forums

Kill Trolls Dead Thread

Advertisement
If a poster reports someone, that should be public information. No anonymous tipsters. It should say, for all to read, "X reported post No. *** by Y for Z."

And it should go without saying that if the person issuing the report is a shrimpfvck or a slapd!ck, the report should be treated with extreme skepticism.
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
If a poster reports someone, that should be public information. No anonymous tipsters. It should say, for all to read, "X reported post No. *** by Y for Z."

And it should go without saying that if the person issuing the report is a shrimpfvck or a slapd!ck, the report should be treated with extreme skepticism.
Click to expand...


There is the bottom line, right there.

It's not that I was banned. It's that the dude who banned me is the drive by manager of this place, just checking in for a few minutes a day to review his click totals. While here he just bans whoever got reported, regardless of who it is and who did the reporting.

Doing that, then responding to a question about it with "I'm not going to take the time to do anything extra" is the work of someone who's completely lost sight of what this place is, who it's real membership is and what it took to make CIS successful.

It's just lazy, entitled, management with no regard for the customer. And don't come at me with the whole "This place is free" bs. This free sight is generating $$ for it's owners so how much we pay to be here isn't the point.

Dude just can't get it or just doesn't care to. That's the death knell of any business.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
No_Fly_Zone said:
If a poster reports someone, that should be public information. No anonymous tipsters. It should say, for all to read, "X reported post No. *** by Y for Z."

And it should go without saying that if the person issuing the report is a shrimpfvck or a slapd!ck, the report should be treated with extreme skepticism.
Click to expand...
Or at the very minimum the accused should have the right to know who it was.
 
Red-robes-700x700.webp
 
Go Canes!! said:
There is the bottom line, right there.

It's not that I was banned. It's that the dude who banned me is the drive by manager of this place, just checking in for a few minutes a day to review his click totals. While here he just bans whoever got reported, regardless of who it is and who did the reporting.

Doing that, then responding to a question about it with "I'm not going to take the time to do anything extra" is the work of someone who's completely lost sight of what this place is, who it's real membership is and what it took to make CIS successful.

It's just lazy, entitled, management with no regard for the customer. And don't come at me with the whole "This place is free" bs. This free sight is generating $$ for it's owners so how much we pay to be here isn't the point.

Dude just can't get it or just doesn't care to. That's the death knell of any business.
Click to expand...

Go...I'm the last person to defend the mods.

We aren't customers but rather passersby in the public courtyard and the owners* are the groundskeepers with keys to lock/unlock the gates.

This forum is the commons that passersby put down their soapboxes and howl at the moon.

They groundskeepers allow said passersby to stand on these soapboxes to bloviate as they wish--but make no mistake who opens and closes those gates during visitor hours.

Simple.

*Don't know, don't care who owns (Andrew is one?)--whoever it is it's their bar--don't like it, one/all could leave
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Go Canes!! said:
There is the bottom line, right there.

It's not that I was banned. It's that the dude who banned me is the drive by manager of this place, just checking in for a few minutes a day to review his click totals. While here he just bans whoever got reported, regardless of who it is and who did the reporting.

Doing that, then responding to a question about it with "I'm not going to take the time to do anything extra" is the work of someone who's completely lost sight of what this place is, who it's real membership is and what it took to make CIS successful.

It's just lazy, entitled, management with no regard for the customer. And don't come at me with the whole "This place is free" bs. This free sight is generating $$ for it's owners so how much we pay to be here isn't the point.

Dude just can't get it or just doesn't care to. That's the death knell of any business.
Click to expand...
The owners created the venue but the members sustain it - even it is "free". It's impossible to monitor this site 24/7 without a paid staff doing so. The business model of being a "free" site probably doesn't justify paying a staff to monitor the site 24/7. I'd say most other similar sites don't monitor theirs 24/7 either.

That being said, decisions to ban a member should not be based entirely on one incident - unless it's blatantly egregious. That members history should be taken into account and, and based on the incident, dealt with in a fair manner according to rules set forth by the owners. There have been obvious exceptions, especially in the last few months, of trolls and extremists inciting the masses. Those should be, and have been (for the most part) , dealt with accordingly. But to arbitrarily ban a long time member for one incident with a history of making significant contributions is not justifiable.
 
South Side Chi Cane said:
You know he’s back right?
Click to expand...
Yeah he unblocked me a long time ago. I saw him on here last week I think and posted. We’re good now. In that original thread he did - which come to think of it needs to go in the Classics thread I started - people were going nuts in there and I said “this is where CIS wakes up everyday to take its morning dump before starting out the day and going to the other threads.”
 
Advertisement
423Hurricane said:
The owners created the venue but the members sustain it - even it is "free". It's impossible to monitor this site 24/7 without a paid staff doing so. The business model of being a "free" site probably doesn't justify paying a staff to monitor the site 24/7. I'd say most other similar sites don't monitor theirs 24/7 either.

That being said, decisions to ban a member should not be based entirely on one incident - unless it's blatantly egregious. That members history should be taken into account and, and based on the incident, dealt with in a fair manner according to rules set forth by the owners. There have been obvious exceptions, especially in the last few months, of trolls and extremists inciting the masses. Those should be, and have been (for the most part) , dealt with accordingly. But to arbitrarily ban a long time member for one incident with a history of making significant contributions is not justifiable.
Click to expand...
Well said. And that member didn’t even do anything ban-worthy as most of us see it.
 
JD08 said:
Or at the very minimum the accused should have the right to know who it was.
Click to expand...
Nah. If you're going to be a bytch and "report" someone, then everyone should know who that rat snitch bytch is. LOL at aspiring men actually reporting other guys to mods on a football/virus forum. If you find yourself reporting another person on a fcking internet forum it might be time to take a knee and reevaluate where your life is heading. Give yourself a standing 8 count.
 
Advertisement
The Franchise said:
Nah. If you're going to be a bytch and "report" someone, then everyone should know who that rat snitch bytch is. LOL at aspiring men actually reporting other guys to mods on a football/virus forum. If you find yourself reporting another person on a fcking internet forum it might be time to take a knee and reevaluate where your life is heading. Give yourself a standing 8 count.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree at all. But how likely would someone be to report a post if they knew the person they were snitching on would find out? It shouldn't be like an anonymous tip, I should be able to see if some ******* is following me around reporting posts, even if it isn't public.
 
JD08 said:
I don't disagree at all. But how likely would someone be to report a post if they knew the person they were snitching on would find out? It shouldn't be like an anonymous tip, I should be able to see if some ******* is following me around reporting posts, even if it isn't public.
Click to expand...

Hahaha, this might actually be the best reason to make it public. The chilling effect on reporting of public shaming and the stigmatization that will come with it. In that case, if you are reporting someone, it sure as **** needs to be something that looks legitimate.
 
This isn't a woman being relentlessly harassed at work by some deviant or a kid getting the **** bullied at him at school.

It's an online forum for God's sake. If you don't like it ignore or don't respond.

But if you post something insanely controversial, then have the balls to report someone, you should face the person you accuse like a man. If not, go home like the gigantic doofus you are.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top