NSFW avatars / Censorship / Gripes - Issues!

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:28 pm

Just to balance out Gold hat's extraordinary rant, the link was to a religious video at YouTube. I have not rewritten the laws on free speech, set up my own dictatorship or drowned any puppies, but the day is not yet done, so I have high hopes..... Laughing

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:29 pm

I'm actually very interested now as to what it is specifically that we're doing that has so many people upset. I really, and I'm serious, confused as to why people are so angry. Remembering I was away for 9 months, so I want to know what it is that has changed, and what it is we can do to make it better. I'm still the same person I was when I went on hiatus, and now I'm arguing with people I thought I'd never argue with, and I don't like it very much.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:32 pm

open bitch day? lol

this thread has kept me amused all day

Baiting Guru Joined: 03 May 2007 Posts: 18313

I'm all for intelligent discussion and conversation regarding Eater. However, what we most often see is snarky comments and passive aggressive behavior instead. Crying or Very sad

I agree with NN. Though I haven't been here as long as some of you, I am not clear on what has changed and/or what has been more restricted.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:41 pm

Eight wrote:

I have not rewritten the... drowned any puppies, but the day is not yet done, so I have high hopes..... Laughing

Hahahahah! That about had me spitting water out of my mouth.

And yes, Razor, since your "modding" there has been much less appealing "banter". Very Happy

Oh how I miss your wit. The mod lounge probably has to keep tissues in the mod room from the tears you cause. That is, from laughter, not your rancid odor. Wink

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:44 pm

Ima Baeder wrote:

I haven't been here as long as some of you, I am not clear on what has changed.

Well I can remember new members getting lots of snarky / pissy replies to their questions and I also remember lots of members having *warned* tags.

What I honestly don't remember are lengthy discussions about religion or politics, and to be honest I don't really understand why members would now want to introduce those two most volatile subjects into the forum. Because as I said, I am sure they were not allowed in the "good ol' days"...

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:48 pm

Why doesn't somebody simply just lock this thread because a) It no longer has anything to do with the original post and b) it is causing more friction than me making love to a beautiful woman without any raspberry flavoured KY jelly. Laughing

and c) in the words of my granddad when he burnt the house down boiling an egg to go with his soldiers : "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." Luckily he was having a toilet break in the outside karzy at the time. Aaaah, the good old days where everybody wore rose tinted National heath glasses and had Rickets.

Can I report my own post now please Question

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:48 pm

Personally I think its good having this thread as I'd like to hear what members have to say....although heated, it's good. Those who are feeling that we've gone too PC, please comment and give us examples.
It would be nice if we could stay away from making it personal Wink

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:49 pm

My $0.02
As a relative newbie I have noticed that the Mod team is at the ball now all the time, fast in solving problems, finding treads and also kicking the forum the direction it's going now, a tad more control, less B.S. We might also have more mods than before (2007) so things get sorted out faster.
Yes I run into a problem every now and then, depending my mood and the subject, but on the other hand, this is one of the few forums I return back to all the time, structured (and the mods try to keep it that way) almost anything is discussable unless you get close to the No-No's as given in the general instructions.
Within those lines you can do whatever you want and get responses accordingly. I hope that not all members here agree all the time over everything, I would switch to another forum then.
As far as I know, there can be only one captain per ship and if you can't live with that, jump overboard. Until then, banghead

or

or

All part of the game here(and in life in general) and the main goal is still that the lads suffer and we laugh.

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 3123

I agree with Bill2, some of us don't like the rules, or underhand tactics, but we keep coming back for more Wink

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:58 pm

This thread is beginning to make it's own point. It started off as a polite request to avoid causing offense, got a bit jokey in the middle and is now on the verge of going critical.

A lot of members I regard as friends are posting here and I'd just like to ask they stop and think on before posting anything they might regret.

Once you've posted and it's been read, you can delete it but you can't take it back.

I've seen this happen too many times before to stand by and watch good baiters go or get themselves banned. Evil or Very Mad

*EDIT* I'm so peed off I put the wrong emoticon in.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:03 pm

Okay I add $0.08 and make it a full dime Laughing

If you can't tell your friends how you feel about things, where are your friends then?

Baiting Guru Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 7103 Location: Yes

craig007 wrote:

I agree with Bill2, some of us don't like the rules, or underhand tactics, but we keep coming back for more Wink

See -- when we ask for examples we mean it. When you say things like this, it hurts my little brain b/c I try to think of the 18 different ways to take that phrase and frankly, it's more than I can handle. Whose "underhand tactics" are you referring to? Can you pretty please with sugar on top provide one or more examples? If not, I'd ask that you clarify.

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 3123

See, I would love to. But I can't. Because I couldn't do it without it getting personal.

I'll be as well removing that post if it annoys you so much JM, I'm just stating that's what I've experienced.

Baiting Guru Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 7103 Location: Yes

Well then PM me the information -- even if it's about me -- I'll hold it in confidence. If we can agree to a way to communicate its import, then I will do so.

It's unacceptable to call people out for being "underhanded" without backing it up. Honestly -- it's what drives many of the Mods/Admins nuts. I'm not offended. You have to much worse to offend me.

If you want to be part of the solution (if there's a problem) then please act accordingly. If you want to be part of the problem (if there is one), then carry on as above. One way you could have handled it was to point out an example of something you were unhappy with, but without characterizing it as "underhand" -- that would have achieved the goal of open communication without necessarily starting an attack.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:20 pm

Razor, it's okay, I know exactly what this is about. Very Happy

Pray, do tell, craig. It'll give me a chance to use that immortal line again. Laughing

And just in case you do edit it:

Quote:

I agree with Bill2, some of us don't like the rules, or underhand tactics, but we keep coming back for more Wink

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 3123

Why would I edit it? And why is it an immortal "line"? This isn't a television drama. Yes, I don't like some of the underhand tactics used here (you know what I'm on about), but yes I still remain here to communicate with the majority of members on who I'm on good terms with. I also remain here to bait, and give assistance if I can to other baiters.

*** BANNED *** Joined: 18 Jul 2004 Posts: 2049

Eight wrote:

Gold hat's extraordinary rant

Rant . . . .??????
Again, another example of perception I guess. I for one, have never considered measured, coherent, intellectual discourse as ranting.

The video was intended as a metaphor:

Quote:

a figure of speech in which an expression is used to refer to something that it does not literally denote in order to suggest a similarity

To my mind, anyone who views the video will immediately see the reason for the post. It was intended as a silly and fun statement characterizing the present state of this discussion. You may have missed this interpretation but I had hoped to leave this thread with a light hearted laugh. The fact that it was ‘religious’ only adds to the metaphor. How in hell could anyone take offence at that video – unless you were a member of that inane band.

The result - I never thought I would be told to FO and leave Eater because of posting a video.

Simba wrote:

. . . and to be honest I don't really understand why members would now want to introduce those two most volatile subjects into the forum.

Simba – that was never my point – but as you can see from the discussion in this specific thread, there is a huge disagreement on what is political.
p.s. – love the avatar.

bill2 wrote:

If you can't tell your friends how you feel about things, where are your friends then?

Well put – that really sums it up.

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 3123

GH, what you said there about perception is 100% correct. PM'd.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:35 pm

craig007 wrote:

GH, what you said there about perception is 100% correct. PM'd.

C'mon Craig, the whole purpose of this thread is so that everyone can air their point of view and we can address any genuine issues that may arise from the discussion.

Sending a PM to Gold Hat isn't making a contribution, and some might actually see that action as being a little, underhand.... Laughing

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:38 pm

@craig: Hiding in plain sight in the open-to-anyone Skype chat - yeah, that's really underhand. And reading what people have said in the chat - even sneakier. Laughing

Though you do have a point - 'immortal line' was over-stating it a tad, but I thought it was funny at the time. Laughing

Let me refresh your memory - "it's a private chat with a mod in it, f*ckwit". Laughing

@GH, whichever way you slice it, it's a religious video. I do have the formula somewhere for how many question marks you have to include before a post officially becomes a rant, but I can't lay my hands on it immediately. Will later do? Laughing

Baiting Guru Joined: 08 Jul 2004 Posts: 11857 Location: UK

Gold Hat wrote:

The fact that it was ‘religious’ only adds to the metaphor. How in hell could anyone take offence at that video – unless you were a member of that inane band.

What part of the forum rules about no posting nothing religious do you not understand? I didn't view the video you posted, I can't view them on this computer, I took no offence at it as I didn't see it, all I saw was it was about religion, and the other point is that you were taking the piss by posting it a second time after you saw that Eight had deleted it the first time, I and the other mods have better shit to do than monitor your posts for religion, and politics, which you also posted about earlier in the topic.

Gold Hat wrote:

The result - I never thought I would be told to FO and leave Eater because of posting a video.

I never told you personally to FO or leave eater, so don't try to make it look that way, it was aimed at anyone who doesn't like it here or can't stay within the forum rules, if you want to post religious stuff, go to a religion forum, if you want to post about politics, go to a political forum, just don't post that crap here.

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 3123

Eight, you said it yourself. Hiding

Simba, I PM'd GH because I happen to agree on a point. It isn't underhand at all, I would probably be rebuked for going off topic if I posted it here.

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:57 pm

I said 'hiding in plain sight' and it was an obvious joke. I was clearly there. I was on the list of participants, and there was a post when I joined saying who I was. In any event, if you didn't know the identity of everyone in the chat, maybe you should have been a bit more circumspect about what you said.

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 3123

Obvious joke, eh? I didn't perceive it to be Rolling Eyes

Also, one post is suffice to let everyone know you are there? You think I read the back-dated chat logs too?

What I said was wrongly perceived by you.

You were hardly an active member on the chat, the main purpose was in fact to "spy".

I didn't believe the creators of the chat would let anyone suspicious in, so I and everyone else chose to speak openly.

NSFW avatars / Censorship / Gripes - Issues!	View next topic View previous topic