I do not like the idea of an anonymous admin on the forums. What do you think?

Ha. First vote.

No more talking about it. There could be spies anywhere.

the problem here is that BBAMFH is most likely someone we know. I doubt they picked a guy off the street and asked him to moderate us kids. So, BBAMFH gets demoted back to member. Hard feelings, methinks?

Jen

i did not have sexual relations with mike z's avatar

Thank god. Your retinas probably would have detached, I suspect.

Jen

QUOTE (MattR @ Feb 14 2006, 11:52 PM)

i did not have sexual relations with mike z's avatar

palmela handerson

I think it is fine... needs have dictated that we need a dick tator

I pun therefore I am!

...are there any mass graves?

Yes or no?

How about taunted?




M

QUOTE (Jenny @ Feb 14 2006, 10:48 PM)

the problem here is that BBAMFH is most likely someone we know. I doubt they picked a guy off the street and asked him to moderate us kids. So, BBAMFH gets demoted back to member. Hard feelings, methinks?

not only does she know how to work a whip, she's smart too!


i like peaches but i still voted NO ...
Andy

I voted yes. I am new here and to 914's. I came over here for the info, not the drama. I could care less either way about avatars, or sigs(many of which are funny); but if your going to moderate published rules, just have the balls and do it. If they whine, tough shit. If one of my posts goes over the line, tell me, but have the balls, or enlarged labia to say who it's coming from. It would go a long way toward preserving the "club" atmosphere.
ie. If you mouth off in a bar and some stranger says STFU, your more likely to take that as aggressive, but if your drinking buddy says hey man, STFU it's ok.




My .02

Haha. The enlarged labia bit might be out of line.




But you're DAMN right!

I voted no because like the "who shot JR" mania that took over America in the 80s.... its just a lot of fun.

I voted yes, because I don't like the idea that there is no accountability. You can say this is not a democracy, but the truth is that there is a common sense of morality and propriety. Clearly some people push the bounds of what is acceptable, but there is no reason or benefit for the enforcement to be anonymous. If someone cares to make a valid argument as to why Mike's avatars are offensive, I'm all ears. I just don't like the idea of a police state. I'd rather see an occasional asshole than a dictator.

QUOTE (dweymer @ Feb 14 2006, 11:24 PM)

or enlarged labia

QUOTE

Power dements even more than it corrupts, lowering the guard of foresight and raising the haste of action.

Ariel Durant


i voted yes. unaccountable power as perceived by the eyes of the governed, makes for a less than pleasant situation. anonymous power is unaccountable.

I voted yes because I personally don't like the idea of anonymous authority. Authority without respect is akin to tyranny and it's difficult to respect an anonymous figure. The members at least have a 'relationship' with the non-anonymous admins. and with that comes a certain amount of respect.

The forum does require some form of moderation to keep things under control. I personally like an open and free atmosphere, but I don't like explaining 'what that lady is doing' to my four year-old daughter who looks over my shoulder while I'm on the computer. I don't really think I should have to wait until the children have gone to bed to peruse the 914Club.

NO

I voted no because I always root for the underdog, and I want the little bar to catch up to the bigger bar.

I would like to compare my response to this poll to the whole issue itself, silliness from grown men and women. However, I do lean towards the NO because my 4 year old son loves to sit with me and look at car stuff on the internet. I hate that he can't do that when I'm reading the 'club' pages.

And FWIW, I don't view the new admin as anonymous in a bad way. I know many of you know each other personally (it seems like half the 'club' knows each other personally), so I view almost everyone as anonymous.

All of these threads have been entertaining, but also kind of pathetic.

Dion

I voted no because that would put me out of th job.

b

that's for the admins to decide. remember, the United States is not a democracy, it's a REPUBLIC, based upon democratic principles. i hate the whole "who am they anyway?" and "where are they located?" mysteries. i voted not to vote. just consider yourselves lucky. all of you would be standing in the corner if i had my way!!!

k

Slits does not stand in a corner...especially when A-aron Admin and MattR are in close proximity.......

... in case ya missed it from the other thread...


i shut off my avatars because i didn't want my 4 year old daughter to see the illustrated guy smashing himself into a bloody mess on his keyboard.

but if she DID see it, i'd be able to explain it easily because i know how to be an effective parent.

kids, granny's, priests, mullahs all see the same things we see in the world. we can't stop it. ever. if you have concerns about content here or anywhere else in the world, i'd suggest it's more a reflection of your capacity to accept and understand others who have a different lifestyle than yours. to ask someone else to censor for everyone what one individual or a minority doesn't want to see (assuming an established and acceptable set of rules based on common sense) is unenlightened nonsense.

the administrators up to this have proceeded pretty well in my opinion with the rules and the addition of the sandbox. anything beyond that diminishes the viability and asset value of the group as a whole.

due to all your help and assistance, i would'nt make you stand nose first! first we would need to elect a congress and senate. have hearings, decide that we really don't want an impeachment (behind the scenes), and settle for a censure. one of the admins should form a ballot so folks can run for office. i nomitate Rhodyguy (NITC party) for the majority whip!! vote early and often.

k

I voted yes because I think his or her very existance is a drakonian. It's a childish knee-jerk response to a childish incident.

I vote the admins change their "group" memembership under their avatars to "moderator". We don't need to know which one of you deleted a post or avatar, just that one of you did it.

BBAMFH is childish.

QUOTE (SLITS @ Feb 15 2006, 05:20 AM)

NO

Now if this were the USA, this vote may even count...

Now all the yes votes can start an adults only pornfest ogry in their 914 club board and do what ever you like.

This appears to be a place to act like an adult, not an adults only place.

BTW: I'm not a bible thumper. I was locked out, as in banned lastnight on the Bird Board for scolding the man you all worship. Read the posts over there. It's real enlightening. This is more about someone needing to take ownership of his actions and less about how things are done around here. Focus on something you have a better chance of changing, like world peace.

rick, my friend!
i totally respect you, your opinions (and your car!), but you don't think those who eschew censorship would then by default, condone anarchy, do you?!

your comment ignores a baseline foundation of governance; "assuming an established and acceptable set of rules based on common sense".

i also think this is a very valid debate. those who don't think so aren't obligated to post, or even read it. that's the beauty of following a "free press" model.

If the rules are published, then you know what they are when you come to play. If you break the rules, you should get a PM stating so, and why. You may give up some of your free speech rights when you sign up at the door.

I personally don't mind boobies and such, but that doesn't mean I think they belong on a car club website. There's lots of places on the internet for that. I got kids, and on occasion they see this site, when I'm checking in. Do I want to go and turn off the avitars, no.

As far as the annonomous admin goes, I don't have a real problem with that. So you bust someone for breaking the rules, some anonimity might be an asset for an admin.

If you can't play by the rules then you take what you got comin. Just my .02.

Also, it would be ovaries, not labia, OK?

I voted yes.... anonymously.....

QUOTE (bd1308 @ Feb 15 2006, 05:33 AM)

I voted no because that would put me out of th job. b

maybe they can just not be 'anonymous' put their real name in their sig or something...

why does it have to be removal in order to be more acceptable?

QUOTE (lotus_65 @ Feb 15 2006, 06:50 AM)

rick, my friend! i totally respect you, your opinions (and your car!), but you don't think those who eschew censorship would then by default, condone anarchy, do you?! your comment ignores a baseline foundation of governance; "assuming an established and acceptable set of rules based on common sense". i also think this is a very valid debate. those who don't think so aren't obligated to post, or even read it. that's the beauty of following a "free press" model.

What free press model are we following? When was it ever said this is a free-for-all! Your response is eliquent, respectful, and lucid, but pointless. read the rules, and abide, pretty simple stuff.

HMFG...

I go out for one night and all hell breaks loose.


Hey... not like we have not been through this before.


I'm goin' back to sleep now.

i thought by saying

QUOTE

"Now all the yes votes can start an adults only pornfest ogry in their 914 club board and do what ever you like"

you felt that it could become a free-for-all be if not for the secret police!

QUOTE

read the rules, and abide, pretty simple stuff.

i ABSOLUTLY, POSITIVLY and COMPLETELY agree.

i just don't want the secret police. it represents too much subjective, or worse, assigned morality for me!

a 4 y.o shouldn't be sitting on daddy's lap, when he's surfing the site, under the guise of "quality time". go play chute and ladders, read her some little golden books...something. you should'nt have to explain mike's avatars to a 4 y.o. inappropriate content. this is an adult site. period.

k

QUOTE (rhodyguy @ Feb 15 2006, 10:16 AM)

a 4 y.o shouldn't be sitting on daddy's lap, when he's surfing the site, under the guise of "quality time. go play chute and ladders, read her some little golden books...somthing. you should'nt have to explain mike's avatars to a 4 y.o. inappropriate content. this is an adult site. period. k

the ignorance of that comment fits so well into the corral i just finished building, it could be considered brilliant.

cheers to you!

you guys do realize that even if the vote is 99% yes, remove the anonymous admin.... nothing will be happen... this isn't a democracy, remember...

let it go, it was an avater that pushed the rules that are clearly stated... we've had this arguement, the argument was lost by those in favor of nude avatars....

QUOTE (lotus_65 @ Feb 15 2006, 07:26 AM)

QUOTE (rhodyguy @ Feb 15 2006, 10:16 AM) a 4 y.o shouldn't be sitting on daddy's lap, when he's surfing the site, under the guise of "quality time. go play chute and ladders, read her some little golden books...somthing. you should'nt have to explain mike's avatars to a 4 y.o. inappropriate content. this is an adult site. period. k the ignorance of that comment fits so well into the corral i just finished building, it could be considered brilliant. cheers to you!

what ever. enjoy all that quality time with your daughter. ignoratio elenchi.

k

I voted yes. We have too many anonymous demands, decree's in our lives as it is, usually some faceless government office, enity as it is. Try to find out who said what, where this new demand came from, you just get stonewalled. That's why I started using a voice activated tape recorder everytime I talk to one of them. No one wants to take responsibility for their actions. I don't need more of that here.

I was just talking with some friends how refreshing I have found this non club with it's sense of integity and honesty amoung the members. I really don't want to lose that.

The rules are simple, follow them or leave, it's your choice.

Stand up for who you are, take responsibility for your actions, grow up, and don't hide behind anominity (sp).

The admins accepted the job, sometimes it's gonna be tough, your job is not a popularity contest. If you can't take the heat, maybe you shouldn't have the job. And yeah, I do know about taking heat to do the job, read my career history sometime. A rule I always used, if I'm not willing to put it in writing and sign my "name" to it, maybe I shouldn't be saying it.

My .02

Later, Don

QUOTE (rhodyguy @ Feb 15 2006, 10:34 AM)

what ever. enjoy all that quality time with your daughter. ignoratio elenchi. k

"ignoratio elenchi" at me!



good one!

The Moderator ( admin team ) made the call.

Why is it so hard to see that?
Andy, Jeroen, Sean, Aaron, Clay and Mark answered questions and made comments on the various threads.

The moderator is not a secret bad guy.


KT

I voted no.

Simple rules... Break them and you are gone.

An anon-admin is also a matter of practicallity. If I were the anon-admin I would not want to "bring out the stick" and then have to feel uncomfortable at the WCC because I did.

Now public flogging is another matter. That should have been handled privately.

QUOTE (DonTraver @ Feb 15 2006, 07:40 AM)

I was just talking with some friends how refreshing I have found this non club with it's sense of integity and honesty amoung the members. I really don't want to lose that. The rules are simple, follow them or leave, it's your choice. Stand up for who you are, take responsibility for your actions, grow up, and don't hide behind anominity (sp). The admins accepted the job, sometimes it's gonna be tough, your job is not a popularity contest. If you can't take the heat, maybe you shouldn't have the job. And yeah, I do know about taking heat to do the job, read my career history sometime. A rule I always used, if I'm not willing to put it in writing and sign my "name" to it, maybe I shouldn't be saying it. My .02 Later, Don

I refuse to vote.

Can someone please define PG-13?

Given the content of most PG-13 movies I would say that the guidelines that the admin. staff is following in more along the lines of a G rating.

The level of violence and nudity including bare breasts in most PG-13 rated movies is astounding. After being locked on several strings last night my 15 yo son and I sat in front of the tv and fast forwarded through 11 movies with a PG-13 rating .
All had bare breasts and all had SIGNIFICANT violence. Three of them had frontal nudity.
Please define in definitive clear terms what is and what is not acceptable.

Perhaps the rules need to be changed to a G rating.

I belive even BRAD had some form of nudity in one of his posts at one point.

Miss Mari

But seriously, folks...

I voted no. Admin should have the right to enforce the 'rules' without having one person abused because of that action. Think of the BBMF as the conscience of the club. I also suggest that rather than an evil presence, we use Miss Manners slapping your knuckles with a ruler.

Animated or ‘R’ rated avatars/signatures really don’t belong. Almost anything goes in the ‘Sandbox’, but if you have a questionable avatar or signature it appears in every post you have ever made.

But freedom of speech is essential. If you feel the need to post something nasty (I do), put it in the ‘Sandbox’. The same goes for threads like this. And Admin, it doesn’t look to good when you lock or delete a thread just because it is critical of your actions. Just move it to the box.

Just my not terribly humble opinion. On with the bashing.

The "Other" car club I belong to has a great solution to the many problems that occur here. True, they don't have the "garage" lingo goin' on and they don't have avatars. They don't even allow a post that has anything to do with boasting of street racing but they do have conformance. There is no controversey about rules. They are written & enforced quietly by editing or deletion quickly.

This club forum is not fun like the 914 Club is. It is strictly ABOUT CARS. So I go there to learn. I come here for the Peyton Place laughs and To Learn. It's All Good wether there's a badassMoFo or not. Cheer up

Guess it all depends on what the admins want, what the members want and what shall be.

But, I forsee this "bump" in our lives flattening out..............................

eventually

....b

ok. mike put the whole question out there long ago. the "b" answered the question pretty succinctly(look a me with the fancy words and latin in the am). this is pretty close, a paraphrase( ) if you will, " if you wouldn't want your daughters to view it, it doesn't belong here". pretty concise.

k

QUOTE (lotus_65 @ Feb 15 2006, 08:43 AM)

QUOTE (rhodyguy @ Feb 15 2006, 10:34 AM) what ever. enjoy all that quality time with your daughter. ignoratio elenchi. k "ignoratio elenchi" at me! good one!

kevin made me go learn something.... im smart now

QUOTE

(also known as irrelevant conclusion) is the logical fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but which proves or supports a different proposition than the one it is purporting to prove or support. "Ignoratio elenchi" can be roughly translated by ignorance of the issue;

And the funny thing is this isnt new. Mike has been doing this since the board started. He makes the claim the board has change, but not really. Here's an old post from april 2003, when we only really had one moderator, Brad.
old post from 2003