Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
or to put it in more general terms...personA complained about something personB posted and a mod took action without any proof whatsoever and without any backing of any forum rule
if you cant see that as a problem (and I get the feeling you cant) then there is nothing further to discuss
I already had the feeling i would come from outer space.
For me it is so obviously against all common behavior ...
One marginal question:
I am not an expert, but how can one recognize it as being from a dog?
Not that it would matter for me, i like the general look&feel, not that part, and the wallpaper/desktop is not the problem here.
"I am not fine with it, so there is nothing for me to do but stand aside." M.D.
Telemachus wrote: I will say that this whole thing looks to me (at a quick read), like a tempest in a teapot. No doubt with a little team spirit and commitment we could stretch this thread out for 10 or even 20 pages, but really, is it worth it? ?
ahh yes....Teles preference is for things not to become a big issue...no ugly arguments and all that.....maybe time for a new rule???
things should run the way the mods want them to run afterall....
but I wont stretch the thread out any further....no more to say besides THANK YOU to the admins/mods....really have needed for this last bastion of sensibility to turn to crap so I could feel comfortable not visiting it anymore....so thanks...the fact that a turd wallpaper is the reason is just WAY too good....way too good....
rule #15 - no turds for your wallpaper, naked chicks are fine (although debian-women wont like it) and religious figures/signs are fine as is political thingys but no turds....no no no....no turds....
I grant that you did this in your persona of Gnudude. I didn't remember that. Or maybe you're objecting to me saying you volunteered? I can't say that for sure - no idea, actually.
"We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful."
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
Mr James wrote:You people do realize you're arguing over dog crap, don't you?
The discussion is over whether a poster's comments should be censored without a proper review to confirm forum rules were broken. The thing that makes it so funny is that a couple of dog turds were the impetus for the discussion. I still think it should be the default wallpaper for at least one derivative distro.
I'd add a smiley, but I'm really only half-joking.
I wish for a conjugal visit and world peace. (Don't want to seem selfish.)
Somebody apparently has dog crap as a wallpaper. Someone else, of delicate sensibilities no doubt - and more importantly who felt (wrongly I think) he was being insulted by the dog turd wallpaper - made a complaint. AbsentMinded,....
or to put it in more general terms...personA complained about something personB posted and a mod took action without any proof whatsoever and without any backing of any forum rule
if you cant see that as a problem (and I get the feeling you cant) then there is nothing further to discuss
I think your description of AM's actions is not quite fair or accurate. First, there is a rule against "Links to inappropriate websites" and content is supposed to be "polite". Both are mentioned as things that may get your post edited. We can debate whether or not the turds were appropriate or polite, but there rule is there. Second, you don't mention that AM asked nadir what the picture was. Third, as I keep saying, I think it matters that AM compromised: he didn't lock the thread or make the link disappear. He made it a little harder to get to, in an effort to please both parties - the person who complained and the person who posted the link.
"We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful."
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
Dean, you couldn't care less about the forum rules on any given day. You have made this quite apparent in the past. The fact is that you have some kind of personal beef with me apparently. It doesn't matter whether I would have consulted with other staff or not. This has been made apparent in the past already as you have specifically mocked me for consulting with others instead of making the decision of my own accord. Either way, you are trying to bully your way threw things. I find it hard to believe that "now" all of a sudden you are clinging to the forum rules that you keep showing such disregard for.
As for my actions, I had just cause to take them. As far as I am concerned, I could have been harder on those involved and it would have still been reasonable. With all the trash talk and bickering the thread probably just should have been locked. There are several more severe actions I could have too rather than just obfuscating a link for a time.
From what you are saying if someone were to of posted child porn instead but I could not have seen it, I should have just left it. That is asinine.
So big deal, the link was obfuscated for a few hours while things were checked out. Anyone who really wanted to view it could (assuming they had the capability). With all this fuss one would think I deleted someones account for no reason at all. Get real and grow up.
Serving the community the best way I can.
Spreading the tradition of Community Spirit.
Please read some Basic Forum Philosophy Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach him how to fish, he eats for life. Updated Nov. 19, 2012
higgins wrote:wow, what a suprise. Posts have been removed from this thread.
They have been? I'm not aware of anything like that. Can you elaborate, please?
Follow-up: after a quick check in the logs, I see that three users appear to have removed their own posts from the thread. Since there has been some anger about moderator edits more generally, I want to make clear that I don't think any mod or admin has edited this thread in any way. I may be wrong about that, but it's what I can see in the logs.
Just for what it's worth, I would hope that we could give each other the benefit of the doubt and not assume the worst (nor jump to conspiratorial, worst-case conclusions). So far as I know, it has always been the case that except for moving outright spam or in the case of very extreme pornography, racism or hate, edited or locked posts are marked as such. I don't believe any of the mods does this sort of thing secretly or on the sly.
"We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful."
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
give each other the benefit of the doubt and not assume the worst
You can see why i quote this?
I did remove my last post, cause in this section not much is going on. I don't want nadir to be there, at top of this section, for a long time. I am tired of him. That was all. In case no one will post after this one i will remove this post too
(assuming no one will make it non-editable)
Checking old posts of oneself will not hurt.
"I am not fine with it, so there is nothing for me to do but stand aside." M.D.
