Another disillisioned past contributor

[WebSlave]

LAME.......What the hell are warning points for then???

This site is all about generating as much flow as possible. Getting banned is absolutely silly in alot of instances and is ridiculous to have to pay a $10 fine.

Why don't you delete the posts if you really want to clean the site up? More than likely people won't keep posting over and over if they see that their posts are getting removed for violating policy.

Cleaning up I guess has a wholenother meaning.........

Well have you been living in a cave? Didn't you happen to notice that the warning points without any teeth behind them just weren't working? People were having a real good time racking up the warning points when there was no real penalty involved. I decided to change that. And so far I think the changes have been an improvement in the overall tone of this site. Some people were just slower to get the hint then others.

Just keep on deleting posts? Get real, please. Do you think I don't have anything better to do with my time, and I can just sit around all day long simply deleting posts? Sorry, but no. My intent is to get to the root of the problems and address it in that manner. If it takes fines and suspensions, or even outright banning, then that is just what I need to do.

Thank you for telling me what this site is all about. If all I want is just traffic, the best thing I could do is to just make this one big HELL forum. THAT would do it, for certain. However, I have a better plan for it, I think. In short, this site is not going to be able to cater to everyone, and that is a fact. So I will cater to the ones who act in a professional and adult manner without the derogatory crap that has soiled this site. They are welcome to be here, while those that are not inclined to fit in and make this site better, will likely be better off elsewhere. The $10 per infraction is incentive for them to make that move if they feel they can't learn the lesson it is intended to teach them.

But, tell you what. You make a site similar to this one and run it your own way. If yours works out better then this one, then more power to you. You can send me an email every day saying "I told you so.", and I'll send you a reply every day, saying "Yep, you were right." But, in the meantime, I'll just muddle along and run this one how I think it is best to do, if you don't mind.

 

[Rockford]

Just keep on deleting posts? Get real, please. Do you think I don't have anything better to do with my time, and I can just sit around all day long simply deleting posts? Sorry, but no. My intent is to get to the root of the problems and address it in that manner. If it takes fines and suspensions, or even outright banning, then that is just what I need to do.

If you have time to sit here and write 12 paragraph responses then I am going to have to say YES that will be better time spent.

Suspensions and bannings for small lame infractions will not clean this site up but make it a ghost town. Just my opinion..............

 

[WebSlave]

If you have time to sit here and write 12 paragraph responses then I am going to have to say YES that will be better time spent.

Suspensions and bannings for small lame infractions will not clean this site up but make it a ghost town. Just my opinion..............

Obviously you are seeing things differently then I do. But I guess I have the benefit of looking at stats that you don't have access to. So what are you basing your opinion on?

The traffic here is INCREASING after the crackdown on rule violations, even the "lame" ones (whatever that means), as you put it. Participation is increasing, new memberships have increased, concurrent active members have increased, new posts have increased, etc., etc., etc. And that is even after some VERY actively posting members who could not comply with the changes have been ejected from here.

"Ghost town"? Sorry, but apparently your "doom sayer" comments are just way off the mark from what I can see.

 

[TomO]

Boo!!

 

[Rockford]

Boo!!

See what I mean???

 

[WebSlave]

See what I mean???

I guess that comment means more to you then it does to me....

 

[Chameleon Company]

Hey Rich, how come you have exactly 100 Karma points !! LOL ... I really don't need an answer !

I have to agree with your earlier point, as I do think that the threads have become more civil. We likely still have a few minor disagreements, and always will. I hope that the tracking programs show "thumbs up" in all areas that matter, as you alluded to.

 

[Cheryl Marchek AKA JM]

Boo!!

What does THAT have to do with the price of rice in Egypt?

~~The truth is~~The most annoying part may be that I am in complete agreement with Rich again on this point~ which does rankle a bit

WHAT???

 

[TomO]

See what I mean???

Quoting me would only support your assertion if I were indeed a ghost.

 

[TomO]

What does THAT have to do with the price of rice in Egypt?

~~The truth is~~The most annoying part may be that I am in complete agreement with Rich again on this point~ which does rankle a bit

WHAT???

Cheryl. My apologies. This has nothing to do with the origins of your thread. I did not mean to drive it off topic. It was simply a commentary on the "ghost town" comment made earlier. Ambiguous as it seemed, my point was that there are still people here. At this point, I don't feel inclined to debate the finer points of the crackdown, (although I did vote in the poll)so I probably should not have made even that one word statement.

 

[Rockford]

I guess that comment means more to you then it does to me....

You have no idea how much that means to me...LOL

 

[WebSlave]

You have no idea how much that means to me...LOL

Yes. Irrelevance is irrelevant..........

 

[WebSlave]

Hey Rich, how come you have exactly 100 Karma points !! LOL ... I really don't need an answer !

That number is not my number of karma points. It is the POWER I would exert if I were to give positive or negative points. I can change that number at will, and as needed. I have had to use this in the past to neutralize some people who were abusing the system. By dropping them into negative karma rating, their own attempts to give or take karma to other people had then been thwarted.

 

[Griz]

You were treated just like everyone else has been on this site.


If you break the rules, then you get penalized, regardless of who you are or what you have done here for this site. That is the only fair way to do it.

Rich, this is not intended to cast stones or to cause more of a ruckus over this topic but I was reading through this and the above struck me. I am in complete agreement with you that this site needed some hands slapped, mine included. However, you need to sit back and take a look at some of your own postings and see where the principles you state above are not in compliance with your own writings. I have seen you swear and respond to people on this board in a more derogatory/insulting manner then others who received fines for it.

For instance, Laura Cox was just suspended for calling someone a Nimrod yet you have used the swear word of "Damn" or "Damn It" (words that we all know are swear words) in some of your recent postings. I even reported one of those comments to you in the hopes that you would maybe take heed of some of the advice that you had just given out.

If your home is in disarray and you want to clean it up, then the "children" are going to look at the "parents" for a role model.

Griz

 

[Chameleon Company]

Griz, I have to concur in part...

Griz says:
For instance, Laura Cox was just suspended for calling someone a Nimrod yet you have used the swear word of "Damn" or "Damn It" (words that we all know are swear words) in some of your recent postings. I even reported one of those comments to you in the hopes that you would maybe take heed of some of the advice that you had just given out.

I didn't go back through that entire thread, and respond here only on the premise that you have accurately described the reason for Laura's fine and suspension. I am also going on the assumption that she got the 10 points - automatic fine from it. If it was a lesser infraction, and merely only put her over the 10 point threshold, than I have no complaint. I don't believe that I can ascertain that from her signature area.

We know that there's a 10 point fine for the use of "derogatory words". I think we also know that you can navigate your way around this by avoiding a specific word, and doing a little word-smithing and still getting the same level of antagonism across. We also have this part of the explanation of the "Antagonism warning 1-point" in the BOI rules:

Although there may be some instances where getting to the truth may require a certain amount of antagonism towards a person who is possibly a bad guy, it can be overdone and overused.

Obviously, this is a judgement call on the part of the Mod's. I have argued in the past that it needs to be more of a tiered system, which is consistent with the above rules quote. The example of Laura's word "nimrod", if all is as I assumed above, is an example that begs for this. If she had used a more defamatory word or expression, OK. The arguement has been made in the past that the lesser penalties do not get the attention of the offender, and do not work. I realize that 2-3 points does not have the same impact as 10 points, but also feel that it has impact, especially when considered in light of the cumulative 10-point fine threshold. Once again, I think that the arguement and all of its opinions would be far more beneficial to the site if we were debating the difference between a 2 or 4 point offense, and not one point or "suspension and $10 fine".

 

[Griz]

Jim, the one and only warning that Laura has ever received was for using the word Nimrod. It was an immediately 10 point warning and she is now "fined & suspended".

If the use of the word "Nimrod" is deemed offensive then the use of the word "Damn" is equally so. What's good for the goose.......

Griz

 

[WebSlave]

Rich, this is not intended to cast stones or to cause more of a ruckus over this topic but I was reading through this and the above struck me. I am in complete agreement with you that this site needed some hands slapped, mine included. However, you need to sit back and take a look at some of your own postings and see where the principles you state above are not in compliance with your own writings. I have seen you swear and respond to people on this board in a more derogatory/insulting manner then others who received fines for it.

For instance, Laura Cox was just suspended for calling someone a Nimrod yet you have used the swear word of "Damn" or "Damn It" (words that we all know are swear words) in some of your recent postings. I even reported one of those comments to you in the hopes that you would maybe take heed of some of the advice that you had just given out.

If your home is in disarray and you want to clean it up, then the "children" are going to look at the "parents" for a role model.

Griz

Sorry, but this is my call to make. It is my call, and that of the moderators, to determine what is considered as "derogatory" or "profanity". There are some people who would consider even the most lightweight terminology to be offensive to them. I don't believe I have ever warned a single soul for using the term "damn" in any context. I do not consider it vulgar nor profane in any context I can think of. Nor do I believe my mods have ever interpreted that word as being profane either. Of course, some people make take a more Victorian view of word usage, but that just is not the case on this site. Generally speaking, it is the usage of derogatory words or phrases directed at another person that will get a person in hot water here.

For instance, since you brought it up, Laura Cox called the person who was the topic of the thread she posted in a "Nimrod". Well before assessing the fine and suspension, I took the trouble to look up how that word is actually defined:

Informal. A person regarded as silly, foolish, or stupid.

Sounded pretty derogatory to me, so if I was not to appear to be inconsistent with past actions, I really had no other choice but to issue the warning points. I believe there were four other members who tripped the wire as well in that one thread, some of which were reported to me. Matter of fact, one person got fined and suspended for calling another member "stupid", so at least in this instance, I was trying to be consistent.

As for me speaking to members in an "derogatory/insulting manner", maybe, maybe not. Depends on your own perspective, I guess. My manner of speaking to people is pretty direct and to the point. Some people are offended by that, but I think you will have trouble finding me actually using profane or derogatory words or phrases. And I doubt you will find many instances of that since I laid down the law about enforcing the rules more strictly here. I do realize that I need to be on my best behavior as well.

But be that as it may, the whole crux of this matter is that I am now strenuously demanding that people simply cut out the derogatory stuff and be more circumspect in how they post. People can complain and resist all they like, but that is what is going to happen here, with or without them.

 

[WebSlave]

Jim, the one and only warning that Laura has ever received was for using the word Nimrod. It was an immediately 10 point warning and she is now "fined & suspended".

If the use of the word "Nimrod" is deemed offensive then the use of the word "Damn" is equally so. What's good for the goose.......

Griz

Sorry, but that just is not your call to make here.

 

[Griz]

Sorry, but that just is not your call to make here.

You're right Rich, it's your playground and therefore we abide by your rules, no matter how inconsistent we may view them.

Definition of the word "damn" - noun = something of little value, verb = curse, adjective = expletive,

Rich, call it what you may, but here's my question "would you say the word Damn in front of your priest or minister and not feel as though you really slipped up? Not a chance and we both know why. It is a swear word and is universally accepted as such. Now, I would agree that when it comes to swear words it is the more harmless of those in which you could choose from but then again, so is Nimrod. It's like calling someone a doofus. Hardly an insult and in my humble opinion hardly worth accessing someone a fine for.

I have said my peace Rich and again, this was not intended with any disrespect. I was simply hoping that these inconsistenancies would be pointed out and accepted by you as such. I reckon that is not the case here and to be frank, that's a shame. But then again, as we have all been told, it's your playground.

Griz

 

[WebSlave]

You're right Rich, it's your playground and therefore we abide by your rules, no matter how inconsistent we may view them.

Definition of the word "damn" - noun = something of little value, verb = curse, adjective = expletive,

Rich, call it what you may, but here's my question "would you say the word Damn in front of your priest or minister and not feel as though you really slipped up? Not a chance and we both know why. It is a swear word and is universally accepted as such. Now, I would agree that when it comes to swear words it is the more harmless of those in which you could choose from but then again, so is Nimrod. It's like calling someone a doofus. Hardly an insult and in my humble opinion hardly worth accessing someone a fine for.

I have said my peace Rich and again, this was not intended with any disrespect. I was simply hoping that these inconsistenancies would be pointed out and accepted by you as such. I reckon that is not the case here and to be frank, that's a shame. But then again, as we have all been told, it's your playground.

Griz

So in other words, since YOU say so then it MUST be so? Interesting perspective, but not a unique one around here, I must say.

It is not that I don't understand you, which means we don't need repetition or expansion of your opinion, it simply means I just disagree. Someone calling someone else a "doofus", "nimrod" or anything else myself or the moderators determine to be derogatory name calling will be fined and suspended. Period. I do not consider "damn" or "damn it" to be profanity and will not interpret it such within the enforcement of the rules here.

And about your "priest" analogy. I have actually heard priests use that terrm "damn" in sermons. "Damnation" is very commonly uttered and I don't see them being struct down by lightning bolts in doing so.

And since you picked this word as being clear evidence of my violation my own rules, perhaps looking at the definition of the word "damn", may be instructive:

damn ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dm)
v. damned, damn·ing, damns
v. tr.
1. To pronounce an adverse judgment upon. See Synonyms at condemn.
2. To bring about the failure of; ruin.
3. To condemn as harmful, illegal, or immoral: a cleric who damned gambling and strong drink.
4. To condemn to everlasting punishment or a similar fate; doom.
5. To swear at.

v. intr.
To swear; curse.

interj.
Used to express anger, irritation, contempt, or disappointment.

n.
The saying of “damn” as a curse.
Informal. The least valuable bit; a jot: not worth a damn.

adv. & adj.
Damned.

Idiom:
damn well
Without any doubt; positively: I am damn well going to file charges against him.

Well maybe I just missed it, but does anyone see anything at all in my rules about "swearing" or "cursing"?