Rules and Moderator information

[Jersey Girl]

Dog has a hefty comprehension problem.

...Speaking only for myself I would much rather see insults delivered straight up than thinly disquised insults embedded in a wall of text or failure to engage which are all a means of disruption...

He's a vortex.

[Jersey Girl]

Hello Canpakes, Jersey Girl wants to witness everyone, not just DrCamnPP and Bishop Schmo, engaging in direct insults with each other rather than what she perceives as indirect insults that she believes I post. Is there a way to obtain a list of words we can use to offend each other?

Read the freaking board rules, you absolute dolt. Then learn how to use the word censor if it bothers you. Did you not examine the features available to you?

[Jersey Girl]

This is the first thing I see here today?

For the record. There are ALL kinds of insults. Cam and others are simply more straightforward in their delivery. Lack of profanity or graphic descriptors in one's composition isn't a sign of respectful discourse or intent. That's not what this forum is about anyway. The message holds the intent. Speaking only for myself I would much rather see insults delivered straight up than thinly disquised insults embedded in a wall of text or failure to engage which are all a means of disruption

Sure, that works for me! If you enjoy direct exchanges of insults, let's request the moderators to provide a list of suitable terms we can use against each other and see who comes out on top in the insult game! Are you comfortable with that? It’s me up against DrCamnPP, Bishop Schmo, and Molok. That appears reasonable to me!

Or are you scared they will lose?

Go ahead and throw down.

[Marcus]

Sure, that works for me! If you enjoy direct exchanges of insults, let's request the moderators to provide a list of suitable terms we can use against each other and see who comes out on top in the insult game! Are you comfortable with that? It’s me up against DrCamnPP, Bishop Schmo, and Molok. That appears reasonable to me!

Or are you scared they will lose?

Go ahead and throw down.

He can't surf right now and it's showing

[Hound of Heaven]

This is the first thing I see here today?

For the record. There are ALL kinds of insults. Cam and others are simply more straightforward in their delivery. Lack of profanity or graphic descriptors in one's composition isn't a sign of respectful discourse or intent. That's not what this forum is about anyway. The message holds the intent. Speaking only for myself I would much rather see insults delivered straight up than thinly disquised insults embedded in a wall of text or failure to engage which are all a means of disruption

It’s increasingly difficult to discern who among you and Marcus is less informed. For a while, I gave it to Marcus, but based on your most recent remarks, I think you're starting to pull ahead in the realm of pure ignorance. Sorry to have to speak the truth.

Let's examine what you mentioned here. I concur with your observation that there are various forms of insults, and I also share your view that the remarks from DrCamnPP and Bishop Schmo are more direct in their expression. I agree that many contributors, such as Canpakes, Ceeboo, Kishkumen, Gadianton, yourself, Marcus, and I, often express our insults without resorting to profanity or graphic language. However, I take issue with your assertion that our method of delivering critiques lacks respect. In fact, I believe that moderating our language in this way demonstrates a level of respect, as it enhances the overall reading experience on the discussion board.

Dr. Shades has created a forum called Spirit Prison for posters who wish to directly insult a board member using rated R language and name-calling. This is where your entire argument crumbles as you make every effort to defend DrCamnPP and Bishop Schmo regarding their so-called direct insults. The second rule for this forum clearly prohibits any blatant or obvious personal attacks, that's exactly what it says! In other words, there should be no rated R personal attacks like those that DrCamnPP and Bishop Schmo engage in regularly. It's unfortunate that you don't seem to grasp that.

Let us examine synonyms for the terms blatant and obvious, as it appears there may be some confusion regarding their meanings in rule #2, or you're choosing to protect your two boyfriends by ignoring the meaning of rule #2. Synonyms for blatant include undisguised, glaring, obvious, and overt. Synonyms for obvious include clear, plain, crystal clear, and evident. It is clear, and I believe Dr. Shades would concur, that his arrangement of Super Spirit Paradise, Spirit Paradise, and Spirit Prison reflects an understanding of the challenges in preventing board members from insulting each other. He has strategically utilized the three forums to manage the effect of personal insults on the readers of each platform.

In SSP, individuals can share their thoughts and anticipate a respectful environment. In Spirit Paradise, posting is allowed, but one should be prepared for insults that are subtle, inconspicuous, and obscure means avoiding blatant profanity or graphic descriptors. If someone wishes to take the conversation in a Rated R direction, they have spirit prison to continue that dialogue, should they choose to insult each other in a more STRAIGHTFORWARD manner, that's your term. This implies that if they want to use Rated R cursing, like the terms your boyfriends DrCamnPP and Bishop Schmo employ in spirit paradise regularly, they can do so in Prison.

It’s important to review the rules and become acquainted with the three nonmormon forums you expressed interest in a few years back! To grasp the full picture, one need only begin at the start of this thread. It becomes clear that you are being hypocritical, as not long ago you were advocating for rules and attempting to reshape the nonmormon forums due to your frustration with direct insults. Yet now, you express a preference for those very straightforward insults. You're a hypocrite!

You are being contradictory and seem ready to say whatever it takes to defend your two boyfriends, allowing them to keep using spirit prison language in spirit paradise. You appreciate their jabs and they make you feel good. Once again, you are being hypocritical!

Please prove me wrong! Go ahead, we're all waiting to see what you come up with!

[Hound of Heaven]

I composed four paragraphs: the first discusses Mormonism, the second covers the JWs, the third focuses on progressivism, and the fourth poses questions regarding all three. Yet, you interpreted that as me emphasizing progressivism?

If I was wrong, then I'll move it back.

Was I wrong?

Dr.Shades, please ignore my post from yesterday, I've moved past them. But please, could you assist me for a moment to ensure that I fully understand the rules you have established for the three non-Mormon forums? I would like to clarify everything so we can conclude this discussion. I believe Jersey Girl and I are seeking to grasp the meaning of rule #2 in relation to spirit paradise, and I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on it. Imagine me, a conservative democrat, engaging in a conversation with someone in Super Spirit Paradise whom I perceive as a progressive. I aim to articulate my perspective on them and their political beliefs. In SSP, I would describe them as progressive. I could even label them as Marxist progressive according to the rules, but I would prefer not to do so, as it might offend some people here. If I were to converse with that same individual in Spirit Paradise, I could easily refer to them as a Marxist progressive without issue, and I could also label them an ignorant Marxist progressive if I wished; that would be a PG-13 description. However, if I wish to adhere to the guidelines and refer to that individual as a fat titty bitch Marxist progressive, should I consider moving the discussion to the spirit prison forum?

Am I right in stating that in spirit paradise, Schmo can use terms like MAGA fascist, MAGA retard, and I can refer to Marxist progressive or Marxist idiot, but if Schmo opts to say fat titty bitch MAGA fascist, that would violate the rules of spirit paradise and that insult would be deemed appropriate for spirit prison?

If I'm correct in my understanding in the rules, you couldn't have made them any easier to understand in my opinion.

[Hound of Heaven]

Dr. Shades, is it permissible in Spirit Paradise to initiate a thread that leans towards parody, spoof, or satire? And if it is, as long as I adhere to the rules and the daily actions taken on the board, can I humorously tease the members of the board?

Yes, so long as it isn't mean-spirited or dickish.

Shades. Are only progressives permitted to use this thread for inquiries regarding the daily events occurring on this board? I'm confused about why Canpakes or you just moved two months of conversations to the spirit prison forum.

The initial page of this thread features a moderator requesting that board members pose questions and offer suggestions! Every page following that features moderators and board members engaging in discussions and deliberations, much like what was transferred to the spirit prison forum.

The sole real distinction is that the initial 72 pages of this thread feature progressive board members offering suggestions, which Canpakes is not against. In contrast, all the pages that were relocated last night consist of me, a conservative, posing questions and making suggestions that Canpakes opposes. The pages that were moved last night to spirit prison contain no more or less drama than what can be found in the 72 pages where the progressives are making suggestions.

I recognize Canpake's wish for this board to stay unchanged, allowing him and his progressive allies to criticize conservatives freely. However, does that imply that suggestions should be concealed in a way that casual readers cannot access or read them in Spirit Prison?

This entire thread is pure drama. All 70 some pages. Why am I being singled out having my questions moved?

[canpakes]

Yes, so long as it isn't mean-spirited or dickish.

Shades. Are only progressives permitted to use this thread for inquiries regarding the daily events occurring on this board? I'm confused about why Canpakes or you just moved two months of conversations to the spirit prison forum.

The initial page of this thread features a moderator requesting that board members pose questions and offer suggestions! Every page following that features moderators and board members engaging in discussions and deliberations, much like what was transferred to the spirit prison forum.

The sole real distinction is that the initial 72 pages of this thread feature progressive board members offering suggestions, which Canpakes is not against. In contrast, all the pages that were relocated last night consist of me, a conservative, posing questions and making suggestions that Canpakes opposes. The pages that were moved last night to spirit prison contain no more or less drama than what can be found in the 72 pages where the progressives are making suggestions.

I recognize Canpake's wish for this board to stay unchanged, allowing him and his progressive allies to criticize conservatives freely. However, does that imply that suggestions should be concealed in a way that casual readers cannot access or read them in Spirit Prison?

This entire thread is pure drama. All 70 some pages. Why am I being singled out having my questions moved?

Hound, the thread’s purpose is not to become your personal pet project to hector Shades and to look for ways to ‘rule lawyer’.

You’ve already stated that you refuse to follow the most basic guidelines of the board with respect to things as simple as reporting posts, even when asked by Shades several times.

Why would anyone spend the time attempting to ‘explain’ rules to you that you’ll intentionally ignore anyway?

[Hound of Heaven]

Dr. Shades, is it permissible in Spirit Paradise to initiate a thread that leans towards parody, spoof, or satire? And if it is, as long as I adhere to the rules and the daily actions taken on the board, can I humorously tease the members of the board?

Yes, so long as it isn't mean-spirited or dickish.

Shades, to begin with, Canpakes is suggesting that I am attempting to turn the moderator thread into my personal pet project. I find it amusing since I use the thread no differently than Jersey Girl, Marcus, Ceeboo, and many other board members. All you or Canpakes need to do is return to page 1 of this thread to observe that the very first post is Jersey Girl asking for changes to the board. Then Marcus requested changes to the board. Then Ceeboo requested modifications to the board. Each of the three utilized the thread in its intended manner. As you continue reading, Marcus and Jersey Girl are meticulously analyzing the significance of the actual rules, defining them and inquiring with Res ipsa about his interpretations or what they ought to signify for effective board operations. Do you concur with this evaluation? And if so, why am I being punished for doing the same thing?

Could you clarify how my use of this thread differs from that of any other board member after you've reviewed the initial pages? I have shown you respect throughout our interactions, haven't I? Canpake's reason for relocating my post to spirit prison is that I'm being a rule lawyer. However, as I read through this thread from the start, I realize that I am not nearly as much of a rule lawyer as Jersey Girl or marcus. They are actively discussing specific rules and their applications, and I concur with their approach since that is the purpose of this thread. Yet, for some reason, Canpakes does not permit me to engage in the same manner as his friends. What is the reason for that?

In my view, Shades, this is the most unfortunate part of this situation, Canpakes acting as a moderator told me, "Why would anyone spend the time attempting to explain rules to you anyway?" This seems to imply that, as a moderator, he is unwilling to fulfill his responsibilities simply because we have differing political views. Regardless, I am utilizing the board as it was meant to be used and adhering to the rules, while he is relocating my post, yet permits DrCam to clutter the board with profanity that violates the guidelines. He is penalizing me for adhering to the guidelines, taking action in advance, while permitting Dr. Cam to hurl insults with profanity and claiming he won't transfer them to the correct format since no one is flagging his post. That is completely illogical and hypocritical.

Could I propose something shades? If you wish to see the board operate more effectively, I recommend starting by discussing matters with Canpakes. He has become quite accustomed to blending his personal involvement with his official moderator responsibilities, and this is evident in his posts. He disciplined me in front of all the board members for show, similar to how he called me a rule lawyer while I am behaving no differently than anyone else in this thread.

As a moderator, he states that I am not worth his time. Out of nowhere, he makes that statement, which puts me on the defensive as I try to devise a way to counter his lies and insults. A moderator should not be acting in that manner; their role is to soothe the board during heated discussions, not to escalate tensions further. Secondly, why is it that Canpakes cannot utilize the PM function to provide advice as a moderator? I've been here for a year; my posts have been deleted, moved, placed in a thread created for me, and I've faced bans for days. However, I've never received any guidance on how to correct my mistakes through a private message. Isn't it a moderator's responsibility to guide board members through private messages, allowing certain actions to be discussed discreetly to minimize drama on the board?

When he offers advice or labels someone a rule lawyer on the board while serving as a moderator, he is merely fostering more drama, which is the complete opposite of his intended role. Please have a conversation with him and encourage him to find ways to minimize the board drama by utilizing the PM function to communicate with board members.

[canpakes]

In my view, Shades, this is the most unfortunate part of this situation, Canpakes acting as a moderator told me, "Why would anyone spend the time attempting to explain rules to you anyway?"

Oops. You appear to have misquoted. Please try again.