Banning reverse trolls

[sirkickyass]

I still think it was the weakest of all warnings/infractions I have received through the years.

You clearly don't remember getting an old warning for linking to a youtube video and having jazz traveler take issue with the language in the comments section.

There is no way something like that would happen today.

Empirically it's been borne out pretty well that it's next-to-impossible to actually get banned unless you go out of your way to be a huge pain in the *** or purposely push it after receiving several warnings/infractions. Even a guy like sloanfeld, who is an undeniable troll, is still kicking around after nearly a year.

 

[sirkickyass]

PAINFULLY OBVIOUSLY the content of the entire post is the most damning, and that was KEK's point to begin with, that he felt a particular post by viny was not ban-worthy just because of ONE WORD. It was clarified by Jason that it was due to a different post, but I was commenting on KEK's original assertion.

And that wasn't the post in question. In fact, that post never came up for a vote. So we don't have a conflict here. I'm not understanding the problem.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

Take it from me, who fought this same battle on the old board, you're going to lose. I received a warning because I posted a link to an article that had the correct term for the female reproductive organ. One moderator told me the warning was because the link went to the article with the word that was filtered and one told me that it was because the story was overly sexual, which it really wasn't.

So basically the moderating staff doesn't have a clue as to what in the hell is going on?

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

And that wasn't the post in question. In fact, that post never came up for a vote. So we don't have a conflict here. I'm not understanding the problem.

Someone's pushin' his chest out.

 

[Jason]

So basically the moderating staff doesn't have a clue as to what in the hell is going on?

Yup. We're all clueless.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

Yup. We're all clueless.

I'm just kidding bro.

 

[TroutBum]

Yup. We're all clueless.

Finally. Acknowledgment is the first step. From here, it only upward and onward!

 

[moevillini]

I just re-read the article. We will agree to disagree because it's still less sexual than Moe's picture. I am done crying harder.

done crying harder perhaps, but it seems like the pissing contest is still going strong
;-)

I do have a serious question for you YB about general rules regarding personal forums. I recall some discussion on the old board about allowing those with personal forums to tweak the filter to allow certain words to be unfiltered in their personal forum. Was that ever in place? Is it in place now?


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[YB85]

There is no filter tweaking, but circumvention is permitted. The only thing not allowed are links to porn and nude and pornographic images.

 

[VINYLONE]

There is no filter tweaking, but circumvention is permitted. The only thing not allowed are links to porn and nude and pornographic images.

...and plastic baby peni.

 

[moevillini]

So basically the moderating staff doesn't have a clue as to what in the hell is going on?

Yup. We're all clueless.

nuh-uh, we've got clues...

we're just not always so quick to put them together, ok?


oh, and welcome back viny

 

[VINYLONE]

Thanks Moe!