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 - Elai
Pages: 1 ... 358359360 361362 ... 633
10771
« on: December 22, 2015, 11:02:46 PM »
It doesn't take a genius to figure out how I have conversations with him that result in arguments. Where else am I going to 'get to know' him?
10772
« on: December 22, 2015, 11:01:23 PM »
10773
« on: December 22, 2015, 11:00:28 PM »
Have you ever gotten to know LC when you're not arguing with him about stupid stuff.
Where else would I "get to know" his personality?
10774
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:58:55 PM »
This is highschooler tier kind of logic and reasoning, "Its something odd to me, so I'm just gonna call it weird and stay clear of it". Believe or not, most just don't give a shit, I already said it, but I'll say it again. Well, deal with it. That's what people think of anime. I'm not saying that's what I believe, I'm saying that's what most believe. Please tell me more how people being cunts to the newbies didn't make them want to leave, or how their drama didn't do the same, please, please do. Holy shit, calm down. You're misinterpreting what I said for the third fucking time. BEING A CUNT DOES MORE TO PUSH AWAY NEW USERS THAN WEEBERY. Christ, you're mad.
10775
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:56:35 PM »
Their personality directly dictates how they will enforce the rules. No, it doesn't. LC has a shitty personality, but he's not a bad moderator. Likewise, Psychologist has a great personality, yet he's not a bad moderator either. Personality has nothing to do with it.
10776
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:54:21 PM »
Moderators a chosen based on their ability to follow the rules and enforce them, but also on their personality displayed on the forum. This should be removed. Their personality is irrelevant, I care about how good they are at the job.
10777
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:52:58 PM »
I'm all for banning assholes, given a proper definition.
10778
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:51:33 PM »
You weren't here when Kiyo was voted into the staff based on popularity.
Then a few months later Kiyo revealed a bunch of user IPs.
Cool beans. Why does that matter? Just because we had one shitty elective doesn't mean we should drop the concept. But this is completely irrelevant -- I don't think we should vote in moderators. I think moderators should be chosen on moderating merit, nothing more.
10779
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:49:09 PM »
We already did that with Kiyo.
Remember how that turned out lads
"George Bush was elected. Remember how that turned out lads." What are you trying to say?
10780
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:47:58 PM »
That isn't contradictory whatsoever. I showed my friend this website, and the first thing he said to me was "Everyone likes anime..." He hasn't been on this website since his first week here. Anime is weird to those who don't like anime. Sorry, it's true. The staff being mostly comprised of weebs doesn't help. It's nowhere near people being cunts to new users, though.
10781
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:43:57 PM »
If you want community representatives, appoint them.
10782
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:43:31 PM »
The role of a moderator is to moderate -- bottom line. Nothing more, nothing less.
10783
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:38:53 PM »
Why would we do that? Representing a community isn't the same as winning a popularity contest. Cheat picks who he think will be the best for the job, and they represent the site after they're promoted.
Cheat is fallible, clearly. The community should pick its representatives, not someone who is barely a part of the community.
10784
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:37:04 PM »
If you think that the awful users that have been apart of the site in the past and still are here didn't contribute to newbies leaving then you haven't been here long enough I don't think this. I literally said that we should have more friendly users instead of moderators.
10785
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:35:58 PM »
That's not what they mean. This isn't democratic representation for legislation, this is representation as a PR front.
I mean, I wouldn't frequent a bar where the staff didn't at least try to appear amicable.
Then they're not representing anything. The job of a moderator is to moderate. That should be a primary concern. Not whether or not they're 'likable'. If likability was the first concern of people on the staff, then LC would be a regular fucking Joe.
10786
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:34:23 PM »
I guess it isn't so much that they're "weebs" but that there seems to be some favoritism in the picks because of the shows they watch and some of the inside jokes can be taken as a "circle jerk group." It doesn't have to be anything big (in fact it likely isn't) but it feels like they have this inside track on getting friends on staff. That's what it appears like at least.
This.
10787
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:33:09 PM »
Kupo if you make an accusation, back it up. It's not "Guilty until proven innocent".
10788
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:32:30 PM »
So?
The weebs on the staff all have their online persona taken over by weebery.
10789
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:32:05 PM »
If what you people want is representation, okay. Let's have a vote. Remove all current moderators and have an election for people to take their place. Have elections every 4 months or something.
I mean, if that's what you want.
10790
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:29:39 PM »
I disagree. Okay? You're not on the staff.
10791
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:26:44 PM »
Getting friendly users is beyond our control, appointing mods is. And "weeb" is such a dumb and arbitrary category to lump people into. If everyone on the staff happened to be obsessed with True Detective, would you say we need some non-True Detective lovers on the staff for the sake of diversity?
Weebery takes over their entire online persona in a way that True Detective likely wouldn't. But if it did, sure, I'd say we'd need some non-True Detective fans on staff. And sorry, I and many others likely don't feel represented on the staff right now.
10792
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:24:40 PM »
Fine, the moderators represent us. But they are currently doing a very poor job if that's what they're meant to do. We'd need a more diverse staff that isn't 99% weeb to fully "represent us".
But again, I don't care about that. I care about ability to uphold the rules, like every person should when picking the very person tasked with doing that.
10793
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:21:34 PM »
Like it or not, any mod on any forum represents the community. I don't see how. Maybe if we voted our moderators into power, then it would be a representation of our community. But we don't do that. And honestly, there's not much rulebreaking that goes on here. If Sep7agon wants to grow, we need to attract new members, and having a friendly staff is a huge part of that. I'd say we'd need more friendly users in general than moderators. And to be honest, having 17000 weebs on the staff limits our ability to attract people more than having one guy that says "Fuck yourself" a few times. If the moderators represent us, then we need diversity on the staff that is sorely lacking.
10794
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:17:21 PM »
It's more than about enforcing rules. It shouldn't be. You should only have one job as a moderator -- and that is, to moderate. It isn't your job to represent the community, let's get a community manager if that's what you want.
10795
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:12:47 PM »
Deliberately derailing any thread a certain targeted user posts in. Angry, hostile PMs. The works. Has he done any of those things in the last couple of months? I mean, I'm on here pretty regularly and I don't think I've ever witnessed any of that.
10796
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:11:10 PM »
How the fuck did this thread turn into a human rights thread
SecondClass tried to trigger me by saying "Suicide is a human right", but it backfired because I already considered it a human right. I just also considered it immoral. He tried to explain to me the very concept of "unalienable right", and that's what we've been talking about the last 2 pages.
10797
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:09:48 PM »
Ah, I see.
10798
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:09:07 PM »
Verb's done a lot more than 'heated debates'. Actual harassment. What constitutes as "harassment"? The only speech that should be limited on a forum is spoilers, anyways.
10799
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:07:30 PM »
1. I disagree. It's not immoral to do drugs unless you're affecting others. Would you not agree that doing top-tier drugs while responsible for a child is "affect others"? I sure as hell would. And eating animals isn't immoral, killing them is. Sure, if you want to be pedantic about it. 2. No it's not. I don't want an anti-natalist argument here either, but it's good to know that I can use this as justification in a later debate. Anyway, I hope you didn't miss the point that unalienable rights are debated and speculated upon by thousands of people daily. There are no solid, concrete "unalienable rights", because people disagree on what those entail. I simply told you the concept and gave you MY opinion on which acts are human rights.
Ah, I see. That makes sense. The very concept of a human right is incapable of being immoral. Gotcha. You haven't really changed my mind regarding suicide, though. I still think people should have the legal right to kill themselves, we should just focus on convincing them not to. Same with drugs and alcohol.
10800
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:01:00 PM »
right to consume whatever you want, right to procreate, 1. By "consume whatever you want", I assume you mean drugs and other substances? Because I'd say that snorting coke or injecting heroin into your body when a child that you're responsible for is present is easily immoral. And if you don't mean just substances, but food as well, it is immoral to eat animals. 2. Procreation is also immoral. Okay, awesome. Now I have 2, maybe 3 solid arguments for unalienable rights that when exercised could be considered immoral.
Pages: 1 ... 358359360 361362 ... 633
|
Show Posts