My signature.

Jaeger

Was removed sometime between yesterday and today.

Sig rules say that a signature has to be 300 * 125 and 20k at most.

Mine was removed because it's 400 * 50. It's 8k. A genuine reason for sig removal would be something like it being too large. In this case it's tiny. It's even less area than the signature image limit.

300 *125 = 37,500
400 * 50 = 20,000

The only reason it seems to have been removed is because of the width, which is not a valid reason. If I put 100 pixels worth of spaces before a 300 pixel sig...would it be banned? Hardly.


I'd like permission to put my signature back on and the promise that it won't be removed again. Failing that, may I have a genuine technical reason as to it's removal? Preferably not from some jumped up mod with a nazi-like penchant for unnecessary displays of rule enforcement either

DapperGent

Woe is you.

garthv

dont mess with the powers that be,you'll get burned.

seamus

Jaeger wrote:

The only reason it seems to have been removed is because of the width, which is not a valid reason.

For images in signatures: 1 image up to 300 pixels wide, 125 pixels tall and 20k in size. No animated images are allowed.

Sounds valid to me.

I'd like .... the promise that it won't be removed again.

ROFL. Ah you're priceless.

We'll let the admins decide what they want to do of course.

Beruthiel

Jaeger wrote:

I'd like permission to put my signature back on and the promise that it won't be removed again. Failing that, may I have a genuine technical reason as to it's removal? Preferably not from some jumped up mod with a nazi-like penchant for unnecessary displays of rule enforcement either

LOL
I think he's talking to you Ecksor...

Jaeger
you're either very brave
or
very stupid

kaimera

I'd say the latter Beruthiel

BuffyBot

I'm voting option number two also!

DeVore

as far as sig dimensions go we arent talking area (because then some smart arsed clever clogs would be here saying "my 1pixel x 5000pixel sig was deleted"). Those width and height dimensions are independant of each other.

Oh and Mods cant delete sigs, only admins can (or more likely the admin script we run occasionally to automate the task).

DeV.

Cloud

I removed your signature with the automatic script. Permission to replace your signature is denied. I'm sorry for you that it wasn't some jumped up mod who did it, as you may have had some hope of appeal in that case.

amp

Jaeger wrote:

Was removed sometime between yesterday and today.

Sig rules say that a signature has to be 300 * 125 and 20k at most.

Mine was removed because it's 400 * 50. It's 8k. A genuine reason for sig removal would be something like it being too large. In this case it's tiny. It's even less area than the signature image limit.

300 *125 = 37,500
400 * 50 = 20,000

The only reason it seems to have been removed is because of the width, which is not a valid reason.

Well in your world it's not valid. Welcome to Boards.ie!

If I put 100 pixels worth of spaces before a 300 pixel sig...would it be banned? Hardly.

One can but dream. Oh you meant the signature...

I'd like permission to put my signature back on and the promise that it won't be removed again.

Hahahahahahahaha. Would you like cake with that?

Failing that, may I have a genuine technical reason as to it's removal?

Your signature was previously extensively capacious.

Preferably not from some jumped up mod with a nazi-like penchant for unnecessary displays of rule enforcement either

Oh alright then. Spoilsport. Thanks for being this weeks self-righteous indignant newbie!

koneko

*ding ding ding*

I DEMAND SERVICE!

SERVE ME NOW, PEASANTS!



You get the point, Jaeger. You act rude, you get rude in return. You know that's not the way to get what you want, so I hope you learnt a valuable lesson today.

SantaHoe

-->insert sarcastic remark here<--

God, I'd hate to be a newbie with a question around here these days.
It's really dissapointing to see so many "well boo fúcking hoo" responses on this board in the past while... let people give their feedback without being a tosser about it.
In response to Jaeger, I'd say the technical justification for such a width limit is to stop the page becoming too wide at lower resolutions and causing an ugly horisontal scroll bar... which, when text is wrapped within a cell like it is here, means people have to scroll sideways to read whole posts.
I suppose the admins just chose a max size limit that they thought was appropriate based on the upper limit of what's considered so-big-its-ugly.

If you're feeling cheeky, you could always do what a lot of other people here do, and have 2 sig images... then you could chop your 400px wide image into two 200px wide images and insert them both side by side *

* Possible ban/wrist-slap as a result.

koneko

SantaHoe, I'll quote my post for you:

"You act rude, you get rude in return. You know that's not the way to get what you want"

If he'd asked his question like a normal person no one would have responded that way. He CHOSE to go on the offensive in his very first post. Besides, he's not a newbie.

SantaHoe

107 posts, I'd call that newbie regardless of reg date.
I didn't think his post was at all offensive.
The only thing that might have been even mildly offensive to anyone was the last sentence, and even that had a smiley on it.
The truth here is that there are people who just love showing off how much of a sarcastic arse they can be to people who aren't in with the mega e-cool boards krew.
If a more well known poster made that exact post, nobody would respond like they have here.
As for teaching someone a lesson, that's such crap... the only lesson here is that if you're not well known and don't phrase your feedback very carefully, you'll get ganged up on by people with nothing to add to the thread.
If I was Jaeger I wouldn't stick around boards having seen this... you might say "well nobodys loss", which sounds just about typical.

spongebob

SantaHoe wrote:

-->insert sarcastic remark here<--

God, I'd hate to be a newbie with a question around here these days.
It's really dissapointing to see so many "well boo fúcking hoo" responses on this board in the past while... let people give their feedback without being a tosser about it.

I totally agree SantaHoe. Looking up the thread kinda shows what is wrong around here.

1. User does a bit of a 'fight the power' routine .

2. Mods start to contribute illiterate one liners.

3. Admins contribute perfectly literate answers.

4. Mods continue to contribute illiterate one liners.

5. User contributes perfectly literate answer that a Mod should/coulda stepped in with .

It probably is not just me but in my opinion.

a) The Mods are getting worse recently ....collectively .
b) There is a culture of superciliouslessness amongst the mods. They are kinda like a series of neighbourhood terriers once one of them goes off they all do. Arf, Arf Arf , Arf Arf Arf.
c) None of the mods stepped in to clarify sig policy , thats sOOOOOO helpful for the Admins I should think that they can fall back on the Mods to explain things for them and that teh Mods seem to step in and clarify things all the time.

Anyway , I asked for my username to be changed last week and I am probably out of here permanently until something is done about the >Overall< mod situation , I find it pretty intolerable nowadays and it is actually getting worse all the time. Individual bBoards are fine but the collective centre has evaporated. .

I feel sorry for the Admins so I do

%^*(

koneko

Some people may have a tendency to jump down people's throats, but I still think that if you want something done or you're asking a question, you don't want to get on people's bad sides by being a dick about it. It's the same for everything in life. If you walk into a shop, and want serving, you don't start off on a tyrade before someone has even spoken to you about whatever-it-is-you're-asking.

BTW, don't take this as an attack (that's definitely not how I intend it anyway!), but you obviously have a dislike for boards.ie, why spend time here? I've been to plenty of boards I don't like, but I just don't go back.

I know someone's just going to poke holes in my posts, or insult me, or call me a stupid mod or whatever, despite the fact I haven't made any lame comments, and have only told the OP that he was going about things the wrong way.

DeVore

I do agree with your post alkjdflkajf and sometimes I do wish people were a little less hasty in replies here but you have to understand a few things.

1. If you have to deal with stupid crass comments all day, eventually you get cynical and many of the mods have had to deal with it for years.

2. I dont see why mod replies are any different to regular user replies here, this one forum is the only place I consider all posters equal. This is adminland.

3. The admins give reasonable answers as you noted, ok some of the regulars are a bit rough with their replies but to be fair its kinda like Koneko said, if you walk in and are rude, you get met with a quantum jump in "rude" right back atcha. Imagine walking into a pub and making demands on the barman in a rude tone, one of the regulars at the bar might well decide to make it their business... neh?

DeV.

SantaHoe

koneko wrote:

I still think that if you want something done or you're asking a question, you don't want to get on people's bad sides by being a dick about it.

Of course, but there's a difference between someone who's slightly frustrated about a question and having that show through in his phrasing of a post, and someone who's being an ignorant dick.
Is it a case of being way over-sensitive? or do people just look for any excuse to mouth off at an unknown poster?

I've been to plenty of boards I don't like, but I just don't go back.

And what's not to like about being ganged up on?
What ever happened to rising above it, and showing people what a friendly place boards is?
Do you ever look at posters who've been here a year or more, then suddenly fly off the handle and get themselves banned? ... ever try looking in their profile and going back over their old posts... ever wonder what made them turn?

koneko wrote:

you obviously have a dislike for boards.ie, why spend time here?

Was this aimed at me or alkjdflkajf?
I don't dislike boards.ie, just certain posts at certain times by certain people.
How this amounts to a general disliking of boards.ie is beyond me.
My impression of alkjdflkajf's post is that he likes boards but not the mods.

seamus

koneko wrote:

Besides, he's not a newbie.

Sin é.

seamus

alkjdflkajf wrote:

c) None of the mods stepped in to clarify sig policy , thats sOOOOOO helpful for the Admins I should think that they can fall back on the Mods to explain things for them and that teh Mods seem to step in and clarify things all the time.

While I agree with your post, people also have a tendency to see a mod posting, see a little sarcasm and write the whole post off, without reading it. You'll find that I quoted the exact sig rule, which should have clarified it.

meditraitor

1. If you have to deal with stupid crass comments all day, eventually you get cynical and many of the mods have had to deal with it for years.

Well if this is the case maybe they should be put out to pasture before the cynicism sets in, bring in the new

2. I dont see why mod replies are any different to regular user replies here, this one forum is the only place I consider all posters equal. This is adminland.

Reg users would be unkindly slapped on the wrist in full view of everyone if they did such,, u know

3. The admins give reasonable answers as you noted, ok some of the regulars are a bit rough with their replies but to be fair its kinda like Koneko said, if you walk in and are rude, you get met with a quantum jump in "rude" right back atcha. Imagine walking into a pub and making demands on the barman in a rude tone, one of the regulars at the bar might well decide to make it their business... neh?

God bless admins, this aint no pub

DeV.[/QUOTE]

DapperGent

SantaHoe wrote:

God, I'd hate to be a newbie with a question around here these days.
It's really dissapointing to see so many "well boo fúcking hoo" responses on this board in the past while... let people give their feedback without being a tosser about it.

Agreed honestly.

Though I think if someone is asking for a favour or information or a justification there is no reason they can't be polite about it. I didn't view the the original post as polite and I also thought it was pretty whiny. So while I was being sarcastic it was honest sarcasm and not for effect.

You're right there are people who wander around boards in a boards krew, all the homies in my clique, drive by sarcasm sort of way. I would like to think I'm not one of them.

SantaHoe

seamus wrote:

Besides, he's not a newbie.

Sin é.

Alright then, by UBB standards he's a Crazy Poster - like there's a huge difference considering the people he's being flamed by.

people also have a tendency to see a mod posting, see a little sarcasm and write the whole post off, without reading it.

Knowing this, why would someone include sarcasm in the post at all?

spongebob

seamus wrote:

While I agree with your post, people also have a tendency to see a mod posting, see a little sarcasm and write the whole post off, without reading it. You'll find that I quoted the exact sig rule, which should have clarified it.

THis may be one of thos particular/general arguments but this Board is RIDDLED with examples where /user/noob(god bless its ickle socks)/trollish person starts something.

In no time at all the arf arf , arf , arf craps starts, usually from Mods for some really inexplicable reason .

Finally an admins steams in and EXPLAINS policy.

Have the Mods completely lost sight of the collective centre here. Do the Admins have to explain EVERYTHING when an experienced Mod could/should do it. ?

This is what disappoints me. There appears to be a growing gap between admins and mods , largely noticeable in terms of ability and willingness to explain. 2 or 3 years ago there woulda been a queue of literate answers to Jaegers original post. Nowadays all you get is arf arf from those who DO KNOW better. It looks like a meaningless txt conversation , not a discussion.

It may be that the mods are disenfranchised from collective discussions of where boards 'goes' or something, I simply don't know . That could explain the arf arf tendency in here . This is not an argument for democracy but an argument for collective responsibility of some sort , once one is a Mod they buy into the collective whole of Boards and should represent themselves accordingly in the central Boards. Keep the arf arf for the Beers Board.

Anyway I think I cannot Really tell you how to fix what I think is wrong and will probably vote with my feet.

*&((*%

Sangre

Half the posts of feedback are a pissing contest with attempts to be the most sarky or cutting. It gets old, fast. My own personal pet peeve is people pointing out 'noobie indignation' and 'fight the power'
I'd agree with Santahoe except this thread isn't the worst of them, I would have dismissed the user as too abrupt and not bothered posting. Tbh, this thread would have been better off in Help where only admins can reply.

koneko

Mods are only mods on the boards they moderate for. On other boards they're just users. A lot of old-schoolers/regulars happen to be mods aswell.

spongebob

koneko wrote:

Mods are only mods on the boards they moderate for.

I think you are very wrong there Koneko . Mods also have a collective/individual duty to step in and to help the overall Administration of Boards . Boards is busier than it ever was nowadays.

I see a lot less of that collegiality and a lot more of the arf arf tendency nowadays. This is partially the Admins fault and will result in lots of 'work' getting thrown onto the Admins as a consequence which is of course ultimately 'their' fault.

M

koneko

Mods also have a collective/individual duty to step in and to help the overall Administration of Boards

That's the way you view it and it's your opinion (so I'm not wrong), but mods have no power outside their own boards. If they want to answer a question, or give advice, they can, but outside those boards they're pretty much just users.

seamus

alkjdflkajf wrote:

THis may be one of thos particular/general arguments but this Board is RIDDLED with examples where /user/noob(god bless its ickle socks)/trollish person starts something.

In no time at all the arf arf , arf , arf craps starts, usually from Mods for some really inexplicable reason .

Finally an admins steams in and EXPLAINS policy.

Have the Mods completely lost sight of the collective centre here. Do the Admins have to explain EVERYTHING when an experienced Mod could/should do it. ?

OK. The actual issue in this case was the poster's tone. If he had asked nicely, I would have replied nicely (I'm assuming your post is aimed mostly at myself, Beruthial and pam). Instead he asked in an abrupt and demanding manner, and I/we replied in a similar abrupt manner. I learned a while back that there's no point in giving nice replies to abrupt people because it won't make them change their tone, so why bother wasting much more than 30 seconds of my time with a shiny happy, holding-their-hand reply? They won't thank me, and their next thread will be similarly grating.

Why bother replying then? Well, I did answer his question. He said it wasn't breaking sig rules, I demonstrated otherwise.

This is what disappoints me. There appears to be a growing gap between admins and mods , largely noticeable in terms of ability and willingness to explain. 2 or 3 years ago there woulda been a queue of literate answers to Jaegers original post. Nowadays all you get is arf arf from those who DO KNOW better. It looks like a meaningless txt conversation , not a discussion.

Again, 2 or 3 years ago, such a "GIVE ME SERVICE PEASANTS" type of post, would have in fact received a much harsher reception, but from fewer people. That's the difference.
Remember also, that it's the admins who make policy. While mods can quote policy, it's only admins who can give the authoritative answer of *why* it's policy.

It may be that the mods are disenfranchised from collective discussions of where boards 'goes' or something, I simply don't know . That could explain the arf arf tendency in here . This is not an argument for democracy but an argument for collective responsibility of some sort , once one is a Mod they buy into the collective whole of Boards and should represent themselves accordingly in the central Boards. Keep the arf arf for the Beers Board.

Anyway I think I cannot Really tell you how to fix what I think is wrong and will probably vote with my feet.

*&((*%

Boards policy has always been that mods are normal users outside of their own boards. To decide that outside of their own boards, moderators must conduct themselves in a special fashion, completely negates the idea of all posters being equal, and excludes moderators from participating in the same fashion that made them stay with boards in the first place.

You'll find that long-time posters who aren't mods will reply with the same attitude, the only conundrum being that most long-time posters *are* mods, which is why it appears that only mods take such an abrasive attitude.

Your points are noted though, and I'll keep them in mind.

Sangre

Its true, 2 or 3 years ago a post like that would have been utterly, utterly devastated in a no doubt amusing fashion which usually resulted in abrupt people never posting again.

On the whole mod issue, I think it can be confusing to most users as they are appear to be mods everywhere and hence have special powers and responsibilities so they are often horrified when a mod doesnt act like he thinks he should have acted. Preferably there should be some way to only see a mod tag on the actual board in question.

Hmm, I wonder who is the oldest poster who has never been modded, providing they still post somewhat...

spongebob

seamus wrote:

Boards policy has always been that mods are normal users outside of their own boards. To decide that outside of their own boards, moderators must conduct themselves in a special fashion, completely negates the idea of all posters being equal, and excludes moderators from participating in the same fashion that made them stay with boards in the first place.

If one were to systematically flush the Trolls out of the PI Board then a lot of Mods would have nowhere to go late at night. so I am most certainly not advocating that Mods ' behave accordingly ' at all times everywhere.

That point would apply in the System dropdown though !

M

CuLT

Sangre wrote:

Its true, 2 or 3 years ago a post like that would have been utterly, utterly devastated in a no doubt amusing fashion which usually resulted in abrupt people never posting again.

Indeed, the very curbing of such cutting and devastating replies was the reason for "The Grand Exodus" about a year ago iirc.

Hmm, I wonder who is the oldest poster who has never been modded, providing they still post somewhat...

I think it's TwoShedsJackson; that's just a reasonably-educated guess though.

amp

SantaHoe wrote:

The truth here is that there are people who just love showing off how much of a sarcastic arse they can be to people who aren't in with the mega e-cool boards krew.

And the truth here is that there's no such thing as the mega e-cool boards krew. At least not until we get the forum set up and the signature images designed.

I didn't read the rest of your post because I've read it before. It's the aul protect the newbie in the name of the Fight the Power blahblahblah. GET A NEW RECORD PAL!

kaimera

I dont see what the problem is ::

original poster stated in first post s/he had read the sig rules and knew what they were, knew the sig didn't conform and yet STILL wanted it put back up WITH a promise it wouldn't be taken down.

come off it fs.

SantaHoe

Yeah you've got my number there alright, I just love rebelling against the immense power that an internet bulletin board moderator weilds :rolleyes:

pam wrote:

It's the aul protect the newbie in the name of the Fight the Power blahblahblah.

Sangre wrote:

Half the posts of feedback are a pissing contest with attempts to be the most sarky or cutting. It gets old, fast. My own personal pet peeve is people pointing out 'noobie indignation' and 'fight the power'.

Getting predictable in your old age Amp, maybe I'm not the one who needs a new record eh?

Cactus Col

seamus wrote:

Boards policy has always been that mods are normal users outside of their own boards. To decide that outside of their own boards, moderators must conduct themselves in a special fashion, completely negates the idea of all posters being equal, and excludes moderators from participating in the same fashion that made them stay with boards in the first place.

Not all the powers that be agree with you there.

CLOUD wrote:

It's quite simple. Moderators have no rules, but you, the user, must follow these ones.

Zeroth Law:
A user may not annoy the boards.ie community, or, through inaction, allow the boards.ie community to become unhappy.

First Law:
A user may not annoy a moderator, or, through inaction, allow a moderator to become unhappy, unless this would violate the Zeroth Law of boards.ie.

Second Law:
A user must obey orders given it by moderators, except where such orders would conflict with the Zeroth or First Law.

Third Law:
A user must protect its own wellbeing as long as such protection does not conflict with the Zeroth, First, or Second Law.

Anyway ... the original question didn't seem particularily impolite when I read it. Seemed s/he was just looking for confirmation on why the sig had been removed.

seamus

Cactus Col wrote:

Not all the powers that be agree with you there.

Hopefully you quote Cloud in jest.

Anyway ... the original question didn't seem particularily impolite when I read it. Seemed s/he was just looking for confirmation on why the sig had been removed.

It's in the final two paragraphs. Guess it could depend on how one reads it.

Stabshauptmann

kaimera wrote:

I dont see what the problem is ::

original poster stated in first post s/he had read the sig rules and knew what they were, knew the sig didn't conform and yet STILL wanted it put back up WITH a promise it wouldn't be taken down.

come off it fs.

The poster didnt understand the rule, tbh (hangs head) the ans didnt come to me for a while.
There was logic to the post albeit a little frustrated -- there was no reason to flame him/her

seamus: your quoteing the rule wasnt in any way helpful since the rule was known just not understood

And id say Jaeger a noob, not just cos of the 100 posts, cos of the way he used smilies and the way he spoiled his chances by flameing.

Ive few posts but wouldnt consider myself a noob, but then again Ive never been good at self deprecation*






*or spelling

oscarBravo

Necromancer wrote:

Ive never been good at self deprecation

spongebob

So far I am really Verily VERY Vurry impressed by the overall quality of the posts coming in from Mods on the Collective Responsibility issue I mentioned earlier.

Do keep those considered responses flooding in guys !

%^T))(*&%

Cactus Col

seamus wrote:

Hopefully you quote Cloud in jest.

Well yes and no, the main reason for putting Cloud's quote in there was to show how people would rather be clever, than give a proper answer (don't mean to say that this is Cloud in particular, but rather it's common among most of the moderators / administrators). I asked a question about moderators having rules, which wasn't answered until the second page of replies. Over 10 different moderators / administrators put in replies before Devore actually gave a proper answer.


On the Newbie board a question was asked about how to become a moderator, where, despite having replies from 5 different moderators, a proper answer has not been given.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=214995

seamus wrote:

It's in the final two paragraphs. Guess it could depend on how one reads it.

Thats true, I would have taken it as a joke (which I'd think that Jaeger meant it as). But I don't think that is reason enough for the question to be ignored as much as it was.

seamus

Necromancer wrote:

The poster didnt understand the rule, tbh (hangs head) the ans didnt come to me for a while.
There was logic to the post albeit a little frustrated -- there was no reason to flame him/her

seamus: your quoteing the rule wasnt in any way helpful since the rule was known just not understood

That's not the way I read it at all.

seamus

Cactus Col wrote:

Well yes and no, the main reason for putting Cloud's quote in there was to show how people would rather be clever, than give a correct answer (don't mean to say that this is Cloud in particular, but rather it's common among most of the moderators / administrators). I asked a question about moderators having rules, which wasn't answered until the second page of replies. Over 10 different moderators / administrators put in replies before Devore actually gave a proper answer.

This is where policy needs to be set. Moderators are the biggest spammers of the lot. I haven't seen a thread on the Mod board in the last 2 months that *hasn't* veered wildly OT from the second post.

The Help board is the place where questions, even ones such as yours about Mod rules, need to be asked. True, the S:N ratio on this board has gone up recently, but that's to be expected. Iirc, the actual purpose of the help board was to allow an admin-user interaction where no-one else could butt in.

Is it user error for not posting on the Help board though?

Gordon

Off-topicness leads to what has transpired here in my mind. The way to curb this is to make posts more valuable. The way to do this is to crack down on posts that are contrary to that. The way to do this is to ban.

Mods do not get banned enough from certain boards for going off topic. The main board is this board. In fact, if a heavier hand was applied on Feedback it would help with a great deal of OT S:N. However, if you think that S:N is bad here, you should see the Mod board.

Personally I don't mind off-topicness but I don't like it on PI because I mod PI and it is more often than not a hindrance to the forum.

So basically what I'm saying is - it's the Admins fault*

*awaiting a ban from ecksor promptly...

Cactus Col

seamus wrote:

This is where policy needs to be set. Moderators are the biggest spammers of the lot. I haven't seen a thread on the Mod board in the last 2 months that *hasn't* veered wildly OT from the second post.

The Help board is the place where questions, even ones such as yours about Mod rules, need to be asked. True, the S:N ratio on this board has gone up recently, but that's to be expected. Iirc, the actual purpose of the help board was to allow an admin-user interaction where no-one else could butt in.

Is it user error for not posting on the Help board though?

I was originally afraid I might be putting my question in the wrong board, however, after reading the other threads here I thought it fit in as well as anywhere. (I assumed it would have been moved or deleted by administrator if it didn't belong).

amp

SantaHoe wrote:

Yeah you've got my number there alright, I just love rebelling against the immense power that an internet bulletin board moderator weilds :rolleyes:


Getting predictable in your old age Amp, maybe I'm not the one who needs a new record eh?

Guess so, maybe that's because the same boring topics keep coming getting brought up by outraged newbs demanding silly things like "rights" and "customer satisfaction".

Maybe if you and others didn't keep fighting for their ignorant cause things would get a little less predictable around here.

StupidLikeAFox

pam wrote:

Maybe if you and others didn't keep fighting for their ignorant cause things would get a little less predictable around here.

Now how much more cocky can ya get?

To the gentleman who put forward the thing that mods have no power outside their own board, this is true, they have no power, but because their names are in bold/italics or the diff stars or whatever, they appear to be a tier up from regular users. Now i guess its up to the user to approach them differently, but it also gives *some* mods a bigger ego when posting on places such as feedback

amp

Oh buggar Muck is on the case. Wouldn't you be better use your immense powers fighting real corruption?

alkjdflkajf wrote:

I totally agree SantaHoe. Looking up the thread kinda shows what is wrong around here.

1. User does a bit of a 'fight the power' routine .

Which users not familar to the structure and culture of boards tend to do quite regularly.

2. Mods start to contribute illiterate one liners.

Most of my one liners are literate, unless I think it's ironic that they shouldn't be.

3. Admins contribute perfectly literate answers.

That's up to them, but some of the funniest one-liners I've read have come from Admins.

4. Mods continue to contribute illiterate one liners.

ATTACK OF THE ILLERTERATE ONE LINERS!!!ONE!

5. User contributes perfectly literate answer that a Mod should/coulda stepped in with .

On Feedback we are users, not moderators. If Jaeger had actually posted an actual request for more information and not an arrogant post demanding promises and for the rules to be overturned just for her/him maybe the moderators and admins would have reacted differently.

It probably is not just me but in my opinion.

a) The Mods are getting worse recently ....collectively .

Yeah, we decided this on the Mod forum. Next month we're going for the burn and try two-liners.

b) There is a culture of superciliouslessness amongst the mods. They are kinda like a series of neighbourhood terriers once one of them goes off they all do. Arf, Arf Arf , Arf Arf Arf.

There's a rival pack that do the same but attack the first group. Wag that tail man!

c) None of the mods stepped in to clarify sig policy , thats sOOOOOO helpful for the Admins I should think that they can fall back on the Mods to explain things for them and that teh Mods seem to step in and clarify things all the time.

The help the user need was in his/her signature. The fact that he/she chose to ignore this and complain about it in a annoyingly arrogant fashion, is what gets me.

Anyway , I asked for my username to be changed last week and I am probably out of here permanently until something is done about the >Overall< mod situation , I find it pretty intolerable nowadays and it is actually getting worse all the time. Individual bBoards are fine but the collective centre has evaporated. .

To be honest Muck I really don't think you understand fully how boards functions. There is no collective centre. There hasn't been for a long time. Feedback might seem like it is or was but it's not. I'll bet there are users in forums like Phantom and Ireland Offline that have never even heard of Feedback let alone posted here.

Users fearing the one-liners can quite easily post to the Admin board and not be attacked the moderator pack. The problems your describing are not coming from moderators. Moderators are reacting to the steady flow of newbies coming into boards.ie, some of which have trouble understanding that this site is a privately owned website where the rules are different from other bulletin boards and real-life(tm).

My advice is to find a different windmill to attack. You sound like conspiracy theory nutjob.

amp

ColHol wrote:

Now how much more cocky can ya get?

To the gentleman who put forward the thing that mods have no power outside their own board, this is true, they have no power, but because their names are in bold/italics or the diff stars or whatever, they appear to be a tier up from regular users. Now i guess its up to the user to approach them differently, but it also gives *some* mods a bigger ego when posting on places such as feedback

For 50 bucks you too can get a bigger ego!

Seriously though, there's no real way of even identifying the difference between moderator and a user. A newbie reading this board might think that the ones that aren't italicised are moderators.

Next up: How moderators caused the Asian tsunami.

seamus

ColHol wrote:

To the gentleman who put forward the thing that mods have no power outside their own board, this is true, they have no power, but because their names are in bold/italics or the diff stars or whatever, they appear to be a tier up from regular users. Now i guess its up to the user to approach them differently, but it also gives *some* mods a bigger ego when posting on places such as feedback

Name in bold or stars isn't relevant. The name in bold only appeared recently, and the stars have been there forever, so that can't really be it, can it? Perhaps some users feel intimidated when a mod posts. That's their problem.

What anyone perceives as an abundance of ego is just experience. Many users are afraid of having themselves cut down. Eventully you reach a point where you (don't care || are glad for the education || don't care) when someone disagrees with your opinion. Until then, anyone who cuts you down is (abusing their power || a very bad man). It's a bit like a very experienced tech support person. They get a query, and can answer it in quiet confidence, with a quick wave of their hand - they don't even need to double-check. That's experience, however arrogant it might appear.

Boston

CuLT wrote:

Indeed, the very curbing of such cutting and devastating replies was the reason for "The Grand Exodus" about a year ago iirc.



I think it's TwoShedsJackson; that's just a reasonably-educated guess though.

He used to be castor troy so thats a no.

Also santahoe, You used to be one of the first people to put the boot into an unsuspecting newbie back in the day, so why don't you shut the hell up muppet.

Also I agree with Amp on pretty much everything he's mentioned so far in this thread.