Go ask me shit in my AMA scrub.
Also this is my fault but the color of the duck in your avi and in your sig are different and it bothers me.
Sucks to suck... at ducks ;)
And when I figure out something worthwhile to ask you I will.
- Yui likes this
Jump to content
Posted by Zaiduck on 24 April 2017 - 09:54 AM
1) And yet people seemed to be dicks to Winter pretty damn frequently without punishment. Or if punishment comes, it comes well after it's due.
2) Consitency; If being a pest for two fucking years (Or however long it's been) wasn't a cause for banning up till now, something had to change in order to validate the choice now. Either a new mod bringing a changing attitude and standards, or as it reads currently 'If they can't get with the program, there's only one inevitable conclusion anyway. Best not waste our time any further.'
And I am outright calling for Winter's ban to be undone, he be given an apology, and by whatever measure is possible for the team you get your shit together. You establish a proceedure, you make it known, and you follow it. Any mod who steps outside that procedure should be punished.
I can't testify for the others, but I know there's been more than one occassion where I've gone on fairly pointed rants that are just 'fuck you Winter' without ever having any form of punishment for it. In the form of verbal punishment or warning points. I'm reluctant to believe the same would be true in reverse. Free reign may be hyperbolic, but it feels like I'm get given more lienecy than Winter does, despite not actually having much more of a leg to stand on than him.
I'll say I'm not accussing you specifically of bias, you are more than fair the majority of the time, and usually aware after the fact when you aren't. But it feels like, there is an overall mod bias, and that Winter is the person this forms a crux against.
I don't think it's Winter himself who makes the site worse, so I phrased that poorly. Winter just happens to be a dissenting voice with god-awful phrasing, and people try to rip into him for it. It's just as fair to blame people (Like myself) who can't let his poor phrasing go, and always insist on pressing the point against him. He has his faults as a debater and a victim complex, but it feels like he is being assigned all the blame for the problems on the site that he has even tangential relation to. And I don't think he is.
And what about the other side of this? That maybe the people reporting Winter so frequently are the ones with the problem, not him? If Winter would get reported, multiple times a week, by presumably the same group of people ever week, why is it not possible they are the problem? Winter's manner is poor, but until now that has never been an outright bannable offensive. According to him, he hasn't been officially warned in a long time. Why if his manner was still poor to the same extent as usual, was he outright banned for it instead of being given further formal final warnings?
Like don't we have an example of someone outright stalking Winter for evidence of wrong doing, and then his findings were actually considered by the mod team instead of treated like one should treat it?
So Winter and everyone in a debate thread acted like Winter and everyone usually acts in a debate thread. Why was in a bannable offense in this instance compared to every prior instance? What was fundamentally different about the thread in this case that warranted a ban, several hours after the fact I might add, (Like Winter didn't even escalate the situation, or attempt to, after the thread got locked, I did)? Because whilst I'm not privy to the inner details of the site very often, the only thing that seemed different about it this time was that it was a thread against the mod team. And that looks really bad.
Winter posted 3 times in that thread. An instance of gloating against liberals, a legitimate point of discussion, and something that could very fringely be classed as hate speech, but is more likely just him being trollish about it. What's bannable there?
More so, why if the Chechnya thread was a bannable offense did it take nearly two weeks to ban him for it? And furthermore, why the fuck is Shard still here if the conesus is that Shard did post a 'Hate-speech' rant? How on earth is Winter the one who gets the harsher punishment from that thread?
I mean given my confusion I clearly don't know the procedure. That might just be on me not being that involved here, but I don't see what procedure this fits (And if it does fit one, I think whatever procedured it fits is fundamentally flawed).
No, I don't want unrestricted access to the mod forum. But if the mod team thinks it has better judgment than the memberbase here (Which I think is how you act at times), then why can't you do the self policing I ask for yourselves? We don't need to know the details, so long as the mods keep themselves in line for our sake.
But I have outright attacked Winter before. I've not been given a verbal warning for it even. And I can list examples of other people doing the same thing, arguably not on as frequent basis, but arguably more directly than Winter has done in turn to people not called Roxas.
Posted by Zaiduck on 23 April 2017 - 12:11 PM
His argument being accurate is an objective measure
It being hate speech is not. There's a reason the Supreme Court protected "hate speech" (or rather declined to criminalize it) and that's becuase "hate" is a highly subjective measure.
There's little difference between what shard and other critiques of Islam have said. The rest of us just dress the pig up.
I'm not a Christian, but cut out the false equivalency. If a man marries a 12 year old, he has every right to be called a pedophile. The fact we're not allowed to state this basic fact is as clear a demise of debates as anything.
Jesus had his moment, God certainly does, but trying to create an equalized Islam and then raving "hate" and "Islamophobia" at anyone who disagrees is a major problem with western discourse
If it goes outside debates. Warn the ever living shit out of it.
Posted by Zaiduck on 22 April 2017 - 08:55 AM
Posted by Zaiduck on 12 April 2017 - 07:32 AM
A phobia is described as an irrational fear. My fear of Islam is not irrational. I know exactly why I hate it. I suggest you not use the word Islamophobic, that word was invented by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to silence dissent. As for Indonesia, I can find countless examples of violent, barbaric practices such as floggings, whippings and other blatant human rights abuses. Let's forget the fact the one Judaic state in the world has a relatively open stance on gays, and allows them to live in peace. Let's forget Europe has a very similar policy. While Judaism and Christianity do not like homosexuality, the majority of practitioners are able to reason like normal people and reach the conclusion that some people who do not share the same belief have the same rights to their own belief. No, this problem is not me being "Islamophobic". The problem isn't even radical Islam. The problem is Islam.
If you'd like me to call out Islam, I shall. Islam is a violent hate filled death cult started by a warmongering paedophile who slaughtered thousands of innocent people because they didn't think the same as him. The word "Muslim" literally means Submit. What is a Muslim saying about themselves? They're okay with submitting to a war loving, child molesting, women hating death cult of a violent hateful moon god and to smash their stupid brainwashed skull off the ground five times a day. Muslim extremists do not attack the West because we are involved in Middle East conflicts. They attack us for the same reason their religion attacked thousands of innocents back in the 7th century. We aren't Muslim. No amount of concessions, apologies or excuses will stop them. Look at it this way, Sweden, a country that has been openly helpful to the supposed "plight" of the Muslims was attacked. Trying to negotiate peace with them is pointless. The Arab does not know how to negotiate peace. It is a clockwork creature, fuelled by generations of religious indoctrination and programmed only to take up arms against "Nonbelievers". I have not yet seen an example that proves me wrong.
Every "ill" that has befell the Muslims is a result of their own intolerance. It's okay for them to cut a blood swath through the Middle East and threaten genocide on the Europeans on multiple occasions, but when the Europeans band together and push back and give the invaders a taste of their own medicine, they squeal like cornered rats. Islam has been openly trying to invade Europe since it's very inception. Why? Because to them, the Arab, we are "nonbelievers". To the Arab machination, the world will only be at peace when everyone submits to their hateful ideology and smacks their skulls off the ground 5 times a day.
Need another example of Muslims being blatant hypocrites? Look no further than Israel. Israel is loathed by Muslims for the mere "crime" of being Jewish. To the Muslims, the Jewish are subhuman. Invading Arab armies have bragged about committing Jewish genocide, on multiple occasions. Unfortunately for the Arabs, after the Holocaust, the Jews had a little more fire in their blood than they were expecting. The Arabs reject the peace offers given by Israel, then attack Israel, then squeal to the United Nations that they're being oppressed. Western leaders, as easy to beguile and as thoughtful as we are, are lead to believe the Jews are the aggressor, and the Arabs are merely underdogs fighting for that feel is "just". If the Arabs laid down their arms tomorrow, there would be peace. If the Jews did the same, they'd be massacred without a second thought. No other nation on the planet has to fight to merely survive. Why? Because the Arab feels the Jew is inferior. The same Jew who has made the phone chip that he is using to detonate his suicide vest. For all their talk of hating the West, the Muslim is unable to commit his acts of hatred without Western technology.
From the way I've worded this post, you may get the idea that I am racist. However, I am no less of a racist than the hateful fascist death cult of Islam.
Posted by Zaiduck on 07 April 2017 - 03:12 PM
I'm genuinely curious why everyone feels the need to link to pornhub in the first place. You've obviously done extensive research. What is so hard (pun intended) about not linking to pornhub on YCM?
What difficulty is there in understanding that this is against the rules? Is something about that not clear? Or is this just people bitching because "BUT ITS FUNNY" or "BUT EVERYONE ELSE HAS SEEN PORN"? If you really feel that you have a physiological need to copy and paste pornhub links, do it in your own skype chat or with some of your personal friends outside of YCM. Don't do it here.
The fact that this is even being debated, baffles me.
Posted by Zaiduck on 02 April 2017 - 08:20 PM
File 01: The Gathering
"Hey, Dracomon, the compass disappeared."
"Hmm? Let me have a look." The little dragon brushed aside the dense jungle foliage that separated him from his human companion, and rather forcefully swiped the digivice from his hand. Just as Takeru had said, the compass that had been guiding them toward the coordinates specified in Seraphimon's message had vanished from the screen, and was now replaced by a pulsing dot near the top of the D-Cipher's display.
"I think it means we're close."
"I'm positive that that's what it means. Its probably only a few hundred meters that-a-way." He gestured with his free claw to what appeared to be the entrance to a clearing of some sort off in the distance. "Why don't we go check it out?"
"Shouldn't we go back to camp first and tell everyone else? We could probably check the other digivices to see if they're showing the same thing."
Dracomon extended his chin slightly, producing an expression that mimicked a pout. "We're supposed to be scouting ahead, Takeru."
"But we don't wanna go too far ahead, right?"
"You're not scared, are ya?"
"N-no..." He truthfully wasn't, at least not of what lay ahead of them. Takeru was much more worried about incurring the wrath of Yurika Isshuin (compounded with a lecture from her partner, Lunamon) if he and Dracomon left the rest of their party behind in camp, or worse still, provoking yet another confrontation between his headstrong partner and Eileen Sheridan. The last couple of days had been stormy (both literally and figuratively) and the last thing Takeru wanted was for tensions to run even higher.
"Well then, what are we waiting for?"
"L-look, I just don't think-" Takeru stopped, and the both of them turned around as they heard footsteps coming from behind them. It seemed that the rest of the group had caught up to them.
Posted by Zaiduck on 24 March 2017 - 07:46 PM
THIS is nothing but trying to piss people off. Even if it's in text, I can hear every word of this in a sneer. Either stop the antagonization or GTFO of the thread.
I know I'm not a mod, but this is ticking me off.
I'd rather you not start a fight here, Tes. Nipping the flaming in the bud before it starts. This is everyone's warning, or we just might have to have a live-fire test of these temp bans ;)
Posted by Zaiduck on 24 March 2017 - 07:30 PM
Why do you want wiggle room when you already have such for warning pt hand outs. It's not hard to have an objective yet progressive way to implement Giga's proposal.
Because every person and most every offense is different. Actions have context and I'd rather not be forced to hand out a punishment that may not be appropriate based on an arbitrary guideline. Vol Vrac is new but I'd say he's said much more offensive things than others have received warning points for, as an example.
Posted by Zaiduck on 24 March 2017 - 07:25 PM
Bigger problem was with the abuse case where Nai said buildup, Evil and Night were like WTF, why does this merit WPs, and Aix said I got off easy. You guys operate like a clownshow
You and me didn't alway have a problem. It develops. You need to design your laws with a bit of forsight
Set a period (like 2 weeks) as the crit value.
Think of it like a parabola intersecting a line. At one pt, the growth of the parabola can't be matched by the growth of the linear function. Area in between those curves would be the redemption area ( you can integrate to set a value, say 1 month )
I'm not writing a formula or drawing a graph for how to set disciplinary actions. I'd much rather trust my coworkers' judgement and give us a simple guideline to follow.
Posted by Zaiduck on 24 March 2017 - 07:01 PM
Warning points mean nothing. Doling out temporary bans for any offense combined with warning points to boot is the best way of handling these sorts of situations. Far more people should be receiving temporary bans far more often.
Warning points are just that, warnings. They aren't a punishment. Temp bans shouldn't be dropped on people for every little thing. We don;t want to be assholes, we just want a working disciplinary system in place.