Well here's the deal.....
Sycraft (Administrators; 21103)
Posted on: 06-08-2005 06:21.
Client: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 Firefox/1.0.4
Message views: 1435 (Score: 0 Protected)
This isn't preschool and I'm not in to hard and fast rules. I don't feel that the rules should be enforced with an iron fist. If you do, ok let me know that, but then I want no complaning when I expect you to hold yourself to the highest standard.
Now as for crossing the line what I means isn't crossing the line in to breaking the rules. That gets crossed all the time and usually it gets ignored. I meant it crossed the line to where I felt problems were starting. If you want a more detailed analysis of why it's along these lines:
So UT started with a jab that I knew would rile people up. It actually wasn't anything against the rules, but it was designed to get people going all the same. Sure enough, wacky rose to it and took a shot at him. While not a personal attack per se but it was a shot none the less, no substance and it implied he was dumb for not considaliting his posts. So UT came back and made a mild personal attack, although one with some justification (it was a silly thing for wacky to say) and then went on to make an argument. Now here I was watching things. If wacky came back and argued with UT, fine, if he just came back with a personal attack, problems were starting. Next time I look, we have a shot from herman, and wacky getting meaner and shooting back. At that point I felt we had a problem starting. Arguments were stopping and 1-line personal attacks were happening, and getting more vicious. So I warned the last person in the discussion.
Now what I find funny is wacky seems to be fine with this, now that I've explained myself, but you two are still having this "persecution by assocation" complex. So I've been unfairly cracking down on you? Well, not that I can remember. Seems to me that if anyone had a point it was wacky, he's the only one I can remember warning publicly in receant memory.
Now interestingly enough Zim, if I was to turn in to Mr. Kick n' Ban and start enforcing the rules harshly, you'd be one who would be tossed. Though you are pretty good about never having a singluar post where you really go overboard you are, to quote someone "death by 1000 cuts".
However that's not what I'm interested in. I'm interested in letting this place continue, letting people have arguments, which may get a little heated and in which rules may get broken, and trying to warn people when it's getting to be too much to settle down. I'd rather not ban anyone because frankly, becomming a forum nazi it too much effort. If it comes to that I'll either find someone else to do it, or just shut down the forums and call it done.
Again, I'm not interested in the childish games that I have to be consistent with yelling at all sides in an argument, or that I have to contact everyone in the same way. Sometimes I PM people, in the case of my friends I'll call or IM them sometimes. If I have a problem with them, I can IM them and say stop and they will. I am not interested in being the mythical fair parent that makes sure all public statements are euqal to all sides and so on. I'm also not interested in strict rule enforcement since I think that'll just lead to people getting tossed left and right, since we seem to be a community that likes to fight.
You do not have the required security level to post to this thread.
Report a Bug!