[Princess]

Originally Posted by Twilight

Why?
Sex is part of life.

It shouldn't be when you're that young.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Princess

It shouldn't be when you're that young.

It would be shocking 10 years ago yes, fair enough but not now surely?

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Princess

*is slighty distrubed about 14/15 year olds talking about sex*

Times have changed...I think

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Thebeast only got an infraction because she got a warning for that already, then thought it was a smart move to post it again...


And in a way, yes, the moderating is stricter now, but thats because people seem to be pushing the boundaries more to see what they can get away with, and then twisting when they get an infraction/the thread gets locked.

Oh, I see. But still, the warning confuses me.

I guess that's a fair point, but I've seen just as much, if not worse, on my years on here. It seems that it's just being cracked down upon now.

[Jords]

Its actually a bit ridiculous that you cant see reasons why infractions were given and threads were closed. You gotta look at it in 2 frames of minds, yes it may be funny to some (I admit to finding somethings funny) or just a debate, but it may offend others and it is not appropriate so deal with the consequences.

I disagree with Smithy getting an infraction for arguing though, plenty of that happens on here.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted by Princess

It shouldn't be when you're that young.

Nothing wrong with talking about it though.
its not like i'm gonna go out and do it:P

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jords

Its actually a bit ridiculous that you cant see reasons why infractions were given and threads were closed.

Its up to the person who recieved an infraction to tell you about it, should they chose to.

Usually a reason is given when a thread is closed also. I tend to post on every thread I lock, and have seen most other mods do the same.

[Jack_]

I'll continue this tomorrow, should the thread still be open that is, I need sleep now.

[Jords]

Not like that Vicky, why people cant understand why infractions have to be given out in these sorts of situations.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I'll continue this tomorrow, should the thread still be open that is, I need sleep now.

Must you? Its getting old now...

Originally Posted by Jords

Not like that Vicky, why people cant understand why infractions have to be given out in these sorts of situations.

I really dont get what you mean...

[Ross]

lol

[Jords]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Must you? Its getting old now...



I really dont get what you mean...

Jack saying he doesnt understand why infractions were given out, but its really quite blatent.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jords

Jack saying he doesnt understand why infractions were given out, but its really quite blatent.

Ah right.

Thought you were saying it was bad that we dont tell everyone the reasons for every infraction and that

Sorry

[Stacey.]

yeah, it really is.
I got 2 infractions for giving my opinion!!

[Enid]

I can tell some **** went down last night.

Someone fill me in, please.

Also, the decision to disable postcounts is ****ing fantastic. THANK YOU.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Jack_

So if somebody reports something, mods/admins automatically have to close/delete the thread and hand out infractions, because somebody said it offends them?

Yes New Labour at fault.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Enid

I can tell some **** went down last night.

Someone fill me in, please.

Also, the decision to disable postcounts is ****ing fantastic. THANK YOU.

Jack would need to Fill you in
Hon.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I'll continue this tomorrow, should the thread still be open that is, I need sleep now.

Yes Jack get some Rest.

Catch you later tonight
you Devil.

[Sticks]

I am a moderator on another forum devoted to astronomy and aerospace with other sciences thrown in.

Some of the rules we have there would ban things I have done here, like image linking using the img tags. The owners worry this is a copyright violation, steals bandwidth and is not nice on those who still have dial ups instead of broadband.

Plus if someone wants to advocate a theory outside the mainstream of science, or with regard to conspiracy theories there are extra rules.

During my time as a moderator there I have been known for being severe and trigger happy, however that forum wants to be available to schools. If we allowed some things there that we see here, the forum would be blocked by various net nannies.

That said, this morning I found a lot of locked threads, one after just two posts and yet I saw no post that would have violated forum rules.

As for the tsunami thread, could the offending posts have just been delete and the posters warned?

As a suggestion, moderator to moderators, if a thread needs to be closed, please could the moderator closing it post a reason as to why it is being closed. when we close a thread on the forum I am a moderator, that is our procedure and it gives a degree of transparency.

[Stu]

Insults Deleted.

A strict forum that really wanted to keep the place clean looking would ban both offensive members and members who are ... well ... stupid? As it stands we have a great policy on banning people for making offensive jokes but absoloutely no policy at all on trolltastic Edit language who could be viewed as a benig offensive to humanity.

Edit of us filthy young things with our bad language but yeah. I wouldn't say this place is strict. Although locking that disaster thread was incredibly stupid. You don't like the thread? Aww. Leave then. I don't like plenty of threads. Can we close them based soley on my opinion or is that a luxury confined to moderators?

On a strict forum, we would never have had to put up with the MeMyself&I trouble becauce the IP would have been banned first day. Jobs done, case closed, thank you and don't come again.

And seriously - how stupid is the obligation to close threads that offend people? Can these people not find the back button? Do they need the thread to be vaccum sealed and shot into space to sleep soundly at night?

Plus as Sticks said - GIVE REASONS WHY YOUR CLOSING YOUR THREADS. Do your job properly peeps. Nobody ever explains what's going on and we then have a further four threads wondering what's going on. Usually they end up locked too.

Insults deleted.

[arista]

"If we really did have a policy of banning stupid people - the number of moderators would drop quiet a bit I reckon. "


No that does not stand for Vicky

[Stu]

I agree.

[Enid]

We have no apparent set guidelines. That's why you get members whinging about getting banned for posting offensive sh!t. I could call somebody a ****** and then another person could say that about someone the next day and get banned. There needs to be consistency.

And members moaning about the postcount thing. Just shut up. You're the reason why it has been disabled. Stop spamming the forums with your bollocks. What does postcount mean really? Absolutely **** all. You just get your sh!ts and giggles from having a huge number of posts and getting your 10K awards because for some reason it makes you feel better about yourself. You can still post in Chat & Games. It's just this time your spam won't contribute to your obscenely large postcount.

Me thinks you need to go out and get some fresh air for a change because some of you are clearly not thinking straight.

[Stu]

Consistency. That's the one. Why didn't I just say that?

Postcount has been disabled? Well halle ****ing lujah. I love these dolts who pretend they don't care. Next step - remove the postcount numbers. That'll also stop any pre teen troll who will gauge any attack on them or their logic as being an attack soley based on postcount.

[Enid]

Originally Posted by Judas Iscariot

Consistency. That's the one. Why didn't I just say that?

Postcount has been disabled? Well halle ****ing lujah. I love these dolts who pretend they don't care.

Only in Chat and Games. Well I'm glad I'm not the only one to think positively of this. Maybe then all the spammers will **** off, since disabling postcount is apparently the crime of the century.

[Stu]

Expressing annoyance at it's removal is pretty much owning up to caring about your post count, and thus owning up to your 1337 noobtube skillz of posting.

Unless of course the postcount function has some hidden virtuous ability granting spiritual energy I have not yet tapped into that betters your life in some way.