Hmmmmmmm :( :( :(

[Baca Loco]

Are you by any chance related to Kim2?

Originally posted by kim1
1--Is it such a good idea to hand debaters the moderating power, really?

2--It's a pity if people get too scared to post here, right?

3--When something is deleted or changed it would be an idea to leave some marks from it... so you don't loose the thin red line when reading through the posts.

4--All specifieng rules makes the darn rule book too long. So; "Anything outside the net interfering with the game should be dealt with" period.

1--I can only speak for myself but in my case--yes, it was an excellent idea.
2--too scared of what? Being disagreed with? Shocking.
3--interesting idea but don't have a clue how difficult that might prove to be and since it really doesn't happen very often probably not much of a real concern. (You will note in this thread it was self-censorship at work, not moderated censorship)
4--too true but still necessary. Whose to say what qualifies as "Anything outside the net interfering with the game should be dealt with"? Is it the guy who also works for the guy who is making the complaint in the first place? Current state of affairs has demonstrated that efforts will be made to gain advantage and seek to influence results when it's possible using "un-ruled" avenues and the only way at present to see that it doesn't happen is to regulate.

 

[manike]

Are you by any chance related to Kim2?

Originally posted by Baca Loco
(You will note in this thread it was self-censorship at work, not moderated censorship)

Nope. I just went back in again and removed the comments that Robbo made look like they came from me.

manike

 

[Baca Loco]

My bad

Originally posted by manike
Nope. I just went back in again and removed the comments that Robbo made look like they came from me.
manike

I didn't realize there had been some rewritin' goin on.
Well, in that case--nevermind.

 

[kim1]

A: No, I'm not related.

Originally posted by Baca Loco

>1--I can only speak for myself but in my case--yes, it was an excellent idea.

Obviously =)

>2--too scared of what? Being disagreed with? Shocking.

Come on, you know I didn't mean that and you also know that I am referring to Simon/Manike, or actually using him as an example, who gets perhaps a little bit too much from Robbo.

For example I understood his post about Sergei as he claims that it was intended to sound like - in fact it's a fact what he says about people's beliefs about successful business men in Russia, they're quite a lot involved with the mafia (and that's basically no option - either you are or you are not - get it? so, you either pay them or you're with them or you're not). I didn't take it as something of an serious accusation towards Sergei, but rather saw the humour in it, as it was intended (stereotyped). It was stupid of Manike to say that, obviously, but I don't think he meant any harm with. This lead to very harsch text and some "moderating".

This is actually not the point, the point is there is no point in (lots of points there) posting if there's only one view allowed, is there?

If one of the "official" moderators get involved in a debate wouldn't it be best if some none involved would moderate it? I'm sure a lot of you are in the same bed so it probably wouldn't matter, but still - it would look at least nicer

>3--interesting idea but don't have a clue how difficult that might prove to be and since it really doesn't happen very often probably not much of a real concern. (You will note in this thread it was self-censorship at work, not moderated censorship)

Neither do I, just a thought - I don't know **** about what's possible when it comes to computers.

>4--too true but still necessary. Whose to say what qualifies as "Anything outside the net interfering with the game should be dealt with"? Is it the guy who also works for the guy who is making the complaint in the first place? Current state of affairs has demonstrated that efforts will be made to gain advantage and seek to influence results when it's possible using "un-ruled" avenues and the only way at present to see that it doesn't happen is to regulate.

Obviously, the NPPL is known for the detailed rules just because if it ain't stated it's allowed kind o. Still basically anything that affects the game outside the net should be dealt with. And the filming issue should be quite straight forward - it should be allowed for all or for no one.

 

[Buddha 3]

A: No, I'm not related.

Originally posted by kim1



If one of the "official" moderators get involved in a debate wouldn't it be best if some none involved would moderate it? I'm sure a lot of you are in the same bed so it probably wouldn't matter, but still - it would look at least nicer

Huh?
What is an official moderator? Am I one?
I agree that it's not a bad idea to perhaps have someone who is not involved in a thread do the moderating on that thread. However, this can be quite confusing. After all, the threads are split up into certain sub groups (speak your brains, techroom, etcetera), and each moderator is responsible for a certain group. If we also have to agree on what threads we'll moderate, and which threads we'll post in, it gets a bit much like work (Aaaaargh!).
Besides, most of us have opinions too, so we like getting involved in some of these debates.

Oh, and in the same bed? No. TJ's hair and Robbo's ego take up way too much space. I'm fine in my own bed.
Seriously, we have our own opinions, and we don't always agree with eachother.

 

[Baca Loco]

Jay, you devious *******!

Originally posted by kim1

Originally posted by Baca Loco

1--Come on, you know I didn't mean that and you also know that I am referring to Simon/Manike, or actually using him as an example, who gets perhaps a little bit too much from Robbo.

2--For example I understood his post about Sergei as he claims that it was intended to sound like - in fact it's a fact what he says about people's beliefs about successful business men in Russia, they're quite a lot involved with the mafia (and that's basically no option - either you are or you are not - get it? so, you either pay them or you're with them or you're not). I didn't take it as something of an serious accusation towards Sergei, but rather saw the humour in it, as it was intended (stereotyped). It was stupid of Manike to say that, obviously, but I don't think he meant any harm with. This lead to very harsch text and some "moderating".

3--This is actually not the point, the point is there is no point in (lots of points there) posting if there's only one view allowed, is there?

4--If one of the "official" moderators get involved in a debate wouldn't it be best if some none involved would moderate it? I'm sure a lot of you are in the same bed so it probably wouldn't matter, but still - it would look at least nicer

5--Still basically anything that affects the game outside the net should be dealt with. And the filming issue should be quite straight forward - it should be allowed for all or for no one.

1--perhaps, but by the same token Robo might say he's had enuf from Si, too. That wasn't the first thread where those two have had a bit of a scrap.
2--you understood it one way, Robo another, and others in their own way. I have an opinion on it too--already expressed.
3--try reading some of the other threads, past and present, before you pass judgement.
4--what Buddha said. While I have the power--I feel it coursing thru my veins and yes, it feels good--but I digress--I don't "moderate" any threads or posts other than those in my forum. Some of the Mods as noted work for the site and mag and some of us don't but I think you will find that even the Mods argue on occasion--except Buddha who's a yes man. He's also the People's Moderator--sticking up, normally, for the "little" guy. I, on the other hand, routinely abuse my power to pick on Brits.
5--quite right but my point is if there isn't an enumerated rule covering the issue you get a situation like you had in Amsterdam.

PS--See, even Jay (Buddha 3) and I fight!

 

[Manning26]

Re: A: No, I'm not related.

Originally posted by Buddha 3




Oh, and in the same bed? No. TJ's hair and Robbo's ego take up way too much space.

Jay forgot to mention that his, ahem, huskiness is also an issue.

 

[Buddha 3]

Yeah you're right. TJ's enormous.

Oh, hang on! I mean, I disagree! (can't be going around being called a yes man, can I )

 

[Robbo]

A: No, I'm not related.

Originally posted by kim1

Originally posted by Baca Loco

>1--I can only speak for myself but in my case--yes, it was an excellent idea.
Obviously =)
>2--too scared of what? Being disagreed with? Shocking.
Come on, you know I didn't mean that and you also know that I am referring to Simon/Manike, or actually using him as an example, who gets perhaps a little bit too much from Robbo.
For example I understood his post about Sergei as he claims that it was intended to sound like - in fact it's a fact what he says about people's beliefs about successful business men in Russia, they're quite a lot involved with the mafia (and that's basically no option - either you are or you are not - get it? so, you either pay them or you're with them or you're not). I didn't take it as something of an serious accusation towards Sergei, but rather saw the humour in it, as it was intended (stereotyped). It was stupid of Manike to say that, obviously, but I don't think he meant any harm with. This lead to very harsch text and some "moderating".
This is actually not the point, the point is there is no point in (lots of points there) posting if there's only one view allowed, is there?
If one of the "official" moderators get involved in a debate wouldn't it be best if some none involved would moderate it? I'm sure a lot of you are in the same bed so it probably wouldn't matter, but still - it would look at least nicer
>3--interesting idea but don't have a clue how difficult that might prove to be and since it really doesn't happen very often probably not much of a real concern. (You will note in this thread it was self-censorship at work, not moderated censorship)
Neither do I, just a thought - I don't know **** about what's possible when it comes to computers.
>4--too true but still necessary. Whose to say what qualifies as "Anything outside the net interfering with the game should be dealt with"? Is it the guy who also works for the guy who is making the complaint in the first place? Current state of affairs has demonstrated that efforts will be made to gain advantage and seek to influence results when it's possible using "un-ruled" avenues and the only way at present to see that it doesn't happen is to regulate.
Obviously, the NPPL is known for the detailed rules just because if it ain't stated it's allowed kind o. Still basically anything that affects the game outside the net should be dealt with. And the filming issue should be quite straight forward - it should be allowed for all or for no one.

Kim, I just got back from Toulouse, so apologies for delay in answering.
As for your point, I am moderated, make no mistake about that !!
Every time I get into 'one of those' type threads, I always end up either getting a phone call from Rancid or TJ telling me what they think and if they haven't, I will always call them for reference and opinion
I not only respect and listen to what they have to say and contrary to what some people might think, I would act immediately on their directives or advice in a heartbeat.
In this particular instance, they both, as well Buddha and Baca (whose opinions I also value) thought his post was inappropriate and did mislead people into thinking there was an implied connection with what Manike was saying about the integrity of Russian bankers and Sergei.
That said, I do acknowledge I may well be overly sensitive in this area for certain reasons and prone to over-reaction but the nub of this was all about sticking up for what you believe in and I have a lot more experience and knowledge of the RL and Sergei than Manike ever has or would have and on that basis, I felt my opinion more justified than his.
Does it warrant the level of reaction?
Probably not, I ain't gonna apologise or try to justify it, Manike knows what I am like, he knows how passionate I am about what the RL are trying to do and therefore shouldn't be too surprised or aggrieved when the firework goes bang !
This is not the first time I have been down this road with Manike, you would have thought he would have learnt to keep well away from the subject, he hasn't.
And let's remember Kim, this is not Manike's house, it is somebody else's, he didn't break any rules, he just pissed me off, that's all, by saying something inappropriate about some people I respect and a guy I would now call a friend.
Robbo

 

[kim1]

...super star

Well Robbo, I figured out as much, and I do respect that you stand up for these guys - obviously they haven't gone the slick way.

What Nick just mentioned is something that I have given a thought too. The eyes are on the RL team and they're not super human - they will, as Nick put it, f*ck up! I mean I've been 1-4-1:d a couple of times for something unintentional... it DOES happen and it WILL happen. So, lets hope that people are not too naive... (yeah, right!)

Kim