ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums
Page 3 of 6 12 3 45 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/index.php)
-   Chat and Games (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=41)
-   -   Is there a better forum member than Daniel-X? (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=341919)

Crimson Dynamo 07-06-2018 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg! (Post 10030823)
LT you always spell boke wrong and it gets on my wick!
its boak not fecking boke ya bam


https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=boak

Nicky91 07-06-2018 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 10030837)
it is Boke ;) which is less filthy than boak

Kazanne 07-06-2018 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 10030837)
That is correct LT, but I'm pretty sure it can be spelt both ways :hee: just to confuse things a bit more:laugh:

Nicky91 07-06-2018 04:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazanne (Post 10030872)
That is correct LT, but I'm pretty sure it can be spelt both ways :hee: just to confuse things a bot more:laugh:
:laugh:

Greg! 07-06-2018 04:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 10030837)
google says it's boke so piss off?

bots 07-06-2018 04:26 PM
I have to side with LT it is and always has been boak

Josy 07-06-2018 06:08 PM
In Scotland its boak

Vicky. 07-06-2018 06:09 PM
I have always known it be boak too tbh

I hate the word too. So piss off all of you with this convo :fist:

Calderyon 07-06-2018 06:52 PM
This thread is off the rails.

JerseyWins 07-06-2018 06:55 PM
Wtf is a boak/boke :joker:

Other than the sound a chicken makes!

Calderyon 07-06-2018 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyWins (Post 10031221)
Wtf is a boak/boke :joker:

Other than the sound a chicken makes!
I searched it.

I think it means vomiting.

bots 07-06-2018 07:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calderyon (Post 10031227)
I searched it.

I think it means vomiting.
its a good scottish puke

kirklancaster 07-06-2018 07:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicky. (Post 10030542)
There is a difference between a thread that was asking if Michael 21 is fake or not, and a thread saying he is a good member,

Feel free to make a positive thread about michael21 :shrug:

I know kirk did not mean the thread in a negative way, but it would clearly go that way with the Op asking if people thought M21 was fake or not. And the reason it was deleted was that, along with...if someone made a thread asking if (for example) brillopad was fake or not...it would be reported and there would be hell on if it was not removed. And if not reported straight away, then once people said 'yes I think so' it would be reported.

Actually, there were reports from inside that M21 thread about people answering 'yes he is fake' or whatever. But the actual thread was not reported itself, but people were reported for ANSWERING the OP. So quite how a thread could remain, when if people answered the question one way there were reports, I don't know?

I seem to be writing essays today, but yeah, if you want to make a thread to actually say M21 is a great member, knock yourself out.
Michael 21 sent me a friends request after I made that good-natured tongue-in-cheek friendly thread but whatever, Vicky.

My question is; did I deserve Infracting for it?

Why not just a friendly pm advising me just why such a thread wasn't such a good idea?

I have had 3 Infractions in a week and all of them are pure B.S. - In my opinion.

Vicky. 07-06-2018 10:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirklancaster (Post 10031313)
Michael 21 sent me a friends request after I made that good-natured tongue-in-cheek friendly thread but whatever, Vicky.

My question is; did I deserve Infracting for it?

Why not just a friendly pm advising me just why such a thread wasn't such a good idea?

I have had 3 Infractions in a week and all of them are pure B.S. - In my opinion.
Kirk I specifically said (twice I think but not reading back, but it does actually say in the post you quoted) that I know you did not mean it in a bad way. However it was inviting negative posts about micahel and there were reports from the thread too which showed us the way the thread would end up.

I would not have infracted you for that, no. I would have sent a PM or maybe a warning. But I would have deleted the thread for sure.

Edit. I agree with the other infractions though, just checked them.

jet 07-06-2018 11:24 PM
Well, threads asking is there a better forum member than Daniel X could also invite negativity like 'of course there is, he/she is a s*** member, what are you on about' (not that I know anything about Daniel at all so that is no reflection on that poster)...
So were the posters who made negative remarks about Michael infracted ...and why was Kirk infracted when it is said it is understood his thread wasn't meant in a bad way? If you wouldn't have infracted him Vicky, then why WAS he infracted? It all sounds dodgy to me.
This forum is a minefield of confusion about what is and isn't allowed and tolerated depending on the mod online at the time, it's currently an uncomfortable place to navigate re the rules which treat us a bit like like children and feels stifling to post on when one mod will do one thing and another do something else - which is why I don't bother anymore and many long time posters are losing their love for this place.

Vicky. 08-06-2018 12:26 AM
Quote:
If you wouldn't have infracted him Vicky, then why WAS he infracted? It all sounds dodgy to me.
Because mods are human, are different people and use discretion?

Seriously do you think we all agree with each others actions constantly? I wish you could see the admin forum, really.

The only way to get totally consistent moderating is to take humans out of the equation completely. Which clearly is not a possibility. Also context and such is important too most of the time, so blanket rules would not really work.

As I said, I would not personally have given an infraction for that, however I see why the thread was removed, and I also agree with the other infractions kirk is talking about which are apparently 'BS'. So yeah, wish I had stuck to not discussing this michael thing tbh. I can see how this thread is going to go now.

Marsh. 08-06-2018 12:42 AM
Oh fgs, can the moans about infractions be relegated to their own bloody section? (ie. Vicky's inbox. Bother her in private :smug:)

Vicky. 08-06-2018 12:48 AM
Thanks for that marsh.Great suggestion :inamood:

Marsh. 08-06-2018 12:50 AM
Josy told me your inbox is very accommodating. :nono:

Jack_ 08-06-2018 12:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsh. (Post 10031942)
Josy told me your inbox is very accommodating. :nono:
A Danielle Lloyd tea

Marsh. 08-06-2018 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 10031944)
A Danielle Lloyd tea
Vicky the Monster Munch Queen?

T* 08-06-2018 01:00 AM
MARSHALL

Marsh. 08-06-2018 01:01 AM
Thomas. :)

jet 08-06-2018 01:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicky. (Post 10031933)
Because mods are human, are different people and use discretion?

Seriously do you think we all agree with each others actions constantly? I wish you could see the admin forum, really.

The only way to get totally consistent moderating is to take humans out of the equation completely. Which clearly is not a possibility. Also context and such is important too most of the time, so blanket rules would not really work.

As I said, I would not personally have given an infraction for that, however I see why the thread was removed, and I also agree with the other infractions kirk is talking about which are apparently 'BS'. So yeah, wish I had stuck to not discussing this michael thing tbh. I can see how this thread is going to go now.
Members are human too, yet they have to stick to rules and regulations or they will be punished. Fair enough..but why do mods not have rules and regulations when it comes to infractions? Members have to navigate how they word stuff to avoid being penalised, but mods can 'be human and themselves' and that's okay and they never get any infractions or bans for wrong decisions or indeed for anything that mere members get infracted for. Not getting at you here Vicky, as you are very fair...but we are ALL human, and if one person pays a price for being human, then we all should.
Unless its understood that mods are allowed that luxury and members aren't, maybe we should be told that once and for all? :shrug:

Vicky. 08-06-2018 01:19 AM
Told what once and for all? Yes members are human too. Except arista.

Mods can get infractions and bans from admin also. I thought this was common knowledge.


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:19 AM.
Page 3 of 6 12 3 45 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.