So, who is the skirt?
I'm just wondering why anyone would ever PM the volunteer mods and ask them to get in the middle of a forum populated by adults. Rather than to:
A: Simply not read the offending material
B: Read with the knowledge that it is simply a POV/discussion between adults
C: Worst case scenario voice your concern directly to the offending parties in a clear and private manner
I am shocked and a little annoyed that I've just been tattled on.
To that person: I've sent back a response to the mod in question thanking them for their hard work and apologizing that they've been put in this position. I've no intentions of toning it down- but particularly when the request to do so comes in such an unreasonable manner.
A: Simply not read the offending material
B: Read with the knowledge that it is simply a POV/discussion between adults
C: Worst case scenario voice your concern directly to the offending parties in a clear and private manner
I am shocked and a little annoyed that I've just been tattled on.
To that person: I've sent back a response to the mod in question thanking them for their hard work and apologizing that they've been put in this position. I've no intentions of toning it down- but particularly when the request to do so comes in such an unreasonable manner.
Comments
But I agree... if you have a problem with how a forumer conducts their foruming then you've got A, B, and C as listed above. Tattling is uncool, and well, what do you really expect it to accomplish?
/g2
http://www.pokerforum.ca/showthread.php?t=7691
Otherwise I expect you to degenerate into another tirade of childish, puerile name-calling that has no business of this forum. If you don't like it, suck it up or go create the Pokerforum for six year olds.
/g2
You know me well enough, that you're on my msn and I have been to your house a few times. I expect you to be capable of A and B but at worst this was a C first.
If we create a forum for six year olds it'll be the only one you should read; the manner in which Cadillac or I speak should not be censored and I stand by my 'no intention' to tone it down- even if it comes from someone I like and respect......
......through the grapevine.
Edit: I also wanted to add that your comment about us 'kids' causing meaningful discussion to degenerate to worthless crap is actually verbal abuse.
Moose, I'd appreciate it if you would stop presuming that your sense of meaning, and values are the only guidelines to which people should subscribe.
I agree with C, especially with people you know and communicate with normally - you should be able to deal with stuff privately/directly first, and then call the mods if things still aren't resolved. The fact that the mods were called first really surprises me. On a personal note, I'm glad you know me and my values well enough to know I too would find the material offensive, but a bit disappointed that you initially thought I was the informer (and that I wouldn't contact you privately first).
I think this relates more to option B, which is the interesting one. I don't think that Moose is presuming his sense of values so much as the forum rules. Whether you think the thread violated the forum rules (respect, profanity, demeaning/harassing) is subjective, and I think we all have different feelings of where the line is. But if you cross that line, you should be censored. This isn't a "free-speech" zone, it's a public forum with it's own set of rules which you agreed to follow when you signed up. You don't think you crossed that line, Moose does (as do I), and in the end the mods will decide where it is. But I don't think anybody here, friend/foe/spammer/etc. can arbitrarily decide that they aren't subject to the rules and guidelines set by the forum, and if they violate them, they should expect consequences (censorship, warnings, bannings, etc.).
Just posting so I get auto updates on this.
I agree and apologize. My posting here is to learn, trade ideas and concepts. I have on several occasions been sidetracked by Kristy and have had a big part in turning some quality threads into garbage.
Sorry all.
Option A is not 'silly' one is clearly are able to look at Caddy's mission impossible pic or read something about 'not pissing on me if I were on fire' and decide..."this is beyond what I'm comfortable with" or "I'm not interested in this" and move on without reading the remainder.
Moose IS presuming..every word included in the posts is found somewhere else on the forum. For example my tagline has been 'fck limit' for months with no complaint, I've been repeatedly ENCOURAGED to keep my naked girl pic up. There is no question that it is something about yesterday's configuration that personally offended him (and believe it or not, I don't like that he was uncomfortable with it...I like him very much)
At any rate, we've established that the 'forum rules' are outdated by time and time again over-stepping that line. (Even you Moose, drop the occassional lmFao) etc. the censure had to have been personally motivated as the precedent is clearly at present set in my favour.
This is a free speech zone, it has long since evolved to become one and is better for it.
My bad Caddy..clearly you're predisposed to upstanding behaviour.
I presume that my attempt at a PM truce has been ignored and will politely suggest that you GTFO of this thread.
Are you telling me that you offer has been recinded?
lol.
From two years ago, natch.
Better? Same? Worse?
BBC_Z you're pretty much my role model. I aspire to your level of pwning.
None of the content was offensive to me because none of it was directed at me. I swear a blue streak myself. That being said there is a big difference between saying that was a fucking bullshit call and you are full of fucking bullshit. Personal attacks against anyone are just not acceptable.
When that goes on it discourages people from posting because they fear being singled out for personal attacks. I followed the thread with interest because it is exactly the kind of discussions I wanted generated out of the forum tourneys. I posted a few times. But once the thread became a personal battle between Caddy and Kristy I decided fuck it, I'm not adding anything more to this thread. Those types of things are what prevent lurkers from becoming posters and the forum suffers as a result. That is what annoyed me and that is why I contacted AJ. That is a forum issue and not a personal issue and that is why he should handle it.
I disagree that somehow lurkers can't get past the odd flame war. I managed to get here and I was fighting with Metro within my first 5 posts as I recall it.
BTW lurkers MAN UP AND START POSTING.
Did you concede to my idea that the 'rules' are outdated, and the precedent clearly set in my favour?
No official warning was issued, nor was action considered to my understanding...we were just informed that we'd been 'snitched' on.
Not quite the words I used actually. I at no time made a reference to being 'snitched on'...just that there was a complaint logged and that I was nicely asking you both to calm down abit.
Kristy, you seem to have taken this very personally. The rules IMO are not outdated, simply not strictly enforced, and I for one don't mind some tolerance on posting just so long as no one complains or gets hurt in the process. I told you I thought you were justified in your remarks, but at the same time, asking nicely for you to keep it off the public boards as much as possible. Moose's comments about it detracting from content is quite right...this is a forum about poker, and when a thread gets personal, it loses the intent.
sit on the fence on someone else's dime.
(sorry..the quotes were misplaced, I did it without thinking..someone msn'd the term snitch but in this context it implies that AJ said and that is not true.)
Post more!
I can no longer remain silent. At the risk of pointing out the obvious.....this is entirely innacurate. I would say that at most this is an example of a moderately clothed girl. I know a naked girl when I see one. (The sites I frequent that mention the word "naked" start with this type of picture at a bare minimum.... get it? bare? ) And for those of you wondering yes I'm always this witty.
true story.
My apologies for not seeking professional opinions before I made such a gross overstatement.
If part of it is her avater.. Well I was basically told to get rid of my ikea avater. due to the content. You couldnt even see the guys really.. But apparently this forum gets a little sexist.. Or is.. Kristy no offence to you.
But the avater is way more revealing then my Ikea one ever was.
I dont get offended by these types of things.
Just, kinda laughin here at all this.. sorry