Topic: What would you do/change if you were a mod?
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 started this discussion 15 years ago #4,221
I'll tell you what I'd do. I'd start modifying headlines like crazy so that it actually gives you an idea of what the thread is supposed to be about. "LOL WTF" and "Everyone Look at This" are not appropriate headlines. I'm sick of having to click every single thread to see what it's about.
The other thing I would do is ban the living hell out of shitposters. If you just post some random pic or link with an irrelevant headline and don't actually have anything to discuss, then fuck you, you're banned. I'm sick of twitter posts.
So, what would you as a mod? (Other than ban OP.)
The other thing I would do is ban the living hell out of shitposters. If you just post some random pic or link with an irrelevant headline and don't actually have anything to discuss, then fuck you, you're banned. I'm sick of twitter posts.
So, what would you as a mod? (Other than ban OP.)
advi !!3gpAcg/hF joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #75,404
i would sit around and never actually enforce any rules
if anything i'd probably get bored and leave
if anything i'd probably get bored and leave
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 38 seconds later, 2 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,405
I would ionize Sim.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,407
It's a CHAN, Broseph. Calm the fuck down. Or, you know, use spoiler mode you dingus.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,408
1. No jews
2. No high schoolers
3. No one who posts on TC unironically
4. No one who lives in the Nederlands or claims to have Dutch ancestry
That would leave me, Leonidas, Salty, Jump and Fats Fergusson.
2. No high schoolers
3. No one who posts on TC unironically
4. No one who lives in the Nederlands or claims to have Dutch ancestry
That would leave me, Leonidas, Salty, Jump and Fats Fergusson.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,409
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,410
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,411
@75,407 (D)
I don't like to think of it as a typical chan, and it isn't a typical chan. Before TC turned into a bunch of faggotry, we emphasized that despite having "chan" in the name, we were not a chan, and we told people who brought that kind of bullshit to the board to go back to /b/. I thought that sort of bullshit was one of the reasons we started this board.
I have always been very vocal about the fact that I don't want this board to become /b/ junior. It seems like we're letting the quality fall to shit.
I don't like to think of it as a typical chan, and it isn't a typical chan. Before TC turned into a bunch of faggotry, we emphasized that despite having "chan" in the name, we were not a chan, and we told people who brought that kind of bullshit to the board to go back to /b/. I thought that sort of bullshit was one of the reasons we started this board.
I have always been very vocal about the fact that I don't want this board to become /b/ junior. It seems like we're letting the quality fall to shit.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 13 seconds later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,412
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 47 seconds later, 10 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,413
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 13 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,416
totoforhire !!Phkn/3Gic joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,418
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 9 seconds later, 19 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,419
@75,411 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
> I don't like to think of it as a typical chan, and it isn't a typical chan. Before TC turned into a bunch of faggotry, we emphasized that despite having "chan" in the name, we were not a chan, and we told people who brought that kind of bullshit to the board to go back to /b/. I thought that sort of bullshit was one of the reasons we started this board.
I think you are taking things way too seriously. I think in the furor of the exodus to this board we were trying to distance ourselves from the problems that came from T4C. Since we've relaxed a little bit I don't think we need to be so strict because we already have our own established identity, and it's operating just fine.
> I have always been very vocal about the fact that I don't want this board to become /b/ junior. It seems like we're letting the quality fall to shit.
Okay, Kimmoseph. The problem that I partly see with 'letting the quality fall to shit' is not completely at the fault of the shitposters, but the normal posters like you or totoforhire who ignore other quality topics and prefer to just go into shitpost threads and bitch about it. It's not helping your 'cause' at all and you know it.
> I don't like to think of it as a typical chan, and it isn't a typical chan. Before TC turned into a bunch of faggotry, we emphasized that despite having "chan" in the name, we were not a chan, and we told people who brought that kind of bullshit to the board to go back to /b/. I thought that sort of bullshit was one of the reasons we started this board.
I think you are taking things way too seriously. I think in the furor of the exodus to this board we were trying to distance ourselves from the problems that came from T4C. Since we've relaxed a little bit I don't think we need to be so strict because we already have our own established identity, and it's operating just fine.
> I have always been very vocal about the fact that I don't want this board to become /b/ junior. It seems like we're letting the quality fall to shit.
Okay, Kimmoseph. The problem that I partly see with 'letting the quality fall to shit' is not completely at the fault of the shitposters, but the normal posters like you or totoforhire who ignore other quality topics and prefer to just go into shitpost threads and bitch about it. It's not helping your 'cause' at all and you know it.
totoforhire !!Phkn/3Gic replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,420
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 34 seconds later, 20 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,421
totoforhire !!Phkn/3Gic replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 25 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,422
Lawrence !9p5vCatBBQ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 27 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,424
Flood everyones inbox with my most prized possession--the photo set of Broseph in drag and covered head to toe in diet cool whip.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,427
BAN EVERYBODY
BAN THEM SO HARD
BAN THEM SO HARD
advi !!3gpAcg/hF replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,429
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,431
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,434
@75,429 (advi !!3gpAcg/hF)
Go back to /b/ and take that stupid meme with you. Some people like intelligent discussion on the internet.
Go back to /b/ and take that stupid meme with you. Some people like intelligent discussion on the internet.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 11 minutes later, 51 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,436
@75,420 (totoforhire !!Phkn/3Gic)
This. I'm always looking for good topics, and I'm always trying to start good topics. I'm not part of the problem. Nega, totoforhire, Deckard Cain, and many others will agree with me here.
This. I'm always looking for good topics, and I'm always trying to start good topics. I'm not part of the problem. Nega, totoforhire, Deckard Cain, and many others will agree with me here.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #75,437
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Remember that when you start pointing fingers, you're pointing three back. Stop complaining so much about shitposts or shitposters. Ignore them and move on. I'm tired of people getting upset over something silly that Ninjj or Nickalollyoff post. It's intended to be silly and not serious, and it's not a major problem. If you don't want to click topics to see what they are about, turn on spoiler mode. Simple.
Remember that when you start pointing fingers, you're pointing three back. Stop complaining so much about shitposts or shitposters. Ignore them and move on. I'm tired of people getting upset over something silly that Ninjj or Nickalollyoff post. It's intended to be silly and not serious, and it's not a major problem. If you don't want to click topics to see what they are about, turn on spoiler mode. Simple.
(Edited 22 seconds later.)
advi !!3gpAcg/hF replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,439
@75,434 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
so if you can't fine one.....start one and ignore anybody who wants to stir up a shitstorm? the internet does not exist solely to pertain to your needs.
so if you can't fine one.....start one and ignore anybody who wants to stir up a shitstorm? the internet does not exist solely to pertain to your needs.
Tekamine !AnRbswGQv. joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,444
Id annoy DM
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,446
Tekamine !AnRbswGQv. replied with this 15 years ago, 54 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,447
Ks !KansasxqvM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 14 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,448
Get rid of all the creepy fuckers and shit-trolls around here permanently. If you're only here to fuck shit up you can go die in a fire. You aren't wanted.
The last time I was around I was having an email discussion with some of my favorite posters and one you faggoty little fucks hacked one of their email accounts compromising any security I thought I might have had. I have a life, a business and responsibilities. The last fucking thing I need is some little fuck-wit fucking shit up "for the lulz". There are some deeply disturbed individuals that hang around here, the same people who are ruining this place. We all know this, yet few want to talk about it or admit it, much less do anything about it.
If you want to have "chan" elements to this board fine, but keep the good things about the chans and dump the rest. "Chan" is no excuse for stalking, harassing, hacking, obsessions with pedophilia, or some fucked up autistic dude in Sweden. Take out the garbage or be buried in it. Implement email registration if you have to, anyone who really likes this place and is here for good reasons will have no problem with it. Do something.
<3 Ks
If shit ever changes I'll be back.
The last time I was around I was having an email discussion with some of my favorite posters and one you faggoty little fucks hacked one of their email accounts compromising any security I thought I might have had. I have a life, a business and responsibilities. The last fucking thing I need is some little fuck-wit fucking shit up "for the lulz". There are some deeply disturbed individuals that hang around here, the same people who are ruining this place. We all know this, yet few want to talk about it or admit it, much less do anything about it.
If you want to have "chan" elements to this board fine, but keep the good things about the chans and dump the rest. "Chan" is no excuse for stalking, harassing, hacking, obsessions with pedophilia, or some fucked up autistic dude in Sweden. Take out the garbage or be buried in it. Implement email registration if you have to, anyone who really likes this place and is here for good reasons will have no problem with it. Do something.
<3 Ks
If shit ever changes I'll be back.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 32 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,449
Tekamine !AnRbswGQv. replied with this 15 years ago, 43 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,451
advi !!3gpAcg/hF replied with this 15 years ago, 31 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,452
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 40 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,453
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 8 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,455
I'd be the biggest mod abuser ever.
The Doctor !7MHPahvoGY joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,459
Tekamine !AnRbswGQv. replied with this 15 years ago, 46 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,460
Lawrence !9p5vCatBBQ replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,463
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,478
@75,437 (D)
A) When the majority of the topics are shit, it is a problem.
B) Just because someone points fingers doesn't automatically mean that they're to blame. I do try to promote good threads. Just because I'm complaining doesn't mean I'm not doing anything.
C) Spoiler mode sucks, and doesn't work right on my phone. Plus, it shouldn't be used as an excuse to put whatever you want as the headline. Headlines should be relevant.
A) When the majority of the topics are shit, it is a problem.
B) Just because someone points fingers doesn't automatically mean that they're to blame. I do try to promote good threads. Just because I'm complaining doesn't mean I'm not doing anything.
C) Spoiler mode sucks, and doesn't work right on my phone. Plus, it shouldn't be used as an excuse to put whatever you want as the headline. Headlines should be relevant.
advi !!3gpAcg/hF replied with this 15 years ago, 18 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,479
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
you sure did
you sure did
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,480
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,483
@75,478 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
A) Your opinion
B) To others, your whining could be interpreted as shitposts.
C) Fair enough, but I disagree with you about what a headline says, Kimmoseph. I bet if anything you click on all topics anyway, regardless of what the headline says. You just get upset when it doesn't meet your expectations.
A) Your opinion
B) To others, your whining could be interpreted as shitposts.
C) Fair enough, but I disagree with you about what a headline says, Kimmoseph. I bet if anything you click on all topics anyway, regardless of what the headline says. You just get upset when it doesn't meet your expectations.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,486
@75,419 (D)
> Kimmoseph
Quite frankly, if Kimmo wasn't so fucking psychotic, and if it weren't for all the pedo bullshit, I probably would be on AnonTalk. I like the idea of a board where meaningful discussions are promoted while bullshitting gets banned. I'm not saying this site needs to be like that, but I wish there were a site like that, minus the Kimmo.
> Kimmoseph
Quite frankly, if Kimmo wasn't so fucking psychotic, and if it weren't for all the pedo bullshit, I probably would be on AnonTalk. I like the idea of a board where meaningful discussions are promoted while bullshitting gets banned. I'm not saying this site needs to be like that, but I wish there were a site like that, minus the Kimmo.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #75,490
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,496
@75,483 (D)
A) I'm entitled to my opinion.
B) They're entitled to their opinions also. They might think I'm just whining, but I'm not shitposting. The fact that you and I are arguing proves that I'm not shitposting, because we're having an intelligent, meaningful discussion, even if we're not agreeing. I like arguing because it forces people to use their minds and actually come up with convincing arguments instead of shitposting. The fact that other people here share my sentiment also proves that I'm not shiposting. If a post contains meaningful content that people can agree or disagree with then it's not a shitpost. Just because you don't like a post doesn't make it a shitpost.
C) Headlines should be relevant to the topic. Period.
A) I'm entitled to my opinion.
B) They're entitled to their opinions also. They might think I'm just whining, but I'm not shitposting. The fact that you and I are arguing proves that I'm not shitposting, because we're having an intelligent, meaningful discussion, even if we're not agreeing. I like arguing because it forces people to use their minds and actually come up with convincing arguments instead of shitposting. The fact that other people here share my sentiment also proves that I'm not shiposting. If a post contains meaningful content that people can agree or disagree with then it's not a shitpost. Just because you don't like a post doesn't make it a shitpost.
C) Headlines should be relevant to the topic. Period.
Tekamine !AnRbswGQv. replied with this 15 years ago, 46 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,497
@75,486 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Lol Internet, serious business. You don't have to force yourself to stay here you know.
Lol Internet, serious business. You don't have to force yourself to stay here you know.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,500
@75,496 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
What I find extremely hard to make sense of is how you feel this way, and yet you're an admin on GHOUL? Please explain that to me.
What I find extremely hard to make sense of is how you feel this way, and yet you're an admin on GHOUL? Please explain that to me.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 43 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,559
@previous (D)
What I don't get is his sympathy for DM. When anyone else makes a shitpost, BAN THEM TO FUCK AND BACK! But when he does it, "Oh, he's just bored, you guys should keep him entertained if you want him to stop".
What I don't get is his sympathy for DM. When anyone else makes a shitpost, BAN THEM TO FUCK AND BACK! But when he does it, "Oh, he's just bored, you guys should keep him entertained if you want him to stop".
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,591
@previous (N)
At least Depressionman had some variety and gave himself a realitic 3D persona, all Nick does is post problem.jpg, didn't read lol.jpg and that guy with the beard.
At least Depressionman had some variety and gave himself a realitic 3D persona, all Nick does is post problem.jpg, didn't read lol.jpg and that guy with the beard.
(Edited 12 seconds later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,593
@previous (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
That "3D persona" is something that has evolved ten years in the making. I don't excuse one shitposter for another. That favouritism nonsense is dreadful.
That "3D persona" is something that has evolved ten years in the making. I don't excuse one shitposter for another. That favouritism nonsense is dreadful.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 46 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,594
@previous (D)
> That "3D persona" is something that has evolved ten years in the making
Exactly, the guy put effort into it. I'd swap Nick for Depressionman.
> That "3D persona" is something that has evolved ten years in the making
Exactly, the guy put effort into it. I'd swap Nick for Depressionman.
totoforhire !!Phkn/3Gic replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,599
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 59 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,600
@75,594 (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
But it's not real, and it's completely done without restraint. DM's problem is the VOLUME at which he posts, not necessarily the content. Most people would ignore an occasional 'poopfart' or foraâ„¢ or whatever shtick he's throwing, but he does it at such an excessively high rate. This doesn't happen just merely in his own threads. He does it to other topics, and will go so far as to mess up quality ones because of his desire for that kind of attention. Nick doesn't do this. He doesn't crap up threads, especially quality topics, nor does he post the same stuff at an alarming rate. Sure, he may make an occasional shit thread once in awhile, but I am fine with this, because he shows restraint. I don't care if the content is good or bad, I care about at what rate it happens. That's the real cancer, not something you just happen to disagree with.
But it's not real, and it's completely done without restraint. DM's problem is the VOLUME at which he posts, not necessarily the content. Most people would ignore an occasional 'poopfart' or foraâ„¢ or whatever shtick he's throwing, but he does it at such an excessively high rate. This doesn't happen just merely in his own threads. He does it to other topics, and will go so far as to mess up quality ones because of his desire for that kind of attention. Nick doesn't do this. He doesn't crap up threads, especially quality topics, nor does he post the same stuff at an alarming rate. Sure, he may make an occasional shit thread once in awhile, but I am fine with this, because he shows restraint. I don't care if the content is good or bad, I care about at what rate it happens. That's the real cancer, not something you just happen to disagree with.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,607
@previous (D)
> Most people would ignore an occasional 'poopfart' or foraâ„¢ or whatever shtick he's throwing, but he does it at such an excessively high rate
He went months and months without doing a single one, made one thread and got permabanned for it.
> Most people would ignore an occasional 'poopfart' or foraâ„¢ or whatever shtick he's throwing, but he does it at such an excessively high rate
He went months and months without doing a single one, made one thread and got permabanned for it.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,609
Anonymous N replied with this 15 years ago, 42 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,611
@75,607 (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
Then, there were always those things the mods deleted before we could see them.
Then, there were always those things the mods deleted before we could see them.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,615
sim !!hXKXHhLro joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,618
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 13 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,619
@75,615 (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
I'm not going to refer to as that while you are being obviously contrarian and not prone to reason, Ash Ketchup. Sorry.
I'm not going to refer to as that while you are being obviously contrarian and not prone to reason, Ash Ketchup. Sorry.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,621
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,622
@previous (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
Then you have some pretty backwards reasoning. I'm glad you don't run this place because obviously you have very obtuse ideas about what is and what isn't appropriate to the community.
Then you have some pretty backwards reasoning. I'm glad you don't run this place because obviously you have very obtuse ideas about what is and what isn't appropriate to the community.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,627
@previous (D)
I simply do not think that Depressionman's rate of 'shtick' was worse than the shtick of Nickalollyoff, especially when we compare Depressionman's non-shtick to Nickalollyoff's non-shtick.
I simply do not think that Depressionman's rate of 'shtick' was worse than the shtick of Nickalollyoff, especially when we compare Depressionman's non-shtick to Nickalollyoff's non-shtick.
RedFox !FANATICibM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,630
rangeban myself
psychopath !PAHVpsycho joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,632
I'd delete shitposts, ban people that post loli/shota (3 days or less, depending on how much was posted), and permaban anyone that posts CP.
(Edited 54 seconds later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 11 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,633
@75,627 (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
I enjoy how you put Depressionman's shtick in quotes but Nick's not in quotes. Obviously you share a strong bias and are not being very objective to the situation. Your opinions are therefore invalid, and while I agree you are allowed to have this opinion, I just think they are plainly wrong. I think trying to compare these two individuals is a red herring of sorts, anyway, considering their prior histories. Nick is, for the most part, disregardable. If he was banned or not banned, the nature of the community here doesn't change drastically. Since DM was banned, the environment on the board indeed has, and it's self-evident of what kind of influence DM impresses upon here.
I enjoy how you put Depressionman's shtick in quotes but Nick's not in quotes. Obviously you share a strong bias and are not being very objective to the situation. Your opinions are therefore invalid, and while I agree you are allowed to have this opinion, I just think they are plainly wrong. I think trying to compare these two individuals is a red herring of sorts, anyway, considering their prior histories. Nick is, for the most part, disregardable. If he was banned or not banned, the nature of the community here doesn't change drastically. Since DM was banned, the environment on the board indeed has, and it's self-evident of what kind of influence DM impresses upon here.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,638
@previous (D)
> Since DM was banned, the environment on the board indeed has
Yeah, I think it's got a shit-tonne worse.
Also, note how I put Depressionman's shtick not in quotes the second time.
I don't read over and edit my posts before posting them, they get loose threads like that in them often
> Since DM was banned, the environment on the board indeed has
Yeah, I think it's got a shit-tonne worse.
Also, note how I put Depressionman's shtick not in quotes the second time.
I don't read over and edit my posts before posting them, they get loose threads like that in them often
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,639
@previous (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
Goodbye, Ash. I see you clearly have no leg to stand on longer and I refuse to kick a man when he's down.
Goodbye, Ash. I see you clearly have no leg to stand on longer and I refuse to kick a man when he's down.
sim !!hXKXHhLro replied with this 15 years ago, 31 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,641
Why is it so hard to ignore things you dislike and/or report shitposts and other crap?
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,643
advi !!3gpAcg/hF replied with this 15 years ago, 16 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,644
sim !!hXKXHhLro replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,650
cccuuunnttt !nIGga.SL0w joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,657
Wow, you're serious. lol
Anonymous N replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,662
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 11 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,668
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 25 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,669
@75,497 (Tekamine !AnRbswGQv.)
Yeah, I could just give up and leave, but for the most part I enjoy the site. I'd rather have a discussion about its flaws and merits and think of ways we can improve it, rather than break off and start an entirely new BBS again. Just the fact that we're discussing it is part of the solution. I've enjoyed this thread more than any other thread so far this month. Like I said, I don't mind arguing because when people get defensive about their opinions it forces them to think and post meaningful content.
Yeah, I could just give up and leave, but for the most part I enjoy the site. I'd rather have a discussion about its flaws and merits and think of ways we can improve it, rather than break off and start an entirely new BBS again. Just the fact that we're discussing it is part of the solution. I've enjoyed this thread more than any other thread so far this month. Like I said, I don't mind arguing because when people get defensive about their opinions it forces them to think and post meaningful content.
Anonymous G replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,672
Anonymous S joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,680
unban DM
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 35 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,683
@75,500 (D)
@75,559 (N)
Most of what DM posts are not shitposts. He would occasionally shitpost when he was extremely bored, but I find the discussions I've had with him to be some of the most interesting. If you're actually willing to have a real discussion with him, he does take it seriously and can be a great contributer. Most people dislike him not because of his shitposts but because of his "shtick." That's why "angry anons" would hijack and derail any sort of serious thread he tried to start, because no matter how meaningful his posts were, some people just couldn't stand his online persona. So I went to Ghoul to continue having some occasional conversations with him.
@75,559 (N)
Most of what DM posts are not shitposts. He would occasionally shitpost when he was extremely bored, but I find the discussions I've had with him to be some of the most interesting. If you're actually willing to have a real discussion with him, he does take it seriously and can be a great contributer. Most people dislike him not because of his shitposts but because of his "shtick." That's why "angry anons" would hijack and derail any sort of serious thread he tried to start, because no matter how meaningful his posts were, some people just couldn't stand his online persona. So I went to Ghoul to continue having some occasional conversations with him.
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,685
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
People who want him gone have got their wish, and those who don't can see him as much as they want on ghoul. You'd think that this would more or less remove any DM-related drama here.
People who want him gone have got their wish, and those who don't can see him as much as they want on ghoul. You'd think that this would more or less remove any DM-related drama here.
(Edited 24 seconds later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,689
@75,683 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
He forced the situation upon himself, Broseph. It's obvious that it wouldn't have happened for simply arbitrary reasons; it happened because of what I mentioned above. He purposefully derails threads, makes shit threads on his own, and generally makes up lies about himself at such an extreme rate that it's not tolerable. I do agree with you that 'angry anons' that hate on him are excessive, but they do not exist without consequence of his own actions. Trying to fault them for their erratic behaviour is no more stupid than not faulting Matt for his own. He made his bed, and now he has to sleep in it.
He forced the situation upon himself, Broseph. It's obvious that it wouldn't have happened for simply arbitrary reasons; it happened because of what I mentioned above. He purposefully derails threads, makes shit threads on his own, and generally makes up lies about himself at such an extreme rate that it's not tolerable. I do agree with you that 'angry anons' that hate on him are excessive, but they do not exist without consequence of his own actions. Trying to fault them for their erratic behaviour is no more stupid than not faulting Matt for his own. He made his bed, and now he has to sleep in it.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,695
@75,641 (sim !!hXKXHhLro)
It's much easier to do when the headlines are appropriate for the content. Perhaps I was a being a bit too harsh when I said that I'd ban anyone who shitposts. What I'd probably do is just constantly edit headlines to reveal who the shitposters are, which would lead to the threads being quickly ignored.
Take hamfist for example. He's constantly posting pointless, stupid shit all the time. I think a week or so ago he posted some youtube video of a guy drinking candle wax. I don't remember what his headline was, but it was completely irrelevant. I would probably just change the headline to "Youtube video of a guy drinking wax." So, if you're interested in such a video, go ahead and watch, while the rest of know what we're getting into before accidentally opening another one of hamfist's retarded threads. Same with Nick. If he wants to post bullshit, fine, but if his "thread" is just a picture of a guy with a beard, I wouldn't tolerate a thread title "LOLOLOLOL I FUCKED YOU UP" or whatever. I'd change the headline to "Nick posts a pick of a guy with a beard." I wouldn't even lock threads. I'd just use my ability to modify headlines to reveal shitposts as shitposts ahead of time.
I'd hold DM to the same standard. I like it when he posts regular content, despite the shtick, but I'd probably change his headlines to let everyone know in advance if it was just another shitpost about girlfarts. Shitty threads won't stick around very long this way.
It's much easier to do when the headlines are appropriate for the content. Perhaps I was a being a bit too harsh when I said that I'd ban anyone who shitposts. What I'd probably do is just constantly edit headlines to reveal who the shitposters are, which would lead to the threads being quickly ignored.
Take hamfist for example. He's constantly posting pointless, stupid shit all the time. I think a week or so ago he posted some youtube video of a guy drinking candle wax. I don't remember what his headline was, but it was completely irrelevant. I would probably just change the headline to "Youtube video of a guy drinking wax." So, if you're interested in such a video, go ahead and watch, while the rest of know what we're getting into before accidentally opening another one of hamfist's retarded threads. Same with Nick. If he wants to post bullshit, fine, but if his "thread" is just a picture of a guy with a beard, I wouldn't tolerate a thread title "LOLOLOLOL I FUCKED YOU UP" or whatever. I'd change the headline to "Nick posts a pick of a guy with a beard." I wouldn't even lock threads. I'd just use my ability to modify headlines to reveal shitposts as shitposts ahead of time.
I'd hold DM to the same standard. I like it when he posts regular content, despite the shtick, but I'd probably change his headlines to let everyone know in advance if it was just another shitpost about girlfarts. Shitty threads won't stick around very long this way.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,700
@75,689 (D)
I can sympathize with your case, which is why I don't beg people to unban DM, and I generally don't bitch that he's gone. If I want to talk to him, I'll go to Ghoul forum, but I do still miss the real contributions he made to threads here when he wasn't shitposting, back when angry anons didn't ruin every thread he posted in and make it look like his fault. There are still way worse shitposters than DM though. DM was hated more for his shtick than his shitposting. Meanwhile, hamfist can still post the most useless shit without consequence, even though in tinychat he admits that he's just trying to get on people's nerves, while DM really does want to be a meaningful contributor but just can't control himself sometimes.
I can sympathize with your case, which is why I don't beg people to unban DM, and I generally don't bitch that he's gone. If I want to talk to him, I'll go to Ghoul forum, but I do still miss the real contributions he made to threads here when he wasn't shitposting, back when angry anons didn't ruin every thread he posted in and make it look like his fault. There are still way worse shitposters than DM though. DM was hated more for his shtick than his shitposting. Meanwhile, hamfist can still post the most useless shit without consequence, even though in tinychat he admits that he's just trying to get on people's nerves, while DM really does want to be a meaningful contributor but just can't control himself sometimes.
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,701
@75,695 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
To be fair it's a chan. We don't all have such enthusiasm for 100% descriptive headlines.
Besides, shitposts in general are a laugh.
To be fair it's a chan. We don't all have such enthusiasm for 100% descriptive headlines.
Besides, shitposts in general are a laugh.
(Edited 14 seconds later.)
faggot !26D7I/H7YY joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,703
fuck off autism
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 50 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,705
@75,643 (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
Ash, I don't always agree with your posts, but for the most part you are a meaningful contributor. What I don't understand is how Anonymous D can criticize me for talking about what sort of content I think should be encouraged here, and in the same thread tell you that your opinions don't count because he doesn't like the sort of content you want to see here.
Ash, I don't always agree with your posts, but for the most part you are a meaningful contributor. What I don't understand is how Anonymous D can criticize me for talking about what sort of content I think should be encouraged here, and in the same thread tell you that your opinions don't count because he doesn't like the sort of content you want to see here.
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 16 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,706
@75,700 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Hamfist isn't as annoying, as evidenced by the fact that he isn't as widely hated as DM. Constant threads baiting for an argument and begging for money isn't as bad as the odd amusing shitpost.
Hamfist isn't as annoying, as evidenced by the fact that he isn't as widely hated as DM. Constant threads baiting for an argument and begging for money isn't as bad as the odd amusing shitpost.
faggot !26D7I/H7YY replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,712
itt: boring people who will never mod anyway
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 55 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,714
@75,700 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
That seems somewhat arbitrary though as well. While I do not come to the defense of hamfist, he is creating a history of his own. He or the mods will see the course of his actions and take proper measures for it. Hamfist is somewhat predictable but he's also new, and he can be afforded some tolerance. There's no reason to believe he hasn't been sent warning PMs for what he does. On the other hand, DM has, and went against these PMs countless times and I do not think he deserves the many chances he's been afforded to redeem himself, because it has happened so often and yet he does not heed the warning. I also think it unfair to compare other posters (read: shitposters) to DM since he's become such a long-standing and special case. DM's problem is that he is constantly reprimanded but exhibits no signs of remorse for what he does; he constantly repeats offenses and abides long enough to think he's 'in the the clear' but any person with any sort of memory knows it's not the case. I tried to be patient with him; I've tried to be empathetic to his ability to post here but he just cannot, and will not, cease his behaviour of posting the same stuff over and over. I have a very strong breaking point, and he managed to break it. I'm willing to give him another chance, but I have strong doubts that he can ever truly overcome his ability to not do what he does.
That seems somewhat arbitrary though as well. While I do not come to the defense of hamfist, he is creating a history of his own. He or the mods will see the course of his actions and take proper measures for it. Hamfist is somewhat predictable but he's also new, and he can be afforded some tolerance. There's no reason to believe he hasn't been sent warning PMs for what he does. On the other hand, DM has, and went against these PMs countless times and I do not think he deserves the many chances he's been afforded to redeem himself, because it has happened so often and yet he does not heed the warning. I also think it unfair to compare other posters (read: shitposters) to DM since he's become such a long-standing and special case. DM's problem is that he is constantly reprimanded but exhibits no signs of remorse for what he does; he constantly repeats offenses and abides long enough to think he's 'in the the clear' but any person with any sort of memory knows it's not the case. I tried to be patient with him; I've tried to be empathetic to his ability to post here but he just cannot, and will not, cease his behaviour of posting the same stuff over and over. I have a very strong breaking point, and he managed to break it. I'm willing to give him another chance, but I have strong doubts that he can ever truly overcome his ability to not do what he does.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,717
@75,701 (H)
Well I've already said my peace about how I do not think that this is like other chans, how I don't see it as a chan, and how I hate chan bullshit. Putting that aside though, I can see how "shitposts" can occasionally be good for a laugh, but if they really are funny, then I wouldn't call them shitposts. I'm not saying every thread/post has to be serious or thought provoking, they should just serve a point. I'm saying that every headline has to be perfectly written and detailed, just relevant to the topic you're trying to start. As a rule of thumb, if what you're about to post is so pointless that you can't think of a meaningful headline, or at a headline that's ironic to what you're about to post, it's probably a shitpost and shouldn't be posted.
Well I've already said my peace about how I do not think that this is like other chans, how I don't see it as a chan, and how I hate chan bullshit. Putting that aside though, I can see how "shitposts" can occasionally be good for a laugh, but if they really are funny, then I wouldn't call them shitposts. I'm not saying every thread/post has to be serious or thought provoking, they should just serve a point. I'm saying that every headline has to be perfectly written and detailed, just relevant to the topic you're trying to start. As a rule of thumb, if what you're about to post is so pointless that you can't think of a meaningful headline, or at a headline that's ironic to what you're about to post, it's probably a shitpost and shouldn't be posted.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,720
@75,705 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
> What I don't understand is how Anonymous D can criticize me for talking about what sort of content I think should be encouraged here, and in the same thread tell you that your opinions don't count because he doesn't like the sort of content you want to see here.
The reason they don't count is because he's obviously saying disingenuous things. He's not being realistic, and from any objective observer that has spent time here they would know that a lot of things DM used to say were deleted because they were shtick/shitposts. I'm sorry you didn't have to chance to see them before they were deleted, but they were there. Stop confusing the issue.
> What I don't understand is how Anonymous D can criticize me for talking about what sort of content I think should be encouraged here, and in the same thread tell you that your opinions don't count because he doesn't like the sort of content you want to see here.
The reason they don't count is because he's obviously saying disingenuous things. He's not being realistic, and from any objective observer that has spent time here they would know that a lot of things DM used to say were deleted because they were shtick/shitposts. I'm sorry you didn't have to chance to see them before they were deleted, but they were there. Stop confusing the issue.
(Edited 8 minutes later.)
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 9 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,728
@75,714 (D)
You do make a very good, strong case in that post. Nobody comes close to the history that DM has, but not all his content was terrible. I think he's just been around so long that his reputation has built up. The only reason I ever go to Ghoul is because sometimes I can get some meaningful discussion out of him, but I admit that Ghoul is so full of shtick it's disgusting. The difference with someone like hamfist is that I have not once seen him post something I like. At least I would occasionally get some interesting or funny content out of DM, and that alone was enough for me to tolerate sifting through all the other bullshit. What I can't stand are the ones who post nothing but bullshit, and don't even try to contribute anything good.
So for me, it's not how much or how little bullshit you add to the board, it's what you contribute when you're actually trying. Do you see what I mean? DM actually tried (and failed) but at least tried. Meanwhile, hamfist probably likes getting PMs, since he admits in tinychat that he likes pissing off the mods. For someone like hamfist, a PM is a reward, because it tells him that his trolling is working, while someone like DM is crestfallen that he can't live up to the board's standards and be liked.
You do make a very good, strong case in that post. Nobody comes close to the history that DM has, but not all his content was terrible. I think he's just been around so long that his reputation has built up. The only reason I ever go to Ghoul is because sometimes I can get some meaningful discussion out of him, but I admit that Ghoul is so full of shtick it's disgusting. The difference with someone like hamfist is that I have not once seen him post something I like. At least I would occasionally get some interesting or funny content out of DM, and that alone was enough for me to tolerate sifting through all the other bullshit. What I can't stand are the ones who post nothing but bullshit, and don't even try to contribute anything good.
So for me, it's not how much or how little bullshit you add to the board, it's what you contribute when you're actually trying. Do you see what I mean? DM actually tried (and failed) but at least tried. Meanwhile, hamfist probably likes getting PMs, since he admits in tinychat that he likes pissing off the mods. For someone like hamfist, a PM is a reward, because it tells him that his trolling is working, while someone like DM is crestfallen that he can't live up to the board's standards and be liked.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,737
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
You already tried that on Ghoul. You even banned me, and banned Matt off his own board. That was funny though.
You already tried that on Ghoul. You even banned me, and banned Matt off his own board. That was funny though.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,740
@75,728 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
The issue isn't about hamfist; it's about DM. That was my original argument. As I said before, I'm not coming to his defense. It's been discussed before whether or not he should be banned. He's digging his own hole, and that hole isn't nearly as deep as DM's is. I'm not excusing either of them; I find their posts to be pretty bland and uninteresting. If you made a ratio of what DM says that's quality content to what he shitposts, you'd probably be extraordinarily surprised. That being said, I shitpost from time to time myself, and I've had a number of my 'quality topics' derailed by shitposts but I don't throw a hissy fit over it. It's best to just report and ignore and move on with your life. Repeat offenders should not be allowed the tolerance they sometimes receive, though, so we can agree there. That's my two cents.
The issue isn't about hamfist; it's about DM. That was my original argument. As I said before, I'm not coming to his defense. It's been discussed before whether or not he should be banned. He's digging his own hole, and that hole isn't nearly as deep as DM's is. I'm not excusing either of them; I find their posts to be pretty bland and uninteresting. If you made a ratio of what DM says that's quality content to what he shitposts, you'd probably be extraordinarily surprised. That being said, I shitpost from time to time myself, and I've had a number of my 'quality topics' derailed by shitposts but I don't throw a hissy fit over it. It's best to just report and ignore and move on with your life. Repeat offenders should not be allowed the tolerance they sometimes receive, though, so we can agree there. That's my two cents.
Anonymous X joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,744
Make Meta into a Sysop.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,749
@75,740 (D)
> The issue isn't about hamfist; it's about DM.
The issue really isn't about DM either, since a) I mostly agree with you and I'm not begging for him to be brought back and b) because we were talking about shitposts in general, not just DM, which led to my points about hamfist, or rather, just using hamfist as an example. The real topic here is, as my headline implies, what you would do to make the board a better place if you were a mod, and I discussed techniques I would use to discourage shitposts while encouraging interesting/funny/worthwhile topics to stay on the front page. I see no reason to stay hung up on DM.
> The issue isn't about hamfist; it's about DM.
The issue really isn't about DM either, since a) I mostly agree with you and I'm not begging for him to be brought back and b) because we were talking about shitposts in general, not just DM, which led to my points about hamfist, or rather, just using hamfist as an example. The real topic here is, as my headline implies, what you would do to make the board a better place if you were a mod, and I discussed techniques I would use to discourage shitposts while encouraging interesting/funny/worthwhile topics to stay on the front page. I see no reason to stay hung up on DM.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,756
@75,740 (D)
Also, I don't think I'm throwing a hissyfit. Many have suggested that if I don't think any of the current topics are interesting, I should make my own, and that's exactly what I did here, and I think it lead to some great discourse. Like I said earlier, arguing is a great way to get people thinking. So just arguing about it is partially solving the problem. I'm enjoying this thread, and I see no reason why we can't discuss the sort of content we like to see and why, and what sort of content we hate.
So, what would you do if you were a mod?
Also, I don't think I'm throwing a hissyfit. Many have suggested that if I don't think any of the current topics are interesting, I should make my own, and that's exactly what I did here, and I think it lead to some great discourse. Like I said earlier, arguing is a great way to get people thinking. So just arguing about it is partially solving the problem. I'm enjoying this thread, and I see no reason why we can't discuss the sort of content we like to see and why, and what sort of content we hate.
So, what would you do if you were a mod?
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 42 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,758
@75,749 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
I think most would be somewhat hard-pressed to not discuss DM, though, given he was the king of shitposting. I see what you mean, though, and we'll drop discussing him in order to continue discussion. That being said, there are a number of shitposters who come and go without restraint, and some are really only more noticeable than others. I think Nick gets a bad rap because of his history; I don't think he's a bad person whatsoever nor do I think he should be banned or anything of the sort. I really like Nick. I don't see why others don't. There are other posters we have that shit up the place but I think they get excused for arbitrary reasons, but it is what it is. I think under your method we'd see a lot more people banned, and that may not necessarily be a bad thing, because some shitposters here are excused based upon gender at times.
I think most would be somewhat hard-pressed to not discuss DM, though, given he was the king of shitposting. I see what you mean, though, and we'll drop discussing him in order to continue discussion. That being said, there are a number of shitposters who come and go without restraint, and some are really only more noticeable than others. I think Nick gets a bad rap because of his history; I don't think he's a bad person whatsoever nor do I think he should be banned or anything of the sort. I really like Nick. I don't see why others don't. There are other posters we have that shit up the place but I think they get excused for arbitrary reasons, but it is what it is. I think under your method we'd see a lot more people banned, and that may not necessarily be a bad thing, because some shitposters here are excused based upon gender at times.
sim !!hXKXHhLro replied with this 15 years ago, 11 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,774
@75,695 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
I delete a lot of those topics, but some I will miss, or let it be on purpose. Feel free to report them, so a mod can hav a look at it. We can;t check everything.
I delete a lot of those topics, but some I will miss, or let it be on purpose. Feel free to report them, so a mod can hav a look at it. We can;t check everything.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,776
@75,758 (D)
I see what you mean. Nick is similar to DM (at least in my opinion) in that when he's not shitposting he does contribute. The difference is Nick can drop the act and go into "serious mode" while DM seems to take his shtick with him even when he's being serious. It's just the way he is. Same is true with stickybuns and a few others. I just think bombing a thread with irrelevant pictures over and over is stupid, and mods should probably just delete those posts outright if it's obvious that that's what's happening. It makes loading threads on my cell a pain in the ass.
As far as seeing a lot more bans under my method, I wouldn't ban people outright. I would stick to the method of altering headlines as way to call people out on their shit, and then just watch the shitty threads fall off the board. Or, maybe even with the altered headline, the thread still gets attention and stays on the front page, but that's sort of the beauty of this method. Rather than delete or lock the thread, I let it go in case what I see as a shitpost, someone else might see as funny or a launchpad for another discussion (and if it does turn into a better discussion, I could alter the headline again so that people don't miss out on what's actually a good discussion because the headline doesn't describe what's actually going on in the thread). But altering the headline at least makes the bullshit more transparent.
Anyway, I would only ban someone if they just constantly bumped their own bullshit constantly, or constantly made bullshit threads to always stay on the front page, or bombed other threads with bullshit, etc. That sort of stuff.
I see what you mean. Nick is similar to DM (at least in my opinion) in that when he's not shitposting he does contribute. The difference is Nick can drop the act and go into "serious mode" while DM seems to take his shtick with him even when he's being serious. It's just the way he is. Same is true with stickybuns and a few others. I just think bombing a thread with irrelevant pictures over and over is stupid, and mods should probably just delete those posts outright if it's obvious that that's what's happening. It makes loading threads on my cell a pain in the ass.
As far as seeing a lot more bans under my method, I wouldn't ban people outright. I would stick to the method of altering headlines as way to call people out on their shit, and then just watch the shitty threads fall off the board. Or, maybe even with the altered headline, the thread still gets attention and stays on the front page, but that's sort of the beauty of this method. Rather than delete or lock the thread, I let it go in case what I see as a shitpost, someone else might see as funny or a launchpad for another discussion (and if it does turn into a better discussion, I could alter the headline again so that people don't miss out on what's actually a good discussion because the headline doesn't describe what's actually going on in the thread). But altering the headline at least makes the bullshit more transparent.
Anyway, I would only ban someone if they just constantly bumped their own bullshit constantly, or constantly made bullshit threads to always stay on the front page, or bombed other threads with bullshit, etc. That sort of stuff.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,778
@75,756 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
I'm glad you're enjoying it, because I'm enjoying it as well. I also appreciate we've kept this at a serious level and I genuinely apologize for throwing around insults like calling you 'Kimmoseph'. I was acting short-sighted and a little irritated so that was rude of me. You're a cool guy, Broseph, and I enjoy talking to you.
Anyway, if I was a mod? I'd mostly allow discussion to occur, almost without restraint, because I think being raw and unfiltered discussion is important. The only time I would ever do something would be when a post is excessively inflammatory towards one person, or dox material, or extremely disruptive. Banning/deleting for personal reasons is not to be desired. I would hope there would exist a level of maturity, and I'd like to reinforce it, because I think it important to encourage legitimate discussions. That being said, I do not dismay myself for having shitposts or shit threads. I think they should continue just fine without a lot of restraint. Personally, though, I'd probably delete them off the board after a few hours of inactivity once they've served their purpose. Namely those FAO topics and such. I think less action is better generally.
I'm glad you're enjoying it, because I'm enjoying it as well. I also appreciate we've kept this at a serious level and I genuinely apologize for throwing around insults like calling you 'Kimmoseph'. I was acting short-sighted and a little irritated so that was rude of me. You're a cool guy, Broseph, and I enjoy talking to you.
Anyway, if I was a mod? I'd mostly allow discussion to occur, almost without restraint, because I think being raw and unfiltered discussion is important. The only time I would ever do something would be when a post is excessively inflammatory towards one person, or dox material, or extremely disruptive. Banning/deleting for personal reasons is not to be desired. I would hope there would exist a level of maturity, and I'd like to reinforce it, because I think it important to encourage legitimate discussions. That being said, I do not dismay myself for having shitposts or shit threads. I think they should continue just fine without a lot of restraint. Personally, though, I'd probably delete them off the board after a few hours of inactivity once they've served their purpose. Namely those FAO topics and such. I think less action is better generally.
Anonymous D double-posted this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,779
@75,776 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
I personally am not a fan of editing people for the sake of personal gain. Just because I dislike something, doesn't mean I have to personally get involved. That seems to be where you and I differ. I do not wish to micromanage what happens on this board or what people do, but it is curious to see what they do at any rate.
I personally am not a fan of editing people for the sake of personal gain. Just because I dislike something, doesn't mean I have to personally get involved. That seems to be where you and I differ. I do not wish to micromanage what happens on this board or what people do, but it is curious to see what they do at any rate.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,793
@75,778 (D)
I really didn't mind the "Kimmoseph". If you hadn't said it, I wouldn't have made my point that I'd actually enjoy a site like AnonTalk that was a site for serious discussion and not a chan, just without all of Kimmo's bullshit. I'm not saying this site needs to be like that, I just think that AnonTalk wouldn't be to bad if you took away Kimmo and the pedo topics.
I agree that free speech and being raw and unfiltered is very important, it's just the sort of "yelling fire in a crowded theater argument." You have to draw the line somewhere, as even places like /b/ have to put defenses in place to fend off bots and spam. The questions is, what's the best way to censor a place like this without doing it in a way from stifling people from expressing their thoughts/beliefs/opinions?
For example, someone posts a youtube video that seems to be pointless with the headline "Watch this". Is it a shitpost that should be deleted? Is the video pushing a product that could lead one to believe that the post is spam? Was it posted by a bot that's just trying to get views on a youtube video? You could just delete it, but what if the person who posted the video really did feel that it was something worth sharing and that's why he or she posted it? Then by deleting it, you've censored them by passing judgement on something that they hold value to. So, for me, the easiest solution is to modify the headlines of things you're not sure about and let others be the judge. I guess this was my logic behind the modifying headlines idea.
When you look at it this way, I see a shitpost as a post that's so pointless that it can be deleted without it being considered censorship, because it's not coherent enough to express an opinion/view that would be censored in its deletion. Does that make sense?
I really didn't mind the "Kimmoseph". If you hadn't said it, I wouldn't have made my point that I'd actually enjoy a site like AnonTalk that was a site for serious discussion and not a chan, just without all of Kimmo's bullshit. I'm not saying this site needs to be like that, I just think that AnonTalk wouldn't be to bad if you took away Kimmo and the pedo topics.
I agree that free speech and being raw and unfiltered is very important, it's just the sort of "yelling fire in a crowded theater argument." You have to draw the line somewhere, as even places like /b/ have to put defenses in place to fend off bots and spam. The questions is, what's the best way to censor a place like this without doing it in a way from stifling people from expressing their thoughts/beliefs/opinions?
For example, someone posts a youtube video that seems to be pointless with the headline "Watch this". Is it a shitpost that should be deleted? Is the video pushing a product that could lead one to believe that the post is spam? Was it posted by a bot that's just trying to get views on a youtube video? You could just delete it, but what if the person who posted the video really did feel that it was something worth sharing and that's why he or she posted it? Then by deleting it, you've censored them by passing judgement on something that they hold value to. So, for me, the easiest solution is to modify the headlines of things you're not sure about and let others be the judge. I guess this was my logic behind the modifying headlines idea.
When you look at it this way, I see a shitpost as a post that's so pointless that it can be deleted without it being considered censorship, because it's not coherent enough to express an opinion/view that would be censored in its deletion. Does that make sense?
Born this Way !dLadyGAgAA joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,796
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,805
@75,793 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
> For example, someone posts a youtube video that seems to be pointless with the headline "Watch this". Is it a shitpost that should be deleted?
No. Come as they are. I'm not going to stifle what people say or how they say it for a brief inconvience of how they structure their language. I think we're fine not editing what is said for the sake of 'semi-quality'. I think you should adopt that philosophy too, because if people didn't want you to watch they wouldn't phrase it in an interesting way. You should see that evidence in what some people (read: hamfist) posts. Don't watch those videos if they are presented in a poor fashion.
What you said makes sense, but again, I'm not interested in stifling people's opinions. Again, I think it's just a chan, and I think opinions can be expressed regardless of quality. The nature of that quality (or lack of) is a different issue, however.
> For example, someone posts a youtube video that seems to be pointless with the headline "Watch this". Is it a shitpost that should be deleted?
No. Come as they are. I'm not going to stifle what people say or how they say it for a brief inconvience of how they structure their language. I think we're fine not editing what is said for the sake of 'semi-quality'. I think you should adopt that philosophy too, because if people didn't want you to watch they wouldn't phrase it in an interesting way. You should see that evidence in what some people (read: hamfist) posts. Don't watch those videos if they are presented in a poor fashion.
What you said makes sense, but again, I'm not interested in stifling people's opinions. Again, I think it's just a chan, and I think opinions can be expressed regardless of quality. The nature of that quality (or lack of) is a different issue, however.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 11 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #75,814
@previous (D)
I see what you mean. It's not worth that level of micromanagement, especially since it is just a chan. That also may have been a poor example.
I was really just trying to drive home my point about censorship. The real point is, where would you draw the line? Like I said, even places like /b/ put things in place to prevent the botting and spamming. So, would you do what /b/ does, and allow anything as long as it's not blatant abuse, or would you do anything to ensure that we at least stay a few notches above a place like /b/?
Edit: Like I said, my goal is not to stifle anyone's opinion, regardless of how shitty I think it is. My point is, how do you figure out what's actually a sincere opinion and what's just blatant trolling/shitposting under the guise of freedom of expression?
I see what you mean. It's not worth that level of micromanagement, especially since it is just a chan. That also may have been a poor example.
I was really just trying to drive home my point about censorship. The real point is, where would you draw the line? Like I said, even places like /b/ put things in place to prevent the botting and spamming. So, would you do what /b/ does, and allow anything as long as it's not blatant abuse, or would you do anything to ensure that we at least stay a few notches above a place like /b/?
Edit: Like I said, my goal is not to stifle anyone's opinion, regardless of how shitty I think it is. My point is, how do you figure out what's actually a sincere opinion and what's just blatant trolling/shitposting under the guise of freedom of expression?
(Edited 1 minute later.)