Log in

View Full Version : I have a suggestion:


sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 07:58 PM
Something must be done.

I am not posting this thread in the Ministers' Lounge because I do not believe that the leaders of this site should be the only ones to help clean it up.

I'm going to post the points in different posts, so that it is easier to pick one or more for response.

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 07:58 PM
1. Rules

We need them, we have them, but they are not yet posted. In fact,we've had these rules since April, and yet somehow they have not been put up. I've decided to put them here, first, and have the members look over them.

Here we go:

To all users,

What follows is a a list of things you need to be made aware of as you enjoy your stay here on thechurchofgoogle.com forums. These rules are not designed to curb your fun but, instead, to make the experience more fun for everyone. Please note that these rules are there to act as guidelines, but lkeep in mind that the admins reserve the right to enforce them as law at a moment's notice.

1] We, the Administrators and Ministers of the CoG, reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

2] Thechurchofgoogle.org forums and its accompanying website are privately owned, NOT public property. You are a welcome and honored guest here. Please act accordingly. Any behaviors deemed offensive, disruptive or illegal will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis accordingly. This includes the posting of pornographic materials, sexist/racist materials (comments, photographs, user names, signatures, etc.), spam, hacking or anything else that could disrupt the flow of the forum or a user's ability to access its content.

3] Administrator decisions are final. No arguments, personal attacks or open forum debates on the subject of those decisions will be tolerated. Such reactions could result in temporary or even permanent banishment from the forum, if necessary.

4] Moderator decisions are semi-final. If you have a problem with a Moderator's decision, take it up with an Administrator in PM, NOT in open forum. If said Administrator deems it necessary, the Moderator's decision can be overturned. If not, see rule 3.

Ministers and their rankings. (http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/forum/showgroups.php)

5] "Trolls" or "trolling" will not be tolerated. Anyone deemed obviously inflammatory and/or looking for trouble will eventually find it. See rule 3.

6] "Flame wars" will not be tolerated. Any post or thread deemed inflammatory or disruptive risks being moved to IFU, being edited, being closed or even being deleted outright if necessary and the offender dealt with accordingly, at the discretion of the Moderator or Administrator. Healthy debate is fine and, indeed, welcome! But, debates that disintegrate into name calling or other such nonsense will be curbed.

7] "Derailing" or "hijacking" of threads is highly frowned upon. Please stay on topic when at all possible. Threads deemed too far off topic or disintegrating into the realm of "chatter" may be edited or closed at a Moderator or Administrator's discretion. When in doubt use the forum "Search" feature.

8] "Resurrection" of old threads for the simple purpose of submitting short replies such as, "Yeah!", "I agree" or "This sucks" is also highly frowned upon. If, however, you have something useful to add to the thread such as a point that may have been missed by the OP and the resulting posters, or if something having to do with the discussion has changed in the interim, by all means feel free to add your 0.02$ worth. If not, don't bother. Use your best judgment. Again, when in doubt use the forum "Search" feature.

9] New users are to be handled with utmost respect and care. Everyone was new once and didn't quite know the ropes yet, either. New users are the future of this forum and we want to welcome them and make them feel comfy as soon as possible. The attacking or harassment of new users will be dealt with harshly and without remorse.

10] The "I'm Feeling Unlucky" section as well as the other "unmoderated" areas of the forum are the pseudo-exceptions to rules 5, 6, 7 & 8. We call them pseudo-exceptions due to the fact that the moderation of these forums is much more lax, although still patrolled by the Ministry from time to time. Rules 1, 2, 3, 4 & 9 still stand at all times, however.

Simply put, treat your fellow visitors, the staff and the forum with respect and you will in turn be handled with respect. We want to create and maintain a safe, educational and fun community for all involved. Keep it real, keep it civil, and above all, keep it accessible for everyone.

Have fun and enjoy your time with us,

The Ministry

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 08:03 PM
Posted where? Here?

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 08:04 PM
2. Content

See rzm below.

rzm61
September 4th, 2008, 08:05 PM
Okay, well it's been mentioned before that we don't really have much to blog about. However if the ministers (or even regular members) are interested we should start up the blog. We could take current religious events and blog about them, or even parody them.


We keep talking about needing content and updates, and this is something that might help us get some substance into the forum! So please, let's not be so quick to dismiss this idea. I think we should give it a shot. What does everyone else think?

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 08:07 PM
Where else? >_>
I'm going to go ahead now and make those rules a universal announcement.

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 08:11 PM
I think they need their separate sticky too.
I was hoping to just keep the announcement up until the admins add them to the FAQ....

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 08:16 PM
I hope this works but we will need you guys to be bad cops even to well known members.

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 08:26 PM
I'd only ever give infractions for:

- Spamming
- Foolhardiness
- Severe off-topic (as in, drailing an on-topic debate)

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 08:44 PM
Agreed. Will do.

rzm61
September 4th, 2008, 08:53 PM
Okay.
I sent a message to Matt via facebook. Hopefully he will read it and either respond or pop up sometime soon.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 09:11 PM
I hope for the Popping up because we need him!

Vexx
September 4th, 2008, 09:12 PM
Hopefully he'll just transfer ownership of the site to someone else so we don't have to worry about this anymore.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 09:21 PM
Who would he transfer too? I would go to a group of people in order to keep one from getting a huge head. Who would the group be?

Vexx
September 4th, 2008, 09:23 PM
Anyone willing to do it, knows how, and has enough mind about them to not be a total douche with it.
Really, I don't care right now as long as there's SOMEONE who is active with it.

Vexx
September 4th, 2008, 09:27 PM
It's up to Matt.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 09:43 PM
I'd go with both!

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 09:49 PM
Rimmer you need to kick ass or chew bubble gum and you are all out of gum.... so do it! But explain what you mean by zero-Tolerance.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 09:55 PM
I under stand that but where is the line so we know when we cross it. Is it just the rules? or is the some slack in the rules?

rzm61
September 4th, 2008, 09:57 PM
Goofy, read the rules.
It's all there in black and white.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 09:59 PM
It's not really that detailed on what you are and are not allowed to do.

Thank you Rimmer! One thing is if you are going to be vague then there are lots of loop holes!

rzm61
September 4th, 2008, 10:04 PM
Eh it seems pretty decent to me.

No trolling/flaming outside of IFU. Stay on topic, especially Serious Discussion. General Discussion is okay for some topic-drift however taking a thread from Gas prices to LOL WAFFELS is too much of a drift.

Those are basically the main points. Right?

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 10:04 PM
That is true. Just make sure the rules state a sentance followed by a paragraph of explanation so there is no second guessing!

RZM, then you get people like me or loki who find the loop holes and expose them. A rule needs to be well defined and not just a blurb!

rzm61
September 4th, 2008, 10:13 PM
Well in general what you can post and can't post should be almost common sense. However this is the internet. With that being said, offensive material. Now that covers a lot, seeing how anyone can be 'offended' by literally anything in this day and age. So I guess it's more like sexist, racist or any other discriminatory banter/slander. No porn or other NSFW images and such.


How about this for a real basic guideline as to what you can (and can't) post - this is a 'church' don't post anything that you wouldn't normally say in a normal church and in front of the congregation. Or something of that nature?

Just a suggestion.

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 10:18 PM
I like rzm's definition of tolerance.

Basically:

If you're outside of IFU, make sure that threads don't reach the point where "LOL WAFFLES" would be an acceptable response.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 10:28 PM
Also you have to open it for people new to forums. New people would not know what flaming or trolling is.

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 10:29 PM
People who are new to forums will most likely not stumble upon this forum as their first forum and most likely start flaming/trolling as soon as they get here.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 10:32 PM
When I got here I did not know what flaming was and I barely understood trolling.

sudikics
September 4th, 2008, 10:36 PM
Yes, but if you do not know what flaming and trolling are, you are unlikely to flame and troll.

You, for instance, did not come here flaming and trolling.

Besides, they can look it up.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 10:54 PM
I think Rimmer gets what I am saying.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 10:57 PM
As have I but I have canceled almost ally my forums but here.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 11:06 PM
It happens!

1. Show respect toward all religions. This means no name calling or general disrespect toward Deities of any kind. Take the higher moral ground.

2. Use logic to debate. Lay your arguments out as logically as you possibly can. You won't gain any respect calling people "retards" and "morons" simply for believing in something you consider to be silly.

3. Use common sense and save the fighting for I'm Feeling Unlucky.

This is a sticky under this one and I don't think it is followed either.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 4th, 2008, 11:58 PM
Yea if only admins were around more! But you two are doing a bang up job. Keep it up!

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 5th, 2008, 12:05 AM
Can't wait for his input!

sudikics
September 5th, 2008, 01:07 AM
So Rimmer, Geoff, and I have finished going over and posting up the new rules. There are Universal Forum Rules (in the announcement), and individual Forum rules, located as a sticky in each forum.

Whadaya think?

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 5th, 2008, 01:13 AM
Good Job Guys! Now all that is left is beating us when we go nuts.

GeoffBoulton
September 5th, 2008, 01:14 AM
Yea if only admins were around more! But you two are doing a bang up job. Keep it up!

I second that, good job boys. ;)

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 5th, 2008, 01:23 AM
a 2 hour power nap is all you need!

GeoffBoulton
September 5th, 2008, 01:28 AM
a 2 hour power nap is all you need!

I'm teaching at 7, it's hardly worth the bother now! And since I've still got work to do putting notes on the website for the students I don't think I'll have time even for a power-nap! :icon_lol:

sudikics
September 5th, 2008, 01:31 AM
I agree. I'll fix it.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 5th, 2008, 01:34 AM
I have class at 9am but it is only 8:40pm here so I am good. As for the nudity I see no reason that it would be relevant and if it is then why not link to the picture with a warning not the post itself! But give me an instance in which nudity would be relevant.

Vexx
September 5th, 2008, 01:35 AM
But give me an instance in which nudity would be relevant.

The Wizard's Dual thread, or maybe the funny picture thread.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 5th, 2008, 01:38 AM
That is IFU not General disscusion though. I mean when I talk to people every day I do not show them porn or wip it out.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 5th, 2008, 01:44 AM
Ok I see your point but why would you need to img tag it.

sudikics
September 5th, 2008, 01:44 AM
Rimmer, you're overthinking this. Look at what Geoff pointed out: we decide what's fair game. The rules already say that people shouldn't be stupid about this.

If someone posts nudity in SD, then we punish them. Plain and simple. They can't complain, because it's already painfully obvious that they werent' supposed to do it. Plus,

The determination of what constitutes offensive material, or disruptive behaviour, and all matters relating to the smooth running of this site are at the sole discretion of the Ministers, Moderators and Administrators. No warning will necessarily, nor need, be given when posts are moved, edited or deleted or when action is taken against posters. There is no negotiation and no right of appeal. By using this forum you automatically agree to be bound by the conditions and rules laid out in these FAQs. There are no exceptions and ignorance of these conditions and rules is not an acceptable defence.

GeoffBoulton
September 5th, 2008, 02:26 AM
We can't use that as an excuse to have un-clear rules.

Check my update on the Serious Discussion rules. I doubt there should be any objections.

The problem with rules is that, try as you might, you can't cover every eventuality. Look at the majorleague sock puppet thing. Nobody saw that coming. And look at the hand-wringing that went on over whether promoting her 'skills' was actually spamming or not!

If you try and define everything then sure as eggs are eggs someone will find a loophole and you'll end up writing the rules again. It's better to be general and leave it to the common sense and discretion of the Ministers.

Bottom line, if the Ministers think it's unacceptable but the poster disagrees then it's just tough on them. If they don't like it they can go elsewhere. You can't please everyone. ;)

GeoffBoulton
September 5th, 2008, 02:36 AM
we can do our best to please as many good people as possible while still being a nice and friendly place.

Who will be exactly the same people who wont need telling how to behave in a way that is considerate to others! It's only usually twats like majorbasketcase that are a problem and I for one wont miss people like that.

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 5th, 2008, 02:44 AM
Everyone was! I left for 2 weeks and when I came back all shit was blown to hell by new people and some older ones who got use to the new way of thinking.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 5th, 2008, 03:42 AM
Rimmer, Jon, etc:

Why don't you lean on people, really, really hard. Kill threads mid-conversation to end conversations not going your way, post all kinds of new rules that are DESIGNED to be abused, etc. That is bound to increase the number of active users.

Oh, wait. That's already been done.

TGRR,
Can see the future.

rzm61
September 5th, 2008, 03:44 AM
I love it, one member bitches about no structure and rule enforcement.

The other is upset about it.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 5th, 2008, 03:56 AM
This is fucking AWESOME! :icon_lol:

These rules have been here, what, 2 days, and ALL the mods are acting like Jon. I've had 2 threads closed and an infraction in FIVE MINUTES! By ONE MOD!

:icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:

Oh, yeah, this sort of thing is gonna increase membership. Well, by the sort of people who actually whack off to Dutch porn, of course, but membership.

I'm laughing so hard I shat myself. SHAT MYSELF!

TGRR,
Infractions from assholes are a benediction.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 5th, 2008, 03:57 AM
We'll let the rules evolve as shit happens. If a serious enough thing happens to warrant writing a new rule, and there is a general consensus that such a rule would be good, then let it be written.


I don't see a rule about "foolhardiness" and you dinged me for it.

:icon_lol:

Jackass.

SAVAGE
September 5th, 2008, 04:00 AM
This is fucking AWESOME! :icon_lol:

These rules have been here, what, 2 days, and ALL the mods are acting like Jon. I've had 2 threads closed and an infraction in FIVE MINUTES! By ONE MOD!

:icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:

Oh, yeah, this sort of thing is gonna increase membership. Well, by the sort of people who actually whack off to Dutch porn, of course, but membership.

I'm laughing so hard I shat myself. SHAT MYSELF!

TGRR,
Infractions from assholes are a benediction.

I believe this is infraction number two according to rule umber 4

Deliberately trying to annoy or offend others will be considered "trolling" and will be dealt with as such.

I guess you should just follow the rules laid out and keep this sort of drivel the the IFU.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 5th, 2008, 04:01 AM
I believe this is infraction number two according to rule umber 4

Deliberately trying to annoy or offend others will be considered "trolling" and will be dealt with as such.

I guess you should just follow the rules laid out and keep this sort of drivel the the IFU.

Yep. Anything a mod doesn't like is now a bannable offense.

And I wasn't dinged for trolling, I was dinged for "foolhardiness".

So...when did you all turn into Jon clones?

The Good Reverend Roger
September 5th, 2008, 04:02 AM
I'll ding you for that PM too as soon as I figure out what the proper punishment is. There's something known as "asking for it", you know.

Oh, fuck off. I refuse to kowtow, and that's what you're demanding.

"I'll ding you for that PM", indeed. :icon_lol:

Dr Goofy Mofo
September 5th, 2008, 04:05 AM
The fact of the matter is this site use to be intelligent conversation then it turned into mindless dribble which you are now contributing to. These rules are in place to bring back the former glory days and hopefully bring in better company.

SAVAGE
September 5th, 2008, 04:05 AM
Yep. Anything a mod doesn't like is now a bannable offense.

And I wasn't dinged for trolling, I was dinged for "foolhardiness".

So...when did you all turn into Jon clones?

No anything that breaks the rules now will get you a warning. You are taking this thread off topic....please create a new thread for this if you wish to continue complaining about the rules

SAVAGE
September 5th, 2008, 04:11 AM
Nah, that's what this topic is for. Can't nail him for off-topic.

Aye.

rzm61
September 5th, 2008, 04:14 AM
Nah, that's what this topic is for. Can't nail him for off-topic.

Aye.

Yeah, Rimmer did point him in this direction with complaints.
Sadly the help at the desk is asleep right now.

Cain
September 5th, 2008, 03:18 PM
3] Administrator decisions are final. No arguments, personal attacks or open forum debates on the subject of those decisions will be tolerated. Such reactions could result in temporary or even permanent banishment from the forum, if necessary.I can't be the only person who read that as "don't question MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!"

:icon_lol:

sudikics
September 5th, 2008, 03:35 PM
Yes, that's about right. They run this site, and they say what goes.

However, they won't do that too often, so don't worry.

Cain
September 5th, 2008, 03:45 PM
Yes, that's about right. They run this site, and they say what goes.

However, they won't do that too often, so don't worry.

And where would the site be without those posting on it? Or is this now "this is my house and you'll do as I say" deal? I already have parents, thanks.

And what is there to stop them? Their good nature? Sorry, that doesn't play. I don't like "I'm infalliable" rules, way too easy to abuse.

Clark Nova
September 5th, 2008, 04:13 PM
first they came for our foolhardyness, but i did not speak up because i was not a foolhardy

Dolores
September 5th, 2008, 05:17 PM
The rules are insane and dictatorial.

"Foolhardiness"???

And the mods are infallible, not to be questioned?

Cult of Google is more like it.

sudikics
September 5th, 2008, 05:20 PM
Specify: Foolhardiness...in boards where people are looking for debate. Foolhardiness is OK in IFU. Just don't derail threads in SD when people are trying to hold a debate.

And mods are not infallible. We are to be questioned. And once questioned, we can discuss the problem. The admins of the site will act as judges. That's what it means by final word.

rzm61
September 5th, 2008, 05:24 PM
Also as a note, it seems that people are confused about 'foolhardiness'

It's not grounds for a ban (unless you're a multiple offender) it's just a reason for an infraction.

Clark Nova
September 5th, 2008, 05:33 PM
Also as a note, it seems that people are confused about 'foolhardiness'

It's not grounds for a ban (unless you're a multiple offender) it's just a reason for an infraction.

why, what horrid sordid little background did you come from that humor was an infraction

rzm61
September 5th, 2008, 05:37 PM
why, what horrid sordid little background did you come from that humor was an infraction

Huh?
I think we're reading each other wrong.

'Foolhardiness' is an option that can be selected for an infraction.

Cain
September 5th, 2008, 05:37 PM
Specify: Foolhardiness...in boards where people are looking for debate. Foolhardiness is OK in IFU. Just don't derail threads in SD when people are trying to hold a debate.

And mods are not infallible. We are to be questioned. And once questioned, we can discuss the problem. The admins of the site will act as judges. That's what it means by final word.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Clark Nova
September 5th, 2008, 05:38 PM
oh no the envelope has been pushed too far,
INFRACTION


Huh?
I think we're reading each other wrong.

'Foolhardiness' is an option that can be selected for an infraction.

Cain
September 5th, 2008, 05:51 PM
Yare yare. This is crazy...

Look, due to member complaint and loads of members leaving because of the forum quality deteriorating we decided to actually start moderating the boards for once. That's all there is and there should be no reason to explain. Infractions are just a way of telling someone they're stepping out of line. An old and unused feature that deserves to see the light of day now.

STOP QUESTIONING ME!
\
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/Smileys/default/enraged.gif

cockles
September 5th, 2008, 06:06 PM
I'd only ever give infractions for:

- Spamming
- Foolhardiness
- Severe off-topic (as in, drailing an on-topic debate)

"Foolhardiness"?
What about "Costermongering on Roodmas" and "Calculating zenzizenzike"?

Dolores
September 5th, 2008, 06:09 PM
From Merriam-Webster:
foolhardiness

One entry found.

foolhardy

Main Entry:fool·har·dy http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?foolha01.wav=foolhardy'))Pronunciation: \ˈfül-ˌhär-dē\ Function:adjective Date:13th century : foolishly adventurous and bold : rash (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rash)


You can't be serious.

sudikics
September 5th, 2008, 06:10 PM
"Foolhardiness"?
What about "Costermongering on Roodmas" and "Calculating zenzizenzike"?
May I explain?

"Foolhardiness," at least in my book, is disrupting a thread where a debate is being held. Now that I think about it, it kind of fits with Severe off-topic, which I'll work on.

Designation101100
September 5th, 2008, 06:10 PM
"Foolhardiness"?
What about "Costermongering on Roodmas" and "Calculating zenzizenzike"?

You can't blame them. This IS the Church of Google after all. http://www.our-picks.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/gnonsense.jpg

Dolores
September 5th, 2008, 06:22 PM
The issue I have with infractions for "foolhardiness" is that it's entirely subjective and VERY difficult to pinpoint. It's a catch-all that can be used by mods to serve infractions to anyone they don't like for just about any reason, or none at all.

If you're going to make up your own definition for it, you might as well make up a new word, as well.

3] Administrator decisions are final. No arguments, personal attacks or open forum debates on the subject of those decisions will be tolerated. Such reactions could result in temporary or even permanent banishment from the forum, if necessary.

4] Moderator decisions are semi-final. If you have a problem with a Moderator's decision, take it up with an Administrator in PM, NOT in open forum. If said Administrator deems it necessary, the Moderator's decision can be overturned. If not, see rule 3.


So what I'm reading here is that the admins are infallible and not to be questioned, but mods can be questioned. However, questioning of mods (which may in fact be "foolhardy", but you never know until you test the theory) is subject to final ruling by admins, who are infallible and not to be questioned. It sounds as if the users have little to no input or control over how the forum is run, or why and how the rules are enforced. That's fine; it's your forum. However, a forum where users aren't allowed to complain is usually a dead forum before long. FYI.

9] New users are to be handled with utmost respect and care. Everyone was new once and didn't quite know the ropes yet, either. New users are the future of this forum and we want to welcome them and make them feel comfy as soon as possible. The attacking or harassment of new users will be dealt with harshly and without remorse.

Apparently this is true unless the new user posts twice in a row in the same thread... I confess, when I saw that, I was disbelieving. I've been online for going on twenty years and I've NEVER seen anyplace that was treated as a no-no.

Then again, I kind of wonder if the infraction was really because of so-called "double posting", or it was because the mod in question simply didn't like the user.

Dr. Drilling_Teeth
September 5th, 2008, 06:32 PM
LOL WAFFLES!

rzm61
September 5th, 2008, 06:33 PM
LOL WAFFLES!

Never fails.

Tsar Phalanxia
September 5th, 2008, 06:39 PM
The fact is, the mods need authority. If you don't like the rules, you can fuck off. In my opinion, the rules are
1. Fair
2. Enforcable
3. Needed
I have been here long enough to know what this forum needs. The fact is, it isn't an attack on your personal liberty, on the contary, it's about a balance between anarchy and fascism. If I felt that the rules went too far, I would be at the forefront of leading the resistance. However, I believe that the rules are exactly right.

Dolores
September 5th, 2008, 06:52 PM
The fact is, the mods need authority. If you don't like the rules, you can fuck off.

Yeah, actually, that's exactly the kind of attitude that keeps a forum thriving!

Dr. Drilling_Teeth
September 5th, 2008, 06:58 PM
The fact is, the mods need authority. If you don't like the rules, you can fuck off. In my opinion, the rules are
1. Fair
2. Enforcable
3. Needed
I have been here long enough to know what this forum needs. The fact is, it isn't an attack on your personal liberty, on the contary, it's about a balance between anarchy and fascism. If I felt that the rules went too far, I would be at the forefront of leading the resistance. However, I believe that the rules are exactly right.



The RULES are the RIGHT rules because they are the RULES! And if the RULES were WRONG then the Tsar would let everyone know. However, since the RULES are RIGHT, then STFU!

Brilliant!

Tsar Phalanxia
September 5th, 2008, 07:30 PM
The RULES are the RIGHT rules because they are the RULES!

No they are the right rules because the CoG has descended into anarchy they are fair and just. If it said "Double Posting is punishable by death" I would oppose it on the grounds that it is unfair.
And if the RULES were WRONG then the Tsar would let everyone know.
Yes, I would. Your point?

However, since the RULES are RIGHT, then STFU!

Couldn't have put it better myself.

Dr. Drilling_Teeth
September 5th, 2008, 07:35 PM
Aww, they're so cute when they goosestep.

Tsar Phalanxia
September 5th, 2008, 07:37 PM
Are you calling me a fascist? There is nothing fascist with rules, and claiming that they are is either immature or incredibly stupid.

Dr. Drilling_Teeth
September 5th, 2008, 08:24 PM
Are you calling me a fascist? There is nothing fascist with rules, and claiming that they are is either immature or incredibly stupid.


No, I wasn't calling you a fascist. I have no idea what your political ideology is regarding nationalism or corporate interests. I was referencing the goosestep as a visual reference.

Cain
September 5th, 2008, 08:58 PM
OMG anarchy! There will be looting in the internet streets and bad Sex Pistols records played all day long! And workers communes! And arcane hard-left theory fights with the Juche guy! Oh teh horror!

No-one has yet explained why admins are infalliable.:D

Dr. Drilling_Teeth
September 5th, 2008, 09:00 PM
OMG anarchy! There will be looting in the internet streets and bad Sex Pistols records played all day long! And workers communes! And arcane hard-left theory fights with the Juche guy! Oh teh horror!

No-one has yet explained why admins are infalliable.:D

You're not paying attention. They aren't infalliable, but they are right, because Tsar Phalanxia said so. Simple enough.


Well, simple anyway.

Cain
September 5th, 2008, 09:07 PM
You're not paying attention. They aren't infalliable, but they are right, because Tsar Phalanxia said so. Simple enough.


Well, simple anyway.

Well, clearly the gravity of the situation is such that there is no time for in depth descriptions about why. If we don't hurry up and start infracting people, there will be ANARCHY.

Banner of Juche
September 5th, 2008, 09:39 PM
DEATH TO THE COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY BOURGEOIS IDEALISTS

http://static.flickr.com/52/186030732_e246770062_o.jpg

MANSE!!!

jon_hill987
September 5th, 2008, 10:46 PM
So...when did you all turn into Jon clones?

I resent that.

I apologised for the OTT infraction I gave you and it was removed.

Reckoner
September 6th, 2008, 01:00 AM
I will never be able to understand a mentality that says, "Hey, our forum is kinda small with only a couple dozen regular forum dwellers. Maybe the best way for us to gain users is to make a bunch of vague and opressive rules! People will be lining up around the block!1!"

sudikics
September 6th, 2008, 02:25 AM
No-one has yet explained why admins are infalliable.:D
Oh, they have. You just missed it, that's all.

http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/forum/showpost.php?p=88402&postcount=204

Lord_Jereth
September 6th, 2008, 02:57 AM
I will never be able to understand a mentality that says, "Hey, our forum is kinda small with only a couple dozen regular forum dwellers. Maybe the best way for us to gain users is to make a bunch of vague and opressive rules! People will be lining up around the block!1!"

What part exactly of those rules is oppressive? They all boil down to and center around one simple truth: this is a private forum, not a public site and you do night have the right to do everything that you wish. It's a simple reality that has escaped you somehow, although it's prevalent in every part of society including, I would imagine, your own home. You have simply come here with the very misguided personal expectation and/or conviction that you are somehow imbued with and guaranteed the explicit right to do as you wish, anywhere you wish, without imposed structure. Sadly, your expectations are unrealistic and, to be frank, irrelevant. You seem to me to be simply angry about finding out that those unrealistic expectations are not going to be met. Hence, it follows that your incessant badgering of the point amounts to nothing more than an impotent temper tantrum.

The owner of this site and forum, the man who pays the bills and ultimately makes the rules we ALL live by here, has appointed Admins and Mods to assist with the upkeep and policing of his property. It is the consensus of the majority of that appointed body, The Ministry, that these rules (or guidelines) are presently the best means to that end.

No one is forcing you to stay. If, on the other hand, you do wish to continue to utilize the owner's personal property, please follow the rules set before you, a guest, by his appointed stewards. If not, go with our blessing. End of story, debate and discussion.

:icon_cool: LJ

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:12 AM
The fact of the matter is this site use to be intelligent conversation then it turned into mindless dribble which you are now contributing to. These rules are in place to bring back the former glory days and hopefully bring in better company.

Okay. So now you're going to FORCE intelligent conversation?

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:13 AM
I resent that.

I apologised for the OTT infraction I gave you and it was removed.

Point. I retract the statement.

Let me re-phrase it: The mods are all infected by whatever was going through your mind when you did it.

SAVAGE
September 6th, 2008, 05:14 AM
Okay. So now you're going to FORCE intelligent conversation?

To be honest we cant force anyone to have intelegent conversation, we can only make it so intelligent conversation happens naturally.

Which judging from the standard lately (the last 24) it would not be hard.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:22 AM
To be honest we cant force anyone to have intelegent conversation, we can only make it so intelligent conversation happens naturally.


And how would you do that?

I mean, we all know that intellectualism thrives under police states, right?

SAVAGE
September 6th, 2008, 05:26 AM
And how would you do that?

I mean, we all know that intellectualism thrives under police states, right?


We know that intelectual conversations are civil between civil people, I guess the type of people we are trying to attract would not want flamemongers in there face...so we seperate them.

Are you saying that in a police state there is no intellegence?

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 05:27 AM
I mean, we all know that intellectualism thrives under police states, right?

Nah man. The drugs. It's all the drugs!
But it's not your drugs. It's there drugs!1

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:30 AM
We know that intelectual conversations are civil between civil people, I guess the type of people we are trying to attract would not want flamemongers in there face...so we seperate them.


Horseshit.

Some of the best intellectual writings in history came from uncivil asshats. Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Voltaire, Oscar Wilde, the list goes on and on.

Civility has its place. It is not a straightjacket.


Are you saying that in a police state there is no intellegence?

Yes, I am. A police state is a mindless beast, which is forced to create an infinitely regressive chain of secret police agencies to keep an eye on the other secret police agencies.

It's funny, but dumber than a bag of anvils.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:31 AM
Nah man. The drugs. It's all the drugs!
But it's not your drugs. It's there drugs!1

Don't take drugs.

Give them to "Bob".

SAVAGE
September 6th, 2008, 05:33 AM
Horseshit.

Some of the best intellectual writings in history came from uncivil asshats. Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Voltaire, Oscar Wilde, the list goes on and on.

Civility has its place. It is not a straightjacket.

Yes some great inttelectuals have been drugies, lovers of little boys etc....however we just want to seperate them here and I dont see why that is such a big problem.



Yes, I am. A police state is a mindless beast, which is forced to create an infinitely regressive chain of secret police agencies to keep an eye on the other secret police agencies.

It's funny, but dumber than a bag of anvils.

Not my question...do you think there are no intellectuals in Police States? No scientists or Doctors all just drones?

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 05:34 AM
Don't take drugs.

Give them to "Bob".

Who is the "Bob" you speak of?
And where and when can I give him my surplus of drugs.

I really need to get rid of all this shit.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:36 AM
Yes some great inttelectuals have been drugies, lovers of little boys etc....however we just want to seperate them here and I dont see why that is such a big problem.

Wait. Are you suggesting Thomas Jefferson was a pedophile? :icon_lol:





Not my question...do you think there are no intellectuals in Police States? No scientists or Doctors all just drones?

That's precisely what I'm stating. What intellectuals they have are firmly clamped down on, or killed outright.

Search "The Cultural Revolution" or "Khymer Rouge".

Genuine intellectualism is anathema to a police state, and is never tolerated.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:36 AM
Who is the "Bob" you speak of?
And where and when can I give him my surplus of drugs.

I really need to get rid of all this shit.

http://subgenius.com

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:37 AM
Oh, look. Here we are, dangerously close to having an intellectual conversation, and nobody had to force us to do it.

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 05:41 AM
http://subgenius.com

Ah, I should have known this.

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:42 AM
Ah, I should have known this.

You were blinded by The Conspiracy™.

SAVAGE
September 6th, 2008, 05:48 AM
Wait. Are you suggesting Thomas Jefferson was a pedophile? :icon_lol:

Not at all.


That's precisely what I'm stating. What intellectuals they have are firmly clamped down on, or killed outright.

Search "The Cultural Revolution" or "Khymer Rouge".

Genuine intellectualism is anathema to a police state, and is never tolerated.

Wait I asked if you thought that they had NO intellectualks....and you say no, they do have some?

Do they have any intellectuals or not?

Even one?

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:49 AM
Not at all.

Then what, exactly, were you saying?




Wait I asked if you thought that they had NO intellectualks....and you say no, they do have some?

Do they have any intellectuals or not?

Even one?

Oh, you can be as intellectual as you like. Once.

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 08:30 AM
You were blinded by The Conspiracy™.

wut The Conspiracy™.?

They struck again did they?
Well, let me put on the kettle then.

Cain
September 6th, 2008, 09:37 AM
What part exactly of those rules is oppressive? They all boil down to and center around one simple truth: this is a private forum, not a public site and you do night have the right to do everything that you wish.

Sorry, I think you took a wrong turn, propertarian boi.

You meant to post that at http://www.aynrand.org/

Besides, I think you forgot the little detail of there being no real site worth speaking about without a little thing called members. You know, people who create content, invite others etc etc

I know the internet revolution has been hard on people like you, but one day you will realize your old ideas do not work anymore.

Tsar Phalanxia
September 6th, 2008, 09:43 AM
No, you're the kind of people who are killing the internet. With your blatant disregard for common courtesy, intelligent discussion can only happen in remote sites, like the CoG used to be. People have become all too used to the idea that because said person on the other side of the wire can't punch you in the face you can do whatever the hell you like. You are the kind of people who are incapable of functioning in society as reasonable human beings, as years of abusing people over the internet has left you clueless as to how people actually react when you insult them and show a basic disregard for the law, not because the law is unjust, but because the law is stopping you from showing the same kind of disrespect to people that you show them over the internet.

Cain
September 6th, 2008, 12:31 PM
Sorry, thats too long to put as a testimonial in our site news feed. Could you sum it up in a sentence or two?

I'd argue the point, only your inaccurate outrage is much more amusing.

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 12:41 PM
Sorry, thats too long to put as a testimonial in our site news feed. Could you sum it up in a sentence or two?


Why, because that's all you will be able to comprehend?


.....side note.
I'm hungry.

Cain
September 6th, 2008, 12:41 PM
Past testimonials may help, so I'll list them too:

"I cannot see a slither of a viable defense for this godawful circlejerk board."

"None of you seem aware of quite how bad you are. I mean I'm pretty outspoken on how bad the internet has gotten, but this is up there with the worst."

"It's just honestly sad that a place like this exists"


Pithy and with invective and venom, thats how we like it.

Cain
September 6th, 2008, 12:42 PM
Why, because that's all you will be able to comprehend?


.....side note.
I'm hungry.

learn2read n00b

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 12:47 PM
.....if it's not Brail.

I'm fucked.

Seriously though Cain, why do you feel the need to hide?

Cain
September 6th, 2008, 12:57 PM
.....if it's not Brail.

I'm fucked.

Seriously though Cain, why do you feel the need to hide?

Because for those who are not mods and so can see me whenever I am online, it makes my presence unpredictable - like that of a Great White Shark, or rickroll.

That and sometimes I logon but go off and do something else, so it doest get people all expectant for an answer or anything, because they cannot know I am logged in.

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 01:30 PM
Oh please. If you're going to do a rick roll, make it presedential.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65I0HNvTDH4

Tis' the season, you know.

Booty
September 6th, 2008, 01:36 PM
Because for those who are not mods and so can see me whenever I am online, it makes my presence unpredictable - like that of a Great White Shark, or rickroll.

That and sometimes I logon but go off and do something else, so it doest get people all expectant for an answer or anything, because they cannot know I am logged in.

Argh! Conspiracy theories - they are all out to get you, you know!
Just don't listen to the Rice Krispies whatever you do - sadistic little fuckers they are!

Lodestar of Songun
September 6th, 2008, 01:40 PM
I like this new rules.

Reminds me of glorious socialist motherland of Corea.

http://www.defensetech.org/images/DPRK.jpg

DEATH TO ALL WHO WOULD OPPOSE GREAT JUCHE REVOLUTION

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 01:41 PM
Good, if you like the rules. Then join the ranks!

Rise with the Fallen.

Lodestar of Songun
September 6th, 2008, 01:45 PM
I'm dislike how some mods are child. This is great problem for Juche revolution. In Juche self-reliance paradise of Corea, we are purge this people.

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 01:50 PM
You know, if you cleaned up your English and Grammar a bit, I might just be able to understand your complaint better.

Booty
September 6th, 2008, 02:08 PM
You know, if you cleaned up your English and Grammar a bit, I might just be able to understand your complaint better.
I don't know - Engrish can be kinda funny!
http://engrishfunny.com/

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 03:10 PM
See!

That's what I'm talking about.
However you mention one thing, and you're being called a racist this and pig that.

cockles
September 6th, 2008, 03:18 PM
I like this new rules.

Reminds me of glorious socialist motherland of Corea.

http://www.defensetech.org/images/DPRK.jpg

DEATH TO ALL WHO WOULD OPPOSE GREAT JUCHE REVOLUTION

Meh.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y137/Stella01904/14102008.jpg

The Good Reverend Roger
September 6th, 2008, 05:08 PM
No, you're the kind of people who are killing the internet. With your blatant disregard for common courtesy, intelligent discussion can only happen in remote sites, like the CoG used to be. People have become all too used to the idea that because said person on the other side of the wire can't punch you in the face you can do whatever the hell you like. You are the kind of people who are incapable of functioning in society as reasonable human beings, as years of abusing people over the internet has left you clueless as to how people actually react when you insult them and show a basic disregard for the law, not because the law is unjust, but because the law is stopping you from showing the same kind of disrespect to people that you show them over the internet.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/Smileys/default/roglol.gifhttp://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/Smileys/default/roglol.gifhttp://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/Smileys/default/roglol.gif

rzm61
September 6th, 2008, 06:18 PM
Meh.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y137/Stella01904/14102008.jpg

Long cat is long.