# Request for admins to stop locking out threads.



## Ursus_Amplus (Jul 13, 2006)

Okay this is why this place turns into a dramafest, people get frustrated when admins lock out a thread a proper discussion was getting underway in. 

I've just had a thread locked out that I spent ten minutes constructing a reply to and it really really annoys everyone when that happens. There was nothing wrong with that thread, uncia, and you know it, a discussion rather than an argument was taking place.


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 13, 2006)

I disagree!  People are still superheated like a copper wire ready to assplode, and threads can easily balloon out of control making it impossible to read every single post to make a quick descision -- the current admins and moderators are unable to keep watch over these almost viral-like thread expansions before they potentially explode into mob-like behavior because they are currently cleaning up all the mess that's occurred over the past few days, so really there's no other choice but to lock the threads until the mess is cleaned up, I think.

Though, it would seem that with all the unbannings of the "unpopular" crew, certain nameless vindictive individuals are taking this opportunity of "oh I won't get banned" to fling mud at the people just now returning.  It is a shame, but I believe the only course of action that can be taken without returning to more fascist manuvers is to close the threads.


----------



## Ursus_Amplus (Jul 13, 2006)

Maybe you are right on that one >:/ you've raised some good points there, and your point about the gloating and vindictiveness is pretty much spot on.

I dunno really.


----------



## wut (Jul 13, 2006)

Personally I feel that locking should only happen when the flaming is actually occuring and there is no way to set things back on track. But given the timing of everything I dunno.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

I lol'ed

Because remember kiddies, only assholes are allowed to be assholes without being punished for it


----------



## Emerson (Jul 13, 2006)

nobuyuki said:
			
		

> I disagree!  People are still superheated like a copper wire ready to assplode, and threads can easily balloon out of control making it impossible to read every single post to make a quick descision -- the current admins and moderators are unable to keep watch over these almost viral-like thread expansions before they potentially explode into mob-like behavior because they are currently cleaning up all the mess that's occurred over the past few days, so really there's no other choice but to lock the threads until the mess is cleaned up, I think.
> 
> Though, it would seem that with all the unbannings of the "unpopular" crew, certain nameless vindictive individuals are taking this opportunity of "oh I won't get banned" to fling mud at the people just now returning.  It is a shame, but I believe the only course of action that can be taken without returning to more fascist manuvers is to close the threads.



NOBUYUKI RETURNS.

Excellent point.


----------



## Ursus_Amplus (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> I lol'ed
> 
> Because remember kiddies, only assholes are allowed to be assholes without being punished for it



Oh for crying out loud, do you have to turn every god damned thread into a flaming war? You're accusing people of being an asshole here when in fact you've been the only asshole in the last two threads, and in fact have been the only one to swear in both.


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> I lol'ed
> 
> Because remember kiddies, only assholes are allowed to be assholes without being punished for it



if by your logic said alledged assholes are wrong in that their tone is unacceptable, then I ask you -- is what you're saying a good example of two wrongs making a right?  Or is it simply hypocrisy?


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 13, 2006)

Being less subtle, wolfie, stop trying to derail threads with pointless, childish and seemingly vindictive flaming.  This could very well be grounds for a ban under normal circumstances, and you're pushing your luck testing everyone's patience at this trying time by "swooping in" at just the right moment to take a few personal hacks at people.  

It's almost as if you had a personal vendetta against someone or something.  Creepiness factor set to maximum, here.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

Ursus_Amplus said:
			
		

> Wolfie said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Cuz even though I barely post at all, and can count the arguments I've been in on one paw, I'm still a worse person than a guy who is ALWAYS being insulting to people, but just happens to be keeping up a well-behaved front at the moment since he maybe isn't too eager to get banned again.

Thus proving that giving people time-outs for bad behavior is effective, and should be done more often.

But I do apologise for the swearing, at least to you Ursus, cuz I haven't seen you swear yet. If you'll understand, my tone is mostly directed at other people who have done far too many flamewars to have any room to criticise me for my first :?

And I apologise to the mods for my behavior, and will stop it now. I just would feel a bit annoyed if I get punished for behavior that obviously wasn't enough to hold against these guys


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Ursus_Amplus said:
			
		

> Maybe you are right on that one >:/ you've raised some good points there, and your point about the gloating and vindictiveness is pretty much spot on.
> 
> I dunno really.


Yep: incisive comments from Nobu. Plus the other side of the coin, of course, where people _might_ feel as though they're getting ganged-up on by everyone who has returned in "invulnerable mode" from their tempbans + various other "supporters".
(Very easy to read what was written in that context).

We should know where people stand on such matters by now and further "discussion" at present is unlikely to improve understanding between the parties involved.

Better to bite one's lip and resist the temptation to reply when that's only likely to result in a retaliatory response, IMHO.
Many other, more constructive, matters that might benefit from discussion, I'd've hoped.

=
_If only I could prod y'all in the direction of the FA mainsite for all that pretty artwork _


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

_*hovers over the "lock thread" button*_


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> I lol'ed
> 
> Because remember kiddies, only assholes are allowed to be assholes without being punished for it


Wolfie, I'm you have any further intentional flamebait posts like, the next time you go to post, reconsider. If you want to push buttons against them, that's fine, go ahead. Just remember: we have buttons too. Judge not lest yet be judged.

You have the right to an opinion on these forums, NOT the right to be an asshole to those you dislike.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> I lol'ed
> 
> Because remember kiddies, only assholes are allowed to be assholes without being punished for it





			
				Dark Helmet said:
			
		

> How many assholes we got on this ship, anyhow?





			
				Col. Sanders said:
			
		

> Everyone on the ship: Yo, sir!





			
				Dark Helmet said:
			
		

> I knew it, I'm surrounded by assholes.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Dragoneer said:
			
		

> Wolfie said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe it's just me, but I didn't read that as flamebaitey: more as a general observation following the threadlock. Oh well... 

(aside @Arshes: Did Aesop have a fable to cover that "moral" of Wolfie's?).


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

*RE:    Request for admins to stop locking out threads.*



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Maybe it's just me, but I didn't read that as flamebaitey: more as a general observation following the threadlock. Oh well...
> 
> (aside @Arshes: Did Aesop have a fable to cover that "moral" of Wolfie's?).



Unfortunately his post was too contradictory to find the appropriate fable, but I thought in this case, Spaceballs was more appropriate.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

Contradictory?

A couple users with a strong history of involvement in flamewars get unbanned.

A user who has only just now felt the need to speak up about the level of stuff that these users get away with congratulates the mod team for finally ending the tolerance of general nastiness.

the unbanned users all gang up on him, then the thread gets locked before he can defend himself, and he gets a warning for expressing himself in the thread that those same users opened directly as a result of the closed topic.

"only assholes are allowed to be assholes without being punished for it" was not meant as flame-bait, but an honest expression of my feelings at the moment, and I really think that given the circumstances, that feeling is valid.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Unfortunately his post was too contradictory to find the appropriate fable, but I thought in this case, Spaceballs was more appropriate.


Ow.... play nice, Arshes!

=

Oh, sorry! That was nice? :twisted: 

_*pounces ya* :3_


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> Contradictory?
> 
> A couple users with a strong history of involvement in flamewars get unbanned.
> 
> ...



Yes, and users with a strong history of involvement in flamewars NEVER got banned.

Either party can be considered trolls for a very blank reason of how they treat other users they don't like, and it has nothing to with "what side" they take on FA, however, the problem is, you're using your stance with FA's admin as a reason to be nasty to another party. That's not an excuse .


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Arshes Nei said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hahah yeah it was, I merely was reminded of that scene in Spaceballs, and I think many people can appreciate Spaceballs humor :lol:


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

_*prrs and nods*_ Yeah, I think I'll have to dig out the movie again, Arshes... 


=
Well, at least I hope we haven't yet reached a critical mass of assholes on FA, above which we collapse under our own weight to form a black, erm... tautology.

_(Not a particularly elegant analogy, perhaps? )_


----------



## WHPellic (Jul 14, 2006)

I think it'd help if people placed themselves in the others' shoes before responding. Look at both sides of the situation.


----------



## dave hyena (Jul 14, 2006)

> Either party can be considered trolls



I think that giving everyone the same label implies that everyone has the same level of responsibility. 

However, my opinion is that not everyone has the same level of responsibility.

Also, I must say, I am astonished to see Wolfie being treated right harshly while others *appear* to have got away with murder. :?


----------



## Litre (Jul 14, 2006)

we need sergeant kovac to set this right! it'll work!

From my standpoint, Wolfie was starting to get out of line. Treated harshly? Hardly.


----------



## nrr (Jul 14, 2006)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> I think that giving everyone the same label implies that everyone has the same level of responsibility.


I agree.



			
				Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> However, my opinion is that not everyone has the same level of responsibility.


Elaborate.  Explain yourself here, good sir.



			
				Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Also, I must say, I am astonished to see Wolfie being treated right harshly while others *appear* to have got away with murder. :?


Treated harshly?  Where?  By whom?


----------



## dave hyena (Jul 14, 2006)

Litre said:
			
		

> From my standpoint, Wolfie was starting to get out of line. Treated harshly? Hardly.



Wolfie took no part in the drama threads of the past few days and has presented his veiws in a polite and inoffensive manner.

Then, in a thread he starts, people who are known for trouble making and people (some of whom were recently banned for trouble making) all pile in on him. The thread is locked.

In this thread Wolfie made one comment (surely out of sheer frustration) which under normal circumstances would not be construed as offensive and he is told that he is flamebaiting.

Then in this thread Nobuyuki lectures wolfie on the correct fashion to behave. Surely this would gall even a saint and is flamebaiting itself in my opinion, given Nobuyuki's actions in past threads.

Someone who is posting in this very thread was the one who sparked the drama of the past few days by making that poll. 

Have they been punished?

Why no, Instead a moderator indulges their behavior with friendly banter, thus making it *appear* as though such actions are not even worthy of a slap on the wrist.

Such things only give encouragement to the clique of drama-mongers and it now appears that they are truly in the ascendent, not being punished and active aid being given to them when people criticise their behavior.

Again, I must say that I find it absoutely *gob-smacking* that known trouble makers are escaping with not even a slap on the wrist for breaking into an adminstrators account and posting offensive messages and for sparking off mucho forum drama.


----------



## Damaratus (Jul 14, 2006)

Dragoneer said:
			
		

> Wolfie said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think this thread was subject to a series of posts where the people didn't think about the context very well (I could be wrong in this assumption).  After viewing the first few it seems like the overall response to Wolfie's comment was far greater than it should have been.  

I, personally could just as easily see his comment, and several other misconsrued ones, as being simple statements of observation (as Uncia suggested).  They were going for a general "you" and it was taken as a personal "you".  Same goes for Dragoneer's comment, since I saw it as a general statement on how all people should act on the forum, but based on the previous sentence made it sound like he was focusing his comment solely on Wolfie.  (Which I happen to know was unfortunately taken as a personal attack).

I think that some of what was said should have been kept to PMs because it's nothing but heated banter between two people or directed comments that only serve to ridicule one person rather than further discussion.

Edit: Of course I realize that I haven't really kept on topic, but the thread has already digressed off of topic anyway.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 14, 2006)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Litre said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, quite a few people seemed more than willing to lecture wolfie.
And I'm grateful that he didn't bite back beyond a few posts which were generally (deliberately, in a few cases?) misinterpreted as being attacks.

If things calm down again, good. If not, so be it.



			
				Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Again, I must say that I find it absoutely *gob-smacking* that known trouble makers are escaping with not even a slap on the wrist for breaking into an adminstrators account and posting offensive messages.


The bans related to events on IRC and overspill here, not the abuse of an admin account.
At least some of those bans (if taken to be permanent) were perhaps heavy-handed in that context and biased by ongoing perceptions of those users as being unduly negative rather than constructive. I can see where that's coming from in a couple of cases, to be honest, but that's difficult to reconcile with decisions taken in the heat of the moment when _many_ people are hyped-up.

Just the current view from over here, anyhow...


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 14, 2006)

thx, Damaratus.



			
				Damaratus said:
			
		

> Edit: Of course I realize that I haven't really kept on topic, but the thread has already digressed off of topic anyway.


Is this thread not remaining "on-topic" by not being locked?
Nobu's reply covered much of how I would've said, anyhow.

(If someone feels they are being deprived of their voice by a thread being locked-down (temporarily or permanently) and cannot hold themselves back to post the same argument when things have calmed down, a quick self-check might be of benefit to confirm whether they are valuing their desire to be heard over the content of what they are saying. 
Only a _general_ observation, mind you... ymmv, of course ^^).


----------



## Litre (Jul 14, 2006)

I would like to put my word in about that poll. It was related to the IRC event that occured, and was a show of inappropriate behaviour presented at that time and previous times. honestly, something cannot be turned into a flamefest unless someone comes along to start it initially (in this case, people who were strongly opposed to it).

Again, this boils down to perception, which has already been discussed. Bleh.


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 14, 2006)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Again, I must say that I find it absoutely *gob-smacking* that known trouble makers are escaping with not even a slap on the wrist for breaking into an adminstrators account and posting offensive messages and for sparking off mucho forum drama.



Do you have any proof to back up this accusation, or are you slinging mud, too?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 14, 2006)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Someone who is posting in this very thread was the one who sparked the drama of the past few days by making that poll.



Dave, (sorry I can't make this shorter)

The incident on IRC are actually unrelated to the recent attacks on Fur Affininity. You have said in previous threads that without discussion admins cannot see their mistakes, yet now you seem to do a 360 you are contradicting yourself. Explain please.

If you noticed, I also made the people accountable for how they voted by having it show who voted for what. If the admins removed the poll that is quite fine.

What happens when FA is attacked naturally people go on IRC or other venues to find out what is going on. A lot of those people banned have regularly visited the channel more often than the ones complaining they're a "clique" that should be banned. Something I actually don't get because I would think the people who are there more often would *care more* about it than the people who are not.

What often happens is that because of the amount of traffic that increases during FA's downtime on IRC *can* get on an admin's nerves, and random IRC behavior that would normally be left alone can be miscontrued and an operator with a short fuse can start kicking and banning. The problem is, if that operator is not a regular visitor of the chat, naturally people will wonder what is going on.

None of those people on the channel that were being banned at the time even attempted or hacked the site, they mereley went to the IRC to do their business. Their behavior is MORE visible on the channel versus the site. What is ironic is that this is the same amount of randomness and behavior on FA's main site. It is basically out of the general user's visibility because of the fact, no one is going to follow EVERY thread on sever submission, journal or shoutbox.

I dunno about you but it's more interesting to be in a channel that is ACTIVE even if some people are doing stuff that's stupid or I don't agree wtih, because there is always /ignore. If they were flooding the channel or using hack scripts, I'd say go for the ban. Or some guy was just there yelling "FUCK YOU FURRIES" 50 times flooding the channel that's also fine.

When you try to control every aspect of the randomness of IRC and what conversations go on, you end up with what happened for a while, and that was sadly mode changes and idling.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 14, 2006)

nobuyuki said:
			
		

> Dave Hyena said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Drop it please, Nobu. You are fully aware from the other thread that Dave was working on the premise of what was apparently reported first on a FA IRC op's journal.

That has now been clarified as a false rumor. 
No further action required here and no "apologies" _required_ for any misunderstanding.


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 14, 2006)

allrighty then


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 14, 2006)

nobuyuki said:
			
		

> allrighty then


Thank you, Nobu. Appreciated.

=

Am hoping that at least a few of the learning lessons (for everyone?) from the last few days will filter through in due course. Not that anything's going to be "perfect"... in the immediate future, anyhow. 
Will be comparing notes with a few people who are rather more in the "silent majority" over on the FA mainsite, too, since such matters often get highly amplified and/or distorted by the nature of IRC and the fora even before the rumor mill steps into action.


----------



## dave hyena (Jul 14, 2006)

*RE:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Request for admins to stop locking out threads.*



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> The incident on IRC are actually unrelated to the recent attacks on Fur Affininity. You have said in previous threads that without discussion admins cannot see their mistakes, yet now you seem to do a 360 you are contradicting yourself. Explain please.
> ...
> A lot of those people banned have regularly visited the channel more often than the ones complaining they're a "clique" that should be banned.



In my opinion, some of those people banned acted as though the FA IRC channel and/or the main site & forums was enfeoffed to them in exchange for naughty behavior and exerted themselves as lords and masters thereby. 

It was not mere "randomness" but persistent and long-term trolling on the part of some people as I see it. (And just because it gets less visability on the main site, that doesn't excuse it.)

When I read the false story a person had allegedly broken into an admin account I was perfectly ready to believe this because of the history of the people supposedly involved.

Due to this history, I thought that the banhammer should be wielded manfully.

So, looking at this now, I can see that I was moved across the chess board of furry politics as lesser men may move those pieces with the bobbly bits on top.

I think much of the virulence of the reaction on my part and the eagerness with which I thought the acts of attainder should be passed was because of resentment grown over several months. On account of my perceptions of certain peoples behavior and the lack of consequences thereof. 

Not to mention that If I am anything, it is quick to judge and hasty to act.

However, Dragoneer has already made a post about this trolling issue so it is all moot now and I have nothing more to say.


----------



## cesarin (Jul 14, 2006)

and now for something completely diferent...
*squeezes uncia*


----------



## WHPellic (Jul 15, 2006)

cesarin said:
			
		

> and now for something completely diferent...
> *squeezes uncia*



Mr. Whipple! Don't squeeze the kitty!


----------



## Wolfblade (Jul 15, 2006)

Not trying to restart this, so please, nobody get up. Wolfie just wanted me to throw a thank you out to Dave, Damaratus, and Uncia for being understanding of him. He's not upset that he got banned, because he knows his behavior wasn't acceptable, and he's just glad that something's being done about it from now on. He wanted to apologise to everybody he was harsh to, and is looking forward to coming back and being more active in the forums now that he doesn't have to worry about things being pushed to that point again.


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 15, 2006)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> Not trying to restart this, so please, nobody get up. Wolfie just wanted me to throw a thank you out to Dave, Damaratus, and Uncia for being understanding of him. He's not upset that he got banned, because he knows his behavior wasn't acceptable, and he's just glad that something's being done about it from now on. He wanted to apologise to everybody he was harsh to, and is looking forward to coming back and being more active in the forums now that he doesn't have to worry about things being pushed to that point again.


That's ok. We understand that things like this happen, but we're cracking down on flaming from ALL SIDES. Unfortunately, sometimes the "good guys" get caught up in flaming as well, but... if we judge one side we have to judge the other.

But, no hard feelings towards Wolfie.


----------



## Wolfblade (Jul 15, 2006)

Hey, no problem. We'd both much rather have both sides be held to some standards of conduct than nobody held to anything, or just a general pick-and-choose. Fair is fair after all, and you guys don't deserve the stress of trying to run a country when you're just wanting to run a fun interest site. ^_^


----------

