# ADMIN Notice Offensive?



## conneich (Jul 13, 2006)

Uh... who the fucj put a picture of a guy humping a balloon into the admin notice?! That is something not everyone wants to see, some of us find it rather disgusting, and besides that, there are minors that browse the site, thats why there's adult setting restrictions. I dont like it, and i certainly dont want to see that shit on every goddamn page >< TAKE IT OFF!

<<End Ranting>>


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 13, 2006)

IT WAS DOOG


----------



## imnohbody (Jul 13, 2006)

Apparently it's another attack from the individual that compromised the admin account earlier, mentioned in the "Admin Lockdown" thread in the announcements forum.

I'm not sure what's worse, that someone takes the time for proving rocks aren't the stupidest things on the planet, or that the security wasn't tighter.


----------



## Caution_Cat (Jul 13, 2006)

DOOG DID IT. 
I SAW IT WITH MY OWN INTERNET.


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 13, 2006)

the latter, of course


----------



## Nightingalle (Jul 13, 2006)

conneich, calm down.  There's a reason why the page is now in security lockdown.  It was hacked, second night in a row.

Doesn't make it any less frustrating =|  ::grumble::


----------



## wut (Jul 13, 2006)

it was totally that dastardly jackanapes DOOG


----------



## Damaratus (Jul 13, 2006)

Just more drama nonsense to deal with.


----------



## ArrowTibbs (Jul 13, 2006)

Please refrain from trolling.

We are looking into this issue and hope to have it resolved soon, sorry for the inconvenience.


----------



## capthavoc123 (Jul 13, 2006)

I missed what happened the first time. What was it?


----------



## imnohbody (Jul 13, 2006)

Short form is that someone gained unauthorized control of the site's administrator account, and generally dicked around with FA.

Beyond that, I wouldn't imagine much discussion of the matter from official circles, at least to J. Random FAer (as opposed to J. Random LawEnforcementOfficer).


----------



## Hanazawa (Jul 13, 2006)

This is getting fucking ridiculous. Everyone's getting banned for no reason, posts are getting deleted whenever they try to call the admins out for acting like asshats, and we're apparently "trolls" for having fun in threads, but calling someone "fucking retarded" is perfectly within the bounds of good forum etiquette.

Go fuck yourselves, guys.


----------



## ArrowTibbs (Jul 13, 2006)

That's pretty much what we know thus far, for absolute certain. Seeing as someone posted said offensive image and the short message with it on the site. 

We know which admin account was compromised initially, but this one's beng investigated. 

Also: Gaaaaaah this really sucks ass >_<


----------



## Xax (Jul 13, 2006)

*RE:  ADMIN Notice Offensive?*



			
				Hanazawa said:
			
		

> This is getting fucking ridiculous. Everyone's getting banned for no reason, posts are getting deleted whenever they try to call the admins out for acting like asshats, and we're apparently "trolls" for having fun in threads, but calling someone "fucking retarded" is perfectly within the bounds of good forum etiquette.
> 
> Go fuck yourselves, guys.



Welcome to the wonderful world of Furaffinity! It is usually fairly normal, but there are short sudden bursts of insanity you must learn to deal with.


----------



## Strawkitty (Jul 13, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> This is getting fucking ridiculous. Everyone's getting banned for no reason, posts are getting deleted whenever they try to call the admins out for acting like asshats, and we're apparently "trolls" for having fun in threads, but calling someone "fucking retarded" is perfectly within the bounds of good forum etiquette.
> 
> Go fuck yourselves, guys.


Considering the situation imho there isn't much reason 'to have fun' in this thread... though I'm still quite unsure in just what you are referring to with that calling someone 'fucking retarded'? If you mean that third reply then it's rather justified to call those who are the cause of this situation just that in my opinion.



			
				ArrowTibbs said:
			
		

> We know which admin account was compromised initially, but this one's beng investigated.
> 
> Also: Gaaaaaah this really sucks ass >_<


Better check them all this time as you probably are going to with that 'all admins contact' note and such. And yes. Yes it does.


----------



## Hanazawa (Jul 13, 2006)

Strawkitty said:
			
		

> Considering the situation imho there isn't much reason 'to have fun' in this thread... though I'm still quite unsure in just what you are referring to with that calling someone 'fucking retarded'? If you mean that third reply then it's rather justified to call those who are the cause of this situation just that in my opinion.



I'm referring to statements made in another thread a few weeks ago that were reported to administration with no actions taken. There's all sorts of hypocrisy going on here, and my faith in the site/forum administration is going down faster than a $5 whore at a nudie bar.



			
				Xax said:
			
		

> Welcome to the wonderful world of Furaffinity! It is usually fairly normal, but there are short sudden bursts of insanity you must learn to deal with.



I'll be gone before I have to just "deal with" the kind of bullshit happening here.


----------



## kitetsu (Jul 13, 2006)

I got banned from IRC because i was Bob Saget for 15 minutes in this subject. That was kinda sucky.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

I miss uncia2000's levelheadedness, it is sorely needed right now.


----------



## Strawkitty (Jul 13, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> I'm referring to statements made in another thread a few weeks ago that were reported to administration with no actions taken. There's all sorts of hypocrisy going on here, and my faith in the site/forum administration is going down faster than a $5 whore at a nudie bar.


From site side of things FA's admins seem to be doing a pretty good job but I guess I should visit these forums more often than just everytime FA gets in owner mode or lockdown to know what goes down here. ^^;


----------



## Xax (Jul 13, 2006)

*RE:    ADMIN Notice Offensive?*



			
				Hanazawa said:
			
		

> I'll be gone before I have to just "deal with" the kind of bullshit happening here.



Yeah, but aforementioned bullshit tends to keep happening over and over and over again... eventually you just go "oh hey, it is the latest hax drama/ban spree/mod schism" and move on with the laughing at.


----------



## Strawkitty (Jul 13, 2006)

Xax said:
			
		

> Hanazawa said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


While I do admit this is a valid and important subject matter and it should discussed in a constructive way this isn't the time or thread for this conversation to take place imho. Can we put this one on hold until the current much more urgent situation is resolved?
edit: I meant everyone with this.


----------



## Hanazawa (Jul 13, 2006)

Hey, the bans I was bitching about have been lifted, I'm done for now.


----------



## Dakota Surbane (Jul 13, 2006)

Ok now that I'm finally unbanned - which I don't even get because this account is only about 15 minutes old - has anyone even asked or shared why were being banned one by one before just going on a rampage and yelling at each other and threatening to leave? Everyone's jumping the gun here.


----------



## wut (Jul 13, 2006)

the "current situation" will be resolved with or without people talking about whatever they're talking about.

Things move on. It's not like the admins are using this thread to keep track of the situation. They know the problem, they're supposedly dealing with it.


----------



## Xax (Jul 13, 2006)

I'm guessing you registered during the forum drama and some admin ever-so-wisely banned you because they thought you were a sockpuppet account created to get around some other account's ban.


----------



## Strawkitty (Jul 13, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> Hey, the bans I was bitching about have been lifted, I'm done for now.


Well that's good, thank you.  How long do temp bans last btw? I at least think there are different sort of bans.

Anyway hopefully we'll be hearing some good news as soon as possible.


----------



## wut (Jul 13, 2006)

They were permanent bans that were just lifted. Not really a ban with a set timeout.


----------



## Strawkitty (Jul 13, 2006)

wut said:
			
		

> the "current situation" will be resolved with or without people talking about whatever they're talking about.
> 
> Things move on. It's not like the admins are using this thread to keep track of the situation. They know the problem, they're supposedly dealing with it.


I just thought that trying to keep a thread on topic at least for the first few hours it has lived would be good especially since people probably come to this thread to find info on the current situation. There are plenty of other not so 'important' informative threads here to have fun in. Anyways things seem stable now. edit: So I'll shut up now.


----------



## Caution_Cat (Jul 13, 2006)

I live again


----------



## wut (Jul 13, 2006)

There's an administration notices/site status forum. They can check there for updates. You know, like they should do. 

Of course that requires the admins to be proactive.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

Dakota Surbane said:
			
		

> Ok now that I'm finally unbanned - which I don't even get because this account is only about 15 minutes old -



Sorry too busy laughing here, this somehow comes off as the equivalent of a drive by shooting, where a bunch of the admins rolled by in a dark SUV with semi-automatics just popping caps in anything that moved.

got hit with the +b+b gun


----------



## Myr (Jul 13, 2006)

I have no idea what went on since I've been working night work this week and am not around when the attacks happen. There currently is a system lock and I've noticed it seems to have been engaged all night long and is still up this morning. I'm not sure why it is on and what all is going on right now, but I'm attempting to track things down. I just got off of work an hour ago so I'm still trying to catch up, and mostly everyone appears to still be asleep. :/

The facts as they stand right now are that an admin's account got compromised. I won't say which one. Currently it appears to be done by a rival art site, but that's not yet confirmed. We suspect that the admin was using the same password on the rival site and FA as both attacks seem to focus on this one admin for some reason. We currently have a good deal of information about who is making the unauthorized system access, but I will not reveal it at this time. I am personally pushing to have this put out in the public eye for a front page explanation about what happened, who did it, and what we're doing to make sure it doesn't happen again. I think that is the most responsible and respectful thing to do for the FA users who have been inconvenienced by someone's personal grudge. Also, I'm pushing for immediate action from the FBI or other proper authorities and service providers. No one should have a free pass to attack a community of people without consequence.

Also, it's important to note that there is quite a big security upgrade sitting behind the new v4 Ferrox code in all aspects from registration to simple logging in and out. I've also got some more ideas I'm about to post in the admin forums about to try to safeguard unauthorized admin access by intruders.

That's all for now. I have no idea what this ban business is though. Could be a result of the attacks. I will keep my eyes on this place for the next couple hours. If you want to chat with me, I'll be sitting in the IRC and on my IM's. I'll also be back on my regular hours starting friday.


----------



## conneich (Jul 13, 2006)

Wow, gotta be the most posts Ive ever gotten in a thread on started on any forum ;P Anyway, I understand it was a hack, I thought it was some admin's "stupid" idea until a few page clicks later I got the "Site in lockdown mode", then I just had to laugh, both at FA and at myself for being stupid ;P Oh well, lets hope it'll be resolved soon!


----------



## timoran (Jul 13, 2006)

Sigh... How many times does it have to be said? Don't use the same fucking password at different sites! Most don't MD5 passwords like they are supposed to!


----------



## TORA (Jul 13, 2006)

I would think being an admin would require someone to have a hard password and basic brains not to use the same password as other sites.


----------



## Mephistopheles (Jul 13, 2006)

TORA said:
			
		

> I would think being an admin would require someone to have a hard password and basic brains not to use the same password as other sites.



*deep voice* This is.. FurAffinity


----------



## InvaderPichu (Jul 13, 2006)

Myr said:
			
		

> Also, I'm pushing for immediate action from the FBI or other proper authorities and service providers.



ROFL


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

TORA said:
			
		

> I would think being an admin would require someone to have a hard password and basic brains not to use the same password as other sites.



As I also understand being an admin has a heavy responsibility of being a represenative especially on other sites. If what I understand is true, a certain admin got into a flamewar with another site. Even that is not good.

Perhaps it gives the staff an opportunity to think twice and not cast stones in glass houses?

If the staff doesn't appreciate harassment or a flamewar on their own territory,  I think they should excerise more caution and do the same on other sites so they don't draw attention negatively.


----------



## RTDragon (Jul 13, 2006)

This is getting ridicolous look what i found.


----------



## Emmm (Jul 13, 2006)

RTDragon said:
			
		

> This is getting ridicolous look what i found. http://s31.photobucket.com/albums/c378/Dragontripmon/Common%20Problems/?action=view&current=WTF.png&refPage=&imgAnch=imgAnch1



Well it's been a while since there'd been any hacker drama. I guess FA was over-due.


----------



## Graveyard Greg (Jul 13, 2006)

The apology amuses me.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

TORA said:
			
		

> I would think being an admin would require someone to have a hard password and basic brains not to use the same password as other sites.


People are people are "lazy" and that wasn't in 100 point flashing red font, alas. :?
(Kinda like it's safe to presume that not every single user on FA has read the TOS and Submission Agreement).

Lesson learned and apologies for the resultant inconvenience. 



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> As I also understand being an admin has a heavy responsibility of being a represenative especially on other sites. If what I understand is true, a certain admin got into a flamewar with another site. Even that is not good.
> ...
> If the staff doesn't appreciate harassment or a flamewar on their own territory,  I think they should excerise more caution and do the same on other sites so they don't draw attention negatively.


I can't speak on anyone else's behalf, but there's a lot of sense in that, Arshes.
And, hypothetically, perhaps easier to say in hindsight than in the heat of the moment when one thinks one has particular evidence.

Worth bearing in mind; and certainly noted. Thanks.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Emmm said:
			
		

> RTDragon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If that's the worst we have to suffer... _*sighs*_

Well, the site's back now.
Hopefully Gushi is still feeling generous with the bandwidth as people make up for lost time (thx, ferret!). Running fairly smoothly at 14 Mbps just now and looking forward to those other upgrades and fixes.

Hopefully any bad aftertaste from that latest episode will fade soon and we'll try to keep our eyes on the ball to reduce the likelihood of such negative issues in future.

Thanks, too, to everyone who kept a patient, level-head through that. Your support for overall community goals is always good to see. 
_*pads over to have a browse through the new, shared art*_

Regards,
David.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

Hey, has anyone thought that maybe the same admin account that was hijacked was also being used to toss bans out here? Just for extra chaos and all that?

And even if not, I think everyone, ESPECIALLY the people who tend to be of the "lol serious business" mindset at people reporting harassment and rule breaking need to chill a bit and remember: this is an entertainment website for people to just share a common interest and have a good time. NOT some vital-to-your-existence basic civil right thing. This place is FAR from Y!G's attitude of ban-anyone-who-questions-a-mod. The bans I can see right now so far are all on people who should have gotten them a long time ago for being dicks.

So anyways, thank you again to all you guys who put in the hard work to run this place. BIGGER thank you to all of you who are finally actually getting rid of the people who only seem to be here to complain about the place anyway.

And to everyone acting like a few bans being handed out makes the moderators big evil dictator-types, just please stfu and gtfo. I don't see a single person banned right now who hasn't at some point or another been a source of needless bullshit for the mods and the other users. This place isn't your LIFE. Get over it. It's a happy fun silly thing for people to come and get away from the BS of the real world, and I for one think its about damn time they start doing something about the people who feel the need to bring that kind of crap here and drag everybody down.


----------



## Litre (Jul 13, 2006)

regardless, some bans are unneeded (accounting for "Wut", who was both banned here and onsite for "IRC trollzor", when one: he wasn't on IRC (Furnet/FA Channel) at all for months, and two, has done nothing wrong here anyways).


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

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



Very nice to see you around again <3

I'd like to take the time to say a very special thanks you yak during this time, because he was very well reasoned and levelheaded during the time of the hacks. Your levelheadedness as mentioned before is sorely missed.

I'm sorry that Dragoneer had to cut the vacation short for this, but it is appreciated he's trying to do his best.

The thing I was disappointed is that my post was deleted earlier and the problem I had most with the incident was the priorities (despite my complaint about the IRC) even I know the main concern should have been the site.

All the time the site experienced issues, it seems more concentration was on the users that annoyed the operators, (and granted it was a stressful situation) over SECURITY. Bans were handed out over giving people who don't know what was going on, relevant information.

When I saw admins arguing with Yak with what he should and shouldn't do it left me with a bitter taste because yak has importance in keeping the site safe, if you guys diminish his existence then what purpose does he have here?

You have plenty of admins that know how to ban accounts, you do not have that many admins that can secure the site, and I think before any arguments occur, that should be taken into consideration.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

Yeah but, what is "doing something wrong?"

A lot of people act like not letting everyone act however they want to on here is like taking away their freedom or something.

Using the furry pr0nz0rz sites is not an american civil liberty 

If the people running this place decide that they want people to try to be nice to each other, then why is it so hard for people to just TRY and be nice? And if it IS just that unthinkably impossible for them to swallow down the bile they're spewing and say something with civility, well then, they probably wouldn't want to be here anyway, right?

The way I see it, trolls are trolls. But trolls themselves often have a much narrower definition of the word that excludes themselves from it. This leads to much frustration on the part of trolls when they get the boot for trolling


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> If the people running this place decide that they want people to try to be nice to each other, then why is it so hard for people to just TRY and be nice? And if it IS just that unthinkably impossible for them to swallow down the bile they're spewing and say something with civility, well then, they probably wouldn't want to be here anyway, right?



Didn't you just tell people to stfu and gtfo? That can be considered inflammatory and trolling.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Litre said:
			
		

> regardless, some bans are unneeded (accounting for "Wut", who was both banned here and onsite for "IRC trollzor", when one: he wasn't on IRC (Furnet/FA Channel) at all for months, and two, has done nothing wrong here anyways).


Beauty is in the eye of the beholder?

Personally; yes, I agree with the "absolute minimum number of bans" approach, Litre.
Hopefully we can steer well clear of the total knee-jerk reactions that are observable elsewhere. 

I don't know whether wut was "just" in the wrong place at the wrong time and got caught up as being perceived to be "trolling", or in a "trolling" group (definitions and perspectives varies, of course). 
Compare with http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=611&pid=6690#pid6690 , say.

Yup, noted and was already being discussed admin-side, though.
I'm fairly sure someone will comment, in due course, if such a post is workable in public.

Just my 02c, fwiw, anyhow.


----------



## Hanazawa (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> This place is FAR from Y!G's attitude of ban-anyone-who-questions-a-mod.



They don't ban us, just delete our posts without even a PM indicating why (see the "no action without warning unless it's a SERIOUS IMMEDIATE problem", which a "wtf?" post is not).

I've already asked Dragoneer privately to investigate the matter and do what he thinks is best, but seriously, it's really obnoxious to be talked down to by someone who doesn't even have half a freaking clue what's going on.


----------



## Litre (Jul 13, 2006)

He could've been, but when kneejerk reactions to ban is the case without thoroughly evaluating a situation, problems happen. (That thread is olde too :<)


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Didn't you just tell people to stfu and gtfo? That can be considered inflammatory and trolling.


Agreed.

But then, it's far too easy to put too much emotion into text.
And similarly far too easy to misread and end up further bouncing the thread to-and-fro ad nauseam with further "inflammatory" and/or "trolling" responses.

i.e. This could go on for another five pages, but I can't see particularly much benefit in doing so, if we all know the ground we're covering in _that_ discussion.
Not particularly constructive, IMHO.


----------



## Suule (Jul 13, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> But then, it's far too easy to put too much emotion into text.
> And similarly far too easy to misread and end up further bouncing the thread to-and-fro ad nauseam with further "inflammatory" and/or "trolling" responses.



So, which responses are not inflammatory or not considered as trolling? Tell me Uncia, I'd like to know. I think Wolfie's post was pretty formal and jumping on him was unneccessary.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Litre said:
			
		

> (That thread is olde too :<)


Yep... And whether it's possible for anyone on either "side" to have "perfect" knowledge of a given situation or not, in the first place.

Ban "issue" noted (but please do give a nudge in a day or two if no word is heard: sorry, I don't know/can't say any more on that).
Admin notice issue (thread topic!) cleared and learning lessons also noted.
=> Any chance of a few self-imposed timeouts/winding-down on this thread? Or are there any other particularly pressing issues worthy of note?

Thanks y'all.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Suule said:
			
		

> So, which responoses are not inflammatory or not considered as trolling? Tell me Uncia, I'd like to know.


(Heh. That's the part where "we" somehow magically expect every user to show the same degree of restraint and wisdom that's expected of every admin).

If in doubt and it's not important, say nothing?? 

But, in all seriousness, if something IS IMPORTANT speak in a level tone of voice, sticking to the facts without making deliberately snide, disparaging or drama-worthy remarks that contribute nothing to the discussion.
With any luck that'll _help_ keep the stress levels and the potential for bans/timeouts arising as low as possible.

Hopefully that's fairly obvious?


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Suule said:
			
		

> I think Wolfie's post was pretty formal and jumping on him was unneccessary.


Who was jumping?

I simply agreed with Arshes that Wolfie's use of "stfu and gtfo" could be considered inflammatory and trolling.
(Try that in some other fora and the chances are that _will_ be taken as such without a second thought).

=
If you wish to make that into a "jump", that's your call not mine.
Best not to always presume the worst, Suule. 


p.s. You mean _informal_, no?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Suule said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Right, I was trying to make a point that people who disagree with issues can consider side A or B trolling, they don't like the heated remarks or inflammatory language. I don't see where you jumped on Wolfie but actually agreed with an example I posted on this very thread.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

I think it would be awesome if "stfu and gtfo" would be considered too inflammatory, because they ARE. Its not being nice at all, and I said it specifically because I think it's stupid for nasty people to be allowed to go around being nasty and rude to the ones who are trying to be polite, but the polite people just have to take it.

I also think its funny how fast Arshes of all people pops up to throw that back at me. I see her on here all the time arguing against people who want more rules trying to keep people playing nice and to stop being so tolerant of trolls. But as soon as someone says something evn remotely trollish AGAINST those same people she usually defends, poof, there she is. ^_^

I'm not trying to troll. But I do admit that this sort of argument back and forth is something that really has no place on an entertainment site like this. But I figured, what the heck. Nobody is stopping the nasty people from being nasty to the nice people, so maybe somebody should start using that leniency to be nasty to the nasty people.



> I think Wolfie's post was pretty formal and jumping on him was unneccessary.



Thank you. I didn't mind Arshes comment though. People who don't want rules forcing some level of proper behavior on them will always be the first to point out when someone who doesn't NEED rules to behave properly makes the teensiest step out of line 

I would like nothing more than for the site's administration to deem this argument, and all other petty nastiness like it, unacceptable, and to tell people involed in stuff like this to quit it. I'm gonna go ahead and stop now anyway, cuz I don't want to add more stress to the mod peoples. I think you do a great job here Uncia, and don't mean to step on your toes, I just think it's funny that someone is complaining that mods are starting to get rid of problem users, but then takes a crack at me and implying that my one little offense there is somehow needing of correction.


----------



## Litre (Jul 13, 2006)

this thread needs allegra


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Who was jumping?



Arshes was ^_^



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> I simply agreed with Arshes that Wolfie's use of "stfu and gtfo" could be considered inflammatory and trolling.



And I agree that it should be. I just think that the people who are _known_ for acting like that need to be dealt with and cleaned out before worrying about people like little old me, who tries hard to not say such things, but darnit, just sometimes feels like giving back a teensy little bit of what he's seeing dished out 



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> they don't like the heated remarks or inflammatory language.



And is it really just that impossible for people to have a discussion without so much inflammatory language?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> I also think its funny how fast Arshes of all people pops up to throw that back at me. I see her on here all the time arguing against people who want more rules trying to keep people playing nice and to stop being so tolerant of trolls. But as soon as someone says something evn remotely trollish AGAINST those same people she usually defends, poof, there she is. ^_^



Try thinking this out again. Do you see me saying you should be banned for your statement? I merely pointed out the irony of your own statement. I think I'm actually consistent here, I support your right to say something without being banned because you are in disagreement with one side as well.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> I also think its funny how fast Arshes of all people pops up to throw that back at me. I see her on here all the time arguing against people who want more rules trying to keep people playing nice and to stop being so tolerant of trolls. But as soon as someone says something evn remotely trollish AGAINST those same people she usually defends, poof, there she is. ^_^


Heh, heh... I kinda like you both. Is that a banning offence? 



			
				Wolfie said:
			
		

> I'm not trying to troll. But I do admit that this sort of argument back and forth is something that really has no place on an entertainment site like this


Being 100% on-topic all the time might be rather boring.
Inevitably discussion floats further afield, but yes there are people who enjoy the argument/debate as much as the _content_ of the argument/debate.
Sometimes useful, sometimes rather wearing... Trying to strike a balance is rarely "easy".



			
				Wolfie said:
			
		

> I think you do a great job here Uncia, and don't mean to step on your toes, I just think it's funny that someone is complaining that mods are starting to get rid of problem users, but then takes a crack at me and implying that my one little offense there is somehow needing of correction.


(aside: I have been pretty much absent for the past month as far as public-facing input is concerned. The admins have probably been doing a better job than some might give them credit for. Alas(?), it's possible to slog 10+ hours per day, every day, and still be "invisible" to 99.5% of users. Guilt by association for _any_ negative occurrences on FA are far easier to apply...)

Mhmm... You've highlighted one of the major problems there, Wolfie.
Once "problem users" are seen to be "got rid of", it can become tempting for some community members either directly or indirectly to aid situations that lead to other people being "removed"- whether they dislike the way they behave, the comments they make, the personal interests they have, etc., etc.
Not that that applies to the comments between Arshes and yourself, of course.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Try thinking this out again. Do you see me saying you should be banned for your statement? I merely pointed out the irony of your own statement. I think I'm actually consistent here, I support your right to say something without being banned because you are in disagreement with one side as well.



First, why does everyone seem to act like its either no action or total ban? I think people being nasty or too inflammatory should be warned, repeat offenses should be more firmly warned, maybe a temporary suspension, and if someone is just really incapable of roping in the nastiness, then it is not unreasonable to ban them. Why does everyone want to act like getting banned is the same as a bullet to the head?

My point is that I DON'T think people should be able to be so nasty.

Whether people like you, who do seem to be "supporting my right to say something without being banned" or people like Nobuyuki who I think are just trying to keep the place open for people to be nasty if they feel like it, my point is that neither matters. Nobody has a RIGHT to be here at all. Let alone any RIGHT to be able to conduct themselves like total dickwads just because they think being "nice" isn't cool, or whatever their didn't-get-enough-hugs issues might be.

People: This is not real life. This is not the real world. You act like we're talking about censoring ideas on a national level or some other sort of horrible oppression, and that's really just plain silly. This is just asking people for some pretty basic levels of courtesy and respect. They're not telling us what we can and can't say, just asking that we don't make an asshole of ourself when we say it.

And I'm sorry, but there is a BIG difference between "I'm defending your right to voice your opinion" and "I'm defending your right to be an asshole while voicing your opinion."

When people who act like you can't have the first without the second, it is  REALLY hard to buy that they're not just wanting to be free to be a dick.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Heh, heh... I kinda like you both. Is that a banning offence?



Totally! Immediate Ban! (See that you other people? I was "being funny" but without being a jerk to someone. *gasp* it is possible!  )



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Being 100% on-topic all the time might be rather boring.
> Inevitably discussion floats further afield, but yes there are people who enjoy the argument/debate as much as the _content_ of the argument/debate.
> Sometimes useful, sometimes rather wearing... Trying to strike a balance is rarely "easy".



Oh absolutely. I just don't like when people confuse "having fun" with being a jerk. To me: directly insulting another user, or acting like someone is dumb or a "whiner" just because they have OMG feelings that got hurt is not "having fun." It's being a twat, and that shouldn't be cool. Being mean to someone who is upset because someone was mean to them is just really a low thing to do "lol internets" or not. 



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> (aside: I have been pretty much absent for the past month as far as public-facing input is concerned. The admins have probably been doing a better job than some might give them credit for. Alas(?), it's possible to slog 10+ hours per day, every day, and still be "invisible" to 99.5% of users. Guilt by association for _any_ negative occurrences on FA are far easier to apply...)



I think the people who act like 'unless I SEE for myself each and every day "X" moderator making X minimum number of posts responding to all of my complaints, they can't possibly be working' need to just be patted on the head and told to move along. Those of us with sense know that most of you are working hard, and if we don't _know_ it, well it's more productive to just assume they are, OR have faith that the others will take up the slack rather than stress out the ones we DO see by bitching about 'where the fuck are they' over the ones we don't see.



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Mhmm... You've highlighted one of the major problems there, Wolfie.
> Once "problem users" are seen to be "got rid of", it can become tempting for some community members either directly or indirectly to aid situations that lead to other people being "removed"- whether they dislike the way they behave, the comments they make, the personal interests they have, etc., etc.



All of this stuff about behavior and punishments is easy: where does the Administration draw the line? If this is ok, and that is not, then that's how it needs to be. You guys make your rules, but also have SOLID and publicly stated CONSEQUENCES for breaking the rules. And STICK to them. That's the big thing.

If a user points out something not acceptable, it is dealt with. If a user points out something that isn't hurting any users or breaking a rule, they need to just be told 'sorry, they're not doing anything wrong.' If a good deal of users feel something SHOULD be unacceptable, then the administration chooses whether or not to agree with them, but SHOULDN'T just do something because one or two people have a problem with it.

Its always a balancing act for the moderators. But that's why they're moderators. A good community run by good people will end up with like-minded people in charge. If you hate all the people in charge of a place, leave it, cuz you're not likely to be happy with what they want to do with their community. This community seems to primarily want to be as enjoyable as it can for everyone. The problem is when they also try to be enjoyable to the people who enjoy causing hurt feelings and heated fights and just generally bringing everyone else down.

You can't ever make EVERYONE happy. But its a lot easier to come close to it if you focus on the people who want to _be_ happy, and make others happy, and try to just disregard the ones who are getting in the way of all the happy.

If a person only seems happy when they're free to make someone else NOT happy, then they're not gonna BE happy unless they're bringing someone else down. Then there are the people who are happy by being around others who are happy.

I think you know which type of user needs to be considered more if you want a happy community


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 13, 2006)

*nod nods*. Appreciate the feedback & p.o.v., Wolfie.
Many valid points in there, even allowing for the difference of (personal) preference re. rigid rules vs. shades of grey.


			
				Wolfie said:
			
		

> I think you know which type of user needs to be considered more if you want a happy community


The (relatively) silent majority who may arrive and leave without warning, perhaps, because no amount of rational debate or irrational drama in its own right will fulfil their fundamental requirements in terms of _community_?


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 13, 2006)

wolfie said:
			
		

> First, why does everyone seem to act like its either no action or total ban? I think people being nasty or too inflammatory should be warned, repeat offenses should be more firmly warned, maybe a temporary suspension, and if someone is just really incapable of roping in the nastiness, then it is not unreasonable to ban them. Why does everyone want to act like getting banned is the same as a bullet to the head?



Guys like Myr try to take this attitude to heart, unfortunately, the problem with this sort of "shades of gray" thing is that it comes down to the whims of the individual admin who decides whatever it is you're doing is objectionable or not.  You could have someone who is as liberal as I am when it comes to administering warnings and bans (hint:  I've only had to permaban a 2-3 "regular" people in the entire 8 years I've been an IRC operator), or someone as fascicistic as.... well, I don't think calling people fascist flies very well due to the negative connotations that are associated with it, so I think I'll refrain from naming any names here, but you get what I mean.  It's literally impossible to impliment this kind of system you propose consistantly -- and that means by its very nature it is not a fair system.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

*nodnods* Yes! The majority will always be the ones who don't speak up. So, you either work on what you assume they all want, or you listen to the loudest minority. I think the best thing to do is for the site to decide what it's purpose is, and then do whatever will serve that purpose best. The people who are compatible with what you guys want this place to be, will be happy with it. The ones who aren't, won't, but don't matter because what they want is not what you guys want to offer.

Its just a matter of is this a website meant to be a "fun and enjoyable source of entertainment" or a site that is meant to be an entire social structure, complete with all the drama and strife, law-abiding and law-breaking users, etc, all that crap that is a part of the real world that really doesn't HAVE to be here at all unless the guys in charge WANT it to be


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 13, 2006)

nobuyuki said:
			
		

> Guys like Myr try to take this attitude to heart, unfortunately, the problem with this sort of "shades of gray" thing is that it comes down to the whims of the individual admin who decides whatever it is you're doing is objectionable or not.


And we will discuss it further to see what course of action needs to take place. I agree something needs to be done, but on the same scene, we have to be as worried about the trolls as we do the blind defenders. FA and the system are not without faults, and we need to review how things are carried out from this point.

I am not too pleased at the "crisis response" that has occured today, and it probably got off to a bad foot on multiple fronts.


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> Its just a matter of is this a website meant to be a "fun and enjoyable source of entertainment" or a site that is meant to be an entire social structure, complete with all the drama and strife, law-abiding and law-breaking users, etc, all that crap that is a part of the real world that really doesn't HAVE to be here at all unless the guys in charge WANT it to be


It should be, but we should also be careful so as to note mute a disgruntled voice that also has a damn good opinion.


----------



## Damaratus (Jul 13, 2006)

Dragoneer said:
			
		

> I am not too pleased at the "crisis response" that has occured today, and it probably got off to a bad foot on multiple fronts.



It definitely reached the "Chicken with Head Cut Off" level rather quickly.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> When people who act like you can't have the first without the second, it is  REALLY hard to buy that they're not just wanting to be free to be a dick.



Umm aren't you doing this now? I find this ironic once again. You can keep making excuses to be nasty to the "nasties" or you can demonstrate by example.

_The North Wind and the Sun

The North Wind and the Sun disputed as to which was the most powerful, and agreed that he should be declared the victor who could first strip a wayfaring man of his clothes.

The North Wind first tried his power and blew with all his might, but the keener his blasts, the closer the Traveler wrapped his cloak around him, until at last, resigning all hope of victory, the Wind called upon the Sun to see what he could do.

The Sun suddenly shone out with all his warmth. The Traveler no sooner felt his genial rays than he took off one garment after another, and at last, fairly overcome with heat, undressed and bathed in a stream that lay in his path.

*Moral: Persuasion is better than Force.*_

Aesop is your friend.

The fact is, that's right, they can be WARNED, the sad part is, most of the time bans are enacted first, yet you say this is ok. You're also making your own rules as to when it's ok to be inflammatory and not in your own posts. Please remain consistent in your conviction and ideals, otherwise the message is lost.


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 13, 2006)

Damaratus said:
			
		

> Dragoneer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I wanted to draw today. Not handled this crap, and now it's like...

Argh.

I'm just burned out. We'll get this sorted, and I'm dissapointed it transpired as it did.


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 13, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Umm aren't you doing this now? I find this ironic once again. You can keep making excuses to be nasty to the "nasties" or you can demonstrate by example.


There's no excuse to be nasty to ANYONE. Ever. At least on these forums.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 13, 2006)

Dragoneer said:
			
		

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



How about doing the Nasty? :shock:

But yeah exactly and I've been in worse hell I used to use USEnet lol.


----------



## Wolfie (Jul 13, 2006)

Dragoneer said:
			
		

> It should be, but we should also be careful so as to note mute a disgruntled voice that also has a damn good opinion.



Asking someone to not be a dick isn't silencing them unless they just can't speak their opinion without being a dick. If someone has a good opinion, they can probably say it without bein a dick. But if you guys let people be dicks, then the good opinions of the people trying to stay polite get drowned out by the assery of the impolite ones. Either the respectful people end up silenced because they can't speak without being attacked by the crappy people, or they end up turning to dicks themselves just to get their voice heard. I hardly post here at all, and here I'm trying to show someone how it isn't worth the energy to get so worked up about this stuff, and then I go and get worked up about it. That's the kind of atmosphere you give your otherwise quiet and happy users when you show them that you're not gonna try and stop that behavior in other users.

OR, you guys set some rules of conduct AND the consequences of those rules, and start enforcing them. Some mods will enforce rules inappropriately. So the head guy, YOU dude, will then correct them and set it right. If a mod doesn't learn the right way to moderate, they get demoted. If people don't like YOUR decision, they can eat a brick.

For all intents and purposes dude, you are the figurehead of this place. You decide what behaviors you want and don't want. If you get rid of someone who needs to be gotten rid of, there WILL be people accusing you of all kinds of nasty crap. You ignore them. Don't worry about whether people think you're some tyrant or not, worry about what will make this place happier and more enjoyable for everyone, and asking people to not be dicks is really not unreasonable at all except to the dicks.



			
				Dragoneer said:
			
		

> There's no excuse to be nasty to ANYONE. Ever. At least on these forums.



Then please let something be done about it. I apologise for my own contribution to it today, but it is not fair or right to watch the same peple be nasty and condescending post after post, but it doesn't seem to be a problem until someone who usually isn't nasty turns on them. THAT sucks. To watch someone behave that way on the forums, and nobody do anything about it, but then when they've managed to get someone else so sick of seeing their bs that they actually speak up about it, NOW it's a problem that needs to be addressed.


----------



## Damaratus (Jul 13, 2006)

Dragoneer said:
			
		

> I wanted to draw today. Not handled this crap, and now it's like...



Pulls out a set of guns.  Alright partner...draw!


----------



## cesarin (Jul 13, 2006)

Dragoneer, I want to be nasty.... with your butt


----------



## kitetsu (Jul 14, 2006)

Wolfie said:
			
		

> I think it would be awesome if "stfu and gtfo" would be considered too inflammatory, because they ARE.



So you'd also agree with the ban on all image macros even if they're sometimes meant for compliments?


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 14, 2006)

kitetsu said:
			
		

> So you'd also agree with the ban on all image macros even if they're sometimes meant for compliments?


I delete all image macros without even batting an eye.


----------



## imnohbody (Jul 14, 2006)

For the illumination of us out in the artistic hinterlands, what exactly is an "image macro"?


----------



## Myr (Jul 14, 2006)

nobuyuki said:
			
		

> Guys like Myr try to take this attitude to heart, unfortunately, the problem with this sort of "shades of gray" thing is that it comes down to the whims of the individual admin who decides whatever it is you're doing is objectionable or not.


I do not appreciate you attacking me behind my back and trying to paint me as a rogue admin. You were given warnings. You were also one of the last people I chose to ban. You showed clear intent to malign me, and you are still telling me specifically how to act instead of making suggestions. You had zero hesitation when it came to assulting me, and persist in doing so even now. You just don't give up. Sorry, but I'm not your typical "idle until the problem goes away" IRC user.


----------



## dave hyena (Jul 14, 2006)

I read that it was someone who was banned from the FA IRC who hacked into FA using an admins password they got from the Y! gallery.

That narrows down the suspects drastically and it means that at the least, several people out there know who did it.

Heck, I could make a good guess myself.

Will that person be held responsible for the rude admin messages and the unauthorised entry to an adminstrators account or will they get away scot-free?


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 14, 2006)

Myr said:
			
		

> nobuyuki said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Look, I see you're interpreting my simple observations as "yet another" assault on you.  This kind of exactly proves my point about individual's interpretations.  Don't take it personally.  I do disagree on how you choose to do things, but that's neither relevant nor part of the point I was trying to make in this thread.  I wanted to point out in a general sense how individual whims can create an unfair system due to one administrator's judgements being so completely different (and possibly contradictory) to another.


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 14, 2006)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> I read that it was someone who was banned from the FA IRC who hacked into FA using an admins password they got from the Y! gallery.
> 
> That narrows down the suspects drastically and it means that at the least, several people out there know who did it.
> 
> ...



btw, I heard this rumor, too.  I think it was started by Calorath, cause I saw it on his journal first.  It would almost be entirely laughable if it weren't for the fact I can see some people actually want to _believe_ it!  

The story's a completely hilarious invention and I doubt anyone will be able to believe it.  At least most made-up stories have some sort of evidence to em, all this one's got is speculations piled on more speculations :lol:

(I think I might actually be offended at the lack of effort that went into making up this story, even)


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 14, 2006)

nobuyuki said:
			
		

> btw, I heard this rumor, too.


*nods*. As clarified on http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=1947&pid=21458#pid21458

Everyone picks up a false rumor or ten from time-to-time. :?


----------



## Litre (Jul 14, 2006)

Which gives us our next lesson: Don't jump to bloody conclusions. Ask around instead of your buddies who can (and mostly likely will) be biased. If you have NO IDEA of the situation, don't blame others for actions they did not commit, especially if they some connection to people who is already under fire for their reputations. This causes more harm than good.


----------



## yak (Jul 14, 2006)

> We live in a free world
> I whistle down the wind
> Carry on smiling
> And the world will smile with you
> ...


yeah, something along like these lines.....


----------



## Damaratus (Jul 14, 2006)

Litre said:
			
		

> Which gives us our next lesson: Don't jump to bloody conclusions. Ask around instead of your buddies who can (and mostly likely will) be biased. If you have NO IDEA of the situation, don't blame others for actions they did not commit, especially if they some connection to people who is already under fire for their reputations. This causes more harm than good.



Asking the administration and being patient is usually a good route to clearing up speculation and hearsay.  FA has normally been forthcoming about the problems that occur.  Sometimes they can't post what's going on in a timely fashion because they're actively dealing with the program rather than reporting on it to the masses.

I'd rather have the problem fixed and find out what it was later, then have them initially waste their time on anwering the dozens of questions that arise whenever something happens to any part of FA (main site, forums, IRC, etc.).  Common sense and less word-of-mouth speculation on the part of the users is usually a good way to keep insanity under control.  Unfortunately, that's not readily practiced by most people.


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 14, 2006)

nobuyuki said:
			
		

> Guys like Myr try to take this attitude to heart, unfortunately, the problem with this sort of "shades of gray" thing is that it comes down to the whims of the individual admin who decides whatever it is you're doing is objectionable or not...


To be honest, I'm not sure you really know Myr well enough to make that distinction as to how "guys like Myr" act, and I can't help but feel your statement carries bias.


----------



## nobuyuki (Jul 14, 2006)

Dragoneer said:
			
		

> To be honest, I'm not sure you really know Myr well enough to make that distinction as to how "guys like Myr" act, and I can't help but feel your statement carries bias.



All I have to go on is my limited personal experience with Myr, really, so you may very well be right.  However, it seemed to be clear-cut enough through several incidents that occurred throught that day with other users to establish what I believed was an at least contextually accurate modus operandi.


----------



## Wolfblade (Jul 14, 2006)

nobuyuki said:
			
		

> All I have to go on is my limited personal experience with Myr, really, so you may very well be right.  However, it seemed to be clear-cut enough through several incidents that occurred throught that day with other users to establish what I believed was an at least contextually accurate modus operandi.



Basically then, your attitude towards Myr was built on what are most likely the exact same foundations he used to build his attitude towards you. 

There are more than enough incidents involving yourself that would paint you as an irritant and source of unneeded hostility and misconduct towards the site, moderators, and other users. Whether that image of you is right or wrong, it is your own words and actions that have led people to accept it.

Every person decides what to think of every other person and their motivations based on their own "limited personal experience" with that person.

You, as a user, have taken the stance, based on your experience with Myr, that "guys like Myr" are a threat to your freedom to behave in the manner you wish to.

Myr, as an administrator, took the stance, based on his experience with you, that you and the others banned were a threat to the peace and enjoyment of this community.

You made a personal decision to voice a personal attack against an administrator WHILE complaining that he made an administrative decision to deal with a person who, in his experience, had established himself as more of a source of conflict than constructive aid.

You did to him exactly what you're complaining he did to you.

The difference being, his action was an admin acting as an admin, while your action is the retaliation of someone who had to face a consequence of his own actions.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jul 14, 2006)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> Basically then, your attitude towards Myr was built on what are most likely the exact same foundations he used to build his attitude towards you.



I'll actually agree with that, and I even talked with Myr, saying there is a bit of overraction on his end, but I do understand why he reacted to Nobu the way he did, and in the case of he being kickbanned at that point was Nobu's fault.

However, emotions were running on high, and the problem is that it didn't seem there was levelheadedness just knee jerk reactions to a lot of replies.

When I said "lame bans" I was kicked, he was then educated my reference to lame bans was about the effectiveness of the bans, and they were actually just filling up the channel ban list, in fact if he had placed the wrong wildcard, he could have banned himself depending on how the ircd works.


----------

