The Chainlink

So after the amazing shit show that was Gabe and Michelle crapping all over the message board here I think it is a good time to ask this question.

 

What happened here is ridiculous, two people were allowed to run wild like a couple of monkeys flinging shit everywhere.  Regardless of who you want to see as wrong or right there the fact remains that they were allowed to carry on completely unchecked.

 

Why?  Light moderation is one thing but why should two defective people be allowed to run wild like that?  Especially when others have been kicked off for doing the same?

 

Didn’t we kick off Beezodog for hijacking threads and not letting an argument die?

 

Of course that leads to another thing; we have some loose rules but they never seem to be enforced, why?



So what is it, do we have an enforce rules or can people just do whatever they like?  Because it mostly looks like people can just act however they want…

Views: 8788

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This is kind of insane.  Basically you are asking me to re-hash most of what has already been posted here.  Are you to lazy to read or do you just not understand what has been happening around you?  You spent a significant amount of time telling me to shut up and stop complaining, even threatened to post troll pictures if I didn't, but now, even though I'm OK with the changes, you want me to continue to complain?  And then you accuse me of having issues thinking logically?

Really?

I mean I'm pretty sure I clearly laid out exactly what I thought the issues were but I guess I can clarify.

I think that the 'punishment' of Michelle compared to the complete pass Gabe got in the recent blow up was unfair.  I am not taking sides, I thought they were both acting like idiots and deserved some form of moderation be it editing, warnings or banning.  For one person in the situation to be reprimanded when they were both jerks was not fair in my opinion.

I think things were not fair because we had/have poorly written rules that were not evenly enforced due to apathy, lack of attention and favoritism.  Agree or disagree at will, but I feel there is a 'cool kids club' vibe going on with that whole scene.  I feel the rule changes and moderation guidelines made to help this issue are not very good but was willing to accept that there were changes as a step in the right direction and stop making trouble but you seem to want me to complain more...  I mean is that really what you want?  

Go back and read this thread, I asked Julie some direct questions and they have never been answered. I think that counts as being ignored.  I think she should answer them, you think she should not but that does not change the fact that she ignored them.  

Quite some time ago I was also asked by Julie and some CL staff to write some rule and moderation suggestions after an in person meeting and everythign I sent was ignored.

As for issues with the rules... 

Well for one thing there is no rule regarding language that can be used here.  That means people can curse and use hate speech to their hearts content and not be reprimanded for it.  If you want to be able to stop people from doing something you have to have a rule against it.

As far as the guide lines go they are just really goofy sounding but this one in particular is goofy: 

'The moderators will do their best to be fair and patient, and to avoid pettiness; you will do your best to obey the rules and the judgment calls of the moderators without complaining or disrespecting their authority

So the moderators only try to be fair and not petty, there is no standard of actually being fair, just trying to be fair.  Of course, the flipside to that is I only have to do my best to not complain or respect them.  I mean that is just a sloppy mess of a rule to the point it is actually a lack of a rule.  They way that is worded there is no rule there.  There is also the fact that it is kind of sorta trying to be a rule saying that it is not OK to question the moderators which is also pretty not great.

Good enough for you or would you like more?


Haddon said:

Notorious,

I feel it necessary to put you on the same pike that you regularly offer to others.

"The new rules are enough for me to drop it", but your words in fact were:

"Some of my questions have been addressed and others have been ignored but at least we have some kind of rules and moderation update.

The new rules and moderation guidelines are still kind of a joke but an improvement on what was there."

What, in fact, is a jokeWhat has been ignored? This is the point in time where your constructive criticism would be the best, before things get formalized. I asked you to explain what is "a joke" and you failed to do so. The Chainlink surely operates on a modest budget with many volunteers. Given these constraints what is "a joke" and what has been "ignored" and what should be done to address these issues? It's one thing to take a piss and another to offer valid, intelligible, actionable criticism. I asked you to explain a bit and you didn't. You chose to move on and pretend you were civil.

You owe Julie an apology because: while you complain, you are either unwilling or intellectually incapable of stating you position.  So answer this question: What is a joke?  Answer the question, its not so difficult. For the record there are thousands of websites that have similar / ~the same rules. Why are they so bad here? Just answer the question.

Having anything to say about me / my posts is one of these: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ Defend yourself with logic and reasoning. I'm not asking you to do any thing that you didn't ask of anyone else. You were demanding of Julies time but as of yet you have not explained in a cogitant way what the problem is. If you can't explain what "A JOKE" is, or lay out what the problem is why do you feel a response is necessary?  At this point you have not and apparently will not, or cannot explain. If this is the case you are simply ranting and should be ignored as just a person who wants to get indignant but really has nothing positive to offer.

In this thread you said this Notorious: "I've made it clear in the past that I am OK if the things I say that are pushing or outside the rules are edited or deleted."

This is not the statement of a responsible adult but, in fact, a child. Basically you are saying "Oh I want to crap to my hearts content and if you have problems with it you clean it up".  How about when you post you manage to have enough decency and respect that your words don't need to get mopped up by people who probably aren't paid to do so. Be an adult.

In the YOLO (you only live once) philosophy you have down very cold being indignant and insulting. Please, before you die, how about becoming a person that every one respects as a noble human being. Once I talked to you at RT and thought you were pretty cool and I didn't get how you are so regularly vile on this site.  So before you kick the bucket how about, rather than being the type of person of whom there have been regular discussions about your continued presence on this board you become a person that people look up to, respect even. And I know you think this is unimaginable but it is, in fact, attainable.

You have it in you to be a decent person PLEASE WORK ON IT or please do THIS

H

(and I apologize to all who have to read this but, it needs to be done. Holding DUG to his own words might do him some good, we can only hope)


notoriousDUG said:

So basically you want me to argue more here?  The new rules are enough for me to drop it and you want me to continue to argue?

Are you sure I'm the troll?

I already expressed my concerns and some were addressed, not exactly how I want but good enough for now so why argue it more?  It is pretty easy to go back and see what questions of mine were ignored, they are the ones nobody answered.

I'm confused as to what I owe Julie an apology for.  

I'm also confused as to why, when you hate my arguing so much, you want me to continue to do so when I feel things have been addresses.


Haddon said:

NO.

There are 10,000 members of The Chainlink (as of a recent event proclaimed) and for 9,999 of the members, (give or take) the sit works just fine.  If it doesn't work for you please let me know so that I can learn. I humbly ask you to enlighten me.

You stated this so what are the "guidelines are still kind of a joke" What is a joke to you? Explain? 

Also "Some of my questions have been addressed and others have been ignored" What has been ignored? Please explain. 

I, personally, don't like you. I have been subjected to your disdain and seen it many times and I think this board would be far better without you.  Given that you had no problem calling Julie out, practically goading her into a response I think you should be an example and show us all how it's done. Use your intellect, your logic, your reasoning. If you can't express your concerns in a logical fashion than you have no place calling the site owner out to explain herself and you owe her an apology. If your just unhappy because that's how you are as an individual than you should see a psychologist.

So please, tell us why are are you not happy with the the new guidelines and what questions have not been answered?

Please answer the questions. There is an old Chinese proverb (that I probably picked up from an Amy Tan novel) that there are people that don't really have anything they support but there is plenty they are against.  I put you in this group.

Explain your troubles, apologize or go away

Respectfully, Haddon



notoriousDUG said:

And you could stop following and posting in this thread at any time as well.

Weren't you the one who was saying something about feeding trolls?



Haddon said:

Yea, has your individual concerns been addressed or is more needed? For a forum that you could be LEAVING AT ANY TIME ARE YOU HAPPY????

Tandemonium said:

Ya good now champ?

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service