Quote:
Originally posted by damasa
This isn't an attack so don't take it as such. But who or what gives you the authority to say what is right or wrong on this site? John runs the site, John pays for the site, so to sum, John says what does and does not go. Since John does pay for this site, and I don't see any of us paying a membership fee, I think he is entitled to handle the site in a manner in which he sees fit.
I don't much agree in banning people, even those that I do not care for. UF pike was the ultimate exception. Just the way he talked and acted toward some of the female members should have had him banned. But he was given chances, and still kept at it. That is how he was banned in the end. Only to come back again, still given more chances and when those were gone, he was banned again. ONLY to come back a third time, I think we see the pattern here.
In all, John makes the final decision in everything.
|
Good point, Blaine. I'm not telling people whats right and whats wrong. The rules are simple and clear cut. I just think there's a weak stance behind the rules of the site. If some rules apply to some people but not to others, then maybe the terms of agreement should be changed and reworded to appropriately fit the acceptable code of conduct on GC. It doesn't make sense to say one thing but mean another, right? I think the current rules are just a cop out and a way of justification for getting rid of people or deleting certain members posts and that if you get in good with certain crowds on GC you have somewhat of a free for all to a certain extent. And it sucks. It's not fair. ZetaAce has posted the code of contact and rules of the site far more than I can remember, time and time again I see how many of people here ( no names) dodge repremandation or don't have anything said to them publicly. I kinda get the feeling that some people think it's about UFpike-IMthechamp-theV's or other previous trouble makers, but it's not. It's about the image we portray to non-regulars, lurkers and visitors to the site. What does that say about us? In this thread itself I meant to actually talk about this issue seriously. Still there are many who are far from any serious conversation in their replies, moderators included. And since a lot of mods are the ones responding in this thread I guess I could take this time to throw in my .02 cents on how some moderators make the others look bad.
Mods are supposed to be serious, they are on a different level from the regular GC user. With greater power comes a different level of responsiblity and thus a different level of appropriate behavior is called into play. You don't see Zeta Ace, IowaHawkeye, bucutie, Amycat, most recently James, OTW and a few others pulling some of the stuff that other no-named mods pull. Why, may you ask? Because they understand that people on the site actually look to them for many different things and in the process take them seriously. Again, it's not just some mods who get away with a lot of stuff but it is also quite a few regular users. All I'm saying is that a lot of crapp on the chit-chat forum that has been going on is making the rest of GC look bad and since a lot of you know each other and have actually met one another, do you not care what others think of you? Sure you can say it's just the internet but many people look at this as real life, I can name a few users and mods who have said publicly that GC and/or certain people on this site have affected their life or the life of their friends. At the same time some of those people and/or mods are the very reason for this thread. Each and every one of us is apart of this site, all I'm hoping for is that some people clean up their act a little bit and everyone be treated the same.