nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Moderators

kboc

I have little interest in chat rooms on the internet, but nightly, i check boards.ie for the 3 or 4 areas which interest me in my personal life. I enjoy reading the comments and opinions of good people and some tools who post. But i very rarely post anything, i don't feel i can offer more than those who have done so already.

I am becoming increasingly disappointed and frustrated at the low tolerance that moderators are showing. Threads are being locked for small discrepancies in the charter/rules. Yes i can see why moderators cannot allow advertising and liabilism etc, but small issues!

I do appreciate that moderators are unpaid members of this forum, and they do a absolute necessary job. But the continued rate of "thread locking" etc will santitised the wonderful community of boards.ie beyond its proper function within a period of time.

This is not a personal grudge, no offence is meant. If somebody has an email address that i can direct my frustrations at then please do PM this to me.

Regards
Me

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Insect Overlord

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Um.. he quoted my post and it was a misunderstanding. You have nothing to do with it.

Are you deciding who can/cannot respond to posts in this thread now?
Overheal's point, while it may have been posted in response to one particular misunderstanding, is still valid as the events he describes did indeed happen. Several people have already pointed it out. LoLth has explained that it's already been reviewed though, and has given a very valid reason for not taking action on it, so I don't know why it's still being argued...

Chaotic_Forces

Thaedydal wrote: »

After what happened to Ms Gale, not a hope in hell.
/peers at Chaotic_Forces closely to make sure they are not a flying monkey.

I get your point overheal but it varies from forum to forum and situation to situation and
in this case it's not my call, it was Lolths and they made it.
It wasn't meant to be a "dick" move.

Um... *throws away the banana and pulls cloak tighter*
No monkeys here sir! :P

The thing about the whole "dick" move isn't just that assuming I get banned, I go to the prision form. Everyone can see that forum so if someone from boards.ie was a dick in that forum couldn't an actual complaint be made?

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Are you deciding who can/cannot respond to posts in this thread now?
Overheal's point, while it may have been posted in response to one particular misunderstanding, is still valid as the events he describes did indeed happen. Several people have already pointed it out. LoLth has explained that it's already been reviewed though, and has given a very valid reason for not taking action on it, so I don't know why it's still being argued...

No I was just saying that it was a complete misunderstanding and it seems like he was trying argue my point for me... except he never understood what I meant.

Aidric

Thaedydal wrote: »

and this is for you Aidric

Would you care to explain this post?

Chaotic_Forces

Aidric wrote: »

Would you care to explain this post?

You're joking, right?
It's easy to understand he said "unless you're demanding". You took that as "HE SAID I WAS DEMANDING! GRR! SNARL! RAGE!"* so he made light of the situation.
*maybe a tad bit OOT

Point is, you got hostile and wound up for no reason so he pointed it out.

Overheal

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Are you deciding who can/cannot respond to posts in this thread now?
Overheal's point, while it may have been posted in response to one particular misunderstanding, is still valid as the events he describes did indeed happen. Several people have already pointed it out. LoLth has explained that it's already been reviewed though, and has given a very valid reason for not taking action on it, so I don't know why it's still being argued...

Had missed that then.

oscarBravo

Aidric wrote: »

Would you care to explain this post?

Something to do with consistency and hobgoblins, I would imagine.

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

You're joking, right?
It's easy to understand he said "unless you're demanding". You took that as "HE SAID I WAS DEMANDING! GRR! SNARL! RAGE!"* so he made light of the situation.
*maybe a tad bit OOT

Point is, you got hostile and wound up for no reason so he pointed it out.

I didn't - Thaed did

Aidric

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

No I was just saying that it was a complete misunderstanding and it seems like he was trying argue my point for me... except he never understood what I meant.

I already explained earlier that my core point still stood, misunderstanding as to your original post or not. I wasn't trying to argue any point on your behalf, thanks.

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Point is, you got hostile and wound up for no reason so he pointed it out.

Hostile and wound up? Eh, wut? I think it's you that's joking, right?

Besides I took that picture as being a troll pic. Hence my reason for questioning it.

Chaotic_Forces

oscarBravo wrote: »

Something to do with consistency and hobgoblins, I would imagine.

I didn't - Thaed did

Huh? I'm a bit lost.

Aidric wrote: »

I already explained earlier that my core point still stood, misunderstanding as to your original post or not. I wasn't trying to argue any point on your behalf, thanks.

Hostile and wound up? Eh, wut? I think it's you that's joking, right?

Besides I took that picture as being a troll pic. Hence my reason for questioning it.

Well I don't mean to offend you but I'd be very thankful if you stopped trying to argue on my behalf. I see you were trying to back me up "assuming that was my point" and I'm thankful.

You didn't need to get so agressive with anyone at all, like you did.

Aidric

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Huh? I'm a bit lost.
Well I don't mean to offend you but I'd be very thankful if you stopped trying to argue on my behalf. I see you were trying to back me up "assuming that was my point" and I'm thankful.

Lost is right. What part of 'I wasn't trying to argue any point on your behalf' didn't you understand?
The bottom line is I was coming on to the thread to make my point. I saw your post and quoted it because I mistook it for the same thrust of the point I was about to make. You then explained your post. I said fine but my core point still stood.

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

You didn't need to get so agressive with anyone at all, like you did.

You can drop that line and all. I already explained to you that I was neither aggressive nor hostile.

Chaotic_Forces

Aidric wrote: »

Lost is right. What part of 'I wasn't trying to argue any point on your behalf' didn't you understand?
The bottom line is I was coming on to the thread to make my point. I saw your post and quoted it because I mistook it for the same thrust of the point I was about to make. You then explained your post. I said fine but my core point still stood.

You can drop that line and all. I already explained to you that I was neither aggressive nor hostile.

I'll explain a bit more then...

The part of me being confused was about the post I quoted. THEN I quoted YOUR post and said my piece about that. Follow me so far?

Nevyn

oscarBravo wrote: »

Something to do with consistency and hobgoblins, I would imagine.

foolish consistency only :P

It's a hobgoblin as picture on hobgoblin ale by the Wychwood Brewry.
It's pretty tasty but I have yet to try some of the King Goblin brew.

http://www.wychwood.co.uk/beers.html

oscarBravo wrote: »

I didn't - Thaed did

Did what now?

Oh and can mountains be shy?
Cos I swear on hearing I was on the road near by Croagh Patrick got all shy and hide behind a cloud bank.

Aidric

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

I'll explain a bit more then...

The part of me being confused was about the post I quoted. THEN I quoted YOUR post and said my piece about that. Follow me so far?

Forget it. I'm off to have a chat with a wall.

Nevyn

Aidric wrote: »

Forget it. I'm off to have a chat with a wall.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqUI_rL2XSo

Chaotic_Forces

Aidric wrote: »

Forget it. I'm off to have a chat with a wall.

Perhaps that will listen without pointing out your rantings and ravings. :rolleyes:

Aidric

"The more things change, the more they remain the same" Alphonse Kerr

Goodnight and God bless.

Chaotic_Forces

Aidric wrote: »

"The more things change, the more they remain the same" Alphonse Kerr

Goodnight and God bless.

We aren't birck walls here on the boards.

P. Breathnach

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

We aren't birck walls here on the boards.

True. If you bounce something off a brick wall, it comes back at a fairly predictable angle.

Chaotic_Forces

P. Breathnach wrote: »

True. If you bounce something off a brick wall, it comes back at a fairly predictable angle.

Are you sure? Try explaining that to the feckin' wall that bumped off me when I was hammered. I'm still trying to sue the cu*t

OutlawPete

This is quite unbelievable, yet again we have *some* moderators and *some* members of Admin tag teaming up to frustrate a user with a genuine complaint.

How much longer is this crap going to be allowed in Feedback?

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and the moderator of this forum has explained why he let it slide.

No they have NOT, did you even look at the links that Aidric posted?

Perhaps if you spent a little more time paying attention to the content of a user's feedback posts and a little less time trying to make sure you have backed up a fellow moderator, we might actually get some where with moderation complaints.

LoLth's post addressed why it was tolerated that Thaedydal called Winters and Sir Digby "trolls", it did not address why she also told JaneyBaby to "stop trolling", which was one of the points that Aidric was trying to make.

The reasoning given by LoLth was a nonsense anyway.

Thaed only jumped in on that thread and called those two users trolls as it suited her as she was in full agreement with Liah, which she is entitled to be of course, but to act as if she was just lending a hand and making sure the thread flowed along is laughable, do you really think users are that gullible?

OB, if you paid the attention to Aidric's post that it deserved, you would have seen that he also linked to a post where Thaed told a female user, that had an opinion that coincidently was diametrically opposed to hers, to "stop trolling".

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68036337&postcount=138

Now, you want to tell me how exactly LoLth's reply could possibly have addressed this post, when Aidric hadn't even linked to it at that stage?

Thaed posted that reply because she disagreed with JaneyBaby, plain and simple and if anybody thinks that there was any other reason for it, they are kidding themselves.

Thaedydal wrote: »

and this is for you Aidric

Tell me Thae, do you see everybody that disagrees with you as a Troll?

Chaotic_Forces

OutlawPete wrote: »

This is quite unbelievable, yet again we have *some* moderators and *some* members of Admin tag teaming up to frustrate a user with a genuine complaint.

How much longer is this crap going to be allowed in Feedback?

No they have NOT, did you even look at the links that Aidric posted?

Perhaps if you spent a little more time paying attention to the content of a user's feedback posts and a little less time trying to make sure you have backed up a fellow moderator, we might actually get some where with moderation complaints.

LoLth's post addressed why it was tolerated that Thaedydal called Winters and Sir Digby "trolls", it did not address why she also told JaneyBaby to "stop trolling", which was one of the points that Aidric was trying to make.

The reasoning given by LoLth was a nonsense anyway.

Thaed only jumped in on that thread and called those two users trolls as it suited her as she was in full agreement with Liah, which she is entitled to be of course, but to act as if she was just lending a hand and making sure the thread flowed along is laughable, do you really think users are that gullible?

OB, if you paid the attention to Aidric's post that it deserved, you would have seen that he also linked to a post where Thaed told a female user, that had an opinion that coincidently was diametrically opposed to hers, to "stop trolling".

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68036337&postcount=138

Now, you want to tell me how exactly LoLth's reply could possibly have addressed this post, when Aidric hadn't even linked to it at that stage?

Thaed posted that reply because she disagreed with JaneyBaby, plain and simple and if anybody thinks that there was any other reason for it, they are kidding themselves.

Tell me Thae, do you see everybody that disagrees with you as a Troll?

About that pic (JUST about that pic) I'm taking her side. The user was being whiny and being... insane? (:P)
So yeah, anyone else would have done the same. BLARGGHH GRR HATE = aw poor baby!

LoLth

Ok,

there are three choices in how this forum should be moderated:

1. zero tolerance. any breach of the boards.ie rules OR the forum charter results in the user being banned from the forum.

2. Charter based: Rules of the charter are strictly imposed with the rules of the site treated as a guideline.

3. Discussion based: have a discussion, discuss the points. the rules of baords.ie are upheld and hte charter is a good guideline for posting practices HOWEVER the primary concern is the faciliting of a forum for open and frank discussion. The user interaction and opinions are the important thing.

the downsides:
1. This would imho result in users not giving their honest opinions or being afraid to disagree with one another which would make Feedback pointless as all real value would be removed from the discussion.

2. Depends a lot on the charter being accurate and is open to abuse "its not in the charter so I can do it!" attitude or users will feel that the charter stifles their ability to express their opinion.

3. Users can get too involved in a topic and to invested in an argument. Frustration can lead to insults, insults to fight, fight to ruination of the discussion for everyone involved and an unpleasant atmosphere for the users. Consistency can be hard to achieve as each infringement has its own set of circumstances that must be taken into account.

Of these three options, I prefer to go for the third. This means that threads/conversations are given more leeway as long as they remain calm, civil and stay on topic. Allowances have to be made for the occasional flare of temper (hence I prefer infractions to bans in this forum) but users that persistently and deliberately provoke other users or persistently derail threads for their own amusement have no place in a feedback forum as that is not what they are interested in.

Are users going to be insulted? yes, I think so but not majorly (pedant! stop trolling etc, nothing personally offensive unless the user has a particularly thin skin, in which case, why are they on an internet forum in the first place?).

Are users going to argue? I certainly hope so. Only by having opposing opinions can we get good feedback on contentious issues. And, argument can sometimes help users clarify their own stand point on an issue that they didnt realise they had a strong opinion on before.

Its not the easiest way to moderate to be honest. Zero tolerance is. No judgement to be made, no having to read a thread to get a feeling of where its going or what lead up to a comment or action. Just a red marker and a ban hammer.

Now, thats my opinion of how this forum should work. As a result I did not infract anyone in that thread apart from those that deliberately attempted to derail the thread or deliberately provoked the OP just for the sake of it. The only posts that were deleted were those that were irrelevant or the usual "me troll too!" type posts.

My opinion may be wrong however and I am open to suggestions.

OutlawPete

LoLth, with all due respect you are (and some others) are totally missing the point here.

The "don't be a dick" rule is repeated around this forum on an almost constant basis and yet here in Feedback it seems to be forgotten about.

Aidric has been very respectful to Moderators and Admin in this thread and yet last night he was stonewalled and belittled to the point where he said he had enough as nobody was listening to him, that is unacceptable.

It happens regularly on Feedback and I have pointed it out a few times this month alone.

I am not saying that Admin and Moderators have to agree with all users when they complain in Feedback but a little respect wouldn't go amiss, even if those users don't return the favour.

It is cringe inducing to see a user make a complaint, then for them to be treated as if their complaint has no grounds, jokes to then be made, the inevitable backslapping that then usually breaks out and ultimately a thread that becomes all about sarcastic in-jokes about how there is Mod conspiracy.

I think there are certain Moderators on Boards that know well how to drown out user's complaints and are well versed and subtlety making users look as if they are being unreasonable and that their complaints have no foundation.

It's all in the language and tone that is used, like how it was insinuated last night that Aidric was "demanding" things and how his complaint was addressed already and so he must be being unreasonable to try and continue the debate, right?

Wrong.

He didn't demand anything, in fact he was very measured and provided links to exactly what he had issues with but as I point out, this is just what happens lately to users in Feedback that have complaints about Modertaors.

Right or wrong, users should be listened to and their grievances should be examined.

If Moderators and Boards users have something to add to the debate other than jokes and backing up Mods for the sake of it, fine - let them contribute what they feel needs to be to have a balanced discussion.

If Admin then go on to find that the user's complaint had no merit, then just post so and the reason why they came to that conclusion.

I don't think anybody could disagree or find fault with that system, we all want to see intelligent debate here, that is what it should be all about.

What we don't need are users being belittled or treated like trolls for little or no reason other than to make them appear as if their complaints have little or no basis.

Nevyn

OutlawPete wrote: »

Thaed only jumped in on that thread and called those two users trolls as it suited her as she was in full agreement with Liah, which she is entitled to be of course, but to act as if she was just lending a hand and making sure the thread flowed along is laughable, do you really think users are that gullible?

No I don't think people are gullible, but I think you are that cynical.
and you are reading things into my actions which were not present.

OutlawPete wrote: »

OB, if you paid the attention to Aidric's post that it deserved, you would have seen that he also linked to a post where Thaed told a female user, that had an opinion that coincidently was diametrically opposed to hers, to "stop trolling".

I called out a poster who said that there are feminazis looking at boards purely to find things to be offended about, and I called them out on that bull**** and asked for links. Calling out a poster is now back seat modding?

OutlawPete wrote: »

Tell me Thae, do you see everybody that disagrees with you as a Troll?

Dear OutlawPete that is a picture of a Hobgoblin not a troll.
Aldric mention consistency and I used the picture to reference's a quote by
Ralph Waldo Emerson - ""A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds..."

I explain this was a hobgoblin in a post you seem to have failed to read
which is only a few above your last.

Thaedydal wrote: »

foolish consistency only :P

It's a hobgoblin as picture on hobgoblin ale by the Wychwood Brewry.
It's pretty tasty but I have yet to try some of the King Goblin brew.

http://www.wychwood.co.uk/beers.html

LoLth

OutlawPete wrote: »

LoLth, with all due respect you are (and some others) are totally missing the point here.

i dont think I am.

Aidric made a comment about the moderating of a specific post and alluded to it being favouritism of some description. I responded. He then posted more examples where he felt the moderation was not up to standard. You agreed with Aidric (I believe the term to describe my reasoning was "nonsense" not exactly a non-belittling term to describe another users post I must say). my post about the options in moderating was to further explain the moderating decision employed in the thread in question and hopefully cover all posts of concern and not just the specifics.

The "don't be a dick" rule is repeated around this forum on an almost constant basis and yet here in Feedback it seems to be forgotten about.

And the "dont be a dick" rule is open to interpretation. Is challenging someone's assertion being a dick? Is arguing a point beign a dick? You think people are being a dick to Aidric, I'm not so sure.

Thaed responded to a direct question. The picture posted was a hobgoblin (really? I thought it was a redcap...) though it seems several people assumed it was a troll. Thaed then clarified what the depiction was.

OB responded to a comment by Aidric in which Aidric did not feel the modding was consistent or strong enough. OB wen tto the other end of the scale and asked if zero tolerance was what was wanted (a valid argument style, take an example to an extreme and work back from there)

Chaotic_Forces: seems to be trying to bring light and joy to the thread. So far its not quite de-railing

Aidric has been very respectful to Moderators and Admin in this thread and yet last night he was stonewalled and belittled to the point where he said he had enough as nobody was listening to him, that is unacceptable.

I see Thaed engaging in a discussion, I see Chaotic_forces bring...well, chaotic and misquoting posts and I see OscarBravo asking for a clearer definition of what Aidric was asking. You see belittlement. One of us is wrong in this, maybe both of us are to a certain extent however, this is an open format forum. If a user posts something that ten other users disagre with then they all have the right to reply. It may look like ganging up but it could just be individual users responding to another user's post.

And I have no argument over Aidric being polite and respectful. he was. hence he was answered. if he'd spouted nonsensical vitriol I doubt the response would have been the same.

It happens regularly on Feedback and I have pointed it out a few times this month alone.

I am not saying that Admin and Moderators have to agree with all users when they complain in Feedback but a little respect wouldn't go amiss, even if those users don't return the favour.

as long as a poster (of any description) is not directly insulting a user I'm not sure how we can police the "tone" of a post let alone the perception of the recipient. If you have a suggestion as to how to reduce the perceived mockery then I would honestly like to hear it. What *exactly* in OBs post do you find offensive?

It is cringe inducing to see a user make a complaint, then for them to be treated as if their complaint has no grounds, jokes to then be made, the inevitable backslapping that then usually breaks out and ultimately a thread that becomes all about sarcastic in-jokes about how there is Mod conspiracy.

I agree. I'm not sure its as commonplace as you seem to think though and I do think that misinterpretation could be a large contributor to that on one of our sides.

I think there are certain Moderators on Boards that know well how to drown out user's complaints and are well versed and subtlety making users look as if they are being unreasonable and that their complaints have no foundation.

you could be right. Thing is, how do we tell a subtle user manipulation apart from a genuine post that reveals that the complaining user actually has no grounds for complaint? If we post that the user has a history of trollin gor stirring trouble for his own enjoyment, we get slated for dragging in unfair and unrelated posts and abusing our position.

It's all in the language and tone that is used, like how it was insinuated last night that Aidric was "demanding" things and how his complaint was addressed already and so he must be being unreasonable to try and continue the debate, right?

Wrong.

I do not recall anyone saying he was unreasonable to want to continue a debate. I do recall an admin asking what it was he wanted seeing as a mod decision was questioned and the question answered and then the same mod (me) was questioned again concerning another decision. I believe OB was trying to stem a potential flow of "oh, and what about this!" posts. Look at how many charters do not allow the on-thread discussion of a mod decision yet Aidric's question was answered, on thread. If you wish to see a question seeking clarification of a complaint as belittlement or bullying then I'm not sure what can be done.

He didn't demand anything, in fact he was very measured and provided links to exactly what he had issues with but as I point out, this is just what happens lately to users in Feedback that have complaints about Modertaors.

Right or wrong, users should be listened to and their grievances should be examined.

emmm... DRP, feedback, helpdesk, PRISON ffs. are you saying there arent enough ways for a user to be listened to? We respond to users who have been banned for spamming and shilling. There are countless examples of 4 or 5 page threads (20 posts per page) of admins and mods talking to users with an issue and not even hinting at "go away". Lengthy posts where mods/cmods/admins try to explain an action or decision in a lnaguage the user can understand and hopefully see the logic of. And thats not even touching on the marathon rounds of PM tennis that are played.

If Moderators and Boards users have something to add to the debate other than jokes and backing up Mods for the sake of it, fine - let them contribute what they feel needs to be to have a balanced discussion.

not sure what you mean by the second part. Hopefully not a "you can only post if it will even up the number of people on each side of the debate" system as this would preclude many opinions and contributions to discussions. But I do agree with the first part.

If Admin then go on to find that the user's complaint had no merit, then just post so and the reason why they came to that conclusion.

and cue the multiple threads about admins not interacting and edicts being passed down without consideration. Are you actually suggesting that admins do NOT engage with the community except to pass a judgement on a post or suggestion?

I don't think anybody could disagree or find fault with that system, we all want to see intelligent debate here, that is what it should be all about.

agreed

What we don't need are users being belittled or treated like trolls for little or no reason other than to make them appear as if their complaints have little or no basis.

agreed also. I would add that we also dont need users who make a suggestion or complaint and then feel unfairly treated when more than one person disagrees with them. and no, I am not saying that this is what happened with Aidric.

Jazzy

Thaedydal wrote: »

I called out a poster who said that there are feminazis looking at boards purely to find things to be offended about

Thaedydal wrote:

Stupid sexist remarks are stupid and people who use them are lazy imho.
I see no reason why such sexist remarks can't be stamped out like Yore Ma was.

The Ironing! its delicious!

Nevyn

Really Jazzy you have to stop flirting with me using such posts, they are not going to work.

OutlawPete

Thaedydal wrote: »

..and you are reading things into my actions which were not present.

No I'm not, it's as clear as day what your agenda was on that thread.

Thaedydal wrote:

I called out a poster who said that there are feminazis looking at boards purely to find things to be offended about, and I called them out on that bull**** and asked for links. Calling out a poster is now back seat modding?

No, telling them to "stop trolling" is.

Thaedydal wrote:

Dear OutlawPete ...

Don't waste your time trying to antagonise me with the usual passive aggressive clap trap, it's yawn inducing.

If I addressed you with "Dear Thaedydal.." , you'd no doubt be screaming: sexism.

I shouldn't complain though, at least you've moved on from addressing me as "Darling".

Thaedydal wrote: »

that is a picture of a Hobgoblin not a troll.

Do you honestly think anyone is buying that, seriously - how dumb do you think people are exactly?

You posted that photo to imply that Aidric was a Troll, plain and simple.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Aldric mention consistency and I used the picture to reference's a quote by
Ralph Waldo Emerson - ""A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds..."

I explain this was a hobgoblin in a post you seem to have failed to read
which is only a few above your last.

"Failed to read"?

You must be kidding me.

No, I read it - I'm just not a simpleton and so seen right through it.

Don't get me wrong however now.

I am not saying that you weren't aware that it was a hobgoblin in the pic and that you had your little quote all ready for when you would inevitably get called for posting it, but you knew well what you were implying, and that people would see it as a troll and leave people in no doubt what you thought of Aidric.

Listen, you can waffle on as much as you want about how some 19th century poet / philosopher once said some crap about 'consistency' in same sentence as the word 'hobgoblin' and so it should be clear what you meant, but please don't expect those of us with even an ounce of cop on to believe it.

How about sometime down the road, you make a comment on a thread that you feel that one of my posts was 'obnoxious' and in reply I post a photo of an 'arsehole'.

Then when you report my post and complain that I insinuated that you were an arsehole, I respond with:

"That's not just an arsehole, that's Bianca Love's arse, with cocaine on it.

Which is in reference to the famous quote by Linda Ronstadt, where she said:

"Cocaine made people deaf, it made people dead and it made people real obnoxious."

oscarBravo

OutlawPete wrote: »

Do you honestly think anyone is buying that, seriously - how dumb do you think people are exactly?

You posted that photo to imply that Aidric was a Troll, plain and simple.

And yet, I saw a picture of a hobgoblin posted in response to a post about consistency, and immediately thought of the quote that Thaedydal claims she was referencing in the first place (and said so).

I guess she's a liar, and I'm an idiot. Thank you for clarifying that.

OutlawPete

LoLth wrote: »

Aidric made a comment about the moderating of a specific post and alluded to it being favouritism of some description.

Why wouldn't he cry "favourtisim"?

I doubt many users would get away with calling JaneyBabe a troll for giving her opinion.

Thaed didn't like that post for obvious reasons, none of which were because she thought JaneyBabe was a troll.

She was clearing backseat modding by telling janeybabe to stop trolling, which would not be tolerated if it were another user.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/faq.php?faq=bie_faq_guidelines#faq_bie_faq_guidelines_backseat

LoLth wrote: »

And the "dont be a dick" rule is open to interpretation. Is challenging someone's assertion being a dick? Is arguing a point beign a dick?

No.

LoLth wrote: »

You think people are being a dick to Aidric, I'm not so sure.

Posting a photo that 99% of people would identify as a Troll in reply to Aidric's post was "being a dick".

I also don't think it should have been implied that he was "demanding" anything, he wasn't.

LoLth wrote: »

.. it seems several people assumed it was a troll. Thaed then clarified what the depiction was.

Are you serious?

You honestly believe that Thaed was not aware of what she was implying?

If you do, that beggars belief.

LoLth wrote: »

I see Thaed engaging in a discussion..

More nonsense and you know it.

Posting pics of Trolls and Hobgloblins is NOT " engaging in a discussion".

LoLth wrote: »

.. if he'd spouted nonsensical vitriol I doubt the response would have been the same.

When Aidric went on to say that he was felt as if he was banging his head off a wall, why did Thaedydal then go on to post a video making fun of that fact?

OutlawPete

oscarBravo wrote: »

I guess she's a liar, and I'm an idiot. Thank you for clarifying that.

Don't put words in my mouth.

Thaed knew what she was implying and while you might have been aware of that quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson, I would venture that the vast majority of people aren't, and she knows well they wouldn't be and so the implication would there for all to see.

I would say, even those people that are aware of Hobgoblins and the connection to some quote, a 19th century poet once made about consistency - would still see that Thae was being clever and knew well that not many people would make the connection and so would see just what she thought of Aidric, even if she did have that little get out clause tucked up her sleeve.