INTENSITY²
Start here => Free For ALL => Topic started by: Scrapheap on July 07, 2007, 07:03:06 PM
-
I was going to post this in the World Council discussion, but I'd rather put it on a public board.
The post that MrMark made at WP really disturbed me and I'm wandering what we here at Intensity could do to prevent such a thing from happening here. Dunc and odeon have shown no inclination to run the site themselves and niether has Callaway. However, what if, a few years down the road, somebody like MrMark comes here with ambitions to take over the site in a 'de facto' sense?? MrMark was real smooth at first, simple acting like a clown to tray to gain support of both members and Alex. He succeded in doing this. For those who were watching though, his intentions were clear. He PM'ed me on several occasions BEFORE he was a mod (he was still a n00b even) trying to dictate to me what my behavior and words should be. I just ignored him, but in retrospect, I should've made his behavior public.
Anyways, here's MrMark's manifesto for anybody who didn't read it before.
Hi Planeteers-
My user name is MrMark, but you can call me Mark. I would have just gone with Mark, but it was already taken. I’ve created this thread to give members an opportunity to get to know me better.
I’d like to share with you a little bit about my philosophy with respect to Wrong Planet and my role as Moderator. Please bear in mind that these opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the owner or other moderators.
I drafted a mission statement for the moderators. “It is the mission WP mods to promote and maintain a peaceful and supportive environment, where members can help each other grow and change and learn skills that they will need to succeed in life.†I feel like this is consistent with the mission statement that appears on the home page. We are first and foremost a support site and information resource. We also perform the secondary function of providing for some of the social needs of some of the members, people who might otherwise have no social lives whatsoever.
As with any community, virtual or otherwise, there are mischievous elements. This necessitates some type of regulation. This is achieved by giving some members additional authority to censor posts and sanction members. Such authority is typically given to long-time members in good standing who have good communication skills and have demonstrated an ongoing interest in the mission of the site, the ability to consistently comply with the rules, the ability to set not just a good example but a better example, and a calm demeanor when dealing with conflict. I personally feel that policing the forums is only 5% of a mods job. The other 95% is setting a desired tone, keeping discussions interesting and on-topic by asking relevant and thought provoking questions, and helping to cultivate the leadership skills of less experienced mods.
In a perfect world, everybody would behave themselves and there would be no need for police. We do not live in a perfect world. Additionally, our membership is unique in that the vast majority of us have some type of developmental disability. Some are mild and some are severe. Most are in between. We have a number of members who are particularly vulnerable. Some are suicidal. We have other members who are bullies. Some of them are homicidal or may become so. What all of these people have in common is that they experienced some sort of trauma early in life, in addition to having a diagnosed or undiagnosed ASD. Some responded to that trauma by turning their anger inward and experienced depression and low self-esteem. Others turned their anger outward and became bullies themselves. I belong to the first group. As I matured, I learned to let go of my anger and develop a more positive self-image.
I am extremely hesitant to exercise my authority to ban other members. The owner has always demonstrated much less patience than I have in this regard. I find banning people to be most distasteful. I strongly prefer that members correct their own behavior. However, when that does not happen, I have an obligation to the owner and the membership to take appropriate action.
Speaking of the owner, I am aware of some uncomplimentary references. “The Emperor†and “His Highness†come to mind. Personally, I prefer “Captain†of this spaceship. It has been suggested that Alex is a rich kid here to make more money. I don’t know if he makes any money here or not, but I wouldn’t have a problem with it if he did. Capitalism and altruism are not mutually exclusive, and if he can generate $10,000 or $20,000 or $30,000 a year from operating this site, he would be free to focus more on activism. Alex is famous. He’s done TV appearances. He’s spoken with presidential candidates. It’s no wonder he doesn’t have time to answer all his mail.
I’m thinking about establishing a locked thread where I can report on a daily or weekly basis on my policing activities, number of warnings, number of bannings, that sort of thing. Alex, the other mods and I are still revisiting and reviewing the current rules. Until we arrive at a consensus to the contrary, I am not inclined to discuss any member or their activities in public. Recently, there has been a rash of allegations from all quarters, yet my mailbox remains virtually empty. I read and respond to all thoughtful, well-written complaints about the activities of others or myself. I also read complaints that are not so thoughtful or well written, at the very least. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any ideas, praises, comments, concerns or criticisms you may have.
-Thanks,
Mark
Notice hew he has appointed himself as first amoung equals?? (mods)
Wherever there's prey, there's predators, and the predators will always rise to the top of the food chain.
So how do we stop this from happening here??
-
Gee, WHAT do you think that my attempt to set
up rules was for? To better protect us.
-
Gee, WHAT do you think that my attempt to set
up rules was for? To better protect us.
But how do we protect ourselves from you?
Scrap, I don't know much of the conversation about Mr Mark...but I'm always suspicious of people who come in and know how "to run things better" and put a whole case forward for it. I assume this person is Mrs Mark also?
-
I assume this person is Mrs Mark also?
Yep it sure is.
-
I assume this person is Mrs Mark also?
Yep it sure is.
Opportunist psycho. The site would be so wonderful run by one like him.
-
personally, i think that was well written. it seems like he read several posts here and took outr advice for a support site, several times.
also, he kissed ass alot.
let me ask you a question scrap?
how could that possibly happen here?
i believe that as long as callaway is the chief administrator here then we will be fine. she is really open minded about other people and she is an advocate for free speech. and she also acts as the site conscience. she is perfect for us.
if she were to ever leave, for whatever reason, i think that PI could probably serve in that role, almost as well.
-
personally, i think that was well written. it seems like he read several posts here and took outr advice for a support site, several times.
also, he kissed ass alot.
let me ask you a question scrap?
how could that possibly happen here?
i believe that as long as callaway is the chief administrator here then we will be fine. she is really open minded about other people and she is an advocate for free speech. and she also acts as the site conscience. she is perfect for us.
if she were to ever leave, for whatever reason, i think that PI could probably serve in that role, almost as well.
It may have been well written, but don't you think some of that person's comments betray the tone of his letter Scrap posted? Hence why I said opportunist...
-
let me ask you a question scrap?
how could that possibly happen here?
I might not be able to think of a situation where it could happen, but that doesn't mean that couldn't happen.
I think by pointing out this example and asking ourselves "how can we prevent this from happening", that we've done 50% of what it takes to make sure it NEVER happens to us.
I think we just have to be vigilant against this kind of crap at all times.
That's why I posted a vote as soon as I saw ATOMICA vandalizing the free for all forum. If Dunc had simply IP banned him and deleted his posts, I think few people would've argued and it WAS the right thing to do. However, it's better that the WC voted on the issuse to delete his posts, and the IP ban was approved (in peoples posts) as well.
MY answer to the question of "how do we prevent this from happening here" is for the WC to be pro-active and stay on top of events so that a strong personality doesn't have the opportunity to exert any influence.
-
personally, i think that was well written. it seems like he read several posts here and took outr advice for a support site, several times.
also, he kissed ass alot.
let me ask you a question scrap?
how could that possibly happen here?
i believe that as long as callaway is the chief administrator here then we will be fine. she is really open minded about other people and she is an advocate for free speech. and she also acts as the site conscience. she is perfect for us.
if she were to ever leave, for whatever reason, i think that PI could probably serve in that role, almost as well.
It may have been well written, but don't you think some of that person's comments betray the tone of his letter Scrap posted? Hence why I said opportunist...
sure.
if i thought that aspies were excellent communicators, then i would read into it more. but i thought that the overall tone was a good one...FOR A SUPPORT SITE.
-
scrap, would you agree that callaway is perfect in her role as full time administrator? perfect for us?
honestly, i can see how if eamonn, omega, or myself would have remained in control how then maybe some powertrip may have occured....in the future.
the three of us were oh so right for the beginning stages of this site. but, i fear what would have become of the site if any one of us would have remained untouched. callaway, as i see it, doesn't have the ego necessary to dictate how others should act....unlike mark. (he said that i could call him that).
-
I've been thinking about this and there
is NO set of rules which can protect us
from democracy. The only possible solution
is a junta of trusted people. McJ is suggesting
something close, with only one member. I would
suggest instead some 5 (or so) long term members
whom we could all agree to. If anything, the possible
choices seem too large for that.
But, keeping the amount small seems important for the
other issue - that they'd have to act with unanimous
consent, and only to protect us from democracy going
wild.
-
scrap, would you agree that callaway is perfect in her role as full time administrator? perfect for us?
She's elected. Hence, a surge in membership could
end up putting Mrs. Mark (or worse, me) into such
a position. Plus, people have melt downs. I wouldn't
want all of our eggs in one basket, no matter how
perfect a choice she seems.
-
its all fake. obviously, atleast i dont try to act like a goodie two shoes, go to another website under a fake screename and show what im really like.
-
scrap, would you agree that callaway is perfect in her role as full time administrator? perfect for us?
She's elected. Hence, a surge in membership could
end up putting Mrs. Mark (or worse, me) into such
a position. Plus, people have melt downs. I wouldn't
want all of our eggs in one basket, no matter how
perfect a choice she seems.
but we also have two web monkeys, who each take regular backups of the site. and both of them are pretty keen on the idea of personal freedoms as well.
also, haven't you considered what would happen to this site if those freedoms were taken away?
we would suck as much as WP currrently does.
-
i dont think that would ever happen, people here in my opinion arent power hungry so theres really no chance of someone turning out like mrmark,
-
but we also have two web monkeys, who each take regular backups of the site. and both of them are pretty keen on the idea of personal freedoms as well.
also, haven't you considered what would happen to this site if those freedoms were taken away?
we would suck as much as WP currrently does.
Yeah, I obviously meant that they'd be part of this.
But, it just seems more legitimate to have them work
as part of a group, rather than unilateraly, as yet another
last resort.
-
I assume this person is Mrs Mark also?
Yep it sure is.
wow. like cybil.
-
but we also have two web monkeys, who each take regular backups of the site. and both of them are pretty keen on the idea of personal freedoms as well.
also, haven't you considered what would happen to this site if those freedoms were taken away?
we would suck as much as WP currrently does.
Yeah, I obviously meant that they'd be part of this.
But, it just seems more legitimate to have them work
as part of a group, rather than unilateraly, as yet another
last resort.
We do act as part of the group already, or hadn't you noticed? The structure might be informal, but its already accessible. Thats precisely what happened with the Atomikunt incident - it was necessary for an admin or webmonkey to make a unilateral judgement call on how to deal with the situation. The bulk of the information regarding what was going on came from the WC - which is as it should have been. I agree with Scrapheap in as much as if you want to run the site with few people being more influential than others, its your responsibility as WC members to be proactive in telling the site staff what you want us to do, if its the same couple of folk shouting up all the time they become more influential by default. Its inevitable. However two things IMO prevent the emergence of a MrMark figure here - firstly, while Alex has capricious whims and intermittently seeks direct control of the forums, me and Odeon do not - so while we have 'ultimate' control, there have been very few occasions when it has been necessary to act unilaterally without a given mandate (e.g. dealing with Omega's treachery), and the return of the WC and reform of the admin role was aimed at reducing the likelihood of it being necessary to resort to it in future.
In the unlikely event of a MrMark being elected they'd soon have their behaviour questioned I'm sure, since the WC can vote to remove an admin they have elected if they have no confidence in them. And some of us are used to clipping power trippers' wings. :police:
-
bingo. it's a matter of trust, as far as i'm concerned, and i base that on experience, across several boards. you get to know people after working with them for a few years (coming up 3 years now, dunc - scary, or what?)
-
three years. thats about twenty in interweb time. :laugh:
-
three years. thats about twenty in interweb time. :laugh:
christ - shouldn't we be having a dodgy party, then, with "hi ho silver lining", wheezy aunts, sausages on poles and Cava?
-
three years. thats about twenty in interweb time. :laugh:
christ - shouldn't we be having a dodgy party, then, with "hi ho silver lining", wheezy aunts, sausages on poles and Cava?
how about a drunken chat orgy?
-
::)
:laugh:
-
::)
:laugh:
don't roll your eyes at me unless they are rolling into the back of your head because i just made you orgasm.
-
::)
:laugh:
don't roll your eyes at me unless they are rolling into the back of your head because i just made you orgasm.
shall if i want to. cos the likelihood of the latter is remote, as you well know, you cheeky sod. :P
:laugh:
-
::)
:laugh:
don't roll your eyes at me unless they are rolling into the back of your head because i just made you orgasm.
shall if i want to. cos the likelihood of the latter is remote, as you well know, you cheeky sod. :P
:laugh:
don't stick your tongue out at me unless you plan on putting it to good use.
-
oh i am, believe you me. but you see, my tongue is so long, there's some left to razz you whilst it's otherwise occupied too. (http://planetsmilies.net/tongue-smiley-8854.gif)
-
oh i am, believe you me. but you see, my tongue is so long, there's some left to razz you whilst it's otherwise occupied too. (http://planetsmilies.net/tongue-smiley-8854.gif)
what am i wearing right now?
....a grin.
-
i'd threaten to wipe it off your face, but you'd only make a mess in your trousers. :P
-
i'd threaten to wipe it off your face, but you'd only make a mess in your trousers. :P
i am wearing a grin....nothing else. :eyelash:
so i cannot see as to how i can make a mess on anything but the chair.
-
i'd threaten to wipe it off your face, but you'd only make a mess on your chair. :P
fixed.
-
i'd threaten to wipe it off your face, but you'd only make a mess on your chair. :P
fixed.
well, it's fixed now.
i put on some undies.
i had just gotten out of the shower, and, well, i wanted to see what was happening on the board.
ya know?
-
Catkiller - I've been concerned about the issue you're talking about since day one here (technically, before day one). It's why I've taken such a hardline stance here against things like the formation of the forum for people with real problems. Also why I voted against the deletion of Atomika's posts, even though I wasn't around during the peak of the problem to really argue a case for my vote.
I agree with whoever it was that said we shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket. I also agree with Catkiller that it's really important to be vigilant. I've seen takeovers far more insidiously than that officious bullcrap of MrMark's, and even used some of the same techniques myself when I was trying to get established at WrongPlanet a couple years ago.
The biggest forum drama messes happen when all the people in power have their emotions invested and clouding their judgement. (I can back this up with plenty of familiar examples if anyone cares.) So the system needs to be set up in such a way that there is always somebody likely to be uninvolved enough to be objective. We're already doing it to a degree by having the two webmasters, the admin who's not likely to be power hungry, and the world council for voting. But yeah - we do need to be careful.
Heck, maybe the constant influx of disgruntled WP members is a good thing, because it means some people will always have frustration over misuse of power forefront in their thoughts. Good for vigilance.
-
Catkiller - I've been concerned about the issue you're talking about since day one here (technically, before day one). It's why I've taken such a hardline stance here against things like the formation of the forum for people with real problems. Also why I voted against the deletion of Atomika's posts, even though I wasn't around during the peak of the problem to really argue a case for my vote.
I agree with whoever it was that said we shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket. I also agree with Catkiller that it's really important to be vigilant. I've seen takeovers far more insidiously than that officious bullcrap of MrMark's, and even used some of the same techniques myself when I was trying to get established at WrongPlanet a couple years ago.
The biggest forum drama messes happen when all the people in power have their emotions invested and clouding their judgement. (I can back this up with plenty of familiar examples if anyone cares.) So the system needs to be set up in such a way that there is always somebody likely to be uninvolved enough to be objective. We're already doing it to a degree by having the two webmasters, the admin who's not likely to be power hungry, and the world council for voting. But yeah - we do need to be careful.
Heck, maybe the constant influx of disgruntled WP members is a good thing, because it means some people will always have frustration over misuse of power forefront in their thoughts. Good for vigilance.
QFT :agreed: :plus:
-
quality fucking thought
-
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
I just caught MrsMark lurking on this thread!!! :laugh:
-
dude hes obviously snooping and reporting back to the boy king what hes seen
-
Catkiller - I've been concerned about the issue you're talking about since day one here (technically, before day one). It's why I've taken such a hardline stance here against things like the formation of the forum for people with real problems. Also why I voted against the deletion of Atomika's posts, even though I wasn't around during the peak of the problem to really argue a case for my vote.
I agree with whoever it was that said we shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket. I also agree with Catkiller that it's really important to be vigilant. I've seen takeovers far more insidiously than that officious bullcrap of MrMark's, and even used some of the same techniques myself when I was trying to get established at WrongPlanet a couple years ago.
The biggest forum drama messes happen when all the people in power have their emotions invested and clouding their judgement. (I can back this up with plenty of familiar examples if anyone cares.) So the system needs to be set up in such a way that there is always somebody likely to be uninvolved enough to be objective. We're already doing it to a degree by having the two webmasters, the admin who's not likely to be power hungry, and the world council for voting. But yeah - we do need to be careful.
Heck, maybe the constant influx of disgruntled WP members is a good thing, because it means some people will always have frustration over misuse of power forefront in their thoughts. Good for vigilance.
the straightforward approach leaves one with alot less explaining afterwards. eh?
-
without ads here and money being generated, then what would the motivation be for someone to want to take over.
i have found that greed and power are the two most basic reasons.
so minus the greed then all you have is the power.
who, here could be controlled. none, i think.
-
well you certainly were on a little power trip when you modded
-
the straightforward approach leaves one with alot less explaining afterwards. eh?
That, and current IRL circumstances have made me really fucking sick of bullshit. So yeah I'm power hungry (when I can be arsed) and yeah I'm one of the people that needs to be controlled and compensated for.
-
well you certainly were on a little power trip when you modded
you have that backwards.
you were on the power trip and i was simply counteracting it.
locking threads is cowardly and an infringement on the rights of others.
start a poll, ask people who was on the power trip?
-
the straightforward approach leaves one with alot less explaining afterwards. eh?
That, and current IRL circumstances have made me really fucking sick of bullshit. So yeah I'm power hungry (when I can be arsed) and yeah I'm one of the people that needs to be controlled and compensated for.
smooth.
and, we don't ban, so what influence can any one person have.
besides the cult of personality coming from the strongest posters.
-
well as you know i dont start polls, but you defintly were on a power trip. thats why you unlocked my calling out myself thread you were so power hungry you thought every thread even ones where i was talking to myself were "an infridgement of yer rights" give me a break.
-
and, we don't ban, so what influence can any one person have.
besides the cult of personality coming from the strongest posters.
Atomika was IP banned.
I don't have the time or energy to project my personality strongly enough to cause any serious damage to this site.
-
the straightforward approach leaves one with alot less explaining afterwards. eh?
That, and current IRL circumstances have made me really fucking sick of bullshit. So yeah I'm power hungry (when I can be arsed) and yeah I'm one of the people that needs to be controlled and compensated for.
Nice points, Pyraxis.
I+You for your efforts.
-
and, we don't ban, so what influence can any one person have.
besides the cult of personality coming from the strongest posters.
Atomika was IP banned.
I don't have the time or energy to project my personality strongly enough to cause any serious damage to this site.
atomika was not a member.
-
Ah, okay. Point taken.
So are you saying that if Atomika were a member, you would not have been in favor of banning him/her?
-
Atomika's only purpose was to cause harm to this site. He wasn't (and isn't, and can't be, just yet, because he's 14) a member so an IP ban was warranted in pretty much the same way we'd IP ban a spambot if one was flooding the place. Which, btw, *is* pretty much what happened.
That said, I was still hesitant to act, wanting a vote on it first. Dunc got there faster than I did, probably because I also wanted to await his opinion.
There's always a risk that someone tries to take over, but there's really very little we can do to eliminate the risk completely. We have two web monkeys, we have a semi-permanent admin that is the very definition of integrity and honesty, if you ask me, and we have rotating short-term admins.
The risk was a lot higher a year ago, by the way.
-
Ah, okay. Point taken.
So are you saying that if Atomika were a member, you would not have been in favor of banning him/her?
I know I would have hesitated. We would have been forced to do something, eventually, but not necessarily ban him. He is 14, however, so the adults only rule would have been the one to act on.
-
Ah, okay. Point taken.
So are you saying that if Atomika were a member, you would not have been in favor of banning him/her?
not as ready.
but we are talking about a power grab here, are we not?
even if a lowly member were to act as this punk did all over the boards, wouldn't that be a form of power grab? shouldn't something be done to stop it?
we have members who spam here all the time. and i don't see a problem with it. but if someones sole purpose is to screw up the board and the enjoyment of all the other members....do we really have a choice?
-
shouldn't something be done to stop it?
yes you should never be made a mod or an admin
-
shouldn't something be done to stop it?
yes you should never be made a mod or an admin
:laugh:
-
:fuckyou:
-
:fuckyou:
drunk?
-
no
-
dude hes obviously snooping and reporting back to the boy king what hes seen
Nah. He just likes to see what effect he's had. :laugh:
-
I know I would have hesitated. We would have been forced to do something, eventually, but not necessarily ban him. He is 14, however, so the adults only rule would have been the one to act on.
Did I miss something, or do we actually have
knowledge of his age? I was speculating that
it had to be close to that, but don't remember
seeing anyone who had much more information.
-
I know I would have hesitated. We would have been forced to do something, eventually, but not necessarily ban him. He is 14, however, so the adults only rule would have been the one to act on.
Did I miss something, or do we actually have
knowledge of his age? I was speculating that
it had to be close to that, but don't remember
seeing anyone who had much more information.
i had a dream that he was 6. does that count?
-
dude hes obviously snooping and reporting back to the boy king what hes seen
Nah. He just likes to see what effect he's had. :laugh:
and it appears you enjoy it
-
I know I would have hesitated. We would have been forced to do something, eventually, but not necessarily ban him. He is 14, however, so the adults only rule would have been the one to act on.
Did I miss something, or do we actually have
knowledge of his age? I was speculating that
it had to be close to that, but don't remember
seeing anyone who had much more information.
Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. I sort of speculated that he was some young emo kid, too, but I don't remember him ever mentioning his age on WP.
-
That thing Mr. Mark wrote sounds like something from Animal Farm, doesn't it? He might as well have said, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
I agree that we would never want someone like Mr. Mark as an administrator here, but I think the set-up we currently have pretty much guarantees that we won't have someone like Mr. Mark as an administrator here for very long. Even if he managed to fool us briefly into electing him, we could recall him if he got out of hand. Our two webmonkeys, Dunc and Odeon are the exact opposite of Mr. Mark. I'm nothing like him either, but if I ever turn into someone like him, which I am pretty sure I never would, we would have a vote to recall me. It would be the same situation if we had another semi-permanent administrator who acted like that. We would vote them out.
On WP, someone has to hoodwink just one person who is fairly susceptible to flattery. We would see right through an act like that here, IMO.
-
well said, callaway. :clap:
-
well said, callaway. :clap:
Meh! she was apeing my routine. ;) ;) ;) :laugh:
-
anyway - and i'm sure there are others here who'd agree - if some cyber dictator did manage to take over I2, i'd just piss off and find somewhere else. it's been done before - it's how I2 started, after all - and nothing's carved in stone. i'm sure the people i value or enjoy interacting with on here are like-minded enough they'd do the same, so bingo.
-
I know I would have hesitated. We would have been forced to do something, eventually, but not necessarily ban him. He is 14, however, so the adults only rule would have been the one to act on.
Did I miss something, or do we actually have
knowledge of his age? I was speculating that
it had to be close to that, but don't remember
seeing anyone who had much more information.
I think I read it someplace. I could be wrong.
-
anyway - and i'm sure there are others here who'd agree - if some cyber dictator did manage to take over I2, i'd just piss off and find somewhere else. it's been done before - it's how I2 started, after all - and nothing's carved in stone. i'm sure the people i value or enjoy interacting with on here are like-minded enough they'd do the same, so bingo.
Yeah, but nobody would tell me. :'(
-
can't imagine why.
-
If the only forum I was a member of was WP and I saw what MrMark had written, I wouldn't like it. It is like he is trying to be a strict headmaster of a rowdy school.
I don't think we here could be sucked into something like that.
That this thread has been started and posted in is evidence of our awareness.
-
I think We have to many Loud Mouths around here for this to happen at Intensity.
-
If the only forum I was a member of was WP and I saw what MrMark had written, I wouldn't like it. It is like he is trying to be a strict headmaster of a rowdy school.
I don't think we here could be sucked into something like that.
That this thread has been started and posted in is evidence of our awareness.
:plus:
-
i have been thinking about this topic.
we can disallow members who have not been here for one month, or posted in one month to be allowed to vote in any administrator elections.
-
why? aren't they rather unlikely to want to vote anyway, if they've fucked off?
-
why? aren't they rather unlikely to want to vote anyway, if they've fucked off?
it's just that someone can run...example not given.... and then they can invite several people that they know to sign up just to vote for them.
or, they can all sign up 30 days before the next election, not post, but vote for the power hungry person when the elections come up.
that is why i say they should be at least active on the board, and a member for at least 30 days.
-
cor. is anyone that desperate for "power"? numpties. ::)
-
cor. is anyone that desperate for "power"? numpties. ::)
Tell me about it. I'd rather control thunder and lightning with my fingertips than to be some uber-nerd playing dictator on a message board.
-
cor. is anyone that desperate for "power"? numpties. ::)
that was the purpose of this thread, wanker.
-
wanker? have you been peeking again?
-
cor. is anyone that desperate for "power"? numpties. ::)
that was the purpose of this thread, wanker.
You mean Alex Plank signed up here and then tried to take over [/sarcasm]
-
cor. is anyone that desperate for "power"? numpties. ::)
that was the purpose of this thread, wanker.
You mean Alex Plank signed up here and then tried to take over [/sarcasm]
That would never happen around here sarcasm aside.
-
why? aren't they rather unlikely to want to vote anyway, if they've fucked off?
it's just that someone can run...example not given.... and then they can invite several people that they know to sign up just to vote for them.
or, they can all sign up 30 days before the next election, not post, but vote for the power hungry person when the elections come up.
that is why i say they should be at least active on the board, and a member for at least 30 days.
I think that was the idea when we discussed the world council stuff...
-
i have been thinking about this topic.
we can disallow members who have not been here for one month, or posted in one month to be allowed to vote in any administrator elections.
I think this is a good idea.This was kinda
my thinking about letting only WC members
vote. Didn't really matter though, since the
votes were all openly expressed, instead of
done as a poll, which was what I feared.
Still doesn't give absolute protection, but I guess
we just have to rely on the fact that we only exist
at the whim of Dunc anyhow, and thus can simply
trust him to step in.
-
:yawn:
is something being discussed?
-
Why did you want to be green, anyhow?
-
green?
-
why? aren't they rather unlikely to want to vote anyway, if they've fucked off?
it's just that someone can run...example not given.... and then they can invite several people that they know to sign up just to vote for them.
or, they can all sign up 30 days before the next election, not post, but vote for the power hungry person when the elections come up.
that is why i say they should be at least active on the board, and a member for at least 30 days.
I think that was the idea when we discussed the world council stuff...
it is. since only the pool of people standing for election could come from the WC. however, any member can vote in the admin elections.
hypothetical: what if someone decided to put their time in here, and join the World Council. they were active for several months and decided to stand for election. then, they called in a bunch of their friends from a different website, and asked them to register here, just to vote in the admin elections.
also, lets say this was a person who enjoyed power and control. and they also had oppressive ideas.
they quickly learn that they cannot do anything, so they start banning people once they become admin.
what a hassle for the webmonkeys and the I² faithful who will not be able to fill their time as well as they could here, but couldn'tr until someone from Europe reset the forum to an earlier backed up time.
we could just let the WC vote in admin elections.
-
But the elections take place over a period of several weeks. Surely, during that time, we would see what's about to happen?
-
But the elections take place over a period of several weeks. Surely, during that time, we would see what's about to happen?
seceral people wait until the last moment to vote.
-
But the elections take place over a period of several weeks. Surely, during that time, we would see what's about to happen?
seceral people wait until the last moment to vote.
yes but the count is not instantaneous. when i did the count, i had plenty of time to reflect over what happened, who voted for whom, etc.
-
But the elections take place over a period of several weeks. Surely, during that time, we would see what's about to happen?
seceral people wait until the last moment to vote.
yes but the count is not instantaneous. when i did the count, i had plenty of time to reflect over what happened, who voted for whom, etc.
how are we going to explain over-riding peoples votes?
-
To do so after the fact would be REALLY
ugly. But, that's what happens when we
have no rules, and just operate by instinct.
-
:finger:
-
let's say I had noticed something like this happening when I counted the votes. I would have notified the World Council, immediately, and we would have gone from there. I'm not saying that we would have ignored a single vote (I don't like the idea at all) but I would have made sure that everybody was aware of what's happening.
If the bans had happened right after the vote (assuming, in this case, that Renaeden or Callaway snapped), either Dunc or me would probably have reacted fairly quickly.
And that's about all we can do unless the coup is so obvious that we can't avoid seeing it, before the count is completed.
-
To do so after the fact would be REALLY
ugly. But, that's what happens when we
have no rules, and just operate by instinct.
For every rule you add, you lose some of what this site is about.
-
let's say I had noticed something like this happening when I counted the votes. I would have notified the World Council, immediately, and we would have gone from there. I'm not saying that we would have ignored a single vote (I don't like the idea at all) but I would have made sure that everybody was aware of what's happening.
If the bans had happened right after the vote (assuming, in this case, that Renaeden or Callaway snapped), either Dunc or me would probably have reacted fairly quickly.
And that's about all we can do unless the coup is so obvious that we can't avoid seeing it, before the count is completed.
what if mrmark had a cunning plan?
we aren't talking about renaeden, callaway, scrap or ozy, here.
-
To do so after the fact would be REALLY
ugly. But, that's what happens when we
have no rules, and just operate by instinct.
For every rule you add, you lose some of what this site is about.
Yeah, I know. But what you stated about bringing
it to the WP, means that it stands as a bump in
the simulated democracy. If it were to act in a
manner to overturn votes, effectively it's throwing
a coup. Again, I'm not sure that there's anything
which is too big a deal with allowing a 'stolen'
election, such as would happen if a bunch of
new people came in at once. But there can be
no democracy without clear voting rules.
:deadhorse:
-
ok calandale, i take back the finger. now you have me at i'm listening.....convince me.
-
What it came down to, is it's just an internet site,
and it doesn't matter. That still holds. And Dunc and
Odeon can roll it up, and give us whatever they want.
So, it's just NOT a democracy, and really ain't worth
fighting for.
I've given up, and agree. It's just not worth the effort.
But if someone wants to play democracy, there would
be rules.
-
I think I see what you are saying, Calandale, but I agree with Odeon when he said, "For every rule you add, you lose some of what this site is about."
-
To do so after the fact would be REALLY
ugly. But, that's what happens when we
have no rules, and just operate by instinct.
For every rule you add, you lose some of what this site is about.
agreed. +1
-
Why did you want to be green, anyhow?
green?
-
I think I see what you are saying, Calandale, but I agree with Odeon when he said, "For every rule you add, you lose some of what this site is about."
Yeah, but maybe this site should stop the pretenses towards
democracy then. It seems hypocritical, at best. Because that
is NOT what the site is about. And grafting that on, beneath
the other concept does nothing good.
Why did you want to be green, anyhow?
green?
Indeed.
-
Ok, for the sake of fairness and honor, when I become admin. I will impose my own code of ethics and morality and ban everybody from the forum and rule in splendid isolation. >:D Just like my hero, Mrs.Mark! :evillaugh: Because I am so moral and moderate that I hold myself up as a beacon of light in a dark world. ::) Just thought you'd like to know what my plans are. But, then again, I am soooooooooo intelligent that you plebians are completely dumbfounded at my superior intellect. :drool: :headslap: :birdpoop:
BTW, I'm being sarcastic! :laugh: :paperbag: :cuckoo: :shamone: :fos:
-
what do you mean by green calandale? what are you talking about?
-
what do you mean by green calandale? what are you talking about?
Blue + yellow, and all.
You yawned at discussing the
issues here. If you are really that
bored by them, why in the WC?
-
thanks for assuming asshole. i was yawning cuz i was sleepy.
-
thanks for assuming asshole. i was yawning cuz i was sleepy.
you had me at asshole.
-
was i good? :P i can't seem to remember anything.
-
was i good? :P i can't seem to remember anything.
i slipped you a mickey before i slipped you the frankfurter.
-
darn, i missed it.
-
thanks for assuming asshole. i was yawning cuz i was sleepy.
It's what I always assume,
unless told otherwise.
-
i don't like people assuming. it's stupid.
-
yer stooopid.
-
To do so after the fact would be REALLY
ugly. But, that's what happens when we
have no rules, and just operate by instinct.
For every rule you add, you lose some of what this site is about.
Yeah, I know. But what you stated about bringing
it to the WP, means that it stands as a bump in
the simulated democracy. If it were to act in a
manner to overturn votes, effectively it's throwing
a coup. Again, I'm not sure that there's anything
which is too big a deal with allowing a 'stolen'
election, such as would happen if a bunch of
new people came in at once. But there can be
no democracy without clear voting rules.
:deadhorse:
Bringing it to the WP - is that a Freudian slip, Fuehrer?!?!?!
-
Bringing it to the WP - is that a Freudian slip, Fuehrer?!?!?!
:laugh:
Don't see how. A slip certainly,
but I don't see why WP would
be interested in running this place.
-
yer stooopid.
you are.
-
Bringing it to the WP - is that a Freudian slip, Fuehrer?!?!?!
:laugh:
Don't see how. A slip certainly,
but I don't see why WP would
be interested in running this place.
Errrmm... A WP Mod trying to convince us that the site is not run democratically?!?!?!?!
I mean, that's so Kafka-esqe and Orwellian at the same time... I'd be :LMAO: if I weren't concerned.
-
Ok, for the sake of fairness and honor, when I become admin. I will impose my own code of ethics and morality and ban everybody from the forum and rule in splendid isolation. >:D Just like my hero, Mrs.Mark! :evillaugh: Because I am so moral and moderate that I hold myself up as a beacon of light in a dark world. ::) Just thought you'd like to know what my plans are. But, then again, I am soooooooooo intelligent that you plebians are completely dumbfounded at my superior intellect. :drool: :headslap: :birdpoop:
BTW, I'm being sarcastic! :laugh: :paperbag: :cuckoo: :shamone: :fos:
:LMAO:
You will be awfully lonely.
-
Ok, for the sake of fairness and honor, when I become admin. I will impose my own code of ethics and morality and ban everybody from the forum and rule in splendid isolation. >:D Just like my hero, Mrs.Mark! :evillaugh: Because I am so moral and moderate that I hold myself up as a beacon of light in a dark world. ::) Just thought you'd like to know what my plans are. But, then again, I am soooooooooo intelligent that you plebians are completely dumbfounded at my superior intellect. :drool: :headslap: :birdpoop:
BTW, I'm being sarcastic! :laugh: :paperbag: :cuckoo: :shamone: :fos:
:LMAO:
You will be awfully lonely.
Just let me know before the mass bannings so that I can throw an exit tantrum. :eyebrows:
-
Bringing it to the WP - is that a Freudian slip, Fuehrer?!?!?!
:laugh:
Don't see how. A slip certainly,
but I don't see why WP would
be interested in running this place.
Errrmm... A WP Mod trying to convince us that the site is not run democratically?!?!?!?!
I mean, that's so Kafka-esqe and Orwellian at the same time... I'd be :LMAO: if I weren't concerned.
I'm not sure that it is possible to run anything democratically, on the net.
In the end, it's always at the suffering of the proprietor.
-
I'm not sure that it is possible to run anything democratically, on the net.
In the end, it's always at the suffering of the proprietor.
It's true that Dunc could change his mind and we'd have no recourse. Maybe if we were paying to whore his site we'd have some enforcable contract? I dunno - I'm not a lawyer and I don't even know WHERE it would be enforceable - it's just a possibility.. But as long as Dunc is committed to this democratic vision, I think it's possible.
If, for instance, Calaway went off her rocker and banned the WC, the democratic thing to do would be to un ban the WC and call them in for a no-confidence vote. That would allow Dunc to avoid making a unilateral decision to remove an admin.
-
I'm not sure that it is possible to run anything democratically, on the net.
In the end, it's always at the suffering of the proprietor.
It's true that Dunc could change his mind and we'd have no recourse. Maybe if we were paying to whore his site we'd have some enforcable contract? I dunno - I'm not a lawyer and I don't even know WHERE it would be enforceable - it's just a possibility.. But as long as Dunc is committed to this democratic vision, I think it's possible.
If, for instance, Calaway went off her rocker and banned the WC, the democratic thing to do would be to un ban the WC and call them in for a no-confidence vote. That would allow Dunc to avoid making a unilateral decision to remove an admin.
The correct thing to do would be to ban Callaway
(to prevent further damage), and then call for the vote.
But, all the evidence could be rigged, by those in charge.
It was this feeling of unease which I had during the Lit affair.
In the end, it doesn't make a damned bit of difference. He's
NOT really accountable, and whatever is done is simply a
matter of show.
Now, we could LEAVE, if we felt that he wasn't respecting our
desires. This is about the only 'threat' that we have. The site
is essentially a gift to us, and we can take it or not.
-
Ok, for the sake of fairness and honor, when I become admin. I will impose my own code of ethics and morality and ban everybody from the forum and rule in splendid isolation. >:D Just like my hero, Mrs.Mark! :evillaugh: Because I am so moral and moderate that I hold myself up as a beacon of light in a dark world. ::) Just thought you'd like to know what my plans are. But, then again, I am soooooooooo intelligent that you plebians are completely dumbfounded at my superior intellect. :drool: :headslap: :birdpoop:
BTW, I'm being sarcastic! :laugh: :paperbag: :cuckoo: :shamone: :fos:
:LMAO:
You will be awfully lonely.
Just let me know before the mass bannings so that I can throw an exit tantrum. :eyebrows:
I'll throw one with you, if it ever comes to that.
:angrydance: :angrydance:
But the last time people were banned in a counter-coup, the banner was thrown out rather quickly and then we had our first elections.
-
paranoooid
Callaway is trustworthy and so is Dunc.
-
The correct thing to do would be to ban Callaway
(to prevent further damage), and then call for the vote.
I'd probably be more conservative than that, and just say take away the admin powers.
I don't see how she could cause much damage as a regular member...
-
I'm not sure that it is possible to run anything democratically, on the net.
In the end, it's always at the suffering of the proprietor.
It's true that Dunc could change his mind and we'd have no recourse. Maybe if we were paying to whore his site we'd have some enforcable contract? I dunno - I'm not a lawyer and I don't even know WHERE it would be enforceable - it's just a possibility.. But as long as Dunc is committed to this democratic vision, I think it's possible.
If, for instance, Calaway went off her rocker and banned the WC, the democratic thing to do would be to un ban the WC and call them in for a no-confidence vote. That would allow Dunc to avoid making a unilateral decision to remove an admin.
The correct thing to do would be to ban Callaway
(to prevent further damage), and then call for the vote.
But, all the evidence could be rigged, by those in charge.
It was this feeling of unease which I had during the Lit affair.
In the end, it doesn't make a damned bit of difference. He's
NOT really accountable, and whatever is done is simply a
matter of show.
Now, we could LEAVE, if we felt that he wasn't respecting our
desires. This is about the only 'threat' that we have. The site
is essentially a gift to us, and we can take it or not.
Actually, if I went off my rocker and banned the WC, it would not be necessary to ban me before the vote, I could just be de-adminned pending the vote. But I am not going to do anything like that anyway.
And nobody rigged any evidence against Litigious. >:(
paranoooid
Callaway is trustworthy and so is Dunc.
Thank you.
-
But the elections take place over a period of several weeks. Surely, during that time, we would see what's about to happen?
seceral people wait until the last moment to vote.
yes but the count is not instantaneous. when i did the count, i had plenty of time to reflect over what happened, who voted for whom, etc.
how are we going to explain over-riding peoples votes?
We must let them to decide.
-
Actually, if I went off my rocker and banned the WC, it would not be necessary to ban me before the vote, I could just be de-adminned pending the vote. But I am not going to do anything like that anyway.
And nobody rigged any evidence against Litigious. >:(
De-admin would indeed be enough.
Presuming that you hadn't set certain
things up which went unnoticed.
And, I'm not saying that I don't trust y'all in reagards
to the Lit issue. I'm fucking paranoid though, and tend
to look at things in the worst possible light, just to see
what could have happened, and I see no way of telling
the difference, from my position. I'm not certain that yours
is that priveledged to see either.
The slow trend of his posts is enough to convince me
that he was losing it.
-
Actually, if I went off my rocker and banned the WC, it would not be necessary to ban me before the vote, I could just be de-adminned pending the vote. But I am not going to do anything like that anyway.
And nobody rigged any evidence against Litigious. >:(
De-admin would indeed be enough.
Presuming that you hadn't set certain
things up which went unnoticed.
And, I'm not saying that I don't trust y'all in reagards
to the Lit issue. I'm fucking paranoid though, and tend
to look at things in the worst possible light, just to see
what could have happened, and I see no way of telling
the difference, from my position. I'm not certain that yours
is that priveledged to see either.
The slow trend of his posts is enough to convince me
that he was losing it.
I know. I hope that he is doing better now.
-
Lets hope so.
-
good grief...
okay, how about remembering that there are hustings for the bloody admin positions, which means that all members can be made aware of what's going on; threads can be and are started to ask nominees to account for themselves, etc., etc.
this is not WP, ffs, so can we take take a sideways step and stop acting as though it were, cos if i hear any more bloody paranoia and going on about WP, i'm going to leave here and go over there, because they probably TALK LESS ABOUT IT OVER THERE!
about the only way you can set up a safeguard is to have two or three people with final authority and responsibility for the site, who make the final decisions. and that's not I2. so, there will be grey areas, and loose ends. get over it.
-
about the only way you can set up a safeguard is to have two or three people with final authority and responsibility for the site, who make the final decisions. and that's not I2. .
Uh, yes it is.
-
no it isn't actually, if you think about it properly. otherwise we wouldn't have pages and pages of discussion about old tom cobbley and all in the WC forum. we have got four people who do the technical or admin side of things, but they don't have the final responsibility for decision making vis á vis the running of the site with regards to the structure or the modus operandi.
now, you may be surprised to hear it, cal, but i'm an absolute obsessive when it comes to rules and regs, and i agree that simple, clear rules and boundaries make for more freedom, ultimately. but here on I2, the whole thing muddles along rather nicely. let's face it, i've only seen a few discussions in the WC threads which have actually been resolved, whilst the rest have just petered out through lack of arsedness, and shock, the site didn't implode.
when there was something major to deal with (atomic fucktard), it was handled on the spot, efficiently, calmly and without anyone dying.
i'm beginning to have had enough of all tihs control freakery, and that's coming from a complete control freak. it's dull !
-
when there was something major to deal with (atomic fucktard), it was handled on the spot, efficiently, calmly and without anyone dying.
That's not major. That was obvious.
No one's going to die. But, quite simply,
I've said it again and again, there are a
couple of people who absolutely run the
site. They ALLOW us to pretend at a
democracy, but it can't be real.
-
fine, if that's what you think. we'll have to agree to differ.
me? if that's how it is, i've no problem with it. i actually have other things in my life worth getting concerned about.
-
why? aren't they rather unlikely to want to vote anyway, if they've fucked off?
it's just that someone can run...example not given.... and then they can invite several people that they know to sign up just to vote for them.
or, they can all sign up 30 days before the next election, not post, but vote for the power hungry person when the elections come up.
that is why i say they should be at least active on the board, and a member for at least 30 days.
I'd agree with that- I think there's always a fear that someone will invite lots of their 'friends' over to help swing the vote in their favour.
-
me? if that's how it is, i've no problem with it.
Nor do I, except that I let myself be confused,
and thought that it did matter, for a bit.
-
I'm not sure that it is possible to run anything democratically, on the net.
In the end, it's always at the suffering of the proprietor.
It's true that Dunc could change his mind and we'd have no recourse. Maybe if we were paying to whore his site we'd have some enforcable contract? I dunno - I'm not a lawyer and I don't even know WHERE it would be enforceable - it's just a possibility.. But as long as Dunc is committed to this democratic vision, I think it's possible.
If, for instance, Calaway went off her rocker and banned the WC, the democratic thing to do would be to un ban the WC and call them in for a no-confidence vote. That would allow Dunc to avoid making a unilateral decision to remove an admin.
Actually, if Dunc goes overboard, I have a theoretical chance of fixing it. The opposite also applies.
-
when there was something major to deal with (atomic fucktard), it was handled on the spot, efficiently, calmly and without anyone dying.
That's not major. That was obvious.
No one's going to die. But, quite simply,
I've said it again and again, there are a
couple of people who absolutely run the
site. They ALLOW us to pretend at a
democracy, but it can't be real.
It's the same with any democracy. People have to believe in it.
-
when there was something major to deal with (atomic fucktard), it was handled on the spot, efficiently, calmly and without anyone dying.
That's not major. That was obvious.
okay for you to say - you weren't the one putting in all the work to deal with it. dunc was.
-
It's the same with any democracy. People have to believe in it.
Yeah, but this is a situation where
there are a couple of people who
are, by themselves, the combined
military and police might. It is more
than simply believing in the democracy,
but also in those very few people. That
no longer sounds like democracy. Not in
the least.
okay for you to say - you weren't the one putting in all the work to deal with it. dunc was.
Not as though I haven't dealt with worse from him.
Yeah, it's a bit of a pain, but not a real threat to the
site. Not to the core values. Couldn't be allowed.
That's all.
-
Ok, for the sake of fairness and honor, when I become admin. I will impose my own code of ethics and morality and ban everybody from the forum and rule in splendid isolation. >:D Just like my hero, Mrs.Mark! :evillaugh: Because I am so moral and moderate that I hold myself up as a beacon of light in a dark world. ::) Just thought you'd like to know what my plans are. But, then again, I am soooooooooo intelligent that you plebians are completely dumbfounded at my superior intellect. :drool: :headslap: :birdpoop:
BTW, I'm being sarcastic! :laugh: :paperbag: :cuckoo: :shamone: :fos:
:LMAO:
You will be awfully lonely.
Just let me know before the mass bannings so that I can throw an exit tantrum. :eyebrows:
ANd please make it a good one, some of these others have been so pedestrian. We want to be amused :ghey: :halitosis:
-
It's the same with any democracy. People have to believe in it.
Yeah, but this is a situation where
there are a couple of people who
are, by themselves, the combined
military and police might. It is more
than simply believing in the democracy,
but also in those very few people. That
no longer sounds like democracy. Not in
the least.
I am one of those people. I haven't done anything to harm this site. The rest is up to you.
-
/loses the will to live...
-
It's the same with any democracy. People have to believe in it.
Yeah, but this is a situation where
there are a couple of people who
are, by themselves, the combined
military and police might. It is more
than simply believing in the democracy,
but also in those very few people. That
no longer sounds like democracy. Not in
the least.
I am one of those people. I haven't done anything to harm this site. The rest is up to you.
we need some complainers. conflict is good for the storyline.
-
To do so after the fact would be REALLY
ugly. But, that's what happens when we
have no rules, and just operate by instinct.
For every rule you add, you lose some of what this site is about.
Yeah, I know. But what you stated about bringing
it to the WP, means that it stands as a bump in
the simulated democracy. If it were to act in a
manner to overturn votes, effectively it's throwing
a coup. Again, I'm not sure that there's anything
which is too big a deal with allowing a 'stolen'
election, such as would happen if a bunch of
new people came in at once. But there can be
no democracy without clear voting rules.
:deadhorse:
Bringing it to the WP - is that a Freudian slip, Fuehrer?!?!?!
:plus: :laugh:
I keep waiting to make that mistake myself.
/loses the will to live...
Nooo! There's things in this life worth living for! Like, umm...
like...
like chocolate shoes!
(http://www.gayleschocolates.com/vproducts/257.6AF9FF67.jpg) (http://www.gayleschocolates.com/catalog/index.asp?cid=10005&id=257)
-
i can live without those particular shoes, cos they're a little pedestrian (oh, how i am laughing) for my tastes. but you did mention chocolate. i shall reconsider.
does this mean PMS Elle has just saved my life? :-*
-
i can live without those particular shoes, cos they're a little pedestrian (oh, how i am laughing) for my tastes. but you did mention chocolate. i shall reconsider.
does this mean PMS Elle has just saved my life? :-*
Click on the picture. The shoes ARE chocolate. :evillaugh:
-
i can live without those particular shoes, cos they're a little pedestrian (oh, how i am laughing) for my tastes. but you did mention chocolate. i shall reconsider.
does this mean PMS Elle has just saved my life? :-*
Click on the picture. The shoes ARE chocolate. :evillaugh:
marry me. marry me now. my soul is yours.
and i didn't know (quote) "Nordstrom's was the place for the shoe-obsessed". i shall have to investigate.
(i am PISSING myself!)
EDIT: they have got to be KIDDING! i've just looked at about 400 pairs of shoes, and there wasn't one pair i'd wear without having to be paid vast sums of money. gruesome. :puke:
-
i can live without those particular shoes, cos they're a little pedestrian (oh, how i am laughing) for my tastes. but you did mention chocolate. i shall reconsider.
does this mean PMS Elle has just saved my life? :-*
Click on the picture. The shoes ARE chocolate. :evillaugh:
marry me. marry me now. my soul is yours.
and i didn't know (quote) "Nordstrom's was the place for the shoe-obsessed". i shall have to investigate.
(i am PISSING myself!)
I thought you'd like that. 8)
-
check out the edit. talk about false advertising. believe me - you do NOT want to know the person who's obsessed with those shoes.
-
Hmm, yes- the shoes at Nordstrom's do seem to be a tich shitty.
-
I don't think that I have ever bought shoes at Nordstrom's for myself, but I have gone there to buy shoes for my daughter. She has bunions so she has to have especially wide shoes. Most stores don't carry them, but Nordstrom's either has them or they will order them in from another store for her at no charge. We don't have to buy the ones that she doesn't like or that don't fit her right. I bought her flower girl dress for her aunt's wedding from there too.
-
when there was something major to deal with (atomic fucktard), it was handled on the spot, efficiently, calmly and without anyone dying.
That's not major. That was obvious.
okay for you to say - you weren't the one putting in all the work to deal with it. dunc was.
Just out of curiosity, will he be able to get around the I.P. ban? He seemed to be able to at WP, although Alex never really answered my question about the effectiveness of an IP ban on a user with a dynamic IP address... ???
-
i missed the atomic kitten thing, what happened? :'(
-
He was using several static IPs simultaneously. He might have another try - if he does I'll just ban whatever he's using again until he gets tired of it. Can't = alexspeak = can't be bothered.
-
static IPs? no idea what that means but thanks for the nutshell.
-
When my turn at Admin comes up, will I have the ability to IP ban??
-
When my turn at Admin comes up, will I have the ability to IP ban??
yes.
-
He was using several static IPs simultaneously. He might have another try - if he does I'll just ban whatever he's using again until he gets tired of it. Can't = alexspeak = can't be bothered.
To be honest, I never knew if he was using a static or a dynamic IP address; however I sort of assumed that it would be dynamic since that's what most home users have. The Boy King couldn't even be arsed to tell me if that assumption was correct (as it turns out, I'm not correct). Thanks for the clarification.
-
i missed the atomic kitten thing, what happened? :'(
All his shit's in the sin bin. He got bored after a few hours and quit, but Dunc IP banned him anyway cos he's a kid. I'm thinking that he got bored cos we didn't start freaking out and we PWNED him. He tried to PWN me by claiming to have a giant dick I couldn't handle, and I asked him for photographic proof of that statement - something I couldn't do as a mod on WP. Shortly after that, he made the statement that he was going to quit spamming us for the day and be back. Apparently he has to spam sites manually because he's not even smart enough to write a decent spam bot... :yawn:
-
static IPs? no idea what that means but thanks for the nutshell.
+
a static IP is a permanent IP address. much easier to trace.
-
static IPs? no idea what that means but thanks for the nutshell.
+
a static IP is a permanent IP address. much easier to trace.
thanks.
-
It's the same with any democracy. People have to believe in it.
Yeah, but this is a situation where
there are a couple of people who
are, by themselves, the combined
military and police might. It is more
than simply believing in the democracy,
but also in those very few people. That
no longer sounds like democracy. Not in
the least.
I am one of those people. I haven't done anything to harm this site. The rest is up to you.
Many dictatorships are founded on good intentions.
But, there is no way around it, on the net. Not
really.
-
It's the same with any democracy. People have to believe in it.
Yeah, but this is a situation where
there are a couple of people who
are, by themselves, the combined
military and police might. It is more
than simply believing in the democracy,
but also in those very few people. That
no longer sounds like democracy. Not in
the least.
I am one of those people. I haven't done anything to harm this site. The rest is up to you.
Many dictatorships are founded on good intentions.
But, there is no way around it, on the net. Not
really.
:finger: Give it a rest, already!
-
don't encourage him, hon. it's only giving him attention. ::)
-
It's the same with any democracy. People have to believe in it.
Yeah, but this is a situation where
there are a couple of people who
are, by themselves, the combined
military and police might. It is more
than simply believing in the democracy,
but also in those very few people. That
no longer sounds like democracy. Not in
the least.
I am one of those people. I haven't done anything to harm this site. The rest is up to you.
Many dictatorships are founded on good intentions.
But, there is no way around it, on the net. Not
really.
:finger: Give it a rest, already!
I had. But your responses ALWAYS seem
to make me wonder if I'm right in doing so.
You act just like a petty fucking dictator,
whenever you're questioned. Makes me
wonder.
A lot more than if you shut your
trap.
-
"and then he said my mum was a corner lady!"
"yeah, but she said i was fat!"
"well, you wouldn't let me play football!"
sound familiar? ::)
-
Just like your usual trite crap.
-
I agree, give it a rest already. If Odeon was all that you feared, OTS and other forums where he moderates or helps out would be toast by now.
-
:finger: Give it a rest, already!
I had. But your responses ALWAYS seem
to make me wonder if I'm right in doing so.
You act just like a petty fucking dictator,
whenever you're questioned. Makes me
wonder.
What's your point? That I'm not allowed to expose your bullshit because I'm one of the few around here with the necessary permissions to ban your sorry arse? Whenever you post about it your mere presence here is enough to pwn you.
A lot more than if you shut your
trap.
But you don't want that. You need the attention.
-
Well if he is running a proxy he can fake his IP to be a fucking IP in China if he wants. That is how people get to play betas for games that are only allowed in certain countries (Cabal for example). That would be his static IP, through a proxy. The ISP itself uses has DHCP which is how it gives you an IP address dynamically (not all ISPs are dynamic). Most ISPs uses BGP as a long distance routing protocol from what I remember. Yeah IP bans are totally useless though if someone knows wtf they are doing. All you can do is ban accounts and IP addresses, but he will come up with new email accounts and IP addresses pretty damn fast if he knows anything. Last forum I got banned from I didn't try to come back after being banned, mostly because my work there was done.
-
What's your point? That I'm not allowed to expose your bullshit because I'm one of the few around here with the necessary permissions to ban your sorry arse? Whenever you post about it your mere presence here is enough to pwn you.
No exposing going on. Telling me to give something
a rest doesn't say a damned thing. When you do answer,
it's usually with little discussion of the issues raised, but
mere "it'll all work out." I really wonder what odd pleasure
you get out of the WC at all. It's neither to be made fun of,
nor to be made effective, from what you've posted.
But you don't want that. You need the attention.
Nah, but it's as good as other attentions.
-
Well if he is running a proxy he can fake his IP to be a fucking IP in China if he wants. That is how people get to play betas for games that are only allowed in certain countries (Cabal for example). That would be his static IP, through a proxy. The ISP itself uses has DHCP which is how it gives you an IP address dynamically (not all ISPs are dynamic). Most ISPs uses BGP as a long distance routing protocol from what I remember. Yeah IP bans are totally useless though if someone knows wtf they are doing. All you can do is ban accounts and IP addresses, but he will come up with new email accounts and IP addresses pretty damn fast if he knows anything. Last forum I got banned from I didn't try to come back after being banned, mostly because my work there was done.
He's just a dumb kid, so I think that you may be giving him too much credit if he's going to that extent.
-
What's your point? That I'm not allowed to expose your bullshit because I'm one of the few around here with the necessary permissions to ban your sorry arse? Whenever you post about it your mere presence here is enough to pwn you.
No exposing going on. Telling me to give something
a rest doesn't say a damned thing. When you do answer,
it's usually with little discussion of the issues raised, but
mere "it'll all work out." I really wonder what odd pleasure
you get out of the WC at all. It's neither to be made fun of,
nor to be made effective, from what you've posted.
But you don't want that. You need the attention.
Nah, but it's as good as other attentions.
Why don't the two of you, BOTH, stick a sock in it, STFU and give it a rest. Odeon, your giving attention to an attention whore/poseur. Colondull, you are the second biggest fake to be here since <a person who's name will not be mentioned by me>. You want to play the effete/degenerate/intellectual, fine, great, whatever spins your wheels, floats your boat, inflates your ego, hardens your dick, pickles your brain, gives you carpal tunnel syndrome. As alex's sock puppet, you need to find a new schtick. This one is getting very old and dull.
-
:clap:
:plus:
-
Well if he is running a proxy he can fake his IP to be a fucking IP in China if he wants. That is how people get to play betas for games that are only allowed in certain countries (Cabal for example). That would be his static IP, through a proxy. The ISP itself uses has DHCP which is how it gives you an IP address dynamically (not all ISPs are dynamic). Most ISPs uses BGP as a long distance routing protocol from what I remember. Yeah IP bans are totally useless though if someone knows wtf they are doing. All you can do is ban accounts and IP addresses, but he will come up with new email accounts and IP addresses pretty damn fast if he knows anything. Last forum I got banned from I didn't try to come back after being banned, mostly because my work there was done.
He's just a dumb kid, so I think that you may be giving him too much credit if he's going to that extent.
Aren't We All dumb kids in the beginning of Adulthood that is the way of it in the end.
-
What's your point? That I'm not allowed to expose your bullshit because I'm one of the few around here with the necessary permissions to ban your sorry arse? Whenever you post about it your mere presence here is enough to pwn you.
No exposing going on. Telling me to give something
a rest doesn't say a damned thing. When you do answer,
it's usually with little discussion of the issues raised, but
mere "it'll all work out." I really wonder what odd pleasure
you get out of the WC at all. It's neither to be made fun of,
nor to be made effective, from what you've posted.
But you don't want that. You need the attention.
Nah, but it's as good as other attentions.
Why don't the two of you, BOTH, stick a sock in it, STFU and give it a rest. Odeon, your giving attention to an attention whore/poseur. Colondull, you are the second biggest fake to be here since <a person who's name will not be mentioned by me>. You want to play the effete/degenerate/intellectual, fine, great, whatever spins your wheels, floats your boat, inflates your ego, hardens your dick, pickles your brain, gives you carpal tunnel syndrome. As alex's sock puppet, you need to find a new schtick. This one is getting very old and dull.
No, there's something that I see as very real
in being willing to explore oneself. Something
which I suppose you're too certain to manage,
in all your 'reality'.
-
:yawn:
-
he's Alex' sockpuppet?
-
Calandale? Your guess is as good as mine.
-
Calandale? Your guess is as good as mine.
I wouldn't go as far as sockpuppet. However, there is some good evidence that he's trying to be a double agent.
-
I suspect he is trying that, yes. Fine, I say. We don't have any rules for him to break here.
-
Why doesnt someone go on WP and do a parody of MrMark?
-
I think MrsMark has done a pretty good job all by itself. :P Still it would be interesting to find out how long it would last and how long before the person doing it got banned. :evillaugh:
-
I think MrsMark has done a pretty good job all by itself. :P Still it would be interesting to find out how long it would last and how long before the person doing it got banned. :evillaugh:
Well you do it at a time when MrMark is offline, and you know he is going to be offline (i.e. when he is asleep). When it gets removed make a new acc the next nite and stick it back up again!
-
I think MrsMark has done a pretty good job all by itself. :P Still it would be interesting to find out how long it would last and how long before the person doing it got banned. :evillaugh:
Well you do it at a time when MrMark is offline, and you know he is going to be offline (i.e. when he is asleep). When it gets removed make a new acc the next nite and stick it back up again!
but mrmark is 40 something. and these actions would be juvenile.
-
I think MrsMark has done a pretty good job all by itself. :P Still it would be interesting to find out how long it would last and how long before the person doing it got banned. :evillaugh:
Well you do it at a time when MrMark is offline, and you know he is going to be offline (i.e. when he is asleep). When it gets removed make a new acc the next nite and stick it back up again!
but mrmark is 40 something. and these actions would be juvenile.
Since when has being juvenile ever stopped you, McJagger?
-
I think MrsMark has done a pretty good job all by itself. :P Still it would be interesting to find out how long it would last and how long before the person doing it got banned. :evillaugh:
Well you do it at a time when MrMark is offline, and you know he is going to be offline (i.e. when he is asleep). When it gets removed make a new acc the next nite and stick it back up again!
but mrmark is 40 something. and these actions would be juvenile.
Since when has being juvenile ever stopped you, McJagger?
never, mrmark.
-
I think MrsMark has done a pretty good job all by itself. :P Still it would be interesting to find out how long it would last and how long before the person doing it got banned. :evillaugh:
Well you do it at a time when MrMark is offline, and you know he is going to be offline (i.e. when he is asleep). When it gets removed make a new acc the next nite and stick it back up again!
but mrmark is 40 something. and these actions would be juvenile.
Since when has being juvenile ever stopped you, McJagger?
never, mrmark.
lol, i am not some reincarnation of mrmark, i assure you. I dont think i could ever write something as gay and pretenious as the crap that he has written at the start of this thread.
-
Calandale? Your guess is as good as mine.
I wouldn't go as far as sockpuppet. However, there is some good evidence that he's trying to be a double agent.
You know, it's funny. I think that the only time that
I provided a link to a thread here, on WP, it began
one of the two PM exchanges which I've had with
Alex.
I felt honor bound to inform SteveK about the
thread bashing him, especially since I was doing
so in it. I was told plainly not to do that again.
-
Did Alex read your PM?
-
Did Alex read your PM?
No. Steve mentioned it in the thread,
and was advised to let Alex know. At least,
that's what I was told. I couldn't be bothered
to look.
If Alex is wading through my PMs, he's in
for a treat. Most of my spam has been though
them, recently. :laugh:
-
Gee, WHAT do you think that my attempt to set
up rules was for? To better protect us.
:indeed:
-
Ah, I recognize a style under a more recent name.
Never understood those who just seem so predisposed against me.