~~ WHO Was Banned Today? #2 ~~

[bradmedic04]

I liked 88GT and agreed with many of her complaints about one moderator, but I understand the mods decision. She was long past the time to just let it go, accept that there was nothing she could do to change things, and move on.

Do I need to bring back the Frozen picture?

 

[churchmouse]

I liked 88GT and agreed with a few of her complaints, but I understand the mods decision. She was long past the time to just let it go, accept that there was nothing she could do to change things, and move on.

In what you are saying I never understood what she and a few others were trying to change. I do not see a need. Things run smoothly enough. There are Verboten topics/phrases for good reason. When these reasons are openly discussed and explained then it is never a good idea to skirt those areas. This is in no way a democracy. It is a privately owned club house with rules in place to make us all get along. We as a group have shown many times that those rules need to be in place. I have been in the hot seat more than once.

That said, I agree with GFGT.......some of the Vibrant's will be gone. This place is the sum total of its posting members. Every piece of that puzzle made up some of the big picture.

 

[jdmack79]

In what you are saying I never understood what she and a few others were trying to change. I do not see a need. Things run smoothly enough. There are Verboten topics/phrases for good reason. When these reasons are openly discussed and explained then it is never a good idea to skirt those areas. This is in no way a democracy. It is a privately owned club house with rules in place to make us all get along. We as a group have shown many times that those rules need to be in place. I have been in the hot seat more than once.

That said, I agree with GFGT.......some of the Vibrant's will be gone. This place is the sum total of its posting members. Every piece of that puzzle made up some of the big picture.

Although I share a few of the same opinions as her, I'm not going to constantly dwell on the complaints. She had a tendency to just go around stirring up trouble as a way to air her grievances. If even I was tiring of her whining, I'm sure the mods were long past their breaking point.

 

[churchmouse]

Although I share a few of the same opinions as her, I'm not going to constantly dwell on the complaints. She had a tendency to just go around stirring up trouble as a way to air her grievances. If even I was tiring of her whining, I'm sure the mods were long past their breaking point.

And you would be correct.
I get stirred up sometimes but that is life. Let the waves settle down and deal with the ripples..........there will be more than enough waves if you sit long enough.

 

[Rookie]

Well, ok then. Nobody is invincible...

WHAT?!?

 

[mbills2223]

WHAT?!?

excluding you and I, of course.

 

[Rookie]

excluding you and I, of course.

Had me worried for a second...

 

[bradmedic04]

In what you are saying I never understood what she and a few others were trying to change. I do not see a need. Things run smoothly enough. There are Verboten topics/phrases for good reason. When these reasons are openly discussed and explained then it is never a good idea to skirt those areas. This is in no way a democracy. It is a privately owned club house with rules in place to make us all get along. We as a group have shown many times that those rules need to be in place. I have been in the hot seat more than once.

That said, I agree with GFGT.......some of the Vibrant's will be gone. This place is the sum total of its posting members. Every piece of that puzzle made up some of the big picture.

That's what really gets me about the whole thing. You sign up, read the rules/FAQs, and it should be clear that this place exists at the pleasure (pain?) of Fenway. Constantly complaining about rules, complaining about mods, or complaining about any and every little thing one doesn't like becomes irritating to everyone. We know this results in being banned, yet people still act surprised when it happens. I suspect a lot of folks just like the drama.

Don't get me wrong; I'm all for testing limits. However, once limits have been tested and the behavior that crosses them becomes apparent, one should endeavor to walk the line if they don't want to join "the banned."

Can't we all just share our mutual love of bacon?

 

[KG1]

INGO will be a little less vibrant without 88GT.

Agreed. I wish her well.

 

[churchmouse]

excluding you and I, of course.

I used to think I was.......till it caught up with me.

 

[bradmedic04]

excluding you and I, of course.

Reported.

 

[mbills2223]

I used to think I was.......till it caught up with me.

I've learned that lesson the hard way a few times, and that's outside of INGO!

Reported.

Denied!

 

[Harleyrider_50]

1 the MAIN rulz, any forum I ever been a part of......when the Mods remove, or lok a thread down......it plainly states .....DO NOT....open anuther topic/thread pertain'n ta the other(keep the ball roll'n.....).....PERIOD......

 

[bradmedic04]

1 the MAIN rulz, any forum I ever been a part of......when the Mods remove, or lok a thread down......it plainly states .....DO NOT....open anuther topic/thread pertain'n ta the other(keep the ball roll'n.....).....PERIOD......

You've got it all wrong. When a thread gets locked, you need to immediately open a backup thread. After that, you create several parody threads, plus a thread to complain about the first thread getting locked. After that thread gets locked, you need to start complaining in every other unrelated thread you can find.

 

[Harleyrider_50]

You've got it all wrong. When a thread gets locked, you need to immediately open a backup thread. After that, you create several parody threads, plus a thread to complain about the first thread getting locked. After that thread gets locked, you need to start complaining in every other unrelated thread you can find.

1's I'm talk'n about......they don' give ya that opportunity......

OP o' that thread......should'a never open'd it.....

 

[mbills2223]

Good point harleyrider. In my past experience (albeit a long time ago in Internet time, and on a forum with a MUCH different user base and content), it was sometimes adventageous to explicitly add rules if something was becoming an issue. This wasn't some noble cause, but it made moderating much easier when we could point to a specific rule. It didn't leave the user much room to take issue with it. The problem we ran into then, though, was that as the list of rules grew, some people thought that if something wasn't expliictly against the rules, it was acceptable behavior. Kinda like the whole federalist vs. anti-federalist thing...but I'm no history teacher (Paging JD).

End result: I think INGO is just fine the way it is.

Again, my opinion doesn't matter and no one asked for it...but...yeah...

 

[churchmouse]

Good point harleyrider. In my past experience (albeit a long time ago in Internet time, and on a forum with a MUCH different user base and content), it was sometimes adventageous to explicitly add rules if something was becoming an issue. This wasn't some noble cause, but it made moderating much easier when we could point to a specific rule. It didn't leave the user much room to take issue with it. The problem we ran into then, though, was that as the list of rules grew, some people thought that if something wasn't expliictly against the rules, it was acceptable behavior. Kinda like the whole federalist vs. anti-federalist thing...but I'm no history teacher (Paging JD).

End result: I think INGO is just fine the way it is.

Again, my opinion doesn't matter and no one asked for it...but...yeah...

In the words of AJ Foyt and George Bignotti........If there is no rule against it then we are not breaking any rules.

 

[jdmack79]

 

[mbills2223]

Of course CM would drop in with the racing reference!

 

[Harleyrider_50]

Good point harleyrider. In my past experience (albeit a long time ago in Internet time, and on a forum with a MUCH different user base and content), it was sometimes adventageous to explicitly add rules if something was becoming an issue. This wasn't some noble cause, but it made moderating much easier when we could point to a specific rule. It didn't leave the user much room to take issue with it. The problem we ran into then, though, was that as the list of rules grew, some people thought that if something wasn't expliictly against the rules, it was acceptable behavior. Kinda like the whole federalist vs. anti-federalist thing...but I'm no history teacher (Paging JD).

End result: I think INGO is just fine the way it is.

Again, my opinion doesn't matter and no one asked for it...but...yeah...

I'd have ta agree.....an' I've had my share o'.....whutever it is they call'em.....