Grim... wrote:
You fuck 
This is the second comment I've had about the 'report' button - the first one was to make it smaller / get rid of it, obv
This is the second comment I've had about the 'report' button - the first one was to make it smaller / get rid of it, obv
I've just reported you to yourself so that you have a jolly good think about what you've done.
Grim... wrote:
You fuck
This is the second comment I've had about the 'report' button - the first one was to make it smaller / get rid of it, obv
This is the second comment I've had about the 'report' button - the first one was to make it smaller / get rid of it, obv
I can understand why, but it was probably not thought through.
This is a user driven site, unlike something like WoS which was run by one person. How many people ever reported something on there? I'd suggest people are encouraged to use the button on here because it's a community and by alerting the mods they are helping out.
At the end of the day the mods have the keys to the delete/banning hammer but it will make their lives easier if people can help alert them, nay, feel they should alert them. This is a community effort after all*.
* Although I do propose that the mods be officially named "sinister overlords" for excellence sake.
chinnyhill10 wrote:
How many people ever reported something on there? I'd suggest people are encouraged to use the button on here because it's a community and by alerting the mods they are helping out.
The button has been pressed here a few times, to be honest.
Grim... wrote:
chinnyhill10 wrote:
How many people ever reported something on there? I'd suggest people are encouraged to use the button on here because it's a community and by alerting the mods they are helping out.
The button has been pressed here a few times, to be honest.
That's cool.
But as I say, I hadn't even noticed it.
Mr Chris wrote:
Grim... wrote:
You fuck
This is the second comment I've had about the 'report' button - the first one was to make it smaller / get rid of it, obv
This is the second comment I've had about the 'report' button - the first one was to make it smaller / get rid of it, obv
I've just reported you to yourself so that you have a jolly good think about what you've done.
Don't worry, I'm on the case. He's going to have a lot of jolly good thinking to do once I've investigated this report.
Mr Chris wrote:
Grim... wrote:
You fuck
This is the second comment I've had about the 'report' button - the first one was to make it smaller / get rid of it, obv
This is the second comment I've had about the 'report' button - the first one was to make it smaller / get rid of it, obv
I've just reported you to yourself so that you have a jolly good think about what you've done.
BWAAHAHAHA WARN'D!
Grim... wrote:
chinnyhill10 wrote:
How many people ever reported something on there? I'd suggest people are encouraged to use the button on here because it's a community and by alerting the mods they are helping out.
The button has been pressed here a few times, to be honest.
Seriously? For complaints about posts/posters?
Yeah. And for fun. And for just 'look, this tag is broken' and things. All of which are fine, and appreciated (although the 'fun' one could grate after a while, I guess).
To be fair, once was Thomsedavi reporting himself for being awesome.
It's only useful if it reports to all admin and/or mods.
Erm, it does.
It does. Yours was noted.
I have arranged the poll results in an 'at-a-glance' way.
VOTE GRIM..., etc.
VOTE GRIM..., etc.
Oooh! Nice.
Grim... wrote:
I have arranged the poll results in an 'at-a-glance' way.
VOTE GRIM..., etc.
VOTE GRIM..., etc.
Nice work. Have a special gold star for mathmatical excellence.
chinnyhill10 wrote:
Nice work. Have a special gold star for mathmatical excellence.
Have a cone-shaped hat for spelling poorness, Mr. Sub-ed.
IS THIS WHO YOU WANT RUNNING YOUR etc etc...
Grim... wrote:
I have arranged the poll results in an 'at-a-glance' way.
VOTE GRIM..., etc.
VOTE GRIM..., etc.
Official protest for conflict of interest.
Craster wrote:
chinnyhill10 wrote:
Nice work. Have a special gold star for mathmatical excellence.
Have a cone-shaped hat for spelling poorness, Mr. Sub-ed.
IS THIS WHO YOU WANT RUNNING YOUR etc etc...
Yeah, but I dodged sniper fire* in the forum wars of March 2008. Not forgetting my serving in 'Nam#.
* Hid in a cupboard.
# Technically speaking playing Rambo 2 on my CPC.
[edit] I didn't want to be a sub-ed for spelling reasons. I wanted to be one to comment on style, but also help check any retro reviews for facts etc.
By my reckoning, 51 people have voted so far which leaves rather alot that haven't.
There will be a lot of folks who don't care about some gay election for who's the commanders in gayness, gaylords. Not every aspect of the forum will be relevant to all its readers.
Also, there are bound to be people who have voted for fewer than five overlords.
I'm waiting to see candidate's policies before I vote. Excitingly, I hear I'm winning, so 'agreeing with Grim...' is going to be high on the list.
Grim... wrote:
I'm waiting to see candidate's policies before I vote. Excitingly, I hear I'm winning, so 'agreeing with Grim...' is going to be high on the list.
My policy is to be excellent. However, in the voting I would like to come a close 6th so I can be a gallant runner up in the popularity contest election. Better to be remembered for being a close runner-up than winning. After all, everyone remembers Cliff Richard coming second in the Eurovision Song Contest, but nobody remembers who came first!
So, er, let Cliffs lesson be a lesson to you. Yes.....
Also: Eddie the Eagle!
CUS wrote:
There will be a lot of folks who don't care about some gay election for who's the commanders in gayness, gaylords. Not every aspect of the forum will be relevant to all its readers.
Anyone who doesn't vote has no right to complain about Grim.. the sinister overlords at a later date.
Grim... wrote:
Also: Eddie the Eagle!
Eddie came last. Are you trying to say Kalmar is a speccy eyed attention seeker with a stupid tache who would be out of his depth at the job?
No - I can't see the list leave me alone bullying bugger. Also why the fuck doesn't my enter key work any more?
Grim... wrote:
No - I can't see the list leave me alone bullying bugger. Also why the fuck doesn't my enter key work any more?
You are pressing control. At some point in the early 1990's some sinister person decided to DELETE the enter key. Yet nobody told us
The evidence - http://www.pospischil.co.at/pic/cpc6128.jpg
While we're at it, I'd like the "copy" key back as well. And the escape key in the proper place. And no windows keys.
My only policy is "Ban Mr Chris". I'm counting on it being a real vote-puller though.
Craster wrote:
My only policy is "Ban CUS". I'm counting on it being a real vote-puller though.
I've turned that into a surefire vote winner for you.
My consultancy fee is 3 bottles of Fentimans Cola and a bag of Salt and Vinegar Seabrooks.
Craster wrote:
My only policy is "Ban Mr Chris". I'm counting on it being a real vote-puller though.
I know it's why I voted for you.
Dudley wrote:
Craster wrote:
My only policy is "Ban Mr Chris". I'm counting on it being a real vote-puller though.
I know it's why I voted for you.
Ooooooh.
The dweebs are uniting.
And it's one of two reasons I didn't vote for you.
Oh go on then, I'll ask - the other reason being?
To forcibly drag things back on topic for a moment, given recent uprisings amongst the masses would it be sensible for the mod candidates to give their views on how they'll moderate and how they think the board should be run?
As this isn't a board run by someone who owns it (a la WoS or LSavs or such) who can say "my shop, my rules", the masses should have some say in how the place is run, rather than having random mods' views imposed on them. Now, obviously, the most direct solution would be to have a vote on the various modding issues and make the mods comply with a BETEO Citizen's Charter. However, as that might be a bit unwieldy maybe an opportunity to know how the mods we're voting for would operate would be useful? E.g. views on on-topicness, trolling, editing etc. People can then vote for those who reflect how they'd like the place run (or wail and gnash their teeth because they appear to have voted for 5 ringers from the Communist Party and can't change their votes. In Communist BETEO the amusing thing does amusing things to the opposite etc)
Or am I overcomplicating things and we can all just happily get on in a quasi-anarchic state of excellence?
As this isn't a board run by someone who owns it (a la WoS or LSavs or such) who can say "my shop, my rules", the masses should have some say in how the place is run, rather than having random mods' views imposed on them. Now, obviously, the most direct solution would be to have a vote on the various modding issues and make the mods comply with a BETEO Citizen's Charter. However, as that might be a bit unwieldy maybe an opportunity to know how the mods we're voting for would operate would be useful? E.g. views on on-topicness, trolling, editing etc. People can then vote for those who reflect how they'd like the place run (or wail and gnash their teeth because they appear to have voted for 5 ringers from the Communist Party and can't change their votes. In Communist BETEO the amusing thing does amusing things to the opposite etc)
Or am I overcomplicating things and we can all just happily get on in a quasi-anarchic state of excellence?
Mr Chris wrote:
Or am I overcomplicating things and we can all just happily get on in a quasi-anarchic state of excellence?
I think at least for now that's going to be best, the whole point of voting was to choose people who aren't going to be pricks about it (the exception being my vote for Zardoz, but I just felt obliged).
Mr Chris wrote:
Or am I overcomplicating things and we can all just happily get on in a quasi-anarchic state of excellence?
If people behave inconsideratly they should be told, if they behave badly they should be warned and if they behave badly again they will be hit with the banning stick. That might be a suspension if they are a regular poster, or a full on ban if they are just a troublemaker.
Note there is a difference between being inconsiderate and bad. Although being if you are annoying for long enough and people are calling for youe head, you should probably get a formal warning.
It doesn't need lots of complicated rules other than the ground rules posted elsewhere.
I was more thinking about the mods' behaviour rather than that of the great unwashed, but yes.
Mr Chris wrote:
maybe an opportunity to know how the mods we're voting for would operate would be useful? E.g. views on on-topicness, trolling, editing etc.
I am the Ralph Nader of the supaModz nominations.
I stand for:
* Fairness to Consoomers, and Safety First
* Minimal Moderation Meddling (Don't do shit, unless..*)
* Apple pie but with NO CREAM on it. Maybe soya cream.
* And the Excellent Way.
Don't vote for me, or you'll end up wasting a vote that could have otherwise toppled an incumbent dictator!
[*} unless trolling or an invasion by Canada or that.
Mmmkay...
* I don't care about on-topicness (although I will have a quick word if the first five posts in a thread requesting help are all people being daft, and I'll continue to keep the bargains thread tidy)
* I do care about people being inconsiderate to others, whether through ignorance (see the big pictures debacle) or deliberately.
* If anyone comes on here speaking in leet, vengeance will be swift and painful
* I can, you know, work the forum
* I don't care about on-topicness (although I will have a quick word if the first five posts in a thread requesting help are all people being daft, and I'll continue to keep the bargains thread tidy)
* I do care about people being inconsiderate to others, whether through ignorance (see the big pictures debacle) or deliberately.
* If anyone comes on here speaking in leet, vengeance will be swift and painful
* I can, you know, work the forum
It's probably a bit late for this, as voting has pretty much dried up, but:
[*]I'm a fairly decent chap, all told.
[*]I'm a fairly decent chap, all told.
Craster wrote:
It's probably a bit late for this, as voting has pretty much dried up, but:
[*]I'm a fairly decent chap, all told.
[*]I'm a fairly decent chap, all told.
Oh, that reminds me:
I'm not a liar
Craster wrote:
It's probably a bit late for this, as voting has pretty much dried up, but:
[*]I'm a fairly decent chap, all told.
[*]I'm a fairly decent chap, all told.
Vote Hitler Craster!
I'd just like to say, I will be just as awesome in my second term as mod as this one.
'You're in safe hands'
'You're in safe hands'
So you'll do nothing at all? Honest to God, I didn't even realise you were a mod.
[edit]Because of the picture! /slaps forehead
[edit]Because of the picture! /slaps forehead
Aren't they the best Mods?
Haven't had a complaint yet.*
Unlike some.
*Well, apart from the fat nekkid man incident.
Haven't had a complaint yet.*
Unlike some.
*Well, apart from the fat nekkid man incident.
Zardoz wrote:
Aren't they the best Mods?
You got my vote buddy
Get out - you deleted a whole thread once!
[edit]@ Zardoz, obv
[edit]@ Zardoz, obv
Listen Buster, as your soon to be deputy you'd better start respecting my decisions or you could have a mutiny* on your hands Cap'n.
*or at least Sodomy
*or at least Sodomy