Who makes you Drool debate

Khannie · 05-03-2010 07:56PM

I'm trying not to disect, but some of the things that you said deserve to be responded to as individual points. If it's bugging you let me know and I'll change.

OldGoat wrote: »

to allow the picture thread to go ahead there is a need to keep it as modist as possible

That is simply wrong and there has not been one person on here who has said that the thread crossed any line of decency that has been agreed upon (by anyone!).

OldGoat wrote: »

There are so many other places to see semi naked women why do we have to drag a thread here down to be just like all the others. The OP has stated that it was not the reason he started the thread in the first place. The images of women in lingerie is frankly more suited to a thread called "What makes you drool" rather then "Who makes you Drool". The pictures that I riled against have little to do with the woman herself and are all about titilation in the guise of admitration.

The OP doesn't necessarily decide the tone of an entire thread. Threads are living, evolving things and this one has evolved as we all knew it would. You very clearly don't like it. That's fine. Not mad about looking at endless pictures of ladies in lingerie, but I defend other gentlemens right to do so once it is SFW. We don't need a thread like it in here, but there again there's no *need* for any of the threads in here. It's supposed to be a relaxed place of gentlemanly banter and it generally has that feel to it, but that feel is very quickly waning for me.

OldGoat wrote: »

Phew. OK and I know what you mean about editing a comment line by line but like now it cuts to the core of everything.
Before I reply to your points I should point out that I did respond on the original thread with a hasty response - a rant - rather then a planned thought out and measured post. However that does not invalidate my intent.

Changing the title would make thing worse in my opinion. I see the Mod Note as a useful modding instrument. Anyone seeing the title will know that the mods are watching and trying to control the thread. Reading through the thread posters can't help but notice that it is being heavly (and intentionally) modded.

While it is a useful moderating instrument it serves to make users of the forum feel overly moderated. Notes like that are one of the reasons I have ceased posting in or visiting tLL. From a users perspective they absolutely suck and it can be difficult to see that when you're a moderator because the benefit to you is obvious. As a moderator it allows you to let people know that there have been some warnings issued in thread that you don't want to re-issue. I would say the overhead of re-issuing the warning from time to time has a massive benefit (no nanny state staring you in the face every time you visit the forum) for a relatively low cost (occasional need to reiterate yourself or remove offending posts).

I really feel very strongly about those "MOD NOTE POST BLAH BLAH" things. They set a horrible, nasty tone in what is growing into a super forum.

The thread title would be much better as:

"Who Makes You Drool? - Clean images please" or something simlar. It is much gentler.

On the overhead thing: I would much rather you add another person to the moderating team to spread the load and reiterate yourself from time to time / remove offending posts rather than be faced with those mod notes. I'm sure all of the gentlemen here would agree to report any NSFW stuff to make your life easier if necessary.

OldGoat wrote: »

Yes, threathening to ban photos altogether was a hasty remark and one I'll retract immidatly.
As to the content of the photos and what is accecptable I reacted to an image of a woman who is deemed to be droolworthy yet if her name wasn't on the pic there is no way anyone who know who she is. Just another body in stockings. I fail to see the point in that image.

I don't think that's relevant in the slightest. It is very clear the consensus here is that the thread has been over moderated, whatever the goal was. So you can't see her face. So what? The guy likes her bottom. For some people that's their best feature. Not mad about the picture, but there's nothing that would cause me to avert my eyes there either.

OldGoat wrote: »

As a mod I err on the side of caution. I anticipate where the thread is going and I clamp down before it gets out of hand. I see that a good moderation practice. Proactive rather then reactive if you'll forgive the horrendous bizspeak.

The Fapping ramark was to warn future posters not to post images any more risque they those already posted. If I say the limit is 'B' posters will push the limit to 'C' so i post a warning at 'A'. If the posted road speed is 70 the actual safe roadspeed is 80 but the nannystate knowing that someone will push the bounderies telly you to drive at 70. (Sorry for belabouring the point but neither explanation indivudaly made clear what I ws trying to say) I also include the 'Phwarr' aspect of my post here. I'm sure if I were to go through the entire thread I could come up with something similar but the idea ws to get the point made again in the thread about what should be there.

I agree that my choice of picture size as 'small' was less then useless. I posted in haste as I was rushed for time. Sizing of photographs for this thread is something the mods have bveen discussing over the past weeks. Everything about this thread is under discussion amongst the mods over the past few weeks. We are thrashing out what is acceptable and what is not. I jumped the gun and posted vague instructions as the final draft of what we want to see is not yet polished. The re-sizing of and asking posters not to re-post the same image when quoting are amongst the points we are talking about. In my haste to rant I did't remember the size agreed on. As homerun_homer above suggests a system similar to the Photography forum should be adapted.

Khannie, it was not my intent to make anyone here feel like a child. It was however intended to have a moderators tone. Should I have used a Bold font instead? Though I have to saay that what I said, how I phrased it is the way I speak. I'm a wordy peson.

My problem was that you were eager to clamp down. The sentence was very police-state-ish and set a tone that I have a real problem with as a contributor here (I know I haven't been around much over the last two months, but that's just new baby related).

I take your point that it was a rant. We all have them and fair play for putting your hands up.

OldGoat wrote: »

Appricated. This is where the overall feel of the forum will be shaped, in thread like this.

The very fact that this thread exists is testament to the tone you're trying to set. However other things fly in the face of a pleasant end user experience and the over-moderation of that thread (without a mandate from what I can tell) and mod note thread title are the two biggies from my perspective.

OldGoat wrote: »

I'm the nanny looking over your shoulder making you uncomfortable.

Please don't be, because I'm not in the habit of visiting places where there are nannies looking over my shoulder making me feel uncomfortable and I very much like this forum. I want to come here and feel comfortable all the time. I really don't want to know that you're here as a moderator, only as a contributor (I don't mean that in a bad way, I just mean I'd rather that 98% of your posts in the forum were as a contributor instead of as a moderator).

Dr Galen · 05-03-2010 08:02PM

Ok, here's my initial thoughts on this. I'm going to break it down into sections as its easier for me to think it through that way.

Firstly on the over-moderation comments. That thread is a contentious one. Its going to cause issues no matter what we say, do or agree as a group of posters. So far its 5 pages long, its has 148 posts and has been viewed over 11 thousand times. there has been 1 picture deleted. There have been a few Mod directions made, 2 of which where deemed important enough to be listed in the thread title. Maybe I'm biased here, but thats hardly over moderation in such a thread?

For anyone to come here and claim that we use a heavy hand in this forum is crazy imho. Ask any of the regulars here, and they'll tell you we don't take that tack. We're about the soft hand on the shoulder type of modding, the friendly PM in the ear, not that banhammer shoite. We might make a laugh about it from time to time, but seriously, people who post here even semi-regularly know us better than that surely, don't you?

As for the thread itself. Well, I'm not a fan of it tbh. Don't get me wrong, I ain't no prude. SlyDice is in my subbed list for a reason. I'm as much an admirer of the female form as you all, in fact possibly more. Its not about that at all. Its about suitability in my eyes. I would hate for the forum to become the FHM of boards.ie. With a descent into that kind of territory. Its not man-AH in my eyes either. After this thread, where do we draw a line on the threads that get posted.

Another poster made a good comment about site-wide policy. I think its a good one. Maybe we need some clearer definition on what is and isn't acceptable on this site outside of the SlyDice forum. Thats not trying to absolve responsibility on this. I don't want a get out clause here, but I was under the impression that there was a home for images like some posted in the thread and it was private because it wasn't deemed to be suitable for general viewing on the site. That said there are lots of images in that thread that couldn't cause anyone offense. The issue as others have said is that some smartarse always comes in and wants to push the envelope a bit further, then cry fight the powah when they get pulled up on it. I'd be pretty confident that many of the people posting in this thread wouldn't cause grief, once they knew what was and wasn't acceptable. I'm not concerned by you, its others I worry about.

I'll obviously have more to say, but I notice recently that I'm transforming into Wibbs-esque type wordsmith.

As a final question though, can someone put forward a proper argument as to why they want the thread, one not based on tLL have one (because frankly I don't give a damn, they can do what they like it's a different forum), or how you can see worse in the Evening Herald, (because again, I'm only concerned with standards in here). I want someone to sway me on this, and as yet no-one has.

Dr Galen · 05-03-2010 08:18PM

Khannie wrote: »

I'm trying not to disect, but some of the things that you said deserve to be responded to as individual points. If it's bugging you let me know and I'll change.

I'm going to play your game.......:D but only because I think you make good points that deserve a coherent answer, and I want to make sure I catch them all.

I really feel very strongly about those "MOD NOTE POST BLAH BLAH" things. They set a horrible, nasty tone in what is growing into a super forum.

To clear this up. I posted that in the thread title. I also don't like it, and never really do it. I'll explain why though, and it might make you feel a little better dude.

I knew we as a Mod group were discussing the thread etc at the time. I issued the warning, and tbh, wanted to make sure that no-one, particularly anyone new to the forum, didn't know it was there, and then went against it. It was specifically do to with not arguing Mod decision in thread, so not actually to do with the thread content. I didn't want anyone to get a silly warning/infraction etc over something we could have had sorted shortly after. You get me?

It is most definitely not something I will be making a habit of, mostly because I agree with your own thoughts on it. That includes whatever thread (if any) comes from this discussion.

On the overhead thing: I would much rather you add another person to the moderating team to spread the load and reiterate yourself from time to time / remove offending posts rather than be faced with those mod notes. I'm sure all of the gentlemen here would agree to report any NSFW stuff to make your life easier if necessary.

It may well be something we have to look at. Its getting busier and busier in here. There are a lot more reported posts to deal with etc. As I said already, I would have confidence in many of the core group of posters in tGC that they would report any crapola.

I don't think that's relevant in the slightest. It is very clear the consensus here is that the thread has been over moderated, whatever the goal was.

I'm obviously in disagreement on this, as you can see from my previous post. I would say though, that what you and I think doesn't matter that much. Its all about individual perception really isn't it. At the end of the day its what the person takes from it that matters. To those who do think that I over-moderated, all i can say is that that was never my intention. If it becomes an issue for you again in the future, drop me a PM, and I'll explain my thinking.

trout · 05-03-2010 09:07PM

I don't think the thread has been heavily moderated, but I'm aware afraid there will never be consensus on this ... you really can't please everyone on this topic.

Should we keep this debate more centered on the topic at hand?

Can we identify posts / themes / arguments that encapsulate the pro's and con's of this type of thread, in this forum? Who can argue FOR this type of thread? By argue, I mean convince a skeptic that there is a purpose served by hosting these pictures and discussions ... ideally with some suggested boundaries. Simply saying "tLL have a thread, we should have one" is not a compelling argument to me.

Cards on the table; my own view is well known, the internet is full of pictures, take yer pick ... I don't see why a thread is required here. I'm happy to be convinced by rational arguments though.

So ... if we could do that, identify posts for and against ... we could raise a poll ... and let people vote, rather than broaden the discussion into heavy moderation, or what tLL do; those can be other topics, for other threads, on another day.

How does that sound?

Who can argue for, and against?

deadhead13 · 05-03-2010 09:20PM

A poll might be an idea alright

trout · 05-03-2010 09:23PM

deadhead13 wrote: »

A poll might be an idea.

I'm all for a poll ...I just want to make sure the poll options are sensible, and representative of opinion.

Would you vote For or Against? Can you articulate why?

star-pants · 05-03-2010 09:35PM

Okies - random lady input

I don't frequent tLL at all, nor do I give a toss what's allowed/not allowed in there.
When I come into a forum I'm aware said forum will have different rules and different moderation to others. tGC is a fairly gentle-handed-modded forum as far as I can see, people are nudged in the right direction, as said a pm in their ear or whatever.

Regarding the thread - as a female I'm not too pushed about posting, I will admit I will browse occasionally because well, I'm female and I'm curious to see what guys find attractive. I find it interesting that some posters will post up a gorgeous shot of a female where she doesn't have to be wearing dental floss, and others seek to find ones in scant underwear instead. Whilst neither particularly bother me, I think that there should be some form of gentle line should be laid down as to what's acceptable and what's not.

My personal taste says to me that some of the photos are a smidge too revealing but I don't have to click on the thread if I don't want to.

Regarding what was said about not having 'phwar' type comments, well, I agree to an extent. There's one thing saying 'she's fine' and another saying 'I milk myself dry to that' (a similar comment was actually posted in the thread IIRC) it's a lil bit TMI really. So I'd say that's where Oldgoat is coming from regarding comments.

Again, I don't post in that thread, but just thought I'd throw in my lil 2c.

Khannie · 05-03-2010 09:36PM

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

It is most definitely not something I will be making a habit of, mostly because I agree with your own thoughts on it. That includes whatever thread (if any) comes from this discussion.

Nice one. Thanks. That makes me feel a lot better.

trout wrote: »

I don't think the thread has been heavily moderated, but I'm aware afraid there will never be consensus on this ... you really can't please everyone on this topic.

In fact there is a very clear consensus. Every non-mod who has spoken on the subject has voiced an opinion of over-moderation. Every mod who has spoken on the issue has said that they disagree. What we have is a clear division between the moderators and the moderated.

trout wrote: »

Can we identify posts / themes / arguments that encapsulate the pro's and con's of this type of thread, in this forum? Who can argue FOR this type of thread? By argue, I mean convince a skeptic that there is a purpose served by hosting these pictures and discussions ... ideally with some suggested boundaries. Simply saying "tLL have a thread, we should have one" is not a compelling argument to me.

Cards on the table; my own view is well known, the internet is full of pictures, take yer pick ... I don't see why a thread is required here. I'm happy to be convinced by rational arguments though.

So ... if we could do that, identify posts for and against ... we could raise a poll ... and let people vote, rather than broaden the discussion into heavy moderation, or what tLL do; those can be other topics, for other threads, on another day.

How does that sound?

Who can argue for, and against?

I don't see why there should be a need to argue for a specific thread. The thread exists. It is popular. There is demand for it. It is not in breach of the charter. That in itself should be reason enough for its continued existence.

deadhead13 · 05-03-2010 09:39PM

trout wrote: »

I'm all for a poll ...I just want to make sure the poll options are sensible, and representative of opinion.

Would you vote For or Against? Can you articulate why?

Within the parameters of the forum charter the posters ultimately dictate what direction a forum takes. The thread in question has had 150 posts and 11,000 views . I'm not particularlly excerised about whether it stays or goes, but would vote for it to stay on the grounds of - if a you dislike the contents of a thread you always have the option of not entering it.

trout · 05-03-2010 09:45PM

Khannie wrote: »

In fact there is a very clear consensus. Every non-mod who has spoken on the subject has voiced an opinion of over-moderation. Every mod who has spoken on the issue has said that they disagree. What we have is a clear division between the moderators and the moderated.

I disagree. Can you show me the specifc posts in that thread that display heavy handed moderation?

Khannie wrote: »

I don't see why there should be a need to argue for a specific thread. The thread exists. It is popular. There is demand for it. It is not in breach of the charter. That in itself should be reason enough for its continued existence.

Fair enough ... but why is this thread required?

The thread exists. Fair enough. It is popular, well ... that's subjective. There is demand for it ... maybe that's subjective too, I'd really like to see that demand articulated. A poll could measure opinion in a fair and transparent manner. To do a proper job, I think the poll should be representative.

I'm not picking a fight, I haven't moderated that thread, I don't see the value of it ... but I'm happy to be convinced otherwise.

Herbal Deity · 05-03-2010 09:54PM

But no threads are "required", threads exist because the users of a forum want them to.

Khannie · 05-03-2010 09:56PM

trout wrote: »

I disagree. Can you show me the specifc posts in that thread that display heavy handed moderation?

The first post in this thread quotes the post that I have most issue with. I broke down my problems with it on a point by point basis early in the thread. Maybe go back and have a look (not being smart). As I also said I have a very strong dislike for the "mod note" in the thread title. MM has said he doesn't intend using that particular tool on an ongoing basis so I'm happy out about that.

trout wrote: »

Fair enough ... but why is this thread required?

The thread exists. Fair enough. It is popular, well ... that's subjective. There is demand for it ... maybe that's subjective too, I'd really like to see that demand articulated.

The articulation of the demand is the fact that it's on the front page and has a lot of posts and a lot of views. Why should this thread need someone to defend it and another thread does not? If it gets sufficiently boring / demand wanes enough it will drop off the front page and out of existence.

trout wrote: »

A poll could measure opinion in a fair and transparent manner. To do a proper job, I think the poll should be representative.

Honestly, I think polls are mostly a load of rubbish. Sorry.

trout wrote: »

I'm not picking a fight, I haven't moderated that thread, I don't see the value of it ... but I'm happy to be convinced otherwise.

I don't think it should need to have a value to exist. I don't think I (or anyone else) should need to convince you of the merits of a thread that is not in breach of the forum charter so I wont argue for the thread on its merits and I hope nobody else does either.

Khannie · 05-03-2010 10:08PM

Lads, I just want to add that I think ye do a great job around here in general. I very much like this forum.

trout · 05-03-2010 10:18PM

Herbal Deity wrote: »

But no threads are "required", threads exist because the users of a forum want them to.

Some users want this thread ... I'd like if one of those users could explain why they want it.

Khannie wrote: »

The first post in this thread quotes the post that I have most issue with. I broke down my problems with it on a point by point basis early in the thread. Maybe go back and have a look (not being smart). As I also said I have a very strong dislike for the "mod note" in the thread title. MM has said he doesn't intend using that particular tool on an ongoing basis so I'm happy out about that.

I did read that post ... I still disagree with you that the thread has been heavily moderated.

Khannie wrote: »

The articulation of the demand is the fact that it's on the front page and has a lot of posts and a lot of views. Why should this thread need someone to defend it and another thread does not? If it gets sufficiently boring / demand wanes enough it will drop off the front page and out of existence.

I do think the thread needs someone to defend it, I personally don't like the message it sends out about the forum. I think it says a lot that there have been so many views, but so little debate.

Khannie wrote: »

Honestly, I think polls are mostly a load of rubbish. Sorry.

They have their place. See the recent search discussions / decision in this forum. A poll is at least clear and transparent. What's the alternative?

Khannie wrote: »

I don't think it should need to have a value to exist. I don't think I (or anyone else) should need to convince you of the merits of a thread that is not in breach of the forum charter so I wont argue for the thread on its merits and I hope nobody else does either.

It exists, therefore it should be supported ... I don't think so, I'm inviting people to convince me otherwise, all sophistry aside.

Referring to the charter.

This forum is for discussion on any issue relating to general men's health, mental health, sexual health, the role of men in modern society, the pressures on men to succeed and anything else related to being a man.

We'd like posters to be aware that sometimes people really are looking for help or really want to discuss an issue seriously. There's nothing wrong with a bit of banter and having a laugh but please consider that a thread on 'penis size' or 'hairy back' may be a matter of great merriment for you but the original poster may really want some serious answers and discussion. Just take every thread on a case-by-case basis.

.
.
.

No graphic, explicit or unsuitable images. Adding 'NSFW' is not enough.

I think taking this particular thread as a case in point, there is a case to be made for asking people who are in favour of the thread, to state why they are in favour, and how exactly they see it in the best interest of the forum.

"Discussion of issues" ... to me is something other than a thread of pictures of people that other people find attractive.

Dr Galen · 05-03-2010 10:19PM

Herbal Deity wrote: »

But no threads are "required", threads exist because the users of a forum want them to.

Obviously there are limits to this as a way of doing things, but in the main I have to agree with you. I think the fact that even though the Mods of tGC aren't fans of the thread in question, we're totally cool with the discussion about it, and we've gone on record to say that we're open to having our opinions changed, show that we agree with this notion

Khannie · 05-03-2010 11:21PM

trout wrote: »

so little debate.

First off, it's Friday night. I'm only on here giving it socks because:

a) I like this forum a lot (it is the only forum that I have in my bookmark toolbar that I do not moderate) and it took a big fat nosedive in my estimation today
and
b) I have no life

Also, I think you and I have been reading different threads....

cowzerp wrote: »

I'm embarrassed that we as men are talking about shutting down a thread that has ladies in bra's etc,, Down with this sort of thing mentality should have be left back in the dark ages, pathetic to say the least.

homerun_homer wrote: »

I don't think there is anything wrong with posting pictures of women in lingerie that aren't NSFW or verging on pornish poses.

homerun_homer wrote: »

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go post a pic of someone that makes me drool.

Keano A Legend wrote: »

IMO to delete/close this thread would really be a sign that TGC really has no place.

pikachucheeks wrote: »

I think it's fine!

That's just the first page.

As I said, not one single non-moderator has stepped up to say that they think the moderation in that thread was spot on. Everyone who has commented on it (who is not a moderator) has the thread is grand (maybe with one or two minor issues) and should be left running.

As I said, I don't really care about the thread. I care about the precedent that's being set by it. That you're standing up to defend that precedent (despite the moderator in question admitting that he was going off on one) is a very bad sign to me (and others who have said that it is "pathetic" and that removal of it would call into question the very existence of tGC!!).

I should add that I take your point about it sending out the wrong message. I think it's far more important not to be over-moderated though. We're in a lose-lose scenario now. I think the greater good is served by leaving the thread in place.

trout wrote: »

"Discussion of issues" ... to me is something other than a thread of pictures of people that other people find attractive.

So the record player is ok but this one needs someone to stand up and justify it or you'll close it down? Double standards ahoy!

deadhead13 · 05-03-2010 11:24PM

trout wrote: »

Referring to the charter.

"Discussion of issues" ... to me is something other than a thread of pictures of people that other people find attractive.

Couldn't the same thing by said of the "The Centlemen's Club Record Player" thread or the relatively new "Who do you have a man crush on" thread? Should their existence be debated on the same grounds?

Dr Galen · 05-03-2010 11:46PM

@Khannie

Ok

The drool thread aside, I'm more concerned that you seem to think there is a moderation issue in the forum. Am I reading you wrong? Is this sense of unease linked specifically to the thread we are discussing here or a wider issue.

If its linked specifically to the drool thread then what can we do to settle this, or have we done it already?

Khannie · 06-03-2010 12:28AM

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

Is this sense of unease linked specifically to the thread we are discussing here or a wider issue.

Just that thread.

I think you guys do a really good job here. I got fairly concerned with OG's post on a few grounds. That the thread (which is fairly tame) was right on the limits of moderators patience levels was a bit shocking and implied that there was consensus on it being on the edge. Couple that with the mod note title and I thought things were going downhill fairly rapidly.

I still think that there's a very strong disconnect between what regulars have expressed as their desire for a bit of common sense and what the moderators have said is not over-moderation in that thread (no underpants = very obvious over moderation and very obviously not in line with how posters feel).

As I said, I actually don't really care about that thread but I do care about this forum. I take Trouts point that it sends out a bad message or whatever, but I can't see any good reason for closing it down. There's just nothing wrong with anything in that thread (with a possible few very minor issues). I can't believe there's been such a big hoo-ha over a few bras and underpants in the year 2010 to be honest.

Anyway...I haven't slept in 8 weeks. So what the hell would I know?

edit: Thanks for taking the time to ask though.

Dr Galen · 06-03-2010 12:37AM

Ok so next question

have any of the issues your taking about having been resolved enough for you to be happy/happier?

That goes for everyone btw. The only way we can sort thus issue out for the future is if we can move on from the past and the thread as it stands and all it's issues. If there is a fundamental issue with moderation then regardless of who is in their bra or not, then we've a problem that needs sorted. Then we can move onto a solution for ladypics thread

K-9 · 06-03-2010 12:38AM

Khannie wrote: »

Ludicrous! So this is ok, but this isn't? On what grounds? Some arbitrary line in the sand that hasn't been definied or sanctioned by anyone for any good reason?

Very good example of how thin the line is. Racquel would have been raunchy in its day, but the other one is normal enough.

I'd also agree comparisons to TLL and what they can do over there, aren't needed.

Basically, for me, all I want to know is pictures with lingerie allowed or do they have to be fully clothed, which raises the question above, but that's just arguing over small stuff.

PS. How do you resize a picture? Copy it to the pc, upload to photobucket or wherever and resize it? Is there a simpler way?

shellyboo · 06-03-2010 01:15AM

I think the thread is incongruous - it doesn't quite *fit* with tGC for me. I love the forum because it has the same capacity for debate as tLL without the endless struggle to defend our right to debate at all... But that's an aside.

I have no issue with the thread other than I think it adds an AH-esque element that just... isn't necessary IMO.

As for over-moderation? No way. I think the mods have handled it perfectly.

trout · 06-03-2010 01:20AM

Khannie wrote: »

As I said, not one single non-moderator has stepped up to say that they think the moderation in that thread was spot on. Everyone who has commented on it (who is not a moderator) has the thread is grand (maybe with one or two minor issues) and should be left running.

As I said, I don't really care about the thread. I care about the precedent that's being set by it. That you're standing up to defend that precedent (despite the moderator in question admitting that he was going off on one) is a very bad sign to me (and others who have said that it is "pathetic" and that removal of it would call into question the very existence of tGC!!).

I should add that I take your point about it sending out the wrong message. I think it's far more important not to be over-moderated though. We're in a lose-lose scenario now. I think the greater good is served by leaving the thread in place.

The greater good? Is there something noble about these pictures that I'm missing?

I'm not advocating closing / locking / deleting the thread, I haven't deleted a single picture, I haven't moderated it at all.
I'm asking people to tell me what that thread adds to this forum. That's all. No one seems able to do that.

The thread hasn't been over-moderated in my opinion. The posts you quoted seem to me to be about closing or not closing the thread ... that's not really the question. The question is much more fundamental ... why do people want this thread? If anyone can answer that question, without sophistry or cries of censorship or comparisons with other forums ... I am all ears.

On over-moderation, if enough people feel strongly about it ... start a thread, and have it out.

What I am asking for, in this thread, which is supposed to be debate on the future of the drool thread ... is some debate on the future of the drool thread.

Cards on the table. I don't like "drool" threads. From experience, they are harder to moderate than other threads; I don't like the message it sends about the forum. I dont like them. Now ... you all know where I stand.

Khannie wrote: »

So the record player is ok but this one needs someone to stand up and justify it or you'll close it down? Double standards ahoy!

Back up the tractor. I never said I would close the thread down. It's not my style to go on a solo run. The comparison with the record player thread is apt ... but it's less likely to be contentious, or offensive.

You seem to think I'm dead set on closing the drool thread, and you have called me on defending a precedent ... the only I'm defending here is the concept of debating opposing views with an open mind and a willingness to embrace an agreeable accord ... if this represents "a very bad sign" to you ... maybe we are reading different threads.

For me, the goal here is not to close the thread; if people don't like it, they don't have to read it.

For me, the goal is to establish what's acceptable, and what's not. That's all.

K-9 · 06-03-2010 01:21AM

shellyboo wrote: »

I think the thread is incongruous - it doesn't quite *fit* with tGC for me. I love the forum because it has the same capacity for debate as tLL without the endless struggle to defend our right to debate at all... But that's an aside.

I have no issue with the thread other than I think it adds an AH-esque element that just... isn't necessary IMO.

As for over-moderation? No way. I think the mods have handled it perfectly.

Gentlemen like ladies pictures too!

I liked the point raised earlier, I wouldn't like an FHM type thread either.

krudler · 06-03-2010 01:21AM

shellyboo wrote: »

I think the thread is incongruous - it doesn't quite *fit* with tGC for me. I love the forum because it has the same capacity for debate as tLL without the endless struggle to defend our right to debate at all... But that's an aside.

I have no issue with the thread other than I think it adds an AH-esque element that just... isn't necessary IMO.

As for over-moderation? No way. I think the mods have handled it perfectly.

I dont think it does tbh, its not like every other post is some lecherous comment, most of them are just a pic with "yum" or "I fancy such and such" on it, itd be different if it was just pervy comments , and even though the comparison has been done to death and is pretty redundant, its no worse than the equivalent thread on tLL forum. It'd be one thing if it was endless glamour shots and page 3 style stuff but the overwhelming majority of the pics are just standard red carpet pics and the like, there are tons of beautiful women that not many people may now about, all we're doing is singing their praises

trout · 06-03-2010 01:22AM

deadhead13 wrote: »

Couldn't the same thing by said of the "The Centlemen's Club Record Player" thread or the relatively new "Who do you have a man crush on" thread? Should their existence be debated on the same grounds?

Apples and oranges ... neither of those threads are likely to be contentious.

deadhead13 · 06-03-2010 01:27AM

trout wrote: »

Apples and oranges ... neither of those threads are likely to be contentious.

So its the contentious nature of the thread which is the issue, not whether there is a discussion of issues or not on that thread. Which was my point really.

K-9 · 06-03-2010 01:28AM

trout wrote: »

I'm not advocating closing / locking / deleting the thread, I haven't deleted a single picture, I haven't moderated it at all. I'm asking people to tell me what that thread adds to this forum. That's all. No one seems able to do that.

Well, 154 replies with maybe over 100 of pictures and the rest arguing the rules, would suggest users think it adds to the forum.

Personally, while a few would have been beyond what I thought was apt for the forum, most were fine.

What does it add to the forum? Nothing substantial, it's nice to see pictures of good looking women and some not so good looking IMO. Interesting to see the different looks men like.

Does it add anything new to the forum? Probably not. Neither does it take away from it.

A poll may have a use on this thread as a few vocal posters on both sides of the debate may drown out the debate.

trout · 06-03-2010 01:40AM

deadhead13 wrote: »

So its the contentious nature of the thread which is the issue, not whether there is a discussion of issues or not on that thread. Which was my point really.

This thread has my attention right now ... I don't have a strong opinion on the the record player thread or the man-crush thread. If you want to debate their merits ... go right ahead.

In this thread, on this topic, have you a strong opinion for or against the drool thread, and can you articulate your position?

Do you think the drool thread promotes discussion?

Are you arguing we should have a drool thread because we have a record player thread?

Khannie · 06-03-2010 01:44AM

trout wrote: »

On over-moderation, if enough people feel strongly about it ... start a thread, and have it out.

Eh....they did. This is that thread.

trout wrote: »

What I am asking for, in this thread, which is supposed to be debate on the future of the drool thread ... is some debate on the future of the drool thread.

Sorry, you're in the wrong thread, and actually (no offence here) you're dragging this thread off topic. If you go into the drool thread you'll see that this thread was started off the back of me asking whether or not I should start a feedback thread (on over-moderation of that thread). It was suggested that we should have it out in here and so OG started this thread.

If you want a debate on whether or not there should be a drool thread at all I'd suggest you start a thread on it. I don't think there should be a debate on it personally and I don't think there's room in this thread for the discussion you want to have without muddying the waters.

edit: I'll come back to you on the other stuff though. I'm just hitting the hay now. Knackered.

Who makes you Drool debate

Comments