*ban

volumptuous cannot be banned because star accounts are immune to banination - ignoring ban request by blankfist.

While I agree with you in spirit, how do you reccomend we rid those who disagree with us?

*fist

It's so annoying, now. Everyone's trying to get each other banned. Some people are probably looking for an excuse to destroy joedirt the moment he does something wrong.

The Siftquisitions never seem to solve anything that couldn't be solved privately. I think that only admins should be allowed to call for Siftquisitions, and only for gross transgressions of the rules of Aaron McDonald proportions. In their current state, they're not much more than Internet lynch mobs.

What you're suggesting is far worse than the ugly, yet necessary process of Siftquisition. Sending little "notes" and back channel pm snitching to admins so they can ban people without any community involvement ... it doesn't work. It is completely not what this site is about. This site is built on 100% community participation, which includes users being banned.
You would wind up with just as much public outcry and sift talk posts saying WHY WAS SO AND SO BANNED?!!
The public nature and ugliness of it would not go away.

*discuss

I demand we examine this "volumptuous" character and find out why they are afraid of the Spanish Siftquisition.

I hereby summon a tribunal for a formal siftquistion to get to the bottom of why volumptuous is allowed to speak of such blasphemy.

Hey how do we get this on the main page. I personally think all SiftTalks should have been on the main page, especially ones like this that deal with policy.

>> ^joedirt:
Hey how do we get this on the main page. I personally think all SiftTalks should have been on the main page, especially ones like this that deal with policy.


Why don't you discard it and repost it yourself?

>> ^burdturgler:
What you're suggesting is far worse than the ugly, yet necessary process of Siftquisition. Sending little "notes" and back channel pm snitching to admins so they can ban people without any community involvement ... it doesn't work. It is completely not what this site is about. This site is built on 100% community participation, which includes users being banned.
You would wind up with just as much public outcry and sift talk posts saying WHY WAS SO AND SO BANNED?!!
The public nature and ugliness of it would not go away.



Well your "little notes" and "back channel snitching" concepts seem to be straw men to me. While I don't have nearly as much history with Da Sift, I'll have to disagree with the idea that there would suddenly be a slew of people trying to get eachother banned, just because it could be done privately (which it still can today, without the public siftquisitions.)

Maybe I haven't been around long enough to see these siftquisitions happening with any regularity, but even from my brief yet awesome experience, this is the first I've seen of it, and not only has it gotten ever uglier, but also more frequent.

And the "why was so and so banned" idea would also probably not happen with the vast majority of us "outsider" users, as we aren't on the inside of any cliques or friendships that many of you have, and wouldn't even notice if say a "mxxcon" or "evilspongebob" was banned.


[edit] btw: how is a private note to an admin, not "community participation"? If I call the police on my neighbor for using a power-tool at 4AM in his yard, is that not "community participation"? Should I call a town hall meeting to discuss what my neighbor is doing, or simply let the authorities know that he's breaking the rules?

hmmm!!!!

I didn't say there would be an increase in the number of people trying to get anyone banned.

Private notes aren't community in this sense, because ... the community is removed from involvement in the member's being banned, which is what you're suggesting and what I think is bad for this site.

Yes, there are rare cases when dag or lucky or some other member with instaban powers have stepped in an outright banned someone for violating the rules, but the majority of cases are dealt with by the community, and that's how it should be.

Some people don't want to be involved in that, they don't have to be.

And do you honestly think that if CP420 was banned by an admin, without any public involvement, that there wouldn't have been sift talk posts made about it? You noticed CP420's ban and made this post about it.

Umm.. Maybe it isn't obvious to you, but if someone does that, they LOSE ALL THE COMMENTS, so no, I don't think that way is a good idea. In fact the comments are more important then the little sifttalk original submission.

>> ^blankfist:
>> ^joedirt:
Hey how do we get this on the main page. I personally think all SiftTalks should have been on the main page, especially ones like this that deal with policy.

Why don't you discard it and repost it yourself?

>> ^joedirt:
Umm.. Maybe it isn't obvious to you, but if someone does that, they LOSE ALL THE COMMENTS, so no, I don't think that way is a good idea. In fact the comments are more important then the little sifttalk original submission.

Hey mister loose logic, I think you failed to realize my Talk Post also had comments when you discarded it. But, I understand. Narcissism has a way of revising one's own history.

Can't you guys work this out in the bedroom? Angry sex can do wonders.

The public discussion on cp420's bigotry and bait-and-switch tactics was healthy. Communication, in general, is a good thing, and a siftquisition gives you a say. Taking this away would mean quiet admin bans in the dark of night. Would you have preferred cp420 to have been mysteriously disappeared?

I actually trust and like Dag and Lucky quite a bit, so it would not be a big deal to me, but it would deny the choggies and cp420's of VS the ability to publicly defend themselves.

This post, for instance, is a good topic, and it would suck if some arbitrary decision in the past denied you your right to say it.

my 2 cents

^ but CP420's supposed "bigotry" was nothing but pure, unadulterated troll-ery. Just because some were offended, doesn't mean it wasn't (over the top) sarcasm the entire time. (There's that pesky fine-line between walking on eggshells to not offend the pearl clutchers, and enjoying some ripping sarcastic humor.)

So I don't see how much "good" it does to discuss something that doesn't even exist.

Although the bait-and-switch of his renaming the title of the stupid Cheney video, while not a big deal, does break some rules.

But in regards to banning; if the only instance where people were banned was due to - you guessed it - not following the rules, then what's the difference whether they're banned in the public square or in that "dark of night" you talk about? I would assume that if someone was banned without a public flogging, the admins had a very good reason.

It all seems so cut-n-dry, without the public embarassments and the mob-like gang-ups on some members.

Because we're a family, and we're not perfect, but we don't hide it. You're being unfair to the community, assuming it has no say in these matters, unfair to dag and lucky to ask them to just rule over all over us, and shortsighted in assuming this would solve or change anything.

>> ^volumptuous:
^ but CP420's supposed "bigotry" was nothing but pure, unadulterated troll-ery. Just because some were offended, doesn't mean it wasn't (over the top) sarcasm the entire time.

We established long ago that this is not the case. Please stop defending him.

THIS THREAD IS NOTHING BUT BIGOTRY

My heavens!

^Yeah, cp420 is a straight up bigot. If he is actually a trolling liberal trying to make Republicans look backwards and ignorant, then his bannination should be considered a victory badge.

I think part of the problem here is that it is more culturally acceptable to hate on gays and Muslims. If he'd aimed those comments at African Americans or Jews, he would have been banned for life, and no one would defend him.

Anyone who joins in the current anti-gay hate brigade deserves severe public humiliation at the very least. I'm proud of this community for putting its foot down.

We are berticus.

I am berticus. [long pause]

No seriously, I am berticus.

yes! thank you volumptuous, i'll second your notion to ban siftquisitions. the system of "law" here is rooted in the word "inquisition" for god sakes.

the people conducting siftquisitions are the the same type of people who have been burning people at the stake for the last 10,000 years--only difference is now they do it on internet web forums. i do not consider that "progress".

new methods, but still the same, terrible, people.

I'm sorry, did you have a suggestion on how to improve things? Or just downvotes and bullshit?

^i believe "banning siftquisitions" is a suggestion on how to improve things.

when you are really stupid, i can see how it would be hard to distinguish between "a pile of cow sh*t" and "suggestions". i guess thats probably why you want to ban everyone?

by the way, i'm allowed to call you "stupid" right? since you already called me a "homophobic bigot" today?

lol Yes I am stupid. I should ban myself for being so stupid honestly.
Although I see you've childishly downvoted all my comments, even the two volumptuous upvoted, I wish you the best of luck in whatever it is you're trying to accomplish here. Hopefully tomorrow we can live in a world where no one breaks the rules, people can treat each other with respect and no mean ugly siftquisitions have to be posted. Sweet dreams.

^sorry to break it to you, but you'll never see that world because it doesn't look like that world will ever exist through your eyes. at least i can go away on vacation--you however, can never escape yourself.

i've already seen with my eyes what you can only dream about...

ahem. auto-ignore. no more siftquisitions. just vanishing trolls.

alternatively, we could just ask a few questions when new users sign up. like "how do you resolve conflicts in the work place" users with answers like "try to get them fired" will be flagged and sent to a special "videosoft" where everything is surrounded in protective bubbles and all words such as "gay" "stupid" "black" and "barbara streisand" are replaced with the word "rainbows"

Or you could just go back to YouTube.

oh the downvotes! Oh ... they're just killing me!
I may never make a comment again!
<cry>

Man, I keep seeing "banning everyone" being banded about like it's fact. How the fuck is one person being dealt with after nearly a year of bullshit and bigotry all of a sudden turning into everyone getting banned? There are a lot of douches around, a lot of people think i'm one. That's ok. I'm not gonna get banned unless I repetitively break the rules and neither are the rest of us. This has been a long time coming, it's not an overreaction. The amateur dramatics of people saying this place is turning into a police state when we're discussing one individual case is becoming laughable.

Time to move on now

imstellar, will you ever stop resorting to calling people stupid just because they don't agree with your book-read point's of view. You do realise it has the exact same effect as the accusation, do you?

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUT

^Oh, he's an Ayn Rand fan. Well that explains a lot, now, doesn't it.

Objectivists (who are about as far from objectivity as you can get) are a kooky and delusional lot. It's a pseudo-philosophy that promotes the virtues of being selfish. According to Rand, if we are all selfish and only look out for ourselves, we will all be architects and railroad tycoons.

Hopefully imsteller is still a college student, and will grow out of this phase in a year or two. Truth be told, I spent an entire summer thinking I was Howard Rourke, but I eventually realized that living a life of selfishness and indifference is just sad and that objectivism was beyond stupid. If he's over 30 and still buys into this crap, then I'm afraid he's intellectually doomed.

Anyway, the point is, that this 'philosophy' is actually more of a cult, and you know how cult members will dig in their heals when challenged. So, argue with him all you like, but you'll only be going in circles.

There is to much bullshit in here, to much arguing and tribalism.

This thread went from being about siftquisitions to being about this unspoken... or outspoken disgust with imstellar.

Well if we are going to screw this whole thread up, i suppose ill Godwin it! Siftquisitions are just like Nazi Tribunals.

What we do need to worry about is the Rule By Rabble majority, and the deft but introverted backroom tribalism.

For Example: If I had done something, in violation of the rules, or used one to many fuck words in the Kennedy Center. The majority would rule, that I had violated the one to many fuck rule. In this case the majority would be correct, however had I been a minority like imstellar, and or the originial poster (which minority I do belong to at the moment) the majority may be out to get them Hypothetically.

What I mean is both back room, under the table banishment and public get a rope siftquisitions are in need of re tooling.

While most people are in effect attempting to be banned, there will come a case where some one is innocently hanged by the Colosseum audience.

I'm looking forward to that case, I think it would be intrepid.

At this rate we should start a b& pool, wagering promotes. (Like an office dead pool.)

I am now returning to my indifference.

Redacted, Its a waste of space.

I have never been that comfortable with the very word Siftquisition (who started this btw?). Clearly there's a process for sorting out no-stars who clearly violate the rules and we can very quickly ban them. For starred accounts obviously someone has to decide but hoping some sort of reasonable consensus emerges from these gatherings is surely prone to mishaps.
From what I gather most sites/forums have admins/moderators who call the shots. This should be the case here and a clear process defined for dealing with offenders. It might seem tempting, nay logical, for the "community" to deal with everything but some of the old school ways of doing things can still be appropriate.

And I really would rather read more interesting posts than people slinging mud at each other, as has happened in this very post.

this thread is classic.

I don't know who this srazy fellow is, but he sounds like an asshole.

[Edit: Thanks for changing your comment and making me look like a fool, NordlichReiter. ]

It seems that the siftquisitions have an almost palpable intent to inflame the situation to back the attacked individual into a corner. Then it's kill or be killed and they come out swinging like never before, which makes everyone even madder so they all feel even more happy about banning someone or at least running them out of town torches and pitchforks in chase.

I'll admit that such celebrations of mob justice do on occasion make us in the minority a tad nervous about what we say or more accurately how we say it. People get way too sensitive these days.

On the other hand, it is pretty rare at least, and in a number of cases that I've seen, "the witch" was a witch. <torches>

^ It is really rare, I think that's the point. People are getting up in arms about something that nearly never happens.


"ps: How do I know there's cliques here?

Well, a lot of us reach new stars/crowns etc and never have a "CONGRATS TO ____" thread. We just are rewarded silently and privately by Mr.Sifty, and go about our business"

@volumptuous

I just saw this on the other thread. I know you don't care and you're not asking to be "rewarded" for your achievements here. I just wanted to mention something though.
I specifically remember congratulating you on your bronze or silver star, not sure which. And I believe the reason i noticed is because at the time you were making a lot of comment contribution and I saw you about. I really don't think that the congratulatory posts have anything at all to do with cliques. It's just people who are out and about more on the sift are easier to notice when you see them with different coloured stars aginst their names. I really hate to feel that you think it's a clique issue, because I truly believe it is not.

Not saying it isn't cliquey around here, it is. But not in a bad way. No-one would shun anyone, it's not a playground and we're not nasty little kids. We probably just have way more to say for ourselves, are more attention loving etc. than others.

And I wanted to do this earlier and give you a *quality for saying what you mean and meaning what you say, the whole point of any of these posts should be to have healthy debates, we don't have to agree

Awarding volumptuous with one star point for this contribution to Sift Talk - declared quality by alien_concept.

^ btw: I'm gonna eat the hell out of your icon in two days. (sans chapeau)

And this thread is great, I'm so happy I'm an asshole enough to start it. Watching a load of people I don't know, attack eachother, is out-of-this-world awesomezzz!11!!


ps: I was a member of a music forum for about five years, but over time, a large clique emerged from ppl who knew eachother IRL. They invited more and more of their RL friends aboard, who in turn, ganged up on other members who weren't quite as "popular" or "cool" as the big gang. Not only did members end up leaving in droves, but others started getting viciously attacked for mostly no-good-reasons a 'tall.

I was one who was backed into a corner, forced to defend myself, but then ended up unsubscribing entirely.

One has to watch out for that kind of behavior. Group-think and cliques can destroy a community that once had good motives.

^When you see this happening, be sure to start another sift talk won't you!

In the meantime how about you drop your baggage you've brought with you from being bullied in other forums and start afresh ya fuckin emo

Siftquisitions are a mixture of the holocaust, 9/11 and the musical career of David Hasselhoff.

volumptuous and anyone else who has not received a congratulatory post,

Why not make one yourself? Why not create your own groups of friends? You don't have to live under the thumb of the dominant sifters of the present. Make your own sift culture. Take over. That's how it's supposed to work. I'll even promise right here and now not to complain when you do. And, I sure as fuck won't wax rhapsodic about 'the good old days' when the next generation of sifters takes over. Take some initiative.

(rolls for initiative)

If we never have the Airing of Grievances, how are we ever supposed to have the Feats of Strength?

>> ^Sarzy:
I don't know who this srazy fellow is, but he sounds like an asshole.
[Edit: Thanks for changing your comment and making me look like a fool, NordlichReiter. ]



Feel free to shop my avatar in revenge! I look forward to a thorough shopping of my kitty.

perhaps its time for some SEXUAL HEALING

^I call top.

If you want a congratulatory post of some sort, you have to make an impact on some other user, so that they will make it for you. Some do it by controversial videos, some do it by good comments, and I imagine there are other ways. The more you make an impression, the more likely it is.

Sure there are some cliques here, but I don't think we're completely circle-jerking cliques like they usually are in the schoolyards. There are some natural groupings, where like minded people tend to gather, but other than that, I don't think there are any firmer than that, apart from the occasional couple.

I say we lead the inept across the high pass of Cirith Ungol, above Minas Morgul, and let Shelob make a feast of them.

I could lead them, I take unwanted puppies up there every month.