How uncensored do you want our community to be?

Mods, you are getting traffic because of banter back and forth, it will die down and if you keep slowing obvious sock puppets and hate mongers you are going to be left with the equivalent of an island full of deported criminals. It may seem great that you get traffic now but you have to build it by quality posters, not jerks like Freddy and Larry and kjisgay

 

great thread admin...........thank you for asking for input instead of playing favorites like the WoV mods

fortunately there's only 2 members who are the problem here and who knows maybe they're even the same person?

I look at it this way.............................even though their posts may be offensive I actually don't object to them on those grounds

what I object to is them harrassing other members and following them around from threads to thread just to write posts like "Fuck you pussy boy!! Fuck you homo!! Fuck you Jew! Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you!"
the guy saying this isn't here for "discussion" and after the 20th time it really starts getting annoying for the rest of us........
uncensored is great, harrassment is not................

I also object to these guys derailing threads at every turn and flooding the board. the rest of us shouldn't hhave to wade through numerus posts of bullshit just to get to posts that say more than "Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you!"

 

As I said, I completely understand the attempt at more latitude for people making their points. Life isn't always greeting card polite and sometimes you get a little heated and language can get strong. That is great as long as it is on topic or a least semi connected to topic. But if someone is allowed to come and just go off on somebody about sometime like race, religion, being gay, ect that isn't remotely connected to any recent discussion, then the site becomes something else, something not even remotely connected to gambling.

Whatever rules or policies that you come up with, there will be someone that wants to test them and how far they can go, so thinking you are going to lay out a set of policies, won't work. You have to be prepared to look at each situation.

And now getting specific to this situation, when someone signs up with a handle, where the handle itself is an attack on another member it is a pretty good indicator he has only one intent and it isn't to contribute to this community. And when in his opening post he further tells you his intent, that should not be acceptable.

I think someone in charge, who ever that is, needs to decide what this site is. Is it a completely uncensored....anything goes, wild west, free-for-all about anything, even nothing related to any recent topic? in which case you should probably change the name. Or is it a gambling related site, where there is a little extra latitude to make your gambling related points and criticsisms?

 

to me this isn't even a tough call......and it's not even debateable.....

only 2 handles are guilty..........and they've each been given 20+ second chances yet they continue their behavior
enuff is enuff!

they continuously derail topics, flood the board, and follow other members aroudn the forum just to harrass them
I doubt you will find anyone on this board who will defend them.......

 

This suggestion just occurred to me, I haven't thought it through, but it seems almost elegant in its simplicity:

Pemit an attack of an IDEA, but prohibit ad himinem attacks against a PERSON.

Also, as I alluded to elsewhere, prohibit any attacks which contain or infer an attack on a federally protected class, i.e. an attack focusing upon another's

• Race – Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Color – Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Religion – Civil Rights Act of 1964
• National origin – Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Age (40 and over) – Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
• Sex – Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Civil Rights Act of 1964
• Pregnancy – Pregnancy Discrimination Act
• Citizenship – Immigration Reform and Control Act
• Familial status – Civil Rights Act of 1968 Title VIII: Housing cannot discriminate for having children, with an exception for senior housing
• Disability status – Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
• Veteran status – Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 and Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
• Genetic information – Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act

As for the trolls OAB and KJisGay: give em a warning, and if they misbehave show em the door.

No doubt they can find a skinhead site more to their liking.

 

That is a great idea. No sense in continuing to read the non-stop drivel from the 3 guys involved.

idpa

 

​

none of the above is necessary.......................because the "folks" in question is only 1 person and you can get rid of him because he continuously derails threads, floods the board, and follows other members around the forum just to harrass them...........

 

i SAY leave it wide open.....people can handle themselves and one day the real identity of the retards will comeout and they'll be screwed,

 

Interesting that the people of this forum love how it's free speech this, uncensored that, etc. but as soon as KJ gets attacked, everyone is up in arms that the poster isn't being censored.

Granted, if I ran the site, it'd be censored compared to the shit-flinging fest it currently is. The "WOV is dying" thread is basically all attacks. If that shit ain't censored, then neither should KJisGAY's posts or anyone else's. Not that I think the entire forum should be completely uncensored....but I think if some parts are censored while others are completely uncensored....well, that's worse than heavy censorship or "everything goes", as you're choosing what's OK and what's not OK.

TLDR: You can't have it both ways.

 

apparently ou can't read
no on'es complaining about being attacked................the issue is harrassing a member and following them around the board just to post things like "Fuck you pussy boy! Fuck you homo! Fuck you Jew!"

no one else on this forum does that except for one person..........

also if you really put that type of harrassment on the same level as a post that has a cogent argument and happens to say "beached whale" then you really are as stupid as I thought you were..........

 

also if you think the WizardofVegas is dying thread is "full of shit flinging" and "basically all attacks" then again you are as stupid as I thought you were...............

try reading it next time...................there is post after post of cogent arguments that describe the bias at WoV

we can't help it if your too dumb & unable to see it for yoursef.....................

 

Here's where I disagree with you RS. I am an AP, a professional blackjack player. The large majority of all my contributions on any site that I have participated on has been on or related to the topic of AP, blackjack or such. Now I am going to back track a moment to Norm's site (bare with me). This whole "feud", that has lead to me being here was about me expressing my opinion about un-credible claims being made on the topic of blackjack. Challenging someone's credibility about claims made on a specific topic, may seem harsh, but it is not personal. I believe as AP's and professional players that we have not only a right, but a responsibility to call out BS that is misleading and can be harmful to those that accept that nonsense. At times in the heat of 'feuding', statements made related to that credibility, may like seem like they are crossing over to personal attacks, but as long as they remain in that vein related to the credibility of claims made, it is not personal. That's what I tried to do. Maybe I wasn't always successful (as a matter of fact, I will go on record as saying on another site ZZ, my frustration got the best of me and brought out the worst in me). But at no time did I ever attack anyone on the basis of their race, or religion or sexual orientation or anything like that.

Now fast forward to WoV. Expressing my opinion on blackjack related topics, this same credibility issues of the same couple of people along with a negative opinion of the site involved and how the site owner (Qfit) handled the situation, resulted in me being banned at a second site, WoV. Sort of a domino effect, because of the relationship between the two site owners/administrators. But, this was all still very much on the topic of blackjack, blackjack claims made and the credibility of those claims. At no time did I have anything to say about anyone's race, religion or sexual orientation. Even words such as dishonest or liar, that may seem to be attacks referring to someone's honesty and integrity are not personal attacks if they on topic. Do you see the difference?

So fast forward again to here, where there is a long running thread criticizing WoV, Mike and other mods and members. I chose to join that thread and express my criticisms of WoV, Mike and Mike's handing of this specific situation which still is related to blackjack, so this is all still very much on topic. I am being critical of Mike's handling of a situation about a professional player expressing his opinion of credibility of claims made on the topic of blackjack. At no time did I attack Mike's religion, race, looks, family, children, or the fact that he is a breeder ( a little humor). Nothing personal. Other's may have during this thread....let's make that...others have. I am not responsible for that, and even condoned such personal attacks.

So no, I don't believe it is an everything or nothing situation. The recent attacks on my sexual orientation, including my marriage (wedding dress comments) have nothing even remotely to do with the topic being discussed which was related to and stemmed from, blackjack and claims blackjack claims made. Personal attacks of a race, religion, sexual orientation nature, completely unrelated to the topic of the discussion should not be tolerated.

 

Much of my previous post would have been better served as a private communication with RS, since it re-hashes history that he and I are familiar with and few other's care about. Sorry about that gang.

But the bottom line is there is a difference in attacks and criticisms. I do like the extra latitude in comments, even somewhat harsh comments if they are on or related to a topic. But just to have a barrage of personal attacks of someone completely unrelated to the topic is quite a bit different.

I am new here obviously. Management can do as they like, and it may draw people or repel them. But in my opinion, you can see what happens when a site is totally uncensored. There are a couple sites out there that went that route. Just spewing hate becomes old and tiresome and the sites dwindle to irrelevancy.

 

I think that the mods here should be able to see if the "bad language" is tied to a real contribution to the topic at hand.

The problem is that some people will make a very slight reference to a previous post, thereby in their mind giving them "safety" ...but then using the rest of their post to curse and bash a poster personally.

This "technicality" is what some people thrive on. You know something like this"I think you are off base in your last comment,...but you are a fucking pussy Jew and go eat bagels like the assfucker that you are"

That is a real response to a post "technically". But its really a veiled attempt to personally attack someone.

This leaves the mods in a tough spot. Then we are asking them to decide what is a worthwile rebuttal and what is a veiled attempt to make a serious comment when in effect all the person wants to do is issue racial or sexual slurs.

There is a difference between sarcastic humor and uncivilized attacks.

I think mods can tell the difference ....and can recognized civilized discourse vs uncivilized vulgarities

I like the method of breaking off posts to another area of the board to keep the thread clean. you are really erning your money in the time and effort that is taking lately.

The questin the mods have to ask themselves is...."is this thread being hijacked"....if it is,,then the comments get shuttled off...and eventually it ends.
Look what I did with OAB....he kept hijacking.....I kept ignoring.....and you kept shuttling off to another area......sooner or later he gets tired.

THats what needs to be done.....these people want a reaction. If you shuttle them off to their own section, and if the targets just shut the fuck up and leave them alone to themselves...then its just a thread of them talking to themselves.....

seeing you do your job, i didnt want to undo your work by encouraging the other person, so I just kept my mouth shut. I hope others see the success and follow suit