i think he means that i would be draconian

i would punish people without any forethought

which isn't true, but i think that's what he meant

"Draconian" for our website is basically anything longer than a week ban. Which is fine in my books.

oh?

by "personality fade," i'm just referring to the stress of the position
i'm just not sure how you'd handle that

see, because lots of users dropped their positions, just because the site wasn't as fun as it used to be
and i'd hate for that to happen to you as well--something tells me you'd be prone to that

in terms of your willingness to enforce the rules, i dunno, that's just mindless conjecture on my part

i could be totally wrong, that's just what i think

Quote from: Cup-O on December 21, 2015, 06:18:20 PM

I'm going to be blunt, here.

Verbatim's obvious temper issues, and an apparent desire to religiously enforce to the rules if given power, would be liabilities. Combine that with a lack of understanding of the basic unwritten rules of governing a forum and it just sounds like a disaster to any right-minded individual.

Obvious seems like a strange word for his temper issues given that he's explained why he gets angry over certain things. It isn't because of his temper, it's because he has to explain things to people many, many, many times. Which I sort of get.

He doesn't so much as explain the rationale behind his opinions so much as shove them down throats because he can't handle other peoples' opinions. And then still doesn't elaborate on his rationale.

And if it's a problem for a mod to have a desire to enforce rules given the power he has then there likely is a problem with the way the rule is written and not with the individual enforcing them.

True, but that's not the point I was trying to make. He's said he would ban shitposting.

(Though we've yet to see him moderate, history doesn't really paint a hopeful picture. That's really all I have to go on here, so I'd be glad to be proven wrong.)

Fruit, because Fruit actually has experience doing this stuff.

Quote from: TBlocks on December 21, 2015, 06:21:44 PM

Quote from: Cup-O on December 21, 2015, 06:18:20 PM

I'm going to be blunt, here.

Verbatim's obvious temper issues, and an apparent desire to religiously enforce to the rules if given power, would be liabilities. Combine that with a lack of understanding of the basic unwritten rules of governing a forum and it just sounds like a disaster to any right-minded individual.

Obvious seems like a strange word for his temper issues given that he's explained why he gets angry over certain things. It isn't because of his temper, it's because he has to explain things to people many, many, many times. Which I sort of get.

He doesn't so much as explain the rationale behind his opinions so much as shove them down throats because he can't handle other peoples' opinions. And then still doesn't elaborate on his rationale.

But if he was a moderator this really wouldn't apply. Generally speaking you don't talk over a potential ban with someone in depth before doing the deed. Bans can be appealed to Cheat or LC anyway and if you find out Verb is handing out bans like candy for things that don't need bans then you make the decision to demote him from there.

Quote

And if it's a problem for a mod to have a desire to enforce rules given the power he has then there likely is a problem with the way the rule is written and not with the individual enforcing them.

True, but that's not the point I was trying to make. He's said he would ban shitposting.

(Though we've yet to see him moderate, history doesn't really paint a hopeful picture. That's really all I have to go on here, so I'd be glad to be proven wrong.)

But he doesn't make the rules. I get the feeling it's the same thing that I experienced with Second Class on Plug.dj a while back. At first I wasn't expecting him to enforce the rules because he was so lax about them in the first place (Verb being the opposite in this case) but when he became a mod he stuck by them to the T and held to the meaning of the rule. (At times even asking me for clarification on certain details as he needed them.)
Point being that he wouldn't make the rules and to be a mod would have to stick to the ones already in place.

Quote from: TBlocks on December 21, 2015, 06:35:17 PM

Quote from: Essessen on December 21, 2015, 06:32:06 PM

Quote from: TBlocks on December 21, 2015, 06:25:38 PM

Quote from: Essessen on December 21, 2015, 06:23:48 PM

Quote from: TBlocks on December 21, 2015, 06:21:44 PM

Quote from: Cup-O on December 21, 2015, 06:18:20 PM

I'm going to be blunt, here.

Verbatim's obvious temper issues, and an apparent desire to religiously enforce to the rules if given power, would be liabilities. Combine that with a lack of understanding of the basic unwritten rules of governing a forum and it just sounds like a disaster to any right-minded individual.

Obvious seems like a strange word for his temper issues given that he's explained why he gets angry over certain things. It isn't because of his temper, it's because he has to explain things to people many, many, many times. Which I sort of get. And if it's a problem for a mod to have a desire to enforce rules given the power he has then there likely is a problem with the way the rule is written and not with the individual enforcing them.

A lack of patience is a bad thing for a mod, a very bad thing.

A lack of patience for what exactly?

Dealing with other people requires one to not have a lack of patience. Being a moderator requires you to spend time dealing with other people. And like you said, he does not have great patience.

Quote

It isn't because of his temper, it's because he has to explain things to people many, many, many times.

Coupled with how he's as dense as Osmium, I don't think people would have any sort of enjoyable experience dealing with him as a mod.

I never said he didn't have patience. What I meant by that comment was more on the philosophical side of him and that's what people generally see when they think of his lack of patience. Beyond Anti-natalism he's alright with patience.

Are you aware that 90% of conversations involving Verb end up getting steered towards anti-natalism?

It entirely depends on the issue at hand. I highly doubt a disagreement over whether someone was sperging out about spoilers could turn into an anti-natalism debate.

Can you think of any times where he exercised great patience when dealing with people, and didn't have pre-judgements about them?

Yes actually. Just the other day there was a sexualism is video games thread where him and I were able to have a civil discussion on the topic and he actually changed his view of the situation. Which is funny because on the past we haven't gotten on great in those types of disagreements.

I'm going to be blunt, here.

Verbatim's obvious temper issues, and an apparent desire to religiously enforce to the rules if given power, would be liabilities. Combine that with a lack of understanding of the basic unwritten rules of governing a forum and it just sounds like a disaster to any right-minded individual.

Thank you Kupo

Verbatim has no sense of how to handle any situation with tact or grace

He'll basically tell you to shut up and ban you if you don't

you're still talking about me, right

because literally all i do is explain the rationale behind my opinions

I feel like if that were true, half of the 12-page debates you've had wouldn't have happened.

okay, first of all, mods enforce the rules--they don't make the rules

whether or not i'd "ban" shitposting is contingent upon whether or not shitposting is considered a bannable offense in the first place

would i lobby for shitposting to be banned? fucking hell yes i would
but i wouldn't actively crack down on them unless i was given the okay

*sigh* Okay, point taken.

Quote from: Verbatim on December 21, 2015, 06:27:38 PM

Quote from: Ganon on December 21, 2015, 06:24:56 PM

Quote from: ڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪ on December 21, 2015, 06:18:20 PM

Verbatim's apparent desire to religiously enforce to the rules if given power, would be liabilities.

A moderator that follows and enforces our rules? How awful.

i think he means that i would be draconian

i would punish people without any forethought

which isn't true, but i think that's what he meant

maybe, kind of, partly >.>

Regarding rule enforcement: From what I remember as a monitor, the rules are more loosely/questionably enforced than one would think. There was a point where I stopped doing much on my own, because there'd be a good chance that what the rest of the staff would do was very different from whatever I'd reason after talking it over with Kits. I figured it was safer to just point stuff out and let someone else handle it.

I can't really see you enjoying something like that whatsoever. Honestly, I'm a bit like you in that I like having a set of solid, consistent rules to govern logic. You won't find that on the staff.

Thank you for bringing this up. This right here is another problem that's always been there with the current (and last couple iterations of) rules and is one reason why it seems to be so inconsistent which certain people have brought up.
Interpretation is very present a lot of times.

I feel like if that were true, half of the 12-page debates you've had wouldn't have happened.

what you get in a lot of those arguments is a bunch of people (at least ten) who end up asking the same questions that were asked pages and pages ago--when i say unpopular stuff people don't agree with, i tend to get dogpiled

it's just what happens--and that's why i end up repeating myself so often

this speaks nothing of my ability to actually "elaborate my rationale"

tbh efmely moderation is more about managing discussion than the will to ban members. While the threat of punishment and the enforcement of established rules regarding nsfw/spam material is the ultimate necessary deterrent against shit behavior, a good mod should be willing to let members have their banter and eat it too, unless a specific complaint is sent to the staff.

Told ya this nigga would make a good mod

Irrelevant given that most people would try to take blind stabs at saying "What do you mean sexuality is wrong?!" and not using logic to defeat his argument.

Which is needed because most of Verb's thoughts are based in logic and as such he believes them to be as such. Being a moderator is good for that because it means he would be unbiased and fully use logic to decide whether someone deserves a ban or not.

Ignoring that Verb has his own set of logic that is set in different principles than the majority of people. Verbatim, unbiased? I find that very doubtful. His take on logic is generally set in an extremist route, he prefers absolutist measures as opposed to compromises. Surely you see the incompatibility inherit in that?

Quote from: ڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪ on December 21, 2015, 06:51:52 PM

I feel like if that were true, half of the 12-page debates you've had wouldn't have happened.

what you get in a lot of those arguments is a bunch of people (at least ten) who end up asking the same questions that were asked pages and pages ago--when i say unpopular stuff people don't agree with, i tend to get dogpiled

it's just what happens--and that's why i end up repeating myself so often

this speaks nothing of my ability to actually "elaborate my rationale"

What's the definition of insanity? Trying the same thing over and over hoping for different results? I just have this creeping sense that most folks don't understand the logic you've taken to reach your positions, because it's so not-easy for folks to wrap their heads around it (ie the inner machinations of your mind are an enigma).

To cite an example, that the premise of your anti-natalism is partly because the non-existent can't consent. That seems to defy conventional logic, because a verb can only apply to something that currently exists or once existed.

a lot of people accuse me of being stubborn--there's a LOT of stubborn people on this website

LC, challengerX, Lemon, Assassin, etc.

when you have a lot of stubborn people, you're gonna have long arguments

Hence one of the, I'm sure many reasons engraved into the minds of some users on this forum of why chally, lemon, or I shouldn't be made moderators. Could you imagine what it would be like if we were the mod team? Good God, next to nothing would be resolved. One stubborn person in charge, LC, should be enough.

Quote from: ڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪےڪ link=topic=53363.msg1072827#msg1072827

What's the definition of insanity? Trying the same thing over and over hoping for different results?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-therapy/200907/the-definition-insanity-is

don't even

Quote

a verb can only apply to something that currently exists or once existed.

the limitations of language are often transcended by logic

and you most certainly can apply verbs to things that don't exist: santa clause is coming to town
and more importantly, things that don't exist yet: roman's girlfriend will be fat

besides--don't you think it makes even more sense that a long argument would ensue as a result of the abstruseness of my beliefs? if a belief of mine turns the conventions of humanity on its head, it's going to take a very long time to get people to reconcile with it, no?

Don't remind me of the futility of changing opinions on the Internet >.>

Well, like, I guess 'thing' in this case needs to be non-fictional. You can't sue Santa Claus, because there's nothing to sue--he doesn't exist.