**MUST READ THIS** New Announcement

[Vlyrock]

Make sure you read this new announcement so you're aware of what's going on with the boards. Feel free to discuss it here.

http://www.aggiefans.com/forums/announcement.php?f=&a=27

[Pumchavas28]

:gig:

[The Massacre]

just for clarification... is telling someone they are full of ************ considered a personal attack?

[polish]

I expected a better thread since it said must read. I figured it'd be a hotties thread.

[jagowar]

just so vly doesnt take the flack for this it started out as my idea... but we have been discussing things in the mod section for a while now.

[Vlyrock]

I expected a better thread since it said must read. I figured it'd be a hotties thread.
Those would have NSFW tags... I'm sure many users will understand why this is being implemented...

[Burnetaggie99]

I don't think anybody has posted nude pics but you see personal attacks here all the time.

[polish]

Those would have NSFW tags... I'm sure many users will understand why this is being implemented...
I was joking :cool:

I definately understand and agree :gig:

[Burnetaggie99]

I agree with the NSFW tags and leaving a link to look at at your own risk.

[Superaggie79]

I've been reprimanded for nudity that no one else even noticed

[Vlyrock]

I don't think anybody has posted nude pics but you see personal attacks here all the time.
There have been several pictures that I've had to delete. Near nudity is usually pushing the line. See through clothes counts as nudity (and we've had several of those) or ones where hands aren't covering everything like they should be (again several of those). I haven't handed out infractions, just deleted the pictures, but this will also be infractioned from here on out.

[The Massacre]

my earlier question was actually a serious question. no answer?

i also like the enforced policy. i personally attack people on a regular basis and this will eliminate that. hopefully the limitation on those attacks will keep people from being whiny bitches about names i call them.

keep up the good work Vly and feel free to slap some infraction points on me if i forget about the rules.

:gig:

[Burnetaggie99]

:( no more see through pics

[polish]

So I have a week left to mess with people ;)

[Dustin00whoop]

So telling someone they have no clue what they are talking about is no longer considered discussion?

[Superaggie79]

this brings up a good point. What is considered personal attack? Please give examples.

[The Massacre]

i want to know if my original example is a p.a.

[Superaggie79]

does the ;) fix personal attack?

[Vlyrock]

Saying "you have no clue what you're talking about" is getting in muddy water and I don't want to have to rule on that -- so avoid saying it.

A personal attack on a poster is any time you attack the poster themselves. You stop arguing in terms of what's been posted and start bringing up things like, "you're a cleat chaser"..."you're a nappy headed ho"...."you're an idiot"..."you're full of crap".

Essentially, discussing and disagreeing is normal, but do it in a civilized manner. Once it turns personal and gets away from the subject at hand, then it becomes a personal attack.

[Vlyrock]

Tro, yes, telling somebody they're full of **** is a personal attack. That's one of those things where we'd hope you'd either ignore the person or call them on their **** with a factual statement. Saying you're full of **** adds no value to the boards and only opens the thread up to bickering and bashing.

[Curly06]

Saying "you have no clue what you're talking about" is getting in muddy water and I don't want to have to rule on that -- so avoid saying it.

A personal attack on a poster is any time you attack the poster themselves. You stop arguing in terms of what's been posted and start bringing up things like, "you're a cleat chaser"..."you're a nappy headed ho"...."you're an idiot"..."you're full of crap".

Essentially, discussing and disagreeing is normal, but do it in a civilized manner. Once it turns personal and gets away from the subject at hand, then it becomes a personal attack.

:gig:

[The Massacre]

re:cc

sorry again to the original person who used that phrase. i just made a comment passing by in other post and it has exploded.

didn't meant to steal your thunder, mr. creator.

[Superaggie79]

Saying "you have no clue what you're talking about" is getting in muddy water and I don't want to have to rule on that -- so avoid saying it.

A personal attack on a poster is any time you attack the poster themselves. You stop arguing in terms of what's been posted and start bringing up things like, "you're a cleat chaser"..."you're a nappy headed ho"...."you're an idiot"..."you're full of crap".

Essentially, discussing and disagreeing is normal, but do it in a civilized manner. Once it turns personal and gets away from the subject at hand, then it becomes a personal attack.
But what if the person doesn't have any idea what he/she is talking about?

EX: I was talking about our recruits not leaving earlier and I deserved to be told that because I was just arguing for the sake of it.

[Vlyrock]

1) How would the person know you have no clue? (normally, they wouldn't because you're an anonymous poster).
2) Ignore the post. If I think you're full of crap, I'll ignore your post. Responding just gives you a reason to spew more fake stuff...but again, if you can't ignore them, then call them on their bluff. Attacking a post in a respectful manner is fine. (ex: I think you're wrong because I've talked to x and they told me...) -- that person can be lying too, but they haven't broken any forum rules via a personal attack.
3) If you can obviously tell the person's just stirring the pot, as a moderator, we'll usually step in at that point because of the "flaming" potential.
4) If the person is annoying and adds nothing to the board, add them to your 'ignore list'.

[Superaggie79]

will there be more freedom on the rivalries board?

[jagowar]

Saying "you have no clue what you're talking about" is getting in muddy water and I don't want to have to rule on that -- so avoid saying it.

A personal attack on a poster is any time you attack the poster themselves. You stop arguing in terms of what's been posted and start bringing up things like, "you're a cleat chaser"..."you're a nappy headed ho"...."you're an idiot"..."you're full of crap".

Essentially, discussing and disagreeing is normal, but do it in a civilized manner. Once it turns personal and gets away from the subject at hand, then it becomes a personal attack.

and to expound on that when we have sips trolling theres no need to quote that post and say quit trolling sip or whatever. just report the post via the icon next to the post and we will take care of it. dont even dignify it with a response.

[The Massacre]

1 more question... is it a personal attack to call someone a 2 %er?

[Superaggie79]

What about the commenting on players and coaches rules. Are those back in effect? Y'all have gotten pretty lax on that.

[Superaggie79]

:spy: 1 more question... is it a personal attack to call someone a 2 %er?

[jagowar]

will there be more freedom on the rivalries board?

i expect so... but at the same time the rules still apply there but its natural to see more "hate" going on there because thats where the other fans are supposed to go.

[Vlyrock]

will there be more freedom on the rivalries board?
There will be some limited freedom since it's a "rivalries" board. If a Texas athlete gets in trouble for smoking weed again, post it and make fun (the university and player personal attacks can be waived in there). However, attacking a Texas poster (like Calihornia or JohnL still will not be tolerated).

[WesTxAg]

just so vly doesnt take the flack for this it started out as my idea... but we have been discussing things in the mod section for a while now.
what a couple of douches...:cool:

**THIS IS A THREAD WE WOULD DELETE** - VLY

[jagowar]

1 more question... is it a personal attack to call someone a 2 %er?

not in my opinion....

[Superaggie79]

http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/images/808/808_img_11.jpg

[Vlyrock]

1 more question... is it a personal attack to call someone a 2 %er?
Depends on the context...can't answer that one with a simple yes/no. Generally, it would be because you'd be using it in the context of questioning the poster's loyalty to the school. However, you could also saying it jokingly in which it wouldn't be a personal attack (ex: quit being a 2%er and go to the game...)

[jagowar]

What about the commenting on players and coaches rules. Are those back in effect? Y'all have gotten pretty lax on that.

yeah... its part of the personal attack section imo. you can say you hated this play or that scheme etc. you dont need to say something like fran needs to eat sh#t and die.

[Vlyrock]

What about the commenting on players and coaches rules. Are those back in effect? Y'all have gotten pretty lax on that.
Yes, during the Gillispie deal we were lenient because obviously, everybody was upset. But now, it's over, we have a new coach and BCG is no longer a concern with us. Threads bashing him (or posts) are not allowed along with any players/recruits, etc...

[Superaggie79]

Do you feel that these "possibles" like the 2%er rule will make the moderation purely judgemental and like or disdain for a certain poster could influence moderation? Example: when I came on it was cool for people to bash homosexuals by saying they'd rateher their daughter be a pornstar than a gay son but when I made a questionable post I was reprimanded.

[jagowar]

moderation has and always will be judgemental... its really going to be a case by case basis.

thats what the infractions will be for, we are going to start giving them out ALOT more but make them worth less so you really have to piss us off to get banned.

[Vlyrock]

Tenure has no affect on whether you're breaking a rule or not. If you break a rule, you get an infraction. As for differences in moderation... I'm not Jag or Twelfthag and I know I will interpret things differently. We're not the end all say all nazi's that'll boot you off without warning. We will most likely moderate a little differently, but in general be consistent across the board.

If you ever feel we're not or we're doing something wrong, feel free to post about it. You'll find that 50% of this site is member input...we've come a long way and half the things implemented now (arcade, chat, etc) were brought up by members. Same with rules...

[Superaggie79]

moderation has and always will be judgemental... its really going to be a case by case basis.

thats what the infractions will be for, we are going to start giving them out ALOT more but make them worth less so you really have to piss us off to get banned.
Isn't that like the NFL fines that have been so small the players don't even care but now they come with a hefty penalty to get the players attention. Are you afraid that you'll have the same problems?

[The Massacre]

i think i should say my goodbyes now. i'm going to try my best, but i have a feeling i will be perma-banned before too long.

[Vlyrock]

Isn't that like the NFL fines that have been so small the players don't even care but now they come with a hefty penalty to get the players attention. Are you afraid that you'll have the same problems?
Okay, now you're just getting picky. The idea is a user realizes why and how they broke the rules and adjusts their posting behavior accordingly. If he/she doesn't, then moderation against the user will continue and the user will find themselves removed from the board for a time period. Continual infractions and short bans will result in a permanent ban.

[jagowar]

Isn't that like the NFL fines that have been so small the players don't even care but now they come with a hefty penalty to get the players attention. Are you afraid that you'll have the same problems?

well the difference is you could easily rack up 10 infractions in a single thread if you keep going back and forth (like we have seen). you get an infraction per post generally now. so if you see the thread going in the wrong direction (and we all know when a thread is about to derail) leave it alone.

we havent worked out the points system yet but i envision it something on the order of 20 (worth 5 pts each) infractions to get booted for a few days.

[Superaggie79]

What about the fact that a paying user has an opinion moderated like "Fran is no better than RC and is fat". The user pays for the right to use the service and the first amendment give him/her the right to voice their opinion as long as it doesn't harm another person or the government. How does that work?

[WesTxAg]

i think i should say my goodbyes now. i'm going to try my best, but i have a feeling i will be perma-banned before too long.
i think i will be, too. i guess i got a week...

[Superaggie79]

Okay, now you're just getting picky. The idea is a user realizes why and how they broke the rules and adjusts their posting behavior accordingly. If he/she doesn't, then moderation against the user will continue and the user will find themselves removed from the board for a time period. Continual infractions and short bans will result in a permanent ban.
My point is if I can get 20 five point infractions before getting banned. I could spread them out over time and allow them to wear off and never get banned but at the same time never really follow the rules. And I'm not talking about me personally I'm just discussing as was stated in the initial post.

[polish]

My point is if I can get 20 five point infractions before getting banned. I could spread them out over time and allow them to wear off and never get banned but at the same time never really follow the rules. And I'm not talking about me personally I'm just discussing as was stated in the initial post.
Then Vly goes NFL Commish on you :bow:

[Vlyrock]

What about the fact that a paying user has an opinion moderated like "Fran is no better than RC and is fat". The user pays for the right to use the service and the first amendment give him/her the right to voice their opinion as long as it doesn't harm another person or the government. How does that work?
Donations don't give you the right to break the rules. As a donor, you get other benefits like extra forums, AFTV, custom avatars, and PM Space, etc... Again, tenure or donation status doesn't matter when it comes to following the rules.

[jagowar]

My point is if I can get 20 five point infractions before getting banned. I could spread them out over time and allow them to wear off and never get banned but at the same time never really follow the rules. And I'm not talking about me personally I'm just discussing as was stated in the initial post.

and if that happens we will figure it out eventually.... really all the infractions system is designed to do is give slaps on the wrist to tell you when you do something wrong.

[Vlyrock]

My point is if I can get 20 five point infractions before getting banned. I could spread them out over time and allow them to wear off and never get banned but at the same time never really follow the rules. And I'm not talking about me personally I'm just discussing as was stated in the initial post.

I don't think we'll go that low on them, in fact, I'm not sure we should change them... If you're a continous offender, then we'll make your infraction points last longer (we can do that) so that you have to behave for longer... We have ways to keep you from getting around the system (and I use you vaguely, not implying you SA).

[jagowar]

actually thats probably a good idea.... but we should remove the premade ones other than the instant ban ones and make everything custom because then we can set the time on a per infraction basis and we see the infraction history when we go to the screen to give the infraction so we can easily see if you are a "repeat offender" and give a longer expiration time to it.

[WesTxAg]

so are these infraction pts. going to be public(like right below the rep bars?

[The Massacre]

now that's interesting. if you are a continuous offender, your infraction points will last longer than others' infraction points.

[jagowar]

you will be able to see them... i know that. and we can see them but i dont think they are public.

you can see your history in your profile.
http://www.aggiefans.com/forums/usercp.php

[WesTxAg]

what a couple of nice guys, i love our moderators!!!:cool:

**THIS IS A THREAD WE WOULD DELETE** - VLY


totally uncalled for

[Vlyrock]

Infraction points are not public to others. They are viewable to you (like Jag said) in your user control panel. You also receive a PM from us when you get one...(cause we're nice like that...you won't just log in and find out you were banned like other sites that start with T)

[Vlyrock]

Nice WestTxAg. :)

[Thisjeffguy07]

we should have a forum where you can personally attack people... just in case two individuals want to slap themselves around... :headslap:

[The Massacre]

the chat room is a good place to do that jeff.

i vote that we have a list on the site that we keep track of who is and who isn't a dumbass. that way you won't get points for calling them one because you won't need to call them because we'll already know they are, if they are on the list.

whatcha think?

[Thisjeffguy07]

the chat room is a good place to do that jeff.

i vote that we have a list on the site that we keep track of who is and who isn't a dumbass. that way you won't get points for calling them one because you won't need to call them because we'll already know they are, if they are on the list.

whatcha think?

we could have an exam that people could take to get off the dumbass list... everybody would start out as a dumbass... we could even have different levels... it could be a new factor in rep power :gig:

[The Massacre]

score!

[Thisjeffguy07]

this is one of the first things that tro and i have ever agreed on... that's got to be worth something :cool:

[WesTxAg]

we should have a forum where you can personally attack people... just in case two individuals want to slap themselves around... :headslap:
ye, like back in the day when high schools would just let two guys duke it out in a ring in the gym

[Thisjeffguy07]

the chat room is a good place to do that jeff.

i vote that we have a list on the site that we keep track of who is and who isn't a dumbass. that way you won't get points for calling them one because you won't need to call them because we'll already know they are, if they are on the list.

whatcha think?

:rep:

first time i've ever given rep to tro???

these new rules are working already

[The Massacre]

2 free weeks of immunity from the personal attack infraction points? staff? ;)

[Thisjeffguy07]

ye, like back in the day when high schools would just let two guys duke it out in a ring in the gym

exactly :popcorn:

[Thisjeffguy07]

is it a personal attack if i'm making fun of myself... :undecided:

[WesTxAg]

where's sam at, im pretty sure he won't be too happy about this

[The Massacre]

where's sam at, im pretty sure he won't be too happy about this

it might actually work out in his favor, because now people can't tell him what a doosh he is without getting in trouble. ;)

jk of course, sam is my fav of favs.

[Gravy]

FYI, Calling someone a 2%er is much worse than calling them a ************head. Also, where would the line be drawn for the following 3 (allowed or not)?

1. I am not sure what Fran is thinking, but he is not making smart decisions in my opinion.

2. There are a lot of crappy, overrated, and overpaid coaches out there and I think we have the king of the pile.

3. A lot of coaches are smart and worth paying a lot of money. A&M should try to get one of them next time rather than repeat our current situation.

Now obviously, all of those are knocks on Fran, but none of them actually "attack" him, or do they?

How about something like, "Don't be a dumbass." You are not calling them one, and suggesting that they not be one, but really you are basically saying they were one. Or, "Dustin, I would never call you a dumbass for that statement, but I wouldn't be surprised if many others did."

sigh....I know it got sorta personal on here at times, but it was never so bad that someone did not come back other than Cali which worked out the best for everyone.

I just need to know where the line is........ :undecided:

By the way, would my signature by an attack? What if someone in an article actually quotes something I like, but it can be considered an attack, yet is a real quote that can be proven....?

[The Massacre]

ha ha. i figured the Coach Fran bashers would chime in on this soon.

[WesTxAg]

FYI, Calling someone a 2%er is much worse than calling them a ************head
personal experience?:spy:

[Gravy]

personal experience?:spy:

yep, in the corps, calling someone a ************head was just everyday life. Calling them a 2%er was direct insult to their school pride.

[WesTxAg]

yep, in the corps, calling someone a ************head was just everyday life. Calling them a 2%er was direct insult to their school pride.
i could understand that

[The Massacre]

what about a ***head micmack nappy 2% hoe?

[WesTxAg]

what about a ***head micmack nappy 2% hoe?
:laugh: :laugh:

slow down there, imus...

[GregH]

All I can say is WOW. So now if the mods take a comment that someone posted out of context, like, (assuming you are a Liberal yourself for the sake of an example) "I think all the current Liberal candidates running for President are stupid ass morons and have zero to offer the American public" oh well, that's the way it was interpreted? That doesn't sound right at all.

[Vlyrock]

All I can say is WOW. So now if the mods take a comment that someone posted out of context, like, (assuming you are a Liberal yourself for the sake of an example) "I think all the current Liberal candidates running for President are stupid ass morons and have zero to offer the American public" oh well, that's the way it was interpreted? That doesn't sound right at all.
Yeah, you lose me at "stupid ass morons"...how is that not a personal attack?

[Vlyrock]

Also, where would the line be drawn for the following 3 (allowed or not)?

1. I am not sure what Fran is thinking, but he is not making smart decisions in my opinion.

2. There are a lot of crappy, overrated, and overpaid coaches out there and I think we have the king of the pile.

3. A lot of coaches are smart and worth paying a lot of money. A&M should try to get one of them next time rather than repeat our current situation.

Now obviously, all of those are knocks on Fran, but none of them actually "attack" him, or do they?
1 is fine as long as you give reasons why you think he's not making smart decisions.
2 is a personal attack. King of the pile of crappy, overrated and overpaid coaches is a personal attack.
3 is fine (in my opinion).

[Gravy]

1 is fine as long as you give reasons why you think he's not making smart decisions.
2 is a personal attack. King of the pile of crappy, overrated and overpaid coaches is a personal attack.
3 is fine (in my opinion).


Thanks for the feedback. That does actually help kinda define the boundaries for me. :gig:

[Thisjeffguy07]

is :headslap: a personal attack...

[shaft-john shaft]

i'm ready to rumble , by the rules of course.

[Thisjeffguy07]

i'm ready to rumble , by the rules of course.

:headslap:

[Pumchavas28]

If you use more than 1 :headslap:, is that a personal attack?

:headslap::headslap::headslap::headslap::headslap: :headslap::headslap::headslap::headslap:

[Thisjeffguy07]

If you use more than 1 :headslap:, is that a personal attack?

:headslap::headslap::headslap::headslap::headslap: :headslap::headslap::headslap::headslap:

you bring up a good point... the rules state that anything that can be considered A personal attack is not allowed... that means that something that would be considered multiple personal attacks is ok... :gig:

[Superaggie79]

what if we call Jorvorskie overweight?


p.s. everyone that misspells jorvorskie should get infraction points.

[Gravy]

If instead of saying, "Dustin, you are a dumbass." I change it to, "You are all dumbasses." Then it is no longer personal.....right?

[House Divided RV]

Dangit. I have been saving up all my personal attacks for almost 2 years to unload all at once. *SIGH*

:headslap:

[PJAggiegrrl]

You guys are hilarious. :) and oh yeah.... I guess I will follow the rules too.

[Mole]

I personally disagree with this new line of moderating. I feel like the boards are just fine. I will agree that there have been several instances lately that would have required moderation but those are isolated cases and could be delt with easily.

Unfortuneately I feel that this will only generate confusion and stifle conversation. In other words people won't know if what they are saying is permissible so they won't post and I don't need to tell you we need all the posters we can get. This board is slow sometimes.

In my opinion calling someone a "stupid brain dead fata$$" is a personal attack, but saying "You don't know what your talking about" isn't a personal attack.

I guess I will just have to wait and see what the outcome is. I don't use personal attacks (i don't think) so I don't think this new era of moderation will affect me.

I also think we wouldn't need this moderation if people would remember a few things:

1. Argueing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even when you win your still retarded.

2. Don't feed the trolls.

3. You have an ingore button for a reason. Use it.

4. There are a lot of internet tough guys and gals. See statement 3.

5. Remember you came here to talk about A&M with other Aggies. We are all on the same team.

6. Remember it's "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." NOT "Do it to others before they do it to you."

I enjoy being a memeber here at Aggiefans. I like coming here and talking with all of you. I hope this leads to a better board experience for all people.

[Dustin00whoop]

What if I say that Gravy is a homosexual male whore?

It may or may not be true, but that obviously doesn't matter anymore! And, it really isn't attacking him personally unless you have something against gays or whores!

[Mole]

What if I say that Gravy is a homosexual male whore?

It may or may not be true, but that obviously doesn't matter anymore! And, it really isn't attacking him personally unless you have something against gays or whores!

I would have to say that is a personal attack. Unless of course you have personal experience proving otherwise. :spy:

[TexAgFromCal]

What if I say that Gravy is a homosexual male whore?

It may or may not be true, but that obviously doesn't matter anymore! And, it really isn't attacking him personally unless you have something against gays or whores!


I would say that without facts that it would be a personal attack in my opinon. And the only way to have the "facts" to back up that case would be pictures. I REALLY DON'T want to see the pictures that you would have to post to show that as a fact.

Now for my question:
If I say, ""XX looks like a ***." I am stating an opinion and thus I don't think it would be an attack.
Now if I say, "XX is a ***." that would be a personal attack.

If I am correct then I am ok with the new rules.

[Mole]

I think according to the rules both of those instances are personal attacks.

[Dustin00whoop]

I would have to say that is a personal attack. Unless of course you have personal experience proving otherwise. :spy:

So you're saying you have something against whores? ;)

[Mole]

So you're saying you have something against whores? ;)

Far be it from me to say things against those that are less morally challenged than the rest of us when it comes to all things carnal.

[jagowar]

I personally disagree with this new line of moderating. I feel like the boards are just fine. I will agree that there have been several instances lately that would have required moderation but those are isolated cases and could be delt with easily.

Unfortuneately I feel that this will only generate confusion and stifle conversation. In other words people won't know if what they are saying is permissible so they won't post and I don't need to tell you we need all the posters we can get. This board is slow sometimes.

In my opinion calling someone a "stupid brain dead fata$$" is a personal attack, but saying "You don't know what your talking about" isn't a personal attack.

I guess I will just have to wait and see what the outcome is. I don't use personal attacks (i don't think) so I don't think this new era of moderation will affect me.

I also think we wouldn't need this moderation if people would remember a few things:

1. Argueing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even when you win your still retarded.

2. Don't feed the trolls.

3. You have an ingore button for a reason. Use it.

4. There are a lot of internet tough guys and gals. See statement 3.

5. Remember you came here to talk about A&M with other Aggies. We are all on the same team.

6. Remember it's "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." NOT "Do it to others before they do it to you."

I enjoy being a memeber here at Aggiefans. I like coming here and talking with all of you. I hope this leads to a better board experience for all people.

if people used common sense when posting we wouldn't need rules at all either but thats the curse of the internet. my one personal rule which covers most posts is "if i wouldn't say it to their face i wont say it online". but the anonymity of the internet works against that.

i think most of you are taking the new rules too literally.... they still are guidelines and have always been on the books (as long as ive been here atleast) but the difference now is we are starting to enforce them. but its always been up to us (mods) to determine what we think you are trying to say and make our decision based on that but alot of times its made pretty clear for us.

[TexAgFromCal]

"if i wouldn't say it to their face i wont say it online". but the anonymity of the internet works against that.



This works well for most people, but quite frankly i don't really have a filter when I talk to people. If you asked any of the people I work with they will tell you the same thing.

Having to type it here means that I have a little more time to think about it and filtler myself, but once I get typing that filter is gone as well. Overall I think the rules are going to help maintain civility on the boards so it is really a good thing. I just hope that staff will police the stupid threads more than anything else.

[Vlyrock]

I personally disagree with this new line of moderating. I feel like the boards are just fine. I will agree that there have been several instances lately that would have required moderation but those are isolated cases and could be delt with easily.

Yes, but it has spilled over into other threads and sets a tone for the boards. That's not what Aggiefans.com is here for.

Unfortunately I feel that this will only generate confusion and stifle conversation. In other words people won't know if what they are saying is permissible so they won't post and I don't need to tell you we need all the posters we can get. This board is slow sometimes.

We're stopping personal attacks, not conversation. Talk about A&M, talk about GW, talk about whatever you want...just don't attack the person. I don't feel like that's stifling anybody.
In my opinion calling someone a "stupid brain dead fata$$" is a personal attack, but saying "You don't know what your talking about" isn't a personal attack. Usually the second thing wouldn't be a personal attack, but at the same time, does it really need to be posted?


I also think we wouldn't need this moderation if people would remember a few things:

1. Argueing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Even when you win your still retarded.
2. Don't feed the trolls.
3. You have an ingore button for a reason. Use it.
4. There are a lot of internet tough guys and gals. See statement 3.
5. Remember you came here to talk about A&M with other Aggies. We are all on the same team.
6. Remember it's "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." NOT "Do it to others before they do it to you."

This is exactly why we have the new enforcement. The arguing, the baiting of trolls, the lack of ignoring bad posters, etc.
I enjoy being a memeber here at Aggiefans. I like coming here and talking with all of you. I hope this leads to a better board experience for all people.
I have a feeling it will, but as I've said before, if you think otherwise, feel free to voice your opinion. We actually listen here...

[blackgloves]

Saying "you have no clue what you're talking about"


So where there be infractions for those that DONT know what their talking about, but fronting like they do?

;)

[Gravy]

the major flaw is that those in support of the current football coach which seems to greatly include the mods, would see any statements that are unfavorable concerning the coach as a personal attack on the coach. That would kill about 50% of the threads on this board.

[blackgloves]

the major flaw is that those in support of the current football coach which seems to greatly include the mods, would see any statements that are unfavorable concerning the coach as a personal attack on the coach. That would kill about 50% of the threads on this board.

sounds good to me

[TexAgFromCal]

the major flaw is that those in support of the current football coach which seems to greatly include the mods, would see any statements that are unfavorable concerning the coach as a personal attack on the coach. That would kill about 50% of the threads on this board.


I think Gravy has a good point here. I really wonder if the moderators can keep an objective eye on the comments by people that are unhappy with the current football situation. I have faith that their memories of that other site's moderation will provide an impetus to maintain fairness and to allow people to express their displeasure, while at the same time calling the current coach a "blithering idiot" (example not an attack) shouldn't be allowed no matter what.

For those bringing up the constitution and saying that freedom of speech applies, remember the constitution applies to governmental control of speech, not companies.

[Vlyrock]

I've never not allowed threads that disagreed with my point of view. If you don't like Fran's playcalling, post about it. But complain about the playcalls and not how Fran's an idiot and can't coach and needs to be fired for being dumb, etc....

People tend to go that way on negative threads, but feel free to post unfavorable comments about the football team if you feel that way, just be careful about how you word it so it's not a personal attack.

[TexAgFromCal]

I've never not allowed threads that disagreed with my point of view. If you don't like Fran's playcalling, post about it. But complain about the playcalls and not how Fran's an idiot and can't coach and needs to be fired for being dumb, etc....

People tend to go that way on negative threads, but feel free to post unfavorable comments about the football team if you feel that way, just be careful about how you word it so it's not a personal attack.


Stick with this standard and nobody should have a problem with the moderation. It comes down to a matter of the wording of your post. You will simply have to put some thought into your posts before hitting "submit" I don't think that is a bad thing.

Thanks Vly for actually answering the questions in this thread and not just posting the rules and ending the discussion.

[Pumchavas28]

I said I hated it when Fran made the Ags go 5 Wide because A&M's success rate was low, and because it was predictable what A&M was going to do....

Nothing came of that.... (Didn't get locked or deleted)

I think what Vly is saying is that if you hate something... Like Torbush rushing only 1 DL against 5 OL, then speak on it... just don't call Torbush an idiot for it (even though no other coach would ever do that)

[legelegel]

This "lay down the law" thread now has 106 replies. :wow:

And, I just wanted to say, "Hi". :laugh:

No, I have not been drinking.

[jagowar]

I think what Vly is saying is that if you hate something... Like Torbush rushing only 1 DL against 5 OL, then speak on it... just don't call Torbush an idiot for it (even though no other coach would ever do that)

exactly... there are many ways to disagree with something the coaches or players do w/o resorting to personally attacking them.

something to the effect.... i hated torbush's call there going with a blitz or whatever vs torbush is a f7cking idiot and i hope you burn in hell.

Now during a game situation when something bad happens its understandable that peoples emotions will be higher than normal and a few personal attacks will slip out there. sometimes we get caught up in the moment so depending on the situation some stuff might slide but its going to be a judgement call by the mods.

[The Massacre]

the Coach Fran haters are sooo worried about their continued ability to bash the hell outta Coach Fran that they aren't even trying to understand the differences in what they are saying and what Vly is saying.

too funny.

[legelegel]

the Coach Fran haters are sooo worried about their continued ability to bash the hell outta Coach Fran that they aren't even trying to understand the differences in what they are saying and what Vly is saying.

too funny.

Maybe we should give Coach Fran a code name for those that don't like him to use. That way his name would not be identified with the hate.

I suggest that his code name be "Mr. Good Guy" . Now it would be hard to stick mud on that kind of name. Try it. I hate Mr. Good Guy. The hate really loses its power. Don't you think?

[The Massacre]

that's a great plan. let me try.

I would kick Mr. Good Guy in the junk if I ever saw him walk into Wings n More when i was eating chicken there. Mr. Good Guy polishes knobs in the dwarf prostitution ring in South Bryan.

wow. you're right. that kind of works. ;)

[PJAggiegrrl]

:laugh:

[Pumchavas28]

:laugh:

[legelegel]

My day is done. I have pissed off a few and made a few laugh.

What more can I ask for before this day finally ends?

Well, maybe a little sex later on in the evening would be great. I'll try to remember to ask if it would be OK.

[WesTxAg]

legel calling it a day, wow...thanks:stupid: :(

[Superaggie79]

I've never not allowed threads that disagreed with my point of view. If you don't like Fran's playcalling, post about it. But complain about the playcalls and not how Fran's an idiot and can't coach and needs to be fired for being dumb, etc....

People tend to go that way on negative threads, but feel free to post unfavorable comments about the football team if you feel that way, just be careful about how you word it so it's not a personal attack.
what about not being ablet to tell time or forgetting that a field goal is only worth 3 pts?

[Pumchavas28]

what about not being ablet to tell time or forgetting that a field goal is only worth 3 pts?


If you don't like that move... say that... But is there really a need to start calling him an idiot? or bash him months later?

[legelegel]

legel calling it a day, wow...thanks:stupid: :(

Hate and Stupid are Words of Hateful Stupidity

I will admit to being ignorant at times, but never to :stupid: ity.

Hate and stupid are two words that I hope that I will never knowing direct at anyone.

[WesTxAg]

how did that apply to my quote?

[Superaggie79]

If you don't like that move... say that... But is there really a need to start calling him an idiot? or bash him months later?
Most mentally challenged adults can comprehend those concepts

[WesTxAg]

Most mentally challenged adults can comprehend those concepts
i don't get it:bored:

[Pumchavas28]

I think he forgot the "T" after can.....

[legelegel]

how did that apply to my quote?

I am sorry. I guess I didn't understand the use of the stupid smilie.

[Superaggie79]

I think he forgot the "T" after can.....

nope. My mom worked at a Methodist run center for mentally challenged adults. They understand how a field goal works.

[Pumchavas28]

nope. My mom worked at a Methodist run center for mentally challenged adults. They understand how a field goal works.


When you make a comment like

Most mentally challenged adults can comprehend those concepts

You should elaborate more.... I read it as though folks on here couldn't comprehend the concept of disagreeing with a call instead of bashing a coach 4 to 5 months later...

But if your talking about the call in general.... Then all I can say is :bored:

[WesTxAg]

I am sorry. I guess I didn't understand the use of the stupid smilie.
sorry, i rarely use the smile for the word they equivocate it to...all i meant to convey was that i was angry/sad that you were calling it a day(leaving)

[Superaggie79]

When you make a comment like



You should elaborate more.... I read it as though folks on here couldn't comprehend the concept of disagreeing with a call instead of bashing a coach 4 to 5 months later...

But if your talking about the call in general.... Then all I can say is :bored:
It was an example... I'm sure he'll give us the opportunity to discuss this again in the fall.

[Pumchavas28]

It was an example... I'm sure he'll give us the opportunity to discuss this again in the fall.


As does every coach....

[GregH]

Yeah, you lose me at "stupid ass morons"...how is that not a personal attack?
Is this a personal attack to someone who is frequenting this message board? So the idea is to surpress feelings and not make people mad? Well there goes fruitful discussion.

[GregH]

1 is fine as long as you give reasons why you think he's not making smart decisions.
2 is a personal attack. King of the pile of crappy, overrated and overpaid coaches is a personal attack.
3 is fine (in my opinion).
this is bull************...not a personal attack...right?

[Vlyrock]

Is this a personal attack to someone who is frequenting this message board? So the idea is to surpress feelings and not make people mad? Well there goes fruitful discussion.
Personal attacks don't just extend to people viewing (or visiting the message board). That's why it extends to players, recruits, coaches and universities...

[Vlyrock]

this is bull************...not a personal attack...right?
Not necessarily a personal attack, but it could be construed that way depending on the context. If you were to post a post like this, I'd recommend more content (why you think that) so that we can be sure it's not a personal attack. If you're referring to something somebody posted, then it could be considered a personal attack (without more information as to why).

[GregH]

Personal attacks don't just extend to people viewing (or visiting the message board). That's why it extends to players, recruits, coaches and universities...
Even Presidential candidates?

[legelegel]

sorry, i rarely use the smile for the word they equivocate it to...all i meant to convey was that i was angry/sad that you were calling it a day(leaving)

OK, I'm sure glad we figured that out. I think :stupid: looks like a traffic cop telling someone to stop anyway. We've got a :mad: , but no angry.

I'm just glad we weren't drinking. There, I put my knife down. Now you can put your razor away. :laugh:

W. Texas, I'll have to admit to you that I thought you may have used the wrong similie, so I took the opportunity to pull your chain a little. :headslap:

That's me on the left and you on the right.1164

[Vlyrock]

Even Presidential candidates?
Haha, yes, even presidential candidates. Argue about their platform, past, opinions, quotes etc...but not about how so and so is a dumbass, etc...

[dre1222]

:(

[addsae]

:gig:

[Dustin00whoop]

What if you make a very broad statement? For instance, "I'm convinced that about 33% of the people on this board are complete idiots." I'm not personally attacking anyone!

[Pumchavas28]

What if you make a very broad statement? For instance, "I'm convinced that about 33% of the people on this board are complete idiots." I'm not personally attacking anyone!


Good question.....:laugh:

[Vlyrock]

What if you make a very broad statement? For instance, "I'm convinced that about 33% of the people on this board are complete idiots." I'm not personally attacking anyone!
But you are...33% of the people on the board. And us mods will take it personally since with me, Jag and Twelfth...1/3 of us is being called an idiot. :)

[macduff93]

What if you make a very broad statement? For instance, "I'm convinced that about 33% of the people on this board are complete idiots." I'm not personally attacking anyone!


That's a rather low estimate by my measure, Dusty.

[polish]

But you are...33% of the people on the board. And us mods will take it personally since with me, Jag and Twelfth...1/3 of us is being called an idiot. :)
statiscally speaking, it's probably true :spy:

If I can prove it with empirical studies from reputable sources, I should be able to state it /Dustin :laugh:

[Vlyrock]

Haha, it's just funny how you guys have analyzed the crap out of the rules...it was mainly posted as a warning so you could get used to the moderating...not play "what if" the whole time.

[Gravy]

Haha, it's just funny how you guys have analyzed the crap out of the rules...it was mainly posted as a warning so you could get used to the moderating...not play "what if" the whole time.


personal attack? :spy: ;)

[Mole]

personal attack? :spy: ;)

I can see Vly at his computer right now:

*delete post, ban user*

[SHAG69]

Vly,

I only have a few comments regarding this issue:

1. It is very tough trying to legislate morality on a fee/donation-collecting board.

2. The perks offered by this board, though good, are not enough to dissuade people from collecting infractions. "so I can't download an custom avatar?"...Big Deal!

3. One of the main reasons I like this board, besides the cool games, etc, is I can, within reason, vent and speak my mind. I work all day with educators and "play the Christian Coalition B.S. nice guy. I enjoy this forum to change things up,

4. Legislating conversation will, in my opinion, kill the spontaneity of the board.

5. I agree with limiting or deleting posts that continue to be just personal attacks.

Just my opinion

[Vlyrock]

#5 is the only one we're planning on doing. Just wait and see how things play out. I think a lot of people are overreacting and are thinking that we're going to moderate every single thing that's said so it has to be universal way around here...

[SHAG69]

I support you. Just don't want to you to scare posters away. Like you said, people are overreacting and it can be contagious.

shag

[Gravy]

I don't think people are necessarily overreacting. I think like with any other post or topic, people just like to push the limits. Figuring out ways around laws and/or rules yet not breaking either is always good for an intellectual challenge. ;)

[blackgloves]

the terrorists have truley won