May users have a personal thread in the rickshaw?

May users have a personal thread in the rickshaw?

  • Yes

    Votes: 271 66.6%
  • No

    Votes: 136 33.4%

  • Total voters
    407
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
As for me and the GG thread, it's really much ado about nothing. I'm not going to go back to doing whatever triggered Khalid.

I gave the new board a grace period where I didn't disturb the shit at all. I agreed wholeheartedly with the community's desire for less moderation and greater freedom. I cheered when posters championed the efficiency of the "ignore" feature and how it would make reporting posts obsolete. I nodded approvingly when to-be mods were campaigning on non-intervention and a light touch.

Then, after the elections, I decided to see if everyone could put their money where their mouths were. I made the types of posts I knew would rustle many jimmies right in the GG thread and waited for the inevitable backlash.

What I hoped would happen: In this new era of light moderation and big-boy pants for everyone, people would accept that sometimes someone says shit you don't like to hear and, unless they're breaking any rules, you're just going to have to live with it.

What actually happened: Mod power abuse which was applauded by the very people who wanted light moderation. Excessive and unwarranted punishment, delivered arbitrarily and with no explanation... Just like on Rerolled.

So rest easy, people. Just like during the significant final stretch of Rerolled's history, I'm going to behave myself and restrict my more controversial points of view to the Rickshaw, where they will be kept safely out of the mainstream and be viewable only to masochists, cancer patients, the uncurably curious, and Hodj.

...At least until a_skeleton_03 blows a gasket because I'm enjoying the board too much and just blanket locks the entire Rickshaw.
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Then, after the elections, I decided to see if everyone could put their money where their mouths were. I made the types of posts I knew would rustle many jimmies right in the GG thread and waited for the inevitable backlash.

Flat out admitting he is trying to do this to generate outrage and controversy.

Yet somehow this doesn't warrant a ban?
 

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
But it doesn't have to be a community forever entangled in this one lunatic's never ending cycle of Anita Hitman Emma shitposting, either.
 

a_skeleton_02

<Banned>
8,130
14,248
Threads should be approved on a case by case basis. Most people are retarded and unfunny and they don't need a vanity thread shitting up the shaw.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Dislike
Reactions: 2 users

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
New rule suggestion: If you call for somebody be banned 100 times, you get banned.
 

pharmakos

soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
<Bronze Donator>
16,306
-2,236
I will agree with Hodj that the ignore feature isn't great. I actually preferred it at Rerolled, where it was very useful. It was extremely satisfying to see that posts were being made by users on my ignore list while continuing to deny them my attention. Feels good, man.

Here, though, not only are all traces of that poster gone (creating awkward conversations where their participation is invisible), but any threads that poster created don't appear, either. I actually do feel like I'm missing out on some stuff.

So I had to go back to ignoring users the way our ancestors did throughout history: By just not paying any attention to them. It's really not that hard.

that's the only part of it that sucks. hm.
 
  • 1Faggotry
Reactions: 1 user

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
No, the part of it that sucks is the same part that was complained about previously, which is that unless everyone ignores the person, and that person takes over a thread, then an entire thread is just responses to that poster.

A shitty poster still can destroy a thread.
 
  • 1Hodjing
Reactions: 1 user

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,478
22,328
I'm pretty sure Screenshots is for threads with lots of pictures in them.

I mean, that would make sense.

Maybe we should make a designated shitposting forum, and leave Screenshots for important things like objectifying women's bodies.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
No, the part of it that sucks is the same part that was complained about previously, which is that unless everyone ignores the person, and that person takes over a thread, then an entire thread is just responses to that poster.

A shitty poster still can destroy a thread.
No one person has the power to "take over a thread". Many people were engaging me directly in the GG thread. There was a back-and-forth. Challenges were made, rebuttals given. If a thread is "destroyed" by the posts of many people, then you can't blame the one person who everybody is actively choosing to continue to engage with.

Also, I guess you weren't listening: I'm back to "good boy" mode now. The GG thread is a safe space again. You keep ranting on and on about something that isn't a problem.
 

pharmakos

soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
<Bronze Donator>
16,306
-2,236
I'm pretty sure Screenshots is for threads with lots of pictures in them.

I mean, that would make sense.

Maybe we should make a designated shitposting forum, and leave Screenshots for important things like objectifying women's bodies.

Screenshots, at some point, turned into being a place for all NSFW content rather than just for posts with pictures in them.
 
  • 1Faggotry
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.