The Deluge of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts

[© tweed]

You all take this sort of thing much too seriously; the forum is a hallowed ground of procrastination, not a matter of life and death. Please consider investing in lives.

Most Time Online

1. Comrade Sibboleth  600days 14hours 20minutes

Obvious, but cheap. I think maybe a little bit too cheap. As cheap as raising an eyebrow at someone with but 67 posts making some in the familiar tone that you do. Hypothetically.

is this a sock-allegation?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

You all take this sort of thing much too seriously; the forum is a hallowed ground of procrastination, not a matter of life and death. Please consider investing in lives.

Most Time Online

1. Comrade Sibboleth  600days 14hours 20minutes

Obvious, but cheap. I think maybe a little bit too cheap. As cheap as raising an eyebrow at someone with but 67 posts making some in the familiar tone that you do. Hypothetically.

is this a sock-allegation?

I hope so, because no newbie with 67 posts would think to look at Al's online time, or probably even know these times were kep.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

If you're referencing locking the Deluge, then read my post in the Goldmine:

I'm doubled over at this idea that Inks was going to bow to the very first hint of public displeasure as if he always does that.

There's no precedent for what I did here.  What I did was not an action out of a Terms of Service moderation, but merely what I understood to be unofficial forum precedent.  Once I would've realized that my understanding of how the goldmine worked wasn't the same as everyone else's, I would've undone what I did, since I wasn't acted under the TOS, but acting under the rules that had previously guided the goldmines.

Whether or not you believe me is irrelevant, because I know I'm right, since you can't know my thought process.

I didn't lock the Institute because I thouht it violated the TOS.  I deleted a page worth of TOS violations and thought that at that point, the thread had run its course and it was time for a new one.

In locking the Deluge, it was my belief at the time that it should be permanently locked.

Why would I think people would flip out over a new comedy goldmine being started?

That's entirely beside the point. What matters is that you seem to think that a longstanding forum institution (the Deluge bzw. the Institute) can be locked on no other grounds than "it was getting annoying to moderate." If you think there is too much material to moderate, step down and let someone else be moderator. It's that simple.

I didn't simply close it because it was getting annoying to moderate.  I closed it because it was getting annoying to moderate AND because when fights like these break out in previous Goldmines, that's the point that a new one starts.

Without that second half of the sentence, I wouldn't have locked the thread, and that's what you're not understanding.

Inks's use of the "Atlas tradition" argument is not only wrong, but also insincere and self-contradictory:

8/6/24.

Is this better, O Great and Powerful Inks?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Post Deleted for Inappropriate with 10 (out of 10) infraction points

Really?

Post Deleted for Inappropriate with 10 (out of 10) infraction points


Stating what you are infracted for is now worth ten points... If this isn't moderator tyranny, I don't know what is.

Yeah... stating what you're infracted for with a quote defeats the purpose of deleting and infracting the post.  If I let you repost it, it's essentially just letting you post it.  If you truly wanted to appeal the points, you could've PMed me.

Sorry, not buying it.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153941.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153010.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=150281.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=148047.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=148745.0

As expected, Inks completely ignores the fact that his argument has been torn to shreds.

It's 4th of July weekend - I'm working double shifts at work with the exception of today.  My apologies that I didn't make responding to your strawman post a priority.

I thought I had seen you post in between those two times.
[EDIT] That's right, you did.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are these better?
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119319.msg3303637#msg3303637
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119319.msg3085130#msg3085130

Plus dozens more that don't quote the infracted post but state exactly what it was about.
[/quote]

And this.
By a moderator, no less.

It is Atlas tradition to post in that thread the post you were infracted for.
Evidently Inks only follows "Atlas tradition" when it suits him.
[/quote]

Those aren't instances of "Atlas tradition".  Those are instances of different moderator style.  On Forum Community, you're not allowed to post an infracted post.  That's something Mikado and I (I'm not sure about Alcon, since he's less active) agree on.

Atlas tradition is stuff like starting a new PAPOY thread each year or "Congrats Phil", not stuff that has to do with moderation style.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

IOW, you didn't bother to read the last three links.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

IOW, you didn't bother to read the last three links.

What links are you referencing?  I skimmed the whole thing... when you post that long of an argument, yeah, I'm going to skim it.  So what exactly is your obscure argument here?

[Vosem]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuLebpUBCio

Gniloy fashistskoy nechesti...zagonim pulyu v lob!

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Oh, I see what you're saying now... 3 links were on my board.  Well, since unfortunately I'm not omniscient anymore, so I don't know of EVERYTHING posted on my boards.  Dude... I hadn't seen the posts before you brought it up.  Did you ever think of that?  You made that post in the middle of the week of Fourth of July, so I was working double shifts all week.  I never saw your response.  Once my recusal period is over, I'll make sure I go back and remove them.  Thank you for assisting me in my moderation duties.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuLebpUBCio

Gniloy fashistskoy nechesti...zagonim pulyu v lob!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ7i0QF9ko0

[King]

I consider myself a good judge of character and good discussion.  I say Dave just make me Admin for a day.  Then I can just permaban everything that sucks about this forum and be done with it.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I consider myself a good judge of character and good discussion.  I say Dave just make me Admin for a day.  Then I can just permaban everything that sucks about this forum and be done with it.

Endorsed.

[5280]

Entire thread is a joke.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=159594.0

[Comrade Funk]

I don't see what's so bad about becoming Barack Obama. If voters have the choice between two guys with exactly the same positions, won't they go for the white guy over the black guy? Not a bad strategy for Mitt Romney

[Badger]

Kal, if ever I needed an example of the pot calling the kettle black...

Again, if you want to say I care too much about it, do yourself a favor and say it like one time. You're a little too bent on saying how much I supposedly care.

P.S. - Others have messaged and started threads about the recent events so I'm glad I'm just a target of one of your bipolar fits (again). See you in like a week or so when you're foaming at the mouth about someone else.

Stay classy, Phil.

Badger, I am positively in awe at this magnificent demonstration of your skill with retorts.

Meh. Over the top sarcasm duly noted, but sometimes less is more. It's not necessary to go on and on with a frothing overly-loquacious screed to note when someone's being a bit of a tool.

Many here could take a point from this.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Badger -- "frothing overly-loquacious screed", referring to a Santorum supporter? I'm fairly certain those jokes are infractible.

IOW, you didn't bother to read the last three links.

What links are you referencing?  I skimmed the whole thing... when you post that long of an argument, yeah, I'm going to skim it.  So what exactly is your obscure argument here?

Oh, I see what you're saying now... 3 links were on my board.  Well, since unfortunately I'm not omniscient anymore, so I don't know of EVERYTHING posted on my boards.  Dude... I hadn't seen the posts before you brought it up.  Did you ever think of that?  You made that post in the middle of the week of Fourth of July, so I was working double shifts all week.  I never saw your response.  Once my recusal period is over, I'll make sure I go back and remove them.  Thank you for assisting me in my moderation duties.

You dismissed the other examples, so I provided more fitting ones.
And I did bring it up again in the same thread 1-1/2 months later, when it was duly ignored again.

But then, this argument wasn't meant to be about your previous failures as moderator, but about your current failure as a moderator.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

As I said, I honestly didn't see it when you posted it in July - that week is a hectic work week where I work, and I was working a lot.  I'm not ignoring it now, I WILL delete those posts once my recusal time is up.  Thank you for bringing those to my attention.  I don't know what else to tell you... give yourself a pat on the back for helping me do my job?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

As I said, I honestly didn't see it when you posted it in July - that week is a hectic work week where I work, and I was working a lot.  I'm not ignoring it now, I WILL delete those posts once my recusal time is up.  Thank you for bringing those to my attention.  I don't know what else to tell you... give yourself a pat on the back for helping me do my job?

You're reinforcing my point -- one of the main purposes of that thread was to share which posts one was infracted for.

The same way that the main purpose of the old Deluge was to post absurd and/or ignorant posts.

In both cases, you decided you didn't like this purpose and purged bzw. locked the thread.

So your argument that the purpose of the MANIC is to be a short-lived/easily-searchable comedy goldmine devoid of argument is hollow.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

As I said, I honestly didn't see it when you posted it in July - that week is a hectic work week where I work, and I was working a lot.  I'm not ignoring it now, I WILL delete those posts once my recusal time is up.  Thank you for bringing those to my attention.  I don't know what else to tell you... give yourself a pat on the back for helping me do my job?

You're reinforcing my point -- one of the main purposes of that thread was to share which posts one was infracted for.

The same way that the main purpose of the old Deluge was to post absurd and/or ignorant posts.

In both cases, you decided you didn't like this purpose and purged bzw. locked the thread.

So your argument that the purpose of the MANIC is to be a short-lived/easily-searchable comedy goldmine devoid of argument is hollow.

My young friend, you are severely confused.  The purpose of that thread was NOT to share which posts you were inracted for, but to share how many posts you were infracted for.  It is the consensus amongst the FC mods that reposting of infracted material is not allowed.  That is not MY rule, it is the BOARD rule.  It is a TOS rule, because if we let you repost material that is against the TOS rule, what is the purpose of the TOS?

In the Deluge thread, I locked it because I believed it was against the TOS.

As to the comedy thread, I locked it because I believed, in forum tradition, it was time for a new one (becasue a page had been deleted due to TOS violations).

The first 2 have direct ties to the TOS.

The third one was NOT locked for being a TOS violation, but out of forum tradition, and time and time again, that is what you are failing to understand.  I did not lock the Instite thread because I didn't like it's purpose.  In fact, I love the comedy goldmines, as evidence by my posting in them.

Seriously, dude, this isn't hard to comprehend.  How you're not following me is honestly getting kinda annoying... I'm tired of banging my head against a wall trying to get you to understand this.  If you can't comprehend it, stop arguing with me.  I have better things to do with my time.

[Keystone Phil]

Kal, if ever I needed an example of the pot calling the kettle black...

Again, if you want to say I care too much about it, do yourself a favor and say it like one time. You're a little too bent on saying how much I supposedly care.

P.S. - Others have messaged and started threads about the recent events so I'm glad I'm just a target of one of your bipolar fits (again). See you in like a week or so when you're foaming at the mouth about someone else.

Stay classy, Phil.

Eh, you're another one. You'll get on a kick of attacking me then throw a fit when I defend myself. It's even more amazing that you're a moderator but I guess there is consistency around here.

[Lief 🗽]

GETTING BACK ON TOPIC, this hilarious gem by a Deluge legend:

Net GOP Senate gain of 3-7.

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=159505

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Here is the chair in question.

Pray tell how does one "lynch" a chair?

The picture shows a chair hanging from a rope.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Yes because he never did anything wrong. Wealth, business, success...that's been the Capitalist backbone for our history. Communism, government control, socialism, all that crap is what the rest of the world does. We would have had a nuclear war before allowing our nation to embrace the ideals of communism, now we seem to have people who sit back and think, "Hmmm maybe it's not so bad if I can get free stuff..."

Those people are no different than commies, themselves.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If you're referencing locking the Deluge, then read my post in the Goldmine:

I'm doubled over at this idea that Inks was going to bow to the very first hint of public displeasure as if he always does that.

There's no precedent for what I did here.  What I did was not an action out of a Terms of Service moderation, but merely what I understood to be unofficial forum precedent.  Once I would've realized that my understanding of how the goldmine worked wasn't the same as everyone else's, I would've undone what I did, since I wasn't acted under the TOS, but acting under the rules that had previously guided the goldmines.

Whether or not you believe me is irrelevant, because I know I'm right, since you can't know my thought process.

I didn't lock the Institute because I thouht it violated the TOS.  I deleted a page worth of TOS violations and thought that at that point, the thread had run its course and it was time for a new one.

In locking the Deluge, it was my belief at the time that it should be permanently locked.

Why would I think people would flip out over a new comedy goldmine being started?

That's entirely beside the point. What matters is that you seem to think that a longstanding forum institution (the Deluge bzw. the Institute) can be locked on no other grounds than "it was getting annoying to moderate." If you think there is too much material to moderate, step down and let someone else be moderator. It's that simple.

I didn't simply close it because it was getting annoying to moderate.  I closed it because it was getting annoying to moderate AND because when fights like these break out in previous Goldmines, that's the point that a new one starts.

Without that second half of the sentence, I wouldn't have locked the thread, and that's what you're not understanding.

Inks's use of the "Atlas tradition" argument is not only wrong, but also insincere and self-contradictory:

8/6/24.

Is this better, O Great and Powerful Inks?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Post Deleted for Inappropriate with 10 (out of 10) infraction points

Really?

Post Deleted for Inappropriate with 10 (out of 10) infraction points


Stating what you are infracted for is now worth ten points... If this isn't moderator tyranny, I don't know what is.

Yeah... stating what you're infracted for with a quote defeats the purpose of deleting and infracting the post.  If I let you repost it, it's essentially just letting you post it.  If you truly wanted to appeal the points, you could've PMed me.

Sorry, not buying it.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153941.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=153010.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=150281.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=148047.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=148745.0

As expected, Inks completely ignores the fact that his argument has been torn to shreds.

It's 4th of July weekend - I'm working double shifts at work with the exception of today.  My apologies that I didn't make responding to your strawman post a priority.

I thought I had seen you post in between those two times.
[EDIT] That's right, you did.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are these better?
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119319.msg3303637#msg3303637
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119319.msg3085130#msg3085130

Plus dozens more that don't quote the infracted post but state exactly what it was about.

And this.
By a moderator, no less.

It is Atlas tradition to post in that thread the post you were infracted for.
Evidently Inks only follows "Atlas tradition" when it suits him.
[/quote]

Those aren't instances of "Atlas tradition".  Those are instances of different moderator style.  On Forum Community, you're not allowed to post an infracted post.  That's something Mikado and I (I'm not sure about Alcon, since he's less active) agree on.

Atlas tradition is stuff like starting a new PAPOY thread each year or "Congrats Phil", not stuff that has to do with moderation style.
[/quote]

this exchange should be nominated for some kind of award for complicated use of quotation formatting and links

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I don't even:

Romney has a lot of money and it looks like he'll end up with a lot of money left over after November 6th. Why not make a 20 million ad buy in California? If he could win California, that could offset losses in Ohio, Florida and Virginia

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Texans get exactly the kind of government they deserve. They are only Texans, after all. They wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

^^^This. Texans (or at least the conservative mental midget types) don't deserve any government. They can live in the Stone Age and die in poverty for all I care.