How do you feel about TFT's? (TFT)

Professor Chaos · 07-14-2008, 09:19 AM

Should they be allowed?

Should they be allowed, but no threads that were originally created without the TFT label should be allowed to be converted?

Should we just ban the fucking trolls already?

Discuss.

Professor Chaos · 07-14-2008, 09:24 AM

By the way, before this turns into the inevitable "Define troll" discussion, I will say this about defining trolls:

There are no textbook definitions, ok? Can we just avoid the conversation? Smelly, Eva, and I have been elected to use our judgment and discretion. I think all three of us err on the side of "not a troll" when defining.

To further define just how conservative Professor Chaos the moderator is: There is currently only one troll that I would even consider banning, and that is YHWH. I do not take troll banning lightly. I would have, however, banned Francis a long time ago.

(Professor Chaos the member, however, would have YHWH, Missionary, and Lily banned.)

Kate · 07-14-2008, 10:00 AM

Tft?

Wtf?

NEver mind. I get it.

Waddlie · 07-14-2008, 10:03 AM

Awww, I thought you were gonna let me have the last word. 8 minutes later a poll pops up. Outrageous.

antix · 07-14-2008, 10:08 AM

Not that I've started any TFT's (or any new threads for that matter) I like the idea. Since usually when the issue of a troll comes up and we do discuss it, we're pretty split. This way the ones who prefer the banning method can have threads free of them, while the ones who prefer not banning also get their wish.

Cause lets face it, there are some of us who can't stop ourselves from engaging them

Choobus · 07-14-2008, 10:13 AM

how about we have a troll nomination system? We could vote on someone who has been accused of trolling and if they are found guilty of under-bridge like activities then that person would be excluded from TFT's.

Or we could all just stop being such little bitches about the whole thing.......

Waddlie · 07-14-2008, 10:14 AM

Kate · 07-14-2008, 10:20 AM

Professor Chaos · 07-14-2008, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Waddlie wrote

Awww, I thought you were gonna let me have the last word. 8 minutes later a poll pops up. Outrageous.

I did let you have the last word in your thread you silly goose. I'm not going to argue with you about it. But as I closed that post

Quote:

Professor Chaos wrote

If everyone wants these to stop, I won't enforce them.

I figured I'd actually find that out.

Choobus · 07-14-2008, 11:25 AM

none of this would have happened if Myst had been made a mod like he wanted

(But only because everyone who isn't a total shitgoblin would have left)

Kate · 07-14-2008, 11:30 AM

Kamikaze189 · 07-14-2008, 07:03 PM

I voted forbidden.

We have an ignore function on the forum as well as the normal, human, ignore ability. If a member doesn't want to see something, I think it's fairest to everyone involved to use these.

That said, do ban those who spam, those who exist only to annoy, and other complete time-wasters. Those posters don't deserve fairness.

Professor Chaos · 07-15-2008, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Kamikaze189 wrote

I voted forbidden.

We have an ignore function on the forum as well as the normal, human, ignore ability. If a member doesn't want to see something, I think it's fairest to everyone involved to use these.

That said, do ban those who spam, those who exist only to annoy, and other complete time-wasters. Those posters don't deserve fairness.

If a hobo comes into your home and defecates in every room of your house every five minutes do you ignore him?

Anyways, do YHWH, Missionary, and Lily not "exist only to annoy?"

a different tim · 07-15-2008, 05:29 AM

No, they don't. Theism does not equate to trolling.

I quite enjoy arguing with Lily. She doesn't create multiple threads. She hardly starts threads at all. Does disagreeing with forum consensus count as "trolling" now? Missionary, although utterly wrong in all respects, hasn't flamed, done huge copy and paste posts as far as I know, or any of the usual shit we complain about. He's argued his case (such as it is) badly but I don't think he's here to troll, he's here to argue. YHVH, maybe.

Trolls IMHO are people like Kilik and the Drive By Theists (worst band name EVER!) who post huge retarded screeds or copy and paste shite all over multiple threads and then refuse to engage. Ban those people, sure. I'm also fine with Smelly's habit of giving warnings or limiting the number of threads people can start.

I'm dubious about troll free threads but it's a reasonable compromise, I guess, that isn't too much work for the Mods.

Alternatively, what Choobus said.

Professor Chaos · 07-15-2008, 05:34 AM

Quote:

a different tim wrote

No, they don't. Theism does not equate to trolling.

I didn't say that it did. I wasn't mentioning thomas, SteveG, or Quaker, was I? I was mentioning trolls.

Quote:

I quite enjoy arguing with Lily.

Did you bump your head?

Quote:

She doesn't create multiple threads. She hardly starts threads at all. Does disagreeing with forum consensus count as "trolling" now?

No. A Christian coming to an atheist forum only to tell the atheists how uneducated, vile, worthless and wrong they are constitutes trolling. That's all she does.

Quote:

Missionary, although utterly wrong in all respects, hasn't flamed, done huge copy and paste posts as far as I know, or any of the usual shit we complain about. He's argued his case (such as it is) badly but I don't think he's here to troll, he's here to argue. YHVH, maybe.

I agree. Remember, I said in another thread that the only person we have worthy of banning, as I see it through my mod-goggles, is POSSIBLY YHWH. So we see it the exact same way from that standpoint.