EPTQuality of new posters? - Page 8
| Forum Index > General Forum |
BroOd
Austin10833 Posts
| ||
|
camooT
United States1354 Posts
On June 08 2005 20:56 SickofLife wrote: No, nationalism does. Defending your country for no reason should be bannable. I can't think of any examples, but like a lot of Americans (IronMentality) defend America to death, like we are infallible, but we aren't. They should be banned, because they are retarded. To represent a different viewpoint is one thing, to act as if your country can do no wrong is another, and shouldn't be tolerated. I thought your complaint was against retarded posters. as much as i disagree with ironment or excal, i respect them for their ability to produce incredible amounts of information pertaining to the discussion. that's much more than most (including you and myself) have been able to do. i don't believe anyone deserves to be banned for their views or obstinacy, only if they're EXTREMELY offensive and their posts completely lack value. (oh and i should note im on good terms with excal, and haven't had serious run-ins with iron-mentality.) | ||
|
pirate cod
810 Posts
On June 08 2005 20:56 SickofLife wrote: No, nationalism does. Defending your country for no reason should be bannable. I can't think of any examples, but like a lot of Americans (IronMentality) defend America to death, like we are infallible, but we aren't. They should be banned, because they are retarded. To represent a different viewpoint is one thing, to act as if your country can do no wrong is another, and shouldn't be tolerated. That's why people raise points and make arguements. People who defend the U.S. to the death have the right to as they provide evidence as to why - therefore creating discussion. Just because you don't like a person's stubborn point of view dosn't mean you should ban them. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
On June 08 2005 21:08 pirate cod wrote: That's why people raise points and make arguements. People who defend the U.S. to the death have the right to as they provide evidence as to why - therefore creating discussion. Just because you don't like a person's stubborn point of view dosn't mean you should ban them. I'm too lazy to pin it down, but there is a clear differentiation between honest argument and dishonest argument. The kind of rigid and shallow thinking employed by the Chinese nationalists isn't pleasant, but it's a national fault and better to be ignored so long as the more reasonable points in their argument are dealt with. | ||
|
camooT
United States1354 Posts
I'm too lazy to pin it down, but there is a clear differentiation between honest argument and dishonest argument. The kind of rigid and shallow thinking employed by the Chinese nationalists isn't pleasant, but it's a national fault and better to be ignored so long as the more reasonable points in their argument are dealt with. honest argument: I AGREE dishonest argument: I DISAGREE | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
On June 08 2005 21:17 camooT wrote: honest argument: I AGREE dishonest argument: I DISAGREE I sometimes wonder if there are really people this stupid as to bend truth to suit their shallow perspectives or whether people are rather so dishonest that they fabricate motives which any rational person knows don't exist. | ||
|
camooT
United States1354 Posts
| ||
|
RiSE
United States3182 Posts
| ||
|
SoMuchBetter
Australia10606 Posts
On June 08 2005 20:44 camooT wrote: You seem to take our political stance as a personal affront. Go ahead, you might as well just ban all chinese nationalists because you hate our stubborness so much. If anything, your post demonstrates that what qualifies as 'quality' posting is subjective  .Refer to grot's post. I'm not saying that you deserved to be banned, rather that you annoy me. SickofLife is using the same logic about BloodBath and those eV guys as a justification to have them banned. The reason I hate you four at times is because of exactly what you mentioned. Blind stubborn nationalism with a dash of ignorance. However, as long as you can production good arguments in the threads concerning you, then you are an asset to the forums, no matter how much you piss people off. If you want an example of this, look no further than Excal. The entire forum hated him whenever he opened his mouth on the subject of politics and yet he still has the ability to post here. Since a couple of people have mentioned it, I would make a bad moderator by some of your expectations. I'd find myself being much more lenient on new posters. Rather than banning BloodBath, I would have PM'd him a warning about what has to change if he wants to keep posting. The reason I'd do this is because I would want people to have fun on these forums, like I did when I first started posting. | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36402 Posts
let me try | ||
|
ihatett
United States2289 Posts
ihatett is another poster that I find particularly annoying to have around +1 | ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36402 Posts
Poll: Is this post offtopic? (Vote): Yes (Vote): Yes (Vote): Yes (Vote): Yes (Vote): Yes (Vote): Yes (Vote): Yes LOLZ | ||
|
Dachau
Poland285 Posts
On June 08 2005 14:55 SickofLife wrote: Normally I wouldn't make this thread, and it's probably going to get closed, but what do you people think about the quality of the new posters that have been coming here? One that comes to mind is BloodBath, who's a fucking twatt, and a spammer. I can't figure out why the dumbass is still here. I'm fucking sick of seeing all these idiots running around the forum, and not being banned. The reason this forum was so good is because dumb people who did nothing but post inane comments were banned within a week, unless they were really funny. Now, all that comes here are fucking pre-pubescent 12 year olds, who want to spam the forums with stupid comments. MvP[eV], and all those [eV] guys, along with BloodBath and a few others. They all SUCK. Why are the mods allowing them to stay here? So, any comments before this is closed? SickofLife are u the same Sick of Life from old nH. forums or pS forums, if yes I'm Kojak hope u remember me, asnwere here!! | ||
|
chobopeon
United States7342 Posts
On June 08 2005 21:07 camooT wrote: I thought your complaint was against retarded posters. as much as i disagree with ironment or excal, i respect them for their ability to produce incredible amounts of information pertaining to the discussion. that's much more than most (including you and myself) have been able to do. i don't believe anyone deserves to be banned for their views or obstinacy, only if they're EXTREMELY offensive and their posts completely lack value. (oh and i should note im on good terms with excal, and haven't had serious run-ins with iron-mentality.) ironmentality is, I think, is good to have around. regardless of politics, he's generally coherent and interesting. | ||
|
LetMeBeWithYou
Canada4254 Posts
On September 13 2004 22:42 mensrea wrote: - Racist remarks will be shot down and you will be lynched. but hell nobody cares about rules | ||
|
Orlandu
China2450 Posts
Teamliquid.net has done something amazing that I think a lot of people don't fully understand. It would really be a shame to see a place like this tarnished by something that so many are willing to step up to fight against. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28926 Posts
2 : it's not what you post. it's how you post. moltke is among my favourite posters. I adore him. however, I also disagree with him very often. but when it comes to general posting quality, I can't think of anyone I like more than him. 3 : if I were going to be an elitist and ban more often, amusingly enough, some of the people who have complained about how lax we are would be gone.  4 : there's one problem ; I try to avoid banning people in disagreement with me. this because I absolutely do not want a reputation as someone who bans FOR disagreeing with me. and this is a problem in one way, because I generally only notice stupidity when the stupidity is in disagreement with myself. for this reason, the people I recognize as idiots avoid getting banned because well, they're disagreeing with me and people should not be afraid of showing their disagreement towards me just because I'm a moderator. they shouldn't be afraid to flame me either, if I deserve it. | ||
|
ihatett
United States2289 Posts
I should probably expand on that. I assume that you don't like me is because of politics. Is this correct? | ||
|
wishterran
United States1045 Posts
I agree with what MPXMX said earlier in the topic and believe it has to do with declining interest in BW on the forum. Almost all of us make many short to the point posts and the occasional long deeply meaningful post (at least this applies to me and i think many others here), but many newer members seem to make stupid or useless posts. Don't get me wrong - there are many newer quality posters, but also some that bring the forum down. I won't mention any of the names that come to mind because there are too many enjoyable posters here and also too many pointless ones. It does take good posting to last a very long time on the site - if you go back and look at very old topics, you will notice many banned users that simply didn't last. Even users with 1000+ posts or who have been reading for a very long time still get banned. It IS possible to disagree with everyone and remain on the site just as it is possible to ageree with everyone and be banned. Good posters that last have manners, use their brain before they post, and attempt to make their posts readable, understandable, and pleasant for the community even if nobody agrees with them. I don't think the moderators are doing a bad job and I don't think this topic was wrong. I believe this is the expierenced forum users asking for slightly stricter posting rules from the moderators, and there is nothing wrong with that. To the people quoting one stupid post by a normally enjoyable poster and trying to make a case against them - Karma : The total effect of a person's actions and conduct during the successive phases of the person's existence, regarded as determining the person's destiny. | ||
|
chobopeon
United States7342 Posts
On June 08 2005 22:05 ihatett wrote: I should probably expand on that. I assume that you don't like me is because of politics. Is this correct? even if you do think I'm a snivelling leftist I think you're good to have around. regardless of politics, you're generally coherent and interesting. edit | ||
| ||
