Thunderdome.

tunbridgewells

Goin unreg for this.

I think the Thunderdome went too far yesterday. There was a character assassination of a poster that involved visiting external sites and postin of personal details. I can understand why the forum exists but there needs to a limit to what can go on in there.

Overheal

Actually there was a time when there was no charter, no line, and i think - no mods. This changed in oh 2008:

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055352351

So to say there should be a limit is would be inaccurate. Safer to suggest the existing line needs to be re-marked

sceptre

I'm assuming you didn't report the post? Please report the post. The two moderators of the Dome are dr.bollocko and tbh (both good folks) and if they get a report they can find the post and take action on it. We all know what the place is for but posting personal details is beyond what the forum is for. Charming as the Dome is, I suspect that the forum mods aren't dropping in anywhere near at all hours of the day (odds are good that they depend heavily on reports for the Thunderdome rather than active reading, it's not an entertaining read after all) so a report of something like this would help.

Or if you drop in a link to the post here, one of us in adminland can look at it but it's easier if you report it - after all, that's why the little warning triangle is there at the bottom-left of any post.:)

The Thunderdome charter includes:

If you feel something has crossed the line,

* Bare in mind the nature of the forum

* Report the post/send a PM or visitor message to me with some info including pointing me to the offending post!

Simples:)

5starpool

Not relevant to the thread at all, but the quote from the charter quote has 'bare' instead of 'bear'. Maybe it doesn't bother most people, but it should. If this was the dome I'd tell what I really think of it, but I don't post in there so I won't start now.

looksee

Charming as the Dome is, I suspect that the forum mods aren't dropping in anywhere near at all hours of the day (odds are good that they depend heavily on reports for the Thunderdome rather than active reading, it's not an entertaining read after all)

I've never bothered looking in the Thunderdome before, so I just had a look and you really are right 'its not an entertaining read after all'. Is there ever any variety in insults, anything original?

Yes, I know, if you don't want to read it etc. It was more by way of research Think I've done enough research now. :rolleyes:

CreepingDeath

tunbridgewells wrote: »

Goin unreg for this.

I think the Thunderdome went too far yesterday. There was a character assassination of a poster that involved visiting external sites and postin of personal details. I can understand why the forum exists but there needs to a limit to what can go on in there.

Ah DjHunter30 / ItsThatManAgain, you posted a pic of Bronte from the private Ranting and Raving forum. Violating her privacy first and possibly the Ranting & Raving charter ?

I think you got a proportional response back.

Slidey

Although the 'dome may seem unpleasant to those who read it, most of us are quite friendly with one and other and take it at face value, a bit of harmless slagging.

If you don't like what you see, PM DrB or teebs and they can resolve that issue fairly quickly.

@Sceptre, I disagree with you, teebs and the doc post there regularly enough and keep an eye on things from what I can see.

4zn76tysfajdxp

sceptre wrote: »

it's not an entertaining read after all

Couldn't disagree more.

tbh

tunbridgewells wrote: »

Goin unreg for this.

I think the Thunderdome went too far yesterday. There was a character assassination of a poster that involved visiting external sites and postin of personal details. I can understand why the forum exists but there needs to a limit to what can go on in there.

ok, I *think* I know what this relates to. Let me set things out as I see it:

1. I preferred the dome when there was no mods, but I understand the reason why mods are needed. However, the role of the mods is not to use our own standards to enforce where something is distasteful, it's merely to implement the charter as written. So, when you say "there needs to be a limit" - there is a limit, albeit a tiny little limit miles off in the distance. If that limit is too little for you, the dome probably isn't for you.
However, unless something expressly breaks the charter, you shouldn't assume that the mods will step in if we think somethings gone too far, because we probably won't.

2. Any publication of private information, such as someones real name, or any posts they've made in either LTI or Personal Issues/Relationship issues will result in a banning. This is a rule we've never (to the best of my knowledge) had to enforce. If the post you are referring to is the same as the one I'm thinking of, it's my understanding that no "secret" information was needed to find it.

3. Nobody who doesn't post in the dome may be referenced in the dome. Therefore OP, if you've never posted in the dome, you don't have to worry. If you are someone who's posted in the dome already and you want to be removed, you can do that by pm'ing me or dr. bollocko and it will happen straight away - we both take that very seriously indeed.

If the post you are talking about is the same post I'm thinking about, the subject of that post never contacted me or (to the best of my knowledge) the doc, so we can only assume that he doesn't have a problem with it.

If the subject of that post does have a problem with it, then he should contact me or the doc and let us know. We can review the post and review the circumstances behind the post to see if maybe the charter needs to be updated.
For example, I'm friends on facebook with a number of the 'dome regulars, but it's always been an unwritten rule that we don't use any of the info from there in the dome. Perhaps it should be unwritten no longer.

finally, I'd remind domers that they shouldn't take it upon themselves to try to, in some way, punish others whom they feel have gone too far. Nothing in that thread is meant to be taken personally or seriously, and no knights in shining armour are needed.

Again, if anyone has a problem with any post, let me or the doc know. The thread and forum are there for the amusement of the users, and if someone is getting grief then we can fix that one way or another.

5starpool

tbh wrote: »

if someone is getting grief then we can fix that one way or another.

lol

sceptre

Slidey wrote: »

@Sceptre, I disagree with you, teebs and the doc post there regularly enough and keep an eye on things from what I can see.

Fair cop. I don't post there and I don't tend to read there and as I said above, they're both good folks and I know they've both got a good interest in the place and I've personally always been happy to leave it to their good judgement so my odds are good comment above probably didn't adequately reflect that, though it was definitely meant to (as well as being inaccurate - I shouldn't assume, apparently it makes an ass out of something:)).

AckwelFoley

Im No fan of the 'dome, howeveri do know that the lads that post there enjoy the slagging, so you need a thick skin to go there, i dont see the entertainment value in it but, others do.

If someone did link to other sites and do as the op suggests i would think that regardles of the rules in the 'dome or lack thereof - this is not tasteful at all, and as suggested should be nipped in the bud, i think that most of the dome users wouldnt condone it and self regulate it before the mods even need to.

So in the words of the 'dome i would say to that member whoever they may be, that did do that to "Cop the **** on and dont be a childish prick"

Whats said and done in the dome - should stay in the dome

Quality

I think the moderators of the dome are doing a great job,,


The get out clause is for those who can't hack it!

And unless you are posting or have posted there recently you cannot be written about!

If your in your in and anything goes! If you can't hack it don't post in it!

Simple as!

L.Jenkins

Quality wrote: »

I think the moderators of the dome are doing a great job,,


The get out clause is for those who can't hack it!

And unless you are posting or have posted there recently you cannot be written about!

If your in your in and anything goes! If you can't hack it don't post in it!

Simple as!

Despite the whole point of TD and who slags who about what. There is a subtle line that some crossed. I'll take a good slagging no bother, but it went a bit too far for my liking thank you very much. On the point of a subtle line, despite what is publicly available relating to certain people, people should use alittle more common sense, tact and think should some things be left alone. Enough said, it's done now.

Slidey

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

Enough said, it's done now.

Yet you feel the need to get the last word in.

The rules are quite clear, nothing from LTI, PI or RI is allowed to be brought into the 'dome. AFAIK there has only been one breach of that since it was brought into play and the user in question was dealt with.

L.Jenkins

So GID isn't a personal issue. Well fcuk me! I didn't think it gave people the right to be dickheads and start posting detailed PERSONAL information. You can have TD Slidey, your well suited to it with that sort of post.

tbh

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

I didn't think it gave people the right to be dickheads .

you have *read* the insult thread, right?

L.Jenkins

I have, but would u take the mick out of someone with a disability openly. Same thing with me. Still pisses me off despite the thread.

tbh

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

I have, but would u take the mick out of someone with a disability openly.

it they posted in the insult thread, then yes. Why wouldn't you?
I mean, look at all the grief slidey gets :pac:

look, I'm not trying to get the last word in or anything, I'm just saying that you weren't singled out especially. If you give it, you have to be able to take it. If you're not comfortable with it, that's cool, but if anyone did a search of your posts in the thread, they may raise an eyebrow at you saying there's a certain line that shouldn't be crossed

Quality

We take the Mick out of "everything"!

I am sorry if it offended you but what do you expect of an insult thread?

There has been far worse said in the dome in the last few years!

There is never gonna be a happy ending!

I suppose it is a place
for the thicker skinned!

Edit.. Meant to add that you were not singled out personally! You were posting in the dome and therefore you are fair game!

CreepingDeath

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

I have, but would u take the mick out of someone with a disability openly.

GID is not a disability, you are physically abled.
If you have psychological issues, then perhaps your decision to voluntarily enter an insult cage fight wasn't a wise one given your public admissions.
You know how we love finding fault with each other in the thread.

Learn from your mistake and move on.
We've no problem with you outside the insult thread.

bronte

Listen, I've been called "hatchet faced h**ker" "talentless" "Hard faced cnut" " casting couch cast off" "Baldilocks" and various lovely things about my lady -parts that I won't repeat. Maybe it's my fairly strange sense of humour, but I find that hilarious.
If for a second I didn't find it hilarious, I'd ask to leave.

Whilst I appreciate you weren't happy regarding your own personal situation being put up for ridicule, I think it was something that could be expected if you post in the insult thread. If I posted in AH tomorrow about a fight with my other half , I'd expect it to find it's way to the dome.
I'd also expect them to take his side because I am a hatchet faced......well you know the rest.

The two moderators of the forum are very forthcoming and take what they do very seriously. I believe one of them offered at one point the other day to remove you if you wanted at anytime.
It comes down to choice, if you feel you're happier and better off out of the thread then so be it.

Nevyn

tbh wrote: »

2. Any publication of private information, such as someones real name, or any posts they've made in either LTI or Personal Issues/Relationship issues will result in a banning. This is a rule we've never (to the best of my knowledge) had to enforce. If the post you are referring to is the same as the one I'm thinking of, it's my understanding that no "secret" information was needed to find it.

Well it maybe that it should be considered adding LGBT and parenting to that list.

tbh

Thaedydal wrote: »

Well it maybe that it should be considered adding LGBT and parenting to that list.

done.

Quality

I think the most important thing to recognise here is that the insults although personal are not made because we dint like a person! I quite like "most" of the domers! Lol

it's just a game! A dirty game that sometimes goes a bit to far but that is with keeping within the rules!

Lmao at bronte - above!

Slidey

tbh wrote: »

done.

This, I feel, is a wrong move.

tbh

Slidey wrote: »

This, I feel, is a wrong move.

I shouldn't have added that in without talking to the doc first but I think the reasons for adding those two forums to the charter are the same for adding the first two. I think we don't want to preclude people from using both, say, the IT and the LGBT forum for very different reasons.

Having said that tho, even tho you can't can't reference the LTI forum, that doesn't stop people slagging me for the reason I post in that forum, if you know what I mean.

Karl Hungus

I was never much for the thunderdome, but frankly, I'm enticed now. I'm gonna give it a go.

CreepingDeath

Thaedydal wrote: »

Well it maybe that it should be considered adding LGBT and parenting to that list.

Well, there goes half our material by the thought police. :rolleyes:

So how does that work ?
We can only make gay jokes if a poster has not posted in LGBT ?
Then we'd have to search for them first.

One delicate soul entered the insult thread, got hurt, threw a hissy fit and now wants the game changed even though he's not playing any more.

That's a bit like him trying a boxing club, getting a black eye and then insisting everyone wear body armour in future even though he's leaving.

Slidey

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Well, there goes half our material by the thought police. :rolleyes:

So how does that work ?
We can only make gay jokes if a poster has not posted in LGBT ?
Then we'd have to search for them first.

One delicate soul entered the insult thread, got hurt, threw a hissy fit and now wants the game changed even though he's not playing any more.

That's a bit like him trying a boxing club, getting a black eye and then insisting everyone wear body armour in future even though he's leaving.

Well put.

Nearly everyone who comes into the 'dome has their sexuality questioned, insults 101.

Nevyn

I never said don't make those sort of comments, it seems that of late people are going digging through people's posts on other forum for material to have a go, personally I think that can be crossing a line and there is a difference from seeing them post in motors and telling them they have a **** car and seeing that they have posting in PI/LTI/Parenting/lgbt and having a go at based on the content there.

Those forums are considered sharing and suportive forums and I do think material from there there should be verboten.

I know what put me of posting in the 'dome would be stuff dragged in from those forums.

If PI and LTI are out of bounds then LGBT and Parenting should be due to the nature and topics of those forums, that would be my reasoning behind it.

I do think that ItsThatManAgain was at a bigger disadvantage then she should have been with posters doing that and honestly the standard in the 'dome must have slipped if ye couldn't think beyond the fact that person was trans. Talk about fish in a barrel,
where is the inventiveness and imagination gone.

tbh

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Well, there goes half our material by the thought police. :rolleyes:

So how does that work ?
We can only make gay jokes if a poster has not posted in LGBT ?
Then we'd have to search for them first.

One delicate soul entered the insult thread, got hurt, threw a hissy fit and now wants the game changed even though he's not playing any more.

That's a bit like him trying a boxing club, getting a black eye and then insisting everyone wear body armour in future even though he's leaving.

no - you can't quote from posts made in either of those forums. Like I said - You all slag my diabetes, but you don't go quoting posts I've made in LTI. This would be the same. If someone posts in, say, Parenting saying they have a disabled child, then you don't use that against them, but I doubt that anyone would anyway. Nothing has changed really.

tbh

Thaedydal wrote: »

I never said don't make those sort of comments, it seems that of late people are going digging through people's posts on other forum for material to have a go, personally I think that can be crossing a line and there is a difference from seeing them post in motors and telling them they have a **** car and seeing that they have posting in PI/LTI/Parenting/lgbt and having a go at based on the content there.

Those forums are considered sharing and suportive forums and I do think material from there there should be verboten.

I know what put me of posting in the 'dome would be stuff dragged in from those forums.

If PI and LTI are out of bounds then LGBT and Parenting should be due to the nature and topics of those forums, that would be my reasoning behind it.

I do think that ItsThatManAgain was at a bigger disadvantage then she should have been with posters doing that and honestly the standard in the 'dome must have slipped if ye couldn't think beyond the fact that person was trans. Talk about fish in a barrel,
where is the inventiveness and imagination gone.

I'm stuck now because although I agree with everything you've said there, I also agree that a poster shouldn't be able to come into a thread and, say, post information about others from certain fora, but hide behind a ruling that states that their particular issue can't be used.

When we remove someone from the dome, we ban discussion of them and we ban them. If you can't be slagged, then you can't slag.

To be honest I'm thinking now that maybe it's better if we leave things the way they were.

I propose to leave the amended charter in place for the time being, but to judge each case on it's merits.

I would also point out that the four forums included all have anonymous posting. I would suggest that if people don't want others to know certain things about them, they should post anonymous until they are ready to accept a bit of static about it.

The case we're discussing is an unusual one and I doubt it'll happen again, but if it does, we'll try to handle it fairly to all concerned - both the injured party and the dome regulars.

Kiera

I dont see how the OP can post a pic of someone from a private forum and then complain when a private pic/info of them has been used. I mean, if you have a public Bebo page then you're fair game?

tbh

Kiera wrote: »

I dont see how the OP can post a pic of someone from a private forum and then complain when a private pic/info of them has been used. I mean, if you have a public Bebo page then you're fair game?

I would agree. If you link your boards profile to your bebo page, I would consider most - not all - but most of the info on that page fair game. No real names tho. And no referencing anyone not in the game.

Nevyn

I think that people always have more then one issue and more then one quirk and thinking the only thing you can slag a trans person over is being trans shows a lack of awareness and imagination and I honestly think the 'dome regs are a talented bunch and the less oblivious burn can be a lot better.

With the inclusion of T in the LGBT forum the site is going to get more T posters and they shouldn't be secluded off to that one forum but I do think it would be bad forum to bring up them being trans to undermine them posting in other forums.

I know the rules in the 'dome are a hell of a lot different then the rest of the site, I read it a lot, cheers me up no end, but there are certain rules and fair enough a person has the right to get out of the kitchen if they can't handle the heat but if your gonna have certain forums ruled out there should be parity.

just my 2cents

tbh

Thaedydal wrote: »

I think that people always have ore then one issue and more then one quirk and thinking the only think you can slag a trans person over is being trans shows a lack of awareness and imagination and I honestly think the 'dome regs are a talented bunch and the less oblivious burn can be a lot better.

With the inclusion of T in the LGBT forum the site is going to get more T posters and they shouldn't be secluded off to that one forum but I do think it would be bad forum to bring up them being trans to undermine them posting in other forums.

I know the rules in the 'dome are a hell of a lot different then the rest of the site, I read it a lot, cheers me up no end, but there are certain rules and fair enough a person has the right to get out of the kitchen if they can't handle the heat but if your gonna have certain forums ruled out there should be parity.

just my 2cents

speaking for myself, I certainly appreciate the spirit of what you're saying and broadly agree.

CreepingDeath

Thaedydal wrote: »

I think that people always have ore then one issue and more then one quirk and thinking the only think you can slag a trans person over is being trans shows a lack of awareness and imagination and I honestly think the 'dome regs are a talented bunch and the less oblivious burn can be a lot better.

Actually, this feedback thread was initially nothing to with the trans issue, if you check the posting times.
It was to do with a bebo profile entry saying he kissed a member of the opposite sex. That was all. It was that innocent.

The trans thing only came to light when this thread was created and I think we all predicted he was going to blow up and got the last few digs in while he called for us to be banned.

L.Jenkins

Quote me post where I state I want people banned. I never even seen the initial post in question until there was a mention of it here.

Kiera

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

Quote me post where I state I want people banned. I never even seen the initial post in question until there was a mention of it here.

So you didnt post a pic in the Dome of someone from a private forum?

L.Jenkins

Yes I did. But I can't remove it now can I?

Kiera

Nope, but the mods can. What made you think that was ok? It was in a private forum!

L.Jenkins

Ignorance I suppose.

Armin_Tamzarian

Load of nonsense IMO.
If you post in the dome then you should expect to have every single one of your boards posts trawled for material as well as any networking sites you're daft enough to link from your boards profile.

P.S. For the record, I'm not a suicide bomber and I've never murdered innocent civilians. :mad:

Bonito

Armin_Tamzarian wrote: »

P.S. For the record, I'm not a suicide bomber and I've never murdered innocent civilians. :mad:

Surrrrre you're not!

What's next, a disclaimer for the 'dome?

"Yes, I understand and agree that my posts may be trawled and used against me in the 'dome. I also give permission that posts I make in LGBT and Parenting may be used in the 'dome. I do not give permission for my posts in LTI to be used against me"

And so on.

If it aint broken....