or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Transparent Moderation Log & Site Topics - Part I
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Transparent Moderation Log & Site Topics - Part I - Page 242  

post #3616 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas View Post
two words: Black Berry.

Ummm...BlackBerry is one word.
post #3617 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by rach2jlc View Post
No offense, but I don't think the forum should be changed just so you guys can break the rules at your place of work with greater ease and comfort. If the browsing is distracting/NSFW or something your boss wouldn't want you doing, then the choice is pretty simple: DON'T do it at work.

I'm actually not breaking the rules at work by surfing. We're allowed, per the rules, to spend our personal time (breaks, lunch) doing personal things on our computers. But porn is strictly forbidden. No warnings, straight out firing. StyleForum is not a porn site and, imo, the default in a case like this should be "No porn".


Quote:
Originally Posted by rach2jlc View Post
In short, I'd say stop whining about it and "play" at home.

I take offense that you think I'm whining because I would like to maintain some level of decorum around here. NSFW tags are prominently displayed where threads contain content that is widely viewed as objectionable at work, but we few choices when it comes to avatars. We can either see them all, see none of them, or put those users on our "ignore" list.

The second option means being deprived of perfectly acceptable material (funny pictures, pictures of sytlish people, easy identification of posters, etc.) for a very tiny percentage of users who want to use images border on being pornographic. The last option allows me to avoid just their avatars, but also means I can't read their postings at all.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rach2jlc View Post
You don't HAVE to surf at work...

And you don't HAVE to put porn in your avatar. Why is that choice by default acceptable?


And I love how this is being framed as me wanting a change just to please myself versus everyone else defending the preferences of the entire forum. It's a small number of people versus another small number of people.
post #3618 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNWorn View Post
Ummm...BlackBerry is one word.

You're arguing that there's no space between Black and Berry, which is accurate. However, I note that both Black and Berry are capitalized which to me indicates two proper nouns (i.e., words). They're just strung together with a really really small space between them.

That or I'm illiterate, which is always a possibility.

Oh, and nice avatar you sellout.
post #3619 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas View Post
You're arguing that there's no space between Black and Berry, which is accurate. However, I note that both Black and Berry are capitalized which to me indicates two proper nouns (i.e., words). They're just strung together with a really really small space between them. That or I'm illiterate, which is always a possibility. Oh, and nice avatar you sellout.
...says the dude with a cartoon character for his avatar. Whatever.
post #3620 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNWorn View Post
...says the dude with a cartoon character for his avatar.

Whatever.

touche
post #3621 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawson808 View Post
I'm actually not breaking the rules at work by surfing. We're allowed, per the rules, to spend our personal time (breaks, lunch) doing personal things on our computers. But porn is strictly forbidden. No warnings, straight out firing. StyleForum is not a porn site and, imo, the default in a case like this should be "No porn".

I take offense that you think I'm whining because I would like to maintain some level of decorum around here. NSFW tags are prominently displayed where threads contain content that is widely viewed as objectionable at work, but we few choices when it comes to avatars. We can either see them all, see none of them, or put those users on our "ignore" list.

The second option means being deprived of perfectly acceptable material (funny pictures, pictures of sytlish people, easy identification of posters, etc.) for a very tiny percentage of users who want to use images border on being pornographic. The last option allows me to avoid just their avatars, but also means I can't read their postings at all.

And you don't HAVE to put porn in your avatar. Why is that choice by default acceptable?

And I love how this is being framed as me wanting a change just to please myself versus everyone else defending the preferences of the entire forum. It's a small number of people versus another small number of people.

B,

As I said earlier, it really doesn't affect me either way; if the mods decide to change the way things are, that's fine with me. My post was more directed at my reluctance/fear of over-moderating/changing the way things have typically run on a forum where there really isn't an overall benefit to everybody. I've been on forums (probably 20 or more) since the late 1990's and EVERY one of them except SF is all but dead because of over-moderating.

Next, I don't want you to take offense thinking I was singling out YOU, and the "stop whining" was actually meant to be tongue-in-cheek (I should have added a smiley).

I understand your concern, but again, my argument was mostly just to say that I think as little control as possible is generally better. Further, it would be my hope that members could handle this stuff THEMSELVES, as opposed to as for mod intervention.

Could you possibly email/PM the members in question and discuss it with them directly? I doubt they'd get angry at you if you explain it to them. AND, we don't have to have RULES from on high telling us to stop doing something.

Cheers!
post #3622 of 9842
Hmmm all this talk has me wondering if I could be NSFW instead of Senior Member
post #3623 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNWorn View Post
...says the dude with a cartoon character for his avatar.

Whatever.

Where's Romy?
post #3624 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJmanbearpig View Post
Where's Romy?

In training, and temporarily replaced by my newest Latina appreciation, Claudia Bassols.
post #3625 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by rach2jlc View Post
I've been on forums (probably 20 or more) since the late 1990's

20 forums? I cant keep up with this one sinkhole of my time. Quit your whining and go out and get a life.



K
post #3626 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNWorn View Post
In training, and temporarily replaced by my newest Latina appreciation, Claudia Bassols.

Your newest is quite pretty, but I miss your old avie as it is pure sexy
post #3627 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKK3450 View Post
20 forums? I cant keep up with this one sinkhole of my time. Quit your whining and go out and get a life. K
Not all at ONCE!!! Pretty much, SF is the only one I play at now, though every once in a while I head over to Basenotes or StyleZeitgeist, when I have time. I mean twenty altogether since the beginning, where you start at one and then you find others from that one, then when that forum dies or gets boring, you move on. So, there's BN, SZ, SF, AAAC, TFS, six or seven different brand-specific forums over the years, some watch forums... I doubt 20 is too far off..
post #3628 of 9842
Rach2jlc,

Fair enough. And I share your desire to not have "over-moderation." I think the guys do a good job. And in the past I've always thought members did a good job of policing themselves. However, there seems to be a slight shift in that lately. I just don't want it going too far.

Fwiw, I turned off all avatars, but thought the principle was worth debating. For me it's a moot point in practice.

b



Quote:
Originally Posted by rach2jlc View Post
B,

As I said earlier, it really doesn't affect me either way; if the mods decide to change the way things are, that's fine with me. My post was more directed at my reluctance/fear of over-moderating/changing the way things have typically run on a forum where there really isn't an overall benefit to everybody. I've been on forums (probably 20 or more) since the late 1990's and EVERY one of them except SF is all but dead because of over-moderating.

Next, I don't want you to take offense thinking I was singling out YOU, and the "stop whining" was actually meant to be tongue-in-cheek (I should have added a smiley).

I understand your concern, but again, my argument was mostly just to say that I think as little control as possible is generally better. Further, it would be my hope that members could handle this stuff THEMSELVES, as opposed to as for mod intervention.

Could you possibly email/PM the members in question and discuss it with them directly? I doubt they'd get angry at you if you explain it to them. AND, we don't have to have RULES from on high telling us to stop doing something.

Cheers!
post #3629 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by VKK3450 View Post
20 forums? I cant keep up with this one sinkhole of my time. Quit your whining and go out and get a life.
K

20? That's nothing. Back in the early 90s I had more usenet group subscriptions than I could count. And you know they were mostly porn so the traffic was heavy!

b
post #3630 of 9842
Quote:
Originally Posted by rach2jlc View Post
Not all at ONCE!!! Pretty much, SF is the only one I play at now, though every once in a while I head over to Basenotes or StyleZeitgeist, when I have time. I mean twenty altogether since the beginning, where you start at one and then you find others from that one, then when that forum dies or gets boring, you move on. So, there's BN, SZ, SF, AAAC, TFS, six or seven different brand-specific forums over the years, some watch forums... I doubt 20 is too far off..

Wasssssup Mr. Sensitive. Me think he doth protest too much.

No-one's trying to judge you (well yes we are all judging you).



K
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Transparent Moderation Log & Site Topics - Part I