Topic: My proposal to forum administration (Read 2429 times)

 
Agreed.


Agreed


Agreed

Touche.

I agree.There was no point in dragging the meaningless thread to almost 5 pages if not for his signature campaign. Apparently,he makes the most out of his campaign.

No one forces you to post here

I could just as easily claim that you are basically trying to troll and hijack the thread in some really nasty way (you'd better explain how you managed to trash 1,000 threads of forum users on your own), but I don't particularly care since it is not up to me to judge or decide. Anyway, if you consider this thread as a spammy one you should, first, stop posting in it yourself (which seems to be obvious), and, second, report on me being a "genuine spammer" (provided you really think so). Though I don't know whom you are going to report to since both theymos and hilarious seem to think different somehow (well, at least I think so). If anyone thinks along the same lines as Lauda, I guess you should just stop posting here as well. Otherwise, it would be a bit hypocritical if you continue to raise the thread you hate so much. In any case, real spam should get deleted, not replied to, as simple as it gets


You are just severely uninformed (but that would be as severely off-topic)


It cuts both ways, which you seem to forget

The moment I said:


I realized that it is meaningless to argue with the OP, deisik, since he don't have what it takes to start a logical argument. Anyone who had read the thread would surely understand what I'm saying. At that moment, I had foreseen that the argument would end like this and I'm right!

I'd expect that the participants and the readers of this thread had already figured out that deisik is a "genuine spammer". This thread was created solely due to his campaign earnings.

The only right course of action would be to ban him from his campaign.

Your whole thread has been obliterated. Either learn to admit being wrong, derive a better argument(s) or go spam somewhere else now.

Just curious what I see here. deisik there is no doubt you opened this thread because of lost posts in signature campaign (because everything starts from coinroll sig thread).
I read some of your previous post and please answer me, what negative effect did bitcoin economy get from deleting some old threads? If you really care so much about bitcoin, than why did your talk start from coinroll's thread?
Not only moderators started vendetta against you but theymos and even satoshi tries everything to get you down, haha.
Don't act like bitcoin lover, you are money lover and that's all, even from 2013 it seems how you "hate" campaigns, just see your sent trusts. Everytime trust is because of campaign payment. You can't hide trust.

This thread is made because you only carries about your campaign, there is no doubt. If not, just leave sig forwvwr and do your best in bitcoin economy developing. (you won't do this in your entire life).
Truth is trusth, we can't hide it in most cases.

What's the difference between a Frenchman and a Jew?

The Frenchman leaves without saying goodbye, and the Jew says goodbye but never leaves (while the Russian never says goodbye and never leaves). I guess you shouldn't have come here in the first place. At first you were trying to victimize me, then flip-flopped and tried to make a victim out of yourself. Playing someone is right about fooling everyone else into thinking that you are not who or what you are. Further, your whole message (as quoted in my post above) is meaningless since people are complaining about their posts deleted irrespective of whether they post for free or for a remuneration. The latter just adds more injury to the insult. I guess even outright shitposters like the dude above wouldn't be quite happy to see their posts removed for no reason at all (though in the latter case the reason should be pretty obvious). That's why discussing anything with you was an exercise in futility right from the start. I hope this could help you see some light at last and finally find some piece of mind


So instead of actual posting you were just busy removing other posters' threads and kinda trashed like 1,000 threads during the times of your moderation? Good for you! That's what I call a hardcore moderation, lol. But somehow I am not surprised at all. I'm just curious how many threads would get deleted if it were reflected in your post count too



Well, now I start to understand theymos

Can we just ban sig campaigns please? 

Sig campaigns are like donations to sub sahara Africa. It just makes the situation worst for the people.

Anyway deisik is an idiot whom you cant have a discussion with.
He always sidesteps arguments and changes topics.

Perhaps I am trying to play the victim, though I don't believe I am 'fooling' anyone with it. There is nothing for me to fool anyone with. I've made my point of view extremely clear, and yet you disregard both it and me by telling me I am trying to mislead people.
However, if anything it shows that you have nothing to back up your argument with. Thank you for making that clear.

I don't believe that I was misleading anything or anyone by posting my opinion on why you're making this thread. Saying that I think you're doing this simply out of greed does not constitute as me trying to 'twist the facts'.
In addition, the discussion that I was looking for is exactly what happened. You gave me your point of view, and I gave you mine. I wished that it could have ended differently, but such is.

I can now see that I will be wasting my time trying to discuss things like adults with you, so I will simply leave you to your own little bubble. Best of luck with your proposal.

As to me, you are doing exactly that

Right now you are obviously trying to play a victim here, but I can only repeat to you what I just told Lauda, I'm not that kind of person who can be easily fooled with such tactics. After all, you are free to leave at any moment if you feel insulted or anything to that tune. No one is forcing you to post here, and I certainly won't miss you (good riddance). Other than that, I will just quote below your first post in this thread (just in case you choose to change it), so that anyone could check and decide for themselves whether you are misleading others and what kind of discussion you are really looking for (this is not intended as an offense but exclusively for the sake of fairness):


I don't know how that could be interpreted as a "viewpoint" which I should listen to. I sincerely hope you won't mind me leaving this quote here


You can pack up and go home too

"Let's cut the crap" -> proceeds to post ad hominem because your argument had been destroyed. Very indulging my young padawan. It does not seem like they teach logic at your school.

I don't care about your interpretation of what Lauda is saying, but don't accuse me of twisting facts. I've done nothing but tell (what I know as) the truth about forum moderation and how I feel it should be done. If I am wrong about anything I'm happy to be corrected by someone who knows what they're talking about.

If you're not able to listen to my viewpoint and discuss it with me without insulting me and trying to make it out as if I'm trying to mislead you and others, you shouldn't be on a space where people don't agree with you. Try going to your local church, if you're lucky there will be an echo big enough so you can hear what you want to.

---

IIRC shorena linked it to you when you rejoined the forum, but here it is again.

I believe everything there is to be discussed about this proposal is already discussed. Is there any reason to continue this discussion?


When did that happen? Can someone give me a link to a detailed thread(if any)?

Let's cut the crap here

You may twist the facts as much as you want with your buddy minifrij but you were a moderator (by whatever name), and you were kicked for doing something which a moderator is not allowed to do (and what many mods still do at every other forum out there). I don't know the details of that story since I'm not very much interested in such stories in general (maybe, you had some reason behind your actions after all, I don't know). But personally, to me, blackmailing someone (as it was rumored) is a lot heavier "crime" than just stealthily deleting posts of some user which you may not quite like (heck, that might be a real crime that could put you in a real jail). So please don't tell me about "the opposite of normalcy bias", I'm not that kind of person (I don't know what you meant to say anyway)

Precisely. As I mentioned earlier, you can avoid your theoretical situation happening (by anyone other than a Global Moderator or Administrator) by avoiding the sections moderated by the staff member you do not trust. However, if you do not trust the staff to do their jobs properly it is questionable whether you should be on the forum at all.

---

I believe Mitchell lost more than you, did he not?

It's related to the Moved threads. I have often not left them, but due to my high activity whilst moderating their count must have been high.

Jurisdiction means: Section that they moderate. If you look closely, a single moderator couldn't do much in his "personal vendetta" conquest.

It has never happened, and in expectancy of it happening once we should do this? Seems to be the opposite of normalcy bias.

I'm also utterly curious how you managed to get so many non-existent posts


I'm afraid that this is not the case

I don't know if that's true (though I think it is), but, according to hilarious, "all staff can delete or trashcan a thread as long as it is in their jurisdiction". So it seems that this is not as theoretical as you want it to appear. In fact, I don't see anything wrong with preventing such situations from happening before they actually come about since everything happens for the first time one day. Basically, it is just a matter of time. I guess when Satoshi started this forum, he couldn't even imagine that it would become a source of income for so many people. I don't mean just sig campaigners, you should also include here campaign managers, people advertising their services, and even moderators themselves (and I don't know whom else)

This was in reply to your theoretical situation where a moderator would go on a streak of deleting one user's posts specifically due to a personal vendetta. That quote was also in regards to Lauda being promoted to a Global Moderator.

What you said was that posts in a necrod thread were deleted, not the theoretical situation you came up with (This isn't the same as what I was replying to in the first point). I tried to later clarify this.

Which is true. As it is not the theoretical situation that you were talking about (which I tried to point out to you by asking you the questions that you ignored), it is completely fine for a moderator to do what they feel as most appropriate when dealing with posts made on a necrod thread.

Which is what will happen on this forum, regardless of what nobodies such as you and I think about it. This isn't my personal stance, this is outlining that we have very little say in what goes on with the moderation.

---

To make my stance absolutely crystal clear to you, I think that your theoretical situation (that I will quote here):
is extremely improbable to ever happen. In the example that you gave (Lauda's extortion), the subject (Lauda) would have been unable to carry out said theoretical due to their status as only a staff member (Not a Global Moderator). In the very rare event that this would happen, I would not condone this and would rally for the moderator behind it to be removed from their position of power. I would not rally for important tools to be removed from use.

I think that it is absolutely fine for necrod posts to be removed from the forum by moderators, providing that they don't give anything useful to the conversation (which they usually don't, whether it be useless spam, an answer to a question that has already been answered or a number of other factors). I would then agree with you that, if these spam posts have been removed, the thread should be locked to prevent any further spam.

I think that it is absolutely fine for spam threads (such as those mentioned by hilariousandco here):
to be completely removed regardless of their age or the amount of posts in them.

Finally, regardless of what you and I think, moderators will do whatever they see fit when it comes to moderating the forum and there is very little that you or I can do about it.

Hope you can follow this.

Sounds like you're not on the winning side of an argument.

Damage to account farmers, signature spammers and the people who cry when their post count goes down?

Number of times that this has happened: 0. The value of solving issues which do not exist is, exactly 0.

It is irrelevant for me, but I wonder whether I am the person who lost the most amount (absolute wise, not percentage wise).

They are certainly allowed, but they risk not being taken seriously if they flip-flop a bit too often


As to me, your proposal to introduce the "banned" rank is simply incomparable

In respect to the amount of devastation and damage that it would have caused and made if it had been accepted. As I told, I don't see any reason in deleting old threads apart from a rogue moderator starting a vendetta against a certain user. To avoid this, old threads should get locked after they remain inactive for a specified amount of time. As I also mentioned, I have seen users punished just for raising a necrothread (namely, all the new posts to this thread got deleted and these posts were no spam by any means). Locking such threads after some expire period would effectively prevent this (if necroraising is not allowed)


Enjoy the pain as they would say. It's not a big deal anyway, right? After all, "the forum doesn't owe you a living"