Paul Phillips was right
 

about the moderators.

Astroglide threatened to ban me today because I dare question his power-mongering and thread deletion.

Ok--ban me. I spend too much time at 2+2 anyway. The strategy posts have become repetitive and increasing censorship makes the value of various forums here worthless.

Plus Sklansky is a crackpot whose post are now being ridiculed in print magazines. He is setting back the image gains of poker with his weirdo posts.

So ban me Mr. Nazi Astroglide.

(note--I'm a hebe so I can say use the n word...kind of like black guys using their n word)

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

I'm guessing you'll get your wish.

Which print magazines are making fun of David Sklansky?

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing you'll get your wish.


[/ QUOTE ]


Gonna miss u man!!!!!!

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

anyone find it ironic that the nazis did pretty much the opposite of banning people? it's been awhile since I've taken history, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't "gehen Sie hinaus! Sie können nicht hier bleiben! Deutschland ist zu exklusiv!"

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

astro does most of his stuff behind the scenes (unlike [censored]).

We needed another battle royale thread about moderation. Thanks for starting it. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

There's only limited recourse on the internet...besides the insult isn't meant to be historically correct--just insulting...

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

In case anyone missed it, the Zoo is now like the old OOT. They have like 20 duplicate threads mocking an original thread.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

Wow, you are pathetic.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

tek - i know i will miss your posts - many of them either made me laugh or agree with something i hadn't considered...

but asking to go will probably get you just that...so long.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
There's only limited recourse on the internet...besides the insult isn't meant to be historically correct--just insulting...

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, I figured you'd be banned before you could respond to my insight. now this is just awkward.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

Well he has a 3rd star now so I guess the deed is done.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

incase anybody missed the 'you know you are a child of the 60s when...' thread before i locked it, see http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...Number=4083785

this resulted in a 'why did the mods lock the child of the 60s thread?' with no text in the body of the post by tek, which i deleted and contacted him via pm to say it was locked because it sucked.

he pmd back and said that the zoo and science/philosophy forums might as well be eliminated, and that 'power corrupts'. i suggested i am not the moderator of the zoo, and also pointed out that oot gets 4 times as many posts as the zoo and is the busiest forum on 2+2 by a mile so it needs more vigilant policing to maintain a high signal to noise ratio.

he didn't respond, but started yet another thread at http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...Number=4102012 to complain about inconsistent moderating. i locked it and pmd him again to say that he could bitch and moan all he wants privately, but if he keeps starting crap threads in oot he is going to be banned (and that i would ban him from just oot if i could, but i can't). i noted to him that this was because of the useless threads, not because he was disagreeing with me.

so in summary, this is basically all happened because of his obnoxious defense of the first link, a copypasted email joke. the thread did have a fair amount of content from other posters, but i think allowing the dumping of email jokes onto this forum is a bad precedent to set. people will see them, come out of the woodwork with their own, and the place will start to look as unfortunate as so many cubicle dwellers' office inboxes.

the OP of the 60s thing also posted http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...Number=4084521 at the same time, which was locked.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

IP ban him please. otherwise they just come back and flame some more.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

Dude, you don't need to explain yourself. If I recall, at the beginning of the [censored] regime, you are the one who said, "If SIIHP is wrong, I don't want to be right."

QOTY.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

oh, i'm fine with the decision - it wasn't a justification. i just thought i'd record it in summary here so that any other moderator looking at his account can read this thread (i linked to it in the private notes field of his account), and i thought it might be interesting to some readers to hear how it got to this point.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
We needed another battle royale thread about moderation. Thanks for starting it. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...ttleroyale.jpg

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]

this resulted in a 'why did the mods lock the child of the 60s thread?' with no text in the body of the post by tek, which i deleted and contacted him via pm to say it was locked because it sucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

A thread was locked for no other reason than it didn't amuse a mod?

I don't mean to start a whole thing here, but seriously?

Note that I haven't seen the thread in question, though the fact that it may or may not have sucked is irrelevant to the discussion IMO.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
(note--I'm a hebe so I can say use the n word...kind of like black guys using their n word)

[/ QUOTE ]
This doesn't make any sense. You'd have to be using the slur for Jewish people for this to be correct. Or you'd have to be German.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]

(note--I'm a hebe so I can say use the n word...kind of like black guys using their n word)

[/ QUOTE ]
I can just imagine two orthodox jews encountering each other on the street.

Jew #1: "SHALOM MY NAZI!!!"
Jew #2: "WAZZUP ADOLF?!?"

or...maybe not.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

would that be jazi's, like wiggers?

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

KneeCo,

Please continue reading astro's post to see his very good explanation re: posting of random email joke spams to OOT.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

nice work Astro, dude sucked from his inception anyways.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
KneeCo,

Please continue reading astro's post to see his very good explanation re: posting of random email joke spams to OOT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough, it seems perfectly justified to want to discourage people from posting forwards. Just so long as we don't start locking threads just because some people think they suck, because then there wont be any threads life and I'll have to do something with my life. In other words, one would hope that the thread would have been locked for being a copy/pasted forward even if it was absolutely hilarious and/or brilliant (which would be a first for a forward, but anyway).

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

"A thread was locked for no other reason than it didn't amuse a mod?"

No one here is amused by stupid forwarded email crap

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
"A thread was locked for no other reason than it didn't amuse a mod?"

No one here is amused by stupid forwarded email crap

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn, and I was going to post "10 reasons why cats are really not the pets, but the 'owner' is."

craig

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

craig,

pls post that ASAP, it sounds very ROFL

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

I'd just like to say that if astro deleted posts based on his own taste, that would be a godod thing.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
craig,

pls post that ASAP, it sounds very ROFL

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you trying to get me banned? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] If so, I can just do it myself. It's like suicide when a mod bans himself. In fact, I think Camus, in his essay on suicide, mentions it is rational for a mod to want to ban himself sometimes.

craig

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

this resulted in a 'why did the mods lock the child of the 60s thread?' with no text in the body of the post by tek, which i deleted and contacted him via pm to say it was locked because it sucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

A thread was locked for no other reason than it didn't amuse a mod?

I don't mean to start a whole thing here, but seriously?

Note that I haven't seen the thread in question, though the fact that it may or may not have sucked is irrelevant to the discussion IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. There was no reason to lock the first thread. That was truly dumb.

Astro, you're a smart guy, but if you're just going to lock things pretty much on random whims, that's pointless.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
craig,

pls post that ASAP, it sounds very ROFL

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you trying to get me banned? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] If so, I can just do it myself. It's like suicide when a mod bans himself. In fact, I think Camus, in his essay on suicide, mentions it is rational for a mod to want to ban himself sometimes.

[/ QUOTE ]
Speaking of which, are you going to kill yourself any time soon? I have a hundo that says you'll do it tonight.

Encouragingly yours,
Mason Hellmuth

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

(note--I'm a hebe so I can say use the n word...kind of like black guys using their n word)

[/ QUOTE ]
I can just imagine two orthodox jews encountering each other on the street.

Jew #1: "SHALOM MY NAZI!!!"
Jew #2: "WAZZUP ADOLF?!?"

or...maybe not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I got a serious grin out of that.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
"A thread was locked for no other reason than it didn't amuse a mod?"

No one here is amused by stupid forwarded email crap

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you're apparently wrong about that, as the thread got to four pages.

Discouraging someone from just posting joke e-mails makes sense, but that can be done between the moderator and the poster better than between the moderator and the forum, since its not a forum issue, it's a poster issue. The people who brought the thread to four pages were obviously fine with it and at that point the thread wasn't about the OP anymore.

It's not the crime of the century, but it was a bit of a sloppy and excessive way of handling it.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

Get all the goddam family guy posts off of this forum, or make them into one thread; that's the best thing a moderator can do in my opininon.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

I can't believe that show ever got popular.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
about the moderators.

Astroglide threatened to ban me today because I dare question his power-mongering and thread deletion.

Ok--ban me. I spend too much time at 2+2 anyway. The strategy posts have become repetitive and increasing censorship makes the value of various forums here worthless.

Plus Sklansky is a crackpot whose post are now being ridiculed in print magazines. He is setting back the image gains of poker with his weirdo posts.

So ban me Mr. Nazi Astroglide.

(note--I'm a hebe so I can say use the n word...kind of like black guys using their n word)

[/ QUOTE ]

You've trolled 2+2 for too long anyway. Unfortunately you have't done it in the forum i moderate or astro wouldn't have to 'threaten' you.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

[ QUOTE ]
I can't believe that show ever got popular.

[/ QUOTE ]


-falls over-

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

I feel vindicated.

Re: Paul Phillips was right
 

"It's not the crime of the century, but it was a bit of a sloppy and excessive way of handling it."

Please become a moderator. 2p2 is filled with amazingly intelligent moderators who perform their duties like jackasses and as if they're actually doing something important.

-Michael