ewerk 30544 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 There's something very un-toontastic about this thread. Anyway, there's no need for bannings unless someone acts like a twat (to the extent that it pisses off at least half the board's posters) for years on end. Then maybe there should be a vote to decide. That would be my solution. Only those with a post count of over 500 are eligible to vote and if 80% of those voting are in favour of banning then Ant gets his big ban stick out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 There's something very un-toontastic about this thread. Anyway, there's no need for bannings unless someone acts like a twat (to the extent that it pisses off at least half the board's posters) for years on end. Then maybe there should be a vote to decide. People who are pissed off vote in polls like that, perhaps a vocal minority. People who couldn't give a fuck tend not to bother. That's how you end up with Snow Patrol winning the greatest song ever written on Virgin radio's poll to end all polls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30544 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 People who are pissed off vote in polls like that, perhaps a vocal minority. People who couldn't give a fuck tend not to bother. That's how you end up with Snow Patrol winning the greatest song ever written on Virgin radio's poll to end all polls. Add in a 50% turnout threshold of those who have logged in over the week prior to the poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Even longer morning. This thread is getting me hard. I can see you are going to be a great mod. That's about the 5th message you have spat your dummy out at and changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 He was just taking the piss, so I am too. The first one to lose their sense of humour looks like a dick. Won't be me. Too late man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7083 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 He was just taking the piss, so I am too. The first one to lose their sense of humour looks like a dick. Won't be me. Good to hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Good to hear. On a serious note. Stop changing my posts to get your kicks. You weren't made a mod to have a little chuckle to yourself when you decide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7083 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 On a serious note. Stop changing my posts to get your kicks. You weren't made a mod to have a little chuckle to yourself when you decide Consider me stopped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Add in a 50% turnout threshold of those who have logged in over the week prior to the poll. Sounds pretty arbitrary. What if I'm on me hols that weekend? and unworkable, how do you set up a polll with those restrictions? Will you check all the voters posted in the specified period? My assumption would be lurkers and infrequent posters don't feel stongly enough to log in and voice their unhappiness either. There's 205 people with over 500 posts, so if you really want this, then the democratic way would be first past the post. Get 103 of them to vote for a ban and that's unarguable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4747 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Consider me stopped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TicTacWoe 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) Well you can't just make up a rule that says "derailing threads=banning" as there'd be nobody left. It's just a question of quantity. The only posters I can think of who've done this on a mass scale in my time here are Fop, LM and ASM and even Fop was at least derailing it with different nonsense each time rather than that one bonkers debate the other two used to have. Edited May 4, 2012 by TicTacWoe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30544 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Sounds pretty arbitrary. What if I'm on me hols that weekend? and unworkable, how do you set up a polll with those restrictions? Will you check all the voters posted in the specified period? My assumption would be lurkers and infrequent posters don't feel stongly enough to log in and voice their unhappiness either. There's 205 people with over 500 posts, so if you really want this, then the democratic way would be first past the post. Get 103 of them to vote for a ban and that's unarguable. FPTP isn't really appropriate, if someone is going to be permanently banned following a democratic vote then it needs to be by a qualified majority, not simply because more than 50% are pissed off. I'm sure that Ant has some way of identifying eligible members and they could be granted access to a restricted forum where these polls are set up by the mods and then only the eligible posters can vote. It's just an idea that I'm throwing out there, if you guys want the issue of bans to be democratic. The alternatives are to have a set of rules and a rigid disciplinary process or to base it on the subjective feelings of the moderation team. I'm not particularly arsed which route you choose to go down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7083 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Well you can't just make up a rule that says "derailing threads=banning" as there'd be nobody left. It's just a question of quantity. The only posters I can think of who've done this on a mass scale in my time here are Fop, LM and ASM and even Fop was at least derailing it with different nonsense each time rather than that one bonkers debate the other two used to have. A fair point, I actually enjoy the vast majority of derailments. A thread about Ameobi ending up being a discussion of childhood farting incidents is part of the appeal of the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Author Share Posted May 4, 2012 On a serious note. Stop changing my posts to get your kicks. You weren't made a mod to have a little chuckle to yourself when you decide Your giggling in the two posts above, so its even getting a laugh from you. You werent taking the topic seriously and it was detracting from the super serial discussion, according to the prissy law of the ban happy brigade, something HAD to be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inglez 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 This just seems to have caused more problems than what there originally was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 44804 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Ideally you want a moderating team that isn't scared to make a decision in the best interests of the forum. In the absence of that, things get difficult, as evidenced by this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 4725 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Ideally you want a moderating team that isn't scared to make a decision in the best interests of the forum. In the absence of that, things get difficult, as evidenced by this thread. Yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Your giggling in the two posts above, so its even getting a laugh from you. You werent taking the topic seriously and it was detracting from the super serial discussion, according to the prissy law of the ban happy brigade, something HAD to be done. I was laughing at how much FAIL you have shown in this thread. I'm all for having a sense of humour. Give me the ability to alter your posts and we can both have a good laugh together. As it stands, it's only really fun for one of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7083 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 I was laughing at how much FAIL you have shown in this thread. I'm all for having a sense of humour. Give me the ability to alter your posts and we can both have a good laugh together. As it stands, it's only really fun for one of us. Now you're talking, let us all alter each other's posts. Anarchy FTW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7083 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 I didn't write that. That's not funny anymore guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BestBaNone 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Stevie, Fop, Hova, ASM, Victor, LM to name but a few. Months of debate and people falling out, leaving the forum etc because like some fucking pubescent fucking teenager 'we dont want rulez' It's fucking hilarious iyam. So if Leazes stays the aforementioned will all be unbanned, correct? Or is he a special case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Author Share Posted May 4, 2012 So if Leazes stays the aforementioned will all be unbanned, correct? Or is he a special case? I dont know, i just thought a bit of discussion about this was better than none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 FPTP isn't really appropriate, if someone is going to be permanently banned following a democratic vote then it needs to be by a qualified majority, not simply because more than 50% are pissed off. I'm sure that Ant has some way of identifying eligible members and they could be granted access to a restricted forum where these polls are set up by the mods and then only the eligible posters can vote. It's just an idea that I'm throwing out there, if you guys want the issue of bans to be democratic. The alternatives are to have a set of rules and a rigid disciplinary process or to base it on the subjective feelings of the moderation team. I'm not particularly arsed which route you choose to go down. There's no "you guys" here. It's been said several times that these are all personal opinions. I don't want a ban at all democratic or not. The bold bit is EXACTLY why Chez started the thread, but there seems to be little interest in defining those rules to apply to all, even from those that get most hot under the collar about it and ask for bans. If it's not feasible to define it, then I guess we see how the new moderating team gets on for now, using their own judgement, rather than asking them to ban someone before they've had the chance to moderate a single post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BestBaNone 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Changing posts for fun now. Getting a bit ridiculous. Changed one of mine last night because I posted something he didn't like. It's descended to fucking farcical now, this. Look at how much shit gets kicked up because of the sour ald git. I even spent a night on the naughty step last week because of him. HE PISSES EVERYONE OFF - ON PURPOSE - HE'S LAUGHING AT YOU FFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BestBaNone 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Ironically, LM himself mocks the idea of rehabilitating offenders. He's not an offender like, because there's no rules [/chez] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts