Posting Guidelines...
- Thread starter jtee
- Start date
things like that cannot be just left up. How would you feel if it was you. However Yulia then turned around and said that 1day ( I think) was abusing her unborn child by getting him cird. I don't agree with circ for the most part, but again totally innapropriate and was deleted. Not the enitire post granted
As far as warnings go, this is ridiculous they think we are calling bluff and do not think that we are serious I guess. So I say if someone breaks the rules we have to be hard nosed. EVEN if we like them otherwise. Otherwise i am going to have to call it quits here as well. I jsut can't sit back in good judgement and allow certain members to bash others.
As far as warnings go, this is ridiculous they think we are calling bluff and do not think that we are serious I guess. So I say if someone breaks the rules we have to be hard nosed. EVEN if we like them otherwise. Otherwise i am going to have to call it quits here as well. I jsut can't sit back in good judgement and allow certain members to bash others.
Kaytee, I understand/share your frustration 100%. I am sure Fallon does as well. Personally I do not believe Fooser will not change his ways, and the three of us will have to decide what action needs to be taken. If he does stay within the posted guidelines, then he's being responsible parent. I believe he enjoys the attention he gets by being the bad boy in the forum, so I fully expect he will continue along the same course for as long as he has the ability to post in the forum.
Maybe you and Fallon can explain to me what is so appealing/alluring about the "Bad Boy" image? <U>I do believe</U> he can remain the Bad Boy and stay within the rules, but that is his problem to solve, not ours to solve for him.
Maybe you and Fallon can explain to me what is so appealing/alluring about the "Bad Boy" image? <U>I do believe</U> he can remain the Bad Boy and stay within the rules, but that is his problem to solve, not ours to solve for him.
http://www.parentingforums.org/57585-post46.html
Here is the first post in the thread. While I'm pretty vocal privately, I do know how to separate my private comments from my public comments.
Also, we would like to get your opinion on how these guidelines restrict an individual parent's ability to have fun while they are in this forum. All the moderators are in agreement that ParentingForums.org should be a fun place. The guidelines that were posted to ensure it is safe and friendly place. I think everyone agrees there needs to be <U>posted</U> guidelines, we just might not agree 100% on them.
Thanks for any feedback you would like to provide.[/quote]
Here is the first post in the thread. While I'm pretty vocal privately, I do know how to separate my private comments from my public comments.
jrrsmom, in a sense the moderators consider "General Chat" to be for opened ended and free flowing chat.jrrsmom said:How about a part of the forum where we can goof off. No pr0n or anything like that. But you know...somewhere where the "weirdos" go.
Also, we would like to get your opinion on how these guidelines restrict an individual parent's ability to have fun while they are in this forum. All the moderators are in agreement that ParentingForums.org should be a fun place. The guidelines that were posted to ensure it is safe and friendly place. I think everyone agrees there needs to be <U>posted</U> guidelines, we just might not agree 100% on them.
Thanks for any feedback you would like to provide.[/quote]
I agree with you partly Jtee. i don't htink Fooser will change, I htink he will fall within the guidlines but then overstep them> I also feel Yulia and Meow will do the same. They all need to be treated equally though.
I have no interest int he bad boy. So can't help ya there
I have no interest int he bad boy. So can't help ya there
Because I am not gay, and I am a guy, the "bad boy" attraction is very hard for me to understand. I know guys who are like Fooser, and woman do seems to enjoy the love/hate banter, and it gets the guy a lot of sex with a lot of women, but once the women want to have a real relationship, it start to fall appart pretty quickly.Kaytee said:
BTW, I beleive "Fooser" (as we know him to be) is more a online persona that Scott has created to express a limited side of his personality or person he would like be. Not suggesting he lying about his life, just we are seeing a false front to some degree. This of course, is just my speculation.
FYI, I will not be responding publicly to lissa's comments posted in the thread. She is attempting to cause problems. We can't allow her to derail that thread which has been pretty good so far. If she persists, I will start removing her posts.
http://www.parentingforums.org/57701-post69.html
http://www.parentingforums.org/57701-post69.html
I did respond her Lissa privately and I think she'll be OK. I think she still a bit upset by my PM to her where I informed her to stop trolling the forum (stirring things up), or I revoke her privileges
And actually, she's more upset with you Kaytee than me. Not sure what that is all about because she didn't saying anything specific, just doesn't like your tone. With Lissa I am always leery because she is a "player", so it is not always easy to know what she is up too, other than she is looking for opportunities\angles to mess with us (code term: "fun"), and find Allies to be part of her game. Lissa has picked up that you and Ari don't get along\agree, and is trying work that public tension to our (moderator) disadvantage.
And actually, she's more upset with you Kaytee than me. Not sure what that is all about because she didn't saying anything specific, just doesn't like your tone. With Lissa I am always leery because she is a "player", so it is not always easy to know what she is up too, other than she is looking for opportunities\angles to mess with us (code term: "fun"), and find Allies to be part of her game. Lissa has picked up that you and Ari don't get along\agree, and is trying work that public tension to our (moderator) disadvantage.
I know. What is funny though is that Ari and I are on the same page on everything. Ari knows how to debate and not take it into the rest of the board. We get along just fine. She doens't like that. She doens't like that I don't take her crap either. She will get over it or she can leave
I don't want to make too many assumptions about what you two think. Are we all on the same page that members of this forum can not be giving us bad rep of doing our jobs as moderators? If one of us says "Stop that" or whatever to a member of this forum for violating the posted guidelines, we are safe from bad rep retaliation.
It is the same idea that is applied to police officers or those who serve in the Milatary. They are protected for doing their job (properly/fairly/wisely). If member doesn't like a modeerator decision I have made, then he/she can go to you two, same would apply mod decisions you make.
What is fair game for bad rep, is for example, if I were to start making racist statements based on personal beleifs.
It is the same idea that is applied to police officers or those who serve in the Milatary. They are protected for doing their job (properly/fairly/wisely). If member doesn't like a modeerator decision I have made, then he/she can go to you two, same would apply mod decisions you make.
What is fair game for bad rep, is for example, if I were to start making racist statements based on personal beleifs.
I don't think we should be free of getting bad rep. I think they should be able to give us bad rep if we deserve it for seomthing. So yes if you said something racist, they should be able to give bad rep. If I said formula is rat poison then yes they should be able to give me bad rep. Now they should not be able to give any of us bad rep because we banned their friend and they are mad kinda thing They should not be able to give us bad rep becuse " your a stick in the mud lately so hahaha" Foosers to me a few days ago lol. I personally do not care if I get bad rep sometimes, i get good rep more. But if I was just a person on this board and got that, I might be hurt a tad kinda thing.
This is a very very excellent point that I had not considered. Thank you!Kaytee said:
Imagine a parent who is new, and gets so-called "fun" bad rep. Or the in frequent parent who gets hit with so-called "fun" bad rep that makes no sense.
My thinking is so-called "Fun" bad rep is not like having that says a rule "You can't have fun". It is more like you can't play with your baseball bat if you keep hitting the family dog because you think it is funny.