But when you allow rough housing, the supposed line is an absolute blur. You'll have instances where the majority thinks it doesn't cross the line, but the moderators do. When you allow certain degrees of something and not others, it's kinda hard to be consistent.
Quote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 10:51:22 AMBut when you allow rough housing, the supposed line is an absolute blur. You'll have instances where the majority thinks it doesn't cross the line, but the moderators do. When you allow certain degrees of something and not others, it's kinda hard to be consistent.Yes, but I believe a majority consensus should win in that instance. So long as what the majority wants doesn't endanger a site from being shut down, or utterly failing then let them have it for the most part.
Quote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 10:51:22 AMBut when you allow rough housing, the supposed line is an absolute blur. You'll have instances where the majority thinks it doesn't cross the line, but the moderators do. When you allow certain degrees of something and not others, it's kinda hard to be consistent.Yes, but I believe a majority consensus should win in that instance. So long as what the majority wants doesn't endanger a site from being shut down, or utterly failing then let them have it for the most part.This applies to more subjective matters that aren't plainly stated as prohibited in the CoC. Like someone being negative, or a certain argument that might have escalated to some degree.
Quote from: DemonicChronic on July 29, 2014, 10:59:56 AMQuote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 10:51:22 AMBut when you allow rough housing, the supposed line is an absolute blur. You'll have instances where the majority thinks it doesn't cross the line, but the moderators do. When you allow certain degrees of something and not others, it's kinda hard to be consistent.Yes, but I believe a majority consensus should win in that instance. So long as what the majority wants doesn't endanger a site from being shut down, or utterly failing then let them have it for the most part.This applies to more subjective matters that aren't plainly stated as prohibited in the CoC. Like someone being negative, or a certain argument that might have escalated to some degree.Wait.... Demonic aren't you one of the mods?Why aren't you orange?
Quote from: TBlocks on July 29, 2014, 11:02:55 AMQuote from: DemonicChronic on July 29, 2014, 10:59:56 AMQuote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 10:51:22 AMBut when you allow rough housing, the supposed line is an absolute blur. You'll have instances where the majority thinks it doesn't cross the line, but the moderators do. When you allow certain degrees of something and not others, it's kinda hard to be consistent.Yes, but I believe a majority consensus should win in that instance. So long as what the majority wants doesn't endanger a site from being shut down, or utterly failing then let them have it for the most part.This applies to more subjective matters that aren't plainly stated as prohibited in the CoC. Like someone being negative, or a certain argument that might have escalated to some degree.Wait.... Demonic aren't you one of the mods?Why aren't you orange?He wasn't online to accept last night and I am away from my desktop. Special colored bars are hard coded and I'll have to edit then manually.
Quote from: DemonicChronic on July 29, 2014, 10:59:56 AMQuote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 10:51:22 AMBut when you allow rough housing, the supposed line is an absolute blur. You'll have instances where the majority thinks it doesn't cross the line, but the moderators do. When you allow certain degrees of something and not others, it's kinda hard to be consistent.Yes, but I believe a majority consensus should win in that instance. So long as what the majority wants doesn't endanger a site from being shut down, or utterly failing then let them have it for the most part.Majority consensus among the staff, maybe.
Quote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 11:01:32 AMQuote from: DemonicChronic on July 29, 2014, 10:59:56 AMQuote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 10:51:22 AMBut when you allow rough housing, the supposed line is an absolute blur. You'll have instances where the majority thinks it doesn't cross the line, but the moderators do. When you allow certain degrees of something and not others, it's kinda hard to be consistent.Yes, but I believe a majority consensus should win in that instance. So long as what the majority wants doesn't endanger a site from being shut down, or utterly failing then let them have it for the most part.Majority consensus among the staff, maybe.See I don't entirely agree with that. I like forums where it's community has some level of say on what is allowed or disallowed. I wouldn't try to enforce that believe on this board, however. This is cheat's site, of course. He can do with it as he pleases.
Quote from: DemonicChronic on July 29, 2014, 11:15:07 AMQuote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 11:01:32 AMQuote from: DemonicChronic on July 29, 2014, 10:59:56 AMQuote from: Zizzy on July 29, 2014, 10:51:22 AMBut when you allow rough housing, the supposed line is an absolute blur. You'll have instances where the majority thinks it doesn't cross the line, but the moderators do. When you allow certain degrees of something and not others, it's kinda hard to be consistent.Yes, but I believe a majority consensus should win in that instance. So long as what the majority wants doesn't endanger a site from being shut down, or utterly failing then let them have it for the most part.Majority consensus among the staff, maybe.See I don't entirely agree with that. I like forums where it's community has some level of say on what is allowed or disallowed. I wouldn't try to enforce that believe on this board, however. This is cheat's site, of course. He can do with it as he pleases.I can see what you mean, and I can get on board with the community being allowed to suggest rules and give their opinions on already existing ones. But for me, when it comes to deciding who stays and goes, that's what mods are for.
I've just had mods on other boards want to eliminate certain members due to personal bias. Maybe their own bias alone or the bias of a group of specific members. In the end it always created a large amount of drama between those that didn't agree with the decision and those that did. And there was no definite rule in the CoC to look at and say, "Well here's the rule/rules that were broken. This discussion can end here, now."
QuoteI've just had mods on other boards want to eliminate certain members due to personal bias. Maybe their own bias alone or the bias of a group of specific members. In the end it always created a large amount of drama between those that didn't agree with the decision and those that did. And there was no definite rule in the CoC to look at and say, "Well here's the rule/rules that were broken. This discussion can end here, now."Exactly. It has to be on the moderator's volition whether the person is crossing the "imaginary line", and if they're showing personal bias through their actions then they shouldn't be mods.I fully support a CoC constructed at least partially by the community. All I'm saying is that the moderators should be the ones fully in charge of enforcing it. When you put an iffy situation to the public vote, I just find it hard to see the entire board looking at the situation objectively and voting. I'd see it becoming a popularity contest every time.
Quote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:08:28 PMI want you to be gentle with me You wanna touch meh ban hammer ?
I want you to be gentle with me
Quote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:09:46 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:08:28 PMI want you to be gentle with me You wanna touch meh ban hammer ?only if I get "punished" by it
Quote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:23:57 PMQuote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:09:46 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:08:28 PMI want you to be gentle with me You wanna touch meh ban hammer ?only if I get "punished" by it What's going on in here?
Quote from: Avatar Korra on July 29, 2014, 12:25:21 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:23:57 PMQuote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:09:46 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:08:28 PMI want you to be gentle with me You wanna touch meh ban hammer ?only if I get "punished" by it What's going on in here?Some hawt banhammer action
Quote from: TBlocks on July 29, 2014, 12:26:43 PMQuote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:26:27 PMQuote from: Avatar Korra on July 29, 2014, 12:25:21 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:23:57 PMQuote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:09:46 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:08:28 PMI want you to be gentle with me You wanna touch meh ban hammer ?only if I get "punished" by it What's going on in here?Some hawt banhammer action I want in Only if you bring the syrup
Quote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:26:27 PMQuote from: Avatar Korra on July 29, 2014, 12:25:21 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:23:57 PMQuote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:09:46 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:08:28 PMI want you to be gentle with me You wanna touch meh ban hammer ?only if I get "punished" by it What's going on in here?Some hawt banhammer action I want in
Quote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:26:27 PMQuote from: Avatar Korra on July 29, 2014, 12:25:21 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:23:57 PMQuote from: SoporificSlash on July 29, 2014, 12:09:46 PMQuote from: Officer Nasty on July 29, 2014, 12:08:28 PMI want you to be gentle with me You wanna touch meh ban hammer ?only if I get "punished" by it What's going on in here?Some hawt banhammer action *Grabs chair and sits down*Imma watch.
What do you guys want from the mods?
