SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Apr 27 2010 01:30 am

Oh har har har

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

whatever. I was drunk. still am. I don't like posting something in jest, in a topic that was made in jest to begin with, about something stupid and funny, and basically being told that I'm an asshole that ruins everything for everyone. fuck that. Fuck all of that. There have been plenty of stupider things said and done here. fuck that.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 01:54 am

nobody wants to have to be a bad guy on a forum like this, but i guess its a necessary evil.

I think we all like each other on this forum for the most part, we pretty much share the same interests. I have realized however that if ur drunk or intoxticated do not go to the forum or chatroom or u will get flammed bad.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 02:19 am

Syd, as a moderator/admin you should know that ignoring threads you don't like isn't supposed to be an option. Otherwise, when people break rules no one will know.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 02:28 am

He shouldn't get a pass, but it all could've been avoided if he'd sent a goddamned PM.

Shit, the system's there for a reason, right?

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Apr 27 2010 02:37 am

Or, you know, that whole thread in that whole forum that has the sole purpose of calling people fucktards.

Ya know?

Posted: Apr 27 2010 05:15 am

Blackout wrote:

in the interest of throwing gasoline on the fire, any chance Syd would post a list of these people he does not like? Razz

I think Syd should do an artical where he reviews the top 50 posters in the forums. Now THAT would be a fun artical to read.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 05:48 am

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

Syd, as a moderator/admin you should know that ignoring threads you don't like isn't supposed to be an option. Otherwise, when people break rules no one will know.

Well let me clarify. I don't care about Mein Kampf. But if I see a thread about Mein Kampf, of course I'm going to monitor it because it's a high risk thread. If I see a thread about the Berenstain Bears, whom I also don't care about, I'm going to ignore it, because I have no reasonable expectation that it will/could/might turn into something ugly. If for some reason it does, I'll get like 5 PMs about it and deal with it swiftly.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 06:46 am

Syd Lexia wrote:

If I see a thread about the Berenstain Bears, whom I also don't care about, I'm going to ignore it, because I have no reasonable expectation that it will/could/might turn into something ugly.

sorry i had to make the reference Very Happy

Joined: Oct 01 2009 Posts: 5316

Mr. Bomberman wrote:

inb4 thread lock

LOL...it's not even locked...LOL!!!!!!

Posted: Apr 27 2010 07:39 am

Syd Lexia wrote:

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

Syd, as a moderator/admin you should know that ignoring threads you don't like isn't supposed to be an option. Otherwise, when people break rules no one will know.

Well let me clarify. I don't care about Mein Kampf. But if I see a thread about Mein Kampf, of course I'm going to monitor it because it's a high risk thread. If I see a thread about the Berenstain Bears, whom I also don't care about, I'm going to ignore it, because I have no reasonable expectation that it will/could/might turn into something ugly. If for some reason it does, I'll get like 5 PMs about it and deal with it swiftly.

Really? People PM you when a thread starts to go south? What a bunch of marys.

I think where we went wrong is that Hacker is no longer the butt of every joke. We're spinning out without our punching bag.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 07:45 am

We could bring back vampyr. Wait... no.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 08:01 am

I love all of you guys just, so god-damned much. Fo rizzle. You guys are my brothers. I just...I love you. Love.

Banned Joined: Sep 13 2008 Posts: 3129

Syd Lexia wrote:

We could bring back vampyr. Wait... no.

Or Murdar

But on serious note, does this mean we can have forum games again?

Ross Rifle wrote:

I love all of you guys just, so god-damned much. Fo rizzle. You guys are my brothers. I just...I love you. Love.

If you loved us you would come to the chatroom more often Mad

Posted: Apr 27 2010 09:43 am

Doddsino wrote:

Mr. Bomberman wrote:

inb4 thread lock

LOL...it's not even locked...LOL!!!!!!

It was last night, and he got in literally a few minutes before it was.

And I'd like to add that just because Syd says we should chill out a little doesn't mean we should all start be fucking annoying brats and push the envelope. Act like kids, you'll get treated like kids. Douche up the forums, and the locks will return. How about acting like we can actually handle a little freedom?

Hacker, I like you more than most ('cause I'm new), but stop bringing up stuff that has already been shut down (i.e forum games). That doesn't help.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 10:07 am

Klimbatize wrote:

Doddsino wrote:

Mr. Bomberman wrote:

inb4 thread lock

LOL...it's not even locked...LOL!!!!!!

It was last night, and he got in literally a few minutes before it was.

And I'd like to add that just because Syd says we should chill out a little doesn't mean we should all start be fucking annoying brats and push the envelope. Act like kids, you'll get treated like kids. Douche up the forums, and the locks will return. How about acting like we can actually handle a little freedom?

Hacker, I like you more than most ('cause I'm new), but stop bringing up stuff that has already been shut down (i.e forum games). That doesn't help.

I understand what you're saying, but in my opinion a thread in a general topics forum should never be locked unless it's becoming particularly offensive or insulting to an individual (and even then.....depends on your definition of "offensive.")

I'm all for mods keeping the movies/music/videogame threads on topic, but in here......meh. This section is supposed to be fun and entertaining. I don't see how it benefits from being over-modded.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 10:17 am

^I do. I don't want to see the same guys posting the same shit, writing in caps, spamming, using pictures too large, starting retarded topics so they can talk about themselves...mods do a lot more than we think. If they didn't, reading this forum would get annoying fast. It would ruin a good thing.

Also, what isn't offensive to you might be for most people. You're probably like me where just about nothing offends you. Well, not everyone is like us. I do think topics like religion, race, and politics need to be monitored because they can get out of hand quickly, and I'm sure Syd didn't start a forum for people to write offensive material about those topics.

As far as over-modding, it's obvious that there's progress there and my point was let's take advantage of that and not make Syd regret it.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 10:35 am

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

Syd, as a moderator/admin you should know that ignoring threads you don't like isn't supposed to be an option. Otherwise, when people break rules no one will know.

I don't want to be the one to tell you all this, and I wish it wasn't true. You know what happens when you give too much power to the mods?

Posted: Apr 27 2010 10:53 am

I'd go on the chatroom more if my computer could handle it. Yeah, seriously. Good to know I'm loved though!

Title: Hugh Joined: Sep 23 2007 Posts: 1591

Yeah, you're dearly missed there, no doubt. Sad

Posted: Apr 27 2010 11:11 am

Klimbatize wrote:

^I do. I don't want to see the same guys posting the same shit, writing in caps, spamming, using pictures too large, starting retarded topics so they can talk about themselves...mods do a lot more than we think. If they didn't, reading this forum would get annoying fast. It would ruin a good thing.

Also, what isn't offensive to you might be for most people. You're probably like me where just about nothing offends you. Well, not everyone is like us. I do think topics like religion, race, and politics need to be monitored because they can get out of hand quickly, and I'm sure Syd didn't start a forum for people to write offensive material about those topics.

As far as over-modding, it's obvious that there's progress there and my point was let's take advantage of that and not make Syd regret it.

Well I do agree that mods should deal with the inanely stupid/annoying stuff that you listed. Obvious troll threads, people typing in caps, etc. Nobody wants to read that stuff, so I support the mods' efforts to stop it. And I also agree with you that threads about race/politics/religion should be more closely monitored, because they usually tread close to people's values and thus have more potential to be offensive.

That said, I've got no problem with low-brow or silly threads. If someone wants to create a thread about a huge bowel movement he had, that's fine with me. I suppose some people would find that offensive, but my advice to them would be to simply ignore it.

Having said everything above, one peev of mine is when people create threads with vague titles, giving us no clue as to the thread's content without clicking on it. That's where I can see you running into problems with people being offended.....you click on a vague thread to find that it's Nazi propaganda or nudity or something. Mods should warn/ban people to break that rule.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 11:22 am

Locked threads don't bother me but I think it should be a rule that the mod gives like a 10 minute warning so everyone can hurry up and add the rest of their smart ass comments. Sometimes you go through a locked thread and you wish it could have lasted just a little longer.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 11:40 am

Ash Burton wrote:

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

Syd, as a moderator/admin you should know that ignoring threads you don't like isn't supposed to be an option. Otherwise, when people break rules no one will know.

I don't want to be the one to tell you all this, and I wish it wasn't true. You know what happens when you give too much power to the mods?

Seig HEIL! That's communist, right?

Also Ice, on the topic of silly/pointless threads, I understand where you're coming from, but really, if we allow too much of that then the forum becomes a cluttered, ridiculous mess that no one wants to wade through. And then if we try to mod it a little bit, we get the "why was my thread locked and not his." Hence, its easier and cleaner to just keep threads like that to the nWo, where you can dick around to your heart's content. My two cents anyway.

I will say things have gotten a bit lock-happy in the last week or two imho, but yeah. We're doing our best to strike a balance that's fair and fun for everyone, like the Fearless Leader said.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

Syd, as a moderator/admin you should know that ignoring threads you don't like isn't supposed to be an option. Otherwise, when people break rules no one will know.

Ignoring disliked threads and posts is exactly what all members of the community including moderators should do. By direct contrast, threads or posts that clearly violate the forum rules should not be ignored and action should be taken. If a rule changes or needs amending, it should be conveyed to the community. Worthy of note, Syd has been very good about expressing rule changes in the past, and it is appreciated.

Why is it that non-rule breaking threads are being locked more often now instead of the administration moderating posts as a first attempt to save a discussion. Often it isn't the general topic that needs to be removed, but rather the few posts that have poisoned it. When a post is moderated, the individual who makes the mistake is able to see that they broke the rules and they can amend their ways. In addition the community can see the type of discussions that are welcomed and those that are not.

When a thread is locked, there is the underlying suggestion that the topic itself might be bad, even if it might just be a bad discussion. This is especially true for thread topics that don't break the rules.

In general Sydlexia.com is a great community and it will continue to be as long as mutual respect is always kept in mind.

Posted: Apr 27 2010 12:22 pm

I agree with GP, word for word.