If I were moderating/administrating Lit, the GB wouldn't be such a shithole.

[Fantasies_only]

Number one seems a bit draconian.

We cannot make fun of the "Breatharian" religion, for example?

I'm sorry, but that religion is just stupid.

What I meant by negative comments is either a direct attack or mere mention of a known entity, weather board member or person, not like Micro$oft or anything.
The religion itself such as scientology may be made fun of, but not a person (unless in on the joke or celebrity).

 

[Rowdy_Y]

What I meant by negative comments is either a direct attack or mere mention of a known entity, weather board member or person, not like Micro$oft or anything.
The religion itself such as scientology may be made fun of, but not a person (unless in on the joke or celebrity).

Oh, that sounds more reasonable.

 

[Fantasies_only]

Did you think of it all by yourself? Good job. [pats you on the head]

If that was sarcastic:
Shutup you shithead!
If it wasn't meant to be rude, then thanks, but it's modeled after the TOS of other sites.

There are plenty of moderated forums already, one of the reasons that this one is popular is because it is not.

I agree that free speech/freedom of expresion is a right that shouldn't be ignored or censored in any manner, but I don't think these rules do that.
They are meant as a guide for the poster to follow (otherwise he or she would be banned right away), not as any type of censor.

 

[MechaBlade]

Why not me? Because I don't play the "well, it's not the same thing when you do it" bullshit that goes on here? Because if I see the 'n' word, I'm gonna ban the fucker no questions asked without favoritism or exceptions?

Ninja, please. This place would be troll-free in ten seconds flat.

No, because you play the "it's not the same thing when I do it" thing, and because I'm quite certain you are slightly insane and you'd become (more) corrupt with power.

Might work if it were done with a light hand; as in my "quorum of wise men" concept.

A light hand, agreed.

 

[Comshaw]

Depending on the severity of the rule that is broken, you're membership will be suspended and flagged rather than have an immediate ban (all suspensions will have warnings and a ban must have a notice).

You will get a warning for:
1: Negative comments about race, religion, upbringing, lifestyle, or sexual preference.
2: Posts that include the "N" word (the post will be edited or the entire thread deleted if the word appears in the topic).
3: Spamming the board with site links in multiple posts or one word bumps.
You will be banned for:
1: Harsh accusations or threats that would ruin reputation in occupation, disturb social or private life, or create legal situations for family.
2: Posting or promoting access to illegal activity such as Torrents and Warez (Youtube and related sites not included).
3: Encouraging the sale of products (just saying "The book's a good read, you should get it," is not included in this rule).

All IPs are recorded to enforce these rules, however only the administrators may see them (moderators may give warnings and flag posters).
If you see a rule being broken, you may report it to the moderator who will take the appropriate action (mods must request take down beforehand and consider argument).


Anyone care to comment on this plan?

Sure. Everybody has some idea how to make things better. And unfortunately, most of the time it entails more rules, stricter rules or the concept of throw the bums out!

My question is: Why? Why more rules? This place has a basic set of rules as protection. So why restrict the conversation? And that's all that it is, conversation. The old saying of sticks and stones will break my bones.....carries a lot of credence. If someone can get under your skin, make you feel bad or hurt your feels by using words, then you need to take a trip. A trip down into yourself and understand why that is. Self discovery is hard, but something worthwhile.

All of us here have the tools required to make this place enjoyable. You don't like what someone says? Don't listen, it's as simple as that. Go find a conversation that suits you. Unfortunately most of us can't do that. We're drawn, like a moth to a flame. And we get burned because of it. But that's the readers problem, not the posters.

Do you want to try to change the mind of a poster who spews hated and bile, or strike back in kind? Go for it. Here you have the freedom to do so.

Then there is the Ignore feature, the dragon slayer of them all. You don't want to put up with someones bullshit? Don't like those who try out of spite, malice or just plain ugliness of soul to hurt others? Iggy! Use it.

But use it wisely, for even those who wallow with the hogs can say something intelligent from time to time.

Personally I don't see a thing wrong with the way it is now. Leave it be. There's always a trade off. More structure, more rules, more controls = less freedom. Me, I'll put up with the trolls, the political rabble rouser's, the spam, the vacillating low brow idjits in exchange for the freedom we enjoy here.


'nuff said,

Comshaw

 

[Comshaw]

No, because you play the "it's not the same thing when I do it" thing, and because I'm quite certain you are slightly insane and you'd become (more) corrupt with power.


A light hand, agreed.

Power corrupts. And absolute power corrupts absolutely. I'm a watcher. I always have been, even in real life. I sit on the side lines and watch people, listen to what they say and from time to time, when the urge strikes me, I speak up. I've been here a long time and have watched much drama flow through this place. I can tell you for certain than if LT were to be made a mod, be put into a position of power, he would be a mini-Hitler. A draconian nightmare of the first order.

And I too believe he has a mental problem.

Done, see ya.



Comshaw

 

[Le Jacquelope]

No, because you play the "it's not the same thing when I do it" thing

Uh, no, I don't.

and because I'm quite certain you are slightly insane and you'd become (more) corrupt with power.

Insane, by your definition, meaning I don't tolerate any bullshit from people and I don't back down from bullies.

I won't even chance to ask you your definition - you probably don't even know what 'sane' is.

And I'd sure as hell have fixed this place a lot faster than you. I go by simple rules - you fuck up, you're out. No second chances.

 

[Fantasies_only]

Sure. Everybody has some idea how to make things better. And unfortunately, most of the time it entails more rules, stricter rules or the concept of throw the bums out!

My question is: Why? Why more rules? This place has a basic set of rules as protection. So why restrict the conversation? And that's all that it is, conversation. The old saying of sticks and stones will break my bones.....carries a lot of credence. If someone can get under your skin, make you feel bad or hurt your feels by using words, then you need to take a trip. A trip down into yourself and understand why that is. Self discovery is hard, but something worthwhile.

All of us here have the tools required to make this place enjoyable. You don't like what someone says? Don't listen, it's as simple as that. Go find a conversation that suits you. Unfortunately most of us can't do that. We're drawn, like a moth to a flame. And we get burned because of it. But that's the readers problem, not the posters.

Do you want to try to change the mind of a poster who spews hated and bile, or strike back in kind? Go for it. Here you have the freedom to do so.

Then there is the Ignore feature, the dragon slayer of them all. You don't want to put up with someones bullshit? Don't like those who try out of spite, malice or just plain ugliness of soul to hurt others? Iggy! Use it.

But use it wisely, for even those who wallow with the hogs can say something intelligent from time to time.

Personally I don't see a thing wrong with the way it is now. Leave it be. There's always a trade off. More structure, more rules, more controls = less freedom. Me, I'll put up with the trolls, the political rabble rouser's, the spam, the vacillating low brow idjits in exchange for the freedom we enjoy here.


'nuff said,

Comshaw

About updated release of the Firefox browser:
Aren't you the guy who tried to justify having sex with children?
Uncalled for and hurtful
About the word pwn or p0wn:
Stop posting in threads about children moron!
Thread not about children at all, and unprovoked name calling is uncalled for.
There are many other examples of this, and my original threads you all can't get past said nothing about having sex or the desire to have sex with children.

I don't use the ignore feature because I think THAT'S censorship, not rules such as these.

 

[Comshaw]

About updated release of the Firefox browser:
Aren't you the guy who tried to justify having sex with children?
Uncalled for and hurtful
About the word pwn or p0wn:
Stop posting in threads about children moron!
Thread not about children at all, and unprovoked name calling is uncalled for.
There are many other examples of this, and my original threads you all can't get past said nothing about having sex or the desire to have sex with children.

I don't use the ignore feature because I think THAT'S censorship, not rules such as these.

Yes it is censorship, but a very personal kind. And that is very acceptable. It's called freedom, freedom to listen to who I wish and ignore those I don't. As for the rest of what you just posted, I have no idea what you're talking about. It's total gibberish.

Edited to add: I take it a personal thing like the ignore feature, that allows one person to ignore someone else is censorship, but a global rule banning someone for saying their mind isn't? Aw, yes, that makes a lot of sense. :avery:




Comshaw

 

[Fantasies_only]

Yes it is censorship, but a very personal kind. And that is very acceptable. It's called freedom, freedom to listen to who I wish and ignore those I don't. As for the rest of what you just posted, I have no idea what you're talking about. It's total gibberish.

Edited to add: I take it a personal thing like the ignore feature, that allows one person to ignore someone else is censorship, but a global rule banning someone for saying their mind isn't? Aw, yes, that makes a lot of sense. :avery:




Comshaw

It is not acceptable to have someone start a conversation with you (even if not seen) and be totally ignored.
If it is rude to do in real life, it shouldn't be done online.
The only exception is if the conversation threatens your life or potentially does harm visually or verbally.

What freedom actually means is one can have a difference of opinion, conveyed in an appropriate manner.
Rules are there for a reason, and if it's inappropriate for a poster to post things like "Why I hate niggers," or "Why I hate obese people," then that person shouldn't have written it.

 

[Cade Is Here]

As for my faked death - again, fuck off and die. You obviously have a problem with my little prank, which shows you have no life whatsoever

Total Posts: 67,214 (31.99 posts per day)

Huh....32 posts a day and he has no life????

Awww..LeJ needs attention..pats him on head.

I have over 20 alts that is known to be lt on iggy..
Lol..Why would anyone want him to be a mod

shakes head

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

It is not acceptable to have someone start a conversation with you (even if not seen) and be totally ignored.
If it is rude to do in real life, it shouldn't be done online.
The only exception is if the conversation threatens your life or potentially does harm visually or verbally.

What freedom actually means is one can have a difference of opinion, conveyed in an appropriate manner.
Rules are there for a reason, and if it's inappropriate for a poster to post things like "Why I hate niggers," or "Why I hate obese people," then that person shouldn't have written it.

You are confusing the "right to free speech" with the "right to be heard".

You have the right to say pretty much anything you want, but you don't have the right to make anyone listen to you. Ignore is not censorship, although what you propose most certainly is as banning someone from posting is done to prevent anyone from reading their posts, ignore only makes it so that you don't have to.

What this boils down to, at least for Le Jackass, is control. He wants to be able to exact revenge on those whom dare disagree with him on any subject. Since besting them (Bwahahaha) relies on his ability to silence any retort to his charges (which he just LOVES to manufacture from whole cloth), he wants to moderate the GB with his very own special set of rules applicable of course to everyone BUT him.. <Cue "I did it my way">

 

[bronzeage]

Toss out an unprovoked racial slur? You get one chance to apologize and then you're gone. Banned AND deleted. There won't be any need for someone to retaliate.
Come back again? Banned. By subnet.
Fat basher trolls? Gone. Deleted. As if they never existed.
Threaten someone over an internet argument? Banned.
Male bashers? Hasta la vista, baby.
Create alts? Banned.

Cade, gone. Ishmael, gone. Cap'n Amatrixca and his alts? Gone.

No mercy. No discussion. No bullshit. Just gone.

The subnet bans alone would clean this place up inside of a day.


Blah blah blah, shut the fuck up. Even when I'm gone, this place is an anti social shithole. You can't put that on me.

By your own standards, you would have to leave.

 

[The_Trouvere]

I would like to thank La Jacquelope for starting this thread. This is an important topic, which for the most part has been discussed intelligently. I find myself drawn between La Jacquelope, who has presented good arguments for moderating the General Board, and rosco rathbone, who has pointed out that the Literotica General Board is an interesting internet forum, and that people keep coming back.

I most agree with Wrong Element that it is important that no personal information be posted. What happens here should stay here. There certainly are employers, bosses, friends, and relatives who would think less of someone if they knew that poster was posting here, and if they knew what that poster posted.

I can think of two additional restrictions.

First, alts should be prohibited.

Second, there should be an end to long copy and paste jobs. These take up too much bandwidth. Anyone can find something on the internet that expresses one's opinions. Those who cannot do their own writing and thinking should stop wasting the time of others. The only legitimate use of a link to another website is to substantiate a fact one uses in one's own arguments.

When I began posting on internet forums I was more sensitive to flaming than I am now. Now I recognize that when someone attacks me personally that poster is acknowledging that he or she cannot answer my arguments.

 

[Fantasies_only]

You are confusing the "right to free speech" with the "right to be heard".

You have the right to say pretty much anything you want, but you don't have the right to make anyone listen to you. Ignore is not censorship, although what you propose most certainly is as banning someone from posting is done to prevent anyone from reading their posts, ignore only makes it so that you don't have to.

What this boils down to, at least for Le Jackass, is control. He wants to be able to exact revenge on those whom dare disagree with him on any subject. Since besting them (Bwahahaha) relies on his ability to silence any retort to his charges (which he just LOVES to manufacture from whole cloth), he wants to moderate the GB with his very own special set of rules applicable of course to everyone BUT him.. <Cue "I did it my way">

The plan I have is not censorship, it's freedom of choice.
I can allow people into my home to discuss general topics in an appropriate fashion.
If someone acts inappropriately, I have the right to kick him out of my house and lock the door.

Talking and hearing are not the same thing, but when in a conversation or potential conversation they are, so the right to be heard is free speech.
What you're saying is like if on a more conventional site, you can post pictures containing nudity because of artistic expression.

 

[cjh]

The plan I have is not censorship, it's freedom of choice.
I can allow people into my home to discuss general topics in an appropriate fashion.
If someone acts inappropriately, I have the right to kick him out of my house and lock the door.

Talking and hearing are not the same thing, but when in a conversation or potential conversation they are, so the right to be heard is free speech.
What you're saying is like if on a more conventional site, you can post pictures containing nudity because of artistic expression.

read this and come back to discuss the topic when you understand it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie

 

[KRCummings]

The plan I have is not censorship, it's freedom of choice.
I can allow people into my home to discuss general topics in an appropriate fashion.
If someone acts inappropriately, I have the right to kick him out of my house and lock the door.

Talking and hearing are not the same thing, but when in a conversation or potential conversation they are, so the right to be heard is free speech.
What you're saying is like if on a more conventional site, you can post pictures containing nudity because of artistic expression.

You like to fuck children. Nobody cares what you think. The only thing anyone here wants to hear from you are your screams as you're dropped head first into a wood chipper.

 

[KRCummings]

This whole thread is stupid. LT talks about banning alts when he's been one of the worst offenders. Hell, probably at least half the people who have posted in this thread have alts.
Most of what I've seen here is "I'd only allow people who think like me."
Idiots.

 

[TheReapersWife]

You like to fuck children. Nobody cares what you think. The only thing anyone here wants to hear from you are your screams as you're dropped head first into a wood chipper.

How about feet first, so the screaming lasts longer?

 

[KRCummings]

How about feet first, so the screaming lasts longer?

You'd be first, troll so you'll miss all the fun. Now go fuck yourself.

 

[_Misty_]

You like to fuck children. Nobody cares what you think. The only thing anyone here wants to hear from you are your screams as you're dropped head first into a wood chipper.

If you wanted to hear screams wouldn't it be more efficent to go feet first into the chipper?

 

[KRCummings]

If you wanted to hear screams wouldn't it be more efficent to go feet first into the chipper?

Nobody wants to hear them for long. That would just get boring.

 

[Fantasies_only]

This whole thread is stupid. LT talks about banning alts when he's been one of the worst offenders. Hell, probably at least half the people who have posted in this thread have alts.
Most of what I've seen here is "I'd only allow people who think like me."
Idiots.

You have the right to state your opinion of someone, but when that opinion is just cruel and meant to be so, please keep it to yourself.
If you don't like what is being said, you don't have to read it, but at the same time I have the right to post it.

As I said, my conversation doesn't include anyone who doesn't approve of me personally.
If you disagree with the post and not the poster, then we can talk.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

How about feet first, so the screaming lasts longer?

Saddam Hussein would've cherished you, my dear.

 

[KRCummings]

You have the right to state your opinion of someone, but when that opinion is just cruel and meant to be so, please keep it to yourself.
If you don't like what is being said, you don't have to read it, but at the same time I have the right to post it.

As I said, my conversation doesn't include anyone who doesn't approve of me personally.
If you disagree with the post and not the poster, then we can talk.

People like you should have your genitals cut off and crammed down your own throat while a battery cable is shoved up your ass and you're slowly cooked from the inside out and all while molestation victims piss and shit on you as you lay dying.

I'm sorry, was that cruel? I hope so because it was meant to be.