EPTtaengoo my queen? i actually switched races again because of her
Korean Music Discussion - Page 2399
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
To ensure this thread won't be closed, you must adhere to
Due to the poor nature of this thread in the past, temporary two-day bans will occur more than often if people slip up. | ||
|
Juliette
United States6003 Posts
taengoo my queen? i actually switched races again because of her | ||
|
nosliw
United States2716 Posts
| ||
|
PatouPower
Canada1119 Posts
| ||
|
Hall0wed
United States8486 Posts
On February 12 2012 09:34 nosliw wrote: Is Taeyeon a regular cast on that sitcom now? Will I get to see her in every episode? Uh I think she is in 3 episodes? I forget exact number, but no she is not permanent. TT On February 12 2012 09:34 Juliette wrote: depends who, halll0wed I am not sure who but maybe one day i shall do it anyway. I don't have any though so I would have to go hunting on tumblr for some first TT For now just have some more Taengoo kkkk ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lfSq9.jpg) + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/qFAvH.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/hHOYH.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/d7fFI.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IMfd9.jpg) | ||
|
Juliette
United States6003 Posts
On February 12 2012 09:42 Hall0wed wrote: I am not sure who but maybe one day i shall do it anyway. you should just do it anyway. ^^ | ||
GTR
51460 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/phQPL.jpg) | ||
|
sgxmitchy
154 Posts
Trolling successful. God dammit. | ||
|
NationInArms
United States1553 Posts
On February 12 2012 08:48 Hall0wed wrote: Guy groups are awesome, they just don't get brought up as often here since a lot of the time this thread is just oogling girls or arguing about something stupid. I mean if you really wanted me to I could go find some pics of guys and post them here... Does it annoy anyone else that everyone in B.A.P has the same bleach blonde (or w/e that is) hair? Really bothers me >.< Yeah, if I remember correctly they're the guys who all bleach their hair to look like G Dragon. My favorite guy groups are SS501 and Beast/B2ST. I've also listened to Super Junior and Big Bang. It's just that I listen to girl groups more often. | ||
|
Kamatari
165 Posts
I don't see how we don't keep flamers out as we've banned people on many occasions for unacceptable behavior, even forum regulars. You are doing a good job. I'm not sure what you're referring to by correcting Kpop-related stuff, but we're not here to assure the accuracy of what's being stated or determine the validity of any opinions. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2394#47871 I believe that the mod tried to correct this person's accuracy, which turned out to be wrong any ways. People in the future may no longer actually correct other people, without expecting a mod's warning. Why didnt Tuelite get a warning? Canadian bros had to stick together? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2394#47861 You're right that we're here to "give out tickets", but it's those tickets that give people an idea of how they're supposed to conduct themselves in this thread. There is a difference between how people are suppose to conduct themselves and common mistakes. Warnings have been given to people without the public knowing the reason why http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2396#47901 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2396#47920 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47923 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47926 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47930 Until someone actually said something: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47931 But then again, it just a common mistake because: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47934 If we didn't warn people about failing to spoil videos and images when quoting, then it would be rampant throughout the thread and most pages would end up becoming eyesores. It may sound like a minor thing to you, but it's something that becomes significant if it's abused or just occurs too often. That is true, they can become significant(People make mistakes everytime), thats why it should be added in the rules section of this thread, (which just occurred today). I personally think your claim that the mods are giong out of their way to be annoying by giving out reprimands for minor things is unfounded because this thread is actually given a lot of leeway compared to TL's typical standards. You're warning people for common mistakes that weren't in the rules section in this thread. And the other threads can probably compared to Russia's mid communism stage(Thank you for not doing that to this thread). We let a lot of stuff slip by, and try to focus only on the issues that threaten to derail the thread into a flamefest and which allow this thread to serve its purpose. Like Tueilite's and Chill's mistake about G.NA and Hyorin. Clearly correcting someone was going to lead into a flamefest. You're entitled to your opinion, but it seems like a pretty unconvincing one that lacks merit as currently explained. | ||
|
Waterhaak
Netherlands525 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u7x62.jpg) + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/G1XvT.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/004jz.jpg) | ||
|
Hall0wed
United States8486 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/t8dnr.jpg) | ||
|
Megaliskuu
United States5123 Posts
| ||
|
Tippany
United States765 Posts
Mixing Kpop with some timely sports references. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PpNQ8.jpg) | ||
|
Atmosfear
United States42 Posts
On February 12 2012 06:05 Radioman wrote: I laughed EDIT: I know I just didn't notice it was there! It's because I copied the link for AKP! I'm okay with makeup for male idols, but this just takes it to the next level. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Spekulatius
Germany2413 Posts
On February 12 2012 09:56 Waterhaak wrote: From Hyomin's twitter. I don't think there are a lot of people who would deny she is gorgeous. But in reality she is actually even more gorgeous than you could ever imagine. + Show Spoiler + I, too, was surprised how they look so much better in person than on tape. Not only my favs but literally everyone. | ||
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
On February 12 2012 09:55 Kamatari wrote:You are doing a good job. Don't understand your initial post then. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2394#47871 I believe that the mod tried to correct this person's accuracy, which turned out to be wrong any ways. People in the future may no longer actually correct other people, without expecting a mod's warning. Why didnt Tuelite get a warning? Canadian bros had to stick together? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2394#47861 That warning wasn't given to correct an inaccuracy, so much as to address what was perceived as trolling/flamebaiting from someone with a history of similar behavior. Obviously, it turned out the mod made mistake because the reason he assumed it was trolling/flamebaiting (mislabeling Hyorin) was false, but the fact remains that it's never been any mod's intention to correct inaccuracies in this thread. That's also why Tuelite wasn't warned. There is a difference between how people are suppose to conduct themselves and common mistakes. Warnings have been given to people without the public knowing the reason why http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2396#47901 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2396#47920 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47923 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47926 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47930 Until someone actually said something: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47931 But then again, it just a common mistake because: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98009¤tpage=2397#47934 The explanation was given immediately after the warnings were given, so there was no issue of people not understanding why they were given. There is always a risk of a warning not being understood since the original post is usually edited to address the offense by the mod or the poster themselves. At the very least, the offender will know why they were warned and ideally not repeat the offense. For this particular issue, most people knew or should have known about the spoiling policy because it's been around for so long and is frequently brought up by thread regulars. That is true, they can become significant(People make mistakes everytime), thats why it should be added in the rules section of this thread, (which just occurred today). You're right that it should have been in the rules, but, again, it's a well-known rule to anyone who peruses this thread on a regular basis. Also, the only repercussion so far has been warnings, which are largely harmless and merely intended to let the poster (and maybe others) know that what they did is not what we want. There's a reason no temp bans have been given for failing to spoiler quoted content up to this point, and a reason why it has been made one of the rules listed above once temp bans were about to come down the pipe. You're warning people for common mistakes that weren't in the rules section in this thread. And the other threads can probably compared to Russia's mid communism stage(Thank you for not doing that to this thread). Read previous. Also, not sure what you're referring to with regards to the Russia's mid communism stage. Like Tueilite's and Chill's mistake about G.NA and Hyorin. Clearly correcting someone was going to lead into a flamefest. Read above about the "correction" that wasn't. Again, this was a perceived attempt at flaming/trolling based on reputation and what has happened previously in this thread. You're entitled to your opinion, but it seems like a pretty unconvincing one that lacks merit as currently explained. Your criticism relies on several mistaken assumptions. Issuing warnings for not spoilering quoted content is not the unnecessarily harsh conduct you're making it out to be. Warnings, particularly for this particular reason, are largely harmless and merely serve to communicate to the person that they did something we don't approve of. What you may not realize is that the explanations for the warnings are not angry or harsh at all, and (at least for mine) worded very politely to ask the posters not to quote posts without spoilering the content. You are the first person to complain about the fact that warnings are given out for that reason, and that includes the people who have been warned. Funny that no one that has been warned has cried foul play or complained that they couldn't have known it was not allowed. As explained above, Chill's mod action was taken for perceived flamingbaiting/trolling. Sure, it was based on a mistake in fact, but the reason behind the warning is valid and not what you think it was. We have, and will continue, to take steps to prevent people from starting unnecessarily flamewars whenever we come across it because we know how quickly this particular thread can deteriorate if we don't from experience. Since us mods are clearly imperfect and can make mistakes, I'm definitely not going to hold these mistaken assumptions against you. You didn't know what the contents of the warnings were to the people who were warned, and you didn't know the reason why Chill did what he did. However, I would caution you against making assumptions and then criticizing mods on that basis. Most of the mods who are tracking this thread have been watching it for a looooong time and we're going to base our actions on things that you may not be aware of at times. I think the results, i.e. that this thread is managining to maintain some semblance of order and quality despite the flame-friendly nature of the topic, speak for themselves and entitle us to the benefit of the doubt in such things. | ||
|
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
On February 12 2012 10:19 Atmosfear wrote: I'm okay with makeup for male idols, but this just takes it to the next level. User was warned for this post I'll let one more slide before tempbans are issued. | ||
|
Craton
United States17250 Posts
On February 12 2012 08:09 XaI)CyRiC wrote: Care to explain your position in more detail? It's been well-known for a while that failing to spoiler content when quoting is a warn-able offense. The thread just moves so quickly that it's difficult to catch and act against every offense. In fact it has been much the opposite, despite my frequent protests calling for it to be added. There have been at least three times where several pages of arguments regarding this threads moderation have come up in which I (and others) have asked for spoiling quoted media to be a requirement, but it was something that was never added, except apparently today when moderation was started before the rule had actually been added to the thread, as was pointed out earlier. That's backwards and unacceptable -- you should not moderate a rule that does not yet exist. All of the moderation that was done prior to this becoming an actual rule should be reversed. The proper way is to add the rule and give a 1 day grace period for people to recognize that the rule had been changed. I didn't even notice something had been added to the top until I found the posts inside the thread on the subject. The top banner needs to actually stand out when something has been changed, when the format actually remained identical from one change to the next. The previous "new rule" sat around for months, when it could've been shifted to the regular section after a week or two. This would've made it so when this "new rule" was added, the top banner looked different and would've therefore be noticed. Moreover, as to red text in general: if you're going to do it, edit something in that actually explains the reason for the moderation instead of trying to have people guess. There was a case several weeks ago where someone got warned and the reason was never discovered. In some cases it's obvious about the reason - racial slurs, sexist remarks, memes, etc. In other cases, it's completely obscure and even the other mods that get asked don't understand the reason for it or think it was a wrongful act. However, there have been several times where memes using kpop pictures have been used and reported, but not moderated. I think it should go without saying that moderating someone for mixing up names is completely over the top when it will invariably get corrected within a few posts. | ||
|
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
On February 12 2012 10:39 Craton wrote: In fact it has been much the opposite, despite my frequent protests calling for it to be added. There have been at least three times where several pages of arguments regarding this threads moderation have come up in which I (and others) have asked for spoiling quoted media to be a requirement, but it was something that was never added, except apparently today when moderation was started before the rule had actually been added to the thread, as was pointed out earlier. That's backwards and unacceptable -- you should not moderate a rule that does not yet exist. All of the moderation that was done prior to this becoming an actual rule should be reversed. The proper way is to add the rule and give a 1 day grace period for people to recognize that the rule had been changed. I didn't even notice something had been added to the top until I found the posts inside the thread on the subject. The top banner needs to actually stand out when something has been changed, when the format actually remained identical from one change to the next. The previous "new rule" sat around for months, when it could've been shifted to the regular section after a week or two. This would've made it so when this "new rule" was added, the top banner looked different and would've therefore be noticed. Moreover, as to red text in general: if you're going to do it, edit something in that actually explains the reason for the moderation instead of trying to have people guess. There was a case several weeks ago where someone got warned and the reason was never discovered. In some cases it's obvious about the reason - racial slurs, sexist remarks, memes, etc. In other cases, it's completely obscure and even the other mods that get asked don't understand the reason for it or think it was a wrongful act. However, there have been several times where memes using kpop pictures have been used and reported, but not moderated. I think it should go without saying that moderating someone for mixing up names is completely over the top when it will invariably get corrected within a few posts. How is that the opposite? I admitted that it wasn't an actual rule, but something that was well-known and understood by anyone who peruses the thread on a regular basis. Edit: Also, this isn't the first time that people have been warned for failing to spoiler quoted content. It has been done before with no complaint by the person being warned or by the people who witnessed the warnings. This is not something new or recent. Most people know to spoiler quoted content, and the warnings serve to simply let the people who do so know that it's not allowed. There's no permanent effect on people who are warned. Once we decided to start taking harsher steps, it was made into an actual rule. As you can see, a grace period is being implemented even if it's not spelled out. The reasons behind warnings are always going to be tricky as explained in my previous post. Usually we don't spell out warnings because they're not a big deal and are largely intended for the person who was warned. Bans are a different story, which is why the rule was formally added. The criticism seems to be that mods are taking unnecessarily harsh action against people for a minor offense when that's not the case. The warnings are not harsh and have no permanent effect on the people warned. They are intended to communicate to the person who made the mistake what they did, no more, no less. There is also criticism that the warnings don't effectively let others know what the offense was, but I don't think there's any confusion amongst the people in this thread why those people were warned or whether it's okay to not spoiler quoted content. As for the "correction" warning, I've already explained the actual motive behind it was above. | ||
|
DystopiaX
United States16236 Posts
| ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz80ipdtwf1r4v1xao1_500.jpg)
