What's new
By:
Filters

The Official Welcome Back Rasp/Trout and Hopper/Taint Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hopper said:
I'm the one who will, probably within a matter of days, be permanently banned. Of course those consequences are of a little more import to me than to than to someone who is doing the banning by imposing school marm rules so that they can stay here and rid the board of someone who disagrees with them on gay marriage, etc.
Click to expand...

To quote Kicky, from the first page of this thread: "You received no warning points for the block quoting issue. I would think that would make the answer to your question [of whether you got a warning] relatively obvious."

Why are you so paranoid about getting permanently banned over something that you haven't even received a warning about? Sheesh. And it takes three moderators to vote on an infraction, so it's not like kicky and moe can gang up on you about the quotation issue.

(And for the record, I'm also very much against gay marriage. I'm not sure why you would even think you are being targeted for your views on that topic.)

Hopper said:
Who's "changing the rules" here, exactly, eh, Mo? I read, and agreed to comply with, the site rules when I signed up. I have not violated those rules, to my knowledge. It's the mods who are "changing the rules," willy-nilly, on an ad hoc basis, as they go, for the purpose of dictating style, not substance, so they can threaten banishment for using quotation marks or some other petty matter of form (like not addressing separate issues in separate posts).
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure these rules have existed in nearly the exact form from day 1 (or almost day 1) on the new board, and for several years on the old board:
https://jazzfanz.com/faq.php

To wit:
Trolling: Deliberate attempts to disrupt the usability of the boards will be considered trolling. These include (but are not limited to) comments made solely to provoke reactions, bizarre formatting of posts, extremely large images, many new threads started right after each other, etc. Depending on the severity of the trolling, the single strike policy may be enacted.
Click to expand...

The "many new threads right after each other" might be a new item in the rules--I don't remember it from the old board--but I'm nearly certain the "bizarre formatting of posts" item has been in there for a long time.
 
When I come here, log on, and begin to view threads/posts, is it strange that I find these "hopper complaining threads" easily the most entertaining part of the Jazzfanz experience?
 
Colton, there's one thing I meant to ask you before, and it would senseless for me to try to ask it now by going back and "adding to" a post made pages back. If you recall, after recounting my consultation with Eric for you, I said:

Hopper said:
He was sincere, and he certainly has a viable basis for reading it that way, if you ask me.
Click to expand...

Now your initial statement was this:

colton said:
That's completely false, and One Brow knows it.
Click to expand...

Do you even realize that you have just publicly called One Brow a deliberate liar? Do you even care?

Granted, you went on to add:

colton said:
Or should know it.
Click to expand...

Even this qualification suggests a reckless disregard of the truth by One Brow, as I read it. Why do mods and admins feel that resort to this kind of "defense" of their action is merited and required, I wonder?

I went on to observe:

Hopper said:
That's part of the problem around here. Just because the mods know what they have in mind when they write something ambiguous, they feel it's wholely warranted to insist that EVERYONE reading it knows exactly what they meant. They seem to have NO conception of how their "declaration" might be perceived by a reader without the gift of mind-reading powers. Perhaps they should express themselves more clearly, respond to questions, when asked, etc. rather than insist that everyone KNOWS what they mean when they don't even say it.
Click to expand...

Do you even see the question (problem)?
 
YB85 said:
Explain the "point". And be aware that I have two adopted sons.
Click to expand...

Dodge ball line, bro, dodge ball line. Vince Vaughn yells it at the girl scout after they beat his team in their first dodge ball match. Quote of the movie, imo. I have three adopted sisters btw.
 
colton said:
The "many new threads right after each other" might be a new item in the rules--I don't remember it from the old board--but I'm nearly certain the "bizarre formatting of posts" item has been in there for a long time.
Click to expand...


Well, my sincere thanks for that input, Colton, but it's really not very helpful, I'm afraid. Can you tell me in what way the post(s) I have received infractions for constitute "bizarre formatting?" I have honestly never understood how they could possibly be interpreted as such.
 
YB85 said:
You're saying my wife couldn't contribute to good looking kids? WTF?
Click to expand...

Frankly, you're an ugly dude. Your wife could be Heidi Klum and your kids would still be uglier than a sack of sasquatch bush clippings.
 
Hopper said:
I was told to change my posting style so that I add to prior posts rather than make new ones. I have NEVER understood it, or the reason for it, either. Many attempts to find out what this rule is, and how it applies, have garnered me no new insight. Kicky explicitly refuses to discuss the parameters of this so-called rule. He won't give what he wants to call "advisory opinions," in his words. What he WILL do, in a heartbeat, is issue an infraction whenever he determines that a vague "rule" has been violated. A very convenient tool to have for use against your "enemies," I spoze.
Click to expand...

Hopper, I think you're a very bright guy. So, when you make statements like that, I'm either forced to re-evaluate my opinion on your intellect, or to believe that you are simply trolling.

But just to be clear, kicky cannot unilaterally give ANYONE a warning/infraction. Nor can any other moderator. When a post is being discussed by the moderation staff, the first opinion (infraction/warning/ignore/other) to garner three votes from the moderators (sometimes including Jason and myself) wins. Typically that's the majority view, but at times it might not be. (That's one reason why infractions can be appealed.) So, anyway, it takes at least THREE moderators to give you a warning/infraction. One of the three voting for warning/infraction typically volunteers to notify the individual. In your case, perhaps that has been kicky more often than not.

So when you say "What he WILL do, in a heartbeat, is issue an infraction whenever he determines that a vague "rule" has been violated", you are severely mis-stating the moderation process. Please stop doing that, or I *will* vote on an infraction for you for trolling.

And as far as the posting rules go, let me clarify what the moderators expect in case this really wasn't made clear to you: If you are responding to a post, do so ONCE rather than in three (or insert number here) separate back-to-back-to-back posts. If you are posting without quoting anyone, do so ONCE rather than in three separate back-to-back-to-back posts. If you are posting replies to several different people, then by all means do so in separate posts. But try not to post replies like that in five (or insert number here) posts immediately following each other, as it is very annoying to people who have you on ignore (among others) to see post after post of "Hopper wrote this. You have him/her on ignore." (Or whatever the standard message is.)

Since those issues do substantially impact the readability of the board, the moderators voted and decided that they constitute trolling, especially if someone continues to post like that after having been notified. Exceptions will be made (for example, I don't see any moderators voting for an infraction for tatermoog's back-to-back posts in this thread, https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php/63-Jazzfanz-is-dead-long-live-Jazzfanz), but that's the general feeling among moderators right now.
 
I'm surprised there hasn't been complaining about the ambiguity of "bizarre formatting of posts."

I mean, come on, if there isn't a full page on what the meaning of "of" is, then it's quite the arbitrary rule where the "mods" can "interpret" any "way" they want and thus their actions are "nothing" short of "un"fair.

EDIT:

I was wrong. How could I have missed it?
 
Last edited:
Hopper said:
Do you even realize that you have just publicly called One Brow a deliberate liar? Do you even care?
Click to expand...

I realize I said he deliberately (most likely) implied a falsehood about the moderation policy in order to jab the moderating staff. Personally I think it was sarcasm rather than lying. Either way he deserved to be called on it, in my opinion. If he has a problem with my reaction to his post, he should contact me himself. If he convinces me he was simply misinformed, I'll apologize for my statement.

Edit: you also asked,
Hopper said:
That's part of the problem around here. Just because the mods know what they have in mind when they write something ambiguous, they feel it's wholely warranted to insist that EVERYONE reading it knows exactly what they meant. They seem to have NO conception of how their "declaration" might be perceived by a reader without the gift of mind-reading powers. Perhaps they should express themselves more clearly, respond to questions, when asked, etc. rather than insist that everyone KNOWS what they mean when they don't even say it.
Click to expand...
Do you even see the question (problem)?
Click to expand...

When *you* are the only one that is having trouble in this respect, is it the moderators' fault for not being clear, or is it your fault for not figuring it out?
 
Hopper said:
Well, my sincere thanks for that input, Colton, but it's really not very helpful, I'm afraid. Can you tell me in what way the post(s) I have received infractions for constitute "bizarre formatting?" I have honestly never understood how they could possibly be interpreted as such.
Click to expand...

Which posts were those? (I don't want to take the time to look them up. I assume you were told which posts they were when the infractions were issued.)
 
Archie Moses said:
Tough while online, eh? You're unemployed, live in the woods, a hippy, have terrible personal hygiene, and you were adopted. Your mother doesn't even love you.
Click to expand...
I give it a 3/10. Pretty vanilla, overall.

I wasn't going for tough, just accurate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Top