Lonelygirl15

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:07 pm**

The Ops are planning a meeting to reorganize and clarify things this week for our section. ^_^

That's good to know! See, those little details are helpful without coming off as dismissive.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:09 pm**

luminous, it makes perfect sense.
And that is where a lot of our bad rep comes from...the "hoods" as some people call it "cliques" as others call it...
i'm really undecided what i'd call it. ...
But i think there are better ways to handle the "hoods." a lanket of rules probably wouldn't work and I never really considered that until now. What I think could be helpful are moderators for said "hoods", but moderators that aren't personally involved. I think a great example is the Operators. While I love the bunch to death, and I think they do amazing work ( i really can't stress that enough), a lot of the complaints have been favoritism. That is mainly caused by the fact that a few of the moderators are personally involved. They were a part of the "hood" before they became the leaders of the "hood." And, i'm sure we all know human nature, but in most cases, that type of situation never ends greatly.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:10 pm**

bethy wrote:whooops. Sorry kelly!!

Want me to edit it out??

yea that would be nice, i'll edit mine out too.

edit: tiger, I jsut noticed you have it as well, would you mind editing out bethy's quoting of me? That would be much appreciated as it was kind of a heated response that was immediately deleted after posted

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:11 pm**

itsreallyreal wrote:
Kasdeja wrote:I don't think many are really asking for more or sterner moderation...the concensus has centered on consisten moderation.
I disagree... I think people ARE asking for just a
little
tighter grip on the forum...

I think people are asking for more too....or at least some people are. I am not advocating total anarchy here. But am curious about what the mods should do more consistently? Should they allow all flames, or no flames? How do they tell if it is a flame or a joke?

Yes, I have seen mods shut down some people and let others go. I have been offended by things that no one made a comment on at all too. But seeing how there are groups here that seem to have gained a certain "acceptability", I don't think it is wise to shut down the others, and let these groups continue as they are.

I guess maybe I am agreeing with the consistency thing here, aren't I?

So then the question becomes, what is to be consistently allowed and what is to be consistently not allowed?

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:14 pm**

AutoPilate wrote:If they could tell me when I should take my next dump too, I'd appreciate it.

I think everyone is trying really hard to be reasonable here and trying to hash out a working plan that will make everyone comfortable on the boards.

I don't think anyone is trying to constrict your bowel habits.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:14 pm**

That's a relief.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:16 pm**

Killthesmiley wrote:
bethy wrote:whooops. Sorry kelly!!

Want me to edit it out??
yea that would be nice, i'll edit mine out too.

edit: tiger, I jsut noticed you have it as well, would you mind editing out bethy's quoting of me? That would be much appreciated as it was kind of a heated response that was immediately deleted after posted

sure thing hun!

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:19 pm**

AutoPilate wrote:If they could tell me when I should take my next dump too, I'd appreciate it.

Great example. There are "hoods" here where you can say stuff like that and people are entertained not offended. There are others where i venture it would result in a locked thread in seconds.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:20 pm**

Wait, you're suggesting that there are "hoods" out there where no levity of any kind is permissible? That's just... sad. I suppose next Charlton Heston will be showing up yelling about how we're eating people.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:23 pm**

yea that would be nice, i'll edit mine out too.

You got it! I've edited mine to match tiger's edit. I still agree with what you said, though.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:27 pm**

AutoPilate wrote:Wait, you're suggesting that there are "hoods" out there where no levity of any kind is permissible? That's just... sad. I suppose next Charlton Heston will be showing up yelling about how we're eating people.

No, just that not everyone finds the same things funny.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:28 pm**

Luminous wrote: I can't remember who said it or where, but someone mentioned that there are different neigborhoods here. I think this is really true. And they each have their own culture. For example some neighborhoods have very sarcastic wit, others are insulted by it, and of course then there's pervy town .

I'm not quite sure how to make my point so it can be understood here, but I think it is important recognize that these neighborhoods exist. Know that if you walk into an OpAphid neighborhood in the middle of a drop and do something stupid you're going to get landed on. Likewise, if you go into the LG15 community and start talking anti-meep this is not going to go over well. Because of this I think it's hard, and maybe not even a good idea to create blanket rules that go across the board. It seems that each community's standards are self emerging. What might be helpful is if these emerging don't try to impose their standards across the board on everyone.

From the perspective of moderating, create consistency within a "hood" as much as possible, but don't necessarily try to apply equal standards across the board.

Does this make any sense to anyone?

I completely agree. You made the point I was trying to make, which is that we are all different and have different standards, which should be appreciated in this forum and by the mods. I guess I think that consistent moderating is kind of unattainable if we are to appreciate the different cultures around here. I kind of think that there is something to be said for the "mob" mentailtiy of each group, since it provides a bit of self regulation in each area, even if it isn't always nice or welcoming. Truth be told, insular groups will probably remain and not everyone is welcome everywhere, but isn't it more up to us to hash that out, instead of the moderators?

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:32 pm**

I am happy to hear that the MODs and Admins will be having a meeting...

And even if nothing changes at all no one can say they were not heard and taken seriously... Once descisions are made by the admin staff then we will all have to deal with it... If anyone doesn't like it I suspect they will find somowhere else to post or resort to lurking... But at least action is being taken and that (I think) is all we can ask for...

PS - THIS is pure awesome... HAHAHahahahaha...

silvermoon wrote:
AutoPilate wrote:If they could tell me when I should take my next dump too, I'd appreciate it.
I don't think anyone is trying to constrict your bowel habits.

AutoPilate wrote: That's a relief.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:32 pm**

Killthesmiley wrote:the "hoods" as some people call it "cliques" as others call it...
quote]

Personally, I kind of like "hoods" as it feels more inclusive rather than "cliques" which feels exclusinve.

It is natural that people of like interests, lifestyles, personalities (and sense of humor ) congregate together. This is a healthy thing, not a bad thing.

Posted: **Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:35 pm**

Luminous wrote:
AutoPilate wrote:Wait, you're suggesting that there are "hoods" out there where no levity of any kind is permissible? That's just... sad. I suppose next Charlton Heston will be showing up yelling about how we're eating people.
No, just that not everyone finds the same things funny.

Fair enough. Now what happens when someone posts something of questionable funniness? Do we banish such a transgressor, chop off his hand, send him to the guillotine, shave his head and place him in a camp? Surely I can't be the only person to see what ridiculous extents discipline can be taken to when adding more and more restrictive guidelines. We should, one would hope, as much as we might want to make these nefarious criminals of the worst order pay for their sins, to limit the powers we're granting to staff. We should strive to limit their ability to abuse their power as well. We should be less one-sided about it, is what I'm trying to say.

Lonelygirl15

Flame Wars