Log in

View Full Version : Moderation complants


Dr Goofy Mofo
May 10th, 2009, 03:16 AM
I like pretty much everyone here but I am tired of people asking for more moderation like daddy needs to clean everything up. I am also tired of the complaining about the little moderation that is being done. Renaming rather then merging seems to be better but other then that I see no harm in what has been done moderation wise.

Why is what moderation that has been done so bad?

What is wrong with the moderation we use to do besides the fact the mod's have been slacking on moving some threads?

The only moderation that needs to be done is moving threads IMHO. If a thread gets put into IFU then who cares? It still is there. The renaming of adding NSFW to ill named threads makes sense if you don't want someone at work seeing this. I think these are agreeable terms but for some reason we can't agree worth shit.

I am thinking of taking a break because it seems everyone only knows how to bicker and fight.

I am sure to piss everyone off but Fuck if I care, If the site dies and I piss everyone off then it doesn't matter.

Paul Vii
May 10th, 2009, 03:30 AM
this thread needs to be merged! fucking crybaby threads should all be merged to a thread called "fucking crybabys" maybe if it was merged you'd know what it felt like to have a thread moved. fucking crybaby. oh, and go ahead and leave, like i give a fuck.

Daruko
May 10th, 2009, 03:34 AM
Don't leave Goofy. We need your optimism.

fomenter
May 10th, 2009, 03:49 AM
I like pretty much everyone here but I am tired of people asking for more moderation like daddy needs to clean everything up. yes I am also tired of the complaining about the little moderation that is being done. Renaming rather then merging seems to be better but other then that I see no harm in what has been done moderation wise.

Why is what moderation that has been done so bad? you answered this when you addressed the sort by date thing, it is bad because it created a crap pile out of threads and it looked "to observers" like it was on purpose

What is wrong with the moderation we use to do besides the fact the mod's have been slacking on moving some threads?

The only moderation that needs to be done is moving threads IMHO. If a thread gets put into IFU then who cares? It still is there. The renaming of adding NSFW to ill named threads makes sense if you don't want someone at work seeing this. I think these are agreeable terms but for some reason we can't agree worth shit.

I am thinking of taking a break because it seems everyone only knows how to bicker and fight. fundamental flaws in having a "serious" section and ministers that can see ip addresses and guest posting need to be addressed the bickering is a symptom not a cause I am sure to piss everyone off but Fuck if I care, If the site dies and I piss everyone off then it doesn't matter. every one needs a break some times if you go the balance may shift to the big daddy fix everything with modding crowd.

Sister Faith
May 10th, 2009, 03:50 AM
The only moderation that needs to be done is moving threads IMHO. If a thread gets put into IFU then who cares? It still is there. The renaming of adding NSFW to ill named threads makes sense if you don't want someone at work seeing this. I think these are agreeable terms but for some reason we can't agree worth shit.

They are agreeable terms, fair and reasonable. What I don't get is why the mods/admins now need member's permission/approval before they can do their job?

I am thinking of taking a break because it seems everyone only knows how to bicker and fight.

May I point out that it's not the mods who are in disagreement over this? It's the members who should have no decision making powers who are squabbling and whining and calling the shots.

I am sure to piss everyone off but Fuck if I care, If the site dies and I piss everyone off then it doesn't matter.

Doc, you are taking on blame that you haven't earned. If this site dies it won't be because of anything you or anyone else did or didn't do. You can't please everyone, so please yourself. Do what you think is right and to hell with the critics.

btw, I wouldn't be pissed off if you fucked off but I would be very, very sad. :icon_cry::icon_cry:

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 10th, 2009, 03:59 AM
Thanks folks.

fundamental flaws in having a "serious" section and ministers that can see ip addresses and guest posting need to be addressed the bickering is a symptom not a cause

every one needs a break some times if you go the balance may shift to the big daddy fix everything with modding crowd.

I think I will stay if not for this reason, then the fact I am bored.

What flaws with serious? I understand the ministers seeing ip's. What is wrong with the guess posting?

fomenter
May 10th, 2009, 04:11 AM
serious (in addition to being silly in a parody religion forum) is causing problems what is serious? who gets to decide? these are questions that don't need to be asked, and certainly wont ever get a good answer, at least one that every one finds agreeable, renaming the sections of the forum is easy and if done wisely ends half the fights.

guest posting is unnecessary a mailbox for visitors to comment gives passersby a voice, anonymous posting is an open invitation to troll and it works its way up into the forum /b/ becomes the standard not the exception..

Daruko
May 10th, 2009, 04:19 AM
Guest posting encourages ppl to troll the board and makes it easier for them to do so. Imho, at least temporarily, it would benefit the board to disable guest posting to help keep the pclamb type stuff to a minimum. If anonymous ppl were mostly posting funny stuff, that'd be one thing, but I can't see anything valuable we'd be giving up by just requiring ppl to register to post.

I also think IFU would be further improved if you had to register to even view it. This would reduce the amount of people that register for the sole purpose of trolling the board with nonsense, and possibly increase the number of people who join because they like Googlism and some of the higher quality conversations here.

fomenter
May 10th, 2009, 04:22 AM
you do have to register to view it daruko log out and check..

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 10th, 2009, 04:33 AM
So renaming serious to debate would probally be for the best.

fomenter
May 10th, 2009, 04:36 AM
i think so

Daruko
May 10th, 2009, 04:39 AM
you do have to register to view it daruko log out and check..
Oh, I see. Awesome.

To the problem with SD, I think people are taking it too srsly and too literally. It just seemed apparent to me that it was an easy to use title for the Science, Politics, Philosophy, Literature, etc. section of the board. Simply reading the subtext should clarify the purpose for that section. I don't understand what's so bad about "Serious Discussion"... there is a definite distinction in it's purpose from that of GD. Perhaps insert some sarcasm by changing to "SRS BUSINESS", so as to reassure posters that a sense of humour isn't forbidden? If it would help satisfy ppl to change the title, what has been offered as a superior representation of that section's function?

Daruko
May 10th, 2009, 04:43 AM
So renaming serious to debate would probally be for the best.
How is that a better reflection of it's contents? Not everything we talk about there is a debate. Often it's just news, discussion, sharing information, or other philosophical, theological, scientific, political, etc. meandering.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 10th, 2009, 04:44 AM
Philosophy would cover all that

Daruko
May 10th, 2009, 04:45 AM
We should give time for people to submit ideas for a new title, and then all vote or something. Whaddaya think?

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 10th, 2009, 04:47 AM
That would be best because only loki can do it anywho.

fomenter
May 10th, 2009, 04:55 AM
something google related would be nice how about "advanced search"

Daruko
May 10th, 2009, 04:58 AM
something google related would be nice how about "advanced search"
Hot shit, that's actually pretty good!

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 10th, 2009, 05:05 AM
Yea it is!

DrM
May 10th, 2009, 05:12 AM
Dont go doc!!!
I dont like this. If doc is in a bad mood, we know we did something wrong.
Look guys stop the bickering. If not for me and the site, FOR DOC!!!

Here is what i think we should do: (http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/forum/showthread.php?p=132159#post132159)

O and advanced search is awesome go with that.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 10th, 2009, 05:14 AM
Dont go doc!!!
If doc is in a bad mood, we know we did something wrong.


LOL how true!

Sister Faith
May 10th, 2009, 05:57 AM
Dont go doc!!!
I dont like this. If doc is in a bad mood, we know we did something wrong.
Look guys stop the bickering. If not for me and the site, FOR DOC!!!

Here is what i think we should do: (http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/forum/showthread.php?p=132159#post132159)

Well said Dr. :icon_cool:
May I add 'divided we stand, united we fall'? ;)

O and advanced search is awesome go with that.That is good! Gets my vote and Fo gets a Brownie Point (http://www.worldonaplate.org/photos/uncategorized/2007/04/09/brownie_pref_2.jpg). :icon_lol:

The Good Reverend Roger
May 10th, 2009, 06:53 AM
They are agreeable terms, fair and reasonable. What I don't get is why the mods/admins now need member's permission/approval before they can do their job?


Well, just think back to when "mods" erased the posts of people they didn't like, regardless of content, banned people who disagreed with them, etc.

Needless to say, I don't include Goofy in this, as he wasn't a mod at the time, and is a very reasonable guy.

But backlash happens.

Tsar Phalanxia
May 10th, 2009, 12:52 PM
Advanced Search ftw

Sister Faith
May 10th, 2009, 11:05 PM
Well, just think back to when "mods" erased the posts of people they didn't like, regardless of content, banned people who disagreed with them, etc.

Needless to say, I don't include Goofy in this, as he wasn't a mod at the time, and is a very reasonable guy.

But backlash happens.

I remember exactly what went down back then. There were inexperienced mods making honest mistakes and then there were mods (like Savage) working on their own agendas. They are no longer here, and those that are no longer have any power. That fuck-up was fixed and apologies were made.

But that isn't good enough for you. In a fit of pique, you delete all your better posts and flounce out like a petulant little girl.

You aren't fooling anyone Tigger. Your insistence on picking the scab of ancient history over and over again is designed to justify this new round of shit.

Get over it, get over yourself, and get on with it. Lashing back has never solved any problems.

The Good Reverend Roger
May 11th, 2009, 02:13 AM
I remember exactly what went down back then. There were inexperienced mods making honest mistakes and then there were mods (like Savage) working on their own agendas. They are no longer here, and those that are no longer have any power. That fuck-up was fixed and apologies were made.

And now we have Erasmus telling Loki to resign so HE can be the admin, and take us all back to the good old days.


But that isn't good enough for you. In a fit of pique, you delete all your better posts and flounce out like a petulant little girl.

Why not? They didn't get put back, did they?



Get over it, get over yourself, and get on with it. Lashing back has never solved any problems.

Sure it has. I have no problem with the mods now. Just a couple of users, and that's mostly because they won't let it go. You know, like you.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 11th, 2009, 02:59 AM
Sure it has. I have no problem with the mods now. Just a couple of users, and that's mostly because they won't let it go.

:icon_eek: so true :icon_eek:

Tsar Phalanxia
May 11th, 2009, 09:21 AM
Would you say I am one of those users?

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 11th, 2009, 12:42 PM
Would you say I am one of those users?

You were last time but I don't think you are this time but we will see.

Dolores
May 13th, 2009, 05:37 AM
I like "Advanced Search" too!

fomenter
May 13th, 2009, 05:38 AM
thanks ..

Daruko
May 13th, 2009, 06:39 AM
You were last time but I don't think you are this time but we will see.
Play your cards right, Tsar. :icon_lol:

Tsar Phalanxia
May 13th, 2009, 10:24 AM
I am being more, eh, respectful and calculated this time.

Smelly Vagoo
May 14th, 2009, 02:22 AM
Would you say I am one of those users?

you posted IP addresses and got off scott free you can be on my shit list you POS

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 14th, 2009, 03:38 AM
Not entirely scott free!

Tsar Phalanxia
May 14th, 2009, 09:26 AM
you posted IP addresses and got off scott free you can be on my shit list you POS
BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS
Not entirely scott free!
Exactly. I had a dicussion about it with Goofy and we came to a conclusion.

Cain
May 14th, 2009, 11:44 AM
Complaint: I have not yet been moderated.

Love and kisses,
Cain

Smelly Vagoo
May 14th, 2009, 03:50 PM
BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS

Exactly. I had a dicussion about it with Goofy and we came to a conclusion.

unless the conclusion is that you are a idiot that shouldn't be trusted with peoples personal information not much has been accomplished

rzm61
May 14th, 2009, 04:08 PM
Complaint: I have not yet been moderated.

Love and kisses,
Cain

Well Mr. Cain, how exactly would you like to be moderated? I'm sure here at the Church of Google, something can be figured out.

Tsar Phalanxia
May 14th, 2009, 04:14 PM
unless the conclusion is that you are a idiot that shouldn't be trusted with peoples personal information not much has been accomplished

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v215/jonnie5/Bawwwww_bunny.jpg

jon_hill987
May 14th, 2009, 04:17 PM
I think renaming serious to debate is a good idea, but it should be coupled with moving threads that are not a debate into general or, if they are that bad, IFU.

We also would need some debating ground rules.

Daruko
May 14th, 2009, 04:43 PM
I think renaming serious to debate is a good idea, but it should be coupled with moving threads that are not a debate into general or, if they are that bad, IFU.

We also would need some debating ground rules.
That's ghey. Introducing a new set of rules would be counter-productive. SD has been used to inform and inquire as well as for debate and other things. "Advanced Search" is a far superior title. Any rules written out for that section should be representative rather than stipulative, which would introduce new limitations.

jon_hill987
May 14th, 2009, 04:54 PM
Limitations that prevent it turning into a free-for-all flaming match would be a good thing.

Dolores
May 14th, 2009, 05:31 PM
Although "Advanced Search" is definitely cuter and catchier, I think having a debate section is a good idea, and it makes it very clear what that section is for, without room for ambiguity. One of the problems is that people post what THEY think is serious in Serious Discussion, and then a mod with a different subjective idea of "serious" moves it, which bruises people's egos and starts complaints rolling.

I think the only rule needed for "Debate" is "no personal attacks".

If people start a thread in "Debate" that appears frivolous, it can go in one of two directions; either people will find something in it to debate, or they won't and it will sink to the bottom.

A "Current events" sub might also be a good idea. Just about everything else can go in "General Discussion".

fomenter
May 14th, 2009, 05:48 PM
debate as a sub section of advanced search is a good idea, let advanced search be open to whatever interests the members and cut out the constant thread moving. i would also rename general discussions as well, turn it into "members lounge" and use it for all the chattier personal type threads and the fun Internet humor stuff.

and while you are doing all these improvements, go for the big fix and do away with ministers and the ministers lounge and the guest posting section at the same time..

Dolores
May 14th, 2009, 06:12 PM
I agree... the constant thread moving and merging is out of hand, disruptive, and generally just irritating as hell.

Loki
May 14th, 2009, 06:44 PM
I can go along with most of the last few posts.

No matter the names we give the sections I think we need three:

This is how I think of the site...

1) A debate/serious/advanced/whatever section. Minimal thread drift.
(re. thread drift: You can't eliminate it because;
a) good threads lead to tangents. In that case we make new threads about the tangents.
b) bad threads lead to boredom - in that case we kill them.)

2) General. Vanity threads, general crap, interesting stuff, music .... like the name says.

3) Potentially Offensive. R rated bar talk without the pool table and chance of physical violence.
No beer though :(


OK for starters? I think that's covered most of the problems. :D

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 14th, 2009, 06:51 PM
I like how this is going. I also think we should hide the lounge if we are to keep it because showing it to everyone is kinda annoying.

I Think Googlism Chat should stay for projects and other things we come up with. and Introduction is nice as well.

I think on a more productive note we could lock the News that threads and start discussing the news as it comes in a current event thing rather then just dump it and forget it.

Just my 2 cents.

fomenter
May 14th, 2009, 07:04 PM
on doing away with ministers, i think it kinda defeats the purpose of parodying religion, if you are going to adopt a system that hands out the same kind of privileged status that make real religions worth mocking.. and making it a secret doesn't make it better btw

i would knock the word chat off he googlism section and move it to the top of the list to try to encourage more projects and brain storming on what googlism is about and where it should be going..

Tsar Phalanxia
May 14th, 2009, 08:56 PM
I can go along with most of the last few posts.

No matter the names we give the sections I think we need three:

This is how I think of the site...

1) A debate/serious/advanced/whatever section. Minimal thread drift.
(re. thread drift: You can't eliminate it because;
a) good threads lead to tangents. In that case we make new threads about the tangents.
b) bad threads lead to boredom - in that case we kill them.)

2) General. Vanity threads, general crap, interesting stuff, music .... like the name says.

3) Potentially Offensive. R rated bar talk without the pool table and chance of physical violence.


OK for starters? I think that's covered most of the problems. :D
Sounds great. But I think we should still have nine forums, to keep in with Sis's seal.
No beer though :(
It doesn't stop you from drinking whilst posting :D I did that with a bottle of rum .
I like how this is going. I also think we should hide the lounge if we are to keep it because showing it to everyone is kinda annoying.

I Think Googlism Chat should stay for projects and other things we come up with. and Introduction is nice as well.

I think on a more productive note we could lock the News that threads and start discussing the news as it comes in a current event thing rather then just dump it and forget it.

Just my 2 cents.
These are all great ideas.

i would knock the word chat off he googlism section and move it to the top of the list to try to encourage more projects and brain storming on what googlism is about and where it should be going..
The Theologian Chamber perhaps? Although that sounds ever so slightly like a BDSM movie. I like Theologian though.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 14th, 2009, 09:06 PM
Googlism is fine, it states what it is.

fomenter
May 14th, 2009, 09:24 PM
Googlism is fine, it states what it is.
i agree

edit to add-
chat seems to imply "talk of no real consequence" if the forum section is for getting creative stuff happening and generating results then the word chat isn't helping.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 14th, 2009, 09:29 PM
Well I thought this would turn into another flame war but it is not so I am moving this thread to a more productive area.

fomenter
May 14th, 2009, 09:44 PM
i think there is a connection between doing away with ministers and the renaming the serious section to avoid the moving threads,

anyone can get on google and look up anything without needing somebody to tell them what is or is not serious enough to look up,
the idea that googlists need to be told what is serious on a parody forum (oxymoronic?) by a religious hierarchy of ministers who get there sense of importance to googlism by demanding the mods move this or that, and mods getting to be important to the Church by moving it instead of there creative contribution,
you end up becoming in some ways what you set out to parody

rmw
May 14th, 2009, 11:24 PM
At the very least, I think we should open up the Ministers' Lounge. (Yes, I know it's been discussed before and was shot down, but I think keeping it hidden causes more problems.)

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 14th, 2009, 11:44 PM
That maybe better to allow anyone to become a minister.

Daruko
May 14th, 2009, 11:57 PM
That maybe better to allow anyone to become a minister.
That's what I was thinking. All Discordians can be Popes. Why can't all Googlists become Ministers?

DrM
May 15th, 2009, 01:04 AM
I dunno about all googlist being ministers... I would work for now, but i think if we got huge, we wouldn't be able to regulate that. (we'd need to think up a new system...)

Alot of good ideas here! =D
Debate being a sub-division of advanced search? sounds awesome!

I agree that we should elevate things like googlism chat and possibly suggestion box to the top, because the church projects should be more important than random discussions. (however cool they may be...)

fomenter
May 15th, 2009, 01:32 AM
I dunno about all googlist being ministers... It would work for now, but i think if we got huge, we wouldn't be able to regulate that. (we'd need to think up a new system...)


if there are no privileges or mod powers associated with it, it doesn't have to be regulated its just a title and means what everyone decides it means, doing away with hierarchies and excess regulation is the point of the change.

Dolores
May 15th, 2009, 02:29 AM
That maybe better to allow anyone to become a minister.


This is a fantastic idea.

The Good Reverend Roger
May 15th, 2009, 04:17 AM
Would you say I am one of those users?


Nope.

The Good Reverend Roger
May 15th, 2009, 04:18 AM
I dunno about all googlist being ministers... I would work for now, but i think if we got huge, we wouldn't be able to regulate that. (we'd need to think up a new system...)


You aren't going to get huge by being exclusionists.

Tsar Phalanxia
May 15th, 2009, 08:58 AM
At the very least, I think we should open up the Ministers' Lounge. (Yes, I know it's been discussed before and was shot down, but I think keeping it hidden causes more problems.)
Hmm. I dunno. I think it would be better if we kept it hidden, as people would then have an incentive to contribute to the Church.
That maybe better to allow anyone to become a minister.
That's what I was thinking. All Discordians can be Popes. Why can't all Googlists become Ministers?
How about we just relax the standards required a lot more?
if there are no privileges or mod powers associated with it, it doesn't have to be regulated its just a title and means what everyone decides it means, doing away with hierarchies and excess regulation is the point of the change.
I agree with most of that, but there's hardly any "excess regulation" here.
Nope.
:icon_surprised:

fomenter
May 15th, 2009, 05:25 PM
Hmm. I dunno. I think it would be better if we kept it hidden, as people would then have an incentive to contribute to the Church.


How about we just relax the standards required a lot more?

I agree with most of that, but there's hardly any "excess regulation" here.

:icon_surprised: keeping it hidden doesn't solve anything, a hidden hierarchy is worse not better, dislike for the ministers title will increase, and the kinds of contribution you get, moving things around and bitching about how things should be moved is not a real contribution, respect should be earned not given by a elitist group or hidden elitist group within the group.

Clark Nova
May 15th, 2009, 05:42 PM
Complaint: no one is posting.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 15th, 2009, 06:05 PM
That tends to happen when not many people are here

Clark Nova
May 15th, 2009, 06:07 PM
can you split posts out of threads and construct a new one for me so that i have something to read?

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 15th, 2009, 06:14 PM
HAHA I am not so sure that needs to be done and I am constructing a graduation dvd for my cousin.

Tsar Phalanxia
May 15th, 2009, 09:31 PM
keeping it hidden doesn't solve anything, a hidden hierarchy is worse not better, dislike for the ministers title will increase, and the kinds of contribution you get, moving things around and bitching about how things should be moved is not a real contribution, respect should be earned not given by a elitist group or hidden elitist group within the group.

Sorry, but I think you're wrong, for serveal reasons. You ignored what I said: Making the standards a lot more relaxed. And if more people are in the ministry, then it will cease to be an "elitist" group. Besides, people like Sciki, Goofy and Sis all earned their posts. Likewise, keeping it hidden is an incentive for people to work towards. I just think you're too cynical to see it otherwise.

fomenter
May 15th, 2009, 09:55 PM
Sorry, but I think you're wrong, for serveal reasons. You ignored what I said: Making the standards a lot more relaxed. And if more people are in the ministry, then it will cease to be an "elitist" group. Besides, people like Sciki, Goofy and Sis all earned their posts. Likewise, keeping it hidden is an incentive for people to work towards. I just think you're too cynical to see it otherwise.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others, (but only by a little bit if we lower the standards) and Napoleon, Squealer, and Minimus have earned their posts, joining their esteemed ranks in the secret chambers is our incentive to tow the line and obey our benevolent overlords and please them

fucking right i am cynical and probably not enough..

hierarchy is unnecessary, and a big part of why religions are a joke, and why they need to be parodied,

Dolores
May 16th, 2009, 02:07 AM
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others, (but only by a little bit if we lower the standards) and Napoleon, Squealer, and Minimus have earned their posts, joining their esteemed ranks in the secret chambers is our incentive to tow the line and obey our benevolent overlords and please them

fucking right i am cynical and probably not enough..

hierarchy is unnecessary, and a big part of why religions are a joke, and why they need to be parodied,


I completely agree with this.

The Good Reverend Roger
May 16th, 2009, 07:37 AM
Sorry, but I think you're wrong, for serveal reasons. You ignored what I said: Making the standards a lot more relaxed. And if more people are in the ministry, then it will cease to be an "elitist" group. Besides, people like Sciki, Goofy and Sis all earned their posts. Likewise, keeping it hidden is an incentive for people to work towards. I just think you're too cynical to see it otherwise.


Do what to work towards what?

Anything you do on this board will be modded, erased, or moved by a mod. Why the fuck would anyone put WORK into anything? Go look at the SD forum, fer Chrissakes. The mods decided to empty it all out, just to show what they thought of everyones' posts.

Work, my arse.

fomenter
May 16th, 2009, 08:21 AM
if you work at supporting the status quo maybe somebody will make you a mod, and let you fuck up the forum by moving erasing or modding every body's posts or emptying entire sections of their content, there must be some reward for being a sycophant of the way things are now, and it obviously isn't a good or active forum.

The Good Reverend Roger
May 16th, 2009, 08:22 AM
if you work at supporting the status quo maybe somebody will make you a mod, and let you fuck up the forum by moving erasing or modding every body's posts or emptying entire sections of their content, there must be some reward for being a sycophant of the way things are now, and it obviously isn't a good or active forum.


Hah! "King Nothing". Lord of all he surveys...a dead board and 60 googlebots.

fomenter
May 16th, 2009, 08:26 AM
Hah! "King Nothing". Lord of all he surveys...a dead board and 60 googlebots.
:icon_lol:

look out for the tumbleweeds



http://www.outterrim.com/The_Good_News/Graphics/tumbleweed.gif

rzm61
May 16th, 2009, 01:26 PM
Hah! "King Nothing". Lord of all he surveys...a dead board and 60 googlebots.

:icon_lol:

look out for the tumbleweeds



http://www.outterrim.com/The_Good_News/Graphics/tumbleweed.gif

I'm looking at two right now.

The Good Reverend Roger
May 16th, 2009, 04:35 PM
I'm looking at two right now.

Oh, sorry. Did we fail to show proper respect to a joke religion and it's heirarchy?

Oh, dear.

Cain
May 17th, 2009, 01:14 PM
Complaint: I don't think quite everyone capable of providing content to this forum has been banned or run off yet. Please rectify this. TIA.

Loki
May 18th, 2009, 10:41 PM
Complaint: I don't think quite everyone capable of providing content to this forum has been banned or run off yet. Please rectify this. TIA.

Give it time. :barf:

Fallen Hero
May 18th, 2009, 11:11 PM
Complaint: I have not yet been moderated.

Love and kisses,
Cain

I wanted to edit this to include "Glad to be at your service." at the bottom because that's my sense of humour.

Well Mr. Cain, how exactly would you like to be moderated? I'm sure here at the Church of Google, something can be figured out.
:icon_lol:

I can go along with most of the last few posts.

No matter the names we give the sections I think we need three:

This is how I think of the site...

1) A debate/serious/advanced/whatever section. Minimal thread drift.
(re. thread drift: You can't eliminate it because;
a) good threads lead to tangents. In that case we make new threads about the tangents.
b) bad threads lead to boredom - in that case we kill them.)

2) General. Vanity threads, general crap, interesting stuff, music .... like the name says.

3) Potentially Offensive. R rated bar talk without the pool table and chance of physical violence.
No beer though :(


OK for starters? I think that's covered most of the problems. :D

This.

That's what I was thinking. All Discordians can be Popes. Why can't all Googlists become Ministers?

I completely agree with this.

Story time! One upon a time, this forum was new, and had few posters other than religious trolls. Ministership was given to a couple members at Matt's whim either for having been there in the first 10 accounts or for having comtributed greatly to the content. The whole thing was to serve 2 purposes: 1. Mimic the function of a religious group's leaders and 2. Make crucial decisions (i.e. rules, main site changes, authorship of the blog/etc. which never actually went for long, to prepare the newsletter which is not used) But that was then and this was now. It is now essentially a short list for mods and a group of respected users who have "mystical powers" which influence the "universe."

Cain
May 18th, 2009, 11:34 PM
Complaint: I require more Canadian drugs. Please do not ban my suppliers.

Fallen Hero
May 18th, 2009, 11:35 PM
Complaint: I require more Canadian drugs. Please do not ban my suppliers.

Shit... sorry, I made a rule against selling Canadian drugs outside of Canada and banned all offenders.

--EDIT-- Tazishsethaus is now banned. There goes your supplier. --EDIT--

Tsar Phalanxia
May 19th, 2009, 08:59 AM
--EDIT-- Tazishsethaus is now banned. There goes your supplier. --EDIT--

NEOOOOOOOO

Damn, now Bouchie/Sis/Matt have all their Moose Pills to themselves :icon_mad:

Fallen Hero
May 19th, 2009, 05:30 PM
NEOOOOOOOO

Damn, now Bouchie/Sis/Matt have all their Moose Pills to themselves :icon_mad:

:icon_lol:

You forgot that I am Canadian too.

Tsar Phalanxia
May 19th, 2009, 05:47 PM
Good God! I can see now! It's a conspiracy!

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 19th, 2009, 06:57 PM
I am not canadian but maybe someday, Fallen lets get hitched. =D