Diablo banned

[Evan]

Why? I don't think posting "personal info" about jason and mslif is reasonable. Especially since the parties involved reasted with a "wtf".

[MrWookie47]

Regardless of the content of the thread, I really hope this is just a temporary thing. Even exiling him from OOT seems pretty outlandish.

Edit: Checked the poster info. I think a 1 day suspension is a reaonsable sentence, assuming this is wrong. I don't really have an opinion on that subject.

[B Dids]

I consider Jason a close friend, but this is a bad ban. There's just no precedence for this to take place. I can see the thread being locked/deleted, but even a one day suspension is really silly.

And if you're going to lock the thread, why not just delete it? All this does is leave it sitting there to raise more questions and potentially cause more problems for the people involved?

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a 1 day suspension is a reaonsable sentence

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? Because Dynasty doesn't want info about Jason to be posted in OOT? I think one day is an absurd sentence.

[Dynasty]

Posting personal information like that about any other poster is out of line. If jason_T and mslif want to share any information about their dating lives, they can do it themselves.

Nobody should have stuff like this exposed to the forums.

A one-day suspension is a slap on the wrist.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

And if you're going to lock the thread, why not just delete it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Link to locked thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=4133255&an=0&page=0#Post 4133255)

I left it up and locked to make it clear discussion on the topic wasn't going to continue. If it just disappeared, I suspect a new post would go up to replace it.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Posting personal information like that about any other poster is out of line. If jason_T and mslif want to share any information about their dating lives, they can do it themselves.

Nobody should have stuff like this exposed to the forums.

A one-day suspension is a slap on the wrist.

[/ QUOTE ]
Jason does not want Diablo banned. I don't see why he should be if you, an uninvolved third party, are the only one that has a problem with the post.

[B Dids]

I just know that if I ever see a locked thread, that's likely the first one on the page I'm reading, I like dirt. I'm not alone in this. If the logic behind the deletion is protecting jason and mslif, I'm not sure that that does anything but make people wonder and want to ask more questions.

If your intent is to make it clear that the discussion will stop, my humble suggestion is to make a closing post in the thread explaining why it's close and why future threads will be deleted.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

And if you're going to lock the thread, why not just delete it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Link to locked thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=4133255&an=0&page=0#Post 4133255)

I left it up and locked to make it clear discussion on the topic wasn't going to continue. If it just disappeared, I suspect a new post would go up to replace it.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you're really concerned about Jason's privacy then locking it it extremely stupid. You either have a problem with the information being out there or you don't. If you do, then deleting it is best (from your pov). If you don't, then leave it alone. Locking it accomplishes nothing other than excusing a ban of El D.

[astroglide]

diablo is a reasonable guy so the 'warning ban' seems unnecessary

i can also see your point about locking only making a martyr out of it. i feel the same way about a number of threads, but i think this subject is too 'hot' to let it remain exposed. all of the soap opera [censored] is embedded in old posts, this one clearly spells out the heart of the rumor and i think it's damaging to have people introduced to it if the topic is a concern. i think it should be deleted.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
my humble suggestion is to make a closing post in the thread explaining why it's close and why future threads will be deleted.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a close second to anything that makes even a modicum of sense. (Meant to insult Dynasty's decision, not Dids' suggestion)

[B Dids]

My suggestion is more as an overall suggestion on how to mod. People learn by example. Telling them why something is bad helps. It's why you make the dog look at the pile of crap before hitting them on the head.

I'd also suggest that this whole discussion will be more productive the more it resembles a discussion and not just an argument. If we the mods can disagree and not get irate about it, this whole user mod venture will be a lot more productive.

[durron597]

If anyone cares I agree with astroglide on all points.

[Lloyd]

Wow, I was expecting to see some major breach of confidence or at least a revealed social security number or the like. I think this is just the nature of OOT and if you don't want him there fine, exile him (although I think that would be silly). But I think a ban is way uncalled for particularly if the parties involved don't really care. Delete the thread, unban Diablo, and move on.

[astroglide]

apparently some have gotten the impression that i was the one that locked the thread. i haven't taken any action on it, and i have no plans on doing so.

[stabn]

This is not really personal info. If we don't want rumors like this we might as well remove the NVG forum. The ban is a joke.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
apparently some have gotten the impression that i was the one that locked the thread. i haven't taken any action on it, and i have no plans on doing so.

[/ QUOTE ]

what's funny is I had 3 PM's waiting for me asking me why I locked it. I didn't even have a clue WTF they were talking about.

[astroglide]

i'm not sure if you're specifically responding to me. fwiw i wouldn't have banned diablo, and i think that is the most unnecessary part of the situation.

i disagree that it is so much like nvg though, because nvg usually discusses 'far away players' and surrounds activities that they conduct in public (usually winning or losing in poker). these people are active members of oot, and storms/gossip were created in the last popular thread that surrounded the issue. mslif appears to be particularly sensitive about such things as well.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not sure if you're specifically responding to me. fwiw i wouldn't have banned diablo, and i think that is the most unnecessary part of the situation.

i disagree that it is so much like nvg though, because nvg usually discusses 'far away players' and surrounds activities that they conduct in public (usually winning or losing in poker). these people are active members of oot, and storms/gossip were created in the last popular thread that surrounded the issue. mslif appears to be particularly sensitive about such things as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

No it was really just in general. We'e had a lot of NVG posts about diablo, andyfox, jennicide, etc.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, I was expecting to see some major breach of confidence or at least a revealed social security number or the like. I think this is just the nature of OOT and if you don't want him there fine, exile him (although I think that would be silly). But I think a ban is way uncalled for particularly if the parties involved don't really care. Delete the thread, unban Diablo, and move on.

[/ QUOTE ]

IF the party's don't care, NO action should be taken.

[B Dids]

To be clear, the parties very much want the thread deleted.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
To be clear, the parties very much want the thread deleted.

[/ QUOTE ]

The parties need to grow up.

[B Dids]

Given the rules astro just outline in OOT, the thread's out of bounds.

Given how historically horribly OOT has treated women, I can see why somebody wouldn't want their business aired out in public. Anybody who has read OOT for a month knows exactly what's going to be said in the thread, and very little of it is something that we should be permitting posters to say about other posters.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
Given the rules astro just outline in OOT, the thread's out of bounds.

Given how historically horribly OOT has treated women, I can see why somebody wouldn't want their business aired out in public. Anybody who has read OOT for a month knows exactly what's going to be said in the thread, and very little of it is something that we should be permitting posters to say about other posters.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's one thing to lock a thread because it's saying nasty things about posters. It's another to do it because it could. Moving it to NVG is far betting than locking it or banning the origional poster.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be clear, the parties very much want the thread deleted.

[/ QUOTE ]

The parties need to grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. It's way out of line for anybody to be posting such personal information about others.

El Diablo's suspension (how come nobody uses that term but me?) is reduced to six hours, ending it now.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be clear, the parties very much want the thread deleted.

[/ QUOTE ]

The parties need to grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. It's way out of line for anybody to be posting such personal information about others.

El Diablo's suspension (how come nobody uses that term but me?) is reduced to six hours, ending it now.

[/ QUOTE ]

He said he heard they were dating. That's really not that personal, they could have just denied it or laughed about it or ignored it. It's not like he said they were caught [censored] in the mens room at the tropicana and posted a video and their #'s.

It's also not like he posted pictures of someone without their permission.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be clear, the parties very much want the thread deleted.

[/ QUOTE ]

The parties need to grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. It's way out of line for anybody to be posting such personal information about others.

El Diablo's suspension (how come nobody uses that term but me?) is reduced to six hours, ending it now.

[/ QUOTE ]

He said he heard they were dating. That's really not that personal

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people think their romantic lives is very personal.

[stabn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be clear, the parties very much want the thread deleted.

[/ QUOTE ]

The parties need to grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. It's way out of line for anybody to be posting such personal information about others.

El Diablo's suspension (how come nobody uses that term but me?) is reduced to six hours, ending it now.

[/ QUOTE ]

He said he heard they were dating. That's really not that personal

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people think their romantic lives is very personal.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only thing he posted was a rumor. He could have said that knowing nothing about it. No two posters can really expect that if they start dating eachother that will stay a secret.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

No two posters can really expect that if they start dating eachother that will stay a secret.

[/ QUOTE ]

But, they can expect that even the smallest details of their personal romantic lives won't be posted on the forums and allowed to be fodder for other posters.

[Lloyd]

I think the consensus is certainly that the thread should have been deleted. The issue is whether or not it warranted a 6-hour "suspension". Seriously, what does that really accomplish? Have you had problems with Diablo crossing the line before? Was he warned not to do similar things? And what about the whole issue regarding not banning strategy posters for OOT issues?

[Ed Miller]

I don't think we should be banning Diablo ever for basically any reason. He is, IMO, the overall #1 poster on 2+2 for years.

He should get leeway times a hundred. In my view, this is a business, and the goal here isn't to apply every rule 100% equally to every member. This is about creating a popular and profitable site. And Diablo does that more than anyone else around here and gets nothing but entertainment in return.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think we should be banning Diablo ever for basically any reason. He is, IMO, the overall #1 poster on 2+2 for years.

He should get leeway times a hundred. In my view, this is a business, and the goal here isn't to apply every rule 100% equally to every member. This is about creating a popular and profitable site. And Diablo does that more than anyone else around here and gets nothing but entertainment in return.

[/ QUOTE ]

For that most part, I agree with Superman.

But as I've said in the past, specific and arbitrary rules shouldn't be used when dealing with almost anything that isn't spam related. Specific rules often remove the ability to make judgement calls.

However...

The temp. ban doesn't seem like a specific policy or rule that I have ever seen posted on these forums. That was just a judgement call made by Dynasty.

[Ed Miller]

[ QUOTE ]
The temp. ban doesn't seem like a specific policy or rule that I have ever seen posted on these forums. That was just a judgement call made by Dynasty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Diablo is exactly the kind of person who has helped make this site so successful. He's been around for years.

He also behaves like an adult. There's no reason at all to "send him a message" by "suspending" him for any period of time. If he posts something you think absolutely must come down, then take it down and politely explain to him why it was removed.

There's a big difference between an 18 year old guy who can't control his behavior and barely posts anything useful and a 35 year old guy who is rational and mature and who has been giving to us for years.

If the "system" we have set up involves giving people like Diablo "time outs" then the system needs to change. Big time.

[AngryCola]

I'm not saying he made the right call. But the simplicity of it being nothing more than one person's mistake seems better than a mod being able to duck responsibility for an action because 'rule 78-f was violated.'

Still, that point is slightly OT. The point of this thread probably should be that many of us, including myself, believe the decision to temp. ban Diablo was wrong. One person's judgement is responsible for this action, so the situation is pretty simple. No system was responsible for this.

[astroglide]

i'm not a fan of the 'suspension' idea at all. to me, either they listen to reason or they don't. if somebody can't chill after a pm, i think they're ready for a dirt nap. if they can, then a temporary ban just comes off to me as a "know your place" kind of action. but hey, i'm the one who started the unorthodox * system when i became a moderator in oot.

i can see how this is particularly incensing given how many people are friends of diablo personally, or at least enjoyed his posts (which probably means all of us). i'm a personal friend of his too. we all know he's a reasonable guy.

but i'm sure dynasty is going to be a reasonable guy here too. i think everybody agrees that his decision to suspend diablo was a mistake, and i'm sure he understands that, so there's no need to bash.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
there's no need to bash.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not a fan of the 'suspension' idea at all. to me, either they listen to reason or they don't. if somebody can't chill after a pm, i think they're ready for a dirt nap.

[/ QUOTE ]

It works on some people. Out of the very few posters I have temp. banned, I can think of three who came back from the suspension as better posters. I can understand your perspective, though.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To be clear, the parties very much want the thread deleted.

[/ QUOTE ]

The parties need to grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. It's way out of line for anybody to be posting such personal information about others.

El Diablo's suspension (how come nobody uses that term but me?) is reduced to six hours, ending it now.

[/ QUOTE ]

He said he heard they were dating. That's really not that personal, they could have just denied it or laughed about it or ignored it. It's not like he said they were caught [censored] in the mens room at the tropicana and posted a video and their #'s.

It's also not like he posted pictures of someone without their permission.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. I think it's pretty silly that many of the "rules" in place around ehre seem to be designed more for children than rational adults. If you need as much protection from yourself as many of the moderators on this site seem anxious to afford than posting on this forum is probably not for you.

Also, I think this thread is a good example of one that should have just been moved to this forum. If you really had a problem with it but couldn't make the irrevocable decision to nuke it then jsut put it here. the bit about another one going up after you delete the first one doesn't make much sense to me. If you really think it would then PM Diablo and explain what happened. Like many people here have said, he's a pretty reasonable guy and he won't just put up a new one for the sake of frustrating people.

[[censored]]

I think you could make a reasonable case that one of the primary focuses of OOT has been about people's lives outside of the forum. Thus just posting about someone's personal life should should not be reason to ban unless the intent is obviously mean spirited in nature.

I think there needs to be a judgement made about content and intent. Now no one would argue that a poster should be banned for posting something like I hear [censored] and wacki have become friends outside of 2+2 or something similar. Also things like so and so got really drunk and did x stupid thing has never been a problem.

On the other hand posting something like I hear "evan and bigsteve" are butt buddies would obviously be way out of line and deserving of a ban.

This is where intent comes in. El Diablo's post wasn't Jason and Mslif are [censored] or some other lewd question. It was simply stating that there was a rumor of them dating. This is where intent comes in. I think its clear El Diablo didnt have any malicious intent.

They could easily ignore said post without any harm or embarrassment coming to them or choose to respond. Or if it was a problem for some reason either could ask a mod to delete or lock the thread as was done in the other instance.

Also I have never nor will I ever believe that all posters should be treated equally. Instead I believe 2+2 should be moderated with a caste system that treats the quality posters better than it treats others. It just makes good sense to me.

[Mike Haven]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think we should be banning Diablo ever for basically any reason. He is, IMO, the overall #1 poster on 2+2 for years.

He should get leeway times a hundred. In my view, this is a business, and the goal here isn't to apply every rule 100% equally to every member. This is about creating a popular and profitable site. And Diablo does that more than anyone else around here and gets nothing but entertainment in return.

Diablo is exactly the kind of person who has helped make this site so successful. He's been around for years.

He also behaves like an adult. There's no reason at all to "send him a message" by "suspending" him for any period of time. If he posts something you think absolutely must come down, then take it down and politely explain to him why it was removed.

There's a big difference between an 18 year old guy who can't control his behavior and barely posts anything useful and a 35 year old guy who is rational and mature and who has been giving to us for years.

If the "system" we have set up involves giving people like Diablo "time outs" then the system needs to change. Big time.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hear, hear, Ed.

As always: perfect strategy in a nutshell.

[Evan]

Your post makes perfect sense to me.

[B Dids]

WRT giving Diablo credit.

I like him a lot, I respect him a lot. However, from what I know, he wasn't just posting a rumor he heard. He was digging up information from other people and baiting jason in other posts.

Diablo hasn't posted much in the way of meaningful strat in a long time. I agree he's a fantastic poster when he wants to be, but I'm not sure that's a life time pass to make other people's lives difficult.

Still, I think the ban was incorrect, but I don't like pretending that he did nothing wrong, or that we should just ignore it when long time posters are going out of their way to be dicks to other people.

I think the rule that astro stated in OOT is perfect. Don't post stuff about other people unless you know they won't mind. Diablo is clearly smart enough to use context to figure out that jason and mslif have tried to keep things under wraps.

[citanul]

First off, the worst thing about this whole thing is I totally missed the thread before it got killed or whatever, so I don't get to know the gossip!

I think that everything important beyond that has been said:

1) there should be clear rules
2) not making exceptions is absurd
3) not treating people differently is absurd

I've got no problem sending a PM or IM to a guy saying why what he did was wrong, and trashing a bad post, who has 5000 good strategy posts, while at the same time banning or suspending some clown with 30 posts who does the exact same thing. The maturity of the poster should be considered very strongly.

sidenote: El D still posts strategy, just less often than he used to, and less directly than he used to.

meh.

btw, Dynasty, post some strategy man, you used to post good strategy from what i remember.

c

[timprov]

[ QUOTE ]

Diablo hasn't posted much in the way of meaningful strat in a long time. I agree he's a fantastic poster when he wants to be, but I'm not sure that's a life time pass to make other people's lives difficult.

Still, I think the ban was incorrect, but I don't like pretending that he did nothing wrong, or that we should just ignore it when long time posters are going out of their way to be dicks to other people.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well put.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
1) there should be clear rules


[/ QUOTE ]

For the most part, I still disagree with this.

[ QUOTE ]
2) not making exceptions is absurd

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? If it's a good enough idea to be made a rule, it shouldn't only apply to some people. I've always maintained that once you make something a stated policy or rule, it doesn't make sense to allow certain people to break it.

If a rule is flexible enough to allow some people to break it, while others have it enforced against them rigidly, I don't think it should have been made a rule in the first place.

Guidelines have always been the best way to go, IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
3) not treating people differently is absurd

[/ QUOTE ]

I've always agreed with this.

Since there is a good chance nobody wants to hear me go on and on about my thoughts about rules, I'll shut up about it for now. Most of you guys already know what I think anyway.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) there should be clear rules


[/ QUOTE ]

For the most part, I still disagree with this.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't think there should be many clear rules, just that those that exist should be clear. my agreement and reasoning for your other points follows from this, i think. so i'm not quoting any more.

as a totally off the wall and Ulysses/El D loving kinda guy idea, what would people think about the following, as he's clearly 1) the type of guy who this site wants around in general and specific, 2) got a good head on his shoulders - pokerwise, lifewise, and rationality wise -

what would people think about giving him access to this area? i don't know what would be entailed in that, or if he would want to do it, but i think that there's some matters of rules and such that he'd have a good perspective on, both due to his intelligence and his closer to long run view of this site than many of us.

dan

[nolanfan34]

So, I missed the original thread, WHAT'S THE ANSWER, DID IT SAY??

I think the play I would have made is probably to delete the thread if it was requested by the parties who are being talked about. Then PM'ed the poster, telling them why.

I do sort of agree overall that the posters have a right to personal privacy though. I'd bet if J.A. Sucker or Boris posted a real life pic of El D, with his name, for example, he probably wouldn't be too happy about it.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]

as a totally off the wall and Ulysses/El D loving kinda guy idea, what would people think about the following, as he's clearly 1) the type of guy who this site wants around in general and specific, 2) got a good head on his shoulders - pokerwise, lifewise, and rationality wise -

[/ QUOTE ]

I nominate El Diablo for the Beats, Brags and Variance forum moderator.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
I nominate El Diablo for the Beats, Brags and Variance forum moderator.

[/ QUOTE ]

haha, i think that's a nice way of getting him access to stuff and not encumbering him with needless responsibility. he has previously said he wants to not be a moderator, but if he's interested in the other stuff, he would probably not mind being the mod of the bb&v forum, since moderating it is unnecessary. also, because it's his playground.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I nominate El Diablo for the Beats, Brags and Variance forum moderator.

[/ QUOTE ]

haha, i think that's a nice way of getting him access to stuff and not encumbering him with needless responsibility. he has previously said he wants to not be a moderator, but if he's interested in the other stuff, he would probably not mind being the mod of the bb&v forum, since moderating it is unnecessary. also, because it's his playground.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly my thoughts. Anyone else have an opinion?

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone else have an opinion?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm almost positive that Diablo has always been welcome to be a mod. If someone can politely persuade him to do it, BBV should be just fine.

[citanul]

he has just told me that he has no interest in any of these responsibilities or accesses.

btw, ibiliti looks pretty stupid.

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]

Diablo hasn't posted much in the way of meaningful strat in a long time. I agree he's a fantastic poster when he wants to be, but I'm not sure that's a life time pass to make other people's lives difficult.


[/ QUOTE ]

I totally disagree with this. It's just not posted in a straight foward manner. Above all it's his perspective and experience that is a huge asset to the high-stakes NL forum. I think it's retarded that him making someone's life "difficult" is even a blip on the screen compared to making sure diablo continues to participate.

I know you said you disagreed with the banning and I appreciate your nuanced reason. I just disagree with this part.

El Diablo should essentially be immune from banning. I think Ed hit the nail on the head.

[B Dids]

There's no need to have an argument about if he contributes as much. The point is simply that he's no longer the proflific and AS valuable strat poster as he was back when he was Uly. I'm just not sure what he brings to the table warrents saying "you can do whatever you want", but then I don't think that we should be saying that to anybody ever.

[astroglide]

diablo does not want to be a moderator. i infer that it's because he feels like some sort of official association with 2+2 will limit his ability to express himself, or rather that it would change the way that people interpret what he does express. i can understand that.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just not sure what he brings to the table warrents saying "you can do whatever you want"

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think he'd be limiting himself to "X and Y are dating" if he had free reign to say whatever he wanted. This is all pretty silly imo. Do you guys realize we have this long thread because someone said that some other people were dating? I thought that was an okay thing to say post-puberty.

[jason_t]

Can El Diablo's thread be locked now please? And can we please find a solution to this ThinMan problem. Please edit his post so it is empty.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't think he'd be limiting himself to "X and Y are dating" if he had free reign to say whatever he wanted. This is all pretty silly imo. Do you guys realize we have this long thread because someone said that some other people were dating? I thought that was an okay thing to say post-puberty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah this is my feelings exactly. it was a post about dating. I mean I just don't see the problem and I thought Jason's response was ideal. They are dating and people seemed pleased or indifferent about it. It seems like if the post would have been left alone, jason would have given his response or ignored it. Either way it wouldn't have been a big deal at all from what I can see.

Now in fairness to those involved I think there any posts in regards to sex or things of that nature would be over the line and subject to deletion etc. But I guess to me a dating announcment is just something you smile at go "oh cool" or "oh that's interesting" or even "oh who cares" not some dirty secret that has to be dealt with severly.

Again I thought Jason's response has pretty much put the whole thing to rest.

[B Dids]

Jeremy,

I know this is a point I made in OOT, but I'd like to make it here as well.

I think that's an awfully optimistic view of OOT. Everybody here is an adult, dating=sex, and sex=idiot 19 year old posters with SIIHP jokes and worse.

I think it's probably in 2p2's best interest to try and curtail the abuse our female posters get as much as we can. If that means being a little trigger happy on threads like this, I'm all for it.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
dating=sex, and sex=idiot 19 year old posters with SIIHP jokes and worse

[/ QUOTE ]
Do people really get offended by someone saying "SIIHP"? This is a serious question. Let's say that thread was left unlocked and got 50 replies saying "OMG Jason you should SII mslif's P!!!!!" Is that something that would piss people off? Personally I wouldn't care if someone posted a thread about my girlfriend and joefuckhead23 told me I should bang her in the ass. I just don't see why that's a bad thing. Maybe some people do, I would like to understand why.

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's probably in 2p2's best interest to try and curtail the abuse our female posters get as much as we can

[/ QUOTE ]
Do you think the SIIHP comment would qualify as abuse? Personally I don't, based on context of where it was said. It's sort of equivalent to being told to shut up, which I think we can all agree is not abuse.


I'm just really tired of so many people around here being ultra sensitive.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I don't think he'd be limiting himself to "X and Y are dating" if he had free reign to say whatever he wanted. This is all pretty silly imo. Do you guys realize we have this long thread because someone said that some other people were dating? I thought that was an okay thing to say post-puberty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah this is my feelings exactly. it was a post about dating. I mean I just don't see the problem and I thought Jason's response was ideal. They are dating and people seemed pleased or indifferent about it. It seems like if the post would have been left alone, jason would have given his response or ignored it. Either way it wouldn't have been a big deal at all from what I can see.

Now in fairness to those involved I think there any posts in regards to sex or things of that nature would be over the line and subject to deletion etc. But I guess to me a dating announcment is just something you smile at go "oh cool" or "oh that's interesting" or even "oh who cares" not some dirty secret that has to be dealt with severly.

Again I thought Jason's response has pretty much put the whole thing to rest.

[/ QUOTE ]
I like you a lot more than I used to.

[B Dids]

I'm not saying SIIHP is offensive at all. Mostly just that it's an example of lowbrow OOT humor. I do think it's true that things that are much more offensive will likely be said as well.

My biggest beef with SIIHP is that I used to be great with the "cornhole" jokes and they're taken all the joy out of a good ass sex line by driving it into the ground.

Regarding people being sensitive- on of the tasks that we take on as mods is balancing all that. A lot of what we have to do is cater to the lowest common demonitator (not most apt description, but I think it makes my poin more clear) in these cases.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Regarding people being sensitive- on of the tasks that we take on as mods is balancing all that. A lot of what we have to do is cater to the lowest common demonitator (not most apt description, but I think it makes my poin more clear) in these cases.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree. I don't see any reason to cater to people that are wrong, whether it's as a mod or not.

[B Dids]

But Evan, it's still a definition of "wrong" that's subject to interpretation. It's probably in the best interests of 2p2 to lean more towards the standards set by somebody more conservative than well, you. (I don't mean that personally, it's just that based on these conversations and the fact that you're obviously on the more liberal end of the spectrum when it comes to these things).