|
|
#51
11-16-2005, 06:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Who has the most posts?
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't mind jake. There are a lot worse posters here than him, like maybe half of them, and they were often decent. I do think that after, oh, the 5000th posting of the picture of cows in response to virtually any post someone else made, the very minimal funniness of it had worn pretty damn thin. I think I might have been alone on that, actually. But his regular posts seemed okay to me. I don't think OOT is any better for his being booted. At least now that the cow pictures have stopped. [/ QUOTE ] Was that Jake? I thought that was all Patrick's doing. 
|
|
#52
11-16-2005, 07:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who has the most posts?
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't mind jake. There are a lot worse posters here than him, like maybe half of them, and they were often decent. I do think that after, oh, the 5000th posting of the picture of cows in response to virtually any post someone else made, the very minimal funniness of it had worn pretty damn thin. I think I might have been alone on that, actually. But his regular posts seemed okay to me. I don't think OOT is any better for his being booted. At least now that the cow pictures have stopped. [/ QUOTE ] This really gets at the reason why he should have been reprimanded in some way. It's one thing to make 100 posts per day, but it's something else when a percentage of those posts are continually aimed at busting other posters' balls for supposedly cluttering the forum. That being said, there's absolutely no reason to permanently ban Jake.
|
|
#53
11-16-2005, 07:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who has the most posts?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] but thankfully he is [censored] [/ QUOTE ] he wasn't [censored] [/ QUOTE ] Yes he was. This is from his profile (viewable by mods only). banned by [censored], almost 20k posts without one once of content. When jakethebake e-mailed me several days later, I lifted the banned temporarily under the condition that he contact both [censored] and Mat Sklansky immediately. [censored] was already on vacation at the time. It doesn't seem possible for mods to view a top posters list. The whole Admin section is different after the most recent upgrade. In fact, the Admin sections seems to be the main reason for the upgrade [/ QUOTE ] Great, unbiased moderation there. What a joke. [/ QUOTE ] How many people are going to fail to realize that there was never a premise of unbaised moderation in what [censored] was doing.
|
|
#54
11-16-2005, 07:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who has the most posts?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I didn't mind jake. There are a lot worse posters here than him, like maybe half of them, and they were often decent. I do think that after, oh, the 5000th posting of the picture of cows in response to virtually any post someone else made, the very minimal funniness of it had worn pretty damn thin. I think I might have been alone on that, actually. But his regular posts seemed okay to me. I don't think OOT is any better for his being booted. At least now that the cow pictures have stopped. [/ QUOTE ] Was that Jake? I thought that was all Patrick's doing. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I think the dung pile picture and the hot tub pic account for about 95% of Patrick's post count.
|
|
#55
11-16-2005, 07:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who has the most posts?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] but thankfully he is [censored] [/ QUOTE ] he wasn't [censored] [/ QUOTE ] Yes he was. This is from his profile (viewable by mods only). banned by [censored], almost 20k posts without one once of content. When jakethebake e-mailed me several days later, I lifted the banned temporarily under the condition that he contact both [censored] and Mat Sklansky immediately. [censored] was already on vacation at the time. It doesn't seem possible for mods to view a top posters list. The whole Admin section is different after the most recent upgrade. In fact, the Admin sections seems to be the main reason for the upgrade [/ QUOTE ] Great, unbiased moderation there. What a joke. [/ QUOTE ] How many people are going to fail to realize that there was never a premise of unbaised moderation in what [censored] was doing. [/ QUOTE ] Why was he made a moderator, then? And more importantly, why is he still a moderator?
|
|
#56
11-16-2005, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who has the most posts?
If moderation can't be unbiased, it shouldn't be done at all. As I said a few times in the Paul Phllips thread....
2003'er here. I lurked for a few months before I registered.
|
|
#58
11-16-2005, 07:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who has the most posts?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] does anyone else ever notice how there are tons of people who regged in 2002, 2004, and 2005 but very few from 2003? [/ QUOTE ] 2003 WHAT [/ QUOTE ]Holla
|
|
#59
11-16-2005, 07:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who has the most posts?
Your question, and the question below you are for Mat to answer.
Basically, [censored] proposed that he be a mod and ban people as per his desire, the vast majority of OOT posters thought this would be a great idea, Mat agreed and bannings commenced (and OOT got a lot better).
|
|
#60
11-16-2005, 07:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who has the most posts?
[ QUOTE ]
If moderation can't be unbiased, it shouldn't be done at all. [/ QUOTE ] [censored] and those that supported his plan were tired of all the crap threads/posts in OOT. By definition his plan was biased against the dumb people starting dumb threads and making dumb posts. It was biased but it made OOT a better place.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
