The 'official' rules:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/forum-rules.html

---

Below is a 'first draft.' All policies are open for debate. Feel free to suggest modifications or additions.

OzPolitic is committed to free speech and open debate about all political issues. We will try to avoid censoring people in any way for merely expressing political views.

If you suspect a person is trolling or wasting members' time, please ignore them. A forum that grants free speech will only function effectively if members are able to control their emotional reaction to inflammatory remarks. Please make an attempt to clarify a person's views via personal messages in case they are joking.

We have a swear word filter. Please do not try to bypass this filter by misspelling swear words. Some words have been taken off the list where it was deemed unnecessarily restrictive. Ask in the feedback board for more info.

Pornography is not tolerated. In some cases this may be difficult to determine. We will judge images based on the context and whether they are gratuitous (ie if an image involves nudity, is it necessary to get a point across, and is the nudity 'real' or more like a porn shot?).

Personal attacks (ad hominem) against other members are discouraged and may be censored. They add nothing to the debate. Unless a person uses their own reputation to back up their argument then their reputation is not relvant to the issue at hand. There is plenty of controversy inherent to political debates and there is no need to manufacture it with personal conflict. Remember that others are more interested in the issue, not who is debating it.

While political correctness is not mandatory, members are encouraged to avoid unnecessary use of politically incorrect terms, especially to 'bait' or where the term is likely to 'open old wounds' from recent historical injustices. Members are encouraged to use language appropriate for as broad a cross section of the community as possible and to assume that members of whatever minorty group they are discussing are viewing and participating in a discussion. While OzPolitic is dedicated to free speech, please remember that insensitive language can effectively prevent many people from speaking out and that the OzPolitic community will be poorer for their absence.

Remember that children view and use these boards, as well as foreigners - especially the global issues board. They are encouraged to participate. Please be patient with language barriers with non-english speakers, and also with foreigners who speak English but are not familiar with Australian slang.

I will adhere. does that include the gwb and binladen pic?

That's a tough one. I think we should vote on it. I haven't deleted it yet as it is political satire. I can't imagine anyone getting turned on by that. But it probably bothers people in the same way porn does.

If anyone gets turned on by that picture, they need a psychiatrist.

Is anyone in favour of limiting the use of, or size of, images in signatures, or limiting font size, colour etc?

freediver wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2007 at 12:18pm:

Is anyone in favour of limiting the use of, or size of, images in signatures, or limiting font size, colour etc?

yes, i am in favour of limiting the size of images and text in signatures. that photo in donald trump's signature takes up alot room whenever he posts and can be quite distracting when the picture has nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

actually, come to think of it, it would be better if only text was in signatures, and any pics should be posted as avatars.

If you can get at least 5 members to support that rule, and the majority of those who vote, then I will impliment it. Make sure you are clear what rule you want - a maximum image size or height, no images, and what about font size and colour?

And don't do a poll on it - get people to PM me or voice their opinions publicly.

Be nice to new members.

Do not post personal messages publicly without the permission of the author.

Do not post personal information about people without their consent. This includes contact details and information that was accidentally made public, if reasonable effort was made to have it removed.

Don't get personal - stick to the issue.

---

Racism and sexism:

While racist and sexist issues may be discussed, politically correct and polite language is to be used. This is not intended to limit the views that can be expressed, but how you express them. It is intended to cut out racial slurs, 'cheap shots' and comments designed to offend. There are some old threads around that clearly violate this policy. I will close them as I come across them.

Swearing:

I will also start enforcing a ban on bypassing the swear word filter by deliberately misspelling words. If you think the filter is too restrictive please raise the issue here.

freediver wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2007 at 9:52am:

Racism and sexism: While racist and sexist issues may be discussed, politically correct and polite language is to be used. This is not intended to limit the views that can be expressed, but how you express them. It is intended to cut out racial slurs, 'cheap shots' and comments designed to offend. There are some old threads around that clearly violate this policy. I will close them as I come across them. Swearing: I will also start enforcing a ban on bypassing the swear word filter by deliberately misspelling words. If you think the filter is too restrictive please raise the issue here.

freediver,

I think most pple have come to accept in 2007..that the odd expletive here and there is aall part of the Australian  vancular. I think maybe words such as coon-nig ger etc should have your new restrictions placed upon them.but I think telling adults they dont have the right to use a cuss word here and there is a bit over the top.

OK, but if I allow swearing that means we may have to put up with new members who put strings of expletives in every single post.

freediver wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2007 at 11:21am:

OK, but if I allow swearing that means we may have to put up with new members who put strings of expletives in every single post.

I havent seen that have you?

Ive seen stfu etc...but not an abuse of swearing.

keep in place the word recognition system you have right now..that will deal with most of it anyway and the regulars dont overstep the mark i dont think..

wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2007 at 6:29pm:

This is a ripper Aussie Flag... The coat of arms and beer and meat pie as a unifying symbol!!!! :) :) :)

That flag sucks!

This one is better ;D

Post 1772

---

I moved this from the flag debate in the general board. The rules have changed a bit since you left AN. This sort of thing is not allowed. I moved it here rather than deleting it because it the rules are still open for discussion.

I think that a lot of members aren't getting the rules as they are currently expressed. Hopefully this will clear things up:

I can't expect that you respect all other members, however regardless of how you feel about them you must act in a courteous and respectful (or at least neutral) manner towards them. This forum cannot function if members think that once they take a disliking to someone for whatever reason they can respond with personal criticism instead of reasoned rebuttal.

Most importantly, if you feel that someone else has violated any of these rules, that is NOT an excuse for you to do the same. Unless you take the higher ground you are equally to blame.

Perhaps you should enforce your rules.
As it is they are being completely ignored.

This forum is not to be used to pursue personal disputes and grievances.

Do not respond to personal criticism.

Hey freediver, why the 'swearing' filter?   We're all adults aren't we?  What's with banning good old Australian swearing?

It was included with the forum software by default. I have removed a few words from the list. Feel free to suggest more.

deepthought wrote on Nov 16^th, 2007 at 9:25pm:

Hey freediver, why the 'swearing' filter?   We're all adults aren't we?  What's with banning good old Australian swearing?

yeah DT- dont you just love "crappity smacks"-?

oceanz wrote on Nov 18^th, 2007 at 4:44pm:

deepthought wrote on Nov 16th, 2007 at 9:25pm: Hey freediver, why the 'swearing' filter?   We're all adults aren't we?  What's with banning good old Australian swearing? yeah DT- dont you just love "crappity smacks"-?

It's so . . . so . . . so . . .  smacking grown up.  It gives me the nuts   ;)



freediver wrote on Nov 18^th, 2007 at 2:20pm:

It was included with the forum software by default. I have removed a few words from the list. Feel free to suggest more.

How about bugger poo bitch freediver?

Quote:

yeah DT- dont you just love "crappity smacks"-?

It's so . . . so . . . so . . .  smacking grown up.  It gives me the nuts   ;)




How about bugger poo bitch freediver?

Ill second that DT?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/members/freediver/dontfeedthetroll.jpg

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2008 at 3:01pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/members/freediver/dontfeedthetroll.jpg

That's discriminatory to pin heads.

The word troll is offensive and thrown around too carelessly.  Maybe you should be more specific and say which person you're referring to.  There don't appear to be any "trolls" on this forum - although you could say there are some dissenters, sounds a bit better.

The only complaints I have made are about racial slurs, personal hate innuendo, gutter talk and ugly photos.  Does anyone disagree with this?  Obviously arguing is part of debate and can't be helped occasionally.


Quote:

an ugly manlike creature that lived in a cave or under a bridge.

Does anyone really want to be described as a troll?  

mantra wrote on Mar 5^th, 2008 at 5:19pm:

The word troll is offensive and thrown around too carelessly.  Maybe you should be more specific and say which person you're referring to.  There don't appear to be any "trolls" on this forum - although you could say there are some dissenters, sounds a bit better. The only complaints I have made are about racial slurs, personal hate innuendo, gutter talk and ugly photos.  Does anyone disagree with this?  Obviously arguing is part of debate and can't be helped occasionally. Quote: an ugly manlike creature that lived in a cave or under a bridge. Does anyone really want to be described as a troll?

A troll does.

I suspect everyone is aware of this, but just in case you aren't:

If you disagree with the way a member run board is hosted you are welcome to bring it up with the moderator, however if you don't get your way your only recourse is to stop using the board in question. You are not compelled to use the member run boards even if they are the obvious place for a thread you want to start, based on the topic. While they are convenient 'repositories' for a given topic, they should also be viewed as experiments in moderating styles. If a board is hosted well it should attract participants. If not, people will avoid it.

Do not try to make each moderator conform to uniform 'OzPolitic-wide' values and standards regarding free speech and civility, beyond the basic rules outlined above. The member run boards are intended to foster a diversity of communal experience. Your freedom of speech is not infringed if you can simply repost the same thing elsewhere where it will be equally (or most likely more) prominent.

freediver wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 3:14pm:

I suspect everyone is aware of this, but just in case you aren't: If you disagree with the way a member run board is hosted you are welcome to bring it up with the moderator, however if you don't get your way your only recourse is to stop using the board in question. You are not compelled to use the member run boards even if they are the obvious place for a thread you want to start, based on the topic. While they are convenient 'repositories' for a given topic, they should also be viewed as experiments in moderating styles. If a board is hosted well it should attract participants. If not, people will avoid it. Do not try to make each moderator conform to uniform 'OzPolitic-wide' values and standards regarding free speech and civility, beyond the basic rules outlined above. The member run boards are intended to foster a diversity of communal experience. Your freedom of speech is not infringed if you can simply repost the same thing elsewhere where it will be equally (or most likely more) prominent.

So tell me freediver, if you believe this (and unless this a display of your hypocrisy I guess you do) why did you overrule a moderator decision in the user run boards?

I didn't. It was the member's choice to delete the post, because the post was made by that member. If you had chosen to delete a post, I wouldn't have over-ruled you. That being said, I have over-ruled hosts in the past and reinstated deleted posts, but no-one has complained so far. Preventing a person from deleting their own post is not a moderator 'right' in the first place. It only appeared to exist due to the absence of a button. If it makes you happy I will restore the button so members can do it themselves and you won't have to fret over imaginary rights that I am taking away from moderators. But as I said elsewhere, I would like it discussed here first in a new thread.

You are mistaking a technical 'flaw' that deprived members of a right for an authority assigned to moderators. It was not a moderators decision in the first place. You imagined you had a power that you didn't really have. It only became an issue because you tried to abuse that power.

freediver wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 4:27pm:

I didn't. It was the member's choice to delete the post, because the post was made by that member. If you had chosen to delete a post, I wouldn't have over-ruled you. That being said, I have over-ruled hosts in the past and reinstated deleted posts, but no-one has complained so far. Preventing a person from deleting their own post is not a moderator 'right' in the first place. It only appeared to exist due to the absence of a button. If it makes you happy I will restore the button so members can do it themselves and you won't have to fret over imaginary rights that I am taking away from moderators. But as I said elsewhere, I would like it discussed here first in a new thread. You are mistaking a technical 'flaw' that deprived members of a right for an authority assigned to moderators. It was not a moderators decision in the first place. You imagined you had a power that you didn't really have. It only became an issue because you tried to abuse that power.

I exercised no power.   You did.  It would have been an exercise of power had I deleted a post.  But I didn't.  And as it was impossible for the contributor to delete their own post the post would have remained had you not overruled the moderator who declined to remove it.

But yet you say that "If you disagree with the way a member run board is hosted you are welcome to bring it up with the moderator, however if you don't get your way your only recourse is to stop using the board in question".  

Why are you a hypocrite?  Because you are now saying that is not the case.  Why do you state two opposing concepts?

I exercised no power.

Yes you did. You edited a member's post against their wishes. The member attempted to delete her post by removing the content, which would normally suffice. You denied her the right to delete her post.

Editing another member's post is usually a big 'no-no' in moderating. It pisses people off - often more than deleting a post.

You did.

The member in question did. It's just that she had to go through me because the button wasn't there. You are confusing a right with the method used to exercise the right.

And as it was impossible for the contributor to delete their own post the post would have remained had ytou not overruled the moderator who declined to remove it.

You have missed the point. I did not over-rule you because it was never your decision. Mantra only asked you because of a technical flaw, not because it was something you had genuine authority over. You only imagined that you had that authority. You took advantage of a situation, that's all.

freediver wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 4:45pm:

I exercised no power. Yes you did. You edited a member's post against their wishes. The member attempted to delete her post by removing the content, which would normally suffice. You denied her the right to delete her post. Editing another member's post is usually a big 'no-no' in moderating. It pisses people off - often more than deleting a post. You did. The member in question did. It's just that she had to go through me because the button wasn't there. You are confusing a right with the method used to exercise the right. And as it was impossible for the contributor to delete their own post the post would have remained had ytou not overruled the moderator who declined to remove it. You have missed the point. I did not over-rule you because it was never your decision. Mantra only asked you because of a technical flaw, not because it was something you had genuine authority over. You only imagined that you had that authority. You took advantage of a situation, that's all.

The post had words added as the thread's opening post said it would have, nothing more and nothing less.  Nothing was deleted and the added words were clearly marked as added by a mod and the word was bolded to make it clear it had been added by a mod.    By posting in a thread that stated that words would be added if the contributor did not use the words themselves mantra implicitly agreed to the terms of the thread.   She had no right to complain that she did not want her post there after she put it there.

And why was there a technical flaw that stopped mantra from deleting her post?  Does the 'technical flaw' apply to everyone or just mantra?  Or are you lying now because it is not a 'technical flaw' at all but a forum policy that a member can not delete their own post?

You did overrule the mod's decision to leave the post.  If you had not the post would still be there.

By posting in a thread that stated that words would be added if the contributor did not use the words themselves mantra implicitly agreed to the terms of the thread.

No she didn't. She explicitly disagreed with the terms.

She had no right to complain that she did not want her post there after she put it there.

She did have the right to remove her post.

And why was there a technical flaw that stopped mantra from deleting her post?  Does the 'technical flaw' apply to everyone or just mantra?  Or are you lying now because it is not a 'technical flaw' at all but a forum policy that a member can not delete their own post?

I have explained that in another thread already. There used to be a button that allowed members to do what mantra wanted to do. Perhaps you weren't here then.

You did overrule the mod's decision to leave the post.  If you had not the post would still be there.

I have explained a number of times that is wasn't the mods decision. I am not sure how to make it any clearer to you. I am not saying the post wasn't removed as you seem to think. I am saying it was not your decision to make.

FD  I dont think I ever rememeber a button to delete a post..we could edit our posts and sometimes even that appears to be not an option..other times it does.

The editing functions are important and can circumvent a lot of problems such as the little fart fiasco of the last 4 days.

I have switched off the editing function occasionally when I suspected it was being abused, but I always turn it back on shortly after. I don't think I have done this in the last few months. If the option disappears again please start a new thread about it on this board.

freediver wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 5:12pm:

By posting in a thread that stated that words would be added if the contributor did not use the words themselves mantra implicitly agreed to the terms of the thread. No she didn't. She explicitly disagreed with the terms. She had no right to complain that she did not want her post there after she put it there. She did have the right to remove her post. And why was there a technical flaw that stopped mantra from deleting her post?  Does the 'technical flaw' apply to everyone or just mantra?  Or are you lying now because it is not a 'technical flaw' at all but a forum policy that a member can not delete their own post? I have explained that in another thread already. There used to be a button that allowed members to do what mantra wanted to do. Perhaps you weren't here then. You did overrule the mod's decision to leave the post.  If you had not the post would still be there. I have explained a number of times that is wasn't the mods decision. I am not sure how to make it any clearer to you. I am not saying the post wasn't removed as you seem to think. I am saying it was not your decision to make.

By posting she agreed - unless you are saying she did not comprehend English words?  However you are wrong by even mantra's statements - she admitted she should not have posted there.   She made a bad choice and she has to live with the consequences and take responsibility for her actions.  Adults do.

If she had the right to remove her post where was the 'delete' button?  How do you delete your post without one if none exists?

And why are you lying now?  You said right at the start that "If you disagree with the way a member run board is hosted you are welcome to bring it up with the moderator, however if you don't get your way your only recourse is to stop using the board in question".  Now you are saying that's not the case as it is not the "moderator's decision to make"?  Who moderates the user run boards if not the moderator as you previously said?

Was the first statement a lie?  Or the second one?

I have explained it to you a number of times already. I will not explain it to you again. If you don't understand it, tough luck. I don't believe you are as confused as you make out.

freediver wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 5:33pm:

I have explained it to you a number of times already. I will not explain it to you again. If you don't understand it, tough luck. I don't believe you are as confused as you make out.

I'm not confused about this - you are.  You have made two (probably more) completely contradictory statements.  One is a lie.  

I do confess to being confused about which one is the lie.

Moderate: reasonable, temperate, judicious, just, cool, steady, calm. Moderate, temperate, judicious, reasonable

Moderator: One who presides over a meeting, forum, or debate.

Most Forum Moderators don't even enter into the discussions on Forums.  They just Moderate them and make sure that the posters follow the rules of the Forum (that you agree to on signing up) and "warn" posters if they are out of line according to the Forum Rules.  Read the Rules!

Moderating is not being the person with the Big Stick as some people think.  After all, Forums are just people stating their opinions.  

logicalconclusion wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 5:41pm:

Moderate: reasonable, temperate, judicious, just, cool, steady, calm. Moderate, temperate, judicious, reasonable Moderator: One who presides over a meeting, forum, or debate. Most Forum Moderators don't even enter into the discussions on Forums.  They just Moderate them and make sure that the posters follow the rules of the Forum (that you agree to on signing up) and "warn" posters if they are out of line according to the Forum Rules.  Read the Rules! Moderating is not being the person with the Big Stick as some people think.  After all, Forums are just people stating their opinions.

Welcome aboard logical.

I agree with you.  Yet freediver claims that you can post even after reading the terms and still "explicitly disagree with the terms".

And the poster in question also agrees with that premise - that you can read the terms and then post with complete disregard for them.

Thank you deepthought!  I vote liberal too because I care for Australia!

Some people seem to take their role as a Moderator to mean they have the "right" to stymie free speech!

Even QE2 "farts".  ;D

Some people seem to take their role as a Moderator to mean they have the "right" to stymie free speech!

Um, that's what moderators are supposed to do. It is their responsibility. Even if a deletion is justified by whatever standards you apply, it still stymies freedom of speech. A moderated forum is one which by definition does not have absolute freedom of speech.

freediver wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 6:01pm:

Some people seem to take their role as a Moderator to mean they have the "right" to stymie free speech! Um, that's what moderators are supposed to do. It is their responsibility. Even if a deletion is justified by whatever standards you apply, it still stymies freedom of speech. A moderated forum is one which by definition does not have absolute freedom of speech.

It depends on whether the standards are applied appropriately and with regard to fairness and equitability.   In this case (of which we speak) the moderation was applied to overrule the duly appointed moderator for a user run board - and you say the user run boards should be autonomous - and it was applied without any reference to any rule at all.  In other words it was applied arbitrarily because one member decided her opinion was superior to anyone else's and the administrator acted inequitably to silence other members.

In my experience with Forums, Moderators do NOT have an opinion at all.  They Moderate!  Moderating is keeping the peace when things get out of hand. Not controlling the Forum.

I'm not interested in the so-called Relationship Forum anyway. Amusing though.  ::)

I'm here for political debate.  As I thought this Forum was all about.

This forum has a diverse range of topics Logical...thats what makes it so diverse?

logicalconclusion wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 6:32pm:

In my experience with Forums, Moderators do NOT have an opinion at all.  They Moderate!  Moderating is keeping the peace when things get out of hand. Not controlling the Forum. I'm not interested in the so-called Relationship Forum anyway. Amusing though.  ::) I'm here for political debate.  As I thought this Forum was all about.

Not really - in fact the global moderator, freediver, joins in with and encourages the flaming - as in this exchange in Politics


Dooley wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 6:16pm:

you must have arms like an ape to be able to pull a bow as long as that one dt's. mind you the image of you clutching at straws with ape like arms and hands also has a peculiarly piquant resonance.....

freediver wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 6:23pm:

I suspect he was joking, though it is always hard to tell with Deepfort.

Dooley wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 6:28pm:

not to worry fd, i get the impression the boot is on the other foot with dt. it's always nice to see determinists like dt's backpeddling into the vacuum left by their hero (in this case jh). the image of a pissed loudmouth in a bar yelling and screaming obscenities as they run out the bar comes to mind when i consider the rantings of dt's :)

He can't even use the contributors' proper nicks.

logicalconclusion wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 6:32pm:

In my experience with Forums, Moderators do NOT have an opinion at all.  They Moderate!  Moderating is keeping the peace when things get out of hand. Not controlling the Forum. I'm not interested in the so-called Relationship Forum anyway. Amusing though.  ::) I'm here for political debate.  As I thought this Forum was all about.

Just out of interest, what forums are you referring to? Almost all of the forums I use are moderated by people who also participate in the discussion. It does often lead to problems arising from conflict of interest. There are a few where the moderators try to hide the fact that they participate. There is one where the owners don't seem to care what goes on so they probably don't participate at all.

Just out of interest, what forums are you referring to? Almost all of the forums I use are moderated by people who also participate in the discussion. It does often lead to problems arising from conflict of interest. There are a few where the moderators try to hide the fact that they participate. There is one where the owners don't seem to care what goes on so they probably don't participate at all.

;D  I'm referring to Forums, plural. Not specifically Australian Political Forums.  ::) I do read a few and get a good laugh most times.

Check these out and read and giggle.

http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?13@992.1nlYa5fkZNs@.ee74cb9



http://www.libertyforum.org/wwwthreads.php?Cat=


Obviously not Australian politics but people say what they think .... freedom of speech .... and Moderation is very limited .. unless someone starts a vendetta.

My opinion is that having prolific posters moderating is a bad idea!  Moderators should moderate.  Not pass judgement or have control.

logicalconclusion wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 7:39pm:

Just out of interest, what forums are you referring to? Almost all of the forums I use are moderated by people who also participate in the discussion. It does often lead to problems arising from conflict of interest. There are a few where the moderators try to hide the fact that they participate. There is one where the owners don't seem to care what goes on so they probably don't participate at all. ;D  I'm referring to Forums, plural. Not specifically Australian Political Forums.  ::) I do read a few and get a good laugh most times. Check these out and read and giggle. http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?13@992.1nlYa5fkZNs@.ee74cb9 http://www.libertyforum.org/wwwthreads.php?Cat= Obviously not Australian politics but people say what they think .... freedom of speech .... and Moderation is very limited .. unless someone starts a vendetta. My opinion is that having prolific posters moderating is a bad idea!  Moderators should moderate.  Not pass judgement or have control.

Agree.  Once a moderator starts controlling the forum it really becomes his/her blog as all diverse opinion is discouraged or moderated.

If they have a fourm it may as well be one - otherwise stop people posting altogether and just post your own stuff.

logical conclusion - a prolific moderator will prob end up with a dead room. Esp one that overruns or argues with posters.
moderators are like taxes - a necessary evil, so as little as possible, and as equitable as possible.

Quote:

a prolific moderator will prob end up with a dead room. Esp one that overruns or argues with posters

That is true Sprintcyclist in many instances, but what do you do about a poster who might spoil the pleasure of another through a particular attitude or bad language.  

You are a polite and considerate poster - so how do you feel when there's little moderation on a forum and people are allowed to post offensive comments or pictures and make personal attacks?

Should a moderator interfere and demand higher standards - or allow this "free speech" by one or two people at the expense of losing regular posters or guests?

mantra wrote on Mar 19^th, 2008 at 11:38am:

Quote: a prolific moderator will prob end up with a dead room. Esp one that overruns or argues with posters That is true Sprintcyclist in many instances, but what do you do about a poster who might spoil the pleasure of another through a particular attitude or bad language.   You are a polite and considerate poster - so how do you feel when there's little moderation on a forum and people are allowed to post offensive comments or pictures and make personal attacks? Should a moderator interfere and demand higher standards - or allow this "free speech" by one or two people at the expense of losing regular posters or guests?

You would moderate Dooley then?

Quote:

You would moderate Dooley then?

Deepthought - I had no idea that "woolley" was abuse.  If he had been more explicit - of course I would have had a whinge if it had sounded rude.  In fact I still haven't a clue what you or Oceans mean.

The Australian vulgar term "get a woolley bull up ya.." Refers to bestiality being committed on a human..

I heard this term once being used by 2 men. It can be perceived as offensive.

I'd never heard the term before either. We've had a few complaints about sexually explicit language, with the tea bagging comments being another example. I'm not sure where to draw the line on these. If you want something done about it, start a new thread about it on this board so I can get other people's views on it.

Teabagging?

Never heard of it..and that would be the case for a lot of pple.

Over moderation is not good FD..The woolly bull comment didnt offend me unduly...but can be construed as such by some. Most, as in the case of mantra dont even know what it means.


I was just clarifying for mantra..

I am mainly offended by nasty examples of rascism/child pornography etc and that would be the same for most.

We can get too nit picky about words..and for heavens sake ..the word thing? Where would it ever end?.Most pple dont give a toss..a minority will complain .

If a poster pms you and asks to have an offensive comment removed then it should be..but a blanket policy on all suspect words is unecccessary.

Moderators are a tolerated neccessary evil, as Sprint said..not the arbitrator of values for the masses.



If a person feels strongly enough about a comment then they will feel motivated enough to contact the mod and discuss it with her/him.

Live and let live.

If someone PM's me and asks me to remove soemthing that is generally accepted I'm not going to bother removing it. It's a hassle and would lead to even more complaints about arbitrary moderation. Some people get (justifiably) upset about having their posts edited or deleted, especially if the rules are unclear. I want a 'blanket policy' so that I'm not always in that position - even if the policy is that they are acceptable.

I am also a big fan of social feedback - that is, community standards that aren't enforced as a rule. This is a good way to deal with issues like sexual references that are fine occasionally but can be a problem if a member goes overboard and uses them constantly. Of course, you need a sense of community for that to work.

freediver wrote on Mar 19^th, 2008 at 3:38pm:

If someone PM's me and asks me to remove soemthing that is generally accepted I'm not going to bother removing it. It's a hassle and would lead to even more complaints about arbitrary moderation. Some people get (justifiably) upset about having their posts edited or deleted, especially if the rules are unclear. I want a 'blanket policy' so that I'm not always in that position - even if the policy is that they are acceptable. I am also a big fan of social feedback - that is, community standards that aren't enforced as a rule. This is a good way to deal with issues like sexual references that are fine occasionally but can be a problem if a member goes overboard and uses them constantly. Of course, you need a sense of community for that to work.

maybe one poster could contact another and ask for offensive word to be removed?

Sure, that's always an option. I hope that people try that before contacting me about an issue.

freediver wrote on Mar 19^th, 2008 at 4:21pm:

Sure, that's always an option. I hope that people try that before contacting me about an issue.

Would seem the commonsense thing to do.

Quote:

I want a 'blanket policy' so that I'm not always in that position - even if the policy is that they are acceptable.

I have to agree with this as well.  Many forums have a list of what is acceptable behaviour and what isn't.  I'll have a look around at some of the policies on different sites and post them and FD can judge the feedback and make a decision if he wants to.  

If we have a hodge podge of individual assessments on what is acceptable and what isn't - it will create too much dissension.  

This is the policy on Appropriate Conduct from the Google forums - which seems fairly comprehensive.  It can be modified quite easily, but seems to cover it all.  It may sound a bit harsh for some - but it is something to work on.  

Appropriate Conduct

You agree that you are responsible for your own conduct and communications while using the Forum and for any consequences thereof. You agree to use the Service only to send and receive messages and material that are legal, proper and related to the particular Forum. By way of example, and not as a limitation, you agree that when using the Service, you will not:

defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others;

post any inappropriate, defamatory, infringing, obscene, or unlawful Content;

post any Content that infringes any patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret or other proprietary right of any party (the "Rights"),    unless you are the owner of the Rights or have the permission of the owner to Post such Content;

post messages that promote pyramid schemes, chain letters or disruptive commercial messages or advertisements, or anything else prohibited by the Group owner.

download any file Posted by another user of a Group that you know, or reasonably should know, that cannot be legally distributed in such manner;

impersonate another person or entity, or falsify or delete any author attributions, legal or other proper notices or proprietary designations or labels of the origin or source of software or other material contained in a file that is Posted;

restrict or inhibit any other user from using and enjoying the Service;

use the Service for any illegal or unauthorized purpose;

remove any copyright, trademark or other proprietary rights notices contained in or on the Service;

interfere with or disrupt the Service or servers or networks connected to the Service, or disobey any requirements, procedures, policies or regulations of networks connected to the Service;

use any robot, spider, site search/retrieval application, or other device to retrieve or index any portion of the Service or collect information about users for any unauthorized purpose;

submit Content that falsely expresses or implies that such Content is sponsored or endorsed by Ozpolitics;

create user accounts by automated means or under false or fraudulent pretenses;

promote or provide instructional information about illegal activities or promote physical harm or injury against any group or individual; or

transmit any viruses, worms, defects, Trojan horses, or any items of a destructive nature.

As with most large scale forums it is very broad and vague. It is basically open to the interpretation of whoever the mod is, as to what 'crosses the line'. Everything or nothing could be considered a violation. What I hope to do is be able to offer specific guidance on what is appropriate.

That sounds OK - I misunderstood and thought you wanted to eliminate the hassle of posters complaining all the time.  But yes a more personalised set of standards is a good idea.  Do you agree with this:


Quote:

defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others;   post any inappropriate, defamatory, infringing, obscene, or unlawful Content; impersonate another person or entity, or falsify or delete any author attributions, legal or other proper notices or proprietary designations or labels of the origin or source of software or other material contained in a file that is Posted;

Defamation is part and parcel of political debate. Abuse, harass, stalk, inappropriate, infringing, obscene are very open to interpretation. I threaten members all the time. I support member's privacy well beyond their legal rights. No idea what the last bit of legal mumbo jumbo is about.

Basically it's just saying that we can't use another poster's contribution in another forum (unless permitted by the poster) and we are not to alter (unless there's a violation) another person's post.  Which can be looked at two ways I suppose and no doubt DT will make a comment on this.

Yes but you're right FD - everything is open to interpretation.  Obviously some posters aren't happy with any specific regulations and that's fair enough.

If some posters believe it should be open slather and anything goes and this is accepted by the administrator - then it also has to be accepted that this will have a detrimental affect on the forum at the expense of new posters, guests and prospective advertisers.

It seems that leftards can't help themselves.  A thread has been locked by the forum dictator freediver.  Please overrule the moderator as you did before and re-open it.

Doesn't the Yabb forum come with its own terms of use template? I'll check.

Here we go. This is what you agree to on registration (FD may have modified this for this board - I'm not sure):

You agree, through your use of this YaBB forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually-oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of ANY law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or you have consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also inappropriate to this YaBB forum.

Note that it is impossible for us to confirm the validity of posts on this YaBB forum. Please remember that we do not actively monitor the posted messages and are not responsible for their content. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information presented. The messages express the views of the author, not necessarily the views of this YaBB forum. Anyone who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to notify an administrator of this forum immediately. We have the right to remove objectionable content, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, so please realize that we may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. This policy applies to member profile information as well.

You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold harmless this forum, and any related websites to this forum. We at this YaBB forum also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any information we have about you) in the event of a complaint or legal action arising from any information posted by you. You have the ability, as you register, to choose your username. We advise that you keep the name appropriate. With this user account you are about to register, you agree to never give your password to another member, for your protection and for validity reasons. You also agree to NEVER use another member's account to post messages or browse this forum.After you register and log into this YaBB forum, you can fill out a detailed profile. It is your responsibility to present clean and accurate information. Any information we deem inaccurate or vulgar will be removed.

Please note that with each post, your IP address is recorded, in the event that you need to be banned from this YaBB forum or your ISP contacted. This will only happen in the event of a major violation of this agreement.

Right. I have not bothered to modify that. I don't think it means anything seeing as no-one ever reads them. It may come in handy if we get sued, but that's about it.

deepthought wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 6:23am:

It seems that leftards can't help themselves.  A thread has been locked by the forum dictator freediver.  Please overrule the moderator as you did before and re-open it.

Bump for freediver

That's a bit ambiguous DT. If you are referring to locked threads on the relationships board, my answer is no.

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 5:51pm:

That's a bit ambiguous DT. If you are referring to locked threads on the relationships board, my answer is no.

Why?  You said you acted on a request from a member and overruled the moderator of the time who had made a different ruling.

The other day I made this statement.


deepthought wrote on Mar 18^th, 2008 at 6:08pm:

It depends on whether the standards are applied appropriately and with regard to fairness and equitability.   In this case (of which we speak) the moderation was applied to overrule the duly appointed moderator for a user run board - and you say the user run boards should be autonomous - and it was applied without any reference to any rule at all.  In other words it was applied arbitrarily because one member decided her opinion was superior to anyone else's and the administrator acted inequitably to silence other members.

It appears I am right about the arbitrary application of so called rules.  Am I not?

Hi DT..

Are you talking about the thread "get down and dirty with deepy"..just noticed it..not sure why its locked. Is there a reason FD?

wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 6:07pm:

Hi DT.. Are you talking about the thread "get down and dirty with deepy"..just noticed it..not sure why its locked. Is there a reason FD?

No,  The Farting thread has been mysteriously locked again.

DT locked it in order to censor people and trample their rights while maintaining tight control over his little dictatorship.

I didnt realise ..I didnt see the note mantra put at the bottom , never got back to that thread in time to see it..otherwise I may have spoken up.

Maybe start another humour thread...you have a good imagination.

Perhaps if you put it in the chat thread?

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 6:12pm:

DT locked it in order to censor people and trample their rights while maintaining tight control over his little dictatorship.

No I didn't.  I can't lock threads.  It was locked early this morning.

Why not tell the forum why you apply biased and arbitrary rules - presumably depending on the political flavour of the forum member.

wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 6:14pm:

I didnt realise ..I didnt see the note mantra put at the bottom , never got back to that thread in time to see it..otherwise I may have spoken up. Maybe start another humour thread...you have a good imagination.

What's the point?  The forum dictator ably assisted by the chief dictator will probably lock it.

No wonder posters don't stay when they see the right to free expression randomly withheld from those who don't share the political indoctrination of the forum owner.

..

wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 6:20pm:

I have to admit..its getting beyond a joke.

Not to worry. Once DT is gone, how ever that happens, the forum usually returns to it's former glory. I've seen him do this to three so far. You guys are the 4th. I've just turned up with my cheek cause I can see it coming to a head and have this amazing desire to rub DT's nose in it - in the nicest possibly way of course.  :D ;D :D ;D

If its acceptable to you..could I move the fart thread to "chat"..?

Then its out of the relationships forum so those that patronised the thread may continue to do so.

Hopefully this will keep mantra and DT happy.

Sappho wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 6:34pm:

wrote on Mar 20th, 2008 at 6:20pm: I have to admit..its getting beyond a joke. Not to worry. Once DT is gone, how ever that happens, the forum usually returns to it's former glory. I've seen him do this to three so far. You guys are the 4th. I've just turned up with my cheek cause I can see it coming to a head and have this amazing desire to rub DT's nose in it - in the nicest possibly way of course.  :D ;D :D ;D

Why not name the three forums that have "returned to their former glory" Sappho.  Bet you can't substantiate your lies but it will be interesting watching you squirm though dude.

Incidentally while you are stalking me why not answer this question.  Why are you re-posting my posts from here on other forums?  Are you in love with me?

wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 6:38pm:

If its acceptable to you..could I move the fart thread to "chat"..? Then its out of the relationships forum so those that patronised the thread may continue to do so. Hopefully this will keep mantra and DT happy.

Sure.  It was about farting and your partner's reaction to it though so 'relationships' was the perfect forum for it.  But yeah if Adolf can't stop her controlling behaviour best move it out of her reach and let her moderate the relationship board within an inch of its life.

I might stay away from the resultant padded cell though.

DT - you saw the comments I made.  I gave Oceans and FD a few hours to complain and they didn't.  It's been there for days in the one spot while you keep adding one cartoon after another.

It's a relationships forum and I'm sorry but since it's been removed the forum has started moving again.  If I sound like a dictator I probably am - but if you keep posting those same pictures over and over again - I'll just delete them.

Sorry Oceans if I'm treading on your toes - but DT needs to take a step back from his f**ting thread - he's got it on the brain.

NB - you've got the Bob Brown thread to have your fun with.


Quote:

No wonder posters don't stay when they see the right to free expression randomly withheld from those who don't share the political indoctrination of the forum owner.

The thread couldn't be called political DT.

And don't you wish you could moderate that  ::)

I think that was the straw that broke the Nazi's back- No von vill be allowed to disparage mein furher Bob
::)

I'll say it again Mantra- you're pathetic

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 7:34pm:

DT - you saw the comments I made.  I gave Oceans and FD a few hours to complain and they didn't.  It's been there for days in the one spot while you keep adding one cartoon after another. It's a relationships forum and I'm sorry but since it's been removed the forum has started moving again.  If I sound like a dictator I probably am - but if you keep posting those same pictures over and over again - I'll just delete them. Sorry Oceans if I'm treading on your toes - but DT needs to take a step back from his f**ting thread - he's got it on the brain. NB - you've got the Bob Brown thread to have your fun with. Quote: No wonder posters don't stay when they see the right to free expression randomly withheld from those who don't share the political indoctrination of the forum owner. The thread couldn't be called political DT.

It has nothing to do with the thread.  It has a lot to do with the bias of the alleged moderator.  You two are leftards and when you wanted the moderator (me) overruled, freediver complied, to give you your wish.  When I requested the same treatment as you had received and have the moderator (you) overruled, freediver declined, and gave you your wish.

See a pattern emerging?

Incidentally the forum has begun 'to move' again as you say but the topics appear to be about your heavy handed control of the forum.  One is specifically asking if a hornswogglingly good root might loosen you up.  But if that is a topic you welcome instead of farting good luck with it.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 7:34pm:

DT - you saw the comments I made.  I gave Oceans and FD a few hours to complain and they didn't.  It's been there for days in the one spot while you keep adding one cartoon after another. It's a relationships forum and I'm sorry but since it's been removed the forum has started moving again.  If I sound like a dictator I probably am - but if you keep posting those same pictures over and over again - I'll just delete them. Sorry Oceans if I'm treading on your toes - but DT needs to take a step back from his f**ting thread - he's got it on the brain. NB - you've got the Bob Brown thread to have your fun with. Quote: No wonder posters don't stay when they see the right to free expression randomly withheld from those who don't share the political indoctrination of the forum owner. The thread couldn't be called political DT.

Its OK Im not a real moderator anyway...you over ruled me on something we both agreed to.  I could have changed it back..but the fight is not worth it.

Oceans - to be quite honest I can't stand DT's constant whinging, IQ's dirty mouth and you feeling sorry for yourself.  Run the bl**dy forum the way you see fit.

Go back to your arguments with IQ.  Let DT write his 20 one-eyed posts to every 1 written by anyone else.  Let DT and IQ post all the ugly pictures they can manage - do whatever you want.  All I was trying to do is lift the standard here a little and attract some more people.

I saw the thread taking a vote on whether I have any rights to veto - and the results and that's fine.  You stay here with your little mates and keep them company and whatever you do - don't get them off side - they might decide to turn on you.

NB - I don't need to be abused, criticised, ridiculed, sworn at, derided or harrassed and ever since I agreed to moderate - that's all I've received - so God knows why you think you're badly done by Oceans.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 8:43pm:

Oceans - to be quite honest I can't stand DT's constant whinging, IQ's dirty mouth and you feeling sorry for yourself.  Run the bl**dy forum the way you see fit. Go back to your arguments with IQ.  Let DT write his 20 one-eyed posts to every 1 written by anyone else.  Let DT and IQ post all the ugly pictures they can manage - do whatever you want.  All I was trying to do is lift the standard here a little and attract some more people. I saw the thread taking a vote on whether I have any rights to veto - and the results and that's fine.  You stay here with your little mates and keep them company and whatever you do - don't get them off side - they might decide to turn on you. NB - I don't need to be abused, criticised, ridiculed, sworn at, derided or harrassed and ever since I agreed to moderate - that's all I've received - so God knows why you think you're badly done by Oceans.

Yes that 'whinging' sound of a call for freedom can be disagreeable if freedom is not something you believe in.

And if you believe my posts are one eyed feel free to offer a balance.  This is, after all, a political comment forum.  All views can be posted, discussed and defended.  In the threads themselves would be good though - not whining helplessly in the 'forum feedback' thread.

Mantra they only hassle you because you appear to care what they think.

Quote:

Mantra they only hassle you because you appear to care what they think

Possibly FD.  DT's tolerable - but IQ is just becoming the straw that broke the camel's back.  Everytime she gets the opportunity - she writes something derogatory or foul.  I can't think of one other forum that would allow a person to call someone a "C" 3 times and make such continuous degrading comments to me over and over.

I'm sorry FD - I know you don't like banning anyone - but unless IQ is banned, I'm leaving until she is.  When I write onto Cracker and she lets loose over the weekend - I know that she'll be banned the following Monday for a few days until she reinvents herself.  She's banned every week.

It's too humiliating to write into here anymore - no-one deserves to be spoken to like that.  All the guests that read these forums see me being abused and I'm not accepting it.

Two female moderators won't work either.  Oceans is more easy going than I am and it's her forum - she's put all the work into it.

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:16pm:

Mantra they only hassle you because you appear to care what they think.

Yes mantra.  Why not adopt freediver's approach of not giving a faeces what the visitors to his forum think?

Yes well - I suppose that's where you and IQ think you are - a public toilet.  That's how you treat this forum anyway.

Mantra they only hassle you because you appear to care what they think.

Yes- take a leaf out of FD's book- no one cares what he thinks and it doesn't bother him one iota.


mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 8:43pm:

Oceans - to be quite honest I can't stand DT's constant whinging, IQ's dirty mouth and you feeling sorry for yourself.  Run the bl**dy forum the way you see fit. Go back to your arguments with IQ.  Let DT write his 20 one-eyed posts to every 1 written by anyone else.  Let DT and IQ post all the ugly pictures they can manage - do whatever you want.  All I was trying to do is lift the standard here a little and attract some more people. I saw the thread taking a vote on whether I have any rights to veto - and the results and that's fine.  You stay here with your little mates and keep them company and whatever you do - don't get them off side - they might decide to turn on you. NB - I don't need to be abused, criticised, ridiculed, sworn at, derided or harrassed and ever since I agreed to moderate - that's all I've received - so God knows why you think you're badly done by Oceans.

I don't need to be abused, criticised, ridiculed, sworn at, derided or harrassed and ever since I agreed to moderate

No- you don't need to be, but you deserved to be. I know it is foreign to you but you need to take responsibility for your actions

All I was trying to do is lift the standard here a little and attract some more people.

You can't lift the standards when they are already above you- you can try to drag them down into your mud as you are so willingly to do but good people will resist your evil ways.

You need to get with the program of expression that you are so afraid of rather than the oppression that you are so very fond of.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:28pm:

I'm sorry FD - I know you don't like banning anyone - but unless IQ is banned, I'm leaving until she is.

This is appalling.  Your threats that someone should be banned are the height of arrogance Adolf.  

Pratice tolerance and love of freedom - and quit the Greens, the indoctrination is pure cultism.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:32pm:

Yes well - I suppose that's where you and IQ think you are - a public toilet.  That's how you treat this forum anyway.

Does that make you a urinal or a bowl?  :-?

but unless IQ is banned, I'm leaving until she is.

The intolerance for someone who purports themselves to be a new age hippy is shocking although not completely expected

Sorry FD.  IQ & DT are supposed to be adults - why would they even need to have to be told to behave.  Everyone else is fine, but this is ridiculous.  Look don't make a decision if you can't.  

Deepthought - Why not name the three forums that have "returned to their former glory" Sappho. Bet you can't substantiate your lies but it will be interesting watching you squirm though dude.

Sappho - LOL. Of course I can't substantiate what I say. You demand of each forum from which you are banned that your posts be removed. But I can put my good debating name 'Sappho' and 'nom de plume' from Debate and Relate, to what I say. My consistency and reason in debate should be enough for others to take notice of what I am saying.

Deepthought - Incidentally while you are stalking me why not answer this question. Why are you re-posting my posts from here on other forums?

Sappho - You mean Political Animal? Hmmm... I had noticed that none of the regs were posting over a particular weekend recently and other strange happenings. Your post seemed to suggest sinister goings on, which, with my observations seemed compelling enough to question. You were merely a catalyst.

Deepthought - Are you in love with me?

Sappho - LOL. Dreamer. I'm merely here to watch your departure and pass comment every now and then.
You really shouldn't set me up to be anything more than I claim. One look at my posting habits would make it clear to most, that of the two of us, I am the friendly one.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:37pm:

Sorry FD.  IQ & DT are supposed to be adults - why would they even need to have to be told to behave.  Everyone else is fine, but this is ridiculous.  Look don't make a decision if you can't.

You can try but it won't work.  Adults are the ones who respect the rights of others to have freedom of expression.  It is children who are weak of mind and want to control everyone around them.

Let me give you an example.

You maintained the thread about farts was offensive to you.  Yet you still read it.  And, guess what - you found it to be offensive.  Again.  Why?  Would not an adult ignore what they found uninteresting or offensive?

Take responsibility for your own actions mantra.  Adults do that.  They don't try and sheet the blame towards someone else.

You love to provoke a reaction and you get it.

You ex husband must have been a gem to even get as far as walking down the aisle with you without trying to drown himself in the holy water on the way through

IQSRLOW wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:43pm:

You ex husband must have been a gem to even get as far as walking down the aisle with you without trying to drown himself in the holy water on the way through

That is inappropriate IQ. Why do you always go below the belt?

Sappho wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:40pm:

Deepthought - Why not name the three forums that have "returned to their former glory" Sappho. Bet you can't substantiate your lies but it will be interesting watching you squirm though dude. Sappho - LOL. Of course I can't substantiate what I say. You demand of each forum from which you are banned that your posts be removed. But I can put my good debating name 'Sappho' and 'nom de plume' from Debate and Relate, to what I say. My consistency and reason in debate should be enough for others to take notice of what I am saying. Deepthought - Incidentally while you are stalking me why not answer this question. Why are you re-posting my posts from here on other forums? Sappho - You mean Political Animal? Hmmm... I had noticed that none of the regs were posting over a particular weekend recently and other strange happenings. Your post seemed to suggest sinister goings on, which, with my observations seemed compelling enough to question. You were merely a catalyst. Deepthought - Are you in love with me? Sappho - LOL. Dreamer. I'm merely here to watch your departure and pass comment every now and then. You really shouldn't set me up to be anything more than I claim. One look at my posting habits would make it clear to most, that of the two of us, I am the friendly one.

Except I post comment and you post about me.  You give yourself away dude.

But meantime I do enjoy your slithering squirm.  I expected it and you did not disappoint.  Keep on stalking dude, it's obvious you have nothing else to do but follow me about the web.

So the lies Sappho?  You acknowledge you lie?  I see no proof of the forums which have "returned to their former glory".

;D

Sappho - deepthought won't leave here.  He has a niche and FD, who is very tolerant would never ban him.  

It will be me who leaves because deepthought & his offsider IQ's bad behaviour are making it too difficult to stay here.  What's the forum you are talking about - it sounds as though it might be worth having a look at - especially if it is adequately moderated and the people are half way decent.

Is it Political Animal?

OK, that's enough. We seem to have gotten completely off the topic here. Unless you have a comment specifically about forum policy and not about other members, stop posting.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:50pm:

Sappho - deepthought won't leave here.  He has a niche and FD, who is very tolerant would never ban him.   It will be me who leaves because deepthought & his offsider IQ's bad behaviour are making it too difficult to stay here.  What's the forum you are talking about - it sounds as though it might be worth having a look at - especially if it is adequately moderated and the people are half way decent. Is it Political Animal?

You still won't take responsibility for your behaviour will you.

You are obviously the type of person who deliberately moves alongside a noisy road then complains about the noisy road without ever once taking responsibility for your own choices.  The world is not yours.  Others have freedoms too - you just don't want them to have freedom.

I recommend PA.  It would suit you down to the ground.  They work very hard to silence people too.

No, not Political Animal. PA is odd. I don't really post much there, just read as I mainly do here.


I post at this one below and not really any others. Not enough time. It's good. Worth a look. :D
http://www.debaterelate.com/phpBB2/index.php

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:54pm:

OK, that's enough. We seem to have gotten completely off the topic here. Unless you have a comment specifically about forum policy and not about other members, stop posting.

Why bother?  You don't respond unless pressed and then give non committal answers.  Often even after being pressed you still ignore everyone.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 8:43pm:

Oceans - to be quite honest I can't stand DT's constant whinging, IQ's dirty mouth and you feeling sorry for yourself.  Run the bl**dy forum the way you see fit. Go back to your arguments with IQ.  Let DT write his 20 one-eyed posts to every 1 written by anyone else.  Let DT and IQ post all the ugly pictures they can manage - do whatever you want.  All I was trying to do is lift the standard here a little and attract some more people. I saw the thread taking a vote on whether I have any rights to veto - and the results and that's fine.  You stay here with your little mates and keep them company and whatever you do - don't get them off side - they might decide to turn on you. NB - I don't need to be abused, criticised, ridiculed, sworn at, derided or harrassed and ever since I agreed to moderate - that's all I've received - so God knows why you think you're badly done by Oceans.

Would normally speak to you in private about this mantra..but you have changed lately and I feel I cant broach my real problem with you lest you take deep offence..so not sure how or where my problem would come out, but I guess it just did.

My little mates? Since when?..but I did see they're point.Sorry for having a thought process that belonged to me , as deficient as it maybe.

Run the forum the way you want you say, why would you think i had that objective in mind beats me .I want to be part of it.[for better or worse]
You have said it yourself repeatedly..you have become "controlling"...[sorry  :-[].I think your a great person..but to be honest this came out of the blue for me.

Most pple will not be controlled and the resultant revolt against having a will imposed on them will give you exactly what you didnt want..as you are seeing.

I cant back you up the expense of my own beliefs.


I will defend you to the death Mantra as you know..but in this I have felt very compromised.

Love oceans

Sappho wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:56pm:

No, not Political Animal. PA is odd. I don't really post much there, just read as I mainly do here. I post at this one below and not really any others. Not enough time. It's good. Worth a look. :D http://www.debaterelate.com/phpBB2/index.php

Don't lie.  You do post at PA, and you stalk me here.  In fact you posted a post I made here at PA.  Lying, though natural to you Sappho, is not becoming.

deepthought wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 9:57pm:

Sappho wrote on Mar 20th, 2008 at 9:56pm: No, not Political Animal. PA is odd. I don't really post much there, just read as I mainly do here. I post at this one below and not really any others. Not enough time. It's good. Worth a look. :D http://www.debaterelate.com/phpBB2/index.php Don't lie.  You do post at PA, and you stalk me here.  In fact you posted a post I made here at PA.  Lying, though natural to you Sappho, is not becoming.

I never said I didn't post at PA Dude, I said I don't post their much. Are you having problems with the english language. Don't worry about it. Most Rightards are illiterate.

Sorry Oceans.

FD - could you tell me please how to deregister - I would appreciate it.  Thanks.  I just need to get off this board ASAP - sorry.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 10:08pm:

Sorry Oceans. FD - could you tell me please how to deregister - I would appreciate it.  Thanks.

Dont be silly mantra..Im sorry if I hurt your feelings..there is no need to leave..most pple in here think highly of you and value your presence..its true.   :-[

Most Rightards are illiterate.  

Ahhh...another narcissist who disdains freedom of thought and disparages others with no backup or logic- What a surprise- she's a lefty
::)

Good God you people show yourselves for the true despicable beings that you are with every post

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 10:08pm:

Sorry Oceans. FD - could you tell me please how to deregister - I would appreciate it.  Thanks.  I just need to get off this board ASAP - sorry.

Just log out don't come back if it bothers you that much- are you that weak willed or are you that much of a drama queen?

No - I just want my details of this forum - is there a problem with that?

Sappho wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 10:04pm:

deepthought wrote on Mar 20th, 2008 at 9:57pm: Sappho wrote on Mar 20th, 2008 at 9:56pm: No, not Political Animal. PA is odd. I don't really post much there, just read as I mainly do here. I post at this one below and not really any others. Not enough time. It's good. Worth a look. :D http://www.debaterelate.com/phpBB2/index.php Don't lie.  You do post at PA, and you stalk me here.  In fact you posted a post I made here at PA.  Lying, though natural to you Sappho, is not becoming. I never said I didn't post at PA Dude, I said I don't post their much. Are you having problems with the english language. Don't worry about it. Most Rightards are illiterate.

You have been counting forums I am at according to you so you have obviously stalked me all over the shop.  And you do post at PA quite a lot.  Your lies are not convincing dude.  Anyone can check the number of posts you have made there so lying is pointless.  Apart from increasing the length of your hooter.

wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 10:15pm:

mantra wrote on Mar 20th, 2008 at 10:08pm: Sorry Oceans. FD - could you tell me please how to deregister - I would appreciate it.  Thanks.  I just need to get off this board ASAP - sorry. Just log out don't come back if it bothers you that much- are you that weak willed or are you that much of a drama queen?

This is beyond a joke.....enough is enough.

Dont give anyone thats satisfaction mantra..


Saphho is keeping DT busy..maybe we can tackle mighty to the ground and put her in a headlock?

wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 10:27pm:

Saphho is keeping DT busy..maybe we can tackle mighty to the ground and put her in a headlock?

Sappho is kinda like having dog excrement on your shoes.  A smelly inconvenience but it won't slow you down any.

To slow me down requires credibility and intelligence.  Sappho possesses neither.

Her stalking, lying and contrived, garbled posts are evidence of her dishonesty and inadequacy.

mantra wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 10:17pm:

No - I just want my details of this forum - is there a problem with that?

What 'details'- You want the "Mantra ex-member" moniker? BFD...For what reason- other than the drama that you love?

If you want to leave- just leave, it isn't rocket science- but with the way the Liebor party has been performing, you are probably questioning all of your convictions at the moment.

I'd be quite embarrassed if I was a leftard, that I voted in with such joy what was thought to be the goose that was going to lay the golden leftard egg and what I got was this lame duck that is symbolic of the left

I fart in your general direction
;D ;D ;D

wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 10:12pm:

[quote author=mantra link=1172540626/105#113 date=1206014916]Sorry Oceans. FD - could you tell me please how to deregister - I would appreciate it.  Thanks.

Dont be silly mantra..Im sorry if I hurt your feelings..there is no need to leave..most pple in here think highly of you and value your presence..its true.   :-[/quote]

I think mantra is an excellent contributor (though somewhat misguided but everyone is entitled to an opinion).  But she's a shocking tyrannical moderator (as she freely admits).

Stay, but quit trying to silence everyone.  It is way too lefty for an adult forum.

wrote on Mar 20^th, 2008 at 11:12pm:

mantra wrote on Mar 20th, 2008 at 10:17pm: No - I just want my details of this forum - is there a problem with that? What 'details'- You want the "Mantra ex-member" moniker? BFD...For what reason- other than the drama that you love? If you want to leave- just leave, it isn't rocket science- but with the way the Liebor party has been performing, you are probably questioning all of your convictions at the moment. I'd be quite embarrassed if I was a leftard, that I voted in with such joy what was thought to be the goose that was going to lay the golden leftard egg and what I got was this lame duck that is symbolic of the left I fart in your general direction ;D ;D ;D

YES IQSRLOW you've had your little stir..                      

As Oceans is deleting or altering posts as fast as they are made I'll duplicate posts here so that it can be seen what is being removed or changed by the tag team of dictators.   Caution leftards at work.




deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 8:44am:

wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 7:57am: As you all  have made so much milaege out of the fart thread and most of it as an excuse to tear into mantra ..It will remain locked and part of forum history..it turned out to be devisive and a negative inluence on the whole forum [ i dont care whos FAULT that was]..so Im not reinstating it. Put another up in chat if its so important and give FD the headache of moderating it. So you only pretended to reopen  and move it.?

wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 9:03am:

Quote: My moderation style is not up for discussion..so dont bother. You know the rules..there is no confusion. refer to rule.

deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 9:12am:

wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:03am: Quote: My moderation style is not up for discussion..so dont bother. You know the rules..there is no confusion. refer to rule. So you lied?  I see.  Is this the new direction now with the dictatorship?

deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 9:21am:

wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:15am: Quote: From now on flames such as this and disregard for the moderator of this forum will not be tolerated. I meant this and you obviously didnt read the rules. I am the moderator not your wife. I will listen to any reasonable request if you speak to me respectfully and not do your old trick of trying to incite others to flalme against me..simple..Learn some life skills DT. Asking reasonable questions about your prior commitment to move a thread is not a flame.  Did you lie?

sappho is right about you..

Hopefully youll get bored and go away.

wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 9:29am:

sappho is right about you.. Hopefully youll get bored and go away.

Really?  But she stalks and tells lies.  Would you care to corroborate her lies?

deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 9:37am:

wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:27am: deepthought wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:21am: wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:15am: Quote: From now on flames such as this and disregard for the moderator of this forum will not be tolerated. I meant this and you obviously didnt read the rules. I am the moderator not your wife. I will listen to any reasonable request if you speak to me respectfully and not do your old trick of trying to incite others to flalme against me..simple..Learn some life skills DT. Asking reasonable questions about your prior commitment to move a thread is not a flame.  Did you lie? No honeybunch I reconsidered. [your original post was a flame btw..I deleted offensive words] Maybe you can put one up in chat. Maybe you can do what you said you would do.  I understand the concept of upholding your principles may be difficult.  Try though. I can't move the thread.  Only you can.  And freediver only obliges leftards.

deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 9:34am:

wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:29am: sappho is right about you.. Hopefully youll get bored and go away. Really?  But she stalks and tells lies.  Would you care to corroborate her lies?

How do I know she lies..? Ive only your word for that...not that I really care..but you do show some obssessive traits which could lead to the outcomes she describes.
::)

wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 11:49am:

deepthought wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:34am: wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:29am: sappho is right about you.. Hopefully youll get bored and go away. Really?  But she stalks and tells lies.  Would you care to corroborate her lies? How do I know she lies..? Ive only your word for that...not that I really care..but you do show some obssessive traits which could lead to the outcomes she describes. ::)

I note you didn't query the stalking because you have seen that first hand.


And you don't only have my word for it - she told them here and the proof is here.

For example she said I had done something or other to three forums previously.  I asked her to name them and she declined.  Why?  Because she's lying.  Otherwise why make the claim and back pedal when called on it?  I would still like her to attempt to name them.  But she can't of course.  It's a lie.

I asked her which forums had returned to their previous glory after I left.  She declined to name any again, but Political Animal's name came up. Check it out.  It is all but dead with only two or three posters who post there regularly and that's mainly really intense abuse or insult.  Last weekend two posters (out of the three who post regularly) got suspended.  I haven't posted there for years.

And she said she doesn't post much at PA, it is odd.  

She must consider herself odd then because she has made nearly 400 posts there - anyone can check - have a look at the link and check out the member 'sappho'.

The proof is right here Oceans.  But you will need to open your eyes.

Will try to keep an open mind DT..you and sappho have a history that much is obvious.

What did you do to the poor woman.?

Duplicated for the sake of record


wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 11:43am:

deepthought wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:37am: wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:27am: deepthought wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:21am: wrote on Mar 21st, 2008 at 9:15am: Quote: From now on flames such as this and disregard for the moderator of this forum will not be tolerated. I meant this and you obviously didnt read the rules. I am the moderator not your wife. I will listen to any reasonable request if you speak to me respectfully and not do your old trick of trying to incite others to flalme against me..simple..Learn some life skills DT. Asking reasonable questions about your prior commitment to move a thread is not a flame.  Did you lie? No honeybunch I reconsidered. [your original post was a flame btw..I deleted offensive words] Maybe you can put one up in chat. [quote]Maybe you can do what you said you would do.  I understand the concept of upholding your principles may be difficult.  Try though. I can't move the thread.  Only you can.  And freediver only obliges leftards. More insults...as you obviously dont know the meaning of respectful and  cannot speak to someone without the urge to put themdown..Ill ignore that one.. I dont have a problem with the word fart..what I do have a problem with is what the thread descended into [ I got a laugh out of it too].. You and IQ have taken great delight in going after mantra for nigh on a week...thats excessive in anyones book. Im not saying mantra didnt play her own part in it all..but what I am saying out of respect for the forum and at this point mantra..who has been so distraught by the chaos its caused, I will not be reinstating it..as yet. Next week when hot heads and hurt feelings have settled down I will reconsider..and then I will put it back up in here. ...next Friday perhaps. So you have your answer DT..The thread is subject to rules laid out above..Humour is welcomed, attacks, villification and putdowns are not. I dont dislike you DT..you have some good qualities ..but I cant run a forum without some rules. Noone likes rules but its part of life.

deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 11:59am:

Truth is not insult.  And it is true that you offered to move the thread then reneged on your offer which is a failure to uphold a principle.  Unless of course you don't possess the principle in the first place. So unless you do as you said you would do you are unprincipled.  That's not a baseless insult - it is the truth.

wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 12:20pm:

My decsion to reconsider was based in fact on compassion and principle as it so happens..You are not the only one who inhabits this forum. After mantra was so upset she couldnt she could no longer reconcile her particiaption..then the/my principle changed..my offer previous to that was based on my own objection to all the kerfuffle over the silly word and the too strict line on silly every day words used by us all..I saw a slippery slope to total abandonment of commonsense on trivial issues that would lead to a closed graveyard that would once have been known as Ozpolitics..but thast just my take on the whole issue. Im done argueing semantics with you in this. Its clear you want the thread back now and thats not going to happen. Unles FD over rules me and in that case it will. Have a wonderful Easter DT..god bless your little cotton socks.... ::)

deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 12:34pm:

What is destructive to a forum (as I said right at the start) is inequitable moderation - the kind you, mantra and freediver practice. But I am pleased to see you concede that your principles are easily abandoned and you can renege on a principle according to your mood on the day. It is commendable (and noteworthy) that you admit that you can not be trusted to hold to a principle.

wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 12:25pm:

Will try to keep an open mind DT..you and sappho have a history that much is obvious. What did you do to the poor woman.?

Nothing.  I suspect she stalks lots of people and lying seems to come naturally to her.  I'd probably feel sorry for her if I felt she had any redeeming qualities.  But I haven't seen any.

deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 9:19am:

As Oceans is deleting or altering posts as fast as they are made I'll duplicate posts here so that it can be seen what is being removed or changed by the tag team of dictators.   Caution leftards at work.

deepthought wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 7:04pm:

A couple of pics seem to have vanished

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n65/deeper_thought/WayneSwan_Fart_02.jpg


http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n65/deeper_thought/Rudd_Fart_06.jpg

FD....grant me very temporary moderator status across the Board, and your problem will be solved with the press of two (whatever) buttons.

After I have done that, I will relinquish or you take the keys from me, whatever is necessary.

History repeats.

You will never be able to reconcile with this pair.

What a surprise that we have yet another leftard wanting to ban everyone who is sympathetic to the leftard agenda.

Isn't it cute that Ozpolitic has become a mini 3rd Reich complete with a mini Hilter and now we have a mini Goring

Aussie wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 7:24pm:

FD....grant me very temporary moderator status across the Board, and your problem will be solved with the press of two (whatever) buttons. After I have done that, I will relinquish or you take the keys from me, whatever is necessary. History repeats. You will never be able to reconcile with this pair.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha, you're the dude who keeps getting warned about your ad hom attacks.  Reckon you can be trusted to be a reasonable man?

Quote:

Ha ha ha ha ha ha, you're the dude who keeps getting warned about your ad hom attacks.

I must have missed these warnings concerning, specifically, 'ad hom attacks.'

Bung 'em up DT.

Aussie wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 9:02pm:

Quote: Ha ha ha ha ha ha, you're the dude who keeps getting warned about your ad hom attacks. I must have missed these warnings concerning, specifically, 'ad hom attacks.' Bung 'em up DT.

You must have amnesia, but I'd find them for you if I could get the awkward search function on this forum to work.

This was the last warning from freediver to watch yourself.


Quote:

Easy Aussie, I much prefer his photo shopped contributions.

You'll have to take freediver's word for it - he'll vouch for me that he's told you on more than one occasion to play the ball, not the man.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/forum-rules.html

Care to address the request I made months ago about the words "damn" or "damned" and "poo" and "bugger".  These are so commonplace it's pretty weird to have your net nanny reword your posts to make them 'nice'.

I will start closing threads on this board if they keep getting hijacked by personal disputes.

freediver wrote on Mar 26^th, 2008 at 3:49pm:

I will start closing threads on this board if they keep getting hijacked by personal disputes.

In this case I agree.  I apologise.  I should not respond to the stalkers.   I just find it amusing to call their bluff.  Yep.   Lock it.   I'm out.

Note that moderators of the member run boards are not expected to ignore abuse as per the rules. They are expected to deal with it however they think is appropriate - obviously not by responding with more abuse, which is what the general rule is all about. They should also be your first avenue of complaint about abuse on member run boards.

Good to know the restrictions are sensible ones  :)

I'd like to access my favourites list, is this possible? I'd also like to see how the ranking system works. What's a gold member? is this something to do with paying? If so how much? Can I donate without going through Pay Pal?

I hate being called 'Junior'  ;D

Grey wrote on Apr 1^st, 2011 at 8:17am:

I'd like to access my favourites list, is this possible? I'd also like to see how the ranking system works. What's a gold member? is this something to do with paying? If so how much? Can I donate without going through Pay Pal? I hate being called 'Junior'  ;D

LOL...I can't answer all of your queries, but suffice to say that your membership level changes purely on the basis of the number of posts you've made (unless you gain modding privileges, of course)...

At 80 posts, you are currently 20 short of being a 'Full Member'...

'Senior' membership kicks in at 250 posts and 'Gold' at 500...

ok

Grey wrote on Apr 1^st, 2011 at 8:17am:

I'd like to access my favourites list, is this possible? I'd also like to see how the ranking system works. What's a gold member? is this something to do with paying? If so how much? Can I donate without going through Pay Pal? I hate being called 'Junior'  ;D

Yeah. I'll give you the PayPal details......

Just kidding  ;D

Equitist is right.

Equitist wrote on Apr 1^st, 2011 at 8:25am:

Grey wrote on Apr 1st, 2011 at 8:17am: I'd like to access my favourites list, is this possible? I'd also like to see how the ranking system works. What's a gold member? is this something to do with paying? If so how much? Can I donate without going through Pay Pal? I hate being called 'Junior'  ;D LOL...I can't answer all of your queries, but suffice to say that your membership level changes purely on the basis of the number of posts you've made (unless you gain modding privileges, of course)... At 80 posts, you are currently 20 short of being a 'Full Member'... 'Senior' membership kicks in at 250 posts and 'Gold' at 500...

Membership levels on this forum may change according to the number of posts made .. but the resultant level issued doesn't really mean much.

In short .. it doesn't really matter what colour or word shows under your name.

freediver wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2007 at 12:18pm:

Is anyone in favour of limiting the use of, or size of, images in signatures, or limiting font size, colour etc?

yes me I hate those moving pictures give me a headache... are they really necessary?

I dislike the colour type as well some take so many liberties..I do by pass them but its a shame to have to be driven to that.

cods wrote on Apr 5^th, 2011 at 7:08pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 2nd, 2007 at 12:18pm: Is anyone in favour of limiting the use of, or size of, images in signatures, or limiting font size, colour etc? yes me I hate those moving pictures give me a headache... are they really necessary? I dislike the colour type as well some take so many liberties..I do by pass them but its a shame to have to be driven to that.

Second that.

Thanks for the replies guys  :-* . So nobody knows how to access their favourites list? Well I don't suppose it matters much, the email notification works pretty good, but I miss having a list of threads I'm subscribed to, it used to help with navigating my way around the forum on the Guardians site. I'm enjoying my time here,  but  feeling a bit lost as to where to strike next.  ;D Are you the forum owner FreeDiver? Should I refrain from kicking you in the nuts  ;D too often   ;)

Yes I own it. Treat like any other member.

Cods what colour type are you referring to?

Grey wrote on Apr 5^th, 2011 at 7:59pm:

cods wrote on Apr 5th, 2011 at 7:08pm: freediver wrote on Mar 2nd, 2007 at 12:18pm: Is anyone in favour of limiting the use of, or size of, images in signatures, or limiting font size, colour etc? yes me I hate those moving pictures give me a headache... are they really necessary? I dislike the colour type as well some take so many liberties..I do by pass them but its a shame to have to be driven to that. Second that. Thanks for the replies guys  :-* . So nobody knows how to access their favourites list? Well I don't suppose it matters much, the email notification works pretty good, but I miss having a list of threads I'm subscribed to, it used to help with navigating my way around the forum on the Guardians site. I'm enjoying my time here,  but  feeling a bit lost as to where to strike next.  ;D Are you the forum owner FreeDiver? Should I refrain from kicking you in the nuts  ;D too often   ;)

Hint taken - I'll switch my flipfloppy thingy off soon-ish!   :'(

That said...I, for one, vote that Smithy's Avatar is so priceless that it should remain!  8-)

As for the creative colours - pfftt!  Methinks that people should be allowed a little room for personal expression...   ::)

Grey wrote on Apr 1^st, 2011 at 8:17am:

I'd like to access my favourites list, is this possible?

You might find what you are looking for in the far right bottom corner of the page...

Equitist wrote on Apr 5^th, 2011 at 9:31pm:

Grey wrote on Apr 5th, 2011 at 7:59pm: cods wrote on Apr 5th, 2011 at 7:08pm: freediver wrote on Mar 2nd, 2007 at 12:18pm: Is anyone in favour of limiting the use of, or size of, images in signatures, or limiting font size, colour etc? yes me I hate those moving pictures give me a headache... are they really necessary? I dislike the colour type as well some take so many liberties..I do by pass them but its a shame to have to be driven to that. Second that. Thanks for the replies guys  :-* . So nobody knows how to access their favourites list? Well I don't suppose it matters much, the email notification works pretty good, but I miss having a list of threads I'm subscribed to, it used to help with navigating my way around the forum on the Guardians site. I'm enjoying my time here,  but  feeling a bit lost as to where to strike next.  ;D Are you the forum owner FreeDiver? Should I refrain from kicking you in the nuts  ;D too often   ;) Hint taken - I'll switch my flipfloppy thingy off soon-ish!   :'( That said...I, for one, vote that Smithy's Avatar is so priceless that it should remain!  8-) As for the creative colours - pfftt!  Methinks that people should be allowed a little room for personal expression...   ::)

LOL Thy thanks
I read cods post thought about it but NAH
Unless the forum is changed old Adolf will keep on enjoying his techno ;D

Grey wrote on Apr 5^th, 2011 at 7:59pm:

cods wrote on Apr 5th, 2011 at 7:08pm: freediver wrote on Mar 2nd, 2007 at 12:18pm: Is anyone in favour of limiting the use of, or size of, images in signatures, or limiting font size, colour etc? yes me I hate those moving pictures give me a headache... are they really necessary? I dislike the colour type as well some take so many liberties..I do by pass them but its a shame to have to be driven to that. Second that. Thanks for the replies guys  :-* . So nobody knows how to access their favourites list? Well I don't suppose it matters much, the email notification works pretty good, but I miss having a list of threads I'm subscribed to, it used to help with navigating my way around the forum on the Guardians site. I'm enjoying my time here,  but  feeling a bit lost as to where to strike next.  ;D Are you the forum owner FreeDiver? Should I refrain from kicking you in the nuts  ;D too often   ;)

Your question got me thinking so i had a bit of a play and clicked add to favourites button on this thread.
After looking thru my profile trying to find the list I've come back to the forum to find a gold star next to this thread.
I can only assume from this it's not so much a list but just adding a marking to the thread list on the ones you like.

Right, I had noticed that earlier, better late than never.  :)

I thought I was seconding the idea of limiting signatures to text, I wouldn't see any reason to change avatars. But I know that signatures can get really big and that's a bit tiresome.

Equitist wrote on Apr 5^th, 2011 at 10:26pm:

Grey wrote on Apr 1st, 2011 at 8:17am: I'd like to access my favourites list, is this possible? You might find what you are looking for in the far right bottom corner of the page...

Brilliant Equitist - Forum Jump. Now that looks like the most useful button to know to me, it's kinda secret like a hidden door ;D i think we should let everybody in on the secret. - (or are they?) ;D

freediver wrote on Apr 5^th, 2011 at 8:28pm:

Yes I own it. Treat like any other member. Cods what colour type are you referring to?

the pink and blue and primrose too....someone who will remain nameless on the politicians suck board uses them all the time..I find it immature to be honest.,.. I like this idea of reading all the posts at once good idea.. so clever saves a "where was I " moment.

when we evolve something and think its a good idea.. someone in your position should take a bit more time to think how will the brain deprived handle this!@!!!!!!!

What's happening on the anti-smoking thread is just 'bumping' which stifles debate and ought to be discouraged.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1302157225/171#171

I agree, but there is nothing yet in the rules about it.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/forum-rules.html

We probably have fewer rules here than most forums.

Quote:

We probably have fewer rules here than most forums.

Nothing to be proud of. Best you lot get your heads together and develop a few before Googling "troll", "stupid" or "chronic whinger" returns Ozpolitic.com as the top result.