Living Dead Guy, I have no idea what you’re talking about, and therefore, I cannot criticize it. Could you state what you mean in plain terms without obscure innuendo, please?
(jarbaby, there’s a Hello Kitty message board!?! No one tells me anything!)
<gulp> I KNOW I’m gonna be sorry I asked this. But, WHO???.
Your servile toady,
Cartooniverse
19th century New Orleans voodoo priestess.
Marie Laveau was the VooDoo Queen of New Orleans in the 19th Century.
People still leave offerings for her at her tomb in New Orleans because she’s supposed to be able to grant wishes or some such.
well; I thought this was an innocuous question.
Didn’t expect it to end up in the pit!
Fenris: you are sooo creative.(you look like Brad Pitt, don’t ya?)
vanilla, who will not do anything to get banned.
I believe LDG was making an insinuation that those folks with something other than “member” under the name are not held ot the same standards as “members”.
Then again, who listens to ficking zombies, anyway. Where’s my chainsaw?
Spiritus is correct, and just to reclairify:
I’m saying the rules aren’t applied as strictly towards the moderators and administrators as they are for everyone else. That’s all. As I understand it, this is the place to take issue with the people whom oversee the board and that is an observation of mine.
And you’d be completely correct. I’d go as far to say that we’re even a bit more lenient with long-tme posters that we’ve grown to know and love. But as moderators, we are allowed a little more slack because frankly, we’re all rich, we dress better than you do, drive classier cars and have sexier significant others. So there.
Dare you speak of my wife? You shall answer for that on the field of honour, sirrah! (draws glove)
Oh yeah, let’s get it on!
The line for the first annual Moderator cat fight starts right here. Tickets go for fifty bucks.
Ladies and gentlemen, lllllllets get ready to rumblllllllllll… 
No, nooo … the other significant other. You know … <nudge, nudge> …
Hey now! No hijacks allowed! Depending on what Just Call Me Tech-Mex says, this might be my very first Pit Thread and I’m not gonna let any silly moderator cat-fight spoil it. I’m at 2K Posts and never been Pitted, and dammint, this might be my last chance. So take it to another thread. For poor, unPitted l’il me. Please?
'sides, ev’ryone knows that Tuba, Lynn, Gaudere and Veb’s speical someones have the sexiest significant others of all the people connected with the board.[sup]*[/sup]
Fenris
[sup]*[/sup] Blatent sucking up, part 2 in a series. Collect them all!
An opinion that no doubt you’ve come to through neutral and independent observation.
But I think you mean Ciao.
Chow.
It was 2.26 pm, he was having a late lunch. Widely used in some geographical areas.
*Hey I like this Duck Duck Goose style of writing!
Er-hem.*
Search Google for “chow”. 27 uses in this context.
Time taken - three minutes.
Rant score 4.
Get over it.
'boss
No no no. Any Discordian can tell you that “chao” is the singular form of “chaos.”
Yeah but chow means he’d be two letters out. Therefore it’s more likely that he meant ciao, chat, chap, chas, chad…hey, maybe it was a malformed chad?
So, I’ve heard people talk about this before, and I’ve always wondered. Do members in good standing regularly get ‘taken to the Pit’? I’ve only seen it happen a couple times now (let’s see, off the top of my head I can think of Hamadryad’s anti-flirting thread, then the anti-Hamadryad thread, um, one about Hastur, and the recent one that seemed to be something about Spiritus Mundi, but since I couldn’t keep up with that thread right from the OP, who knows what they could have been saying), but people frequently lament that they’ve never been called here. Does it really happen that often? Besides to trolls and/or soon-to-be-banned posters (a la Nothing But Net, I think we all knew where that one was going), I mean.
Thanks for noticing that I have an interest in the administration of the Board in general and banning lore in specific - the same as most mods, judging from the names above. But that’s not what brought me here today. It was my name turning up in a search to see if I’ve gotten responses to my other posts. So, since you called me for my opinion, I’ll give it.
This time we even have a couple of the rational mods, Chronos and Arnold, being rational. And of course Lynn and Tuba being irrational.
Lynn says it is anti-board to correct Tuba’s guess of 2% with an actual count of 3%. Is this rational?
Then she says Ma only comes to complain, but a) she doesn’t come just for that, as a couple of people noticed, but also b) correcting a guess to a count is not a complaint, but in the spirit of the “Seeking Truth, even when it contradicts bureaucrats and their Received opinions” theme of this board.
(Aside- I’ve never understood the theory that Ed and Lynn are the same person. Even split personalities don’t split that much. Ed is dry and humorless, but rational. Lynn is tacky and humorless, but irrational. Logic free and logic proof.)
**Errors in facts and logic in this thread (by various writers above): **
- Anthracite’s study, while methodical and with statistical validity for its main objectives, was not “random”. Picking names at uniform intervals is the opposite of random. Uniform intervals can tell you many things, but percentage of Banned is not among them.
- Banned names are not random, but highly clustered. Of course there are some arising at random points. However, in numerical terms the process of banning forces clusters. Posters who get into Catch Me If You Can games of changing the last digit of their names, or the number of blanks preceding their names (as was once possible), create dozens of banned names all registered in the same day. Besides this there are the Alpha Challenge groups, like the Alphabet gang, where the raison d’être was to get consecutive names. There was also the time when Ed declared that “all names registered yesterday are toast”. And if you look around the membership list you will find large clusters of names which appear to be random letters, apparently designed to confuse and scoff at the bureaucrats who search for names to ban before they even post.
(To look around the list like Anthracite did, just vary the last number in this link** http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=10000 ** ) - The list Ma mentioned is not imaginary, nor a secret. At least it wasn’t. It was collected over time by the posters at http://out.at/socks . Sadly, that board was recently shuttered when CoolBoard went out of the free forum business. But at least it did exist, and some of you who visited may have copies of the page in question on your Temporary Internet Files directory.
- “Warning” posters on a thread is not logical. We have email for genuine warnings. There is no particular reason to think Ma knows Lynn came in after her to whine. We all know Lynn is too sensitive and takes things too personally, but Ma was not responding to Lynn, but the OP. So that was a cover in case she wants to ban her later, she can pretend there was a warning, and the board toadies will agree with her.
- The contention of whichever airhead above that Ma had better produce the list “within the hour” is stupid even for a troll hunter. Ma, like most of us probably only comes here every week or so when there is a new Straight Dope column; the vast majority of our 15-thousand+ members have real lives outside the board. (No offence to those of you who don’t.)
Liar. It’s impossible to search on your user name. The search engine requires 3 consecutive alphanumeric characters.