Double Standards

[Cleveland Rocks]

Don't you all hate double standards?

This is an acceptable signature on this board.

http://www.footballforum.com/customavatars/avatar958_1.gif

This is an acceptable signature on this board.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b23/dvlspwn/0738_01_005a.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/8544/5c25pv9.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t54/GRLSLUVFTBL2/nfldenverbroncos.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/resources/custom/homepage_artwork/Cheerleaders/featured_cheerleader/2007%20New%20Site/RomiBean.PNG

This is acceptable on this board.

http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/image.php?u=49&dateline=1188536634


But this is unacceptable?

http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/charlesanselmo/th_sincity.gif

Personally, I don't think I should remove my signature untill every half-nude man and every half-nude woman on this message board is removed. Jessica Alba in my signature is fully clothed and the only "skin" showing is her belly and her thighs. All the above? The buttocks is showing in one, the upper portion of the breasts is showing, even a man's chest is being shown.

[Kapaibro]

I don't have a problem with your sig.

Maybe it's the fact that she's a pole dancer in that clip. The woman in her bra, you're right.

Brandon Stokely, shirtless? Yeah right, not going anywhere on a Broncos Forum.

And cheerleaders? Nah.

[Cleveland Rocks]

I don't have a problem with your sig.

Maybe it's the fact that she's a pole dancer in that clip. The woman in her bra, you're right.

Brandon Stokely, shirtless? Yeah right, not going anywhere on a Broncos Forum.

And cheerleaders? Nah.

The reason I am including the cheerleaders is because their mode of dress is very similar to Jessica Alba's in my clip.

Just in case anyone may have "issue" with her mode of dress.

[underrated29]

WELL I didnt like the guy, or the cartoon so much, but everything else looks good. real good.

That includes yours amigo;)



But i personally could care less who or what people have in thier sigs, freedom of speech (or something close to that)

[Kapaibro]

WELL I didnt like the guy, or the cartoon so much, but everything else looks good. real good.

That includes yours amigo;)



But i personally could care less who or what people have in thier sigs, freedom of speech (or something close to that)

Like I said, the guy is Brandon Stokely.

[SR]

Life and the world are full of double standards...no one is free from them. Live with it. Let the moderators do what they're supposed to do.




But God forbid some of human's "forbidden fruits" get partially exposed along the way.

[Escobar]

who is complaining about that? :confused: i don't see nothing wrong here...

[Tned]

CR, it isn't so much a double standard as some of those sigs not coming to the attention of the mods, or them being viewed differently, since there are two factors. One, is the level of dress or undress. Two, is the suggestive nature of the pole dancing.

I won't get into my personal feelings in regards to sigs, because it is immaterial. The advisory board put a rule in place, and the mods have to make judgement calls as to what is and isn't ok.

However, the way BroncosForums.com is setup, you or anyone else is free to suggest that some part of the rules (or other aspect of how the community runs) be reviewed, modified or removed. If a suggestion is made, the advisory board will consider the suggestion, possibly open it up for a public discussion to get feedback, and then make a decision. Our goal is to represent the feelings/desires of the community at large, so if we missed the boat on anything, we are more than willing to listen to feedback.

[topscribe]

Don't you all hate double standards?

This is an acceptable signature on this board.

http://www.footballforum.com/customavatars/avatar958_1.gif

This is an acceptable signature on this board.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b23/dvlspwn/0738_01_005a.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/8544/5c25pv9.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t54/GRLSLUVFTBL2/nfldenverbroncos.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/resources/custom/homepage_artwork/Cheerleaders/featured_cheerleader/2007%20New%20Site/RomiBean.PNG

This is acceptable on this board.

http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/image.php?u=49&dateline=1188536634


But this is unacceptable?

http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/charlesanselmo/th_sincity.gif

Personally, I don't think I should remove my signature untill every half-nude man and every half-nude woman on this message board is removed. Jessica Alba in my signature is fully clothed and the only "skin" showing is her belly and her thighs. All the above? The buttocks is showing in one, the upper portion of the breasts is showing, even a man's chest is being shown.

CR, thank you for your feedback. It sincerely is appreciated.

First, has anyone asked you to remove your sig?

Regarding the examples you gave . . . Stokely? :pound: You're kidding, right?

And that cartoon rendition of a cheerleader? :laugh:

Anyway, you still have your sig. Do you have it because no one has asked
you to remove it, or is it because of defiance?

-----

[Cleveland Rocks]

CR, thank you for your feedback. It sincerely is appreciated.

First, has anyone asked you to remove your sig?

Regarding the examples you gave . . . Stokely? :pound: You're kidding, right?

And that cartoon rendition of a cheerleader? :laugh:

Anyway, you still have your sig. Do you have it because no one has asked
you to remove it, or is it because of defiance?

-----

Because of defiance.

Somebody has asked me to remove it. I sent them a PM some time ago basically stating what I have already stated here.

[underrated29]

HEY CR,

is she doing this in a movie?, or music video or something? I dont avidley follow her, but i had just realized that i do not belive that i have ever seen that before.

[Cleveland Rocks]

HEY CR,

is she doing this in a movie?, or music video or something? I dont avidley follow her, but i had just realized that i do not belive that i have ever seen that before.

It's from Sin City

Based off of the Graphic Novel of the same name.

If you ever watch the film it is the section based off of the "That Yellow Bas..."

They were quite faithful to the Graphic Novels as well as I was an avid fan - though Jessica Alba has a no-nudity clause in her contract. In the Novella the character is nude. But since the very attractive Alba played her in the film they made that "minor" adjustment and more or less made her a Go-Go Dancer rather than a Stripper.

[underrated29]

It's from Sin City

Based off of the Graphic Novel of the same name.

If you ever watch the film it is the section based off of the "That Yellow Bas..."

They were quite faithful to the Graphic Novels as well as I was an avid fan - though Jessica Alba has a no-nudity clause in her contract. In the Novella the character is nude. But since the very attractive Alba played her in the film they made that "minor" adjustment and more or less made her a Go-Go Dancer rather than a Stripper.



i have wanted to see that one for a while now. I think its a tarentino? sorry to hijack.

[Cleveland Rocks]

i have wanted to see that one for a while now. I think its a tarentino? sorry to hijack.

Yea, he worked a bit on it.

Him and Rodriguez. It's an awesome movie and extremely faithful to Frank Miller's Novels when I say "extremely faithful" I mean it is within the 96-100% accuracy range.

[Broncos Mtnman]

CR,

Please see the following from the rules and guidelines of membership in our community....

#9. Moderators decision's are NOT to be questioned in public. If a moderator closes a thread, do not start another one with the same topic. If you have a question for a moderator on a decision, you can send a PM and discuss it privately. We all may not see things the same way, we do understand that. Please understand, we do things we think are right for the site but are approachable.

The Town Hall isn't intended for use to discuss your differences with mod decisions.

[dogfish]

for the record, this member of the advisory board agrees with you 1000% CR, and i have said so in our private discussions. . . .

[Tned]

CR, and others, we need ot try and take any discussions away from what esxactly you were accted to do, and who contacted who, and just focus on whether or no tour current reules are too restrictive, too loose, or just right when it comes to sigs and avvys.

[saddletramp]

With the number of underage members (some as young as 14) your sig is unappropriate.

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l71/Saddletramp69/SMILEYS/imo.gif

[SR]

With the number of underage members (some as young as 14) your sig is unappropriate.

So a 14 year old can go look at porn online, but having Jessica Alba in clothes in a .gif movie clip is inappropriate. How about not. :rolleyes:

[Poet]

With the number of underage members (some as young as 14) your sig is unappropriate.

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l71/Saddletramp69/SMILEYS/imo.gif

That is absolutely no worse than half the crap that you see on TV. Seeing how you see cheerleaders in the NFL (this is a football site after all) that have even lless clothing on than the sig in question there is absolutely no validity to that statement at all.

[saddletramp]

That is absolutely no worse than half the crap that you see on TV. Seeing how you see cheerleaders in the NFL (this is a football site after all) that have even lless clothing on than the sig in question there is absolutely no validity to that statement at all.

yeah, but cheerleaders dont use a brass pole in their routines either. Brass poles are used in strip clubs with the the end result being to get men turned on.

[saddletramp]

#9. Moderators decision's are NOT to be questioned in public. If a moderator closes a thread, do not start another one with the same topic. If you have a question for a moderator on a decision, you can send a PM and discuss it privately. We all may not see things the same way, we do understand that. Please understand, we do things we think are right for the site but are approachable.

The Town Hall isn't intended for use to discuss your differences with mod decisions.

Ladies and Gentleman I would like to welcome you to Bronco Mania. This is one of the biggest reasons I hate BM.


Rule #9 ......


ya know folks, I used to call the inability to scrutinize the authorities figures a dictatorship.

But thats just me.

[saddletramp]

Saddle all I can tell is that the Advisory Board is discussing the issue whether or not some rules are too restricitve. I just ask that you try to be patient. My pm is in response to this:

http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/...?t=6517&page=2




Being patient has nothing to do with my post. I am just posting my opinion and feelings on the subject. And, so we are all on the same page here, if at anytime my opinion is not welcome here, there are several options available to the administration of this board.


1. Forum Mask.

2. Forum Closure.

3. IP Ban.

[TXBRONC]

Being patient has nothing to do with my post. I am just posting my opinion and feelings on the subject. And, so we are all on the same page here, if at anytime my opinion is not welcome here, there are several options available to the administration of this board.


1. Forum Mask.

2. Forum Closure.

3. IP Ban.

I sent you a pm you do not bring that out into the open forum.

[saddletramp]

I sent you a pm you do not bring that out into the open forum.

why???

is it supposed to be a big secert that you are considering adjusting the rules??

[TXBRONC]

why???

is it supposed to be a big secert that you are considering adjusting the rules??

Why? Becasue it was a private message.

[saddletramp]

Why? Becasue it was private message.

well ok .



But,if the consideration of adjusting the rules was supposed to remain private, why did you feel the need to inform me in advance?? My reasoning for asking is:

1. I am not on the advisory Board. (nor likely to be now or ever for that matter)
2. I am special and you felt the need to inform me before the rest of the members were to know? If so, why me?

[TXBRONC]

well ok .



But,if the consideration of adjusting the rules was supposed to remain private, why did you feel the need to inform me in advance?? My reasoning for asking is:

1. I am not on the advisory Board. (nor likely to be now or ever for that matter)
2. I am special and you felt the need to inform me before the rest of the members were to know? If so, why me?

This is getting us nowhere fast. If you want to pick a fight do it with someone else.

[topscribe]

Ladies and Gentleman I would like to welcome you to Bronco Mania. This is one of the biggest reasons I hate BM.


Rule #9 ......


ya know folks, I used to call the inability to scrutinize the authorities figures a dictatorship.

But thats just me.

ST, some of the items in the Rules and Guidelines are not met with a great
deal of enthusiasm by some of the Advisory Board and Mods, either. It is my
understanding that the Advisory Board has already initiated discussions on
modifying them, and this is one of the rules they are going to address.

The Advisory Board is swamped with issues right now because this is still a
very new message board. That was a generic set of rules they had to put
up because we needed something to go by, but, as I implied, everyone
knows they need some work.

However, I might add that if you can't see the difference between this
board and Broncomania, then perhaps you would fit in better over there.
Opinions, criticisms, and complaints are welcome in this Town Hall forum.
That is what it is here for. But I do not take it well when you start to run
Broncos Forums down and start insuting it. That is not necessary.

Call it to our attention and express your opinion. That is good, and we want
that, as I mentioned. But if you think this is such a bad place, then perhaps
this isn't for you. :noidea:

-----

[saddletramp]

This is no where fast. If you want to pick a fight do it with someone else.

I am not picking a fight. You get mad that I posted a pm from you in public and I am the one picking a fight????

If the consideration to adjust any rule or adjustment of any nature to the board is supposed to remain private from the members, then dont tell a member about it. Especially when it is in direct response to a post said member has made in the feedback forum. Thats just commonsense. I dont wanna know your secerts (the Adminstrations, Moderators, or the Advisory Boards), keep it to yourselves then inform the members. Thats why us members cant see the moderationforum or the Adminastration CP. To keep us in the dark til said adjustments are cussed, discussed, and finalized.

[underrated29]

god, if i could only remember what that book is called. TOP you might now as it is (now atleast) required literature for i believe 9th grade english. anyways its the book about the animals on the farm and they get rid of the people (the old farmer guy) because they dont like what he does. (slaughter etc.)

anyways after a while the pigs and animals start walking on two legs, and dressing in clothes and they become what they worked so hard to get rid of.

I am seeing the same thing here. Mind you i am not calling out anyone on either side, but seriously. This is getting way out of hand. I understand the sig, but im not sure about the discussing moderater actions thing... This is all just my personal opinion, but we are here on a very "select or non renown site". Which is a good thing mind you. My point being that not many people know of this site, even those from bm. So any under agers that are here, are not here for "the goods." They will go somewhere else if they want it. Not to a quiet little football forum.

Does it mean we should post outrageous sex pics, course not, but to me maybe a little more lee-way then normal might be...theres a word there, but it escapes me for the moment so... might be acceptable. *shrugs*

[saddletramp]

ST, some of the items in the Rules and Guidelines are not met with a great
deal of enthusiasm by some of the Advisory Board and Mods, either. It is my
understanding that the Advisory Board has already initiated discussions on
modifying them, and this is one of the rules they are going to address.

The Advisory Board is swamped with issues right now because this is still a
very new message board. That was a generic set of rules they had to put
up because we needed something to go by, but, as I implied, everyone
knows they need some work.

However, I might add that if you can't see the difference between this
board and Broncomania, then perhaps you would fit in better over there.
Opinions, criticisms, and complaints are welcome in this Town Hall forum.
That is what it is here for. But I do not take it well when you start to run
Broncos Forums down and start insuting it. That is not necessary.

Call it to our attention and express your opinion. That is good, and we want
that, as I mentioned. But if you think this is such a bad place, then perhaps
this isn't for you. :noidea:

-----

Where did I say that I cant see a difference?

I posted that, that was one of the reasons I hated Mania. Stop putting words in my mouth top. Not cool. I did it once to you on Mania and you blew a gasket, dont do the same to me. It isnt a shock to me that you dont like something I have posted.

As for the Town Hall Discussion Forum, I am perfectly aware that is to post opinion, criticisms and complaints. And, that is all I posted. I can't help it that you didnt like it.


Top? have you ever noticed that when we get into it, its always in the feed back forum???

[saddletramp]

god, if i could only remember what that book is called. TOP you might now as it is (now atleast) required literature for i believe 9th grade english. anyways its the book about the animals on the farm and they get rid of the people (the old farmer guy) because they dont like what he does. (slaughter etc.)

anyways after a while the pigs and animals start walking on two legs, and dressing in clothes and they become what they worked so hard to get rid of.

I am seeing the same thing here. Mind you i am not calling out anyone on either side, but seriously. This is getting way out of hand. I understand the sig, but im not sure about the discussing moderater actions thing... This is all just my personal opinion, but we are here on a very "select or non renown site". Which is a good thing mind you. My point being that not many people know of this site, even those from bm. So any under agers that are here, are not here for "the goods." They will go somewhere else if they want it. Not to a quiet little football forum.

Does it mean we should post outrageous sex pics, course not, but to me maybe a little more lee-way then normal might be...theres a word there, but it escapes me for the moment so... might be acceptable. *shrugs*

less restrictive???

[underrated29]

no not less from what we have now. Just less then what maybe BM has or some other place. I think imo that it was fine. as i said we are like a quiet little town hidden out in the woods that no one knows about. The youngins here, they arent here for that. And they are smart enough and capable enough to know where to go get it.

Just to clarify, i am not advocating any underage viewing of sensative material, just saying that provacative or not its not anyworse than one would find anywhere else, being in real life,tv, or internet. And since we are not being innundated with tons of new users each day, that maybe our rules here might be a little more lienient.

Maybe we can have a spelling course here too, because i seem to have forgotten how to spell almost everything.:tsk:

[topscribe]

Where did I say that I cant see a difference?

I posted that, that was one of the reasons I hated Mania. Stop putting words in my mouth top. Not cool. I did it once to you on Mania and you blew a gasket, dont do the same to me. It isnt a shock to me that you dont like something I have posted.

As for the Town Hall Discussion Forum, I am perfectly aware that is to post opinion, criticisms and complaints. And, that is all I posted. I can't help it that you didnt like it.

Stop making it personal, ST. I'm not interested in personal squabbles. I
don't even remember what happened over on BM. Morever, I'm not even
interested in it.

I did not mean to represent your saying something that you didn't say, and
I apologize for that.

But just so the point is not lost in the morass of personal innuendo that is
going on in this thread, I repeat my assurances to you the the Advisory
Board has taken up the modification of the Rules and Guidelines, and the
result should be more to your liking.

-----

[saddletramp]

no not less from what we have now. Just less then what maybe BM has or some other place. I think imo that it was fine. as i said we are like a quiet little town hidden out in the woods that no one knows about. The youngins here, they aren't here for that. And they are smart enough and capable enough to know where to go get it.

Just to clarify, i am not advocating any underage viewing of sensitive material, just saying that provocative or not its not anywise than one would find anywhere else, being in real life,tv, or internet. And since we are not being inundated with tons of new users each day, that maybe our rules here might be a little more lenient.

Maybe we can have a spelling course here too, because i seem to have forgotten how to spell almost everything.:tsk:

I dont think anyone or at least I dont think you would advocate underage viewing. I do however think that the sig should go. My opinion. nothing more.

And, you really need to learn to spell, mainly as I is the worlds worseest speller and I am very proud of my title and really do not wish to relinquish it.
















pst u29, right click your mouse, in your post and then left click check spelling.

[underrated29]

LOL i always wondered who that one person was at 4:30 am in the "other teams" forum.




St- good call on spell check

[Lonestar]

LOL i always wondered who that one person was at 4:30 am in the "other teams" forum.




St- good call on spell check

also the ABC/check mark.. above the smilies is a spell checker

I-spell.
Pretty handy tool..

[pnbronco]

Thanks for the spelling tips. I was never a good speller but as I get older it's getting really bad and I just forget words.

[SR]

Saddletramp, for being a 40-year old parent, you're acting like a child.

If you don't like the way this site is run, don't post here. I hate saying that to people because I believe everyone here is an asset in their own way, but really, there is no sense in whining about anything. There are methods to suggestion. All of the moderators here are open for suggestion as to how they can make this site better for the posters, something BM is not interested in. So if you're going to compare this site to BM and talk down about this site in a public forum, take that crap to BM and pull a Dream over there.

[Tned]

Ladies and Gentleman I would like to welcome you to Bronco Mania. This is one of the biggest reasons I hate BM.


Rule #9 ......


ya know folks, I used to call the inability to scrutinize the authorities figures a dictatorship.

But thats just me.

Your free to go back to BM. We would love to have people provide constructive criticism, but if your goals are just to take shots at people and the message board as a whole, you might find there are better message boards for you.


why???

is it supposed to be a big secert that you are considering adjusting the rules??

It is a Cardinal sin of messageboards to post PMs in the public. NOW, do you have any wonder why people don't respond to your PMs, which you complained about in a thread earlier this week? If you show fellow posters such little respect, can you honestly expect them to show you any in return???


I am not picking a fight. You get mad that I posted a pm from you in public and I am the one picking a fight????

If the consideration to adjust any rule or adjustment of any nature to the board is supposed to remain private from the members, then dont tell a member about it. Especially when it is in direct response to a post said member has made in the feedback forum. Thats just commonsense. I dont wanna know your secerts (the Adminstrations, Moderators, or the Advisory Boards), keep it to yourselves then inform the members. Thats why us members cant see the moderationforum or the Adminastration CP. To keep us in the dark til said adjustments are cussed, discussed, and finalized.

Their is ALWAYS a consideration of changing rules at BroncosForums.com. That IS what makes us differnet than most boards, regardless of your earlier snipe.

If you bothered to read the earlier posts, you would have seen this reply from me very early on:


CR, it isn't so much a double standard as some of those sigs not coming to the attention of the mods, or them being viewed differently, since there are two factors. One, is the level of dress or undress. Two, is the suggestive nature of the pole dancing.

I won't get into my personal feelings in regards to sigs, because it is immaterial. The advisory board put a rule in place, and the mods have to make judgement calls as to what is and isn't ok.

However, the way BroncosForums.com is setup, you or anyone else is free to suggest that some part of the rules (or other aspect of how the community runs) be reviewed, modified or removed. If a suggestion is made, the advisory board will consider the suggestion, possibly open it up for a public discussion to get feedback, and then make a decision. Our goal is to represent the feelings/desires of the community at large, so if we missed the boat on anything, we are more than willing to listen to feedback.

Anyone can can suggest changes to the rules, and the advisory board will seek feedback from all members of the message board and then decide if a rule needs to be changed. So, of course we are 'considering' changing some rules, we have been for some time. We will always be considering it, because we have stated many times that no rules is set in stone, if the feedback from the community that something needs to change (rule, background color, recognition system, etc.) the advisory board will listen to the feedback and consider making changes.

If that isn't the type of community you like, than by all means go back to BM or elsewhere, but this is AT least the second thread in the last weak where you have pulled this 'if they don't like me they can ban me' crap. That's not a very mature way to be a part of the community and is unfair to the moderators, advisory board and every other member of this community.

[SR]

Excellent post tned.

[Poet]

yeah, but cheerleaders dont use a brass pole in their routines either. Brass poles are used in strip clubs with the the end result being to get men turned on.

Your right, the cheerleaders just bend over and stick their arse up in the air with their tiny skirts on while shaking their massive cleavage around. ST your argument has no validity to it at all. This girl has MORE clothes on than your typical cheerleader.

[Kapaibro]

Your right, the cheerleaders just bend over and stick their arse up in the air with their tiny skirts on while shaking their massive cleavage around. ST your argument has no validity to it at all. This girl has MORE clothes on than your typical cheerleader.

decidedly more than a Dallas Cowgirl, Tampa Bay Buccaneer Cheerleader, or Eagles cheerleader.

[schnooks1]

As a woman, with a pretty strict belief system.... Plus I have 2 daughters and a son...I do not take offense to the avvy at all. Any picture can be taken to a different level.. because it is always and forever in the "eye of the beholder".

I have to trust that the board is going to be made up of a pretty fair lot, and they will do what is best for the rest of the posters.

Plus underage members should be supervised by their parents anyway. If their parents find things on this board offensive to their 14 year old... they handle it from their end. That is THEIR JOB... not anyone on this site!

[topscribe]

god, if i could only remember what that book is called. TOP you might know as it is (now atleast) required literature for i believe 9th grade english. anyways its the book about the animals on the farm and they get rid of the people (the old farmer guy) because they dont like what he does. (slaughter etc.)

anyways after a while the pigs and animals start walking on two legs, and dressing in clothes and they become what they worked so hard to get rid of.

I am seeing the same thing here. Mind you i am not calling out anyone on either side, but seriously. This is getting way out of hand. I understand the sig, but im not sure about the discussing moderater actions thing... This is all just my personal opinion, but we are here on a very "select or non renown site". Which is a good thing mind you. My point being that not many people know of this site, even those from bm. So any under agers that are here, are not here for "the goods." They will go somewhere else if they want it. Not to a quiet little football forum.

Does it mean we should post outrageous sex pics, course not, but to me maybe a little more lee-way then normal might be...theres a word there, but it escapes me for the moment so... might be acceptable. *shrugs*

"Animal Farm"? :D


(by George Orwell, who also authored "1984")

-----

[underrated29]

"Animal Farm"? :D


(by George Orwell, who also authored "1984")

-----



this man is a genious ladies and gents. yes sir, thats the one!

I got to say i didnt really like the book at all, but i understood it. Did you read it top? did you like it? Oh, ya, you probably had to teach it, huh.

[LordTrychon]

There's really two arguments going in this thread.

Is it ok for the Moderator to shut down any discussion about moderating... and the one that the thread was started for.

I have already stated that I don't like the particular rule regarding moderator actions not being discussed. I gave my reasons, but nobody felt like discussing at the time. If someone wants to start a thread or bring it up in the moderator thread (which may not actually be ok, based on the rules and how you interpret them), I'd love to discuss that further.

However, until that rule changes, Mtnman was within his rights to close this thread... and if discussing his actions isn't allowed by the rules, I would think publicly overruling him and reopening a thread he's closed would be a slap in the face that nobody would allow.

That's all I have to say about that for now.

On topic -

It doesn't make sense to argue that a 14 year old can go out and find porn elsewhere, so Charlie's sig is ok. For the record, I think Charlie's sig is ok. Actually, I love it. :laugh: Anyway, the fact that a 14 year old can view pornography online doesn't mean that you want that 14 year old to come here to view it. I'm sure you don't want pornography posted here, so why even bring that up? Draw the line somewhere... child pornography anyone? I doubt it. Just because not everyone has standards doesn't mean you don't want to have them here.

If I type out the word '****'... I'm assuming all you'll see is '****'. I remember when that was debated here. That means that obviously, it's hoped that this forum is kept fairly family friendly, so you do want the line to be before pornography. I don't know what your thoughts on implied profanity such as posting asterisks or cussing and allowing the filter to catch it is, but that's for another thread. I'll just have to hope I don't get banned. ;)

So what's important to address is that things that start out as benign, can become less so when turned into a repeating gif. Again, I personally think that Charlie's sig is on the safe side of this line, but the fact that it is constantly repeated makes it less PG than it was originally (and it comes from a rated R movie, no less). When movies are rated, they keep track of how long suggestive scenes and nudity/partial nudity are in the movie. By taking one suggestive scene that was originally short, and making it never ending, it's much more suggestive. There's one out there that started out as a 1/2 second animation of a couple of women dancing by Mr. Smithers (probably couldn't have gotten away with much longer) that when made into a gif, ends up being an eternal lap dance.

Also, if I were to take a quick clip of a woman grabbing a guy's crotch, and turn it into a repeating gif file... I could make it look more like she was giving the guy a hand job. Then I could argue that I got it off of Network TV, so it must be ok. I've seen a video that I'm sure someone didn't just turn into a gif because he like ice cream... but much more likely because he liked the way this one particular girl was eating her ice cream, especially when it's repeated over and over.

Likewise, one of the examples that Charlie gave was a pair of breasts bouncing over and over. I'm sure the point is not that 'I love jogging' or 'what a cool pink shirt!'. It's meant to be sexually suggestive.


I'm not saying that these have to be deemed over the line. Just that it bears discussion. I'm assuming that you want 14 year olds to post here. Maybe you don't. If you do, you have to understand that many of those 14 year olds' parents DO care about what they see online.

In any case, it's not just as simple as saying that it has clothes, it must be ok. I'm not sure there's an easy way to describe where the line is (based on what you decide, anyway). In the end, much of it becomes a case by case decision.

I wrote this in several spurts (darn work) so I'm sorry if it's disjointed, repetitive, or hard to follow at points.

[Lonestar]

this man is a genious ladies and gents. yes sir, thats the one!

I got to say i didnt really like the book at all, but i understood it. Did you read it top? did you like it? Oh, ya, you probably had to teach it, huh.

Many of us old farts had to read it as it was still in the future for us..

It was not a classic like it is now..

[topscribe]

There's really two arguments going in this thread.

Is it ok for the Moderator to shut down any discussion about moderating... and the one that the thread was started for.

I have already stated that I don't like the particular rule regarding moderator actions not being discussed. I gave my reasons, but nobody felt like discussing at the time. If someone wants to start a thread or bring it up in the moderator thread (which may not actually be ok, based on the rules and how you interpret them), I'd love to discuss that further.

However, until that rule changes, Mtnman was within his rights to close this thread... and if discussing his actions isn't allowed by the rules, I would think publicly overruling him and reopening a thread he's closed would be a slap in the face that nobody would allow.

That's all I have to say about that for now.

On topic -

It doesn't make sense to argue that a 14 year old can go out and find porn elsewhere, so Charlie's sig is ok. For the record, I think Charlie's sig is ok. Actually, I love it. :laugh: Anyway, the fact that a 14 year old can view pornography online doesn't mean that you want that 14 year old to come here to view it. I'm sure you don't want pornography posted here, so why even bring that up? Draw the line somewhere... child pornography anyone? I doubt it. Just because not everyone has standards doesn't mean you don't want to have them here.

If I type out the word '****'... I'm assuming all you'll see is '****'. I remember when that was debated here. That means that obviously, it's hoped that this forum is kept fairly family friendly, so you do want the line to be before pornography. I don't know what your thoughts on implied profanity such as posting asterisks or cussing and allowing the filter to catch it is, but that's for another thread. I'll just have to hope I don't get banned. ;)

So what's important to address is that things that start out as benign, can become less so when turned into a repeating gif. Again, I personally think that Charlie's sig is on the safe side of this line, but the fact that it is constantly repeated makes it less PG than it was originally (and it comes from a rated R movie, no less). When movies are rated, they keep track of how long suggestive scenes and nudity/partial nudity are in the movie. By taking one suggestive scene that was originally short, and making it never ending, it's much more suggestive. There's one out there that started out as a 1/2 second animation of a couple of women dancing by Mr. Smithers (probably couldn't have gotten away with much longer) that when made into a gif, ends up being an eternal lap dance.

Also, if I were to take a quick clip of a woman grabbing a guy's crotch, and turn it into a repeating gif file... I could make it look more like she was giving the guy a hand job. Then I could argue that I got it off of Network TV, so it must be ok. I've seen a video that I'm sure someone didn't just turn into a gif because he like ice cream... but much more likely because he liked the way this one particular girl was eating her ice cream, especially when it's repeated over and over.

Likewise, one of the examples that Charlie gave was a pair of breasts bouncing over and over. I'm sure the point is not that 'I love jogging' or 'what a cool pink shirt!'. It's meant to be sexually suggestive.


I'm not saying that these have to be deemed over the line. Just that it bears discussion. I'm assuming that you want 14 year olds to post here. Maybe you don't. If you do, you have to understand that many of those 14 year olds' parents DO care about what they see online.

In any case, it's not just as simple as saying that it has clothes, it must be ok. I'm not sure there's an easy way to describe where the line is (based on what you decide, anyway). In the end, much of it becomes a case by case decision.

I wrote this in several spurts (darn work) so I'm sorry if it's disjointed, repetitive, or hard to follow at points.
-


Excellent discussion, as usual, with some good points. One everybody should read carefully.

For the record, Mtnman opened the thread back up himself. No one overrode him.


-----

[LordTrychon]

-


Excellent discussion, as usual, with some good points. One everybody should read carefully.

For the record, Mtnman opened the thread back up himself. No one overrode him.


-----

Oh ok... I'm glad to hear that. Good call Mtnman. I hope we can have a good discussion on the subject.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Great post/points LT.

My thought is that this is a Broncos football board first, and within this board, other areas of interest have been added, so, because the idea behind this board was to create a Broncos football board, what you would see/allow should not be what you would see/allow on some other sites in regards to language, avatars, sigs, etc.

[topscribe]

Oh ok... I'm glad to hear that. Good call Mtnman. I hope we can have a good discussion on the subject.

Just as an aside, I am death on overriding other Mods.

That just should never happen unless it is in some kind of really extreme
circumstance, which I can't think of what that would be right now. Not that it
has happened . . . I don't believe it has . . . but I think the other Mods are in
concert with me on this.

Just wanted to throw that in, in case anyone ever gets the idea of asking
another Mod to do that.

-----

[LordTrychon]

Just as an aside, I am death on overriding other Mods.

That just should never happen unless it is in some kind of really extreme
circumstance, which I can't think of what that would be right now. Not that it
has happened . . . I don't believe it has . . . but I think the other Mods are in
concert with me on this.

Just wanted to throw that in, in case anyone ever gets the idea of asking
another Mod to do that.

-----

Oh, I disagree...

I think that it can be needed at times.

PUBLICALLY disagreeing or overriding is most certainly a bad thing. A united front is very important, and hopefully it will keep members from trying to play you off one another.

Maybe on this forum, you'll want to leave that entirely to the board... I don't know... I don't fully understand the way you have that set up. Wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing for any mod approached about another mod to say 'take it to the Jedi Council' or whatever.

In any case, moderators are human too... and can make mistakes. In times when I've had this issue (which isn't often, and hopefully isn't here either), I would usually talk to that other moderator about it... or more likely, all the moderators. Decide where to go from there.

But yeah... I wouldn't publically do it.

[SR]

The more rules, restrictions, guidlines, political BS (to include political correctness), arguements about double standards, etc, etc, the less fun it is to post. Let people post. If people get out of line, lay down the law. Before long, there will be too much between posters and them posting and people won't enjoy posting anymore.

[topscribe]

Oh, I disagree...

I think that it can be needed at times.

PUBLICALLY disagreeing or overriding is most certainly a bad thing. A united front is very important, and hopefully it will keep members from trying to play you off one another.

Maybe on this forum, you'll want to leave that entirely to the board... I don't know... I don't fully understand the way you have that set up. Wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing for any mod approached about another mod to say 'take it to the Jedi Council' or whatever.

In any case, moderators are human too... and can make mistakes. In times when I've had this issue (which isn't often, and hopefully isn't here either), I would usually talk to that other moderator about it... or more likely, all the moderators. Decide where to go from there.

But yeah... I wouldn't publically do it.

Well see, that's the difference here: We have an Advisory Board to
consider all that. You will probably never see me overriding an action by
another Mod, and I think (speaking for them, of course, which perhaps I
should not do) they feel the same, agree or disagree with the other Mod.

If I severely disagree with another Mod, I will probably submit it to the
Advisory Board, but I will not take it upon myself to go and override him/her.
I just think that would be diluting the other Mod's authority and image on
the message board.

IMHO.

-----

[LordTrychon]

Well see, that's the difference here: We have an Advisory Board to
consider all that. You will probably never see me overriding an action by
another Mod, and I think (speaking for them, of course, which perhaps I
should not do) they feel the same, agree or disagree with the other Mod.

If I severely disagree with another Mod, I will probably submit it to the
Advisory Board, but I will not take it upon myself to go and override him/her.
I just think that would be diluting the other Mod's authority and image on
the message board.

IMHO.

-----

Ok... so not that they don't need to ever be overridden... just that it's the function of the board. I understand.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[topscribe]

The more rules, restrictions, guidlines, political BS (to include political correctness), arguements about double standards, etc, etc, the less fun it is to post. Let people post. If people get out of line, lay down the law. Before long, there will be too much between posters and them posting and people won't enjoy posting anymore.

That's good advice, SR, and well taken. From what I have inferred from the
discussions I have seen (and I'm not privy to them all since they have their
own discussion forum), the Advisory Board seems very aware of this and is
approaching such issues very carefully. That is probably another reason
why some of these things seem to be taking so long. Personally, I admire the
members of the Board for they way they have approached the issues.

-----

[LordTrychon]

The more rules, restrictions, guidlines, political BS (to include political correctness), arguements about double standards, etc, etc, the less fun it is to post. Let people post. If people get out of line, lay down the law. Before long, there will be too much between posters and them posting and people won't enjoy posting anymore.

Surely the limit is somewhere though... I'm curious as to where you feel it should be.

Is Porn really ok?

Worse than that?

Do you want to have to put up a 'Yes I am 18' checkbox on the board?

[SR]

Surely the limit is somewhere though... I'm curious as to where you feel it should be.

Is Porn really ok?

Worse than that?

Do you want to have to put up a 'Yes I am 18' checkbox on the board?

I didn't mean to insinuate that just because a 14 year old can find porn on the net means we should allow it here. I like the family oriented nature of this message board, but we're 90% adults here and 100% of us have all heard things outside of this message board that are ten times worse than anything anyone could say here. A line has to be drawn, but it can't be drawn on the side that is so restrictive people can't post. It shouldn't be drawn so far off that people are free to drop f-bombs left and right. It has to be in the middle. I'm not advocating that cursing should be allowed, or that boobs all over should be allowed, just that we as posters need to be granted some sort of freedom.

If a guy has a sexually suggestive avatar or signature and it offends one woman or one man, but nowhere near the median or majority, it should be allowed. If everyone spent their whole lives catering to the minority, we'd live in a screwed up, upside down world. The advisory board is a democratic approach to something that is usually run by a dictator (a la BM with Harbula). If the advisory board is there to represent the people, it needs to represent the majority of the people.

Also, there needs to be a little more diversity among the moderation staff and the advisory board. Every single mod we have leans the same way. I don't know who all is on the advisory board, but I know the majority of them and there isn't a whole bunch of diversity there either in terms of demographic, age, beliefs, etc. If we've got a little piece of everything in there, the board will be better for all.

[topscribe]

I didn't mean to insinuate that just because a 14 year old can find porn on the net means we should allow it here. I like the family oriented nature of this message board, but we're 90% adults here and 100% of us have all heard things outside of this message board that are ten times worse than anything anyone could say here. A line has to be drawn, but it can't be drawn on the side that is so restrictive people can't post. It shouldn't be drawn so far off that people are free to drop f-bombs left and right. It has to be in the middle. I'm not advocating that cursing should be allowed, or that boobs all over should be allowed, just that we as posters need to be granted some sort of freedom.

If a guy has a sexually suggestive avatar or signature and it offends one woman or one man, but nowhere near the median or majority, it should be allowed. If everyone spent their whole lives catering to the majority, we'd live in a screw up, upside down world. The advisory board is a democratic approach to something that is usually run by a dictator (a la BM with Harbula). If the advisory board is there to represent the people, it needs to represent the majority of the people.

Did you mean "minority"? :confused:

-----

[underrated29]

Well see, that's the difference here: We have an Advisory Board to
consider all that. You will probably never see me overriding an action by
another Mod, and I think (speaking for them, of course, which perhaps I
should not do) they feel the same, agree or disagree with the other Mod.

If I severely disagree with another Mod, I will probably submit it to the
Advisory Board, but I will not take it upon myself to go and override him/her.
I just think that would be diluting the other Mod's authority and image on
the message board.

IMHO.

-----


I can see it now, Top and another mod, lets jsut use mtn since he is here.


(mtn) SO YOU WENT OVER MY HELMET!?:mad: to unlock the thread.

(top) no, more, more around the side. gulp:uh:

(mtn) *pulls out little thumb pop ring and puts it on*

(top) no! not that!:eek:

(mtn) yes, this. *little laser shoots out and uses the schwarts to squeeze tops marbles*

[SR]

Did you mean "minority"? :confused:

-----

Yeah sorry. I'll edit it. I also added a little ninja edit.

[topscribe]

I can see it now, Top and another mod, lets jsut use mtn since he is here.


(mtn) SO YOU WENT OVER MY HELMET!?:mad: to unlock the thread.

(top) no, more, more around the side. gulp:uh:

(mtn) *pulls out little thumb pop ring and puts it on*

(top) no! not that!:eek:

(mtn) yes, this. *little laser shoots out and uses the schwarts to squeeze tops marbles*
-


:faint:


-----

[LordTrychon]

I didn't mean to insinuate that just because a 14 year old can find porn on the net means we should allow it here. I like the family oriented nature of this message board, but we're 90% adults here and 100% of us have all heard things outside of this message board that are ten times worse than anything anyone could say here. A line has to be drawn, but it can't be drawn on the side that is so restrictive people can't post. It shouldn't be drawn so far off that people are free to drop f-bombs left and right. It has to be in the middle. I'm not advocating that cursing should be allowed, or that boobs all over should be allowed, just that we as posters need to be granted some sort of freedom.

If a guy has a sexually suggestive avatar or signature and it offends one woman or one man, but nowhere near the median or majority, it should be allowed. If everyone spent their whole lives catering to the minority, we'd live in a screwed up, upside down world. The advisory board is a democratic approach to something that is usually run by a dictator (a la BM with Harbula). If the advisory board is there to represent the people, it needs to represent the majority of the people.

Also, there needs to be a little more diversity among the moderation staff and the advisory board. Every single mod we have leans the same way. I don't know who all is on the advisory board, but I know the majority of them and there isn't a whole bunch of diversity there either in terms of demographic, age, beliefs, etc. If we've got a little piece of everything in there, the board will be better for all.

When it comes to not wanting people offended, again it's hard to decide how many is too many? If someone's offended because they're in some extreme view a la "I don't like seeing women's faces! They should be covered!"... obviously that's a bit much. If I post a sexist remark that really only pisses off women... and women only account for 1/3 of the board... well... that is something different. Still a minority though.

Although it went round and round in another thread, I'll say again that what's more important with a moderator in my humble opinion... is not which way they lean, but their ability to act fairly and see both sides evenly DESPITE which way they lean.

If you don't have moderators who can act fairly, does it really matter?

[Mike]

Although it went round and round in another thread, I'll say again that what's more important with a moderator in my humble opinion... is not which way they lean, but their ability to act fairly and see both sides evenly DESPITE which way they lean.

If you don't have moderators who can act fairly, does it really matter?

Good post. :salute:

[Poet]

Surely the limit is somewhere though... I'm curious as to where you feel it should be.

Is Porn really ok?

Worse than that?

Do you want to have to put up a 'Yes I am 18' checkbox on the board?

But does the content in question remotely come close to needing a I am 18? Taking down something like the content in question on the internet is like taking your kid to a gun show and giving him money for a gun but then getting made at him for buying a small blunt pocket knife LT.

[Poet]

When it comes to not wanting people offended, again it's hard to decide how many is too many? If someone's offended because they're in some extreme view a la "I don't like seeing women's faces! They should be covered!"... obviously that's a bit much. If I post a sexist remark that really only pisses off women... and women only account for 1/3 of the board... well... that is something different. Still a minority though.

Although it went round and round in another thread, I'll say again that what's more important with a moderator in my humble opinion... is not which way they lean, but their ability to act fairly and see both sides evenly DESPITE which way they lean.

If you don't have moderators who can act fairly, does it really matter?
If you say something sexist odds are that you will offend more than the women on this MB. If you say something racist you will offend more than just people of that race on this MB. It goes on and on and on and on and on.

I am inclined to agree with SR for a point. A lot of this stuff is just opinion's,although some people actually have arguments that goes with theirs and others do not. The issue is that you can often come to a lot of just decisions with cases like these. There are a lot of ways that the advisory board could rule and a lot of them I could end up saying "I disagree with that but I see where they are coming from". And if you have a large group of people who often see a lot of things very similar you can often find that the MB or office, or poker game, or sports team or whatever it is gets ran by view points that are often only one sided. Now, granted I can tell you that with all of my dealings with the advisory board and moderators that they are all good at their jobs. And trust me, at fault of my own I have dealt a LOT with the mods. I think that sometimes it is best to be a little diverse because you hear things from the other side that you would not usually hear, and that can help put things in perspective.

[SR]

When it comes to not wanting people offended, again it's hard to decide how many is too many? If someone's offended because they're in some extreme view a la "I don't like seeing women's faces! They should be covered!"... obviously that's a bit much. If I post a sexist remark that really only pisses off women... and women only account for 1/3 of the board... well... that is something different. Still a minority though.


If you don't have moderators who can act fairly, does it really matter?


If someone says something that offends someone, that someone can report the post. If the mod decides, using their judgement, that it is offensive, that moderator can take the necessary action. I was referring more to visible things that things said, like avatars and signatures, since that was the original thread topic.

If for whatever reason we get on the topic of boobs and someone refers to them as fun bags or whatever and it offends someone, then yeah that should be handled. But my point is if we lay down so many rules and guidelines that it makes people question what they post, people will stop posting.

This board is not that big and we half a half dozen moderators. I'm another board, DFWStangs.net that has 16k members and the same amount of moderators. I'm another board, militarystangs.com that has a whole lot more members than this site, and there's roughly the same amount of moderators. My point is that this site has way more than enough moderators to handle things on a case-by-case basis. All of these rules and crap that are trying to be put in place aren't necessary and is a big waste of time.

We have a CoC with rules in it. Let that be the law. If people post outside of 'the law', appropriate actions should be taken.

[SR]

If you say something sexist odds are that you will offend more than the women on this MB. If you say something racist you will offend more than just people of that race on this MB. It goes on and on and on and on and on.

I am inclined to agree with SR for a point. A lot of this stuff is just opinion's,although some people actually have arguments that goes with theirs and others do not. The issue is that you can often come to a lot of just decisions with cases like these. There are a lot of ways that the advisory board could rule and a lot of them I could end up saying "I disagree with that but I see where they are coming from". And if you have a large group of people who often see a lot of things very similar you can often find that the MB or office, or poker game, or sports team or whatever it is gets ran by view points that are often only one sided. Now, granted I can tell you that with all of my dealings with the advisory board and moderators that they are all good at their jobs. And trust me, at fault of my own I have dealt a LOT with the mods. I think that sometimes it is best to be a little diverse because you hear things from the other side that you would not usually hear, and that can help put things in perspective.

I think the problem is that people are too damn touchy. No one can please everyone. Someone is bound to get offended or butt hurt somewhere down the line. Personally, I don't care if I offend someone or piss someone off. Life is tough. Deal with it.

[LordTrychon]

I think the problem is that people are too damn touchy. No one can please everyone. Someone is bound to get offended or butt hurt somewhere down the line. Personally, I don't care if I offend someone or piss someone off. Life is tough. Deal with it.

If we didn't care about pissing people off or offending them, there wouldn't be a point to having moderators.

I'm not saying there is a need for more rules or more strict rules... just trying to discuss where the rules/boundaries should be. Mainly regarding the visual boundaries, as that is the point. I used the written examples just because it's an easier way to illustrate my point, as it IS hard to define what's explicit visually.

[LordTrychon]

But does the content in question remotely come close to needing a I am 18? Taking down something like the content in question on the internet is like taking your kid to a gun show and giving him money for a gun but then getting made at him for buying a small blunt pocket knife LT.

The particular content was not over the line in my own opinion if you go back to my huge rant a page or so ago... I was merely trying to point out that something doesn't have to involve nudity to become explicit.

Or to follow your simile... it's like giving your kid money to go to a gun show, as long as he doesn't buy a gun... so he buys a knife that shoots bullets. :confused: :laugh:

[Devilspawn]

I liked Sin City.

This upset Charlie, and I don't blame him. I don't know much about pole dancing except that it's very inconvenient that the pole is not near any ATM. I hate losing my seat!

So if he has to take his sig down, I'm taking mine down and putting up the Rosie O'Donnell in a tub of mayonnaise sig for your viewing pleasure.

[LordTrychon]

I liked Sin City.

This upset Charlie, and I don't blame him.

So if he has to take his sig down, I'm taking mine down and putting the Rosie O'Donnell in a tub of mayonnaise sig up for your viwing pleasure.

:neg:

:IP:




.....



Damn.

[Devilspawn]

:neg:

:IP:




.....



Damn.
Red sun gotcha down, Kal-El? :laugh:

[UnderArmour]

Question: Why are moderators enforcing gray area rules without any discussion among themselves? This is absolutely ridiculous. It's one thing to have a bad rule, it's another when a moderator is essentially making up rules. That's what a gray area allows. Please, confer on these sorts of things.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Question: Why are moderators enforcing gray area rules without any discussion among themselves? This is absolutely ridiculous. It's one thing to have a bad rule, it's another when a moderator is essentially making up rules. That's what a gray area allows. Please, confer on these sorts of things.

UnderArmour - we moderators have discussions among ourselves all of the time. We send pms back and forth to discuss different situations. And no moderator is making up rules. We try to do our best to mod based on the rules/guidelines as they are set forth.

[LordTrychon]

UnderArmour - we moderators have discussions among ourselves all of the time. We send pms back and forth to discuss different situations. And no moderator is making up rules. We try to do our best to mod based on the rules/guidelines as they are set forth.

It's true... I see you guys posting in your secret forums quite a bit. ;)


I think what underarmour was concerned about though was that this seemed like a borderline call, and there was no mention of it being discussed.


Edit: It's important to note that VERY OFTEN it's assumed that nothing's gone on when lots has, as far as moderator discussion is concerned... or any moderator actions for that matter. Regular members can't see the reports, the emails back and forth... the pms, the moderator/staff forums...

[Watchthemiddle]

It's true... I see you guys posting in your secret forums quite a bit. ;)


I think what underarmour was concerned about though was that this seemed like a borderline call, and there was no mention of it being discussed.


Edit: It's important to note that VERY OFTEN it's assumed that nothing's gone on when lots has, as far as moderator discussion is concerned... or any moderator actions for that matter. Regular members can't see the reports, the emails back and forth... the pms, the moderator/staff forums...

IMO...I think in a case like that, it needs to be mentioned to the members that discussions have taken place. That way members know discussion has gone on and it wasn't just a knee jerk reaction by one mod. Details don't need to be mentioned.

[LordTrychon]

IMO...I think in a case like that, it needs to be mentioned to the members that discussions have taken place. That way members know discussion has gone on and it wasn't just a knee jerk reaction by one mod. Details don't need to be mentioned.

I understand what you're saying...

But in general, moderator action isn't supposed to be discussed at all on this board. Where are they suppost to let the members know?

If Carol removed my sig, she wouldn't put up a thread saying that it was discussed first... and I don't think I'd want her to make it public anyhow.

[Watchthemiddle]

I understand what you're saying...

But in general, moderator action isn't supposed to be discussed at all on this board. Where are they suppost to let the members know?

If Carol removed my sig, she wouldn't put up a thread saying that it was discussed first... and I don't think I'd want her to make it public anyhow.

I know that...and like you said earlier its a case by case thing. I am saying that if members thought things were a knee jerk reaction and there was discussion discussing a certain discussion...:laugh:..then it could be noted to members that a discussion took place and in fact it wasnt' a knee jerk reaction.
;)

[Lonestar]

UnderArmour - we moderators have discussions among ourselves all of the time. We send PMS back and forth to discuss different situations. And no moderator is making up rules. We try to do our best to mod based on the rules/guidelines as they are set forth.

If memory serves correct someone reported this. It was determined after several PMs that it was deemed inappropriate by members as well as the mod staff. He was asked to remove it. Until this thread I was under impression that he had done so..

I personally never went back to double check it, but I think that he had done so after a couple of PM's back and forth with the mod that handled it.
I do not remember any negative comments one way or the other..

I can assure you that each reported post is looked at by one if not all of the mods. If something does not set right with me on how it was handled (wording mostly) I have on several occasions PM'd the mod to advise them how I've felt.

I think overall that the rules as set forth in the COC have been followed real close Even If I have not agreed with them it is our job to follow them..

I do not think anyone has deviated from them.

I also try to read each deleted post that I see to see if how it was handled. As each of us are new to doing this it has been a learning experience for me and I suspect all of us.

Just as the police enforce the laws as written we can not afford to go off half cocked and nuke someone with out answering to someone.

[SR]

If memory serves correct someone reported this. It was determined after several PMs that it was deemed inappropriate by members as well as the mod staff. He was asked to remove it. Until this thread I was under impression that he had done so..

I personally never went back to double check it, but I think that he had done so after a couple of PM's back and forth with the mod that handled it.
I do not remember any negative comments one way or the other..


I think I was still a mod the first time this came up and I think I voted in favor of letting Charlie keep it up. I can't remember exactly though.



But all of this crap is exactly what I'm talking about. Quit over-analyzing this and JUST LET PEOPLE POST. If a person gets out of hand, we have MORE THAN ENOUGH MODERATORS to deal with things on a case-by-case basis.

This is getting retarded.

[Tned]

Don't you all hate double standards?

This is an acceptable signature on this board.

http://www.footballforum.com/customavatars/avatar958_1.gif

This is an acceptable signature on this board.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b23/dvlspwn/0738_01_005a.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/8544/5c25pv9.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t54/GRLSLUVFTBL2/nfldenverbroncos.jpg

This is acceptable on this board.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/resources/custom/homepage_artwork/Cheerleaders/featured_cheerleader/2007%20New%20Site/RomiBean.PNG

This is acceptable on this board.

http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/image.php?u=49&dateline=1188536634


But this is unacceptable?

http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y200/charlesanselmo/th_sincity.gif

Personally, I don't think I should remove my signature untill every half-nude man and every half-nude woman on this message board is removed. Jessica Alba in my signature is fully clothed and the only "skin" showing is her belly and her thighs. All the above? The buttocks is showing in one, the upper portion of the breasts is showing, even a man's chest is being shown.

CR, I just realized you had not removed your sig. While it is perfectly acceptable and good, for us to have this discussion, the fact is that if a moderator asked you to remove the image, you need to do it. You can post that image in your initial post, so that this discussion can continue, and if the moderators and/or advisory board reach a seperate conclusion on that image, makes a rule change or how they are interpreted, it is possible you can readd it. However, it isn't acceptable to not comply with a mods direction.

[topscribe]

CR, I just realized you had not removed your sig. While it is perfectly acceptable and good, for us to have this discussion, the fact is that if a moderator asked you to remove the image, you need to do it. You can post that image in your initial post, so that this discussion can continue, and if the moderators and/or advisory board reach a seperate conclusion on that image, makes a rule change or how they are interpreted, it is possible you can readd it. However, it isn't acceptable to not comply with a mods direction.

That's my fault, Tned. CR PM'd me and asked what he should do, and I repied
to wait until the Board's decision. In the case of an appeal in the judicial
system, nothing is done until the decision comes down. That is the principle
by which I was going. So CR was not being defiant in this case.

-----

[Tned-Mobile]

That's my fault, Tned. CR PM'd me and asked what he should do, and I repied
to wait until the Board's decision. In the case of an appeal in the judicial
system, nothing is done until the decision comes down. That is the principle
by which I was going. So CR was not being defiant in this case.

-----

In that case CR can disregard what I posted.

[TXBRONC]

In that case CR can disregard what I posted.


He's already taken it out.

[Tned]

Ok, there has been some miscommunications on several fronts. In the spirit of openess and community that we are trying to use when running this message board, I will give all involved in this thread a brief update.

First, the advisory board and moderators haven't communicate as well as we could, and have learned from that. I think we will work on some procedures as a result and therefore come out of this for the better.

Second, as has been recently posted, CR was told he could keep his sig up until a decision was reached. Therefore, I have apologized to CR for the miscommunication on that and the mixed message he has received. However, it is important for everyone to understand that in the future, if a mod tells you to do something, your first obligation is to comply, and then if you choose to you can request to have that moderator decision reviewed.

Third, in relation to number two, no request to review the moderators decision was ever made in this case, so the board has not been making a determination as to whether this single sig is acceptable, but instead has been talking about the bigger picture, which is whether or not the rules or guidelines/interpretations on those rules (specifically regarding sig images) needs to be amended in any way. It is important that a poster not assume that because he complains about something, that the board will automatically review the action in question. It falls to the poster to make a direct request to a board member asking them to have the advisory board review a decision or action, and the poster should provide as little or as much explanation as s/he sees fit to allow the board to review the decision/action in question.

[Cleveland Rocks]

It is important that a poster not assume that because he complains about something, that the board will automatically review the action in question. It falls to the poster to make a direct request to a board member asking them to have the advisory board review a decision or action, and the poster should provide as little or as much explanation as s/he sees fit to allow the board to review the decision/action in question.

I already did that. I sent a PM several days ago to a member of the Advistory Board requesting they have a discussion about my signature. I recieved a PM back saying that they have no problem with my signature and that they (that individual) will look into it.

[Tned]

I already did that. I sent a PM several days ago to a member of the Advistory Board requesting they have a discussion about my signature. I recieved a PM back saying that they have no problem with my signature and that they (that individual) will look into it.

Yes, that apparently was one of the places we had some internal confusion/miscommunications, not helped by the fact I am in another time zone this week. We are all on the same page now and reviewing your sig. Sorry, again, for all the confusion.

[Tned]

The advisory board has discussed the sig in question (Jessica Alba in CR's signature) and find that it does not violate the signature rule, as by the current standards of society, that is not a 'sexually explicit' image or action. For instance, you might see a scene just like it on a sitcom that comes on TV at 7:00 pm, which is during the time the FCC has more stringent rules for the protection of children.

During this issue, we have identified some procedural gaps for dealing with problems such as this, and therefore the board will work on formalizing the review process and will publish those details when it is completed. We will make every effort to make the process of requesting reviews and getting answers as quick and painless as possible.

[Cleveland Rocks]

The advisory board has discussed the sig in question (Jessica Alba in CR's signature) and find that it does not violate the signature rule, as by the current standards of society, that is not a 'sexually explicit' image or action. For instance, you might see a scene just like it on a sitcom that comes on TV at 7:00 pm, which is during the time the FCC has more stringent rules for the protection of children.

During this issue, we have identified some procedural gaps for dealing with problems such as this, and therefore the board will work on formalizing the review process and will publish those details when it is completed. We will make every effort to make the process of requesting reviews and getting answers as quick and painless as possible.

Yay!

Thank you all very much.

:cool:

[Escobar]

Yay!

Thank you all very much.

:cool:

did you know that she is pregnant dude?

[Cleveland Rocks]

did you know that she is pregnant dude?

Now she is.

But not in the signature.

I don't much care for Celeb gossip.

[Escobar]

Now she is.

But not in the signature.

I don't much care for Celeb gossip.

hehehhehehehehe

[topscribe]

Yay!

Thank you all very much.

:cool:

Just as I told you, CR: The system can work for you if you just use it.

Let this be a lesson to everybody.

-----

[TXBRONC]

Yay!

Thank you all very much.

:cool:


You're welcome.

[dogfish]

Yay!

Thank you all very much.

:cool:


no, thank you for having jessica alba in your sig. . . . :werd:

[Kapaibro]

no, thank you for having jessica alba in your sig. . . . :werd:

The Return of The Filthmeister! ;)

[KCL]

The Return of The Filthmeister! ;)

And we wouldn't want him any other way....;)

[KCL]

Yay!

Thank you all very much.

:cool:

Your welcome CR.