options for the offended 51

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (564 of them)

lamp breakin it down

plaxico (I know, right?), Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:33 (fourteen years ago) link

uh lamp kinda otm imo but whatevs

plaxico (I know, right?), Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:33 (fourteen years ago) link

xp - would it be more accurate to say that the people that have been sb-ed have all had a combination of dickishness/aggressiveness and an over the top posting style - in differing proportions, obviously.

sarahel, Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:34 (fourteen years ago) link

i like sb as it is pretty much but it would be cool if there was a write-in thing where you could put a description of why you hit sb, which could eventually be made public or at least disclosed to the sb'ed while the sb'er remains anonymous. might also force people to think about it and maybe even change their mind about sb'ing that person

harbl, Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:34 (fourteen years ago) link

^^ heh, it could be like facebook's options for why you don't like an ad:

offensive
unintertesting
overly repetitive
irrelevant

sarahel, Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:35 (fourteen years ago) link

yeah it could have radio buttons with common reasons and then maybe one for "other" like, i just think this person is a cockfarmer

harbl, Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:37 (fourteen years ago) link

this is total bullshit, and if you don't stop making shit up to further some weird non-argument I'm going to ban you from this thread.

dude i dont even no u but HI DERE and jjusten have said a couple of times that it should be clear to any posters getting 51'd what they do that annoys so many ppl w/o resorting to giving them specific examples - ive always agreed with that i just dont think that what say l.jagger does that gets under other poster's skin is "being a dick"

lol "making shit up" tho a+++ response v. constructive

¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨ (Lamp), Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:37 (fourteen years ago) link

Show me an example of either JJ or Dan telling anyone they don't "deserve" any transparency.

mu-mu (Pashmina), Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:40 (fourteen years ago) link

most schools don't give multiple plusses after an a u kno, u may want to revise that

plaxico (I know, right?), Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:41 (fourteen years ago) link

xxp - i think more people sb-ed L0uis for having one - and going on about related issues, er, at length, than being one.

sarahel, Thursday, 26 November 2009 18:50 (fourteen years ago) link

anti-SB ppl need to come up with something better than "let the moderators moderate!" (since old-timers know that back when it was just mods making the call, the howling over the moderators not having the right to make choices that impact the community was just as loud, and would be again) as a solution imo

howbout 'let the mods moderate but in a very laissez faire manner where banning is a last resort'? - I mean of the above posters, how many would have been banned on any msg board with traditional moderation? probably...cankles?

imo the sb system has been a pretty big failure and it seems like everyone but the mods is beginning to accept this.

this whole thing is just getting so patronizing. the poor silent majority can't protect itself? mods might let you back after 30 days and maybe even twice but maybe not it depends whether you learned your lesson? if somebody should be banned, they should be banned - if we really decide that 51 anonymous people is the best way to go about that, fine, but at least have consistency about it.

iatee, Thursday, 26 November 2009 19:17 (fourteen years ago) link

part of the reason there's no consistency is because we've wanted to make it work, and people have seen obvious flaws, so we've been chopping and changing as we go. that's why I'm saying we should leave it running unmeddled for a period till we can work out what's actually useful and unquestionably bust about it.

stet, Thursday, 26 November 2009 19:22 (fourteen years ago) link

gd to see history mayne back from the land of monochrome, even if his 'white ribbon' review made me want to SB him

Ward Fowler, Thursday, 26 November 2009 19:52 (fourteen years ago) link

When does Geir get back from his exile in wastes of the icy north?

The bugger in the short sleeves (NickB), Thursday, 26 November 2009 20:20 (fourteen years ago) link

in the wastes, even

The bugger in the short sleeves (NickB), Thursday, 26 November 2009 20:21 (fourteen years ago) link

this whole thing is just getting so patronizing. the poor silent majority can't protect itself?

yeah seriously law-of-the-jungle ideology like this is exactly what the SB is great against. the notion that people should either learn to be dicks back to people who're being dicks to them, or in some way develop strategies against hostile, antagonizing posters, is bullshit. but it fact, the silent majority can project itself. by clicking the suggest ban button.

a full circle lol (J0hn D.), Thursday, 26 November 2009 20:46 (fourteen years ago) link

The problem with the silent majority is that they're fucking silent too fucking often.

The bugger in the short sleeves (NickB), Thursday, 26 November 2009 20:50 (fourteen years ago) link

Happy Thanksgiving!

lift this towel, its just a nipple (HI DERE), Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:09 (fourteen years ago) link

by clicking the suggest ban button.

e.g. being dicks, anonymously

iatee, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:18 (fourteen years ago) link

wait i.e.

iatee, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:18 (fourteen years ago) link

I do think that if anyone clicks the SB button more than 10 times or so, a message should come up that says 'Wait - don't you think that you might be the problem here?'.

The bugger in the short sleeves (NickB), Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:20 (fourteen years ago) link

only if it then gave you an option to sb the system

iatee, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:21 (fourteen years ago) link

http://www.p2fe.com/Silent_Majority_Badge_2.jpg

Kiwi, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:25 (fourteen years ago) link

Stick that on your proud member.

The bugger in the short sleeves (NickB), Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:29 (fourteen years ago) link

But don't post a picture of it to the WDYLL thread.

sarahel, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:33 (fourteen years ago) link

It's all making sense now...from the proud silent members at www.narlo.org:

"We give inspirational speeches to groups of 50 or more on freedom, liberty, the constitution and property rights. For details contact us by telephone at 1 800 682-7848 or by e-mail at: i✧✧✧@na✧✧✧.o✧✧"

Kiwi, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:42 (fourteen years ago) link

imo the sb system has been a pretty big failure and it seems like everyone but the mods is beginning to accept this.

I disagree pretty strongly with this! Not a mod etc.

Gravel Puzzleworth, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:42 (fourteen years ago) link

get a badge etc

Kiwi, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:44 (fourteen years ago) link

i disagree too

harbl, Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:45 (fourteen years ago) link

I disagree massively. SB is far from perfect but it's an improvement on unilateral modding imo, and I mean that without disrespect for the mods. As far as I can tell the SB system has made modding the boards a marginally less stressful job than it used to be, which means that reasonable people are more likely to be happy to do the job.

Herman G. Neuname is the first European president (Noodle Vague), Thursday, 26 November 2009 21:54 (fourteen years ago) link

again, no disrespect, but is that the point? to make the mods' jobs easier?

we be emi robin' (k3vin k.), Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:03 (fourteen years ago) link

to ban more people more efficiently

harbl, Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:04 (fourteen years ago) link

power to the people... ilx "proud silent member" avatar please

Kiwi, Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:16 (fourteen years ago) link

even if his 'white ribbon' review made me want to SB him

This is the fucking problem. SB'ing because of differing opinions. Engage the review, point out its flaws. Grapple with his taken position. State your own. Only press SB if you think someone is providing noise rather than signal. Critical comment is signal.

I am cool with the SB system because I never, ever think to click the button. It's there, unused, dormant, but its mere presence is placatory for many. Sadly, people rarely engage ideals of tolerance, community or broad-mindedness when they use it. They do so out of a Pavlovian response which dictates that a moment's disaffection ought to equal a lengthy ban.

People of ILX, press that button if and only if someone is directly and wilfully undermining your enjoyment of ILX, and only if they are showing signs of persisting in this behaviour. I know these words will fall on deaf ears, and I know a load of people will possibly SB this post for joeks (because invisible bans upon someone who isn't going to be 51'd ever, ever again are so lol-bringing), but please, try to look at it from the potential bannee's perspective. SB is there for a reason, and a dismally large number of you are misusing it.

GET THAT BABY JESUS RIGHT UP YE (acoleuthic), Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:35 (fourteen years ago) link

hey dumbass he said it "made me want to SB him" not it "made me SB him" so basically he followed your guidelines

congratulations (n/a), Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:38 (fourteen years ago) link

(Also, yes I know many SBs are given after someone has inadvertently annoyed a poster a number of times. Each annoyance, when taken in isolation, is trifling. At this juncture, I recommend a killfile or a gritted-teeth toleration. There will be other threads. Better still, let them know openly why they're being annoying, because subsequent persistence will be an SB'able offence under my proposed unofficial guidelines.)

(ha n/a but for many 'want to' becomes 'really does')

GET THAT BABY JESUS RIGHT UP YE (acoleuthic), Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:41 (fourteen years ago) link

(Of course, this gets difficult, if what one poster perceives as intolerable and SB'able is deemed by the annoying poster as perfectly reasonable. Free speech issues are thus implicated and the whole thing gets too much for me to handle...just learn to live with each other kthxbi)

GET THAT BABY JESUS RIGHT UP YE (acoleuthic), Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:42 (fourteen years ago) link

l-r: kate, lj, history mayne, harbl

sarahel, Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:45 (fourteen years ago) link

why me???

harbl, Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:46 (fourteen years ago) link

Jesus appears to be sitting on the banks of Lough Swilly there which is a bit of the Bible I wasn't aware of.

Twisted Hipster (Noodle Vague), Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:46 (fourteen years ago) link

xp - because you & history mayne support the sb, and kate is against it - you are on opposite knees of jesus. Also, you said before that you were blond, I think.

sarahel, Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:47 (fourteen years ago) link

does kinda look like me i guess

harbl, Thursday, 26 November 2009 22:50 (fourteen years ago) link

I'm fine with SB existing also, but what I am hating is the endless endless fucking whinging about it, jesus god on a pushbike.

hulk would smash (Trayce), Thursday, 26 November 2009 23:05 (fourteen years ago) link

Trayce the whinging is like the icing on the cake of suggest bans

a full circle lol (J0hn D.), Friday, 27 November 2009 00:04 (fourteen years ago) link

Haha well thats a better way of looking at it!

hulk would smash (Trayce), Friday, 27 November 2009 00:15 (fourteen years ago) link

anti-SB ppl need to come up with something better than "let the moderators moderate!" (since old-timers know that back when it was just mods making the call, the howling over the moderators not having the right to make choices that impact the community was just as loud, and would be again) as a solution imo

― a full circle lol (J0hn D.), Thursday, November 26, 2009 1:06 PM (6 hours ago)

I was anti-sb back before it was cool to be anti-sb, and there have been many suggestions made on how to modify the system to make it more workable. for instance, a poll is required to finalize somebody's sb ban. that wouldn't have saved deeznuts or gabbneb, but it would've reprieved tuomas and jordan maybe. then you can really claim it's the will of the people, until then I still think it's 51 touchy ppl.

another suggestion made numerous times by diff ppl is to implement something along the lines of a "suggest awes" button to offset sb clicks and help those who in total do more good than harm.

I'd given up engaging in these conversations because the mods are unyielding in their support of the system as it is, guess we all enjoy having the same one over and over.

鬼の手 (Edward III), Friday, 27 November 2009 00:46 (fourteen years ago) link

I'd like the option to review and rescind any SBs I've made as I reckon a couple have been fucking up clicking the bookmark link next to it and okaying it without thinking. Also a few might have been heat of the moment 'fuck this guy' SBs that would look unnecessary and petty in the cold light of day (I'm pretty sure I SBed someone in haste for zinging the dead balloon kid before we knew he wasn't a dead balloon kid but the son of an arsehole).

I know it comes up in big red writing asking you to be really really sure etc but maybe we should be allowed to regret and retract an SB as much as a poster can regret and retract a dickish zing.

nearly 50 in vagina years (onimo), Friday, 27 November 2009 00:59 (fourteen years ago) link

i think that would be a great feature. i also think that you should have to accrue more sbs for a second banning to counteract grumps who sb banned posters the instant they return.

estela, Friday, 27 November 2009 01:08 (fourteen years ago) link

^no evidence this actually occurs

electrical audio's sm57 (electricsound), Friday, 27 November 2009 01:09 (fourteen years ago) link

As a mod you can post as different user names. I envy mods this ability.

sarahel, Wednesday, 2 December 2009 21:41 (fourteen years ago) link

lol

sarahel (not), Wednesday, 2 December 2009 21:44 (fourteen years ago) link

Awesome!

sarahel, Wednesday, 2 December 2009 21:46 (fourteen years ago) link

No, not even for twatson, forks.

bamcquern, Wednesday, 2 December 2009 21:50 (fourteen years ago) link

i cannot parse that?

Drama Mama's and Papa's too! (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 December 2009 21:54 (fourteen years ago) link

Oh, I thought you meant - never mind.

bamcquern, Wednesday, 2 December 2009 21:56 (fourteen years ago) link

"Deleting unused users and clearing old suggest bans"

cantus in memory of benjamin bratt (omar little), Wednesday, 2 December 2009 22:01 (fourteen years ago) link

ayo can i get a list of unused users?

harbl, Wednesday, 2 December 2009 22:01 (fourteen years ago) link

needin' some of this:

COOL AIDMAN NEEDS YOU BABY

KOOL-AID MAN, Wednesday, 2 December 2009 22:05 (fourteen years ago) link

Kool Aids Man Day

Drama Mama's and Papa's too! (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 December 2009 22:13 (fourteen years ago) link

cool aidman???

harbl, Wednesday, 2 December 2009 22:20 (fourteen years ago) link

cool aidsylangston

Santa Boars (winshit@burgerfuel.co.nz) (sic), Wednesday, 2 December 2009 23:27 (fourteen years ago) link


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