of my mind......
Although I prefer the Type O Negative cover.1180. JayAckroyd - 2/28/2000 1:25:22 AM
Actually, it's more like a guy who worked for once. He always wondered why the free market types were always shouting so loudly and so often. I mean, if they were right, then it is really just a matter of time, isn't it? So why talk about it?
If transparency is a good idea, it will come about. The forums filled with ranting, anonymous lunatics will drive out the reasonable people. They'll be happy to come to a place where there is accountability for what members post, the simple accountability of knowing who is doing the posting. You can fear stalkers, but they're a lot less scary when you know who they are. And they are less likely to stalk, for that reason.
The medium is still new. People still think they have privacy, while DoubleClick merrily collects their activity, and then matches it up to databases compiled by merchants. They think they still have privacy, when they show up on a couple of dozen video cameras a day. They think they still have privacy as the SSNo becomes a requirement for more and more transactions. It's over. For better or for worse, the era of urban anonymity is over.
You can try to pretend otherwise, and hide behind handles. But it's an illusion.
1181. CalGal - 2/28/2000 1:38:30 AM
Irv,
Works for me--in fact, I just did the rewrite as a way of demonstrating what I meant.
1182. IrvingSnodgrass - 2/28/2000 2:36:30 AM
Jay:
Summer Breeze, makes me feel fine, blowing through the of my mind......
Jasmine... it's "jasmine of my mind" (whatever that means).
Cal:
Cool. I was waiting for your post. I'll do it in my morning.
1183. 109109 - 2/28/2000 3:10:10 AM
Angel
"But if he really does want a toothless central leadership, I can't agree with that -- though it's irrelevant, because his argument is rooted in the concept that we have one now, and we don't. The central leadership in this forum is really the only body with any significant power at all. I don't mind thread hosts being more empowered under the aegis of the Moderator, but that's not a pressing concern. Niner, can you explain your statement a bit more, in case I misunderstood you?"
You may have misunderstood, but the fault lies with me. "Toothless" is a bad word. From my perspective, the central leadership is far too Neville Chamberlain with jack-booted troublemakers, whereas I prefer summary executions for folks that any damn fool can see are interested in masturbatory exercises (excepting me). Otherwise, I have no quarrel with the administrators, I find them judicious and conscientuous, and I am, in fact, hot for wabbit. Which, my luck the way it is, means wabbit is a man.
1184. Angel-Five - 2/28/2000 11:12:16 AM
Type O Negative. Most excellent.
1185. Angel-Five - 2/28/2000 11:17:34 AM
hahaha, Niner. To think that I could have ever once believed you were thomasD.
I'm finding that all the heads on a pike argument are beginning to sway me a little bit, especially having seen some more of Cazart in the meantime. It's always been a near thing for me, whether I should support swift executive action to remove people for the good of the forum, or whether I should support an idealistic point of view where we let miscreants and sociopaths roam the Mote at will. It's becoming much nearer of a thing.
I agree a lot with what Jay's said about how the success of the forum is dependent more upon the leadership than the rules themselves, which is why I find myself favoring a rules statement which emphasises the empowerment of leadership.
1186. wabbit - 2/28/2000 8:18:06 PM
Benevolent dictator checking in...
As Irv is working on a rewrite, I will refrain from comment for now, except to say that I agree with Seguine when she says "less is more".
1187. JayAckroyd - 2/28/2000 10:30:27 PM
Defusing sociopaths is usually as simple as ignoring them. It's just hard to do, sometimes.
1188. Seguine - 2/29/2000 1:27:20 AM
If you're an Iraqui, I expect it's hard to ignore Saddam.
1189. Angel-Five - 3/1/2000 3:35:52 AM
Defusing sociopaths isn't unfortunately as simple as ignoring them. They will always, in practice, find someone to exploit within the forum, and the problem will grow from there once it has taken root. The same goes for people who aren't overtly sociopathic but are nonetheless divisive and destructive to the health of the forum as a whole. To ignore the game they're playing is to court disaster.
However, there's no better alternative to ignoring that I can find. There are really only three ways of effectively dealing with one of these folks -- a) everyone agrees to ignore them (which as mentioned doesn't happen in reality) b) everyone rises up against them and bans them from the forum (which doesn't happen for similar reasons) and c) provide them with as few targets as possible and wait for them to get bored. They always get bored after enough time passes.
One thing for sure is that appeasement usually doesn't work at all. It just makes the idiots stronger. And totally ignoring them doesn't help either, because they're usually really good at getting someone's attention that should know better. I think the best means is to point out, loud and clear, what they're up to -- and THEN do your best to let them bore themselves and leave.
1190. Indiana Jones - 3/6/2000 12:35:23 AM
Re Niner's idea about a Gulag, earlier: I'd like to propose a new topic that would be a subthread of the Inferno: "Kick the shit out of cazart, the fecalphagous jackanapes."
Its purpose would be for hosts to remove any and all cazart droppings from their threads. Also, other posters who feel the need to say anything to this human offal would know where to go (figuratively, of course) to ream his/her/its asshole.
I'm sure many will volunteer to host.
1191. Angel-Five - 3/6/2000 2:08:38 PM
I think it's 'coprophagous'. I'm still not for banning Cazart outright (though I think he's getting pretty close to justifiable grounds with his incessant spamming) but I predict you'll probably have a few takers on that one, Indiana.
1192. Indiana Jones - 3/6/2000 10:36:52 PM
A5: Thanks. I couldn't remember the word and had to jury-rig an approximation, but that's the one I was looking for: cazart, the coprophagous jackanapes.
1193. cazart - 3/8/2000 11:26:32 AM
Excuse me. Do I need to show a hall pass to complain about cazart?
What fucking jokes you are. If you've got a beef against me, air them---don't hide in this fucking subthread, assholes.
As for kicking the shit out of me, Stinky, I now realize that theMote doesn't enforce a prohibition against threats of physical violence--what's stopping you, cocksucker? Hey, I'll accommodate you any fucking time you wish. Think of the big hero you could be, dipshit. Why not back up your threats, shithead? Could it be that you're a motherfucking coward?
1194. Indiana Jones - 3/8/2000 9:23:53 PM
Tee-hee-hee.
1195. cazart - 3/8/2000 10:41:15 PM
Nice giggle, pussy.
Fact is, after seeing your pictures, I can understand why you'd be unwilling to back up your threats of violence.
Say 'hi' to the cats, asshole.
1196. cazart - 3/12/2000 1:00:21 AM
Be advised, Stinkums, that you have 4 hours to remove your entry for my pseudonym from the MoteMovies link.
No games.
