Official Everybody Edits Forums

Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?

You are not logged in.

Advertisement

Hello, visitor! These forums are run off of the revenue generated from these ads. If you'd like to support us, please whitelist us or consider donating:

#26 2017-01-04 07:43:34

AnatolyEE
Member
From: Unknown location
Registered: 2015-07-31
Posts: 2,311
Website

Re: less moderation

AnatolyEE            |        9
Gosha                 |       17

And you called me spammer?


This Forum User is dead, and is no longer playing.

Previous Signature: http://i.imgur.com/vtUxQtZ.png

=================================================================
If you want to stay in contacts with this dead user, come to http://tokoutc.freeforums.net/!

Offline

#27 2017-01-04 17:25:09

N1KF
Member
From: Happiness Hall
Registered: 2015-02-15
Posts: 8,068
Website

Re: less moderation

Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:

We can never have too much moderation! cm68

I think it would make sense if the only rule were to keep this forum a friendly, fun, and PG-13 forum. All warnings and bans would be based on whether or not the user harms that goal, which I think works better than making a list of like over twenty-million rules. You may wonder why me of all people would suggest such a rule, since I have a bad reputation for being a neat freak over rules. It's because when you make a rule rather than a guideline, you're making a literal and specific command in contrast to a general guideline that can be applied nearly universally. With simple guidelines, the forum would be moderated more like a community than a government.

that is the worst idea ever

Do you care to explain why?

Offline

#28 2017-01-04 18:18:20

0176
Member
From: Brazil
Registered: 2015-02-15
Posts: 3,136

Re: less moderation

I honestly think some warnings might be a little bit too excessive, I mean I don't see the problem with some uhhh un-PG words as long as it isn't a direct insult, because sometimes you just can't find another similar word for those. Kids hear worse in the school bus anyway.

But gore, ok bimps I know you but that made you sound like some edgelord who just found 4chan and got aroused by all the NSFW content

Offline

#29 2017-01-04 19:07:06

skullz17
Member
Registered: 2015-02-15
Posts: 6,265

Re: less moderation

It's not gonna happen. Even if you don't consider this a kids forum, it should still be kid-friendly, because kids use it. Kids will always use it because it's a forum for EE, which is a kids game. Simple as that.


m3gPDRb.png
My soundcloud, My youtube

thx for sig bobithan

Offline

#30 2017-01-04 19:34:16

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

0176 wrote:

I honestly think some warnings might be a little bit too excessive, I mean I don't see the problem with some uhhh un-PG words as long as it isn't a direct insult, because sometimes you just can't find another similar word for those. Kids hear worse in the school bus anyway.

But gore, ok bimps I know you but that made you sound like some edgelord who just found 4chan and got aroused by all the NSFW content

look man idrc about the gore part i just threw it in.


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

#31 2017-01-04 19:37:58

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

also, can you guys (hummerz mainly) stop locking threads? as long is isnt pointless spam, it shouldnt be closed imo


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

#32 2017-01-04 19:38:27

kubapolish
Member
From: ̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍̍
Registered: 2015-02-19
Posts: 988
Website

Re: less moderation

Bimps wrote:

also, can you guys (hummerz mainly) stop locking threads? as long is isnt pointless spam, it shouldnt be closed imo

inb4 hummerz closes this topic


Offline

#33 2017-01-04 19:39:56

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

kubapolish wrote:
Bimps wrote:

also, can you guys (hummerz mainly) stop locking threads? as long is isnt pointless spam, it shouldnt be closed imo

inb4 hummerz closes this topic

true
hey if you agree with op dont forget to woot, that's how it goes for these kinds of topics


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

#34 2017-01-04 21:07:55

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:

We can never have too much moderation! cm68

I think it would make sense if the only rule were to keep this forum a friendly, fun, and PG-13 forum. All warnings and bans would be based on whether or not the user harms that goal, which I think works better than making a list of like over twenty-million rules. You may wonder why me of all people would suggest such a rule, since I have a bad reputation for being a neat freak over rules. It's because when you make a rule rather than a guideline, you're making a literal and specific command in contrast to a general guideline that can be applied nearly universally. With simple guidelines, the forum would be moderated more like a community than a government.

that is the worst idea ever

Do you care to explain why?

it's the complete opposite of what i want. basically the mods can ban for anything and they can say "well i thought it wasnt pg-13.". it's horrible








speaking of horrible, the warnings. let me go though each one and say whether i think it should stay or go and why

minimodding: i think minimodding should be allowed. sure it is annoying, but it is not anything more than that. if someone minimods, a mod should pm them to use the report function. then they will. because it's a good thing.

spam (minor): the forums define this as "Posting in the wrong topic, or posting something that doesn't add to the disussion." the wrong topic is part should be warned for, but the not adding to the discussion part should be allowed. only a minor annoyance that can be ignored

spam: yes this should be warned for. "    Posting nonsensical or incomprehensible content."

off topic: "Continuing to post content irrelevant to the topic after a polite request to stop." the last part is important. it should be very minor though

inappropriate (language): i think the censors should be erdicated entirely, so i dont agree with this rule

troublemaking: aka flaming lite. i guess. keep it in the thread it started in and it should be fine

inappropriate (minor): this one is really vague, "Posting content that may not be appropriate for children.". i think it should be removed

report abuse: yeah this should be warned for.

inappropriate: should be allowed

account fraud: should be warned for

personal info (minor): warned for

nub: basically the whole "well you are acting like a nub" rule. stupid and should be eradicated. here it is for you to judge "General purpose warning for things that aren't technically against the rules, but are disruptive to the forums. Typically you'll be asked to stop whatever it is you're doing, and if you don't that's where this warning comes in."

flaming (minor): should be allowed in said topic

flaming: should be allowed in said topic. if goes outside of said topic, get warned on

illegal: this is... i dont get why it is only 6 points. this should get you a **** perma ban. idk. this part is debatable in how major it is

personal info: yes warned



so overall i think this should happen/be kept:

spam (minor) and spam should be merged. the later part of spam (minor) should be removed

off topic, if used correctly and not abused

report abuse

account fraud

personal info (minor) and personal info should be merged

illegal



the current warning system is **** but i honestly dont know what to do to improve it. others probably have better ideas for that part.

ask questions about this and ill answer


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

Wooted by:

#35 2017-01-04 22:29:04

Pingohits
Member
From: ambidextrous dextrose
Registered: 2015-02-15
Posts: 6,627
Website

Re: less moderation

i think eeforums should have an anarchy day where there are no rules and it's just **** and giggles in every corner and crevice yes yeah i think this is a good idea

and on that day there'll be a "+18 WARNIGN MESSAGE" because there are no rules 1000002904% chance!! there will be **** or gore or bad stuff but it's all in good fun

and the day before, March 31st, on 11:59 PM the forums should keep a backup copy

and on April 2nd, 12:01 AM, the forums will revert back to the one on March 31st 11:59 PM that way it's like anarchy day never happen diff GOOD suggestion implement or you'll be sterile from this day forth big_smile big_smile big_smile:D wink

Offline

Wooted by:

#36 2017-01-05 02:52:12

MrJaWapa
Member
From: United States
Registered: 2015-02-15
Posts: 3,879
Website

Re: less moderation

I agree, the mods need to lighten up a bit. Especially buzzerbee and hummer.

I disagree a little bit with bimps on the rules. This is my opinion on them:

Minimodding
"Attempting to do the mod's job for them. For example "You're going to get warned for that" or "That post is spam please stop." While the thought is appreciated, if you see a post breaking the rules you should report it and let us handle it."

This rule is stupid. It shuts down any self governing that could take place. There is no reason someone should be punished for giving a friendly "you guys are getting off topic". If someone is impersonating a mod,  they should be warned. Or if they keep telling everyone they're off-topic/spamming/whatever and they really aren't.

Spam (minor)
"Posting in the wrong topic, or posting something that doesn't add to the disussion."
Why would someone be warned for posting in the wrong topic? That could easily be resolved by sending the user a message, and letting them know they made a mistake.

The second part of this rule is semi-vague. Just let people post in the topic. If it doesn't add to the discussion, it will be ignored.

Spam
"Posting nonsensical or incomprehensible content."
Why is there two spam warnings? This is the only one that makes sense.

Off-Topic
Continuing to post content irrelevant to the topic after a polite request to stop.
This is fine, as long as the "polite request" is actually issued.

Inappropriate (Language)
Swearing and using vulgar language while evading the censor. In general, any language that isn't appropriate around children.
Censor evasion should be its own rule.

The second half basically means anything explicit, and that's already covered in the "Inappropriate" warning.

Troublemaking
Unnecessary rudeness, or purposefully trying to start a fight.
That's fair.

Inappropriate (Minor)
Posting content that may not be appropriate for children.
This is basically ****/drugs, and should be 3 points.

Just get rid of this rule and warn them with the "Inappropriate".

Report Abuse
Repeatedly reporting posts that should not have been reported.
Basically, wasting the staff's time with false reports.

That's fair.

Inappropriate
For nsfw links, sexual imagery, or explicit language.
Why are there two inappropriate warnings when this one covers the same thing as the others.

Account Fraud
Creating an unauthorized alternate account to evade a ban.
I can say things that aren't okay for little children and get in less trouble than when I make an alt without permission.

Also, impersonation should be added to this.

Personal Info (Minor)
Posting the personal information of another person without their consent. For example, real name, email, picture, stuff like that.
No, why is there two separate warnings for this? Just warn them with "Personal Info".

Nub
General purpose warning for things that aren't technically against the rules, but are disruptive to the forums. Typically you'll be asked to stop whatever it is you're doing, and if you don't that's where this warning comes in.
This rule is so **** dumb. This is basically just an open warning that can be handed out for anything a mod doesn't like.

Also, the reason this rule was created is **** stupid.

Flaming (Minor)
Like flaming but minor
****' what?
No, just warn them for flaming.

Flaming
Verbally (textually?) attacking another forum member. For example "I hope you die" or "You're bimpsing retarded."
I can post **** on this site and get in less trouble than calling someone "**** retarded."

That's a bit shocking since we seem to be trying to cater to 9 year old kids.

Illegal
Posting illegal content.
Is this a joke? Just a 3 day ban for posting something illegal? **** permaban them!

Personal Info
Posting the personal information of another user such as facebook or address with malicious intent.
How often is personal info released without there being malicious intent? Permaban.

EDIT: tfw when "****" is censored. That's **** stupid.

Last edited by MrJaWapa (2017-01-05 02:56:06)


ce587bf7.png

Offline

#37 2017-01-05 03:43:41

medeia
Member
From: State Farm
Registered: 2016-11-25
Posts: 107

Re: less moderation

Different55 wrote:
Bimps wrote:

less than probably 20 people are active.

Excuse me there have been 116 registered users who have visited the forums in the past 24 hours. Expand that to a week and we get 216 users, nearly a tenth of all registered users.

I think bimps meant at a time.


U74Ykoo.png

#OmarabdulhaqAdmin

Offline

#38 2017-01-05 03:44:41

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

medeia wrote:
Different55 wrote:
Bimps wrote:

less than probably 20 people are active.

Excuse me there have been 116 registered users who have visited the forums in the past 24 hours. Expand that to a week and we get 216 users, nearly a tenth of all registered users.

I think bimps meant at a time.

you're WRONG

WRONG


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

Wooted by:

#39 2017-01-05 09:27:53

Mysterion
Member
From: Darkness
Registered: 2016-04-19
Posts: 1,092

Re: less moderation

MrJaWapa wrote:

Especially buzzerbee and hummer.

what's with The Armamentarium. he laughed, because i got banned in the ee forum

Last edited by Mysterion (2017-01-05 09:30:34)


Posts: 0 | 100 | 200 | 300 | 400 | 500 | 600 | 700 | 800 | 900 | 1000 | 1100 | 1200 | 1300 | 1400 | 1500 | 1600 | 1700 | 1800 | 1900 | 2000 | ...
Hi, I'm Mysterion from EE, if you have some question about something, just PM me, and I tryed to make EE better, #Stop Cyberbullying, Stop Racism
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Damns: 0€ | 50€ | 100€ | 150€ | 200€ | 250€ | 300€ | 350€ | 400€ | 450€ | 500€ | 550€ | ...
?type=online&name=Mysterion?type=energy&name=Mysterion?type=registered&name=Mysterion
Every 1 damn get #StopCyberbullying Groups just 1€
Press the Discord Logo to join my Discord Server
Mysterion.jpg ckmGBi.png

Offline

#40 2017-01-05 15:37:45

Mieaz
Member
Registered: 2016-10-14
Posts: 174

Re: less moderation

I can bet in $100 bimps made this because he started crying for getting warning, everyone gets mad when they get warned/banned but they don't realize it's their own fault

Offline

#41 2017-01-05 18:16:57

N1KF
Member
From: Happiness Hall
Registered: 2015-02-15
Posts: 8,068
Website

Re: less moderation

Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:

We can never have too much moderation! cm68

I think it would make sense if the only rule were to keep this forum a friendly, fun, and PG-13 forum. All warnings and bans would be based on whether or not the user harms that goal, which I think works better than making a list of like over twenty-million rules. You may wonder why me of all people would suggest such a rule, since I have a bad reputation for being a neat freak over rules. It's because when you make a rule rather than a guideline, you're making a literal and specific command in contrast to a general guideline that can be applied nearly universally. With simple guidelines, the forum would be moderated more like a community than a government.

that is the worst idea ever

Do you care to explain why?

it's the complete opposite of what i want. basically the mods can ban for anything and they can say "well i thought it wasnt pg-13.". it's horrible

No? While the PG-13 part may be slightly vague (as vague as it is now), the others have a strict rule of thumb. Does it worsen the forum's friendly atmosphere? If so, it shouldn't be allowed. Does it make the forum harder to use and read? If so, it also shouldn't be allowed.

Offline

#42 2017-01-05 19:19:56

Mysterion
Member
From: Darkness
Registered: 2016-04-19
Posts: 1,092

Re: less moderation

Mieaz wrote:

I can bet in $100 bimps made this because he started crying for getting warning, everyone gets mad when they get warned/banned but they don't realize it's their own fault

you don't know about the mods of the ee forum tongue


Posts: 0 | 100 | 200 | 300 | 400 | 500 | 600 | 700 | 800 | 900 | 1000 | 1100 | 1200 | 1300 | 1400 | 1500 | 1600 | 1700 | 1800 | 1900 | 2000 | ...
Hi, I'm Mysterion from EE, if you have some question about something, just PM me, and I tryed to make EE better, #Stop Cyberbullying, Stop Racism
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Damns: 0€ | 50€ | 100€ | 150€ | 200€ | 250€ | 300€ | 350€ | 400€ | 450€ | 500€ | 550€ | ...
?type=online&name=Mysterion?type=energy&name=Mysterion?type=registered&name=Mysterion
Every 1 damn get #StopCyberbullying Groups just 1€
Press the Discord Logo to join my Discord Server
Mysterion.jpg ckmGBi.png

Offline

#43 2017-01-05 20:24:05

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

Mieaz wrote:

I can bet in $100 bimps made this because he started crying for getting warning, everyone gets mad when they get warned/banned but they don't realize it's their own fault

no i actually made this because

20:56 <+Evilbunny> bimps do you think the second part of this post was worth a warning http://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewtopic.php?pid=641559#p641559
21:10 <+Pingohits> neat 3 of my warnings expire in january
21:13 -!- kubapolish [[email protected]] has quit [http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
21:15 <&GregBot> [B&P] #12 <ninjasupeatsninja> YouCanBot - Write bots in ... https://greg.cf/641783
21:20 <+Bimps> backerino
21:21 <+Bimps> Evilbunny: i think hummerz is ****
21:21 <+Bimps> and like
21:21 <+Bimps> by the forums rules it does deserve a warning
21:21 <+Bimps> and i hope atilla also got warned for saying retard a lot
21:21 <+Bimps> but i think that it should be allowed
21:22 <+Bimps> because it'd be better that way
21:22 <+Evilbunny> hummerz didn't give the warning
21:23 <+Bimps> proc?
21:23 <+Evilbunny> he just combined my double post
21:23 <+Evilbunny> buzzerbee
21:23 <+Bimps> ew
21:23 <+Evilbunny> I didn't even know he existed
21:23 <+Bimps> buzz is turning into a **** mod
21:23 <+Bimps> he also closed the new years topic
21:23 <+Bimps> just because he didnt like it
21:25 <+Evilbunny> idk I feel like atilla indirectly calling everybody else in that topic a retard makes it ok for me to call him a retard
21:25 <+Bimps> no
21:25 <+Evilbunny> expecially because I went by his definition
21:25 <+Bimps> how the **** does that make it ok
21:25 <+Bimps> in any sense
21:25 <+Bimps> not even about the rules
21:25 <+Evilbunny> the warning was troublemaking
21:26 <+Evilbunny> "Unnecessary rudeness, or purposefully trying to start a fight."
21:26 <+Bimps> dude the mods are ****
21:26 <%atillabyte> didn't get a warning
21:26 <+Evilbunny> I don't think it was unnecessarily rude and I wasn't trying to fight
21:26 <%atillabyte> im not directly calling anyone a retard
21:26 <+Bimps> i hate the way this place is moderated and i wish it wouldnt
21:26 <+Evilbunny> but it's only one warning so eh
21:26 <+Bimps> be moderated so much
21:28 <+Bimps> time to start a new topic on the forums complaining about the moderation

so please **** off


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

Wooted by:

#44 2017-01-05 20:30:50

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:

We can never have too much moderation! cm68

I think it would make sense if the only rule were to keep this forum a friendly, fun, and PG-13 forum. All warnings and bans would be based on whether or not the user harms that goal, which I think works better than making a list of like over twenty-million rules. You may wonder why me of all people would suggest such a rule, since I have a bad reputation for being a neat freak over rules. It's because when you make a rule rather than a guideline, you're making a literal and specific command in contrast to a general guideline that can be applied nearly universally. With simple guidelines, the forum would be moderated more like a community than a government.

that is the worst idea ever

Do you care to explain why?

it's the complete opposite of what i want. basically the mods can ban for anything and they can say "well i thought it wasnt pg-13.". it's horrible

No? While the PG-13 part may be slightly vague (as vague as it is now), the others have a strict rule of thumb. Does it worsen the forum's friendly atmosphere? If so, it shouldn't be allowed. Does it make the forum harder to use and read? If so, it also shouldn't be allowed.

remember how well it turned out on fail forums? that had way less people active than the ee forums, yet it still turned out horrible. you idea is bad and you should FEEL bad


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

#45 2017-01-05 21:16:04

N1KF
Member
From: Happiness Hall
Registered: 2015-02-15
Posts: 8,068
Website

Re: less moderation

Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:

that is the worst idea ever

Do you care to explain why?

it's the complete opposite of what i want. basically the mods can ban for anything and they can say "well i thought it wasnt pg-13.". it's horrible

No? While the PG-13 part may be slightly vague (as vague as it is now), the others have a strict rule of thumb. Does it worsen the forum's friendly atmosphere? If so, it shouldn't be allowed. Does it make the forum harder to use and read? If so, it also shouldn't be allowed.

remember how well it turned out on fail forums? that had way less people active than the ee forums, yet it still turned out horrible. you idea is bad and you should FEEL bad

No I don't really remember how it turned out on Fail Forum. I just know that lately it's been completely unmoderated because nobody's tried and there's not really a reason to. This place however needs to be moderated, and it is, so naturally more effort would be put into good moderation.

Offline

#46 2017-01-05 21:19:16

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:

Do you care to explain why?

it's the complete opposite of what i want. basically the mods can ban for anything and they can say "well i thought it wasnt pg-13.". it's horrible

No? While the PG-13 part may be slightly vague (as vague as it is now), the others have a strict rule of thumb. Does it worsen the forum's friendly atmosphere? If so, it shouldn't be allowed. Does it make the forum harder to use and read? If so, it also shouldn't be allowed.

remember how well it turned out on fail forums? that had way less people active than the ee forums, yet it still turned out horrible. you idea is bad and you should FEEL bad

No I don't really remember how it turned out on Fail Forum. I just know that lately it's been completely unmoderated because nobody's tried and there's not really a reason to. This place however needs to be moderated, and it is, so naturally more effort would be put into good moderation.

back in late 2014-early/mid 2015, the hayday of fail forums, the rules changed from "dont say anything you wouldnt say in front of your grandma" (to everyone who doesnt know about fail forums, yes it really did say that just ask diff) to actual rules. and you want to know why?

you

you kept subverting the god damn rules along with probably colon and some other tards and you guys kept making excuses like "well dur my grandma dead" or "grandma dont care!!" or stupid **** like that. if the only rule here were "keep it pg-13" that would be subverted so hard it isnt funny

just like in the irc. yeah i know you remember that. you rule is **** and you should FEEL BAD


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

Wooted by:

#47 2017-01-05 21:25:16

Different55
Forum Admin
Registered: 2015-02-07
Posts: 14,525

Re: less moderation

just interjecting here, the forums  use the MPAA's definition  of PG-13.

Offline

#48 2017-01-05 21:26:42

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

Different55 wrote:

just interjecting here, the forums  use the MPAA's definition  of PG-13.

clpclpclp go diff woooo

and what is that exactly


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

#49 2017-01-05 21:30:32

N1KF
Member
From: Happiness Hall
Registered: 2015-02-15
Posts: 8,068
Website

Re: less moderation

Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:

it's the complete opposite of what i want. basically the mods can ban for anything and they can say "well i thought it wasnt pg-13.". it's horrible

No? While the PG-13 part may be slightly vague (as vague as it is now), the others have a strict rule of thumb. Does it worsen the forum's friendly atmosphere? If so, it shouldn't be allowed. Does it make the forum harder to use and read? If so, it also shouldn't be allowed.

remember how well it turned out on fail forums? that had way less people active than the ee forums, yet it still turned out horrible. you idea is bad and you should FEEL bad

No I don't really remember how it turned out on Fail Forum. I just know that lately it's been completely unmoderated because nobody's tried and there's not really a reason to. This place however needs to be moderated, and it is, so naturally more effort would be put into good moderation.

back in late 2014-early/mid 2015, the hayday of fail forums, the rules changed from "dont say anything you wouldnt say in front of your grandma" (to everyone who doesnt know about fail forums, yes it really did say that just ask diff) to actual rules. and you want to know why?

you

you kept subverting the god damn rules along with probably colon and some other tards and you guys kept making excuses like "well dur my grandma dead" or "grandma dont care!!" or stupid **** like that. if the only rule here were "keep it pg-13" that would be subverted so hard it isnt funny

just like in the irc. yeah i know you remember that. you rule is **** and you should FEEL BAD

"Don't say it if you wouldn't say it to your grandma" has a lot more loopholes than "don't say it if it gives the forum an aggressive atmosphere". I don't really feel bad for suggesting the rule, but I hope you feel good either way.

Bimps wrote:
Different55 wrote:

just interjecting here, the forums  use the MPAA's definition  of PG-13.

clpclpclp go diff woooo

and what is that exactly

As a sidenote if we took "PG-13" literally swearing and pictures of nudity would be allowed.

Offline

#50 2017-01-05 21:33:21

Bimps
Member
Registered: 2015-02-08
Posts: 4,105

Re: less moderation

N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:
Bimps wrote:
N1KF wrote:

No? While the PG-13 part may be slightly vague (as vague as it is now), the others have a strict rule of thumb. Does it worsen the forum's friendly atmosphere? If so, it shouldn't be allowed. Does it make the forum harder to use and read? If so, it also shouldn't be allowed.

remember how well it turned out on fail forums? that had way less people active than the ee forums, yet it still turned out horrible. you idea is bad and you should FEEL bad

No I don't really remember how it turned out on Fail Forum. I just know that lately it's been completely unmoderated because nobody's tried and there's not really a reason to. This place however needs to be moderated, and it is, so naturally more effort would be put into good moderation.

back in late 2014-early/mid 2015, the hayday of fail forums, the rules changed from "dont say anything you wouldnt say in front of your grandma" (to everyone who doesnt know about fail forums, yes it really did say that just ask diff) to actual rules. and you want to know why?

you

you kept subverting the god damn rules along with probably colon and some other tards and you guys kept making excuses like "well dur my grandma dead" or "grandma dont care!!" or stupid **** like that. if the only rule here were "keep it pg-13" that would be subverted so hard it isnt funny

just like in the irc. yeah i know you remember that. you rule is **** and you should FEEL BAD

"Don't say it if you wouldn't say it to your grandma" has a lot more loopholes than "don't say it if it gives the forum an aggressive atmosphere". I don't really feel bad for suggesting the rule, but I hope you feel good either way.
the thing is that it shouldnt have any loopholes in the first place. also pg-13 =! don't say it if it gives the forum an aggressive atmosphere. that isnt at all what pg-13 is so FEEL BAD


you're drunk. you know where you want to go.
pBEEzUa.png
bruuuuuh

Offline

N1KF1484676064643444

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

[ Started around 1490264553.5222 - Generated in 0.231 seconds, 10 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.53 MiB (Peak: 1.84 MiB) ]