welcome your new mods

1)All claims made by posters now required a reference.
2)Videos on youtube and google do not count as references.

Thats all you need in the new charter!

Nerin

The Economist wrote: »

I dunno, man. There are only so many times a mod can be called a self-aggrandising alien before he cracks.

Orestes got called a zombie so much,that when he started modding wrestling he went on a bloody rampage. They create their own monsters the do. Also,cool,ye're not in hosted anymore.

espinolman

Deleted User wrote: »

1)All claims made by posters now required a reference.
2)Videos on youtube and google do not count as references.

Thats all you need in the new charter!

Supposing someone films something on a camcorder or mobile phone and the only way to get it out to the puplic safely is to post it anonymously on youtube or google , well in that case how could there be a reference!

miju

GhostInTheRuins wrote: »

I don't think it would be a bad idea to at have least one mod who believes in some CT's for a bit of balance (but doesn't use all his posts as opportunities to let everyone know he's a mod ).

that mod is I Ghost

However, like a true CT'er I am also prepared to view the argument from the other side (rather than blindly believe in a CT) and adjust accordingly if needed which is why alot of the time I come across as a skeptic in any posts I make.

GhostInTheRuins

miju wrote: »

that mod is I Ghost

However, like a true CT'er I am also prepared to view the argument from the other side (rather than blindly believe in a CT) and adjust accordingly if needed which is why alot of the time I come across as a skeptic in any posts I make.

That's definitely fair enough. I'm not the most regular poster here I'll admit, but I don't see you post often so I wasn't too sure what 'side' you took (so to speak)

hurdehur

I am afeared of the new regime. -a sometime lurker

K-9

GhostInTheRuins wrote: »

That's definitely fair enough. I'm not the most regular poster here I'll admit, but I don't see you post often so I wasn't too sure what 'side' you took (so to speak)

Indeed and I think you gain respect that way, though I have noticed moderators getting more involved lately.

It's part and parcel of becoming part of the main body of the site.

The natives seem a little restless. The Economist would be aware of how Economics required stricter moderation when it was moved to Social.

I think they'll see how it goes for a few months and if they think it isn't working, seek feedback?

miju

GhostInTheRuins wrote: »

That's definitely fair enough. I'm not the most regular poster here I'll admit, but I don't see you post often so I wasn't too sure what 'side' you took (so to speak)

Miju may not post often but he's ALWAYS reading and watching :pac:

Time Magazine

K-9 wrote: »

I think they'll see how it goes for a few months and if they think it isn't working, seek feedback?

I'm a busy man, K-9. I don't have time for this pussy-footing around. I like to take the "ban now, ask questions later" approach. A forum that's as likely to end up getting Boards in court as this needs this approach.

If people are unhappy I want them to tell me, now. Send me a PM; go to Feedback; even start a thread here if you wish. But less of this hanging around. The time to act is now. If there's truth in the New World Order Theory, then we don't have much time left.

In the meantime, watch this argumentative video:

seamus

In light of his appalling arrogance and lizard denial, The Economist has been demodded. We had to get a pair of hydraulic bolt cutters to remove him from his desk and drag him out into the street.

Économiste Monétaire

What an absolute joke. You refused to demod MC, Seamus, yet this happens so quickly. How ****ing retarded is the moderation around here.

starn

nyarlothothep wrote: »

MC was an ok mod, he made one or two mistakes and people had a fit.

He made a lot more then one or two and had a few more glearing defects. But thats all in the past so theres no need to bring it all back up. Best of luck lads. Im intrsted to see how things will play out in the Soc forum

6th

Économiste Monétaire wrote: »

What an absolute joke. You refused to demod MC, Seamus, yet this happens so quickly. How ****ing retarded is the moderation around here.

Calm down. This is a light-hearted thread to welcome me the new mods.

6th

6th wrote: »

Calm down. This is a light-hearted thread to welcome me the new mods.

In fairness, he has got a point.

The Economist would actually have been a good addition to the modding team here I think.

nyarlothothep

starn wrote: »

He made a lot more then one or two and had a few more glearing defects. But thats all in the past so theres no need to bring it all back up. Best of luck lads. Im intrsted to see how things will play out in the Soc forum

no he was a genius mod who took no bs, there was a concerted conspiracy to get him removed, I refer you to this for further clarification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_Plot

6th

Deleted User wrote: »

In fairness, he has got a point.

The Economist would actually have been a good addition to the modding team here I think.

He would have made a good mod but not if was to continue to post as he did in this thread.

There is actually a good community here despite anything which may erupt now and then. I hope the move to Soc and the addition of new mods will only be a good thing for this forum and the people who have an interest in using it.

6th

nyarlothothep wrote: »

no he was a genius mod who took no bs, there was a concerted conspiracy to get him removed, I refer you to this for further clarification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_Plot

If you have any questions about MC's situation then direct them to him in private.

If you have a problem with any aspect of this forum or its running then I suggest you take it to Helpdesk.

This forum and Boards.ie in general is a platform for discussion, no one is being held here against there will.

6th

This thread was started for a very simple and straight forward reason. Expect it to be closed shortly, not because anyone is being cencored, but because it has served it purpose.

Just a point - feel free to disregard.

The attitude on this forum has been very much biased towards fueling conspircies and as a result people who are 'indifferent skeptics' (ie me) won't post as much here.

Stricter modding, while acknowledging that by definition there will always be a bias towards CTers may lead to a more inclusive forum.

I think The Economist would taken this forum in that direction (and I know his posts for the last while were (mostly) in jest) but he would bring an element of rigour to the place

Also, seriously - are you related to Mat?

6th

Who's Mat?

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=59205990&postcount=16


Mat from MasterChef


Mat from Masterchef?

seamus

It would appear that there's not much room for humour in CT. The Economist was never meant to be mod here. In fact, he never really had any power to mod here.

It was a subtle joke from the existing mods to the community. But javaboy was right...

6th

Deleted User wrote: »

Just a point - feel free to disregard.

The attitude on this forum has been very much biased towards fueling conspircies and as a result people who are 'indifferent skeptics' (ie me) won't post as much here.

Stricter modding, while acknowledging that by definition there will always be a bias towards CTers may lead to a more inclusive forum.

I think The Economist would taken this forum in that direction (and I know his posts for the last while were (mostly) in jest) but he would bring an element of rigour to the place

Also, seriously - are you related to Mat?

I'm all for stricter modding and I thinking both sides (as if there are only 2 side!) will benefit from it. If people are going to make claims then they need to back it up with information. They also need to be prepared to be asked questions or be faced with opposing ideas. Thats said those putting forwad the opposing ideas need to be able to do so without resorting to blacket abuse and name calling.

Really it will be a case of attack the post not the poster.

GhostInTheRuins

Ah well, I don't think I said it so while this thread's still open, welcome 6th

6th

seamus wrote: »

It would appear that there's not much room for humour in CT. The Economist was never meant to be mod here. In fact, he never really had any power to mod here.

It was a subtle joke from the existing mods to the community. But javaboy was right...

In fairness there was nothing there to suggest it was a joke .... which made the reactions funnier

That said I think The Economist did a great job of highlighting the type of posts that arent acceptable. Good job man, *see you when your ban expires















*Now that is a joke! See, I used a smiley.

6th

Deleted User wrote: »

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=59205990&postcount=16


Mat from MasterChef


Mat from Masterchef?

No, he has big ears and looks too happy. Also, I'm straight.

6th

6th wrote: »

No, he has big ears and looks too happy. Also, I'm straight.

MasterChef impersonator could be a good new career move though...

6th

Not if I had to have regular facial hair like that guy. For me its awesome or nothing!

6th

6th wrote: »

Not if I had to have regular facial hair like that guy. For me its awesome or nothing!

You know what would be awesome (and you are an awesome guy so you must agree with this) - banning google vids as proper references...

6th

They are a reference, what they arent is proof. people can put forward whatever they want as evidence but they better be prepared to have it questioned.

DubTony

seamus wrote: »

It would appear that there's not much room for humour in CT. The Economist was never meant to be mod here. In fact, he never really had any power to mod here.

It was a subtle joke from the existing mods to the community. But javaboy was right...

Pity it wasn't funny. To most CTers it would have been pretty horrific. His attitude around here is generally one of absolute disdain for anyone who dares question what he has to say. Seems to me that it could only be entertaining to those who thought it up. Lots of self indulgence there gents. Nice one. :pac:

Anyway, I for one welcome the new mods, as long as they are impartial and consistent in their modding. (I have obvious doubts about one of them, but we'll see how it goes). I particularly welcome the move to SOC. It may bring more people onto the forum, although I think it'll be a riot for a while.

I feel it needs to be said though. It's all waaaaaay too serious around here. FFS guys, it's a conspiracy theory forum. While some of the content can be generally good CT stuff, an awful lot of it should be taken with a vary large pinch of salt. The shame is when the serial debaters have a go just for the hell of it.

Anyway, GL mods.

Time Magazine

seamus wrote: »

In light of his appalling arrogance and lizard denial, The Economist has been demodded. We had to get a pair of hydraulic bolt cutters to remove him from his desk and drag him out into the street.

And 6th's dream of working with me, around me and in me finally came true

Économiste Monétaire wrote: »

What an absolute joke. You refused to demod MC, Seamus, yet this happens so quickly. How ****ing retarded is the moderation around here.

Lol, you really thought I was a serious addition to the modding here?! That would be really unfair on the CTers who, despite their protests, are treated more than fairly here.

Deleted User wrote: »

In fairness, he has got a point.

The Economist would actually have been a good addition to the modding team here I think.

I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole!

Just to clarify what happened, there was a discussion on the Mod forum as to who would be a good mod for CT. Fairly lively, I asked if I could be announced as mod for the laugh to see what the reaction would be. Bonkey agreed it would be funny. Seamus made it so. I had a giggle or two waving my massive electronic penis around, even giving a Bismarck or two. And to be fair to ye, in a short 24 hours...

1. I was called a fascist
2. I was called an alien
3. A boycott was proposed
4. I was given "tips" on how to mod
5. Someone shouted "AGENDA!"
6. I think only one person copped on it was all a joke

Fair play

Edit: Oh and welcome to Mordy and 6th.

Ludo

I'm pretty amazed there wasn't a feedback thread opened within minutes of the post by the Economist.

I was momentarily taken aback by it myself but it was so OTT that it had to be a joke.

javaboy

Ludo wrote: »

I'm pretty amazed there wasn't a feedback thread opened within minutes of the post by the Economist.

I was momentarily taken aback by it myself but it was so OTT that it had to be a joke.

Could be a joke. Or it could be that they were testing the waters to see how you CTers would react to having an NWO right-wing mod.:eek: No feedback threads=no resistance ...... maybe the next time it won't be a joke. Muhahaha!

Time Magazine

Ludo wrote: »

I'm pretty amazed there wasn't a feedback thread opened within minutes of the post by the Economist.

I was momentarily taken aback by it myself but it was so OTT that it had to be a joke.

Aye, well done on copping.

Flamed Diving

I was 50/50, so I kept a safe distance.

GhostInTheRuins

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I was 50/50, so I kept a safe distance.

Same here

Mahatma coat

I's Back

Jaysus ya get banned for a week and the whole thing goes MAD, mad I tellls ya.

nice to see my fanclub came along in the move:D:D:D

welcome to our new mods

I see that Oscar is also OFFICIALY a Mod too, I had expected him to take more of an active roll in policing the forum seein as he is a cmod of Soc, but I think thats a good thing that he has Powaaaah.

as a few other posters mentioned I too would have me reservations about one of the new apointees, I kinda thought he was a joke too with Ibid based on his previous 'contributions' to the forum, but his name is still listed

so welcome to our new mods and

W00t we're a more realler forum now

Soc>Conspiracy theories FTW

Diogenes

This thread is hilarious. Firstly, how could anyone take The Economist seriously? It was obviously tongue in cheek, and furthermore a check on the current mods would clearly have shown that he was yanking your change.

Kernel For years now you've been demanding that this forum leave the Hosted backwater, mind you, you've been demanding that certain posters just stop posting here. Now you've gotten one of your wishes, you're complaining about the choice of mods. It seems that once again it's not about freedom of speech it's about how gets to control who says what

I am as always amused by the people who claim they are opposed to a New World Order, that will control us, are the ones who want to control what is said or isn't said, in what they perceive is their own private fiefdom.

To be honest, I welcome the move, The forum is under mod'd (no disrespect to Miju and Bonkey, they're just two men on a busy forum) and hopefully the change of scenery will mean certain posters casual racism will be dealt with swiftly and severely.

Red Sleeping Beauty

CT should probably be in Rec cause this thread's funny
However, having it in Soc should clear up any problems (I think Guyain is Cat Mod )

Yis better churn out some good threads. And like someone just posted, give a source for your info. Ye can't just say that there's an alien conspiracy because you saw a flash of light in the sky.

Kernel

Diogenes wrote: »

This thread is hilarious. Firstly, how could anyone take The Economist seriously? It was obviously tongue in cheek, and furthermore a check on the current mods would clearly have shown that he was yanking your change.

You believed it too. And his name was in the current mods list wasn't it?

Diogenes wrote: »

Kernel For years now you've been demanding that this forum leave the Hosted backwater, mind you, you've been demanding that certain posters just stop posting here. Now you've gotten one of your wishes, you're complaining about the choice of mods. It seems that once again it's not about freedom of speech it's about how gets to control who says what

I've demanded nothing. I'm not in a position to demand, I've requested and put suggestions across, and participated in the forum in a positive way in relation to the subject matter and users who are interested in same.

Diogenes wrote: »

I am as always amused by the people who claim they are opposed to a New World Order, that will control us, are the ones who want to control what is said or isn't said, in what they perceive is their own private fiefdom.

All I've ever advocated was a forum where conspiracy theorists could discuss the latest conspiracy theories, or put forward their own theories without fear of ridicule and often ill-informed sneering from those with an agenda to debunk. In much the same way as paranormal forum functions. Power and control is irrelevent to me on the internet. I have enough in real life, and don't particularly savour it either.

Diogenes wrote: »

To be honest, I welcome the move, The forum is under mod'd (no disrespect to Miju and Bonkey, they're just two men on a busy forum) and hopefully the change of scenery will mean certain posters casual racism will be dealt with swiftly and severely.

Why continue to take digs at MC? There is no casual racism on this forum that I've ever witnessed.

DubTony

Diogenes wrote: »

and hopefully the change of scenery will mean certain posters casual racism will be dealt with swiftly and severely.

:eek: wtf?

6th

The thread has run its course. Its a pity it was used to get digs in at people.