Why do we let one or two posters ruin the forum?

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
I've been on KMC now for a few years, and I've noticed a pattern in posting on the GDF: KMC goes in waves. Most of the time, we're in troughs, where people will post news articles or intelligent thoughts on some issues. When a political issue looms in the media, however, the GDF hits the crests: there are numerous threads focusing on a particular issue.

When I first started posting on the GDF, President Bush was the "crest issue": favorite Bushisms, Bush is retarded, Bush is turning the U.S. into a dictatorship, etc. This eventually died down and there was a healthy mix of topics. There have been other examples of this, such as with Hurricane Katrina, the 2004 election, etc.

When the GDF hits the crests, the forum gets a little bit retarded, but it's understandable--"hot" issues are going to generate a lot of thoughts, and threads usually will get focused onto one aspect of the issue over time, excluding most other discussion.

My gripe is that we on the GDF allow certain posters to push us into these crests. In the past, Whirlysplat would go on and post several topics about stupid, inane things centered around one issue (if I recall correctly, he made three different threads on homosexuality in a very short span). Quite frankly, when this happens, we look like a bunch of morons.

The past second-to-last crest was about race, and I believe that both FistoftheNorth and Czarina_Czarina worked in conjunction (not deliberately) to swamp the forum with idiocy. Right now, we're suffering under the "Czarina_Czarina's stupid-ass thoughts" crest that is intertwined with the "racism" crest.

(Oddly enough, Czarina_Czarina has to make every single thread of hers involve race, which is why the two crests are intertwined.)

Why do we put up with this crap? Why don't we have the mods make a "Czarina_Czarina's Brainturds" thread where Czarina_Czarina can yammer on and on about her stupid-ass bullshit like the sun having a walk-in while the indigo black girl sits on Czarina_Czarina's energy and makes Czarina_Czarina hate minorities? This would spare us the pain of her stupidity without resorting to the injustice--albeit relief--of a ban.

And it's not like this doesn't happen in other parts of KMC, mind you. Prior to Urizen's "reformation," the Religion Forum was littered with crap about Jesus being gay, angels being gay, God being a vampire, and other such ****wittery that only those such as Chris Crocker can top.

The topics can't really go into the OTF forum because, like it or not, they do (at times) constitute valid discussion points. (Also, the OTF is a horrible, horrible place that needs to get cancer.) It's just that they're so intrinsically stupid that we can't possibly take them seriously without spamming things like "STOP MAKING THREADS YOU ****ING IDIOT."

I missed this place. Of course now I remember why I left in the first place . . .

I like how Whirly always does the same stupid shit that lets us know it is him in the first place...you know, the stuff I talked about in my original post.

What a dumb****.

He should at least get an IP masker.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
I've been on KMC now for a few years, and I've noticed a pattern in posting on the GDF: KMC goes in waves. Most of the time, we're in troughs, where people will post news articles or intelligent thoughts on some issues. When a political issue looms in the media, however, the GDF hits the crests: there are numerous threads focusing on a particular issue.

When I first started posting on the GDF, President Bush was the "crest issue": favorite Bushisms, Bush is retarded, Bush is turning the U.S. into a dictatorship, etc. This eventually died down and there was a healthy mix of topics. There have been other examples of this, such as with Hurricane Katrina, the 2004 election, etc.

When the GDF hits the crests, the forum gets a little bit retarded, but it's understandable--"hot" issues are going to generate a lot of thoughts, and threads usually will get focused onto one aspect of the issue over time, excluding most other discussion.

My gripe is that we on the GDF allow certain posters to push us into these crests. In the past, Whirlysplat would go on and post several topics about stupid, inane things centered around one issue (if I recall correctly, he made three different threads on homosexuality in a very short span). Quite frankly, when this happens, we look like a bunch of morons.

The past second-to-last crest was about race, and I believe that both FistoftheNorth and Czarina_Czarina worked in conjunction (not deliberately) to swamp the forum with idiocy. Right now, we're suffering under the "Czarina_Czarina's stupid-ass thoughts" crest that is intertwined with the "racism" crest.

(Oddly enough, Czarina_Czarina has to make every single thread of hers involve race, which is why the two crests are intertwined.)

Why do we put up with this crap? Why don't we have the mods make a "Czarina_Czarina's Brainturds" thread where Czarina_Czarina can yammer on and on about her stupid-ass bullshit like the sun having a walk-in while the indigo black girl sits on Czarina_Czarina's energy and makes Czarina_Czarina hate minorities? This would spare us the pain of her stupidity without resorting to the injustice--albeit relief--of a ban.

And it's not like this doesn't happen in other parts of KMC, mind you. Prior to Urizen's "reformation," the Religion Forum was littered with crap about Jesus being gay, angels being gay, God being a vampire, and other such ****wittery that only those such as Chris Crocker can top.

The topics can't really go into the OTF forum because, like it or not, they do (at times) constitute valid discussion points. (Also, the OTF is a horrible, horrible place that needs to get cancer.) It's just that they're so intrinsically stupid that we can't possibly take them seriously without spamming things like "STOP MAKING THREADS YOU ****ING IDIOT."

Do you realize what you just did? You put me down in order to lift yourself up. What's the name of that kind of tactic?

Well, enjoy making threads!

Your a spastic. Quote me.

Originally posted by tabby999
Your a spastic. Quote me.

Done.

Everyone can freely decide what threads they read and reply to, I choose not to read threads which have titles like " Jesus being gay, angels being gay, God being a vampire" and if I do open a thread which is obviously rather silly then i don´t even bother replying.

What some people would consider daft threads others might consider worth discussing. Ive opened a few threads and made some replies which some people might find silly or daft, some influenced by high intakes of alchohol. These things happen were all human.

Originally posted by BackFire
Done.

And its not until later i realise i should correct "your" with "you're."
Alpha, its working!

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
Do you realize what you just did? You put me down in order to lift yourself up. What's the name of that kind of tactic?

Seems like honesty and recitation of facts actually . . .

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
I like how Whirly always does the same stupid shit that lets us know it is him in the first place...you know, the stuff I talked about in my original post.

What a dumb****.

He should at least get an IP masker.

Holy.....Shitdude....

For a second there I thought you are Whirly.

Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
Do you realize what you just did? You put me down in order to lift yourself up. What's the name of that kind of tactic?

Well, enjoy making threads!

Pretty common with reasonable folks....you wouldn't know it.

On rule enforcing... Should we enforce a guideline even though it’ s only a minor violation and it probably wasn’ t intentional, or should we let it slide so that we don’ t appear tough, dictatorial, and uncompromising? For a lot of situations, the approach we take will differ. Not only because of the nature of the violation, but also because of the person who deals with the transgression. With 18 different moderators, it is not evident to conform to an identical style or approach. We' re not programmed robots, but humans with our own personality and character.

Originally posted by Storm
On rule enforcing... Should we enforce a guideline even though it’ s only a minor violation and it probably wasn’ t intentional, or should we let it slide so that we don’ t appear tough, dictatorial, and uncompromising? For a lot of situations, the approach we take will differ. Not only because of the nature of the violation, but also because of the person who deals with the transgression. With 18 different moderators, it is not evident to conform to an identical style or approach. We' re not programmed robots, but humans with our own personality and character.

"If you prick us, do we not bleed?

Originally posted by Robtard
"If you prick us, do we not bleed?

now that was funny!

Originally posted by Storm
On rule enforcing... Should we enforce a guideline even though it’ s only a minor violation and it probably wasn’ t intentional, or should we let it slide so that we don’ t appear tough, dictatorial, and uncompromising? For a lot of situations, the approach we take will differ. Not only because of the nature of the violation, but also because of the person who deals with the transgression. With 18 different moderators, it is not evident to conform to an identical style or approach. We' re not programmed robots, but humans with our own personality and character.

If you can't do a job properly and fairly, without bias, don't take the job. I think that seems like a fair request.

I think it's only right that mods be consistent, and not all of them are. They'll make a decision one day, based on nothing, then let a million other things slide because it suits them to. Gone are the days when this was viewed as paranoia coming from myself and a few others, it's actually evident to the point that mods recognise it.

If you are doing to ban one person for doing something, ban everyone who does it, with no exception.

That's one issue, the other is as I said, bias.

-AC

alpha centuri is a game lol

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you can't do a job properly and fairly, without bias, don't take the job. I think that seems like a fair request.

I think it's only right that mods be consistent, and not all of them are. They'll make a decision one day, based on nothing, then let a million other things slide because it suits them to. Gone are the days when this was viewed as paranoia coming from myself and a few others, it's actually evident to the point that mods recognise it.

If you are doing to ban one person for doing something, ban everyone who does it, with no exception.

That's one issue, the other is as I said, bias.

-AC

You're gonna get banned.

Or would that prove your point?

Originally posted by KidRock
Videos like that make me think that the Nazi's and their 'cleansing' programs weren't such a bad idea..

I said something just like this to Jackie Malfoy, and got threatened. (and that's not pointed at Kidrock, but at the situation at hand.)

I think it woud just prove his point, Devil King.

Originally posted by Devil King
You're gonna get banned.

Or would that prove your point?

Man, I need some copy-pasta

Originally posted by The Grey Fox
I think it woud just prove his point, Devil King.

it was a rhetorical question.

Originally posted by Devil King

I said something just like this to Jackie Malfoy, and got threatened. (and that's not pointed at Kidrock, but at the situation at hand.)

That was funny.