thread patrolling?

[CantGetAWii]

Read the second part.
Before that I was talking to Eagles not you.
Hence me quoting him first and not you.
But then I did quote you, but you didn't see that I guess :lol:

So how about you read things a bit more, and respond to the second thing I said?

 

[dodabird]

Read the second part.
Before that I was talking to Eagles not you.
Hence me quoting him first and not you.
But then I did quote you, but you didn't see that I guess :lol:

So how about you read things a bit more, and respond to the second thing I said?

i'm sorry, i was unaware that members of a communal (meaning "as part of a community," in case you needed that defined) forum are not allowed to comment unless they are directly spoken to. thanks for pointing that out. next time, i'll be more careful.

and i hope that my edit addressed the "second thing" you stated.

 

[KrisKhaos]

Boy, you can cut this tension here with a knife! Almost a bit worried about posting to this thread, I have a nack for ringing people's bells and sparking up nerves. :ee5k:

I think I am getting what is trying to be said here, while most may take members assisting others in following the rules and maintaining a healthy forum while others are clearly taking it personally. Maybe to avoid this instead of posting broken rules in the forums by users, resorting to the optional private message may be considered?

Then again, you could find yourself slammed with 5 to 10 pm's asking you kindly not to double post, but at least it wouldn't seem like public humiliation to some? (Don't know, never had a serious problem with the way things work here, and yes I have had members assist me in getting a "feel" for things here. )

I see your point dodabird, but I also see theres. My advice would be not to take it so harshly, as with ANY text based messaging it's hard to capture the meaning the other user intends to push - so often things are taken wrongly when actually these guys are just trying to help. Try to keep that in mind.

 

[CantGetAWii]

i'm sorry, i was unaware that members of a communal (meaning "as part of a community," in case you needed that defined) forum are not allowed to comment unless they are directly spoken to. thanks for pointing that out. next time, i'll be more careful.

and i hope that my edit addressed the "second thing" you stated.

No, we already cleared up that issue, eagles said something and I was responding to him.
You chimed in for no reason, trying to further protest your point although there was no need to.
The quotes were there for a reason, I quoted him and then I quoted you.
Yes, you can have an opinion if someone doesn't talk to you, but what you fail to realize is what I said to eagles was clearing up what we talked about already.

And to your edit job.
Heres the thing with posting right after you already posted.
Some people ask a question (make a thread)
If they don't get a reply within ten minutes even, they throw in a bump.

There is no need for that.

Also, what one can do if they missed something after they posted already, rather than posting again right after, you can do what you did and edit your last post.
Its there for a reason.
Thats where many of out frustrations lie.

Post as much as you want in a thread.
Thats what their for.
Let others talk after you did though to keep the discussion going, you know.
Your not understanding a few things.

Example.

Posted By CantGetAWii
Posted By CanGetAWii
Posted By dodabird

Thats an example of double posting on my part.

Whats ideal is this

Posted By CantGetAWii
Posted By dodabird
Posted By CantGetAWii

No double posting, keeps discussion flowing nicely.

Thats the rules we have here.

 

[dodabird]

i understand quite clearly the concept of double-posting (and thanks for making it clear), and although i could keep going on the subject of double-posting, it's off-topic and shouldn't be discussed here.

KrisKhaos had a good idea, something i didn't think of before reading his response. pms are a PERFECT way to regulate rule-violators; it allows them to save face while still instructing them in the appropriate rules of the forum.

but again, that's not what i'm trying to get at here. if i pose a question, maybe it'll help direct this thread so that it stays on-topic and is more conceptually organized:

what are your thoughts and/or opinions on users who maliciously attack other users for violating minor rules? do you think this is a positive and healthy way to correct these users? do you think there are other ways to go about it (like KrisKhaos's proposal)?

i hope that helps with this thread. i've got class in 10 minutes, so i won't respond until later on tonight (1:50pm Guam time). i understand that none of you are on the same time frame as i am, so i expect you all to be asleep by the time i get to the responses. either way, i'd like to thank all of you for giving your feedback on this particular issue. whether or not i agree with you matters none; what matters is that all our opinions have been stated, and no one outright bashed another user. again, kudos.

 

[CantGetAWii]

Ok, again.
I don't find users attacking people in any way if they break rules.

You also have to understand, when you routinely come to this forum and see the same threads, you tend to speak up.
From what I have seen people are nice about, because its usually new members who do it.
So, you show them the old thread, and let them know about the search feature etc. Show them around. Which I don't see as being bad, helping out other members.

Its almost like training a new employee, you show them the ropes, be nice about it no matter how difficult they can be, your still helpful to them.

Keeps the forums running smoother, and eventually ends up making those posters want to come back to such a friendly environment.
Even though they made a mistake, they want to come back because they know they can rely on WiiChat for help.

Here's another scenario, someones first day at school.
The teacher's job is to make sure the child has a good first day, and helps them make their jump into school a smooth one.
Although many here don't have powers to control things, when we all do are part and help out other members, thats what makes a forum.

And to my knowledge thats what we are on now.

That was my first post, and like I said before.
Informing others of the rules is helpful and can be done nicely.
Those who don't usually see punishment.

Also, most members that often visit here tend to know the rules, so they don't tend to double post.
And someone who does double post but knows the rules well usually has a good reason for doing so, or they simply forgot.
Now they may seem unfair and might show favoritism, but theres a difference from doing it once, and repeatedly doing it over and over again.

Eventually we have enough of it.

 

[Demon Slayer]

This guy is starting to get annoying...whats wrong on showing the new people the right thing and showing them the rules ?

 

[KrisKhaos]

This guy is starting to get annoying...whats wrong on showing the new people the right thing and showing them the rules ?

There isn't anything wrong with it. It seems this gentleman has mistaken senior members objectives to assist others in keeping this a great place to chat, and is taking it kinda personally.

In the process he's also managing to irritate those who assist while he's only trying to express himself openly, in turn creating a bit of a paradox here.

This is why suggested a possible suggestion verses open expression, as it is too easy to misunderstand someone without getting an idea of the emotional expression behind it.

dodabird - with all due respect friend, I highly recommend attempting to build a possible solution to that of which troubles you verses simply verbally expressing it by itself. Without any sort of suggestion people are taking your commentary in the same fashion of which you have originally taken theres (as you mentioned previous), and suggest contemplating something for the moderators and senior members to chew on verses continuing what appears to be an endless paradox.

I see what you are getting at however I hope that in the future you simply understand that these guys are only trying to help, and if you want to see things "improve" than I suggest coming up with a possible solution rather than just what is wrongly appearing to be "complaining". (No offense to be taken there I hope, I am merely trying to help.)

CantGetAWii - Interesting way of looking at it, "like a training session". Nice.

anywho, I am getting out of this thread before I get myself in trouble. :smilewinkgrin: lol

 

[dodabird]

let me just clear a few things up.

1. i am not against having forum rules. on the contrary, i am very grateful that the rules exist.

2. i am not against moderators, or the purpose they serve.

3. i am NOT against ALL members who attempt to assist the moderators.

4. i AM against those members who make vicious attacks on other users. and even if you haven't seen anything of the sort, Can'tGetAWii, they exist; otherwise, i wouldn't be wasting my time and energy creating a thread that i knew was totally bogus.

i just want to put that out there so there is no confusion as to where i stand on this issue.

KrisKhaos: thank you for your suggestion, and judging by the stir this thread has made, maybe that might have been the way to go. but i will not--not now and not ever--stifle my opinions for the sake of the peace of a forum. i happen to be a very opinionated individual (as this thread clearly shows), and i will not digress from the way i am under any circumstance. i really liked your method, however. i think PMing might solve the problem entirely. maybe it's something for the moderators and members of this forum to think about; if you have something to say about a member's rule-violation, it might be best to PM them so that it's kept at a personal level and their integrity, dignity and pride are kept intact.

i feel like i'm done with this thread. i've said all i can possibly say, and i've heard more than enough opinions. thanks to all who've contributed to this thread; i always enjoy good, mature discussions that are good for the soul.

with that, i bid you all adieu.

 

[CantGetAWii]

Proof there bud?
Proof that they exist?

 

[dodabird]

Proof there bud?
Proof that they exist?

i'm sorry, i meant to give reference to what i'm talking about.

if you dont act like such a newb on forums and just read the forum rules and what each specific forum is about you wouldnt encounter this problem.

this one came from Sovieto, on the first page of this very thread. "if you dont [sic] act like such a newb on forums" is a little berating, don't you think?

and you..you just annoy it.

and that's how he ended his reply. if the newb thing isn't bashing enough, this should be the icing on the cake. under no circumstance should one call another annoying; it's rude, inappropriate and quite immature. there are other, more mature ways of speaking to others, and users like Sovieto are the ones that get on my nerve. and you wanna know what's funny? he's got 10 rep blocks, so supposedly he's a helpful and credible member. weird.

i hope that helped with your proof, Can'tGetAWii.

Goodbye.

 

[Dark Wolf]

I woke up this morning and read the comments again and suddenly it reminded me of the King/Peasants scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail:

DENNIS: What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior!
ARTHUR: Well, I AM king...
DENNIS: Oh king, eh, very nice. An' how'd you get that, eh? By
exploitin' the workers -- by 'angin' on to outdated imperialist dogma
which perpetuates the economic an' social differences in our society!
If there's ever going to be any progress--
WOMAN: Dennis, there's some lovely filth down here. Oh -- how d'you do?
ARTHUR: How do you do, good lady. I am Arthur, King of the Britons.
Who's castle is that?
WOMAN: King of the who?
ARTHUR: The Britons.
WOMAN: Who are the Britons?
ARTHUR: Well, we all are. we're all Britons and I am your king.
WOMAN: I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous
collective.
DENNIS: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship.
A self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes--
WOMAN: Oh there you go, bringing class into it again.
DENNIS: That's what it's all about if only people would--
ARTHUR: Please, please good people. I am in haste. Who lives
in that castle?
WOMAN: No one live there.
ARTHUR: Then who is your lord?
WOMAN: We don't have a lord.
ARTHUR: What?
DENNIS: I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take
it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.
ARTHUR: Yes.
DENNIS: But all the decision of that officer have to be ratified
at a special biweekly meeting.
ARTHUR: Yes, I see.
DENNIS: By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs,--
ARTHUR: Be quiet!
DENNIS: --but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more--
ARTHUR: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!
WOMAN: Order, eh -- who does he think he is?
ARTHUR: I am your king!
WOMAN: Well, I didn't vote for you.
ARTHUR: You don't vote for kings.
WOMAN: Well, 'ow did you become king then?
ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake,
[angels sing]
her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur
from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I,
Arthur, was to carry Excalibur.
[singing stops]
That is why I am your king!
DENNIS: Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords
is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power
derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical
aquatic ceremony.
ARTHUR: Be quiet!
DENNIS: Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power
just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: I mean, if I went around sayin' I was an empereror just
because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me they'd
put me away!
ARTHUR: Shut up! Will you shut up!
DENNIS: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system.
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
HELP! HELP! I'm being repressed!
ARTHUR: Bloody peasant!
DENNIS: Oh, what a give away. Did you here that, did you here that,
eh? That's what I'm on about -- did you see him repressing me,
you saw it didn't you?