*DAMN R6 Forum

 Let's begin, shall we?

Is the reason that you defend Snipey really because you think he's right, or just because you feel sorry for him?

Why did you delete Jeb and my posts, while leaving Snipey's?

Why have you not spoken with Mauti, asking him to remove Snipey's signature?

Why have you not requested that Snipey be ban for spamming, and disrepectful bullshit?

Why have you not taken a harder line on Snipey's spam?

I have no problem with you defending Snipey if you honestly belive that he's right. However, If you're only defending him because no one else will, and you feel sorry for him, then you're holding him to a lower standard than the rest of us.

You accuse Jeb and me of baiting him. Let's take a look at who's really doing the 'baiting".

Snipey puts up a fake Typhy quote on his sorry ass excuse for a site. I respond.

Snipey puts a fake Jeb quote in his signature, Jeb responds.

Who's really being 'baited' if they respond to something another person had done?

And honestly, even if we were 'baiting' Snipey, it's his job not to take that bait. If he can't keep his control, maybe he needs some punishment until he learns to 'keep his cool' so to speak.  

1.  We shall.
2.  I feel sorry for him.  I do feel like he's being attacked a little unfairly at times.
3.  Yours and Jeb's posts directly attacked Snipey.  I deleted Snipey's post which returned the attack.  I kept his original on-topic post.
4.  Mauti generally handles signatures - you are as free as anyone else to complain about the signature - that's not my job.  Also, I never said anything was wrong with is other than the fact that's it's rather immature.
5.  Snipey was banned once.  We warned him that he might receive another ban with his behavior recently, and he spammed less frequently.  His latest thread was not spam, however so many people told him his efforts were shit that I don't blame him for reacting with anger.
6.  I've deleted what I've found objectionable, and I've found just as many people goading him on as I have found poor posts that he's made.  Thus I don't really fault him for anything at the moment.
7.  His standard is only lower while he's being attacked - as yours or anyone else's would be if you were responding to someone else.  However, I think he has a right to say most of the things he's said, and I do agree that he's been unfairly targeted.
8.  I'm just trying to keep down the conflict.  It's obvious to me that you and Jeb do not like Snipey.  It's also clear that Snipey spams threats whenever someone tells him he's stupid.  My theory:  If people stop telling him he's stupid, he'll stop spamming in response.

Bottom line:  If someone (Snipey, Bondo, Rapid, whoever) posts something inane, attack the idea, not the person behind it.

9, 10, 11.  It's hard to say who did what first.  "Who started it"  It all seems very childish.  It's really not that hard to ignore little things like that.  However, yours and Jeb's responses were off the topic of the thread.  If you had a specific issue to address with Snipey, that could have been done through PM or in another thread that you would start, such as this one.  An antagonistic post in Snipey's website thread is not the place to do it.
12.  That's where Snipey does get a lower standard than you, because I honestly don't think he's as mature as you are.  I think you should be able to see that too, and not stoop to his level, if you will.  Maybe that's haughty of me, but that's just my impression.  If he can't keep control in normal discussion, he will be punished.  He already has been in the past.  But when he is being antagonized, I don't expect him to respond civilly because he hasn't shown that capability.  So don't attack, and all will be well.

 Ok, Loud, let's start from the top.

1. We shall.

2.) He's not going to improve if people always feel sorry for him. Some people need to learn by failure, or by being knocked down. Snipey is obviously one of those people. Your defending him isn't helping him be a better forum poster, it's encouraging him to continue as is.

3. Maybe it's time that Snipey didn't always have someone there to save him. Maybe it's time that he's forced to defend himself, as I said before, there's no way he's going to learn if he has a good forum poster like you always defending him; not because he's right, but because you feel sorry for him.

4. As a moderator, Loudnotes, you're the one who needs to point out things like that to Mauti. I might add that it would've been a great PR move for you, and would've helped you defend Snipey if you really do belive that he's right. At the moment, ( and I know I'm not alone in this ), think that you will defend Snipey no matter what he does, and no matter how unacceptable it is.

5. "Spammed less frequently" isn't enough. You will also notice that he posted less frequently. Perhaps if he'd lay off starting the threads for a while, people wouldn't get mad at him each time he starts one. At the moment, we've seen about 50 threads talking about his websites, none that any of us really care about; so yes, of course he's going to get shit when he starts another thread much like the others.

6. How can you say that you don't fault him for anything right now? Take this into account: both Jeb and I did interviews for his origonal Blazenet site. We tried to support him at first. What do you think it is that made us change our minds about him? Maybe it was seeing him spam a link 500 times a day on GameRanger? Maybe it was his dozen daily form threads about his site? Take a look at his posts, then think what you just said.

7. I understand that perhaps his standards should be lower when he's being attacked and doesn't have a propper defense. However, look why he's being attacked. He continues to set himself up for such attacks. People have told him time and time again that they're really not interested in his sites, but yet he keeps posting links to them. Sure, he should be held to slightly lower standards, but the standards that you're aparently holding him to have gone to far.

8. Your "it's clear that Snipey spams when he's called stupid" idea is quite warped. People get called stupid on this forum. It's something that you have to put up with. To me, that's like saying "my dog bites you if you try to put him outside", and saying that the solution is to just not put him outside, and to let him shit on the floor. From lessons need to be taught. Should we all show respect for Snipey that he has not earned because we don't want to see his bullshit retaliations?

9, 10, 11. The thread had no topic, the topic was dead. It'd been killed months ago, when Snipey first started making such threads. I saw some bullshit that Snipey had put in his signature, so I retaliated. Why would I be defending Jeb? If you read back through this forum, you'll notice that Jeb and I have always argued, he has me blocked on AIM. Usually, we don't get along very well. Oh, perhaps the reason that I defended Jeb is because Snipey's bullshit had gone to far?

12. Ever think that in punishing Snipey for not responding civilly, you might actually be helping him? He needs to learn that his big brother Loudnotes won't always be here to defend him. Part of this forum is being attacked. There isn't a person here who hasn't been attacked multiple times on this forum. The rest of us have learned our lesson, and learned how to argue against these attacks. You, in defending Snipey, are preventing him for learning this valuable forum lesson.

Loudnotes, I have lots of respect for you, as do most people here. However, I do not respect your defending Snipey, not because you feel that he's right, but because you feel sorry for him. Defend who's right, not who's helpless.  

Okay, I stoped retired my spamming days a bit ago, so you can stop throwing fits now, Typhy.

its nice that we have found a common ground finaly typhy,
 ;D

yup, 24 hours to change that sig snipey, and then...

Snipey...lose the quote from your sig. You are lucky that one moderator is trying to protect you because if it was up to me, I would have let you been ripped to hell by the wolfpack. Your signature is just another act of immaturity and soon enough you will share the same fate as Peekay/Romeo/Juliet, Romulus, Weaselflink aka Jag the Fag (Who has since rehabilitated himself) and Rapid.

Loudnotes, quit helping the kid...if he was a cat he just used up his 8th life. Some people need to learn the hard way that their actions have repurcussions that they must face...maybe a little trial by fire is what is needed to make him see the light and become a decent member of the community (Typhy wasn't exactly the most liked person before, but now he is fitting in rather nicely).

ummm, aSs, if anybody wants to follow my fate, they'd end up with a great looking clan, winning a BL and the 1st RS Tournament.  Oh, and a couple player hatas like yourself, but jealousy is something that comes with the territory ;D.  

PS: Don't include my name in your BS comparisons.  I've stood my ground just fine.  Hell, you wouldn't even CB me, in fear of losing. ;)  That's one good memory to live with. ;D  

I do have mad respect for the PsYcO's that did actually CB us and had fun at  it.  Hell, the PsYcO's I cb'ed, I still get along with, but the one that chickened out, still is an aSs to me...  Go figure :o

I will admit I hadn't seen the latest signature.  I was thinking of the earlier "slaped you in the face" even in the last thread - I thought you were referring to a fake quote elsewhere, not in his signature.

In general, I've just been trying to prevent more vitriol on the forum.  It seems like there's always a scapegoat whom everyone blisters every time they say something.  I don't really like that, but it doesn't appear there's much I can do about it.

So, a little while ago I was tallying how much patience I had left for Snipey - I guess it's down to 15 or 20% now. . .but there's still some.

Typhy you made valid points, so here's what I'll say:

If Snipey wants to start a thread relating to his website, as long as he says something substantive I won't consider it spam.  I would ask those of you who hate his website to refrain from posting in that thread.  However, any further spamming elsewhere will result in my recommendation that he be banned - and since everyone else is suggesting that, he pretty much would be.  

And you're right about the signature.  If that's not removed soon it will result in a ban too.  I will add Snipey's name back to the warned list.

Ughhh. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it at all. If you're so sick of Snipey and hate him so much, etc etc, why are you looking at the threads he started? Obviously, you just want to attack him over the internet. If you're so annoyed by him, don't read the threads. Just ignore him. Now, I'm guessing your response will be "but he shouldn't be posting in the first place! It's spam!". Let the moderators deal with it. If they see 5 threads by Snipey that have 0 replies, I'm sure you'll get your way and they'll ban him. I'd hate to see anyone banned, because there's a few out there that were given a few extra chances in the past, and managed to change their ways.
Next time, maybe just PM loudnotes, Typhy. There wasn't any real reason for making this a public discussion, unless you're just trying to find supporters. We already know how you and Jeb feel about him. Remember, Loudnotes isn't just defending him everytime. He's preventing flame wars. Now, let's go back to having fun and playing RS/GhR. Here, have a blind-guy smiley. 8)

Stfu, or get your own forums, choose your own moderators, and have this many active posters.

P.S. gay

Rapid, it wasn't about how you play the game, it was meant on how your attitude and how attitudes about you have changed on the forum...if you looked at the other people on the list (or even knew who they were) then you would have realized that.

 I don't think that comparing Rapid, Rabid, or even myself to Snipey is an unfair comparison, although, perhaps not in the sence that Sin did.

Rabid, Rapid and myself are all people who've been attacked by multiple people at once, with little or no defence.

Mellow, why should Loudnotes listen to Jeb and me? We're two people. In any argument, there are people on either side. I wanted to show that I had support. So far, the only person who has 'sided up' with us, so to speak, is Sin; however, I know that if we were losing this argument, much more support would come in.

You say that Loudnotes is "preventing flamewars," well, by now, it should be obvious that that this is a problem. Problems need to be solved, not just put off. Someday, Snipey will need to change his ways, and just locking threads isn't going to make him do that.

Now that is just bullshit.

If someone comes on here, asking an opinion about a website, you can't fault those that think it's crap from calling it crap.  What the hell is this "if you don't have anything nice to say" stuff?  He asked for the opinions, anything expressing an opinion of that specific site would then be "on topic" and not spam, right?  

If this forum just isn't nice enough for you anymore Loudnotes, maybe you are too sensitive and need a break from it.  But stop using your moderator abilities to try to make it a "nicer" place.  Some of us will take "honest" over "nice" any-day.

There is a large difference between someone starting a flamewar thread saying his site sucks, and him opening the door by asking opinions.  He has to expect some bad opinions when he does that.  

Stop trying to make this a "can't everyone just get along" place.  That doesn't seem to be it's purpose.  You once said you were sick of wading through the crap, then don't.  Quit.  Nobody is making you.  But stop trying to put the iron boot of what Loudnotes thinks is right over everything.    If people have something negative to say about the site, it has every right to be posted.  It was asked for.

Loudnotes, much respect on your attempts at regulating the kindergardners.  Too bad they're so hard to deal with! ;D

Guess what asswhipes, Loud is in a position to regulate these forums to be pleasant and constructive.  Sure opinions are encouraged, but not when twisted to be so negative.  That's loud's point.  Of course, when you're a kindergardner yourself, you're blinded by your own stupidity.  Now try paying attention to the ones trying to make this a better place.  If you don't like the Moderator, Go post your opinions in your own forums!  Hell, MP has their own forums, yet they feel the need to fill this place with their bullshit.  Do us all a favor, and take your negativity elsewhere and STFU! >:(

ahaha... Where's your BL "medal" Rapid?

 


Now take a look at some of the things that Rapid says in his post. . .





So much for having "pleasant and constructive" convorsation.

[/color]

How about...

Snipey just be banned from the forums for about 6 months...see if he's more mature in 6 months
Typhy stop with all your long ass "educated" posts
Moderators do something about this, so we don't have anymore talkshows...:)

thats all,
one

obviously you didnt know the previous typhy.
let me educate you

he basically stood up and took all the bullshit that was meant for rapid and defended him no matter who was right
his posts tended to be argumentive, pointless, and insulting. in a word flamebait

i much prefer this typhy, who obviously has his shit together. he makes structured posts, he has a point, and he backs it up

if it was anyone but typhy, i'd call him the ideal poster (have to poke at you somehow man;))

i refuse to moderate typhy's posts till they get out of line, and they have a very long way to go before that happens
seriously one, do a little research before you shove your foot in your mouth next time. it's bad  for your image, and the smell sucks too

 One, I say what needs to be said, and make my points. I don't worry about how long the post is, and I won't edit out important things in order to make them shorter.


Because that would be very unfair. You don't ban someone for 6 months for not knowing how to control themselves, or spamming, about 6 days is the max that you should give for something like that.

Giving Snipey a long ban would be even worse than Loudnote's defending him in the first place. He needs to learn. The way for him to learn is not to have a good poster, and moderator always there to defend him wether he's right or not; and to have the option to correct his mistakes.


The only post so far in this thread that may need "dealing with" is you own. It's the typical post of someone who doesn't want to get involved, but feels some impulse to say something.  [/color]

i missed a lot of this argument but i'd just like to point something out...
Silent Killer used to annoy everyone by just spamming in previously made topics, and you admins went back and deleted hundreds of his posts so he wouldn't reach freak status a while ago.
Silent killer learned.
Snipey on the other hand makes boring topics that are all about himself, maybe if he would take some time to think that most people don't care. He could learn, but not with you empowering him to continue to spam.
Loudnotes, he won't learn if your there wiping his ass every time he needs some help.

 Well said, Jeb. Silent Killer is a great example. In his case, the moderators showed him that his posting style would not work in these forums. His choices were either to change or leave; he chose to leave.  

ah memories...

loudnotes, this isn't about how much snipey sucks, its about how your blinded by ideals and helping idiots. Look at this at face value, this is a gaming forum, your not Mother Theresa, and snipey is an spammer who annoys everyone, what fucking purpose does he serve?

Jesus, Jeb - did you not read my last post?

And Bucc - I used to think the most dangerous thing in the world was an opinionated stupid person - a well-connected Dumbass if you will.  Now it's clear to me that it's the smart ones saying stupid things that are the real problem.

Go back to your own forum if you have a problem with me.  I'm not going to keep wasting my time explaining everything that's wrong with your eloquent misconceptions.

 A little forum lesson to you all. When you're trying to convince someone of something, especially someone who is in a powerful position, it's best not to make them feel threatened.


While perhaps this is a poor thing to quote, given the sence that you said it in; however, I feel it needs to be said how bad a statment like this looks.

If someone has a legitimate concern with what a moderator is doing, not only should they be allowed to make a suggestion or complaint, but they should be encouraged to do such.

The attitude of a moderator shouldn't be "I'm not changing. If you don't like me - leave". Part of being a moderator is being able to see what people want, and moderating what they don't want. Since I can see that last line will get quoted, and picked apart, considering how dumb it sounds on it's own, perhaps I should explain:

This forum is different than most forums. Most forums are more peaceful, with less heated arguments. Less things are tollorated on other forums. Here, the moderators, and of course Mauti, have been able to see that what people want here is heated arguments about various issues. Because they've seen what people want, they've adjusted their moderating to fit people's needs.

Doing what the people want doesn't mean banning someone just because their opinion is unpopular. It doesn't mean putting up with spam posts; and it doesn't mean allowing people to be completly killed.

In this forum, and community, there aren't very many people who will look at someone who is being bashed in a thread, feel sorry for the person, and leap to their defense. A good moderator should be able to see when the person has been picked apart endlessly, and know when to put a lock on it.

This doesn't mean locking threads because it looks like someone is going to get bashed. If it looks like that - oh well, then perhaps that's what will happen. Let the person be bashed, let the argument play out, and lock the thread when all content leaves it, or the subject matter has been covered completly.

I have a message to the people who are on my side of this argument ( Bucc, Jeb, Sin, etc. ): Loudnotes is a good moderator, and a good forum poster. You're not going to make any progress if you threaten him. When you're trying to convince someone to change their mind on an issue, which they have more control over than you; it's best to try and keep your argument respectful, and peaceful.

Thank you, and goodnight.   [/color]

Thank you too.

In my earlier post in this thread to which I was referring, I essentially agreed with everything Typhy said, and backed down from my position.  That's all the public defense of my moderating I choose to do for now.  My forum pet peeve is personal attacks, and I will continue to discourage people from getting at the person behind the posts instead of the posts themselves.  I'm not perfect there either - but neither is anyone else.

Talk shows eh?

Hello and welcome to The Mysty Erior Show! And I'm your host The Gameranger Sex Symbol, Mysterio!

Today we have "People who are so blinded by biases they wont shut up!" Our guests are, from the far reaches of Eskimo land Typhy. Also, from some place far away where I never wanna go, Loudnotes! And finally the man in the middle Snipey!

Typhy, when I look at your posts all I see is longwinded whiney spam. Do you have anything to say in your defense?

Typhy: YOU DONT KNOW ME! <snaps fingers down his torso> I'm talkin downtown beotch. And that Snipey fella is the spammer not me foo.

OK Well Loud notes how would you like to reply to that.

Loudnotes: Tese forums are mine! I'm da shit here. I can do wat ever I want! <boos from audience> WAT EVER WAT EVER <stands up and flashes audience>

Audience: MYSTY MYSTY MYSTY!

Well lets see what snipey has to say.

Snipey: Aigt! I no spammer! You dont know me! <prance around on stage yelling unrepeatable curses at audience>

Oh heveans to bettsy what's wrogn with you ppl?! <cheers from loyal Mysty fans> You all make me sick. Stop fighting and take away loudnotes BS powers! <cheers>

Loudnotes: <sits twitchign legs and flingings arms. Stands up and flashes audience again, more boos>

typhy stands up and punches loudnotes and a brawl breaks out. A strong bald guy runs onto the stage and breaks up the fight. Buccaneer jumps up out of audience and feels the security gaurds head

Well let's take a break. We'll be back in another post sometime soon.

Hilarious.  Myst, you are a comedic genius!   ;D

lol Myst, it is a talkshow kind of...

lmao, myst. You should really think about bringing the show on air, I really think it would be a hit  ;D

Typhy, actually, I wasn't coming to your defense, you and Jeb were doing fine, and I don't read the Snipey threads anyway.  So I was avoiding comment.  But due to the ravings of the little prick in other three other threads, and his comment that nobody should say anything bad (which was really stupid) I decided to comment on that attitude.  As for the tone, well, I have no patience for assholes like this, and you don't know the whole story.


Hey, Loudass, boo-fucking-hoo.  You've been playing favorites, and are full of shit.  You don't believe in personal attacks, but you've been pulling them for months.  Wake up and smell your own bullshit.  

I myself will be here to point out your bullshit, for, as Typhy said very well and with manners, it's the only way you'll ever learn.

Bucc, why you have to go and post that?! I had just dramitically lightend the mood. Maybe I shouldnt have made you rub the bald guy's head...

Because I read other posts like this Myst

My bad. well both of you say sorry and be friends.

The biggest lies are always the ones people believe aren't they?  You accuse me of being hypocritical, yet you haven't backed up one of these blanket statements with a shred of evidence.  Instead, you've used direct insults, profanity, and the now infamous "personal attacks".  Every word I've ever held against you has been a response to your own toward me or toward someone else.  

As for Myst, you're right bucc, he doesn't know the half of it.  Incidentally, Myst your humor didn't seem to be based off a reading of this thread.  Anyway, Bucc, why don't you show him posts like these. . .

This is from the Black Ops section.  These excerpts indicate what I have a problem with.  This is the beginning of an off-topic debate on Mazda's car nationality.  (American or Japanese?)  My last post came after I took the middle ground in the argument, stating that different interpretations could consider Mazda either nationality.  This lead to insults against me, and my eventual frustration with the entire debate, and Bucc in particular.



Bondo replies:

Bucc immediately begins the superiority complex with a post including such insights as these:

Bondo replied with a rebuttal that never mentioned anything about Bucc as a person, only attempting to justify his point.  The response:

This was after no provocation.  Bondo's first insult in response came 5 posts later.

---

So, enough about my moderation abilities.  You now have an example of what not to do.  That sort of thing is not what this forum was designed for, and I have discouraged it by trying to lessen the "dumbass-bashing" of Snipey, etc and the flaming among everyone.  I've never pretended that I've never grown overheated myself.  However, I stand by my decisions, and if you have a problem with it, you can discuss it with me in private or post somewhere else.

I like how you pull out just the insults, and not the actual facts that I posted in those posts Loudass.  Like how Volvo and Mazda are different because of where they are designed and built, not just owned by.  How I worked for Mazda and other companies.  

Everyone here knows that I never post that short and just insult.  I always back them up.

Get off your fucking high horse Loudass.  You don't need to be Bondo's protector anymore then you need to be Snipey's.  You aren't even a fucking moderator there.  

As for lack of proof, I thought you could pull it together yourself, but, my bad for assuming.  How many threads did you start bitching about my posting style?  How many polls about me and my style?  I told you then, I take that as a personal attack.  How you can deny it is beyond me, and just a fucking smokescreen as far as I'm concerned.  

Add that to how you've changed quotes that I've made (instead of just using the real quote) taking things out of context to make them look different, and you deleting posts of mine under the guise that they are personal attacks, yet never the personal attacks against me (I can find 3 by Rapid in the last day or two alone).  

Is that not facts of you playing favorites?  Do I need to post links, because I can.

Im gonna turn off my fun loving side for a minute.

Guys, what do you thinks better? Friends arguing for fun over stuff, or when two people who are progessively starting to dispise each other argue with no way of a possivle en or comprimise? That's right...THE FRIENDS!!!!! Why don't you guys even try to be pals. You can do it. me and Typhy, for example, debate over things alot. We don't hate eachother.

To be honest Loudnotes is doing his job, though he may be doing it a bit excessively. Loud, try to losen up, have a few screw around posts like my show. On the topic of Bucc and such, stop insulting eachother and quoting everythign turning it against each other.

Learn to become a happy family on these forums. Nothing is gonna be acomplished, this topic could go on forever, never ending reply after reply. It will all be said, hundreds of times repeated. If you don't ever try to reach out and be friends, or atleast tolerate the other, than you'll be in a constant loop of insults and curses.

Stop hating and start tolerating. You guys could learn a bit by watching South Park or The Simpsons. Have some fun, shake hands with each other, maybe sign a treaty.

So acually consider what you say before you say it. Think of what the other will think before you go and put them down.

Back to the fun loving myst:

Hug and make up!

 Ok, here we go. A nice challenge; trying to say stuff in this topic without pissing anyone off. ( With the exception of Snipey, of course. )

One of my favorite things about arguing with Loudnotes, Bondo, Brain, and others, is that they stick to the facts of the argument. They don't feel a need to throw 'personal attacks' into their posts.

Does calling someone a dumbfuck 10 times in a post actually help your argument at all?


This is one of the sad things about your posting style. You often bring up very good points, and some useful facts. However, beacuse your posts are filled with 'personal attacks', I don't feel that I can work off of your points without screwing up my own case. If you work off of someone points, you are grouped with them for the given thread. I don't want to be grouped with someone who can't make a respectful post.


Perhaps you should've taken such polls and threads as advice, instead of just criticism. Loudnotes and many other posters obviously have a problem with your style of posting. Just as a moderator must adjust his style to fit what the members of the forum want, a poster must adjust his style.


You obviously have different ideas of what a 'personal attack' is. Loudnotes started respectful threads and polls about Bucc's posting style; Bucc considered such threads and polls personal attacks. Should Loudnotes consider this thread as me making a personal attack? Most of this thread is me criticising his moderating, and the way that he's handled the whole 'Snipey issue'.

Or, is it not a personal attack because I presented my case in a respectful way? In my opinon, a personal attack on a forum is someone throwing in insults which in no way help their argument. What's yours?

I look upon personal attacks differently. If they're in response to another personal attack. If Snipey makes up some bullshit quotes, I have no problem if a person retaliates. In some cases, you have to change your style on a thread to thread basis.

Somtimes, a newbie will come in here, say some really dumb stuff, and hear it from everyone. At times like this, the person deserves what they're getting, and no moderator should interfere.

While I'd like to be able to comment on some of the things that Loudnotes has said, over the past few posts, I agree with him; and until Bucc changes how he's posting, I can't side against Loud when he comments on it.

Well, :::Sits back and watches::: Either this will go over well, and perhaps give each of you some ideas. . . Or I'll piss off Bucc. . . Or, I'll piss off both of you.

Wish for the best.  [/color]

I don't know why someone with such outstanding moderating abilities would help that flamewar spill out here.
And yes, your shit stinks too loudnotes, good-luck arguing your imaginary moral high-ground.

Thank you Typhy.  You didn't piss me off since you seemed to be taking my side, but good luck with Bucc.

Jeb, the reason I have a "moral high ground" is that I want exactly what Myst has described: a forum that's not full of wanton insults and constant bickering.  That's one of the things Mauti has entrusted me to prevent.  God knows he doesn't have half the patience I do here - if he were reading through all this you wouldn't be allowed to say twice as many things as I've deleted.  I've taken what steps I can do prevent the forum from degenerating into only name-calling.  To reiterate:  I've never said I was above it myself, I just do what I can to prevent it.  And at times, that has included apologizing and attempting to rectify my own mistakes.  So yes my "shit stinks" but I don't flaunt it or actively encourage the smell.

Incidentally, I included the flamewar here as an example of things Bucc said.  He brought it up - I felt the need to defend myself.  The material points are not the issue - I just picked out the inflammatory things.  Any time you're seriously calling someone a fucking retard, context doesn't matter.

Myst - it seems like whenever I try to be less reserved myself, I'm called a hypocrite.  Bucc and I used to be friends until we started disagreeing on things.  I've said repeatedly that that needn't be an issue if he were willing to look at me on his own level.  However, he persists in viewing me as beneath him as a human being, and I want no part of that.

Bucc, I also left out everyone else's arguments too - like how you worked for the American division of Mazda, and how the mazda website calls the company itself Japanese!  And yet, given that, I still allowed that different perceptions would allow different interpretations.  And yet you still attacked this middle ground??!   You've told me repeatedly that I'm the one who refuses to give in, but it's your own opinions which seem determined to be correct.

Go ahead and post links if you want, there's a solid reason or an apology behind every action I've ever taken as a moderator.  Sometimes with Rapid, for example, its easier to leave something he's said around and ignore it instead of deleting it and starting his bitching up again.  Furthermore, I'm not Bondo's "protector"; he's my friend.  Or an online ally at least, and I resent it when you treat him like scum too.  I won't always defend his actions, but I'm not going to sit by idly when you resort to mudslinging.  Even when that eventually throws it toward me.

Listen to Typhy.  I can't possibly say anything that will have any positive effect on you unless it's conceding a point.  There's really no point in my continuing to debate with you if you refuse to do so civily.

And furthermore, since I don't care to post these same ideas in the other threads, the "rules" to which I was referring are basic manners.  I absolutely refuse to continue to be insulted by some haughty stranger on this forum.  Write politely and without condecension, and you will have my undivided attention and humility.

 Well, I don't expect Bucc to be pissed, just perhaps a bit annoyed.

Loudnotes is an idealist. There's nothing wrong with that, infact, it's probably a good thing that this forum has a moderator like him.

When you actually look at what he's asking, it's not the slighest bit unreasonable. Either I am greatly mistaken, or Loudnotes is asking posters like Bucc to be more respectful, so that we can have respectful arguments, without the 'flame war' style insults.  

Loudnotes can be realistic sometimes ( I hate to word it like this, but I can't think of a better way ).


In a perfect forum, Rapid wouldn't make posts like that, or retaliate if they were deleted; but Loudnotes accepts that this isn't a perfect forum.

A couple of questions that I would like you to answer:

1.) Is Loudnotes' asking posters to be more respectful, and not fill their posts with useless insults unreasonable? If so, why?

And 2.) Does throwing insults into your posts somehow help you argue your point? If so, in what way? If not, then why do you do it?

[/color]

Actually, Bondo throws personal attacks at me all the time. And if you remember, I never attacked that asshole until he made that very hurtful slander of my friend.  Since he deserves absolutely no respect at all, I find insulting him to be appropiate in any case.

But, more to the point, I'll mention a few things.  First, look at me and Tasty.  We have agreed on almost nothing in our arguments.  We don't throw many insults at each other (some debates have gotten very heated, but that's ok, it makes you want to debate more).  But look at them, you see me just randomly throwing out personal insults?  Well that's the way you just made it sound.  Look at you and I.  We've talked plenty.  Have I just trown personal insults at you willy nilly?  We don't agree on things, and we've expressed our opinions, but would you call them personal attacks?  If so, we are both guilty of them, but I dont' think they are.

Second, and think about this, sometimes the asshole that the post is attacking isn't the audience that it's meant for.  So does it help my argument with the dumbass in question, no.  But if I thought that dumbass in question could be reasoned with in the first place, there probably wouldn't have been the personal attack.  So, does it help my arguments, yes, in some cases it does, just not with the person you think I'm aiming at.


That's ok.  You don't need to work off my posts, or take my side.  You have to debate in your own style, what you are comfortable with.  

My only gripe here is that you insinuate that I never make a respectful point.


Typhy, once is constructive.  But we went back and forth in PM's, then the 4 or 5 threads with polls came out.  That's no longer constructive, but attacking.  It's known as harrassment.  

More to the point I was making though, Loudnotes knew full well (because we had discussed it) that I considered that a personal attack.  While he pretends to be against them, he not only partakes in them, but iniates them at times.  That is hypocritical to say the least.  I also told him quite a few times that he may not like my insults, but I found him just as insulting, in the left handed way he said things to me.  Now, he didn't find any merrit in changing his "style" to be less insulting to me either.  So, in other words, he plays at the high moral ground while not actually being there.

Yes, we do.  And I just pretty much covered that.

But, that wasn't the point I was trying to make with that statement, I didn't say it well.  I am agreeing with you that he's not even handed in his moderating, not talking about his posting.  I'm trying to point out that he's deleted a few "personal attacks" of mine, saying that I was just restating what I said and adding personal insults so he considered it spam, while he lets bullshit posts like Rapid has made the last few days, or like Bondo has made towards me in the past.  That's what I meant by him not moderating with an even hand.  He says he's trying to stop the personal attacks, but he only picks and chooses some of them, based on feeling sorry for Snipey or his friendship with Bondo.


First, this isn't a personal attack yet.  Criticism in and of itself isn't a personal attack, especially when posted in a respectful way.  However, once it is fully discussed, if you keep bringing it up, over and over, no matter how respectful, it is then.  So, if this thread plays out, and it ends, no, it's not been a personal attack.  But if you start 3 or 5 or 10 more threads about it, then I would consider it a personal attack.  You see, attacks can be disguised with plenty of nice writing and politeness.  It doesn't not make them an attack, it just makes them harder to spot.

Second, the problem with your definition is that it's too subjective.  "Throwing insults which in no way help their argument".  Who decides if the insult helped?  If the writer thinks they did, was he breaking a rule?  With no set guidelines, it's completely subjective.  And, that leads us to the problem at hand, that we think one of the moderators judgement is skewed.  For different reasons, but to the same point.

Thrid, I never said personal attacks were a very bad thing or something that needed to be avoided.  I'm just saying that he hasn't upheld his own, self proclaimed values or moderated to them very well.


And I pretty much agree with you here Typhy.  I weigh posts and posters before responding to them.  Everyone starts with a full measure of respect, Newb and vet alike.  What I don't do is measure individuals from thread to thread.  You see, three people here have earned a complete 0% of my respect.  And I do mean earned it.  Some others here have earned my greatest respect.  I have a good amount of respect for someone like Tasty for instance.  The only things I don't respect about him is that he lets his hate of Bush color his opinions too broadly.  That he's just too emotional about him.  We don't agree, but I respect him.  He makes good points.  Often wrong =P, but good points.  In other words, (big, important words) HE MAKES ME THINK.  And that's really the name of the game in the debating we do.  I think he'd agree with that (everything except him being wrong ofcourse).  So, other then in the very heat of an argument, we don't really insult each other.  We don't love each other's writing style, but that's just not very important on the whole.  Then you have people like Zeitsev, that I insult often, based on his posts, but when he makes good ones, I don't.  When I've seen him not be a parrot of someone elses thinking, where he can really debate, I've afforded even him respect.  


No Typhy, it doesn't piss me off.  It hasn't given me any ideas, because it's ground we've covered, nothing new.  Sorry.  Maybe you'll understand me a little better from this, maybe not.  But you've given your opinion, and there's nothing wrong with that in my book.  

 Ok Bucc, I understand where you're coming from, and while I don't agree, I can accept most of what you said.

You're obviously not a very forgiving person. You think of the worst of what people have done, and don't give people multiple chances. I can accept that.


Someone like Loudnotes and me give a person a new life in each thread ( until they reach the point which Snipey had ). In my opinion, that makes for more pleasent convorsations and arguments; however, it's your choice.

I still would like answers to the two questions from the end of my post, though.

Only problem there is that what makes you think these two clowns haven't reached that point with me Typhy?  I do give people multiple chances, but they do reach a point, and these two guys both crossed it a while ago.  If I didn't give people multiple chances, you and I wouldn't be talking civilly, for example.  We've had our differences, but we still get along.  I could easily assume that you are less forgiving then I, since the crap between you and Snipey hasn't been going on as long or as personal.  But I don't, because I know that people have their own personal boundaries.  Bondo and Loudass may not cross yours, just like Snipey hasn't crossed mine.  So don't judge that too harshly, especially since you haven't seen half the conversations that go on in my case.


You posted those while I was making that long post, so I didn't see them before (teaches me to start a post and walk away from it without refreshing).

First answer:  I consider it unreasonable because in my opinion, he doesn't practice what he preaches.  A quick and simple example, without getting into more personal issues, I've told him repeatedly I think it's rude as hell to edit a quote I've made (put it in quotes, but paraphrase).  It's not a quote, it's a misquote, and I find it very, very insulting.  I point it out, he continues it.  He does it on purpose, saying that he doesn't understand why it bothers me so much.  There's the heart of it.  He doesn't understand why it insults me, even though I've tried to explain it, so he pushes it.  So, to bottom line this, I find his tone with me and his quoting of me much more insulting than if he called me a motherfucking cocksucking child molester, and I said these words to him months ago.  He's done nothing to make the situation better, after I tried to explain that to him multiple times, so what I see is him only respecting what he thinks is rude, not what others think is rude.

Add to that the fact he considers my style of quoting a personal attack (not talking about insults, just me quoting, like I've done with you).  Now, you may see them as different things, but he's pointed out on multiple occasions that he thinks it's attacking.  

Now sprinkle in the unequal ways in which he enforces this want of his.  He doesn't go for the source in all cases, not at all.  You yourself have seen this.  He picks and chooses who he is going to censor and who he isn't.  Rapid, who Mauti has suspended from the BL for bad mouthing Grifter did it again this week, but no, our super peacekeeper Loudass doesn't do anything about that.  Bondo and Snipey seem to get special considerations, because of friendship or feeling sorry.  That's stuff for him to post as a member, not to edit as a moderator.  So I really don't trust his judgment.  Which is where this all started, with my post in this thread about it being outrageous for him to ask people with a negative opinion (not insulting mind you, but negative opinion) to not post when someone comes here and asks for that opinion.  

A final thought, and I've said this before, if you want to make people follow the rules, they have to know those rules.  He has his opinion of what insulting is, I have mine.  He has his opinion of what good manners are, I have mine.  He has his opinion of what my posting style should be, I have mine.  But, he's trying to enforce rules that are not there to be followed.  He's threatened me about "breaking the rules", and I've asked in many threads where I can find them.  They seem to be in his little head.

I've already answered your second question in the body of that two parter, so I don't think I need to hit it again.  Short answer is yes, and I'm a Lenny Bruce fan too.  

By the way, what didn't you agree with?  My opinion of Loudass in general?  That I have good reason to feel the way about him that I do?  Something else?

 
I think Loudnotes already explained that. You, unlike Rapid, are able to accept when you have a post deleted, and not make a big deal about it. While I think it's a warped way to work, I can't say I wouldn't do the same.


I understand how Rapid and Bondo could've reached that point with their attacks on Grifter. However, knowing Loudnotes posting style, and reading most of the threads that he posts in, I don't see how he could've reached that point with you, so either I've missed lots, of we simply have different standards.

Ack, more soon!  [/color]

Well, I'll ignore the blatant falsehoods in those posts.  I can't repeatedly restate myself, here or in the other forum part.  Both of us have a right to not be constantly on the defensive, and I've maintained that attacking is not how I'll reverse that.

Just to correct a large misconception, I've never claimed to be perfect.  However, Bucc, just as I am one of few who complain about your posting style, you are one of few that complain about my moderating.  It works just fine with only a few exceptions, which I've corrected.

As Bucc has stated to me, not everything is subjective.  There are some concrete things that are not subject to opinion.  Among these is whether calling someone a flaming cocksucking dumbass fucker is insulting.  Agreed, my points, which I try to make politely might be considered insulting by your opinion, though I have stated that that is not the intent.

My issue with Bucc is that there is no diplomacy.  No pretense of not being insulting.  Never an attempt at civility.  Everything is upfront, honest, rude, and intolerable.

Also, the superiority is stifling.  Bucc has judged me well in realizing that that attitude is what provokes me.  The only thing I really can't stand is being talked down to, repeatedly and after direct askance of stopping.  

"Actually, Bondo throws personal attacks at me all the time. And if you remember, I never attacked that asshole until he made that very hurtful slander of my friend.? Since he deserves absolutely no respect at all, I find insulting him to be appropiate in any case."

I love how Bucc misinterprets my having Hitler and Grifter in the same paragraph as a direct comparison continues to count as such even after I've explained that it was in no way a direct comparison.  Just to explain to those who didn't see it, I was making the logical argument that cruelty is wrong whether on an extreme scale (Hitler) or on the small or petty scale (Grifter).  I called Grifter an asshole, a title he no doubt would accept willingly based on how he treated me.  Somehow this perfectly valid and not really insulting argument was taking way out of context by Bucc to mean that I think Grifter is as bad as Hitler.

Apparently you base your justification of insulting me on an "insult" that I made that was in no way meant to be an insult.  We'll also ignore that my insults to you and others as a whole are based on grounds of reciprication and self-defense, not unprovoked derision.  If no insults were made to me or others, I would have no need to use any myself.

Not the insult I ever brought up asshole.  Shows how much you even pay fucking attention.  I've never posted about that part, though others did.  I've pointed out the insult over and over for your retarded ass.  


It was an insult.  You defended the insult.  You stood by the insult.  You are now just full of shit.  You have also insulted me in threads long before I have you, so don't give me that bullshit about self-defense.

Well, that is the "insult" upon which you and Deadeye started insulting me mostly.  I realize you never brought that up, because guess what, I was paying attention.  And since you have not mentioned it in this thread, why don't you share my alleged insult of Grifter that set you against me.

And just a note, if you look at my post above, and then at yours, mine was much more civil than yours.

Wait a minute, if you were paying attention enough to notice that I never mentioned it, ever, then you'd know the insult you made that set this off in the begining.  Which is it?  Paying attention or not?  Because I sure as hell posted on it enough.  Can't figure it out, go back and read.


HA.  And if you had paid attention to anything I wrote in this thead you'd see that civility isn't what I consider respect.  And you can show disrespect your way, and I can show it mine.  What about that can't you wrap your little mind around?

Not in this thread you didn't.

Yep, I'm wrong, I wrote that in the three other threads you have going on around this topic, but not this one.

You still see the point.

You also failed to acknowledge any of the other points.  But what do I expect, that's normal for you.

Why am I obligated to reply to every single thing you write?

I actually agree with rapid   ???

Scary :-[

Lol, and we've been over that too.  Part of the difficulty in replying to everything is the posting style!

Do you understand Bucc?  You can't have it both ways.  Post concisely and expect replies, or post as you do and expect what you're getting.  I frankly don't expect you to reply to this.  Just as we've both missed points of the other that we each thought was extremely important.

Example:

If I make a post with 10 points in it, 9 of which are mediocre and one which makes my case completely - and you dissect that post and kill the 9 points very effectively - what about that 1?  What if you just happen to skip over it, or miss it?  We've miscommunicated. . .down the line somewhere I'll be a loudass and you'll accuse me of missing something of yours in one of your posts.  (As no doubt I will since I'm trying to respond to each of your responses to 9 things!)  The same thing is true with Bondo - you're each missing the main point the other is making to go after the details.  

That's why I've asked you to address the main idea.  We've been over it, it's apparent it won't happen.  But for you to continue to expect Bondo or anyone else to have addressed everything you say is ridiculous.  And admit it, you do feel slighted every time someone "ignores" a point you make - when they've most likely just missed it in the shroud of details.

I'll point out that in the open letter thread, I mentioned that I agreed with him that your moderation was somewhat questionable due to the lack of posted rules (which not only is agreeing with Bucc, but sort of disagreeing with you who has been one of the few people to give vocal support for me).  I of course mean no venom in my comment like Bucc has in regards to the issue.  But Bucc fails to point this out in his response.  So Bucc, I guess that makes you one of those hypocrites you always call me on (which would be a second cause of him being hypocritical in itself).

The point being, you don't reply to all the points Bucc, and neither do we, we should just accept that it isn't going to happen and that it probably shouldn't need to happen.

Nice post rapid

In an addition to my post above.

By pointing out a problem (by Bucc's standards) in his posting, I show that if I were so inclined, I could take Bucc's posts and do the exact same thing he does to others.  He is in no way a better poster than others, it is just he is the only one who is a big enough ass to bother doing what he does.

I won't sink to his level of tearing points out of context and criticizing them, but believe me, there is plenty of potential there for someone who would go to that level.