What's new
By:

Tell Us Who Got Banned Thread Closed?

Creating alts for humorous trolling is a thing I really enjoy to watch and it's absolutely what we need in the off-season's dust and ashes, but the reasons colton stated are lame excuses to even bother to create alt accounts.
 
We did enjoy some of the alts that only posted pics. But can't have a grey area.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
New rule proposal:

If someone has been convicted with creating and using an Alt account, ban the said Alt account and let the BOARD decide what to do with the actual account of the convicted poster.

I don't believe the banning is the only way(not the best way that's for sure) to penalize the Alt crimes. We could neg-rep the culprit(like stoning), change his name, give him a humiliating sig or avatar, shorter suspensions etcetera...

I'm calling for the mods and Jason to deliberate about this.
 
Allowing the inmates to run the asylum is always the safe way to go.
Nice suggestion.

I gotta say... I'm on the side of ownership on this one. Any rule proposal should be suggesting whether alts should be allowed.. not what the penalty should be (because without some absolutes there's no rule at all) and never left to members to decide on a one up basis (popularity contest anyone?).

Not to mention that this website is certainly no substantial money maker and rules enforcement needs to be fairly efficient.

I have ZERO problem with Cy getting banned. None. Would I rather have him here? Definitely. Do I think the rule needs changed on alts?
To be honest, I'm not sure. But this indictment of management is more embarrassing than anything.

I make fun of Jason and Colton at times for the whole 'family friendly' site thing... just because I think it's utterly ridiculous considering it's a sports message board and there's just millions of years of DNA to contend with ... but it's Jason's site and I 100% respect that.

I think many alt accts have been hilarious. I think many have been awful. But how do we justify expecting the mods to monitor things to the level they're polling us on which are acceptable? If I owned this site there would be FAR fewer bannings largely due to me running people off before they even got that far. I'd be fairly quick to flip people off and tell them to kiss my ***.

My opinion on this whole thing is that it SUCKS that Cy is banned... but I don't even blame Jason 1%.

Want to make change? Make solid suggestions with empathy toward everyone involved... and not merely grandstand for the sake of a popularity tic mark on your bedpost.

I know this post will piss everybody off...... but tough ****.
 
^^ That's a serious post. Mine wasn't at all.

Though I would like having tribunals about the convicts. That would be the most fun.

On the other hand I have problems with Cy getting banned and most here feels the same. It says at least something.
 
Enes CanTear You Apart said:
^^ That's a serious post. Mine wasn't at all.

Though I would like having tribunals about the convicts. That would be the most fun.

On the other hand I have problems with Cy getting banned and most here feels the same. It says at least something.
Click to expand...
I agree. My only point is we also should be sincere about how the site has to be administrated and how taxing it would be.

I'm not normally serious around here (why would one want to do that?). I just left one on the doorstep because .. well, just because.
 
PKM said:
I agree. My only point is we also should be sincere about how the site has to be administrated and how taxing it would be.

I'm not normally serious around here (why would one want to do that?). I just left one on the doorstep because .. well, just because.
Click to expand...

Nothing to disagree as well. My mad props to Jason and his bootlicke.. ahem his staff, our dear mods.
 
PKM said:
Allowing the inmates to run the asylum is always the safe way to go.
Nice suggestion.

I gotta say... I'm on the side of ownership on this one. Any rule proposal should be suggesting whether alts should be allowed.. not what the penalty should be (because without some absolutes there's no rule at all) and never left to members to decide on a one up basis (popularity contest anyone?).

Not to mention that this website is certainly no substantial money maker and rules enforcement needs to be fairly efficient.

I have ZERO problem with Cy getting banned. None. Would I rather have him here? Definitely. Do I think the rule needs changed on alts?
To be honest, I'm not sure. But this indictment of management is more embarrassing than anything.

I make fun of Jason and Colton at times for the whole 'family friendly' site thing... just because I think it's utterly ridiculous considering it's a sports message board and there's just millions of years of DNA to contend with ... but it's Jason's site and I 100% respect that.

I think many alt accts have been hilarious. I think many have been awful. But how do we justify expecting the mods to monitor things to the level they're polling us on which are acceptable? If I owned this site there would be FAR fewer bannings largely due to me running people off before they even got that far. I'd be fairly quick to flip people off and tell them to kiss my ***.

My opinion on this whole thing is that it SUCKS that Cy is banned... but I don't even blame Jason 1%.

Want to make change? Make solid suggestions with empathy toward everyone involved... and not merely grandstand for the sake of a popularity tic mark on your bedpost.

I know this post will piss everybody off...... but tough ****.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but everyone here act like children on the Internet anyway. They want all the popular/expelled kids back in school!
 
Quick question - what's to stop someone from having an account at home, and another one at work?


(before you jump at me, I do work from home)
 
scootsy said:
kkk's christian alter ego is an alt. he is really a buddhist thai
Click to expand...

kkk?

fat_buddha_necktie-r7206f5b3e0ee4d129a4953a83db380ed_v9whb_8byvr_324.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: BTP
If all alts could behave themselves, there probably wouldn't be an issue, but in reality, alts create a lot of extra work for the moderators.

Not all are born of nefarious purposes, but some are, and therein lies the problem. Allowing alts on a case by case basis would be even more work.

It's really easy to sit back and argue that alts are no big deal when you aren't the one that has to deal with the residual headache.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top