1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

StrikeForce scandal.

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by RiotChild, Aug 27, 2001.

  1. Keiichi

    Keiichi Old Timer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2000
    Messages:
    3,331
    Likes Received:
    0
    There will never be a utopian forum for the same reason that there will never be a utopian society; that being that the vast majority of people on this planet are assholes who care about no one save themselves. I'd like to see your "free" forums, Mojo. I really would. I'd give it about a week. A "free" forum is an open invitation for every asshole, troll, and spammer on the internet. Sure, if someone posts something that you dissagree with, then you could flame their ass into the ground, but what do you do about the people who's intention is to incite flames? What about the people who crave that kind of attention? What about the people who don't care what anyone else says, and simply continue to post their inane drivel? What about the spammers who don't even stick around to read replys? Flaming them would have no effect, and without any sort of authority figure, there's nothing else that you could do about them. It wouldn't be long before your members would start clammoring for bans, and any action you take, no matter how minor, would be a form of censorship, which means that your "free" forum would be no more. Even if you stuck with insults, it wouldn't be long before the entire forum was nothing but flames and spam.

    Even so, insults are a form of censorship themselves. If I were to open a club and put a bouncer at the door with orders to beat the shit out of anyone who breaks my rules, would you say that my club is "free"? Granted, if you manage to take down the bouncer, then you could do anything you want, but the majority of people wouldn't be capable of doing that, and most wouldn't take the risk. If I say something on your forum that you dissagree with, inciting a merciless attack from you which I cannot defend against for some reason, then I'm being censored. Just like large businesses strong-arm smaller businesses out of the way, you'd be muscling me out of your forums. That's where moderators come in. It's our job to ensure that everyone, whether they're capable of defending themselves or not, is able to express their opinion without fear of attack, so long as they remain civil.

    Moderators are a necessary part of any forum. If you don't believe me, lets use an example. Take an average city and remove all police presence. It wouldn't be long before the entire population descended into chaos and anarchy. We weed out the troublemakers for the same reason that a gardener weeds his garden; because if we don't, the weeds will slowly suffocate the entire forum until all that's left are the weeds. Yes, some moderators abuse their power, just like some police abuse their athority, but that doesn't mean that all police should be done away with. It simply means that more care should be given when appointing them so as to choose only those best suited for the job.

    -Keiichi
     
  2. DLL

    DLL Chrysolyte

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2001
    Messages:
    1,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    :stupid:

    I think the real question here is whether forums done your way, would be better than the current forums Mojo.

    I agree with the Keiich man on this one. I think there would be constant flamming in a pure free forum. I for one would get bored with it all pretty quick.
     
  3. phatcat

    phatcat akward cat

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2000
    Messages:
    9,344
    Likes Received:
    0
    ooooh... I got mojo to call me phatphuck again!! JOY :D

    anyways. if you can give your own usless opinion, then I don't see why I can't give my own usless opinion :)

    remember, free speech mojo ;)



    as for keiichi's post: I agree. You can't say "well the this guys is a bad, mod, so.. then all ar bad".

    I think these fourms are not that bad, I just think there are a few bad apples who try to bring on the flames.

    also how did this thread become a thread about moderators? I thought this was about the mapping scandal in SF??
     
  4. Bad.Mojo

    Bad.Mojo Commander in Chief o' the BMA

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2000
    Messages:
    1,758
    Likes Received:
    0
    Funny Keiichi, DLL... that's what they said about my irc channel too. I've seen one spammer in there, once, the whole time. All the assholes got out because they discovered that even though there's no rules for them... there's no rules for us, either.

    You must be on drugs comparing a bouncer beating the sh<i></i>it out of anybody who breaks your rules at a club. Problem is, there are no rules. If somebody hits you, you hit back. How about that for a better analogy? Where's the censorship in that?

    I do love your oh-so-psychic prediction of the future though, morons trying to prophecise always get my rocks nice and tight. I love the whole "no matter what action you take, its censorship" sh<i></i>it you try to spew on me. Don't assume that just because you wear jackboots, so do I. I wouldn't take action. Yeah, sure, spammers will spam, people will flame. I really don't give a ****. Have you ever seen the forums on, say, Old Man Murray or Portal of Evil? There's absolutely <i>zero</i> rules in those forums, and I can tell you, they're a sh<i></i>itload cleaner than here. Its what communism and anarchy are all about, Keiichi -- the community. There is no ruler, its just all the community, bound together in a rulerless society. I just gave you two examples of forums that work, and work well, without moderators. Here's an example of one that works like sh<i></i>it <i>with</i> moderators: This place. You got nazi thugs like Prophetus running around, threatening to mass-ban a bunch of people, blah blah blah.

    You assume (because you buy into the typical paradigm of, 'we need tyranny for our own good' crap) that man cannot function without a ruler.

    However, on top of the two forums I have given you, there are plenty of examples of communal societies that have functioned for a long time. Many American Indian tribes, for example, functioned self-sufficiently in commune without a distinct ruler or distinctive laws. Sure, they had figureheads, and executors, but those are roles to be played by those experienced at them -- people to explain how things worked and why such things worked that way, not anybody to force anybody else to do anything. 'Course, people like you came along, and ruined a perfectly good world with all this rules, law, order bullsh<i></i>it.

    I'd rather live in a filthy, dirty, grimy, smelly, cave that's free than a pristine, sparkling, shiny, post-modern oppressive city, and that's the end of that.
     
  5. DLL

    DLL Chrysolyte

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2001
    Messages:
    1,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dang Mojo, don't get your panties all in a bunch. If you set up some forums and they work out great, I'll be the first one to admit I was wrong. And I'm not trying to be a naysayer or predict your doom. Chill out. I was just saying I think I would enjoy these forums over forums with no moderators.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2001
  6. Bad.Mojo

    Bad.Mojo Commander in Chief o' the BMA

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2000
    Messages:
    1,758
    Likes Received:
    0
    As to you, phatphuck:

    <i>anyways. if you can give your own usless opinion, then I don't see why I can't give my own usless opinion

    remember, free speech mojo </i>

    Hmm, seems more to me like I was mocking your idiot arguements that contradicted themselves (and not four lines apart, I might add) than trying to in any way hack into the moderator systems and censor your post. Oh wait, that's right, I was. Sorry, silly me. For a minute I forgot you're a socially stunted malformed growth of malignant fat tissue that somehow figured out how to operate a keyboard without confusing it for a cake and choking on it, and hence cannot understand sarcastic tone.

    <i>as for keiichi's post: I agree. You can't say "well the this guys is a bad, mod, so.. then all ar bad". </i>

    No, but it stands to reason that since Keiichi obviously saw Prophetus' post, and since Keiichi, as a moderator, answers to Prophetus, a <strike>Nazi</strike> admin, it would stand that Keiichi, by not refuting what Prophetus posted, was essentially agreeing with him. Say your boss suggests a stupid idea at work, and nobody speaks up. Even if they all know its stupid, they're in essence condoning it because nobody is speaking up against it.

    But then, if Keiichi said "killing babies is good," you'd agree to that too, because, hey, Keiichi said so.

    <i>I think these fourms are not that bad, I just think there are a few bad apples who try to bring on the flames. </i>

    Yeah, like you... observe...

    <i>also how did this thread become a thread about moderators? I thought this was about the mapping scandal in SF??</i>

    Well, when I tried to show some solidarity with the people being oppressed at the Strike Force forums, and you then, in a (once again) disrespectful attempt to throw a temper tantrum, posted all the wave crap again, so I had to go through THAT whole stupid goddam shenanigan again. In short, your lard-assed fat-agression tantrums ruined a perfectly good post, just because I turned you away from the BMA. Now why not learn from it, Phatphuck? You don't have to act like a spoiled little snot following Daddy Keiichi around all the time. Ugh, poor Keiichi, I'd hate to have you as a tag-along.
     
  7. Keiichi

    Keiichi Old Timer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2000
    Messages:
    3,331
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is censorship, Mojo. Phatcat says something that you disagree with, so you flame him. In essence, you're trying to supress his opinion, therefore, you're censoring him.

    By the way, I notice that you've declined to comment on my messages in your Bad.Mojo for moderator! thread. Why is that?

    -Keiichi
     
  8. phatcat

    phatcat akward cat

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2000
    Messages:
    9,344
    Likes Received:
    0
    wow 2x phatphucks in one post

    I'm touched mojo, I didn't know your cared. :D


    Keiichi, I think he is more for a unofficial form of power so not to be a hypocrite. Same thing with his ambiguous way of posting :hmm:

    its not worth arguing with Mojo, becasue in his mind, the world revolves around him being right. which I think is a really sad way existance, especially on a pointless internet fourm. :p
     
  9. Bad.Mojo

    Bad.Mojo Commander in Chief o' the BMA

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2000
    Messages:
    1,758
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, I declined to reply to it cause I didn't notice it. I've had a really busy day today, so I've just been dropping in and out really quick, checking out the top most threads. I'm gunna take a quick nap, I'll get on it after I wake up.

    Anyways, its <i>not</i> censorship to mock somebody's opinion. Two opponents debating in an election (or any debate) for that matter <i>often</i> engage in mudslinging while offering valid rebuttals to valid points. But Phatphuck is incapable of making valid points, so I don't need to rebut anything. His stupidity does that for me, whereas he does try to intice me into flaming him by acting stupid constantly. So hell, I figure I'll give him what I want.

    For example, look at his post. "The world revolves around me being right." Of course it revolves around me being right. Hell, it revolves around EVERYBODY being right. This is what we have opinions for. People always want to prove they're right. I mean, look at Phatphuck. He disagrees with everything I say. Which means he thinks I'm always wrong, which means he thinks he's always right. At least I'm not a goddam hypocrite about it. But he's to blatantly fu<i></i>cking stupid to realise this.
     
  10. phatcat

    phatcat akward cat

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2000
    Messages:
    9,344
    Likes Received:
    0
    who told you I think your always wrong?

    you really should stop making opinions about me when you don't even know me.

    I agree with some of what you say. but ufortunatlly the way you express it is... imature.

    I don't mind if someone tells me if I'm wrong. I like looking at the others views. but I must admit... It dose feel good to be right, I just don't make it my life's mission to be right all the time. My problem with you mojo, is one, you have to be right 99% of the time, if not, you have hell to raise. two, you put everything accross in a way to piss off the opposing party, either by attacking them personally, or insulting there belifes.

    I really think you should not base your life on being right all the time. I mean it won't kill ya, will it?
     
  11. Mason

    Mason Self appointed voice of reason

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2000
    Messages:
    1,216
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mojo, maybe I AM totally retarded(I DO work with them on a daily basis), but I STILL think that these forums are analogous with A newspaper, A radio or A television program..not necessarily ALL of the above. Even with that being the case, I have YET to see ANY paper, radio or television program that DIDN't have some sort of rules set down to maintain a semblance of order(doesn't mean they don't exist, however)..SO, if that is the case, and the definition used the above mediums as examples of a FORUM, then it is logical to assume that said forums would indeed have rules set in place to maintain some order. I honestly don't see where I am misreading the definition...then again I have been working with mentally and behaviorally challenged individuals for 12 years...maybe it does wear off..:D
     
  12. Keiichi

    Keiichi Old Timer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2000
    Messages:
    3,331
    Likes Received:
    0
    *sigh*

    I'm really tired of this damn debate. Ever since I got back from vacation, Mojo, you've done nothing but bitch. I'd honestly prefer to have no enemies on this forum, but I'm sick to death of all the bullshit, and complaints, and arguments, and insults. I don't know about you, but I don't consider spending an hour and a half mulling over an argument to be time well spent, nor do I consider inventing creative new ways to insult people to be an enjoyable experience. If you want to start your own message board, free from the "tyranny and oppression" of the Infiltration forums, then do it and shut the fuck up. As far as I'm concerned, the matter is closed.

    -Keiichi
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2001
  13. Euphoric Beaver

    Euphoric Beaver impeccably groomed

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2001
    Messages:
    3,158
    Likes Received:
    0
  14. Prophetus

    Prophetus Old Fart

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    3,099
    Likes Received:
    7
    I think I've been very patient with Bad Mojo's immaturity. I reinstated you in the belief you would chill out. You stated you would continue to be yourself and I understood. Yet I still decided to go against every admin and reinstate you. I took that chance on you as a sign of respect, but you turn it around and begin a mindless crusade to belittle the Inf Moderators and me.

    Your lack of respect for those in authority is equalized with the same lack of respect we now have for you. You twist people's words to prove your point, but, in essence, you prove how ignorant you can become.

    Yes, I stated I will ban every member of BMA, but if you read the rest of the statement, you will see I mentioned, "BMA will taste their own medicine". If BMA attempts to run people out of the forums, then they should deserve the same type of treatment. Nobody on these forums made BMA the authority here. Ironic, you shout how much you hate a moderated forum, but, in turn, want to moderate the forums by your own rules.

    You have been hateful and inflammatory towards several members of this forum. People have been banned for this type of attitude. You want to rid the forums of "Idiots" but act as an idiot yourself. You want to run people out of this forum who spill flames, but spew incoherent flames yourself. Although many members of this and other PU forums have used vulgar language, hateful words and inflammatory comments, you take it to the extreme.

    Your sig has a Nazi flag and you know full well that is not appropriate. We banned one member for doing the same exact thing. So, why should you be spared? How are you above the law? You are not.

    I will speak with the Inf moderators about your future here at PU and Inf forums. You were given several chances to tone it down, but you've gotten worse. It's obvious you only wanted to be reinstated to create further chaos in the Inf community. You took your reinstatement to recruit followers in hopes to seperate the community in your favor.

    Allow me to quote this:

    Again, although some members here have violated the rules and still remain, you, Bad Mojo, go far beyond the acceptable threshhold. Your future here at PU and Inf will be decided within days. Take this time to post your reply. I suggest you apologize to the Inf moderators, but that maybe too much to ask.
     
  15. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 1999
    Messages:
    5,703
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hereby declare Bad.Mojo the king of the Non-sequitur :rolleyes:

    Taking away all guns would be an illegal act of the state. I've sworn to uphold the constitution, not some regime that seeks to subvert it.

    However if I immigrated to the US after a gun ban, I would be bound by the agreement I make with the new state.

    but that's really neither here nor there.

    These forums are NOT a government institution. Censorship here is NOT a violation of your "rights" because this is private property.

    Lets say I'm a smoker (I'm not, but for the sake of argument let's say I am). My favorite restaurant decides to go completely non-smoking.

    If I want to eat there, I have to agree not to smoke in the restaurant. That's not to say that I am not allowed to smoke elsewhere, just not there in the restaurant. Therefore it's not a violation of my "right" to smoke.

    However if the government decides that all restaurant owners are required to ban smoking in their establishments, or if I as a free citizen am not allowed to smoke anywhere well then you have a case of one's rights being violated.
     

Share This Page