If you have been here for more than a few weeks you will have noticed that these forums – particularly the Politicians Suck board – has become a far less pleasant place of late. We ALL need to change our ways to make this a more fun place to be and to debate/complain/shout our particular point of view. The problems I see are as follows:

1)       Thread spamming. We don’t need 43 threads on Oakeshott and Windsor. We don’t need the daily anti-Bolt thread nor do we need the daily I hate Gillard rant. New threads need to be genuinely new topics. Good topics are being lost in the flood of rubbish. I am asking people to voluntarily (at this stage) limit themselves to a maximum of three new threads per day.

2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. We debate robustly and we mock and hassle each other from our own points of view. This is the way of real debate. But some cross the line. We need to reign in the truly offensive, the hate, the vile accusations and the bully actions. These WILL change.

3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well.

I have noticed that a lot of previously good posters have either left or joined the ‘dark side’ of ugly debate. That is in response to the growing shrill and bitter atmosphere here. A reasonable thread with reasonable posts gets lost in the growing storm of crap flowing around here.

It needs to change and it will change as each of us just tones it down a bit. I can dish it out pretty well myself and I need to dial it back as well. But there is a line; a line over which we should not cross or even get close to crossing. A growing number however are crossing it almost daily.

This is OUR board, our place to vent, to mock to applaud and to complain. If it is to return to that kind of place these things must stop.

Your assistance is requested.

Longweekend is the last person who should be a moderator

2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are.
You are one of the main offenders.
I'm willing to give you a go, but you need to pull your head in too.

skippy. wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:03am:

2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. You are one of the main offenders. I'm willing to give you a go, but you need to pull your head in too.

Actually, skippy you have a point. But I have seen it happen to most people that they feel they need to shout and yell to even get heard above the din of abuse on here. I think you will find that if we all reduced the abuse somewhat the entire place will become a far nicer experience. and yes, i need to pull my head in too.

Fair enough.

Please delete wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:02am:

You are not one to point the finger in regard abuse. I note your little "loop holes". You are an abusive person, and I am shocked that you have been given the responsibility of moderator.

Well we will all have to see how that works out now, wont we. But you have to admit the absence od a moderator to deal with the excesses that occur has been a problem. At least my job allows me to be available - if not actually posting - far mor than most moderators.

I disagree with Longy on most things but he seems like a decent sort of bloke so he's probably one of the few people on here that could do a good job as a moderator.
Good luck with it Longy  :)

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:20am:

I disagree with Longy on most things but he seems like a decent sort of bloke so he's probably one of the few people on here that could do a good job as a moderator. Good luck with it Longy  :)

thanks adelcrow. You are one person I think who has felt pushed and prodded by the sometimes high-octane abuse on here. if we can dial it all back a lot then perhaps the debate can return to more reasonable levels.

Quote:

3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well.

so why didnt you just refer in name to who you were obviously talking about there

barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:23am:

Quote: 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. so why didnt you just refer in name to who you were obviously talking about there

deathridesahorse comes instantly to mind. gimme gimmme (his alter ego) as well

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:26am:

barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:23am: Quote: 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. so why didnt you just refer in name to who you were obviously talking about there deathridesahorse comes instantly to mind. gimme gimmme (his alter ego) as well

are you serious about the alter ego comment or are you just guessing? now that you're a mod you can check IPs, is gimme gimme DRAH? i had a suspicion for a bit too but only because they both love using smilies

barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:31am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:26am: barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:23am: Quote: 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. so why didnt you just refer in name to who you were obviously talking about there deathridesahorse comes instantly to mind. gimme gimmme (his alter ego) as well are you serious about the alter ego comment or are you just guessing? now that you're a mod you can check IPs, is gimme gimme DRAH? i had a suspicion for a bit too but only because they both love using smilies

I dont knwo how to checky IPs (yet) but gimme gimme sounds just liek DRAH without the drug-fuelled stupidity.

So in fairness longwhine, if you're giving up alter ego's hows matty's IP match up against others??

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:32am:

barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:26am: barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:23am: Quote: 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. so why didnt you just refer in name to who you were obviously talking about there deathridesahorse comes instantly to mind. gimme gimmme (his alter ego) as well are you serious about the alter ego comment or are you just guessing? now that you're a mod you can check IPs, is gimme gimme DRAH? i had a suspicion for a bit too but only because they both love using smilies I dont knwo how to checky IPs (yet) but gimme gimme sounds just liek DRAH without the drug-fuelled stupidity.

click the IP logged thing at the bottom of posts

Good Luck LW.

Agree with most of your list

3 new threads a day - I have been thinking about posting my first new topic, could happen any month now but I have trouble finding a topic which does not already exist.

Longweekend is the last person who should be a moderator

skippy. wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:34am:

So in fairness longwhine, if you're giving up alter ego's hows matty's IP match up against others??

I dont know how to do that but Im also not sure that is that important. I think we've all worked out that Matty isnt mellie.  anyhow. IP addresses change as most of us arent on static IPs. so the same poster wil ahev different IP addresses everytime their modem resets.

Congratulations Longweekend.

Dnarever wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:38am:

Good Luck LW. Agree with most of your list 3 new threads a day - I have been thinking about posting my first new topic, could happen any month now but I have trouble finding a topic which does not already exist.

the problem is rarely a lack of topics but the fact of 20 threads on the same one.

Please delete wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:40am:

Well, I'm going to improve this board, and myself, by leaving. Freediver, if you are still involved, please delete my profile, or message me to indicate how I should do so. I looked on help and couldn't see how to do so. I hope you enjoy a board where maqqa, chicken, cods and longweekend agree with each other. BTW Longweekend, previously I was footbru. I had to change names when joining this board because of your constant abuse, and denial of my right to speak under that nickname. You conducted yourself the same way on these boards under my "ernie" psuedonym. It's sad when one poster is SO INTENT on abusing someone else. Pat yourself on the back.

I thought that was you. But rather than have a tantrum why not stay and participate. This is a DEBATE board so dont expect to get complimented on everything you say.

Please delete wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:40am:

Well, I'm going to improve this board, and myself, by leaving. Freediver, if you are still involved, please delete my profile, or message me to indicate how I should do so. I looked on help and couldn't see how to do so. I hope you enjoy a board where maqqa, chicken, cods and longweekend agree with each other. BTW Longweekend, previously I was footbru. I had to change names when joining this board because of your constant abuse, and denial of my right to speak under that nickname. You conducted yourself the same way on these boards under my "ernie" psuedonym. It's sad when one poster is SO INTENT on abusing someone else. Pat yourself on the back.

no one denied you the right to speak/post.

Deborahmac09 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:41am:

Congratulations Longweekend.

Thanks.

Good luck Longy....However the problem posters do not possess the ability to articulate an opinion so they cannot debate in the terms you have framed.....These posters will not change their ways so you must either ban them or ignore them like I do!!!

People tend to give as much as they get so it is best not to participate in insulting each other.....If you argue with an idiot, onlookers cannot tell the difference!!!

If you go in for argument, take care of your temper. Your logic, if you have any, will take care of itself.
Joseph Farrell

Please delete wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:40am:

Well, I'm going to improve this board by leaving.

All I can say is when your right, your right. :)

philperth2010 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:51am:

Good luck Longy....However the problem posters do not possess the ability to articulate an opinion so they cannot debate in the terms you have framed.....These posters will not change their ways so you must either ban them or ignore them like I do!!! People tend to give as much as they get so it is best not to participate in insulting each other.....If you argue with an idiot, onlookers cannot tell the difference!!! If you go in for argument, take care of your temper. Your logic, if you have any, will take care of itself. Joseph Farrell

the REAL problem posters dont possess real debating ability. in that I agree. BUT the problem is the din they create winds the rest of us up in a manner that ruins it. most people on here are decent people. They may be wrong (as in all labor and greens supports LOL!) but they are decent. I want to lower the temperature and improve the quality of posts and the experience.

Please delete wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:40am:

Well, I'm going to improve this board, and myself, by leaving. Freediver, if you are still involved, please delete my profile, or message me to indicate how I should do so. I looked on help and couldn't see how to do so. I hope you enjoy a board where maqqa, chicken, cods and longweekend agree with each other. BTW Longweekend, previously I was footbru. I had to change names when joining this board because of your constant abuse, and denial of my right to speak under that nickname. You conducted yourself the same way on these boards under my "ernie" psuedonym. It's sad when one poster is SO INTENT on abusing someone else. Pat yourself on the back.

I remember now the great footbru debate... it was on Keating's Debt. Your position was that the debt DIDNT EXIST. Im not sure why you didnt expect to be mocked for that!

Well this is a bit of a surprise, open up this morning only to find LongWeekend in blue with a sh!tload of stars, congrats.
I'm sure you'll do a fine job, who knows we may even get back to debating politics.

Congrats Longy.

A bit of a aggressive moderation wouldn't go astray in this place.

Please delete wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:40am:

Well, I'm going to improve this board, and myself, by leaving. Freediver, if you are still involved, please delete my profile, or message me to indicate how I should do so. I looked on help and couldn't see how to do so. I hope you enjoy a board where maqqa, chicken, cods and longweekend agree with each other. BTW Longweekend, previously I was footbru. I had to change names when joining this board because of your constant abuse, and denial of my right to speak under that nickname. You conducted yourself the same way on these boards under my "ernie" psuedonym. It's sad when one poster is SO INTENT on abusing someone else. Pat yourself on the back.

come on ernie no sulking now....

when one keeps changing their ID it becomes confusing and a guessing game so unless you put up your old IDs.. you can expect a bit of flack..

god I cant do anything right.. I mostly come on here as I feel I am at least having conversation.. even though its mostly to myself...lol..but it passes the time for me.. but in saying that longy is right this  board is now all about spite and oneupmanship..who can do the GREATEST putdown..

who can compare the worst of the worst.... we are a b unch of whinging nitpickers.. who will do anything to put down the other side..in some cases beyond decency. how low do we want to go thats the point..

perhaps longy one of the things I liked about the Yahoo board was they showed those that were deleted..in this forum we have no idea, therefore it can look as though they get away with murder..

anyway well done and good luck

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 10:12am:

Well this is a bit of a surprise, open up this morning only to find LongWeekend in blue with a sh!tload of stars, congrats. I'm sure you'll do a fine job, who knows we may even get back to debating politics.

That's kinda the plan! Thanks!

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 8:54am:

2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are.

Yes. YOU. You consistently abuse people who disagree with you when you are incapable of mounting any other argument, you craven little hypocrite ::)

astro_surf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 11:40am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 8:54am: 2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. Yes. YOU. You consistently abuse people who disagree with you when you are incapable of mounting any other argument, you craven little hypocrite ::)

lol coming from the biggest abuser of people who dont agree with your elitist so called information.

Good luck to longie and it is the way of Australia, that someone who is not left, is in some kind of power. I know longie will be fair and look forward to the changes, even if I have to change myself.

How come I get singled out?  The haters chief rep longweekend notices the normally abusive, intolerant evil behavior of the haters has reached new lows so he singles out the peace makers and the targets of abuse for special mention?  Way to not be able to see the splinter in my eye for the plank in your own bigots and warmongers.  Now go kick a few more off the dole - there's an enlightened chap.

astro_surf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 11:40am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 8:54am: 2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. Yes. YOU. You consistently abuse people who disagree with you when you are incapable of mounting any other argument, you craven little hypocrite ::)

says the person who put up the 'sodomizing' thread. that was the catalysts for me becoming a moderator. so how does it feel to be the one who helped make this all happen?

now grow up, start posting like a nice person, stop spamming or get used to being deleted or banned.

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 11:54am:

How come I get singled out?  The haters chief rep longweekend notices the normally abusive, intolerant evil behavior of the haters has reached new lows so he singles out the peace makers and the targets of abuse for special mention?  Way to not be able to see the splinter in my eye for the plank in your own bigots and warmongers.  Now go kick a few more off the dole - there's an enlightened chap.

Its OK the Furher loves you bill

http://images.pictureshunt.com/pics/l/lips-2284.jpg

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 11:54am:

How come I get singled out?  The haters chief rep longweekend notices the normally abusive, intolerant evil behavior of the haters has reached new lows so he singles out the peace makers and the targets of abuse for special mention?  Way to not be able to see the splinter in my eye for the plank in your own bigots and warmongers.  Now go kick a few more off the dole - there's an enlightened chap.

you got singled out for NOT being deleted and banned due to your mental illness. every new identity you assume has a new irrational target.

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 11:44am:

astro_surf wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 11:40am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 8:54am: 2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. Yes. YOU. You consistently abuse people who disagree with you when you are incapable of mounting any other argument, you craven little hypocrite ::) lol coming from the biggest abuser of people who dont agree with your elitist so called information. Good luck to longie and it is the way of Australia, that someone who is not left, is in some kind of power. I know longie will be fair and look forward to the changes, even if I have to change myself.

I'm not the one calling for others to be civil. That would make me a hypocrite. i might be an abusive front bottom but i'm not a craven hypocrite like LW.

Who the hell decided it was a good idea to make one of the most blindly partisan and abusive posters on the forum I will never know.

I'm sure he'll be cpompletely unbiased in his decisions ::)

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 12:00pm:

astro_surf wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 11:40am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 8:54am: 2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. Yes. YOU. You consistently abuse people who disagree with you when you are incapable of mounting any other argument, you craven little hypocrite ::) says the person who put up the 'sodomizing' thread. that was the catalysts for me becoming a moderator. so how does it feel to be the one who helped make this all happen? now grow up, start posting like a nice person, stop spamming or get used to being deleted or banned.

LOL, just ban me know, you power tripper ::)

Oh no I wouldn't want to see you go astro..you are such a nice poster. ;)

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 12:05pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 11:54am: How come I get singled out?  The haters chief rep longweekend notices the normally abusive, intolerant evil behavior of the haters has reached new lows so he singles out the peace makers and the targets of abuse for special mention?  Way to not be able to see the splinter in my eye for the plank in your own bigots and warmongers.  Now go kick a few more off the dole - there's an enlightened chap. you got singled out for NOT being deleted and banned due to your mental illness. every new identity you assume has a new irrational target.

In other words you don't like his style or politics, so it's alright to single him out and call him 'mentally ill'?

Fail.

Can't see I have much future here when somebody whose bias is so obvious gets to be the mod.  

Looking at the last few posts you have a big job ahead of you Longy. Good luck.

Yes..that's what I was thinking.

Unbelievable. :o

Who gives out these awards?

I was replying to Grey..

Good onya mate. ;)

funny thing is I have never looked on longy as an abuser I must have been reading you all wrong all these years longy..

I can only guess everybodies idea of abuse is different to mine!!!!!!!..

I have been called over the coals for abuse by mantra as it happens.. which we sorted out I am glad to say.. but when she posted up for me what she called abuse.. I sort of couldnt see it.. maybe it was because it was my own?????... so likewise longies abuse has escaped me as well.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:32am:

barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:26am: barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:23am: Quote: 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. so why didnt you just refer in name to who you were obviously talking about there deathridesahorse comes instantly to mind. gimme gimmme (his alter ego) as well are you serious about the alter ego comment or are you just guessing? now that you're a mod you can check IPs, is gimme gimme DRAH? i had a suspicion for a bit too but only because they both love using smilies I dont knwo how to checky IPs (yet) but gimme gimme sounds just liek DRAH without the drug-fuelled stupidity.

LOL, this should be a fun train wreck to watch, LW is always accusing people of beng me. Like I give enough of a poo about htis forum to be creating sock puppets. LW jumps at shadows, he's going to be a more paranoid despot than Stalin! ;D

Seriously though, ban me, I'm not having anything to do with a forum run by a complete nut like LW. There is nothing in his history that leads me to conclude he will exercise his authority with anyhing approaching a dipassionat and non-biased manner. The guy is a straight ideological warrior.

LW YOU ARE A PAEDOPHILE SEX OFENDER! BAN ME front bottom!!

cods wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 12:33pm:

funny thing is I have never looked on longy as an abuser I must have been reading you all wrong all these years longy.. I can only guess everybodies idea of abuse is different to mine!!!!!!!.. I have been called over the coals for abuse by mantra as it happens.. which we sorted out I am glad to say.. but when she posted up for me what she called abuse.. I sort of couldnt see it.. maybe it was because it was my own?????... so likewise longies abuse has escaped me as well.

Okaaay... Look come clean Freediver. You want all the left wing voices off the forum? Just say so, because the way this is panning out is barking right ridiculous  ;D

astro_surf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 12:49pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:32am: barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:26am: barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:23am: Quote: 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. so why didnt you just refer in name to who you were obviously talking about there deathridesahorse comes instantly to mind. gimme gimmme (his alter ego) as well are you serious about the alter ego comment or are you just guessing? now that you're a mod you can check IPs, is gimme gimme DRAH? i had a suspicion for a bit too but only because they both love using smilies I dont knwo how to checky IPs (yet) but gimme gimme sounds just liek DRAH without the drug-fuelled stupidity. LOL, this should be a fun train wreck to watch, LW is always accusing people of beng me. Like I give enough of a poo about htis forum to be creating sock puppets. LW jumps at shadows, he's going to be a more paranoid despot than Stalin! ;D Seriously though, ban me, I'm not having anything to do with a forum run by a complete nut like LW. There is nothing in his history that leads me to conclude he will exercise his authority with anyhing approaching a dipassionat and non-biased manner. The guy is a straight ideological warrior. LW YOU ARE A PAEDOPHILE SEX OFENDER! BAN ME front bottom!!

Unlike yourself who is so bi-partisan and not an ideologue. Giver me a second while I cough up a big loogy.

You are just upset that your ideology is not in power, just like the next election. It just gets worse for you.

LW will be fair and we all get dragged into the abuse from time to time. LW is no different and I have faith the job LW does, will be worth the effort.

Grey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 12:12pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 12:05pm: corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 11:54am: How come I get singled out?  The haters chief rep longweekend notices the normally abusive, intolerant evil behavior of the haters has reached new lows so he singles out the peace makers and the targets of abuse for special mention?  Way to not be able to see the splinter in my eye for the plank in your own bigots and warmongers.  Now go kick a few more off the dole - there's an enlightened chap. you got singled out for NOT being deleted and banned due to your mental illness. every new identity you assume has a new irrational target. In other words you don't like his style or politics, so it's alright to single him out and call him 'mentally ill'? Fail. Can't see I have much future here when somebody whose bias is so obvious gets to be the mod.

Grey, corporate_whitey posted for many years on the Yahoo boards under several different IDs.....
And if you'd read those posts, you'd see that calling him 'mentally ill' is the most charitable choice....

Tho they whinge and whine the most about "lefties" as someone that has been here for around five years now I've never seen so many rightards on this forum, they've taken the place over, and now with LWs appointment that really has taken it to the next step. I can see cods whinge and bitch about every post I make to her mate now.
It is a massive mistake to make one of the worst abusers on this forum a mod,  massive.

You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum.

Free speech rules!!!!

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:08pm:

You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!!

deadhorse is a special case. He SPAMs with impunity. That needs to stop, surely you agree?

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:10pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! deadhorse is a special case. He SPAMs with impunity. That needs to stop, surely you agree?

so does maqqa.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:08pm:

You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!!

Deathrides wouldn't be so bad if he/she'd at least let us know WHAT his threads are about, instead of posting one sentence 'responses' to something on another site...

skippy. wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:11pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:10pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! deadhorse is a special case. He SPAMs with impunity. That needs to stop, surely you agree? so does maqqa.

Im talking about a one line response with all the emoticons and doing a copy paste to fill a novel, not articles that can be the catayst of debate (what maqqa does).

This is in reply to the thread deleted.


Quote:

You lot need to calm the bugger down. Astro pull your head in, If you get a ban for this thread you bloody well deserve it. Suck it up & either bugger off for good or return & post reasonable arguments & don't go bloody postal if someone disagree's, point where you think they are wrong, maybe a little public humilation thrown in(SUBTLE NOT OVERT) & move on. Gimme & Skip, I have been crossing swords with Longy for close to a decade now & have never been abused by him. Keep your posts on the topic you are discussing, don't fall into personal abuse & he doesn't either. Sure a stupid or dumb may fall into the post but I hardly consider that abuse & if he let's one of those slip first well there's your invite to go to town. The problem with most from BOTH sides is you guys don't try & defeat the policy idea/direction, you try & beat the poster & in doing so turn political arguments into personal, it then all just turns to sh!t.

Grey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 12:56pm:

cods wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 12:33pm: funny thing is I have never looked on longy as an abuser I must have been reading you all wrong all these years longy.. I can only guess everybodies idea of abuse is different to mine!!!!!!!.. I have been called over the coals for abuse by mantra as it happens.. which we sorted out I am glad to say.. but when she posted up for me what she called abuse.. I sort of couldnt see it.. maybe it was because it was my own?????... so likewise longies abuse has escaped me as well. Okaaay... Look come clean Freediver. You want all the left wing voices off the forum? Just say so, because the way this is panning out is barking right ridiculous  ;D

Not true.
I think any sane person can put up with reasonable discussion but unfortunately its been noticeable in the last few months that more and more cretins are starting idiotic threads like "Do Liberals eat children" etc.

I have no party allegiance, heck I don't even vote in Australia anymore. I am fortunate enough to live in the United States now but I do take an interest in Australia and what is best for it.

If the debate has dropped down to the level seen on here, then the country really is going down the sh!tter.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 8:54am:

If you have been here for more than a few weeks you will have noticed that these forums – particularly the Politicians Suck board – has become a far less pleasant place of late. We ALL need to change our ways to make this a more fun place to be and to debate/complain/shout our particular point of view. The problems I see are as follows: 1)       Thread spamming. We don’t need 43 threads on Oakeshott and Windsor. We don’t need the daily anti-Bolt thread nor do we need the daily I hate Gillard rant. New threads need to be genuinely new topics. Good topics are being lost in the flood of rubbish. I am asking people to voluntarily (at this stage) limit themselves to a maximum of three new threads per day. 2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. We debate robustly and we mock and hassle each other from our own points of view. This is the way of real debate. But some cross the line. We need to reign in the truly offensive, the hate, the vile accusations and the bully actions. These WILL change. 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. I have noticed that a lot of previously good posters have either left or joined the ‘dark side’ of ugly debate. That is in response to the growing shrill and bitter atmosphere here. A reasonable thread with reasonable posts gets lost in the growing storm of crap flowing around here. It needs to change and it will change as each of us just tones it down a bit. I can dish it out pretty well myself and I need to dial it back as well. But there is a line; a line over which we should not cross or even get close to crossing. A growing number however are crossing it almost daily. This is OUR board, our place to vent, to mock to applaud and to complain. If it is to return to that kind of place these things must stop. Your assistance is requested.

global moderator, lol!

 :D :D :D :D :D

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:14pm:

skippy. wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:11pm: progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:10pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! deadhorse is a special case. He SPAMs with impunity. That needs to stop, surely you agree? so does maqqa. Im talking about a one line response with all the emoticons and doing a copy paste to fill a novel, not articles that can be the catayst of debate (what maqqa does).

Chaos Theory, ...end of!  ::)

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 12:00pm:

astro_surf wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 11:40am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 8:54am: 2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. Yes. YOU. You consistently abuse people who disagree with you when you are incapable of mounting any other argument, you craven little hypocrite ::) says the person who put up the 'sodomizing' thread. that was the catalysts for me becoming a moderator. so how does it feel to be the one who helped make this all happen? now grow up, start posting like a nice person, stop spamming or get used to being deleted or banned.

What do you mean the catalyst to you becoming a moderator? It sounds like a very interesting process this becoming of a moderator...

...IT SOUNDS LIKE  A COMPLETE JOKE OF  A PROCESS ACTUALLY!!!

 :D ;D ;D

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:32pm:

Grey wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 12:56pm: cods wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 12:33pm: funny thing is I have never looked on longy as an abuser I must have been reading you all wrong all these years longy.. I can only guess everybodies idea of abuse is different to mine!!!!!!!.. I have been called over the coals for abuse by mantra as it happens.. which we sorted out I am glad to say.. but when she posted up for me what she called abuse.. I sort of couldnt see it.. maybe it was because it was my own?????... so likewise longies abuse has escaped me as well. Okaaay... Look come clean Freediver. You want all the left wing voices off the forum? Just say so, because the way this is panning out is barking right ridiculous  ;D Not true. I think any sane person can put up with reasonable discussion but unfortunately its been noticeable in the last few months that more and more cretins are starting idiotic threads like "Do Liberals eat children" etc. I have no party allegiance, heck I don't even vote in Australia anymore. I am fortunate enough to live in the United States now but I do take an interest in Australia and what is best for it. If the debate has dropped down to the level seen on here, then the country really is going down the sh!tter.

These are not unreasonable questions, the Liberals support all sorts of atrocities from wars, to mandatory detention for desperate asylum seekers.  They support human inequality, they support feudal working conditions, they support forcing people to sign individual employment contracts, holding people without trial, endorsing torture, assassinations, forcing people to compete rather than collectivize and cooperate.  The prize aggression and greed above all things.  These are not unreasonable questions to ask of those on the dark side - they are pertinent.

astro_surf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 12:49pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:32am: barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:26am: barnaby joe wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:23am: Quote: 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. so why didnt you just refer in name to who you were obviously talking about there deathridesahorse comes instantly to mind. gimme gimmme (his alter ego) as well are you serious about the alter ego comment or are you just guessing? now that you're a mod you can check IPs, is gimme gimme DRAH? i had a suspicion for a bit too but only because they both love using smilies I dont knwo how to checky IPs (yet) but gimme gimme sounds just liek DRAH without the drug-fuelled stupidity. LOL, this should be a fun train wreck to watch, LW is always accusing people of beng me. Like I give enough of a poo about htis forum to be creating sock puppets. LW jumps at shadows, he's going to be a more paranoid despot than Stalin! ;D Seriously though, ban me, I'm not having anything to do with a forum run by a complete nut like LW. There is nothing in his history that leads me to conclude he will exercise his authority with anyhing approaching a dipassionat and non-biased manner. The guy is a straight ideological warrior. LW YOU ARE A PAEDOPHILE SEX OFENDER! BAN ME front bottom!!

UM... tryhard fascists have no power!!!  ::) ;D ;D

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:08pm:

You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!!

All of those you quote are categorically insane.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:58pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! All of those you quote are categorically insane.

Honestly,Andrei, how many poster that post on forums like this could be classified as "normal"?

skippy. wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:01pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:58pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! All of those you quote are categorically insane. Honestly,Andrei, how many poster that post on forums like this could be classified as "normal"?

I am a normal, everyday stand-up member of the community for a start....

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 8:54am:

If you have been here for more than a few weeks you will have noticed that these forums – particularly the Politicians Suck board – has become a far less pleasant place of late. We ALL need to change our ways to make this a more fun place to be and to debate/complain/shout our particular point of view. The problems I see are as follows: 1)       Thread spamming. We don’t need 43 threads on Oakeshott and Windsor. We don’t need the daily anti-Bolt thread nor do we need the daily I hate Gillard rant. New threads need to be genuinely new topics. Good topics are being lost in the flood of rubbish. I am asking people to voluntarily (at this stage) limit themselves to a maximum of three new threads per day. 2)      Abuse. We all know who the main offenders are. We debate robustly and we mock and hassle each other from our own points of view. This is the way of real debate. But some cross the line. We need to reign in the truly offensive, the hate, the vile accusations and the bully actions. These WILL change. 3)      Idiocy. I have a low threshold for genuine stupidity. Not mistakes, not errors of judgement but full-blown cringe-worthy idiocy. There is a growing amount of that. It needs to stop as well. I’m not referring to Bill_crany/Prevailing/Corporate_whitey or Wharfy and their type. They are probably literally insane and you can just filter them out. I mean those whose posts have all the feel of a drunken rant or a drug-fuelled fantasy. They need to end as well. I have noticed that a lot of previously good posters have either left or joined the ‘dark side’ of ugly debate. That is in response to the growing shrill and bitter atmosphere here. A reasonable thread with reasonable posts gets lost in the growing storm of crap flowing around here. It needs to change and it will change as each of us just tones it down a bit. I can dish it out pretty well myself and I need to dial it back as well. But there is a line; a line over which we should not cross or even get close to crossing. A growing number however are crossing it almost daily. This is OUR board, our place to vent, to mock to applaud and to complain. If it is to return to that kind of place these things must stop. Your assistance is requested.

Hello LW.

I left this board after the bile that was posted re 9/11. I was determined to not come on here again to post a comment, as I believed that the bullying on most threads was rampant. It didn't seem worthwhile to waste my time on here when there was so much more I could be doing with my life than wasting it looking at vile messages.

When on Yahoo I found the people who posted, whether lefties or righties, were intelligent (for the most part....although there was one individual who didn't fit that category..who just enjoyed disrupting the board and using vile language).

It was mostly a pleasure to sign on and see who was posting and to debate issues of the day....and we seemed to know one another and care about one another, and often knew a few personal details about the family of others and so on....or if one of us was sick or had a death in the family we were all concerned.

Now that you are a moderator, I will look in occasionally to see if anything has changed.

Debate is definitely what it is about. If you think Gillard is good for the country, then you have a right to say so, and endorse her policies without being abused....as does the person who replies who may offer an alternative opinion on her and her policies. Ditto with Abbott. I have never seen the country so divided as it is at present and it would be great if personal abuse could be eliminated from these threads.

Some threads should simply be eliminated...they seem to be posted by people with no education and who bully for the love of it. You have a right to an opinion on the politics of the day without someone abusing you for it. That is when it becomes personal and should be stopped.

Good luck, longweekend. You have a task ahead of you... :)

LW should check Deathhorse's IP address.

I'd lay money that it is some kind of secure unit somewhere.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:58pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! All of those you quote are categorically insane.

Andrei loves rivers of blood!

All the greedy people here love rivers f blood!!  ;) ;) :D

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:04pm:

skippy. wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:01pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:58pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! All of those you quote are categorically insane. Honestly,Andrei, how many poster that post on forums like this could be classified as "normal"? I am a normal, everyday stand-up member of the community for a start....

Yes yes ,one of the common signs of madness is to think you are indeed "normal",Andrei. :D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:06pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:58pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! All of those you quote are categorically insane. Andrei loves rivers of blood! All the greedy people here love rivers f blood!!  ;) ;) :D

Well not rivers......maybe a small rivulet...or trickle...

skippy. wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:01pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:58pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:08pm: You can't ban corporate whitey, gimme gimme or death rides a horse for having a point of view. I consider myself to be quite sane, and I agree with much of what they say. If anyone gets banned for having an opposing veiw you may as well just have a 'right wing only' forum. Free speech rules!!!! All of those you quote are categorically insane. Honestly,Andrei, how many poster that post on forums like this could be classified as "normal"?

I don't think I've ever met a 'normal' person, even in R/L (unless they were on meds...)

People should only be banned if they are continually being personally abusive, having differing views or a unique way of looking at things should not get anyone banned.

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:11pm:

People should only be banned if they are continually being personally abusive, having differing views or a unique way of looking at things should not get anyone banned.

Well I HOPE that's how it will be adel...

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:11pm:

People should only be banned if they are continually being personally abusive, having differing views or a unique way of looking at things should not get anyone banned.

http://www.aaanything.net/wp-content/gallery/best-photos-of-the-week-29-2011/thumbs/thumbs_i_have_bicycles_on_my_feet_your_argument_is_irrelevant.jpg

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:11pm:

People should only be banned if they are continually being personally abusive, having differing views or a unique way of looking at things should not get anyone banned.

LWs a trippa: CODS MADE THE BEST CALL OF ALL AGES AGO (I KNOW i KNOW, THE IRONY!) : SIGN A PLEDGE THREAD THEN BAN ALL SWEARERS AND ABUSERS AND NON-SIGNERS PERIOD!

TOO EASY!

THE GREATEST SUGGESTION OF ALL THANKS TO CODS, BELEIVE IT OR NOT!

SO, LW, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS AND FIX THE FORUM BY EMPLOYING CODS IDEA!

IT'LL WORK AND YOU KNOW IT WILL COS YOU'RE ALWAYS HERE TO BE ABLE TO BAN EVERYONE YA VOYEUR!

...SO, ....UM,... WE HAVEN'T STARTED YET HAVE WE???????????  ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:17pm:

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:11pm: People should only be banned if they are continually being personally abusive, having differing views or a unique way of looking at things should not get anyone banned. LWs a trippa: CODS MADE THE BEST CALL OF ALL AGES AGO (I KNOW i KNOW, THE IRONY!) : SIGN A PLEDGE THREAD THEN BAN ALL SWEARERS AND ABUSERS AND NON-SIGNERS PERIOD! TOO EASY! THE GREATEST SUGGESTION OF ALL THANKS TO CODS, BELEIVE IT OR NOT! SO, LW, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS AND FIX THE FORUM BY EMPLOYING CODS IDEA! IT'LL WORK AND YOU KNOW IT WILL COS YOU'RE ALWAYS HERE TO BE ABLE TO BAN EVERYONE YA VOYEUR! ...SO, ....UM,... WE HAVEN'T STARTED YET HAVE WE???????????  ;D

:D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:19pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:11pm: People should only be banned if they are continually being personally abusive, having differing views or a unique way of looking at things should not get anyone banned. LWs a trippa: CODS MADE THE BEST CALL OF ALL AGES AGO (I KNOW i KNOW, THE IRONY!) : SIGN A PLEDGE THREAD THEN BAN ALL SWEARERS AND ABUSERS AND NON-SIGNERS PERIOD! TOO EASY! THE GREATEST SUGGESTION OF ALL THANKS TO CODS, BELEIVE IT OR NOT! SO, LW, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS AND FIX THE FORUM BY EMPLOYING CODS IDEA! IT'LL WORK AND YOU KNOW IT WILL COS YOU'RE ALWAYS HERE TO BE ABLE TO BAN EVERYONE YA VOYEUR! ...SO, ....UM,... WE HAVEN'T STARTED YET HAVE WE???????????  ;D :D

:D :D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:19pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:19pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:11pm: People should only be banned if they are continually being personally abusive, having differing views or a unique way of looking at things should not get anyone banned. LWs a trippa: CODS MADE THE BEST CALL OF ALL AGES AGO (I KNOW i KNOW, THE IRONY!) : SIGN A PLEDGE THREAD THEN BAN ALL SWEARERS AND ABUSERS AND NON-SIGNERS PERIOD! TOO EASY! THE GREATEST SUGGESTION OF ALL THANKS TO CODS, BELEIVE IT OR NOT! SO, LW, PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS AND FIX THE FORUM BY EMPLOYING CODS IDEA! IT'LL WORK AND YOU KNOW IT WILL COS YOU'RE ALWAYS HERE TO BE ABLE TO BAN EVERYONE YA VOYEUR! ...SO, ....UM,... WE HAVEN'T STARTED YET HAVE WE???????????  ;D :D :D :D

Yes ok, I'll give ya that one.....quite funny..

funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work!

Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times after you eventually fidn the balls to sign the pledge you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!

 ;)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:30pm:

funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work! Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!  ;)

Interesting idea...
Not sure how hard it would be to organise though...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:31pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:30pm: funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work! Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!  ;) Interesting idea... Not sure how hard it would be to organise though...

Have a thread called pledge thread... delete every post by every poster until they sign the pledge thread agreeing not to play the man but the ball and if they fail three times after signing they get banned forever and must feel the shame of having to find a new screenname!

EZY!!  ;)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:33pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:31pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:30pm: funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work! Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!  ;) Interesting idea... Not sure how hard it would be to organise though... Have a thread called pledge thread... delete every post by every poster until they sign the pledge thread agreeing not to play the man but the ball and if they fail three times after signing they get banned forever and must feel the shame of having to find a new screenname! EZY!!  ;)

Why not just make it a rule that if the moderator gets 1 complaint about the man being played instead of the ball, then the moderator will make judgement and delete the message/warn the user.

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:37pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:33pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:31pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:30pm: funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work! Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!  ;) Interesting idea... Not sure how hard it would be to organise though... Have a thread called pledge thread... delete every post by every poster until they sign the pledge thread agreeing not to play the man but the ball and if they fail three times after signing they get banned forever and must feel the shame of having to find a new screenname! EZY!!  ;) Why not just make it a rule that if the moderator gets 1 complaint about the man being played instead of the ball, then the moderator will make judgement and delete the message/warn the user.

yeh well, take it up with someone who has the power: what's the point arguing with me about it!??!

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:44pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:37pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:33pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:31pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:30pm: funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work! Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!  ;) Interesting idea... Not sure how hard it would be to organise though... Have a thread called pledge thread... delete every post by every poster until they sign the pledge thread agreeing not to play the man but the ball and if they fail three times after signing they get banned forever and must feel the shame of having to find a new screenname! EZY!!  ;) Why not just make it a rule that if the moderator gets 1 complaint about the man being played instead of the ball, then the moderator will make judgement and delete the message/warn the user. yeh well, take it up with someone who has the power: what's the point arguing with me about it!??!

Maybe that is your problem. Argument - debate - suggestion. Not the same.

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:47pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:44pm: progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:37pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:33pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:31pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:30pm: funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work! Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!  ;) Interesting idea... Not sure how hard it would be to organise though... Have a thread called pledge thread... delete every post by every poster until they sign the pledge thread agreeing not to play the man but the ball and if they fail three times after signing they get banned forever and must feel the shame of having to find a new screenname! EZY!!  ;) Why not just make it a rule that if the moderator gets 1 complaint about the man being played instead of the ball, then the moderator will make judgement and delete the message/warn the user. yeh well, take it up with someone who has the power: what's the point arguing with me about it!??! Maybe that is your problem. Argument - debate - suggestion. Not the same.

NOT WITH YOU BUDDY... YOU'RE A MORON!  ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:50pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:47pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:44pm: progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:37pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:33pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:31pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:30pm: funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work! Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!  ;) Interesting idea... Not sure how hard it would be to organise though... Have a thread called pledge thread... delete every post by every poster until they sign the pledge thread agreeing not to play the man but the ball and if they fail three times after signing they get banned forever and must feel the shame of having to find a new screenname! EZY!!  ;) Why not just make it a rule that if the moderator gets 1 complaint about the man being played instead of the ball, then the moderator will make judgement and delete the message/warn the user. yeh well, take it up with someone who has the power: what's the point arguing with me about it!??! Maybe that is your problem. Argument - debate - suggestion. Not the same. NOT WITH YOU BUDDY... YOU'RE A MORON!  ;D

Are you playing the man?

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:50pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:50pm: progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:47pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:44pm: progressiveslol wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:37pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:33pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:31pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:30pm: funny or not, the pledge thread idea will work! Every post gets deleted until you sign the pledge and if you commit the serious sin of playing the man instead of the ball 3 times you get banned forever and therefore must feel the shame of finding yourself a new screen name!!  ;) Interesting idea... Not sure how hard it would be to organise though... Have a thread called pledge thread... delete every post by every poster until they sign the pledge thread agreeing not to play the man but the ball and if they fail three times after signing they get banned forever and must feel the shame of having to find a new screenname! EZY!!  ;) Why not just make it a rule that if the moderator gets 1 complaint about the man being played instead of the ball, then the moderator will make judgement and delete the message/warn the user. yeh well, take it up with someone who has the power: what's the point arguing with me about it!??! Maybe that is your problem. Argument - debate - suggestion. Not the same. NOT WITH YOU BUDDY... YOU'RE A MORON!  ;D Are you playing the man?

Have I signed a pledge? Thought not, ...so eat me!!  ;D ;D

I wish you luck longie.  Let's actually see if you can curb the crap from both sides and stop the constant repeating of junk and abuse, from both sides.  

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 2:56pm:

I wish you luck longie.  Let's actually see if you can curb the crap from both sides and stop the constant repeating of junk and abuse, from both sides.

Hasn't done much of that so far; Gimme Gimmes posts are disappearing into other ones while Mattys spam posts continue unabated.

GoddyofOz wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 3:30pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:56pm: I wish you luck longie.  Let's actually see if you can curb the crap from both sides and stop the constant repeating of junk and abuse, from both sides.   Hasn't done much of that so far; Gimme Gimmes posts are disappearing into other ones while Mattys spam posts continue unabated.

It's always good to give a person the benefit of the doubt.  In the end, longie was the biggest whiner about mozz's "biased" moderation.   Let's see if he believes in what he preaches, or if he will simply end up being a hypocrite ;)

GoddyofOz wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 3:30pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 2:56pm: I wish you luck longie.  Let's actually see if you can curb the crap from both sides and stop the constant repeating of junk and abuse, from both sides.   Hasn't done much of that so far; Gimme Gimmes posts are disappearing into other ones while Mattys spam posts continue unabated.

Well we need to bitch and whine, like  longwhine did to FD, thats why FD made him a mod, apparently, if you cant shut em up sign em up. ::)

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 1:51pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:32pm: Grey wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 12:56pm: cods wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 12:33pm: funny thing is I have never looked on longy as an abuser I must have been reading you all wrong all these years longy.. I can only guess everybodies idea of abuse is different to mine!!!!!!!.. I have been called over the coals for abuse by mantra as it happens.. which we sorted out I am glad to say.. but when she posted up for me what she called abuse.. I sort of couldnt see it.. maybe it was because it was my own?????... so likewise longies abuse has escaped me as well. Okaaay... Look come clean Freediver. You want all the left wing voices off the forum? Just say so, because the way this is panning out is barking right ridiculous  ;D Not true. I think any sane person can put up with reasonable discussion but unfortunately its been noticeable in the last few months that more and more cretins are starting idiotic threads like "Do Liberals eat children" etc. I have no party allegiance, heck I don't even vote in Australia anymore. I am fortunate enough to live in the United States now but I do take an interest in Australia and what is best for it. If the debate has dropped down to the level seen on here, then the country really is going down the sh!tter. These are not unreasonable questions, the Liberals support all sorts of atrocities from wars, to mandatory detention for desperate asylum seekers.  They support human inequality, they support feudal working conditions, they support forcing people to sign individual employment contracts, holding people without trial, endorsing torture, assassinations, forcing people to compete rather than collectivize and cooperate.  The prize aggression and greed above all things.  These are not unreasonable questions to ask of those on the dark side - they are pertinent.

If corporate whitey was ever insane they seem to have made a remarkably quick recovery. Personally I have never seen any insanity, just a distinctive artistic and challenging style. That's the problem with having the hard right moderate. Anybody who doesn't conform to their norms is deemed nuts. Because to be hard right you have to lack imagination. A fascist IS a control freak.

name and shame I reckon.. I still reckon yahoo had the right idea... show those that have been deleted...blank out their post but leave it for all to see..eventually they will realise they wont be heard with that behavior.. it shouldnt take too long..for it to sink in... although some are a worry..I thought it hilarious when they used to blank out swearwords...lol.. remember we couldnt print Brumby..but it ment well..

blank out the post its the only way.I guess that means 24/7 watch though and that impracticle..oh well..nice try!

we are going to reclaim the boards for all of us that actually want to debate. that means gimme, astro, maqqa , greens and everyone else has to stop flooding the boards.

Still..I would rather have my nuts caught in a meat grinder than be a moderator on here.
Although its 100 times better than the old yahoo board so good luck with hanging on to your sanity Longy  :)
I'll support anyone silly enough to give it a go  :D

Im with Grey I quite like corporate whitey..he's different and hangs it out there.
I was disappointed when Freediver banned him awhile ago.
Im of the opinion that if you cant stand the way some people put their views just ignore them.

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 4:41pm:

Im with Grey I quite like corporate whitey..he's different and hangs it out there. I was disappointed when Freediver banned him awhile ago. Im of the opinion that if you cant stand the way some people put their views just ignore them.

every now and then bill-crany/prevailing gets out of control. he was repeatedly posting offensive photos and generally making a pain of himself. I generally ignore him but he is certifiable and occasionally does make a nuisance of himself.

Who wants to see this board improved? name yourselves.

I want to see:
1) an end to spamming
2) an end to excessive abuse
3) real debate

I would like to see that, Longweekend.

I would like to see an end to one-liners just putting down a previous poster. As they say, playing the man, not the ball.

A reasonable reply which deals with the subject without the abuse would be great. Too much to hope for I suppose.

No-one minds some "argy-bargy" as Rudd would say, but to just attack, attack, attack someone because they have a different political opinion is poor and is not considered "debating".

Congrats Longy. I am sick to death of being accused of being Mellie, and only getting my views from Alan Jones. I am fair, and I like debating and discussing views with people both agree and disagree with me. I never abuse those on the opposite side. I don't see why they feel the need to do so. As for part 1, that was obviously directed at me, but I must point out that I have not made a thread on either Oakeshott or Windsor for a while now, and haven't made many at all since I promised to reduce them. I probably will make more threads on the in the future, but I have every right to, in moderation.

matty wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 8:52pm:

Congrats Longy. I am sick to death of being accused of being Mellie, and only getting my views from Alan Jones. I am fair, and I like debating and discussing views with people both agree and disagree with me. I never abuse those on the opposite side. I don't see why they feel the need to do so. As for part 1, that was obviously directed at me, but I must point out that I have not made a thread on either Oakeshott or Windsor for a while now, and haven't made many at all since I promised to reduce them. I probably will make more threads on the in the future, but I have every right to, in moderation.

There's no rhyme or reason to having a dozen, or very many more, threads on the one topic. A good topic can run for tens of thousands of posts and can be a valuable resource and an important archive that historians can make use of. So on that score I'm in agreement.

On the Guardians talk board we used to run a thread or two just for left and right to abuse each other colourfully and imaginatively. It was a lot of fun. I should miss not having any opportunity to spill bile over Imperium, I'm sure that wish is reciprocated. After all he started it ;D

A 'Real Debate', there's an idea. Oh but the right doesn't have any :-(  

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 4:47pm:

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 4:41pm: Im with Grey I quite like corporate whitey..he's different and hangs it out there. I was disappointed when Freediver banned him awhile ago. Im of the opinion that if you cant stand the way some people put their views just ignore them. every now and then bill-crany/prevailing gets out of control. he was repeatedly posting offensive photos and generally making a pain of himself. I generally ignore him but he is certifiable and occasionally does make a nuisance of himself.

I'm sorry but hanging out your prejudices based on your past history and naming the names you'll be gunning for is no way to go forwards as a moderator. Carry on like that and the board will empty. Reasonable people will not tolerate unfairness. And before you say it, that is already being unfair.  >:(

We all have our 'pet' subjects that we like to comment upon.

Mine's the poor treatment of the unemployed.

But. I've been silenced on that topic.

I'm gone, been nice to know you all.

Will drop in from time to time, but, no, bugger it.

Bye, all.

Kat wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 12:53am:

We all have our 'pet' subjects that we like to comment upon. Mine's the poor treatment of the unemployed. But. I've been silenced on that topic. I'm gone, been nice to know you all. Will drop in from time to time, but, no, bugger it. Bye, all.

Do I smell burning martyr...

Grey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 3:43pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:51pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 1:32pm: Grey wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 12:56pm: cods wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 12:33pm: funny thing is I have never looked on longy as an abuser I must have been reading you all wrong all these years longy.. I can only guess everybodies idea of abuse is different to mine!!!!!!!.. I have been called over the coals for abuse by mantra as it happens.. which we sorted out I am glad to say.. but when she posted up for me what she called abuse.. I sort of couldnt see it.. maybe it was because it was my own?????... so likewise longies abuse has escaped me as well. Okaaay... Look come clean Freediver. You want all the left wing voices off the forum? Just say so, because the way this is panning out is barking right ridiculous  ;D Not true. I think any sane person can put up with reasonable discussion but unfortunately its been noticeable in the last few months that more and more cretins are starting idiotic threads like "Do Liberals eat children" etc. I have no party allegiance, heck I don't even vote in Australia anymore. I am fortunate enough to live in the United States now but I do take an interest in Australia and what is best for it. If the debate has dropped down to the level seen on here, then the country really is going down the sh!tter. These are not unreasonable questions, the Liberals support all sorts of atrocities from wars, to mandatory detention for desperate asylum seekers.  They support human inequality, they support feudal working conditions, they support forcing people to sign individual employment contracts, holding people without trial, endorsing torture, assassinations, forcing people to compete rather than collectivize and cooperate.  The prize aggression and greed above all things.  These are not unreasonable questions to ask of those on the dark side - they are pertinent. If corporate whitey was ever insane they seem to have made a remarkably quick recovery. Personally I have never seen any insanity, just a distinctive artistic and challenging style. That's the problem with having the hard right moderate. Anybody who doesn't conform to their norms is deemed nuts. Because to be hard right you have to lack imagination. A fascist IS a control freak.

...

are you kidding mate

corporate whitey is an obese loser called bill crany

he was fired from his unspecified job at the tip top bakeries and now he refuses to work and sits there on his computer railing against random targets tangentially related to what he considers to be the bourgeoise class often in a bizarre and fractured way; he is also on the disability support pension for being morbidly obese. he is not a normal or functional human being and all of the posts he makes on each of his consecutive accounts belie his bizarre, schizophrenic, paranoid and energetically vengeful worldview. he is incredibly annoying, though less so than our resident meth head deathridesahorse.

whitey is the ideal poster child for a movement advocating a contemporary re-emergence of eugenics. interestingly enough, the eugenics movement used to be one of his most hated targets; perhaps in his deranged mind he realises that if such practices were to be re-implemented he and his kind would be the first to the wall?

if it takes a fascist to realise the worthlessness of such an individual then erect a fasces lictoriae in my backyard because that's a train i'm willing to hop on.

the funny thing is i'm sure a tool like grey would consider to be many people on the 'hard right' (the LEGITIMATE hard right) to be nutcases - whitey's own political orientation distort grey's ability to make an objective charactersation of his mental state. though the difference is that i don't think just because whitey is some sort pseudo-marxist he is crazy - i think he's crazy because of his (admittedly purported) life history, the way he constructs his posts and the extremely pecuiliar way he switches the targets of his vitriol and scorn every fifteen minutes. it is an indication of *genuine* narrow mindedness and bigotry (and not in the fradulant way that many on the left utilise these terms) to characterise one's political opponents as mentally ill just because they have an alternate stance to one's own - people, or at least i, think prevailing/whitey/crany is a headcase for other reasons.

honestly, the only thing that keeps me coming back to this place is its menagerie of f*ckwits. i've never seen a more unstable collection of individuals anywhere else on the internet; is this a generational thing? most of the other forums i've frequented at (or continue to frequent) tend to be composed mostly of people from my generation (Y), while this forum is abundant with boomers and Xers. while vapid bores like codswal dominate this crapfest and there are a few genuinely insightful and interesting people such as mozzaok, muso, karnal, soren, dsmithy, life_goes_on and helian (mostly, but not all, non-yahooers, how interesting) that i can learn from and challenge my world view, this place still manages to attract a higher concetration of legitimate headcases than any other place on the internet that i have ever dared venture, and given that this is the internet, that's not a statement without some weight. nevertheless, it's what keeps me coming back. in the same way that a horrific train wreck keeps one's eyes concentrated on the aftermath of the event in question, this forum after it was infested by the contemptible denizens of yahoo forums (not calling out all the yahooers mind you, but a majority of them) has the same effect.

i realise that i myself have not made a substantial or non-obnoxious post in a long time, but at least i'll admit it.

does it occur to most on here that you all suffer from a huge dose of intolerance..

Kat for instance doesnt like anyone putting up the other side of the unemployment debate.. he thinks they all deserve more money and less criticism,.. so when he doesnt get his way he buggers off..thats a shame someone has to stick up for these people and put their case.. but you cant expect everyone to agree.. I am sure we all know someone that swings the lead. so its inevitable we think there are many like them out there.

if we all agreed what a boring world..at least listen to the other point of view who knows we might learn something.

I'll do my best  :-[

cods wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 7:02am:

does it occur to most on here that you all suffer from a huge dose of intolerance.. Kat for instance doesnt like anyone putting up the other side of the unemployment debate.. he thinks they all deserve more money and less criticism,.. so when he doesnt get his way he buggers off..thats a shame someone has to stick up for these people and put their case.. but you cant expect everyone to agree.. I am sure we all know someone that swings the lead. so its inevitable we think there are many like them out there. if we all agreed what a boring world..at least listen to the other point of view who knows we might learn something.

The same happens (not with Kat) when I raise the issue about Aborigines

Maqqa wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 8:40am:

cods wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 7:02am: does it occur to most on here that you all suffer from a huge dose of intolerance.. Kat for instance doesnt like anyone putting up the other side of the unemployment debate.. he thinks they all deserve more money and less criticism,.. so when he doesnt get his way he buggers off..thats a shame someone has to stick up for these people and put their case.. but you cant expect everyone to agree.. I am sure we all know someone that swings the lead. so its inevitable we think there are many like them out there. if we all agreed what a boring world..at least listen to the other point of view who knows we might learn something. The same happens (not with Kat) when I raise the issue about Aborigines

personally I think the more we chat about these problems the more understanding we may get...but we have to agree to disagree not get the sh!ts all the time..and the abuse needs to stop..that goes for me as well.

everyone take a deep breath now... ;D ;D ;D ;D

Grey wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 10:37pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 4:47pm: adelcrow wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 4:41pm: Im with Grey I quite like corporate whitey..he's different and hangs it out there. I was disappointed when Freediver banned him awhile ago. Im of the opinion that if you cant stand the way some people put their views just ignore them. every now and then bill-crany/prevailing gets out of control. he was repeatedly posting offensive photos and generally making a pain of himself. I generally ignore him but he is certifiable and occasionally does make a nuisance of himself. I'm sorry but hanging out your prejudices based on your past history and naming the names you'll be gunning for is no way to go forwards as a moderator. Carry on like that and the board will empty. Reasonable people will not tolerate unfairness. And before you say it, that is already being unfair.  >:(

not unfair at all. EVERYONE knows who he is and he has admitted himself that he is a mental health patient. All I am saying is that he occasionally crosses the line and becomes offensive. even that is no longer news.

cods wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:14am:

Maqqa wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 8:40am: cods wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 7:02am: does it occur to most on here that you all suffer from a huge dose of intolerance.. Kat for instance doesnt like anyone putting up the other side of the unemployment debate.. he thinks they all deserve more money and less criticism,.. so when he doesnt get his way he buggers off..thats a shame someone has to stick up for these people and put their case.. but you cant expect everyone to agree.. I am sure we all know someone that swings the lead. so its inevitable we think there are many like them out there. if we all agreed what a boring world..at least listen to the other point of view who knows we might learn something. The same happens (not with Kat) when I raise the issue about Aborigines personally I think the more we chat about these problems the more understanding we may get...but we have to agree to disagree not get the sh!ts all the time..and the abuse needs to stop..that goes for me as well. everyone take a deep breath now... ;D ;D ;D ;D

perhaps the best comment made!

Thanks cods.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:47am:

cods wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 9:14am: Maqqa wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 8:40am: cods wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 7:02am: does it occur to most on here that you all suffer from a huge dose of intolerance.. Kat for instance doesnt like anyone putting up the other side of the unemployment debate.. he thinks they all deserve more money and less criticism,.. so when he doesnt get his way he buggers off..thats a shame someone has to stick up for these people and put their case.. but you cant expect everyone to agree.. I am sure we all know someone that swings the lead. so its inevitable we think there are many like them out there. if we all agreed what a boring world..at least listen to the other point of view who knows we might learn something. The same happens (not with Kat) when I raise the issue about Aborigines personally I think the more we chat about these problems the more understanding we may get...but we have to agree to disagree not get the sh!ts all the time..and the abuse needs to stop..that goes for me as well. everyone take a deep breath now... ;D ;D ;D ;D perhaps the best comment made! Thanks cods.

your welcome.

Yep, Good luck longy, free speech is a hell of a thing to moderate, I wouldnt know how to begin,

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:45am:

Grey wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 10:37pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 4:47pm: adelcrow wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 4:41pm: Im with Grey I quite like corporate whitey..he's different and hangs it out there. I was disappointed when Freediver banned him awhile ago. Im of the opinion that if you cant stand the way some people put their views just ignore them. You have a strong support base Longy- all of it on the Right. Corporate Whitey, is a crazy like Picasso was crazy. This is obvious from his posts here. When he wants to be sober he is. every now and then bill-crany/prevailing gets out of control. he was repeatedly posting offensive photos and generally making a pain of himself. I generally ignore him but he is certifiable and occasionally does make a nuisance of himself. I'm sorry but hanging out your prejudices based on your past history and naming the names you'll be gunning for is no way to go forwards as a moderator. Carry on like that and the board will empty. Reasonable people will not tolerate unfairness. And before you say it, that is already being unfair.  >:( not unfair at all. EVERYONE knows who he is and he has admitted himself that he is a mental health patient. All I am saying is that he occasionally crosses the line and becomes offensive. even that is no longer news.

cods wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 7:02am:

does it occur to most on here that you all suffer from a huge dose of intolerance.. Kat for instance doesnt like anyone putting up the other side of the unemployment debate.. he thinks they all deserve more money and less criticism,.. so when he doesnt get his way he buggers off..thats a shame someone has to stick up for these people and put their case.. but you cant expect everyone to agree.. I am sure we all know someone that swings the lead. so its inevitable we think there are many like them out there. if we all agreed what a boring world..at least listen to the other point of view who knows we might learn something.

Right we need censorship and controllers because we're intolerant. Good clear thinking there Cods wallop

Congrats, longweekend.

I've had a dose of the 'can't be stuffeds' with this board for a while but I might spend more time here now.

stryder wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 10:25am:

Yep, Good luck longy, free speech is a hell of a thing to moderate, I wouldnt know how to begin,

If youve ever looked after large groups of children as I have then you know EXACTLY how to do it. you go after the trouble-MAKERS and the trouble-followers will behave. some of the trouble-makers wont come back of course, but thats no loss.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 3:08pm:

stryder wrote on Sep 24th, 2011 at 10:25am: Yep, Good luck longy, free speech is a hell of a thing to moderate, I wouldnt know how to begin, If youve ever looked after large groups of children as I have then you know EXACTLY how to do it. you go after the trouble-MAKERS and the trouble-followers will behave. some of the trouble-makers wont come back of course, but thats no loss.

haaaa I had the best night on Friday my grandsons first school social hes 6.. they had a ripper of a time.. they had these illuminated flashing strips to wear like in bracelets and anklets.. anywhere they thought they looked good.. and prizes for dancing..the little girls dressed up the boys were being little boys.. it was super cool.. I even did the hocky pocky..everyone should go out and have a good time with all the little kids.. it makes you realize what a wonderful time that is..no need for push and shove everyone gets a turn.. the same on here... stop looking for the worst in people stop the rot... and lets not lose the FAIR GO aussie culture.,.. you put your left hand in your left hand out...

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2011 at 9:20am:

I disagree with Longy on most things but he seems like a decent sort of bloke so he's probably one of the few people on here that could do a good job as a moderator. Good luck with it Longy  :)

I am FLABBERGASTED that this BLATENT LIAR, racist, homophobe and control freak has been given this "carte blanche" key to the censoring of individual postings - by  http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=viewprofile;username=freediver

Anyone from Yahoo should recall the personal smear campaign waged against me by Longweekend regarding statements I ALLEGEDLY made regarding polls as "rogue" when they did not favour the ALP

You will ALSO recall, the claim was proven to be a MALICIOUS LIE





"Improving this board - and ourselves" ?



... don't hold your BREATH !

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:34pm:

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:20am: I disagree with Longy on most things but he seems like a decent sort of bloke so he's probably one of the few people on here that could do a good job as a moderator. Good luck with it Longy  :) I am FLABBERGASTED that this BLATENT LIAR, racist, homophobe and control freak has been given this "carte blanche" key to the censoring of individual postings - by  http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=viewprofile;username=freediver Anyone from Yahoo should recall the personal smear campaign waged against me by Longweekend regarding statements I ALLEGEDLY made regarding polls as "rogue" when they did not favour the ALP You will ALSO recall, the claim was proven to be a MALICIOUS LIE "Improving this board - and ourselves" ? ... don't hold your BREATH !

Just pull out whatever is up your arse and take a couple of deep brearths.

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 12:33pm:

Labor censors Dr Dennis Jensen — denies peer reviewed science The Labor Party claim they think science is important: ”We can’t let this debate be waylaid by people who don’t accept the science,” Ms Gillard said in May. Yet, when Dr Dennis Jensen  wanted to table peer reviewed papers on the Parliamentary record this week, Kate Ellis refused to allow it. Jensen is the only PhD scientist in the Australian Parliament and the papers are directly relevant to the policy under discussion. The ALP will accept  an unaudited foreign committee report, whole, without question, but not scientific evidence from an elected Australian representative.  Who are the climate science deniers? Is it the same team that calls people mindless denigrating names The papers that Labor won’t allow Dr Jensen to table: http://joannenova.com.au/2011/09/labor-censors-dennis-jensen-denies-peer-reviewed-science/#more-17301 http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/politics/Dr%20Dennis%20Jensen-Media%20Release-Labor%20Censorship%20of%20Carbon%20Tax%20Debate.pdf

OH ... the IRONY !

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 24^th, 2011 at 9:34pm:

adelcrow wrote on Sep 23rd, 2011 at 9:20am: I disagree with Longy on most things but he seems like a decent sort of bloke so he's probably one of the few people on here that could do a good job as a moderator. Good luck with it Longy  :) I am FLABBERGASTED that this BLATENT LIAR, racist, homophobe and control freak has been given this "carte blanche" key to the censoring of individual postings - by  http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=viewprofile;username=freediver Anyone from Yahoo should recall the personal smear campaign waged against me by Longweekend regarding statements I ALLEGEDLY made regarding polls as "rogue" when they did not favour the ALP You will ALSO recall, the claim was proven to be a MALICIOUS LIE "Improving this board - and ourselves" ? ... don't hold your BREATH !

get over yourself buzzard! you spent some time boasting about labors polls and predicting the end of the liberal party. I warned you then that these things are cyclical but did you listen? no. well now it is our turn to mock you about your polls although Labors polls are far worse than Libs have EVER gotten and in fact lower than LABOR have ever gotten. so suck it up princess and get back to the job of posting on poltiics.

PS you did call them rogue! it was 2 years ago back in the days when people actually LIKED labor but were starting to turn off them.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 25^th, 2011 at 9:03am:

PS you did call them rogue! it was 2 years ago back in the days when people actually LIKED labor but were starting to turn off them.

dont you love it.. he calls it a SMEAR CAMPAIGN....

hilarious all  saw was you sending him up...I guess you hurt his sensitive nerve...pity he doesnt think about that when he smears others on here..

cods wrote on Sep 26^th, 2011 at 9:50am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 25th, 2011 at 9:03am: PS you did call them rogue! it was 2 years ago back in the days when people actually LIKED labor but were starting to turn off them. dont you love it.. he calls it a SMEAR CAMPAIGN.... hilarious all  saw was you sending him up...I guess you hurt his sensitive nerve...pity he doesnt think about that when he smears others on here..

I don't HAVE a "sensitive nerve"
I just don't like LIARS
Even Andre ( ... the LAST poster I'd expect) came to my defence - and pulled him into line - over his "quoting" of a statement I never made

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26^th, 2011 at 10:43am:

I just don't like LIARS Even Andre ( ... the LAST poster I'd expect) came to my defence - and pulled him into line

Well, THAT put "the mocca's" on things - DIDN'T it ?

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26^th, 2011 at 12:12pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 10:43am:   I just don't like LIARS Even Andre ( ... the LAST poster I'd expect) came to my defence - and pulled him into line Well, THAT put "the mocca's" on things - DIDN'T it ?

you could really do to grow up. My being a moderator can only improve these forums by defending agaisnts the idiots and morons. You could have done just as good a job.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 26^th, 2011 at 12:42pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 12:12pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 10:43am:   I just don't like LIARS Even Andre ( ... the LAST poster I'd expect) came to my defence - and pulled him into line Well, THAT put "the mocca's" on things - DIDN'T it ? you could really do to grow up. My being a moderator can only improve these forums by defending agaisnts the idiots and morons. You could have done just as good a job .

I'd be JUST as inappropriate as YOURSELF - and deleting pro-Liberal posts at at an even GREATER rate

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26^th, 2011 at 9:15pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 12:42pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 12:12pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 10:43am:   I just don't like LIARS Even Andre ( ... the LAST poster I'd expect) came to my defence - and pulled him into line Well, THAT put "the mocca's" on things - DIDN'T it ? you could really do to grow up. My being a moderator can only improve these forums by defending agaisnts the idiots and morons. You could have done just as good a job . I'd be JUST as inappropriate as YOURSELF - and deleting pro-Liberal posts at at an even GREATER rate

Im sure that comment really helps your application to be a moderator! how about you actually show some EVIDENCE of your claims rather than crying and throwing a tantrum as you are now?

I personally would support 2 moderators - one from the right side of politics and one from the left side of politics.  

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 12:05pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 9:15pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 12:42pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 12:12pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 10:43am:   I just don't like LIARS Even Andre ( ... the LAST poster I'd expect) came to my defence - and pulled him into line Well, THAT put "the mocca's" on things - DIDN'T it ? you could really do to grow up. My being a moderator can only improve these forums by defending agaisnts the idiots and morons. You could have done just as good a job . I'd be JUST as inappropriate as YOURSELF - and deleting pro-Liberal posts at at an even GREATER rate Im sure that comment really helps your application to be a moderator!

MY application ?

( ... I must have been "sleep-typing")

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 1:37pm:

I personally would support 2 moderators - one from the right side of politics and one from the left side of politics.

and how do you think that would change anything? a half-decent moderator will moderate without reference to politics. I certainly do. and another moderator wouldnt do things a lot differently

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 2:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 27th, 2011 at 12:05pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 9:15pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 12:42pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 12:12pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 10:43am:   I just don't like LIARS Even Andre ( ... the LAST poster I'd expect) came to my defence - and pulled him into line Well, THAT put "the mocca's" on things - DIDN'T it ? you could really do to grow up. My being a moderator can only improve these forums by defending agaisnts the idiots and morons. You could have done just as good a job . I'd be JUST as inappropriate as YOURSELF - and deleting pro-Liberal posts at at an even GREATER rate Im sure that comment really helps your application to be a moderator! MY application ? ( ... I must have been "sleep-typing")

well I woudlnt bother asking FD to be a moderator as you ahve already said you would delete posts and threads not to your liking.

youve already put up a poll about me being a moderator and lost. do you really want to keep on whining about it?

For the 3rd dam time,

Why is it that a thread on Sophie Mirrabella gets thrown into the Abbotts a thug thread ? what rules justify this ?

wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 2:27pm:

For the 3rd dam time, Why is it that a thread on Sophie Mirrabella gets thrown into the Abbotts a thug thread ? what rules justify this ?

one of the goals at the moment is to eliminate spamming. this means not having a group of threads onthe same topic or resurrecting old topics simply with the view of spaming page one with a specific group of similar topics. until a small minority of people stop spamming my only real options are to merge these spamming threads or ban them.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 26^th, 2011 at 12:42pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 12:12pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 26th, 2011 at 10:43am:   I just don't like LIARS Even Andre ( ... the LAST poster I'd expect) came to my defence - and pulled him into line Well, THAT put "the mocca's" on things - DIDN'T it ? you could really do to grow up. My being a moderator can only improve these forums by defending agaisnts the idiots and morons. You could have done just as good a job.

he doesnt like liars yet he likes GILLARD ... ha.ha.... poor didums..

how you are putting up with all this crap I wouldnt know longy..

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29^th, 2011 at 12:21pm:

FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all)

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29^th, 2011 at 1:17pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all)

would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side.

this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29^th, 2011 at 1:31pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech.

Interesting... days ago you said buzz would make a great moderator.  Are you simply trying to be spiteful now? Not good.

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29^th, 2011 at 12:07pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 7:54am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 28th, 2011 at 10:55am: Geoff Clark: professional complainer and racial whinger. Geoff Clark doesn't even look Aboriginal, for crying out loud! Bolt had a point and it's a shame that what he said can now be found to be illegal. Quote: Victoria's new governor, Alex Chernov, may CLAIM to be "Jewish" in his official biography - but he doesn't even LOOK Jewish A "real Jew" would have a bigger HONKER His SCAM is to gain influence in the rich, Jewish "high society" Is that "freedom of speech" - or LIBEL ?

To HARD basket ?i

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 29^th, 2011 at 1:43pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:31pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech. Interesting... days ago you said buzz would make a great moderator.  Are you simply trying to be spiteful now? Not good.

I am genuinely surprised at the reaction from Buzz. we have sparred for years from opposite poitns of view but this is just whinging for its own sake. I think you would find most posters are a little surprised too and severla have expresse this to me privately.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 27^th, 2011 at 1:37pm:

I personally would support 2 moderators - one from the right side of politics and one from the left side of politics.

ale - sure, I am ok with that.
All in all, a good idea

Hm...somethings a miss. I think it may be   time for a http://www.supportlongweekasmod.com/

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29^th, 2011 at 1:31pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech.

He WASNT denied free speech.

He was brought to account for extremely bad journalism at best , outright lying rabble rousing at worst.



Interesting that you defend his "right" to be intentionally offensive to a minority group and yet ban someone for offending you.

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 1:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:31pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech. He WASNT denied free speech. He was brought to account for extremely bad journalism at best , outright lying rabble rousing at worst. Interesting that you defend his "right" to be intentionally offensive to a minority group and yet ban someone for offending you.

gimme gimme was offending EVERYONE - not just me. he was lucky to last as long as he did.

Quote:

Interesting that you defend his "right" to be intentionally offensive to a minority group and yet ban someone for offending you.

http://www.lamaisondulivre.com.au/pix/45487.jpg

So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up?

skippy. wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 4:39pm:

So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up?

better than buzz who has spent the entire time complaining about it, starting a poll about it (which he lost) and generally behaving like a spoilt little princess.

Everyone else is pretty happy especially since my stated goals of no spamming and less abuse have already been met.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 4:41pm:

skippy. wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:39pm: So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up? better than buzz who has spent the entire time complaining about it, starting a poll about it (which he lost) and generally behaving like a spoilt little princess. Everyone else is pretty happy especially since my stated goals of no spamming and less abuse have already been met.

Well if you've cut down on the spamming that's a good thing.Maqqa must be shattered. ;D

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 4:41pm:

skippy. wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:39pm: So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up? better than buzz who has spent the entire time complaining about it, starting a poll about it (which he lost) and generally behaving like a spoilt little princess. Quote: would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els.

Quite IMPARTIAL

skippy. wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 4:43pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:41pm: skippy. wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:39pm: So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up? better than buzz who has spent the entire time complaining about it, starting a poll about it (which he lost) and generally behaving like a spoilt little princess. Everyone else is pretty happy especially since my stated goals of no spamming and less abuse have already been met. Well if you've cut down on the spamming that's a good thing.Maqqa must be shattered. ;D

he seems to be coping ok and Greens seems ok. gimme gimme was of course totally opposed and had to be given a 24 hour holiday to calm down. But all in all, been a calmer week.

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 4:50pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:41pm: skippy. wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:39pm: So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up? better than buzz who has spent the entire time complaining about it, starting a poll about it (which he lost) and generally behaving like a spoilt little princess. Quote: would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. Quite IMPARTIAL

'Context is king' Buzzard. good to see you failing in that. But it is good to see you repeatedly antagonising the one mod who is actually here and can help you when things get over-the-top.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 4:00pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 1:18pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:31pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech. He WASNT denied free speech. He was brought to account for extremely bad journalism at best , outright lying rabble rousing at worst. Interesting that you defend his "right" to be intentionally offensive to a minority group and yet ban someone for offending you. gimme gimme was offending EVERYONE - not just me. he was lucky to last as long as he did.

Yes.   But the reason you gave was "blasphemy".


Ban him for being offensive but dont wait and wait and wait until he offends YOUR particular belief system before doing it.

Yes.   But the reason you gave was "blasphemy".



I really hope that's not true. Anyone got a link to that????

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 4:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:00pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 1:18pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:31pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech. He WASNT denied free speech. He was brought to account for extremely bad journalism at best , outright lying rabble rousing at worst. Interesting that you defend his "right" to be intentionally offensive to a minority group and yet ban someone for offending you. gimme gimme was offending EVERYONE - not just me. he was lucky to last as long as he did. Yes.   But the reason you gave was "blasphemy". Ban him for being offensive but dont wait and wait and wait until he offends YOUR particular belief system before doing it.

the ACTUAL story was that i would have banned him a day earlier but i didnt have that facility at the time. I was trying to 'encourage' him to behave but failed. his blasphemy happened to occur shortly after my banning priviledges came online. Id really rather not make blasphemy an issue. Many many people here are blasphemous and often quote regularly. But there is a limit and that was beyond it. I cna tolerate a lot of things but that is not one of them. it is who I am and frankly. removing highly offensive blasphemy can only help lower the temperature and improve the standard of debate. I will apply it across ALL religions - not just mine.

skippy. wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 5:02pm:

Yes.   But the reason you gave was "blasphemy". I really hope that's not true. Anyone got a link to that????

whatever you do, dont make a huge debate on it because all you wil do is bring out those whose main strength is deliberately offending others. it wasnt just blasphemy by highyl offensive blasphemy after 48 hours of insults, abusive behaviour and continual high-level spamming. Treat it for what it actually was - no what a fw might THINK it to be.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 4:58pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:50pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:41pm: skippy. wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:39pm: So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up? better than buzz who has spent the entire time complaining about it, starting a poll about it (which he lost) and generally behaving like a spoilt little princess. Quote: would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. Quite IMPARTIAL 'Context is king' Buzzard. good to see you failing in that.

Be it RACE, RELIGION, GENDER or SEXUAL ORIENTATION - vilificastion HAS no "context"

Have you considered "practicing what you PREACH" ?  

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 5:11pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:58pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:50pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:41pm: skippy. wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:39pm: So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up? better than buzz who has spent the entire time complaining about it, starting a poll about it (which he lost) and generally behaving like a spoilt little princess. Quote: would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. Quite IMPARTIAL 'Context is king' Buzzard. good to see you failing in that. Be it RACE, RELIGION, GENDER or SEXUAL ORIENTATION - vilificastion HAS no "context" Have you considered "practicing what you PREACH" ?

context is ALWAYS important in ANY communication. grow up or at least get an education. any message taken out of its context will almost always be misconstrued, misapplied or totally lost. Im not vilifying you, you over-sensitive twit. of all the complaints about my being a moderator you have been by far the worst. I didnt see that coming. I expected more of you. Apparently you are the thin-skinned princess others think you are.

Quote:

context is ALWAYS important in ANY communication. grow up or at least get an education. any message taken out of its context will almost always be misconstrued, misapplied or totally lost.

You're WAY of BEAM

Try and justify it anyway you like ( ... a la BOLT)
There is NEVER an IN or OUT of "context" clause to justify  - or legitimise - ANY form of ABUSE or VILIFICATION

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 5:04pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:00pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 1:18pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:31pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech. He WASNT denied free speech. He was brought to account for extremely bad journalism at best , outright lying rabble rousing at worst. Interesting that you defend his "right" to be intentionally offensive to a minority group and yet ban someone for offending you. gimme gimme was offending EVERYONE - not just me. he was lucky to last as long as he did. Yes.   But the reason you gave was "blasphemy". Ban him for being offensive but dont wait and wait and wait until he offends YOUR particular belief system before doing it. the ACTUAL story was that i would have banned him a day earlier but i didnt have that facility at the time. I was trying to 'encourage' him to behave but failed. his blasphemy happened to occur shortly after my banning priviledges came online. Id really rather not make blasphemy an issue. Many many people here are blasphemous and often quote regularly. But there is a limit and that was beyond it. I cna tolerate a lot of things but that is not one of them. it is who I am and frankly. removing highly offensive blasphemy can only help lower the temperature and improve the standard of debate. I will apply it across ALL religions - not just mine.

He wrote a derivation of "jesus pharking christ"

This is a common exclamation . Its not blasphemy.

And even if it WAS blasphemy ,  we dont ban people for it here in australia thank zeus.




Once your moderator hat comes on , your religious hat comes off.

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 5:52pm:

Quote: context is ALWAYS important in ANY communication. grow up or at least get an education. any message taken out of its context will almost always be misconstrued, misapplied or totally lost. You're WAY of BEAM Try and justify it anyway you like ( ... a la BOLT) There is NEVER an IN or OUT of "context" clause to justify  - or legitimise - ANY form of ABUSE or VILIFICATION

To repeat it yet again, you illiterate princess, 'context' is essential for EVERY PIECE of communication regardless of the actual words. Without context everything can be misinterpreted and mis-used, just as you have done and continue to do. Single words rarely comunicate much beyond a few letters. Irony, quotation, satire, humour and a whole pile of literacy devices are not communicated by single words or phrases, but by CONTEXT. You trivialise language and refuse to understand it because your feelings are hurt for reasons none of us actually understand. When you want to act like a grownup instead of a pouting toddler then rejoin the debate with the rest of the grownups.

You have much to offer, but you constantly minimise your value by your childish whining.

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 6:47pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 5:04pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:00pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 1:18pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:31pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech. He WASNT denied free speech. He was brought to account for extremely bad journalism at best , outright lying rabble rousing at worst. Interesting that you defend his "right" to be intentionally offensive to a minority group and yet ban someone for offending you. gimme gimme was offending EVERYONE - not just me. he was lucky to last as long as he did. Yes.   But the reason you gave was "blasphemy". Ban him for being offensive but dont wait and wait and wait until he offends YOUR particular belief system before doing it. the ACTUAL story was that i would have banned him a day earlier but i didnt have that facility at the time. I was trying to 'encourage' him to behave but failed. his blasphemy happened to occur shortly after my banning priviledges came online. Id really rather not make blasphemy an issue. Many many people here are blasphemous and often quote regularly. But there is a limit and that was beyond it. I cna tolerate a lot of things but that is not one of them. it is who I am and frankly. removing highly offensive blasphemy can only help lower the temperature and improve the standard of debate. I will apply it across ALL religions - not just mine. He wrote a derivation of "jesus pharking christ" This is a common exclamation . Its not blasphemy. And even if it WAS blasphemy ,  we dont ban people for it here in australia thank zeus. Once your moderator hat comes on , your religious hat comes off.

its hardly a common expression nor is it even debatable that it is blasphemous. Not that it matters. we are trying to reduce the temperature here and to improve the language. by that standard alone it is unacceptable. I will be dealing with all forms of bad language and behaviour - blasphemy included. dont get your knickers in a knot until i actually do something you think is wrong.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 6:48pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 5:52pm: Quote: context is ALWAYS important in ANY communication. grow up or at least get an education. any message taken out of its context will almost always be misconstrued, misapplied or totally lost. You're WAY of BEAM Try and justify it anyway you like ( ... a la BOLT) There is NEVER an IN or OUT of "context" clause to justify  - or legitimise - ANY form of ABUSE or VILIFICATION To repeat it yet again, you illiterate princess, 'context' is essential for EVERY PIECE of communication regardless of the actual words. Without context everything can be misinterpreted and mis-used

As in "Jesus F Christ" - in the context of anger and frustration ?

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 5:11pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:58pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:50pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:41pm: skippy. wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:39pm: So I've been away for a week, how has longwhine shaped up? better than buzz who has spent the entire time complaining about it, starting a poll about it (which he lost) and generally behaving like a spoilt little princess. Quote: would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. Quite IMPARTIAL 'Context is king' Buzzard. good to see you failing in that. Be it RACE, RELIGION, GENDER or SEXUAL ORIENTATION - vilificastion HAS no "context" Have you considered "practicing what you PREACH" ?

hey buzz what about being OLD or suffering from dementia...


does any of that also appear on your must not abuse list?...or is it just for other people to mind.


if you want a level playing field..nay... demand a level playing field..

you have to be prepared to follow your own rules.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 6:51pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 6:47pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 5:04pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:59pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 4:00pm: darkhall67 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 1:18pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:31pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 1:17pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 12:21pm: FriYAY wrote on Sep 29th, 2011 at 9:19am: No one should be banned for saying JFC. A mod's religious beliefs are secondary. Poor form LW. :( My "paranoid" concerns are coming home to roost ( ... inevitable GAY slurs - and all) would you prefer I allow everyone to openly abuse gays for your deviant behaviour? you want equality and protection for your deviance  but you arent the slightest bit interested in protection for anyone els. you jump up and down like a panty-waisted clown in a tutu when YOU feel threatened but dare anyone suggest defending a religion - whis you dont support - then you dont give a stuff. Unlike you, I have a developed sense of fairness. I oppose hate speech, racism, blasphemy and all similar kinds of speech. Unlike you, I support Voltares maxim of disagreeing with everything you say but defending your unequivocal right to say it. On a day when Bolt is denied free speech you rejoice. But let anyone criticise you and you bring out your worst side. this is by far, the worst aspect Ive ever seen from you. You have shown time and time again why you would be a truly awful moderator. you dont even understand the notion of balance and free speech. He WASNT denied free speech. He was brought to account for extremely bad journalism at best , outright lying rabble rousing at worst. Interesting that you defend his "right" to be intentionally offensive to a minority group and yet ban someone for offending you. gimme gimme was offending EVERYONE - not just me. he was lucky to last as long as he did. Yes.   But the reason you gave was "blasphemy". Ban him for being offensive but dont wait and wait and wait until he offends YOUR particular belief system before doing it. the ACTUAL story was that i would have banned him a day earlier but i didnt have that facility at the time. I was trying to 'encourage' him to behave but failed. his blasphemy happened to occur shortly after my banning priviledges came online. Id really rather not make blasphemy an issue. Many many people here are blasphemous and often quote regularly. But there is a limit and that was beyond it. I cna tolerate a lot of things but that is not one of them. it is who I am and frankly. removing highly offensive blasphemy can only help lower the temperature and improve the standard of debate. I will apply it across ALL religions - not just mine. He wrote a derivation of "jesus pharking christ" This is a common exclamation . Its not blasphemy. And even if it WAS blasphemy ,  we dont ban people for it here in australia thank zeus. Once your moderator hat comes on , your religious hat comes off. its hardly a common expression nor is it even debatable that it is blasphemous. Not that it matters. we are trying to reduce the temperature here and to improve the language. by that standard alone it is unacceptable. I will be dealing with all forms of bad language and behaviour - blasphemy included. dont get your knickers in a knot until i actually do something you think is wrong.

-----
Different things offend different people. I would really like to see a return to adjectives with meaning, rather than that same old f word that seems to substitute for all adjectives these days. Is that due to a lack of education I wonder, or just a lack of imagination, or is it simply laziness? Certainly it seems to be the favourite substitute adjective for the modern generation...more is the pity.

I wonder why buzz seems to think it is necessary to shout all the time? Is that what he does at home? Or is it just on these boards?

Am happy to have a mod who keeps an eye on things. The way things were going before, people were leaving this forum in droves. Keep up the good work, lw.

Quote:

I wonder why buzz seems to think it is necessary to shout all the time? Is that what he does at home? Or is it just on these boards?

I shout too, I just feel for me it gets my point across a alot clearer and I guess sooo with Buzz, so I have nothing againsts buzz shouting but rather his beliefs and silly leftie ideals

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 11:04pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 6:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 30th, 2011 at 5:52pm: Quote: context is ALWAYS important in ANY communication. grow up or at least get an education. any message taken out of its context will almost always be misconstrued, misapplied or totally lost. You're WAY of BEAM Try and justify it anyway you like ( ... a la BOLT) There is NEVER an IN or OUT of "context" clause to justify  - or legitimise - ANY form of ABUSE or VILIFICATION To repeat it yet again, you illiterate princess, 'context' is essential for EVERY PIECE of communication regardless of the actual words. Without context everything can be misinterpreted and mis-used As in "Jesus F Christ" - in the context of anger and frustration ?

You constantly mock and abuse religion yet you want acceptance for your behaviour which most religions view as deviant. You need to learn to respect some of the boundaries and beliefs of others if you want it for yourself. The 'irony' post from before which you went ape over was clearly lost on you so I wont try such complex literary devices on you anymore. you clearly arent up to it. So basically, if you want respect, you might try by giving it.

Any news on my application yet?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 3:33pm:

Any news on my application yet?

I'm afraid its been rejected.
We already have one fascist bully boy bastard as a mod so your services will not be required. :o

skippy. wrote on Oct 1^st, 2011 at 3:35pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Oct 1st, 2011 at 3:33pm: Any news on my application yet? I'm afraid its been rejected. We already have one fascist bully boy bastard as a mod so your services will not be required. :o

now skippy, you gotta admit Im a lot fairer than andrei would ever be!