Conquer Club

The CC Community

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: The CC Community

Postby fadedpsychosis on Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:00 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
fadedpsychosis wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:You could always apologise. The ban, as far as I'm aware, was a chance for you to cool down, but you seem to have used it as an opportunity to get more worked up.


How do you know that I am "more worked up"?

empirical evidence...


that is based on your own interpretation, which
(1) suffers from your particular cognitive bias,
(2) is limited to written communication, and
(3) lacks awareness of the transmitter's intentions and subject meaning.


Symmetry and all of us have this problem. We impose our interpretations on the meaning of other people's words. In other words, we inadvertently presume to know that which we clearly don't.


Also, it's like the case where if you feel cold, you'll perceive that others are as cold as you--even though they aren't. Likewise, if you feel angry from someone's post, it may be the case that you yourself are angry--yet unwittingly you are imposing your anger onto the meaning of others' words, thus distorting reality.*

*(I'm not saying that you right now ITT are doing this. It's the general "you").

:lol: funny, I was just digging through my old logic and philosophy textbooks on those very topics...

while all 3 points are true, I meant it in that the evidence suggests that you are more worked up than normal, not that it is necessarily conclusive of anything. you do seem to be posting in a slightly more heated manner than normal, but as you pointed out this could merely be my own interpretation
John Adams wrote:I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a Congress! And by God I have had this Congress!
User avatar
Private fadedpsychosis
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: global

Re: The CC Community

Postby BigBallinStalin on Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:36 pm

fadedpsychosis wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
fadedpsychosis wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:You could always apologise. The ban, as far as I'm aware, was a chance for you to cool down, but you seem to have used it as an opportunity to get more worked up.


How do you know that I am "more worked up"?

empirical evidence...


that is based on your own interpretation, which
(1) suffers from your particular cognitive bias,
(2) is limited to written communication, and
(3) lacks awareness of the transmitter's intentions and subject meaning.


Symmetry and all of us have this problem. We impose our interpretations on the meaning of other people's words. In other words, we inadvertently presume to know that which we clearly don't.


Also, it's like the case where if you feel cold, you'll perceive that others are as cold as you--even though they aren't. Likewise, if you feel angry from someone's post, it may be the case that you yourself are angry--yet unwittingly you are imposing your anger onto the meaning of others' words, thus distorting reality.*

*(I'm not saying that you right now ITT are doing this. It's the general "you").

:lol: funny, I was just digging through my old logic and philosophy textbooks on those very topics...

while all 3 points are true, I meant it in that the evidence suggests that you are more worked up than normal, not that it is necessarily conclusive of anything. you do seem to be posting in a slightly more heated manner than normal, but as you pointed out this could merely be my own interpretation


The evidence "suggests" that because meaning is subjective. Anyone can mistakenly twist anyone's meaning of the others' words into something else. The conclusion is that you and Sym have no idea--which isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's just something I'm pointing out. Perhaps, the issue ITT is sensitive, so people are going to feel more alarmed about it, thus things seem to be more heated than normal. etc., etc.,

In order to avoid this problem, I used to post more facial expression pics, but it takes too long, and the emoticons fail to capture my meaning clearly.


Image
slowly but surely
moving in for the kill
feet don't fail me now


*(that pic doesn't portray my feelings; it's more of a joke within a joke for me. Imagine a soundtrack of that "feet don't fail me now" song as the movie portrays Vikings marching, pillaging, killing, and raping. It may give the scene some much needed levity!).
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: The CC Community

Postby Symmetry on Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:42 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
fadedpsychosis wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
fadedpsychosis wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:You could always apologise. The ban, as far as I'm aware, was a chance for you to cool down, but you seem to have used it as an opportunity to get more worked up.


How do you know that I am "more worked up"?

empirical evidence...


that is based on your own interpretation, which
(1) suffers from your particular cognitive bias,
(2) is limited to written communication, and
(3) lacks awareness of the transmitter's intentions and subject meaning.


Symmetry and all of us have this problem. We impose our interpretations on the meaning of other people's words. In other words, we inadvertently presume to know that which we clearly don't.


Also, it's like the case where if you feel cold, you'll perceive that others are as cold as you--even though they aren't. Likewise, if you feel angry from someone's post, it may be the case that you yourself are angry--yet unwittingly you are imposing your anger onto the meaning of others' words, thus distorting reality.*

*(I'm not saying that you right now ITT are doing this. It's the general "you").

:lol: funny, I was just digging through my old logic and philosophy textbooks on those very topics...

while all 3 points are true, I meant it in that the evidence suggests that you are more worked up than normal, not that it is necessarily conclusive of anything. you do seem to be posting in a slightly more heated manner than normal, but as you pointed out this could merely be my own interpretation


The evidence "suggests" that because meaning is subjective. Anyone can mistakenly twist anyone's meaning of the others' words into something else. The conclusion is that you and Sym have no idea--which isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's just something I'm pointing out. Perhaps, the issue ITT is sensitive, so people are going to feel more alarmed about it, thus things seem to be more heated than normal. etc., etc.,

In order to avoid this problem, I used to post more facial expression pics, but it takes too long, and the emoticons fail to capture my meaning clearly.


Image
slowly but surely
moving in for the kill
feet don't fail me now


*(that pic doesn't portray my feelings; it's more of a joke within a joke for me. Imagine a soundtrack of that "feet don't fail me now" song as the movie portrays Vikings marching, pillaging, killing, and raping. It may give the scene some much needed levity!).


To be clear, his de facto facial expression pic was:

Image

Apparently people take trollconmics more seriously if it's not appended to the end.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sergeant Symmetry
 
Posts: 9255
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am

Re: The CC Community

Postby BigBallinStalin on Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:00 pm

Symmetry wrote:To be clear, his de facto facial expression pic was:

Image

Apparently people take trollconmics more seriously if it's not appended to the end.



So, since the above post is false, should Symmetry be banned for baiting?


I meant what I say, and I provide my reasoning for it while addressing all questions here. So far, Sym dodges my questions, and based on the lack of response here, it's pretty clear what Sym's intentions are.



Should he banned for trolling?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: The CC Community

Postby fadedpsychosis on Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:28 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:To be clear, his de facto facial expression pic was:

Image

Apparently people take trollconmics more seriously if it's not appended to the end.



So, since the above post is false, should Symmetry be banned for baiting?


I meant what I say, and I provide my reasoning for it while addressing all questions here. So far, Sym dodges my questions, and based on the lack of response here, it's pretty clear what Sym's intentions are.



Should he banned for trolling?

could this post and others in this thread be counted as troll baiting? you yourself have already stated the rules are biased, so you do everything you can to show him in a negative light? all I've seen so far is circular baiting which puts both of you (and probably me as well) in full equal shares in the blame
John Adams wrote:I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a Congress! And by God I have had this Congress!
User avatar
Private fadedpsychosis
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: global

Re: The CC Community

Postby nietzsche on Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:29 pm

If I had a dime for every time Symmetry asked someone to apologize to him!!!!

I had like 1 dollar
el cartoncito mas triste del mundo
User avatar
General nietzsche
 
Posts: 4597
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:29 am
Location: Fantasy Cooperstown

Re: The CC Community

Postby MeDeFe on Mon Oct 08, 2012 5:08 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:Sometimes I ban people for a day or three when they break the rules.

Perhaps you should ban yourself for baiting?

Been there, done that.
I didn't get a t-shirt, though.

Apparently, you're not willing to hear any criticism. Lemme know when you're done picking up the scattered chess pieces.

I'm not quite sure I understand. Isn't "been there, done that" (with an optional "got the t-shirt") a common expression for saying that you have experience with something another person is talking about? I was trying to convey that I really did ban myself for baiting once.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
User avatar
Major MeDeFe
 
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

Re: The CC Community

Postby Funkyterrance on Mon Oct 08, 2012 5:12 pm

MeDeFe wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:Sometimes I ban people for a day or three when they break the rules.

Perhaps you should ban yourself for baiting?

Been there, done that.
I didn't get a t-shirt, though.

Apparently, you're not willing to hear any criticism. Lemme know when you're done picking up the scattered chess pieces.

I'm not quite sure I understand. Isn't "been there, done that" (with an optional "got the t-shirt") a common expression for saying that you have experience with something another person is talking about? I was trying to convey that I really did ban myself for baiting once.


Duly noted, but do you ban yourself every time you bait? I should think a mod would be set to a higher standard than your run-of-the-mill player.
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: The CC Community

Postby Nola_Lifer on Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:15 pm

fadedpsychosis wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:To be clear, his de facto facial expression pic was:

Image

Apparently people take trollconmics more seriously if it's not appended to the end.



So, since the above post is false, should Symmetry be banned for baiting?


I meant what I say, and I provide my reasoning for it while addressing all questions here. So far, Sym dodges my questions, and based on the lack of response here, it's pretty clear what Sym's intentions are.



Should he banned for trolling?

could this post and others in this thread be counted as troll baiting? you yourself have already stated the rules are biased, so you do everything you can to show him in a negative light? all I've seen so far is circular baiting which puts both of you (and probably me as well) in full equal shares in the blame


I think the point is that Sym bitched about BBS and not Sym is doing the same shit to BBS. Now what is the BigBallinShitheadallin suppose to do. Complain? Bait? Write a nice letter to the mods telling them that he is being picked on? Should he act like a little bitch whine and complain then ask for an apology? :?
Image
User avatar
Major Nola_Lifer
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: 雪山

Re: The CC Community

Postby muy_thaiguy on Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:03 pm

The more things change, the more they stay the same. In other words, yet another temporarily banned poster comes back and demands that the mods explain themselves for banning him, and to top it off, he's one of the older posters.
"Eh, whatever."
-Anonymous


What, you expected something deep or flashy?
User avatar
Private 1st Class muy_thaiguy
 
Posts: 12746
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 11:20 am
Location: Back in Black

Re: The CC Community

Postby oss spy on Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:24 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
notyou2 wrote:You're recent ban BBS, in my opinion, was justified. However, I believe there have been many warnings and bans that weren't justified. I agree the rules and interpretation of them could certainly be clarified and have not been imposed equally in the past.


I guess. I can't see how people perceive the line between acceptable and unacceptable, and that ban still doesn't make that clear. Furthermore, MeDeFe can't even explain that fine line and its ever-changing circumstances. And, those perceptions are subject to change on even the most minute circumstances (e.g. Rds is more sensitive to the use of words like "faggot" and "muslims = X").

Another problem is that I'm a reactive kind of guy. If I see someone causing a bunch of shit, then I'll dash it back at them (e.g. Symmetry). Obviously, Symmetry didn't like that and put on some great theatrics/hysterics, so I got banned for it. So now what?

(1) Should I be an ass and report every instance of him breaking a rule? Pimpdave did that (and most of his reports may have been spurious), but either way, this annoyed the mods, thus contributing to their bias against him (mods aren't impartial).

So what do?

(2) Make a thread showing instances where particular users are baiting, flaming, trolling (the holy trinity)?
Then I may get banned for calling people out on... breaking the rules? (seems likely anyway given that some are effective at theatrics).

(3) Then there's the whole problem of formal and informal rules. Most of us in here have baited, flamed, trolled within the past 3 days, and to me that's not a problem---as long as the frequency is minimal and intentions are good (i.e. the accusations are baseless).

Etc., etc,.


I wasn't on your side before, but I certainly am now. I've been in your position before (and doing the exact same thing) on other forums and it's quite the mess. Thanks for making a better post than most other CC users.
2012-04-05 19:05:58 - Eagle Orion: For the record, my supposed irrationality has kept me in the game well enough. Just in rather bizaare fashion.

2012-04-05 19:06:28 - nathanmoore04: Look at your troop count...
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class oss spy
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:30 pm

Re: The CC Community

Postby thegreekdog on Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:44 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
notyou2 wrote:You're recent ban BBS, in my opinion, was justified. However, I believe there have been many warnings and bans that weren't justified. I agree the rules and interpretation of them could certainly be clarified and have not been imposed equally in the past.


I guess. I can't see how people perceive the line between acceptable and unacceptable, and that ban still doesn't make that clear. Furthermore, MeDeFe can't even explain that fine line and its ever-changing circumstances. And, those perceptions are subject to change on even the most minute circumstances (e.g. Rds is more sensitive to the use of words like "faggot" and "muslims = X").

Another problem is that I'm a reactive kind of guy. If I see someone causing a bunch of shit, then I'll dash it back at them (e.g. Symmetry). Obviously, Symmetry didn't like that and put on some great theatrics/hysterics, so I got banned for it. So now what?

(1) Should I be an ass and report every instance of him breaking a rule? Pimpdave did that (and most of his reports may have been spurious), but either way, this annoyed the mods, thus contributing to their bias against him (mods aren't impartial).

So what do?

(2) Make a thread showing instances where particular users are baiting, flaming, trolling (the holy trinity)?
Then I may get banned for calling people out on... breaking the rules? (seems likely anyway given that some are effective at theatrics).

(3) Then there's the whole problem of formal and informal rules. Most of us in here have baited, flamed, trolled within the past 3 days, and to me that's not a problem---as long as the frequency is minimal and intentions are good (i.e. the accusations are baseless).

Etc., etc,.


What is your ultimate goal? If your goal is to have more enjoyment of the forums, I don't think I can answer that question since I don't know what you would enjoy (I suppose I could guess).

If your goal is not to get banned again, I can offer you some pretty sound advice (see below). If you had informed me, prior to doing so, that you were going to create a thread asking users to choose between saving Symmetry's life and cake, I would have told you that (1) Symmetry would have complained to any and all parties willing or unwilling to listen and (2) You would have been banned for flaming/baiting/trolling.

I'm pretty sure you're more intelligent than I am so I'm also fairly sure that you already knew what was going to happen when you posted that thread. I think it's fairly easy to stay on the right side of the rules. And I think you know how to do that. If others are looking at this thread for guidance on how to stay on the right side of the rules and not get banned, the best advice I can give is to think about what you've typed before you hit submit and determine whether what you're about to post can be a bannable offense. I've been around since 2008 and I've never received so much as a warning, even though I post multiple times a day nearly every day. And the only reason that has happened is because when I get angry or frustrated, I don't give in to the temptation. If you want to give in to the temptation, more power to you, but you're probably going to get some sort of disciplinary action. I've had this same sort of discussion with multiple users when I was a moderator and it rarely works, so I post this with no anticipation of anyone taking it seriously who doesn't already use the same strategy with respect to their posts.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: The CC Community

Postby Funkyterrance on Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:50 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
notyou2 wrote:You're recent ban BBS, in my opinion, was justified. However, I believe there have been many warnings and bans that weren't justified. I agree the rules and interpretation of them could certainly be clarified and have not been imposed equally in the past.


I guess. I can't see how people perceive the line between acceptable and unacceptable, and that ban still doesn't make that clear. Furthermore, MeDeFe can't even explain that fine line and its ever-changing circumstances. And, those perceptions are subject to change on even the most minute circumstances (e.g. Rds is more sensitive to the use of words like "faggot" and "muslims = X").

Another problem is that I'm a reactive kind of guy. If I see someone causing a bunch of shit, then I'll dash it back at them (e.g. Symmetry). Obviously, Symmetry didn't like that and put on some great theatrics/hysterics, so I got banned for it. So now what?

(1) Should I be an ass and report every instance of him breaking a rule? Pimpdave did that (and most of his reports may have been spurious), but either way, this annoyed the mods, thus contributing to their bias against him (mods aren't impartial).

So what do?

(2) Make a thread showing instances where particular users are baiting, flaming, trolling (the holy trinity)?
Then I may get banned for calling people out on... breaking the rules? (seems likely anyway given that some are effective at theatrics).

(3) Then there's the whole problem of formal and informal rules. Most of us in here have baited, flamed, trolled within the past 3 days, and to me that's not a problem---as long as the frequency is minimal and intentions are good (i.e. the accusations are baseless).

Etc., etc,.


BBS, I think that you have proved your point to anyone who will ever be able to even see it. That being said, I would appreciate if you didn't get yourself banned since I enjoy your posts. Won't someone think of the children?
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: The CC Community

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:54 am

fadedpsychosis wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:To be clear, his de facto facial expression pic was:

Image

Apparently people take trollconmics more seriously if it's not appended to the end.



So, since the above post is false, should Symmetry be banned for baiting?


I meant what I say, and I provide my reasoning for it while addressing all questions here. So far, Sym dodges my questions, and based on the lack of response here, it's pretty clear what Sym's intentions are.



Should he banned for trolling?

could this post and others in this thread be counted as troll baiting? you yourself have already stated the rules are biased, so you do everything you can to show him in a negative light? all I've seen so far is circular baiting which puts both of you (and probably me as well) in full equal shares in the blame


So, I can't ask questions, logically defend my position, and provide evidence? Somehow that's trolling?

Doesn't make sense, man.

Yet, notice how I simply asked Symmetry a few questions, how he dodges, and then how he retorts with posts that very much resemble trolling (since we've already narrowed down the other possibilities). He exhibits a predictable pattern, and it need not be instigated by trolling because as I have shown a simple question + reasonable defense gets Sym on edge almost every time. He'll simply resort to trolling, and the mods will very likely do nothing about it.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: The CC Community

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:56 am

MeDeFe wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:Sometimes I ban people for a day or three when they break the rules.

Perhaps you should ban yourself for baiting?

Been there, done that.
I didn't get a t-shirt, though.

Apparently, you're not willing to hear any criticism. Lemme know when you're done picking up the scattered chess pieces.

I'm not quite sure I understand. Isn't "been there, done that" (with an optional "got the t-shirt") a common expression for saying that you have experience with something another person is talking about? I was trying to convey that I really did ban myself for baiting once.


Perhaps I should give equally flippant posts?

Would that be optimal?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: The CC Community

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:58 am

muy_thaiguy wrote:The more things change, the more they stay the same. In other words, yet another temporarily banned poster comes back and demands that the mods explain themselves for banning him, and to top it off, he's one of the older posters.


Sounds like confirmation bias.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: The CC Community

Postby Phatscotty on Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:00 am

I think there should be a certain standard for people who pay good money to troll, and a different standard for those who do not even play games on this site, and just troll to make all the other people want to quit.

That is their goal is it not?
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: The CC Community

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:10 am

thegreekdog wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
notyou2 wrote:You're recent ban BBS, in my opinion, was justified. However, I believe there have been many warnings and bans that weren't justified. I agree the rules and interpretation of them could certainly be clarified and have not been imposed equally in the past.


I guess. I can't see how people perceive the line between acceptable and unacceptable, and that ban still doesn't make that clear. Furthermore, MeDeFe can't even explain that fine line and its ever-changing circumstances. And, those perceptions are subject to change on even the most minute circumstances (e.g. Rds is more sensitive to the use of words like "faggot" and "muslims = X").

Another problem is that I'm a reactive kind of guy. If I see someone causing a bunch of shit, then I'll dash it back at them (e.g. Symmetry). Obviously, Symmetry didn't like that and put on some great theatrics/hysterics, so I got banned for it. So now what?

(1) Should I be an ass and report every instance of him breaking a rule? Pimpdave did that (and most of his reports may have been spurious), but either way, this annoyed the mods, thus contributing to their bias against him (mods aren't impartial).

So what do?

(2) Make a thread showing instances where particular users are baiting, flaming, trolling (the holy trinity)?
Then I may get banned for calling people out on... breaking the rules? (seems likely anyway given that some are effective at theatrics).

(3) Then there's the whole problem of formal and informal rules. Most of us in here have baited, flamed, trolled within the past 3 days, and to me that's not a problem---as long as the frequency is minimal and intentions are good (i.e. the accusations are baseless).

Etc., etc,.


What is your ultimate goal? If your goal is to have more enjoyment of the forums, I don't think I can answer that question since I don't know what you would enjoy (I suppose I could guess).

If your goal is not to get banned again, I can offer you some pretty sound advice (see below). If you had informed me, prior to doing so, that you were going to create a thread asking users to choose between saving Symmetry's life and cake, I would have told you that (1) Symmetry would have complained to any and all parties willing or unwilling to listen and (2) You would have been banned for flaming/baiting/trolling.

I'm pretty sure you're more intelligent than I am so I'm also fairly sure that you already knew what was going to happen when you posted that thread. I think it's fairly easy to stay on the right side of the rules. And I think you know how to do that. If others are looking at this thread for guidance on how to stay on the right side of the rules and not get banned, the best advice I can give is to think about what you've typed before you hit submit and determine whether what you're about to post can be a bannable offense. I've been around since 2008 and I've never received so much as a warning, even though I post multiple times a day nearly every day. And the only reason that has happened is because when I get angry or frustrated, I don't give in to the temptation. If you want to give in to the temptation, more power to you, but you're probably going to get some sort of disciplinary action. I've had this same sort of discussion with multiple users when I was a moderator and it rarely works, so I post this with no anticipation of anyone taking it seriously who doesn't already use the same strategy with respect to their posts.


My main goal is to have a community which isn't too stupid or too intentionally belligerent with too few lulz.


Yours is excellent advice, but as I've said, I'm that reactive kind of guy. I've stayed away from the Report button for a very long time because for years my way of dealing with people's aggressive stupidity was by simply reflecting their own behavior. Apparently, I've hit a dead end (got B&!), so it's time to rethink my strategy. Hence the 3 questions (#1-#3).

Unfortunately, your response isn't proactive enough to answer those three questions. Your approach is great if one does not mind sitting back and doing nothing while user X consistency acts like an asshole to others. (of course, you could Report, but that has problems).


Please, help yourself:


Image
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: The CC Community

Postby muy_thaiguy on Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:09 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
muy_thaiguy wrote:The more things change, the more they stay the same. In other words, yet another temporarily banned poster comes back and demands that the mods explain themselves for banning him, and to top it off, he's one of the older posters.


Sounds like confirmation bias.

Not really. More like, "No matter who is banned for trolling/flaming/whatever, when they get back, they make a thread to complain about it." I've seen similar, if not the exact same threads as these ever since I joined CC, from posters long gone to ones that have somehow not been perma-banned that are still around, or new-comers that are stil finding their niche. So, really just stating a fact more than anything.
"Eh, whatever."
-Anonymous


What, you expected something deep or flashy?
User avatar
Private 1st Class muy_thaiguy
 
Posts: 12746
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 11:20 am
Location: Back in Black

Re: The CC Community

Postby Gillipig on Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:54 am

ManBungalow wrote:This forum deserves a better class of trolls [/joker]

I mean, Gillipig? It's like he's not even trying any more.


To you "trolls" seems to equal people who question the moral opinions held by the majority. To that I am guilty. Do I like to have some fun along the way? Of course I do, humour is the only antidote against feeling distraught over how stupid most people are. I suppose none of this is within your realms of understanding since you couldn't joke if your life depended on it.

BBS, you validly point out the subjectiveness of the mods but you make no attempt at suggesting an alternative. The only way I can think of to remove the human factor from the ekvation is to set the forum free from bans altogether. Now wouldn't that be a sight hehe.
AoG for President of the World!!
I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
User avatar
Lieutenant Gillipig
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: The CC Community

Postby fadedpsychosis on Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:23 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
fadedpsychosis wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:To be clear, his de facto facial expression pic was:

Image

Apparently people take trollconmics more seriously if it's not appended to the end.



So, since the above post is false, should Symmetry be banned for baiting?


I meant what I say, and I provide my reasoning for it while addressing all questions here. So far, Sym dodges my questions, and based on the lack of response here, it's pretty clear what Sym's intentions are.



Should he banned for trolling?

could this post and others in this thread be counted as troll baiting? you yourself have already stated the rules are biased, so you do everything you can to show him in a negative light? all I've seen so far is circular baiting which puts both of you (and probably me as well) in full equal shares in the blame


So, I can't ask questions, logically defend my position, and provide evidence? Somehow that's trolling?

Doesn't make sense, man.

Yet, notice how I simply asked Symmetry a few questions, how he dodges, and then how he retorts with posts that very much resemble trolling (since we've already narrowed down the other possibilities). He exhibits a predictable pattern, and it need not be instigated by trolling because as I have shown a simple question + reasonable defense gets Sym on edge almost every time. He'll simply resort to trolling, and the mods will very likely do nothing about it.

"oh what fun is there in making sense?" besides, as you yourself have pointed out, inconsistantcy is the only constant in moderation here.
John Adams wrote:I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a Congress! And by God I have had this Congress!
User avatar
Private fadedpsychosis
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: global

Re: The CC Community

Postby Woodruff on Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:49 am

oss spy wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
notyou2 wrote:You're recent ban BBS, in my opinion, was justified. However, I believe there have been many warnings and bans that weren't justified. I agree the rules and interpretation of them could certainly be clarified and have not been imposed equally in the past.


I guess. I can't see how people perceive the line between acceptable and unacceptable, and that ban still doesn't make that clear. Furthermore, MeDeFe can't even explain that fine line and its ever-changing circumstances. And, those perceptions are subject to change on even the most minute circumstances (e.g. Rds is more sensitive to the use of words like "faggot" and "muslims = X").

Another problem is that I'm a reactive kind of guy. If I see someone causing a bunch of shit, then I'll dash it back at them (e.g. Symmetry). Obviously, Symmetry didn't like that and put on some great theatrics/hysterics, so I got banned for it. So now what?

(1) Should I be an ass and report every instance of him breaking a rule? Pimpdave did that (and most of his reports may have been spurious), but either way, this annoyed the mods, thus contributing to their bias against him (mods aren't impartial).

So what do?

(2) Make a thread showing instances where particular users are baiting, flaming, trolling (the holy trinity)?
Then I may get banned for calling people out on... breaking the rules? (seems likely anyway given that some are effective at theatrics).

(3) Then there's the whole problem of formal and informal rules. Most of us in here have baited, flamed, trolled within the past 3 days, and to me that's not a problem---as long as the frequency is minimal and intentions are good (i.e. the accusations are baseless).

Etc., etc,.


I wasn't on your side before, but I certainly am now. I've been in your position before (and doing the exact same thing) on other forums and it's quite the mess. Thanks for making a better post than most other CC users.


There's a whole suggestion on this very subject. If I'm not mistaken, BBS has even participated in it (though I haven't gone and looked, so that might be wrong). Unfortunately, despite some moderator interaction and somewhat-agreement and many users agreeing with it, the suggestion has essentially died due to apathy.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: The CC Community

Postby thegreekdog on Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:31 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
notyou2 wrote:You're recent ban BBS, in my opinion, was justified. However, I believe there have been many warnings and bans that weren't justified. I agree the rules and interpretation of them could certainly be clarified and have not been imposed equally in the past.


I guess. I can't see how people perceive the line between acceptable and unacceptable, and that ban still doesn't make that clear. Furthermore, MeDeFe can't even explain that fine line and its ever-changing circumstances. And, those perceptions are subject to change on even the most minute circumstances (e.g. Rds is more sensitive to the use of words like "faggot" and "muslims = X").

Another problem is that I'm a reactive kind of guy. If I see someone causing a bunch of shit, then I'll dash it back at them (e.g. Symmetry). Obviously, Symmetry didn't like that and put on some great theatrics/hysterics, so I got banned for it. So now what?

(1) Should I be an ass and report every instance of him breaking a rule? Pimpdave did that (and most of his reports may have been spurious), but either way, this annoyed the mods, thus contributing to their bias against him (mods aren't impartial).

So what do?

(2) Make a thread showing instances where particular users are baiting, flaming, trolling (the holy trinity)?
Then I may get banned for calling people out on... breaking the rules? (seems likely anyway given that some are effective at theatrics).

(3) Then there's the whole problem of formal and informal rules. Most of us in here have baited, flamed, trolled within the past 3 days, and to me that's not a problem---as long as the frequency is minimal and intentions are good (i.e. the accusations are baseless).

Etc., etc,.


What is your ultimate goal? If your goal is to have more enjoyment of the forums, I don't think I can answer that question since I don't know what you would enjoy (I suppose I could guess).

If your goal is not to get banned again, I can offer you some pretty sound advice (see below). If you had informed me, prior to doing so, that you were going to create a thread asking users to choose between saving Symmetry's life and cake, I would have told you that (1) Symmetry would have complained to any and all parties willing or unwilling to listen and (2) You would have been banned for flaming/baiting/trolling.

I'm pretty sure you're more intelligent than I am so I'm also fairly sure that you already knew what was going to happen when you posted that thread. I think it's fairly easy to stay on the right side of the rules. And I think you know how to do that. If others are looking at this thread for guidance on how to stay on the right side of the rules and not get banned, the best advice I can give is to think about what you've typed before you hit submit and determine whether what you're about to post can be a bannable offense. I've been around since 2008 and I've never received so much as a warning, even though I post multiple times a day nearly every day. And the only reason that has happened is because when I get angry or frustrated, I don't give in to the temptation. If you want to give in to the temptation, more power to you, but you're probably going to get some sort of disciplinary action. I've had this same sort of discussion with multiple users when I was a moderator and it rarely works, so I post this with no anticipation of anyone taking it seriously who doesn't already use the same strategy with respect to their posts.


My main goal is to have a community which isn't too stupid or too intentionally belligerent with too few lulz.


Yours is excellent advice, but as I've said, I'm that reactive kind of guy. I've stayed away from the Report button for a very long time because for years my way of dealing with people's aggressive stupidity was by simply reflecting their own behavior. Apparently, I've hit a dead end (got B&!), so it's time to rethink my strategy. Hence the 3 questions (#1-#3).

Unfortunately, your response isn't proactive enough to answer those three questions. Your approach is great if one does not mind sitting back and doing nothing while user X consistency acts like an asshole to others. (of course, you could Report, but that has problems).


Please, help yourself:


Image


Questions (1) through (3) are good questions and I did not mean to denigrate them. They are just not good practical questions (as Woodruff has essentially indicated). Practically, it does not appear that things will change. I don't think things will change because, in my opinion, there aren't enough people leaving the forums because of poor or inconsistent or aggressive or hypocritical moderation. There are occasional perceived unfairnesses (patent pending), such as you and Symmetry here, but it's not enough to warrant that things change. That's the practical side of things I suppose.

My approach above is indicative of a non-reactive person. As you may know (or perhaps not), I also react to people (other than ignoring, which is also a reaction I suppose). I've been in plenty of "fights" with people on this forum. I think the key is to maintain a level of decorum while lambasting the opponent at the same time. Quite honestly, up until last week, you did this extremely well. I think better than anyone except Saxitoxin.

In sum (ha ha ha), your questions and views are valid, but not practical. And the questions and views are colored by your slip up from a week ago, where many people who support you in other ways found the thread to be in bad taste.

And thanks for the Taj Mahal cake.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: The CC Community

Postby Funkyterrance on Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:49 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
Questions (1) through (3) are good questions and I did not mean to denigrate them. They are just not good practical questions (as Woodruff has essentially indicated). Practically, it does not appear that things will change. I don't think things will change because, in my opinion, there aren't enough people leaving the forums because of poor or inconsistent or aggressive or hypocritical moderation. There are occasional perceived unfairnesses (patent pending), such as you and Symmetry here, but it's not enough to warrant that things change. That's the practical side of things I suppose.

My approach above is indicative of a non-reactive person. As you may know (or perhaps not), I also react to people (other than ignoring, which is also a reaction I suppose). I've been in plenty of "fights" with people on this forum. I think the key is to maintain a level of decorum while lambasting the opponent at the same time. Quite honestly, up until last week, you did this extremely well. I think better than anyone except Saxitoxin.

In sum (ha ha ha), your questions and views are valid, but not practical. And the questions and views are colored by your slip up from a week ago, where many people who support you in other ways found the thread to be in bad taste.

And thanks for the Taj Mahal cake.


Wow, I had no idea anyone took themselves/others so seriously on these forums. I have a feeling that a lot of people were judging me when BBS made his "slip up" of a thread and I played the devil's advocate to some extent. I found the thread to be in bad taste as well, tbh, but there are tons of people in here who make posts/threads in bad taste so I viewed BBS's thread as a mirror to all of them, not an outright lack of class.
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: The CC Community

Postby fadedpsychosis on Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:54 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
Questions (1) through (3) are good questions and I did not mean to denigrate them. They are just not good practical questions (as Woodruff has essentially indicated). Practically, it does not appear that things will change. I don't think things will change because, in my opinion, there aren't enough people leaving the forums because of poor or inconsistent or aggressive or hypocritical moderation. There are occasional perceived unfairnesses (patent pending), such as you and Symmetry here, but it's not enough to warrant that things change. That's the practical side of things I suppose.

My approach above is indicative of a non-reactive person. As you may know (or perhaps not), I also react to people (other than ignoring, which is also a reaction I suppose). I've been in plenty of "fights" with people on this forum. I think the key is to maintain a level of decorum while lambasting the opponent at the same time. Quite honestly, up until last week, you did this extremely well. I think better than anyone except Saxitoxin.

In sum (ha ha ha), your questions and views are valid, but not practical. And the questions and views are colored by your slip up from a week ago, where many people who support you in other ways found the thread to be in bad taste.

And thanks for the Taj Mahal cake.


Wow, I had no idea anyone took themselves/others so seriously on these forums. I have a feeling that a lot of people were judging me when BBS made his "slip up" of a thread and I played the devil's advocate to some extent. I found the thread to be in bad taste as well, tbh, but there are tons of people in here who make posts/threads in bad taste so I viewed BBS's thread as a mirror to all of them, not an outright lack of class.

I found it to be an utter lack of class on BBS's part, but I also find that to be in character for him so... *shrug*
John Adams wrote:I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a Congress! And by God I have had this Congress!
User avatar
Private fadedpsychosis
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: global

PreviousNext

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users