StarGateWars Forums

Posted: **Sat Dec 27, 2008 7:45 am**

Semper wrote:The images were good, but tasteless and unsuitable for this forum. They do not belong within these pixels.

Whoever deleted the thread, should be hailed as a responsible mod, not anything bad, and I (and I encourage anyone else with half a brain cell to follow me here..) do support their actions.

If your that concerned about the time you put into the thread Corran Horn...well I suggest you wake up and smell the christmas pudding my nonna is cooking... you chose to do it, it was not an infinite thing... live with it.

So.. this long rant, rather than, just posting a concise bullet pointed argument against is just to be my last (I think) rant before the new year potentially... so thought I would go out annoying one of my favourite people to annoy... Corran Horn... loik...

well i have looked at that thread myself time to time, and always wonder...who the heck would have the time and infatuation to down load that many pictures of a woman in the military. I could see if this was a rotc forum, but jeez, that a hell of a lot of time spent post pictures when i am sure that time could have been spent at some bar around a military base, getting to know said girls. Sorry for your time lost, thread gone will not change my world or the enjoyment of it.

Posted: **Sat Dec 27, 2008 7:58 am**

The original use of the thread is all but gone, and its turning into spam. as such I am locking it until the relavence returns. Actions have been taken, the threads are being worked on tho weather or not recover is possible is still unknown.

Locked, feel free to pm me CH

ANYONE wishing to lobby for change in current forum rules is welcome to do so.

Posted: **Sat Dec 27, 2008 8:11 am**

Lore wrote:Semper, as you yourself have stated, you do not wish to mod. Then why are you lobbing? The rules are not all correct, nor correctly followed, and in a perfect world rules are not needed. Forums are not perfect, and with this broad of pool of "personalities" it never will be. Right, Wrong, or indifferent, lines have to be drawn. You do not argue this point at all, but you want the lines drawn more where You think they should be, because of how You feel, and care less for others. I'm fine with that. I, much like yourself, feel alot of things could go, but someone who isn't concerned only for themselves see's that its the overall health of the forums thats got to be thought of. Could I create a forum close to perfect? Yes. Would it prompty die shortly after? More then likely. Only a few would come and stay.

The thread is gone, it did break the rules which for continued stability should be followed. There is no need for it to return, there is no need for compensation and finally there is no need to allow a reincarnation of the thread. A fine line, indeed should be followed...but in this instance it needs not be crossed. A breach in the rules of this proportion is silly, its blatently silly. The odd picture here and there, the odd swear word here and there thats what you mean more than anything, as it creates a standardised, blanketed level of comfort throughout the forum. Several, entire threads of god knows how many pages of pictures that DO violate the rules, concentrated in one place... well thats a breeding ground for exactly what you do not want. Oh... I understand what you say master Lore... but do you understand it? Tell me... is it easier to demonstrate the incapabilities of s system, for whatever reason, by having many small instances of a breach... or by having several massive ones in probably the third most visited section of the forum.

Oh I understand it all too well, anyone who uses the debate section would back me on that one.

lore wrote:Make your stand Semper, lobby for your changes. Personally insult me and my mods for not groveling at your feet and accepting your word as law,,,,,,

lol.. there is no stand my old friend there are only pixels.

. I personally insult those who show obvious mistakes that can be avoided for illogical reasons. Your mods, have shown their flaws as of late so much so you, yourself have punished some of them (my direction towards all the misc mods was in response to Void 'speaking' for their choices as a group, obviously if they are considered a group by him in this case, their sins are also a group consequence). So your continued stand to defend them is fair, and duly accepted...I think in your situation I may consider it myself... however I wished to grasp your attention, I have.. you agreed with me, now you defend the mods choice to stop any more inconsistencies and troubles between the administration, the mods, and the community no matter how obvious it is.

Its too obvious lore and as an admin you cannot, should not be able to afford such things.

You know that, your a smart, down to earth guy.

Knowing a fault exist's, that can be fixed yet straying from it? Thats not doing your job, thats the same mistake Smoosh and pookie made because it breeds the wrong things in the forums.

lore wrote:Well lets just say it effects the level of honest respect you carry among us. We are not perfect. I am not perfect. We accept that. Can you?

I accept that no one is perfect, like I said about three times in this post though... this is too obvious lore. That old chest nut only goes so far to defend blatant ignorance and double standards.

The level of honest respect I carry amongst you? I cannot imagine more than two or three of the mods actually have any standing above neutral to me at all. As for the admins... the only thing you guys need be concerned of when it comes to me, is if im doing my job in the debate section, which I am.

I said I did not want to mod misc... as in be solely grouped with the misc mods. I would GM gladly, however im not to concerned with doing another job, ergo why I did not apply to you to be a mod.

Why do I voice my concerns? Well perhaps I DO hold a level of respect for yourself, I like Buck and when I see a problem, one that I know could very easily, more so than others, come back and bite you in the ass when you could so easily have got rid of it, I like to look out for those I respect, so I voiced my concerns, and argued my point. I also know, that it would go a long way to help keeping this place a bit more respectable. The mods can very easily be replaced when they make a bad choice, or the incompetent ones can learn and evolve, however the admins have the be the boss, your the guys who really should not have these problems on such a public level.

Now I am expecting your reply to be something a long the lines of.. "With all due respect, I dont need you to tell me anything about my forums or if you must, put them in a pm"...

and miss out on Void and Corran's stupid comments and arguments?.... not on your life.

*stares at Void*
*laughs*
I'll probably reply to you later.. im hungry now..

*whirls off towards the canteen*

Posted: **Sat Dec 27, 2008 8:20 am**

Lore wrote:The original use of the thread is all but gone, and its turning into spam. as such I am locking it until the relavence returns. Actions have been taken, the threads are being worked on tho weather or not recover is possible is still unknown.

Locked, feel free to pm me CH

ANYONE wishing to lobby for change in current forum rules is welcome to do so.

Posted: **Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:48 am**

I read through the topic linked on page one, I read through the various arguments and a whole lot of spam...

Unless a clear and concise reason is laid out that does not involve personal opinions about what is proper, but laid in the foundation of the rules...

I say that the thread should be put back, and/or recreated and monitored for impropriety.

Bill

Posted: **Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:53 am**

pianomutt20000 wrote:I read through the topic linked on page one, I read through the various arguments and a whole lot of spam...

Unless a clear and concise reason is laid out that does not involve personal opinions about what is proper, but laid in the foundation of the rules...

I say that the thread should be put back, and/or recreated and monitored for impropriety.

Bill

PMed you bill, I think your missing something

Posted: **Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:02 am**

pianomutt20000 wrote:"monitored for impropriety."

has been the case since the thread's conception.

~soul

Posted: **Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:05 am**

I pmed Bill as I don't think he understands the entirety of this. The content was never the issue, it was the deletion.

Posted: **Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:09 am**

gotcha.

~soul
ps sorry for the clutter bill.

Posted: **Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:05 am**

hey... now now. I made some concise points that DID address the rules. It says no pornography... that thread is pornography and most, if not all of you know it is. Fact, not opinion, in fact lores previous post's imply as much. How can I be expected to take the administration and the mods serious if they ignore this so blatantly?

So yes, my argument does address the rules, and does have something to do with the point of the thread, but also extends the entire issue.

My PERSONAL OPINION is that it should be removed..

1. Because it drags down the overall tone of the forum. Yes some of us (me being the best example) may be aggressive, but I certainly do it with at least an intelligent and logical tone that keeps me far away from how low making a thread to post porn and a 'family' forum. Its Vulgar when presented here, there are sites, and many places it is acceptable, this should not, and never used to be, one of them.

2. Because, and this is very personal, it indulges the idiots that you generally find in that area of the forum, I mean read the opening post of this thread and I rest my case.

So I appeal to you Bill, and lore, to re-think you choices. See sense.

oh yeah!!! AND!

TADAAAAAAA!!!!
viewtopic.php?f=85&t=133350

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:34 am**

Semper wrote:hey... now now. I made some concise points that DID address the rules. It says no pornography... that thread is pornography and most, if not all of you know it is. Fact, not opinion, in fact lores previous post's imply as much. How can I be expected to take the administration and the mods serious if they ignore this so blatantly?

So yes, my argument does address the rules, and does have something to do with the point of the thread, but also extends the entire issue.

My PERSONAL OPINION is that it should be removed..

1. Because it drags down the overall tone of the forum. Yes some of us (me being the best example) may be aggressive, but I certainly do it with at least an intelligent and logical tone that keeps me far away from how low making a thread to post porn and a 'family' forum. Its Vulgar when presented here, there are sites, and many places it is acceptable, this should not, and never used to be, one of them.

2. Because, and this is very personal, it indulges the idiots that you generally find in that area of the forum, I mean read the opening post of this thread and I rest my case.

So I appeal to you Bill, and lore, to re-think you choices. See sense.

oh yeah!!! AND!

TADAAAAAAA!!!!
viewtopic.php?f=85&t=133350

Just do what I do ... block his posts if you dont like to see them, we all have free will exercise yours and click the foe button :-D

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:47 am**

MajorLeeHurts wrote:
Semper wrote:hey... now now. I made some concise points that DID address the rules. It says no pornography... that thread is pornography and most, if not all of you know it is. Fact, not opinion, in fact lores previous post's imply as much. How can I be expected to take the administration and the mods serious if they ignore this so blatantly?

So yes, my argument does address the rules, and does have something to do with the point of the thread, but also extends the entire issue.

My PERSONAL OPINION is that it should be removed..

1. Because it drags down the overall tone of the forum. Yes some of us (me being the best example) may be aggressive, but I certainly do it with at least an intelligent and logical tone that keeps me far away from how low making a thread to post porn and a 'family' forum. Its Vulgar when presented here, there are sites, and many places it is acceptable, this should not, and never used to be, one of them.

2. Because, and this is very personal, it indulges the idiots that you generally find in that area of the forum, I mean read the opening post of this thread and I rest my case.

So I appeal to you Bill, and lore, to re-think you choices. See sense.

oh yeah!!! AND!

TADAAAAAAA!!!!
http://herebegames.com/StarGateWarsNew/ ... 5&t=133350

Just do what I do ... block his posts if you dont like to see them, we all have free will exercise yours and click the foe button

now where would be the fun in that. Its not that I have a general problem with Corran Horn, he usually amuses me to no end, I enjoy reading his post's and many other peoples, but that still does not mean that an entire thread should be allowed, nor an indulgence on such a scale.

and...we dont have free will. Its just an illusion. Its all cause and effect. :-D

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:00 am**

Semper wrote:
MajorLeeHurts wrote:
Semper wrote:hey... now now. I made some concise points that DID address the rules. It says no pornography... that thread is pornography and most, if not all of you know it is. Fact, not opinion, in fact lores previous post's imply as much. How can I be expected to take the administration and the mods serious if they ignore this so blatantly?

So yes, my argument does address the rules, and does have something to do with the point of the thread, but also extends the entire issue.

My PERSONAL OPINION is that it should be removed..

1. Because it drags down the overall tone of the forum. Yes some of us (me being the best example) may be aggressive, but I certainly do it with at least an intelligent and logical tone that keeps me far away from how low making a thread to post porn and a 'family' forum. Its Vulgar when presented here, there are sites, and many places it is acceptable, this should not, and never used to be, one of them.

2. Because, and this is very personal, it indulges the idiots that you generally find in that area of the forum, I mean read the opening post of this thread and I rest my case.

So I appeal to you Bill, and lore, to re-think you choices. See sense.

oh yeah!!! AND!

TADAAAAAAA!!!!
viewtopic.php?f=85&t=133350

Just do what I do ... block his posts if you dont like to see them, we all have free will exercise yours and click the foe button

now where would be the fun in that. Its not that I have a general problem with Corran Horn, he usually amuses me to no end, I enjoy reading his post's and many other peoples, but that still does not mean that an entire thread should be allowed, nor an indulgence on such a scale.

and...we dont have free will. Its just an illusion. Its all cause and effect.

tbh its my own personal protest for my own reasons devoid of any amusement that I will keep to myself.

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:07 am**

Major.. if the thread were breaking the rules, you shouldn't have to use the 'foe-button', as it would fall within the mandate of the moderators to cleanse it. Since the thread was being watched closely by my, and your, capable colleague Soulless (primarily), it clearly did not violate any rules. If anything, we have been considered 'too strict', which goes to suggest that that which remained of the thread was within forum rules. There is no accounting for taste or sexual inclination, or the appreciation of the human body.. but as far as the task of the moderators is concerned, the thread and the actions surrounding it right up to the point of deletion were pure.

Semper's point of (most of) the pictures in the thread being pornography is a subjective, irrational point at best, and an utterly failed attempt at blemishing forum staff and members at worst.
In the case of accusations of pornography, the law clearly states (sorry.. feeling a bit Dumbledorish here, allow me to rephrase) the forum rules are clear on the matter. Pornography is not allowed. In fact, according to the forum rules, as seen in exhibit A, it shares its place with "criminal content" (i.e. plotting to carry out a crime), and is highly warnable. However, the trick lies in the definition of 'pornographic'. Using the rather simple dictionary used by the administration in charge of setting the rules, we find: "Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal"
While Semper might be aroused, or felt obliged to be so, by the mere sight of a girl with a gun, I can safely say that the majority of people does not feel a tingle in the loins at such a sight. And even if, such a tingle isn't what the thread is about. The thread is about, and I quote: "Hot military babes from all across the world". Particularly Brazilian, I add, though that bears little relevance.
Posting of pictures of 'hot babes' isn't about 'sexual arousal', while Corran Horn (unattested) might be aroused by them, his intention is not to (and pardon the colloquialism here) get every guy a boner. If sexual innuendo as shown in Corrans pictures is 'pornographic', then the behaviour of many Temple residents is 'erotic' and can, since pixels are of a graphical nature, be described as 'pornographic'. I am quite sure that while there may be a slight undertow of desire amongst the spammers, they do not intentionally turn the Temple into a brothel. Unless I am mistaken? Temptress? SuperSaiyan? Ash? Major? Clarkey?

The reason I mention these few names is because to me, their behaviour stands out more as that thread, and while I respect and adore each and every one of you, you will admit too that your posts contain regular (and quite innocent, usually) innuendo. If there is indeed a problem of sexualisation of the Temple, or the forums as a whole, then that problem lies with the interaction between the forum members, not within individual threads which have been monitored and approved of by capable moderators.

The defence rests. I will be available for interviews and autographs after the proceedings are concluded in the full and unaltered return of Corran Horns Military Babes thread.
*salutes the judges and jury, turns around and leaves the courtroom in full confidence of her defence having been sufficient*

Exhibit A.
Excerpt from forum rules:
[spoiler]d. Pornographic and criminal content.
Posting anything of a pornographic nature is not permitted on the SGW forums. Pornographic being defined as: Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal (dictionary.com).

The SGW forums are not the place for discussing or facilitating criminal activity. This includes arranging to carry out a crime and the posting of illegal images. This includes copyrighted property.

Consequence:
Generally this will result in the issuing of warning points. Very serious comments will be given more warning points. This will be judged with input from the Ombudsperson, Forum Administrators and Moderators. In cases of criminal activity, the administrators will not hesitate to contact the authorities.[/spoiler]

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:34 am**

A fine display Lois.

Sadly the original pourpose of the thread was to protest the deletion of said thread. Not to debate said threads content. Since certain people can not seem to grasp this I am locking the thread.

Complaint was for deletion, and dicipline to the deletionist

Thread is trying to be recovered, weather it can be is still up in the air
Diciplinary action has taken place

Locked.

StarGateWars Forums

my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted

Re: my thread deleted