Silent Bob Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperEeyore Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 Sibob... I couldn't put it better myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpunkyMonkey Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 Sibob... I couldn't put it better myself. wait, so you come into a thread you don't give a damn about to tell us you don't give a damn about it??? yeah, i totally believe this is of no interest to you now, earlier when u hadn't commented, i wasn't too sure... oh, and what happened jax, you've played enough Twister for today??? ... I guess this is a topic for which you can't plagiarize your opinions off another message board... drag. Jax's favorite past time... a giant game of twister. LOOK AT ME I CAN ACT CHILDISH, PARTISAN, HYPOCRITICAL, AND I CAN INSULT PEOPLE WHO'VE DONE NOTHING TO ME JUST TO PROVE MY POINT!!! I'M FINALLY A TRUE HONDONIAN!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 Oh for fuck sake, grow up the lot of you. I don't think its misuse. He has the ability to do it and he was curious. Its not like he's deleting threads or standing on kittns. The fact he came out and said he did it i don't particularly like, but fuck it, que sera, as i said, he was curious. Nick's said that he could easily i.p. check all the trolls or whatever, but he chooses not to as they take the fun out of it Shit like this, mountains out of molehills, is the kinda shit that makes me really not like this place. And no nick, its not trendy for me to be back here, stupid arguments like this have me back here, incase you're wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted May 22, 2008 Author Share Posted May 22, 2008 Eric says nothing about HOSTING a get together...according to the post, it's just him and joel that went out for beers...Eric?And he said Joel was ignoring everyone around him before they went out for beers.Oh for fuck sake, grow up the lot of you. I don't think its misuse. He has the ability to do it and he was curious. Its not like he's deleting threads or standing on kittns.The fact he came out and said he did it i don't particularly like, but fuck it, que sera, as i said, he was curious. Nick's said that he could easily i.p. check all the trolls or whatever, but he chooses not to as they take the fun out of itShit like this, mountains out of molehills, is the kinda shit that makes me really not like this place. And no nick, its not trendy for me to be back here, stupid arguments like this have me back here, incase you're wondering.Yeah. I mean, like I said before, if I thought I was doing something wrong, I wouldn't have admitted to it. I also thought it wasn't a big deal, but people kept bringing it up, so I figured it was worth address in a thread of it's own. I'm still not really convinced it was a big deal. A minor transgression, perhaps. But I'm waiting to heard the prosecutions argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 hah, this thread got fun around Skeet's pic of JJ. I'm willing to believe canesfan but as batyor/SB are going for, its not so much the point. The point is that jax took an action that others consider invasive/basically negates anon's existence, and did so because he wanted ammo against joel and doesnt really care for anonymous posting, which again, is something we dont all agree on, but fact is that it happens, and the only way to stop it is to have me personally approve any new registration, which is tempting but i dont like the idea that it stops newbies when im not around. I prefer to regulate that sorta thing if we can, and again, the ideas behind anon were decent ones, not another madman - even if that's kinda what was happening. To be fair, whiny & self-serving or not, let's say it was in fact joel that posted that thread. that's not far off of what anon was there for, if he was genuinely believed he was not wanted. this is all theory. The other side of the coin is that: yes, only the Drunken Deputies have IP checking rights, and the argument cant be made that i never laid groundwork/ethical guidelines to using that, so jax exercised his own judgement. Of course, again, it can easily be said that he did so for dickish reasons. I dont make Deputies for moral paragons (hence why jax's thing with sigs is his own dickery) but they do need to carry out board tasks in line with our ideals, so for me, the real question is: if the lot of you believe it was unethical for jax to check IPs this way, and he'd resolved not to, would you trust him to follow up on this? would people feel comfortable in the future posting as anon if need be? by the way, DoJ - i dont rightly care if its drama or you just swung by to (again, rightfully) tell me to fuck myself for being a dick to you again; im just glad to see you around man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maldron Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 The point is that jax took an action that others consider invasive/basically negates anon's existence, and did so because he wanted ammo against jax Ha! <3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jables Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 Oh for fuck sake, grow up the lot of you. I don't think its misuse. He has the ability to do it and he was curious. Its not like he's deleting threads or standing on kittns.The fact he came out and said he did it i don't particularly like, but fuck it, que sera, as i said, he was curious. Nick's said that he could easily i.p. check all the trolls or whatever, but he chooses not to as they take the fun out of it Shit like this, mountains out of molehills, is the kinda shit that makes me really not like this place. And no nick, its not trendy for me to be back here, stupid arguments like this have me back here, incase you're wondering. You tell Hondos to grow up? Where's your tough 'Hondos is boring' stance now you fucking quince. Fuck Nick's diplomacy, you shat all over the man from the safety of *unnamed elsewhere* and somehow he still cowtowed to you. Then you come back here and start swinging your judgemental pendulum? Fuck you you bandwagon-hopping. mindless fucking wretch of a human being. Take some initiative in any given matter, and maybe I'll talk to you and not whoever's pulling your fucking strings. PS- Hard pressed fir nominees between Jax's ethical dilemna and Sibobs ever-refreshing gifs. PPS- Since it's almost unanimous(I didn't read Maldron's log-arsed post and Doj's drivel amounts to fuck-all) that Jax dropped the ball and we have 2 pages of rubbing his nose in it, it seems about done. To adress Nick's question, yes, I'd trust Jax to fix it and in any future thingies do erm, what he does. Well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maldron Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 Good policy, I ramble a lot.To summarize, didn't really care about the search, cared that it was done on a whim for ammunition in a grudge match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jables Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 Good policy, I ramble a lot.To summarize, didn't really care about the search, cared that it was done on a whim for ammunition in a grudge match. Cool. Don't take offense man, I just have a reaaally short attention span. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 You tell Hondos to grow up? Where's your tough 'Hondos is boring' stance now you fucking quince. Fuck Nick's diplomacy, you shat all over the man from the safety of *unnamed elsewhere* and somehow he still cowtowed to you. Then you come back here and start swinging your judgemental pendulum? Fuck you you bandwagon-hopping. mindless fucking wretch of a human being. Take some initiative in any given matter, and maybe I'll talk to you and not whoever's pulling your fucking strings. PS- Hard pressed fir nominees between Jax's ethical dilemna and Sibobs ever-refreshing gifs. PPS- Since it's almost unanimous(I didn't read Maldron's log-arsed post and Doj's drivel amounts to fuck-all) that Jax dropped the ball and we have 2 pages of rubbing his nose in it, it seems about done. To adress Nick's question, yes, I'd trust Jax to fix it and in any future thingies do erm, what he does. Well. I've said it before in another thread, but fuck you man, fuck you and your half assed sideways attacks, you forgot your betwixt, joel linked me to this and i thought it was another mountains out of molehills thread, and i still stand by what i said, i was bored with hondos, nothing much has changed given that nothing over here has seemingly changed, now if you want to take this any further, fight club's a calling, but to be fair this seems like a last ditch effort to get some villian points of the upcoming hondies, mostly because you've done fuck all for the past year other than get married and be absent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 oh my god, i totally didnt see it, but yeah, you kids're vying for villain-points. i love viral campaigning. ok, so skeet answered my question, any other takers? seriously, that's the crux of it. Jax didnt think it was an abuse, several others did, given that, do you trust jax to not repeat this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 oh my god, i totally didnt see it, but yeah, you kids're vying for villain-points. i love viral campaigning. He seemingly is, given he needs to make up for a buttload of lost time. ok, so skeet answered my question, any other takers? seriously, that's the crux of it. Jax didnt think it was an abuse, several others did, given that, do you trust jax to not repeat this? I don't think it was an abuse of powers, its like bitching at a president for doing his job, if you didn't want people to know the ip, why give them the option to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 i do think he abused his powers, anon was'nt spamming or harassing anyone so no need to know the ip. but i trust jax and believe that were it to be layed that he can't do this anymore i trust he would'nt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 if the lot of you believe it was unethical for jax to check IPs this way, and he'd resolved not to, would you trust him to follow up on this? would people feel comfortable in the future posting as anon if need be? I think that in his position, if he felt it was the right thing to do, he should have gone for it. The fact anon is on lockdown and has been used for other purposes than its originally intended one diminishes my view of it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted May 22, 2008 Share Posted May 22, 2008 oh my god, i totally didnt see it, but yeah, you kids're vying for villain-points. i love viral campaigning. ok, so skeet answered my question, any other takers? seriously, that's the crux of it. Jax didnt think it was an abuse, several others did, given that, do you trust jax to not repeat this? Well no, not as long as I'm not on his shit list. I mean this question doesn't really apply to me, I don't post anonymous, never have, never felt the reason to. But if I were one of those people who did, I would feel relatively safe unless it was another case like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 ok, so if you hypothetically did post as anon and were on his shit list, you're saying you'd trust it to not happen again, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpunkyMonkey Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 niiick... IM me on msn or something... bitte. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 ok, so if you hypothetically did post as anon and were on his shit list, you're saying you'd trust it to not happen again, then? I still think it stems from anon being used for other means than what it was intended for, the pretense of it was broken, i think, so i felt he was justified in doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 Spunky - im really shit with the chat programs and im heading to gym soon, then hoping to work on awards a bit here before company comes by. not trying to be a dick, but could you PM me if something's on your mind, man? DoJ - well, we could certainly debate about what anon's meant for, and you're right that its within jax's ability to IP check and there's no clear policy saying he cant, but it does hold water that he checked this one time to get ammo on arch, i think that's people's beef - not that he'd void anon and check alla time, but when it suites an argument. personally, i think he'll not in the future now that others've said it aint right (unless necessary) but its important others say if they feel that way or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpunkyMonkey Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 ummm... ok yeah, ignore the pm on the knoll... if you get it. I'll write one soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HypnotizinChikns Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 I think I would trust him. I wouldn't post as anon though, so I feel like it kinda sorta doesn't apply to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 ok, so if you hypothetically did post as anon and were on his shit list, you're saying you'd trust it to not happen again, then? Basically if I'm on his enemy list and he has reason to suspect that the post is made by me then I would feel concerned that he would. I mean whether it was Joel or Eric who made that thread that's arguably like one of 2 posts that have been made by anonymous for the reason it was actually created. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 well, shit. you of all people should know by now running a forum is like herding cats, and the best i can regulate trolls is 1) no voting and 2) the inevitable venting ones, i can suggest what theyre there for but its just a matter of time till someone doesnt get it or bypasses it to take a shot, and then its sharks on blood. i still think anon's function of saying what you cant say, about your own life, is something that i and others dont see the need for but its fair that someone might. ok, since weve got one vote of trust and one not so much (still hoping for more here when people are about), let's also ask this: hypothetically, what if it was joel that posted that topic, would that've been a fair use of anon? let's say the guy wanted to know how people felt without directly asking, cause that's not everyone's way, etc. It doesnt negate jax peering in, but is that something anon should be there for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HypnotizinChikns Posted May 23, 2008 Share Posted May 23, 2008 uhhh. meow? that's up to you nick. You run the place. we're jut here for the litter box. If anon is a pain to you or the other supermods, get rid of it. If it's not, keep it. We'll all live either way. If anon is available, it's going to be kinda hard to say, you can use it for this but not that, which just means more explaining on your part and more arguments and general bitching from various members. you can't make everyone happy, keep anon, and if people don't trust jax, how about they just not use it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.