Change is good

nesf

Penn has joined the mod team. Say hi.

Torakx

Welcome Penn
Its a rough crowd here, keep your hammer with you at all times hehe

Brown Bomber

Nothing personal against Penn but it's a disapointing appointment for me. Especially given the time and effort that's been taken by people to try and figure out ways of moving forward and now we've taken a step back to Penn modding again. Suppose that was all just window dressing. So it's same old same old where you are fair game for abuse for posting conspiracy theories in a forum for conspiracy theories.

hooradiation

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Especially given the time and effort that's been taken by people to try and figure out ways of moving forward and now we've taken a step back to Penn modding again.

Given the utter lack of viable options that those 'efforts' produced, I don't see the problem.

As for Penn - welcome, and I don't know who you pissed off to get this gig, but you might want to stop doing that.

Penn

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Nothing personal against Penn but it's a disapointing appointment for me. Especially given the time and effort that's been taken by people to try and figure out ways of moving forward and now we've taken a step back to Penn modding again. Suppose that was all just window dressing. So it's same old same old where you are fair game for abuse for posting conspiracy theories in a forum for conspiracy theories.

I missed you too.

The long and short of it is; I was wrong. Suggestions I've made recently in the Feedback thread, I was wrong. Over the past few weeks there has been a discussion between mods, cmods and even a few admin about this forum and what needs to be done, based on feedback you all gave in the Feedback thread, and I will quite gladly admit that perhaps due to my history on the forum, I couldn't see the forest for the trees.

You might see my appointment as being a step backwards, but trust me, changes will be made to this forum sooner rather than later. A lot of it in keeping with suggestions from the CT side. I knew some people wouldn't see my return as a good thing, and I can live with that. I'm not asking for people to like me. All I'm asking is for a bit of time for us to implement these changes and see where we stand then.

I can't go into details on what those changes are just yet, as the mods have to finalise the minute details and timeframe. But I'd just ask everyone to afford us a bit of time to set things in motion. The changes aren't going to please everyone (that would be impossible), but we believe we can implement a new revised system to please the core forum base.

GoldCobra

I have no idea what your all on about but Hello Mr. Penn.

Sacksian

Good luck with it - think you were a very fair and active mod in your previous stint.

I've posted this in feedback before, but in the new changes I would love to see

(i) a requirement that any thread started actually involves a conspiracy between two parties (this would keep the off-topic stuff to a minimum and focus the discussion);

(ii) that political or political lobbying threads be moved to the appropriate forums (not liking particular foreign policy does not make it a conspiracy); and

(iii) that, if someone makes a statement of fact, they can be asked to provide evidence to support their belief (otherwise this forum is just an imaginarium).

weisses

Welcome back Penn

I think its good to see a moderator who has experience on this forum ... Going forward from here

seanmacc

Hello Penn! Lets hope the Lizard People don't get to you too

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

I missed you too.

The long and short of it is; I was wrong. Suggestions I've made recently in the Feedback thread, I was wrong. Over the past few weeks there has been a discussion between mods, cmods and even a few admin about this forum and what needs to be done, based on feedback you all gave in the Feedback thread, and I will quite gladly admit that perhaps due to my history on the forum, I couldn't see the forest for the trees.

You might see my appointment as being a step backwards, but trust me, changes will be made to this forum sooner rather than later. A lot of it in keeping with suggestions from the CT side. I knew some people wouldn't see my return as a good thing, and I can live with that. I'm not asking for people to like me. All I'm asking is for a bit of time for us to implement these changes and see where we stand then.

I can't go into details on what those changes are just yet, as the mods have to finalise the minute details and timeframe. But I'd just ask everyone to afford us a bit of time to set things in motion. The changes aren't going to please everyone (that would be impossible), but we believe we can implement a new revised system to please the core forum base.

Penn,

I can't stress this highly enough but my "disapointement", which really would have been better describes as disillusionment is not directed at you. I appreciate you being will to volunteer your time, something that I wouldn't do.

You didn't appoint yourself.

My disillusionment stems from the fact that the forum is rotting from the inside. It is completely dysfunctional and needs a revamp from the bottom up. I have no doubt you are a more than capable nuts n bolts type mod who with the best of intentions but I see your appointment as a an appointment for the the continuation of the status-quo which is highly unpleasant if you are posting from the "CT" perspective.

I see your appointment as an indication, though I would love to be proven wrong that the higher-ups don't care about this forum. That conspiracy theories are deserving of ridicule and the people there can like it or lump it.

Think about it... the supposed animosity is developed from the polar opposite views of "Cters" and "skeptics" and what do they do? Appoint a mod wh doesn't post in the forum and whose username is based on a prominent skeptic.

Hoop66

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I see your appointment as an indication, though I would love to be proven wrong that the higher-ups don't care about this forum.
...
whose username is based on a prominent skeptic.

It's a conspiracy.

weisses

I suggest Penn should rename himself to Icke

Penn

Unfortunately my Internet access is down at the minute so only have mobile, so I'll be brief, Brown Bomber.

This forum does have the support of the higher ups. Like I said, there was a discussion with all the CMods and some of the Admin, and the changes which will be made are geared towards exactly what you said; changing the forum from the ground up. We're not just going to say "Hey, less personal abuse please" and think the forum will suddenly become civil. Certain parts of the whole ethos of the forum will be changed, largely in line with the feedback you among others gave in the Feedback thread. And there will be a much greater crackdown on rule breaking than there was before.

Again, until the mods sort out the exact plan, I'm not going to give any more detail than that. But all we're asking right now is that people wait until they know what the proposed plans are before saying they probably won't work. And even with that, the success of some of the changes depends on the enforcement of them at mod level, so we know that while some changes might not sound like they'll have an effect, they will if we crack down on them enough.

Brown Bomber

Hoop66 wrote: »

It's a conspiracy.

Thank you for highlighting exactly the kind of patronising attitude and comment that is the root of the problem here.

And not for the first time.

Hoop66 wrote: »

You're way too reasonable and well-informed for the CT forum.

Whatever changes do happen going forward the key one is to stop people like you making disparaging comments such as these which are completely unnecessary and currently commonplace and are central to the ceaseless cycle of animosity.

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

Unfortunately my Internet access is down at the minute so only have mobile, so I'll be brief, Brown Bomber.

This forum does have the support of the higher ups. Like I said, there was a discussion with all the CMods and some of the Admin, and the changes which will be made are geared towards exactly what you said; changing the forum from the ground up. We're not just going to say "Hey, less personal abuse please" and think the forum will suddenly become civil. Certain parts of the whole ethos of the forum will be changed, largely in line with the feedback you among others gave in the Feedback thread. And there will be a much greater crackdown on rule breaking than there was before.

Again, until the mods sort out the exact plan, I'm not going to give any more detail than that. But all we're asking right now is that people wait until they know what the proposed plans are before saying they probably won't work. And even with that, the success of some of the changes depends on the enforcement of them at mod level, so we know that while some changes might not sound like they'll have an effect, they will if we crack down on them enough.

OK. Welcome back and good luck.

Brown Bomber

Sacksian wrote: »

(i) a requirement that any thread started actually involves a conspiracy between two parties (this would keep the off-topic stuff to a minimum and focus the discussion);

Couldn't disagree more. This is already part of the problem. It creates a humorless environment where you are either entrenched in Red team or Blue Team. You nail your colours to the mast in the OP and then all the squabbling happens.

Sacksian wrote: »

(ii) that political or political lobbying threads be moved to the appropriate forums (not liking particular foreign policy does not make it a conspiracy); and

There is a failure on your part to grasp that "conspiracy theory" isn't to be taken literally. It is a catch all term for "wacky" or non-mainstream beliefs relating to the world. This covers historical, current and predicted future events.

Limiting the discussion would be pointless.

Sacksian wrote: »

(iii) that, if someone makes a statement of fact, they can be asked to provide evidence to support their belief (otherwise this forum is just an imaginarium).

I completely agree with this. On the grounds that any questions are asked politely and respectfully.

It also needs to be pointed out here that there is an imbalance in terms of those who will ask questions and those who be expected to answer.

For example, how many threads have you personally started?
How many threads have so-called "skeptics"started?
There is no obligation to provided any counter-argument therefore there is mostly only going to be one "side "expected to put in any effort regarding "evidence"

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I completely agree with this. On the grounds that any questions are asked politely and respectfully.

BB, again your complaints are completely hollow and hypocritical.
Never mind you completely ignore and condone disrespectful and rude posting as long as it's from a conspiracy theorist, you engage in it yourself.
Minutes after you post this, you demand some one back up their points like this:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83583168&postcount=40

Would you accept this if some one asked you or another conspiracy theorist like that or would that be another example of the problem you pretend to be worried about?

Brown Bomber

????

"like this" meaning what exactly?

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber wrote: »

????

"like this" meaning what exactly?

Posting:

a) source?
b) so?

As a demand for evidence.
Had I done that you'd be using it as an example of the problem effecting the forum.
But because you are doing it it's acceptable.

And this is just a recent example of the disrepectful posting you engage in or have no problems with because of who posts it.

Penn

Knock it off, guys. You're making it personal, and there's simply no need for it when things were being talked about in general terms.

This line of conversation ends here. The feedback has been noted and will be taken into consideration.

gnfnrhead

Penn, you poor fecker, I dont know what you did to deserve this punishment! :pac:

Good luck

Hoop66

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Thank you for highlighting exactly the kind of patronising attitude and comment that is the root of the problem here.

And not for the first time.



Whatever changes do happen going forward the key one is to stop people like you making disparaging comments such as these which are completely unnecessary and currently commonplace and are central to the ceaseless cycle of animosity.

Over-sensitive much? It was a joke.

I'm perfectly happy to debate reasonably when there is something to debate. This thread is not that place.