Be careful what you wish for.

[Res Ipsa]

For example, if we had a mod right now, I would report this:

A post by Cultellus

And this: A post by Cultellus

And this: A post by Cultellus

Etc., etc., etc..

I think your example is making an excellent point (Precisely THE point in my opinion) - I'm just not sure it's the point you were intending to make.

I don't think the excellent point is what you think it is. People get to report what they want to report. They get to use examples that they want to use. The point is that, if I wanted to do something about a post, regardless of who is the poster, I can't do anything about it that won't make the disruption problem worse. For me, the rules do not exist just because rules. They exist for a purpose, which is to allow people to have their say without having every thread on the board sink into derails and personal insults. I choose not to make the problem worse. The fact of the matter is that I have no effective tools to control the tone and content of someone else's posts. I accept that, on this forum, it's not my job to try and control the tone and content of others' speech. If I had any confidence that reports were being considered and acted upon, I'd report violations, at least those that disrupt a conversation that I'm involved in.

[Res Ipsa]

So, thanks for that, I guess.

I told ya that we agreed.

You are welcome.

I think your written logic is significantly more black and white than mine and that your arguments almost always rely on a straw man. Interesting.

I do not know how you think. I do not know what you understand. You pretend to have a superpower that would reveal both what I think and what I understand. What am I thinking right now? Am I considering telling you to go “F” yourself, or am I considering thanking you for a great post?

I have no idea what you're thinking. All I know is what you post, and I think the conclusions I've drawn from them are entirely fair. I've posted numerous examples of your black and white thinking. "No you're the puppet" is not a meaningful response. If you think my thinking is more black and white, quote some examples, explain why you think it's black and white thinking, and I'd be happy to respond with what I think. Or explain to me why your leap from "Shades, enforce the rules as written evenhandedly" to "Shades, chase New Kid and Mike away and give Doc Cam the ability to be a bigger bully" is rational. Go ahead. Show your reasoning, step by step, from A to B. (My apologies for the fancy letters.) Do it without dividing people into black and white categories. Show me.

[Lem]

For example, if we had a mod right now, I would report this:

A post by Cultellus

And this: A post by Cultellus

And this: A post by Cultellus

Etc., etc., etc..

I think your example is making an excellent point (Precisely THE point in my opinion) - I'm just not sure it's the point you were intending to make.

You are missing the point precisely in what you left out. Here's what you missed:

For example, if we had a mod right now, I would report this:

pissboy, pay attention. You are wrong again. Just carry piss.

And this:

read better, pissboy.

And this:

You do know that pissboy is a metaphor, right? But you are a real pissboy.

Etc., etc., etc..

It's the content of the posts that trigger a report. That's how the rules are written.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I'm just about ready to put a call out for moderators in the Terrestrial Forum, but before I can do so, I need to know something:

If you're willing to accept that our two new participants' personal attacks and off-topic derailments be sent to the Spirit Prison forum when they're directed at you, are you willing to accept that your own personal attacks and off-topic derailments be sent to the Spirit Prison forum when they're directed at Ajax18?

If you are, then I can put out a call for moderators. If you're not, then the status quo should remain intact.

Sure. We’ll get used to a consistent moderator. You might save the board from Doc “pissboy” Seismic:



- Doc

[Res Ipsa]

It's the content of the posts that trigger a report. That's how the rules are written.

What rule precisely? If pancakes is a pissboy, and I call him a pissboy, how is that a violation? He is a pissboy and his motivation is to carry the piss of others, especially Doc Cam. His role is to apologize for Doc's egregious behavior while calling out anyone that objects to Doc Cam's egregious behavior. He is the pissboy with a bucket of open sewage.

Lem and pancakes had absolutely no problem with that and they appear to not have an opinion on Doc Cam's insulting behavior now. They do seem to have an opinion about someone having an opinion about Doc Cam's insulting behavior though.

If you're a disingenuous idiot and I call you a disingenuous idiot in a post, is that a violation? Were I a moderator, I would say it violates Spirit Paradise Rule 2 and would move the post to Spirit Prison.

[Lem]

It's the content of the posts that trigger a report. That's how the rules are written.

What rule precisely? If pancakes is a pissboy, and I call him a pissboy, how is that a violation? He is a pissboy and his motivation is to carry the piss of others, especially Doc Cam. His role is to apologize for Doc's egregious behavior while calling out anyone that objects to Doc Cam's egregious behavior. He is the pissboy with a bucket of open sewage.

Lem and pancakes had absolutely no problem with that and they appear to not have an opinion on Doc Cam's insulting behavior now. They do seem to have an opinion about someone having an opinion about Doc Cam's insulting behavior though.

This is how you derail a thread. The rules are written, viewable, and have been quoted several times, their application has been discussed many times, RI has responded multiple times as to how the whataboutism of other posters is not relevant, but a derailment ignores all of that, asks exactly the same questions, and throws in a few more personal attacks to boot.

Nothing could be clearer than Cult's intent to disrupt. These are the actions of one who only intends to troll.

[Jersey Girl]

If a troll um, pisses all over the board and later admits it's an intentional troll, then continues to piss all over the board, is it okay to call it a troll?

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1091

I have to admit, that with a 50/50 shot of being correct, some of you have accurately guessed my gender. Think about that. Some of you were right. But think about that again. You suckers swallowed the hook.

I have to admit, that some of you correctly guessed my vaccination status which you had a 50/50 shot of getting right. Well done. It is like you flipped a coin and got it right some of the time.

I have to admit too that none of you have shown any clue of guessing who I actually am because this is a forum and anyone can join from anywhere. I do read Reddit. I am a member of many boards. I am banned at many places for posting exactly as I post here. I have no expectation that I will be able to post here much longer. It will either be too idiotic with uninteresting personal nonsense or I will be outright banned.

I will admit to the moderators that I am not a sock puppet and I have no other membership names on this board. I do know posters on here and I have bantered with some. I did indeed win a bet by getting Dr. Cam to use homosexual slurs about me or about my comments. I got a dinner out of that. That is a fact. It was a tricky bet and could only be won by getting him to make his typical racist, sexist and derogatory comments without an FBI type set up. I regret not making more bets, including wagering that the Pissboys would come along and say that what Cam does is glorious and wholesome and if anyone disagrees they are racist or gay haters or something.

I may stick around and continue to troll. For now I dare you to address my comments with facts and information and not with pictures covered with somebody else's words, insults, personal insults, accusations of being a homosexual in the opposite cult, etc. I dare you to stick to the ideas without making it personal about who I am and what I do away from this board. I am trolling and daring you to not bite the shiny lure.

[Jersey Girl]

Lem, I have made this very clear. I will do whatever Shades wants, including being a moderator.

[Res Ipsa]

If you're a disingenuous idiot and I call you a disingenuous idiot in a post, is that a violation? Were I a moderator, I would say it violates Spirit Paradise Rule 2 and would move the post to Spirit Prison.

That ain't the same. You have no way of knowing whether or not I am disingenuous or an idiot. If you saw me holding a bucket while Doc Cam pissed in it, you would not be wrong to call me his pissboy.

Bless your heart, of course it’s the same under the rules. You’re simply applying a classic double standard: if I insult you, It’s bad because you think the insult is a lie. But if you insult me, it’s peachy keen because you think it’s true. Do yourself a favor. Find me the language in Rule 2 that says anything about whether a personal attack is true.

The rules don’t care whether you think your personal attack is true or I think it is false.

[canpakes]

What rule precisely? If pancakes is a pissboy, and I call him a pissboy, how is that a violation? He is a pissboy and his motivation is to carry the piss of others, especially Doc Cam. His role is to apologize for Doc's egregious behavior while calling out anyone that objects to Doc Cam's egregious behavior. He is the pissboy with a bucket of open sewage.

Lem and pancakes had absolutely no problem with that and they appear to not have an opinion on Doc Cam's insulting behavior now. They do seem to have an opinion about someone having an opinion about Doc Cam's insulting behavior though.

If you're a disingenuous idiot and I call you a disingenuous idiot in a post, is that a violation? Were I a moderator, I would say it violates Spirit Paradise Rule 2 and would move the post to Spirit Prison.

Lol. Cultellus must be having a hard time finding his imaginary threat of folks threatening to ‘dox’ him.