BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Darkmatter

 
  

Page: 1234(5)67

 
 
Alex's Grandma
00:54 / 27.09.07
There's almost nothing I can say about this; I appreciate that my credibility is low, but it was, honestly, one of my flatmates who wrote the post in question and not I.

I think I've stood up and been counted for far worse, over the years.

I also wonder if the sensitive figure who responded to;

I won't allow anything to get in the way of us having a nice smooth wedding, because otherwise why have one in the first place?

with this zinger;

I was pregnant. Daddy insisted.

Is really in a position to comment about anything too much in terms of inappropriate Barbe-antics. Bearing in mind that it was/is somebody's actual, y'know, real marriage that is/was under discussion.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
05:26 / 27.09.07
Lady, think about the ways in which your comment was or would be helpful.

Granny, I don't quite understand what you mean. That zinger was in the Conversation, where such behaviour is not inappropriate. Boboss, whose real wedding it is, appears not to have taken umbrage, perhaps taking it in the spirit in which it was meant (or being so downtrodden and oppressed that he dare not resist). However, I don't know why we are discussing my behaviour in Conversation when the precise issue here is that you have suffered the traumatic experience of having your suit hijacked. This is considered an outright banning offence on Barbelith, like the clandestine possession of multiple suits - regrettably, we have found it necessary to restrict the freedoms of the innocent in order to frustrate the wiles of the few. However, banning your housemate would also keep you from posting, if we can trust that the IP blocking brought on by a ban actually takes place. As such,I sought only to protect your good name by removing irrelevant and threadrotting material from the Policy, where it is most frowned upon. The thought of your sticklike, octogenarian limbs taped together as some brute traduces your good name on Barbelith is just too much to bear.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
07:38 / 27.09.07
If I'm not allowed to rot this thread than neither are any of you. Back on topic please...
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
08:05 / 27.09.07
but failing a couple more mods being appointed in Temple - which would actually be the quickest and simplest fix (I note Roy Medallion and Gypsy Lantern are not, presently

I'm more than happy to moderate the temple if it will help matters.
 
 
Spaniel
08:21 / 27.09.07
(Thought Haus's comment in Convo was funny. Different standards apply here)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:42 / 27.09.07
Well, in this case it might at least let us get eight votes in Temple, so we can see what happens next.

Hmmm. Would people trust me to scout around the new moderator applications page, grab a couple of known quantities for forums where there is not a quorum for effective banning, and boot them up to Tom? No idea what the timescale on the next stage (actualy modmaking) would be, but it would be a start...
 
 
Spaniel
09:00 / 27.09.07
DOOIT!
 
 
Tryphena Absent
10:44 / 27.09.07
That sounds fine to me.
 
 
grant
13:31 / 27.09.07
Fourthed, if you're volunteering. Thanks.
 
 
cusm
15:31 / 27.09.07
I sense a disturbance in the force. Amazing the things I find when I check back here sometimes.

Upon review, DM is a wanker. His posts are indicative of juvenile Ch@0t3 style. The unfortunate part is, as a board founded on Grant Morrison, Invisibles, Chaos Magick, and counterculture revolution, this is in a way the sort of thing we should expect to attract. In a sense, its what we came from, and out of this eventually sometimes grow more reasonable and contributive posters.

Prior reference to Fetch is noteworthy, as here we had another psychotic wankspammer but one who did evoke useful discussion, even if his posting style was nearly incomprehensible at times. He was eventually cut when he went over the line on the conspiracy theories and the anti-semite knee-jerk became too much for the collective to bear, as it often will. On that, I do not consider in DM's case quoting David Icke's (known lunatic at that) slurring to be making a slur onesself, but certainly in poor taste and sloppy editing, which is its own crime.

DM shows the same difficult and possibly psychotic style, but his ravings are arguably content in the context of chaos magick study. So, I hesitate on the bannination.

But the spirit of the board has evolved, and the prevailing desire is for a more mature environment for intelligent discussion. We have made a conscious choice on the environment desired here, and are doing so again with this matter on DM. I recommend action in such cases first with lockings, deletions, and warnings given that cite the desire of this board to encourage a more evolved form of communication. If that fails, the stronger message is bannination. Perhaps they will rethink their suit and present themselves again in a new form more congruent with the stated environment.

My point here being, be aware of the choice we are making by this action, and hold future actions to principles of board vision rather than knee-jerk reactions to content. Gods help us all, the counterculture is growing conservative.

I submit bannination #7.
 
 
cusm
15:33 / 27.09.07
And yea, I'm here maybe on a monthly basis it seems. It changes with my available free/net time, which is limited now than I'm not chained to a desk.

Do get more hands on deck.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:57 / 27.09.07
Said it before, say it again. This is why we ought to change the name. Ah, well.
 
 
HCE
21:50 / 29.09.07
Gods help us all, the counterculture is growing conservative.

I have a problem with this. Where is the appropriate place to discuss it?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
22:13 / 29.09.07
Depends what your problem is, if it's with the statement as a statement then HS, if it's board specific either Policy or Conversation.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
23:53 / 29.09.07
So where do we stand on this? I mean, really basically. Has Darkmatter been banned or not? I mean, given that it's been pretty much decided by all the people on whose shoulders it rests (and I agree with them) that he should be, an' all.

Exactly HOW fucked is this banning mechanism?
 
 
Seth
00:35 / 30.09.07
Well, it's early days yet. We've not had the banning function long and I'm glad it's being put to the test with this particular poster than others who I can remember or imagine. It'd be much more of a problem if the person under ban scrutiny was interested in replying. I'm hopeful that all it will take to fix is a couple of values changed in the programming or a review of who mods which forum, but then when it comes to techie stuff I'm an idiot.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
01:18 / 30.09.07
(Threadrot, but still .. 'Pologies for the above, Haus - I was being a bore.)
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
01:36 / 30.09.07
Seth- that's all true (though I'm not convinced on your idiocy... even if it's just in techie stuff I bet I'm a metric shitload stupider than you), but what with it being a test case and all, it'd be nice if we had some feedback. I don't just mean from Tom; there's a full day and a half in which nobody has said ANYTHING. Is everyone assuming it's just fucked and therefore not bothering, or has it gone through and nobody's bothered telling anyone, or has everyone just given up and gone home? Are there still votes to be cast? If so, then surely that's something to be looked at as well, what with it being about a week or so, in which case the old system was JUST as efficient and actually got a result at the end?

It's kind of key that we know, really. Which is why I'm asking.
 
 
Tsuga
01:48 / 30.09.07
For those of us non-moderators, could you tell us what you guys actually see? Can you see the proposed bans, the votes, or what? It's very difficult to talk about it, not knowing anything other than what's referenced in thread, often vaguely. Maybe I shouldn't talk about it, but really-I only want to be helpful (and I'm interested).
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
02:20 / 30.09.07
Well, so far I've seen absolutely bugger all. I think it's down to Temple mods... which is kind of the problem (no slight on Temple mods, just that this isn't working thus far).

In general, we now have an "edit user" tab on the right-hand side of every post in a forum we moderate. That's all I've seen of it, anyway.

This is another reason why I think it would be cool to get in touch with someone who's left amicably and who we can fast-track back in if they change their mind, and see if we can use their suit as a proper test in Convo or somewhere we know we can get 8 mods, because at least that way we can tell Tom what we're complaining about all in one go.
 
 
Tsuga
02:28 / 30.09.07
Okay, because you're not a temple mod, you didn't see anything, right? But temple mods do?
I believe the problem with a "test suit" is the IP address thing, in that they may not be able to post anymore from their own address. If I'm remembering correctly.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
02:32 / 30.09.07
Yeah, which is why I was saying someone who had actually left with no intention of returning, though had left amicably. If the situation changed and they decided they DID want to come back, they could (I would assume) contact Tom and get that IP address unblocked, and have people vouch for them.

None of the relevant mods have actually told us what's going on for a while, so you're as in the dark as I am on your first question!
 
 
jentacular dreams
06:37 / 30.09.07
Well I just tried sending a PM to darkmatter and it went through without any error messages.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
08:01 / 30.09.07
Tsuga caroliniana For those of us non-moderators, could you tell us what you guys actually see? Can you see the proposed bans, the votes, or what?

With all forms of moderation, the only time we see anything is when, at the top of the screen it says 'you have x old messages and x jobs'. You click on the 'jobs' and it gives you a list of the jobs to vote on, it might be to delete a thread or post, lock, modify, etc'. Once you agree, disagree or skip you have no way of knowing what will happen next, or how long it will take.

We've occasionally had cock-ups where two different moderators in a forum have both voted to delete different posts in an accidental doublepost, because they have no way of seeing pending moderation requests. I believe that moderation requests cycle round the mods in a forum until the necessary number of votes are achieved or it's disagreed, rather than going to all of the moderators at once, but I might be wrong.

I think this was something, back when this board was new, that was flagged up with Tom as an issue, way before the whole problems with banning became the main problem it is today.
 
 
Olulabelle
08:21 / 30.09.07
I see nothing now because I have voted. I do not know if we have managed to ban darkmatter but I presume not, as according to the ban count in this thread Cusm was the last to vote and he is ban number seven. That means there was at that point one Temple mod left to vote because we only have nine mods andone already voted against. Now I think the only way to tell is to go back over the thread, count the number of people who say they have voted, work out who it is that has not yet voted, contact them and ask them what they see and also ask them to vote and to inform us of how they have voted.

It's utterly ridiculous.
 
 
Olulabelle
08:40 / 30.09.07
Okay. I have gone back over this thread and worked out who has voted and who hasn't and in what order people announced their vote. It stands like this:

1. Charrellz (proposer)...agreed
2. Seth.........................agreed
3. Electric Worm............vetoed
4. Quantum..................agreed
5. Grant.......................agreed
6. Olulabelle.................agreed
7. Lurid........................agreed
8. Cusm.......................agreed

The only Temple mod who has not yet recorded which way they voted in this thread is Mordant. That could be because she has not yet voted, or it could be that she has chosen not to specifically say which way she voted, or it could be that she didn't think it was neccessary to say. On reading her posts I am unsure as to whether she ended up agreeing or even voting at all.

So basically we'll have to wait until she gets back to find out if Darkmatter is banned or not. She may not yet have voted but if she did and she agreed the ban then he should now be banned and if she vetoed the ban then he won't be.
 
 
Jawsus-son Starship
08:48 / 30.09.07
Does anyone else think it's stupid that there are more mods in Art and Fashion then in Temple?
 
 
This Sunday
08:55 / 30.09.07
Does anyone else think it's stupid that there are more mods in Art and Fashion then in Temple?

On average, do you trust more people to mod your gods and rituals than you do your shoes?

Maybe we'll just get lucky, and the offender will not return to post until after this ban technology's been worked out and they're banned anyway.
 
 
Jawsus-son Starship
09:22 / 30.09.07
On average, do you trust more people to mod your gods and rituals than you do your shoes?

Not thought of it that way. But very true.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
09:35 / 30.09.07
I believe that moderation requests cycle round the mods in a forum until the necessary number of votes are achieved or it's disagreed, rather than going to all of the moderators at once, but I might be wrong.

All mods get the request at the same time. Otherwise, it'd get stuck in place if it ended up with one who isn't here. You might be getting the impression you are from the 'skip action' option, which actually doesn't do a thing and is completely pointless.
 
 
Olulabelle
09:54 / 30.09.07
Yes I agree, it is. It still remains if you skip it. It just sits at the top of your screen until someone else doesn't skip it and actually actions the request. Or you get fed up with seeing it there and go and do it after all.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
11:56 / 30.09.07
do you trust more people to mod your gods and rituals than you do your shoes?

My gods and rituals, shoes are very much more important. I'm more likely to cut my feet on glass than to run into trouble with a god.
 
 
Quantum
12:57 / 30.09.07
After the first round was vetoed, I got a second motion and voted to ban again. I think it was from Stoatie? I was 6 or 7 of 8, so either;
1) there's a vote or two outstanding (which any applicable mod not voted will see)
or 2) the ban went through (in which case someone voted and was 8/8- anyone?)
or 3)all the applicable mods voted, didn't reach 8, and so the request is floating around in the ether. If someone becomes a mod with the ability to vote on it then they should see it.

We could attempt to ban again and see what happens.
 
 
Olulabelle
13:21 / 30.09.07
Oh yes, I forgot about the second vote. Now I'm really confused. Perhaps attempt to ban again? Then we can carefully follow it.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
13:31 / 30.09.07
Can't have been me- I tried to propose one in Conversation, but because the thread hadn't originated there it didn't work.
 
  

Page: 1234(5)67

 
  
Add Your Reply