Moderator Selection Process/Policy Making

-SpectraL-SpectraL Will Faggert
edited January 2011 in Help and Suggestions
«1

Comments

  • edited January 2011
    Pakistanis sniff cum
  • edited January 2011
    Pakistanis sniff cum
  • SlartibartfastSlartibartfast Global Moderator -__-
    edited January 2011
    Spectral: shut up.

    It's getting to the point were everything you say is background noise.

    I'm no longer able to read your posts because they are so blase.
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited January 2011
    Why can't you keep this shit to one thread Spectral? You aren't saying anything you didn't already say in that thread in Bitch and Moan. Just stop making these threads whenever people stop giving you enough attention or like I said before fuck off. Nobody cares what you have to say because it's all the same recycled bullshit over and over.
  • DailyDaily Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    I find the biggest fuckup Dfg has going here is the policies he has going. For example, the "set in stone" policies. It's great to have policies which are set in stone, but they have to be the right ones. A great policy to set in stone is one where no excuse will be made for those either defacing or otherwise preventing others from productive discussion in the discussion forums. That would be a GREAT policy to set in stone... one where NOBODY argues about it... because it's already set in stone. But, no... we still have people arguing the benefits of spammers and general wastes of space. Set in stone policies are great, but this administration has no idea what they should be, and even when advised what they should be through rational and logical argument, pointing to the previous failures of others who traveled the very same road, they refuse to even entertain the thought.

    Another great set in stone policy would be that no one shall hoard power over others needlessly, and yet we have, just like back on Zoklet, a couple of misers who hoard power needlessly. They don't seem to realize the most obvious factors which drive a community forward, such as authority. Only authority leads to change. Without authority, no change will occur. If you want to change things, you need authority to do it. And yet we have a couple of the "in gang" who withhold due authority to those who can effect those changes, thusly preventing ANY change from occurring except for those changes THEY deem appropriate.. by THEIR OWN authority. They sit there and hold ALL the authority, piece-mealing it out to whomever THEY think is worthy of it, rather than gauging community opinion, selecting those whose track records justify it, and after making that selection, fully standing behind such a one, allowing such a one all the authority they need to make the changes they are going to bring. If they do not bring the change, or fuck up, or turn to personal agenda... then FINE... they get removed and stripped of their authority, but to remove their authority before they have even shown what they have to bring to the table, or to dismiss their track record on the basis of the whim of the one holding all the reigns of power, all that is is senselessness in the highest degree. Not that I even asked for a moderator position, but the fact that Dfg turned his back on not only the poll, which definitely showed an overwhelming majority, but turned his back on my entire history, my successes, my battles and my experience, just because HE thought it wasn't a good idea, should go to PROVE that what I say is true about the current administration.

    Failure, failure, failure, and more failures. That's ALL that will come from this kind of mindset, as was so keenly PROVEN at zoklet. And YET, we see a persistence and a push toward the exact same kind of extinction plan.

    Discuss...

    So basically you're peeing your panties, dying to be mod. Well, like, Dfg said countless times, fucktard, you're gonna have to go through the demi-mod status to see if you're really up to the job. It's really not that difficult, kid. Suck it up. Suck that cum up, bitch. Or just simply shut the fuck up.
  • LuxJigabooLuxJigaboo Regular
    edited January 2011
    Why can't you keep this shit to one thread Spectral? You aren't saying anything you didn't already say in that thread in Bitch and Moan. Just stop making these threads

    Well, Dfg did ask for it:
    Dfg wrote: »
    Does it kill you to use PM or make a clean thread regarding this issue so I and others can look at it and possible fix the issue.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    Seriously Spectral that all sounds great so why don't you just bop on over to GoDaddy and get yourself a domain. You already stated that is what you/DaGuru intend to do. So just do it... Of course if that no longer works for you than we can just go with Fatty's ideas and add the name DaGuru to the list so both yous can be happy.
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Ya.. but she's not really in this for the facts or the entire picture, all she wants to do is barge into threads and stamp her feet around like some snot-nosed kid who didn't get the chocolate bar they wanted at the corner store when Mommy took her there to get potatoes for supper. Worst possible choice for modding ANY forum... I don't what the hell Dfg was thinking when he modded these obvious morons.

    So now people who disagree with you are obvious morons? You need to get your ego in check and stop thinking your god because you modded a shitty forum at one point.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    So now people who disagree with you are obvious morons? You need to get your ego in check and stop thinking your god because you modded a shitty forum at one point.


    Yeah and to think I chimed in on this chumps behalf for months on end over at Zoklet. Sure is funny how people change when they lose power.
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Not at all. I call morons out on the basis of the facts, and by an honest examination of what they do and say. If I say someone is a moron, I have a wealth of backing for it available upon request.

    So then back it up. And who exactly are these morons you speak of oh lord of internet forums.smiley_bowdown.gif
  • LuxJigabooLuxJigaboo Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Discuss...

    Fine, I will discuss, but you will probably disagree with most of what I have to say. :p
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    I find the biggest fuckup Dfg has going here is the policies he has going. For example, the "set in stone" policies. It's great to have policies which are set in stone, but they have to be the right ones. A great policy to set in stone is one where no excuse will be made for those either defacing or otherwise preventing others from productive discussion in the discussion forums. That would be a GREAT policy to set in stone... one where NOBODY argues about it... because it's already set in stone. But, no... we still have people arguing the benefits of spammers and general wastes of space. Set in stone policies are great, but this administration has no idea what they should be, and even when advised what they should be through rational and logical argument, pointing to the previous failures of others who traveled the very same road, they refuse to even entertain the thought.

    These are the rules that I believe should be set in stone, as well as my opinion concerning spam and the posts that you do not like:
    1. Thou shalt not cause grief to thy Administrator.
    2. One Account Per Person. (If you want to create a new identity, create a new account and stop using your old account.)
    3. Do not post messages with credit card numbers, calling card numbers, passwords to private computer systems, other user's real names and personal info (including pictures), or unsolicited phone numbers.
    4. Posting the same rant, advertisement, or announcement in multiple forums is moral equivalent of sending SPAM e-mail to people. We hate SPAM.
    5. If you post a link to a harmful script (password stealer, system crasher, other assorted nasties) you must identify it as a link that can cause harm. Trying to trick people into clicking on a harmful link can get you booted.
    6. Do not threaten other users with physical harm or engage in other felonious behavior. Try to be NICE to each other, if possible.
    7. Before bugging the sysadmin with questions, look around and see if you can find your own answers. Seek the Truth!
    8. If you find a bug, send me some Feedback so that I can fix it.
    9. Messages you post may be moved to a more appropriate forum without warning.
    10. Users will not be deleted because of content. About the only thing that could get you banned from the system is if you break any of the above rules or if you try to destroy totse.info. All attempts at destruction so far have been feeble-minded.

    The way I see it is that most of those rules regulate threads. Even in SG there were rules such as a requirement that each thread be started by at least one complete sentence that would generate discussion, not just saying "discuss".

    The only rules that should regulate individual posts are 3,4, and 5 which I believe should be strictly enforced.

    Aside from that I do not believe there should be any regulation of individual posts. DirtySanchez and fanglekai have said that on totse there were strict rules, and they are correct but the rules applied mainly to those who started threads, not those who posted in them. The idea of an "off topic posts rule" was not an original totse idea and comes from zoklet influence.

    On totse, we have seen many people post things like "+1",or "5char", or "InB4 Lock", and the moderators did nothing about it. None of us complained then because there was so much great content and we enjoyed it.

    This "no off topic posts" thing was just made by Zok to make his forum like every other forum on the internet.
    Another great set in stone policy would be that no one shall hoard power over others needlessly, and yet we have, just like back on Zoklet, a couple of misers who hoard power needlessly. They don't seem to realize the most obvious factors which drive a community forward, such as authority. Only authority leads to change. Without authority, no change will occur. If you want to change things, you need authority to do it. And yet we have a couple of the "in gang" who withhold due authority to those who can effect those changes, thusly preventing ANY change from occurring except for those changes THEY deem appropriate.. by THEIR OWN authority. They sit there and hold ALL the authority, piece-mealing it out to whomever THEY think is worthy of it, rather than gauging community opinion, selecting those whose track records justify it, and after making that selection, fully standing behind such a one, allowing such a one all the authority they need to make the changes they are going to bring. If they do not bring the change, or fuck up, or turn to personal agenda... then FINE... they get removed and stripped of their authority, but to remove their authority before they have even shown what they have to bring to the table, or to dismiss their track record on the basis of the whim of the one holding all the reigns of power, all that is is senselessness in the highest degree. Not that I even asked for a moderator position, but the fact that Dfg turned his back on not only the poll, which definitely showed an overwhelming majority, but turned his back on my entire history, my successes, my battles and my experience, just because HE thought it wasn't a good idea, should go to PROVE that what I say is true about the current administration.

    Now, for this part, I am not exactly sure what you mean when you say "hoarding power". It seems that Dfg has been willing to give out moderator positions to pretty much anyone (lol like me :D). I think that idea should be defined in a more clear way that is not based on opinion. I do not think that any rule based on opinion should be set in stone, because when there is no clear absolute to follow, it will lead to corruption.

    As, for the portion about authority, how can any leader not have a personal adgenda? Is it not the job of the administrator to provide a vision for a website? This is why, I never believed any of that "community democracy" bull shit.

    It was obvious from the beginning that polls could only be used for minor forum suggestions, to let them decided every aspect of the site, the administrator would have to give up on their vision and power. As much as people like to throw around the word community, who among us can honestly give up their own power?

    I would prefer if totse was just another absentee dictatorship, like it was in the past. All that I ask is for a dictator who believes in freedom of speech, not some politically correct person like Zok.

    Now, because of the position that you hold on authority, would you agree that if the administrator (Dfg), truly believes that your ideas would damage the site, that he would have the right to keep power from you?
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    A very well written post vozhde. Of course we all know Spectral will not take the time to respond to it point by point but instead will focus on one phrase to the point of ignoring the real message of your post.
  • DailyDaily Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Daily has a VERY thin skin, and VERY little to bring to the table except senseless, unsubstantiated insults.

    I'm just telling it how it is really, -SpectraL. You know it, I know it, EVERYBODY knows it.
  • LuxJigabooLuxJigaboo Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    The proper way to apportion power is to base the decision off the actual merits of the applicant in question, not on the whim of a single member.

    So, what would you consider to be merits?
  • DailyDaily Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    What Dfg thinks is important, just as everybody's opinion is important, but it has nothing to do with the correct way to do things. There's a right way, and then there's a wrong way. If Dfg thinks I have ideas that would damage the site, that's great! But it doesn't mean shit-squat when it comes down to the proper way to select moderators. This discussion isn't really about what Dfg thinks, it's a debate about the proper way to apportion power within community, regardless of personal opinion. The proper way to apportion power is to base the decision off the actual merits of the applicant in question, not on the whim of a single member.

    So what the fuck are you talking about, really? Dfg and the mods scout for potential mods in sections, looking over their contributions and their approach to posting in general. If we see them fit as a moderator, they will get offered the position. Even then, they don't get "promoted" instantly, they go through the demi mod status to see if they're really fit to manage the forums. If the mods see that everything is running smoothly, THEN the user will get their mod status. None of this "I used to be a mod on this OTHER website so I deserve some recognition!" No, -SpectraL. That's not how shit is done. There is no personal opinion. Not all of the mods are personally content with each other. We simply acknowledge their contributions and accept it. I would like you to be on the mod team, I really would, but why don't you just stop being a hardass and accept a demi mod position for a few fucking days.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    vozhde wrote: »
    So, what would you consider to be merits?


    Well we already know that he thinks disdain for the chain of command and the opinion that a mod should be able to do as they wish in their sections is high on his list of attributes. He said that is how he would mod and he obviously thinks he makes a good mod.
  • DailyDaily Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Merits would be that person's known track record.. and I don't mean somebody's fairy tale version of it where they bring no facts to the table to support their dislikes... I mean the actual track record of such a person. Take Daily here for instance. Let's say Daily was up for mod and we wanted to know how she would do. Well, we would only have to call up the moron's posts over at Zoklet to see just what we're getting, isn't that right? We could also inquire as to how many righteous infractions/bans/warnings she has received in the past. And the truth of it, spammy members like Daily... and don't say we don't know all about Daily spammy history... she who played a big part in ruining Zoklet by defacing the discussion-forums time and time again. Shit, if you look at her posting right here you'll see that 80% of it is worthless garbage... fun for her to post, sure... but pretty well useless to anybody else but the other spammy clown-children like her. We have to examine each applicant based on their own merits... merits they have displayed in the past. And no... merits are not canceled out just because one member like Dfg says they are... they are a lasting record of that person and their true natures... easily perused by the administration as they come to a proper decision on whether that applicant would make mod material or not.

    Ah, personal vendettas ain't healthy, Specs.

    And your point is retarded. How I act with my friends is not how I act with my grandparents. How a priest acts in church is not how he acts when he's in bed with a 9 year old boy sucking his cock. That's just not how shit works in real life, Specs.
  • LuxJigabooLuxJigaboo Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    If Dfg thinks I have ideas that would damage the site, that's great! But it doesn't mean shit-squat when it comes down to the proper way to select moderators. This discussion isn't really about what Dfg thinks, it's a debate about the proper way to apportion power within community, regardless of personal opinion. The proper way to apportion power is to base the decision off the actual merits of the applicant in question, not on the whim of a single member.

    But if you were administrator, would you not do the same thing? In the end, all those who have any power will just have to do what they believe is right. It is then that the opinion of the community can support them or turn against them.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Merits would be that person's known track record.. and I don't mean somebody's fairy tale version of it where they bring no facts to the table to support their dislikes... I mean the actual track record of such a person. Take Daily here for instance. Let's say Daily was up for mod and we wanted to know how she would do. Well, we would only have to call up the moron's posts over at Zoklet to see just what we're getting, isn't that right? We could also inquire as to how many righteous infractions/bans/warnings she has received in the past. And the truth of it, spammy members like Daily... and don't say we don't know all about Daily spammy history... she who played a big part in ruining Zoklet by defacing the discussion-forums time and time again. Shit, if you look at her posting right here you'll see that 80% of it is worthless garbage... fun for her to post, sure... but pretty well useless to anybody else but the other spammy clown-children like her. We have to examine each applicant based on their own merits... merits they have displayed in the past. And no... merits are not canceled out just because one member like Dfg says they are... they are a lasting record of that person and their true natures... easily perused by the administration as they come to a proper decision on whether that applicant would make mod material or not.


    So in other words DFG should consider this post when deciding on whether or not you should be a mod.

    https://www.totse.info/bbs/showpost.php?p=122130&postcount=13
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    There's no vendetta, Daily... honest there ain't. I'm just calling it as I see it, that's all. I called you a moron because that's the character you seem to like to portray. If you acted like a fisherwoman, I would call you a fisherwoman, if your words and action proved you were a bowl of salad, I would call you a salad. If your words and actions are spammy, them I call you a spammer. If you're words, or lack of them, and actions present you as a moron, then that is exactly what I am going to call you! I don't play games and call this that when it ain't, and I don't play games and make pretend something is what it, given the facts of the case, is most definitely not. No vendetta, Daily. It's just that YOU made your bed, and now YOU have to sleep in it, but it seems whoever modded you forgot that you even made that bed. Fortunately for me, I didn't.


    So do you call yourself and angry despot?
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    The administrator should not even be the ones making such decisions as who will have the power to be community leaders, IMO. And it shouldn't be made by the majority either. It should be made by those who prove to have their eye on the ball, and those who actually take the effort to investigate the actual facts of each case WITHOUT personal prejudiced or personal opinion. And if those ones who are to make the decision are plenty enough, administration should have no choice but to follow their direction and act. BUT... once you invite a bunch of spammers in, and people who DON'T have their eye on the ball, and the ones who DO have their eye on the ball become outnumbered, the administrator then DOES have a choice in the matter. If enough people here had their eye on the ball and operated on facts instead of personal preference and what they do and do not like to hear, they would BE the majority, and then administration would be able to follow through on their advisement. BUT, if you have a forum where it's just a bunch of spammers, spam supporters, sock puppets, kidiots, then the admin doesn't really have to listen to the reason coming in from the minority. You see, before we go ahead with one thing we need to first resolve the thing behind it... ALL the way back to the root of the problem. Dfg made the initial critical mistake of already fostering a majority of people who DON'T keep their eye on the ball, who DON'T base their opinions and actions on the actual facts, who CAN'T offer any useful advice by their very natures. Things are ALREADY fucked here, in that Dfg decided quantity was a much better thing than quality, pretending the spammers have rights too the entire time, and now he wants to shift the due consequences onto the ones who actually DO keep their eye on the ball, who DO operate according to the facts, who DO have a clean track record.

    What invalidates this is the fact that I and others supported you being mod initially and at least for me it was your own words that made me change my mind. So yes I based my opinion on what YOU said. Also your ACTIONS on HERE are what matters not your actions from zoklet.

    Let's say I was a mod on a forum that has nothing to do with totse. Say I was a mod at stormfront at some point (which I wasn't) should I then go and say "hey look guys I modded at this site and was fair" at that point should I instantly be above the rules any other mod would have to follow? Or should I be allowed to skip the demi mod status and run the forum the way I want despite how everyone else feels.
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Gotta stop you right there, bud. If you think you're gonna let that one "slip by" somebody who actually has their eye on the ball, you got another thing coming. The TRUTH of it is you were vehemently opposed to my presence here the MOMENT I stepped foot in the place, your posts at the time totally confirm this, and here's an example, a post you made on 01/15/2011.

    http://www.totse.info/bbs/showpost.php?p=119757&postcount=27

    The poll was only made days later on 01/19/11

    And YET.. here you are to say you supported me initially? Why do you think that, because you voted for me in some pointless poll, one that was "cooked" up in the first place between a bunch of backroom goons not unlike the very goons we see over at Zoklet?? Give me a break, man! I ain't that stupid as you think I am! ;)

    I like how you focused on that and completely ignored the rest of my post:rolleyes:
  • VizierVizier Regular
    edited January 2011
    Keep your zoklet drama bullshit over there and get over it Spectral. You're probably becoming a mod here under the policies Dfg or Hellish stated and deal with it. It's the fucking internet.

    DirtySanchez, Spectral always does that. He ignores what he doesn't like, like those times we made fun of him because he claims he could punch a bear into submission.
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    And I will get to the rest of your post... in due time. For me, I don't like to stumble willy-nilly through a myriad of information before the beginning of that information is even validated. Your post started out with the "I had always supported you until you spake this and that in the poll which finally opened my eyes to your gross evilness, blah, blah, blah...", when in reality, that wasn't the case at all. You were spouting unsupported rhetoric against me the MOMENT I stepped foot here, way before the poll had even been thought of. So you see, I first need to validate this apparent lie of yours before I can continue any sort of discussion with you. Does that make any sense at all?

    Why dont you check what my vote was you idiot and also check my first post in that thread. I thought you'd make an ok mod until I read what you posted and changed my mind. Now that I've cleared that up how about you answer the rest of what I said.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Why do you think that, because you voted for me in some pointless poll, one that was "cooked" up in the first place between a bunch of backroom goons not unlike the very goons we see over at Zoklet?? Give me a break, man! I ain't that stupid as you think I am! ;)



    LOL @ Spectral's paranoia.


    Does anyone else notice he is using the exact same arguments and same allegations he made on Zoklet after he was demodded?

    Really Spectral, do you honestly think I spent months on Zoklet supporting you and trying to fight a truly corrupt administration just to turn around and make some "backroom" deal that involved making a post supporting you for mod just so I could sidewind you?

    Do you really think that the staff of totse was in on making that thread?

    Do you understand how your publicly expressed paranoia takes whatever credibility you have left and tosses it right down the commode?

    Do you think you could possibility manage to answer those four simple questions without resorting to your usual dismissible claim that the questions are not relevant?

    -SpectraL wrote: »
    I don't see how simple discussion can be labeled drama. Then again, I suppose if you were ... errrr... reluctant? to discuss the facts, then the word drama would be a very appropriate choice of words. Again, very similar to words "members" like wires and zok would use. Interesting, that.

    Please list these "facts" because so far all you have offered is your opinions. Which is fine and dandy but calling your opinions facts just doesn't fly.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    Why dont you check what my vote was you idiot and also check my first post in that thread. I thought you'd make an ok mod until I read what you posted and changed my mind. Now that I've cleared that up how about you answer the rest of what I said.

    The only way Spectral ever answers an uncomfortable question is with outright lies, white-washed bullshit, or by declaring the question irrelevant.

    Why do you think he makes fun of people who bother to post point by point multi-quote replies? It is a sophomoric attempt to invalidate that to which he has no sane answer for.

    It should be clear for all to see that he suffers from paranoid delusions with his allegation that the thread I made suggesting him for mod was some backroom deal which was cooked up to make him look bad. I mean fuck, we all saw him shoot his own foot off with his half cocked ego.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Still wanna play? ;)

    I do address all four of my questions directly.
  • DirtySanchezDirtySanchez Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Nice ninja-edit, but not quite fast enough for an experienced pro such as myself, son.

    You say you "didn't like me", but the actual facts show it was MUCH more than that, wouldn't you say?


    "Once again STFU Spectral you abused power like nobody else and were one of the worst mods to have ever been on zoklet . You have no room to talk. You contribute nothing to the site and instead bitch and moan all the time."

    ^ This post was made on 01/15/11.. DAYS before the poll, and here we have you calling me an unjust mod, somebody who contributes nothing, and somebody who abuses authority, but then JUST FOUR DAYS LATER on 01/19/11 you're "all for me" UNTIL you find out how bad of a guy I REALLY AM... when just four days before you ALREADY KNEW what kind of a bad and evil dude I am.

    Still wanna play? ;)

    Just because you were an unjust mod back on zoklet didn't mean I thought you were incapable of running a section here in a different fashion. I thought mayby you would be willing to listen to how this place is run and make some changes but it was obvious you wouldn't. BTW you still haven't answered the rest of that post.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    The only way Spectral ever answers an uncomfortable question is with outright lies, white-washed bullshit, or by declaring the question irrelevant.

    Why do you think he makes fun of people who bother to post point by point multi-quote replies? It is a sophomoric attempt to invalidate that to which he has no sane answer for.

    It should be clear for all to see that he suffers from paranoid delusions with his allegation that the thread I made suggesting him for mod was some backroom deal which was cooked up to make him look bad. I mean fuck, we all saw him shoot his own foot off with his half cocked ego.
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    I can answer all four of your questions in one sentence, TheDarkRodent. And here it is:

    First of all thank you so much for proving my point in such an expeditious fashion.
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Common sense is much more than just an opinion, it's factual.

    I see now where your trouble originates from. A basic lack of vocabulary and what the big words really mean.

    So I am going to help you out this on time.
    fac·tu·al

    –adjective
    1.
    of or pertaining to facts; concerning facts: factual accuracy.
    2.
    based on or restricted to facts: a factual report.


    fact

    –noun
    1.
    something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.
    2.
    something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.
    3.
    a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
    4.
    something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.
    See here is the crux of the issue. You have confused facts with something that is said to be true. Granted it is always what you have said.
    5.
    Law. Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence.Compare question of fact, question of law


    common sense

    –n
    1. sound practical judgment that is independent of specialized knowledge, training, or the like; normal native intelligence.
    —n
    2. plain ordinary good judgment; sound practical sense

    —adj
    3. inspired by or displaying sound practical sense


    judg·ment

    –noun
    1.
    an act or instance of judging.
    2.
    the ability to judge, make a decision, or form an opinion objectively, authoritatively, and wisely, esp. in matters affecting action; good sense; discretion: a man of sound judgment.
    3.
    the demonstration or exercise of such ability or capacity: The major was decorated for the judgment he showed under fire.
    4.
    the forming of an opinion, estimate, notion, or conclusion, as from circumstances presented to the mind: Our judgment as to the cause of his failure must rest on the evidence.
    5.
    the opinion formed: He regretted his hasty judgment.
    6.
    Law.
    a.
    a judicial decision given by a judge or court.
    b.
    the obligation, esp. a debt, arising from a judicial decision.
    c.
    the certificate embodying such a decision and issued against the obligor, esp. a debtor.
    7.
    a misfortune regarded as inflicted by divine sentence, as for sin.
    8.
    (usually initial capital letter) Also called Last Judgment, Final Judgment. the final trial of all people, both the living and dead, at the end of the world.
    So you see, according to the English language your facts and common sense are merely judgments and opinions from circumstances presented to your mind.

    I hope this helps you play well with others in the future.
  • VizierVizier Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    I don't see how simple discussion can be labeled drama. Then again, I suppose if you were ... errrr... reluctant? to discuss the facts, then the word drama would be a very appropriate choice of words. Again, very similar to words "members" like wires and zok would use. Interesting, that.

    Damn, that hurt man.

    But not really... there's nothing to discuss here man. According to your OP all you want is to become a mod here and feel all powerful and shit; while crying because you'll be put into a demi-mod status first. It seems to work well and you're the only one who is still making a fuzz over it. Stop taking yourself so seriously and stop giving yourself so much importance.

    So stop crying, contribute, stop forcing everyone to be like you and do your job as a mod if you want to keep it. Hopefully everything will turn out fine and a lot of people here will stop crying.
  • VizierVizier Regular
    edited January 2011
    Well shit.
  • edited January 2011
    Pakistanis sniff cum
  • LuxJigabooLuxJigaboo Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    It's true! I just came here as a regular observer and a regular contributor. I could have PM'd Dfg and asked to made mod, and he probably would have done so! But I never did. And I never gave a hint at even wanting to be a mod in ANY threads or posts before that poll was made. This entire idea that I want to be a mod was cooked up by tDR and somebody on the management team... or one of the known spammers. And now I am creating this thread as a direct response to all of that... that which I never created in the first place. I'm saying, they want to make a poll and discuss my modship... well, then... let's discuss EVERYBODY's modship! Fair is fair right? And here I am to discuss JUST THAT. ;)

    What you need is a forum like the one Fish has on zoklet so that you can be part of totse but not part of totse.
  • LuxJigabooLuxJigaboo Regular
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Soooo... you're not actually here in this thread to discuss the points I have brought forward, you're just here to throw meaningless one-liners in thinking you have accomplished a great deal, huh? Ya, well... good for you, dude. Good for you. :thumbsup:

    I am the one person in this thread who has actually discussed everything you posted in the OP.

    Also, that was a serious suggestion. What would be wrong with you having a nice clean sub forum?
  • VizierVizier Regular
    edited January 2011
    Well, whatever the case is, let's just make the best of this site and whatever happens later on. After all, this is a place to both enjoy, find knowledge, find humor and awe inspiring posts and share information.

    In the meantime, here, have some tacos:
    tacos-al-pastor2.jpg
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Actually, that's not the case at all. As I have already stated on numerous occasions... I never asked to be a mod, and I'm not asking to be one now. It was my detractors who were pushing for me to be made mod just so things would not develop naturally on their own merit. They knew that if they made an issue out my being a mod or not, that it would bring out a lot of hostility from the known-spammers and such, and all it was was nothing but a preemptive piece of bullshit somebody cooked up with tDR. In the making of this thread my only goal was to have the making of policy and the apportioning of power discussed... THAT'S IT. You should know by now that I don't play kid games. If I wanted to be a mod as bad as you say I do, I would have just accepted the demi-mod position, waited a week, and I would have been one! But I didn't, did I? No, and the reason for that is that I do not work toward or contribute to something I do not believe in, and which goes against all common sense... it would be counter-productive to do such a thing!
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    It's true! I just came here as a regular observer and a regular contributor. I could have PM'd Dfg and asked to made mod, and he probably would have done so! But I never did. And I never gave a hint at even wanting to be a mod in ANY threads or posts before that poll was made. This entire idea that I want to be a mod was cooked up by tDR and somebody on the management team... or one of the known spammers. And now I am creating this thread as a direct response to all of that... that which I never created in the first place. I'm saying, they want to make a poll and discuss my modship... well, then... let's discuss EVERYBODY's modship! Fair is fair right? And here I am to discuss JUST THAT. ;)

    Is it your paranoia that is preventing you from acknowledged this?

    Or is it that you can't do so without further risk of embarrassment?

    Or maybe your common sense just has not provided you with the facts yet.
  • edited January 2011
    *Tosses Spectral a fresh case of body bags*

    You running out there, bud. :D

    Its funny how people are trying to rewrite history here in regard to you "trying" to be modded....when it was the Barbie Doll owner that started the poll/idea to begin with. :fap:

    Do you people REALLY believe if you keep repeating a lie long enough, it will suddenly become truth over night? :confused:
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    Has anyone else ever noticed how DaGuru almost always follows Spectral with a supporting post when ever he is getting his ass handed to him?
  • edited January 2011
    Has anyone else ever noticed how DaGuru almost always follows Spectral with a supporting post when ever he is getting his ass handed to him?

    Just because you are the pied piper of liars and history rewrites....doesn't magically make the truth change in your favor. Uh huh Rodent....it's Spectral getting his ass handed to him, and not all the morons in here trying to portray all this as something its not, right? :rolleyes:

    How long did it take you to flip-flop your stance on that poll? After MONTHS AND MONTHS of observation, and your "Spectral did this, Spectral did that"...and in less than 2 fuckin hours you did a 180 better/faster than Tony Hawk ever could dream.

    And here you are now.....trying to tell the world it was Spectral "trying to be modded", when you yourself started the whole fucking thing.

    God. Fuckin. Damn.

    Internet nutjobs truly are delusional and lost in their own fuckin bizarro land, ain't they?
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    DaGuru wrote: »
    Just because you are the pied piper of liars and history rewrites....doesn't magically make the truth change in your favor. Uh huh Rodent....it's Spectral getting his ass handed to him, and not all the morons in here trying to portray all this as something its not, right? :rolleyes:

    I dunno make a poll I just call em like I see em. No rewrite here just my opinion of what is on record ITT.
    DaGuru wrote: »
    How long did it take you to flip-flop your stance on that poll? After MONTHS AND MONTHS of observation, and your "Spectral did this, Spectral did that"...and in less than 2 fuckin hours you did a 180 better/faster than Tony Hawk ever could dream.

    We have already covered that it was about 2.5 hours after I created the thread that Spectral changed many minds with his own words.
    DaGuru wrote: »
    And here you are now.....trying to tell the world it was Spectral "trying to be modded", when you yourself started the whole fucking thing.

    Well since you and Spectral are so big and demanding people back up their accusations with facts I am sure you won't be troubled by quoting where I ever said Spectral is trying to get modded.

    You should really learn to read and think before you click on the submit reply button. But that is another piece of sound advice I have already offered you.
    DaGuru wrote: »
    God. Fuckin. Damn.

    Internet nutjobs truly are delusional and lost in their own fuckin bizarro land, ain't they?

    Careful there, time to take your meds, the projection is starting to flair up again.
  • edited January 2011
    ^^^^Any more quote boxes, and you'll get dizzy from the lack of oxygen with that ladder you just built there. So why exactly does dissenting opinion leave your ego in such tattered pieces. Its astounding the campaign of pettiness and inane irrelevance you engage in....just because someone doesn't agree with your myopic way at looking at the world. Just what happened to you, to be THIS much of a ponderous douchebag? Most importantly, you keep asking me why I'm here.....I ask you, why the fuck would anyone want to frequent ANY message forum if disagreeing takes left you so ruined and rattled in your experience?
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    DaGuru wrote: »
    ^^^^Any more quote boxes, and you'll get dizzy from the lack of oxygen with that ladder you just built there. So why exactly does dissenting opinion leave your ego in such tattered pieces. Its astounding the campaign of pettiness and inane irrelevance you engage in....just because someone doesn't agree with your myopic way at looking at the world. Just what happened to you, to be THIS much of a ponderous douchebag? Most importantly, you keep asking me why I'm here.....I ask you, why the fuck would anyone want to frequent ANY message forum if disagreeing takes left you so ruined and rattled in your experience?


    Seriously man go take your meds. Because everything you are trying to say in this post is pure projection.
  • edited January 2011


    Careful there, time to take your meds, the projection is starting to flair up again.
    Seriously man go take your meds. Because everything you are trying to say in this post is pure projection.

    Unoriginal spammer is quite unoriginal.

    Seriously man, is your psyche THAT broken.....you are so desperate to respond with ANYTHING, you'll really post the same repetitive tripe you just did minutes earlier?

    ELL OH FUCKIN ELL @ how this one thinks that is an "effective" way of debating anyone, much less save face in the process. :rolleyes:
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited January 2011
    DaGuru wrote: »
    Unoriginal spammer is quite unoriginal.

    Seriously man, is your psyche THAT broken.....you are so desperate to respond with ANYTHING, you'll really post the same repetitive tripe you just did minutes earlier?

    ELL OH FUCKIN ELL @ how this one thinks that is an "effective" way of debating anyone, much less save face in the process. :rolleyes:


    What makes you think anyone is debating you. From what I see most people just make fun of you.
  • edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    I just thought up a new motto for this place.
    Zokle... TOTSE! A place where only the names have changed, but the two-faces remain the same!

    Obviously no one really wants to discuss the points this thread has brought forward except DaGuru. And that's a real pity, you know?

    It truly is astounding how they'll go on for pages after pages.....scrutinizing every move you've made these last years, even your table manners at beach BBQ as their "analysis" of whether you are mod material.

    But as soon as you try to discuss ALL moderators or the job it could/should be....its like unleashing the gates to every slobbering chump that has been wallowing in their own spittle for days, and they eagerly spew anything out of excitement from seeing the light of day again.

    Really and truly people....how the fuck can some of you really call yourself Totseans, when simple debate and discourse leaves you so epicly butthurt on the side of the highway?
  • VizierVizier Regular
    edited January 2011
    It's funny how only you 3 are writing paragraph after paragraphs of the same shit.

    Another thread that should be moved to Bitch and Moan, IMO.
  • edited January 2011
    Vizier wrote: »
    It's funny how only you 3 are writing paragraph after paragraphs of the same shit.

    Another thread that should be moved to Bitch and Moan, IMO.

    Shhhhhhhh....Rodent is about to be one of DFG's most trusted and able leaders(?) around here. Don't the fun this and point out how completely assinine he looks with all of this.

    Kind of like don't get in a fight with an ugly person? He actually believes he can "win" this spat, all the while looking like the most absurd ninny ever in the process.

    The poster boy for the FUTURE of Totse.....we give you The Rodent! :fap:
  • edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    And do you know where it turned into a bitchfest instead of a discussion? RIGHT HERE, at only the THIRD POST IN. ;)

    Oops, there you go again.....putting a mirror right up to their very own stupidity. Good thing none of them are Medusas running around.....image the horrors if they had to gaze upon THAT image. ;)
  • VizierVizier Regular
    edited January 2011
    Not everything needs absolute control and moderation though.
  • edited January 2011
    -SpectraL wrote: »
    Well... uhhh... if the mod's bitchy post was permitted here, why not mine? Care to share your thoughts, Vizier? And.. uhhh... may I ask why they haven't offered YOU a mod position yet... since you've obviously earned the place by now? Oh, wait... you didn't get Dfg's blessing, did you? That's a real shame that. You're a fine and upstanding member for many, many years.

    Noooooo, I thought it was Rodent's blessing you needed....and then he runs back to his enabler, errrr, admin and reports all of the dirt and naughtiness.

    Just remember Vizier, if Rodent ever does think highly of you......no matter HOW MUCH of a glowing reccomendation he gives you in the first post, you so much as mismatch your ensemble that day he'll do a quick 180 and declare the poll null and void in an instant. I mean he'll whine long enough until DFG agrees with him to invalidate it, but its kind of all the same thing any how...ain't it?
Sign In or Register to comment.