PF RULES AND GUIDELINES - Comments Welcome

Some of our policies evolve over time. A title that does not give an indication of the topic i.e. "What the heck?" or "Where's the outrage?" will be changed. Titles that appear to misrepresent a story should usually not be changed. Proving/disproving the title's interpretation of the story should be debated in the topic. If a mod was to go in and declare what is truth/fact, what is the purpose of debate here at all?

 

12th that is ass backwards. Titles that misrepresent a story NOT be changed, yet the title asking for comments on the story will be changed? And we debate the accuracy of the TITLE?
Git yer butt over here, and give me some of what you are smokin.

 

You are misunderstanding. In the two examples I gave, there is not a whiff of subject in the title at all. Someone looking for a specific story will not see it, and they will start a dupe thread. The main purpose of changing the title is to stop dupe threads.

The article should support the OP's opinion. It does not have to be the sole source of the thread topic. The article in itself is not the topic. The topic is whatever the OP wants it to be. The mods may have to edit for flaming, but as long as the title isn't like the examples above, I would not edit it.

Here's one. "Bush lies to get nation's support for war". The title is obviously the OP's opinion, and I hope that they give a link or two to support their opinion. What if I came in a changed the title to "Bush gives speech to get nation's support for war". Be dumb if you ask me. The first title is better, IMO. It will provoke replies without flaming. Should the mods debate the facts so as to ascertain what to title a thread? I think not.

The TOS simply does not prohibit opinions in thread titles.

These are my own standards for editing thread titles. I do not speak for the whole mod panel, and I am not giving my opinion on a specific case except for my examples.

 

I think this is a perfect explanation!

 

....and yet it happens. I've been registered here for few years but quit this board because of exactly that (note my join date vs my post count). I came back only because crap happened to the board I went to from here and some of the people from over there thought that coming here was a good idea.

Of course I speak only for myself, but my bookie's already got my money on how long those other people last over here. Let's just say that the odds of people leaving because of the bias of the mods are better than average.

 

Well that makes more sense. Search box?

What about the little "subtitle" box on the post? Can one write :What the heck?

So one may write in the thread title: "Obama is a bald face liar" and then in the post write why the poster thinks so with links to support that opinion?

 

Oh I'm sure people will leave.

Just as I'm sure there will be nothing at all that I or anyone else can say that will matter one bit.

I got here last August and pretty quickly got sucked right into a controversy about Mods being biased against lesbians.
Being as how I'm quite the dyke and had stated so---this concerned me a bit.

Until more of the story dribbled out----

I've now been around through two "board wars" and a whole bunch of drama and people leaving, coming, leaving, coming back---gathering a flock---staging a comeback---etc....

And considering up until a little over a year ago I didn't really know from Board culture, it's been quite an education for me.

But here's what else I've seen.

I'm a flaming liberal minded lesbian in an inter-racial relationship.
I'm a Kool-aid swillin' Obama supportin' leftist leanin' loon who has posted here day and night for near 'bouts a year.

I count as friends and people I respect folks from all over the political map and all over the religious spectrum.

Up until a few months ago--I'd never even received a warning, much less an infraction--or a ban.

I've never had a thread or a post deleted or altered for partisan purposes.

I was recently asked to take on a role that has never been in existence before now.
And even more recently I've been given access to the "Mod Lounge"

I've been able to see, with my own two peepers that this whole "conspiracy of bias"---yeah---it just ain't there.

And I also know---though it's taken me a while to get past my blindly optimistic naivete that not one single blasted word---not one---of what I just wrote---is gonna matter to those who truly want to believe that bias is here and ruling the day.


I learned that lesson the hard way.
Had a whole group of "friends" turn on me---simply because I stood by my principles and my beliefs and remained loyal to those loyal to me.

People are going to perceive bias simply because in some cases, they want too and the hell with the facts.

*shrug*

 

This is all very confusing. I would suggest a new rule - no thread titles allowed. That is fair and since no one would be able to find anything it would cut down on all the arguing around here.

Glad I could help.

 

You know Doug, in your twisted sadistic way, you're right. Here. Have a fish.

 

Comes down to, ya can't change wha...OH CRAP, NO COFFEE??????!!!!!

 

Hey!!!
Are you trying to give my PF hubby a

I know!!!
The HUMANITY!!!!!

 

Absolutely. Just be sure you don't put it in Current Events or Latest World News no matter how well you think it fits.

Is that the wink you hate, tresh?

 

It's just as well. There are enough people here that post with "to hell with the facts" attitude.
The mods painstakingly operate without bias. Sometimes without intelligence, but definitely without bias. Sometimes, decisions are even reversed. I know I wouldn't want to be a mod. They are (*)(*)(*)(*)ed if they do and (*)(*)(*)(*)ed if they don't. Me, I'd have itchy delete finger.

So leave if you must, but know it is because you see what you want to see, not because of any moderator bias.

 

Geeze tresh, I got a whole bag of them. The healthy whole grain ones too.

Here, have some

 

You owe me a Stupid Sig Line for a week.

 

So some people slide under the wire while others get singled out. This is not news on a biased board--this is exactly what leads to the charge of rules being applied to some people and not others as a crusade against certain (picked-on, scapegoat, example) people are already tying up mod time. A little even-handedness would go a long way toward at least a thin veneer of appearing fair.

 

Hey! I didn't make any deals!

 

Thank you for helping prove my point so quickly.

 

You just think I did is all...and with that, thank you for proving mine.

 

Color me curious, but why, if you KNOW the mod panel is Oh Soooooo Biased and they are just lying in wait, ready to spring an ambush upon the first unsuspecting poster (because after all, we all know that how you are treated on an internet forum can completely alter the very fabric of your existence) then why?????? I say again, WHY??????? are you here?

 

You have but to page back a page to read for yourself why this is.

=============

Well, from this point, TWO pages.

 

<<<<<<<<<nomination For Post Of The Week>>>>>>>>>​

 

Yes, post of the week for the obvious inability to read anything but the one page he's on.

I guess I need to hold both your hands and direct you to post #105. Sheesh.

 

The break-up or whatever of your previous board is not a sufficient excuse. There are many other boards out there to choose from where you might at least spend a little time posting before the bias becomes blantantly evident. So why stay here? I think you fit into a certain category of posters who would rather stir up drama than actually debate a substantial issue.

 

Well, I don't believe that the sysgods here died and left you in charge of deciding what's a sufficient excuse or not. It just happens to be a fact, like it or don't. I'll come and go where I please to come and go and it will take a banning to keep me out.

And now you give me one more reason to stay--yourself.

Enjoy.