Sigh.
Originally said by KisgRCL: CHAPTER ONE: "the erudition"
Richard sucks up, by making the most salient point possible: there are, in fact, rules to the site! and they're even enforced!!! Never mind that this ignores the actual point; strawmanning has always been an effective way of throwing an argument.
Lost me a little. The actual point IS rules/bans etc. the thread title IS a sarcastic "There are no GreekChat rules". The 1st post IS about breaking of rules and bans. As my post said "... <Administrator quote> we don't even enforce some of the rules strictly since this is a site for adults which is taken into consideration", which I posted to explain my point not every rule must be enforced to the nth degree at all times to make for a happy community when it's mainly adults there.
CHAPTER TWO: "the sermon"
Richard proceeds to ask Rudey to keep the dirty laundry behind closed doors - which is exactly the opposite of how a mature community handles things
No KsigRC, a mature community brings it up at the appropriate opportunity and place. As opposed to a thinly veiled post in this thread, another post in the Random thread etc etc. It's been said by the GC admin staff (mods etc) that contacting them directly is most appropriate for this sorta thing. Even if it was brought up here though it could have been done without: describing specific people so we could all tell who the thread had been started about?
- and then accuses the vast majority of members of being hypocritical in their attacks on certain posters, using a tired cliche and setting the irony meter into the red zone.
No 'he' does not accuse the vast majority of members of anything. I used the word many to just state that no doubt lots of members at one point or another post stuff which could be technically against a rule. No doubt I do/have. I also used the word many as I was being vague since I didn't want to go listing names as I didn't want to single people out unkindly and unecessarily.
CHAPTER THREE: "the false prophet"
We then move into the "solutions that wouldn't really work" portion of the presentation. Here he discusses things that work at other sites, but doesn't apply them to the situation at hand (which, in Richard's defense, was never made clear for the masses).
Hmm, you have missed the point I was making there (another reason why such a supposed translation offends me - that & that it's a mildly hurtful thing to do). I was commenting on the WIDER point made by the thread that all the GC "staff" can do is ban a user - for that user to just re-register (referred to as churning in 1st post). There's all sorts of options for the site administrators and I was just pointing something out and suggesting that the first post was flawed in its suggestion "churning" was the only option; and that getting cocky would not do people any favors.
---
P.S GeekyPenguin, I got what you meant just fine first time
.