Moderators in the lounge.

[MWBATL]

All I can say is that...at the end of the day....my experience is that everyone I have met wants pretty much the same things.....a country where people can be free to pursue their dreams, not persecuted or discriminated against, and feel safe (no matter their race, color, creed, religion or sexual orientation).

All of the wrangling back and forth is pretty much over how to achieve that objective (and hurt feelings from arguing with others whom you feel will persecute you for whatever reason). I try to keep in mind that we do in fact all have the same objectives and that there isn't anything wrong with folks who have the same ideals as I do. Doesn't always work, sometimes I am human.

I respect that the mods are trying to keep it civil. Thanks!

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I have never reported anyone to the mods nor requested a particular thread be removed, but when someone opens a brand new thread with the SOLE purpose of attacking someone, and in the most recent case, slamming the duly elected president of the US, then it should be removed, and I'm glad that one was. Stating an opinion within a given thread is one thing, and I can choose to argue that opinion or ignore the person who posted it if I don't like it. But to open one like the one in question is not merely stating an opinion, it is an example of one person thinking that his OPINION is a FACT worthy of its own thread, and I and a few others found that incredibly offensive. I don't care how old someone is who does something like that, but IMO it shows an incredible amount of immaturity and ignorance. I might think that our previous president was the worst and most corrupt president in our history, but I sure wouldn't open a thread just to say that, and I'm pretty old too.

 

[grandpa jacket]

I have never reported anyone to the mods nor requested a particular thread be removed, but when someone opens a brand new thread with the SOLE purpose of attacking someone, and in the most recent case, slamming the duly elected president of the US, then it should be removed, and I'm glad that one was. Stating an opinion within a given thread is one thing, and I can choose to argue that opinion or ignore the person who posted it if I don't like it. But to open one like the one in question is not merely stating an opinion, it is an example of one person thinking that his OPINION is a FACT worthy of its own thread, and I and a few others found that incredibly offensive. I don't care how old someone is who does something like that, but IMO it shows an incredible amount of immaturity and ignorance. I might think that our previous president was the worst and most corrupt president in our history, but I sure wouldn't open a thread just to say that, and I'm pretty old too.

Typical i will not dignify it.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

I enjoy your return fire, always have. But if you are going to keep reporting me for things, I'm going to return fire. There is the balance that you crave. You guys chose to create this toxic environment a while back. I decided to participate. Lets not cry now when attempts are made to clean things up. The mods on this board don't owe you anything. You can leave anytime you want. You won't be missed by anyone.

LOL. I’ve never reported you or anyone else. You are projecting again.

 

[GT_EE78]

Question for anyone. Since the little alert button tells one who posted on a watched thread , i can easily choose whether or not to read it(so i see no need for the ignore button),but then i'm probably one of the more technically challenged here using a desktop never having had a smartphone.Can and do smartphone users program their settings to receive notification anytime someone posts on a watched thread?

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

@CuseJacket @jwsavhGT

More transparency, even just through pm “warnings” about content removal would still be beneficial imo and hasn’t been addressed yet.

If I may bring point 2 up again I think the change I advocate would grant better clarity to all.

2. If a post is deleted or a warning given to a member here the warning should be clear, detailed, and unambiguous. A typical “warning” usually states “your post was moved from thread X to thread X. Reason: Against GTSwarm rules. Please do not attack other posters.” Or similar.

This is simply too ambiguous for multiple reasons. Primarily because there is no way to tell what post is being referred to. So there is no way to see what content the deletion is regarding. There is no way to then appeal that to mods or measure the offending content to what it may have been in reply to.

Changing the warning to “your post in thread X had been moved to thread X. Reason: Against GTSwarm rules. You posted “You are just an old imbecile @member11345!!” Please do not attack other posters.

Thank you for your responses and consideration.

 

[Animal02]

LOL. I’ve never reported you or anyone else. You are projecting again.

Odds are the butthurt individual complained and it rebounded.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Typical i will not dignify it.

Typical what? Maturity? I plead "guilty". Common decency? I plead "guilty". Not attacking our president for spurious personal opinions? I plead "guilty".

 

[Animal02]

I'm pretty old too.

That is putting it mildly.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

That is putting it mildly.

Pfffft. LOL

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

If

Odds are the butthurt individual complained and it rebounded.

He wants to now play the crybaby role after leveling the most vile personal attacks? Ok. We can play by those rules. I probably have over a hundred posts by him directed to me that could be deemed a personal attack. Instead of crying to mods I just gave as good as I got without all the vile BS of labeling him racist, misogynist, etc. the way he does regularly.

If I had played by his rules the mods would have been very busy indeed. So be it. The mods want complaints they will start getting them. Someone will need to change his manners a great deal.

 

[WreckinGT]

If


He wants to now play the crybaby role after leveling the most vile personal attacks? Ok. We can play by those rules. I probably have over a hundred posts by him directed to me that could be deemed a personal attack. Instead of crying to mods I just gave as good as I got without all the vile BS of labeling him racist, misogynist, etc. the way he does regularly.

If I had played by his rules the mods would have been very busy indeed. So be it. The mods want complaints they will start getting them. Someone will need to change his manners a great deal.

Im playing the cry baby role? You started an entire thread crying to the mods because you didn't get your way on something. Nobody on this site has ever cried as much as you did in the original post of this thread. The mods literally have to feel like parents with toddlers throwing temper tantrums after reading this nonsense. Grow up or leave. If you can't handle being told to act like an adult then there may be better places for you.

 

[WreckinGT]

LOL. I’ve never reported you or anyone else. You are projecting again.

Well, I've been reported multiple times directly from conversations with you. If you aren't the one reporting me (which I honestly think you are lying) then get really mad at the white knight who is standing up for you.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Im playing the cry baby role? You started an entire thread crying to the mods because you didn't get your way on something. Nobody on this site has ever cried as much as you did in the original post of this thread. The mods literally have to feel like parents with toddlers throwing temper tantrums after reading this nonsense. Grow up or leave. If you can't handle being told to act like an adult then there may be better places for you.

Personal attack lol

 

[WreckinGT]

Personal attack lol

Nothing about you personally, but this is a cry baby thread. Feel free to report me again if that hurts your feelings.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Well, I've been reported multiple times directly from conversations with you. If you aren't the one reporting me (which I honestly think you are lying) then get really mad at the white knight who is standing up for you.

Wasn’t me.

The point of this thread was for clarity as things appeared to be changing.

Since you are apparently the one with the most violations such clarity should help you the most.

I don’t care if the mods want to get more or less restrictive. I will adapt accordingly. I just seek clarity.

But since you admit you have reported me. Game on bro.

 

[jwsavhGT]

@CuseJacket @jwsavhGT

More transparency, even just through pm “warnings” about content removal would still be beneficial imo and hasn’t been addressed yet.

If I may bring point 2 up again I think the change I advocate would grant better clarity to all.

2. If a post is deleted or a warning given to a member here the warning should be clear, detailed, and unambiguous. A typical “warning” usually states “your post was moved from thread X to thread X. Reason: Against GTSwarm rules. Please do not attack other posters.” Or similar.

This is simply too ambiguous for multiple reasons. Primarily because there is no way to tell what post is being referred to. So there is no way to see what content the deletion is regarding. There is no way to then appeal that to mods or measure the offending content to what it may have been in reply to.

Changing the warning to “your post in thread X had been moved to thread X. Reason: Against GTSwarm rules. You posted “You are just an old imbecile @member11345!!” Please do not attack other posters.

Thank you for your responses and consideration.

IIRC, when a member is given an actual WARNING and it is associated with a specific post, the system will automatically send you a notice and will reference the reason for the warning and include the original post the warning was issued for. IIRC, the notice will be in the form of a CONVERSATION notice so the member has an opportunity to respond to the staff member.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Yo mods... we are clear on the rules now. Request you lock this thread now. But I still advise implementing my #2 recommendation.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

IIRC, when a member is given an actual WARNING and it is associated with a specific post, the system will automatically send you a notice and will reference the reason for the warning and include the original post the warning was issued for. IIRC, the notice will be in the form of a CONVERSATION notice so the member has an opportunity to respond to the staff member.

Okay thank you very much for that info. I think it would be beneficial to do the same for deleted content but I also understand that might entail more unnecessary work for you mods.

Ty again. Request to lock this thread.

 

[GT_EE78]

IIRC, when a member is given an actual WARNING and it is associated with a specific post, the system will automatically send you a notice and will reference the reason for the warning and include the original post the warning was issued for. IIRC, the notice will be in the form of a CONVERSATION notice so the member has an opportunity to respond to the staff member.

does that mean that there are other types of "non-actual" warnings where the "original post" may not be so clear? or can some posts be made to dissappear without any associated warning? (thanks again for responding)