Zok, a well structured and friendly suggestion with sugar on top.

[zombo.com]

these faggots are literally down to sucking each others e-dick. that's...that's just fucking special i have to admit.

[Shrike]

I'm quite a sexual creature, what can I say. I guess poopy is too since he knocked that bitch up so hard 2 kids came out instead of one...

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by zombo.com

these faggots are literally down to sucking each others e-dick. that's...that's just fucking special i have to admit.

This is why you will never ba a regulard of peoo, and why everyone will always think you're a lil' bitch.

You just fail to understand the crude yet delightful humor of this place.

[zombo.com]

i admit i got a chuckle out of it.

[Fuck the FBI]

I say we just ban ate and zos for life.

[v0x]

If we restrict voting to posters with 1000+ posts, I think we'd get a pretty good idea of things... Anyway, I think we should all start making seeder threads in every forum asking for ideas on mods. Just ask the people who they want as mod for that forum. After a page, close the thread, and put the suggestions in a poll. Post poll in same forum. See what happens. And again, this is just to a preliminary idea. Obviously, as just members we can't restrict who votes or close threads. But we can disregard all posts past the first page, and disregard all votes from unsuitable members. Also, just to be clear, let's say first person who posts this type of thread in each forum is given "official" rights, i.e., no one else can post a similar thread (this will probably devolve into bitching and bullshit in some forums, but hopefully most members will respect the rules [lol], or some benevolent mods in certain forums may step in). Oh, and I know this is all very optimistic, but I think it could work if Zok adopted the model and provided proper support.

[Shrike]

I say restrict voting to users with less than 10 posts, as they will not be corrupted by a long stay in this place.

[reject]

Lol@zos.

[Zok]

Originally Posted by v0x

If we restrict voting to posters with 1000+ posts, I think we'd get a pretty good idea of things... Anyway, I think we should all start making seeder threads in every forum asking for ideas on mods. Just ask the people who they want as mod for that forum. After a page, close the thread, and put the suggestions in a poll. Post poll in same forum. See what happens. And again, this is just to a preliminary idea. Obviously, as just members we can't restrict who votes or close threads. But we can disregard all posts past the first page, and disregard all votes from unsuitable members. Also, just to be clear, let's say first person who posts this type of thread in each forum is given "official" rights, i.e., no one else can post a similar thread (this will probably devolve into bitching and bullshit in some forums, but hopefully most members will respect the rules [lol], or some benevolent mods in certain forums may step in). Oh, and I know this is all very optimistic, but I think it could work if Zok adopted the model and provided proper support.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Let's wait until we figure out how to actually apply those stipulations BEFORE we start figuring out who we want as moderator and what forums actually need mods in the first place...

[Snoopy]

Most forums are doing fine. It's just the forums where the trouble makers post in that need some loving attention.

[Zok]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

This would be abused as admins would quite obviously just veto anyone who they don't like or have some personal beef with. It would make a democratic vote both frustrating and obsolte, making an even bigger shitbasket than we have now.

Unfortunately I think this stipulation needs to stay. Admins having vetoing power is necessary because there are many people who I'd never want to be a moderator. From your list, there were really only two or three of them. But just like you said: what if all the regulars re-elected vlad just to piss people off? Well at that rate, what's to stop them from electing driveby just to piss people off?

Our current system already incorporates admin vetoing. Many of the current moderators will tell you that there's actually quite a bit of vetoing that occurs. I've talked to some of the other admins and we agreed to loosen the reigns on the veto button in an effort to appease some of you lot. That doesn't mean we'd NEVER veto, but we're willing to give people the benefit of the doubt.

Like I said, there were only two or three people from your list who I'd opt to veto. Spectral, for instance. He's already been demodded twice in the past and ever since has stopped at nothing to try and undermine the website, lie about anyone and everyone in the administration, and in general... stir shit up. I would veto him. Though he wasn't on your list, SLIM is another perfect example. I demodded him twice for the same reason both times (leaking M&A stuff). When I confronted him the second time he told me to go fuck myself (amongst some other very rude words) and that he'd "do what he wants." I'd veto him also.

The vast majority of your list, though, is perfectly fine with me. I just think this stipulation is a necessary compromise. Like I said, I think the whole thing is a good idea and I've made lots of compromises here - but this is a compromise that I think y'all will have to make so that we can meet eachother half way.

Originally Posted by Snoopy

T&T doesn't need new mods. driveby is a poor mod choice for that forum as he would troll too much. That's not to say that he can't mod any forum. Just not T&T. If we had a vote I assure you the regulars of T&T wouldn't pick him. And I doubt that driveby has 30 T&T regular alt account.

Most specific forums are fine as they are and don't need any new mods. The spiritual, religious and political forum could use a few mods that are on the other side of the spectrum from the current mods. Especially in forums like paranormal where people who don't agree with ate tend to go missing from time to time.

Driveby was just an example to demonstrate a point: if someone really wanted to be a mod, they might campaign that a certain forum is in "desperate need" of one just to force an election that they might win. You know that would happen.

I get PMs about once every two weeks from random people saying "Forum XYZ really needs a new moderator. It's clearly undermoderated because this thread sat there for THREE HOURS untouched. I think I would be a perfect candidate" What's to stop those same people from demanding a "new moderator poll" so that they can have a shot at it? We could end up with a forum that has 12 mods in it just because everyone thinks that THEY would be a better mod than anyone else I know that's an exaggeration, but that's the point I'm trying to make

[Blunderstar]

How come I can't be a moderator anymore? I was demodded because lots of people had a problem with me, but that was before you realized lots of people have a problem with EVERY mod. I had like, NO complaints compared to a majority of the mods we have now, seriously. That isn't fair, and I feel like such a bitch for continuing to post. YOU KNOW?

[Zok]

Originally Posted by Blunderful Returns

How come I can't be a moderator anymore? I was demodded because lots of people had a problem with me, but that was before you realized lots of people have a problem with EVERY mod. I had like, NO complaints compared to a majority of the mods we have now, seriously. That isn't fair, and I feel like such a bitch for continuing to post. YOU KNOW?

Are you Spectral? Are you SLIM? Nope? Well those were the only two I mentioned. That's not to say that they're the only two on my veto list, but they're some good examples.

While having been demodded in the past would definitely be a red flag for an admin to veto the choice a second time, that's not necessarily the only deciding factor. If someone was demodded years ago for something relatively minor and has been a pretty decent poster ever since, I wouldn't have too big of a problem with that.

[reject]

So why did wires veto me from being Jacks successor in PEOO?

[Snoopy]

I actually did put SLIM on my list though. Although I doubt he'd want to mod anything here even if elected.

[Blunderstar]

Originally Posted by Zok

Are you Spectral? Are you SLIM? Nope? Well those were the only two I mentioned. That's not to say that they're the only two on my veto list, but they're some good examples.

While having been demodded in the past would definitely be a red flag for an admin to veto the choice a second time, that's not necessarily the only deciding factor. If someone was demodded years ago for something relatively minor and has been a pretty decent poster ever since, I wouldn't have too big of a problem with that.

...

I'm not becoming mod again, am I?

[Blunderstar]

PEOO in a nutshell:

Just 3 Boyz - YouTube

Just 3 Boyz - YouTube
Video: click to display

Tim (blonde one): Blunderful
Eric (yellow shirt): Fox Paws
Zach (pigtails): Daily
Reginald (black guy): Zok
Shades: Snoopy

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Blunderful Returns

...

I'm not becoming mod again, am I?

Sorry Timmy.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Blunderful Returns

PEOO in a nutshell:

Just 3 Boyz - YouTube

Tim (blonde one): Blunderful
Eric (yellow shirt): Fox Paws
Zach (pigtails): Daily
Reginald (black guy): Zok
Shades: Snoopy

Which one am I again?

[Blunderstar]

The lamp.

[-SpectraL]

Originally Posted by Zok

...Like I said, there were only two or three people from your list who I'd opt to veto...

And like others have said, nobody really gives two shits who you'd want or don't want. I mean, shit... look at what the decisions of you and wires have done to this place already. Do you really think this thread is here so everybody can respect the proven idiotic preferences of you and your lackeys? This thread is here for the very reason that you and your senseless tool of a forum admin are terrible judges of character. You wouldn't know what a suitable mod was if it dropped out of the sky and landed at your feet.

[Blunderstar]

Originally Posted by -SpectraL

And like others have said, nobody really gives two shits who you'd want or don't want. I mean, shit... look at what the decisions of you and wires have done to this place already. Do you really think this thread is here so everybody can respect the proven idiotic preferences of you and your lackeys? This thread is here for the very reason that you and your senseless tool of a forum admin are terrible judges of character. You wouldn't know what a suitable mod was if it dropped out of the sky and landed at your feet.

Is that why you were modded?

Hahahahaha.

Just three boys!

[Darkhunter]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

http://www.synclinalllun.net/img/dial_k.jpg

Damn man your wife is hot.

Originally Posted by Fuck the FBI

I say we just ban ate and zos for life.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Zok

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Let's wait until we figure out how to actually apply those stipulations BEFORE we start figuring out who we want as moderator and what forums actually need mods in the first place...

Any place where more than three users complain of a Mod abusing their powers, editing or deleting posts, etc... You can guess who I am talking about cant you?

[-SpectraL]

Originally Posted by Blunderful Returns

Is that why you were modded?

Hahahahaha.

Just three boys!

Zok didn't have anything to do with my getting modded. It was Jackketch and Trueborn Vorpal. Got anything to say about them, smart guy?

[Blunderstar]

Originally Posted by -SpectraL

Zok didn't have anything to do with my getting modded. It was Jackketch and Trueborn Vorpal. Got anything to say about them, smart guy?

Jackketch and Trueborn Vorpal didn't have the ability to mod users though.

[Snoopy]

Has anyone checked totse.info lately? They're having a poll asking whether they should ban daguru/spictroll.

I saw that today and LOLLERD.

Guess no one likes retards.

[Blunderstar]

Lol, I thought he was already banned?

[Daily]

I got demodded from totse.info me and Dfg still talk tho!

[Blunderstar]

Originally Posted by -SpectraL

ITT: retards think banning somebody shuts them up

What does DaGuru have to say about that?

OH WAIT LOL.

[Darkhunter]

Originally Posted by -SpectraL

ITT: retards think banning somebody shuts them up

If they are banned and then come back to bitch on making an alt account what does it say about them?

[Darkhunter]

Originally Posted by -SpectraL

Uhmmm... it says they don't take any useless bullshit from proven idiots?

Or are petty assholes.

[coolguy420]

this is probably the best idea ive ever seen and all the people suggested to be mods would make great mods i think except me i cannot accept any offer of being a mod at this time because my life is too busy and fulfillling

[Darkhunter]

Originally Posted by -SpectraL

Or they're people who won't be pushed around by petty retards.

Or are power hungry retards that cant accept the fact that once they are banned they should cool off and then come back and try again later.

[zombo.com]

Originally Posted by -SpectraL

And you're... you're not... TheDarkRodent. I see. Listen, son. The only reason banning should even be an option in the first place is where 1. if it's a spam bot (includes spamming kidiots, spamming attention-whores, spamming page-stretchers, and spamming PM/board flooders), 2. if it's child porn, 3. if it's personal information, 4. if it's the proven source of a network attack on the site, 5. if it's organizing criminal activity on the site, 6. if it's proven multiple account usage, 7. and if it's stalking another member (using the boards for personal gain at the expense of everybody else). ALL other "reasons" for bans are quite simply unjustified. Too many times on this site crooked forum admins, crooked admins and crooked mods ban or ostracize members just because they personally got their feelings hurt, or their ego was just too crumbly to take any sustained criticism. A strong, attractive, solid community is not built upon jackasses who hide behind control panels while they hand out unjustified bans and abuse member accounts just because they personally are thin-skinned cowards afraid of their own shadows much less somebody else's opinion. Nobody should have to accept a frivolous ban from some retard who's just another member just like anybody else, but who is so deluded they actually think they are something more.

i think i've found where the communication break down happens.

those bans you cry about fall under category 1(b) (spamming attention whores)

[King of the world]

Originally Posted by Zok

Though he wasn't on your list, SLIM is another perfect example. I demodded him twice for the same reason both times (leaking M&A stuff).

You're a lying nigger. The second time you demodded me was because you told me to stop bad mouthing the site and admins (you in particular) in public, then I told you to fuck yourself and some other "mean stuff", and then I leaked M&A again. You can go and fuck yourself again. You frizzy haired, redbone bastard.

[coolguy420]

Originally Posted by King of the world

You're a lying nigger. The second time you demodded me was because you told me to stop bad mouthing the site and admins (you in particular) in public, then I told you to fuck yourself and some other "mean stuff", and then I leaked M&A again. You can go and fuck yourself again. You frizzy haired, redbone bastard.

this post was funny!

[King of the world]

I aim to please.

[-SpectraL]

Originally Posted by zombo.com

...those bans you cry about fall under category 1(b) (spamming attention whores)

That's one of the largest problems in real life politics today. People who are just out for their own sorry asses who happily and gleefully interpret the law as it should be just to suite their own sorry agendas, instead of that of the general welfare of the community. You just read whatever you want to read, and you have no regard whatsoever for the spirit of the law... the real reason such a law was put into place. You read into it that we would call people who have an opinion which is unsavory to yours "spamming attention whores", when in reality, they're nothing of the sort.

[Tachosomoza]

Originally Posted by King of the world

I aim to please.

You'z an arsehole.

[zombo.com]

Originally Posted by -SpectraL

That's one of the largest problems in real life politics today. People who are just out for their own sorry asses who happily and gleefully interpret the law as it should be just to suite their own sorry agendas, instead of that of the general welfare of the community. You just read whatever you want to read, and you have no regard whatsoever for the spirit of the law... the real reason such a law was put into place. You read into it that we would call people who have an opinion which is unsavory to yours "spamming attention whores", when in reality, they're nothing of the sort.

1. People who are just out for their own sorry asses who happily and gleefully interpret the law as it should be just to suite their own sorry agendas, instead of that of the general welfare of the community. You just read whatever you want to read, and you have no regard whatsoever for the spirit of the law.. pot, kettle, moron.

2. he real reason such a law was put into place. You read into it that we would call people who have an opinion which is unsavory to yours "spamming attention whores", when in reality, they're nothing of the sort

i understand that .info is polling today on whether to ban you and daguru. Just saw a fun little thread on damagedone, where meta says he doesn't want daguru on his forum. How many forums do you need to be IP banned from, before you figure out that the interwebz isn't interested in your nonsense?