Home | Community | Message Board

Sporeworks
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


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: MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck, Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags by Magic Bag   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds

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: Rose]
    #4742313 -

Quote:
Win or loose, this whole discussion, and future changes, are because of YOU.



This is exactaly the response this poster wants IMO. :wink: The center of attention is his goal. You fell for it hook line and sinker Cervantes. :tongue:


--------------------
"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: Icelander]
    #4742388 -

Nice try IceCube. There was no public 'Swama' without the unjust bans. :popular:

I was just another poster in a Rock & Roll band... :jammingout:

Edited by Swami (10/01/05 08:22 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Swami]
    #4743757 -

wsih you could read the 'Holiday Cookie' thread that was deep-sixed (not merely locked) and then point out what in there fits your definition of "flipping off'.


Does this mean Gourdito is also at risk of censure?  :rolleyes:

Edit Postscript:

I thought about your tennis example some more and what came to mind is that you Swami have become like John McEnroe used to be with regard to the umpires.  Good old Mac (my personal favorite player of all time just because of his puckishness  :tongue:) might get a point taken away just for attitude and past history.  Another normally calm and respectful player might just get a look and no warning for a worse yet occasional blowout complete with a thrown racket and swearing. 

If you were a basketball player Swami, the comparison would be Dennis Rodman.  He could get a technical foul just for his bad attitude and past history of trouble with the refs (OK the blue hair kind of made him stand out a little too).



--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Edited by LunarEclipse (10/02/05 01:05 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #4744100 -

Soon the spirit of Gourdito will bring magical blessings to all that believe in him.



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #4744120 -

you were a basketball player Swami, the comparison would be Dennis Rodman.

I was playing some of my tunes on a grand piano in the lobby of the Marriott Hotel in Newport Beach a few years back. Rodman comes by wearing a kilt, totally drunk and wasted, with a tiny (5') siliconed blonde on his arm.

He sez, "Chill babe. This is guy is rocking out. I want to listen for a moment." He hangs for a while stomping and clapping and when I finish, he reaches a giant paw across the piano to shake my hand. "You were really getting down, bro," he says with a super-wide grin.

His petite girlfriend starts tugging on him and in a whiney voice cries, "Come oonnnn! Let's go!" He looks backwards at me as he walks away in tow and shrugs over his shoulder with a look like, "Well, she IS the boss."


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (10/02/05 02:55 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4744199 -

Icelander said:
Quote:
Win or loose, this whole discussion, and future changes, are because of YOU.



This is exactaly the response this poster wants IMO. :wink: The center of attention is his goal. You fell for it hook line and sinker Cervantes. :tongue:



I fell for it?

Just stating the OBVIOUS truth... good or bad... Swami's bans are why this ALL came up. If not for Swami, WHY is this stuff even being discussed now?

:smirk:

But Swami's aparent refusal to look at the situation rationally, at this point... is VERY bothersome. Remember the disclaimer Swam... keep the scat out.

I don't see how a broken record continues to help... besides it is SOOOO last week.

Suggestions on how to FIX things are welcome, not repeated repeats or repetitious repition... this isn't your 19'th WA&F ban thread. :smirk:

Swami, even though you got us here, this discussion has moved past you... either help fix S&P, or get over it.

If you can't feel the love anymore, why are you even here?


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


Edited by Rose (10/02/05 03:33 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4744523 -

Quote:
Just stating the OBVIOUS truth... good or bad... Swami's bans are why this ALL came up. If not for Swami, WHY is this stuff even being discussed now?



Well, speaking for myself and Veritas at least we have been PMing mods with complaints about moderation for awhile now. Things which have nothing to do with Swami.

IMO he loves the attention, and his attention desire was where the Swami persona came from in the first place.

I have stated this before, if the Mods were fair in their treatment of violations many people would be getting banned that are not now. But Swami would be gone also because he trolls.

This should not be about him. This should not focus on him. He should only be one example of how things go here. Not the focal point. If we needed him for the Mods to begin looking at things then that's just another brick in the wall of how poor the mods are in S&P.


--------------------
"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

Edited by Icelander (10/02/05 08:41 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4745102 -

Admins, I have some more suggestions and this issue first is an example reason for the suggestion that will follow.


Ice,

You and veritas, since you are speaking for her, come to S&P and keep with forum topic discussions. You two have been a welcomed and appreciated addition there by pretty much everyone including me.

I am highly confused by what you just wrote though. You said the mods are not doing their jobs. You said, if they were, others would be banned as well as swami long gone for trolling , right?

Maia did his job when he banned swami again for the trolling tooth fairy post. Just like you said swami does, should be banned for and the mods should be doing.

So why, was it veritas who sent around PMs telling everyone swami was just unjustly banned pass the word? When those types of PM's start circulating, and they always do, emotions are raised and people run to save swami from the unjust moderators and a swama ensues. You both spoke up in swamis defense and against the mods for that and now you say, swami should've been banned long ago and the mods are not doing their jobs? :confused:

Which is it?

You two helped to ignite this swama, feeling sorry for swami being banned, buying into the unjust mod mentality and then you tell Cervantes "he" fell for it?

Now you say, the mods haven't done their job for banning swami long ago for trolling when you said earlier in the week he was unjustly banned for trolling?

What gives?

How are you being fair to the mods of S&P when they do do their jobs and you fall for the dissent against them when they warn and ban, and then criticize them for not doing their jobs to ban trolling?

Like I said earlier in this thread, some members damn them when they do and damn them when they don't. I'm not sure if its because they have authority issues, like playing double sided politics, or want them out so they can get in.

Some members criticize the mods when they step in and ban and warn their favs or just to look "cool" and sooo some mods start to back off a bit, and then when they back off, some of the same people criticize them for not acting to give warnings and bans. That's BS.


Like the kid who gets mad at Dad when he doesn't make his sister stop teasing him and then also gets mad at dad, for being so mean to his sister when he does discipline her. That's manipulative behavior and leaves dad left to wonder, what on earth does it takes to please that child. The more, dad just wants to please his child because of it, the easier it is for the kid to manipulate dad and the kid gets even more spoiled rotten and demanding AND insecure because of lack of boundaries being consistently enforced.

Admins,

Like Lunar said, this is your board to run. You all have a vision for what you want it to be and become. You hire staff to help you fulfill that vision and to enforce your rules, policies and procedures to keep it on track. You hand pick and trust them.

It's when you give the members too much say, like that spoiled kid, that they can start to manipulate the mods and all of you.

You righteously and cooly have started to delete them and take them behind closed doors where they belong.

If you all start doing this, people will respect you and the mods more and stop, undermining yours and the mods authority, and will have no means to cause drama and descent around the shroomery that brings down moral.

It's like the mods going into a public trial, the crowd gathers to mourn their martyred mods or to throw tomatoes at them and chant for a public execution. If you keep leaving your mods to be exposed to such public trials, and public complaints, pretty soon, no one qualified, is going to want to volunteer to mod anymore.

In the professional world, which I have been a part of for the last 23 years, they take it behind closed doors. Why? To keep moral up, the rest of staff focused on the tasks at hand and the business running smoothly, and the customers enjoying their patronage.

Cervantes asked for suggestion on how to keep peace in S&P and get it running more smoothly. Many have given reason for why a split would help a lot and suggestions for setting it up.

I am now also highlighting this undercurrent that is also a cause of civil unrest related to S&P and maybe the shroomery in general when it flares up. I think, to your graciousness to please the members, you have probably given the members way to much power over your message board and thats why "some" members loose trust in you and disrespect you and your staff.

Just like in business, which I have been the owner of and like in parenting, which I am one, it's got to always be clear, who is in charge or else, the customers, staff or children, will walk all over you, because they can, if you let them.

I noticed you developed the support ticket channel and have been deleting public complaints against mods and other members and are directing people to use those private channels. AWESOME!  It looks like you are slowly phasing that in leaving some up in public and taking some down and bringing them behind closed doors.

That sort of inconsistency leaves people feeling insecure or like they are being treated unfairly. Start today and consistently delete all public complaints against mods and members and PM the plaintiff to use the support ticket.

Make a public notice at the top of every forum. Keep the witch hunts, drama, and descent and negativity off the public boards and mods and members will feel more safe and secure here and maybe, you will notice less, childish and irrational public behavior.


If some people just come here to cause trouble, because, it's in their nature too and because, it's easy to here, then make it less easy to do and weed out the trouble makers.

They will be less likely to bitch if they know, they can't cause a public drama and have to go through support tickets. The mods, will be more likely to consistently enforce the rules, if they know, they will not come under a public witch trial every time they do. The place will run with less discord and dissent as a result once the members realize, you guys are not taking anyones shit anymore. Rules are rules, don't like them there's the door. The mass majority follow them easily. They are quite fair and reasonable. They just need to be more consistently enforced.

It's a privileged to be able to come through this door. The shroomery despite some quirks and growing pains, is quite a hot and progressive message board that is quite an enjoyable place to be overall. Look at how many are addicted to this place it's so hot. You guys are doing great. The proof is in the pudding. With anything, there is always room to keep improving.

Maybe its time, some members who do not realize the privilege that it is start to. Like in relationships, if you let a girl flirt with other guys for the first ten weeks, don't think you are suddenly going to get her to stop. Once precedents are set and people know how far they can push you, they will, unless you give ultimatums, that you follow through with.

Typically, once you have let someone walk all over you for a while, they already lost respect for you and will walk when the ultimatum is given. Some members may walk instead of change and oh well. Why keep anyone around who has developed no respect for this place. Good riddance. At least, from this day forward, newbies will come in with a precedent, that consistently commands the respect by simply being consistent. When you say something doesn't fly in the rules, don't let it fly, not even once. 

Ever watch the nanny? It's so true what she says about if you let a kid throw a temper tantrum for 30 minutes before you give in, they know, all it takes is to keep a tantrum up for 30 minutes to break you down and give them their way. Parents who don't deal with temper tantrum manipulative children, don;t give in. They set rules to be followed, give first warning of what will happen, if they are being pushed, and follow through with the disciplinary consequence at the first sign, of your authority being under minded. There is no giving in after that. They were warned, had a choice and choice the consequence, let them serve it and know, you will not be pushed or manipulated.

The consistency of rule enforcement can't happen without empowered mods. They are not empowered if you let members publicly challenge and trash them every time, they go to enforce a rule. The mods need your support in that to do their jobs effectively and consistently. The mods can't support the rules without your support knowing that they will not be publicly creamed for doing so.

You'd have to pay me to put up with what the mods who do take action have to put up with here. Look at this admins and if it's not ice, it will be someone else next. He says sawmi should;ve been banned long ago fro trolling, and when one of your mods recently banned him for it, Ice says, that mod was unjust and should be removed. I hope you all send Maia a gift basket for the crap he puts up with from S&P members.

Xnay, the public complaints against mods is the suggestion here so they will feel more comfortable consistently enforcing rules. Ice was right about overall inconsistencies and I think, thats why they are when they are. They don't want to find their name thrown up in here every other day being trashed just for doing the job you asked them too. That also makes it harder for them, to feel comfortable posting more in their own forums when a few members rally everyone to hate them.

It's not fair to the mods to be publicly subject to it.

I've enjoyed being a part of this community for over the last year and these suggestions for positive, constructive improvement, that have proven themselves in the home and business are just my way of giving back.  :heart:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4745328 -

Jiggy I really have trouble getting through your longish posts. But I will answer to what I read.

My concerns have not ever been with Swami in particular. Yet I have noticed unfair priority given to his actions or non-actions. So when I object to something the mods are doing it's because of my experience in general. Most of it is not related to Swami. He's just one small part of a big (IMO) problem.

Now Veritas's support of Swami, if that happened was without my knowledge. She doesn't tell me everything she does on the forums. But what we have talked about is the lack of action taken when we have noticed flagrant violations of the rules.

That's about all there is for me. If this snowballs into Swami and supporters vs the rest then I can safely drop out knowing nothing is going to change here. Black and white/ us vs them = stalemate.

I would love to hear some more response to my concerns about the Mods but am still waiting. It would be nice if we concerned ourselves with creating a better system instead of concerning ourselves with the concerns of one member. He needs IMO to take it up personally with the Mods and administration. I don't know if he has done that or not. I understand his concerns and take them into account as I try to guess what is going on here.

Does this clarify my position? Probably not.


--------------------
"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: Icelander]
    #4745332 -

Oh yeah, I don't hate Mods or anyone else. Not a good policy for change. :wink:


--------------------
"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: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4745407 -

Quote:
You'd have to pay me to put up with what the mods who do take action have to put up with here. Look at this admins and if it's not ice, it will be someone else next. He says sawmi should;ve been banned long ago fro trolling, and when one of your mods recently banned him for it, Ice says, that mod was unjust and should be removed. I hope you all send Maia a gift basket for the crap he puts up with from S&P members.



I am amazed at how you read my posts. You really might try to pay attention to all of what I'm saying. My point has always been the unfairness of the punishments and not that someone hasn't  committed foul. You almost always miss my point. I would like it if you took a little bit more time with my posts. They are usually quite short. :wink:


--------------------
"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: Rose]
    #4745416 -

He says after failing to read jiggy's last post...

Heh...


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Icelander]
    #4745417 -

Icelander said:
I am amazed at how you read my posts.



I don't think she reads them at all. I think she just makes shit up. When you make posts as long as hers, there's no time to worry about reading comprehension.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4745477 -

Cervantes said:
He says after failing to read jiggy's last post...

Heh...



And I will, I can't get through them. Sorry, I do pay attention to the parts I do read though.


--------------------
"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: Icelander]
    #4745482 -

And the honesty says something... :smile:


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4745907 -

Cervantes said:
He says after failing to read jiggy's last post...

Heh...



Sorry you missed it paradigm, but Cervantes caught it.

I asked Ice to explain how he expects the mods to act with consistency when he himself doesn't consistently support them.

You want the short version?

Why bitch that the mods don't ban trollers while in the same week put up a fuss when the mods ban trollers?

That makes no sense Ice.

The question is simple. Do you want them giving out bans and warnings or not? If you say you do and you also speak for veritas, why was she passing around PMs rallying the troops to protest against swamis unjust ban?

You guys are double talking that issue. Where do you stand on it? Pick a stance and stick with it already.

Paradigm, as much as you would like to believe its not the truth, I will gladly give ANY admin access to my PMs to verify those PMs went around. It's not private info as swamis ban was made public by he himself here in WAF after it happened.

Those PMs went around when swami was banned before last Christmas too. Where any one gets the idea that i will go up agaisnt the mods here is beyond me. No matter how much I personally like someone here, if the mods makes a call, it's there call and authority to make it. I am just a guest.

FYI people, don't send them to me anymore because I will never go up against the mods. My momma raised me differently. I am a guest here.

I didn't think it was fair of Ice to tell Cervantes he fell for a swama ploy when Ice and Veritas did too and helped to get this one off the ground with those PMs, posts and comments in S&P as they were happening.

Did you miss verita's Tyranny post paradigm? Did you miss her edit saying she wouldn;t particpate in trens thread if people were going to get banned over it? Why would she post that unless she wanted other people to follow her lead and aide the swama?

Maybe you resent my calling it all to light because you agreed with it. I didn't.

Do you want links paradigm, to how they both protested it? There was more.

Does it then make sense that here in this thread, Ice says swami should've been banned long ago for trolling?

It doesn't to me and I wanted Ice to clarify his double stance position.

Nothings made up. It's all here at the shroomery in black and white.

I realise that their double talk is not what this post is about. However, ice is contributing to saying the problem is mods not doing their job, while he is one who intiates drama when they do do it.

If the issue is just the lack of consistancy, then why did he/she protest swamis bans?

He did change tune later and veritas did back off. I want them to remember this so if it happens again, they will be all the wiser not to "fall for it". Not just them, but other people too.

When people get banned, it should be left to the mods involved, the admins and the banned member ONLY to work it out. If the mods and admins feel public opinion on a situation is warranted, they will ask.

I don;t recall one mod or admin, asking for anyones opinion on the swami bans.

I do recall them asking for opinions on how to better restructure S&P to keep this shit from happening.

Some meber took it upon himself to put a post up in S&P if swami should be let back in or not.

What the hell was that all about? It's not up to the members to decide who stays or who goes and the admins already made that clear.

It wasn't fair to swami to have a public poll put up on him by another member in a forum he was banned from. How would any of you like it if someone did that to you?

That kind of stuff is was I was talking about when I suggested that such public posts rallying against and for members and mods get deleted. They only create and fuel civil unrest.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4745950 -

Quote:
The question is simple. Do you want them giving out bans and warnings or not? If you say you do and you also speak for veritas, why was she passing around PMs rallying the troops to protest against swamis unjust ban?
.
You guys are double talking that issue. Where do you stand on it? Pick a stance and stick with it already.
.
Paradigm, as much as you would like to believe its not the truth, I will gladly give ANY admin access to my PMs to verify those PMs went around. It's not private info as swamis ban was made public by he himself here in WAF after it happened.
.
Those PMs went around when swami was banned before last Christmas too. Where any one gets the idea that i will go up agaisnt the mods here is beyond me. No matter how much I personally like someone here, if the mods makes a call, it's there call and authority to make it. I am just a guest.
.
FYI people, don't send them to me anymore because I will never go up against the mods. My momma raised me differently. I am a guest here.



:wink: my!


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
personal empowerment for the world

:nyan: LGBT - Love God Before Tradition :nyan:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #4746000 -

When people get banned, it should be left to the mods involved, the admins and the banned member ONLY to work it out.

What if ALL involved have clearly stated personality bias? Where does one go? As geokills so succintly put it, they will do whatever they damn well please.

That leaves me only five options:

1. Leave forever my family of six years.

2. Come back as a new entity.

3. Decide this is a read-only site for me.

4. Appeal to the public.

5. Ride out my latest nonsensical ban, attempt to follow the non-existent instructions, and cringe on my every word lest my intent be miscontrued and wait for the final axe to fall.

Once again, the irony that ALL of the continous attacks, flames and personalizations on me are magnitudes worse than my totally harmless Tooth Fairy thread seems to be beyond the ken of most. That is just plain sad.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Can we have a scat-free discussion about S&P? [Re: Rose]
    #4746022 -

I also want to say that I regret my statement that the Swami character is seeking attention. That sounds very personal and it is. I want to say instead that, Lets not give attention to any one person and make this about them and focus on the issues instead.

I appologise to Swami and all. :wink:


--------------------
"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: Swami]
    #4746023 -

Quote:
2. Come back as a new entity.



Four options. Creating a puppet account is not an option.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
personal empowerment for the world

:nyan: LGBT - Love God Before Tradition :nyan:

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

Shop: MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck, Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags by Magic Bag   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* YOu Mother F*#&$r's
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
KingOftheThing 17,225 115 11/19/03 04:04 AM
by PoetFirst
* &amp EffedS 1,133 3 09/08/03 07:26 AM
by Seuss
* Other Drugs Discussion: Temporarily Closed & Fully Moderated
( 1 2 all )
geokillsA 5,313 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 770 1 02/14/04 06:37 PM
by geokills
* This free IPODS spam shit.
( 1 2 all )
Barbi 3,949 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 1,935 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
13,688 topic views. 0 members, 41 guests and 4 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 0.008 seconds on 16 queries.