Vote for E-I Community Moderators

[bigpaws]

Cop on Paws. If you have nothing better to do than "fuck the place up" just fuck off. I have some respect for you that you have been a member of this site for quite a while and have often contributed positively in my opinion, but you are just being a silly child here.

Pat x

P.S. If you need to keep starting silly threads on this same topic, at least pop them in the Soap Opera would you? I'll move your existing ones over now.

By fucking up the place completely I'd just be finishing what you started Patricia ................ I used to have respect for you too until you completely disgraced yourself with your decision not to punish HighWayMan for posting a real name on here ................... I won't fuck off until/if I'm ready but feel free to ban me if you wish???

Paws

[deafboy]

I won't fuck off until/if I'm ready but feel free to ban me if you wish???

Paws

whats on the menu for tonights bedtime story???

The Wholesome Adventures of Donald Duck and Co,
Westside.

[bigpaws]

whats on the menu for tonights bedtime story???

The Wholesome Adventures of Donald Duck and Co,
Westside.

Didn't I make you cry once in the Chat Room???? Remind me how I did that exactly ............ ??

Paws

[deafboy]

By fucking up the place completely I'd just be finishing what you started Patricia ................ I used to have respect for you too until you completely disgraced yourself with your decision not to punish HighWayMan for posting a real name on here ................... I won't fuck off until/if I'm ready but feel free to ban me if you wish???

Paws

i was going to get a booklet entitled "how to be an idiot in a weekend" but after reading this bullshit i decided i could do it in one night and free up the rest of my time for prayer and bibical scriptures.

I dont think you need a helping hand looking goofy,
Westside.

[bigpaws]

i was going to get a booklet entitled "how to be an idiot in a weekend" but after reading this bullshit i decided i could do it in one night and free up the rest of my time for prayer and bibical scriptures.

I dont think you need a helping hand looking goofy,
Westside.

What's the matter sweetheart?? Weren't loved enough as a child??

Paws

[carlos marvado]

What's going on here is an attempt by some who are philosophically opposed to community moderators for whatever reason to undermine the process of voting for community moderators. Having said that, I welcome bigpaws' poll to determine whether or not the membership even want community moderators. I am in favour of this poll determining the issue.

However some scare tactics are being used in this debate. The notion of community moderators being able to censor and/or ban others has been introduced here. I personally don't want any powers to ban anybody else; to my knowledge, no other nominee has canvassed for such powers; and in the absence of Patricia's terms of reference for community moderators, this is just a red heering.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in banning (permanently) and the lesser punishment of suspension for certain rule infringements. The sort of thing I am thinking about here are:

1. Giving real information about a member out that could assist somebody else in identifying them, i.e. full name, address, phone number, car registration etc.
2. Intimidation and threaths of violence against another member.
3. Actual physical violence.
4. Incitement to break the law or promoting criminal activity, i.e. drug activity, traffiking
of persons, underage-sex and paedophilia, etc.
5. Incitement to hatred based on gender, ethnicity, religion and sexual-orientation.

This list is not exhaustive......they're only the ones that immediately came to mind.

At the end of the day, I see Patricia being the person to wield the whip and do the banning.
The community mods, to my mind are just additional eyes, ears and keyboards, to watch out for rule infringements and report them.....and they would have to agree to be impartial. Patricia initially brought up the idea of community mods to enable her to devote more time to upgrading the website and developing more features and making it more user friendly. Community mods can be of assistance here.

Nobody is going to agree with everything that is posted on this site. Even though it is an adult site, we regularly get bouts of childish behaviour and tantrum throwing, but if this is to remain an open site, then such behaviour should not be curtailed unless it really oversteps rules that people are happy to abide by. I don't personally agree with censorship or banning unless persons engage in behaviour that is against the rules and damaging to the site. A recent example that comes to mind is that of Hilton Baby. Complaints were made by two members to ban this member because his/her avatar was a picture of a young child. Nothing in the posts themselves was offensive or vulgar, in fact I found the content quite hilarious. However, Patricia banned the user and deleted the posts after the complaints were made. I in her shoes would not have banned this person, unless they were using a picture of a child to promote underage-sex or paedophilia. The worst I would have done, would have been to request them to change their avatar within a certain timescale or I would have deleted it myself. Similarly big daddy and big bad john seem to get the utmost of pleasure in taking the piss out of each other. In a recent thread, they posted a number of "scat" pictures while having a go at one another. I personally found these pictures distasteful and "unappitising" but given the nature of the site and the fact that 43 escorts (according to one poster) advertise hardsports here, I did'nt feel it appropriate to complain and spoil their fun.

We all know that some English words carry much more weight and the capacity to insult than others. Example: to call a man a b****x is generally not regarded as carrying the same degree of insult as if one were to call a woman a c**t. Most women that I know would seem to regard this as the single most insulting word that can be directed at a woman, and I would be happy to see it's removal here and it's use penalised by suspension.

Finally some nominees have come in for a bit of stick from others. The fact remains that they were nominated......others could have been, but were'nt. Any side of a members' character/personality that they put into their member identity is purely one aspect. I have no reason to believe that anybody could'nt take themselves out of the daily cat-fights and act as a "referee" for a period of time.......some might even welcome the break.

Apologies to all for the length of my post......it's the QPH effect.

[deafboy]

Didn't I make you cry once in the Chat Room???? Remind me how I did that exactly ............ ??

Paws

you on about my old man dying without telling me he loved me.Ah im so hurt.Im about as hurt as you are tough.Tonights childish rambles have said more about your true self than anyone elses.You have made a laughing stock of yourself although i for one,found it rather enjoyable.So dont hurt me plz. quiver quiver by the way it took you long enough to regain your composure after that dreadful naming thread.Dublin City Council must have being booked out cleaning up the shite.Youd make a fortune in gay hardsports.Two accquisitions which you seem qualified with.You could have invented a renewable form of energy with the panic.


Nite baby,
Westside

[deafboy]

What's the matter sweetheart?? Weren't loved enough as a child??

Paws

but i wasnt reared as a spoilt brat.I got what i got on my own with no whinging ,bitching and crying and i done damn well too and only starting really.

Nite baby,
Westside.

[bigpaws]

Just to let you know Carlos I had absolutely no intention of messing up your thread here .................. I disagree with the concept of "community moderators" and just wanted to voice my opinion on the matter giving my reasons for opposing the idea.

However when one of the nominees knowingly breaks the Cardianl Rule of no real names being posted (twice!!) and Patricia blatantly not punishing the nominee in question in an attempt to biasedly keep a bad idea (in my opinion) afloat then I had no other choice but to vent my disgust both here and through Pm's.

I gave my honest opinion (as I am entitled to do ........ I think??) that I believed two of the nominees obviously couldn't be a "community moderator" and one of them proved my point by breaking the one rule that Patricia had always been strict about with no grey areas ............... to make it even worse Patricia actually attempted to justify his behaviour????

That is how/why your thread ended up going off the rails ................. blame your fellow nominee and blame Patricia's response.

Paws

[deafboy]

Just to let you know Carlos I had absolutely no intention of messing up your thread here .................. I disagree with the concept of "community moderators" and just wanted to voice my opinion on the matter giving my reasons for opposing the idea.

However when one of the nominees knowingly breaks the Cardianl Rule of no real names being posted (twice!!) and Patricia blatantly not punishing the nominee in question in an attempt to biasedly keep a bad idea (in my opinion) afloat then I had no other choice but to vent my disgust both here and through Pm's.

I gave my honest opinion (as I am entitled to do ........ I think??) that I believed two of the nominees obviously couldn't be a "community moderator" and one of them proved my point by breaking the one rule that Patricia had always been strict about with no grey areas ............... to make it even worse Patricia actually attempted to justify his behaviour????

That is how/why your thread ended up going off the rails ................. blame your fellow nominee and blame Patricia's response.

Paws

he can see exactly what your up to even though he may not admit it.

Bring on the dancing horses,
Westside.