|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jul 27, 2022 12:56:11 GMT -5
That's where I left it and grabbed some 🍿. I've never even read the rules, tbh. I have no job here and have been respectful of the moderators and have given honest feedback, which appeared borderline weaponized. I respect that, knowing how hard it can be to balance between being both a poster/member and a moderator in which one must model the rules one has stated. My last sentence purddy much expresses the crux of seeing the PTV ratio.  But, I do getcha, the board as a whole does not want a bunch of food fighting and endless one-upping. The realization can be a hard STOP, but the expression can take many paths. It's good to have a nice 🔥 where we can all share stories and play with the shadows. Actually, we've only got one rule here. And it always was one rule only, common decency. And our current membership understands that intuitively and acts accordingly. I haven't seen any severe transgressions in a long time. But there have been some peeps in the past to whom common decency must have been a foreign concept. And for those I had to create all these other extra rules, like the no crusading rule. But really, if one understands the concept of common decency, it goes without saying that crusading is a no go. We're good. And thank you. Let's see where it goes. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 28, 2022 7:08:09 GMT -5
Yeah. I now think temp bans are a lot better than permanent bans. For permanent bans the threshold is rather high and as a mod you'll put up with a lot more for a lot longer than you usually would, because a permanent ban is a really a big thing which shouldn't be issued willy-nilly. With a temp ban, you can nip it in the bud rather effectively. A couple of days or a week vacation, isn't such a big deal. So the threshold can be a lot lower. And when someone has been sent on vacation multiple times, there's a learning curve to be expected somewhere. Penalty Box. kant .. stop ... laughing .... please ........ send .......... Gretzke! |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 28, 2022 7:10:43 GMT -5
I don't know what 'break of that momentum' means nor the how. I suspect a surge in their psychic energy (for want of a better word) just chalked up another schism to history. Express the wisdom-love or bring on the Hummarabi hocus-pocus! As a regular member, figuring that out is not your job anyway. As a regular member, your job here is to engage in or create interesting and exciting conversations and have fun with all the other members within the parameters of the existing forum rules. Leave details of moderation to the moderators. We don't need to overthink this. We just need to look at the the poop-to-value ratio (PTV ratio). If it just takes pointing out the rules of engagement again as in the case of Satch, then that's an easy decision. But if it takes an entire new set of infrastructure as would be the case with Figgles, then that's just too much of a hassle. That would be asking too much. I'm certain that CNBC will pick up on this new term you've invented.  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 29, 2022 4:34:29 GMT -5
you can't base that decision on four votes and I've just voted and now it's even. Well, that's what I am saying. Just 4 votes, even if they would all be a 'yes', with an active membership of around 20, that's not enough. Which means things will stay as they are. I would give the poll a week, until Friday maybe. Because not everyone is online everyday. But if Figgles doesn't want to agree to the forum rules, as you seem to be indicating, then we don't have to vote anymore. Because that's not going to happen. This is not a fair pole and you know it. You've loaded the questions to be biased against her. You should have had just two simple questions, do you want her in or out? There are 3 clearly distinguishable options for voting: "Yes", "Doesn't matter" and "No". And I don't know who else has voted "Yes" so far, either Big Pharma or the Zeniac I guess, but so far you are the only one who really really wants to have her back (probably as tag team mate). And I find that lack of enthusiasm among the greater membership interesting and quite telling. If other members would be as excited as you are about her possible return, we would have at least 10 votes already, and all a "Yes", wouldn't you agree? We should have at least a dozen votes, ideally more. Go talk to Figgles and see if she is willing to agree to the rules here, especially the no crusades rule. If not, then we can lock this poll right now. If yes, then we wait until Friday. Okay? All, I promised Satch to wait until Friday, and it's already Friday afternoon here. And as far as I can tell, nothing really has changed. The poll remains inconclusive. I didn't vote for obvious reasons. And only 8 out of roughly 15-20 members that regularly log in here actually bothered to vote - 3 Yes, 3 No and 2 Don't care. Which means there really isn't much interest or enthusiasm around here to have her back. What really stood out though and what makes a decision rather easy is the comments you guys left. They are overwhelmingly negative! Even those few who are in favor of her return are rather tentative about it. I didn't really expect that. Generally, the attitude around here seems to be the more the merrier, but this doesn't seem to include Figgles. And the reason for that, judging by your comments, is that a lot of members here seem to still be rather acutely aware of the kind of energy Figgles brought to this forum last time around and how it shaped general forum discussions and direction, the general impact it had. People here seem to have moved on. There is no real interest in rehashing and/or repeating the past. After all, this wouldn't be the first time Figgles would be granted an amnesty anyway. If I remember correctly, it would probably be the third time. So we leave things as they are. No amnesty this time. Thank you to everyone who voted and/or left comments! It was valuable input. I will close this poll and lock this thread now. R |
|
