it would change that poster's experience here as well. i realize that that's something that some members here would be willing to take on but i think the potential to ruin this for them is huge. it's like doing something that you love as a hobby for work and having all the joy sucked out of it (like when i sewed for a living, gah). i am not willing to put one of you up on the sacrificial alter of deleting power. sorry, i'm not. i like this place the way it is and all of you in it.
i really appreciate how we collectively deal with trolls and other crap. with pie and bonbons and talk of eyeliner and other fun stuff. it's our version of "kill 'em with kindness" and i think it works great. it sure has brought us closer together. it's had an affect on how i deal in real life too so thanks for that girls (and the occassional boy).

i would LOVE to see the powers that be take some of our suggestions a little more seriously. like increasing the number of posts before being able to start new threads, like re-installing the forum greeting that tells posters where to go and gives some meager guidelines. like pinning a few headers for us (in the sensitive threads especially). and most importantly RESPONDING to reports in a timely fashion, dealing with garbage right away, deleting posts, threads and users, and sparing us the agony.
mouse
here's an idea. kind of strange but it just popped into my head. if we had a mod whose ONLY responsibility was to delete the steves and their posts, but then also, instead of US being able to start threads, perhaps mods are the only ones with the ability to start threads. that way they would HAVE to go through the ocmmunity forum first.

eh?
sixelacat
Interesting, mouse, but I think I'd still vote no for that. To me the "social pressure" of running things by the community forum is enough. We've had some really good threads that haven't been run by the community first, and while it's the preferred method, I'd hate to have not had, say, TG's What Name thread created because she didn't receive permission from the quorum. And I'm not saying she wouldn't have received permission, I'm thinking what if she didn't have the time/inclination to put it through committee, or even just scrapped the idea of asking her question because she'd had time for second thoughts? The resulting discussion was a really good one, and is one of the reasons I Bust.

I'm also fine with the 10 post minimum, more and I think the trolls we did get would be more hard-core; I wouldn't want them to feel invested enough to stick around forever, the way He Who Wears His Ass for a Hat does.

Really all I'd like to see is a janitor, someone who could clean up obscene pics and the like more quickly and thoroughly than LL does. It makes sense to me that it be a Bustie, someone who checks in daily and keeps aBust of the goings on (sorry, couldn't resist the pun). Quite frankly, I don't think LL would ever do more than that anyway, and for good reasons.
mornington
QUOTE(sixelacat @ Nov 9 2007, 08:37 AM) *
Really all I'd like to see is a janitor, someone who could clean up obscene pics and the like more quickly and thoroughly than LL does.


that pretty much sums up what I think we need - not someone to patrol newbies (as let's face it, we all fuck up and put our foot in it from time to time) but someone who can zip in and go "oh look, photoshopped dead babies" and press the delete button.

And I do agree that the bonbon response has brought a sense of community - it's certainly provided a giggle when there's nasty shit going on, and simply for that reason I wouldn't want a mod to delete anything on the suspicion of it being "trollish".
LoveMyPugs
QUOTE(turbojenn @ Nov 8 2007, 06:28 PM) *
I think I'm in a small minority here, in sticking to not wanting mods....I've just seen this go afoul WAY too many times in other forums, power-tripping, etc...that I just would rather happily add to my "ignore" list as often as I need to, and accept the culture here as is.


turbojenn - yeah i'm leaning towards no mods as well. only because i agree with dj-bizmonkey below


QUOTE(dj-bizmonkey @ Nov 8 2007, 10:37 PM) *
i have been a bit hesistant to get involved in this whole issue, as i am relatively new to BUST. i suppose my only fear would be that newbies might be wrongfully identified as trolls simply because they couldn't figure some of the unspoken rules of the forums. some people are going to be offensive and annoying to us simply because we don't agree with what they have to say and i don't think anyone should have the power to silence some one just because they don't share the same opinion.


I mean look at that new HIV thread. That was created by a "troll" and yet it is a thriving thread. Had that been deleted then that discussion wouldn't be where it is now.


QUOTE(mouse @ Nov 9 2007, 12:12 AM) *
here's an idea. kind of strange but it just popped into my head. if we had a mod whose ONLY responsibility was to delete the steves and their posts


i think this is a good idea. two mods who can just delete the steve threads. the ignore fuction was great for steve until he started putting the pics as his avatar as well. can't ignore just his without ignoring everyone's avatars. irritates me because i like ggg avatar and others and don't want to have to turn them off.
missjoy
I haven't really read through the responses so far, but I'm up for a few mods who only delete troll posts. I'm okay with taking a while longer to delete troll topics because they are usually super-obvious, not disturbing any other conversation and easy to avoid.

I think having the power to delete the really obvious, not even replying to a topic or posting icky pictues posts.

The only grey area would be when someone is causing a lot of shit, but actually interacting with the boards (like that psychic woman). Annoying, but possibly just confused and misinformed. Perhaps in the same way we try to ask in a certain thread wheather a new topic should be started we should also have a certain number of people agree on whether someone is a troll before posts are deleted (I mean, it would have only taken about 5 minutes to have 10 people agree that steve is a troll and delete his posts).

I'm rambling a bit - but I agree to a few mods deleting troll posts in bust topics.
culturehandy
I stick by saying we only need someone to delete the obscene pics. As he is posting under a multitude of different names.

I don't care about other threads.

Honestly, as much as I have advocated for newbies being bumped up, all that's going to happen is the resident douchebag is going to post in the testing thread x amount of times.
pepper
i like the janitor for aisle clean up idea. if that was the only responsibility then we couldn't get irrate with the mod about other issues. a clear cut minimum responsibility split by two or three regular posters would be acceptable.

and this
~~~~~~~He Who Wears His Ass for a Hat
is freaking funny.
bunnyb
well, there goes that idea (cf News and Announcements). At least we generated a good discussion.
faerietails2
I saw that. Thing is, I've never seen any real moderating. It's always taken at least 2 days for a cleanup (and always care of LL, not anyone else), and this last doozy was just out of control.
girltrouble
yeah, i'm not buying it either, i'm not trying to start trouble (although i don't mind trouble, obviously), usually it's been two days MINIMUM, sometimes it's been longer.

if they are moding, either they never check, or they stop checking on days when we have trolls, either way, it sounds fishy. and since when? last LL has said, mods were a no, no and a no-- not, well we do have these people over here...

dunno,
no on anon mods, for me, i don't like the idea of mystery employee mods either. that just strikes me as FREAKING CREEPY. maybe i'm paranoid, but the idea of someone i don't know reading my posts not out of any interest in the subject matter, or interest in watching me make an unmitigated ass of myself yet again, just bugs me maybe it's current president and his machinations, i just don't care for it. but, that's saying that i buy that there are mods on this site, interns or otherwise, and i don't.

i'd much rather have a bustie modding, even if it's just the janitor idea thrown out there. and while i agree there'd be a hell of a time choosing a bustie who is even handed in all things (lord knows, for every bustie here, there is another bustie who pushes their buttons), i still think most busties have good intentions. which, even on a bad call i could give the benefit of the doubt. i think another hazard would be the (very understandable) urge to defend people we care about. we are a tight knit group, an there are cliques-- no shame in that, some folks just get on better than others...god, am i talking myself out of mods all together? whoa! i'm not going that far, but pepper's comment here:

QUOTE
i would LOVE to see the powers that be take some of our suggestions a little more seriously. like increasing the number of posts before being able to start new threads, like re-installing the forum greeting that tells posters where to go and gives some meager guidelines. like pinning a few headers for us (in the sensitive threads especially). and most importantly RESPONDING to reports in a timely fashion, dealing with garbage right away, deleting posts, threads and users, and sparing us the agony.


just rings sooooo true. it's just about making the lounge a place with the minimum about of unnecc'ry friction. i think that's what we all want

on the way we ban together on troll threads, i have to agree. as a card carrying member of satan's biodiesel bust bitches, i have to say, trolls generate way too many laughs to ever just delete there threads out of hand. some of the threads should be left for sheer comedic value....


and sixela, thank you. calling someone an asshat-- always funny, no matter how you say it.
MsYuefie
Well it's not like He Who Wears His Ass For A Hat is every going anywhere. Now he's just yanking away with glee over his latest incarnation "BUSTED DEVELOPMENTS!"

I think it has definetely generated a great discussion and some really good points have been made. While I do not think we need full time mods, I do agree that somebody needs to be as vigilant in keeping his brand of illness off the board as he is in creating new usernames. Hence, us needing someone who isn't too busy to pay attention with the power to ban and delete his ass whenever he pops up.

But really, I think we are wasting our breath (or thoughts). I mean, we *have* mods rolleyes.gif
sixelacat
Actually, I'm betting that "moderating the Bust Lounge" is just way down on the list of things the Bust interns have to do. In what is most likely an unpaid position, it's more of a resume sweetener than a priority task. Also, they seem pretty Monday through Friday. The Assicus Hatticus has always since I've been here started the pix fest on a Friday evening, maximizing the time he has before someone comes in to clean up on Monday. The "really bad" times are when he doesn't get cleaned up until Tuesday, because he's checking in too and just goes wild when the PTB are too busy to give him attention.

Speaking of the PTB, I'm also betting that "LoungeLady" is an account used by Bust staffers when they need to do something on the board. I seriously doubt that it is just one person, why would they go to all the trouble of creating another admin account instead of sharing the LL password with interns?

I didn't really expect BUST to do much here, but perhaps the interns will/have read this and be a little more diligent in at least keeping photo-shopped dead babies off the site for days on end. Doesn't seem too much to ask.
girlygirlgag
I am not trying to be a negative nancy, but here is the thing. LL is the moderator. This board is set up by a magazine, a business entity. This software (usually) probably only has three slots for moderators, one with absolute power and two with clean up abilities.

If this was a hobby board with a visible moderator, it would be different here. BUST doesn't know any of us from Eve, just because we spend time here does not give any of us the right to have moderating powers and BUST prefers it being in their offices so they can see what is going on when they have time. I am sure they are all extremely busy getting the magazine ready, etc.

We just need to ignore, and move on. It is just a message board, we are all strong enough to hang. Love ya ladies.
sybarite
To be honest, I agree with GGG for the most part. The photos are disturbing, but the rest... eh. I avoid annoying bigoted people IRL, I can easily do the same in the lounge.

I think that appointing any BUSTie to act as moderator could potentially lead to power abuse. I don't like to think that of anyone here, of course, but any BUSTie acting as moderator would at some stage delete a post which others might feel shouldn't have been deleted. I can see how things could get messy; whereas now, as has been noted below, trollish behaviour can actually bond us closer together. Like this discussion.
stargazer
i think there should be an outside moderator to be fair. we don't work for bust so that kind of power should rest with the magazine. which i think the lounge lady is doing already.

previous sites i belonged to would have an outside moderator keep track of all material posted no matter how long you've belonged to a board out of fairness. i think everyone should be held to the same type of scrunity like newbies and trolls.

i think i would just like the site to be more restricted to "guest" users. if you join, fine. but, i don't think you should be able to read the message board without belonging to the board.

other than that. that's my only request.
faerietails2
QUOTE(stargazer @ Nov 11 2007, 06:16 PM) *
i thinki would just like the site to be more restricted to "guest" users.
agreed. i'm still all for mods, but i don't think you should have acces to the board/profiles or be able to post if you're a guest/validating.
culturehandy
I've been thinking about this and the more we acknowledge him, the more we play into his trap and give him what he wants. He would love it if we all disppeared and a feminist board which goes against every ounce of his "belief" system, the happier he would be. If we ignore him, it makes him irrate. Yes there will be pictures, but I'm thinking just put him on ignore and do just that. We have that ability here. I'm just going to carry on like he's not there, which he really isn't. It's just another peice of trash I ignore and step over.
MsYuefie
Agreed ch. With the exception of posting PSA's to warn newbies and inform users how to block and ignore trolls, I think it's best we all stop feeding him. I know I've been guilty of it a lot lately, but I am going to do my level best to be like the little girl in my avatar from here on out tongue.gif
faerietails2
Agreed (newbie-thread PSAs are a definite need, though).
girlygirlgag
I HAVE FORGOTTEN HOW TO USE THE IGNORE FEATURE! OH NOES!

please help ohmy.gif
pepper
QUOTE(girlygirlgag @ Nov 12 2007, 07:29 AM) *
I HAVE FORGOTTEN HOW TO USE THE IGNORE FEATURE! OH NOES!

please help ohmy.gif


click on my controls
scroll down, on the right hand side you will see "manage ignored users" or something like that.
click that and enter the crazy asshats name in the "find user" box on the right under your list of ignored miscreants.

that'll do it. i'm lovin' the ignore function right now, makes for a stress-free ride through the bust forum YAY!
mariahill_sex_toys
QUOTE(dcg123 @ Dec 18 2007, 11:23 AM) *
I know I'm in the minority and many times my personal views are quite extreme but, the reason I suggest this forum to friends and what makes this forum so successful is it's free expression. That said, I also agree that stalkers and trolls should be controlled. Usually they simply go away by not acknowledging them.



sometimes extreme is good, at least its not boring !
anoushh
Question 2 doesn't make sense with the choices given for the answer.

But I'd say the poster prior to mine is a good example of why I'd like some moderation.
FabulousFran
Boards that have no or little moderation are overrun with spam. I hate that, how can you communicate if you have lines of viagra ads in between posts?
FabulousFran
Boards that have no or little moderation are overrun with spam. I hate that, how can you communicate if you have lines of viagra ads in between posts?
CandyMandyDandy
I think its good to have moderators its like having police officers in the real world... i think thats good too...they help us and save us from danger...
CandyMandyDandy
QUOTE(anoushh @ Jan 7 2008, 12:48 PM) *
Question 2 doesn't make sense with the choices given for the answer.

But I'd say the poster prior to mine is a good example of why I'd like some moderation.



Did you know your name is and Armenian name my best friends name is Anoush
zxc123
The stu New Jersey Escorts you New Jersey Escorts from seven to three days of the attack. Parcircumstances at the time, and how they felt. To find out whether the New Jersey Escorts memories formed would be lasting ones, the group New Jersey Escorts participants again
megh
This is the best and better topic for all the people in the world. massage in chicago . I would like to say the people in the world and it is a good idea to much.....
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.