Teenage Wildlife

IMPORTANT: Use your registry nickname as your username when logging in to Conversation Piece!


Free for All
   >> Site Douchebag
Thread views: 5144 Previous threadView all threadsNext thread*Threaded Mode

Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
KAdministrator
(thunder ocean)
02/04/11 05:52 PM
Teenage Wildlife press release, 5 February 2011 [re: ]  

As of this day, the 5th of February 2011, the user ziggfried has been granted the rights and duties of a moderator in conjunction with a project relating to re-posting deleted classic threads that he is overseeing. The community joyjoysly welcomed this addition to the moderatorial staff; there were spontaneous marches in support of this assignment on the streets of Coffee Shop, honouring the new moderator and the glorious administrator K Jong-Il.

Trololololololololololololololololo

Auntie Prism
(stardust savant)
02/04/11 07:27 PM
Hit the ground running new [re: K]  

Congratulations, ziggfried. I take it K has briefed you and I'm confident you'll do a fine job.

I have a question, sir. Am I allowed to post a picture of my genitals as an attachment? The picture itself will not be visible in the thread, and my post will contain text notifying readers of the graphic content.

Cheers,
Auntie P.

Rather than words comes the thought of high windows

ziggfriedModerator
(acolyte)
02/05/11 00:11 AM
Re: Hit the ground running new [re: Auntie Prism]  

I don't know where I'm going from here, but I promise I won't bore you.

In reply to:

I have a question, sir. Am I allowed to post a picture of my genitals as an attachment? The picture itself will not be visible in the thread, and my post will contain text notifying readers of the graphic content.


Certainly not, sir. I plan to make this site clean-cut and wholesome. Think of me as Brian Epstein* getting the Beatles out of leather jackets and into neat suits.

* despite the fact that I'm not gay, rich, Jewish or a powerful force in the music industry



Mxy
(cracked actor)
02/05/11 02:19 AM
Re: Hit the ground running new [re: ziggfried]  

Why haven't I seen anything about this in BowieNet?!

This is seriously the most important Bowie related news of the year.

http://bizarrewebcomic.com

Auntie Prism
(stardust savant)
02/05/11 04:03 AM
All four of us will bow when this thread's done new [re: ziggfried]  

In reply to:

Certainly not, sir. I plan to make this site clean-cut and wholesome.


Buzzzz!!! I'm afraid that's the incorrect answer, ziggfried. I was looking for consistency with existing Mod policy. In your defence, you phrased the statement ambiguously to make it sound like a personal pledge ('I plan to make this site' …etc.—and it's position I probably agree with), but you can't answer the question that way.

The question is transferred to the other Mods, and you have the rest of the clock to yourselves.

In reply to:

despite the fact that I'm not gay, rich, Jewish or a powerful force in the music industry


Not yet, ziggfried, not yet …

Rather than words comes the thought of high windows

ziggfriedModerator
(acolyte)
02/05/11 05:05 AM
Re: Hit the ground running new [re: Mxy]  

In reply to:

(mxy) This is seriously the most important Bowie related news of the year.


Martin Scorsese didn't win an Oscar till he was 64. I've become a TW mod before I've reached 30. I think that says a lot, really.

In reply to:

(Auntie Prism) I was looking for consistency with existing Mod policy.


I'm a maverick!



Auntie Prism
(stardust savant)
02/05/11 06:43 AM
So I recovered a 9/11 thread new [re: ziggfried]  

In reply to:

I'm a maverick!


Okay, I'm swayed! I know, moderating is not always the answer; in fact, too often moderating is the problem. We need smaller moderating, and a reduction on moderating for smaller posters. Because moderating hurts the smaller posters, and we need to take it away. We need to get moderators back on the side of the people. That's what I like about you, ziggfried; you're on the side of the people!

Tell me ziggfried, can you see TW from The Triumph of Stupidity?

***

So I was planning on retreading the TW Guide to Posting Your Genitals thread (in which attempts to answer this question re. attachments ended in farce) but I've something more practical to discuss regarding

In reply to:

a project relating to re-posting deleted classic threads that [ziggfried] is overseeing.


… namely, does anyone know how to read the contents of a TW thread url? Three examples, and they're all different:

1) http://www.teenagewildlife.com/Interact/cp/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=coffee&Number=77418&page=1&view=collapsed&sb=7&part=

2) http://www.teenagewildlife.com/Interact/cp/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=coffee&Number=9832&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=7&part=

3) http://www.teenagewildlife.com/Interact/cp/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=coffee&Number=30871&page=&view=&sb=&vc=1

So the individual thread numbers are 77418, 9832 and 30871 respectively. No problem, cos these are all different threads. This is followed by '&page', then either 1, 0 or nothing—what does this denote? Why would these be different?

Then there is the view, which is either collapsed, or again blank. Threads can be displayed in either collapsed view or threaded view. In the case of the latter, the 'showflat.pl' would read 'showthreaded.pl' (further up in the address) and often the number of the threaded post appears at the end of the url with a hash tag. Obviously, I don't want threaded views, but why would there sometimes be 'nothing' where view=collapsed is written when they both are collapsed in appearance?

I've no idea what the 'sb=7' or 'sb=' refers to. Ditto 'vc=1', which appears in some addresses and not others. The 'part=' at the end will display the entire thread, I think, if you add 'part=all'.

I ask because I'm interested in trying out some of the most common variations on half a dozen threads in various 'website grabbing' sites, such as the Wayback Machine,* which *may* have captured them when they were still active in the early 2000s. Unfortunately, whatever was captured was done so in an extremely random and incomplete fashion, hence, I suppose the different forms of the addresses, described above. I've tried doing searches with wildcards, with asterisks after the thread number, which works sometimes but this, again, appears randomised. I don't really hope to recover anything in addition to what I already have, although I am curious what the gunk at the end of the addresses actually means.

* I've spent literally 10 or 12 hours in there, and I think I've exhausted it. So please don't waste your time.


Rather than words comes the thought of high windows

ziggfriedModerator
(acolyte)
02/06/11 00:37 AM
Re: So I recovered a 9/11 thread new [re: Auntie Prism]  

In reply to:

Okay, I'm swayed! I know, moderating is not always the answer; in fact, too often moderating is the problem. We need smaller moderating, and a reduction on moderating for smaller posters. Because moderating hurts the smaller posters, and we need to take it away. We need to get moderators back on the side of the people. That's what I like about you, ziggfried; you're on the side of the people!


I aim to repeal the liberal concessions made on this site by the current and previous latte-sipping administrations, and to bring TW back in line with the policies of whoever this site's equivalent of Ronald Reagan is. I would also promise to reduce this site's spending, but I'm unsure there is any spending.

In reply to:

Tell me ziggfried, can you see TW from The Triumph of Stupidity?


Stupidity, no. Supidity, yes...

In reply to:

So I was planning on retreading the TW Guide to Posting Your Genitals thread...


I want to re-iterate my insistence that this site will never again become a pantheon of penii.


[quote]



KAdministrator
(thunder ocean)
02/06/11 10:37 AM
Penises: my favourite subject new [re: ziggfried]  

As I have personally posted a picture of my penis as an attachment to this site, I believe it is incorrect mod procedure to not allow this. Of course my special rights as the admin could be claimed, but as this incident took place before I was even made a mod I do not think the adgument would hold water.

Of course, ziggfried as the new maverick moderator is free to hold his own views. If there is one thing that's consistent about the rules of this website is that it's not consistent.

For the record, I do not drink latte and the glorious administration of the People's Conversation Piece of Teenage Wildlife is currently considering a ban on all coffee-based drinks. For the glory and advancement of the People, of course.

In reply to:

Stupidity, no. Supidity, yes...


How come no-one ever told me that place exists? Heads are going to roll for keeping this information from me...

Trololololololololololololololololo

Auntie Prism
(stardust savant)
02/06/11 11:55 AM
I'm sorry I made this post so dull new [re: K]  

In reply to:

Stupidity, no. Supidity, yes...


Wow. I must've misread that a hundred times …

I think the problem with the previous rules was that 1) the Mods all acted inconsistently with Adam's advice, and, what's worse 2) acted inconsistently with their *own* advice.

I wrote a post a few years ago which went through the baroque permutations of who said what, and who did what, and I've no wish to repeat it all here. But I think Adam's general rules are, in fact, useful, and consistent with the general opinion at TW:

In reply to:

[Adam] 1. Do not post your genitalia as inline images.

2. The correct method is to use a URL link preferably with some kinda prior warning (so people at work, uni, etc. know what they're getting).


Attachments, however, are something of a grey area, because no-one knows the specifics of Evan's user agreement:

In reply to:

[Adam] On the issue of attachments, I would discourage people from placing questionable material on the TW server seeing we don't know the rules of Evan's contract/agreement. Of course what constitutes porn (or art, etc) is not a science and has therefore been left to the opinion of individual moderators. When the mods were appointed, we were cracking down on a specific form of pornography - most of which would have been considered a 'hardcore' classification by various internet sites so initially there wasn't going to be too many borderline decisions.


As far as I know, there have never been any complaints regarding the contents of an attachment, so perhaps graphic images in the form of attachments (such as K's penis) are okay. On the other hand, it may be safer to disallow this to ensure compliance with Evan's contract, although there will be still be a (safer) boundary in dispute between whether an image is acceptable or not. Whereas the boundary in dispute may previously have been between 'hardcore' and 'softcore', the same ambiguity lies between 'softcore' and 'topless', or 'almost topless', etc. In an additional complication, I'm not sure that a Mod deleting a post deletes the accompanying attachment. Sure, you won't be able to access it via the post, but is it not still stored on the server?

One of the problem's with Adam's original clarification was that even his 'correct method', with a clearly labelled url, had resulted in the deletion of certain posts. I suppose if we can all agree (including EJ) that the url method is acceptable, that would be a start.

Rather than words comes the thought of high windows

KAdministrator
(thunder ocean)
02/06/11 02:21 PM
Yes, I do really keep that blog new [re: Auntie Prism]  

Can I make an official administratorial ruling the URL method is OK?

But seriously though, this does also cointain the question that what can be considered fitting* content for a message board that's not about porn. If a user wishes to share a picture of his (or her) genitalia that's perfectly fine with me. But if someone starts a thread on "share your favourite bukkake pictures" with images sourced from internet porn sites, my impulse would be to delete it as this is not a site for sharing porn. I wouldn't (publicly) share a link to the blog where I post my gay porn comic either, though it could be argued that is more OK than images from a bukkake site as I have created the drawings myself and we do have a forum for sharing artistic endeavours.

For the record, I'm not talking about any official TW policy instituted by yours truly here. Adult material is a complex issue, especially considering the generally anarchic nature of TW, and there doesn't seem to be an easy, clear-cut ansver to the problem.

* = Not the best choice of a term, but it's late and I'm tired, so bear with me.

Trololololololololololololololololo

Auntie Prism
(stardust savant)
02/06/11 07:18 PM
Socialisation, the TW way new [re: K]  

In reply to:

I wouldn't (publicly) share a link to the blog where I post my gay porn comic either, though it could be argued that is more OK than images from a bukkake site as I have created the drawings myself and we do have a forum for sharing artistic endeavours.


A good point, and one I hadn't considered.

I guess what we're saying is that a poster's posts have to fall tolerably within the interests of the community. The interests, or the centre, of a community is determined mostly by the posters, and the centre can shift if you get a flock of new arrivals who share new interests and posting styles. (Or at least, that's how it has worked at TW, where someone with a *ahem* new style, like Diamondogz74, managed to accumulate a significant number of followers who demanded his continued participation and pooping.)

TW's attitudes towards pornography are broadly similar to our non-internet attitudes towards pornography, insofar as we expect a certain degree of restraint. Yes, our TW attitudes may be slightly freer, because we are more anonymous than in non-internet realms. But TW is in an indeterminate space, as far as messageboards go, where a certain level of porn is 'acceptable', being part-social site, and part-reference site. Posters who only talked about and posted images of pornography have faced pressure from the TW community to change.

You're right that there does seem to be a difference between 'self-created' and 'linked' porn, especially for TW where there is an artiste forum. So often it appears that the context or pretence for linking to porn images can be the determining factor in whether they are acceptable or not, even if the images themselves are identical. I imagine *I* could make several threads out of images of David Bowie's crotch if I made them in an ironic or 'knowing' manner, because they would be socialised in the TW vein. If jarethsluvslut14 made them, however, they would be a prime candidate for deletion. I guess this is where the politics of the individual Moderator steps in. Do they allow the possible emergence of a new centre, of a new clique of posters? And although they know there may be a difference between self-created and linked porn, the Mod gets to decide whether they want to keep this distinction, or whether it's a distinction they feel is trifling and arbitrary. And it's a decision that under certain circumstances, when deciding to delete a certain post (not just porn), can result in semi-justifiable charges of fascism.

p.s. I guess Adam's 'url rule' shouldn't be entirely set in stone, for the reason that it would be possible (if registration wasn't broken) for a spambot to make a post containing urls to external porn sites. Not the most topical example, I know, but one that occurred to me when thinking that set in stone rules aren't always a good thing.

Rather than words comes the thought of high windows

schizophrenic
(acolyte)
02/06/11 11:49 PM
There are dozens of us! Dozens! new [re: Auntie Prism]  

Nice to see the rules clarified. This'll really be helpful for all those clueless new posters who've been flooding the boards recently.



ziggfriedModerator
(acolyte)
02/07/11 00:39 AM
Re: There are dozens of us! Dozens! new [re: schizophrenic]  

In reply to:

(K) How come no-one ever told me that place exists? Heads are going to roll for keeping this information from me.


Apologies that you have been thus far deprived of reading PHOENIX and I discussing Exorcist II: The Heretic and Caligula at excruciating length.

In reply to:

(schizophrenic) Nice to see the rules clarified. This'll really be helpful for all those clueless new posters who've been flooding the boards recently.


Zing!



KAdministrator
(thunder ocean)
02/07/11 04:14 PM
Re: Socialisation, the TW way new [re: Auntie Prism]  

In reply to:

(Auntie Prism) I guess what we're saying is that a poster's posts have to fall tolerably within the interests of the community. The interests, or the centre, of a community is determined mostly by the posters, and the centre can shift if you get a flock of new arrivals who share new interests and posting styles.


Yes and yes. And yes to the rest of your post as well. Compared to other message boards that I frequent TW has always been something of a self-regulating entity where mods take comparatively little action. And in perfect honesty there have been comparatively little complaints in TW too.

That had nothing to do with what you wrote, didn't it?

In reply to:

Apologies that you have been thus far deprived of reading PHOENIX and I discussing Exorcist II: The Heretic and Caligula at excruciating length.


I was an avid reader of PHOENIX's Livejournal so actually reading that is interesting. Right now I'm debating with myself on whether or not to register just that I can post something irrelevant to the thread about James Bond books.

Trololololololololololololololololo

Auntie Prism
(stardust savant)
02/07/11 04:32 PM
New posters, old posters: they're all clueless new [re: ziggfried]  

Yeah, PHOENIX's review of Caligula is quite something. I don't think I've been as excited by the prospect of watching such a terrible movie before.

Rather than words comes the thought of high windows

ziggfriedModerator
(acolyte)
02/07/11 05:30 PM
Re: New posters, old posters: they're all clueless new [re: Auntie Prism]  

The Making of Caligula documentary is pretty terrible too - almost as disgusting as the film itself. PHOENIX reviewed half of it (I took over 2&1/2 years later for the rest of it ). Something about creepy disgusting subject matter brings out the best in PHOENIX's wit. Spanking by Roy Lessin and Amityville II: The Possession are other examples...



Mxy
(cracked actor)
02/08/11 02:42 PM
Re: New posters, old posters: they're all clueless new [re: ziggfried]  

Have you and PHOENIX thought about writing for Cracked.com? If I can get articles in there anyone can, and the pay is pretty good.

http://bizarrewebcomic.com

Marquis
(wise like orangutan)
02/08/11 04:42 PM
Seanbaby + Monkeyboy = ? new [re: Mxy]  

Mxy, what've you done for Cracked? I used to read it pretty religiously a year or so ago.

i'm 2 much for these niggas and 3 much for these hos

Mxy
(cracked actor)
02/08/11 05:10 PM
Re: Seanbaby + Monkeyboy = ? new [re: Marquis]  

I started less than a year ago, so you probably haven't seen anything by me. Here are all my articles so far:

http://www.cracked.com/members/Mxy

I'm aware that there's at least one ignorant mistake in the Music Easter Eggs article, but I'm not too broken up about it because it was fun to watch the commenters go apeshit. It always is.

http://bizarrewebcomic.com

Marquis
(wise like orangutan)
02/10/11 06:45 PM
All Babies Are Beautiful new [re: Mxy]  

Well played! I did see that Easter Eggs article, although I have to say that I was less than wowed by the OK Computer / In Rainbows mashup.

i'm 2 much for these niggas and 3 much for these hos

Mxy
(cracked actor)
02/11/11 08:15 PM
Re: All Babies Are Beautiful new [re: Marquis]  

To be honest I'd listened to that a while ago and didn't think much of it. While doing research for the article I decided to sit down and listen to it with headphones and the lights out, and was really blown away by the way it flows. I know I'm in the minority, though: even my co-writer for that article couldn't see it.

http://bizarrewebcomic.com


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
Previous threadView all threadsNext thread*Threaded Mode
Jump to

Teenage Wildlife Davie Bowie | Email Us! Forums powered by WWWThreads v5.1.5perl

Teenage Wildlife Home Page Bowie's music Info on Bowie Other Media Have your say! Search the Site Help me!


Toolbar (Interact)

Etete Systems