This Is The Thread Where MODERATORS SHOUT AT YOU!

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

OK nothing so inflammatory. This thread is for moderators - since there are about 15 of us now - to post whenever they do something, if they have time. The idea is to make us accountable until an automatic public version can appear.

Please don't post to this thread if you're not a moderator. Posts deleted from this thread don't have to be admitted on this thread either :)

― Tom (Groke), Monday, 17 March 2003 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Should we do a moderator roll-call, just so everyone knows who the mods are?

(I am an ILE-only mod.)

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 17 March 2003 19:56 (twenty-two years ago)

i have dominion over all i survey.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 17 March 2003 19:57 (twenty-two years ago)

unbelievably, so does i.

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:02 (twenty-two years ago)

I think you know I'm a moderator anyway.

― Tom (Groke), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Im just waiting for Graham to script the fabled Delete ILX Button. In the meantime I wanna start a compitetion to see if I can out mod mark p and Sean [He says later, testing the admin link].

This thread could probably be automated with a couple of lines.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:02 (twenty-two years ago)

jesus when you take the other newly-inducted moderators into account, it should now take an average of four minutes to respond to any single request

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:04 (twenty-two years ago)

I think it's good un-automated too in case we have to justify things.

― Tom (Groke), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:05 (twenty-two years ago)

i gave the mentalists the key to the jam cupboard!!

however here is who you blame foax: calum robert and the genius posting porn on every thread

― mark s (mark s), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:06 (twenty-two years ago)

I haven't done anything, mainly through fear of fuxoring the entire board, and causing ILXOR to implode. With great power comes great responsibility. I have ILM moderator status too, I shall be cracking down on Avril hate.

― jel -- (jel), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:06 (twenty-two years ago)

ed i don't have the heart

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:07 (twenty-two years ago)

go on, you don't have to admit it if you do

― Ed (dali), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:08 (twenty-two years ago)

(done) [ha ha you stole my idea]

― felicity (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:09 (twenty-two years ago)

also, here's something terrifying that all new mods should know. i found it out the heart-stopping way:

deleting one single message within a thread will yield a result what says

"Thread Deleted
All messages from the thread have been removed."

this is NOT true

the command to delete a single message actually does just what you ask of it

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:10 (twenty-two years ago)

felicity yr name is on my post!

oh god this is already mental

mayhaps we should 'practice' here

itll be like hogwarts

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:11 (twenty-two years ago)

only if i can turn people into toads

― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:13 (twenty-two years ago)

|30\/\/ & p|-|34r, |=3\/\/|_Z, it w0rks!! Now, who's first for kickbanning? ;)

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:14 (twenty-two years ago)

a ha! I changed the spelling of enire in my last post to entire! *ph34r me!*

― Jel Potter (jel), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Now is the time to get working on that code of conduct I think.

― Tombledore (Groke), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:15 (twenty-two years ago)

i think all manner of large issues (ie. b*tty l*cas) should be deferred to mark s and tom unless they're of an urgent nature (ie. porn)

us newbie mod. halfwits should prob. just concentrate on the menial stuff

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:18 (twenty-two years ago)

hello i am ed. i am a puppet in the hands of the mods. [not really what he posted, just testing etc - mark p]

― Ed (dali), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:19 (twenty-two years ago)

There was a guy on ILM who was posting multiple threads asking for the same audio files to be identified on every thread, and then sending emails to anyone who actually responded. I just started deleting his threads when they were exactly the same thing again, after warning him in a previous thread.

You'll probably out-M0d me, Noodles, if you're always keeping track. I'm being very sele(t1ve.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:19 (twenty-two years ago)

what would be cool, would be a banish button. I want people to start saying "moderator banish me please". (I will shut up now)(haha!)

― jel -- (jel), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:19 (twenty-two years ago)

I can be the lightning rod of wrath (as it seems I am already).

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:20 (twenty-two years ago)

every one is dilating my thread.

there's a threesome for you to practice on. I want them all when I get back.

― Ed(ited) (dali), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Im not, just being silly. Im still trying to figure out this admin link.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh fuck, Mark P I kiss you now that Im editted.. (Hm. Missing apostrophe, lousy punctuation and one misspelled word. I'm giving you a D-minus, and hoping you'll improve next semester. You're definitely capable of much better work. - Mr. C) [I didn't know there was a test in this, I knew I should have crammed last night. -Mr. N] (Dang Perry to message! - SC)

― WasCozen (Cozen), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Hey.

I was a moderator before on the old ILM and the main difference now seems to be that people are asking for loads of their own things to be deleted. It's fair enough if they compromise their or someone else's privacy, but I'm not in favour of too many 'ooh that was an embarrassing post' deletions. Err.. shall I take this to email?

― N. (nickdastoor), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:31 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm not in favour of them either which is why I've been quietly ignoring most of them. But we now have so many people that they're much more practical.

― Tom (Groke), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah I had a similar question. What if someone is embarrassed by the outcome of a post THEY STARTED. Do they have ownership of it? Can it be deleted (along w/ everyone else's posts to that thread) if they so desire?

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:33 (twenty-two years ago)

N., I tend to agree -- why don't we discuss on email.

― felicity (felicity), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:36 (twenty-two years ago)

I deleted some posts at a poster's request the other day due to a privacy issue (poster wanted to remove his real name, also some links). I thought that was justified, but what do others think?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:44 (twenty-two years ago)

I should point out that the main way in which I abuse my moderating rights is in correcting spelling mistakes of mine that soil gags. I only do that if no one else has yet added to the thread.

― N. (nickdastoor), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:46 (twenty-two years ago)

That is out of order, ya bastard! Why should you get a second chance to look clever, when the rest of us don't?

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, I know. I try not to.

― N. (nickdastoor), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:51 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm a moderator now too. I plan to do nothing about it, as far as possible. I'm against deleting messages just because someone regrets it, unless there are real issues of confidentiality.

As for email, how about creating an AllModerators email account that forwards to (you can see this coming I expect) all the moderators? Perfect for discussion, plus a quick way to grab a mod's attention, maybe?

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:58 (twenty-two years ago)

I like Martin's idea, only it should forward to The White House instead of us.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 17 March 2003 20:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Martin, an email to you just go bounced. Are we supposed to take the 's' off the first bit of your address?

― N. (nickdastoor), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:02 (twenty-two years ago)

(Let's see if N. edits his "go" typo...)

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:03 (twenty-two years ago)

How about 12 foot lizards does this work?

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:05 (twenty-two years ago)

HEY I KNOW! We can have a special group of the five original moderators - we can call it a 'secure council' or something - and then the other ones can help out when they can and if there's anything controversial we can put it to a big vote except the five original ones can say no to the vote, doesn't that seem fair? And that way there will never be any disputes or problems again yay! I mean how could it possibly go wrong??

― Tom (Groke), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:06 (twenty-two years ago)

wait. did we just become a fellowship?

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:08 (twenty-two years ago)

If we did, do we get rings?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Or at least hobbits?

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:09 (twenty-two years ago)

not a dwarf. called it.

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:11 (twenty-two years ago)

"This Is The Thread Where MODERATORS POST UNADULTERATED SHITE!"

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:12 (twenty-two years ago)

a. i veto everything whatever the conditions
b. jamais trust une elfe

― mark s (mark s), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:12 (twenty-two years ago)

tom, delete this thread

― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Nick, that is my proper email, and I don't know why it would have bounced. I have continued to get email at an apparently normal rate this evening. The excess 's' is there because martin.skidmore had been taken, and we were plural Skidmores in the house at the time :(

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:23 (twenty-two years ago)

if yr using my big send-halloo to the nu-moderator massive i got martin's email wrong in the first one i sent out, so anyone reply-alling to that will get a bouncback

if you look v.closely — as i did not at first — you will see a wee dot between martin and skidmore

― mark s (mark s), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Okay so can I just whine about ILM thread categorization again. I made another pass at the basics today coz there were a few that I rilly wanted to make sure reached posterity (the house thread in particular) and then I got distracted and just kept moving all the taking sides etc.

Anyway it would be grebt if more people would jump in on this.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:49 (twenty-two years ago)

I would be happy to categorize threads (I love to categorize things!) as long as I don't have to moderate.

― Nicole (Nicole), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:57 (twenty-two years ago)

nicole yr wish is granted *ting*

― mark s (mark s), Monday, 17 March 2003 21:59 (twenty-two years ago)

so yeah, a moderators code of conduct would be cool. I'll do some categorisation too.

― jel -- (jel), Monday, 17 March 2003 22:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Is it now possible to to a big overhaul of the categories in a way it wasn't with Greenspun?

― N. (nickdastoor), Monday, 17 March 2003 22:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Moderator log -

Title of "CS Lewis: Rapist?" thread changed to something less inflammatory/actionable.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 11:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Thin or fat she's still a minger...

things are getting a bit heated over here, and as far as i can tell the thread never served much purpose at all

― mark p (Mark P), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 16:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Stop shouting!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 16:46 (twenty-two years ago)

The thread is completely pointless. It's a bit early to lock it though IMO.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 16:48 (twenty-two years ago)

threads like that are easier just to leave alone. locking/deleting on that kind of thread merely spills the posts onto other better threads i think, maybe leave it as a depository for aggression?

― gareth (gareth), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 16:52 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't think there's really any need to delete anything unless Kate specifically asks for it to be deleted...

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 16:56 (twenty-two years ago)

... and she's more than capable of holding her own against a little shitbag like that anyway.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 18 March 2003 16:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Picture posting question in the FAQ updated.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 19 March 2003 10:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Hey! I posted exactly two posts and then left, because I've got better things to do with my time than argue about my armpit shaving habits. (Though it was a nice reminder to shave this morning, it would be very embarrassing for the Bangles to see me with hairy pits! Yeesh!)

― kate, Wednesday, 19 March 2003 12:17 (twenty-two years ago)

The thing irritating me about Calum's thread is that there are a lot of regular posters saying egregiously stupid things and then acting like they've done/said something clever and/or worthy as opposed to being an ass.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 19 March 2003 17:20 (twenty-two years ago)

Felt the need to edit a couple posts from garlicy shrimpy boy tonight.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 20 March 2003 05:05 (twenty-two years ago)

so how bout a complete list of the mods?

― ron (ron), Thursday, 20 March 2003 05:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Just to note that I actually practiced a bit of moderating on myself on Hamish's 'questions for American librarians' thread, in that I felt uncomfortable with my initial answer as possibly going into too much initial detail about an internal discussion at UCI.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 05:17 (twenty-two years ago)

I fixed Nicole's link on same thread.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Thank you.

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 14:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Ron, I'm one, I think there's 15 now

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 15:09 (twenty-two years ago)

so lets see
ned
jess
andrew t
mark s
tom e
felicity
jbr
jel
n.
dan p
martin s
mark p
sean c
mr noodles
pashmina

is that correct?

― ron (ron), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 15:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Ilm:
big chiefs: Tom, mark s, enneff
moderat0rs: nicole, pashmina, Andrew T, Martin s, JBR, jel, mark p, jess, N, felicity, gareth, Mr. Noodles, Sterling, tracer, Ned and myself.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 15:45 (twenty-two years ago)

damn! the trolls ahve had it. a sad day.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 15:46 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm not a moderator, I am just in charge of categorizing threads so that this place is a little more organized and tidy. I don't think it would be wise for me to be a moderator.

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 15:48 (twenty-two years ago)

who/what is 'enneff'

― ron (ron), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 15:49 (twenty-two years ago)

oh is that andrew @wh3rd?

― ron (ron), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 15:50 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah, I'm Moderator Without Portfolio Rogue Agent.

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 17:58 (twenty-two years ago)

this is a dumb thread, fuck you cops

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:09 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm issuing Fritz with a yellow card, 10 minutes in the Sin Bin for you pal.

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:11 (twenty-two years ago)

be careful or I shall rage against you

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:12 (twenty-two years ago)

(note: not an actual thread, just a crap joke)

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:13 (twenty-two years ago)

okay, I'm calling in back up.

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:13 (twenty-two years ago)

is jel dying light?

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:14 (twenty-two years ago)

who that?

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Can a yellow card be called a "Blount"?

― Lynskey (Lynskey), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:16 (twenty-two years ago)

delete this bossy thread you nazis

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:18 (twenty-two years ago)

(only kidding)

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Hahaha the "yellow card" upcoming feature: rich semantic parsing allows ILX to detect posts in which you tell someone to fuck off; you are then rendered unable to post for a full hour, forcing you to step away from the computer and chill out.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:34 (twenty-two years ago)

that would actually be good! I volunteer.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:35 (twenty-two years ago)

That would be a great feature, seriously. But Graham probably has enough to do.

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:41 (twenty-two years ago)

nitsuh can we get "rich semantic parsing" for some of the people on ilm too?

― mark p (Mark P), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Can we create something similar for the posts that DRIVE us to say "fuck off"?

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Hell, why we just put in a mechanism that keeps people from posting altogether? That would solve a whole bunch of problems!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Yay new moderators.

― Mary (Mary), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 18:53 (twenty-two years ago)

dan's onto someth -

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:01 (twenty-two years ago)

yes! we could have a new stats league, who has gotten the most yellow cards, who has said the most crude things (the dang perry very bad mang/womang table), typo league etc. < /gets coat>

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:10 (twenty-two years ago)

Dang Perry is a very
http://www.lucidcafe.com/gallery/artarchive/mang/mang2.gif

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:18 (twenty-two years ago)

stupid fish?

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:43 (twenty-two years ago)

small jpeg?

― oops (Oops), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:49 (twenty-two years ago)

hungry bear?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:52 (twenty-two years ago)

mang2.gif

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

HAHA That's excellent!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:54 (twenty-two years ago)

(that was the result of "bad mang" from the new google image search thread)

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:54 (twenty-two years ago)

something to be tasted, not heard?

― oops (Oops), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:54 (twenty-two years ago)

(Sean, I just realized that after jel posted the "mang2.gif" and I tried googling for that picture.)

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 19:55 (twenty-two years ago)

to be perfectly honest, i don't like it that there are so many moderators. i felt safer when there were only a handful.

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:16 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm with di. I'm scared one of you is gonna get REAL trigger-happy one of these days. Like Tom Cruise in "Taps."

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:18 (twenty-two years ago)

You act like that's a bad thing...

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:20 (twenty-two years ago)

TS: Tom Cruise as the cadet who snaps in Taps vs. Tom Cruise as the tortured Lestat in Interview with the Vampire -- which is least believable?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:23 (twenty-two years ago)

i blame the new world order

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:24 (twenty-two years ago)

as the dude in Magnolia!

I haven't really done any moderating since I got the power.

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:24 (twenty-two years ago)

I haven't seen Interview (I GOTS to) but I totally believed it when Tom Cruise was screaming about how beautiful it was at Timothy Hutton. And one of these days, one of y'all is gonna start deleting threads and screaming JUST LIKE HIM.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Jel got the POWAH!

*ner-ner-ner-nih-nih*

Anyway, SHUT UP ANTHONY YOU BEAUTIFUL MAN AND ENJOY THE CARNAGE!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:25 (twenty-two years ago)

but really. i don't trust some of the moderators. and it bothers me. if i post innocuous questions anonymously, i don't want all and sundry having access to my IP. and those who i don't want to have access to my IP i am afraid would be big blabberheads. its as simple as that. can we PLEASE not get any more moderators? there are ENUFF and TOO MANY.

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:26 (twenty-two years ago)

can I moderate I Love Conkers?

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:26 (twenty-two years ago)

haha now this is the thread where i shout at the moderators, ooops.

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:26 (twenty-two years ago)

If it makes you feel any better, Tom stated specifically in the Draft Moderator Guidelines that IP addresses shouldn't be viewed when people post anonymous advice threads and what have you. I certainly wouldn't check on people's IP addresses. I think there was some talk about only a few moderators being able to view them.

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Tom stated specifically in the Moderator Guidelines that IP addresses shouldn't be viewed when people post anonymous advice threads

shouldn't doesn't mean can't though, does it?

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:35 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah, I guess. I mean I don't mind giving up the ability to view IP addresses.

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:37 (twenty-two years ago)

God damn it, I hate when you have a good joke that only works when it immediately follows the last post. And then you hit "submit" and find that Jel's weaseled into your spot. CURSE YOU JEL I WAS GOING TO BE FUNNY.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:39 (twenty-two years ago)

I could delete the last two posts and this one, if you like?

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:40 (twenty-two years ago)

hahaha

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:42 (twenty-two years ago)

ooops i shouldn't be posting on this thread.

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Clearly the answer is to make Di a moderator. ;-)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:44 (twenty-two years ago)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:46 (twenty-two years ago)

it is the worst punishment ilx has

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm feeling left out. But strangely light-headed by having no responsibilities. Who wants to come to ilx knowing they might have to do something?

― Cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:48 (twenty-two years ago)

i have to get to 10,000 posts. < /semi-kidding>

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 22:51 (twenty-two years ago)

I was going to post about the IP issue. I think at the very least we should make it clear (at the bottom of each page?, well on the FAQs anyway) that 15 people or so can see your IP address and usually work out who anonymous posters are should they wish. I think it's only fair.

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:05 (twenty-two years ago)

i think it's only good form that people do not reveal IP/name connections on anonymous threads. anyone who does so should have their privleges revoked.

trolling threads are another matter entirely, i think

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes but Jess - you kind of did this with Most Obnoxious ILM Poster?

But that's not the point. Even if we don't reveal it to anyone else, WE still know it. I think that's di's point.

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:21 (twenty-two years ago)

haha nick somehow i just can't see "most obnoxious ILM poster?" as an "anonymous help thread"!! we're talking about someone who already posts under an assumed name who was too much of a wimp to stand behind his bit of hateful trolling. (also, much hilarity ensued by seeing him try to wriggle out of it today.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:23 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't think it's up to us whose anonymity we respect and whose we don't.

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:28 (twenty-two years ago)

so you're saying that trolling against regular posters deserves respect?

what i basically see here is people being squeamish. i have only ever posted a handful of anonymous threads on ilx, and even then i knew that the moderators had the ability to see who posted it. if it had bothered me then, i wouldn't have done it, but i trust(ed) them enough to go ahead. and that seems to be the simplest, most effective answer. if you're squeamish about the idea of not retaining total anonymity, then don't post it. one mod or 50, the net effect is basically the same. somehow i think this directly relates back to tom's "ilx has never advertised itself"...it is self-policing to a degree, but since when has it ever been a total democracy, with the ability to vote elected officials in an out of office? i never deputized tom, but here we are. if anything it's anarcho-socialist, with a bunch of headless chickens running around to make sure any tossed pudding bombs don't gum up the works too badly. frankly, i could care less about being a mod. i offered it, and before i knew it there was an email in my inbox from mark s. in my "official capacity" i have deleted a post for nitsuh and some porn posted on ilm. i think a large number of people are taking - shocker! - the ins and outs of an internet forum far too seriously.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:33 (twenty-two years ago)

if 16 or whatever people can see your IP when you post anonymous advice threads, it defeats the purpose of being anonymous. and i am seriously considering never posting another anonymous advice thread because of that, which would impair my experience of ilx somewhat. i didn't mind so much when there were only a few mods.

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Having the ability to see IP addresses != actually seeing IP address. I've got that turned off in my display and never pay attention to it, anyway.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:39 (twenty-two years ago)

sixteen out of how many? mod numbers increases expon. irt to users, no?

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:39 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah, dan raises a good point: they're not screaming the posters real name with you under every post. it's an option like most of graham's wonderful toys.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:40 (twenty-two years ago)

an option which some mods obviously abuse.

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:41 (twenty-two years ago)

if it's an option to see IP addresses, it seems only fair that there should be an option to be notified when someone is checking your IP address.

― oops (Oops), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:43 (twenty-two years ago)

di, it all comes down to squeamishness in the end, namely your own.

oops, i don't think that's really the way it - technically - works but that's a good idea in theory.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:44 (twenty-two years ago)

I know there's no intrinsic difference between there being 3 moderators and there being 15, but you can see how the loss of privacy might be... a continuum.

What if someone on Custos's list had taken it upon themselves to start a flame war with Custos as a result? Hardly helpful. What do others think?

I only think these things should be divulged (if ever) when there's been a series of extreme, abusive threads of personal invective. Otherwise people might be scared off ever trusting the moderators to be able to post anonymously about sensitive matters. No, perhaps they shouldn't be scared, but people don't know all 15 people well enough to be able to make this call if anonymity can't be relied upon.

And yes, I have been curious enough to click and see who anonymous posters are (though I wouldn't divulge it to anyone else). Please take away my privileges if I'm the only one who has done this.

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:45 (twenty-two years ago)

di, it all comes down to squeamishness in the end, namely your own.

Jess I really think this attitude sucks. Do you not think people should ever have anonymity at all?

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Oops's suggestion is a good one, it it's possible (it should say who is looking too).

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:47 (twenty-two years ago)

why do i get the feeling that someone enjoys being a moderator for ALL THE WRONG REASONS?

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:49 (twenty-two years ago)

THE MODERATORS HAVE WON.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:50 (twenty-two years ago)

yes, i agree that it's a continuum. but again, there are more ilx users than ever before, which might be why it doesn't bother me so much.

i can also see your point about custos, but wouldn't that be exactly what he "deserved." i mean, stupidity begets stupidity and all.

i totally think people should have anonymity! but when in life do people every have TOTAL anonymity? it's also a very slippery slope: that sort of escape from responsibility. i also think it might help the argument that people were abusing their mod privs if someone could point out an instance where it actually happened. (i take full responsibility for the custos thing in this case, but i still stand behind it.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:51 (twenty-two years ago)

(it would also be better if di just stopped being a big pussy and came out and said she didn't want me being a moderator. howie did it on another thread and he's certainly a bigger wuss than she is.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:52 (twenty-two years ago)

whoa, where did i say that?

― Cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:56 (twenty-two years ago)

hah the thread where i then replied "fuck you howie"

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Having been a co-conspirator with jess on the thread about ILM obnoxious posters, I'll stand up and say that the only reason I bothered with the whole IP issue there is that the post was obviously a troll, and Custos' subsequent "who me? why I never" posting was just too amusing not to call him on it.

I agree that in general the ability to view IP addresses of posters is a privilege and that we shouldn't use the information we as moderators can obtain from it to post messages that reveal information that has no compelling reason to be revealed.

One way we could get around this uneasiness, if it is something that Graham has the slightest inclination to do, is for a special category of threads which will automatically strip all identifying information, but with the explicit knowledge that posting such a thread in such a category might mean that said thread will be removed altogether by the moderators if the anonymity was abused. As it stands right now I would wager that most of the mods would respect the privacy of those who post non-abusive anonymous threads, but would be willing to go in and bust people's chops if it ever became necessary.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:57 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't care who moderates, and I especially don't care if you moderate specifically.

― Cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:57 (twenty-two years ago)

haha thats funny, one example of jess abusing his moderator privileges seems to HAVE JUST DISAPPEARED.

― di smith (lucylurex), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Well she basically has, Jess. And no offence - I think you're great and all but I'm not sure you have the right temperament for being one either. You've got involved in too many scraps before. And perhaps neither do I. I think I'm fine with conflicts and making judgements about deletions but the curiosity thing mentioned above perhaps rules me out. I think only an implementation of Oops' suggestion would stop this and I don't want to bother Graham with more and more coding projects.

You can, of course, block your IP address with anonymizer.com or whatever (though I think the free version of anonymizer.com stopped working with greenspun.com - not sure what the situation now is).

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 25 March 2003 23:59 (twenty-two years ago)

everyone involved seems v. even-handed and democratic

Isn't that fucker Harvell, y'know, a mod?

- is the quote.

Fuck you harvell, that was a joke, based on your parody.

― Cozen (Cozen), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

somehow if i was stripped of my mod privs when i woke up tomorrow, my heart would go on.

i can understand why people would think that nick, so i don't take offence, but basically what you're asking for then is robots.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:01 (twenty-two years ago)

by which i mean curiosity is a very human response!

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:02 (twenty-two years ago)

test

― testing, Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:02 (twenty-two years ago)

i didn't look!

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:03 (twenty-two years ago)

BRING ON THE ROBOTS

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:03 (twenty-two years ago)

Look if you like - they left no trace

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:03 (twenty-two years ago)

can i just say that, as a moderator, i worry about some of MY anonymous posts being uncovered by other mods? its a complaint i've lodged privately before

frankly it might be better to limit IP viewing to mark s and tom as any situation that should even require IP addresses being viewed would involve them anyway

giving any of us the 'power' to do it is possibly a bit much, especially when there's like a hundred of us

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:04 (twenty-two years ago)

we dinosaurs won't go down easy like the last time with that meteor

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:04 (twenty-two years ago)

(ie. anonymizer.com works)

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:04 (twenty-two years ago)

I agree with mark p.

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:04 (twenty-two years ago)

when there's a hundred of us = i'm outta here

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:05 (twenty-two years ago)

mark p speaks sense.

― di smith (lucylurex), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:05 (twenty-two years ago)

You're so squeamish, Jess.

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:06 (twenty-two years ago)

(i agree with mark too; it seems superfluous to our "stated duties"*.

* deleting cum shot pictures and correcting spelling mistakes.)

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:07 (twenty-two years ago)

i can't imagine the signal to noise ratio that would require us to have 100 mods.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:08 (twenty-two years ago)

signal: http://www.tubgirl.com

noise: [picture not posted cos poster is a wuss - mod.]

― Cozen (Cozen), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Deleting cum shot pictures???? Oh shit...

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:10 (twenty-two years ago)

make them on your own time, perry; you're on the job, here

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:11 (twenty-two years ago)

How about all anonymous posters just email me, and then I'll start threads that go "I have this one friend..?" You can trust me, honest.

― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:11 (twenty-two years ago)

I thought we were meant to be putting more in.

― Dang Perry (Cozen), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:11 (twenty-two years ago)

what so we have to come back and harass custos when he's dicking abt?

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:12 (twenty-two years ago)

sheesh thanks for saving us the good stuff

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:13 (twenty-two years ago)

i mean his internet connection sharing buddy

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:13 (twenty-two years ago)

there is no good stuff btw

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:13 (twenty-two years ago)

i wonder what the moderators of the future will have to worry about...

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:15 (twenty-two years ago)

fossil fuel shortages

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:16 (twenty-two years ago)

moderators of the future = calum AND THAT'S IT!

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:16 (twenty-two years ago)

you heterophobic mingers

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:17 (twenty-two years ago)

also: i was 'made' a moderator in the same way jess was - i very casually volunteered my services in a thread and the next thing i knew i was CCed on that mass baptismal e-mail. now, as far as i can tell, nobody who volunteered was intentionally left off the list, so this basically means that anyone who volunteered and was a regular got modded.

given that the selection process was seemingly kinda slack (which is no slant on mark s or tom - i mean, they added mods because they're k-busy as it is), i've been a little uncomfortable with the level of power alloted to me or some other people on the list.

i think, all things being equal, it'd probably make sense to shift that back a bit, so that we have powers to delete/alter posts and do administrative things but not much beyond that

if that happens i promise i'll start posting dirty, seamy anonymous threads again

thank you and goodnight

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:17 (twenty-two years ago)

the terminator II scenarios are endless

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:18 (twenty-two years ago)

How about all anonymous posters just email me, and then I'll start threads that go "I have this one friend..?" You can trust me, honest.

Everyone would assume they were really about you and conclude that you led the hottest life ever.

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Just for the record: I had the ability to view IP addresses in my capacity as an ILM moderator back in the Greenspun days, so I've been aware of the responsibilities involved in having that power for quite some time now. That said, I do understand other posters' objections in this regard; if access to this feature was scaled back to a select few and I wasn't on that list, so be it.

In the meantime, maybe it would be helpful for someone with the knowledge of how to do it to post a "how to be truly anonymous" bit in the FAQ. N?

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:21 (twenty-two years ago)

tip one: don't leave your monogrammed hanky at the scene of the crime

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:23 (twenty-two years ago)

(ie. LOG OUT)

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:24 (twenty-two years ago)

moderators of the future = calum AND THAT'S IT!

That would be kind of like the ending of the original Planet of the Apes.

― Nicole (Nicole), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:24 (twenty-two years ago)

"i fuck slugs"

― anony mous (Mark P), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:25 (twenty-two years ago)

THAT WAS MARK P AND HE IS FILTHY.

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:28 (twenty-two years ago)

unfortunately there isn't currently a power-distinction between "can delete posts" and "can see IPs" (graham or whoever wd have to add features to achieve that)

i think the key thing here is EXERCISE RESTRAINT and BE RESPONSIBLE! As it happens I totally support jess and sean teasing custos, I think regulars shd know that anonymous trolling cd come back and bite them — and I don't believe any of the mods we chose wd act on info they came on inadvertently (or even "inadvertently"). I'm sorry Di feels compromised by the current situation, but it was the overburden of responsibility that was getting to be the problem, at least for me, not the overburden of power. Obviously it's nice to be trusted, but it gets a bit backhanded after a while being the ONLY ppl trusted.

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:31 (twenty-two years ago)

If it makes you feel any better mark, I don't trust you.*

*this is not really true

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Trust no one! Carry a bayonet at all times.

― Nicole (Nicole), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Mark, but you'd be OK with it if it was just you and Tom that could see IP addressses? That wouldn't be too much responsibility again would it?

[From what I know of the two, I would guess that Mark is actually much less likely to frivolously nose anonymous posters IP addresses than Tom - sorry Tom!]

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:37 (twenty-two years ago)

It's the beard, it makes people evil.

― Nicole (Nicole), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:39 (twenty-two years ago)

N., I don't want a situation to arise where some idiot is going postal on the boards and you guys can't find out who it is except by tracking down Tom or me — I think all moderators shd all be able to see IP addresses, bcz sometimes it's necessary to know. you can turn them off and never look, 99.9% of the time.

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 00:55 (twenty-two years ago)

mark were mods decided on more strenuously i might be inclined to agree

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:01 (twenty-two years ago)

"more strenuously" = "more work for me and tom"

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:04 (twenty-two years ago)

>>>>>>P45HM!N4-M0D3R4T0R AKT!()N L0G FuX0RZ!!!!!!<<<<<<

To-day I posted the real name ov iLM poster "Samson". s/he sent me a very nice email asking me to remove it, so I did. Most of you probably figured who it was anyway.

I put some ILE threads in neat little category pholders yesterday

Thee other day, at c4lum's request i did an ip search to verify somebody else wasn't actually him, er pretending to be someone else. It wasn't.

er.

that's it, really. If anyone posts an anonymous serious help thread, I won't look at yer ip addy to see who you are (really!!) I agree w/mark s about this whole issue.

Bah, time for bed.

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:14 (twenty-two years ago)

According to Jess, you are a robot.

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:19 (twenty-two years ago)

i thought that was assumed

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:24 (twenty-two years ago)

very sexy robot, of course

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes well I'd hold thee whole world in my metal claws/if it wasn't for the three laws/....of robotics

(BTW I am really dumb, and would probably have taked custos' anon troll at face value)

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Notice that i have not gone to bed yet. Mrs k-rad and me have had a row, and i think i might sleep on the sofa tonight :(

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:28 (twenty-two years ago)

"taked" = "taken" god i wish i didn't have such clunky phingers, and could type w/o typos

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:30 (twenty-two years ago)

If I could moderate your row, and make things better, I would you know.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 01:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Obviously it's nice to be trusted, but it gets a bit backhanded after a while being the ONLY ppl trusted.

well to be honest, i don't trust any of you as mods, except maybe andrew t, but i know him so thats natchural. but i think if there are guidelines people should at least try to stick to them. and YES this is getting personal now, i DON'T trust jess to stick to these guidelines, not only cos he admits he doesn't, but also cos he's nasty and disrespectful. not just to me but to people i know and like. and there is no excuse for that, especially not in a mod. jess: hating yourself as much as you hate everyone else DOES NOT excuse it.

― di smith (lucylurex), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 04:02 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't wanna be a moderator anymore, I'm too sensitive. I'd like to be able to categorise threads though, it's kinda therapeutic.

― jel -- (jel), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 08:56 (twenty-two years ago)

What's the worst that can happen?

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 10:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Mea Culpa for the all-must-have-prizes approach to mod privs. Mark kept emailing me saying which of these people do you think should have them, I was busy and just said all of them - people who don't want to do it can back down from it.

Re. IP addresses - yes maybe it should be a privilege thing for 'upper-level' mods. The thing is that sometimes it IS useful to know who is saying stuff and Mark is right in that it shouldnt be a case where he or I have to be hunted out to check, particularly as (not wanting to speak for Mark but this is the impression I've got) both of us are pretty burned-out and want a break.

I've never posted an anonymous advice thread. I think what I would do if I wanted to was pop into an easy everything and spend a quid for the privilege, but this is not really an acceptable solution I admit.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 10:41 (twenty-two years ago)

An idea - we could have a specific login account open to everyone called 'anonymous' or whatever to specifically ask advice questions, and the code is tweaked (dependent on availability of coder) so that IP addresses for that login only can't be checked. The only restriction on its use would be that posts from it which weren't advice questions or anonymously given advice would be deleted with no discussion, as would any 'advice' which was abusive.

I know this sounds complicated but all the other ways I've thought of would be even more so.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 10:51 (twenty-two years ago)

No, that would be terrible. I would abuse it so much.

― kate, Wednesday, 26 March 2003 10:58 (twenty-two years ago)

thanks for addressing the problem, tom. i'm really sorry for being a pain in the ass.

― di smith (lucylurex), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 11:00 (twenty-two years ago)

i really am.

― di smith (lucylurex), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 11:01 (twenty-two years ago)

btw saying i don't trust any of the mods is something of an exxaggeration.

― di smith (lucylurex), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 11:18 (twenty-two years ago)

I would remind people again of the existence of anonymizer.com. Just paste the ILE address into the box there and ta-da!

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 13:15 (twenty-two years ago)

That anonymous account is a good idea, Tom.

I should add that I have not been remotely tempted to abuse my ability to see IP addresses. I have looked at none so far, and won't until there is something more seriously abusive than that Custos silliness. Di might trust me, because I have seen T. Rex live!

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 14:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Me neither re; IP addresses. Just by the way.

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 14:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Also I just did my first bit of moderation, fixing up a Di S. post and deleting her correcting followup posts. Hope that's ok.

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 15:40 (twenty-two years ago)

whilst the anonymous login is a good idea in theory, where other internet sites i've been involved with have utilised a similar idea, it was being chronically abused within hours of being created. beware.

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 22:22 (twenty-two years ago)

hey mark s, btw, i think its pretty disingenuous for you to say that people trusting you is backhanded, you DID afterall e-mail ME and ask me to confide in you.

― di smith (lucylurex), Wednesday, 26 March 2003 23:44 (twenty-two years ago)

To fill the vacant, Testament originally intented to auditionate ex-Ozzy axe-man Jake E. Lee, but when they heard James Murphy (Death, Obituary, Cancer, Disincarnate, Agent Steel and Konkra), they were so impresionated with him that they chosen him.

― unknown or illegal user (doorag), Thursday, 27 March 2003 01:22 (twenty-two years ago)

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Thursday, 27 March 2003 01:22 (twenty-two years ago)

oh nuthin, just thinking out loud

― unknown or illegal user (doorag), Thursday, 27 March 2003 02:01 (twenty-two years ago)

i wasn't getting at you di: by backhanded all i meant "yes it's nice to be trusted and i appreciate it BUT CAN I PLEASE STOP DOING THIS FUCKING JOB NOW AT LEAST FOR A WHILE AND PASS IT ON?"

yes i agree i could just have ignored the issue you raised, and walked away like i want to, so that i am certainly contributing to the co-dependency and this may seem disingenuous

the reason i want to stop is i am fed up and can no longer rely on my judgment

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 27 March 2003 11:18 (twenty-two years ago)

i think i'm saying "I DEMAND THE RIGHT TO UNREASONABLE TANTRUMS SOMETIMES"

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 27 March 2003 11:23 (twenty-two years ago)

Well I for one wouldn't want a moderator who wasn't humang, so consider the right granted.

― Pete (Pete), Thursday, 27 March 2003 11:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Delegate it all to OMNIPOTENT BABY.

― Archel (Archel), Thursday, 27 March 2003 12:24 (twenty-two years ago)

i just used my sparkly new powers today! nordicskillz, i removed your post on the "long distance relationship thread" but i probably wouldn't have if i hadn't wanted to "test out" my abilities. nothing you wrote really crossed the threshold of moderation-worthiness.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 31 March 2003 15:40 (twenty-two years ago)

Whoever locked the Mick Hucknall thread on ILM: good work.

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 31 March 2003 16:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, who did that and why? I'm not saying it's a bad idea necessarily, but it just seemed like more Calum provocation.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 00:44 (twenty-two years ago)

I think it worked because it was locked before anyone answered -- the ILX equivalent of the icy stare that shuts someone up before they even get started. He didn't immediately go start another thread whining about the last one being locked, so it seems to have worked. Which is funny, because it creates this parent-child thing: Calum asks question, ILM goes "alright now, Calum," and he keeps his more ridiculous stuff to himself for a day or two.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 01:09 (twenty-two years ago)

He did go whining about it on the White Stripes thread, but he was ignored.

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 01:12 (twenty-two years ago)

He also started another thread. This type of thing doesn't work unless you can block the person from starting new threads.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 12:19 (twenty-two years ago)

well, whatever you're all doing, its certainly enticing him to stay!

― gareth (gareth), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 12:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah that was me. It seemed to have worked for a while, but then meh. I'm hoping it peters out now. I usually wouldn't do that to him, but this one went beyond "let's make fun of women's appearances" straight into "i think all women are slags, what do you say about that" territory. He needs to learn one way or another.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 12:29 (twenty-two years ago)

im just not sure that you can make people learn. and thats before you even get into what 'learn' means.

there comes a point where it re-inforces what is happening. what does he want from ilx? i think c is getting exactly what he wants from ilx at the moment. i am unsure why anyone is helping that along

― gareth (gareth), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 12:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Furthermore, that's a desperately odd reading of that particular thread. Had anyone else started it and used the exact same reading, I doubt it would have been interpreted that way.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 12:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh c'mon Dan for cryin' out loud:

do chicks have a 'superficial' gene that has yet to be discovered but which make them shag ugly rich man (c.f. Hugh Hefner, Rod Stewart, Gene Simmons) or rich arrogant fuckheads (the cast of Poison, Guns n Roses, Def Leopard etc etc). I mean, it's not like you see guys at S Club 7 concerts hanging around back stage gagging for it.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 12:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Hmm. When I read that, I thought there was a "some chicks" in there. That's how I interpreted it, anyway.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 13:07 (twenty-two years ago)

If this guy is so boring why do you all spend so much time talking about him?

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 13:08 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't know. I think it's a nasty side-effect of the hyper-compulsive core of most ILXers personalities. (Having said that, I don't talk about him that much at all, I'd much rather make sad double entendres.)

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 13:10 (twenty-two years ago)

If one rogue moderator (and in the wake of Graham's recent spazz attack, it's clear it's a real possibility) can start deleting stuff, then we're screwed. The odds of having a rogue moderator are now 3 times as great as when there were just three. There are people in the moderator list I don't want to have *any* powers over me and what I post, and I can't imagine I'm the only one who feels this way.

On the plus side, if they all behave responsibly, then we can only benefit. So it's up to them. Oh, and up to us to keep ILX somewhere we want to be in the first place.

― Mark C (Mark C), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 14:22 (twenty-two years ago)

'Rogue Moderator' - surely even Channel 5 would pass on that one?

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Now, "Rouge Moderator" would have a fighting chance...

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

"clinique gladiators"

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 14:29 (twenty-two years ago)

"When mother of three Linda Dubrovnik (Victoria Principal) accepts a job as an in-store beautician, she uncovers a seedy world of vice and inappropriately applied face powder"

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

I found my bon jovi CD! yay!

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 14:34 (twenty-two years ago)

''The odds of having a rogue moderator are now 3 times as great as when there were just three''

proven by science or something.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 14:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Sorry, I meant as when there were 5. 15 divided by 5, you see.

― Mark C (Mark C), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 15:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Ha ha Mark when you weren't looking I deleted your math skillz.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 15:48 (twenty-two years ago)

I think some people over estimate our powers. Or the speed of our connections. Believe it or not but there is no delete IL* button.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Tuesday, 1 April 2003 16:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Can a moderator please change my last post on the techno thread as I fucked up the HTML and I think I may have thrown the whole thread off.

It's supposed to read:

"That < /facetious>..."

― Cozen (Cozen), Saturday, 5 April 2003 12:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Give us a link and we will.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Sunday, 6 April 2003 04:42 (twenty-two years ago)

(Someone's already done it, Mr Noodles, but I agree that links are highly desirable with these requests.)

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Sunday, 6 April 2003 09:19 (twenty-two years ago)

I locked this:

This is the thread where ILM makes an arguement for why popular music should never, ever be linked to selling sex or any form of sexual fantasy...

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 17 April 2003 00:36 (twenty-two years ago)

thank god. am sorry if (ha - if!) I made an ass of myself. kamikaze mission etc.

― James Blount (James Blount), Thursday, 17 April 2003 00:38 (twenty-two years ago)

if you wnat to delete my last whatever posts feel free

― James Blount (James Blount), Thursday, 17 April 2003 00:39 (twenty-two years ago)

ok james, i think i'd better. thanx.

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 17 April 2003 00:39 (twenty-two years ago)

god i can't believe i got sucked into that one.

pashmina up til the very wee hours dealing with this = beyond the call

― jones (actual), Thursday, 17 April 2003 01:00 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah, that was a garbage thread....i don't care if that was locked. that was designed to piss c@lum robert w@ddell (hahhah) off!

― Sonny Tremaine (Sonny), Thursday, 17 April 2003 05:28 (twenty-two years ago)

we have found his achille's heel I think

― James Blount (James Blount), Thursday, 17 April 2003 05:31 (twenty-two years ago)

that we have ...

― Sonny Tremaine (Sonny), Thursday, 17 April 2003 05:38 (twenty-two years ago)

See, now, this is the perfect thread for someone to say "I deleted the Nicky Taylor Girl thread" and talk about why.

And this is the thread for someone to say that they were considering it, and talk about why.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 24 April 2003 15:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Im guessing it was because someone though it was the duplicate mentioned above. I almost deleted it for that reason earlier.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:36 (twenty-two years ago)

I deleted it in an exercise of discretion.

Before doing so, I re-read the FAQ, did a search of the poster's username and email address, saw that the person had never posted to IL* before under that alias or email, wrote down the poster's IP address, considered the comments of the people who mentioned the thread on the Shouting for the Moderator thread, took into consideration recent stalkiness on ILM, re-read the thread, and exercised my discretion (taking into account my own personal feelings as a female moderator), and came to the conclusion that ILE would survive the deltion of the thread, "banal intercourse" joke notwithstanding.

I felt bad about deleting it, so I actually responded to a more normal thread susbsequently started by that poster when I ordinarily wouldn't have. I think my attitude was, well, I'm a woman and I'm probably one of the only mods who could jsutifiably delete it on behalf of women who were offended, but I really don't feel that strongly about it as long as you please do not also ask me to start deleting or editing your posts when the creepyness starts to alienate the women around here.

― felicity (felicity), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:50 (twenty-two years ago)

I think it was, in this case, a good call, and I'm one of the most pro-restraint people here.

― Ed (dali), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:54 (twenty-two years ago)

But you have no integrity!

― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:56 (twenty-two years ago)

What I wanna know is who fixed the typo!

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, that was a travesty!

― felicity (felicity), Thursday, 24 April 2003 17:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Hey lets share the shit taking, I got it earlier for a 'Mister Bond'. :(

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, horrors. There's a rouge monitor fuckin' shit up yo.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:04 (twenty-two years ago)

just as long as ther's not a rogue cateorgizer! My nightmare. :)

― felicity (felicity), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:05 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm horribly ashamed of myself for even making the request

― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:06 (twenty-two years ago)

I am tempted to create a Red category and throw four or five Treble Charger threads into there.

I'm horribly ashamed of myself for even making the request
AS YOU SHOULD!!!
No one here ever makes a speling mistake!

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:07 (twenty-two years ago)

I never spell making mistakes either

― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:08 (twenty-two years ago)

well you should strive for gooder grammer then

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:10 (twenty-two years ago)

felicity, thank you for deleting that thread, my joke only was there because I made the mistake of reading the post, getting really ill, and then writing "banal intercourse" to cheer myself back up.

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:11 (twenty-two years ago)

We can still make all the "banal intercourse" jokes you want. Countdown to soccer! whee!

― felicity (felicity), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:16 (twenty-two years ago)

I demand you to take pictures

― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Pervert.

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Captain Obvious

― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Pictures are so three days ago, anyway.

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:34 (twenty-two years ago)

B-b-but 70s soccer shorts and kneesocks are timeless

― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:35 (twenty-two years ago)

You didn't take into account my German t-shirt.

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:37 (twenty-two years ago)

It doesn't exist in my imagination of the situation

― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:38 (twenty-two years ago)

No one plays soccer topless!

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:57 (twenty-two years ago)

You're clearly not familiar with the playground tradition of one team being "skins"

― Matt (Matt), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:59 (twenty-two years ago)

You haven't been to Brazil, have you?

― buttch (Oops), Thursday, 24 April 2003 18:59 (twenty-two years ago)

two weeks pass...

Deleted a thread that should have been on ILM. I figure if someone random is going to spam the board then they could at least hit the right one.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Wednesday, 14 May 2003 20:20 (twenty-two years ago)

We got a bunch on ILM .

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Wednesday, 14 May 2003 20:29 (twenty-two years ago)

two weeks pass...

Sorry folks I broke down and lock and linked his thread back to another one of his old ones as per a previous suggestion on how to deal with the fixation. I meant to get the Brittney one but oh well, the only person whose going to throw a fit will probably be our sorry little goof himself.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Friday, 30 May 2003 16:51 (twenty-two years ago)

i recall at least as many people saying locking threads like this just FEED THE TROLL and cause his crap to spill onto other more worthy threads

don't give him the time of day, or blast him comatose if you want, but this kind of penny-ante tit-for-tat makes calzone appear much more of a contendah than he actually is

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 30 May 2003 17:21 (twenty-two years ago)

it would help if people didn't fall all over themselves to post on his threads (even if their intentions are good--posting nonsense & such)--it's too easy to get sucked into arguments with the dude. just let his threads make their way down the page & into oblivion, & he'll probably get bored of it.

― slutsky (slutsky), Friday, 30 May 2003 18:05 (twenty-two years ago)

two months pass...

I deleted a threat and locked the pillars of society thread. I left the vivisection thing because it's more a hysterical wish than a threat and I thought Ally would probably find it amusing anyway.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 31 July 2003 16:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Sorry - 'pillars of capitalism' thread. I forgot what it was supposed to be about, strangely enough.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 31 July 2003 16:42 (twenty-two years ago)

That thread turned out more entertaining then I could ever have hoped for.

― Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Thursday, 31 July 2003 16:43 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't find it funny at this point and really didn't need to read more of his bullshit but wtfe.

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 31 July 2003 16:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Sorry - I seem to have managed to avoid the history of his attacks on you before so perhaps didn't take it very seriously.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 31 July 2003 16:55 (twenty-two years ago)

It's hardly yr fault--there is no "history" besides about two weeks' of bizarro insults on every thread, which is kind of funny but not when it starts upsetting other people, and quite honestly I'm not in the mood to deal with it anyway.

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:04 (twenty-two years ago)

Everyone: be excellent to each other.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:06 (twenty-two years ago)

It's too late for me to try and start now.

― Larcole (Nicole), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:07 (twenty-two years ago)

"Bullshit"... again, for a forum that pretends to be so leftist with its politics the fact that Ally could not respond with reasoned, intelligent answers to my own, and Matt's own, factual reponses beggars belief. I had a close friend of mine, who is doing her masters in animal welfare, check out that thread and she echoed my comments. Ally's reponses were not informed, and pretty childish - I simply brought out some facts. BUT, the fact that the "lefty" ILM defends someone who is pro-fur and pro-vivisection but lets its attack down on myself and Matt beggars belief.

My "Bullshit" was informed Ally, and based on hours of reading and viewing footage on the subject. I wonder how much of that you did before assuming that animals are "bred for science labs".

― Calz (Calz), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:08 (twenty-two years ago)

Calz, you are a stalker.

You start insulting people and try to stir up arguments on threads that have nothing to do with the subject of animal rights.

― Larcole (Nicole), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:10 (twenty-two years ago)

CALUM DID YOU NOT SPEAK ENGLISH WHEN I SAID 47 TIMES ON THE THREAD THAT I WAS PURPOSELY WINDING YOU UP BECAUSE YOUR FUCKING VIVISECTION "ARGUMENT" HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND, IE THE MANIC STREET PREACHERS? GO MASTURBATE TO SOME PICTURES OF EMMA BUNTON AND STOP BOTHERING THE REST OF US, PS SHE'S KIND OF A PORKY BIRD BY YR STANDARDS, I'M GLAD YOU'RE DEALING WITH THAT.

Why do you think that everyone and their brother is telling you that you are a first class fuckwad? Or are we ALL insane?

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Calum, you seem oppressed by your own lumpishness.

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:13 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.stickerguy.com/stikweek/everytimeyoumasturbate-big.gif

― Ally (mlescaut), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:13 (twenty-two years ago)

Ally, if you're against vivisection and don't wear fur then I have nothing against you and will accept your comments about me being a "whatever". I could care less. I'm just passionate about this topic okay?

P.S. It colours my opinion of the Manics. I was fan once too you know.

― Calz (Calz), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Ally, if you're against vivisection and don't wear fur then I have nothing against you

! After HOW many hundreds of posts/insults on various subjects, this is what it is all about? My credulity is stretched.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:16 (twenty-two years ago)

Don't worry, he will find someone else to stalk and fixate on in no time I am sure.

― Larcole (Nicole), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Ally, enough.
Calum, stop harrassing Ally and anyone else for that matter.
Everyone else, let's fuck.

This thread is for moderators to explain things they have done and posts from anyone else from now on may well be deleted.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 31 July 2003 17:18 (twenty-two years ago)

This thread has been locked by an administrator

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.