A lack of moderaters in offtopic?

[TrailblazingScot]

Last night, Calgacus decided first to post inappropriate images in the "Babe Thread X" and then in response to the disapproval of posters decided to create a thread called "Anti-babe thread" .


In the "Anti-Babe Thread" no action has been taken by moderatiors and I have I clearly stated on several occasions the problems with the material posted (some removed as posters have realised they went too far, but it still happened) and what action should be taken.

Considering that for quite some time last night on off-topic it was the fastest moving thread as well as the one with the most vile content (to my knowledge) and surely caused a storm of reports, no moderator action or acknowledgement has occured.


Quite frankly off-topic hasn't enough moderaters and so for considerable periods of time the forum rules can be subverted or plain ignored.

I hope to see strong action taken with regard to the actions of at least two posters (mr "Deleted, oh well" is a GREAT candidate) from last night and some action taken to improve the level of supervision of off-topic as at present it is quite inadequate.


P.S All of the images posted by PantheraTigris2 last night, he has the good sense to have deleted before any of our nomadic moderators happened to wander through.

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Report posts if you want to complain, and Lefty and I are more than enough.

 

[Pangur Bán]

kittenOFchaos, I object to your attempt to be a dictator of aesthetic standards and usurp the role of the mods. You're cynically trying to make the Anti-Babe thread a moderating issue to get your way. The person in question deleted those pictures within minutes. The thread didn't violate any forum rules. It's simply wrong to attack the moderating of OT for this. I'm only surprised that no-one else has castigated you for this cynical attempt at manipulation.

The anti-babe thread would have been fine if it weren't for some individual posters.

I've got to say, I'm disappointed it was deleted, although I acknowledge the right of the mods to do so.

 

[CurtSibling]

'Nomadic Moderators'

Mr Kitten, you display a high level of lip to the Mods!

Perhaps you will be the one who is banned!

 

[Aphex_Twin]

Nah... he just wants to be a mod too. I can't imagine what would drive a person to do that though... :crazyeyes:

 

[Zwelgje]

It's good to see that in the time I was away nothing changed really, still those whining about moderator-threads.....

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Originally posted by Aphex_Twin
Nah... he just wants to be a mod too. I can't imagine what would drive a person to do that though... :crazyeyes:

The day I become a mod, the day Satan goes to work on a skido.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Originally posted by CurtSibling
'Nomadic Moderators'

Mr Kitten, you display a high level of lip to the Mods!

Perhaps you will be the one who is banned!

In your dreams, buddy.

Anyhow you went on record in that thread to agree with me

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Originally posted by Zwelgje
It's good to see that in the time I was away nothing changed really, still those whining about moderator-threads.....

Not at all.

The moderators made the right decision when they saw the thread I had a problem with.


The question was were there enough on duty to cover all the material that is put up quickly enough. To a certain extend self-moderation worked as posters denounced the material put up by PantheraTigris2 as pornographic and he removed it. But not so quick that my innocent eyes avoided offense. + Think about the children!

 

[Pangur Bán]

In fairness to PantheraTigris2, it wasn't that obvious that the photos were pornographic. The women were so flabby that there might have been a G-string.

 

[china444]

Cal, it is a bit disrespectful to make a thread like that. I mean what is the use of that thread, besides humiliating fat women and laughing at them. I mean, attractive babes are what most want to see, in terms of looks, so just go to the babe thread.

Anyway, beauty depends on personality. So, degrading these induviduals is worth a ban, just like it would be to any CFC member.

 

[Pangur Bán]

It doesn't "humiliate" them at all. It's only "humiliating" if their appearance is regarded as bad in the first place. That's not the way I regard it. I've made this point several times, and, to be honest, I'm getting a bit sick of it. Besides, I've already justified the thread inside the thread.

Anyway, it can hardly humiliate them if they don't view the thread. I can tell you with certainty that, they ain't going to view it. If there is any humiliation or degrading on the Off-topic forum, it'd come from women in general for both the Babe and Anti-Babe threads equally.

Lets face it, arguments are not going to get anyone anywhere on this matter. There is no moral gap between both threads. You either like it, or you don't; you either think that it's acceptable to look at exposed women, or you don't. Those are the important issues. Almost everyone on CFC seems to think that it is acceptable to view exposed women. However, most posters want to look at the babe thread, but not at the anti-babe thread. Hence, the only issue is taste.

Don't try to tell me I was in the wrong, 'cause it just doesn't work. Either both threads are acceptable, or neither are.

 

[jack merchant]

The issue isn't whether or not it is acceptable to look at exposed women - instead, the issue is if it is acceptable to post pictures of women that are not in any generally understood or accepted way remotely 'babes' in a thread that is dedicated to 'babes'.
People's tastes are different, of course. But the particular picture Calgacus posted in the babe thread can not by any stretch of the imagination be considered to be suitable for that thread - unless you want to be really obtuse .

I have no opinion about the anti-babe thread. I had a hunch what kind of stuff might be in there and I didn't want to go look. Thus, my delicate eyes have avoided offense

 

[anarres]

calgacus is either turned on by larger women, or he was making a point about male attitudes towards the attractiveness of women.

Whichever one it was, it's not really a bannable offense.

 

[Archer 007]

I say lay off on the guy a little and lets judge him on his future actions, but remember this as a warning if his posting turns south.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by archer_007
but remember this as a warning if his posting turns south.

What?

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by calgacus
What?

It appears that you have acquired a 'fan club'. What do you expect to happen when you post for the obvious purpose (among others) of irritating other posters.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola

It appears that you have acquired a 'fan club'. What do you expect to happen when you post for the obvious purpose (among others) of irritating other posters.

Well, if a lynch mob can be called a fan-club.

That wasn't its purpose, even if that's how things transpired

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Few are not going to believe that were were not consciously using an (large) irritation factor to increase interest and controversy in your thread.

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
In your dreams, buddy.

You always are, cupcake!

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
Anyhow you went on record in that thread to agree with me

Even Hitler and Stalin were allied for a while!