This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Camnator
31
« on: May 01, 2015, 10:16:00 PM »
Feel free to converge this into my list of insults not allowed thread.
32
« on: May 01, 2015, 10:13:08 PM »
Do any insults offend you? Apparently insults are perfectly allowed until you make a big enough stink about them and cry enough.
Let's compile a list!
No one is allowed to insult me about my cannabis use anymore.
No one is allowed to insult my views of police or government.
No one is allowed to insult me in any way. Period.
Am I missing anything?
Oh, ya, don't insult the shemales, even when you're not insulting them.
33
« on: May 01, 2015, 10:10:36 PM »
And you're nothing but contradictions. At one point Meta made a thread I found to be offensive and reported it like hell, I was told they wouldn't remove it because it was a joke, when honestly at the time it wasn't. No one cares what rules you have, they care when you can't properly enforce them and instead abuse them constantly for your own ego. It's nothing but double-talk here. Everyone that's liked can get 25 warnings, but the people that disagree maybe get one.
34
« on: May 01, 2015, 10:06:27 PM »
Oh no, I have been subjected to moderator abuse with every ban I've received, so you can't make such false claims with me. Not you specifically, you're one of the best mods here, probably attributed to you not doing much. While it is my opinion, the way things are now is only backing up my points.
And that's precisely the problem. How can you say there's not selective moderation, and then immediately explain how there is selective moderation? Why do they deserve special treatment? How is insulting some shemale worse than insulting my choice to use cannabis? It isn't. Period. Nothing subjective about it. Period. It's hypocritical and it's why people are pissed with this site and why it CONSTANTLY has drama. How do you not see that?
You're right. People can be perfectly happy in a cess pool circle-jerk without having to think or be challenged, but is that what YOU want this forum to remain? If so, that's perfectly fine, I simply want nothing to do with it if that's the case. Just admit that's what it is if that's what it's going to be. Stop putting on a show.
I'm not overly critical of this community, nor am I prone to forming very strong opinions in general, for the most part. I enjoy this board. Enough to have accepted the position of moderator. However, this isn't the most important thing in the world to me and I don't spend the effort to try and pick it apart so that it might conform to my vision of what an optimal forum is.
I've explained to you that we, as staff, have to make compromises with moderation. But we don't act on the basis of favoritism. There are logical reasons for the compromises we make and, generally, issues are discussed with multiple mods before any action is taken, so long as they are not very miniscule. I never once claimed that there isn't absolutely any selective moderation, only that the nature of that selective moderation is founded in logic. The logic in keeping major bouts of drama to a minimum. And it is not based on specific members, but rather, specific infractions that any and every member would have to answer for in the event they had made any one of those infractions.
Enough of this, I have explained to you multiple times now what the reasoning is for the way moderation works on this board. You don't have to keep telling me that you think the staff are bad at what they do, nor that the site is failing due to it. I understood your view from the beginning. I only tried to give you a more in depth look on how and why things work the way they do so that you might form a better informed opinion. You have made it abundantly obvious that you disagree entirely and will continue to do so despite my explanations so I am done with this redundant debate.
Go ahead and tell us the staff are incompetent, I don't care. Regardless of your perspective, this community will continue to move forward. You aren't influential enough to dissuade me from my much more informed point of view, and by the looks of it, nor the other staff as well. I won't hold that against you though.
You've only explained a system that makes literally no sense. You failed to address my question... "You're right. People can be perfectly happy in a cess pool circle-jerk without having to think or be challenged, but is that what YOU want this forum to remain? If so, that's perfectly fine, I simply want nothing to do with it if that's the case. Just admit that's what it is if that's what it's going to be. Stop putting on a show." Also, you're wrong. We KNOW Meta's thread wasn't insulting. Period. You've failed to even convey what COULD have been insulting about it. Noelle definitely didn't even see it, so stop your BS dude. Just admit you have no argument and the site is based on a select few favorites. It's fine if you want a joke of a forum, just be honest about it.
35
« on: May 01, 2015, 10:04:49 PM »
Also, Demonic. Explain how Meta's thread was at ALL insulting. EXPLAIN!
ftr insults are subjective. As I already stated, what you might perceive as a harmless joke, others might take offense to. Personally, I don't. I'm a hard guy to offend. However, our moderation is not based on my personal feelings, but rather, an average of all of those we can measure of the members of this community.
Very significant offenses that have a large potential for drama affect that average much more so than minor ones that have little potential for drama (It's no different from how averaging numbers works really.) And so they have a tendency to affect the rules to a greater extent.
Fine, so then people will be banned for insulting my cannabis use? It offends me, I'm telling you it offends me, and I want it to stop permanently from now on. Now, enforce this rule fairly, or admit the site is a joke.
36
« on: May 01, 2015, 09:06:49 PM »
Isn't the person supposedly receiving special treatment banned?
Not anymore, and they also weren't here to complain about that thread, either. I've spoken with them, and they made it clear they were done with this site for mistreating them, and I can't blame them.
37
« on: May 01, 2015, 08:59:27 PM »
Also, Demonic. Explain how Meta's thread was at ALL insulting. EXPLAIN!
38
« on: May 01, 2015, 08:58:55 PM »
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEES!
39
« on: May 01, 2015, 08:57:46 PM »
Don't let your thread being locked hurt you THAT much...
40
« on: May 01, 2015, 08:45:01 PM »
No one should be allowed to insult me anymore. It hurts my feelings really bad. Don't insult my choice to use cannabis. Please implement a new rule that will ban people immediately since I'm so offended.
41
« on: May 01, 2015, 08:34:58 PM »
Let me explain. I have NO problem with someone insulting my cannabis use. Doesn't bother me a bit. What does bother me is when I see them constantly get away with it, and even sometimes when I was banned simply for insulting them back, and seeing others banned for insulting shemales. THAT is what pisses me off. Not the insults, the horrible enforcement of the rules about enforcing, and the horrible rules themselves.
42
« on: May 01, 2015, 08:24:56 PM »
Leaving forum moderation up to a vote is a sign it's already a failure. You're running a forum, not a popularity contest. That is merely your opinion. As much as people like to say we're Nazi's, we aren't actually tyrants and like to give the community some degree of input on what the nature of this board will ultimately be.
Then why ban only SOME insults? Let people use the mute option if they're so weak and emotional. Again, as I explained, some insults were decided to be taken more seriously due to the overwhelming amount of drama that resulted from them.
You have a point, but a rapid drop in activity like this one has had is not normal, and a massive sign it's a failure.
I've seen boards bounce back from much worse actually. Some still alive to this day. It's not exactly a sign of failure as you are simply projecting your own personal perspective. There are no physical laws of the universe that dictate the exact nature of internet forums, and you cannot accurately measure and predict how they turn out.
Oh no, I have been subjected to moderator abuse with every ban I've received, so you can't make such false claims with me. Not you specifically, you're one of the best mods here, probably attributed to you not doing much. While it is my opinion, the way things are now is only backing up my points. And that's precisely the problem. How can you say there's not selective moderation, and then immediately explain how there is selective moderation? Why do they deserve special treatment? How is insulting some shemale worse than insulting my choice to use cannabis? It isn't. Period. Nothing subjective about it. Period. It's hypocritical and it's why people are pissed with this site and why it CONSTANTLY has drama. How do you not see that? You're right. People can be perfectly happy in a cess pool circle-jerk without having to think or be challenged, but is that what YOU want this forum to remain? If so, that's perfectly fine, I simply want nothing to do with it if that's the case. Just admit that's what it is if that's what it's going to be. Stop putting on a show.
43
« on: May 01, 2015, 06:59:00 PM »
Sure you can, by just prohibiting all insults or allowing them all. Picking and choosing is the issue. A vote was taken to decide whether or not moderation would be very strict, very lax, or an area in between where the staff would decide on actions based on the degree of severity of whatever infraction and the context of those infractions. The latter option won with a landslide victory.
Consistency is the main problem, rather than the rules. Basically, no one should let insults offend them. That's just silly. Why should those insults be taken more seriously than any other? That's just bad practice and is why this place has such a bag image. That CREATES the bias, that, and not kicking out bad mods. We are merely human beings, and not everyone has developed the capacity to shrug everything off. We aren't going to hold that against people or try to force them to change. You cannot change the unwilling.
No argument there. I can't make this forum help itself. I can only suggest how it can. You can't honestly deny the activity here has dwindled to a fraction of what it was. I've been here long enough.
I have never seen any forum that hasn't gone through bouts of less activity. Nor have I have seen one that didn't bounce back so long as members continued to care about the site.
Leaving forum moderation up to a vote is a sign it's already a failure. You're running a forum, not a popularity contest. Then why ban only SOME insults? Let people use the mute option if they're so weak and emotional. You have a point, but a rapid drop in activity like this one has had is not normal, and a massive sign it's a failure. People would defend the site more adamantly if it wasn't run so incompetently.
44
« on: May 01, 2015, 06:43:51 PM »
Meta's thread wasn't insulting. That's entirely my point. It's just stupid to bar SOME insults and not all of them. That's the unfair special treatment that killed this forum. I've never wanted to just poop on anyone, so that doesn't apply to me. I just want to be able to post without being subjected to unjust moderation. Again, if you actually saw the thread, it was a joke, and people were actually sticking up for the drag person in the video. I'm not sure why you're having trouble reading that.
What you need to realize is that the justice you speak of that's apparently lacking is entirely subjective in nature. The staff can try to make the most objectively possible rules that they can, but we cannot control the multitude of different perspectives here in this community. We have to make compromises, and when issues arise that are blown to magnificent proportions compared to your average every day minor instance, compromises are made.
There is also the matter of consistency, and the blurry line that separates what is and isn't an insult. Offense is another subjective variable we have to deal with. What you see as a joke might offend someone else. The fact that trans insults were decided to be treated more seriously is why trans 'jokes' are also treated more seriously, as a matter of consistency. This is to reduce bias in moderation. Not the speculative 'bias' that people tend to complain about for whatever reasons, but legitimate real bias that would actually exist if consistency wasn't taken into consideration.
You can continue to announce the death of this board and all the reasons you've concluded in your head for it, and yet this community will continue to do as it does, and people will continue to disagree with you regardless.
Sure you can, by just prohibiting all insults or allowing them all. Picking and choosing is the issue. Consistency is the main problem, rather than the rules. Basically, no one should let insults offend them. That's just silly. Why should those insults be taken more seriously than any other? That's just bad practice and is why this place has such a bag image. That CREATES the bias, that, and not kicking out bad mods. No argument there. I can't make this forum help itself. I can only suggest how it can. You can't honestly deny the activity here has dwindled to a fraction of what it was. I've been here long enough.
45
« on: May 01, 2015, 06:27:30 PM »
I believe the staff consider what actions to take against any specific thread or post accused of harassment based on their potential to offend and initiate drama (although some regard for consistency is also taken into consideration). General insults are more lightly handled but very specific derogatory remarks, especially those regarding things that users have stated to be personally offensive are taken more seriously.
The fact that more than one person has taken personal offense to trans jokes/insults, whether they were intended to be real insults or not, which has started very long, drawn out bouts of drama influenced the staff into making a decision to prohibit them more so than other insults.
I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that.
Everyone can take offence to everything. The special treatment you JUST admitted to is why this site is dead. People don't tolerate BS like that.
"I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that."
You're not getting it, then, because that NEVER happened. In fact, everyone was applauding the drag person.
I explained why certain insults are treated more seriously than others. The 'special treatment', as you like to call it, isn't for specific people, it's for the insults themselves. Trans jokes towards any user would be taken seriously so long as the user explains their offense. Obviously it has to be reviewed carefully since someone could just shitpost a few insults to another they talk to that obviously isn't trans, and that user could in turn put on a front and act like they're offended when they really aren't.
I know some of you want to be able to just shit on everyone for anything, but I don't think that's the type of community Cheat had in mind when he envisioned this site and spent all that time creating it.
Meta's thread wasn't insulting. That's entirely my point. It's just stupid to bar SOME insults and not all of them. That's the unfair special treatment that killed this forum. I've never wanted to just poop on anyone, so that doesn't apply to me. I just want to be able to post without being subjected to unjust moderation. Again, if you actually saw the thread, it was a joke, and people were actually sticking up for the drag person in the video. I'm not sure why you're having trouble reading that.
46
« on: May 01, 2015, 06:11:31 PM »
I believe the staff consider what actions to take against any specific thread or post accused of harassment based on their potential to offend and initiate drama (although some regard for consistency is also taken into consideration). General insults are more lightly handled but very specific derogatory remarks, especially those regarding things that users have stated to be personally offensive are taken more seriously.
The fact that more than one person has taken personal offense to trans jokes/insults, whether they were intended to be real insults or not, which has started very long, drawn out bouts of drama influenced the staff into making a decision to prohibit them more so than other insults.
I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that.
Everyone can take offence to everything. The special treatment you JUST admitted to is why this site is dead.
Site still seems up and active to me.
You're not getting it, then, because that NEVER happened. In fact, everyone was applauding the drag person.
I guess you glossed over a couple posts that were directed at/for Noelle.
You should have seen it five months ago. And? That doesn't justify the thread being locked, it justifies actually MODERATING the forum, something they've NEVER done correctly here. Also I doubt that is even true, which is why I suspect Cheat didn't revive the thread as I requested.
47
« on: May 01, 2015, 06:00:09 PM »
I believe the staff consider what actions to take against any specific thread or post accused of harassment based on their potential to offend and initiate drama (although some regard for consistency is also taken into consideration). General insults are more lightly handled but very specific derogatory remarks, especially those regarding things that users have stated to be personally offensive are taken more seriously.
The fact that more than one person has taken personal offense to trans jokes/insults, whether they were intended to be real insults or not, which has started very long, drawn out bouts of drama influenced the staff into making a decision to prohibit them more so than other insults.
I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that.
Everyone can take offence to everything. The special treatment you JUST admitted to is why this site is dead. People don't tolerate BS like that. "I get that you want to shit on someone for laughs, but this is Cheat's site and, in certain instances, he doesn't want that." You're not getting it, then, because that NEVER happened. In fact, everyone was applauding the drag person.
48
« on: May 01, 2015, 05:40:20 PM »
Interesting. Have you tried different ways of using? Maybe I'm just alone here, but cannabis never made me hungry. In fact, I'd often stop being hungry after I began using, and it helped me lose 95 pounds.
It's not just about being hungry, it's mainly the fact that cannabinoids can inhibit digestive motility ergo food takes longer to move through your system. Since the condition I have is essentially a bacterial infection, the longer any food sits in my intestines, the longer the bacteria have to ferment it and produce excess gasses which cause me to bloat like a blimp. It also allows them to multiply even more since they are basically being fed, and their very presence causes inflammation in my intestines, as well as nutrient malabsorption.
Obviously, smoking anything in general can make heartburn worse, but that's not the biggest issue.
What is your current treatment? Is this going to be a permanent problem?
49
« on: May 01, 2015, 05:02:42 PM »
Meta's shouldn't have been locked or deleted, it was literally banter. I understand Noel is giant fucking crybaby, but if I made a thread taking the piss out of Gatsby for being arab, it would stay up.
Your thread could have probably just been a reply. I personally wouldn't of locked it, but eh, definitely shouldn't have been deleted.
I removed it because it was clearly not in a joking manor and had nothing to discuss. I know there has been talk of selective moderation and favoritism, but that thread really had to go (and the continuation Comms made too).
If it wasn't in a joking manner then revive the thread temporarily to prove it. You're wrong. Have you even LOOKED at the thread? Or are you going off one of the butt buddy's word?
Turns out Noelle has an aggressive side
That was literally the entirety of the OP. I feel the removal was warranted and won't be restoring the topic, sorry.
Your rules state obvious jokes are allowed. How is that not obvious? Still, that doesn't explain why mine was deleted.
I've included the rules for you and highlighted the important part.
1. Personal Attacks/Harassment/Private Information (Strict Moderation)
- Moderators will no longer automatically be editing out reported personal attacks in a “one-size-fits-all” manner. Instead, we will be looking at the context of the attack to determine the best course of action.
It had no discussion value and was malicious toward a member here, so yes, it was taken down.[/list][/list]
It wasn't malicious at all, though. It was a joke. The rules allow it. It also had plenty of discussion value, because if it didn't, no one would respond, and it would be pointless to lock it. Maybe you should just make your rules make sense and not allow calling out users at all.
50
« on: May 01, 2015, 05:01:08 PM »
WHY?!
I have a condition called SIBO which basically means I have chronic digestive problems right now. The effect smoking marijuana has on one's appetite and digestion don't cooperate that well with me and makes the condition worse. (increased appetite and lower digestive motility) It can give me bad cases of acid reflux which can, in turn, induce esophagitis for over a week afterwords which is pretty painful and makes it hard to eat.
It's not fun.
Although lower digestive motility can help with things like IBD, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, etc. It is very bad for SIBO.
Interesting. Have you tried different ways of using? Maybe I'm just alone here, but cannabis never made me hungry. In fact, I'd often stop being hungry after I began using, and it helped me lose 95 pounds.
51
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:58:28 PM »
Get pussywhipped.
It's a fetish of mine, actually.
52
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:55:33 PM »
I, too, am outraged.
This is an...outrage? "Yes!" I am outraged!
53
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:54:15 PM »
Meta's shouldn't have been locked or deleted, it was literally banter. I understand Noel is giant fucking crybaby, but if I made a thread taking the piss out of Gatsby for being arab, it would stay up.
Your thread could have probably just been a reply. I personally wouldn't of locked it, but eh, definitely shouldn't have been deleted.
I removed it because it was clearly not in a joking manor and had nothing to discuss. I know there has been talk of selective moderation and favoritism, but that thread really had to go (and the continuation Comms made too).
If it wasn't in a joking manner then revive the thread temporarily to prove it. You're wrong. Have you even LOOKED at the thread? Or are you going off one of the butt buddy's word?
Turns out Noelle has an aggressive side
That was literally the entirety of the OP. I feel the removal was warranted and won't be restoring the topic, sorry.
Your rules state obvious jokes are allowed. How is that not obvious? Still, that doesn't explain why mine was deleted.
54
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:51:55 PM »
no one cares bro just move on
That couldn't be any more true. And it's a shame. This place used to be great.
threads about others in a joking manner are fine unless said person being made fun of dislikes it
Then Meta's thread shouldn't have been deleted. That's precisely my point.
but wasn't it about noelle? she may have reported it
Yes, and they were banned. They weren't even here to see it. I've spoken with them.
55
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:45:22 PM »
Meta's shouldn't have been locked or deleted, it was literally banter. I understand Noel is giant fucking crybaby, but if I made a thread taking the piss out of Gatsby for being arab, it would stay up.
Your thread could have probably just been a reply. I personally wouldn't of locked it, but eh, definitely shouldn't have been deleted.
I removed it because it was clearly not in a joking manor and had nothing to discuss. I know there has been talk of selective moderation and favoritism, but that thread really had to go (and the continuation Comms made too).
If it wasn't in a joking manner then revive the thread temporarily to prove it. You're wrong. Have you even LOOKED at the thread? Or are you going off one of the butt buddy's word?
56
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:43:52 PM »
Meta and I both had threads deleted, not locked. Neither was against the rules. Explain.
Well what was the contents of the threads? You haven't exactly stated that and I think Flee said there were insults being flung in the threads so maybe that answers why the threads are gone?
I didn't say anything about that. All of this happened in the middle of night for me, I was asleep and never even saw these threads.
I linked this thread in the mod chat, Camnator. It's being discussed. I don't know exactly what happened.
I appreciate that.
57
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:43:17 PM »
no one cares bro just move on
That couldn't be any more true. And it's a shame. This place used to be great.
threads about others in a joking manner are fine unless said person being made fun of dislikes it
Then Meta's thread shouldn't have been deleted. That's precisely my point.
58
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:42:55 PM »
no one cares bro just move on
That couldn't be any more true. And it's a shame. This place used to be great.
It was great until your sour ass came back
It was great for your own personal echo chamber since you're an idiot. The only sour one here is yourself.
59
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:33:15 PM »
no one cares bro just move on
That couldn't be any more true. And it's a shame. This place used to be great.
60
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:30:17 PM »
|
Show Posts