Bloody hall-monitor wanker. It would be a shame if you grew some balls.

"...and we don't like it." Boo hoo hoo. Somebody call the Waaaaaaaaaahmbulance.

Hey abgie. Explain how it is possible for you to recommend Fagnaur for a league TD. Your judgment is pathetic.

Shooting your mouth off on social networks is a real sign of immaturity, ignorance and sociopathic tendencies, some of the people on here need to turn off the PC and get out more, the exercise and social interaction would probably do them good
All IMHO

@maple

This has nothing to do with balls; this isn't my site and I will not use my powers to enforce my will outside of my jurisdiction. Please believe me, though, if Kestas gives me the power moderate the forum, you will be the first person to go. You contribute less than nothing to this site.

Why don't we attempt a policy of what amounts to in-community and out-community status.

i.e. we shun you if you're an asshole.

If you think this doesn't work then just look at real people groups of history and around the world. Ex-communication or whatever it's called where it happens is a powerful punishment.

I am essentially suggesting an *actual* petition that has guidelines for how to do this that we sign.

How do we keep it from being abused? There are people who some will certainly suggest but shouldn't necessarily be on there just because they piss a few people off.

@Thucy

How would such a system work?

@Abge....that system would work something like this: The dominant political and religious factions would banish those with opinions they do not like....

@Krellin and that's why I mentioned abuse because that shouldn't happen.

I'm with Krellin on this one

I mean whether it happens or not, such a system allows for it to happen

That's why guideline to prevent that need to be in place. Banishing someone because they disagree is bullshit, punishing them because they're an all around ass is perfectly legitimate.

Define all around ass. And saying "Krellin" does work....nor does stating an offensive opinion, as there isn't a single person here who does not have an opinion that might be offensive to someone else. Which is why, long ago, they decided to not moderate the forums.

That being said....if you think mods do NOT moderate the forums, you are wrong. They just don't do it openly or publicly. Thus, this entire discussion is a farce.

Oh no I would actually defend your right to be on here. I may not agree with you, but you have the right to state your opinions. I just really disagree with the way you say things.
As for an around ass, well that would be up to the community to decide. Perhaps if someone was disruptive and vile in every thread they commented on.

"The way I say things...." So....we will banish people for the way they say things, not their opninions? That's an interesting concept...

Without thinking, I can think of 10 regular forum posters (myself included, mind you) that I consider to be offensive assholes. I don't like the hate that they spew towards conservatives and Christians and people with alternate thoughts on various "scientific" topics. These are people that regularly belittle others, call them child-abusers, tell people they are stupid and brain-washed, call them murderers....but they don't need to be banned - their opinions are valid and a true reflection of this community, and the global community in general.

I strongly suspect that this whole discussion was in fact provoked by me...because of a specific *word* that I used recently - for which I apologize -- and yet, to call THAT hate speech, given the list of things I mention above that I regularly see, is a little absurd. In other words, who is going to determine WHICH PARTICULAR FORM of hatred is acceptable? Because the "hate speech" flows freely around here...

@Krellin That's why I said there needs to be guidelines agreed on by people from both the majority and minority. I have no problem with people stating different opinions. I'd even fight for their right to say them. I just see the need for some of the idiotic trolling that happens. Btw, I wouldn't count you as a troll.

Hey abgie! Why did you push for bi-polar Fagnaur, of all the fucking people, to be a TD in the leagues?

Because he is a mature, rational and responsible human being.........................

It's pretty simple:

A voluntary pact, actually written out, is agreed to by those who agree to it and those who agree to it pledge to uphold it.

The content would involve what sorts of things it doesn't tolerate. And how to deal with it. My idea was that it would proscribe shunning.

So, simple example.

Here is the text of the pact:

"We the undersigned pledge not to interact with or acknowledge a user who uses the following words on the forum for a period of 72 hours or the period under which the shitstorm continues, whichever is longer:

-nigger
-faggot
-coon
etc TBD

Signed
Thucydides"

Simple enough right? It's just a way of formalizing and crystalizing the idea of self-moderation so that it can work better.

Studies show that when people are read an honor code of ethics before engaging in an ethical choice they are far more likely to do the right thing. This is why my university makes you sign the no-cheating/plagiarism honor code before taking a test. It works for me at least; I've never cheated on anything at university.

For whatever it's worth (nothing, I would assume), I would oppose all these ideas. Most people here are adults, and there are plenty of options already for muting people we don't like. Moreover, you don't even have to be active on the forums to use this site. Plenty of top players aren't. If players want to leave because of the content of the forums, fine. Far better than having a moderated forum with the stifling that brings. It's always been rough here, and things have been OK so far.

A final note. Any list like Thucy's _inevitably_ ends up either stifling things or being perceived as amounting to a substantive bias. For example, many Catholics are probably as offended by being called child rapists as the average gay person is by the use of the word faggot. So shouldn't that be included? If not, why is it OK to offend Catholics but not gays? On the other hand, if we do include that, then we're actually stifling substantive discussion. Som epeople on the forum seem actually to believe that Catholics are, by and large, child rapists. Et cetera. Just leave things be, I say.

@Thucy

We could certainly try such a thing. As I've said before, I really don't want to have to moderate the forum. It will be a complete nightmare. What would be nice is if we could all be a little nicer to each other.

I'd be fine with it as long as the list of terms is written and posted ahead of time and agreed upon my majority and minority.

@semck

I agree that, for the most part, muting is a decent solution for veteran players. What concerns me more is new players, especially if we ever want to attract F2F players to our site. The forum is not a particularly friendly place for a new player.

Somebody is dodging a question. Somebody does not embrace accountability. Somebody is a snotty punk.

@krellin

I'm not talking about any particular issue and I'm not saying certain parties are more to blame than others. I'm just saying, as the community grows, a simple Forum such as ours has a hard time accommodating more than a couple ruffians. I'm just asking people to put a little more thought before posting.

@maple

I thought having Draug help with the leagues would help him settle down. He "quit" the site 2 times after taking up the Leagues, so clearly I was wrong. Oh, well. Shame on me for trying to see the best in people.

@abge,

Well, overall, I certainly agree with your plea for better manners, but as I said, I'm just opposed to anything more. Certainly I concur that it would be excellent to attract more veteran and F2F players to our site; but the emphasis there, to me, is "our site." I don't have much interest in changing the site so that it's something F2F players will come to, but at the cost of fundamentally changing the character of the community (which I'm pretty sure would happen*). Instead, I'd focus on making sure new players were immediately aware of the policies and the muting options.

Another option, which might help and would be more positive instead of negative/censoring, could be to have moderator-chosen volunteers who were known not to misbehave too badly and whom newly recruited veteran players could contact if they felt overwhelmed by the venom and nonsense. Actually, as I type it, this seems like a pretty stupid idea. Anyway, though, my main point above remains.

@Thucy, Celticfox, et al. I would certainly never sign such a thing -- though there are players whom I choose myself not to interact with, based on their hateful personalities, I would never want to formalize that decision into a list of terms or behaviors. Does that mean I would be shunned, as well?

*I have been involved in plenty of moderated and unmoderated internet forums over long periods of time. I am unaware of any moderated ones that are as lively as this one.