To what end?
 

Why was this thread locked?
http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....hreadid=112631

Why not? It served no use and provided a link to a place to direct further questions and comments.

What message does this send to newbies, if we start randomly locking bug reports, instead of moving them to their proper forum? I hardly think "it served no use".

And since when did we moderate based on our personal issues with certain members? Should all my threads be locked now, because I use Adil's skins occasionally?

I hope he stops by to explain himself. This really does seem like an injustice to me.

yeah.. that did seam kinda cold...

Really, I'm not trying to be an asshole and stir shit, or anything like that, but I would really like some introspection, and force us all to rethink how this place should be run. Are things just?

With that intent in mind,

http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....hreadid=112508

If we are strictly going by the rules, was it necessary to lock this? There is nothing in the rules forbidding such pictures. Further, if the link was removed, what was the basis for locking the thread? Are we to equate discourse and dissent with flaming?

Honestly know, how was that a flame war? See? This is what I was talking about in Atmo's Censorship thread.

And I ask you reopen it
 

And before I say anything else I did request that it be locked .but this links with the censorship that duet has started .ok I was going to run away,but I won't.I started this and I am going to stand my corner.I will state quite openly that I pm'd ellcheville and was less than complimentary,I was so angry to see it.Flame me if you want.I stand by what I say.
That aside let's help the mod's here and help them in a difficult job.
We get the line ,we make the rukes then they would'nt have such a hard job.
I say that one rule should be :If it is advertised as Adult content only.Then it has no place here.
That thread though in hindsight does have a possibility of helping in all this.
I request though that it be given an adult rating and be blocked to younger members or maybe thats the answer.Whoever posts should be given the option that it should be viwed by Adults only. The main server will then block any minor from accessing said thread.
Then it is up to whoever wether they wish to go in there .
This would mean Age Verification also to access.
Would this be an answer?not really that hard to setup I would think.

Re: And I ask you reopen it
 

i started censorship?? :weird: :igor:

Re: Re: And I ask you reopen it
 

sorry I meant what you posted on censorship.my apoligies .Atmo posted the thread and I for one thank him.
A much more responcible way to discuss this.
Sorry guy's btu we have to do it and we have to be a part of it.
and before you Flame me antyone for this reply go read what I said in that and Rm's thread ,then feel free to Flame me if you wish .
I know that is against the rules but I will take all The Fame if it helps you guy's sort this stuff out.

flaming is a pointless act of dising peope.. we all have our own opinions.. we need to start workign with each other and less tryign to upstage each other.. its pointless.. gets old.. and defeets teh perpose of tryign to show yer point of view:(

Again well said duet I agree ..
 

My point exactly.Nemmesis quoted the problem they as Moderators have etc.It's no good a decision being made in the backrooms because that then only brings up the argument of "Big brother control thing".
We use this place and we generally have a good laugh.
Some of the stuff is Hilarious. Some educational ,helpfull etc.
If it has to be dealt with,then we have to deal with it.
I say ok, if the Adults wish to discuss Adult content then it has to be done in the correct manner.Then it is up to the individuall who wishes to partake in that disscussion.
Sorry but kids should not be allowed access to this material and as such how can it be placed in an open forum.

WRONG!
No one tells me what my son can see.
It's up to parents to decide what their kids see on the net. Not people like you:down:
With a mod like you, we'd be unable to post our beloved dinosaur pics because they scare the kiddies, no more waffles except if they are posted in the morning, and my thong page......Oh the suffering!

Thanyou for your Flame .I would rather not add my reply.I will just accept your disagreement .
But then on a more Intelligent note what would you find acceptable?

that wasn't a flame. that was a disagreement. be fair.

there's a long disclaimer you have to agree to before you join these forums. anyone under the age of 13 is technically not allowed. anyone above the age of 13, then, in the eyes of the owners of this forum, is able to make their own choices as to what is proper and what is not. frankly, i disagree with your objections here. your morals are yours, and not anyone else's. while i agree with you on some points (ie i would not want to see actual suicide autopsy photos), i can't agree with you trying to impose your subjective preferences on a group of different people who according to the rules of the forums are competent adults. but you DO have a right to voice your objections. as i have a right to voice mine. on that note, if chev's avatar was not removed, then we have to assume that the mods have deemed it NOT objectionable. end of story. if you find it objectionable, your only method of retaliation as an adult and a user of these forums is to voice your feelings. but be prepared for dissenting points of view. if things still don't go your way, you can either deal with it like so many people here do, or leave. the choice is yours.

oh, and the issue age verification on the web raises many privacy issues, and frankly it's not worth my time and effort. i have a feeling many people here would agree with me there.

-----------------

rm', while i agree with you that the rules aren't always enforced fairly or evenly, and maybe even that the system needs a change, i feel obliged to point out to you that as far as i can see, all the mods seem to be trying their best to work everything out as fairly as possible. pointing out their flaws at every turn and making threads to point out their errors or misjudgments, honestly, seems to me to cause more harm than good. it is a human system, after all. run by real-life humans, too! we're all apt to make mistakes, my friend, even you. just my two cents.

more to come folks... i'm going to edit this post some more to add more comments... soon.

I tottaly agree with Trigear, the age for the forums is 13, and IMO, if it was seperated so people under 18 had to be on a different forum, then people would just say they were 18 and get in anyway. Me, being 15, i don't think anything of the sort should happen. Im muture enough to handle it, and if some people are not, then, its their choice to stay or not. If they complain about subjective material then let them, its their opinion. We need a little less cencorship in the world, its the parents who need to take a little responsibility, not the corporations and the political fuckwad's of the earth.

I agree with rm', the locking of that thread was uncalled for...even removal of the link was overboard, but that's more of a gray area...the worst part is that it got locked while I was sleeping, so I never even got a chance to reply to smeggle's most recent dig at me, so I guess I'll do it here:

So I'm the one who cannot form a well-thought-out argument? It seems to me like the crux of your argument in that other thread was that you PERSONALLY found the material to be morally reprehensible, and therefore it was morally wrong for ANYBODY to post it, view it, or discuss about it...you take your personal opinions and then apply them to the rest of the world as if they are based on some sort of absolute moral authority, and you do this without justification (logical or otherwise), and then you say that I'm the one who cannot form a coherent argument??? Please explain WHY such material is wrong, WITHOUT resorting to basing the argument off of the fact that you find it to be personally offensive, or off of your opinion that any "normal" person would feel the same way you would. Step back from your personal feelings and justify your standpoint in an objective and rational way, and then maybe I'll show you some respect.

Yes, I do enjoy playing around with words, especially if I find another post to be excessively inflammatory, closed-minded, or arrogant, but there IS a logical argument beneath all that, at least if you have an understanding of how sarcasm and satire work, and all I can say is that you brought it on yourself by posting in such an inflammatory way...I will fight fire with fire, especially if I find that you are flaming in the name of ignorance.

As people have pointed out time and again, you do not get to decided what kids should and should not be allowed to see, as this is a job for their parents...although I really don't see the point in continuing this argument, as you seem to be completely oblivious to logic, or to any rational view which differs from your own...I beleive in another thread rm' once said something about a "brick wall." I must say that I agree...

That says it all right there. Please no more locking of threads that aren't in blatant violation of the rules...at least not while I'm asleep anyways. I was unaware of the rotten.com banning, but had I known about it I would have protested, and locking a thread because it has a link to similar content (although I feel rotten.com is quite a bit worse than that page) does not make the situation any better.

Precisely. My parents decided what was right for me too see and know when they felt it was necessary, and I feel that I have the same right to decide when hopefully one day I have my own children.

I personally hate all this nanny state censorship - minimum ages to watch certain movies, minimum ages to drink, restrictions on how you are allowed to discipline your children. It's all crap.

Watching films which were restricted when I was under-age hasn't done me any harm, and neither did being allowed alcoholic drinks by my parents from a young age. Also, being hit by my parents when I did wrong I feel was a very effective punishment - it certainly makes children think twice about doing it again.

On the flip-side, I don't own these boards, nor do I make or enforce rules here - it's up to Nullsoft to write the rules and the mods to enforce them. Thus I for one would support decisions made by the mods, even if I personally didn't agree with them, or find the material in question offensive. Perhaps I'm also something of a traditionalist, but I don't like the questioning of decisions made by individual mods as I feel it undermines their authority. That's not to say that I think the rules generally shouldn't be questioned if users have problems with them, it's more about controlling personal vendettas/flame wars between members and mods.

I don't believe I'm pointing out the flaws of the mods so much as I'm pointing out the flaws in the system. The mods themselves are not the problem; I'll be the first to say that. The problem is the rules, and because the mods are following the rules (as they are supposed to), injustice arises.

Quote:

Perhaps I'm also something of a traditionalist, but I don't like the questioning of decisions made by individual mods as I feel it undermines their authority. That's not to say that I think the rules generally shouldn't be questioned if users have problems with them, it's more about controlling personal vendettas/flame wars between members and mods.

You may or may not have been referring to me, but I'll answer in any case I tried to make it clear throughout the day that I have no problem with the mods. In fact, many of them are close friends of mine, and the rest, I have nothing but respect for. In the entire day, I have seen not one bit of flaming, except for that aimed towards smeggle. That was wholly unproductive, and completely skirted the issue of intrinsic injustice within the system of law we have set up in these forums.

I think it's absolutely necessary to question authority, if authority is being imposed injustly.

Boom + Adil = Does not compute? BSoD! BSoD!

Unproductive maybe, but was it undeserved considering the manner in which he was acting??? And my posts didn't entirely skirt the issues, there were arguments embedded in the digs against smeggle...at least, I think there were. You're just being anti-flame because it's the "in" thing to do at the moment ;)

Agreed.

I'm just as shocked as you.

A TRAVESTY! I DEMAND BLOOD!

rm', you're so...














larger than life.

btw, nice avatar, phily baby...

So are my feelings. My exuberance for the idea of rd being mod is so immense that it cannot be contained in one single thread.

rm', why is it that when you are feeling sardonic, everyone has to bear witness to your wrath?



[edit]wry wit ==> wrath[/edit]

I don't choose my audience, my audience chooses me.

Or some other silly nonsensical sentiment like that...

And why is it that everybody must be subjected to these pointless, off-topic posts in a thread which was, at one point, a semi-intelligent debate about censorship and other things? <anti-logic>If there has ever been a situation in which repression of free-speech was justified, then now is one of those times.</anti-logic>

OOH! bait! bait! i think i'll pass though. sorry.

/me leaves tainted bait and goes to find a taco bell.

Your sig is talking to me, trigear. It's freaking the hell out of me.

for the love of god, rm', stay away from the psychoactive drugs. your psycho is active enough without them. please.

Which goes along with my theory that you, rm, have gotten in the way of a bad acid trip lately. :) (Kidding, of course.)

Lots of Love,
Mea

EDIT: Tri, you beat me to it. :(

This seemed really relevant for some reason...
http://lwa.blorp.com/Xerxes/rogers3.jpg

kudos to Xerxes.

rm', please stop. i'm asking as someone who respects you. please.

Yeah, I know, I'm scared of Mr. Rogers too.

And the point of all this wasted air was what???
If there is a need for a redefinition of the regulations who will take it upon themselves to do anything?>>wonders I.
Anyway you people have way too much time on your hands...

I promise to take it upon myself to bitch and moan about any changes that would make the regulations tighter, and to support any changes that encourage free expression by flaming the opposition.

i can't tell if you are being sincere or facetious here... but either way the hypocracy of this statement scares me. Some1 why are you being so bitter right now?

I'm sure someone will make a quip about how he's my alterego. I would never stoop to the level of flaming; I can get my point across civilly.

Actually it was more mild sarcasm coupled with indifference...

The topic has died and there's nothing left to do.

what hypocrisy? it says 2 things:

1. I will protest any change that makes regulation of these forums more severe.

2. I will support any change which removes/lessens regulation (i.e. "encourages free expression") by protesting against the people who would protest against such a de-regulation.

...where's the contradiction (other than in the fact that flaming is in itself a method of repressing free expression...but like I said, "mild sarcasm")?