I've noticed recently that myself and a few of my colleagues, specifically Randomperson, have been catching a lot of flack for the way we conduct ourselves on the forums. So, I've decided make a thread for as a general front for out common defense. As of such, I'd like to make a few statements.

My first point is that there will always be spammers, whether the spammers conduct spam or not. The best representation of this is the following math diagram.

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg271/HoboHunter1001/400px-Standard_deviation_diagramsvg.png

Many varying sets of data can be shown with this diagram, of which this forum is no exception. Lets say, for instance, that, from left to right, this diagram represent spammers to anti-spammers (like Viatrophy of ploogle), of which, random and I (as well as a few others at times) take up the extreme left end. Now lets say that we were to suddenly disappear. That .1% doesn't disappear, it is filled by others. I guess what I'm tying to say that whether the "spammers" are really spamming or not, just that we are seen that way because the curve demands it. Let me go into further detail. Spam can be defined as statements without purpose. An example of this is is say, writing "pwnzored l337 haxorz!!!!!" in every thread (does anyone remember chuck norrisss?). Meanwhile, Random and myself, from time to time, make threads of questionable purpose (like his quiz threads or a few of my own), mostly in an attempt at humor or just to start a discussion that, while not all that important or thought provoking, simply give people something to talk about. When compared to Chuck Norrisss, few people would call us spammers. We might even be close to the center. However, without him, we are pushed down the spectrum, and obtain all of the negative consequences that come along with it. In the end, what I'm saying is that we're not the symbol of pure spammy goodness that we've began to be seen as, it just seems that way given the complete lack of true spam on this forums (which I applaud the mods for, by the way). So, next time you see a thread that you interpret as spam, remember the diagram, and how bad it truly could be. Hey, you might find that the spam is all in your head. You might even be thankful.:thumbsup:

Well he does have a point, compared to most forums out there we are pretty spam free and to be honest I enjoy hobo hunters threads, it's usually people who spam in them that kill them *cough* caruso1268 on the ice on mars thread *cough* Personally, I like the threads you make, some of them are actually thought provoking (again going back to the ice on mars thread), I'm just glad you didn't make a thread about religion, because that would degrade into something very bad.

I was going to. I had a very interesting conversation between Tinman and I that I was going to post. I even got Tinman's permission. It fell flat when I asked the mods though.

I was going to. I had a very interesting conversation between Tinman and I that I was going to post. I even got Tinman's permission. It fell flat when I asked the mods though.
I could see why, I mean remember some of your political threads? Those got kind of bad, a religion thread could end up worse. I myself would be part of the thread, however, some people would not... how shall I put this, ah I got it, some people would not be very good sports about the thread.

Very thought provoking Hobo; you know my views; I can tolerate a bit of off-topic humour (what else is life for!) but when a thread goes down the toilet, I have to can it.

By the way, how did you find out about our new super-mod:
...Viatrophy of ploogle...

:wink2:

I just named the first two main accusers that I could think of.


By the way, how did you find out about our new super-mod:


That's another negative effect. Mods only come from the opposite side of the spectrum.

That was a very interesting conversation. Didn't convince me of anything new, but it might have other people.

wow the science of spamming ,nice hobo.

Eh, everybody spams once in a while....

but Im not sure starting a ton of threads is something I consider spamming. We may disagree... alot, but never thought of it as spam. Had I and I would have ignored it entirely.

I am so tempted to lock this thread ;)

First of all, I (not sure if I can say "we" regarding to all moderators here, so I'd rather use "I") don't consider anyone a spammer because of the threads he starts. I do, however, hate: meaningless threads (each thread should allow the community to discuss some even, point of view or information, not just be started "for the lulz"), short and unnecessary posts ("okay", "lol", "good job"), and users who really think they can do whatever they want to here. Well, I have to disappoint you, dear spammers, because you all are watched by the moderators and a single mistake you make could lead to a ban.

Hobo: as I told you in a private message I sent you a while ago, you have pretty shitty reputation here because of what you used to do in the past. I'm not sure, though, why it's you who posted this thread; recently you've been behaving fairly well and - possibly because of what Rothbart sent you, possibly because you got smarter - reduced your spamming to a level when it either doesn't bother anybody or actually doesn't exist. It's the other users who we have to keep our eyes on now, there's no reason for you to defend them.

As to the point you've made, it's actually bullshit. You're saying that the 0.1% will get filled by others? Well, maybe we shouldn't punish murderers, rapers and thieves, because even if we keep them in prisons, there will be others who do the same? No, that's not the way the world works. The more spammers we get rid of, the less of them are on the forums; if we just let everybody post whatever they want, that 0.1% would quickly become 1%, then 10%, and so on. We will not do this. And so, spammers: beware!

"When compared to Chuck Norrisss, few people would call us spammers."... Again, a real-life example: when compared to Harold Shipman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman) or Elizabeth Báthory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_B%C3%A1thory), few people would call Mark Chapman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_David_Chapman) a murderer. Yet he was a serious threat to others and had to be imprisoned; same thing happens with spammers, only we don't keep them in prisons, we keep them out of the forums.

Have a nice day, everyone. And give Santa my regards.

I am so tempted to lock this thread ;)

First of all, I (not sure if I can say "we" regarding to all moderators here, so I'd rather use "I") don't consider anyone a spammer because of the threads he starts. I do, however, hate: meaningless threads (each thread should allow the community to discuss some even, point of view or information, not just be started "for the lulz"), short and unnecessary posts ("okay", "lol", "good job"), and users who really think they can do whatever they want to here. Well, I have to disappoint you, dear spammers, because you all are watched by the moderators and a single mistake you make could lead to a ban.

Hobo: as I told you in a private message I sent you a while ago, you have pretty shitty reputation here because of what you used to do in the past. I'm not sure, though, why it's you who posted this thread; recently you've been behaving fairly well and - possibly because of what Rothbart sent you, possibly because you got smarter - reduced your spamming to a level when it either doesn't bother anybody or actually doesn't exist. It's the other users who we have to keep our eyes on now, there's no reason for you to defend them.

As to the point you've made, it's actually bullshit. You're saying that the 0.1% will get filled by others? Well, maybe we shouldn't punish murderers, rapers and thieves, because even if we keep them in prisons, there will be others who do the same? No, that's not the way the world works. The more spammers we get rid of, the less of them are on the forums; if we just let everybody post whatever they want, that 0.1% would quickly become 1%, then 10%, and so on. We will not do this. And so, spammers: beware!

"When compared to Chuck Norrisss, few people would call us spammers."... Again, a real-life example: when compared to Harold Shipman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman) or Elizabeth Báthory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_B%C3%A1thory), few people would call Mark Chapman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_David_Chapman) a murderer. Yet he was a serious threat to others and had to be imprisoned; same thing happens with spammer, only we don't keep them in prisons, we keep them out of the forums.

Have a nice day, everyone. And give Santa my regards.

Holy crap, that was great.

But Hobo, I really never considered you a spammer, probably because I have not been here long enough to see the reason for the hate you get from some certain higher up members. Your threads might not always be super defined, but they are always interesting and they always do start discussions.

I am so tempted to lock this thread ;)

First of all, I (not sure if I can say "we" regarding to all moderators here, so I'd rather use "I") don't consider anyone a spammer because of the threads he starts. I do, however, hate: meaningless threads (each thread should allow the community to discuss some even, point of view or information, not just be started "for the lulz"), short and unnecessary posts ("okay", "lol", "good job"), and users who really think they can do whatever they want to here. Well, I have to disappoint you, dear spammers, because you all are watched by the moderators and a single mistake you make could lead to a ban.

Hobo: as I told you in a private message I sent you a while ago, you have pretty shitty reputation here because of what you used to do in the past. I'm not sure, though, why it's you who posted this thread; recently you've been behaving fairly well and - possibly because of what Rothbart sent you, possibly because you got smarter - reduced your spamming to a level when it either doesn't bother anybody or actually doesn't exist. It's the other users who we have to keep our eyes on now, there's no reason for you to defend them.

As to the point you've made, it's actually bullshit. You're saying that the 0.1% will get filled by others? Well, maybe we shouldn't punish murderers, rapers and thieves, because even if we keep them in prisons, there will be others who do the same? No, that's not the way the world works. The more spammers we get rid of, the less of them are on the forums; if we just let everybody post whatever they want, that 0.1% would quickly become 1%, then 10%, and so on. We will not do this. And so, spammers: beware!

"When compared to Chuck Norrisss, few people would call us spammers."... Again, a real-life example: when compared to Harold Shipman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman) or Elizabeth Báthory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_B%C3%A1thory), few people would call Mark Chapman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_David_Chapman) a murderer. Yet he was a serious threat to others and had to be imprisoned; same thing happens with spammers, only we don't keep them in prisons, we keep them out of the forums.

Have a nice day, everyone. And give Santa my regards.

I don't think anyone could of put it better then that.
I don't consider you to be a spammer anymore hobo, you act like a 'normal' community member now, and only seem to start meaningful threads and post things worth reading. Its the other few who are pushing there luck to say the least.

Personally, I like the threads you make, some of them are actually thought provoking

Hey, if you throw enough **** at a wall something is going to stick! :lol:
Actually these days, I like a lot of your threads as well.

More seriously though Regua says it pretty succinctly (if some what harshly) but don't forget any spamming is harmful to the site and if it happens one of the Mods has to deal with it. Considering they are all volunteers, spammers are just making extra work for someone that is already giving up their time for other people's benefit. It's unfair to say the least.

Notice I have never closed one of your threads or deleted your comments - this is solely related to the fact that I'm too nice and anyone that says it's just because I have no idea how to is a liar. (ok their not, I have no idea:lol:)

I am so tempted to lock this thread ;)

First of all, I (not sure if I can say "we" regarding to all moderators here, so I'd rather use "I") don't consider anyone a spammer because of the threads he starts. I do, however, hate: meaningless threads (each thread should allow the community to discuss some even, point of view or information, not just be started "for the lulz"), short and unnecessary posts ("okay", "lol", "good job"), and users who really think they can do whatever they want to here. Well, I have to disappoint you, dear spammers, because you all are watched by the moderators and a single mistake you make could lead to a ban.

Hobo: as I told you in a private message I sent you a while ago, you have pretty shitty reputation here because of what you used to do in the past. I'm not sure, though, why it's you who posted this thread; recently you've been behaving fairly well and - possibly because of what Rothbart sent you, possibly because you got smarter - reduced your spamming to a level when it either doesn't bother anybody or actually doesn't exist. It's the other users who we have to keep our eyes on now, there's no reason for you to defend them.

As to the point you've made, it's actually bullshit. You're saying that the 0.1% will get filled by others? Well, maybe we shouldn't punish murderers, rapers and thieves, because even if we keep them in prisons, there will be others who do the same? No, that's not the way the world works. The more spammers we get rid of, the less of them are on the forums; if we just let everybody post whatever they want, that 0.1% would quickly become 1%, then 10%, and so on. We will not do this. And so, spammers: beware!

"When compared to Chuck Norrisss, few people would call us spammers."... Again, a real-life example: when compared to Harold Shipman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman) or Elizabeth Báthory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_B%C3%A1thory), few people would call Mark Chapman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_David_Chapman) a murderer. Yet he was a serious threat to others and had to be imprisoned; same thing happens with spammers, only we don't keep them in prisons, we keep them out of the forums.

Have a nice day, everyone. And give Santa my regards.

That's an extremely different example, because murder is not something that is defined by people's views on it. If you kill someone, it's murder, that's it. Are there different levels of murderers? Yes, that's why we have different sentances from life in prison or death. However, spamming is something that is percieved. There will always be people of different levels of spam, and the people who do it the most will be the "spammers". So you see, your example is wrong because one is based on speculation where the other on is predetirmened.

Comparing something to a far more extreme example often works, but it absolutely has to fit.

That's an extremely different example, because murder is not something that is defined by people's views on it. If you kill someone, it's murder, that's it. Are there different levels of murderers? Yes, that's why we have different sentances from life in prison or death. However, spamming is something that is percieved. There will always be people of different levels of spam, and the people who do it the most will be the "spammers". So you see, your example is wrong because one is based on speculation where the other on is predetirmened.

Comparing something to a far more extreme example often works, but it absolutely has to fit.
The "level" (degree) of murders is determined by the court. The laws regarding murders are, in some countries at least, very elastic so that the final decision was left to the court. Again, the same thing as with spamming; if you've read the SG ToS (http://www.sarcasticgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=30779#post30779) (§II.B, to be exact) you know that spamming is not only "off topic posts, excessive posting, "plugging" competing sites, or any type of posts meant to disrupt this message board system", but "the definition of spam will not be limited to the specifics described in B1, and will be determined at the discretion of Sarcastic Gamer Staff.", which basically means that I can consider any of your posts as spam and just delete it.

I've brought up the comparison with murders just because it was the first thing that came to my mind. Now that I think of it, though, it was a pretty decent example and really suits the situation. All people who spam are spammers, all people who kill others (with malice aforethought and in an unlawful way, but still) are murderers. The forums are a place to share your views, discuss different topics with other people, and the users have to be supervised for the sake of others' comfort. Treat the moderators as both the police officers and the petit jury of Sarcastic Gamer. The rules here are so elastic that you may even treat as as the law.

You are not allowed to murder anyone in the streets, and you are not allowed to spam on the Sarcastic Gamer forums. Keep that in mind and everything's gonna be okay.

And don't question my arguments, I don't like it :wink2:

"That .1% doesn't disappear, it is filled by others. I guess what I'm tying to say that whether the "spammers" are really spamming or not, just that we are seen that way because the curve demands it".

That is completely stupid, if we get rid of the worst offenders for spamming, they won't be replaced by others, as the rest spam at a tolerable level. There's no justification for certain members putting pointless one word posts in almost every thread to get his post count up, or having multiple accounts which he thinks will protect him when he inevitably gets banned. I know you've stopped doing it recently but we can't allow people to spam the forums to be among the top posters, then one day decide to try and contribute, there's multiple users guilty of this at the moment.

All mods go through stages depending on who they are.

The following applies to the majority of mods and is what I would consider "Normal."

The first stage occurs right after they become a mod or gain a new power or tool. They look for violations and are incredibly strict. Any violation, no matter how petty or minor, gains the full brunt of their wrath. They're "Dirty Harry" out to clean up these mean streets, consequences be damned. The reason they do this is because they take pride in what they do and want to do a good job.

The next stage comes after some time has passed. They settle into their role and begin to see that the community is doing quite well and doesn't need "Dirty Harry." As a result the locks, warnings, and such cool down. They settle into what I like to call "General mod mode." They act as needed but, for the most part, are just a community member with added power.

The following applies to the minority of mods and these are the mods no one likes.

They go through stage one above and never progress out of that. They like the power they have and feed off of it. They single out community members they hate and give favors to those they like. Accuse them of this and they go into full-blown defense mode. This is the mod that is most likely to be stripped of their power and banned, unless they're friends with an admin or the owner of the site.

I think Hobo's problem is that he fears the mods here fall into the minority and are now singling him out. I can understand the mods being leery of him but I think there comes a point when the community and the mods should build a bridge and get over it and Hobo needs to do the same.

I say give HoboHunter a clean slate and leave the past in the past.

"That .1% doesn't disappear, it is filled by others. I guess what I'm tying to say that whether the "spammers" are really spamming or not, just that we are seen that way because the curve demands it".

That is completely stupid, if we get rid of the worst offenders for spamming, they won't be replaced by others, as the rest spam at a tolerable level. There's no justification for certain members putting pointless one word posts in almost every thread to get his post count up, or having multiple accounts which he thinks will protect him when he inevitably gets banned. I know you've stopped doing it recently but we can't allow people to spam the forums to be among the top posters, then one day decide to try and contribute, there's multiple users guilty of this at the moment.


All I'm saying is that we ALL spam to a certain degree, some more than others. Those who spam the most will ALWAYS be seen as spammers, unless someone who spams more takes their place. It is the human way of things to associate extremes to every situation. That's all I'm saying.

but "the definition of spam will not be limited to the specifics described in B1, and will be determined at the discretion of Sarcastic Gamer Staff.", which basically means that I can consider any of your posts as spam and just delete it.


OK then, I fail to see how that effects anything, because you are no different than anyone else when it comes to the curve, only you have power.

All mods go through stages depending on who they are.

The following applies to the majority of mods and is what I would consider "Normal."

The first stage occurs right after they become a mod or gain a new power or tool. They look for violations and are incredibly strict. Any violation, no matter how petty or minor, gains the full brunt of their wrath. They're "Dirty Harry" out to clean up these mean streets, consequences be damned. The reason they do this is because they take pride in what they do and want to do a good job.

The next stage comes after some time has passed. They settle into their role and begin to see that the community is doing quite well and doesn't need "Dirty Harry." As a result the locks, warnings, and such cool down. They settle into what I like to call "General mod mode." They act as needed but, for the most part, are just a community member with added power.

The following applies to the minority of mods and these are the mods no one likes.

They go through stage one above and never progress out of that. They like the power they have and feed off of it. They single out community members they hate and give favors to those they like. Accuse them of this and they go into full-blown defense mode. This is the mod that is most likely to be stripped of their power and banned, unless they're friends with an admin or the owner of the site.

I think Hobo's problem is that he fears the mods here fall into the minority and are now singling him out. I can understand the mods being leery of him but I think there comes a point when the community and the mods should build a bridge and get over it and Hobo needs to do the same.

I say give HoboHunter a clean slate and leave the past in the past.
That's kinda why it would be pointless for me to be a mod, because pretty much everything is ok with me anyways.

Again, the same thing as with spamming; if you've read the SG ToS (http://www.sarcasticgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=30779#post30779) (§II.B, to be exact) you know that spamming is not only "off topic posts, excessive posting, "plugging" competing sites, or any type of posts meant to disrupt this message board system", but "the definition of spam will not be limited to the specifics described in B1, and will be determined at the discretion of Sarcastic Gamer Staff.", which basically means that I can consider any of your posts as spam and just delete it.

So me commenting on what you said could be considered spam and you could delete it. While I am one of many who hates the people who go on and on about "rights" and such on a private forum financed by individuals or a corporation I do find that to be very unfair and it seems like the admins are endorsing censorship. Your verbiage and statement that "...I can consider any of your posts as spam and just delete it" seems to make me question why anyone would want to post here. Its almost like you're telling us "Hey, don't post anything I wouldn't like or I'll delete it." That may not have been your intention but that's the vibe I got.

I can understand why the mods would want to delete flames, offensive posts, or fanboy fuel but deleting a subdiscussion in a discussion seems to be taking things a little too far in my opinion. I'm not a mod here but I do feel that if the discussion is civil there's no reason to delete it or lock the thread.

I seriously wonder if there's anyone in authority I can safely talk to should I have an issue. If you police the forums like that how do I know I can bring up a concern without fear of reprisal? How do I know that I won't be targeted, have posts deleted, or be banned if I disagree with or question a lock or deletion of a post or thread I created?

Its your forum and you're free to run it as you wish but you guys have some serious PR issues.

I'm pretty laid back about what happens in threads; I prefer to live to the spirit of the rules, rather than enforce them to the letter.

In short, I'd rather have a thread open and active then locked and silent. As long as everyone is civil, and maintains a vague sembelence of relevance to the topic at hand, I'm fine with it.

I know it might not mean much KeavyRain, but rothbart is nothing if not scrupulouly fair. As are all of the mods. However, if you don't feel comfortable taking it to the higher authority, feel free to come to me with your concerns. Even though staff have extra abilities, we're all forum members first, mods second.

I've noticed recently that myself and a few of my colleagues, specifically Randomperson, have been catching a lot of flack for the way we conduct ourselves on the forums. So, I've decided make a thread for as a general front for out common defense. As of such, I'd like to make a few statements.

Me too... I'd like to make a few statements. Straighten up people... if that applies to you, you know I'm talking to you.

Note: Hobo's banned because of his "conduct" on the forums.

Note: Please don't ask why, if you're not Hobo, it doesn't concern you.

I'm pretty laid back about what happens in threads; I prefer to live to the spirit of the rules, rather than enforce them to the letter.

In short, I'd rather have a thread open and active then locked and silent. As long as everyone is civil, and maintains a vague sembelence of relevance to the topic at hand, I'm fine with it.

I know it might not mean much KeavyRain, but rothbart is nothing if not scrupulouly fair. As are all of the mods. However, if you don't feel comfortable taking it to the higher authority, feel free to come to me with your concerns. Even though staff have extra abilities, we're all forum members first, mods second.
My post was more in reference to the statement I quoted, assuming that my interpretation was correct. From what I have seen the mods here seem fair enough.

Basically it was more a matter of me overreacting and needing someone to assure me that the big bad boogeyman wasn't going to be made a mod and hand out bans like candy on Halloween.

I've been banned from too many forums for reasons I don't consider banworthy (Voicing an opinion counter to that of a podcast guest, making a new account after my old one was necro'd) so regua's post kinda spooked me a bit. It was never my intention to characterize him as that kind of person or accuse the mods here of that kind of behavior.

Anyways I'll shut up now. I feel like I've over explained myself enough.

So me commenting on what you said could be considered spam and you could delete it. While I am one of many who hates the people who go on and on about "rights" and such on a private forum financed by individuals or a corporation I do find that to be very unfair and it seems like the admins are endorsing censorship. Your verbiage and statement that "...I can consider any of your posts as spam and just delete it" seems to make me question why anyone would want to post here. Its almost like you're telling us "Hey, don't post anything I wouldn't like or I'll delete it." That may not have been your intention but that's the vibe I got.
I've only said that I can (in theory) delete every post, because "the definition of spam will not be limited to the specifics described in B1, and will be determined at the discretion of Sarcastic Gamer Staff.". I will never abuse my powers - I'm here to keep the forums clean, not to frighten anybody. I only edit or delete the posts that are offensive, extremely stupid or "disrupt the message board system" in some other way.

I can understand why the mods would want to delete flames, offensive posts, or fanboy fuel but deleting a subdiscussion in a discussion seems to be taking things a little too far in my opinion. I'm not a mod here but I do feel that if the discussion is civil there's no reason to delete it or lock the thread.All posts in a thread should stay on one topic. If the discussion in a particular thread changes the topic, it's okay, but if one person suddenly writes about how he enjoyed spending his weekend on the countryside, I can and will delete such posts.

I seriously wonder if there's anyone in authority I can safely talk to should I have an issue. If you police the forums like that how do I know I can bring up a concern without fear of reprisal? How do I know that I won't be targeted, have posts deleted, or be banned if I disagree with or question a lock or deletion of a post or thread I created?Despite my avatar, this is not Soviet Russia. We don't censor anything (except things like piracy or pornography, but that's obvious), you have the full right to disagree with anything that's been said here or anything that the moderators have done. The fact that I have the power to ban you doesn't mean that I want to do it or that I will ever even actually do it. You're taking my words over the top, seriously...

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg271/HoboHunter1001/400px-Standard_deviation_diagramsvg.png


Would this graph not mean that if one person left from one end of the spectrum, say Hobbo got a permaban, would Ploogle or Viatrophy not have to leave too. The parabola shape indicates that it would just sink down one space on both sides.

Trying to convince people your spam is good Hobohunter? Let me tell you something, because you are probablly lurking around as a guest. Spam means: Stupid Pointless Annoying Crap. Fairly certain spam is not good. But you have been slowly working away from pure spam, to some useful threads. But alas, you are banned.

*cough* caruso1268 on the ice on mars thread *cough*
OOH! i havent been there in a long time!

Trying to convince people your spam is good Hobohunter? Let me tell you something, because you are probablly lurking around as a guest. Spam means: Stupid Pointless Annoying Crap. Fairly certain spam is not good. But you have been slowly working away from pure spam, to some useful threads. But alas, you are banned.

Permabanned?

Permabanned?

rothbart wont tell anyone! i messaged him on Myspace about it! One of his threads came in handy!

As to the point you've made, it's actually bullshit. You're saying that the 0.1% will get filled by others? Well, maybe we shouldn't punish murderers, rapers and thieves, because even if we keep them in prisons, there will be others who do the same? No, that's not the way the world works. The more spammers we get rid of, the less of them are on the forums; if we just let everybody post whatever they want, that 0.1% would quickly become 1%, then 10%, and so on. We will not do this. And so, spammers: beware!

"When compared to Chuck Norrisss, few people would call us spammers."... Again, a real-life example: when compared to Harold Shipman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman) or Elizabeth Báthory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_B%C3%A1thory), few people would call Mark Chapman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_David_Chapman) a murderer. Yet he was a serious threat to others and had to be imprisoned; same thing happens with spammers, only we don't keep them in prisons, we keep them out of the forums.

Have a nice day, everyone. And give Santa my regards.

Do we really need to compare hobo and randomperson's crappy posts to MURDERERS? Come on guys... Good grief, its a video game forum... Let's get a grip and a little perspective on the situation... AND calm down.

My criteria for posting is pretty simple. Is my post going to add anything of substance to the thread? If it isn't going to then I don't post. I read a lot more threads than those that I post in. And am on SG most days.

The last thing the forum needs is no content posts wasting everyones' time.

My criteria for posting is pretty simple. Is my post going to add anything of substance to the thread? If it isn't going to then I don't post. I read a lot more threads than those that I post in. And am on SG most days.

The last thing the forum needs is no content posts wasting everyones' time.

QFT! Excellent post!

Spam means: Stupid Pointless Annoying Crap.

SPAC?

For me there are two types of spam.

1. The incredibly annoying and stupidly pointless stuff. (See fanboy fights for example).

2. Other types which include lighthearted yet off topic stuff. I can enjoy a good off topic thing as long as it doesn't boil down to a flame war. It then becomes type 1.

... Although I'm so paranoid of posting spam I hardly post at all hence my low post count.

Spam means: Stupid Pointless Annoying Crap.
http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/kk208/DeathByWaffle/07jun11-agony-of-defeat.jpg

But seriously, why are some of you guys posting in here like hobo is going to respond?

... Although I'm so paranoid of posting spam I hardly post at all hence my low post count.

Don't avoid posting for fear of being accused of abusing your posting privileges.

Look a few posts back at MashedPenguin's post. If you're adding something meaningful to a thread, no worries.

If the last 12 posts have consisted of nothing more than "Me too", "Yeah...", "No kidding", etc. then maybe you shouldn't be posting. I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to make posts like that occasionally at all... I do it myself. When I talk to someone about abusing the forums over something like what you guys are talking about, I look at a large number of posts, not a post, or even a day worth of posts.

Raven, don't worry about this to the point that you don't post.

This thread is dead.

ENOUGH WITH THE "THIS THREAD IS DEAD" POSTS!

I was very much like that, but now I find that even when my posts are not adding a great deal, they are nowhere near spam.
Well I hope not at least :lol:

Even if your just sharing a joke based on the topic it is usually ok, just look at some of the mod's posts. Just make sure the thread doesn't get out of hand and derailed and your fine.

thanx RP! Yur helping! As for Raven, i agree with what yur sayin, but i try to keep my posts either substantial and on topic or spam type 2. If it turns into a flame war, ill leave. (unless someone's made me look like the bad guy)

Yeah I've started posting more because I'm going to be getting consoles and becoming more active in the community in the coming months but as of right now all i have is a DS so not much to really talk about.

I'm familiar with this diagram. Hobo is right when he says that the diagram adjusts to changes. This is because the middle line represents the mea, or average, of that data. As a result, the removal of an extreme would effect the mean, perhaps significantly, causeing the diagram to adjust.

This is the second time ive caught u double postin Rothbart! If yur not careful, you'll end up with my reputation. EDIT: I know u just got pissed when u saw RP's post, but just edit the origional like me. Farcumshot, *giggle* i have to ask u a question. Are u Hobohunter?

If yur not careful, you'll end up with my reputation. I highly doubt that for some reason. :lol: Yeah, he DOES double post sometimes (more frequently in the past few days), but double posting alone doesn't earn you a bad rep. Also, he's a mod. :D He can do stuff like that.

Farcumshot, *giggle* i have to ask u a question. Are u Hobohunter?
Apparently he doesn't know about "IP bans" :p

now i do.

The full moon was a week ago, weird...

Note: Hobo's banned because of his "conduct" on the forums.

Note: Please don't ask why, if you're not Hobo, it doesn't concern you.

*claps and applauds*

I won't ask why, but is it a permaban this time?

*claps and applauds*

I won't ask why, but is it a permaban this time?
I won't say why, but yes.

But aren't spammers the kind of people you love to hate, it's entertaining to watch some posters make ridiculous posts and threads about utter crap and then watch the entire community slaughter them for it, its adds a little spice to the forums, plus its a great way to vent frustration.

But aren't spammers the kind of people you love to hate, it's entertaining to watch some posters make ridiculous posts and threads about utter crap and then watch the entire community slaughter them for it, its adds a little spice to the forums, plus its a great way to vent frustration.

Well imo Hobo was doing better than he was in the past. But keep in mind, that is just my opinion and he might have been terrible in other places that I am unaware of. He must have done something to deserve it, mods don't throw around bans carelessly.

its a great way to vent frustration.

I certainly think some frustration has been vented...

What you're talking about would've been fine if it were kept localized to a thread or two, but it wasn't. As Community Manager for the site, I have a duty to the "community" first, and this isn't RunWildPostLikeAnIdiotWhileDoingAndSayingWhateverY ouLikeAllOverThePlace.com.

There are a couple folks who at times make me wonder if they wouldn't be better served to take their rampant, disruptive, non-gaming thread starting sprees elsewhere.

Much like any business you go into, we have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. If I went into a crowded restaurant and started pestering all the customers, insulting them, writing random things on their napkins and menus, arguing with some other dufus I brought with me, until several people complained to the manager... I'd be kicked out too.

I won't say why, but yes.

So who won the pool?

In hindsight I can see why: He was really beating the "You guys need me" drum. It doesn't work at an office and it certainly doesn't work on a forum. I'll miss him but life goes on.

... Although I'm so paranoid of posting spam I hardly post at all hence my low post count.

I could not agree more. After seeing all of this, I decided to mostly stick to the bloging thing although im sure not many people read those.

I will say that these forums seem to be very well moderated, but i'm not too sure of the rules just yet. (yes, I have read the rules). Maybe I just need to sit back and watch some more to get a handle on the application of the rules.

Everyone is really friendly Spoon but I'm still kind of under the radar here and in "first impression" stage.

Everyone is really friendly Spoon but I'm still kind of under the radar here and in "first impression" stage.

Yep. In fact, I'm judging you right now. Don't slip up.:thumbsup:

Yep. In fact, I'm judging you right now. Don't slip up.:thumbsup:

no pressure... right

Yep. In fact, I'm judging you right now. Don't slip up.:thumbsup:lol, sometimes first impressions are the only impressions!

Look, I know if I want to make it here then I HAVE to pass Tinman's test. So believe you me, I am walking the line. :thumbsup:

Everyone has been friendly so far, don't take what I'm saying the wrong way. Even if someone is not friendly, I'll be ok. I'm a big boy, I can handle it.

I was just saying that I'm trying to figure out what constitutes as spamming but I don't think I’m going to worry about it so much. I know you guys will tell me if I get out of line :huh:

Plus, I’m sure no one gets banned or a bad rap without multiple warnings so I'm good.

Look, I know if I want to make it here then I HAVE to pass Tinman's test. So believe you me, I am walking the line. :thumbsup:

Everyone has been friendly so far, don't take what I'm saying the wrong way. Even if someone is not friendly, I'll be ok. I'm a big boy, I can handle it.

I was just saying that I'm trying to figure out what constitutes as spamming but I don't think I’m going to worry about it so much. I know you guys will tell me if I get out of line :huh:

Plus, I’m sure no one gets banned or a bad rap without multiple warnings so I'm good.

Basically, just join in with conversations, always reply with something worth reading and everyone will be happy.
To get a ban on this forum you will have 2-3 chances (Maybe less, depending on what you did off course.)
Remember to also give out rep. (Its that little black box underneith peoples name if you think what they posted was good or bad. :thumbsup:)

So yeah, don't worry about being nervous to post, if you think what your going to post is worth reading, Go for it! :evil:

Remember to also give out rep. (Its that little black box underneith peoples name if you think what they posted was good or bad. :thumbsup:)

Although, you can't give people rep until you have a certain amount yourselves...:D You can view the comments by clicking on the "User CP" tab at the top, though.

Apparently he doesn't know about "IP bans" :p


Those usually are effective for whoevers been banned unless they call the internet company to change it or use a different household.

Also, I don't knw exactly who Hobo Hunter is besides this thread, but I am certainly not him.

I don't knw exactly who Hobo Hunter is besides this thread, but I am certainly not him.

But how can you be certain? If you don't know who he is... he MAY be you! :lol:

But how can you be certain? If you don't know who he is... he MAY be you! :lol:
Rothbart your logic makes no sense, it sounds like something the US government would use.

But how can you be certain? If you don't know who he is... he MAY be you! :lol:
True...true...

Rothbart your logic makes no sense, it sounds like something the US government would use.
Anti-US...Anti-Rothbart...Maybe YOU are HoboHunter! :roll:

I admit it, I'm hobohunter, we switched accounts a while back.

I admit it, I'm hobohunter, we switched accounts a while back.

BURN HIM!!!!!1!!!!

Wow, this thread hasn't recently consisted of meaningless posts at all. Nope, nothing wrong here.


Edit:
FIXED REGUA.
YOU HAPPY AT MY PAIN?!?!

Wow, this thread hasn't been recently been full of meaningless posts at all. Nope, nothing wrong here.

Quoted for DeathByWaffle's grammatical mistake!

Quoted for DeathByWaffle's grammatical mistake!

At a friends house...damn squishy keyboards.

At a friends house...damn squishy keyboards.
Quoted for DeathByWaffle's terrible excuse!

Quoted for DeathbyWaffle's terrible excuse!

Do you want me to quote every time you start a flame war by provoking someone? That would be a lot of ti-

Oh sh*t. Way to be a hypocrite :lol:

Quoted for DeathByWaffle's terrible excuse!

Quoted for truth!

Do you want me to quote every time you start a flame war by provoking someone? That would be a lot of ti-

Oh sh*t. Way to be a hypocrite :lol:Be quiet spammer kid! :lol: j/k

Quoted for DeathByWaffle's terrible excuse!

Quoted for truth!

Quoted for DeathByWaffle's grammatical mistake!

Quoted for proving my point.

This thread should be locked. No one is even talking about the topic.

Quoted for proving my point.

This thread should be locked. No one is even talking about the topic.

Quoted for not being able to handle the abuse! :lol:

burned. I'm just messin with ya Waffle.

burned. I'm just messin with ya Waffle.

Yeah, whatever.

The day will come when you all pay. It is closer than you think.

*cackles silently*

Yeah, whatever.

The day will come when you all pay. It is closer than you think.

*cackles silently*
How can someone cackle silently?

How can someone cackle silently?

I found a way.

Oh, and I am god. Forgot to say that before.