How Did 007 Do It?

Owl in Now said:
i haven't paid much attention to howeys recent comments, but at the time 007 was by far the worse party, perhaps that may have changed. but it's not just about fighting, it's also about vitriol, language, etc. annoyance alone usually isn't going to be enough to cross the line, or everyone would be on forced ignore.

Also prior history and other things are taken into account as well, it's not an exact science.

But the broader point of what usf is talking about is simply just dead wrong... sometimes it is just one party being the problem, or being the worse of the two, or being the main provoker. Sometimes certain users have behavioral problems elsewhere on the site and it makes them an easy choice to put forced ignore on.

Recently, we have had (almost exclusively) conservative members of this site pming us wanting us to force ignore people for them to either "get back" at someone or "Teach someone a lesson" or for whatever else stupid reason, and we don't take requests. It needs to be very clear, this isn't a tool for the membership, it's a way to protect the interests of the board. We use it sparingly, and would prefer not to use it at all.

Those complaining about being on enforced ignore are usually trolling, on most boards they would be already banned at that point, but we just make it so they can't converse with a person they never ever get along with. In the broader scheme of things, I consider that to be more than fair, basically we are allowing habiutal assholes to continue posting here and continue conversing with 99% of the memberbase, while not being able to talk to a select few people that they have no intention of having a productive dialogue with in the first place. I do not feel sorry for anyone that is on enforced ignore.

Finally, let me stress that the amount of people on enforced ignore you could count on one hand. It's not something we use a lot, nor do we have too, as most people on JPP are chill enough that if we just ask someone to stop doing X, they will, and they'll have no hard feelings about it. It's really only reserved for the bottom of the barrel of jpp's membership.
Click to expand...

WB's taken on the responsibility of following me around the forum and trolling me. Think of him as a more intelligent Yurt.

Rose Captain said:
I don't see what the point of forcing another poster to ignore your posts would be. They can always just log out and view them. And it's not as if you can see their replies.
Click to expand...

Or use TapaTalk like Paulie does.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Because Grind decided that he wanted to change the definition and allow his BFF's to be able to read the postings of others and therefore also be able to comment on them; but to keep the other side from reading and commenting on the postings of his BFF's.
And we all know that BFF doesn't refer to it's original designation, when it comes to Grind.
Click to expand...


Who's the little girl with the sting-y butt?

Is someone going to be a pout-y baby until him's gets some salve for his sore buttocks?

USF really should hitch up those little girl panties before he starts whining.
 
Last edited:
Owl in Now said:
I think I am the one that originally came up with the idea of forced ignore. (not that I created it but was the one that brought it to attention). I might be wrong on that as we can typically come up with ideas at the same time, but pretty sure I mentioned it first.

Sadly, for you, there is no "new version"

Forced ignore has always been applied as we see fit. Sometimes there is a provoker that is worse than the other party. Sometimes the other party does nothing wrong at all.

It's for those that are incapable of having a constructive dialogue, or can't help foaming at the mouth when they see another person post.

It's 100% at our discretion and our judgment call, and always has been.

It's also not to be used as a "punishment" or at the REQUEST of someone like you. We don't take forced ignore requests, we do it when we find a need for it, and not before then.

As always, you are wrong.
Click to expand...

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight :good4u:

Damocles said:
I have installed a forced ignore feature so that if two users simply will not get along and all their "violations" are when they are "fighting" they will simply be forced to ignore each other.
Click to expand...

<wink - wink> <nudge - nudge>
 
Owl in Now said:
usfreedom, retard, damos quote was a certain situation, it wasn't the the be all end of how we would use the feature. Deal with it.

This has been explained to you many times, and precedence has been shown to you, many times.

You'll notice we don't have forced ignore listed anywhere on the rules page, it's not meant even necessarily meant for rule breakers (as usually name calling and harassing isn't against our rules) as such, the reasons for applying it can be more liberal.

You need to stop this obsession with me, persisting in your whining and tantrum is going to keep you on the shit list. Be a grown up and behave yourself, or face the consequences.
Click to expand...

Now-now; trying to explain your behavior and putting your personal "spin" on it, only makes the situation that much more pathetic. :)

I do find it amusing when someone else, who's acting like a child with sel-esteem issues, decides to call someone else on "acting like a grown up"; especially when they only see one side of the supposed disagreement and allow the other side a pass, so to speak. :)
 
007 said:
So I cannot mention howeys disgusting incontinence but he can gob of at me?
So circumventing forced ignore is only against the rules for non liberals.
Got it!!

Clear as Howeys depends.
Click to expand...

Now you've got it.
Personal bias at it's best.
Oh-well
 
Owl in Now said:
007, you are usually lying. For example, you say that howey said something about your infant son, which is 100% bullshit and a complete, 100% lie, honestly you probably should have been banned for spreading such bullshit. The stuff you are mentioning has already been dealt with, and is in the past. Move the fuck on.
Click to expand...

Does this mean that Howard should have been banned for spreading the lie that I posted a picture from his facebook??

Ooops, what ever was I thinking? :palm:
 
WinterBorn said:
Darla, with all due respect, the way you act towards USF is a far cry from the way Howey acts towards 007. In your case, you were being harrassed. In their case it was a flamefest from both sides. What Grind did was disarm one side and leave the other to run rampant. I see that as grossly unfair.

But I am not a mod. I bow to his expertise in such things.
Click to expand...

Thank you, for your honest evaluation and for your previous post regarding that many of such things are rarely one sided.
 
Owl in Now said:
i haven't paid much attention to howeys recent comments, but at the time 007 was by far the worse party, perhaps that may have changed. but it's not just about fighting, it's also about vitriol, language, etc. annoyance alone usually isn't going to be enough to cross the line, or everyone would be on forced ignore.

Also prior history and other things are taken into account as well, it's not an exact science.

But the broader point of what usf is talking about is simply just dead wrong... sometimes it is just one party being the problem, or being the worse of the two, or being the main provoker. Sometimes certain users have behavioral problems elsewhere on the site and it makes them an easy choice to put forced ignore on.

Recently, we have had (almost exclusively) conservative members of this site pming us wanting us to force ignore people for them to either "get back" at someone or "Teach someone a lesson" or for whatever else stupid reason, and we don't take requests. It needs to be very clear, this isn't a tool for the membership, it's a way to protect the interests of the board. We use it sparingly, and would prefer not to use it at all.

Those complaining about being on enforced ignore are usually trolling, on most boards they would be already banned at that point, but we just make it so they can't converse with a person they never ever get along with. In the broader scheme of things, I consider that to be more than fair, basically we are allowing habiutal assholes to continue posting here and continue conversing with 99% of the memberbase, while not being able to talk to a select few people that they have no intention of having a productive dialogue with in the first place. I do not feel sorry for anyone that is on enforced ignore.

Finally, let me stress that the amount of people on enforced ignore you could count on one hand. It's not something we use a lot, nor do we have too, as most people on JPP are chill enough that if we just ask someone to stop doing X, they will, and they'll have no hard feelings about it. It's really only reserved for the bottom of the barrel of jpp's membership.
Click to expand...

You left off, in your honest opinion; but then there's already enough humor on this forum. :)
 
Howey said:
A large number of my posts are immediately followed by one from either you or USF.

'Nuff said.
Click to expand...

If you want the ultra simple version, that might be true.

But how many of my posts have been calling you out on something? I stand behind what I have said. But I am far from "[taking] on the responsibility of following me around the forum and trolling me".
 
Howey said:
A large number of my posts are immediately followed by one from either you or USF.

'Nuff said.
Click to expand...

WinterBorn said:
If you want the ultra simple version, that might be true.

But how many of my posts have been calling you out on something? I stand behind what I have said. But I am far from "[taking] on the responsibility of following me around the forum and trolling me".
Click to expand...

I rest my case.
 
Pete Campbell said:
007, you are usually lying. For example, you say that howey said something about your infant son, which is 100% bullshit and a complete, 100% lie, honestly you probably should have been banned for spreading such bullshit. The stuff you are mentioning has already been dealt with, and is in the past. Move the fuck on.
Click to expand...
So if it was untrue, why was he banned for it?
 
philly rabbit said:
You enforce the rules the way you can bend them.

You are biased heavily toward the progressive mindset and your moderating reflects it.

I have seldom if ever had an experience with a moderator who referee's a political forum from a neutral position which should be required of a moderator and you're no exception.
Click to expand...

You are fucking wrong. This forum has the fairest moderators in the Omniverse.
 
Howey, grow up, you said what you said, you got your ban, only you are responsible for what you post!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top