[ADMIN] Meta bitching - enough.

I approve - most posters (including myself) have been guilty of doing at least one of these on occasions in the past but it's got to a state where it's all over the place and pretty offputting now.

A 'look, enough is enough' post could help people to think twice about what they post and at least try and rein this stuff in. It's the behind-the-back snideness and the researching ur life stuff I object to, I'm not so bothered about what happens about when posters are in already in an exchange with one another. The 'is Alex in NYC fit to be a father?' thread just seemed totally OTT and unnecessary, this shouldn't be a forum where everything is fair game.

I'm also worried we're getting to a stage where there are several otherwise good posters who get involved in this as a matter of course, like the constant gossiping has got to the point where people maybe don't realise quite how creepy it can be, especially to someone who goes in cold and then looks at a long thread of bitching and mud-raking.

(Actually that's unfair, most posters probably don't move beyond occasional rote flippant zings, I include myself in that)

pash, where does a thread like staring into the mysteries of tuomas fit into this?

Tuomas and Mr. Snrub and Suzy are all apparently either thick-skinned or oblivious enough that they still post here and don't give a fuck. Unfortunately that's not a very good representative sample of all posters and "but that guy didn't seem to mind" is a very poor rule of thumb for deciding what is and isn't bullying or worthless ad hominem boorishness.

When I click through Site New Answers and see that probably about 50% of threads are either devoted to or infested with schoolyard c+p knee slappers and ad hominem trash as opposed to any sort of actual discussion then I have to admit to myself I'd rather just see it all go up in smoke. That's not even taking into account the fact that one type of activity negatively affects the other in a vicious cycle.

The way I see it, ILX is either going to stop being so meta and possibly die a slow death or continue becoming more meta and certainly die a slow death.

Various other communities that have lasted longer than ours have done so by harsh moderation of their open areas while maintaining a restricted repository for crapflooders and douchebags to have their fun in. I'm not against this route, but we've failed so far because 77 and Ask Chaki keep cross-pollinating and us mods haven't laid down the law consistently.

I hope we can repair that situation.

Tom is spot on and I fully support this.

I have little to immediately add at this point, beyond noticing that I too have heard from a variety of folks feeling that something has gone wrong with ILX in the same way that Pash has, for the reasons he's noted. This is strictly anecdotal on my part but I think it is not without reason, and many of the examples that have recently come up have been troubling.

I have constantly cautioned against complaints that 'it's all gone downhill' over the years -- I think that does a disservice to a lot of what has happened over all this time, and the frustrations of the present color our perceptions of the better state of the past. I think it's important to keep this in mind -- and yet it does seem that a newer clarity for ILX as a community would be of great assistance right now.

I will conclude on this note: based on his work since taking over from Andrew, Pash has shown in his time as moderator of the whole site that he has kept its best interests in mind as a whole -- not an easy thing to do for someone who has his own commitments elsewhere, something which should never be ignored. He could easily make any decision he pleases by fiat, but he has not done so. His proposal has been discussed in concert with a number of people and as this thread has already shown, there can and will be further discussions on it, as is appropriate. It may sound a bit restrained to simply say that he and the mods as a whole should be given the benefit of the doubt as a result, but I cannot put it more simply than that.

(I should clarify slightly that I meant to put 'better' in quotes in the second paragraph. The point can be argued, of course, but there have been plenty of moments of angst and anger in the past about the course of ILX -- this context should not be lost, but neither should it be used to simply explain away things as being 'like they've always been' or something similar.)

The way I see it, ILX is either going to stop being so meta and possibly die a slow death or continue becoming more meta and certainly die a slow death.
That's probably right, and I don't think it's much use to have this place just so it can stare into its navel -- there are too many other things it is good at.

and "but that guy didn't seem to mind" is a very poor rule of thumb
Yeh, and even if a particular poster doesn't mind something, I've had others tell me it makes them uncomfortable that we have areas where it's OK to just sit and scrutinise other posters. We might have to be all zero-tolerance for a while if cold turkey's gonna work.

there are too many other things it is good at.

And too many other things that our latter-day meta trolls are also good at, if they would stop obsessing over every other poster that annoys them.

I want to take a moment to mention that I personally am well aware that I'm not innocent in this respect, but at this point I don't know if anybody is; suffice to say we've all wasted some time "being all meta" and realizing when we ourselves have gotten swept up in the tide is part of the reason for this policy coming up.

pash, where does a thread like staring into the mysteries of tuomas fit into this?

-- stet, Thursday, 15 May 2008 17:00 (4 days ago) Bookmark Link

Tom has answered this better than I can, really.

To recap, all of this shit:

An obsessive interest in researching scandal/gossip that's happened on the boards in the past, manifesting itself as revivals of old threads to highlight some post or statement that's supposedly funny or o_0 or whatever.

Ad hominem snide at any other poster about IRL things that are not under discussion on that thread

Meta snidiness behind people's backs on one of the smaller boards or on board 77

Researching-ur-life shit about people who don't even post here anymore.

Using smaller boards or board 77 to plan pranks/raids on the main boards, as in here or here

Sharing logins to run multi-user sockpuppets for baiting people

Helping people who've been banned from the board to register new accounts

Tedious rote responses to certain posters, especially the use of repeated image "zings".

..is likely to get deleted from here on, and this is going to be a permanent change in the moderation style of the site.

perhaps the 'secret' boards should be visible eh?

Applaud all this. Snark levels hereabouts is CRAZY high. Schoolyard BS effectively renders a lot of topic off-limits, which is a shame.

This is the first time I have seen the thread; has it previously been transparent to non-mods on the site? I appreciate Pashmina's acknowledging that he is enforcing (or has begun to enforce) a change in community standards that are not (or not explicitly) set forth in the FAQ, or a change in the extent to which mods are willing to be proactive. Will the FAQ be rewritten to reflect the new standards? Are any of these standards to be presented for community review/discussion before they are enforced?

lol at 77 links that go nowhere for those of us not on 77

uh good luck with this

Have you considered locking the threads rather than deleting them?

Pash, is there going to be some general record of what's deleted that's viewable by non-mods?
This seems reasonable in principle, but it's necessarily arbitrary and something that I (and I imagine the average poster) would want to track to get a sense of http://image.listen.com/img/170x170/5/2/3/9/739325_170x170.jpg.

lol at 77 links that go nowhere for those of us not on 77

Yeah, that was funny.

what is board 77? that sounds kinda cool like area 51 or something.

The truth is out there...

This is the first time I have seen the thread; has it previously been transparent to non-mods on the site?

no. it's been on the moderator discussion forum for the past week and just got moved.

If these standards are going to be implemented across the site equally for everyone, I doubt anyone will have a problem with this. But the acid test will come when we get a new punchbag figure on site who isn't friends with/known to the mods, I mean will Pash treat them threads about the same as, say, Suzy, or will be return to his "lol look at the post this guy mad"/"lol look what i found out about this guy from googling" posts to a minor, not seen to the poster himself, board he adopted when it came to Tynan Delong on this thread: submitted for your consideration (TYNAN APPRECIATION THREAD)

I wish people would stop badmouthing 77 and making it seem like Ask Chaki?

Haha people are bound to think the worst if they can't see the board, Curtis.

FWIW, I'm glad for the change in policy.

anybody who has time to be up on who's talking shit about them and all this secret 77 guff needs to bounce for awhile anyway for their own good. like wtf i come here for the gallup polls.

The intention is to implement these standards across the board for everyone, Dom. Like Tom, I've been guilty of this to some extent in the past. In the case of Tynan, we actually managed to drive the guy away, which I regret. He was actually a pretty funny and cool guy, which I think a bunch of people realised after he'd blown. The hazing that Louis J got when he showed up comes to mind too. That was, and is an embarrasment.

I moved the 2 77 board threads linked to to the HTML playground.

I have said time and time again that anyone can post to 77 and I have offered to invite anyone who wants to and I think I have even tried to add 99% of the people who complain about not being invited

I should also point out, Dom, that I don't "know" suzy any better than you do. I've never met her, and I've probably exchanged more emails with you over the last few years than I have with her.

I'd make the meta laws a lot simpler. If the person it's directed towards objects then it gets deleted. Whether or not the offense warrants a ban is up to the mods discretion.

What about if some new jack starts an ILM thread with a title to the extent of, I dunno, "Why can't rappers stop talking about guns and bitches and be as socially concious as Bono?"? In that situation, what'd be allowed? Flaming him? Image posts? Zings? Or do we have to sit back and discuss his point?

Also this better not lead to the end of Luriqua's spazzouts.

I have said time and time again that anyone can post to 77 and I have offered to invite anyone who wants to and I think I have even tried to add 99% of the people who complain about not being invited

then maybe it should just be open like the rest of the boards

If the person it's directed towards objects then it gets deleted. Whether or not the offense warrants a ban is up to the mods discretion.

^^^ this

I'd make the meta laws a lot simpler. If the person it's directed towards objects then it gets deleted. Whether or not the offense warrants a ban is up to the mods discretion.

-- bnw, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 22:42 (6 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

To me, this is a fairer rule, but is the mod objection "Not everyone on ILx reads every board"?

Unless we make site new answers the default.

dom raises a good point

then maybe it should just be open like the rest of the boards

-- mookieproof, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:43 PM (49 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

no. i like the idea of an ungoogleable board

real talk: there should be an Ask Luriqua board.

about luriqua xp

Curt1s, I don't care about not being on 77! I just thought it was funny.

i dont really get whats so offensive about the meta 77 threads. they werent really meanspirited in any way

im talking specifically about the ones linked, altho in gen. 77 has been pretty good about keepin it positive

What about if some new jack starts an ILM thread with a title to the extent of, I dunno, "Why can't rappers stop talking about guns and bitches and be as socially concious as Bono?"? In that situation, what'd be allowed? Flaming him? Image posts? Zings? Or do we have to sit back and discuss his point?

(Sooooo hard to reply to this without zinging...)

I would suggest not posting on that thread you deem unworthy of discussion.

Meta posts: Dahmeresque when they mix onions and man

I think the mod objection is people should be civil and try to not post anything that would MAKE somebody object to it and ask it to be deleted

BNW that's been the rule for years and it hasn't really stopped the escalation of meta nastiness at any point in ILX's history.

Dom I think the last thing people want is to lose the everyday cut and thrust of ILX exchanges, even heated ones. It's when the 'exchange' element gets removed and it just becomes bitching or mocking off to the side that the problems emerge.

Many people now use site new answers, Dom.

What about if some new jack starts an ILM thread with a title to the extent of, I dunno, "Why can't rappers stop talking about guns and bitches and be as socially concious as Bono?"? In that situation, what'd be allowed? Flaming him? Image posts? Zings? Or do we have to sit back and discuss his point?

Say what the fuck you want to this hypothetical person. Just don't start researching his life, C&Ping stuff he's posted on other fora, that kind of shit.

In an ideal world, such a thread would sink off the new answers board with 0 replies, but when is that ever going to happen, I know. It would be great if it did happen once though.

Just don't start researching his life

My life's work is over.

guys pashmina's statements were pretty clear, i thought that would be the end of it.

loool xp

posting "u mad" after a long rant isn't always funny to everyone, tragic as that may be

LOL

xxpost

hey we could just delete everything that isn't ILE, ILM and some moderator discussion/scrutiny board

To be honest I think Pash has been as clear as he can be about what will be deleted and I'm going to avoid stepping outside those boundaries if at all possible.

poor jaymc

Off topic only somewhat: I still miss aja/dante.

I sure do hate those frat boys

^^^what about a thread like this? Acceptable/not acceptable? It's not targetting a specific poster, it's just "Hey, lots of ILM people use frat boys as strawmen when they can't come up with anything to say about music"

I think it's funny 77 is being called out even though it's generally a pretty nice/non threatening sub board.

the thread about Alex in NYC had a shitty title, but in the contents of the thread there were a lot of people saying he was a rad dude and calling out the thread starter as being a retard.

again, with Tuomas, there are the few standard zings, but overall I think people think he's a swell guy.

I'm also assuming the answer to my original question is "no".

Dom, how many times do you want someone to write "just don't go researching dude's life off-board"?

As someone who has directly been affected by this, repeatedly, in recent months (including ILXors harrasing friends of mine on flickr making VERY CREEPY comments about photos of mine they hosted - and sorry Curtis but that was a 77 doing, so I dont really have too much sympathy), I support this completely.

I tried to email Tom with a complaint/request/suggestion about this last week but I think ilx webmail's playing up and then I realised I just couldnt be bothered to care.

And I suspect a lot more ppl than you'd think also just can't be fucked going through the enourmous hassle of complaining properly about all this - because when they do, they endure months of "did you see what that whiny little bitch said on LJ/facebook/ilx/lol they're such a tightass" gossip afterwards and really who needs that shit?

I'm really disappointed in how this shit's made some people I like and respect change, and I'm fed up with being a topic of rumours, snark, and even worse - off board IM/email harrasment which has in the past actually been of a sexually creepy nature.

I've wanted to say something about this for ages but held off because then (as now) I would get my butt kicked for complaining.

But I just dont care anymore. And the shit I've been copping is REALLY mild compared to some people so what does that say?

lol dom we all kno the thread is about you, quit getting all lawyery about this bs

What are the consequences for doing so? xxp

i dont really get whats so offensive about the meta 77 threads. they werent really meanspirited in any way

imo the Skidmore one was some lame unfunny/uninteresting bullshit

guys pashmina's statements were pretty clear, i thought that would be the end of it.

-- tremendoid, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 22:49 (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page29.asp

And I suspect a lot more ppl than you'd think also just can't be fucked going through the enourmous hassle of complaining properly about all this

It seems that mods may have come to appreciate this point and may be asserting themselves more. Is that in fact the case? As a matter of mod policy?

blueski:
im talking specifically about the ones linked, altho in gen. 77 has been pretty good about keepin it positive

-- deej, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:46 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

all due respect, but with no admin log, this apparent new situation in which posters are subject to the whims of what a group of mods (who were made mods due to coding involvement or likeability to current mods) find to be unacceptable behaviour is kind of infuriating

i mean i like pretty much all of you guys, but you can see how this is kind of WTF to some of us, right?

ah fuck it im going to the bar so ignore ill check back later

Hence my suggestion that threads get locked instead of deleted.

Or set up ITR2 to move them to.

(xp) also fuck you for going to the bar, I'm gonna go talk about you on ITR

yeah, can we have some assessments of what it would take to get an adminlog built? i know we talk about this every time some meta issue comes up

it seems to me that the original post in this thread incorporates a lot more than just the creepy shit, but is borderline fun police.

admin log.

If people honestly have a problem with deleting completely zero-content, no intelligence shit like that which Pash has listed, because they think thats what makes ILX great, then I feel sorry for them.

Sorry, my intention wasn't to call out 77. For the most part, it just seems like old noise board to me, IE a bunch of people who know each other shooting the shit.

Forks, there isn't a record of what's been deleted viewable by either mods or non-mods. People raising issues over threads/posts that have been deleted is fine by me. I don't expect, or want this to change.

John, yes, I can.

(I know that wasnt rly JJs point tho this thread is moving too fast)

Tedious rote responses to certain posters, especially the use of repeated image "zings".

tedious image zings are bad, funny image zings are funny

Interesting points raised here: Post Deletion

blueski:
im talking specifically about the ones linked, altho in gen. 77 has been pretty good about keepin it positive

-- deej, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:46 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

-- jaymc, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 21:54 (3 minutes ago)

thanks jaymc, i read that bit after posting my comment but before reading your one. peace out bruv.

I would love a system where the moderators could hide postings from a thread, but where users could un-hide them selectively. Like a unilateral version of downmodding (see: Slashdot, Digg). For example:

Original Post:

Zing! Nice original thought, jerk!

-- Poster, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 21:49 (5 seconds ago) Link

Modded post:
(Hidden)-- Poster, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 21:49 (5 seconds ago) Click to unhide

Maybe that would just invite even more meta-bullshit, but at least you wouldn't start getting all sorts of "where'd my post go" threads and emails. I guess this would add more code, etc, to the site, though.

The "rote" bit is the most important bit there, Deej. It gets awfully tedious, for a whole bunch of people, to see the exact same image thrown out over and over and over again.

What about the Alice Cooper "lol" gif?

Can we implement thumbs up/thumbs down on people's posts?

^^^^^yes

that would easily halve HOOS' post count tho

^^i haven't even noticed that. maybe an image (like snoop dogg or whatever) will get picked up as a zing response to a bunch of different posters for a couple of days, until it gets old, but i don't see why that's so bad.

XPOST

what an odd thread, which I had not seen. yet I welcome it.

I have no doubt that ilx has gone downhill over years. I respect Raggett's caution on that point, but I think he politely knows it too.

I have never heard of 77 or seen these other boards that are mentioned.

I'm not sure that I've noticed that 'meta' things are the problem; not certain what that means. not have I noticed any of this stuff about researching people's lives (??!).

I think the main problem is too much nastiness. raise an innocent question and get attacked - that's no good. that has happened to me repeatedly since I started posting again a couple of months ago, and I have been quite shocked by it.

I also think a problem is laziness and telegraphic one-word posts - perhaps this is something that Pashmina mentions.

I doubt that ilx could ever be what it was. I doubt that *we* could be what *we* were! but if ilx is going to exist at all, then I think Pashmina's views are correct.

hey, I'm going to meet Pashmina in June, I think.

thumbs down: infuriating

this isn't digg

While I don't think it's quite as bad as some people think (and funnily enough I was reading this thread earlier to-day...
the death of ILE
...) I would pretty much agree him pashmina's thinking here.

With the exception of lifetime bans, which seem pointless and/or unenforcable. See driving bans.

xp
...agree 'with' pashmina's...

It's too bad the yellowcard never was re-implemented.

yellow cards = zings in the hands of mods

The problem is that the era pinefox is talking about never existed on ILX, and thankfully that's not what Pashmina is talking about in the first place. The ILx of 2001/2002 would have about a third of its posts killed by moderators off the bat these days, between momus, doompatroll, becky lucas, and queen g. Old ILX was a place where people regularly engaged in straight-up personal attacks rather than clever, sly digs to make their point, and it's probably why most of the old London lot feel much safer on Tom Ewing's livejournal where they can insult Kate St C and J.Williams to their heart's content without anyone telling them that they're being dicks.

I think your arguments are reasonable and thoughtful, Tombot & Pashmina, and thanks for trying to make things chill around here. You guys do a good job.

I got a yellow card once and it ruined my ILX experience. At least make them an animated gif or something.

it seems to me that the original post in this thread incorporates a lot more than just the creepy shit, but is borderline fun police.

All this is going to necessarily rub up against different posters' differing ideas of "fun," the same way someone might think "what are you, retarded?" is an okay way of saying "I disagree with you completely." I think this tougher moderation stance is necessary, for reasons Tom gets at: "The way I see it, ILX is either going to stop being so meta and possibly die a slow death or continue becoming more meta and certainly die a slow death."

what actually happened when you got yellowcarded??

Just a shame Enrique isn't here to see this. I'm sure he's looking down from the heavens at it, smiling on, though.

I doubt that ilx could ever be what it was

I think I agree with Dom here. I don't know what ^^^this means. We've all looked back at old stuff and there's still some totally crazy and horrible stuff going on. It really doesn't seem like there's that much more now. But maybe it's just the threads I don't go on.

The ILx of 2001/2002 would have about a third of its posts killed by moderators off the bat these days, between momus, doompatroll, becky lucas, and queen g.

I can't speak as to 01/02, but b.l. was subsequent to that period and largely a non-issue, and I believe that there has been a change in the character of the community since 03 and likely earlier.

big yellow box with a user-specific message right above/below(?) the "add a comment" field xxxpost

I approve of this measure. I hope it also makes being a mod a lot easier now that there is much less of a grey area. It almost pushes me to offer to colunteer for what is often a very thankless task. 'Almost' being the operative word here.

A vote of thanks to our mods and all the best in their expanded task.

You got an ugly ass yellow stripe across your screen that looked like something from an "HTML For Pensioners" course day one.xxxxp

So far, so positive.

I guess there'll be 1000+ post by the morning, full of the usual..

i don't think there's been "a change", ilx has been changing since day 1.

^ truth

user-specific message

which was? "lol stfu"? i should have talked more shit on the noizbord back then, this sounds great

digg it! xp

the only time I ever got a yellow card was when I asked what a yellow card was

most of the old London lot feel much safer on Tom Ewing's livejournal where they can insult Kate St C and J.Williams to their heart's content without anyone telling them that they're being dicks.

who do you think actually does this?

Old ILX was a place where people regularly engaged in straight-up personal attacks

this isn't how i remember it

the only time I ever got a yellow card was when I asked what a yellow card was

-- Curt1s Stephens, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 6:13 PM (48 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

i think that was the only one i ever gave out

I like people.

who do you think actually does this?

-- blueski, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 23:13 (58 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

Dude, weren't you on my psycho ex's friendslist when she posted screengrabs of that shit before her fourth suicide attempt?

xpost
old thread revivals are a good tonic for nostalgia

and I believe that there has been a change in the character of the community since 03 and likely earlier.

dom's characterisation of old ilx -- not to mention tom's livejournal -- is pretty slanted and poisonous (and typically clever, of course), but the point he's making is quite right: any attempt to return to an old regime that never existed would be a terrible idea, as well as a pointless one, and this isn't that

Or set up ITR2 to move them to.

-- Dom Passantino, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 21:56 (17 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

This is actually a good idea.

mark s OTM.

Call it "The internet's premier message board for xkcd fans"

xp

And for what it's worth, ILX seemed WAY nastier in '05 than it does now...

http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=77&threadid=48#unread

I remember that when Dom first showed up, a lot of people dumped on him mercilessly whenever he said something even tangentially related to football/soccer and also mocked him for not really being British. I can totally see why his memories of old ILE/ILM are what they are.

xp: lol Jordan

yeah!

ha...ha? xp

I remember that when Dom first showed up, a lot of people dumped on him mercilessly whenever he said something even tangentially related to football/soccer and also mocked him for not really being British.

-- HI DERE, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 23:17 (34 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

It's like a Zadie Smith novel.

Dom what people say on friends-only Livejournals about real life situations (ie almost by their definition personal) is irrelevant to this debate. Then again I wasn't on the aforementioned friends list.

Steve, I'm lolling at posting another thread that no one on 77 can read. You'd think people would actually stop doing this...?

Admin Log would be lots of code and is unlikely to ever happen like it was, but I agree it's counter-productive to have posts and threads vanish without explanation, as nobody will know what's going on, and we need to be transparent to make this work.

The idea upthread about ITR2 is a good one, and I'll get that set up. We also shouldn't delete any posts from the threads -- if a post needs to go, we'll just take out its content and leave a placeholder.

can we compile all the personal attack posts in one thread so I can catch up? preferably with annotations about the offboard stuff so I can have context. thnkx

hm. what should it be called? xp

I remember that when Dom first showed up, a lot of people dumped on him mercilessly whenever he said something even tangentially related to football/soccer and also mocked him for not really being British. I can totally see why his memories of old ILE/ILM are what they are.

-- HI DERE, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:17 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

^^ I thought this same thing

Dom what people say on friends-only Livejournals about real life situations (ie almost by their definition personal) is irrelevant to this debate. Then again I wasn't on the aforementioned friends list.

-- Matt DC, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 23:18 (7 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

Pretty sure, say, "starry sarah" has never hung out with "Catsup Dude", Matt. But you're right. All I'm saying is there was a lot of poison in old ILX that has been thankfully bled out. Bodies tend to develop resistance to most non-lethaltoxins, right?

Really For Real Idiot Thread Repository

Steve, I'm lolling at posting another thread that no one on 77 can read. You'd think people would actually stop doing this...?

-- HI DERE, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:19 PM (20 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

its a thread where ppl joke about ppl saying 'actually...' when they are surprised about liking a song someone has recommended or equivalent, in this case referring to pashmina saying ACTUALLY dom has a good idea

Smart Thread Repository

lets never use the word "actually" on 77

-- max, Thursday, April 3, 2008 7:15 PM (1 month ago) Bookmark Link

this word is for jerks

-- max, Thursday, April 3, 2008 7:15 PM (1 month ago) Bookmark Link

I think one thing that has REALLY got my back up over the last year or so is the way people pull up old threads and ridicule stuff that got posted back then. ILM/ILE back in those days was a tiny, obscure board, it wasn't google indexed, many of the regulars had known each other both on and off-line for years before it started. People who weren't in on it from day one generally found it by accident. Of course people were more open about personal stuff! But to drag it up and hold it up as if the boards were like they are now back then is really dishonest and disingenious.

stet just call it thread dump or something equally neutral.

I do overuse "actually". Also "I must admit".

Dom why are you so incredibly butthurt about sarah or someone dissing you off-board? it's pretty obvious why some people would dislike you no?

Can we call it TURN BACK YOU POXY FULE? I kind of miss seeing that, in a strange way.

so we're not allowed to post umad.jpg anymore?

On the secret board thread last month, Nabisco made a comment that seemed to me right, which was that a number of posters seemed to want a "gated community" for themselves and a handful of others, rather than an open one. I don't know how things were in the early days, but what he said seems right to me about 2008. I think the meta stuff is part of this: alienate those you don't want in your community, so that you can get rid of them.

It's irrelevant now whether old ILX was that way or not.

I don't think the gated community thing is good, and I'd like to see the moderators try to push back against this by pushing against the meta.

Stuff that happens on other (IE non-ILX) boards & lists is stuff that neither I nor any of the other mods can do anything about. I don't even care about it! As long as people don't bring it back here. If you want to address it, address it there.

Idiot Thread Suppository

Dom why are you so incredibly butthurt about sarah or someone dissing you off-board? it's pretty obvious why some people would dislike you no?

-- blueski, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 23:22 (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

How am I butthurt? All I'm saying is, old ILX was hideously poisonous, and the people who were on it still are, long after it's been made clear they're not wanted by the majority of sensible, reasonable people on this board. I'm with Pash on this one.

you should make it invite-only :o)

xxposts I give everyone on ILX permission to post umad.gif after my posts

Live and let live, that's my motto.

People are far too concerned with a. destroying ile b. the death of ile. Who the hell cares either way? Life goes on...

-- Nicole, Wednesday, 5 December 2001 01:00 (6 years ago) Bookmark Link

So the abused becomes the abuser, Curtis?

Who are you thinking of, Dom?

are we allowed to call for posters to be "banned"

I think one thing that has REALLY got my back up over the last year or so is the way people pull up old threads and ridicule stuff that got posted back then. ILM/ILE back in those days was a tiny, obscure board, it wasn't google indexed, many of the regulars had known each other both on and off-line for years before it started. People who weren't in on it from day one generally found it by accident. Of course people were more open about personal stuff! But to drag it up and hold it up as if the boards were like they are now back then is really dishonest and disingenious.

I am with you on this one, is it worth lock threads beyond a certain date?

All I'm saying is, old ILX was hideously poisonous, and the people who were on it still are, long after it's been made clear they're not wanted by the majority of sensible, reasonable people on this board.

Riiiiight.

it's just words on a computer screen

is it worth lock threads beyond a certain date?

you'd have to search for all the potentially-zingable ones.

luckily a few people on ilx already did this.

is it worth lock threads beyond a certain date?

I would oppose this fwiw.

People are far too concerned with a. destroying ile b. the death of ile. Who the hell cares either way? Life goes on...

-- Nicole, Wednesday, 5 December 2001 01:00 (6 years ago) Bookmark Link

-- Ned Trifle II, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 3:26 PM (37 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

Tedious rote responses to certain posters, especially the use of repeated image "zings".

trying to stop this would be insane

I am with you on this one, is it worth lock threads beyond a certain date?

there is such thing as a relevant revival though

i can't talk about any dramas that may have happened between 2002-6 but i do remember an awful lot of bitching at FAPs about people not present

From 7 years ago? Why not start a new thread and discuss it afresh?

xpost

Plenty of threads do get revived for perfectly valid reasons, people want to talk about the subject, some news event relevant to the thread and so on, so I wouldn't be too into having threads before a certain date auto-locked, personally.

[img post]

I understand per mark s that you can't recapture the past, but I would object to the locking of old threads and would advocate (with the understanding that search is difficult, especially for newer posters) more encouragement/obligation to search for/revive old threads to establish a sense of board history/age and identity and the conversation that has already been had.

People are far too concerned with a. destroying ile b. the death of ile. Who the hell cares either way? Life goes on...

-- Nicole, Wednesday, 5 December 2001 01:00 (6 years ago) Bookmark Link

-- Ned Trifle II, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 3:26 PM (37 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

-- get bent, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:28 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

Dom, where is that alice cooper lol gif?

then when is the cutoff point?

Oi Dom, I said no images please.

Dude, weren't you on my psycho ex's friendslist when she posted screengrabs of that shit before her fourth suicide attempt?

-- Dom Passantino, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 11:14 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

shush.

For my part, I'm happy to curtail my obsessive hate campaign against Enrique.

it's pretty obvious why some people would dislike you no?

-- blueski, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 23:22 (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

tbh, from the people involved in the disliking, I always assumed it was a case of their disgust at the idea of a white girl dating a guy of Moorish/Arabic ancestry.

Oi Dom, I said no images please.

-- Pashmina, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 23:32 (15 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

Apologies.

People are far too concerned with a. destroying ile b. the death of ile. Who the hell cares either way? Life goes on...

-- Nicole, Wednesday, 5 December 2001 01:00 (6 years ago) Bookmark Link

-- Ned Trifle II, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 3:26 PM (37 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

-- get bent, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:28 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

-- bamcquern, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:31 PM (1 second ago) Bookmark Link

lol @ all of you reading this thread then

What? I just wanted to see how big it would get.

I mean, I don't actually agree with the post.

from the people involved in the disliking, I always assumed it was a case of their disgust at the idea of a white girl dating a guy of Moorish/Arabic ancestry.

No idea what this is about, and I spect like 80% of current posters don't either. blueski's point still stands.

so i take it you are one of those who want to destroy us xp

Yeah, I'm gonna gobble deeznuts up.

I have nothing original to say so if I stopped using old threads to quote from I'd have nothing to do all day.

I don't think of Dom as being anywhere near the worst offender re: meta, but I guess that's b/c I'm out of the loop on British ILXor gossip

looks like i'm getting out at the right time

You should try a whole computer/TV moratorium for awhile, Omar, it's better than a colonic.

lol @ all of you reading this thread then

Anyway my point was merely that this kind of debate has always happened. And that's a good thing.

unfortunately my work requires heavy computer use. however i don't watch TV except for the occasional TCM/ESPN~

Can people (on both sides of the debate) stop bring personal beefs with one another/other posters onto this thread, it's not what it's for. This isn't meant to be Trial By ILX for any one poster.

^^^real talk

thanx mdc

Yeah, I could ride the TCM on an evening, too.

Screen addict! I'm so glad I'm moving into a house that will only have porch screens.

People here know exactly when they're being creepy so LOL at various 'who, me?' types. I'm not about to let my experience be ruined by people who are noobs relative to me because there is a principle at stake other than 'I was here first,' although that will do in a pinch. Moderators have to assume that people know the rules here when they register, in order to enforce them properly. If that means spiking a thread that starts or goes mean-spirited, so be it. You knew what was expected of you when you arrived at this party so if someone sends you home for being an ass, suck it up instead of starting a thread where you basically admit 'I'm an idiot with no social skills or an attention whore O FATHER WAI DOTH THOU PERTHECUTE ME TODAAAAAY?".

I knew there were probably a lot of people - women in particular - who disliked rocking the complainer boat because it made their haters redouble. Those are bullied people and no amount of backtracking by the instigator changes that. It has never occurred to me to start a thread about another poster because I don't like them, or in any other way subject them to inappropriate scrutiny on any board based on their actions here. Therefore I won't tolerate when it is done to me or anyone else.

Just thanking Norman for sifting through some truly unpleasant stuff when he's got plenty of other more important things to do.

I wish people would stop badmouthing 77 and making it seem like Ask Chaki?

-- Curt1s Stephens, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 2:36 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Link

lol maybe because the threads there are twice as meta and evil as anything on AC! (who not to invite, alexnyc thread, etc.)

It has never occurred to me to start a thread about another poster because I don't like them

yeah for fucking real. a little bitchy post here or there is one thing but actual thread-starting has always seemed over the line to me and it's only certain types who seem to do it (not including all the celebratory ones and happy birthday ones obv).

obv you can sneakily abuse someone more in one post than you can by starting a thread about them to encourage others to do join in with the quotes or whatever but it's an objection based on principle, etiquette and social constructs. if some don't see the difference then OK but for me it's a gulf.

I am comforted by JJ's posts expressing outrage at the injustice. They help maintain a sense of order in the universe.

instead of deleting offending posts they should be highlighted in yellow so everyone can see and understand what the mods find unacceptable

maybe embed a dunce cap above the culprit's posts

lol maybe because the threads there are twice as meta and evil as anything on AC! (who not to invite, alexnyc thread, etc.)

yeah I kno :(

Maybe it's not the board but the people posting. Just a thought...

crut why dont you have mod powers over yr own board?

matter of why isnt this dude a mod period, really

but I'm still in a land where the only thread is "thread of smashmouth" and everything is rose-colored like pinefox's ILX 2001

good place to be

77 has kind of a identity problem maybe, but (or due to) seeming a v laid back whatever kinda place

lol maybe because the threads there are twice as meta and evil as anything on AC! (who not to invite, alexnyc thread, etc.)

Was I one of those who shouldn't be invited? I bet I wasn't. The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about etc.

But srsly they sound bad.

And for what it's worth, ILX seemed WAY nastier in '05 than it does now...

-- contenderizer, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 22:16 (30 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

This is absolutely right, there was a lot of nastiness and a lot of people left, or stayed but their mood markedly different.

(fwiw, I wasn't involved either way)

i'm often seeing threads on 77 (and other sub boards) and thinking 'wish this was on ILE so more people would read/post' (and with so many people able to access 77 now, that compounds it). not that this is particularly relevant to this thread i know.

a little bitchy post here or there is one thing but actual thread-starting has always seemed over the line to me and it's only certain types who seem to do it

There is a wider audience for content in a thread title, assuming the thread stays in the mix long enough, than content in a thread, and privileging a poster to call for the deletion of a thread that names them is an easy standard for a mod to enforce, but otherwise it's a formal distinction that may allow content that is equally or more offensive - everyone knows that the problem is not limited to 'a little bitch post here and there' - to proliferate on any other thread.

seems it's up to you to bust this thing wide open blueski

ok confession time guys - ive been given a secret bord by the mods which includes beta version of a lot of the requests weve all had for a long time: admin log, numerical polls etc. best feature is probably the cupcake button!

sorry gabb i'm not sure what your point is there
likewise tremendoid i'm not quite following you bruv

when people say ILX was nastier in '05, what examples spring to mind for them?

Did anyone else have to read this twice?

xxxpost

Yes to cupcake button.

I'm going to go eat cupcakes.

yum!

i read it .5 and gave up bamc

Who is this "ILX System" character and why does he keep "automatically" bumping threads?

sorry gabb i'm not sure what your point is there

my point is that a thread naming a poster who calls for its deletion (and we'll presume it's not simply because they are modest) can't be presumed to be inherently more objectionable/ill-willed/offensive/harassing than a post or posts directed at the poster in any other thread

this thread is getting snarky. pls to delete cupcake posts.

a history of meta threads on Curt1s's borad

APRIL 2:
~~~~let it grow~~~~
names to invite that require serious reflection

APRIL 3:
people who aren't getting in here

APRIL 8:
thread of people who should unequivocally not be invited to borad 77

I recently used the word bitching and only experienced remorse afterwards. I was too tired immediately afterward, but it jarred to say it.

A search for a common word resulted in bitching. How sad for my brain.

curt1s you missed out a couple on specific ilxors (surely these count as meta)

i think of cUrtis as the jesus of ilx

(haha someone just pointed out to me it's an LJ thread of mine as got linked to noize is the source of all hate ever, oh well, i am a dick)

meta threads currently on new answers page of 77:

"Alex in NYC is personally responsible for the gentrification of lower Manhattan"
what is up with deeznuts
thoughts on the pinefox
thread of people who should be invited to 77
kind of lol but mostly sad
thread of people who should unequivocally not be invited to borad 77
what happened to the ilx roxy graph thing
link to your old-skool sockpuppets
gabbneb and suzy would make a good couple
good anglophiles bad anglophiles

i think his point was that it got increasingly nastier as more ppl came along

i also think of of cRutis as the jesus of ilx

mark you can't blame the host when one of their friends storms in blind drunk and attacks some people who weren't invited.

I would like to thumbs-up this thread and the sentiment behind it.

I honestly don't give a hot shit whatever personal beefs anyone has had in the past, and I suspect I'm not alone in that. One of the most important aspects of adulthood is learning to GET OVER IT. Let go. Realize the stupidity and futility of what you're doing. And then go for a walk.

party host i mean xp

I think that all of ILX except some (but not all) admin and mod content should be transparent to all users

o plz no ilxor would ever get wasted and attack!

cupcake button?

Everybody stop and just listen to the HOOS.

(except mods)

gabbneb and suzy would make a good couple!!!!

Everybody stop and just listen to the HOOS.

-- El Tomboto, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 00:14 (10 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

Should be a disco anthem

tom and hoos would make a good couple!!!

Anyway I'm proud that this hasn't turned into an utter clusterfuck so far and hope we can keep having a vaguely reasonable discussion. but inasmuch as highlighting unacceptable posts, well

Various other communities that have lasted longer than ours have done so by harsh moderation of their open areas while maintaining a restricted repository for crapflooders and douchebags to have their fun in. I'm not against this route, but we've failed so far because 77 and Ask Chaki keep cross-pollinating and us mods haven't laid down the law consistently.

I hope we can repair that situation.

Hint: there are two boards and a verb mentioned. Don't make it three boards and a verb, please.

WATERBOARD

That one's harsh.

crazy thread

the WATERBORAD is secret hush, we don't speak of it

surely it's completely fucking obvious that 77 was a bad idea by now?

77 was a fascinating social experiment!

is there really a thread somewhere called 'thoughts on the pinefox'? what on earth could it contain?

ilx was irritating and infuriating in the past, but what I have said about its changes and development remains true.

Mark S is correct to say that this thread is not an attempt to restore ilx to a previous state. I myself said it couldn't be restored. but I think Mark knows, really, that ilx was better before. (one reason among many: he used to post extensively on it!)

Dom P says that people who used to post on ilx and now don't are 'poison' who have been drained from the system. this seems rather like a diseased, malodorous rat blaming a koala for spreading the bubonic plague. examples of old posters who don't, or hardly, post anymore: Tim Hopkins, Starry, Alix, Carmody, Stevie T, Geordie Racer, Martin Skidmore - the list could go on.

surely it's completely fucking obvious that 77 was a bad idea by now?

-- caek, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 00:24 (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

Secret boards aren't viable, but at least we know it for definite now.

DON'T BLAME THE KOALAS! xp

o_0 at borad 77 threads! The dating suggestions are especially fabulous because I know they come from people who are really, really successful in their personal relationships.

I've been invited to 77 but I'm opposed to invite-only boards and that's a pretty good show for WHY.

Well yes, that's why we're at this point.

At any rate, the idea is that we all have about a week's grace period to discuss and understand what Pash and the rest of the mods have put forth.
I'm not going to go down the list and start looking to kick people tonight, if you were wondering.

I totally agree with the suggestion in the OP.

Pashmina and TOMBOT's statements of philosophy are those of a community I still want to be a part of. I imagine all the stuff Pashmina listed is a huge turn-off to potential new posters. I think we benefit form new posters.

77 is nothing like Ask Chaki. Ask Chaki is public.

I have always thought 77 would end in one of two ways: (1) total deletion, or (2) being made totally public.

I favor #2. People can decide for themselves if it's all in good fun.

I don't think it's right to make people beg for an invite to see what other posters write about them on 77.

Reposting things that were originally written for another audience should be quite familiar to us by now. If anyone has any qualms about unhiding anything on 77, that should tell you something about 77.

ilx is the disease pf, and we are all its happy rats at some time or other -- i stopped posting much bcz (a) my mum wz dyin and (b) it wz takin up WAY too much time, and i needed to get other stuff done

i miss the weird surge of it, that's as present now as ever, and isn't about friends here or friends elsewhere

This is all wonderful news as the creepy zing gang have almost exhausted anything slightly embarrassing I've previously posted on the internet!

almost!

One of the most important aspects of adulthood is learning to GET OVER IT. Let go. Realize the stupidity and futility of what you're doing. And then go for a walk.

Blame the "victims", then? I'm confused as to who this prescriptive is aimed at...

who is in the creepy zing gang?

the hoos abides xp

Oh, and we have never posted anything meta on the King Boy Pato Secret Board except for the popular thread, "What Do You Think Is Poster X's Favourite Pizza?"

kbp i would now like to belong to yr board [pepperoni & sausage]

testing

-- am0n, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 6:36 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

"At any rate, the idea is that we all have about a week's grace period"

Blame the "victims", then? I'm confused as to who this prescriptive is aimed at...

-- dell, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 11:36 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

Any and all who are holding onto a grudge, whether they're the victim of harassment or the aggressor who justifies their behavior by referring to some ancient grievance.

It's like holding a hot coal. Doesn't matter who handed it to you, the circumstances which lead to you holding it. It's a hot coal. It just burns you.

It's like having a wisdom box.

so are we not allowed to call people out for being douchebags in threads where they post like douchebags or are we just not allowed to start other threads about them?

Anyhow, my reactions to this thread topic basically amount to persistent befuddlement that people would treat each other so unreasonably here that it would result in a need for heavy-handed policing tactics. It's really not that difficult to not be assholish to other posters, esp. obsessively assholish.

But I guess I'm just super-naive in that sense.

I have always thought 77 would end in one of two ways: (1) total deletion, or (2) being made totally public.

I favor #2. People can decide for themselves if it's all in good fun.

I actually favor (1), because I favor giving those posters who may have initially thought the board would remain relatively private the benefit of the doubt, and because all the revelations so far about the content of 77 have had net negative results for everyone.

It's like holding a hot coal. Doesn't matter who handed it to you, the circumstances which lead to you holding it. It's a hot coal. It just burns you.

Wull, if you think about it, I think that some people were committing the sin of holding onto old grievances in part b/c they didn't want others to end up receiving similar shitty treatment.

<rhetorical>
Has any friendship or relationship that's been ILX based ever been severed or damaged only because of something posted on ILX?
<rhetorical>

Hoos, Tombot, otm

i love how i have no fucking concept of what 77 is

I actually favor (1), because I favor giving those posters who may have initially thought the board would remain relatively private the benefit of the doubt, and because all the revelations so far about the content of 77 have had net negative results for everyone.
I'm against it ever being made public, for basically the same reasons. But am also against total deletion just on principle. What we'd do is remove all the members.

Have you considered temp locking or disabling 77 during this consideration week to see what that does?

If nobody really misses it, then perhaps it should be deleted.

Sorry, suzy, but I do think you could at least be friends. In any case, it would make a great movie.

so are we not allowed to call people out for being douchebags in threads where they post like douchebags or are we just not allowed to start other threads about them?

the latter, unless the "other thread" in question is a genuine request for a temp ban or other enforcement action posted to Mod Req with links, based on what's set forth here and in the FAQ (the FAQ will be updated). I think that's reasonable. And yeah calling a person a douchebag on a thread because they're being a douchebag (or on the primaries thread, where everyone's a douche) obviously is never going to go away, but relentlessly posting nothing but ad hominem snarkiness is going to be frowned upon, as Pash said.

Honestly, my biggest complaints about ILX(2) to this day remain basic UI issues about posting..

Like "&lt;"'s and "&gt;"'s being reencoded to "<"'s and ">"'s inside the posting box after the intervening posts warning page is produced, as one of many examples. It would be nice to not have to highlight and copy all my posts before hitting submit.

I know I know, this is all free, etc. I appreciate the work done to keep this running, honestly. And I applaud efforts to keep people from being creepey-ed upon.

But practically speaking, basic UI bug fixes are IMHO far more important to me than preventing things on ILX that creepy peoples are going to do off ILX anyway, like on AIM and shit, which has been the case for about 5 years. Just sayin'.

so are we not allowed to call people out for being douchebags in threads where they post like douchebags or are we just not allowed to start other threads about them?

-- bell_labs, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 23:43 (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

If someone is being a douchebag in a thread, by all means call them out for it in that thread. This is by no means an attempt to enforce some kind of bogus "we're all friends here" steez. Ha! X-post

As someone pointed out the benefit (i guess the only benefit at this stage???) is that 77 is ungoogleable

xposts

i feel like i'm in some bizarre matrix-like movie.

But practically speaking, basic UI bug fixes are IMHO far more important to me than preventing things on ILX

^^^^^^^ this is the real deal

felicty: yeh, that's worth thinking about.

i have never been as interested in 77 as i am now

xpost
the matrix reloaded?

I'm against it ever being made public, for basically the same reasons. But am also against total deletion just on principle. What we'd do is remove all the members.

-- stet, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:50 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

Kind of off subject, but I would be interested in arguments for why 77 posters' interests in protecting an expectation of privacy outweighs the interests of non-77ers in reading and possibly responding to what may be written about them there. I think a big reason revelations about 77 have had net negative consequences was because they were selective, which only aggravated the cliquishness.

xp

HOOS I understand yr point but I do think dell and bell labs are right in that we at least need to be able to complain - and some people haven't been, because they're afraid to/cant be bothered to/got burned by doing so in the past.

There are plenty of people who dont bother being here anymore specifically because of the massive volume of "lol lets make YOUR personal life a thing of public ridicule!" bullshit.

I'm not the only one who has had, for example, personal emails and LOCKED livejournal posts reposted on sub-boards for people to have lols at. I mean come the fuck on! That shit is just fucked.

can we still make fun of white boys with dreads even though ed posts here?

I have posted a lot of stuff in 77 I wouldn't want showing up in a google search for personal reasons, but that's my fault -- many xposts

LOL
xpost

Hey if you post it yourself about yourself, that shits different. That I got no sympathy for (and I say that having done so myself lol)

Kind of off subject, but I would be interested in arguments for why 77 posters' interests in protecting an expectation of privacy outweighs the interests of non-77ers in reading and possibly responding to what may be written about them there. I think a big reason revelations about 77 have had net negative consequences was because they were selective, which only aggravated the cliquishness.

hey guess what! anyone can be invited

If someone is being a douchebag in a thread, by all means call them out for it in that thread

OTM. calling them out on another, perhaps specially designated thread - what's the motivation for that? plus you can always call them out off-board i guess

the recent anti-suzy namedropping stuff has been annoying partly because other ppl made similar complaints 6 years ago so groan here we go again (and partly because calling that kind of trivial and often funny stuff out frequently seems far douchier). noobs do the research etc.

Are any of these standards to be presented for community review/discussion before they are enforced?

-- gabbneb, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 07:29 (1 hour ago) Bookmark Link

Not that I want to drag this out, but there's an anecdotal feeling here that all changes affecting the site must be community-approved. This is a cosy idea, but the bottom line is that ilx is provided free of charge by some very nice people who have gone to some considerable length to rehouse the site, rewrite the code, etc. only to be harangued and abused by various people (this is not aimed at Mackro upthread, incidentally) whose noses are out of joint because OH NOES BBCODE IS TEH SUCK OH NO or whatever.

Any community discussion on ilx bullying, zings, etc. would only turn into a 3,500-post clusterfuck without achieving anything. The only real change here is that a few people have to stop being so arseholish; surely there's only a need for discussion on the finer points.

(xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxp egad it's happening again)

Kind of off subject, but I would be interested in arguments for why 77 posters' interests in protecting an expectation of privacy outweighs the interests of non-77ers in reading and possibly responding to what may be written about them there.

Because for better or worse (and I'm inclined to think worse, now) that was how it was set up, and just because we can technically do something isn't in itself a good argument for doing it.

I could have kept logs of all the ilx webmails too, and I'm sure people have logs of AIM chats about ilxors, but "the interests of people they're about" doesn't seem to me to be a good reason for making any of these things public.

Curt1s, I'm beginning to understand the point of those who feel a secret board which is open to everyone should just not be secret. I'm not concerned either way about getting access btw, this is just an observation.

some meta-bitchy people haven't posted their thoughts on this thread yet

Of course they havent steve, they know when to look sweet as pie for the cameras.

Sorry, I realise I'm coming across as a cunt about this topic but I've put up with it for a couple years and I'm very very tired of it now.

agree with autumnalmanac too (so it must not be about doctor who then nudge nudge)

i for one will miss the o_O thread

Trayce I agree that it's utterly immature, unfortunate bullshit, and I want nothing more than for that sort of treatment to disappear.

Trayce I agree that it's utterly immature, unfortunate bullshit, that you've been put through over the years.

hoos where do you stand on this issue?

Yeah for real, Trayce!

i for one will miss the o_O thread

-- jhøshea, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 7:10 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

I never thought of o_O as much different from zing or Excelsior, but YMMV.

no zings, no zing thread

The o_O thread is orright, isn't it? (I was zinged in that thread (cf=0) but it seems well-meaning overall)

oh god xp

Hey look clever zings well-timed are fine, but we are not talking about things like that here, are we?

yes I know, I was making a bad joke I'm sorry

I am part of the problem :(

hoos where do you stand on this issue?

-- jhøshea, Wednesday, May 21, 2008 12:14 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

Which issue?

Or was that a "lol u have given yr opinion lots" lol?

the admins want to eliminate zings altogether

I just want to apologize for everything I've done to enable all this shit. 77, my attitude, etc. I'm sorry, ILX. I didn't mean to do any harm but apparently people don't like me now.

lol i hope yr kidding crut jeez

this has nothing to do w/ you & everything to do w/ people

Nobody doesn't like you AFAIK Curtis. You tried to do everything right, none of this is your fault.

I could have kept logs of all the ilx webmails too, and I'm sure people have logs of AIM chats about ilxors, but "the interests of people they're about" doesn't seem to me to be a good reason for making any of these things public.

-- stet, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:05 PM (13 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

That is true. What's distinct about 77 is that theoretically everyone could get invited eventually, so it's not reasonable to think that other ILXors will see it eventually.

I do understand the point about googling.

Perhaps I'll just add people at random who happen to post on ILBB. Like I have been doing, hint hint.

i for one was not joking at all about considering you the jesus of ilx xp

the admins want to eliminate zings altogether

Do you really believe that, or was that a zing-attempt? Sincere question.

........

Curtis, what Tombot said!

I do understand the point about googling.

I do to a point, and even then I'm not convinced. As someone said upthread, most of what people want to hide is probably premeditated zing attacks.

crut1s i meant jesus in the good way

most of what people want to hide is probably premeditated zing attacks.

-- Autumn Almanac, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:24 PM (47 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

And if they are so uncomfortable with what they wrote, hey, they can always beg the mods to delete it.

I want to hide the personal stuff I've posted about myself and others have posted about me with my tacit permission. tho I guess I could ask that stuff to be deleted. xpost!

Yeah, maybe you guys could have a week to clean it up.

if ppl felt freer about talking about their personal lives cuz 77 is ungoogleable then it really shouldn't be made public, even if some ppl cant see some zings aimed at them. which should really just be shrugged off anyway. if someone zings me in a private telephone conversation or AIM session i'm not going to lobby for the conversation to be made public to the world.

Crutis: Fair enough.

Although with the nu-ilx code leaking the old-ilx code all over Google and consequently spoiling five years of erstwhile secrets it seems a bit careless to continue posting personal stuff anywhere on ilx.

i mean the point that this should stop is totally taken but let's not go crazy here. xp

tom delete ilx plz

Yeah I think thats the wider issue here - some people were engaging in datamining of personal info that would reasonably have been expected not to be resplattered onto a public forum.

For my part I apologise for the harshness of my complaint - I've been angry about this for several years and I just used this opp to snap.

I'm going to lay low now cyas.

An obsessive interest in researching scandal/gossip that's happened in the past, manifesting itself as revivals of old threads to highlight some post or statement that's supposedly funny or o_0 or whatever.

Ad hominem snide at any other poster about IRL things that are not under discussion on that thread

Meta snidiness behind people's backs on one of the smaller boards or on board 77

Researching-ur-life shit about people who don't even post here anymore.

Not to throw monkey wrenches, but where would the Luna situation fall under these guidelines?

it seems a bit careless to continue posting personal stuff anywhere on ilx.

you're talking to the person who's still posting under his real name lol

Trayce I thought yr comments were well-worded and not overly vitriolic

lol jho someday you'll have them wings

you're talking to the person who's still posting under his real name lol

omg are you the crutis I just saw in my local bookshop/music paper/Private Eye?

someone played a prank on me :(

so is the CHALLENGING OPINIONS thread and ones like that going to be locked

so are*

nah, is was fine

i'm scared.

Well I think I've proven my point anyway. There's a reason people do post here instead of just doing AIM chat.

I don't have anything to add to this except that I was listening to this while reading Pash's original post.

good post

^^is this unacceptable now?

"Lady, if you HAVE TO ASK..."

where do the mods stand on posters who obv have good relationships w/ each other engaging in things like "pointless zings". it leaves a lot up to discretion but i think it would be ridiculous for me not to be able to image zing big hoos aka the steendriver for instance

J0rdan you're better than this

I'm pretty sure mods are 100% ok with bro-on-bro zings so long as both parties are cool w/it.

So funny you're not the mod of 77. It should be called the Crutis Memorial Board.

bro-on-bro zings

ok lol

maybe there should be some sort of zing consent form.

consensual zingery

I hereby declare that the zings in the post of intention (attached) have been cleared by all parties concerned and that I will be held personally liable for any damage caused to first, second and third parties.

Sign here to ^^^ this: _______________________________________________

maybe there should be some sort of zing consent form.

http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/Pages/register.jsp

OTM

TRUDAT

last time it said FART TON, this time it's saying HOOKET

if two people want to zing each other in the privacy of their own home, i'm all for it

btw, hadn't tom been saying that the "ask chaki" experiment had been "going well"

ask chaki "experiment", rather

xxxp the reg page is a megalol all on its own

NUMDLES
TRAKED
SORTED
BRIKINIS
PRISELF
MAPDERS
BALING
TRUTELY

yeah I got FUECKED once.

lol thats gonna end up on out of context innit ;_;

NUMDLES
TRAKED
SORTED
BRIKINIS
PRISELF
MAPDERS
BALING
TRUTELY

plz to make poll

So funny you're not the mod of 77. It should be called the Crutis Memorial Board.

Ugh. Makes it sound like he's dead.

Not to throw monkey wrenches, but where would the Luna situation fall under these guidelines?

The luna situation, to my mind, is one that set precedent for the idea that AIM gossip and behind-the-back researching ur life stuff could and should be allowed on the boards. So under those guidelines, Chaki would probably have been handed a stern warning or a temp ban if he insisted on keeping it up and the thread would have been locked (earlier than it was) and moved. Hindsight is always 20/20, but frankly, it was none of our business. You couldn't really call that debacle an improvement.

it seemed so new and exciting at the time

http://www.granitegrok.com/pix/precious.jpg

lol

oops

precious.jpg

lol

It took me a sec to get why that was done.

Reading this thread is like reading about another world. I trust the moderators to act with a certain amount of discretion.

IMO, the people who would seem to be in danger of banning through their contravention of the standards Pashmina outlined above are also people whose contributions to,ilx are mainly confined to self-approving adolescent shallowness insisting upon its claim to everyone's attention, repeatedly, with annoyance aforethought.

When ILX is functioning properly, such posters as I have described are tolerated, reproved gently, and finally reformed into better citizens. But for this to happen their numbers need to stay at a level ILX can absorb.

Too many party-crashers at the same time and the ILX culture is wrenched toward the juvenile so strongly that the re-education process never occurs and the most immature posters come to think that their own tribe represents what ILX is all about.

all societies, real or virtual, consume themselves before they die.

i propose a 're-education camp' board that the troublemakers could be exiled to for a few weeks until the re-education process occurs

AADers are wise to the ways of troll invasions

On a serious note for a moment can I perhaps raise the point that lately a lot of people have been coming in with new names/sockpuppets and it has become impossible to tell who is who, and who's making a joke others know about vs a genuine slanging match or attack?

This usernames without emails/identifiers on nu-ilx is a pain in the arse on that point tbh.

oh hey another systemic change that the coders/mods never thought through

Odd how ppl who objected to manipulation by sockpuppet Luna turned out to be great Muppeteers themselves here and there. Felt sorry for genuine peeps who got hosed, though!

Back in the mists of ILX a badly socialized poster began to stalktroll to the point where he was IP searched and point-blank told that that if he was going to harass people to the point where he wasn't doing any work at work, which we named in an anti-google way, maybe employer's tech department needed to know about it. Guy flipped of course but for some weird reason he stopped behaving so badly IMMEDIATELY and eventually became IRL friends with many of his biggest online foes.

Actually, various reboots of that scenario have happened so often with ILX (calling work threat a one-off though). It's always to do with the narcissism of small differences and private pushed buttons mixing badly with someone else's, but the good news is how easily people overcome it.

oh hey sanskrit beating a dead horse and managing to make it sounds like nails on a chalkboard xp

Aw don't hurt the good name of Muppets in this way.

regardless of its technical limitations, ILX is only as good as its posting populace

has it occurred to anyone that the reason for all this crap being dredged up is because the internal search engine actually works now?

Thats true, unfortunately (or fortunately? lol I dont know anymore) xpost

if that were true jaymc would have been our downfall years ago

regardless of its technical limitations, ILX is only as good as its posting populace

-- Curt1s Stephens, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 11:47 (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

yeah relying on the tech side of things is the board equivalent of "we'll fix it in the mix"

rule #77

you are allowed 1 meta thread per month use it wisely

-- and what, Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:18 AM (1 week ago) Bookmark Link

It's always to do with the narcissism of small differences...

OTFM

ILX rule #4080
New posters are shadyyyy

Hindsight is always 20/20, but frankly, it was none of our business. You couldn't really call that debacle an improvement.

Short-term no, but I believe that the long-term effects of the Luna fiasco are positive.

it brought ILX into the Web 2.0 era

has it occurred to anyone that the reason for all this crap being dredged up is because the internal search engine actually works now?

I used to campaign for the return of the random thread link, but I've since changed my mind.

uh just to pop in here again (bar was awesome btw also a fine brown sugar coated burger was had) i think it would be fair that the way that "borad 77" is being represented here as a constant stream of invective about the non-included is a) completely inaccurate b) being perpetuated by people that HAVE NEVER SEEN THE BOARD even though open invitations have been clearly offered on multiple threads by multiple people or c) people being disingenuous that should probably think about how making it seem like a clusterfuck of brutal taunting is just as cruel (if not more so) to people that aren't on there as starting a thread about a particular posteron the board would be.

for example, i have seen the "thoughts about the pinefox" thread, and if it makes you feel better, dude, it isn't nasty or character-assassination based to my recollection, so i hope you aren't getting the wrong impression

I sincerely doubt that the pinefox is particularly concerned

xp You can see how that impression could be gained, though, surely? 'Thoughts about xxx' in a secret board implies backstabbing to some degree, even if it's not.

(argh I don't mean to pick up the Tuomas mantle)

yes which is why he is speaking out against people posting titles of threads without context in an attempt to soil the name of a perfectly good secret borad

JJ I'd just like to say for my part, the stuff I am talking about isnt rly 77 related so much as specific-posters related and has occurred elswhere too, but I can only speak for mself obv (and I post on 77 ffs)

xp Ah cool.

the crutis is 100% correct re:my intentions.

Sorry then.

(I shouldn't even be commenting as I've not seen the borad)

Short-term no, but I believe that the long-term effects of the Luna fiasco are positive.

-- Elvis Telecom

yes

being perpetuated by people that HAVE NEVER SEEN THE BOARD

Well, then what's wrong with letting them see the board so they can make an informed contribution.

I think it's fair to solicit views on how 77 relates to the ILX community.

90% of 77 is probably fun and playful. I lurked out of morbid curiosity for a while.

It is terribly naive to think that anyone would not, given the chance, read what someone else wrote about them in a tiny community like ILX.

It's evident by now that people post to 77 with a different attitude than they take to the public boards. I don't know that it's an attitude the community feels it wants to encourage.

This is like two walls shouting at each other.

walls don't shout, you sillyhead.

They obviously don't have ears either.

omg zen

ban these walls

Well, then what's wrong with letting them see the board so they can make an informed contribution.

anyone can be invited. I don't making 77 public is the issue here though.

It's evident by now that people post to 77 with a different attitude than they take to the public boards. I don't know that it's an attitude the community feels it wants to encourage.

people post to all the boards with a different attitude! that's what's great about the subboards, they all have their own defined idiosyncracies and they're not just boring cut-and-dry shit like other messageboards. but I know what you're getting at re: 77 and its particular place in the ILX meta shitstorm. if the mods want to lock some of the harsh threads on 77 feel free to do so (and I mean actually harsh, not "your 77 assignment for today" which is u&k and just about inventing retarded short-term memes)

Sorry if you think this is dense, HOOS, but it is a complicated issue and not everyone is going to agree.

That was a misread on my part, sorry.

I was referring specifically to you saying "why not just let everyone see" after several invites to from Croot to join the borad. I didn't read carefully enough and missed that you said that you already lurked 77 for a while.

Walls shouting at walls indeed.

I invite ILBBers from time to time but it's by no means methodical.

77 was fun, and has lots of fun threads, the majority of which had nothing to do w/ meta gossip, the same kind that some posters critical of 77 routinely engage in.

im pretty sure it was understood that everyone would ultimately end up invited just by the nature of the thing, thus repeated joeks on the board in supposedly 'mean' meta threads about 'posters who require serious consideration' (a thread i started basically about dom, who i invited shortly after) about how the real fun would come when everybody was actually invited.

on my part (cant speak for others), we were basically joking about being a 'secret borad' and i dont think anyone was taking it very seriously like it was gonna be some super-secret meta ilx club for all cruelty/eternity. numerous posters offered invites to anyone who wanted them. the vibe was sorta max/gr80 wacky laid back 'post your party jams' 'thread for keepin' it positive' and lots of joeks about 'lol secret borad'.

im not saying individual posters didnt act like individual posters do, just sayin theres some disingenuousness up in here

sometimes it feels like the boards of nu-ilx have like... paper-thin walls or something. i don't know why, i just get that really strong impression.

getty out of here s1ocki

I always thought the unspoken point of 77 was Noise Mk. 2 with a kinder, gentler hegemony.

xposts, HAW

all I have to say is that cut-and-pasting (esp posts months or years old) in an attempt to zing or whatever is lame and juvenile to the nth degree.

walls holding hot charcoals

deej OTM

It's not and never is OK to cover any amount of bad behaviour with LOL JOEK to people who aren't playing along with you.

I think the point is that people who are not fans of going cap in hand to ANYONE to join up with stuff are not going to relish the prospect of soliciting invite requests by any method, especially if the people who seem most gung-ho about having a place like 77 are responsible for actions others have been complaining about.

It's not and never is OK to cover any amount of bad behaviour with LOL JOEK to people who aren't playing along with you.

Applies in real life too. I've no tolerance for this crap.

just so we can be clear--people most gung-ho about 77 (i.e. first few people invited):

curtis
hoos
max
rev
grady
deej

none of whom have been particularly mean to you, suzy?

(those are chaki's 6 favorite posters, btw)

it certainly is a disservice to have 77 repped by such objectional posters as deej and John Justen!!! >:(

it is really wack that 77 is being called out as nasty here, i said it like 300 posts upthread, i'll say it again. it is like 100x less nasty than the noise board, ask chaki, whatever, the only reason it is getting any attention here is because it's invite only.

I WAS NEVER INVITED TO A SECRET BORAT

>:(

77 detractors and defenders are missing the point, this is about individual posters crossing the line regardless of where they post.

I wholeheartedly approve of these new moderation standards.

Also, Aimless OTM way up there.

and it sucks that crutis feels all shitty about his borad and that some d-bags signed into flickr and left trayce's friends creepsy comments.

I think that last conditional statement is a mischaracterization. I don't know that there's anyone left who is "gung-ho about having a place like 77" at this point, everyone just seems to be defending it as a place that wasn't entirely closed-doors gossip mongering and nasty ad hominem rants.

This is about discouraging posters from purposefully doing things to other posters that would be considered bad faith or boorish in any setting. This is not really about 77 or Ask Chaki or any particular group of people.

huge xpost to suzy there.

xxp I'm sorry if I made anyone feel shitty about 77 btw. Just wary of secret things becoming non-secret rather explosively.

Hey, I like 77. But why didn't you start your pinefox thread on one of the other boards?

xp to Mandee

"Thoughts on the pinefox" totally would have worked on ILM 2001

max u forgot kerm

t's on p's

i cant speak for mandee (or jon re: alexinnyc) but i dont think that anyone who contributed a meta thought/post to 77 was going "oh man this is secret look at all the shit i can get away with" especially when chaki was helpfully c/ping everything he could to stir up shit

where's my invite

what is your e-mail address?

We had threads like "Is it getting ruder in here?" back in 2002. There's just a next level of bit-torrent-cloud of gossip and meta made possible here. Meta 2.0. Half-charming but half-crepey.

btw guys this was all a trick to get your emails in my xls. suckers

gbx I invited the one email of yours I had

ev do i have yr email?? also i need u to help me with bike repair, i left it out for a month and it got raided by asshole bike hipster pirates for everything but the front wheel+ frame

oh shit i forgot about that, sorry for not calling back :-/

lemme check my dummy accounts

we just need whatever email u registered with to get 77 access

Post to ILBB instead! Much easier.

OK I was wrong, there is a particular subset of people the new mod policies are targeting. asshole bike hipster pirates.

xlnt!!! i hate those jerks

for some reason i would mind less if my bike had been obliterated by a legit criminal element

I assume you mean the complement of that set xpost

hit me at z e g e m a b e a c h at yahooooooooooooo dot shut the hell up

also give me details of bike incident

asshole bike hipster pirates.

pretty sure this was a roger corman film

Tom, you should put Ed on that one because he could just drop stuff out of a window a la Letterman in the '80s.

a young marty scorcese directed

No you're thinking of Russ Meyer's classic Busty Bike Hipster Pirates.

*slaps forehead* of course, what was i thinking

What's weird is that I don't see 77 as doing anything different from what the Noise Board started doing four years ago (beginning with the Noise Board Enemies thread).

(And for what it's worth, when I complained on the Mod Request Board back in 2004 about ILE posters getting zinged behind their backs, I was basically told it was Jon's board and there was nothing mods could do about it. So I adapted and learned to throw around a zing or two myself.)

I think the issue is really somewhat bigger/beyond the topics on 77 - it's been used as a bit of a strawman here.

I'm personaly more uncomfy knowing about things like Roxy's gossip-meta-chart thats off ILX alltogether, and similarly about AIM chats, because when all youre seeing is a bunch of ppl childishly going "omg you guys this is so ROFL, omg I cant believe you SAID that! You gotta come see this shit", then well, one can't help feel just a little bit nervous, wouldn't you agree?

I've never had much of a problem with zings, beyond them being mostly boring and lazy. It is rumour-spreading, and people threatening to "expose" stuff they were told in confidence off board, using that as some kind of blackmail - thats where I'm coming from here.

Trayce, I hear ya, but this happens all the time in real life with people of all ages outside the internets. And i know you're not nervous in the company of everybody!

Well, thats a fair point. And I'm ready to admit I've probably recently let this get to me more than I should have, but it is for specific reasons to do with personal shit that I made a very very big deal of keeping off ILX, but because I made a couple of errors in who I confided in, this got severely shat on.

Oh well.

Now don't make me get out that pram beer-drinking photo!!!

I've never seen Roxy's gossip meta chart, although it isn't as if I've snooped all over her computer. Is it possible that this was made up to bug people?

Well yeah sure it is, but thats even worse, IMO :(

Look again tho - this is just my take on it all, and I know some of you think I'm an over-precious flower about all this, so it doesn't matter really. I've had a chance to have a bitch about it finally, and its done.

guyz the chart is another strawman. everything it charted when i last saw it-- when tom banned me for posting its contents on 77-- was lazy zing stuff that is repeated constantly over this board or v. harmless in-jokey things that ppl who aren't in the top 10 posters of every month would not care about or probably get. it was not made up to bug anyone, in fact, it was created as an earnest attempt to chart and connect ilx history (like the creation of boards and things). as more people got a hold of it, as has happened w/ this board over the past 7 years, it got a little carried away in places, but it is nothing that should be worthy of paranoia by posters who havent seen it.

i understand that the mere existence of it arouses that paranoia, but try and keep your conspiracy levels to a minimum. a good majority of us are very nice and well-meaning people. some of us thing it's fun and harmless and brotherly maybe to laugh at things people say, others don't feel that way. it will always be this way, tho it seems we all learned this again the hard way.

Roxy loves ILX and she loves ILX people. She wouldn't say, "God, this guy/chick is an idiot," she'd say, "Aw, how cute! Look at this post. Doesn't that make you lol?"

hay sarge can you sum this thread up so i don't have to read it

this happens all the time in real life with people of all ages outside the internets

Let me clear this up for a minute.

ILX is not the commons.
ILX is like a bar, or a club, or an amusement park, or a school, or an office kitchen. It will be regulated for the good of the many. It is not a free-for-all and we are not throwing up our hands in exasperation anymore while one poster after another leaves of their own accord because of the obnoxious behavior of others who believe themselves beholden to no one.
That is what we have said. I don't believe any of the mods has stated that people should be lovely and nice to one another just like we all acted when we lived in Eden. I also do not understand why it is so difficult to understand what kind of activity entails being a dick (as in "don't be a dick") but here we are.

Now don't make me get out that pram beer-drinking photo!!!

it was great!

hay sarge can you sum this thread up so i don't have to read it

-- The Brainwasher, Wednesday, May 21, 2008 1:02 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

mods outline stricter modding policy, ilx reacts, collectively treads water

I like this new mod policy.But what about threads revived not for baiting but because it targeted a topic I/someone wanted to talk about. For example mothers. This thread included posts by Luna. I think in hindsight my revive (which was a ver vague post) cld have been misconstrued as an attack on other posters which was not the case at all. I just have a mother complex I need to go through. *sadface*

also do not understand why it is so difficult to understand what kind of activity entails being a dick

i dunno. Took me a good while. Oops.

thx.

mods outline stricter modding policy, nothing happens for six days, ilx reacts, collectively treads water

-- J0rdan S., Wednesday, 21 May 2008 16:07 (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

fixed

Uhm, hello, have i missed anything?

Relatively, no.

"How am I butthurt? All I'm saying is, old ILX was hideously poisonous, and the people who were on it still are, long after it's been made clear they're not wanted by the majority of sensible, reasonable people on this board. I'm with Pash on this one."

Dom winz disingenuous award:
Best year for rolling teenpop

can I perhaps raise the point that lately a lot of people have been coming in with new names/sockpuppets and it has become impossible to tell who is who

ever since ILX got moved here I've never been able to tell who is who.. I also didn't actually know there was a secret board since I assumed all the references to it were some sort of elaborate in joke (like half the stuff that goes on here now)

http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=48&threadid=1388

enough is enough

So you can be as asinine, challopsy and monomaniacal as you like, and that's all good, but you mustn't call somebody else out on that shit? Okay cool.

yes, Noodle, that is EXACTLY what Pash and the rest of us meant to say.

I assume this Tedious rote responses to certain posters, especially the use of repeated image "zings" refers to tedious rote responses to certain posters tedious rote posts.

I assume it means that being a dick and thinking you're clever for it is no longer going to get a free pass just because eight other posters had the same idea before you.

can i be invited to board 77 please?

\o/
New policy is good.

what is your registered email?

xpost

(also bank details, mother's maiden name, name of first girlfriend, dna swap etc. etc.)

resea✧✧✧.m✧.l✧✧✧@gm✧✧✧.c✧✧

oops xpost

you'll have to email it to me, click my name

just so we can be clear--people most gung-ho about 77 (i.e. first few people invited):

curtis
hoos
max
rev
grady
deej

none of whom have been particularly mean to you, suzy?

-- max, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 7:51 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

(those are chaki's 6 favorite posters, btw)

-- max, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 7:51 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

oh god max stfu you are so lame.

i cant speak for mandee (or jon re: alexinnyc) but i dont think that anyone who contributed a meta thought/post to 77 was going "oh man this is secret look at all the shit i can get away with" especially when chaki was helpfully c/ping everything he could to stir up shit

-- max, Tuesday, May 20, 2008 7:58 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

way to backpeddle all your shit talking.

Cut it out guys.

DC, don't you mean DON'T TRY IT?

Weird Scenes Inside the Message Board

I just wanted to clarify that this isn't about board77. Some of the stuff referred to has happened there, plenty more on the other boards.

tedious rote responses to certain posters tedious rote posts.

"tedious rote" + "tedious rote" = more tedium for everyone.

Nah, geirbot.jpg is hilarious and you know it.

I have this image of Dom telling a stand-up comedy audience what's funny and what isn't due to butthurtedness at ungot joeks. Perhaps this is the problem with all of Dom's aspirations. Is it?

^^^stuff like this is the problem. Old ILX dudes are so fucking quick to turn to personal insults it isn't even funny.

Stop being butthurt Dom.

I don't want this to be "about" any one particular poster (or any one board!). It isn't/

Suzy != 'dude' really

I like Suzy!

so who are being bitched upon these days? i feel kind of above you all because i don't even know who is being persecuted and who are the persecuters anymore.

or is it just because i haven't been invited to area 77?

I wouldn't generalise about "Old ILX dudes" but I would agree that that post was not in the spirit of the post-meta-ILX era that we are tentatively (hopefully) taking steps towards.

The Butthurt Surfers.

There, I did not start that thread. Thank me for my restraint.

The persecuters inevitably get persecuted for persecuting and.... then I go cross-eyed.

can anyone start their own board, by the way? or does it need special privilege? why did board 77 start?

People keep changing their names so I don't know who I'm annoyed at anymore

They used to be able to, not now. (xpost to KenC)

I think it's a test for a 'registration only' board.

Tom, just be annoyed at everyone and then you don't miss anyone out.

You can be annoyed at me for not liking Blazing Saddles if you need someone to focus any excess grr-ness on.

One of the most interesting things to come out of this thread is that the moderators post in full, grammatical sentences on their board. Sounds like fun. Can I have an invite?

COME ON IT'S BLAZING SADDLES. FFS Everybody likes the farting around the campfire bit. I am like so butthurt if you do not get that joek.

Bla-zing Saddles, morelike

Bla-tingtangtonglolbritpopzing- saddleslolcrewe, more like.

^^^ 4-4-2

^^^ Real talk

^^^HOOSing this post

^^^ Dom Passantino ^^^s The ^^^ that needed to be ^^^ed

I am completely out of my depth here

log (x)

*sits back and eats popcorn* I wonder how much this zero toleration attitude will affect the atmosphere of this board. I doubt very little. Or maybe for a while only to return to "normal". That said, I also think some people should cool the fuck out. I mean, sure there's a lot of zinging and shittalking,but sometimes you just have to be able to shrug it off. (It helps to have a few kids and realize it ain't that important. The shittalking, I mean, not the kids.) Then again I haven't followed ILX too closely so I'm not sure how snipey and zingy it has become.

I wish I was kewl enough to be even aware of this meta bitching.

There are only 5 specific response-types in this thread. This is Type B.

i don't know whether bitching about other posters is the best way to stop people bitching about other posters. i'm disturbed by the vein of hypocrisy running through this whole episode.

my prediction is that the more reasonable of the new policies will be lost in the rush to misappropriate the issue and redirect it to suit the cause of certain individuals on this board with an agenda to promote.

-- Roberto Spiralli, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 13:02 (21 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

Sadly, I think this is dead on.

Vicar, it helps to be somewhat of a pessimist and negative person to perceive some remarks as zingy and snipey.

NV, I try to be B +. Get it?

Nath, I just hope you're ready to maintain that attitude when someone starts a thread saying you are a bad parent in real life. Thats the sort of thing that's sparked this.

or a thread called "lol i have kids"

Michael: How bad do you think it's gonna be?
Clemenza: Pretty goddam bad. Probably all the other Families will line up against us. That's all right. These things gotta happen every five years or so, ten years. Helps to get rid of the bad blood. Been ten years since the last one. You know, you gotta stop them at the beginning. Like they should have stopped Hitler at Munich, they should never let him get away with that, they was just asking for trouble.

featuring pictures of your kids taken by private detectives.

xpost

Trayce, I'm not saying that every (snipey interpreted) comment is jokey and should be taken more lightly! I just wonder how one draws the line (between letting it slide or deleting it), y'know. Also some dude once posted a very mean thing about my baby (something about Ophelia looking like a complete freak and dying of crib death). I just retorted something mean in response and then ignored him. (Think he got banned afterwards.)

I think someone acussed me of that (being a bad parent) on the "Maddy" thread. And they didn't even know I was a parent. Oh, how I laughed.

Nath, I was once walking up Glen Nevis with my son in a backpack thingy when a passing fellow told me my baby was dead (because he had fallen asleep). Bizarre. And nothing to do with this thread. Carry on.

Also I am a bad parent! Everyone is, see P Larkin for details.

Who on earth started the "Alex is a bad parent thread", anyway? Ian? A guy that isn't a zinger, an metahead, or one of Roxy's crew.

please

A smear campaign, smear tactic or simply smear is a metaphor for activity that can harm an individual or group's reputation by conflation with a stigmatized group.

90% of posts in this thread: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind-blindness

Conflation occurs when the identities of two or more individuals, concepts, or places, sharing some characteristics of one another, become confused until there seems to be only a single identity.

"Butthurt" is like the stupidest word ever.

also one of the cleverest

is it meta to be butthurt about the word butthurt?

It doesn't actually matter who started the alex in nyc thread on b77. That is not the point.

x-post, yes I agree, j. Common usage I've seen of it seems to be "I'm going to act like a dick and if you complain, then you are the one with the problem"

"In my day, butthurt was a perfectly innocent word used to describe rectal pains. Nowadays, the word has been perverted to mean "upset at trivialities", by the same people who have ruined the meanings of "gay" and "rim". How much more are we expected to take?"

Brigadier Alfred Taylor, Bridgend.

before 'butthurt' people would say 'sandy vagina'. to me these are ilx-clusives but i don't know who coined them.

has anyone ever used "butthurt" in real life?

i did once accuse someone of having sand in their vagina, but(thurt) it did receive the rapturous response i would have liked.

I actually was so out of my mind, I actually said "roffle" yesterday (and then proceeded to talk in Dutch again). I'm pretty sure she thought I was on crack.

can anyone start their own board, by the way? or does it need special privilege? why did board 77 start?

-- ken c, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 10:25 (2 hours ago) Link

They used to be able to, not now. (xpost to KenC)

I think it's a test for a 'registration only' board.

-- Mark G, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 10:26 (2 hours ago) Link

I started and modded a couple of boards around 04-05 back when I was a regular second or third-tier ILX presence, then around 2006-7 (when ILX2 came in) they got hijacked by various persons prominent in this thread. It was only when I tried to clean all the bulldust off the boards that I realised I had lost my mod priveleges. The crap I got from that crowd when I had a whinge about it wasn't what anybody could call bullying or harassment, compared with the stuff I've been reading on this thread, but it was plenty bloody irritating enough to make ILX less of a place I wanted to hang around.

Pash, more power to you.

Ad hominem snide at any other poster about IRL things that are not under discussion on that thread

-- Pashmina, Wednesday, May 14, 2008 7:34 PM (1 week ago) Bookmark Link

I just would ike to point out that when I met Kate St. Clair in person, in real life, in a london pub, she came off exactly the fucking insane homeless bonkers bag lady archetype I thought she would. I vote hard to the left but I don't suffer a fool for very long. I suspect the rest of the FAP crowd felt sorry for me while I endured your lecture on the Masonic conference rooms of London, but I've learned my lesson not to speak for others. To cover my own sentiments, how about a big FUCK YOU YOU'RE PRETTY STUPID. Congrats on getting to open for an overrated pack of 40something talentless bithces that one time, that is something the rest of us will never get to do.

-- El Tomboto, Thursday, 30 August 2007 19:43 (Yesterday) Link

also I hate you and think you're an imbecile.

-- El Tomboto, Thursday, 30 August 2007 19:44

this is the post i believe what inspired pash to make tom a mod

I also do not understand why it is so difficult to understand what kind of activity entails being a dick (as in "don't be a dick") but here we are.

-- El Tomboto, Wednesday, May 21, 2008 2:03 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Link

im really not bringing these quotes up just for shit stirring purposes - a few of the new rules are blatantly absurd a vague - the fact that tom/pash cant see this is kinda o_O and points to the possibility that they may be a little too similar in disposition to effectively enact these new heavy modding policies

I want to take a moment to mention that I personally am well aware that I'm not innocent in this respect, but at this point I don't know if anybody is; suffice to say we've all wasted some time "being all meta" and realizing when we ourselves have gotten swept up in the tide is part of the reason for this policy coming up.

-- TOMBOT, Saturday, 17 May 2008 14:57 (4 days ago) Bookmark Link

Jhoshea fwiw I think that Tombot post would definitely qualify for deletion.

"swept up in this tide"

yahhhh ok

This thread is begining to eat itself

"beginning", lol

anyway i can understand cutting the researching yr life aspects - but cracking down on zings pranks and c&ping is going way too far - prune the rules back and make them more specific and im sure everyone can understand cracking down on the stalkery shit - im sure even the threads devoted to capping on a particular poster can go and no one would cry too much

will be an interesting fix, as schoolyardiness is the first trait I associate w/ ILX.

Mine is their pathetic love of Judd Apatow.

I also agree that that Tombot post stinks, regardless of its context (of which I know nothing).

I also agree that that Tombot post stinks, regardless of its context (of which I know nothing).

-- Fred Nerk, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 14:29 (13 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

Sir, you go too far.

jhøshea otm. very differen things are getting mashed together here and it's not helping the discussion. would perhaps be a good idea to disaggregate.

Maybe set up different threads to discuss different issues?

One for meta, one for C+Ping, one for stalking, and one for general "meanieness"

No, let's keep it all in here, please.

Oh come on, we all sometimes get a bit stir crazy on a Friday afternoon, maybe revive a few threads in a frivolous way, go on a deranged paragraph long character assassination, it's all ju

xpos

Well, obviously everyone cares what happens, however they choose to show it, otherwise this thread would not be like 600 responses long. YAY US.

it's all ju-ju

Come together
Right now
Over meta.

the thread revival aspect is just too much - if someone said something here then its in play - we should all be able to agree on that

^ truth bo

i recommend reading old threads without reviving them

This thread:

SPEAKER
Then it is unanimous, we are going to approve the bill to evacuate the town of Springfield in the great state of--

CONGRESSMAN
Wait a second, I want to tack on a rider to that bill - $30 million of taxpayer money to support the perverted arts.

SPEAKER
All in favor of the amended Springfield-slash-pervert bill?

FLOOR
Boo!

SPEAKER
Bill defeated.

the Stockwell bannings changed everythi

why can't you finish your own

I don't see what the girl who played Betty Rizzo in Grease has to do with anything. (xpost)

The thread revival thing is probably one of the main things that really, really fucks people off. To have stuff they wrote years ago, under very different circumstances dragged up, sometimes repeatedly, for adolescent lols is some pretty poor shit and I disagree that it's "in play", some of it (revivalism) can get pretty obsessive and stalkerish in its own right.

LOL Dom Lennon. Can I point out to you that there are threads where we do get on OK?

It's not so much the revives as to the pattern and the new posts on the revives that make them dodgy or part of someone's vendetta flowchart. We revive because of current events too obv. Moderators who are aware of site traffic and the component of site traffic that's beef related are in a great place to make that call and I'm happy to leave it to them.

if people want to revive threads for lols i guess they can first put together some thoughtful new comment on the subject to bump it with

.....a number of posters seemed to want a "gated community" for themselves and a handful of others, rather than an open one.....I think the meta stuff is part of this: alienate those you don't want in your community, so that you can get rid of them.

-- Euler, Tuesday, 20 May 2008 22:24 (Yesterday) Link

wait, so who wants to be in a gated community, according to this?

either way, i'd go with jhoshea with

anyway i can understand cutting the researching yr life aspects - but cracking down on zings pranks and c&ping is going way too far

im really not bringing these quotes up just for shit stirring purposes - a few of the new rules are blatantly absurd a vague - the fact that tom/pash cant see this is kinda o_O and points to the possibility that they may be a little too similar in disposition to effectively enact these new heavy modding policies

Lol. 1) yes you are 2) no they're not 3) they';ve been thinking about this for however long and at the very least know what they mean 4) Tom and pashmina are polar opposites.

Joshea no one is suggesting clamping down on ALL zings or ALL c&p, it's specifically behind-the-back creepery, mocking and bitching, and endlessly repeated rote responses we're talking about. Going through and deleting every single zing is not my idea of a fun, interesting, productive or successful way to spend my time. No one is going to clamp down on Excelsior or the Out Of Context Thread or anything like that. I'm pretty sure we've gone down this road already.

Of course there's going to be *some* grey area. You can't HAVE a hard and fast set of rules, something or other is always going to have to come down to moderator discretion and there's never going to be 100% consistency unless mods read every single post on every single thread. The best thing we can do is take the really creepy or bitchy stuff down as and when we come across it. Thankfully it's quite easy to find a lot of the time.

The way I see it, people will continue to post if ILX is regularly seen as aggravating, confrontational, cranky, annoying or aggressive, as long as it's also funny, interesting, thought-provoking or just amusingly stupid at the same time. Once the boards get a reputation for being creepy or for posts continually being cut and pasted for being bitched about on sub-boards then that's it.

no post should just be a c&p

Agree with O'Shea about thread revival in general but as always it's a matter of what's motivating it. The 'pots and kettles' routine - you're a dick, no here's something that you posted back in 1982 that shows you're even nmore of a dick, so there nyah nyah nyah - becomes excrutiatingly boring in record-breaking time.

unless it made you laugh out loud of course xp

I've gotta say, I could really go for a moratorium on the word "zing" about now, it's getting like that sectioning episode of Peep Sh

DING DING DING DING DING. A WINNER! (to MDC)

I think the mods should create a secret borad for all the "but what will I do if I can't act a dick waa waa"/"I will protect your freedom to be a dick even if it means the whole place disintegrating" dissenting voices and it'll be such a utopia of liberty and zings frolicking unshackled that they won't want to play on ILE any more.

I think people are maybe guilty of way overestimating the number of posts or threads that will be affected here. Or alternatively deliberately overinflating that figure in order to undermine the new guidelines before we've even had a chance to put them into action.

DING DING DING

So wait will I get banned if I post to this

I certainly wouldn't like to see the database cleared of 'obsolete' threads every so often (six months, a year, whatever), like the C4 cricket forum used to do, for that or any other reason. Looking up old threads from 2004 is one of my favorite wastes of time.

if someone said something here then its in play

in play for what?

FTW BABY

DING DING DING

So wait will I get banned if I post to this

-- MPx4A, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 13:46 (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

Does it match up with any of the following? You can probably work the answer out for yourself pretty easily:

An obsessive interest in researching scandal/gossip that's happened in the past, manifesting itself as revivals of old threads to highlight some post or statement that's supposedly funny or o_0 or whatever.

Ad hominem snide at any other poster about IRL things that are not under discussion on that thread

Meta snidiness behind people's backs on one of the smaller boards or on board 77

Researching-ur-life shit about people who don't even post here anymore.

Using smaller boards or board 77 to plan pranks/raids on the main boards, as in here or here

Sharing logins to run multi-user sockpuppets for baiting people

Helping people who've been banned from the board to register new accounts

Tedious rote responses to certain posters, especially the use of repeated image "zings".

jhøshea, let he who is innocent (of zings) cast the first stone. I mean, shit, dude, everyone has posted something stupid/mean on this board at least once. Does that discredit the rest of the (good) things the poster (in this case Tom) has posted? No.

Well, it seems like it won't affect ILM/ILE all that much, but since zings and c+p'ing are kind of the raison d'etre of some of the minor boards, I see them being affected by this decision quite strongly. Since I don't live in NYC, the only reason I read Noise Board is for threads like "o_O posts," "the final lolution," "lord custos tribute thread," "posts very much in character," "the wit & wisdom of mr. snrub," "truth bombs," "Tuomas staring into the vast seas of mystery," and "the estela appreciation thead" (all of which are in New Answers right now, and all of which seem subject to being deleted, according to the new policy).

hay ive got modified rule proposals here

actions what will provoke immediate mod intervention:

bringing irl shit here to fuk w/a ilxor

starting threads all about zinging one poor ilxor

actions what will get you a stern talking to and eventually provoke mod intervention if you dont shape the fuck up:

chronic bullying: thread revivals, zings, ban requests, ad hominem atakz, c&ping, stalking across threads, minor board bitching etc aimed at ilxors you hate. occasional instances of these activities w/o any larger grudge bearing pattern are totally allowed and hilarious.

in these instances the mod intervention will be initiated in the form of a mod request by the aggrieved party. thus avoiding excessive modding where both parties are cool w/teh beef.

actions what are ok:

using smaller boards to plan pranks/raids on the main boards

sharing logins to run multi-user sockpuppets for baiting googlers

helping people who've been banned from the board to register new accounts

What does IRL mean?

in real life

jhøshea, let he who is innocent (of zings) cast the first stone. I mean, shit, dude, everyone has posted something stupid/mean on this board at least once. Does that discredit the rest of the (good) things the poster (in this case Tom) has posted? No.

-- stevienixed, Wednesday, May 21, 2008 9:54 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

hey i love tom - great poster fascinating guy - i find his modding to be a little self-righteous at times is all

xxpost Something we have little of.

DING DING DING

So wait will I get banned if I post to this

-- MPx4A, Wednesday, 21 May 2008 13:46 (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

I hope not; I love threads like that, and it seems obvious to me that they're not meant to pick on any particular poster. If it's zinging anything, it's Internet message-board cliches. But this does seem like a gray area, where mods might interpret such posts as making fun of individual ILXors, so I think it's worth bringing up.

starting threads all about zinging one poor ilxor

Let's start another salary post.

is it just tedious and rote zings specifically that are being targeted here?

yeah those threads are okay as a pass-agg way of registering your boredom of or amusement at cliched expressions - can take or leave them (xposts)

why don't we just delete all posts prior to january 2008 and then we can all live happily ever after?

Blueski: xpost to where?

To clarify, of course threads like the ding ding ding one are fine, there's nothing snarky about it whatsoever.

actions what will get you a stern talking to and eventually provoke mod intervention if you dont shape the fuck up:

chronic bullying: thread revivals, zings, ban requests, ad hominem atakz, c&ping, stalking across threads, minor board bitching etc aimed at ilxors you hate. occasional instances of these activities w/o any larger grudge bearing pattern are totally allowed and hilarious.

in these instances the mod intervention will be initiated in the form of a mod request by the aggrieved party. thus avoiding excessive modding where both parties are cool w/teh beef.

actions what are ok:

using smaller boards to plan pranks/raids on the main boards

sharing logins to run multi-user sockpuppets for baiting googlers

helping people who've been banned from the board to register new accounts

Srsly, start your own message board, you're in for a big disappointment (also see a shrink if this kind of things makes you hard)

I like jhøshea's modified rule proposals. If it were put to a vote with a poll thread, I would create many many sockpuppets to vote "y".

can we plz ban mark c for talking abt making me hard - gross dude just gross

I would have registered a sock puppet to say "Automatic Bump. Poll is closing tomorrow."

xpost

also think we should vote out one poster a month, Big Brother sty

Cutting down on certain types of snark may be good for ILX, but what also would be good is if some folks figured out how to grow a thicker skin.