Suggestions and Feedback

[Kelly]

*yawns*

 

[Aesop Rocks]

Go to bed, ya big silly!

 

[C. Lee]

let's slow the train down right there....I will decide who I want to know better and who I want to ****ing ignore because they annoy me

I have no problem with "15 Minutes" but I don't need to be told that I should be participating for the sake of some attention ****es

Why the hell do you even bother to log on to this or any other spot?

 

[danoyse]

When was making childish jokes against the rules?

When did Mod's decide if a topic was worth joking about?

Nothing new here, Norm. People made tasteless jokes about Michael Jackson and Heath Ledger when they died, and it was dealt with the same way.

Just because this guy was mainly known for playing a character with a funny name on an 80s sitcom doesn't mean the same rules don't apply.

We all have a sense of humor, and tasteless jokes are ok to a point. But when a mod posts twice in the same thread to knock it off, and someone continues to do it, then they just have to deal with the consequences.

 

[Kane52630]

so is there any word on getting those PSN ID and Gamer tags on the contact info?

 

[Drakon]

Remind me tonight

 

[StorminNorman]

Nothing new here, Norm. People made tasteless jokes about Michael Jackson and Heath Ledger when they died, and it was dealt with the same way.

Just because this guy was mainly known for playing a character with a funny name on an 80s sitcom doesn't mean the same rules don't apply.

We all have a sense of humor, and tasteless jokes are ok to a point. But when a mod posts twice in the same thread to knock it off, and someone continues to do it, then they just have to deal with the consequences.

No they didn't. There was an entire thread dedicated to talking about the "misadventures" of Michael Jackson the day his death was brought in.

A Mod should not be able to come in and change the rules of the thread - there is nothing, NOTHING, against the rules regarding tasteless jokes. If the rules of the Hype are subjective to the opinions of the Mods on duty - there are no rules.

 

[BlackLantern]

what Norm said, and to be honest....C Lee has been kinda sensitive lately with the whole "good taste" and "polite" thing

 

[StorminNorman]

Exactly.

C Lee's moral compass shouldn't be the Hype's moral compass. It's his job to watch out for: "obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws" - not things he doesn't like.

 

[danoyse]

No they didn't. There was an entire thread dedicated to talking about the "misadventures" of Michael Jackson the day his death was brought in.

That thread was created to keep the discussion of Michael Jackson's legal issues separate from the tribute thread. It was not created as a place to make bad jokes. Those were dealt with the same no matter what thread they were posted in.

A Mod should not be able to come in and change the rules of the thread - there is nothing, NOTHING, against the rules regarding tasteless jokes. If the rules of the Hype are subjective to the opinions of the Mods on duty - there are no rules.

It was more than one mod, Norm. C. Lee simply asked to keep the cheap jokes out of thread - twice - because regardless of the name of the guy he played on a TV show in the 80s, it was a sad situation and not something to make jokes about. It was a fair request.

When you posted your little joke, it was reported by another mod for crossing the line, and you infracted by still another mod. That's three mods, not just one making up the rules as they go.

The entire staff has reviewed the post in question and we all agreed it was inappropriate, as were several others in that thread.

So how about not jumping to conclusions here?

 

[StorminNorman]

That thread was created to keep the discussion of Michael Jackson's legal issues separate from the tribute thread. It was not created as a place to make bad jokes. Those were dealt with the same no matter what thread they were posted in.

It was more than one mod, Norm. C. Lee simply asked to keep the cheap jokes out of thread - twice - because regardless of the name of the guy he played on a TV show in the 80s, it was a sad situation and not something to make jokes about. It was a fair request.

So the rule is now sad situations cannot be joked about?

Okay, so when Tila Tequila fell (physical harm = sad situation?) jokes such as "She hit her head? Great, now she'll be even more stupid" or

"I saw the thread title, started laughing, and thought to myself "Wait, this might actually be tragic. It probably won't seem funny at all once I've read the whole article."

I was wrong."

The death of Billy Mays brought a mod to joke "In memory of Billy, I'm going to go de-wrinkle some clothes with a Steam Buddy, repair things with Mighty Putty, and clean my counter tops with Kaboom."

The fact is you can't as if the only acceptable reaction to a "sad situation" is to be sad.

When you posted your little joke, it was reported by another mod for crossing the line, and you infracted by still another mod. That's three mods, not just one making up the rules as they go.

Three mods doesn't dispute the "making up the rules" charge. Its just a further critique on board moderation.

 

[danoyse]

So the rule is now sad situations cannot be joked about?

Okay, so when Tila Tequila fell (physical harm = sad situation?) jokes such as "She hit her head? Great, now she'll be even more stupid" or

"I saw the thread title, started laughing, and thought to myself "Wait, this might actually be tragic. It probably won't seem funny at all once I've read the whole article."

I was wrong."

The death of Billy Mays brought a mod to joke "In memory of Billy, I'm going to go de-wrinkle some clothes with a Steam Buddy, repair things with Mighty Putty, and clean my counter tops with Kaboom."

The fact is you can't as if the only acceptable reaction to a "sad situation" is to be sad.

And everything depends on the situation. If Tila Tequila hits her head but isn't critically injured and survives to be just as dumb another day, I don't see a problem with making jokes about it. Of course it's not funny, but...we all make jokes about that sort of thing. I don't think anyone has a problem with it.

But if it had been a situation like Natasha Richardson dying from a head injury last year, then the jokes wouldn't have been appropriate and we would have dealt with the situation the same way we handled them here.

The Billy Mays example isn't particularly offensive either - it's more of a tribute to Billy, not a joke about his death or how it happened. Or an attitude of how much we're supposed to care because he wasn't famous enough to deserve the respect.

This was a situation were someone was missing and suicidal and it came to a tragic end, and we felt the cheap jokes didn't belong there. And the part you seem to be forgetting was that a mod asked twice for those jokes to stop. And you kept doing it anyway.

Three mods doesn't dispute the "making up the rules" charge. Its just a further critique on board moderation.

No one was making up the rules, Norm. Three of us at the time deemed it inappropriate and dealt with it, when it was reviewed by the full staff everyone else agreed with our call.

 

[StorminNorman]

And everything depends on the situation. If Tila Tequila hits her head but isn't critically injured and survives to be just as dumb another day, I don't see a problem with making jokes about it. Of course it's not funny, but...we all make jokes about that sort of thing. I don't think anyone has a problem with it.

But if it had been a situation like Natasha Richardson dying from a head injury last year, then the jokes wouldn't have been appropriate and we would have dealt with the situation the same way we handled them here.

The Billy Mays example isn't particularly offensive either - it's more of a tribute to Billy, not a joke about his death or how it happened. Or an attitude of how much we're supposed to care because he wasn't famous enough to deserve the respect.

This was a situation were someone was missing and suicidal and it came to a tragic end, and we felt the cheap jokes didn't belong there. And the part you seem to be forgetting was that a mod asked twice for those jokes to stop. And you kept doing it anyway.

I am not upset about getting reprimanded (it was obviously intentional), I am upset that a mod has the ability to make the rules on the fly. Tila Tequila, for example, suffered a concussion during the fall - but people laughed. That's okay. When jokes were being made, it was about a piece of 80's pop culture growing up to be crazy and leaving - while it turned out to be more serious after the fact, the incident itself is arguably far less unfortunate the concussion (one was a person choosing to leave, one was a person who obtained a concussion by accident).

You can't stop jackasses from acting like jackasses, and it's not the place of the Mods to make decisions on their own morals, ignoring the established rules of the Hype. When the restriction of content is listed as: obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violation of any laws. Then the content that should be penalized is that which is obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening or illegal - the majority of the comments that were purged did not fit either of that category.

 

[Marx]

I can assure you that no one on the staff makes up the rules as they go along Norm. Coming from me, I would hope you believe that.

 

[StorminNorman]

There are clear and obvious double standards that do occur (not against me, if anything I would argue I have received slight favorable treatment - I have made certain posts that I were for-sure punishment-worthy), but those are natural.

My problem, here, is that orders to be "polite" and "in good taste" and "mature" are NOT Hype rules. They are not required in a thread about Spider-Man 3 or Batman or Sarah Palin or Tila Tequila - they should not required in other subjects because MODS feel the topic is deserving of it. THAT is making things up as you go along.

A poster should never be able to make an offensive-worthy post unintentionally - and that is what these sort of rules do. When what is acceptable content changes by the thread, there are no rules to follow.

 

[SuperFerret]

Are we still on this? It's over, move on.

 

[Marx]

There are clear and obvious double standards that do occur (not against me, if anything I would argue I have received slight favorable treatment - I have made certain posts that I were for-sure punishment-worthy), but those are natural.

My problem, here, is that orders to be "polite" and "in good taste" and "mature" are NOT Hype rules. They are not required in a thread about Spider-Man 3 or Batman or Sarah Palin or Tila Tequila - they should not required in other subjects because MODS feel the topic is deserving of it. THAT is making things up as you go along.

A poster should never be able to make an offensive-worthy post unintentionally - and that is what these sort of rules do. When what is acceptable content changes by the thread, there are no rules to follow.

They might not be 'official' hype rules, but I would think it is common sense. There's absolutely no reason to be rude, crude, or offensive in any debate or discussion. It serves no purpose.

 

[StorminNorman]

Are we still on this? It's over, move on.

If you have a Suggestion or Feedback, then my discussing mine doesnt interfere in the lease bit.

If you dont, you are just trolling. Which is against the rules. awesome

 

[Marx]

If you have a Suggestion or Feedback, then my discussing mine doesnt interfere in the lease bit.

If you dont, you are just trolling. Which is against the rules. awesome

Sometimes, I think you enjoy being difficult.

 

[StorminNorman]

They might not be 'official' hype rules, but I would think it is common sense. There's absolutely no reason to be rude, crude, or offensive in any debate or discussion. It serves no purpose.

I agree. A poster deserves to have his reputation or perception tarnished by being rude, crude or offensive - not punished*. You should be punished for breaking established Hype-content rules. You post a nipple slip, you should be probated (or made Head Mod) - because this isnt an "adult content" site. You make vulgar posts, bypassing censors or using racial slurs - thats obviously worthy of discipline. You make a joke about *****, in a "***** is missing" thread - thats not.

*Barring no other Hype rules regarding content are broken.

 

[StorminNorman]

Sometimes, I think you enjoy being difficult.

I enjoy being right. Its amazing how frequently the two go hand in hand.

 

[Marx]

...and if it has been said two times previously in the thread not to post the type of post you made, then it is punishable man. Plain and simple.

I'm not quite sure how you don't see why posting a penis joke in that thread was inappropriate, and trolling...

Trolling AND Vulgarity are both 'officially' against the rules of the Hype.

 

[The Original Bamfer]

I enjoy being right. Its amazing how frequently the two go hand in hand.

It's amazing how infrequently that happens.

 

[StorminNorman]

...and if it has been said two times previously in the thread not to post the type of post you made, then it is punishable man. Plain and simple.

I'm not quite sure how you don't see why posting a penis joke in that thread was inappropriate, and trolling...

You are missing the point. The penis joke WAS inappropriate and trolling. It was, I plead guilty. The reason for the penis joke, however, was the ridiculousness of C Lee demanding that people not make jokes about ***** because ***** is a real person and because Boners situation was important to Boners family.

But if we are going to start censoring comments simply because its "important to Xs family", it means we have to remove all the "Sarah Palin is an idiot" comments in the Sarah Palin thread. It means we cant make jokes about Executives at Fox or talk about the death of Rush Limbaugh.

On the day Robert Novac died, we had a Mod call him "a bit of a *****e". Now Robert Novac MAY have been a bit of a *****e, just as the story of ***** BEING MISSING may have been BEGGING for immature jokes to made about it (again, not mine - mine was crossing the line - but all the jokes prior to it that resulted in C. Lees warning).

Again, the fact a Mod made multiple warnings not to do something isnt justification of anything. If a Mod said I cant post a picture of a real life Buzz Lightyear in a funny picture thread - that doesnt mean I shouldnt be able to post a picture of a real life Buzz Lightyear in a funny picture thread. Just because a Mod says you cant make a joke (within the rules of the Hype) DOESNT mean that you shouldnt be able to make a joke (within the rules of the Hype).

 

[danoyse]

...and if it has been said two times previously in the thread not to post the type of post you made, then it is punishable man. Plain and simple.

I'm not quite sure how you don't see why posting a penis joke in that thread was inappropriate, and trolling...

Yes, and when 3 mods separately come to this conclusion, and the rest of the staff agrees with the action taken - and we've disagreed on calls plenty of times before - it's just no good, Norm.