Seriously people

[faustian bargain]

hey here's another unsolicited suggestion.

another forum of which i am a member has a special read-only thread called the 'sin bin', wherein the admins announce when someone is given a temporary 'ban', for how long, and for what offense.

it's a good way to make public examples of the offenders, and also keeps the admins in check from getting too trigger-happy.

don't get discouraged, J & Steve - this is typical forum growing-pain stuff. this too shall pass.

(and then something else will come along to take its place.)

/andrew

 

[Alias]

I'm having trouble seeing the difference between "being a peanut gallery observer and egging an ongoing argument" and calling someone out for being stupid. I hope I don't appear to be taking jabs at anyone just for any reason.

In Internet parlance, there's a slight difference between a troll and a flame.

A troll is a poster who ruins a discussion happening in a thread by deliberately posting something silly, asinine, and contrary to the thread's topic.

A flame is a post directed at a poster with the intent to insult. A poster who does this is called a flamer.

I agree, neither of these should belong in a board in which members are expected to act more civil than 99% of the rest of the Internet.

I do flame. I hope I don't come across as a troll.

 

[JFK]

In short, to get banned one must annoy me or Steve enough and/or be more trouble than he is worth.

As this is j's forum, and Steve acts as moderator at j's request, what more needs to be said than this? If j and Steve decide that someone is acting inappropriately and is to be banned, on what basis do we think to question their decision, or to suggest that they consult with us before reaching such a decision?

We are all of us beneficiaries of these two gentlemen's time and generosity; I say let's trust them to continue making the kind of reasonable decisions that have shaped this forum into perhaps the most civilized such place on the internet.

 

[jharrison]

Quote:

(j @ 21 July 2004, 2:33) In short, to get banned one must annoy me or Steve enough and/or be more trouble than he is worth.
As this is j's forum, and Steve acts as moderator at j's request, what more needs to be said than this? If j and Steve decide that someone is acting inappropriately and is to be banned, on what basis do we think to question their decision, or to suggest that they consult with us before reaching such a decision? We are all of us beneficiaries of these two gentlemen's time and generosity; I say let's trust them to continue making the kind of reasonable decisions that have shaped this forum into perhaps the most civilized such place on the internet.
Amen

 

[marc37]

How about for less-serious offenses, we set up a system of punishment? Â For example, if you (unnecessarily) call someone a name, the text of all your messages you post will be hot pink for a week. Â Or, your avitar will be set to an image of PeeWee Herman for two weeks.

Excellent suggestion versaceman. Gee; l hope we don't set up a voting system whereby members vote people off [the forum]: l would be the first to go. People hate my guts on this forum and Andy's. lt is just a case of being misunderstood. Maybe l should start a forum: the h8-man b8-man forum. (We can tell each other how much we hate each other. Seriously though: thanks J.

 

[j]

l would be the first to go. People hate my guts on this forum and Andy's. lt is just a case of being misunderstood.

Like I said, weird is okay.

 

[Classic]

Just to add my 2 cents.
I do not think there is anything wrong with constructive critique. In fact it can be quite healthy.
What I do not like is the childish name calling and insults, which then takes over the topic for endless posts and all with nothing of value to add.
Certainly we can express our opinions without getting into the pettiness that is often seen.
I certainly do not agree with everything that is said, and I doubt that everyone agrees with me on all issues. Likewise we all have our likes and dislikes when it comes to clothers, shoes, whatever.
This forum, and others have been a great help to me and much has been learned. It would be a shame if others could not share the experiences.
While I do believe that we have the right to express our views, I personally would not object to having Steve B and J
calling the shots, so to speak. After all, it is their "board" and "he who has the gold, makes the rules".
Perhaps we could electronically sign an agreement, which if violated would then mean we would forfiet our right to participate.
Is it not possible to just be civil?

Classic

PS. J and Steve B, thank you very much for your efforts in this forum. It has been a source of knowledge for me in the areas of men's clothing and am gratefull. It certainly has shown that an old dog can be taught new tricks.

 

[bryce330]

I am pleased something is being done (or at least threatened) about the recent deterioration of the forum, but I am also somewhat troubled by the threats to ban "peanut gallery spectators" who "egg on" the main offenders. I don't know what exactly is meant by "egging on," but I don't see the problem with (for example) pointing out inconsistencies where someone is claiming to be someone they aren't, or just pointing out (tactfully) when somebody is being a jerk.

Without naming names, it seems to me that 95% of the recent problems on this board have been the fault of two or three posters and I think it would make more sense to ban those individuals than to threaten to ban the rest of us.

 

[T4phage]

Quote:

(marc37 @ 21 July 2004, 11:10) l would be the first to go. People hate my guts on this forum and Andy's. lt is just a case of being misunderstood.
Like I said, weird is okay.

J, glad that you are now keeping an eye on the various goings on, on this (your) forum. I would just like a definition of "weird" as per your usage towards marc37? for example: Styleforum shoe discussion All posts by marc-au:

...T4phage: l don't trust you. l used to have an available email address and website but, l can't trust people like marc39 and you. You are a troll and a trouble maker. l don't know whether to like you or not. M.g is a homosexual. (Nothing against them but it is dirty).

- a baseless attack coupled with a baseless accusation against a former (and thus unable to defend himself) member.

....T4phage has no credibility. Who cares if he has or knows about good shoes. lf he is not a good person, he is not worth spitting on.

-spitting on??? or how about the killing and eating people? Styleforum discussion on self image

... l enjoy inflicking misery and pain on my fellow man.... like seeing people suffering and in pain. l hate all the people in the world; l wish 95% of the humans on earth were destroyed (Don't want all of the humans dead, l have to eat something). ....

- this is "weird"

?? Remember the recent flap about the German cannibal. Please inform us if this is the definition of "weird", and these kinds of posts are allowed since "weird" is ok. If so, are we then allowed to spill vitriol on whatever we choose? Sincerely, T4phage

 

[avtar]

Ok, I'll say it. Here are the members that should be banned immediately:

A. Harris
AAA
Bjorn H
Carlo
Duveen
FIHTies
HRHAndrew
jcusey
Mike C.
Steve B.
STYLESTUDENT
TimelessRider
tjmaglio

Of course I am kidding, but since they help fund the forum maybe they should be on a type of standards committee.

 

[imageWIS]

Ok, I'll say it. Here are the members that should be banned immediately: A. Harris AAA Bjorn H Carlo Duveen FIHTies HRHAndrew jcusey Mike C. Steve B. STYLESTUDENT TimelessRider tjmaglio Of course I am kidding, but since they help fund the forum maybe they should be on a type of standards committee.

Oh, I second FIHTies.

Out he goes.

Jon. (sorry, inside joke)

 

[HRHAndrew]

Oh come on, I am sure you have good intentions avtar, but I am not intersted in serving on a committee. I just wish that people would use common sense a little more often.

 

[FCS]

Quote:

(j @ 22 July 2004, 10:44)

Originally Posted by marc37,21 July 2004, 11:10

l would be the first to go. People hate my guts on this forum and Andy's. lt is just a case of being misunderstood.
Like I said, weird is okay.

J, glad that you are now keeping an eye on the various goings on, on this (your) forum. I would just like a definition of "weird" as per your usage towards marc37? for example: Styleforum shoe discussion All posts by marc-au:

...T4phage: l don't trust you. l used to have an available email address and website but, l can't trust people like marc39 and you. You are a troll and a trouble maker. l don't know whether to like you or not. M.g is a homosexual. (Nothing against them but it is dirty).

- a baseless attack coupled with a baseless accusation against a former (and thus unable to defend himself) member.

....T4phage has no credibility. Who cares if he has or knows about good shoes. lf he is not a good person, he is not worth spitting on.

-spitting on??? or how about the killing and eating people? Styleforum discussion on self image

... l enjoy inflicking misery and pain on my fellow man.... like seeing people suffering and in pain. l hate all the people in the world; l wish 95% of the humans on earth were destroyed (Don't want all of the humans dead, l have to eat something). ....

- this is "weird"

?? Â Remember the recent flap about the German cannibal. Please inform us if this is the definition of "weird", and these kinds of posts are allowed since "weird" is ok. Â If so, are we then allowed to spill vitriol on whatever we choose? Sincerely, T4phage
My, I missed the apocalyptic killing part. J, I agree with T4phage. His participation at Andy's forum is also similar to this nature, if not more disturbing, with those unamusing racial references and all.

 

[imageWIS]

You know I like American Psycho as much as the next guy, but Marc37's Bateman reference is really disturbing onto itself. Of, course this could be on of his "˜apparent' jokes...as there seems to be some members whom have stated that these posts are meant as jokes. I personally do not find anything remotely amusing about: "l like seeing people suffering and in pain. l hate all the people in the world; l wish 95% of the humans on earth were destroyed (Don't want all of the humans dead, l have to eat something)." Jon.

 

[FIHTies]

Oh, I second FIHTies.

Out he goes.

Jon. (sorry, inside joke)

Dont get me started Jon.

JJF