DANCINGMUSTARD GONE FOREVER!

[Johnny Rockets]

Amnesty for Everyone!
('Cept GettinHed. Really. f*ck that guy.)

Clean the slate, and lets start anew! These forums are starting to look like landgrabs....


Jrock

[pimpdave]

Bring back whump! Anyone ever search for old threads he posted in?

[Juan_Bottom]

Not really. That would be weird.

[TheProwler]

My fav was reminisco. reminisca? Whatever....the lawyer/poet/bartender/bs artist. I think he wanted to fight someone in a boxing ring.



Or was that on the Lepidopterists Unite! Chat Forum?

[jbrettlip]

No, not Prowler!...Chaosfactor was the person that I was hoping wouldn't come back. I couldn't understand his drug induced posts.

Reminisco was pretty funny. I wonder what happened to her?

[Juan_Bottom]

Was CurmudgeonX banned?

[TheProwler]

No, not Prowler!...Chaosfactor was the person that I was hoping wouldn't come back. I couldn't understand his drug induced posts.

chaosfactor is still around. I see him more often on another board...but he posts here from time to time.


Has anyone been in touch with Dancing Mustard? I sent him an e-mail when I saw this thread revived to ask him if he would actually want to be reinstated...he hasn't got back to me. He probably doesn't check the e-mail accounts that I have very regularly though...as far as I know, he's been away from message forums for somewhere are 6 months or so.

[notyou2]

Initially the game drew me. Then the forums made me spend more time. They were fun and interesting. Now it is boring and bland. The game has lost it's lustre and without the forums, it's nothing. Enrollment has been declining steadily for 3 years.

Great job Idi Admin, you have succeeded in making this into another glorified chess site.

I bet Mustard and others wouldn't return if they were allowed, and I wouldn't blame them one bit.

[thegreekdog]

Initially the game drew me. Then the forums made me spend more time. They were fun and interesting. Now it is boring and bland. The game has lost it's lustre and without the forums, it's nothing. Enrollment has been declining steadily for 3 years.

Great job Idi Admin, you have succeeded in making this into another glorified chess site.

I bet Mustard and others wouldn't return if they were allowed, and I wouldn't blame them one bit.

I understand wanting posters like Dancing Mustard back. I get it. Although I think the forums are entertaining, let's say, for the sake of argument, that they aren't. Too many political threads? Yeah, probably. Okay, all that's out of the way... here's the thing:

What I don't understand is what's stopping you or anyone else from making the forums more entertaining to you? Is the loss of one or three or five or twenty-five forum members so debilitating that it stops other people from posting entertaining things? This is what does not make sense to me. I've heard many other users I respect and find entertaining indicate similar things and I just don't understand it. And no one has been able to explain it to me. Are there literally no other intelligent, witty, funny people out there? That seems absurd.

[notyou2]

Initially the game drew me. Then the forums made me spend more time. They were fun and interesting. Now it is boring and bland. The game has lost it's lustre and without the forums, it's nothing. Enrollment has been declining steadily for 3 years.

Great job Idi Admin, you have succeeded in making this into another glorified chess site.

I bet Mustard and others wouldn't return if they were allowed, and I wouldn't blame them one bit.

I understand wanting posters like Dancing Mustard back. I get it. Although I think the forums are entertaining, let's say, for the sake of argument, that they aren't. Too many political threads? Yeah, probably. Okay, all that's out of the way... here's the thing:

What I don't understand is what's stopping you or anyone else from making the forums more entertaining to you? Is the loss of one or three or five or twenty-five forum members so debilitating that it stops other people from posting entertaining things? This is what does not make sense to me. I've heard many other users I respect and find entertaining indicate similar things and I just don't understand it. And no one has been able to explain it to me. Are there literally no other intelligent, witty, funny people out there? That seems absurd.

I really don't remember DaGip but DM had a way with words that few equaled. It is the exceptional posters that are lacking. There are some witty people here but not of that level, or they have grown silent. IMO this site has become too serious and it has ruined the eclectic atmosphere.

[thegreekdog]

Initially the game drew me. Then the forums made me spend more time. They were fun and interesting. Now it is boring and bland. The game has lost it's lustre and without the forums, it's nothing. Enrollment has been declining steadily for 3 years.

Great job Idi Admin, you have succeeded in making this into another glorified chess site.

I bet Mustard and others wouldn't return if they were allowed, and I wouldn't blame them one bit.

I understand wanting posters like Dancing Mustard back. I get it. Although I think the forums are entertaining, let's say, for the sake of argument, that they aren't. Too many political threads? Yeah, probably. Okay, all that's out of the way... here's the thing:

What I don't understand is what's stopping you or anyone else from making the forums more entertaining to you? Is the loss of one or three or five or twenty-five forum members so debilitating that it stops other people from posting entertaining things? This is what does not make sense to me. I've heard many other users I respect and find entertaining indicate similar things and I just don't understand it. And no one has been able to explain it to me. Are there literally no other intelligent, witty, funny people out there? That seems absurd.

I really don't remember DaGip but DM had a way with words that few equaled. It is the exceptional posters that are lacking. There are some witty people here but not of that level, or they have grown silent. IMO this site has become too serious and it has ruined the eclectic atmosphere.

That's two guys though. Did they really make that big of a difference? Are they really that irreplacable? Even if you're not in to politics, Saxitoxin's threads alone are worth checking the off-topics every day. I didn't do the Greekies this year because I was lazy, but some of that was because Saxitoxin would win all categories.

King Herpes is great. There's some good stuff in GD sometimes. I don't know, I just don't think it's so utterly terrible as some make it out to be and I certainly don't think a handful of users aren't irreplacable. I'm trying to figure out what it is that disgusts you and Pedro and others so much.

[john9blue]

dancing mustard was the most overrated poster in the history of the forum.

it's not just about him though.

[notyou2]

It's the high handed tactics that disgust me. I honestly believe this site was more than the game but I feel it has lost it's appeal. I will continue to play as I have made some great friends but the forums are not nearly as entertaining. I agree that Saxi is a great poster but he is not as cutting as DM.

[pmchugh]

dancing mustard was the most overrated poster in the history of the forum.

+ 1

[Aradhus]

My wit is totally underrated, likely because it is too sophisticated for people to comprehend.

[TheProwler]

My wit is totally underrated, likely because it is too sophisticated for people to comprehend.

I don't know what you mean.

[thegreekdog]

It's the high handed tactics that disgust me. I honestly believe this site was more than the game but I feel it has lost it's appeal. I will continue to play as I have made some great friends but the forums are not nearly as entertaining. I agree that Saxi is a great poster but he is not as cutting as DM.

What do you mean by "high handed tactics?" Do you mean by the moderators? What does that have to do with posting?

I'm not trying to be glib. I'm trying to understand what the problem is apart from "bring DM back." If "bring DM back" is the only answer, then it's the only answer, but I have no appreciation for the idea that one user makes or breaks a forum.

[pimpdave]

What I don't understand is why no moderators that were ebullient about banning Dancing Mustard (like Night Strike) ever come into these threads to defend the position that he should stay gone.

[thegreekdog]

What I don't understand is why no moderators that were ebullient about banning Dancing Mustard (like Night Strike) ever come into these threads to defend the position that he should stay gone.

I suppose it's because Night Strike is not a global moderator or discussions moderator, but I don't want to speak for him.

[Neoteny]

I've come to the same conclusion about Xtra. It sure feels nice seeing someone banned when they piss you off, but after seeing several enjoyable posters banned over trash and exaggeration I don't think I can support the banning of anyone, ever. As someone mentioned earlier, if you don't like their posts there's a foe button for you. It's like your own little banhammer. That that isn't enough indicates to me that a) one of the mods threw a temper tantrum (and threw out any semblance of impartial judgment they might have had) and b) none of the other mods gave a shit.

If this place didn't have such a good supporting cast of posters I'd have left over the shitty moderation a long time ago. DM said it best recently:

Man, I had forgotten how much I missed this place and how much I enjoyed the semi-trolling debates that flourish in OT.

Seriously, trolled a whole load of sites while I was away and joined in a ton of very serious debates... but nowhere was quite as much fun as here. It was all either too trolly, too stupid, or too grown-up and serious, I just couldn't quite find an atmosphere that suited.

In other words, I just wanted you all to know that it feels pretty good to be back.

hmmmmm you open up the exact crux of the matter here Frig.

The reason Mustard bothered to grace us with his energy was due to the tone and dynamics of the site.

Give the site Mods etc their dues - their balance of authority whilst allowing for organic conversation and creativity allows what Mustard describes above. Their philosophy of action and how they perceive the sites direction is the soil and we are the flowers all vying for the light of acceptance, the synthesis of attention.

It is a fine, fine balance and one which we, the baying and derisive masses, rarely credit them for.
But our reluctant satisfaction is a part of the dynamic too. That we are one step from revolt at all times guides the tone of the site.. if we do it correctly. That we mock all aspects, and then stay anyway, should be reflection of our satisfaction. I agree that that is a subtle measure for the Site police to make.

The problem is that we now seem to be embarking on a new direction with a new tone. The ban-stick seems to be out with greater frequency. I have no problem with that but the permanent ban used to be so rare as to be almost shocking. It was the last recourse for the heinous activist; the racist, the outrageous point dumper and those who perpetually ruined the the character of the site.
Now it seems to be a tool to wave to maintain authoriteee for its own sake or to relieve the frustrations of the site civil-servants.

.. That's not enough in my opinion.. and i concede an opinion is all it is! But if we allow, unchecked, this 'new subtle direction' then the site will fall from exactly what Mustard describes above. It will become bland and easy. It will become the refuge of all the good little boys and girls who toe the party line. It is our job to make the Mods and Andy realise that the site does not actually want that. They may think they do .. but they do not.


Now specifically; Mustard was a pain in the mods arse... of course he was! He was disruptive and inventively subversive.. he was the boy who did not give a fuck about the consequences of moderation. So the leaders will say "We must show to the rest that rules have to be obeyed and actions have consequences!"

It's a compelling argument but it is also a lazy argument. It also, if you think about it, purely illustrates this new and sanitised direction we are moving in. Why do the mods have to give the ultimate sanction for small and repetitive rule infractions? In my opinion, quite from showing strength, it shows fear and weakness in the face of fun and mischief!

Banning Mustard Permanently for never-ending and frequent infraction, is like giving a petty criminal the death penalty! No modern, self-confident society does that! We, as civilised and reflective human beings, mock such weakness in a society. What we do is keep punishing.. with longer sentences surely but no one realistically forwards that the level of disruption and evil committed by stealing a TV is deserving of the ultimate recourse. It is a given that no amount of repetition of such crimes warrants such retribution.

Now with greater relevance to this particular case - Mustard was more akin to a surrealist comedian with an activists agenda. By banning the inconveniently intellectual, who have an alternative slant on life, we once more show our weakness.
If our little, loosely combined group can not retain its most elaborate yet ultimately passive dissenters then we are doomed to mediocrity and stagnation.

If, merely by the repetition of minor rule infraction, we are to be punished by death? ... then we need to call for the adjustment of this new site philosophy.

The site is a good deal less without such characters.

[Neoteny]

Also:

Libertarians are not conservative. Libertarians are socially LIBERAL and fiscally CONSERVATIVE.

Maybe I am wrong about that. I used to be liberal. Very liberal, but then I grew up. My understanding is that Libertarians are what real old school republicans are supposed to stand for. Ron Paul, a republican, would fit more into the libertarian party, but he will not leave his party, even though his party left him. I stand with Ron Paul.

Ron Paul has some very non-Libertarian planks. He's also a borderline fascist, and Libertarians are the antithesis of fascists.

[thegreekdog]

Also:

Libertarians are not conservative. Libertarians are socially LIBERAL and fiscally CONSERVATIVE.

Maybe I am wrong about that. I used to be liberal. Very liberal, but then I grew up. My understanding is that Libertarians are what real old school republicans are supposed to stand for. Ron Paul, a republican, would fit more into the libertarian party, but he will not leave his party, even though his party left him. I stand with Ron Paul.

Ron Paul has some very non-Libertarian planks. He's also a borderline fascist, and Libertarians are the antithesis of fascists.

HA! I have a big problem with his illegal immigration solution.

[thegreekdog]

I've come to the same conclusion about Xtra. It sure feels nice seeing someone banned when they piss you off, but after seeing several enjoyable posters banned over trash and exaggeration I don't think I can support the banning of anyone, ever. As someone mentioned earlier, if you don't like their posts there's a foe button for you. It's like your own little banhammer. That that isn't enough indicates to me that a) one of the mods threw a temper tantrum (and threw out any semblance of impartial judgment they might have had) and b) none of the other mods gave a shit.

If this place didn't have such a good supporting cast of posters I'd have left over the shitty moderation a long time ago. DM said it best recently:

Man, I had forgotten how much I missed this place and how much I enjoyed the semi-trolling debates that flourish in OT.

Seriously, trolled a whole load of sites while I was away and joined in a ton of very serious debates... but nowhere was quite as much fun as here. It was all either too trolly, too stupid, or too grown-up and serious, I just couldn't quite find an atmosphere that suited.

In other words, I just wanted you all to know that it feels pretty good to be back.

hmmmmm you open up the exact crux of the matter here Frig.

The reason Mustard bothered to grace us with his energy was due to the tone and dynamics of the site.

Give the site Mods etc their dues - their balance of authority whilst allowing for organic conversation and creativity allows what Mustard describes above. Their philosophy of action and how they perceive the sites direction is the soil and we are the flowers all vying for the light of acceptance, the synthesis of attention.

It is a fine, fine balance and one which we, the baying and derisive masses, rarely credit them for.
But our reluctant satisfaction is a part of the dynamic too. That we are one step from revolt at all times guides the tone of the site.. if we do it correctly. That we mock all aspects, and then stay anyway, should be reflection of our satisfaction. I agree that that is a subtle measure for the Site police to make.

The problem is that we now seem to be embarking on a new direction with a new tone. The ban-stick seems to be out with greater frequency. I have no problem with that but the permanent ban used to be so rare as to be almost shocking. It was the last recourse for the heinous activist; the racist, the outrageous point dumper and those who perpetually ruined the the character of the site.
Now it seems to be a tool to wave to maintain authoriteee for its own sake or to relieve the frustrations of the site civil-servants.

.. That's not enough in my opinion.. and i concede an opinion is all it is! But if we allow, unchecked, this 'new subtle direction' then the site will fall from exactly what Mustard describes above. It will become bland and easy. It will become the refuge of all the good little boys and girls who toe the party line. It is our job to make the Mods and Andy realise that the site does not actually want that. They may think they do .. but they do not.


Now specifically; Mustard was a pain in the mods arse... of course he was! He was disruptive and inventively subversive.. he was the boy who did not give a fuck about the consequences of moderation. So the leaders will say "We must show to the rest that rules have to be obeyed and actions have consequences!"

It's a compelling argument but it is also a lazy argument. It also, if you think about it, purely illustrates this new and sanitised direction we are moving in. Why do the mods have to give the ultimate sanction for small and repetitive rule infractions? In my opinion, quite from showing strength, it shows fear and weakness in the face of fun and mischief!

Banning Mustard Permanently for never-ending and frequent infraction, is like giving a petty criminal the death penalty! No modern, self-confident society does that! We, as civilised and reflective human beings, mock such weakness in a society. What we do is keep punishing.. with longer sentences surely but no one realistically forwards that the level of disruption and evil committed by stealing a TV is deserving of the ultimate recourse. It is a given that no amount of repetition of such crimes warrants such retribution.

Now with greater relevance to this particular case - Mustard was more akin to a surrealist comedian with an activists agenda. By banning the inconveniently intellectual, who have an alternative slant on life, we once more show our weakness.
If our little, loosely combined group can not retain its most elaborate yet ultimately passive dissenters then we are doomed to mediocrity and stagnation.

If, merely by the repetition of minor rule infraction, we are to be punished by death? ... then we need to call for the adjustment of this new site philosophy.

The site is a good deal less without such characters.

Yeah, I agree with everything in here.

[pimpdave]

So what's the argument against reinstating DM and DaGip? Why don't any of the mods opposed to this come in here and defend the reason for why they should stay gone?

[jonesthecurl]

if DM is too much to ask, then we'd be willing to settle for suggs.

walkies!