Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

PlanetSpores.ca
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

Feedback and Administration > Website Announcements and Feature Feedback
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Silversoul]
    #4737390 -

Paradigm said:
I don't think it takes a banbot to do a decent job as moderator. It just takes some common sense and a well-rounded sense of fairness, which seems mysteriously absent among the current mods.

And before anyone asks, yes I could do a better job, as could many intelligent people here.


By a banbot, I mean...

The MOD will always press the ban button.

From there, the bot will either warn, ban... permaban... according to the person's Shroomery Ban History.

If you've been warned, banbot bans for twenty four. Banned before, banbot bans for 72... etc... until permaban.

Banbot would not remove subjectivity from the DECISION to ban... but from then on, it WOULD be objective...

It will make ban DURATION fair... and consistent.

A problem we've been struggling with lately.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Silversoul]
    #4737395 -

I think there should be atleast one female mod in the two after the split.
Jiggy in the spiritual
Veritas in the philisophical

although i'm sure they'd both do fine either way.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4737403 -

The problem I have with the progressive ban rule(each ban longer than the last) is that sometimes you get banned for different things, some of which are more obvious than others. Sometimes the first banning may be fair, but the second one is bullshit, yet they pay a higher price for the second one than the first(in Swami's case, it was only his 2nd ban which was even remotely justified).


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4737405 -

I like that idea. Except...there should be a reset period...if someone is good for a certain amount of time they should get to regress down the pole back to a 24hr. ban.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4737408 -

It still starts with a mod paying attention and pressing the "ban" button.

Jiggy: no one in this thread is picking on MAIA in particular.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4737411 -

Quote:
Why are many of you saying that it was Maia's sole duty and responcibility to catch and correct what happened with veritgo?


Maybe I missed it, but who said that?


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Silversoul]
    #4737419 -

I would vote for you and/or Veritas to be the mod in P&R.




--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Thor]
    #4737420 -

Thor said:
OnTheTurningAway said:
What exactly is taking so long for the split to happen? Does anyone know? And how are they going to separate the threads?


A question we haven't answered yet, and the poll has only been up for 3 days so we'd like to see if more will have a say during the weekend.

I'd like any changes made simple so IF this doesnt work out we can change it make with no big problem.


People for the most part are just waiting now because, you said it was going to happen. It leaves the current S&P in limbo-a bit.

Since the current S&P has been used for scrutiny debates, just keep it as the philosophy forum, change the rules at the top and a create a new forum for spirituality. Let that one start fresh. If you don;t like the outcome at the ened of the trial, just archive the new forum and switch the forum title and rules back to the old S&P in the debate forum.

Just a suggestion to get the ball rolling. For now, keep Maia and shroomism as the mods for the spirituality forum and keep phluck in the debate forum and recriut a master philosophical debator to help phluck or ask Phred to cover until you find one.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4737431 -

Ooh. Phred would be an exceptional mod in the P&R forum. :thumbup:



--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: MJF]
    #4737435 -

MJF said:
I like that idea. Except...there should be a reset period...if someone is good for a certain amount of time they should get to regress down the pole back to a 24hr. ban.


I think that is a GREAT idea! :thumbup:

Like say, you go down a step, for every 12 months of good behavior, or something.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Veritas]
    #4737436 -

Veritas said:
It still starts with a mod paying attention and pressing the "ban" button. 

Jiggy: no one in this thread is picking on MAIA in particular.


I wasn't taking refferences from this thread. I was reffering to MANY other posts that went up since swamis ban over the experiement thread. MIAIs taking a lot of forum moderator heat when the forum has two other mods. Trying to be "fair".

Thanks MJ but I am not interested in being a mod. :heart: :wink:


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4737446 -

I hardly even see phluck.....in fact I can't think of a single time ever seeing him post....but I have a shitty memory anyway.

I singled out MAIA earlier because of a thread in WAF titled "trolling" and then he started messing with my threads (which I may have deserved...although I don't think any of my comments were any worse than MAIA's).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4737450 -

What I've read with reference to MAIA in particular was not about Vertigo, but the recent Swami situation. I have not read any post which implied that MAIA was the only S&P mod responsible for allowing 6 flames in Swami's UFO Evidence thread.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: MJF]
    #4737452 -

so now you (mjf) are banned for 5 days from s&p, but can still post elsewhere? so many types of bans, so lil time to enjoy all flavors...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: qhr0me]
    #4737477 -

Yup.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Veritas]
    #4737536 -

Swami and other members have posted that they think maia was being biased to ban swami in the experiment thread but to have not banned vertigo in swamis UFO post.

If you missed any of that and don't feel that way then you have nothing to say here on these questions I raised. I am asking why those including swami, who think maia should've banned vertigo haven't even mentioned why phluck, who was flamed himself in that thread or shroomism, were not also responsible to take action against the rules violations in that post.

I also want to know why everyone jumped on vertigo and not the other person who flamed him first. Bias's and unfair treatment abound by those who say the detest bias and unfair treatment.

I also want to hear from phluck, why he let it go for the time he did and if he was the one who gave vertigo the warning.

If you veritas, are not one of the ones, who is pointing the finger at just maia and vertigo, and crying "bias injustice, where is the fairness?" then, you are not who I am asking for clarification from.

You are not phluck either so.........................

P.S., if no one feels that way, then I guess there will be NO more crying posts about fairness and bias's with fingers only pointing at maia and vertigo.

I want nothing to do with discussing swami's bans. I did want to raise clarity on the UFO thread where flaming went down and it's relevant because of how that was handled keeps getting dragged into the swami bans discussions. So lets discuss how that was handled from a fair an unbiased perspective.

The forum split should keep this stuff from happening in the future or at least make it much more clear, who broke the forum rules. And now we know without doubt, where a mod bias will lie and if not in our favor, we stay out of that forum and post in the other or else get what's coming to us for being an ass.


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4737571 -

Anyone want to talk about my ban? I mean....I know I was crossing/close to the line...but which one of my remarks actually got me banned? The rules seem very vague to me....and if the mod is the slightest bit pissed off about the topic or what you are insinuating then you will get banned even if it is not technically breaking the rules.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: MJF]
    #4737577 -

If you find a loop hole....do you not have the right to exploit it?  :evil:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: MJF]
    #4737632 -

Your ban explanation was stated in both private message and
in the most recent of your S&P locked threads.

Essentially, it was your failure to heed the direct advice of the
staff that landed your ban. Namely, the fact that you kept
creating threads of like nature, when they kept getting closed
for the same reasons.


--------------------

--------------------
┼ ··∙   long live the shroomery  ∙·· ┼
...╬π╥ ╥π╬...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: MJF]
    #4737641 -

The Staff exploits loopholes too. :wink:

I made a few of 'em.


--------------------
Fiddlesticks.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Feedback and Administration > Website Announcements and Feature Feedback
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* YOu Mother F*#&$r's
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 KingOftheThing 17,281 115 11/19/03 04:04 AM
by PoetFirst
* &amp EffedS 1,135 3 09/08/03 07:26 AM
by Seuss
* Other Drugs Discussion: Temporarily Closed & Fully Moderated
( 1 2 all )		 geokillsA 5,329 27 03/17/03 06:36 PM
by geokills
* What discussion board software does The Shroomery run on? LucidDream 1,509 5 01/02/05 03:57 PM
by Jim
* FREE DOOBIE! Calbha 771 1 02/14/04 06:37 PM
by geokills
* This free IPODS spam shit.
( 1 2 all )		 Barbi 3,959 30 07/28/04 04:44 AM
by Shroomism
* Free stuff! Anonymous 547 2 09/05/02 02:59 PM
by Anonymous
* The Other Drugs Discussion problem resin 1,953 13 08/14/03 10:38 AM
by Thor

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Ythan, Thor, Seuss, geokills
13,779 topic views. 0 members, 14 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 18 queries.