Peace QCDN.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sculli said:
but I didn't expect to still see you around.

So your removal of RMT ads were in total vain? Hmm?

I really thought I made a big enough drama about it to have you skim through the ads and delete them...Hrm, oh well. I thought I made it clear I stayed on this board for that effort too.

Sculli said:
See this post http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1138579&postcount=9 on how it will work, under the headline "Give Reputation Using AJAX". The new reputation system will have room to leave a comment, and while it is not exactly a "I disagree" button, it is as close to one as it will get without me finding someone to change the "Thanks" button code around to include a "I disagree" button. If you have someone who can make those code changes, do send them my way.

Can you explain to me again why you got rid of that "Karma" system? I saw no flaws with it. In fact, the "Thank you" button is a much more abused system. People PC+1ing the Good times section, pan-handling if you will - for a Thank you, lol.
The karma system seemed especially more balanced as well, factoring you can disagree -and- leave a comment as to why.

In previous message boards, (a lot more relaxed ones; focussing on cannabis growing so there weren't very many "flames" just more so of "trolls") we used a karma system that wouldn't let you give negative karma unless you left a reason as to why.

I only suggested to you an "I disagree" button, however the karma system that was previously in place could have hit two birds with one stone. However it didn't, because people weren't always incline to leave a message of why they gave bad karma.

If we used the Karma system that I've been so used to. I think it would help in removing the sometimes flaming and sometimes respectfull PC+1's that disagree with others, which this thread is absolutly full of. However sometimes people just don't care and will post a PC+1 anyway, woops. Rappa would know about what I'm talking about, that fit I had with him earlier opened up a can of disagreeing PC+1's because he kept delaying my reasoning.
He brought up the fact that there have always been similar rules and I retorted that the Flameboard allowed for a "free-for-all" with no rules.

So where are these rules about negative PC+1's?
I told him one time that "Sculli took that away, as well as your balls" and he seems inclined to flatter himself over that. Leave another PC+1 that he doesn't "want me thinking about his wang anymore."

Then Sculli, you have the nerve to warn me about negative comments...And not him? Do you see now that it's hard to moderate that kind of material? You seemed to only care if it were a personal attack upon yourself. (which in a way it was, lolrappa) Or were you just favoring Rappa for being on your side?

Anyway, goodluck with this obscene and over-moderated outlook. You will need all the support you can get, honestly there is too much material on this forum to pick and choose (which you seem to be doing) I've seen so many other flames/personal attacks that have gone unnoticed, why? ...Best of luck.

You mentioned two wrongs don't make things right, Rappa. But you really contradicted yourself on that one.
 
man, I say stupid stuff all the time and people screw with it :P I don't mind (Unless I'm already in a bad mood but in that case I usually just leave for awhile) Oh well... *shrugs*
 
Well, since the OP of this thread was Perma-banned, he told me to say Hi in the form of:

"a quote without a name is allowed? Well gee, that doesn't seem what it looked like in that PM you sent me that I convienantly can't access now. GG Hypocrits"
 
_Neosquall_ said:
Well, since the OP of this thread was Perma-banned, he told me to say Hi in the form of:

"a quote without a name is allowed? Well gee, that doesn't seem what it looked like in that PM you sent me that I convienantly can't access now. GG Hypocrits"

GG Eulore. CubsWoo asked about that but Sculli didn't answer yet.
 
Cleofis said:
To be honest i'd rather my account was deleted. I know with boards like this it can be done without saying guest.
I guess he is right, it can be done, I just tested it on him. Anyone else?
 
Cubswoo said:
Honestly, it felt like Sculli had just gone Born-Again Christian and felt this was a crucial step to cleansing his sins.
Let me assure you that I didn't go BAC. It was, however, somewhat of a quick change of heart for most QCDNers. I took a class titled "Human Relations" during the Spring semester. The stuff I learned there made so much sense to me that it changed my life. The change you see on QCDN is just a small part of it, I have massivly changed IRL as well, though I have gotten no heat for changing from a practicing cynic to an optimist IRL.

Cubswoo said:
Instead of a smooth, less chaotic transition to the new QCDN, we had mods stripped of modding with no notice, new mods put in without standards to follow
In hindsight a less drastic, meaning longer, transition from FB to no FB would have been better. However, the new mods did have standards to follow on, QCDN mod standards in addition to the community standards. Everyone who was approached to become a mod was given those standards ahead of time and asked whether they are acceptable to them.

Cubswoo said:
Are you forgetting back in my Requiem thread where you basically said that having the opinion that the FB should come back was pointless and we shouldn't bring that up anymore?
Nope, I do remember that thread well. If your opinion is to bring the old FB back, then I can only say that it won't happen.

Cubswoo said:
Not to mention the way you seem to paint old-guard Flameboard posters in an increasingly negative light, as though we were all F-bombs and PC+1 and nothing else.
It is true that I often call those out who believe that any argument, any discussion, makes insults mandatory. Unless you are one of those, I don't think I said anything negative about you. I know there was a good amount of non-flame discussion going on at the FB in threads that initially started elsewhere, but then ended up at the FB because someone choose to drag the thread in the mud. That sort of discussion can still be had at today's QCDN, insults can not.

Cubswoo said:
I've had ideas on how to improve the board. Ideas that have worked well on other sites. However, at the same time, I've felt slapped in the face and disrespected ever since these changes were made. What incentive do I have to help you (and by proxy, this board) out when the board stopped doing me favors?
I can't answer this one for you. If you feel that I disrespected you by not following your suggestions as to what to do with the FB, then I can't really change that. To me it wasn't personal, your suggestion was simply not where I wanted to go, that doesn't mean that I didn't consider it.
If you feel that I disrespected you in not asking you to come back as a mod, again, I can't change that. The reason I didn't ask you back was because you made it clear that you didn't agree with the changes. No sense in having a mod who is not "on board" so to speak.

I don't know why you would help this board. If QCDN has nothing to offer to you, then you have no reason to help. If QCDN may have something to offer to you if some things were to change, then you have the possibility that you will receive whatever it is you want in return for helping out. However, there is no guarantee that it will work. No sense in sugar-coating it. It may be worth your time to put in effort, but whether that is true I can not answer without knowing what it is you would want to do, and more importantly, I am in no position to guarantee that things will work out the way you intend for them to work out.

I can tell you why I am putting in effort, perhaps that will help you to come to a decision. To me QCDN may become useful beyond QCDN in the future. I would like to launch two more forums. I had those plans (and domains) since early 2005, now over a year later, I have not put in a single hour in actually working on them. I am just too busy with RL stuff and QCDN. I spend on average 25 hours a week on QCDN. That time goes to answering PMs, following up on user issues, reading posts, moderating them as needed, looking for ways to improve vBulletin with code changes and modifications, and trying to find people who would be willing to finance contests.

This is no joke, 25 hours a week is real. Often RL friends ask me why I put up with all the grief instead of just calling it good and selling the site. My answer is that for the 20 users who constantly give me grief over any every so slight issue, there are literally a couple thousand registered users who come to QCDN on a more or less daily basis and get good use out of this site. I feel that I have a responsibility to those users to not let QCDN disappear. QCDN has value even if not a single new post is ever made. I fear that someone who would be out to buy it would make this site essentially unsuable for those who come here daily. Of course that is the worst case scenario, but it is still a very real one.

Cubswoo said:
Make me feel like a comment won't fall on deaf ears and you'll get something to listen to.
I would like to think of myself as a reasonable person. Unless you want the old FB back, I will listen to what you have to say, and if it makes sense, and is practical, then chances are good that it will happen. Chances are good, but again, there are no guarantees. You can PM me, you can post it in public, you can lead a roundtable thing if you believe that it will work. It's up to you.

Cubswoo said:
A lot of other rules get broken less frequently but are still up there. If you were dealing with it on a regular basis, why not add it? It would have taken, at most, 30 seconds to edit a provision for that in.
Point taken, I have added it to the QCDN Avatar & Signature Guidelines. Even though it did come up every now and then, I just didn't see it as a big issue, especially since it never actually created any problems or negative feedback from those who were asked to adjust their sig.

Cubswoo said:
I've said before that I felt you came about these changes in a very naive way and this is just cementing that feeling in my mind.
I think we just have a fundamental disagreement in opinions. I believe that people should treat each other decently, and that when it is in my hands, I will promote such behavior by disallowing the opposite. You seem to have a different view on this.

Cubswoo said:
YES. DO THIS [showing problem users the way out]. THIS IS THE BEST THING YOU CAN DO. If you weren't worried about how people would react by the FB's removal, why the hell didn't you start doing this months ago?
Now here being naive is applicable. I did believe that even those who are problem users have something to contribute and value their QCDN membership. I did believe that if I would point out to them what the problem is, and get their word that they would get themselves under control, that then things could be worked out. However, time has shown that this is not the case. It was a process, and I now arrived at the conclusion that those who are problem users will have to be removed instead of repeatedly asked to better themselves.

Solitia said:
There was nothing wrong with the QCDN of a few months ago. NOTHING.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, just don't expect everyone else to share it.

Solitia said:
There is something very wrong with this board.
It would be more helpful to be specific as to what is wrong, unless "series of judgement calls" is as far as you are willing to go. It would also be helpful to suggest a solution, unless heading elsewhere is the only solution you were able to come up with.

Blazeoffury said:
If a site is going to run and operate in the "heavenly view" that Sculli has of it, then it needs to be consistent on a lot of things.
You can call me out on many things, some of which are even true, but you can definitely not call me out on consistency on this one. This previously unwritten rule has been handled the exact same way for two years, regardless of who the one with the sig, and who the quoted one was. There is a 100% consistency track record on this issue, and it is as objective as it can possibly be. If someone who was quoted asked for the quote to be removed, then it was done.

Cubswoo said:
Just so we're on the same page - if the quote in question does not have a name attached to it, does that make it OK for signatures?
This is what I wrote to Eulore in PM about that. He copied that into the 3rd post in this thread, so I am not the one disclosing the PM.

Sculli said:
Jesus H Christ, the person who wrote it doesn't want it in other people's sigs. What is so hard to understand about that? Why do you keep trying to wiggle your way to keeping the sig? It's a clear cut issue from where I am looking; remove it completely.
Name or not, if the quoted asked for it to be removed, it will be done.

Dowzer said:
I really thought I made a big enough drama about it to have you skim through the ads and delete them...Hrm, oh well. I thought I made it clear I stayed on this board for that effort too.
I am afraid that you will get no credit for me removing the RMT ads from the Adsense cycle, as it was the accepted policy long before your drama started on March 15th. See QCDN January 2006 Newsletter.

Dowzer said:
Can you explain to me again why you got rid of that "Karma" system? I saw no flaws with it. In fact, the "Thank you" button is a much more abused system. People PC+1ing the Good times section, pan-handling if you will - for a Thank you, lol.
The karma system seemed especially more balanced as well, factoring you can disagree -and- leave a comment as to why.
At the time it seemed like the reputation system was not well received with most comparing it to the alla "rate me up" "let's rate him down" system. My plan was to remove the "Thanks" button with the introduction of vBulletin 3.6 and the AJAX feedback system that will make it more likely for people to leave feedback on their ratings. I will look into what it takes to only allow negative feedback if a reason is given.

Eulore by _Neosquall_ proxy said:
a quote without a name is allowed? Well gee, that doesn't seem what it looked like in that PM you sent me that I convienantly can't access now. GG Hypocrits
Nowhere does it say that the quote without names is allowed.

rukkia said:
quick sculli

http://www.qcdn.org/showthread.php?t...rson ality%22

purge that too. she got quoted there.
I did, and placed it with the 99 others I deleted earlier. Seriously, Eulore went through and changed what amounts now to 100 of his own posts to include nothing but the Windaria quote.
 
You can call me out on many things, some of which are even true, but you can definitely not call me out on consistency on this one. This previously unwritten rule has been handled the exact same way for two years, regardless of who the one with the sig, and who the quoted one was. There is a 100% consistency track record on this issue, and it is as objective as it can possibly be. If someone who was quoted asked for the quote to be removed, then it was done.
hmm, you yourself, decided to quote a thread between myself and whoever...i wanted it to just be removed but you didnt. the only reason why it was removed was by mistake by yourself sculli.
are things done by you exempt?

ps, your avatar scares me, i would like it to be removed

i guess hitler comes in many other forms
1149776886.jpg
 
Last edited:
Why did my harmless post get deleted? You know, the one that read: "oh noez hes gunna delete my intarnets, plz save us captain planet."

in response to
Sculli said:
I guess he is right, it can be done, I just tested it on him. Anyone else?

This is getting a tad bit ridiculous, sir. :/
 
Sculli said:
Let me assure you that I didn't go BAC. It was, however, somewhat of a quick change of heart for most QCDNers. I took a class titled "Human Relations" during the Spring semester. The stuff I learned there made y say that it won't happen.

It is true that I often call those out who believe that any argument, any discussion, makes insults mandatory. Unless you are one of those, I don't think I said anything negative about you. I know there was a good amount of non-flame discussion going on at the FB in threads that initially started elsewhere, but then ended up at the FB because someone choose to drag the thread in the mud. That sort of discussion can still be had at today's QCDN, insults can not.

What people are forgetting is that the FB wasn't just about insults and poop jokes, it was a style of posting. People want to boil it down to the base level and demonize it when I don't think anyone will argue that the best, most content-rich threads in QCDN history were almost exclusively on that board. And the only threads so far in GD that even scratch that surface have taken on the FB 'flavor.' Sometimes that means insults. Sometimes the only language people listen to is one with passion. While you can say that you can post like it's the FB without insulting and make it OK, all that leads to is PC+1s of "hay buddy dis aint da fb" and all of a sudden the mob mentality hits and it's no longer alright to post an opinion if it might hurt someone's feelings.


I can't answer this one for you. If you feel that I disrespected you by not following your suggestions as to what to do with the FB, then I can't really change that. To me it wasn't personal, your suggestion was simply not where I wanted to go, that doesn't mean that I didn't consider it.
If you feel that I disrespected you in not asking you to come back as a mod, again, I can't change that. The reason I didn't ask you back was because you made it clear that you didn't agree with the changes. No sense in having a mod who is not "on board" so to speak.

Did you forget that I was the one who spearheaded the FB having any kind of serious moderation in the first place? I never championed it as a free-for-all. You're confusing a disagreement with guidelines with an inability to enforce them. Just because I have to push sales numbers on people who I don't want to bother so I make my quotas every month doesn't mean I have to like doing it or think the policy is unsound.

I'd have felt better if you just told me I was a shitty mod or something. It'd make a lot more sense over assuming that people with differences can't work together. Shouldn't that also have been taught in your classes? I don't know, I didn't take the same courses you do.

I don't know why you would help this board. If QCDN has nothing to offer to you, then you have no reason to help. If QCDN may have something to offer to you if some things were to change, then you have the possibility that you will receive whatever it is you want in return for helping out. However, there is no guarantee that it will work. No sense in sugar-coating it. It may be worth your time to put in effort, but whether that is true I can not answer without knowing what it is you would want to do, and more importantly, I am in no position to guarantee that things will work out the way you intend for them to work out.

Having change be a result of the userbase and not a professor would be a fine start.

I can tell you why I am putting in effort, perhaps that will help you to come to a decision. To me QCDN may become useful beyond QCDN in the future. I would like to launch two more forums. I had those plans (and domains) since early 2005, now over a year later, I have not put in a single hour in actually working on them. I am just too busy with RL stuff and QCDN. I spend on average 25 hours a week on QCDN. That time goes to answering PMs, following up on user issues, reading posts, moderating them as needed, looking for ways to improve vBulletin with code changes and modifications, and trying to find people who would be willing to finance contests.

More details, please.

This is no joke, 25 hours a week is real. Often RL friends ask me why I put up with all the grief instead of just calling it good and selling the site. My answer is that for the 20 users who constantly give me grief over any every so slight issue, there are literally a couple thousand registered users who come to QCDN on a more or less daily basis and get good use out of this site. I feel that I have a responsibility to those users to not let QCDN disappear. QCDN has value even if not a single new post is ever made. I fear that someone who would be out to buy it would make this site essentially unsuable for those who come here daily. Of course that is the worst case scenario, but it is still a very real one.

And who's to say that someone else couldn't both put in the hours necessary and keep this site afloat?

I would like to think of myself as a reasonable person. Unless you want the old FB back, I will listen to what you have to say, and if it makes sense, and is practical, then chances are good that it will happen. Chances are good, but again, there are no guarantees. You can PM me, you can post it in public, you can lead a roundtable thing if you believe that it will work. It's up to you.

No. No, that's bullshit. It's up to YOU. Do not keep making these half-hearted attempts to pass the buck on the responsibility of how this forum should be shaped.

YOU are the one who made the changes. It is not the responsibility of the userbase(many of which still strongly disagree with you and are willing to be banned for it) to make those changes actually work. I'm getting really tired of this feeling I get from you where you're more than willing to take ideas directly from the dream stage into reality and then let everyone else step in and try to clean up the mess for you.

I think we just have a fundamental disagreement in opinions. I believe that people should treat each other decently, and that when it is in my hands, I will promote such behavior by disallowing the opposite. You seem to have a different view on this.

There is a difference between promotion and edict. Frankly, I'm insulted that you feel the general QCDN userbase has to be treated like your children for us to be worthwhile.
 
masterorion said:
hmm, you yourself, decided to quote a thread between myself and whoever...i wanted it to just be removed but you didnt. the only reason why it was removed was by mistake by yourself sculli.
are things done by you exempt?
I honestly do not remember which thread you are talking about. However, most all threads made are still around, and I can look it up. I imagine it was on the old Flameboard?

Be that as it may, the issue at hand is the use of quotes in signatures, where the quoted text is coming up as often as the one who has it in their sig posts.

Without knowing what exactly you are refering to I can only say that quoting a post within the same thread, or branching out of a thread to create a new thread to essentially not go off-topic in the old thread is something I would consider normal forum behaviour.

masterorion said:
i guess hitler comes in many other forms
Nazi references are completely unacceptable. Nothing, absolutely nothing done on these forums comes even close to the grief the Nazi regime caused for millions of people. If you, or anyone else, are unable to accept that and respect those who suffered under Hitler, rather than cheapen them by comparing forum policy to Nazi policy, then you will be shown out. I realize that some find it acceptable since the Soup Nazi in the Seinfeld episode and whatever, but you are asked to choose a different form of expression that while still showing your disapproval for forum policy or leadership, doesn't trivialize the grief millions of people had to go through. See the updated QCDN Community Standards which put this common sense issue in writing.

_Neosquall_ said:
Why did my harmless post get deleted?
Off-topic. I, and some other posters, try to turn this into a meaningful discussion that will hopefully lead to acceptable results. Off-topic content (even if it is funny) does clutter up this thread.

_Neosquall_ said:
This is getting a tad bit ridiculous, sir. :/
He asked for his account to be deleted, so I did it, what else do you want me to do? Seriously, I don't do it, I get heat, I do it I get heat. Make up your mind will ya? I previously refused to delete accounts because vBulletin keeps telling me that the posts will be set to "Guest" which will essentially make the posts anonymous, which is something that I didn't want to happen. Cleofis wrote:

Cleofis said:
To be honest i'd rather my account was deleted. I know with boards like this it can be done without saying guest. It can still have my name just written as if it was a guest. At least that's what happens at another board I frequent.

so I decided to give it a shot, and it worked. Other users had previously asked to have their account deleted, so I let them know that it is possible asking who else wants to be deleted.

Cubswoo said:
What people are forgetting is that the FB wasn't just about insults and poop jokes, it was a style of posting.
[...]
Sometimes the only language people listen to is one with passion.
Insults have never ever won an argument, and they never will. In an argument one is trying to convince the other to see one's point of view and perceive it as true. This can simply not be accomplished by belitteling the one who is supposed to be convinced.

I am not the one who says the FB was all insults, I am the one who is saying that the FB promoted insults. I agree that some of the best QCDN posts were made on the FB, I think we can also agree that a lot of it was "you are a moron!". "no, you are!" etc.

Do you really believe that "You are a fucking idiot for not getting my point" will make the one who was called any more receptive to the OP's point?

Cubswoo said:
Did you forget that I was the one who spearheaded the FB having any kind of serious moderation in the first place?
I do too remember that well. But as I said earlier, the fact that it spilled over into other parts of QCDN was one issue, and the fact that people should treat each other decently even if in disagreement was another.

The FB promoted the attitude to treat each other like shit, I don't believe any amount of moderation would have changed that, it was an attitude that has grown over close to two years. The only chance I saw to change it was to get rid of the pinnacle of that attitude at QCDN.

Cubswoo said:
I'd have felt better if you just told me I was a shitty mod or something.
I don't believe you were a shitty mod. You did have the most shitty job (well, maybe admin is, but anyway) to mod the FB with asiamise. No matter what you would do, you would get heat (which is the seat I am in atm). Historically the FB hasn't been strictly moderated, nor did it really make sense to moderate the "Anarchy reigns supreme" board. That was till it became "Now with 100% more moderation", but even then it was difficult to decide what should stay and what should go. Still, it was clear to me that you weren't in favor of the changes, and while I do believe that those who disagree can work together, I just didn't see enough common ground at that time.

You have seen mods in this thread disagreeing with my decision to ask people to remove quotes. It's one of the few things mods and I disagree on, but overall the current mods are on board in working their way through this mess of community standards, moderator standards, editing policy, reading threads, modding them, taking heat, etc.

Cubswoo said:
Having change be a result of the userbase and not a professor would be a fine start.
Actually it was Maxwell really, the professor just pointed it out. Anyway, userbase initated change is fine to a degree. Ultimately I am the admin and I can't support things I am not comfortable with. I don't believe in a QCDN that we had when the old FB was still around. I am not saying the current QCDN is perfect, it's far from it, but I will not revive the old FB to appease those who crave it.

Cubswoo said:
And who's to say that someone else couldn't both put in the hours necessary and keep this site afloat?
It's possible that there could be others, but are there others who can guarantee consistency, and who will not walk out after taking some heat and realizing that it's one huge time sink? I made a committment that I intend to keep, and while I don't want to rag on Pupusa for real life getting in the way of admining QCDN, I do want to point out that it happened.

Cubswoo said:
No. No, that's bullshit. It's up to YOU. Do not keep making these half-hearted attempts to pass the buck on the responsibility of how this forum should be shaped.
You can't have it both ways. In one post you say that you have all these ideas, but you see no point in bringing them up. Then I reply that you are welcome to bring them up as long as they do not include bringing the old FB back, and then you call BS? Am I missing something, or does this make no sense at all.

How can you say you have ideas, and then get upset when I say "let's hear them"?

Cubswoo said:
Frankly, I'm insulted that you feel the general QCDN userbase has to be treated like your children for us to be worthwhile.
Sorry you feel that way. Behavioral rules exist everywhere. I don't want people to treat each other like shit on my site, yeah, it's still mine, even though it would be nothing without the users. If you feel that this desire makes you feel like I am treating you as a child, then there is nothing I can do to change that. I am telling you want you can and can not do at QCDN. To compare apples with apples; other forums do the same thing. Some are more strict that QCDN, some are less strict, none is lawless (except offtopic.com maybe). You are the one who is not happy with the current rules, why are you asking me to come up with a way to appease you while you have a clear idea as to what needs to happen?

I can only guess, you already know for sure.
You can't get what you don't ask for, don't expect me to sit here and muse all day long what I could possibly do to make Cubswoo happy, because that simply won't happen.

If you are not happy, you have the option to voice your opinion as to what needs to change. If your opinion is reasonable and practical, then chances are good that it will be done. The only exclusion is that the old FB won't come back, and personal insults will not be promoted. That's the framework you can go by.

----

I have removed all the chasym induced drama, and associated replies, from this thread. This is about working out how QCDN will work. Telling those who are not happy with the way things are to go elsewhere doesn't help, unless they want the old FB back, then they will have to indeed go elsewhere.

Do not bring further "just go away" issues into this thread, doing so is counterproductive as to what many QCDN members and I are trying to do here, and will result in access restrictions to QCDN.
 
Sculli said:
Insults have never ever won an argument, and they never will. In an argument one is trying to convince the other to see one's point of view and perceive it as true. This can simply not be accomplished by belitteling the one who is supposed to be convinced.

To be entirely fair i've won more than a few on here and irl by going just far enough insult-wise to knock someone's logic off kilter for just long enough for their ears to open up, it may not happen often but sometimes people shut up for just long enough after 'you fucking moron, the point is ______' to listen for a second.

On the same note i've been insulted in to seeing it someone elses point on here numerous times by many many posters who have recently been about as quiet on the boards as one can be as of late so as not to recieve the banhammer for something deemed intollerable on the fly.

Claiming that it doesn't work ever is a gross miscalculation.

Utopias don't exist for a reason.
 
Sculli said:
You can't have it both ways. In one post you say that you have all these ideas, but you see no point in bringing them up. Then I reply that you are welcome to bring them up as long as they do not include bringing the old FB back, and then you call BS? Am I missing something, or does this make no sense at all.

How can you say you have ideas, and then get upset when I say "let's hear them"?

Because you weren't asking me. It felt like you were saying "Do all the work, catch me at the right time and if I'm available I might listen and occasionally comment." It felt like you want me to do all the work for you, and in that case I'd very much like to feel that said work will be rewarded, or at the very least appreciated.

There was a time when I felt I would give my time and effort unconditionally to this site. That time has passed, for reasons I think we both understand
.
Sorry you feel that way. Behavioral rules exist everywhere. I don't want people to treat each other like shit on my site, yeah, it's still mine, even though it would be nothing without the users. If you feel that this desire makes you feel like I am treating you as a child, then there is nothing I can do to change that. I am telling you want you can and can not do at QCDN. To compare apples with apples; other forums do the same thing. Some are more strict that QCDN, some are less strict, none is lawless (except offtopic.com maybe). You are the one who is not happy with the current rules, why are you asking me to come up with a way to appease you while you have a clear idea as to what needs to happen?

I can only guess, you already know for sure.
You can't get what you don't ask for, don't expect me to sit here and muse all day long what I could possibly do to make Cubswoo happy, because that simply won't happen.

1) Enforce the rules strictly or don't enforce them at all
2) Make available an area where people can see why so-and-so was punished
3) Give mods limited power to probate for short periods of time to ease burden
4) Be transparent when it comes to rules and rule modifications and allow flexibility for the unknown
5) Multiple boards on this site need to go; will expand on this later

Is this what you're looking for?

If you are not happy, you have the option to voice your opinion as to what needs to change. If your opinion is reasonable and practical, then chances are good that it will be done. The only exclusion is that the old FB won't come back, and personal insults will not be promoted. That's the framework you can go by.

Debate forum. Place for all of that stuff to go with fairly heavy moderation on the stuff you don't like while still allowing people to be passionate without being insulting.

Again, is this what you're looking for?

----
 
Last edited:
Sculli said:
----

I have removed all the chasym induced drama, and associated replies, from this thread. This is about working out how QCDN will work. Telling those who are not happy with the way things are to go elsewhere doesn't help, unless they want the old FB back, then they will have to indeed go elsewhere.

Do not bring further "just go away" issues into this thread, doing so is counterproductive as to what many QCDN members and I are trying to do here, and will result in access restrictions to QCDN.

Forgot to mention this - the fact that no punishment was meted out to anyone as of yet was shocking and yet not shocking at the same time.
 
The "This is getting a tad bit ridiculous, sir. :/" was directed to you and other mods deleting posts that caused no threat(For lack of a better word) to this site.

Was it really necessary for you to delete all the posts that we wrote in the past 15minutes? I don't even know what's going on anymore, not that I have ever since those other tard boards were created.
 
RL/VBulletin optimist?

As you said, Sculli, you greatly changed. YOU changed.
This is something so transparent that you didn't actually need to admit it.

The thing that many people do not like about this is that the forum has changed as suddenly, and as drastically as you have in your real life.

Whereas it's nice that you've discovered something and have decided to embrace it, others might not want to put ALL their eggs in that same basket with you. The manner in which you have gone about things forces those who have been here for years to live your vision, and not their own.

Before anyone goes off on a tanget about "forcing"...No, nobody is forcing anyone to merely be here. That is not the point, although I'm sure some of you would like to think that's what I am getting at just so you'll be able to use that as a crutch for your own weak, merry-go-round opinion, that we should just take this medicine and swallow it.


Before I voluntarily relinquished my moderator status, I would have really taken to any relationship or vision you would have shown interest in, to the betterment of QCDN, or the fostering of new ideas. That never happened.

Now you want to change. That change in it of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. I don't think the changes themselves are what gets people up in arms and fired up. The pivoting caused a culture shock, as thousands of us who have been here for years witnessed the boards, rules, and you change over night. The only reason this didn't work as planned, so to speak, is because you are trying to accomplish it like a person would feed a cat a pill....You hold its skull firmly in one hand, pulling it upwards, so the consumption of the pill will be aided by gravity. The cat squirms, but you show it who is boss, and continue holding it's jaw bones with unflinching force. Then, prying open its mouth with a finger, the pill is literally pushed right down its throat.

Mission accomplished. Did anyone remotely enjoy accomplishing the goal? No. Will people be receptive to your methods in the future? No.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top