formal motion to ban

[JediTricks]

If they never come back, so be it. But if they do want to come back and maybe actually contribute, I say we don't let anything stop them.

I agree, and therein lies the catch-22 of banning them: if they are only out for shenanigans and have already been thwarted, they won't be interested in coming back; yet if they do want to contribute something of merit to our forums later, then they would no longer be worthy of banishment.

I am fine with having an open forum. But, we do not need that kind of self-indulgent prickery.

Are you saying you've never engaged in any sort of self-indulgent silliness on these forums, and that you're not capable of doing so? It's a forum about a kids toy line, some cartoons and video games and comic books, I would hate to think we should take ourselves too seriously.

Wouldn't JT ultimately have to make the call?

Yes, but I try to make these sorts of calls based on forum membership input.

Gotta say I'm with Dom on this one. They're spammers who aren't going to contribute anything worthwhile to this community, and they're probably never coming back again anyway. It would be different if they showed up, made a few posts and THEN voted for Erector. Well, maybe not even then...

That's the catch-22 I mentioned above. If nothing else, I'll definitely implement some filter to the voting next year, a requirement of X-many posts (I won't decide how many now so as not to give it away for potential cheaters next year).

Motion for a roll-call vote.

We don't really need to force people to weigh in on this if they don't want to. This sort of thread is advising me on these things. I could set it up alternately so that there is public voting, that system is built into the forums software, but I find it to be just as overly-swayable by groupthink and emotional reactionaryism as that which brought those 7 folks here in the first place.

Before that happens, if any of you new folks are still around, let me at least pose some legitimate questions.

Why do you like Erector? Is he a character that inspired you somehow? Was he the coolest TF you owned as a kid, or maybe your first? Was he special to you somehow? Do you even know his function? His REAL function.

That's what this Hall of Fame vote is about. A chance to make an official recognition of what you love about Transformers. I dig toilet humor as much as the next guy, but to turn this whole process into a chance to show how immature you are is damned insulting to everyone else here, and to everyone taking the time to cast a legitimate vote.

That's a more constructive way to address the issue, to confront the "offenders" and have a real discussion about it.

And no, what they're doing *isn't* worse than what Synjo (or even Deathy) is doing. They came in and voted joke votes in a poll. That is all. They're not insulting us. They're not ruthlessly spamming with Prozac ads or anything like that. And, honestly, they're probably not going to even be here to defend themselves or their actions.

I would disagree that their actions weren't insulting to our community, they were in a way an insult to our group's integrity, and they abused our openness for a silly selfish reason. But that's still, as you said, a pretty small offense compared to some of the worse offenses out there, and we've tackled all of those so far without becoming heavy-handed.

We've all done our share of dumb things in the past. Just at the various BWTFs alone, I can recall that 86 used to post with terrible spelling, grammar, no punctuation, and didn't use two line breaks--until I told him, hey, knock that shit off, and uh...somehow he did. Once I put the entire lyrics to some song or other in my signature, making it take up an entire page (even at the smallest text setting). BWTF used to let you set your text colour and some people would use the most annoying shade of bright green. And sometimes, people voted in polls with joke votes.*

You're taking it way too seriously, Dom. What they did was (a little) messed up, but we already discredited the votes, told them not to do that, and made it known that we don't appreciate that kind of behaviour. A ban is not warranted in this case. What you're calling for is practically a public lynching. I don't think we need that; I think what we've already done is enough.

One thing I've always liked about the attitude we have here is that we *aren't* the kind of place to resort to moderative or administrative action to deal with our minor social issues. When we have a problem here, we talk it out using our words and our minds. We don't just go, "I don't like your opinion or that you posted this, so I'm going to close the thread and suspend you for a week. And also, your mother is a whore and I fucked her dirty twat with my fat cock last night." There are many places where that kind of thing isn't just the norm--it's expected. I used to run a forum that ran like that, and I was actually more or less the main reason it got that attitude in the first place. And then I realized I didn't like that attitude and I left--and that forum still carries on that attitude to this day. I have seen members of that forum *banned* because they posted questions asking for help in the 'wrong section of the forum.' I have seen member accounts deactivated or deleted because they "didn't have enough posts" or "don't contribute enough" and the more I see it, the more and more it makes me sick.

I don't want this place to be like that. We had a problem with the words and actions of these new members, and we already discredited their votes and I think you alone have done enough verbal beration for the rest of us. We don't need to ban them. They're already not coming back.

*I couldn't find a way to work this in to the earlier bit but I also wanted to mention that we're the only board I've seen so far where we even have a chance for someone to vote for Erector as a final vote. TFW and several other forums are running it that you simply nominated a TF to end up in a much more simple final poll, and to me that's a lot more restrictive. Here, someone like Barricade might actually have a chance.

All of this is very well said.

I see what you are saying about not wanting the boards to be over-moderated. And, I agree in principle. Nobody wants this place to turn into YoJoe.com, where deviations from the orthodoxy get deleted and occassionally get users banned/suspended. (Even if you agree with the orthodoxy of the board, conversations are still limited.)

But, this is not about how they voted, it is *why* they voted the way they did. You and I disagree about which characters should make Hasbro's cut. You and I think that Barricade and Lockdown should make the cut, with less difference between the reasoning than one might expect. (We both recognize that newer characters can have staying power.) You happen to like Prowl, I happen to support Mirage. Our reasoning there differes a bit. But, in neither case is it "wouldn't it be wacky if if....".

The "boost Erector" vote is an attempt to put a minor character, based on a forgettable toy from a low point in the frachise's history, over....because he name is an unintentional dick joke. This is more obnoxious than Willis putting Dinobot over. As much of a glam-whoring drama queen as Willis can be, he legitimately likes Dinobot. And, when I put aside my (not entirely rational) dislike of "Beast Wars", I can admit that Dinobot was a legitimately important character that arguably contributed to the franchise surviving at all.

Voting for Erector is an act of self-indulgence that all of the fans will have to live with. This is not completely unlike the shit that the AllSpark pulled back in the BWTF days, when we had the "pick a recolour for Blurr" vote.

The reason this is worse than Synjo's drama-whoring is that these guys are trying to tip an official part of the franchise to suit their own whimsy. Synjo is an obnoxious and self-important ass. He is incapable of having a mature conversation. But, he was not trying to hijack the franchise in any way.

If you don't want this site to be over-moderated, and I've made sure that their actions will be dealt with by not counting their votes, doesn't that already take care of the issue? Wouldn't banning them be the very definition of over-moderation, reacting too heavy-handedly? There's no need to be reactionary at this point that I can see, their offense is a learning lesson for next time and has not in fact changed the path of our voting.

You were 14 or so? That is a factor.

These guys are acting 14.

There is a difference between over-moderating a forum and keeping it clean. We can still have an open forum without suffering idiots. Look at most of my conversations with Sparky. Aside from the time he pounced on me in a public restroom and flushed my head down the toilet, (which I kind of deserved after the drop kick to the groin that I gave him), things are generally civil. Yeah, he eggs my house on occasion, and I got him banned from a few local pizza places, but that is all in good fun. The anti-freeze in his Kool-Aid was a bit out of line. But, so was the rusty nail on the floor near my bed where my feet go in the morning. (In case it needs pointing out, Sparky and I have never actually met.)

Voting for Erector is not a difference of opinion. It is being a jack-ass.

I've been moderating forums for over a decade now on various sites, I've been heavy-handed, light-touch, and everything in between. Back when I was posting on BWTF, O6 was an annoying 14-year-old that really bugged me every time he responded to one of my posts, and I was confident he and I would never see eye-to-eye after a few sparring matches in forum. Yet since then he's grown, he's become a significant member of our community, and had he been banned, both his and my paths would be different in some way, I certainly wouldn't have seen him become a respected personality here.

Everybody's a jackass on the internet, that's what it's for. The question is, what level of jackassery requires an ultimate response, and does undertaking an ultimate response only bring an equal or greater response from the other side? I'm not afraid to ban someone when there's a good reason, I just don't see this as a good reason. Are you asking me to ban them because of what they did, or what they're trying to do stands for?

[Dominic]

I can see not wanting to force members to vote. But, I figured that it would be good for everybody to weigh in.

I am not saying we have to be ultra serious. (For chissakes, I just posted a song about taking pictures of doody to the tune of a terrible song by Taylor Swift. I mean, yes, I send nasty pictures to people, but not usually with music.)

But, to answer your question, it is more a question of the principle than the practical impact. Even if they managed to put Erector over here, we are a small forum. They might manage to put Erector over at TFW2005, and *maybe* get it past Hasbro. But, that is unlikely as Hasbro might (and should) just throw out Erector votes. But, the principle of what they are doing my issue here.

O6 and Misanthrope were twerps. But, they were not self-indulgent twerps beyond what one would expect of kids at that age. Hell, for that age, they were both pretty good. What we are seeing here is what I would expect at the low side of the curve for that age.


Dom
-stands by the banning motion.

[JediTricks]

I can see not wanting to force members to vote. But, I figured that it would be good for everybody to weigh in.

I am not saying we have to be ultra serious. (For chissakes, I just posted a song about taking pictures of doody to the tune of a terrible song by Taylor Swift. I mean, yes, I send nasty pictures to people, but not usually with music.)

But, to answer your question, it is more a question of the principle than the practical impact. Even if they managed to put Erector over here, we are a small forum. They might manage to put Erector over at TFW2005, and *maybe* get it past Hasbro. But, that is unlikely as Hasbro might (and should) just throw out Erector votes. But, the principle of what they are doing my issue here.

And who is going to get that message? How will banning them send a message to anybody but the flock? It seems like it'd just be preaching to the choir here - and we already know it's bad.

O6 and Misanthrope were twerps. But, they were not self-indulgent twerps beyond what one would expect of kids at that age. Hell, for that age, they were both pretty good. What we are seeing here is what I would expect at the low side of the curve for that age.

Seems like splitting hairs to me.

Anyway, I'll consider more arguments on this if anybody wants to make them.

[Onslaught Six]

I can see not wanting to force members to vote. But, I figured that it would be good for everybody to weigh in.

I am not saying we have to be ultra serious. (For chissakes, I just posted a song about taking pictures of doody to the tune of a terrible song by Taylor Swift. I mean, yes, I send nasty pictures to people, but not usually with music.)

But, to answer your question, it is more a question of the principle than the practical impact. Even if they managed to put Erector over here, we are a small forum. They might manage to put Erector over at TFW2005, and *maybe* get it past Hasbro. But, that is unlikely as Hasbro might (and should) just throw out Erector votes. But, the principle of what they are doing my issue here.

And who is going to get that message? How will banning them send a message to anybody but the flock? It seems like it'd just be preaching to the choir here - and we already know it's bad.

Yes.

My major fear is that, if we ban them, they'll go somewhere else and start going "Oh, those TFViews guys are a bunch of uptight twats. We made Erector joke votes and they banned us."

Which is exactly what we would be.

We discredited the votes. We told them not to do it again. JT is apparently putting things into place to make it so that it would be very difficult for this sort of thing to happen again next year. And we have effectively called them children more than a few times. Banning them would be going too far.

I mean, when you describe it, it sounds like they went to Hasbro with a big piece of paper that said "TFVIEWS WANTS ERECTOR." They tried (and failed) to sway a pithy little vote that, honestly, doesn't make a whole lot of difference anyway. (Even if Erector were to become an option for Hasbro, what makes you think they would even put him on the poll? I legitimately don't trust Hasbro's putting Dinobot on there in the first place.)

The damage is already done. I suspect they're not going to come back ever, but if they do, I suspect it's because they decided to actually participate--and who are we to cut that off?

My other major fear is that...well, at what point does it stop? Hahaha Erector, okay, that's obvious. What if someone voted for all Movie characters? Or all Japanese characters? Does that constitute a joke vote? What about all '88 characters, like Nightbeat and Thunderwing? Is that a joke vote? Where do we draw the line?

[Dominic]

People talk smack about other boards all the time.

I can see what you are saying about it going too far though. But, as you said, in cased like this, it is obvious what people are trying to do.


Dom
-actually believes Dinobot made it without seriousl shenanigans.

[BWprowl]

I'm with Six and JT. One thing I've like about this group, going back to the BWTF days, is that we've been *amazingly* capable of handling issues with no moderation whatsoever. The *only* guy I can think of offhand that got banned back in the day was Trinachron/RiD Optimus Prime/Giant Head/whoever he was at the end there, and he was a *serious* tool, and I can't even be sure he got banned (oh wait, there was RUINATION too, but I don't know that we're allowed to talk about that BS). Anyway, my point is, that's exactly what we did here: we solved the issue without resorting to moderation. Put another point on our scoreboard, because we won in the most dignified way the internet allows. Banning them now would just cheapen the victory, not to mention that they probably wouldn't even see it.

I mean, that's just one more tick-mark we have over TFW: We only had like eight people voting, and we still kept the Erector guys from getting on the board. How classy is that?

[Mirage]

It's probably worth mentioning that Erector didn't even win over at 2005, which (I believe) was the source of the movement. He was a runner-up, but I suppose that was bound to happen...

[Onslaught Six]

I'm with Six and JT. One thing I've like about this group, going back to the BWTF days, is that we've been *amazingly* capable of handling issues with no moderation whatsoever. The *only* guy I can think of offhand that got banned back in the day was Trinachron/RiD Optimus Prime/Giant Head/whoever he was at the end there, and he was a *serious* tool, and I can't even be sure he got banned (oh wait, there was RUINATION too, but I don't know that we're allowed to talk about that BS). Anyway, my point is, that's exactly what we did here: we solved the issue without resorting to moderation. Put another point on our scoreboard, because we won in the most dignified way the internet allows. Banning them now would just cheapen the victory, not to mention that they probably wouldn't even see it.

To be fair, most of the reason there was no administrative action at BWTF was because there was no administrator. Ben, for as nice a guy as I'm sure he is, clearly had no desire to run a forum, and didn't put into place any people who did, and that was one of the primary reasons we left, yeah? (That, and he would do things like switch over the entire board to a different system altogether, forever deleting the things we'd written there, with absolutely no warning. Or letting his web hosting crap out without telling anybody, too. I'm still mad about those. The loss of RID2...)

Oh man, RUINATION! Wasn't he like horribly racist or sexist or something? Can we turn this into a forum horror story/nostalgia thread? Because I have a million of those. (Who remembers Jess, one of the only like three girls we ever had on the forums? I dated her. For like two years. Over the internet. She lived in England. Man, I was sad as a teenager.)

[Dominic]

Well,it looks like I lost the roll call vote that I called for, so.... (Man, I feel like a chump, especially after spending to much time sniping at local pols who make the same mistake.)

He was a runner-up, but I suppose that was bound to happen...

\

Giggity? Seriously, was that meant to be rude?


I do not recall Ruination.

RiD Optimus et al may or may not have been more than one person. And, that person may or may not also have used the name CatScan.


I think Ben's absenteeism was a huge factor in how we developed as a group. We learned to be responsible and mature for the most part because we had to. I blame my newer, lower, tolerance for this sort of thing on FaceBook. (There are people there who would be offensive even by old UseNet standards.)

[BWprowl]

That, and he would do things like switch over the entire board to a different system altogether, forever deleting the things we'd written there, with absolutely no warning. Or letting his web hosting crap out without telling anybody, too. I'm still mad about those. The loss of RID2...

Hey, you and me both. The least he coulda done was given us some warning, or found a way to keep the forums running while he rebuilt the main site. I mean, he did *know* we were there, didn't he?

Oh man, RUINATION! Wasn't he like horribly racist or sexist or something? Can we turn this into a forum horror story/nostalgia thread? Because I have a million of those. (Who remembers Jess, one of the only like three girls we ever had on the forums? I dated her. For like two years. Over the internet. She lived in England. Man, I was sad as a teenager.)

RUINATION was the adamantly atheist guy who (and I say this as an atheist myself) offended just about everybody with the sheer insensitivity, doesn't-belong-here-itude of many of his comments/topics.

I remember Jess, but the "girl on the internet" I most *fondly* recall would still have to be Kitty Rose. You remember, the one who didn't think Transformers should bother with transforming and thought the line should be handled like Marvel Legends? Who thought that Classics was "insulting" fans at the same time that the rest of the fandom was celebrating the fact that they existed? Yeah, that one.