A reminder of the rules on images, and our banning policy

JV wrote:Surely those that are questioning the 'bluehats' are just trying to understand why we need a second tier of forum users? If they is a genuine reason as to why they were given special user-group status, the reason i understand is that they had something vaguely to do with the creation of the forum, then that is fair enough. The concern of some forum members appears to be though that the ability to pop into the mod-room and see what is going on suggests that they 'snoop' around on others. I'm not saying this is my opinion on it, but it sure is that of others. It's a valid question as well.

An equally valid question is what other use do they have to the forum? There are a number of guys there that contribute an awful lot to the forum, certainly more so than many of us regulars. There are also 'founders' that do no contribute differently to a great many regular forumites, so it just makes you wonder what it is the purpose of having this second tier of 'upped' users. The whole notion just causes friction, although only for a relatively small minority. The argument that I have seen a few times about 'well, it's done on such a such forum' is just a useless conversation to have. Perhaps we can learn from others, yes, but whatever is implemented at GRcade should be for what is good for GRcade.

Personally I think the entire issue could have been avoided if Bluehats were a symbol only, and no special "privileges"...

I'm not really that bothered by it - despite enjoying watching the arguments

Anyone who's really that bothered should just go join rllmuk and pay to be a super member. Then they can feel "special" and deal with their inferiority complexes. (Complexs? Complexices?)

Also - MCN's a twazock most days. Today isn't really an exception despite other events. Sarge better stay.

Oirish and BLH for Bluehat/modship though

Karlprof wrote:frankly i think you're all banana splits

And also, without Sarge, where'll I get my new episodes of 24 and Lost!?

LukeM wrote:Yay KP is posting again.

Let's celebrate good times come on.

\o/

Karl says:
*you may want to break the news to forums user "luke" that i'd rather drown in a pool of my own bile than contribute to grcade while gooseberry fool like this is still going on

Karlprof wrote:frankly i think you're all banana splits

Seriously how stupid is all this? Sarge don't listen to these people, it's only a forum and I think some people just like stirring things up. I think it's a disgrace that someone should be bullied so much that they feel they need to leave the forum.

Can we lock this topic now!

Hexx wrote:Personally I think the entire issue could have been avoided if Bluehats were a symbol only, and no special "privileges"...

I'm not really that bothered by it - despite enjoying watching the arguments

Me too, and me neither. It's an interesting discussion to watch though, as there is evidently some differing opinions on the matter.

MCN wrote:You're a wise man, JV. I think I need some sleep.

You do realise that I am not defending you, or agreeing with the way you go about things, yes?

Oh Teh Noes wrote:

LukeM wrote:Yay KP is posting again.

Let's celebrate good times come on.

\o/

Karl says:
*you may want to break the news to forums user "luke" that i'd rather drown in a pool of my own bile than contribute to grcade while gooseberry fool like this is still going on

He's got such a way with words

GR may be a dictatorship in theory, where we get handed rules from the the creator of the forum and rules from mods. It may be that you think GR should be a democaracy, but the end result is that it's a hybrid, most of the rules are not derived from mods or Garth, but what we've decided and just because we've decided some things doesn't mean it has to be a democracy through and through.


I'm not going to be snitching or upholding any rules by grassing up members. The main thing I hate and everyone else does is just useless spam, that's about the only thing. The rest of the forum are just a creative lot who know not to push the boundaries too far and the forum works that way. We get a lot of hilarity and we are a creative lot. Stop trying to ruin things for everyone MCN. Even if the rule you're upholding is the 'noporn' rule, if you kick up enough fuss, people will stop posting things that are close to the boundary and we'll lose all the fun. I'd rather forumites get banned from mods rather than being grassed up by others. I mean I know for a fact that if someone posts something that breaks the rule but is just stupendously hilarious which cascades into something even more awesome then the mods will just turn a blind eye to it.

This place IS a community, it's just not what you want it to be. The forum is what it's members are, not whether you decide to think it's a democracy or dictatorship. GR is what it is. Sometimes it's one thing, sometimes it's another.

JV wrote:

MCN wrote:You're a wise man, JV. I think I need some sleep.

You do realise that I am not defending you, or agreeing with the way you go about things, yes?

Yes, but I do concede that your words make a lot of sense.

JV wrote:

Hexx wrote:Personally I think the entire issue could have been avoided if Bluehats were a symbol only, and no special "privileges"...

I'm not really that bothered by it - despite enjoying watching the arguments

Me too, and me neither. It's an interesting discussion to watch though, as there is evidently some differing opinions on the matter.

Glad it appeals to someone. I can't say it enriches my forum time to know that my very existence here is that offensive to some people.

When it comes down to it - Steve/Garth pay, so what they say goes..

Unless until the subscription based Purplehats

JV wrote:Surely those that are questioning the 'bluehats' are just trying to understand why we need a second tier of forum users? If they is a genuine reason as to why they were given special user-group status, the reason i understand...

You make a lot of good points there. I just find this aggression towards the BHs a little odd (not from you btw, JV) seeing as it is essentially just symbolic. Whether it's right or wrong (personally I don't have great feelings either way) the fact that it seems to bother other people so much seems a bit odd to me.

Mind you, I don't even know why I'm arguing the toss over this to be honest, as it's not something that bothers me at all. I just found it a bit sad that there's so much argument over something so insignificant, which in turn has actually upset certain members which I think the forum would be much worse off without.

Raze wrote:Glad it appeals to someone. I can't say it enriches my forum time to know that my very existence here is that offensive to some people.

If it helps, I think that, due to your influence on certain people, you're one of the best people I've never met.

Raze wrote:

JV wrote:

Hexx wrote:Personally I think the entire issue could have been avoided if Bluehats were a symbol only, and no special "privileges"...

I'm not really that bothered by it - despite enjoying watching the arguments

Me too, and me neither. It's an interesting discussion to watch though, as there is evidently some differing opinions on the matter.

Glad it appeals to someone. I can't say it enriches my forum time to know that my very existence here is that offensive to some people.

It has never been about your existence, or Sarge's or anyone elses. What I and others want to understand is what your contribution (in terms of running the place) is now, and whether the privileges that come with your elevated status are still relevant or necessary.

As I said earlier, in a similar topic, are you mods or are you normal users? If you are normal users then why have the extra access, or if you are mods then just be mods.

Raze wrote:

JV wrote:

Hexx wrote:Personally I think the entire issue could have been avoided if Bluehats were a symbol only, and no special "privileges"...

I'm not really that bothered by it - despite enjoying watching the arguments

Me too, and me neither. It's an interesting discussion to watch though, as there is evidently some differing opinions on the matter.

Glad it appeals to someone. I can't say it enriches my forum time to know that my very existence here is that offensive to some people.

I don't think anyone finds your and the other founder group members 'very existence here' as offensive. If they do, then they need a reality check. I guess some people would just like clarity on your positions in the forum hierarchy.

They're members just like everyone else.

Don't go Sarge

My god some of you are acting like spoiled children

But heeeee should've been banned toooo

Grow up, and Sarge don't go!

Commander Jameson wrote:It has never been about your existence, or Sarge's or anyone elses. What I and others want to understand is what your contribution (in terms of running the place) is now, and whether the privileges that come with your elevated status are still relevant or necessary.

As I said earlier, in a similar topic, are you mods or are you normal users? If you are normal users then why have the extra access, or if you are mods then just be mods.

Back when GR was closing, some of us took the initiative and planned to set up a new forum rather than everyone simply parting ways - but there was a very good chance of 3 different groups creating 3 seperate forums and splintering the community. Instead of working separately, we contacted each other and agreed to create this place instead. Together, we worked out forum rules and came to advertising agreements - we also decided that myself and Steve would set up the forum software and hosting, and that we'd invite all the old active mods back.
Giving folk founder status with blue names was simply a way of saying thanks, and recognising them for being part of the team that came together to create this place and preserve this community. I don't see any good reason to remove their founder status, you're just being petty and taking it far too seriously.

Raze has retired from the founders today BTW, and I really hope Sarge will return.

Garth wrote:
Back when GR was closing, some of us took the initiative and planned to set up a new forum rather than everyone simply parting ways - but there was a very good chance of 3 different groups creating 3 seperate forums and splintering the community. Instead of working separately, we contacted each other and agreed to create this place instead. Together, we worked out forum rules and came to advertising agreements - we also decided that myself and Steve would set up the forum software and hosting, and that we'd invite all the old active mods back.
Giving folk founder status was a way of saying thanks, and recognising them for being part of the team that came together to create this place and preserve this community. I don't see any good reason to remove their founder status, you're just being petty and taking it far too seriously.

I seem to remember there being offers of help form pretty much the whole of the GR membership, and also remember most of the rules, the carrying over of mods etc being a discussion within the community rather than you doing all the hard work. But anyway, I am grateful for the work you guys put into getting this place up and running, but at the same time this place is supposed to be a community, a simplified version of the real world, and like the real world conflicts arise when there is a perception of some people being more equal than others. This may seem petty to you, but I was always under the impression that this place was going to be more egalitarian than the old GR boards - that is obviously where I went wrong.

Raze has retired from the founders today BTW, and I really hope Sarge will return.

Fair play to Raze, but it was unnecessary if it isn't all or nothing. As for Sarge, I think MCN for whatever reason has gone overboard today, but Sarge throwing a wobbly doesn't help. I hope he stays because, although I rarely venture into his topics, I believe he gives a valuable contribution the place - but so do most other users.