Missin U <3 - lamentations for those felled by the SB

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1325 of them)

Morbs you know if you don't know something you can always ask.

a muttering inbred (called) (not named) (Abbott), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:28 (sixteen years ago)

exactly, so people like tuomas & LJ are suggest banned without any legitimate reason. xpost

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:29 (sixteen years ago)

They post here now, don't they?

a muttering inbred (called) (not named) (Abbott), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:29 (sixteen years ago)

they can be really irritating, how is that not legitimate?

bodied peanuts (goole), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:30 (sixteen years ago)

the ire that tuomas invokes is pretty hard for me to comprehend

❊❁❄❆❇❃✴❈plaxico❈✴❃❇❆❄❁❊ (I know, right?), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:30 (sixteen years ago)

in re: suicide by image-bomb: think about it man. you & some friends are sitting at a table having a talk. I show up, I decide your talk has gone far enough, and start holding up pictures I think are funny in front of your face, one after another. you're still to free to talk! hey, don't let me stop you, you're not obliged to pay any attention - look around 'em! you'd give me a suggest-punch-in-the-face and I'd deserve it. most of the image-bombing was exactly like what I've described: "I don't like this thread any more, fuck any of you who do." suggest ban is a PERFECT solution for people who think their having become sick of a discussion is reason enough to fuck up others' right to have that discussion.

the evil genius of Zaiger Genetics (J0hn D.), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:30 (sixteen years ago)

They're banned for at least 51 legitimate reasons!

Hugh Manatee (WmC), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:30 (sixteen years ago)

you can fucking ignore their posts xxxpost

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:31 (sixteen years ago)

or you can suggest that they be escorted out since they are being assholes. it's what you'd reasonably do at a party, and it makes sense to do it here.

the evil genius of Zaiger Genetics (J0hn D.), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:32 (sixteen years ago)

I'm talking about LJ or Tuomas here

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:32 (sixteen years ago)

legitimate by what measure, though? There's two sides to this, for sure, but I think it's one of the strengths of SB that you can't go all legitimacy-lawyer about it. I watch what posts ppl click SB on, and it's almost universally stuff that boils down to "acting like a bit of a dick". For some people that's being creepy, for other people it's banging on and on about a topic and not actually engaging anyone else on it, for other people it's imagebombing.

Instead of a whole FAQ-load of "things that will get you banned", the threat of SB comes down to "don't act like a dick". You can say that you don't like the defintion of dickishness that the SBing masses are imposing, but I genuinely don't think it's an unreasonable or minority one, at least judging by how it's been used so far.

stet, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:32 (sixteen years ago)

I know I'm being way more irritating than anyone on ILX ever btw

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:33 (sixteen years ago)

As for LJ: given that he's mostly stopped doing the things that got him SBs, and has stopped garnering SBs as a result and still seems to be a happy poster, that reads more like a success story than an argument for "SB MUST GO"

stet, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:34 (sixteen years ago)

And it's nice to see that you've received zero SBs for it.

x-post.

Keith, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:34 (sixteen years ago)

Not by my (legitimate) reasoning, b/c I haven't SB'd you.

Hugh Manatee (WmC), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:34 (sixteen years ago)

I know I'm being way more irritating than anyone on ILX ever btw

I find it lovable and have given you several lovingly-meant SBs in response

the evil genius of Zaiger Genetics (J0hn D.), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:34 (sixteen years ago)

hahaha Keith!

Hugh Manatee (WmC), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:34 (sixteen years ago)

haha thanks keith that's a relief actually

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:34 (sixteen years ago)

And it might point out that arguing your point doesn't get you SBs. Generally being a dick to other posters does.

Keith, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:35 (sixteen years ago)

anyway I guess I've made my ill-thought-out point about 5000 times on this thread, so I'm out till the next SB thread, catch u later

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:36 (sixteen years ago)

the point of SBs is to forgo argument about what is 'legitimate' and what isn't. there are no legitimacy standards anyone is beholden to, aside from blatant racism or personal attacks or whatever else the mods feel like enforcing. you can post whatever you want. you can be just as irritating to other people as you feel you should be. you can also move to bounce people for whatever standard of irritation they have met in your eyes. if 51 (fifty-one fucking people! that is a lot of people on a not-big board like this) agree with you, or did, at any time, that's as close to any 'community standard' ilx is likely to have.

xps, stet covered this basically

bodied peanuts (goole), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:37 (sixteen years ago)

I think John and Goole are pretty much spot on to where I was at with this thing.

Keith, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:38 (sixteen years ago)

anyway I guess I've made my ill-thought-out point about 5000 times on this thread, so I'm out till the next SB thread, catch u later

You know, you don't have to haul it all back out even on the next SB thread. Much of ILX's present-day clusterfuckery is 100% recycled.

Hugh Manatee (WmC), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:39 (sixteen years ago)

I wasn't serious, my ranting days are over

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:40 (sixteen years ago)

you can also move to bounce people for whatever standard of irritation they have met in your eyes.

this is a thing i really like about it

blobfish russian (harbl), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:41 (sixteen years ago)

btw Crutz I think yr new username is A++ hilarious

a muttering inbred (called) (not named) (Abbott), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:41 (sixteen years ago)

I'm actually content with suggest ban as long as it keeps providing 51 jokes

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:42 (sixteen years ago)

i heard when you're SB'ed you go off to ILX heaven where you hang out with 51 virgins

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:43 (sixteen years ago)

I heard it was 51 happy robots

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:43 (sixteen years ago)

Not location specific, No rules: Welcome to ILX heaven ??????

51 is the loneliest number (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:45 (sixteen years ago)

51 lunas

omar little, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 17:57 (sixteen years ago)

Not sure what point you're making with that link, Crutis...? (Serious question.)

Hugh Manatee (WmC), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 18:03 (sixteen years ago)

Unless I'm mistaken, he's riffing with Que re: the ILX paradise you go to after you've been suggest-banned.

I am over wieght and I have angelical quilities (HI DERE), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 18:05 (sixteen years ago)

D'oh! Obliviousness overtook me.

Hugh Manatee (WmC), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 18:07 (sixteen years ago)

oh hey sorry i dropped out of the discussion for a while, but i was like selling stuff and making money (go economy go!)

just a couple of clarifications:

1 - i actually tempbanned ethan when i saw how fast his SB's were skyrocketing, but the damage was done and he kept getting SB votes from new people that came onto the threads
2 - tuomas accumulated a ton of his SB's for making a "funny" link to st0rmfr0nt, for the people that keep holding him up as an unbannable paragon of good behaviour.
3 - for the 50 bagazillionth time, Dom was banned, not SBed. again, i think this confusion comes from the fact that i mentioned the fact that due to multi-usernames he had also earned a SB after the fact, but he was banned by mod action.
4 - Bimble, on the other hand, was SBed due to someone (Matt DC I think) doing the math and realizing that he had topped the 51 mark. i think in the future this is the policy re:multiusernames if we catch it.

not really trying to make any points here, just committed to making sure that all the information is available to people on all sides of the issue

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for vedderizer. (0.05 seconds) ;_; (jjjusten), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 18:44 (sixteen years ago)

u know the multi-username thing is doubly complicated -- any number of SB's on one could overlap with those on another. i suppose the mods could cross-ref all the SB-ers names. did you?

bodied peanuts (goole), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 19:10 (sixteen years ago)

yep

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for vedderizer. (0.05 seconds) ;_; (jjjusten), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 19:11 (sixteen years ago)

oh. well done!

bodied peanuts (goole), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 19:12 (sixteen years ago)

wrt bimble most of them were on the active account in use when the most recent blow up occurred, so it was pretty easy to do

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for vedderizer. (0.05 seconds) ;_; (jjjusten), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 19:12 (sixteen years ago)

1 - i actually tempbanned ethan when i saw how fast his SB's were skyrocketing, but the damage was done and he kept getting SB votes from new people that came onto the threads

Are you saying you tried to circumvent the SB system by intervening because you thought the result of leaving it to act would be incorrect? (Serious question.)

caek, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 19:55 (sixteen years ago)

Did cankles actually get SB-ed? I thought he was temp-banned by a mod.

free jazz and mumia (sarahel), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:01 (sixteen years ago)

he was temp banned a couple of diff times iirc, sb'd only once

velko, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:12 (sixteen years ago)

1. i tried to intervene because i thought ethan was emotionally caught up in the moment (dom banning btw) and as a good mod, i was trying to cut down on the collateral damage. and yeah, mods are still going to be mods - i would temp anybody that was going on an image blitz, or behaving in any sort of way that was (and i know this might sound parental, i dont mean it that way) going to negatively impact themselves or others. we have temp banned plenty of other posters for similar reasons - bimble was temped before hitting the SB point as well. not saying i know more than ethan about the way he chooses to post obv, but it would be pretty shitty of me not to try to stave off a ban if i thought it could be avoided. I think it bears noting that seriously, mods are trying to make shit better on ilx, not worse. i would prefer that nobody got SBed. I'd prefer that everyone could manage to post in a way where nobody would SB them. this doesnt mean that SB isnt helpful or necessary, it means that in a perfect world, people would all find a way to work out their differences or whatever. GOOD LUCK USA! ILX!

2. yeah cankles got sbed.

xpost

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for vedderizer. (0.05 seconds) ;_; (jjjusten), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:14 (sixteen years ago)

going to significantly negatively impact themselves or others.

to clarify above

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for vedderizer. (0.05 seconds) ;_; (jjjusten), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:15 (sixteen years ago)

OK thanks jjjusten. I have absolutely no problem with that kind of modding. I think that's all we need, tbh. To me SB is a feature that aims to solve a problem that was never that serious, with a huge amount of collateral damage.

caek, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:22 (sixteen years ago)

To clarify that, I have nothing but thanks and respect for the huge amount of time Keith has put into ILX, but SB does not solve the problem it was designed to solve (which I didn't perceive in the first place, fwiw). It has instead made things worse: no less clusterfucky or dramatic, less interesting, and a real cultural change for the worse. The wisdom of crowds is an unnecessary compromise when we already have the resources to maintain and police this site well (which mods did before, afaic). A few smart mods is 10x better.

And for what? I'm not a mod, and they tell us things are better from their p.o.v., but then I see things like jjjusten admitting that he tried to intervene before a SBing and I can't help thinking, shit, things were at least not significantly worse for them before this feature. With the help of threads like these, discussion now has reached the point where they've understandably circled the wagons and there is nothing doing, but c'mon. This sucks. I know Tuomas is a bore, but he's right. Sociopathic behaviour should be policed by mods as before, everyone else should enjoy life's rich tapestry.

(p.s. I think adding an anti-SB button would make things even worse. fishing for good or bad attention is the result, and it leads to the kind of cretinous/banal discussion that you get on digg.)

caek, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:24 (sixteen years ago)

The SB feature always reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons where they all shock each other. The fact that only a handful of posters have gotten SB-ed shows that that worst case scenario isn't happening.

free jazz and mumia (sarahel), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:25 (sixteen years ago)

"A few smart mods are 10x better than us retards", I meant.

caek, Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:25 (sixteen years ago)

u ppl u horrible ppl *shakes fist in impotent rage*

Echt jetzt? COOL Ich bin berühmt als Threadstarter ;) (Lamp), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:27 (sixteen years ago)

I'm not a mod, and they tell us things are better from their p.o.v., but then I see things like jjjusten admitting that he tried to intervene before a SBing and I can't help thinking, shit, things were at least not significantly worse for them before this feature.

That's a bad example to make that assumption off of, considering that the sequence of critical events that happened (Dom getting banned, Ethan going on a rampage, John or another mod temp-banning Ethan) all would have occurred without the suggest-ban feature turned on.

I am over wieght and I have angelical quilities (HI DERE), Wednesday, 5 August 2009 20:32 (sixteen years ago)


This thread has been locked by an administrator

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.