the division of joy Posted May 4, 2009 Share Posted May 4, 2009 And noone would talk to you because you're either a wanker or a rapist. Both actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jables Posted May 4, 2009 Author Share Posted May 4, 2009 What? You ruthlessly sedate your victims & then jerk off on 'em? Lamest sex offender EVER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted May 4, 2009 Share Posted May 4, 2009 What? You ruthlessly sedate your victims & then jerk off on 'em? Lamest sex offender EVER Seeing people waking up curious as to how their hair is sticky never gets old, i swear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbie Posted May 4, 2009 Share Posted May 4, 2009 200? Fuck, that's a lot of wasted creative energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 4, 2009 Share Posted May 4, 2009 ...says one of the biggest fans of trolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HypnotizinChikns Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 I can see moving moving 'troll speak' from certian topics (politics comes to mind). I don't think we have that many instances in comparision to some of the other forums I frequent. Putting them in the crap shack is fine, for now. Terrance and Phillip wouldn't have any place in Politics or the Art forum for example, but in F.C. I don't see any real harm done besides annoying some of the members here. The majority of forums I've seen use a reputation system, where members (after so many posts) have the ability to 'add reputation' to other members, it can be good or bad, someone with 'bad reputation' is seen as a troll, and after so much bad rep is banned from the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 i wanna say we can have such a system here, if not internally then by a custom mod, ive just always hesitated due to fear of cliques and crapping on unpopular opinions. i mean, right now, weve got a 5-star system to rate each other in our profiles, and even that's wacky sometimes. again, if a lotta folks wanted to try to implement such a thing, id likely give it a go. i do so love this place, but new mods that even smell of mock-power always lend themselves to the image of monkeys flinging poo here in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycaon Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 I don't care for the idea of segregating the forums any further than they may or may not be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 we're not talking about segregating the forums, we're talking about real people vs non real people. as a general rule, Mickey Mouse doesn't have any constitutional rights, neither should trolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HypnotizinChikns Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 i wanna say we can have such a system here, if not internally then by a custom mod, ive just always hesitated due to fear of cliques and crapping on unpopular opinions. i mean, right now, weve got a 5-star system to rate each other in our profiles, and even that's wacky sometimes. again, if a lotta folks wanted to try to implement such a thing, id likely give it a go. i do so love this place, but new mods that even smell of mock-power always lend themselves to the image of monkeys flinging poo here in my mind. In a perfect system, only members with 5 stars would be able to 'rate' a poster. I strongly believe in a reputation system, i don't feel that this forum is in a 'clique' state of being. I'm not a 'irish' or 'florida' or a 'texas' person and I have a 5 star rating, so the whole clique scheme doesn't, in theory apply. Even the one VB system i've been banned in, i still have a stellar rep. With this small community, it would work (especially with us, becuase we kick ass like that). Then trolls that everyone agreed were total wastes, would be gone. on that note, unfortunatley, the system i've seen it run are Vb's. That being said, mods and supermods have the highest rep points, if they give you one, it means more than the average poster, and vice versa. God forbid all the mods form thier own super club. But you have both sides of the spectrum to even things out (yes i am speaking of jax and arch muhahaha). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 right, but you forget that people like Jax or myself will never get 5 star ratings. It's problematic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HypnotizinChikns Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 right, but you forget that people like Jax or myself will never get 5 star ratings. It's problematic. No, becuase as super mods, you wouldn't yourself get the highest rep, but you'd have the power to give the hightest rep (along with the NZA), you see, it's not about you, it's about you and the rest of the members of the community, weeding out trolls, and keeping things in balance. Say for instance, someone goes and pulls 'dickhead of the year' out of their ass, and posts something NSFW (like a huge gaping vagina) in a politics thread, where a serious discussion is going on, both you, and jax will probably react, along with the rest of the community, that it's not cool. You give a bad rep, so does he, and everyone else. Said poster sarts getting 'bad rep' and has a time to straighten their ass out and get back in line. This is, in all regards a very small forum, i don't think 'trolls' are a serious problem. The reputation system does work, no one is perfect, but if someone has really bad rep (unless of course they say, for example, "please give me bad rep becuase i want to be funny") it's pretty obvious to the admin they aren't wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 again, that has more to do with kicking out than the current troll situation. I don't think I'm too fond of that system, but that's just me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 Before I start, sorry Dr. G. I still loves ya babe Rarely have I been so against an idea proposed on hondo's, I'm pretty sure I can safely say that if such a system was put into place in hondo's it's not something I'd stick around to find out how it went. It actually repulses me that this is even being discussed I can see moving moving 'troll speak' from certian topics (politics comes to mind)...Putting them in the crap shack is fine, for now. No it's not, at all, it's 100% the opposite of what hondo's stands for Terrance and Phillip wouldn't have any place in Politics or the Art forum for example, They can post wherever the fuck they want to post (again sorry, not you, just your idea) The majority of forums I've seen use a reputation system, where members (after so many posts) have the ability to 'add reputation' to other members, it can be good or bad, someone with 'bad reputation' is seen as a troll, and after so much bad rep is banned from the board. Downright revolting Then trolls that everyone agreed were total wastes, would be gone. Have you read the faq? That's not how it's done, ever. Say for instance, someone goes and pulls 'dickhead of the year' out of their ass, and posts something NSFW (like a huge gaping vagina) in a politics thread...Said poster sarts getting 'bad rep' and has a time to straighten their ass out and get back in line. Or what? if someone has really bad rep...it's pretty obvious to the admin they aren't wanted. So therefore nick.....? we're not talking about segregating the forums, we're talking about real people vs non real people.as a general rule, Mickey Mouse doesn't have any constitutional rights, neither should trolls. We don't have a constitution, what he have is a non-censorship policy (except for illegal activity) I really like the vest hate this idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 something's gotta give, asc. i'm not disagreeing that members should be allowed free speech, but we have to have some structure. trolls arent real members, damn it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 something's gotta give, asc. i'm not disagreeing that members should be allowed free speech, but we have to have some structure. trolls arent real members, damn it. Before I continue, just to clarify. Are you saying we should move just troll posts to crap shack or all "irrelevant" posts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 not to crap shack. I do think there should be 'troll free zones', mostly in the 'higher' forums. I also think in certain forums, things should be as much on topic as possible. In politics, for example, if things go off topic, we either move all vitriol to another thread (in either FC or crap shack) or start a new thread for that direction. It's to keep topics cohesive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycaon Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 My, things have certainly changed here. That, or I apparently never really knew this place at all. I always felt that alternative user identities where rather welcome here. Now we are talking about sticking all user identities that do not fit in to what we define as "real members" in a specific section where their posts will not bother the rest of us. This idea, and that of running on a popularity equals "citizenship" system here does not appeal to me. At all (this is not meant to be an attack on anyone that suggests or backs either system, mind you). Are we going to be voting on either system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 it was just a suggestion, and not something im certain can be done either way (again, itd need a custom mod, looks like we cant "rate" each other past our profiles). The central topic, i think, had more to do with arch's qualms about troll posting in the "upper" forums. for my stance, there's a difference between trolls cracking a joke in a topic vs outright spamming it. of the 100 trolls weve got here, there's only been one i had to relegate to the crap shack for a while for doing just that; most times, they say their piece and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbie Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 of the 100 trolls weve got here, there's only been one i had to relegate to the crap shack for a while for doing just that; Who was that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HypnotizinChikns Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 meh. no worries ASC. I only brought it up becuase the whole 'OMG TROLLZ!!11' issue was presented. I don't feel this forum is big enough to really have any major problems with trolls. Some of us are just more easily annoyed than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Who was that? i forget the other, but i know stewie was one that was spamming like in '04 or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jables Posted May 18, 2009 Author Share Posted May 18, 2009 Reporting DEAD from Bizarro-world, The JZA has some important things to not say... I like Dr G's system. Eammon & Ly should really back up their desire for trolls with something more than waving a cyber-daisy & saying 'quit killing my buzz, man'. Stewie was about the only Troll I ever liked, possibly because Joanna/ Baka was behind him, possibly because this was all before Stewie & Family Guy became a devalued currency. Going back to the first point, a system like this would have maybe spared us giving a Troll MVP in 2005, and for the most part would keep popular trolls like Pink Hulk around, and stupid arsehole non-point-serving trolls like T/P in the crapshack where they belong. Joel's point of Mickey Mouse not having constitutional rights is about as perfect a summary as it gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 totally not seeing where a popularity system wouldve kept MM from taking it that year. i do, however, see where itd keep someone like joel from winning shit, moreso than just the votes. also, if you guys are arguing to silence them, doesnt it fall on your lot to argue why that should be? Ly & ASC shoudlnt, by default, have to defend anyone's right to post, masked or not; theyre not arguing to change the current status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jables Posted May 18, 2009 Author Share Posted May 18, 2009 The minute he acted up, he coulda been smacked down like a naughty puppy. You can't say there weren't fucking warning signs that MM wasn't completely round the goddamned twist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.