Bye Illcommandante; See You in Five Months

[csrowan]

I have always said that I would support the rules and do my best to follow them... AS LONG AS WE ARE ALL REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE SAME SET OF RULES. That has not happened... which makes the rules nothing more than a big farce.

Following the rules appears to be relatively voluntary, with unknown and unexplained enforcement, which may or may not be somewhat arbitrary and/or selective, but is most certainly nowhere near the level that is implied in the actual written rules themselves.

And if we're told the rules are going to be enforced from now on (as we were) and find out that no such thing happens, and then if we're told that there's a call for moderators, and we see no evidence of additional moderation, some of us (like myself) can get a little tetchy on the subject.

If the rules are not going to be enforced as written, they should be re-written to be more accurate (in my opinion). Either that, or they should actually be enforced. For everyone.




However, while I certainly agree that the rules should be enforced evenly and fairly, I haven't actually seen anyone else act quite like Illc; making post after post in thread after thread that are only tangentially related to the topic and often accusing people of criminal behavior. I don't know how often he was warned, or if he was warned at all. But he was told why he was banned, and when the ban lifted, he did it again. I'm fairly certain that the same thing would happen to anyone who posted the same way.

[broadzilla]

However, while I certainly agree that the rules should be enforced evenly and fairly, I haven't actually seen anyone else act quite like Illc; making post after post in thread after thread that are only tangentially related to the topic and often accusing people of criminal behavior. I don't know how often he was warned, or if he was warned at all. But he was told why he was banned, and when the ban lifted, he did it again. I'm fairly certain that the same thing would happen to anyone who posted the same way.

Exactly.

[chuck white]

I believe rules are to be followed. If he is incapable of following them, which I don't think is the case, he is still breaking the rules and needs to be dealt with. It is more than just putting him on Foe, because the thread gets bumped and if one wants to follow it, they will have to open it to see why it bumped.

I too complained that there was not adequate moderation. I wont now complain or feel bad when moderation is used as spelled out.

What are you?, some kind of freekin cop?

[Wonky]

I have always said that I would support the rules and do my best to follow them... AS LONG AS WE ARE ALL REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE SAME SET OF RULES. That has not happened... which makes the rules nothing more than a big farce.

Could be. That the rules are "nothing more than a big farce".
If so, I wonder if we could all become more aware and responsible in how we express ourselves and in doing so make the "rules" unimportant except in the most blatant examples.

Just a thought. (I have so few that I jump at the chance to sound off when one hits my tiny little brain)

[tvguy]

Could be. That the rules are "nothing more than a big farce".
If so, I wonder if we could all become more aware and responsible in how we express ourselves and in doing so make the "rules" unimportant except in the most blatant examples.

Yeah that's gonna happenBut hey that's a pretty Nice Miss America pageant speech.
I wonder if you're wondering , (actually disguised request or plea) will accomplish anything?
No I'm not really wondering It won't. So why not wonder if we could also end war and starvation? Maybe help out some sea turtles.
Don't get mad Wonky , get even

[gapper]

I believe rules are to be followed. If he is incapable of following them, which I don't think is the case, he is still breaking the rules and needs to be dealt with. It is more than just putting him on Foe, because the thread gets bumped and if one wants to follow it, they will have to open it to see why it bumped.

I too complained that there was not adequate moderation. I wont now complain or feel bad when moderation is used as spelled out.

What are you?, some kind of freekin cop?

Nope. Just someone that freekin [sic] gives a damn.
Why do you ask?

[Tiamat]

I just don't get it.

What don't you get?

I think I was being rhetorical. No need for any picture painting.

I don't get you; care to paint a picture?

Smeagol? What's he got to do with anything???

[cletus1]

I just don't get it.

What don't you get?

I think I was being rhetorical. No need for any picture painting.

I don't get you; care to paint a picture?

Smeagol? What's he got to do with anything???

Well, it is a picture.

[Wonky]

Could be. That the rules are "nothing more than a big farce".
If so, I wonder if we could all become more aware and responsible in how we express ourselves and in doing so make the "rules" unimportant except in the most blatant examples.

Yeah that's gonna happenBut hey that's a pretty Nice Miss America pageant speech.
I wonder if you're wondering , (actually disguised request or plea) will accomplish anything?
No I'm not really wondering It won't. So why not wonder if we could also end war and starvation? Maybe help out some sea turtles.
Don't get mad Wonky , get even

Get even?
A more courteous and adult behavior on this site is not a Pollyanna and simplistic goal to consider.
Your response was humorous, and made me smile but the underlying tone of your comments are more troubling.
Why the need to be negative? A proactive effort to make a few changes might be pie in the sky, as you suggest. But it's unnecessary to approach so many comments here with critical opposing views that seem to be simply offered for the sake of a contrary voice.
I remain hopeful. I also remain aware of my own failings and hope to improve as I monitor my comments.
We can embrace change without fear, and be hopeful without being seen as simple.
Maybe.
Or maybe I'm just full of crap.
Time will tell.

[gapper]

.....
A proactive effort to make a few changes might be pie in the sky, as you suggest.
.......

A well known in certain circles man of great knowledge and wisdom, Gapperstotle, often preached to his children that "I can't , never accomplished anything".
Keep trying.

[tvguy]

Could be. That the rules are "nothing more than a big farce".
If so, I wonder if we could all become more aware and responsible in how we express ourselves and in doing so make the "rules" unimportant except in the most blatant examples.

Yeah that's gonna happenBut hey that's a pretty Nice Miss America pageant speech.
I wonder if you're wondering , (actually disguised request or plea) will accomplish anything?
No I'm not really wondering It won't. So why not wonder if we could also end war and starvation? Maybe help out some sea turtles.
Don't get mad Wonky , get even

Get even?
A more courteous and adult behavior on this site is not a Pollyanna and simplistic goal to consider.
Your response was humorous, and made me smile but the underlying tone of your comments are more troubling.
Why the need to be negative? A proactive effort to make a few changes might be pie in the sky, as you suggest. But it's unnecessary to approach so many comments here with critical opposing views that seem to be simply offered for the sake of a contrary voice.
I remain hopeful. I also remain aware of my own failings and hope to improve as I monitor my comments.
We can embrace change without fear, and be hopeful without being seen as simple.
Maybe.
Or maybe I'm just full of crap.
Time will tell.

I was joking Wonky because IMO your never ending desire to teach, monitor, encourage. Your constant "we must strive posts" are IN MY OPINION pointless and much like asking or hoping for world peace.
That's what I think and I tried to say so as humorously as I could. I don't know what underlying tone you think you are hearing. I normally am pretty clear about what I say.

[csrowan]

The problem with achieving something like world peace lies not in the peacemakers, but in those who think that peacemaking is pointless as long as other people aren't making peace.

You seem to feel justified in being a bully and rule-breaker because other people do the same thing. But if more people like you would decide that the effort is what was important, rather than the results, we might actually GET results.

[gapper]

The problem with achieving something like world peace lies not in the peacemakers, but in those who think that peacemaking is pointless as long as other people aren't making peace.

You seem to feel justified in being a bully and rule-breaker because other people do the same thing. But if more people like you would decide that the effort is what was important, rather than the results, we might actually GET results.

I have to agree.

It would seem that when multiple people point out they perceive a trait that is undesirable to the clan, if you will, the logical response might be some self evaluation rather than consistently blowing it off as "I don't know what underlying tone you think you are hearing.", or "you (he/she) started it" or "so and so does it too.".

The sad thing is, I see TV as one with the ability to interact in a friendly manner when he chooses and has good insights to offer many times. But that seems to get lost when it turns to a competition to be right or, to simply disagree disagreeably for whatever reason.

But, that is merely my opinion and perception.

[Willie Krash]

Ill, May the 4th, be with you. ?

[Wonky]

Ill, May the 4th, be with you. ?

Yep. One day at a time.

[Simon Peter]

Good to c the moderations is working fairly.

[cletus1]

Good to c the moderations is working fairly.

Simon is that sarcasm?

Simon, don't you have anything more to say?

Simon, are you hung over again?

[chuck white]

I still don't understand how clitus1 knows that the ban is for five Months?

I can find the info stating that ILL is banned, but where is the time line?

[PonderThis]

I still don't understand how clitus1 knows that the ban is for five Months?

I can find the info stating that ILL is banned, but where is the time line?

Look at the "Ban Expires" column for Illcommandante: http://www.roguevalleyforum.com/forum/mi...on=banlist

[chuck white]

I still don't understand how clitus1 knows that the ban is for five Months?

I can find the info stating that ILL is banned, but where is the time line?

Look at the "Ban Expires" column for Illcommandante: http://www.roguevalleyforum.com/forum/mi...on=banlist

I was looking at the member list, there is a lot of nooks and crannies on the forum