ForumGarden

Are we so, so, *so* frightened of stuff like that? A mere *echo* of a fart in a thunderstorm needs censure like *that*?

That's really bloody silly, isn't it.

Now, if *you're* going to censure *me* for saying "fart", or "bloody", and I wouldn't be *at all* surprised if someone *did*, then please censure all the other posters of at least 500 occurrences of "fart", to save me having to complain about them, and similarly innumerable occurences of the posting of the word "bloody", including some by current moderators.

Me.

Complaints were made, I acted, I directed it to the compost pile.

eta, Why did you think it was you that was being censored?

Jeez we've got some sensitive members. How can anybody take that stuff seriously?

:wah::wah::wah:

Bill Sikes;1239597 wrote: Are we so, so, *so* frightened of stuff like that? A mere *echo* of a fart in a thunderstorm needs censure like *that*?

That's really bloody silly, isn't it.

Now, if *you're* going to censure *me* for saying "fart", or "bloody", and I wouldn't be *at all* surprised if someone *did*, then please censure all the other posters of at least 500 occurrences of "fart", to save me having to complain about them, and similarly innumerable occurences of the posting of the word "bloody", including some by current moderators.


Frightened? No

Bored? Certainly

Willing to be a dumping ground for rubbish copied verbatim from other boards? No

Wanting to remain a family forum? Yes.

And who has ever suggested that members are censured for saying fart? Your last paragraph just makes a mockery of the whole post because it has no basis in reality.

abbey;1239600 wrote: Me.

Complaints were made, I acted, I directed it to the compost pile.

eta, Why did you think it was you that was being censored?


Well, what about the "My programme for a more masculine world" thread, also by the same poster? Anything with the town name "Scun thorpe" in it to kill? This is really ridiculous. FG will become useless and grind (if that's not too rude a word) to a halt.

I didn't say that I thought I was being censored at all. I wrote no such thing. I do not know why you even think I did.

Bryn Mawr;1239610 wrote: Frightened? No

Bored? Certainly

Willing to be a dumping ground for rubbish copied verbatim from other boards? No

Wanting to remain a family forum? Yes.

And who has ever suggested that members are censured for saying fart? Your last paragraph just makes a mockery of the whole post because it has no basis in reality.


This is hopeless.

Bored? FG contributors are able to make something out of such nothings, which can be the spark for fantastic contributions. I admire many contributors for their abilities.

People post stuff from elsewhere, not just "boards", all the time. Look at Coberst's contributions (and I am *not* complaining about them, just using them as an example of stuff copied from elsewhere), and many others.

Wanting to remain a family forum? Well, there's a lot more that can be chopped, then, isn't there.

My last paragraph of post #1 of this thread did not "suggest that members are censured for saying fart" (your words). Read it again, if you need to. It was quite obviously not intended to make a mockery of the whole post, and indeed it does not. It *does* make a mockery, though.

Bill Sikes;1239597 wrote: Are we so, so, *so* frightened of stuff like that? A mere *echo* of a fart in a thunderstorm needs censure like *that*?No, I intervened over a guy cross-posting a stack of stuff from sites from which he'd been thrown off, year after year, for intolerable idiocy. Or a guy cross-posting a stack of stuff he didn't write in the first place. Either way he can't carry on doing it.

spot;1239621 wrote: No, I intervened over a guy cross-posting a stack of stuff from sites from which he'd been thrown off, year after year, for intolerable idiocy. Or a guy cross-posting a stack of stuff he didn't write in the first place. Either way he can't carry on doing it.


Well technically he could, he's not banned.

spot;1239621 wrote: No, I intervened over a guy cross-posting a stack of stuff from sites from which he'd been thrown off, year after year, for intolerable idiocy. Or a guy cross-posting a stack of stuff he didn't write in the first place. Either way he can't carry on doing it.


Are you a moderator?

Do you complain about everyone who "cross-posts"[1] or posts stuff he didn't write?

[1] A strange and inappropriate application of a Usenet term to a "forum".

Bill Sikes;1239612 wrote: Well, what about the "My programme for a more masculine world" thread, also by the same poster? Anything with the town name "Scun thorpe" in it to kill? This is really ridiculous. FG will become useless and grind (if that's not too rude a word) to a halt.



I didn't say that I thought I was being censored at all. I wrote no such thing. I do not know why you even think I did.
I never was much good at reading between the lines.

buttercup;1239625 wrote: Well technically he could, he's not banned.


Technically I hope he sees sense. Someone likened him to Coberst which is completely unrelated. Coberst posts new original topics which he's written this week. He just happens to put them on a number of boards because each site gives so little feedback and he regards what he does as self-education, he values the feedback to his ideas. Jooma has got hooked on the thrill of shocking people and can't drop it.

I enjoy Joona's threads :-6

oscar;1239630 wrote: I enjoy Joona's threads :-6


No surprise there then.

spot;1239628 wrote: Someone likened him to Coberst which is completely unrelated.


No, Spot, *someone* (me) did *not* liken jooña to Coberst. It seems to me that you possibly have a very short memory and or rather selective reading ability. Try again.

oscar;1239630 wrote: I enjoy Joona's threads :-6What is it you enjoy about them?

Bill Sikes;1239634 wrote: No, Spot, *someone* (me) did *not* liken jooña to Coberst. It seems to me that you possibly have a very short memory and or rather selective reading ability. Try again.Are *you* not the one that is reading selectively?

Spot never said it was you that likened joona to coberst.

abbey;1239641 wrote: Are *you* not the one that is reading selectively?

Spot never said it was you.


No, I am not. Spot said "someone". The only possibility is me, isn't it. Is Spot a moderator? He hasn't answered my question yet, despite posting twice since then.

No spot isn't a mod.

abbey;1239645 wrote: No spot isn't a mod.


I do not support jooña's trolling in the least[1]. However, it is my opinion that posters should not harass others who have not actually been banned. Perhaps it's time to ban jooña, at least.



[1] However, the after-posts to posts like his, from "normal"[2] FG posters can sometimes be worthwhile.

[2] I do not of course mean to belittle FG posters by my use of punctuation.

Bill Sikes;1239634 wrote: No, Spot, *someone* (me) did *not* liken jooña to Coberst. It seems to me that you possibly have a very short memory and or rather selective reading ability. Try again.


What you wrote was "Look at Coberst's contributions (and I am *not* complaining about them, just using them as an example of stuff copied from elsewhere), and many others". We were discussing cross-posting from other sites (and I think it's a legitimate extension from Usenet when it's material authored by the same person dropped into different locations to generate different discussions). If you feel "Look at" in this context differs from "liken" then you're entitled but I don't understand the distinction you're trying to generate. Either you're inviting a comparison and saying the difference isn't significant or you're not.

You know perfectly well I'm not a moderator or you'd not have asked. I'm a member. I'm pointing out to other members that the site's hospitality is being (in my opinion) abused. I don't actually think joona wrote all those OPs but that's just my guess. Acknowledged copying may have a place on forums but what he's doing is (again in my opinion) unacceptable.

spot;1239649 wrote: I'm pointing out to other members that the site's hospitality is being (in my opinion) abused. I don't actually think joona wrote all those OPs but that's just my guess. Acknowledged copying may have a place on forums but what he's doing is (again in my opinion) unacceptable.


But its not a reason to ban him, what rule has he broken? Let's just move on, he's been discovered and is either going to keep on posting or not.

Its up to the members if they want to take his stuff serious or tell him he's a twat.

abbey;1239636 wrote: What is it you enjoy about them? Although some-what of a pythonesque nature, they are varied and thought provoking. :-6

buttercup;1239654 wrote: But its not a reason to ban him, what rule has he broken? Let's just move on, he's been discovered and is either going to keep on posting or not.

Its up to the members if they want to take his stuff serious or tell him he's a twat.


It's not even crossed my mind that he might be banned! Where do you get that from?

Bill Sikes;1239620 wrote: This is hopeless.

Bored? FG contributors are able to make something out of such nothings, which can be the spark for fantastic contributions. I admire many contributors for their abilities.

People post stuff from elsewhere, not just "boards", all the time. Look at Coberst's contributions (and I am *not* complaining about them, just using them as an example of stuff copied from elsewhere), and many others.

Wanting to remain a family forum? Well, there's a lot more that can be chopped, then, isn't there.

My last paragraph of post #1 of this thread did not "suggest that members are censured for saying fart" (your words). Read it again, if you need to. It was quite obviously not intended to make a mockery of the whole post, and indeed it does not. It *does* make a mockery, though.


I read your post quite well enough the first time thank you. It is quite clearly implicit in "I wouldn't be *at all* surprised if someone *did*" that you feel that such an action is par for the course here which is totally untrue.

Bill Sikes;1239644 wrote: No, I am not. Spot said "someone". The only possibility is me, isn't it. Is Spot a moderator? He hasn't answered my question yet, despite posting twice since then.


Why is the only possibility you? Are you the only one to make comments on this Forum?

Spot did not even suggest that the comment had been made in this thread - it could have been anywhere on the board at any time.

BTW, no-one is obliged to answer your questions - it is not a crime you know

buttercup;1239654 wrote: But its not a reason to ban him, what rule has he broken? Let's just move on, he's been discovered and is either going to keep on posting or not.

Its up to the members if they want to take his stuff serious or tell him he's a twat.


Has anyone suggested that we ban him? Apart from Bill, that is.

As far as I know it is not being contemplated as a serious option based on what has happened so far.

Sikes: My last paragraph of post #1 of this thread did not "suggest that members are censured for saying fart" (your words). Read it again, if you need to. It was quite obviously not intended to make a mockery of the whole post, and indeed it does not. It *does* make a mockery, though.

Bryn Mawr;1239663 wrote: I read your post quite well enough the first time thank you. It is quite clearly implicit in "I wouldn't be *at all* surprised if someone *did*" that you feel that such an action is par for the course here which is totally untrue.


I wonder. Are you being deliberately obtuse? To spell it out, it is not "quite clearly implicit that you feel that such an action is par for the course here". You have mistakenly interpreted my words as having such meaning. The real meaning is as I said, of course - referring to my particular post.

Bill Sikes;1239667 wrote: Sikes: My last paragraph of post #1 of this thread did not "suggest that members are censured for saying fart" (your words). Read it again, if you need to. It was quite obviously not intended to make a mockery of the whole post, and indeed it does not. It *does* make a mockery, though.



I wonder. Are you being deliberately obtuse? To spell it out, it is not "quite clearly implicit that you feel that such an action is par for the course here". You have mistakenly interpreted my words as having such meaning. The real meaning is as I said, of course - referring to my particular post.


Maybe I'm just thick then but I do not see a meaning beyond the interpretation I have given - if you don't expect it to happen then why suggest that it will?

Bryn Mawr;1239664 wrote: Why is the only possibility you? Are you the only one to make comments on this Forum?

Spot did not even suggest that the comment had been made in this thread - it could have been anywhere on the board at any time.


So suddenly you say that a post made in a particular context could in fact refer to any other context? That is, not to put too fine a point on it, crap, isn't it. I should have added, especially in view or Spot's own reply.

spot;1239660 wrote: It's not even crossed my mind that he might be banned! Where do you get that from?


Bryn Mawr;1239666 wrote: Has anyone suggested that we ban him? Apart from Bill, that is.

As far as I know it is not being contemplated as a serious option based on what has happened so far.


Ok then, what do you want done with him?

Bill Sikes;1239670 wrote: So suddenly you say that a post made in a particular context could in fact refer to any other context? That is, not to put too fine a point on it, crap, isn't it.


The statement that "somebody has likened" does *not* imply "in this thread" but "on this Forum" - that is the context of the comment and no, not crap at all or I would not have posted it.

Bryn Mawr;1239666 wrote: Has anyone suggested that we ban him? Apart from Bill, that is.

As far as I know it is not being contemplated as a serious option based on what has happened so far.


I would not ban him. I do not positively support him, though. However, I take a dim view of the machinations of others concerninging his posts.

Bryn Mawr;1239669 wrote: Maybe I'm just thick then but I do not see a meaning beyond the interpretation I have given - if you don't expect it to happen then why suggest that it will?


Perhaps you are thick, but I don't think so. You said "generally". I said "particularly".

buttercup;1239672 wrote: Ok then, what do you want done with him?


Just knock his head against another similar dense object.

Bill Sikes;1239676 wrote: Perhaps you are thick, but I don't think so. You said "generally". I said "particularly".


I cannot find either word in any post during the initial exchange - could you possibly point them out to me so that I can understand where you're coming from?

Bill Sikes;1239674 wrote: I would not ban him. I do not positively support him, though. However, I take a dim view of the machinations of others concerninging his posts.


I haven't machinated, I've slapped the sod.

Abbey didn't machinate either, she cleaned the front page so people accessing ForumGarden from work didn't have something embarrassing logged against their computer use. The thread's still intact for FG members but it's caged.

Bryn Mawr;1239680 wrote: I cannot find either word in any post during the initial exchange - could you possibly point them out to me so that I can understand where you're coming from?


Of course not. That's where your skill at reading comprehension comes in. Start again, at the beginning, tomorrow.

Bill Sikes;1239684 wrote: Of course not. That's where your skill at reading comprehension comes in. Start again, at the beginning, tomorrow.


OK, I will be plainer. I have not used the word generally anywhere in this thread and do not believe that I have implied that I am referring to a general situation. You did not refer to "my particular post" until after I had queried your meaning.

i think if hes going to post stuff like that he should at least answer the posts and they leave alot of his posts up ive been waiting for him to answer a few but he never does, he an envolope pusher who doesnt want involved after its posted, his oppinions are extreme of course some will be removed,i personally dont know why your offended,unless your him,then why not answer:D

well have fun:D

Bill Sikes;1239597 wrote: Now, if *you're* going to censure *me* for saying "fart", or "bloody", and I wouldn't be *at all* surprised if someone *did*, then please censure all the other posters of at least 500 occurrences of "fart", to save me having to complain about them, and similarly innumerable occurences of the posting of the word "bloody", including some by current moderators.


i understand what your saying here, but do you really believe that you would be censored for saying fart?thats not even close to the extremes of joonas posts?

Bryn Mawr;1239693 wrote: You did not refer to "my particular post" until after I had queried your meaning.


No. I thought it was self-evident, but obviously not. I have formed the opinion that this is now too convoluted, and will be too time-consuming to pursue.

Besides, what does it matter if Joona is copying and pasting from other forums if that is indeed what he is doing?

I do have other forums but I have not seen any of his posts else-where. This means that to myself and probably many others, I am seeing the threads for the first time here.... what's wrong with that?

oscar;1239915 wrote: Besides, what does it matter if Joona is copying and pasting from other forums if that is indeed what he is doing?

I do have other forums but I have not seen any of his posts else-where. This means that to myself and probably many others, I am seeing the threads for the first time here.... what's wrong with that?


Because the posts he is copying/pasting here aren't his to begin with. He is taking someone elses posts from their forums as his own and taking credit for them as though he had wrote them. No right IMO.

Mustang;1239917 wrote: Because the posts he is copying/pasting here aren't his to begin with. He is taking someone elses posts from their forums as his own and taking credit for them as though he had wrote them. No right IMO. Not right in your opinion? It would be interesting to see what other opinion is would it not?

Is using other forum material considered legal plagiarism?

I sure wish the only concern in the world that I had was a stupidass troll on a forum. Why do you people even argue about this? Nothing better to do? Read his sh1t or ignore it... move on already!

I'm to the point where I don't even understand why mods defend themselves either. You're in a position where you have to do a "job" .. so do it, screw the questions, let em take it to Tombstone if it so seriously disrupts their life.

This place has gotten completely out of fkn hand

almostfamous;1239929 wrote: I sure wish the only concern in the world that I had was a stupidass troll on a forum. Why do you people even argue about this? Nothing better to do? Read his sh1t or ignore it... move on already!



I'm to the point where I don't even understand why mods defend themselves either. You're in a position where you have to do a "job" .. so do it, screw the questions, let em take it to Tombstone if it so seriously disrupts their life.



This place has gotten completely out of fkn hand
Out of fkn hand on a self abuse thread....I get it...

oscar;1239925 wrote: Is using other forum material considered legal plagiarism?Obviously not. It's simply a matter of etiquette. And I've not said he didn't write them. Whether he did or he didn't, either way it's bad form.

oscar;1239925 wrote: Not right in your opinion? It would be interesting to see what other opinion is would it not?

Is using other forum material considered legal plagiarism?


Certainly considered breach of copyright without permission.

spot;1240032 wrote: Obviously not. It's simply a matter of etiquette. And I've not said he didn't write them. Whether he did or he didn't, either way it's bad form. Where did I say that you had said or even Implied that you said he did not write them?

One merely enquired to Mustang If the practice of copying and pasting from other forums was legal plagiarism. A curious enquirey nothing more.

oscar;1240151 wrote: Where did I say that you had said or even Implied that you said he did not write them?One can scarcely plagiarize oneself, oscar. "Is using other forum material considered legal plagiarism" relates to copying other people's original text, it can't possibly mean copying one's own.

My point was that whether he plagiarized or whether he merely copied his own years-old posts from elsewhere onto FG it's a breach of forum etiquette. The one lacks attribution, the other lacks sanity.