"Abusing" the swear filter

[edczxcvbnm]

In a heartbeat. I've seen it happen to current staffers before. Remember Krel? Remember Chewbacca? Didn't think so.

Furthermore, if I were banned, I'd never be back, so there'd be no sense in making 16,000 annoying sigs about me.

I remember them. Go Chewy! He was awesome with is Frog avatars. I miss him ;_;

[Agent Proto]

Chewy was banned? ;_;

[Dr Unne]

No he wasn't.

[Raistlin]

I don't know if I agree that staffing is such a big "responsibility," which may be where problems (with me) stem from. I just don't think its a big flippin' deal either way. I don't get paid enough to force myself to be uptight. I'll try to behave better for the sake of other's comfort levels though... asshole.

So if it's not a responsibility...what it is? What's the reason people become staffers? Why do staffers continue to stay on...staffing(for lack of a better term)? If it's not a responsibility, it's a privilige, complemented with "perks" and other such jobs to make it more "fun" and "worthwhile." The worthwhile part should come with making a difference at the board. Basically, if you don't care enough to be able to put in the small amount of effort needed to follow the rules enough to do your job on the forums, you shouldn't be part of staff. For instance, Bleys. He didn't like the swearing restrictions, but followed them out of respect. Everybody who knows him would know that he also could have been very unprofessional on the forums by being rude/cussing at members, but he didn't out of respect for the board(as he has already stated), and out of the sense of responsibility he felt towards it.

I'll just leave it at this: hypothetically, back when I adminned at FG(supposedly more "laid back"), if I had seen some of the language and attitudes from the staff there that I have seen here, they probably wouldn't have been on staff anymore(or at the very least, had a looooong very one-sided talk with me, as happened to DocFrance when he was rude to an admittedly obnoxious member; yes, I swore a lot).


Oh, and I remember Chewy! *elitist*

[Doomgaze]

Unban Chewy! I will be making sigs soon.

[meowwl]

As far as word filters, I don't think this one is very bad at all..It could be worse..It could be completely anal, like the Adult Swim boards, which won't even let you say jackass, or it could change all your swearwords into the word sunshine like one of the other boards I frequent...That would sure discourage swearing! sunshining sunshineers! I'll be happy as long as I can still say "There was a pert lass from madras, Who had a remarkable ass. It wasn't rounded and pink as you probably think, it was gray, had long ears and ate grass!"

[Loony BoB]

I said Staff can have fun! I actually encourage it, because it's...well, fun! However, our point is that they(you) don't have to break the rules to do it. Changing everyone's style set, messing around with the banner, randomly spamming/banning/editting profiles(i.e., the Bleys vs. Unne days) are all great. But spamming closed threads and flaming? Those can cross the line.

I don't flame. At least I hope I don't.

There is no rule against spamming closed threads. In fact, randomly spamming/banning/editting profiles seems a hell of a lot worse than 'spamming in a closed thread'. Every Staffer has done it, including all the Staffers you've praised and I'd be very surprised if you've not done it before, too. =P

I mean, I could just open the thread, post in it and close it again... It's also notable that most people I've talked to about us posting in closed threads have said they love it, they find it amusing and some of the posts made by Staffers in closed threads are the best posts on the board. I guess it's just your personal viewpoint.

And yes, Staffing is a responsibility. So is my job at work. In my job at work, I have huge responsibilities, as do all my superiors, but we still abuse our powers every now and then for our own amusement. Having an admin password on my computer at work is something few people in my company are allowed to have, but I have it - and that means I install all sorts of non-work related programs on it. Do my bosses care? Not one bit. I think you'll find more people enjoy our posts in closed threads than there are against such activities. When I was a regular member, I never had a problem with it. I was more likely to read a thread if it was closed, because I liked reading the final posts made by Staffers of the time.

In short, just because it's a responsibility doesn't mean we can't have perks to go with it. If we were breaking rules by posting in closed threads, we wouldn't have the option for our usergroups to be able to post in closed threads turned on.

[Raistlin]

There is no rule against spamming closed threads. In fact, randomly spamming/banning/editting profiles seems a hell of a lot worse than 'spamming in a closed thread'. Every Staffer has done it, including all the Staffers you've praised and I'd be very surprised if you've not done it before, too. =P

Yes, but I wouldn't do it if members complained about it. Also, there's no that staff can't randomly ban people for fun or edit their profiles, or even randomly spam(since regular members can do it also). However, every time members try to spam up a thread about to be closed, the staff bitches about it(the latest announcement, anyone?). So when the staff then continues to spam it up after it's closed, it looks like they are contradticting their own policy.
Yes, I've done it before. But I also never complained about the regular members spamming it up first.

I mean, I could just open the thread, post in it and close it again... It's also notable that most people I've talked to about us posting in closed threads have said they love it, they find it amusing and some of the posts made by Staffers in closed threads are the best posts on the board. I guess it's just your personal viewpoint.

I've only witnessed members complaining each time this discussion is brought up. And they do have a point.

And yes, Staffing is a responsibility. So is my job at work. In my job at work, I have huge responsibilities, as do all my superiors, but we still abuse our powers every now and then for our own amusement. Having an admin password on my computer at work is something few people in my company are allowed to have, but I have it - and that means I install all sorts of non-work related programs on it. Do my bosses care? Not one bit. I think you'll find more people enjoy our posts in closed threads than there are against such activities. When I was a regular member, I never had a problem with it. I was more likely to read a thread if it was closed, because I liked reading the final posts made by Staffers of the time.

I never said abusing staff powers was bad; didn't I just say I encouraged it? But there's a way to do it that doesn't break the rules and doesn't irritate some of the members.

In short, just because it's a responsibility doesn't mean we can't have perks to go with it. If we were breaking rules by posting in closed threads, we wouldn't have the option for our usergroups to be able to post in closed threads turned on.

Perks is a horrible word; stop using it. The point is that, despite being staff, you can still have fun. That means you can still spam, and have all the extra "fun" of messing around with your admin powers(RSL Day anyone?). That is a given that I don't think you realize that everybody here would accept(otherwise, why are you arguing it?). However, there's a way to do that that doesn't fly in the face of the rules and doesn't contradict your own policies. Members have been yelled at before for spamming up a thread about to be closed.

For the record, I couldn't give a damn what staff does in closed threads. However, I've noticed numerous people complain about this every time the issue is brought up, and they are right.

[Loony BoB]

But I mostly hear people saying they enjoy it. It seems it's just another case of some people like it, some people don't. If we didn't do things that a few people complained about, we'd be screwed. I've already had people IM me after reading this thread saying that they have no problem with me posting in closed threads and that they enjoy it. If I stopped, then they would complain, and then I'd have to start again, since they're complaining, and then I'd have to - you get the idea.

However, you brought up the announcement. I wouldn't complain about people posting in threads they knew would get closed if they were posting something different to "This thread is going to get closed! " Also, if a staffer was to repeat something that somebody had already said - for example, if I closed a thread saying "This is the reason this thread is being closed." and then another staffer came along and said "Haha! This thread has been closed!" then I'd probably slap them on the back of the head. It's not just "oh, they can't post but we can" it's "don't post saying that a thread is going to get closed, just use the warn button instead." If they're going to come up with something witty, so be it.

It's fairly rare that we have staffers post twice over in threads that are obviously going to get closed, too. The most common example of people stating that a thread is going to get closed is during an advertisement thread. I don't remember staffers posting in those closed threads, or anything very similar to them.

[Raistlin]

But I mostly hear people saying they enjoy it. It seems it's just another case of some people like it, some people don't. If we didn't do things that a few people complained about, we'd be screwed. I've already had people IM me after reading this thread saying that they have no problem with me posting in closed threads and that they enjoy it. If I stopped, then they would complain, and then I'd have to start again, since they're complaining, and then I'd have to - you get the idea.

You can't go by who likes it who enjoys it. People would enjoy not having spam regulations, and I'm pretty sure I could dig up a few twits who would like a spam forum. That doesn't make it justified. You have to be completely objective here, and the people complaining about staff spamming up closed threads have a point.

However, you brought up the announcement. I wouldn't complain about people posting in threads they knew would get closed if they were posting something different to "This thread is going to get closed! " Also, if a staffer was to repeat something that somebody had already said - for example, if I closed a thread saying "This is the reason this thread is being closed." and then another staffer came along and said "Haha! This thread has been closed!" then I'd probably slap them on the back of the head. It's not just "oh, they can't post but we can" it's "don't post saying that a thread is going to get closed, just use the warn button instead." If they're going to come up with something witty, so be it.

I'll agree with that. If you allow members to spam up threads-about-to-be-closed as well, then allowing staff members to do the same after it's been closed does not blatantly contradict your own policy.

Now let's just see how much of staff actually follows that.

[Loony BoB]

If someone is going to make a witty post then so be it, but I'm sure you agree that "This thread is going to be closed." is lacking any decent wit. You could even go as far as to say that you don't say "this thread is going to be closed" because that's mod-whoring as well as spamming.

If you allow members to spam up threads-about-to-be-closed as well, then allowing staff members to do the same after it's been closed does not blatantly contradict your own policy.

Depends on what kind of thread and what kind of spam. Like I said - I don't see staff posting in threads that are closed when the threads are nothing more than an advertisement for some other site. However, we already allow you guys to spam up Feedback threads on a pretty constant basis, don't we? That's the only place that I can think of right now that Staff consistently post in closed threads... it's very rare in other forums as far as I can recall.

[Psychotic]

However, we already allow you guys to spam up Feedback threads on a pretty constant basis, don't we?

Oh really?

I could also probably find the billions of threads in Feedback where Shlup told myself and Baloki to stop spamming and accused us of drinking tea, or something.

[Loony BoB]

I'm pretty confident I can find more threads that you haven't been told off in. And isn't that post taken from a thread where people had already asked you to stop spamming it up? I think it was the thread-starter that told you to stop, too. =P On a whole, people don't joke about calling the Feedback Forum the "unofficial spam forum" for nothing. I won't encourage it and every now and then we will have to tell you to stop, yeah, but you get away with enough as it is. To take your tactic of quoting examples: Oh really!

[Psychotic]

I'm pretty confident I can find more threads that you haven't been told off in. And isn't that post taken from a thread where people had already asked you to stop spamming it up? I think it was the thread-starter that told you to stop, too. =P On a whole, people don't joke about calling the Feedback Forum the "unofficial spam forum" for nothing. I won't encourage it and every now and then we will have to tell you to stop, yeah, but you get away with enough as it is. To take your tactic of quoting examples: Oh really!

No, I only posted two spammy posts in it and no-one asked me to stop before you did....and what the heck's with that example? I posted ONCE in it on a related tangent.

And besides, I only posted that link because I like to whine when I don't get my way 110% of the time.

[Raistlin]

If someone is going to make a witty post then so be it, but I'm sure you agree that "This thread is going to be closed." is lacking any decent wit. You could even go as far as to say that you don't say "this thread is going to be closed" because that's mod-whoring as well as spamming.

I agree that those kind of posts should be discouraged as mod-whoring, NOT spamming.

Depends on what kind of thread and what kind of spam. Like I said - I don't see staff posting in threads that are closed when the threads are nothing more than an advertisement for some other site. However, we already allow you guys to spam up Feedback threads on a pretty constant basis, don't we? That's the only place that I can think of right now that Staff consistently post in closed threads... it's very rare in other forums as far as I can recall.

I've seen it happen fairly regularly in GC...but does that matter? Is there a point regarding to what forums this happens in?
If you don't want to discourage staff from spamming closed threads, then members should be allowed to spam up a thread(spam, not mod-whore) for the brief amount of time it remains open. If something is said out of line which violates another rule, then that should be handled on a case-by-case basis.


Psy: staff does a pretty good job of not discouraging fun-spamming. It's the way they handle suggestions/feedback that's an issue, as certain staffers have been clearly wanting in that regard as of late.


EDIT: this is a great example of how it should be done.