Forum Death Pool

[Cognisant]

https://encyclopediadramatica.es/Democracy

 

[Cavallier]

Spoiler

Yeah. Fine. And to think I counted you as a friend. I think I was an idiot for that.

 

[Hadoblado]

forum arselickers

Shots fired

 

[Cavallier]

Ultimately this is heartbreaking for me. Do I play favorites as an admin? I guess I must because I made the biggest mistake an admin can make. I befriended a troll who insisted on Death By Cop. Two of them actually.

I think I'll resign as admin. I was asked to do it out of the blue by LoR. I did it out of a sense of nostalgia. I did it because I'd seen so many members I liked leave. In the process I've become closer to many here than ever before. Though I've made the usual mistakes of not recognizing manipulative assholes until it was to late. I think that in the end I've done a bit of good. I've tried to chop off the heads of some of the biggest monsters here. Mostly I've won those battles. Though I admit I've always been better at taking out the trash than trying to rehabilitate the trash.

But now I'm tired.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Come on, shake it off. You's a good moderator and you know it.

 

[Jennywocky]

I know it's tiring and sometimes sad. People don't seem to get that, for some, handling disciplines and banning isn't a joyride / power trip but exhausting and sometimes painful.

You're a good mod. Take a break if you need to and let someone else do the dirty work for awhile, but don't let it distract from your self-faith and keen judgment.

I think it was kind of unfair for THD to make you pull the trigger. Again, like Jesse told Walt on Breaking Bad, "if you want it....do it yourself!"

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

hehe... This might provide some entertainment :

Spoiler

https://encyclopediadramatica.es/Mod

The Moderators' Creed

Almost without exception, moderators will operate under the following guidelines;

1. What's good for the goose is definitely not good for the gander - in short, established board members are allowed to rip the piss out of n00bs but should the n00b under fire actually fight back and start winning, a mod will step in (often by locking the thread, see "Mod powers" below) before the established member starts losing too much face.

2. Law of the Post Count - an unwritten internet law that states that the likelihood of a poster being moderated, regardless of the merits or otherwise of their post, is inversely proportional to their relative post count. The Law also states that the truthiness of any post is directly proportional to the post count of its creator. (However to those in reality, the higher the post count, the bigger a loser in real life the person is and the less worthy their opinions are. But mods and admins like high post count people as they're basically minions in their army.)

3. ThisIs Not ADemocracy - a phrase invoked when a moderator has been seriously pwned for making a crap decision, and will not (or, more likely, cannot) justify the decision in public.

4. I'll see how I feel - a decision made by a moderator does not have to be consistent, but instead will often be arrived at through gut instinct and with absolutely no regard to whether or not a forum rule has been breached. Can often result in double standards, a basic requirement for any self-respecting forum.

5. Lets just take this to PM - When a moderator has been called out for being a faggot and a Nazi. Rather then face the masses and actually admit to being an epic failure, they hide behind the cozy barrier of a PM and hide from the public like bitches.

6. You Don't Need No Stinkin' Thick Skin - Since every mod (especially older ones with high post counts) is an asshole, there is often a rule in a forum that you should bring your "thick skin." Moderators however do not need to adhere to these rules. If anyone is being an asshole to them, they can simply throw a hissy-fit and ban you without recourse.

Mod powers

There are a variety of tools that a moderator can employ in order to carry out his or her duties efficiently. These range from the basic (editing of posts, maybe even deleting of posts) to the advanced (locking of threads, avatar and signature alteration).

These powers are there to be routinely abused; for example, a thread can be locked yet some moderators will still post on it regardless, denying a basic right of reply to the OP or the poster who apparently caused the thread to be locked in the first place.

As a result, moderators are often some of the worst (or best, depending on your point of view) internet trolls, which doesn't stop them from accusing others of trolling at every opportunity. Should a moderator start losing an argument on a thread, they will often use the aforementioned powers, like deleting fucking everything, in order to attempt to beat a dignified retreat. Either that, or go running to the admin.

Moderator Induced Necrosis

The law: - "The older that a forum becomes, the more reasons that Moderators find to ban the members". Eventually so many people have been banned and so many posts inevitably produce hairtriggerresponses from the forum administrators that the dreaded condition "Moderator Induced Necrosis" begins to set in. Moderators become more concerned with their own status than the health of the forum and posters begin to drift away to other places where they can speak their minds without having to kowtow to a bunch of people who have been overcome by their own self-importance. In the final stage, all that is left in the forum are (a) the Moderators, (b) the occasional newbie who has wandered in by mistake, soon to leave, (c) the forum arselickers and (d) one or two trolls with the energy left to be entertaining. Soon after that, like a sun collapsing of old age, the forum dies, with only about tenmemberstalking toeach otherabout thesamethingsover andoveragain, stubbornly soldiering on out of sheer inertia or perhapsevennostalgia. The irony is that if only the forum founders -- who have often left a previous forum in disgust at the lack of freedom of speech - remembered their origins and removed the collective sticks from their anuses then the forum would probably have survived

.

Yes..burn you filthy bridges burn.

[BIMG]http://ilovemylsi.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Burning-bridges..jpg[/BIMG]

TheHabitatDoctor is on a two week ban potentially a permaban because he asked to be banned and was willing to do anything to get what he wanted.

See you in two weeks

 

[Grayman]

I know it's tiring and sometimes sad. People don't seem to get that, for some, handling disciplines and banning isn't a joyride / power trip but exhausting and sometimes painful.

You're a good mod. Take a break if you need to and let someone else do the dirty work for awhile, but don't let it distract from your self-faith and keen judgment.

I think it was kind of unfair for THD to make you pull the trigger. Again, like Jesse told Walt on Breaking Bad, "if you want it....do it yourself!"

I think THD just sees himself as a martyr. I am not saying he is or isn't but that is what he seemed to indicate earlier in this thread. This being the case. It was not an attempt of to get others to pull the trigger but instead to make a statement. As people are continually removed, punished, and banned. There will be hard feelings, reactions and damage thereof. Where does this end?

I tried to point out the rift in the forum, in the philosophers vs society, and point out the separation of views and a the destructive course we were on. What occurred was disbelief and a view that I was delusional. I began to think it true and that my intuitions had failed me but this rift is so much wider and people keep falling in.

 

[redbaron]

People don't fall in, they throw themselves in by being drama queens.

I mean uh, look out for that serious rift because it's getting wider. Everyone needs to be careful or it's gooing to turn into a chasm that will swallow the ENTIRE FORUM WORLD and everyone is going to burn and choke and scream and endure endless torment for all eternity.

...

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

I have made a 500 letter response to this thread,
but, apparenty i got somewhere into the Ctrl+E section of the keyboard,
and my fine, detailled, reasoned critique disappeared, not only from the internet, but also from my cache and my cookies,
so, i will have to break down my critique again to the point that i accuse you of being (whoever reformed the rules to this degree of ridiculousness), internet thought crime nazis.
(2 week ban for this?)
(permaban? who knows? bruce almighty?)

 

[Grayman]

I have made a 500 letter response to this thread,
but, apparenty i got somewhere into the Ctrl+E section of the keyboard,
and my fine, detailled, reasoned critique disappeared, not only from the internet, but also from my cache and my cookies,
so, i will have to break down my critique again to the point that you, or whoever reformed the rules, are internet thought crime nazis.
(2 week ban for this?)

I don't think the expectations of the mods have changed. The only thing that changed is they wrote them down and put it out there for you to see plainly.

 

[redbaron]

Have you guys actually been to other forums? This is one of the only forums where moderators even allow people to continuously discuss bans or issues they have with the moderating team.

Which I find curious in a way because it's one of the only forums I've seen where someone doing what BAP did would last more than one day. Maybe that's the problem though, people are accustomed to being treated like precious fairies by the moderators and so they lash out like spoilt brats whenever they do something they dislike. I mean, here's the pattern:

*user gets banned that a particular member likes*
Member: wow you guys are Nazis.

Reminds me of toddlers having tantrums yelling, "I HATE YOU!!!" at the supermarket because for once in their lives their mother doesn't allow them to have every single bag of lollies in the store.

 

[Jennywocky]

Have you guys actually been to other forums? This is one of the only forums where moderators even allow people to continuously discuss bans or issues they have with the moderating team.

We do it at TypC too, but sometimes I wonder if we should -- what usually happens is just a fleshpile on the staff.

If the staff is being fair, they've already spent a lot of energy and time evaluating the member as fairly as possible, engaging them to get things back on track, etc.... and then if they do ban them at the end of an exhausting odyssey, they now have to spend yet more energy fielding criticisms, insults, and complaints. It's a wonder anyone gets banned, sometimes -- it's not that the decision doesn't make sense, but it's hell on the staff if they're human.

Which I find curious in a way because it's one of the only forums I've seen where someone doing what BAP did would last more than one day. Maybe that's the problem though, people are accustomed to being treated like precious fairies by the moderators and so they lash out like spoilt brats whenever they do something they dislike. I mean, here's the pattern:

*user gets banned that a particular member likes*
Member: wow you guys are Nazis.

Reminds me of toddlers having tantrums yelling, "I HATE YOU!!!" at the supermarket because for once in their lives their mother doesn't allow them to have every single bag of lollies in the store.

It's not really surprising that sometimes the response is just what a parent would do in that situation -- not argue, not explain, just quietly take the tyke, sit 'em in the cart seat, finish shopping, and wheel them (screaming) out of the store until the whole event passes.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

I seriously disapprove the banning of
BAP
VARIFORM
BASEGROOVE
SOMEFOOLISHFOOLE
THD

If you take out the salt of a soup, what do you have as a result of this?
I have followed the thread which spoke about reforms of the forum in general.
Well, i don't think banning long-term contributors is a healthy policy.

THD: August 14, 2014
Salmoneous: November 19th, 2014
Cognisant: March 13th, 2015
Cherry Cola: October 4, 2014
EyeSeeCold: January 8, 2015
Quicktwist: July 12, 2014
Duxwing: July 30, 2014
Lot: June 24, 2015

And this has nothing to do with THD's initial listing.
It's a slippery slope we are all going down, and the question which we must ask ourselves is, do we want to go there?

I for myself came here, despite having the suspicion of being an INTJ, because this was a fun place.
A fun place for an INTJ is where he/she can think outside of the box.
I think that a certain degree of madness sometimes comes close to ingenuity.
I for myself am terribly interested in the insane.
To put it into the words of the poor sod Diogenes of Sinope:

I threw my cup away when I saw a child drinking from his hands at the trough.

But without recognizing the ingenuity and insanity in the same quote, you won't be talking on even level with me, or the persons mentioned above.

 

[Grayman]

Have you guys actually been to other forums? This is one of the only forums where moderators even allow people to continuously discuss bans or issues they have with the moderating team.

Which I find curious in a way because it's one of the only forums I've seen where someone doing what BAP did would last more than one day. Maybe that's the problem though, people are accustomed to being treated like precious fairies by the moderators and so they lash out like spoilt brats whenever they do something they dislike. I mean, here's the pattern:

*user gets banned that a particular member likes*
Member: wow you guys are Nazis.

Reminds me of toddlers having tantrums yelling, "I HATE YOU!!!" at the supermarket because for once in their lives their mother doesn't allow them to have every single bag of lollies in the store.

I am not certain who you are talking to...

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

I highly value the open-ness this forum seems to be operating under.
That's one of the reasons why i ended up here.
That's also one of the reasons why i wouldn't write a main stream media piece.
But when you have an under-the-radar community, and you want to hammer it into conformity, you will naturally have to face with resistance.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Which I find curious in a way because it's one of the only forums I've seen where someone doing what BAP did would last more than one day.

What did BAP do? Was he always doing that? BAP had chances because he was a longtime member.

That could be for no other reason than the admin had the community in mind. Have you not been given chances yourself? Who hasn't?

 

[redbaron]

We do it at TypC too, but sometimes I wonder if we should -- what usually happens is just a fleshpile on the staff.

If the staff is being fair, they've already spent a lot of energy and time evaluating the member as fairly as possible, engaging them to get things back on track, etc.... and then if they do ban them at the end of an exhausting odyssey, they now have to spend yet more energy fielding criticisms, insults, and complaints. It's a wonder anyone gets banned, sometimes -- it's not that the decision doesn't make sense, but it's hell on the staff if they're human.

Right. Yet I don't think people actually factor this into their equation. The moderators are just there to serve the whims of the community and their concerns as a user are not counted. People expect moderators to go to absurd lengths to reform people, yet I wonder if this is even a good thing.

The issues that a lot of people bring to the forum have no inherent connection to the forum. People want them to "rehabilitate" people with psychological issues. What's next, INTPforum moderators have to do their taxes as well? Give me a break.

People can go out of their way to try and rehabilitate someone if they so choose, but just because you're the moderator of a forum it doesn't mean that every user with a mental problem who signs up is now suddenly your responsibility to take care of.

I seriously disapprove the banning of
BAP
Variform
Base Groove
Somfoolishfoole
THD

Me too. Those bans were far too late. They were given way too much rope in the first place.

Well, i don't think banning long-term contributors is a healthy policy.

Ah I see, so you support the idea of favoritism then? People who are long-term contributors should get special treatment?

What did BAP do?

You mean apart from harassing Lyra and constantly speculating publicly about the personal lives of forum members?

That could be for no other reason than the admin had the community in mind. Have you not been given chances yourself?

How does that even constitute a "chance"? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not an exception for moderators to deal with people privately and they have generally always told people to keep personal feuds outside of the public forum?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

You mean apart from harassing Lyra and constantly speculating publicly about the personal lives of forum members?

I was here almost as long as BAP. He wasn't always obsessing over members or provoking administration. Like I said he was given chances out of respect for the community.

How does that even constitute a "chance"? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not an exception for moderators to deal with people privately and they have generally always told people to keep personal feuds outside of the public forum?

I'm sorry but if you can't see how the administration has given you a chance for your own past transgressions, I can't see any use in discussing it further. Yes I'm aware I brought it up, I had a point, but continuing would make it personal.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

You have failed to address my third point.

But when you have an under-the-radar community, and you want to hammer it into conformity, you will naturally have to face with resistance.

I'm on the list as well, ain't i?

 

[redbaron]

I was here almost as long as BAP. He wasn't always obsessing over members or provoking administration.

So because he didn't always do it, people should just ignore him when he does do it for months on end? Am I missing something here?

Yes I'm aware I brought it up, I had a point, but continuing would make it personal.

Uh, that wasn't me telling you not to be personal. I was pointing out that the comment you linked to was Absurdity telling someone else not to bring whatever issue they had into the thread - it wasn't him defending me or giving me a chance.

Yeah alright everyone just edit your posts 37 times D:

You have failed to address my third point.

But when you have an under-the-radar community, and you want to hammer it into conformity, you will naturally have to face with resistance

Wait, that wasn't a joke? Do you seriously see this as an issue of the forum being hammered into conformity and you're some kind of resistance? HAHAHAHAHA, oh my god.

 

[Latte]

I seriously disapprove the banning of
BAP
VARIFORM
BASEGROOVE
SOMEFOOLISHFOOLE
THD

*scratches head*

Did you find somefoolishfoole and variform to be contributing other than through being case studies? The former willingly through mostly just talking about his personal life, the latter accidentally through being largely incoherent, illogical, self-contradictory and interpersonally erratic in both self-destructive and elsepeople destructive ways in a pattern that most of us have not encountered before.

I'm genuinely curious.

I can more easily understand that the other three can be regarded as having contributed intellectually in periods. Whether one sees their socially destructive aspects as not outweighing that (or regards them as having socially destructive aspects to begin with), is to some extent a personal taste, valuing and perception thing. It makes sense to me that some people will see keeping them as outweighing whatever one might see as community detrimental aspects of their behavior.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

Yeah alright everyone just edit your posts 37 times D:

3-5 times is not obsessive in INTP terms, especially when sleep-deprivation takes its toll.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

Somefoolishfoole did offer some insight into persons who identify as INTP and have some narcissistic/sociopathic issues, which is to a certain degree inherent in INTP qualities.
But, a true narcissist/sociopath would never ask others for advice, he has no doubts, he doesn't question him/herself, he is not interested in getting a different view on the issue.
So, as a result of banning/ousting these types of people, who are genouinely interested in understanding, we do not only damage the INTP spectrum as a whole, but we also project a disapproving image towards anyone vaguely interested in these kinds of topics.

In regards to Variform, the solution to the enigma is given in his username.
And i think he catered to a variety of people on the INTP spectrum as well.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

So because he didn't always do it, people should just ignore him when he does do it for months on end? Am I missing something here?

Lurk more

"BAP's obsessive behavior started at the beginning of 2013 to put this in perspective."

BAP's join date: Jan 2010

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

What about the people listed here, who have been banned in a two week span?
Who were they a threat to?
Oh, you only defended the powerless INTPf masses from their evil doings, of which so many complained about?

 

[redbaron]

Lurk more

"BAP's obsessive behavior started at the beginning of 2013 to put this in perspective."

Could you be a little clearer? It started at the beginning of 2013 and went on for months on end. I don't see how any of that contradicts what I said.

So, as a result of banning/ousting these types of people, who are genouinely interested in understanding, we do not only damage the INTP spectrum as a whole, but we also project a disapproving image towards anyone vaguely interested in these kinds of topics.

And as a result of keeping these types of people, we project an approving image to people being self-absorbed, making personal attacks on people based on their race and gender and lying about other people's personal lives. This is turn projects a disapproving image towards anyone vaguely interested in having open-minded, neutral discussions with people who don't attack them.

We'll just have to agree to disagree with either of them wanting to understand things. I don't think either of them wanted to understand anything beyond the extent that it was advantageous for them to. Neither of them struck me as particularly understanding individuals, to say the least.

 

[Latte]

But Variform wasn't even INTP. The only indicator we have of that is him claiming he was. He didn't quack like and INTP, nor walk like an INTP. He talked like an extremely unhealthy Fi user of some sort.

I see your reasoning though. Predicated on the idea that intpforum.com should first and foremost be shaped around the idea of being a place where people who identify as INTP can interact without much interference.

I'm not sold on Variform genuinely wanting to understand things, nor do I see a forum member genuinely wanting to understand to be relevant to whether I would prefer them to be cut from the forum or not (as it doesn't necessitate an overall "positive" contribution)... but this is tangential and besides the point.

I guess there's a degree of difference between respective visions of what the forum preferably should value when assessing who should be allowed to play in this sandbox, and how much various aspects of people and their behavior preferably should be valued.

A lot more exploration of this difference ultimately probably won't matter much in terms of how things will actually be run henceforth if the mods and a sizable portion of the community roughly share a vision. Rebellion also seems rather futile if it is so.

Somewhat fruitful discourse at the moment. Understanding each other can prevent miscalculations and unnecessary negative feelings.

Regarding INTPs tending to have some narcissistic and sociopathic issues, I'm curious about hearing about this idea in more detail, though it probably would deserve its own thread if it is to be thoroughly explored.

 

[Jennywocky]

Lurk more

"BAP's obsessive behavior started at the beginning of 2013 to put this in perspective."

BAP's join date: Jan 2010

You're right -- I mean, that was only about 3700 posts, give or take a few (based on the Search feature running back to Jan 2013).

3700 posts of obsessive behavior -- about 2400 a year based on the last 18 months, compared to the 1600 posts a year or so before than that weren't obsessive enough to be generalized in a call-out.

I'm glad you put this in perspective. My god, what have we done??

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

I'm glad we are not totally in disagreement here.

My first statement was about SFF.

The second statement, i must admit, i have failed to elaborate upon.
From what i can see, Variform is a multi-layered personality.
There is a lot to discover, and one of this layer is his INTP personality.
The way i see it, some persons are INTP because they are born with it,
others are made to be it, due to their experiences with society and education.
From what i can gather from Variforms post, we can not judge either one to be true (yet).
And my perspective is that he has been mistreated his whole life because others could not understand him, and he could not understand them.
So, his presence on the forum was not only to learn to understand other people's rationale,
but also to put forward and put into relation his own views about the world in relation to the opinions of the majority of INTPs.
You may disagree with me, whether that observation is true or not,
but i think INTPf should also be a safe haven for people who come from that perspective, as hard as it may be for the majority of the users involved here to relate to.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#Modern_philosophy

And, please, don't consider this as a cheap snide remark (as it seems to be en vogue on this forum, funnily enough not listed as punishable behaviour), take it into consideration with all your heart and intellect.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

You're right -- I mean, that was only about 3700 posts, give or take a few (based on the Search feature running back to Jan 2013).

3700 posts of obsessive behavior -- about 2400 a year based on the last 18 months, compared to the 1600 posts a year or so before than that weren't obsessive enough to be generalized in a call-out.

I'm glad you put this in perspective. My god, what have we done??

If his behavior that was to be considered bannable started in early 2013, and he was only banned just now, there was clearly a lot of leniency provided for BAP. He was member who has been here for years, which is likely the reason he was given so much leniency.

The point is that admin give leniency out of respect for the forum, regardless of who the member is. Redbaron made a remark that perhaps admin are too soft, but if they did stick to the rules and ban by the book he would not be here either, as many others.

Banning isn't the only way to cultivate a community, or so was what the mods believed.

 

[Kuu]

This thread is deliberately inflammatory and really, really pathetic.

I often reply in these threads, largely not because I want to argue with the person(s) involved, but to set things straight for other readers, because often I perceive a massive misrepresentation of what we do or what transpired. So, here we go again...


Hey THD (when/if you come back), why didn't you post your comments in the recent thread discussing the state of the forum? There were plenty of thoughtful answers by a diversity of members. Afraid your narrow and selective criticism would be shot down by other's perspectives ("arse lickers", classy)? So now we get this in the Arena so you can pretend its all a joke, like everything seems to be to you?

Seeing as the glorified hall monitors have adjusted the rules in such a way that nearly anything can now be considered a banworthy nuisance

This is BULLSHIT and YOU KNOW IT. NONE of the rules were "adjusted", they were just consolidated in a single place. They have remained the same since 2009. After quite some time of people worrying over what makes a nuisance, much controversy, desire of transparency, we obliged and decided to try and spell out some things in more detail regarding the moderation choices. This is to provide more consistency and assurance to people about what is and is not acceptable. The list just clarifies the moderators thoughts, it does not really provide anything new.


We make a genuine effort to improve moderation and communication and suddenly we're the thought police? Get real. You were an admin, so don't pretend as if it is some sudden development when you know for a fact it is not. It reeks of hypocrisy.

The rules were always all-encompassing when it came to possible interpretation. Now that what constitutes being a nuisance is clarified (albeit still quite broad), the parameters for being banned according to the moderation guidelines are actually more narrow.

The previous, broader definition just wasn't strongly enforced, as many people whose consistent behavior was considered a nuisance by the majority of the mods were/are not banished to the shadow realm from whence they came upon the realization that they were in fact, a nuisance.

I don't think the expectations of the mods have changed. The only thing that changed is they wrote them down and put it out there for you to see plainly.

Quoted for truth.

June picks:

THD — If you want to immolate yourself, its your choice
Salmoneous — Same as above. You think the place is an unsalvageable dump? You're free to leave whenever you desire.
Cognisant — He's abrasive at times, but backs down when swatted. He knows were the lines lie, and he's often right on the matter more often than not. Contribution outweighs flaw, but will be banned if an offence warrants it
Cherry Cola — Same as above, less abrasiveness
EyeSeeCold — Zero reasons to warn or ban
Quicktwist — Zero reasons to warn or ban
Duxwing — Has been warned repeatedly and has improved considerably. We respect his attempts to resolve any issues without making a huge drama
Lot — Zero reasons to warn or ban
Grayman — We hope he doesn't turn BAP 2.0. It's ok to question things, it's NOT OK to constantly insist on a point when you haven't informed yourself and there's a ton of info there explaining and the issue has been talked to death. Other than that, no complaints
Paradoxparadigm7 — Zero reasons to warn or ban. I find her posts quite thoughtful and considerate, not a hint of aggression
Animekitty — Could make an effort to post with more substance
ApostateAbe — He could learn a bit of humility
Own8ge — Haven't seen him in a while

I don't think I've ever been warned by madmin either.

This is BULLSHIT too. There are some examples in the threads you linked in that childish thing you did down here. Did you even read those?

Here's one.

hehe... This might provide some entertainment :

https://encyclopediadramatica.es/Mod

The Moderators' Creed

Almost without exception, moderators will operate under the following guidelines;

...

Some of those threads actually hold plenty of examples of the opposite of what you're pretending not to argue here. I'm not saying we're perfect but to assert we're some foolish, wilful tyrants is disproportionate, defamatory, disingenuous and frankly hurtful coming from someone that knows better.

Then again, nobody's supposed to read all those threads, or take them in context, and this is all a game after all, right?

I and the other mods always try to talk straight. Why do you insist on playing games? Proving a point through convoluted means? A desire for martyrdom? Just stirring up dirt for amusement?

I don't know your bizarre motivations, but I do know this thread is thinly-veiled drama bait. Keep it up and you might get your martyrdom.

OH and by the way, THD, you do remember when you banned someone on a whim? And it was much criticised and discussed, and you stopped being a moderator? And it all happened around a time of considerable tension when we were struggling with the removal of an administrator that was genuinely power mad?

Pffftt. Talking about abuse of power.

People don't fall in, they throw themselves in by being drama queens.

Wisdom.

If the staff is being fair, they've already spent a lot of energy and time evaluating the member as fairly as possible, engaging them to get things back on track, etc.... and then if they do ban them at the end of an exhausting odyssey, they now have to spend yet more energy fielding criticisms, insults, and complaints. It's a wonder anyone gets banned, sometimes -- it's not that the decision doesn't make sense, but it's hell on the staff if they're human..

Jenny, shut your reasonable mouth or I'll ban you, they're trying to have a tantrum here!


And now, the great words of the sagely EditorOne, whom we will promptly ban for no reason at all:

"No problem, he was annoying."

Yes. This is a forum where you can be banned for being tiresome. (I think that's a good thing.)

Being a moderator in an INTP forum requires actions that go against the grain. We invariably tend to not take action against folks who provoke us, it's the "meh?" part of us that can't be bothered and doesn't get all that emotional anyway. To be banned by an INTP moderator is really an indication you were beyond any boundaries. And even now we've got some folks saying "well, well, gosh, banned, that seems kind of a bit much." The world is a better place with INTPs in it.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

I seriously challenge this misrepresentation of BAP.

 

[Latte]

You may disagree with me, whether that observation is true or not,
but i think INTPf should also be a safe haven for people who come from that perspective, as hard as it may be for the majority of the users involved here to relate to.

Do you think safe haven includes safety from other people's conduct, or safety from being decisively excluded (banned) no matter what so long as one doesn't do something like spamming?

An example of the kind of instances I'm thinking about is the 16 year old military family child that joined the forum and received a verbal dose of potentially quite heart shattering and distorted characterization of herself and her family, in a way that went way beyond the harshness of any similar incident on the forum (I don't categorically think harsh characterizations are undesirable).

One argument I can think of against attempting to use moderation to resolve such is that other forumites can remedy this by stepping in if they disagree with the message or conduct and express this (which did occur).

It did, however, significantly alter the nature of the thread, and if it hadn't happened in the first place, the thread might have been "better" overall, or at least less disheartening. And people might have felt better overall and more positive. In a better mood in their daily lives and feeling better on the actual forum. A lot of his behavior was quite emotionally draining for many people.

Are there good mechanisms for the forum to deal with this that doesn't include definite exclusion as a resort if the pattern repeats?

And, please, don't consider this as a cheap snide remark

Will not : ).

I suspect there will be a lot less aggressivenes on the forum in general with more forceful moderation. Not just because some people who contribute directly to this are removed, but also because they usually themselves are targets of aggressiveness as people grow frustrated with their behavior and how it colours the forum experience and consequently the lives of those who are on it.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

As much as i respect the mods efforts to keep this place "clean" and "enjoyable" for everyone, but i have a few difficulties understanding the following:

Salmoneous — ... You think the place is an unsalvageable dump? You're free to leave whenever you desire.

Where did i ever state something even remotely resembling your statement?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crCMKjeM3YQ

 

[Kuu]

As much as i respect the mods efforts to keep this place "clean" and "enjoyable" for everyone, but i have a few difficulties understanding the following:

Where did i ever state something even remotely resembling your statement?

I apologize for my poor wording. Its a rhetorical question. If you allow me to rephrase: "If you think the place is an unsalvageable dump, you're free to leave whenever you desire."

Not saying its your case, but some people just complain and complain and complain and complain and don't contribute much else. If they dislike the place so much, it would make sense for them to leave rather than expect the place to mould itself to their every demand, right?

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

Not saying its your case, but some people just complain and complain and complain and complain and don't contribute much else.

Fair enough.
But is it fair in regards to my activity on the forum?
If so, i would like to discuss this in detail.

 

[BrainVessel]

but i think INTPf should also be a safe haven for people who come from that perspective, as hard as it may be for the majority of the users involved here to relate to.

*stands on newbie box and wiggles fingers in the air for permission to speak*
I came here for the ability to discuss freely and watch others discuss freely(and reason quoted above).
Variety in opinion and perspective is the most fertile ground for genius, and I understand that weeding must be done, but we could at least entertain the thought that the wolf peach might be a tomato without eating it.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

Do you think safe haven includes safety from other people's conduct, or safety from being decisively excluded (banned) no matter what so long as one doesn't do something like spamming?

I think, ideally, each and everyone should be given the chance to self-improve, sometimes this includes self-correction via insight.

An example of the kind of instances I'm thinking about is the 16 year old military family child that joined the forum and received a verbal dose of potentially quite heart shattering and distorted characterization of herself and her family, in a way that went way beyond the harshness of any similar incident on the forum (I don't categorically think harsh characterizations are undesirable).

I think each side can gather insight from that instance.
It may have been harsh for some to put it this way,
but the other participants could have easily swayed the discussion in a more desireable direction, if they had intended to.

One argument I can think of against attempting to use moderation to resolve such is that other forumites can remedy this by stepping in if they disagree with the message or conduct and express this (which did occur).

Yes, i think a society is a self-correcting organism.

It did, however, significantly alter the nature of the thread, and if it hadn't happened in the first place, the thread might have been "better" overall, or at least less disheartening. And people might have felt better overall and more positive. In a better mood in their daily lives and feeling better on the actual forum. A lot of his behavior was quite emotionally draining for many people.

I think some critical points of thought that everyone could have benefited from have been raised, although the wording was, to put it mildy, at some points more than subpar.

Are there good mechanisms for the forum to deal with this that doesn't include definite exclusion as a resort if the pattern repeats?

I think, in the long term, each societal structure, no matter how big or small, will put forward desireable behaviour to counter-balance undesired opinions and conduct.

Will not : ).

Thank you.

I suspect there will be a lot less aggressivenes on the forum in general with more forceful moderation. Not just because some people who contribute directly to this are removed, but also because they usually themselves are targets of aggressiveness as people grow frustrated with their behavior and how it colours the forum experience and consequently the lives of those who are on it.

I think direct punishment from an authority will always provoke resistance,
if the behaviour of the people (the cultural climate) in general nourishes positive behaviour and discourages disruptive behaviour, it is much less controversial.

But, again, i think we do not appreciate the (accused) people's contributions, which i listed previously,
if we measure them by our black and white expectations.

PS:
Re-reading this, i have noticed that i use the intro phrase "I think..." too often, but it's late, and i don't want to re-edit this, as RB pointed out, sometimes form doesn't matter to get a point across.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

we could at least entertain the thought that the wolf peach might be a tomato without eating it.

I like the way you poetically put this.

 

[Black Rose]

Animekitty — Could make an effort to post with more substance

It has been a real difficulty for me to express myself my whole life as I always felt like a failer since I was 12. My unbalanced approach to development has left me to form unrealistic expectations of myself. Only now am I able to approach thing from a new perspective. I lost the internet for a month so was able to meditate 5 hours and hour each and 4 times for 15 minutes. I had to become less anxious and unsettled. The last time I lost the internet in 2011 I had to be in the world and ended up going to the mental ward. Things are different now. I have a new house to live in and my family is less angry with each other.

I know THD has recently been banned. He is so playful and sometimes that can lead to internal anger if rejected and seeing others rejected. Maturity I required to be a moderator but I think THD might just be going through a faze. I think the same about BAP. Something happened in their lives that triggered confusion and hostility. On INFJ forum I was being playful once and I upset a lot of people and I felt sad and hurt deeply. Good people can be put in bad situations especially if they cannot handle change. I know its unpopular and it hurts be banned but this is a community cannot brings peoples inner conflict to everyone else. Please think out what you say as a reflection so you can empathies with others.

 

[TheScornedReflex]

Change is upon us.

 

[Grayman]

People don't fall in, they throw themselves in by being drama queens.
...

It is more like they see fire at their backs and feel the need to jump. You however see no fire at your or their back.

The fire is a representation of their ideals burning; ideals you do not have.

It may seem silly but history has shown what man will do for an ideal. Brother has fought brother over ideals, bled and died. Perhaps the forum is not a place to practice ideals but some believe certain ideals are not contingent on place or position.

Your opinions about their behavior being dramatic, silly, and/or delusional, are pointless. They are what they are and are going to do what they will do. The question is what is to be done about it?

 

[Latte]

@Sal

Thanks for answering.

I have a some more question for the purpose of disambiguating, I think (I think!). If the questions feel too many and laborious to respond to due to the lengthy nature of our current conversation, that is understandable.

What constitutes having the chance to self-improve? Do you prefer the chance to be limitless or do you have a kind of threshold of tolerance in mind, but one that is higher than and/or different to what is currently in practice?

I'm unsure about the nature of and how categorical you are in the belief that societies are self-correcting organisms.

Take for instance the thought experiment of a community of 100 people, where one of these people will walk around and yell in people's ears every day as much as it can muster, especially when it sees them trying to have conversations. If the community attempts to reform this person up to the point where it sees itself as having run out of feasible ideas, is it ideal if the society endures the behavior of that one person with the idea that they have failed in helping the person ceasing to behave the way it does, and should indefinitely try to find new ways to remedy the situation without the exclusion or restraining of that person?

This can also extend to scenarios involving people who display patterns of violence and so on.

Do you also not view moderation as a subsystem part of the self-correcting organism that is this forum? Or do you view it more like it currently being so, but a self-correcting organism without moderation (apart from spambot bans and such), would be one more suitable to your tastes, and/or more self-correcting in nature due a flatter structure? (Another option?)

Do you think with the absence of moderation, people would have reacted to occurrences such as the example I mentioned in a way that would have morphed it more positively than what happened because they knew the moderation cavalry simply didn't exist to resolve such?

I've gotten the impression that in the absence of moderation, negative tone developments occur. That people take it upon themselves to act in ways that serve to make another person feel unwanted, if they deem the person to be incorrigible and thus an undesirable community element... which does and will happen, I think. If they see this function of exclusion of incorrigible elements as being handled by the subsystem that is the mods, I would think they are less inclined to try to adopt a role that fills this function, and also less inclined to actively evaluate whether someone's behavior is incorrigible. I think the void and freedom from feeling less inclined towards that increases the tendency of the average forumite to be constructive and try to rehabilitate people who are struggling in a destructive manner, as the monopoly on exclusion is to a large extent effectively held by the moderators.

My perspective could possibly sounds a bit human-nature-pessimistic.

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

...the perfect society cannot exist while driving single-mindedly towards a utopian society, for it is destined to lead to dystopia...since perfection has no allowance for error, a society led by mankind is prone to the weakness and mistakes of human nature and will never achieve perfection. Secondly, absolute happiness is dependent on the elimination of all differences; this defines the impossibility of a utopian society due to the lack of members resorting to equal conformity. Thirdly, the perfect society requires absolute stability, this makes no room for advancement and therefore the contingency of reaching true perfection is impossible.

source : http://www.studymode.com/essays/Utopia-The-Impossibility-Of-Perfection-1719050.html

 

[The Introvert]

Cog will never be banned, unless he wants to be.

This forum is dead. I only come to watch it burn from the inside out (I can read more posts as a member than as a guest). I used to agree with most of what the mods did, but now - especially with Cav in mind (and Puffy as a possible lone exception) - they've gotten power hungry or delusional, or both. This is no longer a place of freedom or fun, if it ever was during my time here.

Of course, my opinion matters little to none. Mostly I'm posting here to automatically subscribe to the thread so I can read it later, if I'm not banned for this expression of opinion.

*T.I. permabanned for... calling out mods?

 

[redbaron]

The drama queens are mounting a full scale offensive!

Yes, the forum is dead and banning four people from an online forum constitutes someone being power-hungry and delusional. Oh and yes you're certainly going to get perma-banned for that post...who's supposed to be the delusional one here again?

Although to be fair at least you didn't go straight to the Nazi routine.

 

[Jennywocky]

If someone honestly thinks he's going to get permabanned for making such an innocuous post, I end up mistrusting his entire perspective.

 

[Absurdity]

THD will be back in less than two weeks. All the melodrama isn't necessary.