Discussion II about the Suspension List
ZCore13
suspension list not updated with that info
Quote: 100xOddswhat did lilredrooster do?
suspension list not updated with that info
Three days for dropping fifty or sixty F-Bombs in a post per BBB. Uncensored and unmasked ones, clear, "Keep it PG," violation.
Wikipedia (among other sources) begs to differ.Quote: IbeatyouracesI've heard thousands of F bombs in PG movies. This forum is rated G.
Quote: Wikipediause of one of the harsher "sexually-derived words" as an expletive will initially incur at least a PG-13 rating.
BTW, love the sig... Whaddya think's in the burgers?!!
Quote: JoemanWikipedia (among other sources) begs to differ.
BTW, love the sig... Whaddya think's in the burgers?!!
Most of them were probably older movies long before there was a PG-13. BTW, I'm not saying the suspension was deserved or not, but whether you mask those words of not, we all know whay they are. So why even worry about it?
And to answer your last question....I don't know. 😁
Quote: NathanI have a friend on here who wants to become a better poster because there have been rumors that people are beginning to think my friend is an annoying Troll. My friend has also been suspended from here a few times. Any advice for my friend on how to become a better poster? :)
Tell your friend to not post annoying posts or start threads that have just been discussed in other threads already. I think that about covers it.
That's the secret to a happy life at WoV.
Quote: AxelWolfI was going to make a list but then I realized if your friend has to ask the question in the first place there is no hope for him.
Come on, make the list. :) My friend wouldn't ask if they really didn't want to become a better poster on here. :P
Quote: NathanCome on, make the list. :) My friend wouldn't ask if they really didn't want to become a better poster on here. :P
It's Saturday, the mods have better things to do today!
Quote: DeMangoIt's Saturday, the mods have better things to do today!
To be fair, I was talking to Axel. ;)
My name is not in green. So I can't be an official ModeratorQuote: NathanTo be fair, I was talking to Axel. ;)
Can I be a secret moderator? Who knows? Everything regarding secret moderatorservice will be denied either way. Just ask everyone who gets biased treatment.I meant to quote Derangego. (-;
Quote: DeMangoIt's Saturday, the mods have better things to do today!
It's February. This one doesn't.
How not to be a s$% poster? Write properly, including spelling, grammar, and especially paragraph breaks. Have a subject and stick to it. Have a point and make it. Perhaps do a search first to ensure you're not making the 706th version of the same topic. And have fun while being respectful.
T'ain't hard. Good luck to friend-o.
Well F*** you. 😆Quote: Face
How not to be a s$% poster? Write properly, including spelling, grammar, and especially paragraph breaks.
1. make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.
Definition of troll:
a mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.
When someone is stated to be "trolling" we are not accusing them of "having a very ugly appearance." We are saying that, by review of their recent posts, its appears that they are trying to post provocative statements in order to elicit angry responses.
Why suspend people for use of the word "trolling?" Moderators, please review this practice.
Can we say: "I think you are posting provocative posts just to elicit angry responses" without getting suspended????
Quote: MrVNathan, tell your "friend" that her posts need to demonstrate both erudition and a sense of abashed contrition.
That's the secret to a happy life at WoV.
I had to look up erudition. It means, "knowledge acquired by study, research, etc.; learning; scholarship."
Yes, agreed 100%. Secret to a life worth living too.
Quote: gordonm888Can we say: "I think you are posting provocative posts just to elicit angry responses" without getting suspended????
Yes, you can say that.
Quote: AxelWolfWell F*** you. 😆
Axel are you the friend Nathan is asking for? Your phone should have autocorrect to fix some of those mistakes 🤣
Quote: gordonm888Definition of trolling:
1. make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.
Definition of troll:
a mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.
When someone is stated to be "trolling" we are not accusing them of "having a very ugly appearance." We are saying that, by review of their recent posts, its appears that they are trying to post provocative statements in order to elicit angry responses.
Why suspend people for use of the word "trolling?" Moderators, please review this practice.
Can we say: "I think you are posting provocative posts just to elicit angry responses" without getting suspended????
I’ve always loathed trolls and never understood the phenomenon .... until the political thread on this forum.
I find myself wanting to post stuff there for no other reason than to get the conservative’s panties in a bunch. Things like overly gushing about how Obama was the best president of our lifetime by any reasonable and objective metric. Some of the opinions in there are so diametrically opposed to my own, that there’s really no chance in any sort of thoughtful discourse that would lead to anyone changing their opinions, so why not twist the knife and make things interesting?
I never do it though. Maybe a meme here or there but I really don’t consider it trolling. While getting someone who disagrees with you riled up over politics can be fun at face value, all it Really does at the end of the day is create enemies. And I ALWAYS try to make a point to separate someone’s political opinions from them as a person.
My parents, sister, and girlfriend, and most of her family are all fairly staunch republicans. If I truly disliked and wanted to troll anyone I disagree with politicially, my life would be pretty rough.
Quote: gamerfreakQuote: gordonm888Definition of trolling:
1. make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.
Definition of troll:
a mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.
When someone is stated to be "trolling" we are not accusing them of "having a very ugly appearance." We are saying that, by review of their recent posts, its appears that they are trying to post provocative statements in order to elicit angry responses.
Why suspend people for use of the word "trolling?" Moderators, please review this practice.
Can we say: "I think you are posting provocative posts just to elicit angry responses" without getting suspended????
I’ve always loathed trolls and never understood the phenomenon .... until the political thread on this forum.
I find myself wanting to post stuff there for no other reason than to get the conservative’s panties in a bunch. Things like overly gushing about how Obama was the best president of our lifetime by any reasonable and objective metric. Some of the opinions in there are so diametrically opposed to my own, that there’s really no chance in any sort of thoughtful discourse that would lead to anyone changing their opinions, so why not twist the knife and make things interesting?
I never do it though. Maybe a meme here or there but I really don’t consider it trolling. While getting someone who disagrees with you riled up over politics can be fun at face value, all it Really does at the end of the day is create enemies. And I ALWAYS try to make a point to separate someone’s political opinions from them as a person.
My parents, sister, and girlfriend, and most of her family are all fairly staunch republicans. If I truly disliked and wanted to troll anyone I disagree with politicially, my life would be pretty rough.
You touch on something really important to me. I grew up in politics, and only stopped being active while it was illegal for me to participate.
In my experience, it was a question of different paths to reach common goals, operating from mostly similar values. There are plenty of historical records of truly loathsome garbage written about nearly every President and Administration (see FDR and Lincoln for surprisingly ugly rhetoric, for example), so I guess it's nothing new. But things have changed in my lifetime.
It's almost like a loyalty pledge is required now. My way or the highway. If I'm right, you MUST be wrong. There doesn't seem to be any room for disagreeing with an approach or a value standard while still respecting the person. I think that's a HUGE loss of civility and fellowship among Americans, and it really needs to change back. Which starts with all of us.
Quote: gamerfreakSome of the opinions in there are so diametrically opposed to my own, that there’s really no chance in any sort of thoughtful discourse that would lead to anyone changing their opinions...
The error (IMO) is thinking that changing an opinion is the goal.
If you wanted to be physically strong, would you engage in effort that flowed effortlessly? If you wanted to expand your knowledge, would you study that which you already know?
Living in an echo chamber makes you insane, or at least appear so, and likely is an ingredient in breeding extremism. I mean, who do you prefer debating with? Someone who appears to understand both sides and generates unique commentary and/or opinions, or someone who merely parrots talking head hot takes? What good does me discussing politics with AZD do me, when we already agree on most things? Just sit there saying "Yup, yup, yup" to stroke my own ego? Why would I do that?
I'd rather debate Mission. Neither of us will "change each other's minds", but each of us will get a much better understanding about the "other side" and may gain understanding on what each other's key issues are, and understanding is what could lead to real compromise and an actual answer, a possible solution to a problem. You NEED your view to be attacked. That's not a "win" for your "opponent". Rather, it's a test to reveal where your stance is weak, which allows you to make changes, which makes you a stronger and more well rounded individual.
Or you could rub your peen and giggle that you made some stranger upset for an hour. It's your life. How do you want to spend it?
Quote: FaceThe error (IMO) is thinking that changing an opinion is the goal.
If you wanted to be physically strong, would you engage in effort that flowed effortlessly? If you wanted to expand your knowledge, would you study that which you already know?
Living in an echo chamber makes you insane, or at least appear so, and likely is an ingredient in breeding extremism. I mean, who do you prefer debating with? Someone who appears to understand both sides and generates unique commentary and/or opinions, or someone who merely parrots talking head hot takes? What good does me discussing politics with AZD do me, when we already agree on most things? Just sit there saying "Yup, yup, yup" to stroke my own ego? Why would I do that?
I'd rather debate Mission. Neither of us will "change each other's minds", but each of us will get a much better understanding about the "other side" and may gain understanding on what each other's key issues are, and understanding is what could lead to real compromise and an actual answer, a possible solution to a problem. You NEED your view to be attacked. That's not a "win" for your "opponent". Rather, it's a test to reveal where your stance is weak, which allows you to make changes, which makes you a stronger and more well rounded individual.
Or you could rub your peen and giggle that you made some stranger upset for an hour. It's your life. How do you want to spend it?
How funny that we said nearly the same thing at the same time, almost to the second . But under the new "rules", did I "win" because I posted first, or did you "win" because you had the last word?
Quote: beachbumbabsHow funny that we said nearly the same thing at the same time, almost to the second . But under the new "rules", did I "win" because I posted first, or did you "win" because you had the last word?
Hehe, I thought the exact same thing, and your post went and triggered me all over again (you've been doing that a LOT lately ;))
I think it all goes back to your impassioned statement that we "are at war". I don't know if you meant against those in power re: media or Russia with their media based interference, but it's stuck with me. My thoughts are still incubating, but...
I agree and I don't. I think I feel like... it's not that we're being actively controlled or influenced, but that said control and influence is a feature of the larger issue. I totally see all the rift and divide you lament; it's as clear as day. BUT, it seems I see it in secluded enclaves. Social media is one, whether Twit, Face, here, whatever. For sure public news commentary, YT comments, et al. But while that's very obvious and very real, I find there are still places I don't see that at all. It's not in my neighborhood. It's not in my locker room. A majority of my real life goes pretty much just as one would hope - reach out to someone and someone reaches back. Color, creed, red or blue, things are generally OK in my neck'o.
I guess I sort of feel like we're reaching the point of critical mass. Like, we all know fiat currency has no worth. It's but an idea that we all just go along with. It kind of feels like we are nearing that with media. I can still look at report or the resulting comments, disengage, and see things for what they really are. An opinion piece. A personal stance. But I do find, every now and again, where something that's obviously sensationalized for clicks hits me in a way that makes me forget that. It makes me accept it as Fully Real and totally skips that logic check that usually happens.
Stuff like that is what I call the danger. And when it comes to MSM at least, I don't feel like it's a mass conspiracy to control the populace. Rather, I think it's simply a feature of offering what sells. Facts are boring. Sensation sells. So sensation is what we get, and it's US, not the big bad MSM / LSM, that are asking for it.
I'm trying my best to implore US to be better. Not to control .gov or to control Big Cable, but simply to control self. To turn on, tune in, and drop out. There's something about this idea that I just can't let go of. Hearts and minds, after all. I guess I think if people start knowing one's self, loving one's self, and improving one's self, then all the pokes and prods from media, whether an innocent attempt at views or a purposeful attempt at implanting insurrection, will all be moot. No one will care because they're too busy tending gardens, pressing flowers, lathing billet, or whatever else one finds that turns them on.
OK, call it a tie or take the win, I've no preference. I got a third generation Kia headlight I need to make fourth generation, like, yesterday. Weeee!
I thought Clinton was the best Pres in our life time, even tho he had a weakness for a certain young girl.Quote: gamerfreakThings like overly gushing about how Obama was the best president of our lifetime by any reasonable and objective metric.
while I like Obama, I hated him bloating out National debt by $Trillions$ deficit.
I wanted Bill Clinton for Pres for 3rd term, via Hilary.
sigh
Quote: beachbumbabs
It's almost like a loyalty pledge is required now. My way or the highway. If I'm right, you MUST be wrong. There doesn't seem to be any room for disagreeing with an approach or a value standard while still respecting the person. I think that's a HUGE loss of civility and fellowship among Americans, and it really needs to change back. Which starts with all of us.
Most of Congress, the Senate and even the president himself have opinions somewhere in the middle and would be able to negotiate more freely if the interest of the lobbyists weren't in their back pocket. It's called corruption. Election campaign reform, redistricting, and removing lobbyists from the house would greatly alleviate these issues, and they are not difficult issues to resolve. It just takes a sense of morality and efforts to do so.
Blind, tacit support of a President who is breaking so many traditions (tax returns, maintaining business ties, his Twitter account, attacking the free press, attacking his own intelligence service, taunting other countries, and so on and so on) is plain wrong. Maybe that statement in itself is political. But I think it's more of looking at what is truly right and wrong and what a President should be. There's valuable discussion to have there, but few want to have it, because their support in their president is blind, like God.
The tax cuts are arguable. Immigration rights for children of illegals is arguable. Health care is arguable. But these arguments should be informed if you want to make a step forward in trying to have a debate. A lot of them aren't.
Quote: FaceHehe, I thought the exact same thing, and your post went and triggered me all over again (you've been doing that a LOT lately ;))
I think it all goes back to your impassioned statement that we "are at war". I don't know if you meant against those in power re: media or Russia with their media based interference, but it's stuck with me. My thoughts are still incubating, but...
I agree and I don't. I think I feel like... it's not that we're being actively controlled or influenced, but that said control and influence is a feature of the larger issue. I totally see all the rift and divide you lament; it's as clear as day. BUT, it seems I see it in secluded enclaves. Social media is one, whether Twit, Face, here, whatever. For sure public news commentary, YT comments, et al. But while that's very obvious and very real, I find there are still places I don't see that at all. It's not in my neighborhood. It's not in my locker room. A majority of my real life goes pretty much just as one would hope - reach out to someone and someone reaches back. Color, creed, red or blue, things are generally OK in my neck'o.
I guess I sort of feel like we're reaching the point of critical mass. Like, we all know fiat currency has no worth. It's but an idea that we all just go along with. It kind of feels like we are nearing that with media. I can still look at report or the resulting comments, disengage, and see things for what they really are. An opinion piece. A personal stance. But I do find, every now and again, where something that's obviously sensationalized for clicks hits me in a way that makes me forget that. It makes me accept it as Fully Real and totally skips that logic check that usually happens.
Stuff like that is what I call the danger. And when it comes to MSM at least, I don't feel like it's a mass conspiracy to control the populace. Rather, I think it's simply a feature of offering what sells. Facts are boring. Sensation sells. So sensation is what we get, and it's US, not the big bad MSM / LSM, that are asking for it.
I'm trying my best to implore US to be better. Not to control .gov or to control Big Cable, but simply to control self. To turn on, tune in, and drop out. There's something about this idea that I just can't let go of. Hearts and minds, after all. I guess I think if people start knowing one's self, loving one's self, and improving one's self, then all the pokes and prods from media, whether an innocent attempt at views or a purposeful attempt at implanting insurrection, will all be moot. No one will care because they're too busy tending gardens, pressing flowers, lathing billet, or whatever else one finds that turns them on.
OK, call it a tie or take the win, I've no preference. I got a third generation Kia headlight I need to make fourth generation, like, yesterday. Weeee!
Re: this board. I was in LV last week for the first time in 3 years, and met up with several people from here for a pretty good poker game. They included the entire spectrum of the political threads, preponderance right. It was a very congenial game. And, aside from some good natured ribbing, no one had any issues with anyone else.
So there's hope for the world. Once again I find, IRL, a very pleasant, intelligent, fun group of WoVers. No matter how misguided their political posts in those threads. ;-p
Quote: gordonm888Definition of trolling:
1. make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.
Definition of troll:
a mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.
This is a troll (from Norwegan movie "The Troll Hunters"):
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: FaceHehe, I thought the exact same thing, and your post went and triggered me all over again (you've been doing that a LOT lately ;))
I think it all goes back to your impassioned statement that we "are at war". I don't know if you meant against those in power re: media or Russia with their media based interference, but it's stuck with me. My thoughts are still incubating, but...
I agree and I don't. I think I feel like... it's not that we're being actively controlled or influenced, but that said control and influence is a feature of the larger issue. I totally see all the rift and divide you lament; it's as clear as day. BUT, it seems I see it in secluded enclaves. Social media is one, whether Twit, Face, here, whatever. For sure public news commentary, YT comments, et al. But while that's very obvious and very real, I find there are still places I don't see that at all. It's not in my neighborhood. It's not in my locker room. A majority of my real life goes pretty much just as one would hope - reach out to someone and someone reaches back. Color, creed, red or blue, things are generally OK in my neck'o.
I guess I sort of feel like we're reaching the point of critical mass. Like, we all know fiat currency has no worth. It's but an idea that we all just go along with. It kind of feels like we are nearing that with media. I can still look at report or the resulting comments, disengage, and see things for what they really are. An opinion piece. A personal stance. But I do find, every now and again, where something that's obviously sensationalized for clicks hits me in a way that makes me forget that. It makes me accept it as Fully Real and totally skips that logic check that usually happens.
Stuff like that is what I call the danger. And when it comes to MSM at least, I don't feel like it's a mass conspiracy to control the populace. Rather, I think it's simply a feature of offering what sells. Facts are boring. Sensation sells. So sensation is what we get, and it's US, not the big bad MSM / LSM, that are asking for it.
I'm trying my best to implore US to be better. Not to control .gov or to control Big Cable, but simply to control self. To turn on, tune in, and drop out. There's something about this idea that I just can't let go of. Hearts and minds, after all. I guess I think if people start knowing one's self, loving one's self, and improving one's self, then all the pokes and prods from media, whether an innocent attempt at views or a purposeful attempt at implanting insurrection, will all be moot. No one will care because they're too busy tending gardens, pressing flowers, lathing billet, or whatever else one finds that turns them on.
OK, call it a tie or take the win, I've no preference. I got a third generation Kia headlight I need to make fourth generation, like, yesterday. Weeee!
Re: this board. I was in LV last week for the first time in 3 years, and met up with several people from here for a pretty good poker game. They included the entire spectrum of the political threads, preponderance right. It was a very congenial game. And, aside from some good natured ribbing, no one had any issues with anyone else.
So there's hope for the world. Once again I find, IRL, a very pleasant, intelligent, fun group of WoVers. No matter how misguided their political posts in those threads. ;-p
That just means we are all forum thugs. The modern equivalent of a phone thug
Definition of a phone thug: someone who acts tough and bravado over the phone where the chance of getting punched or physically assaulted for his thuggish behavior is impossible(while in person hes too scared to take the chance)
Quote: djatcHere's a nice copypasta for your Sunday ... (removed)
I remember being shocked and unnerved the first time I read it until I found out that this was an old hoax floating around many websites. I felt better. :)
From "Captain Ron" with Kurt Russell;Quote: FinsRuleDoes he kill gorillas? Or is he using gorillas to do the killing?
"He could have said guerrillas but no, he said gorilla's" great line.
Quote: darkozThat just means we are all forum thugs. The modern equivalent of a phone thug
Definition of a phone thug: someone who acts tough and bravado over the phone where the chance of getting punched or physically assaulted for his thuggish behavior is impossible(while in person hes too scared to take the chance)
No. It just means we would rather talk about other stuff and have a good time rather than discuss politics. Discussing politics with people whom you already know their political opinions on most things is pretty boring, and just discussing politics in general isn't all that interesting either. Plus, why would we discuss politics when we'd just wipe the floor with Babs? Too easy. :)
Quote: beachbumbabsRe: this board. I was in LV last week for the first time in 3 years, and met up with several people from here for a pretty good poker game. They included the entire spectrum of the political threads, preponderance right. It was a very congenial game. And, aside from some good natured ribbing, no one had any issues with anyone else.
Agreed. Something about being behind a steering wheel or computer keyboard I think brings out people's anger.
Quote: WizardAgreed. Something about being behind a steering wheel or computer keyboard I think brings out people's anger.
Come at me bro! I bench 5000 pounds and my 4 wives are all supermodels.
Quote: NathanI wonder why 7staringinfo has been banned. His posts seemed mature normal, and wise :/
Sock puppet of a banned member.
Quote: beachbumbabsSock puppet of a banned member.
Okay, that makes sense. :)
Was he a man pretending to be a woman that was pretending to be a man.Quote: RSWhy did my sock puppet account, Russion, get banned? RIP. :(
J/k
Quote: beachbumbabsSock puppet of a banned member.
How can you just ban a member without also banning the man to which it is attached?
Quote: beachbumbabs
Re: this board. I was in LV last week for the first time in 3 years, and met up with several people from here for a pretty good poker game. They included the entire spectrum of the political threads, preponderance right. It was a very congenial game. And, aside from some good natured ribbing, no one had any issues with anyone else.
Replicants are getting quite good at imitating people.
If you are banned, you can still read posts, right...
Do they need private message access to hustle the suckers?
Are they just itching to help the uninformed become better gamblers while being very careful not to divulge a protected trade secret?
Maybe they are just lonley?
Quote: prozemaSo what's the draw of creating a new account after you've been banned?
If you are banned, you can still read posts, right...
Do they need private message access to hustle the suckers?
Are they just itching to help the uninformed become better gamblers while being very careful not to divulge a protected trade secret?
Maybe they are just lonley?
I think, depending on the person, all of those have been true.
I would have to add at least one person was offended at being asked to leave, so they came back with another ID.
At least one person came here numerous times as a personal attack on another member.
At least one person came here to say something offensive or in anger, got tossed, and returned.
At least one person was angered by something someone here said to them, said something offensive back, and got banned before they were finished speaking their mind, so they returned.
At least one person got a suspension of x days and did not want to wait it out, so they made another ID.
At least one person got suspended for spamming the forum, thought better of it down the road, made a new ID, got banned for the dupe.
And probably others I don't know all the background on.
Quote: beachbumbabsI think, depending on the person, all of those have been true.
I would have to add at least one person was offended at being asked to leave, so they came back with another ID.
At least one person came here numerous times as a personal attack on another member.
At least one person came here to say something offensive or in anger, got tossed, and returned.
At least one person was angered by something someone here said to them, said something offensive back, and got banned before they were finished speaking their mind, so they returned.
At least one person got a suspension of x days and did not want to wait it out, so they made another ID.
At least one person got suspended for spamming the forum, thought better of it down the road, made a new ID, got banned for the dupe.
And probably others I don't know all the background on.
This makes me think about the poor facilities people at my office. Dang near every week there is a mass email that goes out about parking ettiquitte or misuse of recycling containers... There is also a lot of coffee drama. People take the last cup and don't brew another pot... Or they make a double strong batch in the regular strength pot.
What we need at my office is a staff of moderators with the authority to hand out 3 day suspensions... Think of how angry people are here when they get a 3 day time out... If that meant 3 day without pay, you'd see one helluva S-show!
I bet being a mod is like being a facilities manager... Um, excuse me, but there seems to be an issue with toilet number 3 / user number 3... If you could go ahead and come in Saturday to take care of that? I'll bet they don't even ask that nice... And to add insult to injury, you have to come to a thread like this and get questioned on your actions...
How do you deal with it all? Bourbon?
